TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Jacksambuck Archive

View 9 posts and 1,322 comments by Jacksambuck on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,322 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

well, we do, so same difference. We should move away from questions of blame or superiority(''men are bad in bed, sex obsessed', 'no, it's women who are frigid', etc) and just focus on an honest assessment of differences if we want to resolve them more effectively.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/17 08:56 PM
2

I honestly think it would help somewhat. But it's a stupid way to go about it, like promoting more men so women executives can't discrimate against other women.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/17 07:51 PM
2

How many times do we have to make this point? It's not an advantage to have the same sex as the person who makes the decision. It's more the opposite. Like how women discriminate against other women in jobs, or how male politicians passed more and more feminist and anti-male laws.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/17 05:59 PM
2

3) Discrimination in their favour (The article provides a clue, with african american women being particularly 'hurt'). With a man and a woman of equal 'potential'(meaning a mixture of past grades, intelligence, good extracurricular hobbies, etc), the woman will get in the more elite college, which costs more.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/17 05:20 PM
3

Really, when and how? you got sociologists to redefine the words so that they wouldn't apply to white men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/17 04:09 AM
8

Does the SJ side ever complain about racism or sexism against white men? Things that make you go HMMM
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/17 08:56 PM
4

Source for that 80% claim? Wage gap doesn't start with the assumption of equal work.It's an absolutely meaningless statistic. It's not meaningless, it measures a real thing, aggregate male vs female wages. It's just misused as 'women only make 77 cents on the dollar for the same job', which is false. I calculated something resembling a real figure for that concept.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 08:27 PM
3

You're making my point for me: No one should be compensated for their decisions. Screw alimony. You make your decisions, and you live with them. Society operates entirely on 'compensate the stay-at-home parent(usually women)' for their decision.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 08:20 PM
3

I'm sorry, what? Do men force their wives to bear 'their' children? Did she not choose to 'endure' those things of her own free will? Why should she be compensated for her own decisions? What does 'granting him equal rights over the offspring' even mean? Do mothers have an unalienable magical right over the child that fathers don't have? You seem to be making all kinds of weird assumptions. You should reflect on that.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 08:11 PM
5

You do you. But it's wrong to assume your perspective applies to everyone. From my perspective, if a woman was at home taking care of the kids for 10 years, she owes him the next 10 years of alimony where he can take care of the kids at home.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 07:56 PM
7

I hate work and love taking care of the house and kids. It's unpaid 'work' because most people, men and women, would do it for free.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 07:48 PM
10

If I wanted to be mean I could point out that it's no surprise that after a split the parasite has a harder time than the host.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 07:29 PM
7

Source? What is counted in that 2T? I ran the numbers, assuming the 77 cents on the dollar wage gap plus all income comes from wages(just a simplifying assumption), that gives a before tax income of 56,5/43,5 in favour of men. If 2 trillion is transferred, the gap neatly reverses to 44/56. So women work 23% less for 27% more money. Which works out to an after-tax wage gap, assuming equal pay for equal work, of 60 cents on the dollar for men compared to women.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 07:12 PM
1

Several times this statement or a similar statement about "men being disposable" comes up, it really disgusts me to read. Why? Seems to me it's one of the most well-supported, original and helpful concepts of the manosphere.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/17 06:49 AM
1

You have to show that women in general were less likely to support those things than men, else you don't have a reference point and it was just the society as a whole that was more collectivistic than other societies. If those societies had a lot of women's groups who were opposed to them partly on anti-collectivistic grounds, you'd have a point. But women, as far as I know, support those things in at least similar number to men. Hitler had more female voters than male.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/17 06:01 AM
5

It's just a dichotomy like any other, and subject to the same shortcomings, missing a lot of nuance, ignoring everything that doesn't fit. Like your beloved Marx, who thought that everything, from every problem in the world, to each unique individual's views, and passing through the whole of human history and art, was defined by the poor/rich dichotomy. if left-wing politics are feminine, how come communist ideology was developed primarily by men? no kidding, men were in everything. The politica…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/17 05:44 AM
1

Because she's part of the outgroup so she loses her minority privileges.
/r/MensRights24/01/17 09:58 PM
1

They have more orgasms and take way more time per sex act, but they have far less sex. Emphasizing "had sex" in their sample, only about one-third of lesbians in relationships of 2 years or longer had sex once a week or more; 47% of lesbians in long-term relationships had sex once a month or less, and among heterosexual married couples, only 15% had sex once a week or less. They also reported that lesbians seemed to be more limited in the range of their sexual techniques than did other couples, …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/17 09:45 PM
40

Because I'm a woman that spent 27 years in prison and we are the most marginalized of this demographic and we continue to be silenced, we continue to be negated, we continue to be vilified, we continue to be dehumanized… A) She has no remorse B) Even worse, she's actually using her conviction for being complicit in gruesome torture and murder to increase her victim cred, like this is just another, stronger example of The Man keeping her down. The Left went from "support the weak, no matter what"…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/17 09:18 PM
12

It jumped out at me too. It's almost certainly bullshit. Something like comparing manslaughter convictions to murder first degree, or invented whole cloth. Here's what I could find. Probably comes from this book Angela Browne. When Battered Women Kill. The Free Press. 1987. referenced on this page: http://umich.edu/~clemency/clemency_mnl/ch1.html Or the book references a study that exists, I don't know, but obviously the book looks biased. The other sources I've seen, often feminist in nature ('…
/r/MensRights24/01/17 08:59 PM
5

This is where we're heading, mgtow/wgtow atomized individuals tuning in to some hd fantasy world, occasionnally jerking off to best quality porn/dolls. Technology has only gotten better at providing the things we needed (significant) others for, sex, money, companionship. Deep down, no one wants to have to deal with someone else's shit if they can get only the good parts for free. The man/woman thing is not working out properly nowadays, with all the hostility from both sides, so maybe it's time…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/16 08:52 PM
2

a healthy exchange of ideas based on reason and openness of mind in one of the forges of our nation's bright youth
/r/MensRights30/10/16 09:04 PM
1

nevermind, I was just rephrasing the idea that "oppression" means more than just "problem faced by some group".
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/16 07:57 PM
1

uh, you're welcome. It just brings some baggage you might not want.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/16 06:51 PM
9

I think men are more individuallisticly inclined, women more collectivistic. Women think everybody(here, the couple) should agree on what to do, and then do it together. Men think individuals have their own reasons and know best how to navigate their own life, and so let people do their own thing. Plus, you know, women expect men to give them money, goods and services. The more, the better. And who could blame them. I like money.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/16 01:46 PM
1

I'm sorry I interrupted your shitposting with my demand that you make an actual point.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 07:24 PM
1

I take it the silence means you concede my point? Do me a favour then, and reevaluate, ever so slightly, what you think you know about feminism. Thank you.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 06:48 PM
1

Correct. I just said exactly that to the other commenter. So please name one right women had, that men didn't. My example for men: conscription.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 05:03 PM
1

Alright, I'll put it in very simple terms this time so that you can understand. Women were and are privileged legally. They have rights men don't, while the opposite is not true. Yet feminists claimed oppression and demanded redress of non-legal issues. Any objective egalitarian activist would have first equalized the law. It is unacceptable for one group to have less rights than another. Recap: Issues facing men in the sixties: Legally disadvantaged, negative sexist attitudes stopping them from…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 04:52 PM
1

Additionally, while I'm sure you have a whole brochure about the many and varied rights women had over men in 1960 And this is somehow not relevant? While feminists fought/fight against largely trivial or even imaginary first world problems, men were/are not equal before the law, and you just brush it off? How does that make sense? Your point... seems to be that since legal equality is not instantaneous in its consequences, it doesn't matter... and therefore segregation and slavery should still …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 04:08 PM
1

Hmmmm, i'd go with "disadvantaged".
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 02:46 PM
2

But men also couldn't do some of the things women could do (like not working, spending most of your time with your children, sitting at home exploring your artistic side). Were men also oppressed? I think, like the author in exhibit A, your heart may be in the right place but you're still using rhetoric that comes from the wrong place. Oppression should not be used lightly; in this case, to characterize gender roles, which on both sides had some good and some bad. Plus, when feminists use it the…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 02:31 PM
1

so you admit that you used, to put it charitably, a hyperbole. They already had equal rights. Attitudes? Give me a break. You can find "negative stereotypes" affecting every group on the face of the planet if you look hard enough. I can list a shitton affecting men, if you want. The point is: women had more rights than men at that time, and they still do (for instance, conscription). Yet you managed to state the opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 02:04 PM
1

Women stopped "being women", did they not? Feminists changed what it meant to be a good woman (being feminine, taking care of the house and children, keeping their husband well-fed and happy, etc), and I didn't see women complaining. Same rules apply for men. They don't go out and work their asses off till they die because "it's in their nature" or some shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 01:58 PM
1

but back then women were still largely "opressed" and without equal rights. Back then, what were the rights women did not have, that men did?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 11:16 AM
1

Because men do these things. Voluntarily. Every day. They don’t ask for a “thank you” because it is so built-into them to give, to serve. What an incredibly self-serving thing to say. It is not anymore "built-into" men to serve and sacrifice themselves for women as it is in women to serve men. It's a trade, quid pro quo. And women have not been holding up their end of the bargain for a long time now. Even women like this author who are starting to grasp this fact can't let go of misandric tropes…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 11:13 AM
1

I too long for a time before science, where this blatant defense of witchcraft would have been delt with swiftly, the western way. We know the power that resides behind natural occurences like lightning bolts and floods as well as her witch friends do. It's called Satan. The student should have called for a young priest and an old priest to exorcise her. Anything else is blasphemy against the Great Colonizer, our Lord and Saviour.
/r/MensRights15/10/16 02:25 PM
1

ok then we're not very far apart
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/16 07:04 PM
5

If you mean that men like sticking their dick in strange more than women like having strange dick stuck in them, then yes, I agree with that. It has nothing to do with the mechanical properties of our respective sexual organs. Men also like having strange dick stuck in them more than women, see gays. It's a cliche, but female sexuality is more complicated than male. How do you separate this idea from simply, wanting and enjoying sex less? Mathematically, if you care about sex less, if you care a…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/16 06:38 PM
2

Reality is that more men are raped than women, so the more important priority for feminism should be to stop the rape of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/16 12:23 AM
3

Do we take away (regular) morons right to vote? If some guy stopped emotionnally maturing at 16 do we bar him from college? No, our society is based on equal opportunities, equal voice, equal vote, equal treatment for all, even though people, fundamentally, are not equal at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/16 12:15 AM
3

It's unlikely that I'll ever go to prison, while women can rape me right now with quasi impunity. But please, tell me what I'm allowed to care about. Your sex is already allowed to rape mine, you might as well tell me how you want me to react to it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/16 12:06 AM
0

Just because someone's immature or stupid does not mean they should be barred from career paths or treated differently.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/16 11:41 PM
5

Yeah, men are by and large still not legally protected from rape, especially by a woman. Tough shit, be patient, guys, the law might change at some point. Meanwhile, in feministland, the fact that marital rape was not recognized until decades ago is considered sound proof of women's oppression and still a present source of outrage.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/16 10:06 PM
5

I gave you my answer: sure, let's all be less cynical, antagonistic and paranoid, let's give each other the benefit of the doubt, be fruitful and multiply. But men would have to be naive idiots to do it unilaterally, when feminists and women in general have not.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/16 10:04 PM
8

You could easily change a few words in the op and return the question to feminists. The point is that RP feminism conditions its followers that the male/female dynamic is always antagonistic, a zero sum game. Either you win or s he wins, and s he is always looking to use you, abuse you, and dump you, rape you and oppress you. This is starkly different than "normal" male/female relationships, so much so that I don't believe a lot of posters recognize the paranoia that grips RP men feminists when …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/16 09:26 PM
1

Well it's always helpful to believe the truth. So it would be better for all involved if women didn't falsely assume that their (relative) frigidity was due to some personal defect, their partner's, or the evil patriarchy conspiring to deny women their rightful orgasms.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/16 08:55 PM
1

His argument is that you could give the salaries of government employees to bums to sit around and it wouldn't change a thing to the economy, since the important thing is that people spend that money. He thinks this is true for all employees. This is how leftists think the economy works. Money magically appears out of a giant pot, ready to be spent.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/16 11:07 PM
1

If it's a tautology, I guess we should introduce some 40-years super-Phd program for elementary teachers so they can teach kids the last year before they retire. Every Super-Qualified-Teacher would create 2 dozen Einsteins instantly with his vast concentrated knowledge.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/16 10:47 PM
5

Do you have some kind of source or study for the assertion that elementary education is "nothing but babysitting for people who can't do math"? Is it somehow possible to just skip most of school and go straight to highschool or college and be fine?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/16 10:12 PM
1

there's really nothing we can do beyond guess about it. Congrats, you wasted 500 words on utterly pointless ad hom speculation.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/16 09:55 PM
1

Why would women so massively underperform men? We have weapons nowadays, you don't need to be the hulk to pull a trigger. I think 2 battalions of dwarves can beat one battalion of normal men, all else being equal. Just because women are weaker, doesn't mean they should be exempted. They really have to be a lot weaker to justify the draft inequality.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 12:49 AM
0

I really don't understand her appeal. She's not, and has never been, "movie star good looking". Her acting is pretty good, but she's made tons of movies, and the only one I really like is adaptation, and it wasn't because of her performance. It seems her movies are all made for a different person than I am. A woman, probably. Her movies seem feminine to me. Maybe her appeal lies in how women can identify with her because she's just a normal, okay-looking, vaguely middle-aged woman. She's a good …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/16 11:16 AM
14

Jesus you're just spitting out the most overused bullshit feminist arguments like a robot. Communism, nazism, conservatism, catholicism, islamism, liberalism, are all "too diverse for any prominent member to speak for everyone anyways". Let's just assume they're all beyond criticism.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/16 02:12 PM
12

Oh wow, she got married, to someone she didn't consider scum. Next you'll tell me her father was actually a male. Case closed, no possible misandry there.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/16 01:58 PM
5

I don't see the distinction. No man, no new life. No woman, no new life. Same thing. Men can be replaced by some gamete generation process, women by a gamete generation process and an artificial womb. In Nature, both sexes were equally irreplaceable. In a post-industrial society, you just need a bit more technology to replace women than men, that's the extent of their difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/16 10:23 AM
7

Because women are the givers of life, men are the takers of life. Is that some kind of hyperbolic allegory, or do you literally believe that? Biologically, women are in charge of feeding the combined gametes, sure, but both sexes are necessary to create the stuff in the first place. Women don't "supply life", they supply food to life. I'm afraid I can't let you take credit for Life, even if you leave us Death, in your generosity. What the fuck is effeminate energy? I see mostly sex drive as keep…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/16 01:38 AM
1

you must not know many people
/r/MensRights11/04/16 08:18 PM
3

It's almost like you're using AWALT to generate a woman who fits your point even though the person you're talking to doesn't. Almost like AWALT is being used as a bludgeon! I most definitely did not use awalt, since i don't believe awalt. Remember when we had this argument before I talked about buying food or something in a video game? I don't believe that was me. You can't tell us apart, all men are the same, amalt, is that it? My feelings are now hurt. Everything I've seen in TRP shows me men …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/16 11:18 PM
3

I was just following your "marriage means a transactional obligation to do X, Y and Z every month" to its conclusion. Also commenting on how many of those "maintenance of the marriage" things aren't really all that necessary or enjoyable to men, yet it's framed as positive and necessary "for the marriage".
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/16 10:41 PM
4

Why can't I just work a few hours extra and give you the money, and then you pay someone to do things like talk about feelings and massage you and remember birthdays and give little presents to make you happy and content?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/16 10:25 PM
3

and I spent all my energy getting as boring and basic as possible. dammit, feminists lied to me again. But one day I'll get you you friendzoning bitches, and your little dogs too!
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/16 01:15 AM
5

people don't get smarter with age, you know. dumb young people turn into dumb old people. It's not like people who were morons at 20 suddenly find their intellect and an interest in philosophy at 40. There is roughly the same amount of smarts in any age group.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/16 10:15 PM
3

Columbia and Brown are "gynocentric?" Oh, good point, I read that backwards You got reading problems pal. I called the article gynocentric, not columbia and brown. I'll call the link from browndaily gynocentric also. Intellectually, for whining about lower female admission rates the whole article while quietly admitting that the female admission rates at princeton are higher than men(and, as we know, harvard: two universities with far greater prestige than brown). Emotionnally, for clearly adopt…
/r/MensRights18/01/16 09:28 PM
3

The article clearly says that at harvard, women's admission rate is higher than men. Like in stem, and unlike brown, columbia, vassar. So you were wrong when you said "only true for tech schools". It's true for tech schools, and for the most prestigious colleges like Harvard. The only exceptions are the heavily female-dominated colleges the author cherrypicked for his gynocentric article.
/r/MensRights18/01/16 08:58 PM
6

it doesn't say anything about harvard or yale.
/r/MensRights18/01/16 08:33 PM
3

more opportunity due to greater strength? Stronger sex drive? It's not hard to find hypothetical reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/16 12:07 AM
3

The sexual assault figures he provides(98% of perps men) are rightly considered utter bullshit by MRAs. For the simple reason that they don't count female-on-male rape as rape. If you carefully read the NISVS 2010 for instance, you will see that the true figure is more like 60%.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 11:57 PM
4

She has no qualms describing in great detail everything else he "did to her"(made her mentally and emotionnally uncomfortable) but the most relevant thing is left ambiguous? It's not credible. The word "heavy" is suspect too. What does "heavy physical abuse" mean? Did he start beating her with a tire iron every night? I seriously doubt it, given the tone of the story. Either it's physical abuse, and in this case she is definitely a victim, or it isn't, and then she and him could both be annoying…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 08:36 PM
8

the one thing unambiguously wrong, is the physical abuse, and it's half a line thrown in there: he just recently began heavy phusical abuse. This doesn't smell like truth. It's apparently sudden and surprising (and, obviously to everyone, horrible), yet it's described in both vague and clinical terms. What did he do, exactly? Why doesn't she say "he hit me" or "he shoves me" or whatever it was? The line is surrounded by paragraphs of exact descriptions of the mental anguish he's causing her, not…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 05:04 PM
2

There are more than one huffpo article on this. Such as this one. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brett-a-sokolow/bernie-is-wrong-about-rape_b_8965772.html we need to recognize the privilege older white men bring to any discussion of women's bodies and autonomy. That's a charge of sexism. Further, your position is aligned with the Men's Rights movement, which believes that rape in this country is a false epidemic contrived by man-hating feminists. I'm a feminist, Senator, and I hope you'll come ou…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 03:35 PM
2

Yeah, Feminism was misandric from the beginning. The sentiments blame men, and solely men, for every single thing in women's lives that is not to their satisfaction. Some of those sentiments are clearly privileges (get out of jail free card, anyone?), yet all they got from that is unilateral oppression, men are always at fault, women are always victims. Blaming men to get free stuff: that is the essence of feminism, captured in the sentiments.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 12:01 AM
1

Oh, is that how you want to play it? You... have a great day then!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 05:17 PM
1

Terrorism is hard to define, and is open to interpretation at the edges of the definiton. Mcveigh and breivik and avowed isis supporters qualify, people who shoot up high schools randomly probably don't (unless they leave behind a political manifesto). The EU definition is this: serious offences against persons and property that; ...given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of: seriously intimidating a population; …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 04:51 PM
1

You're not arguing. That was hit-and-run whataboutism, tacit admission of defeat.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 04:06 PM
1

What about it? It seems its only victims were the rosenbergs, who turned out to be guilty. I can't believe the left is still milking this old affair, even though soviet espionage was very real, and the CPUSA was definitely under stalin's orders.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 03:55 PM
1

take timothy mcveigh, take every other terrorist attack on US soil that wasn't islamic in the last 50 years, and you don't even have 10% of the deaths due to islamic terrorism! A super-small minority, 1% of US population , responsible for 90% of terrorism deaths! And the numbers are similar in europe. This obviously has nothing to do with islam, this is perfectly normal.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 03:29 PM
3

But western media and mass hysteria exaggerate fears about Islam and conflate extreme practices with the ideology as a whole. On the contrary, they push a very similar viewpoint to yours. Every time there's an attack, the media and politicians rush with the same nonsense you're spewing, the most iconic being the "religion of peace" stuff, which couldn't be more wrong. Here's an effective example[1] of that hypocrisy. Oh wow, proof by 'asking morons on the street', top argument. I could disprove …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 01:29 AM
3

How is it better to be under perma-death threat, where everything fun is banned, the economy, science, and culture are shit, and you are ruled by retarded mullas? We don't need to imagine: the society exists in saudi arabia, and to a lesser extent in other muslim countries, like pakistan. Explain to me how this is in any way better than what we have in the west. Why don't you emigrate?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 01:16 AM
4

there's also lashes for drinking and gambling, death for apostasy, extra-marital sex, homosexuality and some more traditional crimes, like treason or terrorism. Those are just the so-called crimes against god. Then there's another part of islamic jurisprudence that's just the eye for an eye rule. And then there's one category for whatever else the current islamic ruler deems a crime. The death penalty is also permitted for crimes in this extremely vague category. Those are real categories within…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 01:03 AM
7

totally fine. Actually, I think I'm going to go with "actively increasing world happiness". I think most incel men would massively prefer to have sex like that and be dumped no-contact than not to have sex at all. If you want to be in the sexual/romantic game, getting dumped is part of it. If anything, she's doing them another educational favour by dumping them. I don't know why she's getting all that hate. Women who protect pussy scarcity? Bitter incel men who wish to deny other men the opportu…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 09:42 AM
7

Most feminists I've met in real life don't hate men and don't base their worldview on individual circumstances. That's cute, but you know, most RPers also say they don't hate women, yet you accuse them and MRAs of misogyny in the next paragraph. Why is your anecdotal, biased judgment acceptable to defend feminists, when you accept no such defense for MRAs? Even better, apparently the only reason you condemn MRAs for misogyny, are vague allegations by "some people", which you couldn't even confir…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 08:48 AM
3

Men love unrealistically, as in men will fall in love with a fantasy rather than falling in love with a real person. Love itself is unrealistic, irrational. When I know I'm in love, I have to remind myself that all the good I think of the object of my affections probably has nothing to do with her true sexual/romantic value, down the line, after the hormones fade. So if women are not prone to such irrational feelings, and they always keep a cool head as to their lover's worth, how would you know…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 01:04 AM
3

You basically implied that all that mattered was his perspective. ANd as a woman who watches Bond movies I always consider both. It's only because to me and most people, the bond films are mostly about male perspective, male fantasies, male sexuality. To see them as women-centric or women-empowering is unorthodox. I don't mean anything by it, women have stuff like gone with the wind. Same with the recent Bond film. I don't like the new bonds. Bond is not supposed to fall in love with women and s…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 09:44 PM
2

HOW.IS.IT.SHOWN (compared to all the preceding movies where men and women had implied sex)? Your argument is that something new apparently happens that "makes women sexual", but you can't give an example. I'm still floored you honestly watch movies and don't assume ppl see themselves in the characters that are most similar to them. Also, cut the hyperbolic OH MY GOD I CAN'T EVEN I'M TOTALLY AMAZED!!!! . I didn't say anything close to that.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 09:09 PM
3

How is it shown that they are enjoying themselves particularly? I have no recollection of an old bond girl having an orgasm on camera or something like that. You're reaching, and your argument is weak to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 08:57 PM
1

I (29m) am vary vary much blue pill, to the point of supporting or at least enjoying the opinions of the most extreme anti-male sentiment. So you're a radical feminist, you support the political degradation of men? It's not acceptable to push your sexual desires into the political. Say if you were a woman who has rape fantasies (which is okay in itself), it wouldn't be acceptable to support policies that encourage rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 08:51 PM
5

no I do, just not for women's sexual pleasure. HE is enjoying it. His partners are just things to be conquered by his coolness. Your theory is that a 50s women saw that james bond was having fun, and decided that she wanted that? That requires women who think men and women have the same relationship to sex, which they didn't believe at the time. Feminism did that.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 08:33 PM
3

I don't know how anyone can watch james bond and infer a message of sexual "liberation"/over-sexing for women out of it. James is going through girls like he's beating up henchmen. Their point of view is as irrelevant to the film as a henchman's. I prefer my reasoning to yours because mine doesn't rely on implicit, indirect effects. Feminism was very explicit in its message that women should be "less repressed"/more sexual. Your theory, otoh, says women changed through soft acceptance of implici…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 08:27 PM
5

I never said women had no orgasm or sex drive. I don't get your point. What are those movies examples of? Your first paragraph has no important verb, your second somehow involves a negative hypothetical wrapped in third-party confusion. Can you disentangle?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 07:53 PM
7

You're missing a certain popular theory in your equation. Who convinced everyone that men and women were basically the same, and differences in sex drive are purely cultural? What you call the "male influence" is feminism telling women they're really like men, and that they're supposed to like sex as much as men. Feminism has always denied sex differences, so when men's burning sexual urges are compared with women's lukewarm desires, it follows that women are somehow repressed and should sex it …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 07:37 PM
1

I don't know why you insist on finding hidden meaning in a lowest common denominator foreign language pop band. Next you"re going to tell me dancing queen is about the british monarchy and thank you for the music is really about existentialism. Abba has good melodies and garbage-tier lyrics, this is known. You're also being extremely rude and condescending to those who question your incorrect, as well as impopular, opinion on this.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 07:55 PM
3

explain. no one is getting it. money money money's lyrics are even stupider and more morally bankrupt.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 11:00 PM
5

I don't get it either. Look at the money money money lyrics: In my dreams I have a plan If I got me a wealthy man I wouldn't have to work at all, I'd fool around and have a ball... All the things I could do If I had a little money It's a rich man's world abba's money money money is literally about marrying a rich man for money! . Is wub joking? Impossible, I know for a fact he's a very literal guy. Must be the sexualization or the non-horrendous haircuts. I've always suspected wub to secretly be…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 09:39 PM
4

He'll probably turn into norman bates/ted bundy and make a human replica of his mother out of dead women to have dinner dates with, and the prison won't give him a female psychiatrist.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 08:21 PM
1

Mamma mia! ruined them for me, lol. I just wanted to see amanda seyfried's beautiful unexpressive face to some tolerable music, but something else happened. As I listened to the corny abba songs in that shitty corny movie, it was like eating too much candy and fudge, and the sweetness turned disgusting; I snapped "I've tolerated your cornyness long enough, abba!". I walked out and didn't look back.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 08:13 PM
5

that's wrong on at least 3 different levels: morally, educationnally, financially. The strong oedipal vibe is a bonus. That kid's future psychologist is going to be a rich man.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 08:02 PM
1

that's very brave
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 05:35 PM
5

You can easily see the extent to which this represents literal moral decay just by comparing it to pop music of 30-40 years ago. Not exactly ABBA, is it? You lament the past moral wholesomeness of abba? Oh my god, I've never seen anything less cool than this. Are you a religious 80-year old retired bookkeeper who still wears a tie and striped shirt to his florida bingo game?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 05:26 PM
3

ue hue hue" jokes date back to the late medieval ages. But that's the point, they are tongue in cheek jokes. Or maybe they're not and they never were. As in, women had a lot of power all along (I'm not saying women were all-powerful in the unilateral "patriarchal oppression" way). There were these things called queens, and these other things called mothers, and they had power over men, it's undeniable. Besides, the middle ages had no "punching up" concept. If you punched up, you got disemboweled…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 01:58 AM
4

There's also a downside to being the master in a master-slave relationship, or a nazi in a jew-killing camp. It limits some opportunities for friendship, it stunts one's humanity a bit, etc. But harping on about it is obscene.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 01:27 AM
6

. I am clarifying your very incorrect definition of slut shaming which is nothing more than a strawman. You can't just yell "strawman" every time you're called out on your bullshit. Do you deny that "I don't date sluts" is considered slut-shaming in BP circles? Except he literally said: "I do not consider you to be relationship material Yeah, I said it wasn't an important part of the argument. I said nothing about being a virgin being associated with negative characteristics. I said people often…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 08:32 AM
16

You are redefining slut shaming to suit the needs of your particular argument. Saying "I don't date sluts", is slut shaming in any other BP/feminist context. Moreover, the "I don't date" part wasn't even important in his argument... he said being a slut could be associated with negative characteristics, as you said being a virgin was associated with negative characteristics.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 01:40 AM
18

I prefer to speculate and be wrong than to let hidden biases go unnocited. Here's what I think happened: you felt insulted by his argument, even though it was completely un-personal(as seen by the phrase "by the same token", and the quote marks, which indicate a separation between the commenter and the speaker), and you decided to insult him back, or at least to "take him down a notch" by insulting his ability to get girls, and by extension, his manhood. "Oh, I'm a slut who's not relationship ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 01:19 AM
25

This is irrelevant and needlessly personal. His argument was not. What you implied there: "women don't want to date you". ie, he's hypothetically worthless for not having fucked enough women, one comment after saying you're against virgin shaming.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 12:44 AM
6

you are the caricature of a white knight, dude. At least RPers have an ideology that supports macho shit. You're like "my feminism makes me alpha, fite me irl losers", and it's hypocritical as fuck.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/15 07:38 PM
6

Here we go again. some RPers speaks in generalities, a BPer takes it as an absolute and gets offended, cites personal anecdotes as "refutation". What we've got here is a failure to communicate. I always appreciate the macho bullshit when it comes from BPers, though. "I know women who could beat you har har"
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/15 07:14 PM
0

"I have so much stuff I don't need" , 5 seconds later: "I wish I could afford more" "my degrees are worthless"...., also: "I can't afford college for my kids" Put two and two together: stop buying stuff you don't need! your degrees are worthless? Good news, you just saved yourself the money it takes to send your kids to college!
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/15 07:04 PM
5

You can reduce your expenses by doing away with "consumerist noise", buy a small house in the country on a low-level job. Done. What you mean is you can't buy a london house on your hobby/profession of choice. You're a man of letters, you're supposed to live in a garrett.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/15 03:51 PM
-2

I can't take this economic whining. You're richer than 99% of people who ever lived, of course you can own a home. Get your story straight: are you too poor, or is your wealth nothing but "meaningless consumerism"?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/15 03:11 PM
3

Often emotional abuse and control is the first step on a path toward physical abuse. (...) Catching these initial signs of abuse before things escalate to violence is in my view an excellent idea. This is getting more and more in the realm of pre-crime, where people are controlled and policed by the state for things they might do. You could put also a soundmeter in every room, and whenever someone raises their voice, some alarm in the nearest cop car rings and the "suspect" is escorted to the ne…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 10:00 PM
6

I expect consistency. Feminists claim to fight against gender roles and that we're all equal, yet they fight attempts to make joint custody of children the norm in divorce cases. They are pushing the "mothers are better than fathers" sexism they claim to be against. If you're asking me what we should do if "sexism"(or biological differences) is real and inescapable, I think treating people equally under the law does not require actual equality of people. The law treats the smart and the dumb, th…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 08:51 PM
6

if any movie or book can be perfectly representative of the desires of women, fift shades comes close, while quills doesn't. Shades has the numbers to prove it. There are women who would much prefer the movie Quills, and there are women who's fantasies are more represented by Fofty Shades. ....yes, and there are women who wish to live on the moon. Do you know what a generalization is?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 08:35 PM
9

high-brow, written and directed by men, barely made a profit, not representative of women. The polar opposite of fifty shades.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 08:13 PM
8

If some of what you call sexism is biological, the feminist solution ("end gender roles") will not work. Not that I would even trust feminists to end gender roles if they were 100% cultural. They had more than enough time, but they let men stuck in their roles as protectors and providers because it's advantageous to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 07:33 PM
13

We are familiar with the universal feminist "solution" to everything, derived from its unfalsifiable theory of everything, thanks. It's good that you're learning things, though. Stick around and you'll learn some more.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 06:57 PM
10

The bias is seeing someone getting help(commenter above) or being generally favoured("women are wonderful" effect), and interpret it as evidence of oppression. If getting favoured and helped is really oppression, then oppression is awesome for "victims". I wish men were oppressed more.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 11:39 AM
12

Yeah, you and the manosphere agree: society is very sexist. It favours women to an absurd degree. The mental gymnastics BPers/feminists will go to defend their biases in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence is astounding. Such as: From archaic ideas of sexism and that women are weaker, so we should help them out more. In the same vein, slaves make masters look bad, they imply masters can't work hard or take pain.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 08:07 AM
10

Loser and the expectation of success it represents is a highly gendered term. You rarely see it applied to women, even though they form the bulk of those satisfied without a job, or a parttime clerking job, often wasting an expensive education in the process. One thing you and TRP agree with is this double standard of expectations. They've accepted that women are teenagers who can't be expected to be as productive as them. Do you?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 08:37 AM
1

you give an example from your personal life to defend your argument, it's only fair that I give my take on the incident to attack your argument. it's just business nothing personal.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/15 07:13 PM
2

they were barred form institutions of learning and had no means to study and invent. The vast majority of men didn't either. Having six to a dozen children wasn't unusual. They didn't have the sole care, not even close. Men had the burden of providing for this "tribe". Feminists can't grasp that making money is harder than spending it. If they did achieve in a scientific field, men often took the credit. The feminist conspiracy theory of history.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 12:20 PM
2

Whereas for women, the work NEVER ended. Not even during the night (babies needing feeding) my ass... Not all women bared children, where are their achievements? Never ended.... except when the kids grew to 3 years old. Answer me this: How many men in history had the sole care of a tribe of children and a house and still managed to invent great things? That question is the equivalent of asking: how many men with long hair still managed to invent great things? Men almost never had the sole care o…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 11:36 AM
3

no I do think you think cis people are boring, relatively speaking. And your fiance knows it. He probably faked a laugh, then retired to his room, crying from the thousand cuts of your poorly hidden contempt. So too do they hate men, even though it is said in a joking manner, like a bully making a joke at the expense of his victim.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 09:23 AM
1

Anecdotes are now "the real world" while statistics are "made up".
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 09:15 AM
2

would you two chill and let it go already? it's a simple mutual misunderstanding, no need to get ugly.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 08:51 AM
2

I don't know if you've noticed, but men weren't exactly given free time and told to go invent something. They had a very time-consuming role(at least as time consuming as women) as well. Astounding that they managed to do most of the work, fight wars, and still achieve >10 times what women did.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 08:19 AM
1

we'll get everyone a bot even better than the real thing, don't worry. You like human body warmth? Wait till you get a load of 4000 Watts of robot warmth, applied directly to your erogenous zones!
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 12:39 AM
3

you're incapable of good faith arguing. please go back to SRS and AMR where your dismissive oneliners are appreciated. what is the point? Are you wasting people's time on purpose as some kind of activism?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 12:16 AM
3

you're never arguing anything, I see. yes, this sub is supposed to be for debate. you're shitposting all the time. well we're done
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:36 PM
3

dodging
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:26 PM
3

Before you tell me, am I allowed to dismiss any and all bodies of knowledge that disagree with my prejudice? Why would I need to tell you anything, you have an entire area of academia dedicated to the study of gender, especially rape... That should be easy, especially for you, lecturing others. I mean you went as far as tell me to educate myself so why should I educate you? Doesn't it interest you in the least?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:23 PM
6

I think Zelda's point is ridiculous and completely backfires... Okay, I accept that women produced kids, while men gave everyone all the scientific, artistic and technological wonders. IOW, women did what every animal does, while men made humanity the most extraordinary thing in the universe this side of Gods. As uncomfortable as it is to admit given that contrary to some RP opinions, many women have made astounding social contributions to all academic fields and professions Astounding how? You …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:18 PM
3

you're dodging the question and avoiding debate, as I knew you would(which is why I implied you were the irrational "crank"). Debating feminists is like shooting fish in a barrel.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:12 PM
3

It's not hard when you're right. In fact, it's the easiest thing in the world. You just point out where they're wrong. I do it all the time with feminists who think they know their shit. I got a question for you: How often do women rape men?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:08 PM
3

You're literally repeating your one-liner three times in a row. Why do I still bother? feminists can't argue, it is known.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:03 PM
2

yep, that's an argument from authority alright. Did the entire field ever produce anything falsifiable? I think they did, but then they always ignore contradictory evidence, such that domestic violence is as common for both male and female perpetrators, which goes against their "patriarchal terrorism" model, or that women commit rape in comparable numbers to men, which goes against most of their theories. intellectual giants They're more like dwarfs, standing on the shoulders of... the sea, drow…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 10:59 PM
3

How many books on feminism and classes is it necessary to read and take before rejecting it? And how many for TRP?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 10:42 PM
1

lol sure. I'm not the one throwing one-liners instead of debating. Your inept attempt at deflecting criticism is well-known: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtier's_Reply
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 10:39 PM
4

Get this: sometimes, people read about something, evaluate it, then reject it. As in, don't agree with what is "taught". You disagree with TRP, think it's misogynistic or something? You probably don't understand it, you should read more Redpill books and blogs before criticizing.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 09:45 PM
2

yeah, grey versus grey morality I do think the materialism of women tends to be downplayed, so it usualy looks like grey versus white morality, with women being "pure" and "romantic".
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 09:04 PM
5

It's not the car, it's what the car says. It's a clear fashion statement, or biologically, a mating call. "I have money, and I'm stupid with it! Come get some, and I will get to come!"
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:50 PM
2

What do they know? They just throw darts at the wall, see what sticks. It's their job to diagnose, I'm sure they could diagnose anyone who came in, no matter how sane. There was this experiment in the 70s where some researcher sent sane students in a psy ward, after 3 weeks the doctors declared most of them insane. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment Some psy tried to diagnose me once (wouldn't you know, also aspergers), I told her I didn't think so because this and that symptom we…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:42 PM
3

right to vote without okaying self-conscription : Selective service. right to be accepted at most DV shelters, paid for by their taxpayer, when beaten up by their spouse. right to abandon one's child at birth(safe haven laws) right not to have one's genitals cut up as a child for weird cultural reasons. right to have the crime of rape against oneself be recognized as rape and not some lesser sexual offense (some US states, UK) Now let's hear the rights women don't have.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:09 PM
2

All was straight except santa, that was banter. You don't seem all that autistic, xem. No offense, but how do you know?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 07:55 PM
5

All these things about women are either true or not. Whether an imaginary thoughtcrime of "objectification" has taken place is irrelevant. So what if they don't find women funny, or interesting? Is it obligatory to like and admire other people, now? So what if they want to have sex with them? Is it not a free, sexually liberated society?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 07:43 PM
1

The thread is about accusations of misogyny, so it's not surprising they'd justify accusations of misogyny. This place is slowly becoming more blue pill. I don't see it. You're getting frustrated because it's christmas and you can't wait for Santa to come.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 07:38 PM
3

Feminism has theories say all men either rape or approve of rape("rape culture") to keep women down("patriarchy"). Men's natural sexual thoughts are described as evil and dehumanizing to women("sexual objectification"). The core of feminism is demonization of men. You can't see it, because it succeeded.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 07:03 PM
6

asianmasculinity is pathetic, a weird mess of SJW talk and sexual bitterness/tribalism. The top posts are about asian men/white women couples, and of course they hate the reverse. They're like /r/short in that regard. Hypocrites. Then of course there's the fact that asians don't actually suffer any serious discrimination. I'm not saying that some things don't suck for asians, or especially asian men. It's true that, in a multiracial society, asian women are closer to the female beauty ideal than…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:42 AM
2

It's ironic, because TBP claim, with good reason, that TRP only cares, or cares too much, about sex... yet their insults almost invariably involve a reference to TRPers low sexual worth, thereby validating how important sexual success is to TBP, and society at large. They're feeding the beast.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 10:05 PM
4

Compatibility has nothing to do with sexual attractiveness, which is what these SMV models and most of TRP/PUA/seduction concerns itself with. LTRs are really more an afterthought in the RP canon. Nine times out of ten, their advice will be: AWALT, don't get married, don't commit, she's not a unicorn, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 09:40 PM
2

I don't support banning opponents, and agree with your criticism of TRP on their policies, but it's true that feminists/progressives have coopted a lot of mostly unrelated movements/spaces and made them all about feminism. The atheism community and the gamer community are now separated in two sides, at war with each other, thanks to feminist activity. Here on reddit, most of the anarchist and communist subs (/r/communism , /r/anarchism , etc) are completely feministicized: criticism of anarchism…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 09:12 PM
5

there's definitely some homoerotic shenanigans going on between TRP and Chad... Not to say the real reason they want to slay pussy is to get closer to their legendary alpha bro idol. Then have a few beers, shoot the shit, jerk the Thunder Cock off in the shower.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 08:48 PM
4

1) Kind of a strawman. I doubt RP says 30 yo women have no sex appeal at all. Those women you cited are all 30...Most of us are not constantly looking at recent pictures of them, so when we think "Amanda seyfried" we think "amanda seyfried 2-5 years ago. But Okay, let's accept it, they still look good at 30. But then you make a massive jump and say the limit is mid to late 40s? If they had been forty, you maybe could have gotten away with that leap, but a 2 decade jump, seriously? To recap: you …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 09:31 PM
2

Ah sartre, compatriot of mine. The man who kickstarted second wave feminism because he wouldn't stop cheating on his hag of a gf. Anyway, existentialists have always opposed rationalists like myself. Those depressed communists hate the truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 01:19 AM
4

You've read too many self-help books. Tell me, how many iterations of a voice on tape telling you "you are a winner" did it take before you believed it?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 12:58 AM
3

Which attitude is going to get that person farther, do you think? I already told you: such a question does not interest me. The truth matters to me, not "which version of reality should I accept, so I can reach my personal goals". Feminism is either harmful, or not. You social skills either suck ass, or not. If one is true, say so, if not, don't. which statement is likely to "get you farther" is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 12:29 AM
3

What I'm saying is that they believe, with good reason, that feminism is harming them. You seem to be saying that they shouldn't say that, even though they believe it's the truth. So you're saying they should lie about the external factors(why life sucks for men in general), so they can focus on the internal factors (their own shortcomings as persons, work on their "game/social skills", carreer, etc).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 12:08 AM
1

Are they supposed to adapt their perception of reality to what their personal goals are? e.g., should they suddenly declare that the moon is made of cheese if it helped motivate themselves?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/15 11:32 PM
15

The statements "You can become better at getting laid" and "feminism is poisonous garbage that is making your life harder" don't contradict themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/15 10:11 PM
3

Both. I'm not into mgtow, but I generally appreciate loners, outsiders, misanthropes, hermits, the anti-social perspective. I imagine one of the advantages of withdrawing from society is no longer having to care what society thinks of you (in this case, are you a Loser or a strong independent Man?). The usual mechanisms of social control, shame, the status hierarchy, no longer apply to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/15 08:17 AM
1

your problem is that you suck at analogies
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 11:56 PM
6

Why would you assume that a woman who's more into frank sex talk is low value? A "proper girl" isn't into sex, is that it? I'm afraid you are slut-shaming. Maybe she's sex positive and empowering herself through her sexuality.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 11:27 PM
1

I think generalizations are fine either way. We are all archetypes, we are all part of conceptual groups. To consider every person as a unique uncategorizable snowflake is not to think at all. Thinking requires generalizations. The reason you see hypocrisy is because the "don't generalize" argument is inane bullshit, so of course one only uses it on enemies, not oneself.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 11:05 PM
1

It's just listing how reality works. Nothing more. If I say, "if an asteroid hits the earth the size of the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs, it will cause humanity to go extinct", am I disparaging the asteroid? Am I angry at it? There are a few differences between an asteroid and a woman. For instance, velocity, or consciousness. It would do you no good to be angry at an inanimate fucking object. A piece of rock whizzing through space also lacks the capacity to feel disparaged, as it does not…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 10:49 PM
2

Don't bring female solipsism into this. You're literally giving her the speech feminists give male feminists when male feminists are sick of taking too much shit. But we know that not all men are pits of misogyny, so if you aren’t acting out misogyny, then it’s not about you. It’s understandable how sometimes criticisms of misogynists come across as generalisations about all men, when read by someone who isn’t used to the jargon shorthand and feminist perspectives. Time to lurk and learn. Link I…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 10:11 PM
7

The reversal, though amusing, doesn't really work, because that's TRP's point: everyone manipulates. You might as well play the game right, or you will lose.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 07:41 PM
7

Who needs superfluous human contact? The shortest path between two points is a straight line.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 04:19 PM
8

and you know this how...? Feminine intuition?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 02:31 PM
9

Good example of older men being attractive to women. I doubt very much that hollywood producers would force older male leads on all those female romcom consumers if they didn't like it. There's money to be made.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 01:01 AM
2

Let the studies decide who has the warped narrative. Still waiting on the source for the 79 cents for the same job. Here are some of mine: Feminists fight attempts to make rape laws gender neutral USA: ;Although consideration of male victims is within the scope of the legal statutes, it is important to restrict the term rape to instances where male victims were penetrated by offenders. It is inappropriate to consider as a rape victim a man who engages in unwanted sexual intercourse with a woman.…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 12:41 AM
4

I'm saying the exact same position pays men on average more. Women make 79 cents to the man's dollar. Source. Women work on average less hours, in less dangerous and demanding fields. That figure reflects that, it's not apples to apples. It's not a single person. It is prevalent in society I think society's view on men is far more negative. Feminists have convinced everyone that men are evil, that they rape women to keep them down, that men's very existence, normal behaviour, and desire, is oppr…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 12:14 AM
1

Yeah. The people I disqualify are a minority of self-described feminists, so I think my criticism is on point. Besides, plenty of self-described, respected feminists call people like Hoff Sommers "anti-feminists"... I merely agree with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 11:55 PM
1

No, other than myself I don't have any examples handy. In that case, you're the exception to the rule, like the individualist feminists from earlier. They don't blame men either, and I don't consider them feminists. I would hesitate to apply that to MRAs in general. You are all individuals, just like we are. Heh, my views are relatively common. This issue of ultimate blame is very important. I think MRAs and feminists could come to an understanding, if feminists shifted the blame for past and pr…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 11:44 PM
4

Women still make a fraction of what men make in the same feilds. No they don't. A full-time cardiologist may make more than a part-time pediatrician, but it has nothing to do with sexism. here are still people who think a woman's time, money, opinions, and desires are meaningless Haha... So as long as a single person ignores/despises women, they will be considered oppressed? It's a Long road to utopia. there is an enormous backlog of rape kits Men are raped in large numbers too, and no one even …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 11:22 PM
1

No examples then... Well in any case, I'm glad you understand a little better what MRAs beef with feminism is. If you think feminists are blaming men in general for the Patriarchy I know they don't blame every man individually, but they blame some men directly, and then the other men benefit (ie, are indirectly complicit). Women are neither to blame nor complicit.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 11:16 PM
1

Can you link me or give examples of prominent feminists who think men are not to blame, who are disagreeing with the others? I'll tell you how I see it: Feminists will perhaps deny blaming men, but if you probe a little deeper, they will blame the 'patriarchy/kyriarchy' , and according to them, men controlled that, so it's the same thing. Add to that that women are never truly blamed: even a vehemently pro-patriarchy woman (the female equivalent of an "oppressor") would be excused as "internaliz…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 10:57 PM
1

Dude, you're misjudging me. I've done this many times before. This is not a simple misunderstanding, I'm not going to change my mind after you linked me to some introductory wikipedia page and explain feminism 101. I've read all of that before. Understand that I am allowed to interpret feminism's theories as I please. Just like I can interpret "jews drink christian blood" as an antisemitic theory and not just a statement about the religious practices of jews, I can interpret "rape culture" as de…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 10:29 PM
1

You have to understand that I don't take feminists at their word. Of course they're generally going to say"We don't hate men. We're pro-sex, we're egalitarian etc". I watch what they do and what their theories imply, and the result is less rosy. One example of what we're talking about: Feminists nowadays are big on objectification. That concept comes directly from sex-negative feminism, and demonizes men's sexual thoughts.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 09:44 PM
3

Everyone knows it sucks big time, but you have to pretend to like it as a sort of painful initiation ritual into nerdom.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 09:28 PM
3

I'd rather rewatch the tao of steve than citizen kane. CK is proof that milestones are boring. Just like the original star wars.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 09:11 PM
5

No, the meaning already existed. Wiktionary: solipsism ‎(plural solipsisms) (philosophy) The theory that the self is all that exists or that can be proven to exist. Self-absorption, an unawareness of the views or needs of others; self-centeredness; egoism Funny, I actually remember a TRP-ish movie called The Tao of Steve about a loser who fucks hot women by not giving a fuck, and he called his love interest solipsistic at some point.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 08:52 PM
3

They were never correct, they just happened to stumble onto some worthwhile issues inadvertendly. Feminism is just a narrative, unilateral oppression of women by men. This story has never been true, now it's just more apparent than ever. They rack their brains to find some, but no substantial women's issues are left. Yet they stick to the narrative. Proof that it's never been about the issues, or about some quantifiable disadvantages of women compared to men. It's a religious myth, independent f…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 08:24 PM
2

You should take it as a celebration of a grown man and a teenage girl's common humanity.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 12:09 AM
1

fun is childish
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 12:04 AM
2

Why? Wommens can't take an insult?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 11:35 PM
3

yet you're acting as if I'm assuming something more than you Yes; You led off with the flaws of this hypothetical man, and yet when I work off that same basis, I'm somehow doing something different, right? You went from the physical flaws and an objectively bad situation to the mental/moral flaws. Which boils down to karma, ie, he deserves to be ugly because he's evil. Alright, let's change the scenery a bit, see if that fires off your fairness neurons. Hypothetical: a woman was raped. I'm just …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 11:23 PM
13

Just like I blame women who don't say "no" and then complain about having been exploited sexually, I blame men who don't say "no" and then complain about having been exploited platonically.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 10:14 PM
12

I guess BP strategy, as used in the context of PPD, is a mixture of common advice & "knowledge", feminism, and hollywood/media tropes. Especially the parts that are most dissimilar to RP advice. "Be yourself", "be nice", "respect women more", "there's someone out there for everyone", that sort of stuff. I would say the BP's ideological backbone, and the source of its views on sex relations, is feminism. But feminism doesn't have a clearly defined sexual strategy, because the very concept of men'…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 09:40 PM
5

You didn't "lose" me, you are just obviously a practitioner of the just world fallacy. You are saying, without knowing anything about this hypothetical ugly, short guy that he must have self-inflicted or moral flaws because he's dateless. That is a textbook case. So then, to preserve the just world, you look for flaws (in a hypothetical guy, which makes it so funny. Oh, I bet he's a terper. Maybe he hurts animals too). You would find flaws if you looked long enough, just like you would find them…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 08:47 PM
6

What? What are you talking about? This ugly short guy is a hypothetical, yet you somehow managed to invent "concrete examples" of his hypothetical shitty behaviour? I see you've played justy-worldy before.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 07:05 PM
15

The NISVS 2010 (The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey) is a good start. http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf I have more links, but there's no need to inundate you with stuff you won't read(I don't like it when someone just gives me 10 links. It's the equivalent of burying your opponent in paperwork). I'll walk you through this link. The authors of that report hide female-on-male rape by not calling it rape, but "made to penetrate". P.17, you've got…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 06:39 PM
15

Women hardly ever rape men. There would be a handful of cases. It would not even be 1% of the number of cases of men raping women. Not even close. Let's see your evidence, then. Your "obvious" opinion is not supported by studies, that show women commiting rape in similar numbers to men( or in any case, far more than 1%). The fact that your opinion is so widely accepted should make you more suspect, rather than less. People don't usually need a reason to believe what you do, it's what they've alw…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 05:08 PM
32

Yeah. There's also the just world fallacy at play. People don't like being reminded that the world isn't fair, and that good people suffer through no fault of their own. So when the short ugly guy complains that he's rejected and lonely, rather than face reality and tell him he's got massve disadvantages and it's got nothing to do with his moral character, they invent an evil disposition so the illusion of "karmic" fairness can be preserved.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 12:20 PM
4

I can't tell if you're joking or not. Maybe I should check if they have another man's name branded into their backs, before I proceed with sex... Women are not cattle ffs. They are responsible for their own actions, it's not my job to make sure they don't cheat.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/15 05:58 PM
27

They no longer have a monopoly on providership, a previously consistent source of value for them. With the loss of this value to women, men find that women have no desire to associate with them anymore. You're glossing over the fact that the state redistributes a ton of money from men to women(both in regular taxes/welfare and mandatory CS and alimony). It has not freed men from the provider role, simply freed women from the obligation to spread their legs regularly in exchange for those resourc…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/15 12:08 PM
11

So the girl has no agency and just says yes all the time when she means no because she's braindead? There's being submissive and then there's being a zombie. t's that they end up in a lot of bad situations, and they're sick of being blamed for the mistakes of unruly men. A girl isn't a slut just because she gets date raped. But what you described isn"t rape. Men are not telepathic omniscient beings who can read women's minds and then act in women's best interests regardless of how the woman hers…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/15 11:10 AM
9

Oh please, I could fuck a dirty sponge. Where there's a will, there's a way.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/15 06:14 PM
3

A lot of achievements, such as degrees, are not important per se for women, they're just signaling intelligence, stability and middle class upbringing. Which is good, if you want a LTR with an intelligent man. For everyone and everything else, it's irrelevant. Now if her achievements were so impressive that she would be in a position to bring home the bacon long-term and assume the provider role, it's something else. But it's rare, and has nothing to do with attractiveness. You'd be attracting m…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/15 04:48 PM
10

I can't privilege anecdotes over data. I think our society is already doing a lot to prevent rapes, maybe too much. I can't agree to remove the presumption of innocence in cases of rape, which is what all this "believe the victim" stuff boils down to. Essentially, "victim advocates" are asking for an entirely different and draconian justice system just for rape. That says a lot of our society's hysterical concern for rape. Are you familiar with Blackstone's formulation("It is better that ten gui…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/15 09:21 AM
1

wow you don't understand anything when people talk. "It's not rape" was the absurd part, that made the other commenter's argument wrong, not my own opinion. It must be hard for you in a debate sub when you take everything literally and can't understand half the arguments.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/15 02:04 AM
4

Are you incapable of argumentation?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/15 01:23 AM
8

Na it's excellent and relevant. In fact it's so good, it's not even an analogy, it's more a direct illustration of exactly what you were talking about. The victim agreed to get raped when the alternative was death. According to you, that's not rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/15 12:55 AM
8

"stop resisting or I shoot you" "...ok, don't shoot..." it's not rape
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 10:42 PM
2

don't care, not a person. might as well be sperm.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 10:14 PM
10

The fact that your group can be shooed off so easily hardly testifies to its intellectual curiosity. What you call "a normal discussion" is in fact an extremely sanitized, feminized, safe, tea-room ambiance, more conductive to empty consensus-building than the search for truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 09:02 PM
1

Are you calling me uncivil or going off on a tangent? I can never tell with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 08:10 PM
9

It wouldn't work, because arguably society cares more about a woman's rape than a man's suicide. The "divorce rape" term is purely an attempt to use some of society's outrage about rape for a good cause. MRAs are saying "I know you care about rape! This hurts like a rape! Help us!". And OP is protecting the taboo of rape as the Holiest-Crime-that-shall-never-be-cheapened-by-analogy.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 07:59 PM
3

It's the teapot argument, beloved of atheists. There's an infinity of extremely unlikely ideas(flying pigs etc) that can't be disproved. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 07:43 PM
2

The new rape laws are worse than the drinking culture. Ergo, I think it's all a victorian era sex scare. We could always prohibit alcohol and sex, two things feminists were never fond of.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 07:26 PM
4

I don't understand your point. The fact that we can even write this down as something plausible that could happen just shows how fucked up our society is. A hypothetical proves nothing. Fucked up how? People get drunk? The whole culture of going out and getting so inebriated that you barely know what you're doing, let alone can you remember it the next day, is fucking ridiculous. Why? What's wrong with drunk people fooling around? Is the chastity of our young ladies under threat? When drunk peop…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 07:09 PM
6

It's not a question of choice. To the invader, women are assets, men are dangerous. Oftentimes men would get slaughtered after they had already surrendered. That's why they were fighting in the first place. You're reversing the causality. However, it's not always just about physical extermination for men. Women are valuable, even when poor and near-useless. But men are basically screwed after the invader takes their tools, riches and territory. No one is going to take in the men and give them br…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 05:59 PM
1

I mean total loser professsionally. And you do count his above average intelligence as a bonus to his SMV, so you agree that raw intelligence counts.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 07:36 PM
1

Eh I think they do. Especially the shy, intellectual type of woman can be impressed by small displays of intellectual prowess (showing ease at getting good grades, solving problems and understanding complex stuff, wide-ranging culture, irony) as long as they look natural and not forced/arrogant. I definitely think a 'total loser' with good intelligence is able to punch above his weight class in relationships (assuming he's reasonably social).
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 07:27 PM
1

Thanks. I like it, it's a neat little theory, logically sound, gives cool conclusions and everything. The only downside is that the effect it describes, while real, is imo very small and easily fudged by the randomness of the real world.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 06:48 PM
1

I never said they never hauled nets, but a little bit of nethauling and a lot of childcare is easier than full-time fishing. Especiallly since women end up doing the easiest less risky part of the jobs they do do. Your life is back breaking hard work. You think men don't do back breaking hard work? You want to look at figures of work injury by sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 04:37 PM
3

It's a cliché based on Jane Austen. She was whining all the time about women, yet her male counterparts were fighting the napoleonic wars while she sang and wrote books. It's typical. Yeah, most women worked, but not nearly as hard as men. They had the easiest, least dangerous and most fulfilling job, taking care of the kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 04:29 PM
3

Historically, it's not an off chance at all. The "benefits" of being a guy consisted in society forcing you to work and to die. For the benefit of women. No, I wouldn't have minded staying in the warm drawing room, drawing and playing the piano and shit. Seems like internet really. Old school women: the original neckbeards. The only thing I mind is being forced to die for someone, and then a few decades later they go and claim they were the ones really oppressed by the whole deal.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 04:09 PM
2

According to the theory, the more exceptional they are, the bigger the intelligence difference with their "female counterpart". Male geniuses correspond to merely smart women. Maybe the big gap is too much of a hindrance. Cleverness, which I find to be the social/economic utility of intelligence, is selected for, but intelligence in the abstract is not I think if you check for the intelligence of couples, they are correlated to a high degree. Of course, it could just be a byproduct of things lik…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 03:28 PM
4

As a woman fate conspired to keep you down. Keep you safe mostly. I'll take the non-dying role, thank you. Where's the choice in being forced to die for your country? As if being a hero was a choice. It requires an insane amount of luck to beat the odds and not die, only then you can be a living hero. Most heroes just die a heroic death, and that's it. "master of your destiny" in the grave... You're spouting such misandric bullshit. Fates worse than death? I'll take 100 rapes over one death. Wha…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 02:28 PM
12

The question can be returned to you. Why is it so important to you that men never be the underdog? As for women who use pills, if they really wanted to die, they'd do it again or change methods until they're dead. But they don't. They signal suffering, get empathy, then get on with their lives. Men don't get the same empathy for their problems (they're "losers", should man up, etc), so they choose the more radical way out.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 09:22 AM
1

If they're just normally stupid, then there's plenty of stupid women too, since it's only at the extremes that men outnumber women. So you can't say that feminist blogs are more witty. Reread my comments or something, you're really not getting it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 12:33 AM
1

If they're really average or close to average, then there's just as many women in that intelligence group and the other part of his argument falls down, about feminists having nicer blogs or some shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 12:17 AM
2

Idc if he insults MRAs, the guy is just badly misusing statistics. Most feminists and MRAs come from the same giant pool of average-to above-average intelligence people.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 12:06 AM
2

So the mediocres are aware of it, but the retards aren't. They're so retarded, yet they get people to read their blogs. For some reason, there's 60 times more retards than geniuses, even though the numbers should be similar(if say, retard: bottom 2%, genius: top 2%). You make no sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 12:03 AM
2

He said 60% are retarded.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 11:54 PM
4

Yeah, but OP is massively overestimating the effect. You have to go to the very high and low IQs to see some serious male-to-female imbalance. The overwhelming majority of people are in a giant clump in the middle.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 11:50 PM
2

You separate them into 60% retarded, 1% geniuses, so where's the giant middle? You know what a bell curve is? do you think that makes you more a moron or more a genius? Tough question. It's relative, really. Right now, I look like a genius.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 11:47 PM
3

Nah that's stupid. Male variability does not mean that men are either morons or geniuses. There's a giant bell curve of normal men in the middle. Most MRAs/RPers are going to come from there. And most feminists are going to come from the equivalent giant female bell curve. Male geniuses and morons are exceptional, ie rare. Moreover I seriously doubt male morons spend their time writing about gender on the internet. They're out there catcalling, presumably.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 11:34 PM
0

I don't care if it works, blue pill is lame. You want to be a rebel or not? No one ever produced good art while happy, that's a fact. You need frustration, preferably a lot of it, to get the energy needed to better yourself. Sure, you're slaying lots of pussy, everyone loves you and everything's great, but you have to really ask yourself: Is it really what you want? You're gonna wake up one day, wondering if you didn't miss a fundamental part of the human existence: suffering, depression, loneli…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 11:14 PM
1

You can be selfish without being solipsistic. Solipsism is a lack of understanding of other people's minds, of reciprocity. Yesterday a woman said to me: "I'd never give a man who approached me on the street my phone number. But if I was a man, I'd approach girls on the street all the time." This seems solipsistic to me: she doesn't seem to understand that her mindset(as approachee) can be applied to other people, and draw conclusions for what that means from the opposite side (mindset of the ap…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 10:11 PM
2

hanlon's razor
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 06:58 PM
6

Just because extreme RP-ism works better than extreme BP-ism, doesn't mean that RP-ism is completely correct. There's plenty of middle ground that could provide a healthier and more effective alternative. RP has thrived on a taboo on "misogyny", criticizing women. You can't analyze something, such as women, if you can't point out the bad as well as the good. This taboo created a "truth vacuum", as all taboos do. Anyone who ignores the taboo quickly encounters truth. RPers did, but then they star…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 04:38 PM
2

That was your point? Okay, since biology is irrelevant and I prefer bolting, I'll bolt. What now?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 11:34 AM
2

What I'm trying to tell you is that what biology wants is completely amoral and mostly irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 11:01 AM
4

That's not even true. Biology supports fucking lots of women and then skipping town. Biology supports murder and rape. Biology supports social darwinism. Biology is not a Nice Guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 10:09 AM
3

I have very ambivalent feelings about women. They're social. On the one side, they're good with people, on the other, they're good at manipulating people. They're emotional. They can be genuinely kind, but also irrational. I do feel that there is a large gap between men and women, and a failure to communicate. I need them for companionship, sex and kids, but I sometimes resent this involuntary strong attraction and dependency. I don't think they're generally dumb, or evil, or slutty/hypergamous,…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 12:16 AM
3

I have in the past argued that before a certain date, it makes sense for men to be allowed to sign forms for a legal/financial abortion, but to suddenly stop whenever he wants is an nonsensical as saying no property rights. Most reds and purples will agree to that, so I don't get this debate. You said I've noticed a lot of twerps say 'well if the man never consented to having a baby, why should he need to pay?' Yeah, they agree with you?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 09:17 PM
2

Perosnally I would never give my number to a stranger on the street - however IF I WAS A GUY, I would approach girls all the time. How does that make sense? You think it's a gratifying experience to make smalltalk until you get rejected?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 09:07 PM
4

yes, it's called greater male variability, it's well-supported. The president of harvard was fired for suggesting that it might explain the lack of women at the highest levels of ability in stem academia.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 07:09 PM
5

are you? yeah. Also more male geniuses, who pay for everyone else. If you want to go there(who costs more to whom), you'll find that the state is massively redistributing wealth from men to women. That's why it's so bizarre for you to argue that point. If everyone is supposed to pay for their own group, it's women who will be left in the cold.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 06:42 PM
2

It's a long discussion. The short version is that feminists do not actually blame the women who act "pro-patriarchy". It's internalized sexism, kowtowing to the oppressors, etc. When men act the same way, it's never excused as if women really were responsable.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 03:57 PM
3

So when a child is five seconds away from birth, it isn't a person, and five seconds after birth, it magically becomes a person? So because it's not a one-off event, we have to consider a clump of cells a person? Funnily enough, I think meat is murder too. You'd have a greater chance of convincing me to forgo meat than abortion. I don't mind getting a veggie meal here and there, I do mind getting a 20 year ball and chain + huge prison-backed mortgage forced on me here and there. I think that coe…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 03:31 PM
15

Look at you being all heartless and cold when it comes to men. "Money is only supposed to go to women, not useless men." It's amazing how all those progressives turn into the harshest right-wingers ("you can't provide, fuck you") on the topic of men. I got one cold argument for you: If you want less retards, maybe you shouldn't encourage low IQ women to reproduce on society's dime.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 02:35 PM
8

Would it be justified for a man to suffocate an infant to death to avoid paying child support for it? No. I operate under the assumption that the fetus is not a person at all. Y'know, because I'm very pro-choice. How high a risk of murder are you willing to run to avoid paying child support? Not high at all. Abortion is not murder and has no chance of being murder for me. It's like eating meat. Some call it murder, but I do it every day. Abortion = eating a steak. It's pretty funny that when men…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 10:59 AM
4

no
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 03:04 AM
12

It's not just about money, either for me or for them. Being a parent is a massive responsibility, and time-drain, aside from all the rest. They can delude themselves into thinking that it will help the relationship, or that men have to be forced into parenthood, and after a while men will "mature" into accepting involuntary servitude and everyone will live happily ever after. Maybe they just selfishly want a kid and they don't care what it takes. In any case, don't ask for my empathy when you ig…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 03:01 AM
19

As a non-RP MRA, I approve of this post. Except the bit about maybe it's amoral to act this way. It isn't. Men are completely justified to lie and manipulate to get out of an involuntary, life-ruining situation. It's no different than an abused woman who lies and manipulates her husband into letting her have an abortion so she can dump him later. Would we care if the poor guy was emotionnally crushed after her cunning escape? Women who try to force men into parenthood and extort money from them …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 02:36 AM
10

Absolutely. The way I see it, feminists blame men 100% for all gender oppression throughout history. All I want is a little load-sharing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 01:53 AM
11

Why? Women use "are you gay?" on het men all the time when they want something from them, especially sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 01:33 AM
7

It's way more detrimental to a man's sexual value to be perceived as gay or to have engaged in homosexual sex than for a woman. This talk of men's "insecurity about their sexuality" is basically just rubbing men's faces into the fact that their gender role is more restrictive than women's.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 01:04 AM
1

growing every day. The ratio of independent events that can be entirely explained by feminism to total events is approaching 1.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/15 10:19 PM
4

It is possible that inverse biases exist in different industries. Even just that is sufficient to refute the standard feminist narrative of unilateral women's oppression. But rejecting the idea that the studies we quoted are all correct, it seems more likely that the researcher's biases would work in your favour rather than mine, due to them being generally friendly towards the feminist narrative. And I got more N, which is what studies crave. ie, mine are correct, yours are dogshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/15 09:50 PM
1

It's nice to discuss women and other things without worrying about what's offensive. Whether in the media or in one's social circle, it's way more accepted to bitch about men than about women. I'd go as far as to say that it's usually taboo to criticize women in general in our society. Such a taboo discourages the search for truth in sexual matters: breaking it should naturally yield some insights.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/15 08:12 PM
1

I do think that "men are evil/morally inferior" is an implicit assumption of feminism, so I don't feel bad "batting for the other side", so to speak. But of course, you're right, we can drop it. Regardless of the truth of the matter, it's probably one of the most dehumanizing things one can believe about the other sex, and is detrimental to good faith discourse and friendly cohabitation.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/15 06:42 PM
14

Riach and Rich (2006) In their London-based field experiment, Riach and Rich (2006) found statistically significant discrimination against men in “mixed” occupations (trainee accountants, 31% female; and computer analyst/programmers, 21% female) and in “female” occupations (such as secretarial, 97% female). They attributed this to gender stereotyping on the part of those making the decisions about who to call back. Booth and Leigh(2010): Extent of the pro-female bias The responses indicated that…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/15 06:04 PM
1

I think assuming women in a matriarchal society would behave the same as they have in historical patriarchal societies is a huge mistake. It's the best estimate available. What are you gonna do, blindly speculate over some womanist utopia? I think they mean "women are morally inferior" the way a child is morally inferior. Not that they're evil, they just don't know what they're doing, morally speaking, and a child has its important decisions made for him. Saying "adults commit most crimes" does …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/15 05:47 PM
20

So much bias. That's why women earn 60% of college degrees, an imbalance roughly equal to the one at the start of second-wave feminism. And they still have tons of women-only scholarships. Their unemployment rate is 20% lower than men. Here, clear bias against men in academics, not some orchestra no one cares about: http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21648632-recruitment-academic-scientists-may-be-skewed-surprising-way-unfairer It appears that the best way feminism has found to…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/15 04:16 PM
1

There is a difference between what their "justice system" and what their sociobiological conditioning says.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 09:51 AM
0

They stone their men for adultery, too. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3210053/Stoned-death-adultery-ISIS-crush-skull-man-accused-having-affair-claims-group-killed-30-people-gay.html Is your vid gory? I'm not in the mood for that shit.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 09:07 AM
1

In the discussion, I pointed out that women had a more passive role than men, and that shouldn't be confused with moral goodness. If you take passivity to its conclusion, you can infer what I just said. Of course this is all speculation. You can take it as an example where being passive is bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/15 08:51 AM
-4

And good luck with forcing women to wear IUDs. Getting women to wear an IUD is too much sacrifice but telling men to hug bullets is just fine? Get outta here. There have been like 3 women all time who have dunked a basketball during a game. Good thing they're not playing basketball, then. Women can pull a trigger just fine. They would be annihilated. You don't know that. And even if they performed at, say, only 80% of the performance of an equivalent male battalion, they should still be sent to …
/r/MensRights08/12/15 01:31 AM
-9

You're just grasping at straws with some of those arguments. Tampons? Come on, that's a bullshit excuse. You can make a rudimentary tempon that takes less space than the commercial stuff. Women eat less food, so there's your extra space. Our bathroom in the field is often a hole in the ground dug by an e-tool, and we see each other piss and shit all the time. Bathing with wet wipes in an enclosed space, is everyone supposed to turn and face the wall while the one girl to clean herself? No, becau…
/r/MensRights08/12/15 12:23 AM
-21

Drop the condescending shit, jarhead. You haven't even thought about this issue, it's just your ego talking. If we wanted to find good use for women in front line situations, we'd find them. Obviously we'd have to drop the "weak little flowers in need of protection" attitude and think about it rationnally, coldly, and in a utilitarian way. Women dont carry the "machine gun." I said fixed. In a car or APC. you havent seen ISIS's treatment of women, IDK. ISIS would have more qualms killing a woman…
/r/MensRights07/12/15 11:32 PM
1

After the 10 seconds, it should also emit a loud beeping sound, and in James Earl Jones' voice: "Consent has been revoked. Put down the sex and step away, Police is on the way." I think in principle it's not a bad idea, it would remove the ambiguity that clouds some of these situations. Men are afraid that drunk sex can be considered rape if a woman feels like it. And women are afraid that they would not be believed, or that their lack of consent is hard to express. This could fix those issues. …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/15 11:16 PM
-8

Put them in all-female front line battallions, then. Women are weaker? You don't need much strength to fire a gun, even less to man a tank, fixed machine gun, other equipment. If they're so weak, men are also better at making bullets/other things. Even if they're generally weak, many men are still weaker and some women are stronger than the male average. Women have advantages as cannon fodder too: most equipment is better suited for a smaller size, the enemy probably dislikes seeing them hurt as…
/r/MensRights07/12/15 11:04 PM
1

Reforming divorce would really only help men who plan on getting married. For the rest of men, we have to find another way to compensate them for their sacrifice. Blood isn't cheap. We could take ideas from feminist fantasies: a considerable wage gap for the same job, covert affirmative action for 90% of all high-paying and prestigious jobs, the power to order women around and treat them as second-class citizens, the ole monthly patriarchy check in the mail. For starters.
/r/MensRights07/12/15 09:46 PM
3

They're all about making things easier for women, imo. Of course, gynocentrists will claim that it's about "enticing women to do X", but the end result is the same. It's like affirmative action. It's supposed to be about enticing women to go into STEM or positions of leadership, but de facto it's privilege for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/15 08:40 PM
57

I have no problem with women on the front line. Why should it offend me less if some male stranger gets killed instead of a female stranger? That's textbook sexism, and not the kind where people's feelings get hurt. It's profoundly unfair, and I think most people could see that, if it was explained well. Is equality just a meaningless buzzword? I'll go even further: I see no reason to go on the frontline myself if women aren't also forced, or alternatively, drop the equality pretense and give me…
/r/MensRights07/12/15 07:58 PM
2

You know the women's olympic gold hockey team trained against a good highschool men's team? They often wouldn't make any money by switching to "men's" teams. Only the absolute best women(such as judit polgar, who is a degree above the second-best woman) would even be able to compete at the top level. In tennis, the female number one wouldn't even crack Top 200. Yet they often get equal compensation to the real world championship.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/15 07:33 PM
6

If women wanted to, they already could. But they're not good enough and therefore, usually don't want to. Who wants to play in the 3d league coed when you could play for female-only world championship? For instance, Judit Polgar. She is like the strongest female chess player of all time. She refuses to play for the woman-only championship, which she would easily win, instead she is a "normal" top chess player among men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/15 07:06 PM
15

Everyone knows some muscles on a guy is more attractive to women than a little fat/skinnyfat. The question is, how much it matters, compared to the other things women like in men. TRP thinks - a shitton. Average guys - barely.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/15 06:18 PM
1

Bumps in the road. Look at how often they made excellent ones, look at the result. Your life, my life, is miles ahead of where we started. In the savannah, dying young, killing each other over a fruit, no money, no technology, no freedom. With women in charge we'd still be there, probably.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/15 05:29 PM
13

Every nutjob and his dog claim Rome fell because of their pet cause. One could say History is the unbiased study of how exactly the historian's political opponents caused the fall of Rome.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/15 05:22 PM
2

I don't get your comment. I don't uphold either TBP or TRP as the truth, as my flair says. I don't think the average "blue pill but not radical feminist person outside of the pill shere" has a working, quality understanding of sexual relationships, either. This punchingmorpheus stuff looks okay, I'll check it out.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/15 02:44 PM
2

And more moral behaviour. Whether due to some innate deficiency, to their biological circumstances(carrying and raising kids), or to their place in society, women have had less (direct) influence and drive to change things for the better or the worse in history. Men have definitely used more violence, but violence is a tool, it can be used for good or bad. Being impotent and passive is not the same as being good.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/15 02:05 PM
5

Looks like a tu quoque(it isn't, because I don't claim that TRP is true), but it seeems TBP cares even less about what is true or what works than TRP. They reject entire hypothesis and behaviours on purely "moral" grounds. They think that if they point out the misogyny in TRP, they've won the debate. It's like they pride themselves on their ability to not even argue for truth. They sacrifice truth on the altar of "morality", as if that proves their commitment to being good persons("I'd rather be…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/15 11:34 AM
5

I don't think anyone would deny that it's sexist. The definition of sexism is so large it's useless. You think men and women are different, so you're a sexist by defintion, via the "stereotyping" part. Say that awalt is false or morally wrong, they'd have something harder to argue against.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/15 12:33 AM
2

oh fuck off that's an unnecessary dig at MR. You're not changing anything by lifting weights and acting like bonnie's good little performing dominant monkey.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/15 12:18 AM
1

I remember one guy in particular. He was something else, unreal. Smart (top med student), athletic (he was in the national skiing team), handsome as a god, blue eyes, hyper-masculine face, tall, sociable. He talked to everybody, and everybody wanted to talk to him. He had an aura of competence, and the aura didn't lie. He always knew what to do, and then he just did it. I swear I'm not making this up: His father was this big-shot doctor, his girlfriend was gorgeous and had long blonde hair, and …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/15 08:51 PM
2

If people are good at one thing, it's ignoring all the situations where they get the bigger piece of the pie. Even more so when everyone else is telling them they get the smaller piece of the pie (housewives as "slaves" etc).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/15 11:09 AM
0

Good arguments. There are definitely laws/standard legal procedures that benefit women in the SM, which makes the idea of perfect competition laughable. A woman can rape and abuse a man with near impunity. She can accuse a male partner of rape/DV and get him expelled from university or worse. How favourable divorce is to women. And if she decides to conceive a child with your sperm against your will, you're forced into parenthood and extorted a percentage of your income for 2 decades. Not that t…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/15 10:18 AM
8

Are you kidding? Engels is the "first mate" to Marx's captain, he has had an enormous influence on marxism, second only to marx himself. He was constantly in contact with him, thought with him, wrote with him, and supported him. His word is as good as marx's. If you're just going to ignore all contradictory evidence, why even ask?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/15 02:42 PM
1

Paul Lafargue? Never heard of him. The guy who's always sitting at the right of Marx, his friend, co-author and benefactor, Engels, did say plenty of proto-feminist things. It's actually perplexing how much his views are literally ""the feminist version of history". In 1884, Engels published The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State[5] According to Engels (1884), the shift from feudalism to private ownership of land has had a huge effect on the status of women. In a private owner…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/15 02:34 PM
2

My feels have nothing to do with it. Coming from someone who uses personal anecdote to refute general trends, that's rich. Also linguistics is important to understand complex theories and philosophy along with politics and so on, one is not more important than the other. Missing the point. This is just your opinion, there's nothing scientific about it. I could just answer "no, it isn't. math is more important to intelligence." Could be more important, could be less important, but there is no rea…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/15 01:16 PM
1

Don't get hysterical. One problem with BP ideology is that no one can discuss this stuff calmly without being called names. it was constructed so as to be gender neutral and fair, not valuing traditional male subjects (math) over traditionally female subjects (linguistics) Who's to say that math is or isn't more indicative of intelligence than linguistics? For example, maybe women are excellent at basic grammar, but math is necessary to understand complex subjects. It doesn't necessarily mean an…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/15 12:25 PM
0

now you're just shaking your head, going "nuh huh".
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/15 11:12 AM
1

I think he makes way more sense than his critics. The "ethics of care" theory comes dangerously close to arguing that women just aren't as rational as men, and that's a good thing. If that's a bullet you want to bite, fine, but then don't complain if guys like TRP think the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/15 10:36 AM
5

That's an easy one. It's because, according to the american psychological association, "Most standard tests of intelligence have been constructed so that there are no overall score differences between females and males."
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/15 09:37 AM
1

Forget about whales, people. What do I care about sea cows? I meant: Between humans, homo sapiens, you and me, brain size and intelligence are correlated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_and_intelligence#Brain_volume
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/15 09:32 AM
1

Speaking of height, men have definitely bigger brains. So if everything is the same inside and volume correlates with intelligence(and it does), how do they intend to maintain the equality of intelligence axiom? It's funny to me how the politically correct keep tripping onto their own shoelaces in their attempts to "correct stereotypes".
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/15 01:55 AM
5

Not at all. If an attractive woman gets propositioned 100 times, and an unattractive woman 10 times, over a number of years: if the first woman is twice as picky/better at filtering than the second (10% VS 20%), she will end up with an n of 10, while the unattractive will only have an n of 2, desite being "sluttier".
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 11:28 PM
4

All else being equal, the more attractive she is, the higher n is. The older she is, the higher n is. The more extraverted she is, the higher n is. And iif she had a bunch of one-night-stands while single, it's not infidelity. Plenty of fidelity-independent factors have an influence on n, so it cannot track fidelity closely.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 11:20 PM
2

I don't care about marriage itself, I meant basically having children with someone. Can you do that without the risk?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 11:06 PM
5

There's plenty of idiots among those 42 %. Kids, people who get married in vegas, people who live in trailers. It's a question of opportunity costs. I don't think the mantra "don't get married" is a one-size fits all solution. You definitely shouldn't get married just because "it's time" or people tell you to, but scratching off children if you want them with a fine woman if you have one, because of a ~relatively low risk of psycho wife attack seems excessive to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 10:54 PM
1

If you make a long list of feminine and masculine character traits and stereotypical behaviour(gender roles), some will be bad(as determined by whoever's talking). Hence, those specific traits will be referred to as toxic masculinity and toxic femininity. Simple. MRAs don't like the term "toxic masculinity" as it currently exists because we think it's used to demonize masculinity in general(despite what feminists may claim). The fact that "toxic femininity" does not exist in feminist discourse p…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 10:31 PM
3

It has nothing to do with my beta-induced thirstyness, brosef. If he has high standards in everything, as he says he does, including intelligence and personnality, the fact that he wants attractive women does not prove that he values it over the other things. It's just logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 08:31 PM
15

While I agree with the gist of it, you're being a little over-dramatic. It's not nigh impossible to get a gf and children if you're roughly average, as you seem to imply. Still a rougher deal for men when compared to women, but only a minority of marriages end in divorce. In practice, no more than 40% of men will be successful in reproducing Where do you get this? Did you pull that number from the future or what? If I look at 40+ yo in my extended family, this doesn't seem true, and includes a f…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 08:00 PM
3

Well, if you just have super-high standards due to being massively above average in everything, that fucks up the rating system. I mean, it's no longer usable as a map of what the average man values in women. So how do you feel about long-term dating very attractive women with low personality traits or intelligence?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 07:02 PM
3

Okay, thanks for clarifying, in that case you actually think that personality is more important than looks. That contradicts the first comment (looks and n count are most important).
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 06:43 PM
4

No, you don't understand how these utility comparisons work. You said you'd be willing to sacrifice on looks, but only at most a single point, for great intellect and personnality. That is the point at which you are indifferent. You don't care if you get the 7 in looks with great personnality and intelligence or the 8 in looks with none of the above. You can make the trade at this point, but you don't care either way. Which means that for any difference in looks greater than one, you want to sac…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 06:31 PM
9

What? You're willing to sacrifice a ton of intelligence and good personnality for only a single point in looks? I don't think that is normal for men, outside of one-night stands. I think you are far more looks-oriented than average. Yes a few women will get unfairly generalized--who gives a fuck, that's their problem. I don't care about generalizing women. I just think the stats are slanted by things like ultra-religious chicks who are no fun in other respects, and I'm not willing to sacrifice a…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 06:14 PM
11

How do you quantify that? Say you put all women on a bell curve, rate them one to ten with 5 the average. Then you compare who you would choose between a 8 in looks and 6 in personnality (including intelligence, sense of humor, etc) and the reverse? Because I think that's a tough one between those two, but an 8 in n-count (pretty low n, rather than average n)) with 6's in personnality and looks can't compete with them. Then you've got your cutoff points and the same is true: Anyone below 4 in lo…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 05:50 PM
45

The hostile energy is just too much and everyone starts freaking out until it explodes in an orgy of angry hate sex. All rational expectations fly out the window as people act the opposite of what they're supposed to, biting the forbidden fruit in perverse relish. The BP women enjoy being degraded, the RP men lose all frame and beg for cuddles, the BP men bark sexual commands, and RP women run around whipping everybody, cackling sadistically.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 12:12 AM
3

If you're looking for scientific evidence, I think Kohlberg's stages of moral development supports that to a degree. The short version: a well-known psychologist developed this theory of moral development that comprises 6 stages. It's not about doing good or evil per se, it's about how you justify whichever decision you went with. So small children, for instance, are barely even aware of that other people can be hurt too. They only care about avoiding punishment and what's in it for them. They m…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/15 02:45 PM
7

ohshit, a feminist tells a mra he's not a misogynist, that's a first. I'd like to thank everyone here at PPD, for making it happen.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/15 12:40 AM
0

Oh, good, I thought you were just making up an excuse to bail, but you really do want sources. I'm sure you understand I can't source every single statement I make right away in a multi-paragraph comment, that takes too much time. But ask nicely and you shall receive. Feminists fight attempts to make rape laws gender neutral. USA: Although consideration of male victims is within the scope of the legal statutes, it is important to restrict the term rape to instances where male victims were penetr…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 11:40 PM
1

Does being sent to war as a child constitute oppression? For what sentence exactly do you want sources?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 10:47 PM
8

Sure, I agree, if TRP is false, TRP behaviour is annoying as fuck. You're not making any sense. We established that we just disagree on the validity of feminism. How does that make me a misogynist exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 10:39 PM
1

Paternity fraud, definitely. I could see myself dopting a child in some circumstances, that's why this one is weird. But paternity fraud? I'd leave the country and live in a hut for the rest of my life rather than raise that child and see the woman who did that to me. The aversion I have towards it is far, far greater than the one I feel towards mere infidelity, or anything else in the realm of gender relations. It's greater than what I can justify rationnally.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 10:31 PM
8

It always seems to come back to this. It comes back to our disagreement on the validity of their complaints. I think there isn't any. Consider, hypothetically, that feminism is false, women are not getting the short end of the stick, at all. Given these premises, how is their behaviour not annoying as fuck?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 10:26 PM
14

Even if there wasn't all the real, legal stuff, referenced in other comments, and the fact that it's complete hogwash, feminism creates women with a massive chip on their shoulder. They're making the personal political, so every small issue in the day to day gets overblown into a political fight. People are selfish, and they understand their own needs better than others'. So if you always look for ways in which your needs are not met as well as you think others are, you will find them. In short,…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 09:56 PM
0

You're moving the goalposts now. I never claimed they were common. You claimed they didn't exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 08:53 PM
1

You're seriously telling me that being repeatedly raped and beaten by your husband with no recourse isn't such a big deal as long as you get first place on a life boat? Men can be raped and beaten by women with impunity, in the past and now. Feminists fight attempts to make rape laws gender neutral, and they try to hide evidence of female-on-male rape and DV whenever they can. Sources are available if you ask. It took over seventy years after that for women to be granted the right to vote. "As s…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 08:49 PM
0

There's this MIT math professor and blogger, for instance. At one point, I actually begged a psychiatrist to prescribe drugs that would chemically castrate me (I had researched which ones), because a life of mathematical asceticism was the only future that I could imagine for myself. All this time, I faced constant reminders that the males who didn’t spend months reading and reflecting about feminism and their own shortcomings—even the ones who went to the opposite extreme, who engaged in what y…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 10:57 AM
1

Good example, thank you.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 10:52 AM
1

This narrative of oppression simply does not hold up to scrutiny for gender relations. What other oppressor group was supposed to sacrifice himself for the oppressed if some disaster struck? Did slaveholders had a rule in place where slaves were given first place on lifeboats? The women got the vote as soon as they wanted it. Plenty of women argued against women's suffrage, plenty of men in favour. How do they fit in in your theory? Are those women oppressors of women? The topic of those women a…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 09:27 AM
2

I am aware of how feminists define oppression, I just reject it as a prism to analyze gender relations. Anyway, I appreciate the effort you put in, I don't have time for a lengthy reply now, I'll probably come back to it tomorrow.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 01:33 AM
6

Eh, don't care. I'm not there to protect the mystical sexual purity of my daughter, she can make her own decisions and live with them. RP justification: she'd end up on the CC anyway. BP justification: Love has no age. How cute, it's like harold and maude or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 01:25 AM
2

Because they think there is some merit to the racists claim. They want to get better. And the republicans say they can, theoretically. But the blacks are still depressed and their lives suck even more than average.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 11:23 PM
1

Is that all the thanks I get for educating you? What they were fighting for is not the point. It's how they did it, how they explained it. They blame men for everything, and frame everything as one-sided oppression of women. A majority of women did not want the vote. Women had advantages that men had not, like conscription. Some of that is even obliquely referenced in the sentiments themselves, ffs they even framed the fact that they don't get sentenced as harshly for the same crimes as men as o…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 10:42 PM
1

Do you even know anything about your own movement? The declaration of sentiments is a laundry list of supposed "crimes"/oppression committed by men against women. Feminism in a nutshell: everything is the fault of men. He has withheld her from rights which are given to the most ignorant and degraded men - both natives and foreigners. Having deprived her of this first right as a citizen, the elective franchise, thereby leaving her without representation in the halls of legislation, he has oppress…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 10:26 PM
2

You know what came just a year before the 19th amendment, giving women the vote? The 18th amendment, starting prohibition. I don't have perfect links ready, just google frances willard, susan b anthony, women's christian temperance union.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 10:07 PM
4

Of course not. It comes from the entirety of feminist theory, starting with the declaration of sentiments at the seneca falls convention 1848, blaming men for everything.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 10:00 PM
5

"My male urges disgust me; I hate myself for being a man!" The subtext is there. You want more explicit: The "they have it, we want it" model of sexuality is a part of the structure of rape culture, and it doesn't actually make for good sex, in and of itself. I've just got that shit in my brain still. And I notice it now. I know there have to be times where I creep women out. I still have the "checking her out" habit in me. Why creepily glance at attractive bodies? Because THEY HAVE THEM and WE …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 09:33 PM
3

I don't care about them getting laid. Just be a mensch.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 08:55 PM
2

If republicans had an explicitly anti-black platform, and some black republicans started hating themselves as a result, then yeah, I think it should concern them.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 08:48 PM
2

IDK, I am pretty sure a subreddit that teaches men how to successfully rape women, declaring them to be nothing more than fuck holes, is worse than the movement which gave women the right to vote, purse professional careers, and have recourse in the event of sex-based discrimination, domestic violence, and rape. Who knows what they can achieve if you give them 150 years. Feminism did start as straight-up manhate with added racism and alcohol prohibitionism, after all. They never did shed the man…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 08:40 PM
5

I back them up when they say that the sky is blue and feminism is poison. Just because TRP is misogynistic, doesn't mean feminism isn't worse. I never backtracked because I never claimed to be RP, and I've been in this sub for a while. I have a flair that says I'm not RP. What more do you want?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 08:17 PM
8

I always try my best to respect women no matter what, let them know that I see how strong they are, and let them know that I value them as people. I always try to let them speak and never talk over them. I've been working on things like not mansplaining ever since I knew it was a problem and I always try to make women feel safe. I make absolute sure that there's nothing I'm doing which could make a woman feel like I'm expecting sex or like I see her as a sexual object. The only place that actual…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 07:53 PM
5

read the posts
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 07:32 PM
6

I think it's relevant. I am on the RP/BP spectrum. Is there a rule against moderates I don't know about?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 07:24 PM
0

The truth is ugly, isn't it? Drop by /r/srsmen sometime.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 07:22 PM
1

You obviously have to go pretty far down the feminist hole to see that kind of commitment to the ending of rape culture. Again, this post is not about garden-variety male feminists. I'm talking about those who read a lot of books by feminists, use "mansplaining" unironically, and call themselves "feminist allies" instead of "feminist" because they haven't earned the "title".
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 07:18 PM
4

I' m not RP, just MRA/antifeminist.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 07:08 PM
2

no, I mean tell them their self-flagellation isn't helping anyone. Tell them they're probably not going to rape some woman. Tell them there's nothing wrong with male sexuality per se. Tell them feminism is not worth ruining your life for. And especially don't tell them their loneliness and depression is the result of their entitlement.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 07:06 PM
1

Curious that you believe that it's women's responsibility to make sure men have a happy and fulfilling life. Where did I say that? It is the responsibility of feminists to take care of their fellow feminists, when their life sucks because of feminism... even if they do happen to have a penis.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 06:58 PM
1

what do RPW have to do with male feminist losers? Obviously, if you take RP and feminism as mirror images of male and female chauvinism respectively (a frequent analogy in this sub), those two groups correspond.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 05:13 PM
4

What can I say, I'm a sucker. I won't stop until I've given feminists the 47th chance to show they care even a little bit about men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 05:04 PM
1

MRAs and redpillers and normal shy dudes aren't in danger of castrationg or offing themselves as a tribute to the female gender. "One less oppressor." They don't hate themselves for lusting after women or that one time they told an inappropriate joke. It's one thing to be dateless, it's another to attribute it to one's essential "evil-oppressive" nature.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 04:50 PM
6

You can always go to /r/SRSMen and read the self posts on the front page. The titles: I just need to vent At 19 as a guy I already feel like a failure It's finally happened. I'm a 40 year old virgin. 26 Year Old Virgin, Struggling to Find Reason to Go On
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 04:42 PM
2

I don't doubt that those guys can have some other problems on top of it (ugly, socially awkward, etc), but their feminism is definitely not helping at all. Sure, there are some bitter anti-feminisists too, but they aren't following the dominant gender narrative of the time to its logical conclusion, they're outcasts. I mean, the II feminists do everything right on paper, follow the feminist instructions/rule book like good little boys, they have the backing of academia and a powerful "progressiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 04:33 PM
3

is that all?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 04:23 PM
1

I said that it doesn't apply to all male feminists, only a small minority. I'm curious how you developed this theory. When I see people hurting that bad as a result of imaginary problems and wrong ideas, I try to point out the problem. What is your solution to their problems? As a feminist, do you take any responsibility at all for the situation they're in?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 04:06 PM
1

np
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 02:56 PM
1

resubmitted with option 2
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 02:42 PM
1

I will 'Too much blue pill sucks'? 'Male feminists: a Life in Blue'?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 02:23 PM
1

I don't want to have anyone harass anybody, but look at the front page of /r/SRSMen . Posts 3-7 titles I just need to vent At 19 as a guy I already feel like a failure It's finally happened. I'm a 40 year old virgin. 26 Year Old Virgin, Struggling to Find Reason to Go On
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 02:20 PM
1

It's not too dramatic. I didn't have strong feelings on the matter for a long time, though I guess I could have been described as an uninformed feminist. Then elevatorgate happened in the atheist community, and something about watson's take irked me. I just couldn't see what the coffee-asker did wrong. I read up on a lot of feminist and anti-feminist stuff, and the anti-feminist take made more sense. I became a MRA. I come here because I like to argue and the discussion is pretty free from the u…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 09:08 AM
2

What is there to discuss. Could be true. Men are turned on by the weirdest shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 10:49 PM
1

They're in the OP, the part I quoted. Anyway, here they are again: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf I am available for further clarifications. Any MRA who's spent a little time on the internet can practically debate that study in his sleep.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 04:24 PM
2

Exactly. I don't think oppression is always this unidirectional thing, where one side does the oppressing, and the other the oppressed. I said "suicide" because the question is sneering and not in good faith, and such an answer is hard to sneer at.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 02:00 AM
3

Of course no one is blaming you specifically, but the fact remains that we live in a culture where women are more likely to be victims than not![2] (link to NSVS2010) You know that report shows that just as many men as women were raped during the last year? (Table 2.2 p.19, 12 month figure, "made to penetrate", compare to table 2.1p.18, "rape", twelve month figure).Have you ever talked to a MRA before? This is the go-to MRA study on female-on-male rape. A perfect example of feminist obfuscation …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 01:12 AM
3

Even weaker excuse. Every bad thing just was, at some point. Until we fixed it. And it does follow an anti-feminist narrative pretty well. Feminists never fix any of men's problems, only women's. The evidence: Men have it just as bad in a supposedly "progressive" country as in some third world repressive shithole or the past.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/15 11:15 PM
6

I don't know what you mean "not an ideological issue"... Men have this massive problem, and, what? You're just going to wash your hands of it because it's been true for over a century and is also happening in other countries? That is the feeblest excuse I ever heard for dismissing a problem. Men hate their life so much that they chose Death. As far as problems go, this one is top-level, as grave and as meaningful as can be. Most gender-based complaining is not even in the same league.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/15 11:00 PM
9

But let's not open up about our feelings, because then you'd be seen as weak. Let's keep all those personal problems inside and put a stigma on mental health care (for men, done by other men). I can easily blame women for these things. Women are not exactly fond of weak men, even their own feminist allies. Most mental health professionals are women. Bonus irony: when men complain (MRA stuff), they're told to toughen up and take it because they're sooo privileged. You basically just told men to '…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/15 10:24 PM
9

Suicide. 3 times the black rate, 4 times the female rate.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/15 09:58 PM
1

the best looking woman you can ever get to sleep with you is a 6. So the guy's obviously pretty low on the attractiveness scale. I mean, we've got a once in a lifetime opportunity here, I'd have to consider it. I wouldn't marry her or anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/15 10:54 AM
1

Is it my subconscious or does she look exactly like the chick in Gone Girl? I hope this Cool Girl doesn't betray us with a "feminism can fix men's issues!" message.
/r/MensRights04/11/15 12:42 PM
1

They say something, you say something else. Does anyone have actual numbers? Like, statistically, a guy with a median-high salary, divorced after 10 years, 2 underaged children stay with mother, how much does he lose? Are you saying that this hypothetical Joe doesn't lose the common house plus pays heavy support?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/15 07:41 PM
1

Doesn't really jive with what I know about the wage gap, so I'm a little suspicious. I know men work more hours, but I've never seen it claimed that the difference in hours worked explains the entirety of the wage gap. If true, it is obviously a terrific counter to the wage gap argument. Which makes it weird that I haven't seen it. So I'm not convinced for now, until I see more discussion and sources for this.
/r/MensRights29/08/15 06:34 PM
0

I don't really condone it, but it's their lives, none of my business. Let whoever has never done anything on the internet he wouldn't want to be doxxed for throw the first stone.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 11:45 PM
3

You're forgetting: tons of sexual experience and an artist ("draw me like your prostitutes!"). He's not just a gentleman and a scholar, he's also a pimp and an artist. By comparison she's really boring and average, but I guess that's to be expected in a movie targetting women. A movie targetting men would have a boring average protagonist and an awesome woman(maybe a Manic Pixie Dream Girl).
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/15 03:25 PM
2

I don't know why, I didn't make the rules. When I jerk off, I'm creating the optimal female "avatar" in my mind to fuck, and she can be anything I like, yet I go far more often with "dumb" or "normal" than "smart". Just like I go more often with young, beautiful face and big tits. I don't choose any of this.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/15 03:29 PM
1

I must agree to some degree. Intelligence in women does nothing for me, sexually. Might even be a turnoff. It does increase the social and romantic compatibility, but sexually, it's a dud. I take no responsibility for this state of affairs, I deplore it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/15 01:16 PM
5

Except coontown isn't banned yet, yishan doesn't work for reddit anymore, and he's obviously got an axe to grind. He feels top admins and redditors both slighted his pal pao. I'd take everything he says with a considerable side serving of salt. I wouldn't put it beside him to lie to get the two groups at each other's throats.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/15 12:58 PM
2

That's true, but libertarians are massively overrepresented compared to the general population. half of the US population is already left to center-left and votes democrat, but how many vote for the libertarian party? Yet on reddit the usual debate is between a libertarian and a liberal(with more liberals, I agree). otoh, the conservatives/religious/republicans are very much underrepresented and barely exist on this site.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/15 08:18 PM
2

No, it just sucks. You can't present basic arguments from either side, so all is left is pointless bickering between middle-of-the-roaders. It would be like a religion debate sub where neither the idea "god doesn't exist" and "god exists" can be expressed. You end up politely discussing the finer points of agnosticism, and that's it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/15 12:52 AM
1

Yeah, it's pretty amusing how they manage to censor both the average feminist view and the average MRA view on any given subject. "Heu, some feminists...may say that, heu, some men sometimes say things that can be interpreted as...hem....misogynistic." "wow, slow down with the generalizations there. What does feminist and misogyny mean anyway? First warning. "
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/15 11:00 PM
3

It's not only better than TRP and TBP, it's pretty much the best gender debate sub around. The other ones are so heavy on moderation, it sucks all the fun out of debate (like /r/femradebates , all feminist subs), and it creates circlejerks, because some views are simply moderated out. But a debate sub that accomodates the exteme view of redpillers is pretty much guaranteed to never ban on ideology alone, and I value that. A lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/15 07:43 PM
1

I think objectification is bullshit, total air, doesn't mean anything. And women obviously aren't oppressed. But you want a standard feminist argument for why they're oppressed, so I'll give you one, without undermining it or telling why it's wrong. Women are oppressed because men run things, and people are self-interested. Women are oppressed because they make less money than men, and money is power. Women are oppressed because they're raped and abused by men, and this both satisfies men's desi…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 10:47 PM
4

What is "nice", and who are they nice to? I don't think they're nice, I don't think they're good. Especially not to men and to their ideological enemies. Maybe you mean "polite". They're definitely more polite than TRP. But it's easier to be polite when the mainstream agrees with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/15 10:08 PM
1

Exactly. Such compassion is nowhere to be found in feminists.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 08:35 PM
8

Good. Because freedom good.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 06:28 PM
1

Fine by me. Feminists wouldn't get away with their vicious slander against any other group of humans, even the privileged groups. Even marx didn't go as far as to say that rich people rape the poor to assert their domination because they're amoral beasts.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 06:25 PM
17

http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21648632-recruitment-academic-scientists-may-be-skewed-surprising-way-unfairer?fsrc=scn/tw/te/pe/ed/theunfairersex It appears there's a massive bias against men in STEM. So maybe the reason women get called pretty and not complimented on their work is because they were hired for being women over more qualified men and their work just sucks.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 05:21 PM
1

Haha, god, terrible analogy, but I really appreciate this sub for its offensiveness and liberty of tone. Most of the gender discourse everywhere else is so sanitized, but here you get gratuitious comparisons of women to dogs. Never change, PPD.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 11:58 AM
1

Not sure how You could tell I was just correcting a guesstimate that was three orders of magnitude(!) off the mark with a more reasonable one. Seeing how those are the outermost statistical outliers, and how one would expect the larger overall group to have disproportionately more outliers Why? I don't think so. Take, I don't know, chess players who were born in january. You'd expect to find the same proportion in the chess population whether they're casual players or GMs.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 12:53 AM
1

If you have 10 million male players and a thousand female (overall) The pool of men playing chess is not that much bigger, what are you smoking? For one woman, ten thousand men? Come on. It's something like ten to one.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 02:37 PM
1

You don't understand feminist theory. I think you don't. Patriarchy reinforced male dominance over women, but it was not always to the benefit of men. Who is talking here? You or feminist theory? As a statement of fact, I agree. If this is your interpretation of feminist theory, I disagree. It is only relatively recently that feminism even acknowledged that patriarchy could hurt men, too You cited a blog post? It's a well-respected feminist blog, meant specifically to respond to critics of femin…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 06:17 PM
2

Feminists did not blame patriarchy on men. According to feminism, patriarchy is oppressive to both women and men. Disagree. According to feminism, the main point of patriarchy is to oppress women for the explicit benefit of men. Patriarchy – Literally means the rule of the father and is generally understood within feminist discourses in a dualistic sense as asserting the domination of all men over all women in equal terms. https://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/03/21/faq-isnt-the-patriarc…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 04:17 PM
3

Why would you want to punish men for patriarchy? Is that a general "you"? Because I certainly don't, being an MRA and all.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 03:16 PM
3

Almost everyone today, including men, is pro-women. I don't deny that progressivism/feminism is even more pro-women, to a degree that can only be described as batshit supremacist. In short, conservatives just don't give a shit about men, while feminists are outright happy when men have problems ("What about the men???" and so on, it's justice, because "patriarchy", masculinity are "backfiring").
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 01:58 PM
2

I know it is. Conservatism in its present form is definitely pro-women. When it talks about gender, it always couches it in terms of what's best for women, like this video.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 11:55 PM
3

Well, at first I was glad that they didn't deny the obvious fact of men's higher sex drive. I think the idea of a sexual market place has some value. Minor quibble with the green revolution analogy, I think it has had way more positives than negatives. Does the thinning of some bird's eggshells because of pesticides belong in the same realm of problems than feeding hundreds of millions of extra people? I think not. By the end, what struck me was the exteme gynocentricity ( ie pro-woman, ie anti-…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 11:12 PM
1

Could you stop telling people to lurk more? This isn't TRP. It sounds extremely condescending and lazy. As to your comments on feminism, you need to lurk more on /r/feminism .
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/15 01:47 AM
3

Of course he's a man, he's just not a masculine man in that regard. It's his choice. But I'm tired of hearing that anything connected to masculinity is bad and the solution to all of men's problems is to start crying and talk about your feelings.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 04:52 PM
2

No offense, but I don't trust the social sciences, they're full of feminist assumptions. I need the actual questions, how they define narcissism. Based in these calculations, they found that by far, the widest gap between men and women was a feeling of entitlement (d = 29), which I’m guessing comes as a surprise to no woman anywhere. " And shit like this is not helping. Imagine the reverse. "Finding something bad about women" followed by ".... which I'm sure comes as no surprise to no man anywhe…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/15 08:10 PM
6

The funny thing is that you can turn around most of those pro-women articles very easily by agreeing with the facts and slightly disagree on the interpretation, and suddenly you're a sexist who preaches ugly biotruths. There were these articles after the financial crash that said: "Men's proven higher risk-taking caused it, we need more women in banking". Well, in a business environment, risk-taking is usually seen as positive (would you say you never take risks at a job interview?), so.... "Waa…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/15 02:46 PM
1

This question may sound bizarre, but is the guy's abuser female? It has nothing to do with homophobia on my part, it's indirectly about your character and commitment to feminism as currently practiced. Feminism has done its best to hide female-on-male domestic violence and deny men those services, so your attempt to bridge the gap sounds at least suspect. edit: yep, she said she works with LGBT, probably just a regular feminist bigot
/r/MensRights26/02/15 10:46 PM
2

lol now I'm repeating myself, you're too confused to argue with. It's hard not to work, voluntarily. The boredom must be excruciating. and yet less than 24 hours ago you claimed to envy them The second time was sarcasm. yes as i said you want to be compensated for the choice to alow your spouse to be stay at home. No, it was a "if A, then B" argument. I don't want A or B (compensations).
/r/MensRights02/02/15 09:35 PM
2

yes you don't care that's why you are still argueing this. I didn't say I don't care, just a lot less than you. I'm here to argue, I enjoy it. I think it can do some good, weed out the bad ideas from the sound. You seem more interested in defending your misconceptions or what you feel is your honor by insulting others. It shows how weak your justifications are, if you have any. that's what marriage is. shared assets. there is no "my earnings". so nobody can go away with half of "my earnings". th…
/r/MensRights02/02/15 08:36 PM
7

Jesus Christ take a chill pill. Obviously you are far more invested in this than I am. This isn't a divorce court, and I'm not your ex-spouse. no full custody if you're the nuturing parent. Why? Is custody based on who's the most nurturing? Does the neighbour or babysitter get custody if he's nurturing enough? Did you know it was customary for the breadwinner to get custody, because he had the money to care for his children? All you're doing is spewing some culturally engrained, feminist-influen…
/r/MensRights02/02/15 12:44 PM
1

so i guess full custody should in fact go to the stay at home parent? What's your point? If you're a halfway decent parent (no drugs, etc), you get shared custody if you want. As simple as that. who made that choice anyway? you're acting like such a choice is solely on the shoulders of the stay at home parent. as if they on their own decided they didn't wanna work anymore rather than the far more likely agreement between partners. They made the decision together, so no one gets compensated. I do…
/r/MensRights02/02/15 10:38 AM
6

Why do you frame your opinion as wisdom, and other people's as ignorance? You can absolutely look at it two ways: Either the working one sacrificed his/her time to provide for his/her family, or the nonworking sacrificed his/her career to care for his/her family. As a society, we've been getting exclusively the women/stay-at-home point of view and looked after their interests until now. Personnally, I think the stay-at-home parent got the better deal. My time is more valuable than my career. And…
/r/MensRights02/02/15 10:05 AM
3

I didn't mean to say I've become a flatearther who denies everything and questions empirical truth, I just take it with a grain of salt when people tell me science is on their side. The feminist research isn't necessarily supposed to link up to the theory. It also used to say this, right after the first part: Thus, feminist research rejects Weber's value-free orientation in favour of being overtly political—doing research in pursuit of gender equality. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=F…
/r/MensRights01/02/15 11:34 PM
4

I don't think feminist theory is what bamboozles people. I think people just accept it uncritically as a timeless truth. I'm not sure, but given how they insist they have academic backing, some people think feminist theory is falsifiable, even proven, with lots of evidence. I certainly used to think so, even after I had become more or less a MRA. It didn't occur to me that they could just blatantly produce research and explanations that were one-way only. I've become a lot more skeptical towards…
/r/MensRights01/02/15 10:38 PM
5

It's a tool for analysis---just not a very good one. It's also because of this that feminist theory often seems so immune to empirical facts. The theory precedes the facts and only exists to interpret whatever we find, rather than to have counterexamples made. Amazing how little they try to hide it, and yet people get bamboozled by their "findings". The wiki article for "feminist theory" used to say: Feminist researchers embrace two key tenets: (1) their research should focus on the condition of…
/r/MensRights01/02/15 10:02 PM
0

BMI from 24 to 28 or so. Much more than that, and you' ve given up on being conventionnally attractive physically. Which of course doesn't mean you can't find love or sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/15 10:24 AM
0

It kinda sorta looks like a second peak is on the rise (p6). The curb didn't just move to the right. While it used to be that most were thin, and then the curb went down fast, now it's getting flatter between 30 and 40.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/15 10:57 PM
0

You may be right on some level, but those are friggin chinese.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/15 10:19 PM
-2

Somehow the middle ground hardly exist nowadays. It's either 'fuck-my-weight' fatties or 'count-the-salad-leaves' starvies.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/15 09:44 PM
3

To be clear, I'm a MRA and not RP. To be cynical, I wonder if RPs, and also MGTOWs and PUAs, could be the bad cop to our good cop. Take even something as immediate as this sub. Given the offensiveness of their beliefs and tone, any sub that accomodates RPers needs to have a very lax discourse policy, and that is good for the free discussion and spreading of MRM talking points, which are pretty much snuffed out of the mainstream. I appreciate how much more honestly one can speak his mind here com…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/14 02:17 AM
1

So do you also hate abolitionists because they only focused on one group? That's not what I said. I don't dislike feminists because they focus on one group. I dislike them because they demonize another group.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/14 12:31 AM
2

Zero. They poisoned the discourse from the very beginning, by making it all about a sex war between the evil men and the oppressed women. Look at the declaration of sentiments, seneca falls convention, 1848: He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise. He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she had no voice. He has withheld her from rights which are given to the most ignorant and degraded men - both natives and foreigners. Hav…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/14 11:13 PM
7

haha the analogy is just terrible. If you don't water your garden, no one does and the plants die, dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/14 09:31 AM
10

If anything, it affirms it. Lol. It sure seems like everything does. I think women are judged negatively for displaying traits typically associated with masculinity because its threatening to male power. Women displaying feminine qualities are, for the most part, only ostracized by men because they also threaten male power by appearing "weaker." This is so absurd it reads like a parody. So whatever women do, they "threaten male power". If they appear stronger, they threaten male power. If they a…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/14 01:47 PM
9

You're not going to get very far with rpers with that line of reasoning, although the gist is correct. Sexual success/lack of it is how they define themselves, their relationships with women, their relationships to other men. It's the reason they take up hobbies, they cultivate friendships, they work.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/14 01:26 PM
2

What makes you think she's a feminist? Don't blame feminism for shitty people without evidence. Although in that case they are partly responsible for the lack of resources available to abused men.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 12:52 PM
7

That's fucking horrible. Can't you save for a bit and get a one-bedroom apartment? Any friends or family you might go to for help? Usually I'd say go to the cops about the abuse and rape, but it doesn't look like you need that sort of complication in your situation.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 11:09 AM
2

an event so obnoxious that three hundred people (and likely more, if it had gone forward) were willing to hold a protest over it. That's three hundred likes, only about sixty said they would go. http://www.cherwell.org/news/college/2014/11/17/christ-church-jcr-pressure-college-over-abortion-debate Just so we're clear; as long as enough people oppose/aggressively demonstrate/want to disrupt/ an event or debate, we should cancel it? If enough neonazis or republicans wanted to show up and disrupt a…
/r/MensRights22/11/14 02:10 AM
2

You mean, they planned to exercise their right of free expression? Funny how that gate swings both ways. No, they threatened violence: Three hundred promised to turn up to the debate with ‘instruments’ — heaven knows what — that would allow them to disrupt proceedings. Then the debate was cancelled, citing, "safety concerns". You're arguing in bad faith. Their avowed goal is to shut down the debate, not express their point of view. ... at their school. Who should be deciding who speaks at Oxford…
/r/MensRights21/11/14 07:58 PM
3

It's not your living room, it's some hall on campus, made for debate (and a good debate should be controversial). The only reason these debates were banned were because it was "offensive" to some of the students. They didn't just say:"Im not going there", the way a redditor decides not to respond to a stupid or offensive comment, no, they actively wanted it shut down, preventing those who were interested in the debate from participating. No one was forcing them to go to the debate, to listen and…
/r/MensRights21/11/14 05:23 PM
2

Do you feel obliged to listen to people who want to explain to you about patriarchy theory I frequently do so, it's part of the reason why I'm on the internet, to convince people who are wrong. To me, it's very clear that your position on the matter is false and harmful, and yet here I am. I didn't just say "I wish they'd just ban chavelah's opinion from this sub's bandwidth, the matter is settled".
/r/MensRights21/11/14 03:24 PM
5

He sais close to 100% impossible, and since it's already hard to adopt as a couple, and it's even harder to adopt as a single woman, and it's even harder to adopt as a single man, he's in the ballpark of truth. Plus some countries outright ban single men from adopting, so it's not "close to", but actually 100%. Plus I suspect "most" single parent adopters being female could be 80-90%, making it, again, close to 100%. Plus your previous answer didn't actually refute anything he said. He said "clo…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/14 01:34 PM
3

How does that make him a liar? Most single adoptive parents are female http://statistics.adoption.com/information/adoption-statistics-single-parents.html Don't know how much "most" is. However, today, many countries only allow women to adopt as a single parent, and many others only allow men to adopt boys. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_parent#History_of_single_parent_adoptions
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/14 01:12 PM
10

Just my subjective opinion, but: It's on a spectrum, and most stereotypically femininine and masculine qualities are not inherently toxic, but become so when there is too much of it. toxic masculinity: too great an unwillingness to compromise, too great a propensity to solve conflicts with violence, too much stoicism in the face of danger(like not going to the doctor)... toxic femininity: relying too much on the judgment and help of others, seeking consensus and harmony at the cost of Truth and …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/14 12:58 PM
4

But to insist on it as a matter of right is to deeply misunderstand how freedom of speech works. No one is saying holding conferences on all issues on campus is a right, except disingenuous little puritans such as yourself. The concept of Free speech is more than a right, than a law. It includes confronting ideas you don't like, instead of banning them.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 02:18 AM
2

Wow, didn't know we had some of those folks here. It's funnier because as an MRA, you have some of those ideas deemed unfit for consumption by your friends, who would make the exact same argument as you do wrt abortion, but about male issues. Poor conflicted stepford student, the scaffold was raised for none but you. "If only we could censor everything except my own opinions!"
/r/MensRights21/11/14 12:02 AM
5

I don't think those analogies work. Who gets the credit? The soldier or the general? Secretaries and nurses are not on the same level of intellect, education and responsibilities than CEOs and doctors (and there are far less of those). They're on the level of factory workers and specialized technicians. This has nothing to do with femininity.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/14 09:57 PM
4

I'm sorry for being pedantic, but what does femininity entail? traditional female role: Raising children, staying at home, or stereotypically femininie qualities: stuff like submissiveness, valuing feelings over reasoning, seeking consensus, nurturing or girly hobbies: interest in things like shopping, gossiping, clothes, makeup? I disagree that masculinity (defined the same as point 2) is valued over femininity, btw. Feminists keep saying that masculinity is the root of all evil, and the media …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/14 09:44 PM
6

Just keep asking your feminist friends about these sorts of problems and you'll lose your illusions fast. It's not going to be pretty. Most feminists are either like your friends, or grossly ignorant of feminist theory and practice It's the reasonable and fair feminists who are the exception.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 07:14 PM
1

This gender gap is about six times as large as the racial disparity that Prof. Starr found in another recent paper. Holy shit I thought they were equally as large.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 12:20 AM
67

The rationalizations are just bizarre. "old women need free time and money so they can help their relatives". Sure they do. Man, this pisses me off. Men pay more and longer for the privilege of a shorter retirement. Work, work, work all your life, then die quickly so you're not a burden on all those women living off your contributions.
/r/MensRights19/11/14 09:02 PM
1

Are ISIS atrocities invented, or justified? Oh wait - you have no right to defend yourself because - fuck foreigners. Right. Fuck the foreigners getting slaughtererd by the glorious anti-imperialist army. Small price to pay to teach america a lesson, right?
/r/MensRights08/11/14 11:02 AM
2

Apart from the obvious fact that it appears to consist of people defending their country from the US invasion of Iraq you mean? They're "defending" their country from the shia majority. How about this? Yeah, they're allied to sunni baathist generals. They found continuity in the "killing kurds" aspect. What's your point? As long as they're fighting amerikkka, they're good people? Why are you defending them? There's defending Stalin, and then there's defending genocidal maniacs with whom you have…
/r/MensRights08/11/14 12:42 AM
2

Oh, I'd love to hear the communist spin on how ISIS is all about resistance to imperialism.
/r/MensRights07/11/14 11:56 PM
4

But I thought you couldn't make it to the top on merit? I don't know many more names because I don't read Forbes. According to you, non-famousness is proof of incompetence?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/14 09:22 AM
2

Are you a gender constructivist, that is, you don't think biology plays any role in the differences between men and women?
/r/MensRights04/11/14 10:48 PM
2

We don't pick explanations by which is less misandric, feels better, or offends the least amount of people. Crazy, I know.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 09:17 PM
3

So, your point is that being on the highest corporate boards has no correlation to competence and intelligence? It's just one big aristocratic family. Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett etc just knew and married the right people, I guess. Believing anything else is holy shit level naivete.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/14 05:52 PM
6

not everywhere, just the jobs where competence matters the most
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/14 02:05 PM
8

Irrelevant. This has nothing to do with pushiness in respective cultures, this is just a broad attack on meritocracy, which failed to give women all the goodies just for having a vagina. Those less pushy european countries are also the ones most ready to introduce 50/50 quotas everywhere women are underrepresented.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/14 01:55 PM
2

Don't know why you're getting downvoted. Yeah, there's a number of female MRAs in your situation. The owner of [this blog] (http://breakingtheglasses.blogspot.fr/p/whose-blog-is-this.html#.VFgZ8clkKGU) for instance has had an unpleasant encounter with the courts when she tried to defend her husband, a divorcee. She used to comment here a lot and writes some articles for MRA sites and does radio podcasts I think. She seems really easy to talk to, so maybe email her and she can give you some advic…
/r/MensRights04/11/14 12:17 AM
12

zero hour is a little early to throw your kid under the bus
/r/MensRights03/11/14 11:57 PM
3

because of your arguing somewhere, a rape victim is crying
/r/MensRights02/11/14 01:33 AM
2

So Emma Watson was sexualized by "the male population" at the age of eleven?
/r/MensRights01/11/14 11:14 PM
4

It's useless. Worse than useless. As long as feminism blames men, it can never help them. And her discourse clearly buys into that oppressor/oppressed dichotomy. Men are aggressors and controllers. "The patriarchy hurts men, too" is no revolutionary statement from a feminist. It just means they can't deny all male issues. Still, it's men's fault, and men's reponsability to fix not only themselves, but women too. Starting with the pure innocent gender.
/r/MensRights22/09/14 10:00 PM
0

of course it needs to be fixed, but some precautions are in order until it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/14 08:22 AM
3

82% is scary low. Almost unbelievable. Where does the commonly heard 99% come from?
/r/MensRights17/09/14 09:25 PM
0

Actually, my argument is not one of emotion but rather logic. And you don't seem to have understood it. Stating "My arguments are logical" does not make them so. You don't seem to understand what a coherent argument is about. He's punishing a great amount of innocent individuals for the actions of a few because they have a body part in common, when the body part wasn't responsible for the shitty actions. In a way, it was, since without the body part the false accuser couldn't have had him expell…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/14 09:17 PM
-1

Rapists do not have institutional/legal power on their side. The female student does. Your argument is pretty emotional. "Woman uses institutional power to punish an innocent." You: "Men rape and murder people!" We are not talking about evil people. We're talking about the law backing them, rewarding them. And if you genuinely give a shit about what happened to him, you'd be maybe organizing a protest against the Dean, or contacting lawmakers. By that logic, anyone not actively fighting an injus…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/14 07:15 PM
25

To all the people commenting "nice to see a reasonable feminist woman", this is CHS, a major inspiration for the MRM. She's reasonable alright, but it has nothing to do with feminism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christina_Hoff_Sommers I feel like I'm sourcing a girl on the fapping subreddits.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 09:32 PM
1

Lawyers and guilty people say a lot stupid shit. Let's wait until the verdict to be outraged.
/r/MensRights14/09/14 08:41 PM
3

Nag more. You can always fuck yourself. Sincerely, Prince Charming
/r/MensRights11/09/14 07:54 AM
1

Yeah, I'm just tired of seeing of seeing women vent about men everywhere, while men are ruthlessly demonized if they do the same. Although the standard for hating women is so low these days, I might qualify just by being misanthropic.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 12:08 AM
2

Here's a poll from two years ago. It answers most of your questions. For instance, an overwhelming majority views early feminism's gains positively, most MRAs are socially liberal, etc. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/xwj1r/rmr_poll_results/
/r/MensRights04/09/14 12:25 AM
3

Whatever we decide, women will be pressured , while men will laugh in the dark. Such is life. At the same time, men who want to get out of a marriage cheaply can run to divorce court on the eve of the next cut-off period. Oh noez they don't want to pay extra!
/r/MensRights04/09/14 12:07 AM
3

Be careful with hookups, the system will fuck you over and never look back if a woman so desires. If it happens, it's best not to have had sex with that woman. Screen for crazyness and feminism. The forced brainwashing is funnier. I think I'd enjoy that, in a "secret one-eyed in the land of the blind" way. Find like-minded people and laugh at the SJW, they're so easy to tease.
/r/MensRights31/08/14 10:59 PM
8

Sometimes I think feminism is just a way for privileged girls to unfairly win arguments against their usually harmless, feminist-leaning boyfriends, whose greatest sin is masturbating withour permission. Feminists only care about one line: the one they have traced between men and women, separating bad and good. All the other lines are blurred, esp. the one separating good women from bad women and good men from bad men. They have no interest in locating the problem to actual perpetrators. On a co…
/r/MensRights31/08/14 05:33 PM
4

They all are, technically. Rich people are obviously a minority, Men are in the minority in general , and white people in the world. And you said "desire to see everyone as nice people".
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/14 07:49 AM
3

This is more a problem with leftist ideologies desire to see everyone as nice people and not single out any minority group as bad (political correctness) and to preach tolerance of other cultures. What the hell? I nearly choked on my adam's apple reading that. Leftist ideologies certainly do not have have a desire to see rich people, white people or men as nice people. They do not have some kind of stoner-hippie "everyone should just get along" mentality. On the contrary, they always take the si…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/14 09:35 PM
11

But he's not into Pokemon.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 09:34 PM
1

And another overton window is closing on radical feminist policies.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 08:35 AM
1

It's probably because representatives of the people need to be held accountable for their votes and the policies they support. But it does have obvious downsides, true.
/r/MensRights28/08/14 01:54 PM
11

ideology =/= biological group
/r/MensRights26/08/14 08:31 PM
9

Well it does happen, but what some call "upgrading to a younger model" others call "the old marriage wasn't working/there was no love anymore, only routine/etc". Given feminism's gynocentrism, when women break up their marriages, they have the best reasons in the world, but when men do it, it's always out of callousness and perversity.
/r/MensRights26/08/14 08:14 PM
2

Was someone wrong on the internet again? I hate when that happens.
/r/MensRights19/08/14 10:04 AM
6

People changing their minds shouldn't be chastised for their previous beliefs (as long as they didn't actively do too much harm). Many of us used to be feminists by ignorance, like OP was. Cast the first stone etc.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 09:37 PM
1

Have there ever been laws forcing bachelors to marry, or imposing special taxes on bachelors in your world? I haven't heard of that. Care to develop?
/r/MensRights18/08/14 09:31 PM
15

Yeah I'm having trouble believing the show takes itself at face value. Conscientous objectors who refuse to beat children and invalids are not usually targeted by sincere mockery. One piece of dialogue he quotes: “I really believe in this war and I’m really keen to help.” She replies: “Rubbish, if you were really keen to help you would have killed yourself to raise morale.” No one can seriously believe this to be the right opinion. Sounds more like a parody of hyper-patriotic rhetoric to me.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 05:30 PM
2

He's full of shit. see my answer to him for sources.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 11:51 AM
5

In societies where it is acceptable for women to pursue these disciplines, such as Scandinavian countries, women make up the great majority of doctors, lawyers, etc. Definitely not true. Some data from 2000, showing most scandinavian countries have ~60% male doctors. http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Labor/Female-doctors Another one from WHO, again showing a majority of male physicians: http://www.who.int/gho/health_workforce/physicians_density_gender/en/
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 11:18 AM
4

Agreed that TRP explicitly promotes calmness. However, when you take into account that most TRP readers will never achieve the ideal super-cool, winner alpha, plus that their ideology promotes despising non-alpha men as well as women, and interpreting some innocuous, normal human behaviour as evil and manipulative, it creates a situation where they might "lose it" rather easily when their self-image conflicts with reality. If a "stupid slut" holds a mirror to their face and they see a needy beta…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/14 01:57 PM
17

Why 85%, why not 90 or 99%? How arbitrary is that? There's zero guarantee that they will be satisfied with 85%, because that number made no sense in the first place. And so it goes on. It's just...completely irrational. Understanding feminists is like trying to interpret North Korea's actions. Is the insanity part of the strategy, so that no one fucks with them? Have they reached a point where other people's POVs, and the justifications owed others for feminists' actions, don't even enter their …
/r/MensRights15/08/14 10:16 PM
17

"The reason I beat you now, is because you ask why I beat you." Amon Goth, Schindler's list I'm obviously not being serious here, but I do think there is some hateful gloating in that "peace offer".
/r/MensRights15/08/14 01:22 PM
4

Shit, right, I must have confused you with all the other communists who treat Mensrigths as radioactive.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 01:23 PM
10

You first, shithead.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 12:59 PM
4

Hi anticapitalist, you're out of /r/DebateaCommunist Since when have you been MRA-leaning? Did DavidByron convert you? :)
/r/MensRights14/08/14 12:24 PM
2

I can't blame unwilling fathers of any race for not sticking around. And the US does have a problem putting too much (mostly black) men in prison, which isn't working as a way to prevent criminality.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 12:09 PM
0

Excellent. This is just the kind of mainstream-palatable article we can use more of, now that the MRM has picked off some steam.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 12:05 PM
15

"I can't hire you, all customers would want you." Wait, how does that make sense?
/r/MensRights13/08/14 08:36 PM
7

Is this one of your "wawaaaa MR was mean to me again" threads? I'm going to assume that the perspective is going to be from the white population. Haha, good one, original, conductive to discourse, excellent. If you're going to come in hostile, at least flesh out some criticism. I'm pretty sure you have an idea what men's gender roles are.
/r/MensRights12/08/14 09:10 PM
2

Nice.
/r/MensRights12/08/14 07:22 PM
-6

Could we not make this into an MRM issue?
/r/MensRights12/08/14 07:18 PM
-1

Oh, fuck off. Mainstream society is full of hypocrites. Why do we have to abide by the rules of political correctness they so blatantly flaunt? I don't know if men are smarter than women, and I usually assume and argue that women and men are basically the same, but if some feminist told me women were smarter, you bet I'd rub her face in any study showing male superiority and the achievements of men.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 10:25 PM
2

True. One is worse, but both are censorship.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/14 11:18 AM
1

it's worse than that. Possibly at the micro, interpersonal level. that's "maybe, and then only the lowest possible amount, on the level that doesn't matter" If you get any closer to zero than that, you can't divide by it.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 10:12 AM
4

I see you're french. Do you know of a large men's forum in french ( or even a feminist, non-banning forum)? I'm starting to think we got Sweden beat in totally unopposed feminist encroachment.
/r/MensRights05/08/14 11:39 PM
6

http://translate.google.fr/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Ffemmes.gouv.fr%2Fle-parlement-a-definitivement-adopte-le-projet-de-loi-pour-legalite-reelle-entre-les-femmes-et-les-hommes%2F Basically, 40% affirmative action on everything, media has to be nice to women, "To protect women victims of violence:[...] The eviction of a violent spouse from the couple's home becomes the rule.", no trace of helping male victims of anything, (I don't think anyone here even knows it can happen). Ah, …
/r/MensRights05/08/14 11:01 PM
2

When did she provide that quote then, and what was the context? Googling it gives nothing except that article. We all know Pizzey is part of Avfm.
/r/MensRights05/08/14 09:32 AM
0

dae has a problem with the MSM stealing our talking points goddam i hate when people start agreeing with me i need another niche cause stat
/r/MensRights04/08/14 09:31 PM
1

waiddaminute are u trollin son?
/r/MensRights03/08/14 10:37 AM
0

In my observation, the average girl is getting quite a high partner count while the average guy absolutely is not. You realize that for every hetero woman that gets layed, a hetero man does too? The average has to be the same. Of course, it is theoretically possible that a minority of men gets tons of sex and the rest very little, while women all get similar amounts. But then (female) sluts shouldn't really exist, and neither should (female) prudes/virgins. Anyway, there are studies about this, …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/14 01:15 AM
–

How could he be a villain on reddit? He likes Pink Floyd and weed!
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/14 10:14 PM
–

Eternal Sunshine of the spotless mind: Is Carrey just too beta for freewheeling Winslet?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/14 09:38 PM
–

American Beauty: Spacey gets his mojo back after being despised for years by his female family members. RP hero for going his own way or BP hero for not taking advantage of a virgin damsel in distress?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/14 09:38 PM
–

Dangerous Liaisons: It's so ruthless in its gender war it's gotta appeal to RPers. Or maybe the movie's war can be seen as between RPers(Valmont and merteuil) VS BPer(the rest). And the moralistic ending gives BPer a bang for their buck.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/14 09:37 PM
2

Agree with RP: Feminism is shit. Mainstream dating advice doesn't work for men, even demonizes and guilt-trips them. The dating script, typical relationship counseling, marriage, etc, is biased in favour of women. Misogyny is blown out of proportion. There's nothing wrong with trying to sleep with women. There's also nothing wrong with sleeping with drunk women. There are major biological differences between men and women. Acting like a doormat leaves you gf- and dateless. Acting like a minor as…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/14 09:29 PM
1

I was just pointing out how incredibly common the reverse is. So is TRP looking to emulate those fucks now? Naaa, don't think so. They think they're the superior ones. Just like women who read shit-tier mags. Totally different. But this kind of double standard is why I really don't care about low-level misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 05:53 PM
1

Looks like they are even more valuable than children... Out of the civilian deaths, there are 200 Men, 130 Children and only 70 women. How is that possible?
/r/MensRights01/08/14 04:15 PM
2

an article from yesterday http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2711845/Treat-partner-like-PUPPY-youll-earn-lifelong-love-devotion-says-life-coach.html
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 03:09 PM
2

That's not rape.
/r/MensRights28/07/14 02:13 PM
7

The main one is to shift the blame for gender oppression past and present from men to society as a whole, and mean it. Some will say this is already the case, but everything they do contradicts this.
/r/MensRights22/07/14 09:11 AM
1

Pill yourself
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/14 07:49 PM
7

I guess what really gets me about this page is that not only does it not understand what feminism is or what a feminist looks like, but that often people complain that they have been “repeatedly harassed” on the internet from so called feminists because of what they have said. Well, not that it makes it right, but, may I say on behalf of all netizens, welcome to the internet. I get harassed on an almost daily basis from people on the internet because I am a feminist, which is part of the reason …
/r/MensRights18/07/14 06:37 PM
172

To hell with all the downvotes this will get Oh come on this wouldn't even get downvotes in regular reddit, let alone MR.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 11:03 AM
6

Well, they call chivalry benevolent sexism. Something that harms men and benefits women is "good". That just shows they've abandoned any kind of universal morality. They even brag about that and call it "feminist ethics". Men are moral non-persons in feminism, and women alone are "the measure of all things". I agree that feminism for women today is about primitive self-interest, allbeit inconsciously so. "I know I'm supposed to be against sexism and gender roles, but what does chivalry do for me…
/r/MensRights15/07/14 11:02 PM
2

I explained to him that rape culture is one of the biggest issues facing our society right now, and he looked confused and seemed to not understand. http://imgur.com/AwMxcDi
/r/MensRights14/07/14 09:21 AM
7

Ho-lee shit. So that's why we're nearly hitting 100k subs. When the most pro-men of feminists just come out and tell men to "shut up and listen", "you don't get a say in feminism", recruiting MRAs is easy. I wouldn't want it any other way. The most moderate gynocentric feminists have always been the most dangerous to the aims of the MRM imo.
/r/MensRights14/07/14 12:54 AM
2

Christ not one of those posts again. Fuck off, no one cares what you think "we" should do.
/r/MensRights14/07/14 12:52 AM
29

Good thing they "infiltrated" our super-secret conference. They caught us right-handed, that was a textbook secret Patriarchy meeting for keeping women down. We're going to have to dial down the oppression until this blows over. Don't expect your Patriarchy check this month, guys.
/r/MensRights12/07/14 06:22 PM
3

Where?
/r/MensRights10/07/14 01:47 PM
5

I put it this way: men > women : men are evil men < women : men are weak
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/14 11:19 AM
5

Entire argument is a strawman. She's acting as if men already had a right to opt out, and arguing against an extension of that right. I'm not getting the point, it's ridiculous. Can anyone fall for this?
/r/MensRights04/02/14 10:59 AM
4

The ugliest said 400,000 RMB and a house.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 12:57 AM
1

Maybe situations that aren't clearly sexist should be ignored/blamed on people's assholishness. Else we'll denounce nonexistent problems and anything bad that happens to us will only confirm our biases. God help us if we turn into those feminists who see misogyny in every sneeze. I'd rather focus on the law and direct ideological attacks.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:30 PM
13

define: special pleading
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:17 PM
1

Just from my PM conversation 10 mins ago. (From me) Did you remove this thread? Why? http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1wdhqh/man_sentenced_to_13_years_eight_months_for/ Maybe I have shit in my eyes, but I can't see it either on front or new or a green mod taking action ITT. permalink source reply full comments [–] from nameofmod [M] via /r/MensRights/ sent 16 minutes ago It was removed. It has nothing to do with men's rights. No one has the right to dose others with prescription chemi…
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:13 PM
2

This thread was removed by mods. Apparently(direct quote in response to my PM): It has nothing to do with men's rights. No one has the right to dose others with prescription chemicals. ???
/r/MensRights28/01/14 08:58 PM
1

Oh, Dave, you'll always be a MRA to me. And to feminists. You can't define yourself against the whole world. Btw, your tripod site is gone. Are the essays available elsewhere?
/r/MensRights28/01/14 08:28 PM
1

You can like her without liking her if ya know what i mean
/r/MensRights26/01/14 11:37 PM
1

I guess I kind of go by the belief that we have both a moral duty to try not to be offensive and to do our best to not be offended. I see it as an unspoken dichotomy. There's two ways to achieve a lack of offensiveness/hurt feelings. One is to force people not to say anything offensive ("try not to be offensive"), the other is to let offensiveness roll by us ("do our best not to be offended"). I find the first stifling to discussion and the search for truth. You appear to have clearly chosen the…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/14 11:54 PM
2

I am pretty submissive and sensitive, I'd be eaten alive in a sub that was ok with poop slinging. I would just stop participating. This goes for the other side too. I don't enjoy being told what I can and can't say. There are lots of "safe spaces" on reddit already, that I avoid like the plague. One of the reasons this sub is so active and I appreciate it, is that its rules are pretty lax, partly because TRP is offensive by nature and any sub accomodating them must at least shelve rules prohibit…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/14 10:04 PM
4

Anger is an emotion that has historically been associated with men, but has somehow been seen as exempt from the negative associations attached to more traditionally feminine emotions. And you base this on what? Have male philosophers praised anger as a virtue? I've seen feminists do it, but that's neither here nor there. Letting yourself be overcome by anger is seen as a childish/adolescent thing to do, not manly. On the internet, it means you've lost the discussion and people will make fun of …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/14 09:45 PM
-1

We've banned mods before, just ask SpermJackalope. Irrelevant. First I don't support any ban, no matter the side, and second redpillschool is way more of a RP leader than SPJ is a BP leader. TBP has 70 mods anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/14 09:13 PM
7

Most moderators in debate subs have to ban people. Having a place where people aren't just slinging poop at each other requires it. I don't believe in banning people in debate subs. At all. Unmoderated debate subs work pretty well, like /r/DebateaCommunist . Slinging poop at each other is far preferable to the soft death of too much moderation, which has completely strangled almost all gender-discussion subs on reddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/14 09:09 PM
5

You're making it sound as though he is the bad guy for responding to baits and getting into fights with aggressive, circlejerky, pro-majority commenters. Debate mods should be especially lenient towards those arguing against the grain like he is. Besides, he is a representative leader of the RP side, and as such should be protected by something resembling diplomatic immunity. To be clear, I don't support any ban, even of the baiters.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/14 05:32 PM
2

Jesus Christ. She says it makes sense to restrict the focus to female victims because women are the primary victims of rape, while rape is defined as a thing men do to women. How biased and/or stupid do you have to be to not see the tautology?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 02:51 PM
-1

lol definitely not. gtfo shitbird
/r/MensRights21/01/14 08:35 PM
2

I have no interest in allying with feminists, even the moderate ones. Zero. As long as they blame men, they're poison. The author of this comic believes in Patriarchy, ie men-blaming. They can go fuck themselves.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 08:02 PM
2

omg I laughed at a joke! Bad, bad MRA! Report it to your masters. Manboobz is gonna have a field day with this.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 07:54 PM
0

It's a feminist comic. If it can be changed to an anti-feminist message by simply putting the characters in the same boxes, I'll laugh. As you refuse to engage with the heart of the matter, I'll leave it at that.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 07:41 PM
-4

When you said that being direct, but polite, does.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/14 07:36 PM
1

That isn't the point of this conversation. lol You can't even deny it.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 07:33 PM
2

Yeah, so? This does not contradict anything I've said. You're saying the plausible deniability technique doesn't work and you should tell women politely that you want to fuck them. The comment contradicts you. That TRP's explanation for why it works might be false doesn't change the fact that it does work.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/14 07:25 PM
0

Are you going to pretend that feminism doesn't blame men?
/r/MensRights21/01/14 07:12 PM
-3

Wtf are we supposed to do? Take on all the evil in the world on our heads just because? Accept to be the sacrificial lamb? I don't think women should take men's place as the universal scapegoat, but this is a comic. It's funny because it reverses the way feminists always present it, and because some of the insults actually do sound more like things women would say, highlighting the weakness of their case.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 05:09 PM
2

You realize you're contradicting the top comment of this thread? She said, "yeah it works, but because I need an excuse to leave if things don't work out".
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/14 03:38 PM
1

no man could ever write that and be published. this wouldn't be news. you're also ignoring the sexism in her comments to her husband and the firefighter. No one can be that oblivious to how her situation mirrors innumerable men's and not fail morally. Anyway, you seem either dim or arguing in bad faith so I'll leave you to it.
/r/MensRights19/01/14 07:44 PM
3

Why? Because she has no clue how caught up she is in her own sexist prejudices. She treats her situation as an outlier, something exceptional that never happened to anyone besides her and her girlfriends. Except it happened millions of times to men, and she never gave a shit about that. "Why should I suffer? I'm a woman." She's careful not to blame "people who take alimony" in general because that would incriminate women and she knows it. The only reason she gives is that her husband is "a pussy…
/r/MensRights19/01/14 06:44 PM
0

It's probable most women look better to the average man with long rather than short hair. Doesn't mean there aren't exceptions, of course. And no one has an obligation to look a certain way to strangers. There seems to be an assumption that long hair is a sign of fertility, but I don't think that's actually true. It doesn't matter whether it's true or not, or was true at some point. It's not because Nature configured us one way that we have to follow. Otoh, it's not because Nature's reasons aren…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/14 01:57 PM
1

I thought they didn't go to prison? They weren't even charged because of their airtighht alibis.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 09:59 AM
2

Fuckin hell, every single discussion. Anti-feminist: Claim. Feminist: Nuh-huh. Source it. Anti-feminist: Source. Feminist: Nuh-huh. Explain. Anti-feminist: Explanation. Feminist: Nuh-huh. What's the meaning of "original claim", anyway? Anti-feminist: Meaning. Feminist: Nuh-huh. What's the meaning of "meaning"? ...ad infinitum moving of the goalposts The discrepancy between the certainty with which they assert their opinion and how utterly they fail to support it is insane.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/14 11:22 PM
3

first things first, which side are you on? "If you support TRP: BPer: Obviously your problem is you hate women too much. If you support TBP: RPer: Obviously your problem is you don't hate women enough." Joking aside, are you okay? I know two kinds of slackers: sad ones who can't find enough joy in life to do anything, and happy ones who find so much joy in so little that they just lazily drift through life with a smile on their face. Sometimes the happy ones will pretend to be sad so as not to i…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/14 07:07 PM
0

What's the use of growing up anyways, in your analogy I'll always be a baby. I'm sorry I hold people responsible for the actions they take.
/r/MensRights16/01/14 06:48 PM
0

feminists aren't babies
/r/MensRights16/01/14 05:51 PM
1

I'm not sure what you mean here - you realise that "grandmother" isn't a literal term here, right? She is a grandmother to ideas and movements, not people. Really? I thought feminists were like a dynasty. Presumably, they ate all the men they reproduced with as soon as copulation was over. I don't see how it's possible to interpret it any other way. Let me help you there. "the oppressor"= men. "Him"=men, Man ..Since that's more or less the definition of 'norm' used in this context. Success and a…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/14 01:54 AM
2

She is informally described as the grandmother of feminism! That is, her ideas gave birth to the generation that gave birth to feminism. She would have had more than enough time to grandmother Elisabeth Cady Stanton, who was born when Wollstonecraft would have been 56. "He" and "him" are discussing male norms and gender roles, not actual men. In other words, it is attempting to poetically embody the notion of patriarchy in a way for some people to better understand what is being discussed. Haha …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/14 01:10 AM
1

Yeah, econ. Not that sort of social science, thank God.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/14 12:22 AM
1

That's the most ridiculous thing I ever read.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/14 12:17 AM
8

It's funny how you can wake up one day, everything the same as yesterday, feeling secure in your righteousness, going through your routine internet blogs, and then something feels slightly off. You start reading more and more arguments and counter-arguments to make the weirdness go away, but suddenly it's 2 in the morning, you've got 35 partially unread browser tabs open, and your mind is going in every direction at once. You try to sleep, but you can't stop thinking. In the morning, there's no …
/r/MensRights15/01/14 10:46 PM
0

hat's why the "Declaration of Sentiments" is usually considered "proto-feminist", as it was one of the sparks that eventually led to first wave feminism a few decades later. Even Mary Wollstonecraft (18th century) is considered a feminist (see the wikipedia page I just linked), so you're arguing against a wall. Your other link said nothing about feminism blaming men so I don't see why you thought it was relevant. If calling men in general oppressors and patriarchal women insane does not count as…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 09:19 PM
4

It's very common actually. Certainly to grow as a movement we can't rely solely on first-hand feminism-damaged elite MRAs like you.
/r/MensRights15/01/14 08:49 PM
14

No. I have plenty of opinions that have nothing to do with my life circumstances. My anti-feminism is one. It just so happened I stumbled upon the whole Elevatorgate debacle as an atheist and decided the feminist side didn't make any sense.
/r/MensRights15/01/14 08:33 PM
0

Oh I'm sorry, what game is this? Is it "pretend Elisabeth Cady Stanton isn't part of first-wave feminism" week already? Prominent leaders of the feminist movement in the United States include Lucretia Coffin Mott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucy Stone, and Susan B. Anthony http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-wave_feminism#United_States Can you link to a source that didn't take place nearly half a century before feminism starts? Sure, did that in another response. Still waiting on your side's sources…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 08:16 PM
-1

Men's studies is an offshoot of feminism, a self-flagellation course for men. It's completely unacceptable to MRAs, or anyone who wants a different perspective on gender issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 07:57 PM
0

How many people go to congress? Less than 0.01%. How many go to college? 40% or so. You're not making sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 07:50 PM
1

Is the finallyfeminism101 blog and shakesville from 1848? Sources you provided: still zero.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 07:25 PM
2

It's fun, but it's just a lifestyle choice among others. It's not morally wrong either, even with stuff like "negging" (excluding things that are clearly "rapey"). RPers shouldn't define themselves (and every other man) exclusively by how much they adopt and succeed at this. It's as stupid and reductive as defining yourself solely by how much money you make, how many books you read, or how good you are at football. Because if you lose interest, you have nothing to fall back to. For me, "I've see…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 07:21 PM
3

I understand feminism better than you do. I already gave 2 sources, with supporting arguments. You have nothing but your assertion.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 05:32 PM
3

You'll never accept anything, will you? This is an introductory, well-known feminist site, specifically created to answer critics of feminism. Melissa McEwan, founder of Shakesville, is among the three editors. http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/about/
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 05:20 PM
1

This is actually a perfect example of feminism changing and morphing over the years. I'm not sure how else I can explain it to you. You can try sourcing it, as I just said. Consider women oppressing women because of patriarchal beliefs. I did, and it does not support your argument at all. It's in my response to CFRproflcopter.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 05:00 PM
4

I just presented one argument. I got more. You want more, okay. If feminism doesn't solely blame men, that means it blames some women too, right? Presumably, women who support the Patriarchy/Kyriarchy. Let's look at those women. How are women who support the oppressive gender system explained, within feminism? By Internalized misogyny/internalized sexism (meaning the same thing). http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/20/internalized-sexism/ So this is essentially the insanity defense f…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 04:49 PM
8

You realize this was a source intended to support the claim that feminism has always blamed men historically, not prove that today's feminism does? It's painfully obvious to anyone outside of the feminist bubble that present feminism does. It never changed that part of its ideology. I'd love to see a feminist source saying "the declaration of sentiments is wrong or outdated because it blames men". What's the name of the oppressive gender system we live in, according to feminists? Patriarchy. Huh…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 03:55 PM
5

Of course it blames men. Always has: The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_sentiments#Sentiments
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 01:00 PM
5

Blaming all their problems on them isn't going to help them.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 11:03 AM
-1

suit yourself
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 09:23 AM
-1

Great, a discussion on whether this innocuous word or that is appropriate in discussion with a stranger on the internet. Not interested. Good day.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 12:59 AM
0

I used lady, because I originally wanted to go with "dude", but checked your flair and settled on something more conversationnally appropriate for your sex. People getting offended at ridiculous things like that is part of the reason I dispise feminism. So, no thanks on the apology. Why don't you act like a reasonable person?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 12:37 AM
-1

Also, please don't address me as "lady" again. I find it disrespectful. of course you do lol
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 12:21 AM
0

I imagine by showing examples of feminists helping men. Of which there are many examples The plural of anecdote isn't data. You failed to disprove. Which confirms my point that many points are either impossible or incredibly hard to confirm/refute with evidence. It's a bit disingenuous to argue as you did, and then when asked to support, back out by saying, "well, it's just an opinion" in a debate sub. None of my numerous debate opponents cited evidence. 99% of debate subs is opinion. you always…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 12:04 AM
0

Jesus, calm down. You're not the one arguing in hostile territory. If you want to refute my claim that most feminists condemn men, you have to do all of that: you have to be what I consider a real feminist, not an MRA/feminist hybrid (which I consider to be MRAs, and not feminists). Believe in the Patriarchy in the West, male privilege, rape culture, etc. Do you? If you don't, then my criticism does not apply to you. you have to convince me you don't hate men, which tbh would be very hard for me…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 11:54 PM
-1

People can judge what opinions make more sense to them. I present an alternative viewpoint, with a few reasons why I believe it, that's worth something on its own. Evidence is nice, but it takes more time, and you always end up arguing about the evidence anyway. How is it even possible to prove or disprove that feminists condemn all men? Few things are so clean-cut as to be possibly proven or refuted by solid evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 11:27 PM
0

Why do you keep changing the definition of hating men? I said hating, then you said "believing men are useless", now it's "men are inherently bad".
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 10:38 PM
2

Feminists are also the one attempting to make the Selective Service equal. True, but besides the point. It's just an example of ongoing legal discrimination against men. VAWA, otoh, is all on feminists. VAWA does not discriminate against men. Bullshit. It specifically provides for women's only shelters and forbids men's (or rather, excludes shelters who accept men from the financing). It just has women in the name because domestic violence is the kind of violence women most frequently face. Yeah…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 10:35 PM
0

Simple. By seeing men as "the problem" preventing equality. By seeing men as advantaged in everything they do, even when they're not. Then blaming them for everything. If you believe that, it's makes sense to always want to push men down for "equality". Which is what feminism does.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 10:22 PM
0

Both the wiktionary and the wikipedia definition say it's a movement that "aims" and "seeks to" [achieve equality] instead of "is".
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 10:08 PM
-1

Evidence? We don't know each other well enough. I never provide evidence on the first three debates. My opinion will do for now, especially since I'm supposed to argue on 15 fronts at the same time.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:58 PM
0

This
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:52 PM
1

Of course you're arguing with deductive reasoning. You're saying (one of) your definitions is true because experts. Besides, as we already established, there's no expert consensus on the definition of feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:42 PM
0

no contradiction. A movement can aim at equality and fail spectacularly.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:31 PM
0

Did I say that all men are misogynists? No, I did not. Did I say that no women are misandrists? No, I did not say that either. Why are you intentionally trying to misquote me? Are you serious? You just said it's "stupid" that someone would secretly hate the people they live with, yet it's one of the central premises of feminism with regards to men. Looks like you're frantically backpedalling now that I've pointed this out. I never said that you believed all men are misogynist or no woman misandr…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:21 PM
0

I wouldn't call myself a feminist, however even I would say patriarchy still exists in pockets of the world. It's awfully hard to deny that it doesn't. Oh sure, I mean here in the West. Why is that so absurd? Because it's an appeal to authority.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:01 PM
4

Nice, individual feminists praised a dozen celebrities at some point in time. You've won the argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 08:39 PM
0

Wiktionary: Feminism: A social theory or political movement arguing that legal and social restrictions on females must be removed in order to bring about equality of both sexes in all aspects of public and private life. I don't see where I've violated that definition. Do you mean I have no right to criticize what this movement does, according to its own aims?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 08:37 PM
0

Which feminists? Do you realize that feminism is a huge movement? Yes I do, and I don't give a shit, they're similar enough for my criticism to apply. The only feminists I exclude from my criticism are those who largely reject the belief in patriarchy, like Kathy Young, Christina Hoff Sommers, Camille Paglia. Feminists don't define feminism. Professional intellectuals do. lol. Do they supplement their income with some professional quote-making?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 08:32 PM
-2

I support both feminism and MRA, I dont think men are the sole oppressors, I think society as a whole is. If you actually believe that, I don't consider people like you feminists. I seriously doubt most feminists would either. To be clear: you believe men and women are both oppressors and oppressed? You believe men can be oppressed as men? Try not to overgeneralize, it make you look just as bitter as all the other radicals. idc about looking bitter. Besides, it's always better to go in with a ba…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 08:12 PM
0

I don't read junk so weak the central thesis can't even be defended by slackers on the internet.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:59 PM
1

Feminism, by definition, seeks to achieve gender equality (more specifically, gender equal opportunity). Then feminists have failed feminism. Numerous laws discriminate against men (VAWA, Selective Service, etc) and none against women(with the possible exception of walking barechested in public in NY, and joining the Navy Seals), yet the present situation is still framed as female oppression. Any movement or group that attempts to discriminate against, by definition, cannot be feminist. They can…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:49 PM
-1

your ideology condems all men, whatever they do
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:16 PM
-1

Fine, prove that I'm getting all my information from tumblr blogs.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:10 PM
0

So? I didn't say that part wasn't justified.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:09 PM
-1

Where did you get that impression?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:05 PM
-2

Thanks for your input. Try refuting it instead of CJing.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:03 PM
-3

you are saying that they all secretly hate the men that they love, fathers, brothers, boyfriends, husbands and sons. I hope you can see how stupid that is and how little sense that it makes. Feminism doesn't have any qualms saying most men are misogynists, so why don't you explain your brilliant reasoning to them. Men have girlfriends, daughters and mothers too, you know. Feminists don't have to hate "all men" in order to want to be respected by them. The only way to believe that feminists all h…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 06:54 PM
0

I'll take your refusal to defend that philosophy as a confirmation of my view that it's junk.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 06:40 PM
0

No, I'm arguing that if your diet plan is "ignore how good sugar and fat taste", it's going to be very ineffective. I've now said numerous times that we're not perfectly rational, and that it does feel good and it's easy to follow your feelings. I haven't seen a single argument from you that giving in to those morally myopic feelings is morally better than acting on the answers universal ethical systems give. You're muddying the issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 03:55 PM
4

Feminism like any "ism" has no 100% set rules but I think most reasonable people who call themselves feminists do not hate men Your word against mine. You wouldn't take a bigot at his word on his bigotry either. That's because your ideology condems all men, whatever they do. Not true, mainly the societal stuff that harms women (and men) Who is responsible for that and benefits from it, according to feminism? There's a difference between a nice person and Somone who feels entitled to sex and is a…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 03:32 PM
1

Prove it's a strawman.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 02:50 PM
-2

Prove it's a strawman.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 02:39 PM
2

That works partially, I could have written large parts of it. I'm not RP. If you want to say that feminism is to men what TRP is to women, I'm not going to protest very much. One of the differences is how mainstream feminism is compared to TRP. So in the analogy TRP is more like a distant uncle to women, someone you can avoid easily, than a parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 01:56 PM
0

I'm attacking feminism, not TBP. I don't particularly care about TBP; as a self-described CJ, it has zero intellectual weight. OP is a feminist and linked to one, so I don't know what you're on about. that is its a misrepresentation/dumbing down of feminism It's my opinion on feminism. Obvioulsy, it's unfavourable, so you're not going to like it, but that's not my problem. It's not up to feminists to define what critics see feminism as. When feminists say things like "the MRM is a backlash again…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 12:47 PM
-1

Pretty obvious, don't you think? Starts with f, ends with -eminism. Believes men to be oppressors whatever they do, for crimes present and past. Are you close?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 11:47 AM
-1

The relationship of feminism to men is that of an abusive parent to the child she hates for reasons outside his control. When the child fails to gain approval whatever he does, he rebels and ignores his parent's advice, and asks himself what he wants. For redpillers, who want to get layed above all else, it appears 2-being macho works best. Of course you can say that feminists are only criticizing some type of male feminists or nice guys, but there's just not enough praise of "good nice guys/goo…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 11:41 AM
-1

Are you not a feminist? You linked to one to make your argument. It's only fair I'd attack it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 11:12 AM
7

That's because your ideology condems all men, whatever they do. Be a nice guy = entitled creeper with ulterior motives Be a macho = sexist to the core Be a male feminist = wants cookies, drowns women's voices, always fails to call out sexism enough
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 10:24 AM
0

I reserve the right to write off whatever I want according to what makes sense. You're like someone arguing that eating lots of sugar and fat is good for you because it tastes good and people do it anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:38 AM
1

We aren't perfect logic-creatures in any way No shit. You're arguing besides the point. I'm arguing the more we strive to be perfect logic-creatures, the better we are. Like, moral disgust gives you an emotional reaction similar to the one you get to spoiled food. Yes, but only a fool would trust his Nature-given feelings and instinct unconditionnally. If some life-saving medicine tasted like spoilt food, would you refuse it?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 09:24 PM
2

Why do we experience an obligation to feed our families before sad orphan children? The fact that most universal ethical systems ignored this reality was a real problem for their practicality and completeness. That most people would kill 2 or more other people's children to save their own doesn't change the fact that it's morally wrong. It's moral myopia, a form of tribalism. universal ethical systems > feels Nature did not make us into perfectly good people by instinct. Nature isn't good. Natur…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 09:10 PM
1

IMO, EI is a bullshit measurement created for the sole purpose of making women look better. Specifically, turn women's greater tendency to emotionalize, which was generally considered a flaw, into something positive, something resembling intelligence. Sort of like some feminist came up with the "ethics of care" when women didn't do well on the moral tests of the 60s. It's relatively recent and substantial disagreement exists regarding the definition of EI, with respect to both terminology and op…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 07:21 PM
2

Well it's the truth. Do you want them to lie and say they'll date any ugly stupid fat girl who loves their music (or whatever it is they do) ?
/r/MensRights10/01/14 08:28 PM
2

This is in Switzerland
/r/MensRights09/01/14 08:18 PM
2

I've asked myself this question many times and in different contexts (in the past, in a developing country, etc...), and I don't think I would, today in the western world. But that doesn't prove anything. Being male/a man is a big part of my identity, I'm used to it, and pretty satisfied with my life in general. I'm not sure I would change who I am just to make my life easier, assuming women have it easier (which I'm agnostic about). So the transaction costs are high, even ignoring the practical…
/r/MensRights05/01/14 11:17 PM
10

I don't like censorship. While sometimes using your opponents' weapons against them is a good strategy, in this case, even if it succeeds, all it will do is limit everyone's freedom.
/r/MensRights22/12/13 09:42 PM
5

Hahahaha Satire is hilarious
/r/MensRights22/12/13 02:40 AM
8

Still a lesser charge, as the article says. Rape carries a max sentence of life imprisonment, unlawful sexual intercourse 10 years. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/consol_act/clca1935262/s48.html Interesting: the law in South Australia calls "made to penetrate" "rape" and describes it as "forced self-penetration".
/r/MensRights22/12/13 02:12 AM
22

Of course it's misogyny. It's always misogyny. If it was the other way around I'm 100% sure they'd say: "Men want contraception? Duh, they get it immediately. Women want contraception? Wait 40 years, maybe they'll fix you something. Just another proof of misogyny."
/r/MensRights13/12/13 04:46 PM
2

Just found out my original reply was eaten by automoderator for linking to AMR. So here goes again: I think it's genuine. The original query, 3 months ago, was apparently from an againstmensrights regular. David Futrelle received a very similar answer from the cdc 1 month ago. (although one where they did not repeat the above mistake) Futrelle: I can provide contact info for the NISVS representative who got back to me on this to any serious (non-troll) person who requests it. AMR post is called …
/r/MensRights09/12/13 11:22 PM
10

Or "Haha now this kid will bring us together whether wou want it or not...unless you abort... In which case the abortion will bring us closer together! Total Win!!!"
/r/MensRights08/12/13 10:46 PM
2

How personally attached do you feel to the MRM movement? Not much. I just think they're mostly correct about feminism and men's issues. I have no problem with being called a MRA in a gender debate context, since both feminists and MRAs will consider me as being on that side, but that's about it. There are many other groups and positions I defend. If someone were to make a statement believing the net impact of the MRM might have more negatives than positives, would you listen to such a perspectiv…
/r/MensRights08/12/13 07:41 PM
7

It's a good thing that they talk about it. But they predictably make exuses for women's violence, trace it back to men: Miranda Alison, a professor at Warwick University in England, has interviewed female combatants in Northern Ireland and Sri Lanka and contends that women in these conflicts were reputedly more violent than male peers, perhaps “to compete for status and recognition in a traditionally patriarchal context.” “Their minds have altered,” says the Congolese U.N. employee, requesting a…
/r/MensRights08/12/13 05:19 PM
10

I'm sure it sucks. Kimmel is in it, for one. Just the same old feminist crap about masculinity being the root of all evil. Thing is, even if feminists made a perfect film, exposing every way in which men suffer, struggle or face disadvantages, it would mean nothing, and certainly not help men in any way. Because it would all be framed as their own fault, against the background of the "real victims", women. And this goes for feminism in general. Even if feminists acknowledged every way in which m…
/r/MensRights07/12/13 11:38 PM
3

The greater age difference between female offenders and their victims (9 as opposed to 6 years for male-on-female) probably reflects a greater latitude given to female-on-male offenders when the age difference is small ("seduction", "boy got lucky", etc...).
/r/MensRights07/12/13 09:18 AM
2

http://www.ncjj.org/Publication/Statutory-Rape-Known-to-Law-Enforcement.aspx Boy victims don't outnumber girls in absolute numbers at those ages sonce they represent only 5% of victims of statutory rape according to this report, they're just more likely to be 7 to 11 or 15 to 17 than girls, who are more often 12 to 14.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 10:28 PM
1

Agreed with most of it, however: The "made to penetrate" and female rape figures were listed as 1.1% per year. The rate for men raped as if they were women is not recorded but based on other surveys we can guess it is about 0.1 to 0.3% which should be added to the rate of 1.1% to make more men raped than women. This would mean instead of a figure of 40% you'd get maybe 50% of rapists women using that flawed but best-we-have estimate. No, since men who were penetrated reported mostly male perpetr…
/r/MensRights06/12/13 06:25 PM
3

True, that's a mistake. 1,581,000 is the lifetime male "rape" victims. What would be the point of faking that email? Do you have any other information?
/r/MensRights05/12/13 04:11 PM
8

Saw this on /r/Feminism http://np.reddit.com/r/Feminism/comments/1s5fdr/nisvss_response_to_mra_female_rapists/ Thought you'd want to see this. First off, they don't back down from their ridiculously anti-egalitarian classification of made-to-penetrate as "not rape", and don't offer any explanation either (other than they used "experts in the field"). Then they start to nitpick (although technically, they are mostly correct; but anyone with half a brain knew our numbers are just an approximation …
/r/MensRights05/12/13 03:09 PM
2

Let's not forget that they live in a male-dominated society. So any evil acts they may commit is traceable back to men while their being morally pure victims is traceable to their womanhood/femininity.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 12:54 PM
1

Dude, I never said anything about him. You, otoh, are making a lot of assumptions about me. Which, by your own theory, means you're projecting hard and don't want to face the argument.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 11:36 AM
3

Hammond told PsyPost that the findings supported Ambivalent Sexism Theory. I'd be interested in what kind of result would not have supported the Ambivalent Sexism Theory.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 11:28 AM
1

Bad argument. Consciousness, happiness, awe, sadness, pain, pleasure are nothing but "chemical reactions in the brain". Does that mean we can dismiss those? I'll show you Life in a handful of neurons.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 11:01 AM
2

Yeah. Explain the problem, ask for "help" from a nurse or secretary so that you can show them, and turn on the camera.
/r/MensRights03/10/13 02:48 PM
12

Relevant: more women than men voted Hitler in power. Tingsten's statistics are used by Thomas Childers in one of the two major works on the nazi vote to have appeared in the early 1980s. Childers claims that "the NSDAP made enormous gains among the female electorate in 1932". In those areas where votes were tabulated by sex, women for the first time outnumbered men in the National Socialist Constituency. Tingsten has also provided the basis for other recent claims of"a disproportionately high pa…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 08:03 PM
1

What are you saying? That the americans would have spared Hitler?
/r/MensRights26/09/13 07:31 PM
1

A supervisor gives a female(male) subordinate a nice gift on her (his) birthday TRICK QUESTION! Feminism says giving gifts to women is always allowed. Aha. This must be the odd one out. No, seriously, what are the right answers, I'm panicking here, this is frightening.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 08:52 PM
6

I'd have to agree. All the rest, the manhating, the unfalsifiable theories, the double standards, .... well, that's pretty bad too. But tampering with science, with the evidence everyone relies on, e.g. by redefining words to hide uncomfortable facts or simply not asking the same questions to the other sex, that's another level. It's the difference between good faith and bad faith. It means cooperation is completely out of the question.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 12:38 AM
2

That would be too bad, as you know a lot about feminism. Plus your rants against feminists, Obama, libertarians and rich people are entertaining. That said, the conversation you linked to does not make you look good. If such a small point about private property is enough for you to label the entire MRM racists, then goodbye I guess.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 07:28 PM
1

I don't like the term "oppression" either, especially for gender roles, because it assumes an oppressor/oppressed dichotomy. Can both genders be oppressed simultaneously, and if yes, by whom? Wikipedia gives the definition "Oppression is the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner." Take a primitive society where men fight wars and work on the fields while women stay home and take care of the kids. Is the fact that women are denied "political representation" (in t…
/r/MensRights07/09/13 06:38 PM
1

No, crime was pretty rare actually Bullshit. Source it. with most being religions and many armed and all. Society was extremely polite compared to today. Religion was much more mainstream, and even though it has its bad moments, nothing has done more to keep citizens moderate and polite. Yeah, that's why the most religious societies on Earth are such bastions of peace and morality. I see much more child abuse today. That's because no one cared about it in the past.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 03:34 PM
5

wat
/r/MensRights04/09/13 11:55 AM
1

Like I said, I don't think it reads as an attempt to demonize masculinity. To me it reads as let's ignore all differences, masculine or feminine. The two are not mutually exclusive. You can make everyone the same by turning girls into boys, or boys into girls, or a little bit of both. From the incredibly negative opinions of feminists on masculinity, I have no doubt as to which path they favour. The example of the toys being taken away was male but the example of free play leading to hierarchies…
/r/MensRights31/08/13 04:42 PM
1

Whoever is pushing for the adoption of "hen".
/r/MensRights31/08/13 01:17 PM
15

Interesting that they didn't remove the baby dolls and tea sets. Probably because masculinity is a rape manual, and femininity will lead to peace and wonderfulness for all. In equality, of course. Reminds me how they used to tie lefties' hands behind their backs to make them righties. They often stuttered and had psychological problems because of that. But who cares about the kids when gender-free utopia is on the line?
/r/MensRights31/08/13 01:16 PM
1

Do you dispute that they would remove them if they had the power? Can't be too careful with the insidious ways of the Patriarchy.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:59 PM
12

Look at his username. While some people may think it's funny, others reading it can cherry pick this one to point out the so-called "rape culture." The entire point of his account is that feminists will find "rape culture" in anything anyway. Might as well have a laugh at their expense in the process.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 10:45 AM
1

I wtfed at the stupidity of his response. That guy is a textbook definition concern troll. Look at his history, he goes around MR saying "this is why we are seen as misogynists and won't ever achieve anything."
/r/MensRights31/08/13 10:32 AM
1

That's certainly moronic in every way. Even your math is false: it's about a seventh of a percent.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 07:46 AM
2

Fine, why is it so insanely pro the-one-who-stays-at-home? It assumes that person has no agency. If you want to pay, or one of the two doesn't want to stay at home and stays anyway, you can make a contract based on whatever alimony you choose. Why force it on everyone?
/r/MensRights30/08/13 09:14 PM
2

Why aren't women responsible for their choices? The husband doesn't have the power to make the woman stay at home, so why is he responsible for her decreased earning potential? The way you present it is just so partial to women. It assumes men want to work, and women don't want to stay at home. Let's assume the opposite: that the woman made him work to support her, while she wanted to stay home with the kids and had lots of fun. Suddenly, she's on the hook for alimony because he sacrificed himse…
/r/MensRights30/08/13 08:57 PM
1

The law of large numbers doesn't apply here, because the expected outcome of the trials (the profit from sending someone to college) diminishes, the more you pay for education. Geniuses are more likely to go to college than morons. People who gain the most from college are already in college. Ergo, the additional people you pay for will have way lower expected profit than the people already in college. Because they're likely stupider, less motivated, etc. The law that applies here is the law of …
/r/MensRights30/08/13 09:18 AM
1

NO THAT'S NOT HOW IT WORKS, and I'm out
/r/MensRights30/08/13 01:45 AM
1

Oh for the love of God, no. Do you recognize that the figures you quoted: The report titled "The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life Earnings" (.pdf) reveals that over an adult's working life, high school graduates can expect, on average, to earn $1.2 million; those with a bachelor's degree, $2.1 million; and people with a master's degree, $2.5 million. Persons with doctoral degrees earn an average of $3.4 million during their working life, while those with pr…
/r/MensRights30/08/13 12:49 AM
89

It think you mean "down". A woman who buys this is almost certainly lacking in good intentions. I mean, what possible scenarios are there? He's hesitating, she wants him to propose. He's distant, she wants him to stay. He's married, she wants him to dump his wife and kids. He's happy, she wants to pretend she's pregnant as a joke, then pretend to miscarry for some extra fun?
/r/MensRights29/08/13 09:30 PM
1

My marginal returns for higher education are different than your marginal returns higher education. If I major in economics and you major in political science, I will surely earn more money than you by attending. We wouldn't be at the margin if we did that. Only one guy is. Maybe you're confusing "marginal" with "opportunity costs"-related concepts. The opportunity cost of me going to college is all the money and job experience I would have had if I didn't go to college. Anyway, so let's say you…
/r/MensRights29/08/13 09:09 PM
1

You seem to be under the impression that I am confusing average returns for marginal returns. I am not. I'm nearly positive this is the case now, and I don't say this to put you down. You look at the average return, when you should be looking at the marginal return. The only difference is that you want to filter out bad investments on a one on one basis where there is no cheap, reasonable way to predict outcomes, whereas I don't think it matters enough to do that until you actually start to lose…
/r/MensRights29/08/13 08:21 PM
1

By definition, there's only one "marginal guy". He's at the margins. When the state says "we're going to pay for one more college student", it can't affect anyone, it will affect precisely the guy who was very close to going to college, but decided against it. The average marginal return is what we can expect for everyone on average. Exactly how does your "average marginal return" differ from my "average return", as presented in the example?
/r/MensRights29/08/13 08:03 PM
1

The average marginal return here is the difference between educating up to a each level. Looks like you missed a bunch of words here. There's no such thing as an "average marginal return" in this discussion. Because if you are educating too many dumb people, then the average marginal return will start going down faster. Both the marginal return and the average return will go down. You seem confused as to how they differ. Let's say you have a population of one genius and 99 morons. If the genius …
/r/MensRights29/08/13 07:39 PM
1

Oh man, I usually like your comments, but you've got so much bullshit here you could supply a new green revolution. Your argument rests on an unproven assumption - that there are just not enough innately smart people in society to ever fill society's need for doctors. Never said that. Maybe they're lawyers, engineers, managers, entrepreneurs, or english lit phds. If the pay isn't good enough to attract smart people, you should start there. The government should continue to educate people right u…
/r/MensRights29/08/13 05:53 PM
1

You can't make doctors out of idiots, no matter how much education you pour in. Your "innate potential is irrelevant" position is too irrational to argue further.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 03:30 PM
1

In fact it's your innate potential that has very little to do with your overall success. How do you figure? You know how much money and job experience you can rack up in the time it takes to complete a Phd, assuming you're clever and motivated, which most phd-earning folks are? It's just my guess against yours, but I'd be very surprised if, all else being equal, the phd route earns considerably more than the straight to work route. I'd say it's largely possible that the worker out-earns the doct…
/r/MensRights29/08/13 02:52 PM
1

Well that's not even close to the average lifetime returns we get from educating people: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/moneymatters/a/edandearnings.htm Correlation =/= Causation. If the kinds of people who earn Phds were competing on the job market with high school dropouts at 18, they'd still outearn them something fierce.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 09:15 AM
2

The rape victim's response to the rape threat was "lol u mad". I think he's fine.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 06:37 PM
-1

The other one's trolling too. Even called him scum right before.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 03:44 PM
8

Learn some "technology". FTFY
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:57 AM
1

Huh? Are you denying she defended FGM to maintain consistency with her pro-circumcision stance? It seems pretty clear-cut. Having reading problems is one thing, but you appear to be deliberately obtuse to save you the embarassment of being so rudely wrong.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 09:07 AM
1

On reddit the socialist / anarchist / communist subreddits have been taken over by feminists. They are not actually socialist sites. NACALT. You have to admit it looks bad. Look at the evidence and not what these feminists simply claim. But how do you explain that so many communists buy into it? It's not just feminists who claim they like communism. The other way around too. That is because most MRAs are more right wing themselves and hate the idea that feminists are also right wing. Spare me th…
/r/MensRights23/08/13 12:14 AM
2

Mind-blowing. You should post this somewhere.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 10:20 PM
1

Tamen's interpretation is better than yours, and makes her look way worse than even OP's interpretation. I'm sure now you're a little sorry you have called the other guy a "complete fucking moron who can't read", lol.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 10:18 PM
1

In truth, men's dicks are wiser than women's hearts, because the penis is a barometer of female genetic fitness A barometer who is stuck in the same position for the last thousands of years is a poor barometer. With the advances in medicine, and contraception, a woman's "reproductive fitness" is damn near irrelevant. Just like the barometer for hunger is stuck on the "sugar and fats" position, with disastrous results. Agreed that women's (and men's) hearts are just as poor. The men/women dichoto…
/r/MensRights20/08/13 09:21 PM
2

With all due respect, could you get this shit off the front page?
/r/MensRights14/08/13 11:25 AM
3

To be fair, more women than men voted Hitler in power. Tingsten's statistics are used by Thomas Childers in one of the two major works on the nazi vote to have appeared in the early 1980s. Childers claims that "the NSDAP made enormous gains among the female electorate in 1932". In those areas where votes were tabulated by sex, women for the first time outnumbered men in the National Socialist Constituency. Tingsten has also provided the basis for other recent claims of"a disproportionately high …
/r/MensRights13/08/13 04:46 PM
15

40000 a year? What, dollars? Woooooow, that's like one entire person working full-time on this issue. In all seriousness, let's be thankful it even exists.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 06:10 PM
14

Funny how Suzanne Venker in the linked article talked about wanting men to give up their place on the lifeboat for women, then said: But the truth must be heard. Being equal in worth, or value, is not the same as being identical, interchangeable beings. Nothing screams "equal in worth" like the presumption that one is supposed to die while the other lives.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 03:53 PM
5

I agree we could reject all feminist-influenced research out of hand. They outright admit to privileging women's experiences, focussing on only women's issues and assuming women to be oppressed. Still. The fact it is so heavily biased against men makes it all the more powerful when we can use their data to make our point. For instance, the now well-known NISVS' numbers on female-on-male rape, and the fact that they don't call it rape on purpose, has helped me win a lot of arguments.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 03:26 PM
3

57% offer to pay but 39% of those do not mean it. I.E. only 35% of women legitimately offer to help pay. I think it's only 18%, although it's a little ambiguous. Over half (57 percent) of women claim they offer to help pay, but many women (39 percent) confessed they hope men would reject their offers to pay
/r/MensRights12/08/13 09:35 AM
8

Dude's a dude. We've all done shit under the taught delusion that pussy = everything. That cliche is so horribly inadapted to the facts of his situation I suspect you might be trolling. This is a man who used the demonizing of all men's sexuality to get into his student's pants. No one forced him to shit on all men constantly to assuage his conscience. He could easily win an Oscar for "most damaging hypocrisy". The only similar example that comes to mind is that hard-line religious preacher who …
/r/MensRights10/08/13 11:19 AM
19

So the real story you all missed is that I talked my way into teaching women's studies on the basis of 2 undergrad courses only. The college knew that at the time, and since I had a history degree and wanted to teach it, they let me. I read one book of Kimmel's and made myself an expert on men and masculinity. So with the clarity that comes from a shitload of anti-psychotics, I'm sorry I've been such a breathtakingly cocky fraud 'll be fine, and I'll dump in some tranquilizers in a sec. But let …
/r/MensRights10/08/13 02:51 AM
2

Remember the discussion we had about Santa? He was big and red too, wasn't he? Oh God I can't do this.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 11:39 PM
5

Yeah, the atheism+ thing didn't start on reddit.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 09:35 PM
2

Apologies for making fun of people are not necessary. Not among men, anyway (lol). I could tell you that I think it's manly to rationnally think about issues and ignore what society in general thinks, but the truth is I think it's just good. Although in today's climate even mentioning that something associated with maleness is "good" is taboo anyway.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 03:41 PM
8

The threshold for hating women keeps diminishing, because the general opinion of women relative to men gets more and more skewed in favour of women. It's scary because there's no negative feedback. No matter how high society values women and femininity, they will always find plenty of misogyny. If you truly believe that all women are wonderful and good at all times, even saying "I'm not too fond of women" is an insult. On the other side, if you call a random person on the street a "piece of shit…
/r/MensRights08/08/13 03:29 PM
11

You got fifteen hours to spare? This is the most comprehensive article on the event: http://freethoughtkampala.wordpress.com/2011/09/11/elevatorgate/
/r/MensRights08/08/13 03:19 PM
1

The evidence is, then, that /r/mensrights[2] hasn't really got much interest in her work compared to other people. On this issue, we merely align with a large part of reddit, so there's nothing particularly original for us to say, and no urgency to make ourselves heard. That's a fight we can afford to leave to others.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 08:33 PM
0

just what it says on the tin
/r/MensRights01/08/13 11:13 PM
8

Forgetabouddit. It says everything you need to know about feminism. Something that harms men at the benefit of women (sometimes life and death stuff, like the draft) is qualified as benevolent. It's "good" that men die instead of women. That is feminism's outlook. This is what they believe. This is what they defend in academic publications. I can hear the so-called justification for this insanity: "feminism rejects Weber's value-free orientation, it is a movement by and for women, resolutely sub…
/r/MensRights28/07/13 10:35 PM
7

Sure. A lot of issues overlap: perceptions and laws based on the idea that men are perverts, predators, responsible for everything bad that happened or happens, etc. Do you guys support gay rights? It's really a different question. We could be accepting of gay men in the movement without actively campaigning for gay rights. As it happens, I and many here do support the issues you raise. Gay marriage: Why not? Although the institution of marriage means nothing to me (especially since it's become …
/r/MensRights24/07/13 10:48 AM
6

What kind of mysogynist are you? Are you: male: regular misogyny, you hate women by breathing female: oh shit, it's internalized! Who gets hurt on the subject under discussion: women/a woman: direct misogyny. duh. men/a man: benevolent misogyny. the suffering of men is just a byproduct, really. everybody: both of the above nobody: abstract misogyny. erases women's experiences.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 04:22 PM
11

I gotta hear this.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 02:27 PM
1

did you watch the vid, shithead?
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:03 AM
1

That makes feminism the movement of "people helping white women to steal bikes", I'm afraid.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 03:43 PM
3

=] Accountability and responsibility – On a personal perspec, as a woman I abhor being viewed as weak/passive/suffering from false consciousness etc. This subreddit upholds (indeed insists) on woman as a strong and equal creature. We do focus a lot on ways in which men are victimized directly, as opposed to "What can the MRM do for women?" (even though it is a legitimate question), because severe men's issues are so often framed as merely an inconvenience to women (like Hillary's egregious "wome…
/r/MensRights10/06/13 08:22 PM
3

And there's always a disagreement in a romantic comedy because true love or whatever has to have some obstacles thrown in the way so they can be overcome. Usually these obstacles are scripted as the man being an asshole to his gf so he has to win her back. Part of it is because they need to fill in the last half hour between the meet cute/relationship begins part and the happy ending. But sometimes its not scripted as his fault; he just has to beg for forgiveness anyway. A very common one is whe…
/r/MensRights10/06/13 03:40 PM
15

Yeah. The more I learn about feminism, the less I like it. And it's been a while now since I first got interested in it. I notice that it's often the newcomers who wanna sing kumbaya. No matter how low my opinion of feminism gets, I still find out stuff that makes them look even worse. First it was just the fact that they censor their opponents everywhere they set up shop (which is a dead giveaway that something is rotten with the ideology). Then that they ignore and obscure male victimhood stat…
/r/MensRights09/06/13 09:52 PM
21

Why should we pretend to understand social theory when we simply write it off as "feminism." Because feminist research explicitly focuses on women and assumes them to be oppressed? Feminist researchers embrace two key tenets: (1) their research should focus on the condition of women in society, and (2) their research must be grounded in the assumption that women generally experience subordination. It's not science. It's a rationalization in support of a political group.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 09:37 PM
5

so they use to have higher crime rates. Used to? They have higher crime rates. Eh! So do men.
/r/MensRights08/06/13 02:25 AM
35

Whitemanproblems: "When I'm stealing a bike, noone helps me!" Very funny vid. Bad world to be a black guy.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 09:32 PM
0

what do "non-corrupt" feminists do? They value objectivity and falsifiability. Did you know this factoid or not? what section are you referring to? The sidebar, and/or the articles for the terms. s OBGYN work dogmatically enforced sexism?asking feminism to study men equally with women in all regards Is feminism supposed to answer objective questions about gender inequality, or is it a lobby group? Pick one. Hint: they explicitly reject objectivity. i don't see why focusing on a topic means other…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 10:55 PM
1

It's upvoted because what feminists are doing is crystal-clear and outrageous. If you weren't so corrupt, you'd see it. I wonder if you knew it before today, or if you just bit the bullet for your fucked-up ideology. It's telling that none of you outright deny it. jacksambuck takes a field of study within feminism (literally, from the article, an "extension of feminism into theoretical or philosophical discourse" Accrding to wikipedia, "feminist theory" happens to contain: Gender studies, Gynoce…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 10:30 PM
2

It's a tricky one. On the one hand, she's got all the power, and the powerless can make some compromises with morality. Otoh, she might not really know the bad she's doing. The practical problem is that to make it okay to hurt her in this way, it would be preferable if she had clearly ignored his wishes after she knew his side of the story. Which requires him to insist on not having the child numerous times before he starts lying, which will make it harder to lie later.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 08:24 PM
5

I thought this too, that's why I asked some feminists what they thought of it. They all defended it. By all means, refute the information if you can.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 05:18 PM
1

What exactly is your problem with this post? Do you think it's a repost? Do you think it's irrelevant/uninteresting?
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:59 PM
6

You made it sound like I avoided discussing it with you ffs. The fact that it was stopped by mods is more than a little relevant.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 12:20 PM
3

lol calm down MV. I was going to post it in GoD too. Forgive me for going to bed yesterday. I'm sorry to post this piece of information to a sub where people actually care about objectivity and universality. If I had posted your comment, you'd have accused me of brigading. FTR, there was only one "venue", and our conversation was censored by mods, as anyone can see for themselves. Anyway, here is her "rebuttal": http://www.reddit.com/r/Game0fDolls/comments/1fmxgu/racial_bias_in_marijuana_arrests…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 12:05 PM
120

Feminist researchers embrace two key tenets: (1) their research should focus on the condition of women in society, and (2) their research must be grounded in the assumption that women generally experience subordination. Some of you might have been aware of it, but I must say it came as a shock to me. Even though I am antifeminist, I had some lingering faith in the integrity of feminism. Turns out they've been playing with a stacked deck the whole time. They refuse to play by the rules of objecti…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 11:23 AM
17

And it must be willing to recognize that not all gender-based biases disadvantage women, or are perpetuated by men. That's so elementary, and yet feminists can't even get that through their heads. They started at zero on the scale of understanding gender, and stayed there.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 01:28 AM
2

Society, obviously. Men's gender roles are considerably narrower than women's, especially nowadays. For instance, male homosexuality/bisexuality being looked down upon harsher than female homosexuality/bisexuality.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 09:54 AM
41

Reminds me of the cake analogy: [Imagine there's a party buffet and all the men and women are lined up separately.] (http://feministhate.tripod.com/id140.htm) The women are told they may take any of the items at the buffet. Anything at all, or they can pick and chose some of this and some of that. The men however are told they can only take cake. Its cake or nothing. They have no choice. Now its easy to see this represents discrimination against men, not women. No woman is going to demand to be …
/r/MensRights27/05/13 11:18 PM
52

By "underage girl", you mean 17-year old? I hate this sort of hyperbolic bullshit.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 09:53 AM
1

The court didn't think shit, since it's a troll. It's fun to see you guys defend any less-than-optimal sexual encounter as rape, though. I think his four year sentence is great. I bet you do. You're the type to get a kick out of revenge-justice, as long as it feels right. Just like the dumbass conservatives you pretend to hate. A woman feels bad, someone must pay. Doesn't even matter that the condemned had no malice whatsoever.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 06:50 PM
0

Technically, they were both drunk, they didn't have valid consent. A double rape occured. No rape without rapists. Both should go to prison IMO.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 08:42 PM
2

I would like to hear from you how much a minute of drunken misunderstanding is worth. In prison minutes.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 08:34 PM
5

There's nothing misleading about that statistic. Male disposability, the textbook case. Men die in war, period. Everyone knows that women are not joining the army in the same numbers as men. Only an idiot would be misled.
/r/MensRights19/05/13 07:28 PM
61

Yeah, just go with the recent figures. For instance, in Irak 2003-2008, 3965 male deaths, 94 female. That's 97.5% male. [Source.] (http://usiraq.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000671#cummiltfat) You really don't need to bring the past into this.
/r/MensRights19/05/13 12:58 PM
5

If a brother, friend or classmate is [...] disrespectful to girls or women in general, don't [...] Yeah right, I'm going to seek confrontation with my fellow man to defend the honor of poor damsels everywhere. No problem, I was just on my way to slay a dragon.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 11:35 PM
10

You're asking the wrong question, young padawan. What did he do to make her abusive? Getting beaten up is a classic cheater's tactic to elicit sympathy. Moreover, when everyone's male ancestors have been abusing everyone's female ancestors, there's bound to be some sort of genitals-based backlash. Can we really hold everyone accountable for what they're doing now, when the people who share a sex identity with the bad dead people are right in front of us?
/r/MensRights16/05/13 08:16 PM
0

Yeah, I find it hard to believe demmian was arguing in good faith. Every feminist site has a big section on violence against women, and... that's it. Violence against men isn't even on the radar, so they have nothing to deny. It doesn't play into their one-sided sex war narrative.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 09:43 AM
8

For reference, [here's the nuked thread] (http://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/1ec8sg/do_you_think_that_feminist_organisations_will/) and demmian's justification. Wow. I expected better from that place. Since it's the "confronting critics" -space of the least censorious feminist sub on reddit, /r/Feminism .It's a testimony to the inbred state of their ideology.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 11:42 PM
2

Try putting your own thoughts into aguing against us, because this "borrowing the brain of a rodent"-thing isn't working.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 11:30 PM
34

I think the point we should focus on is that their's no equality in STEM yet. Women are horribly discriminated against there, as the less-than-fifty-percent numbers show. Knowing you MRAs, I expect a "what about the menz", right? Yes, men are fallling behind, tragic. I care about men's issues. But it only goes to show that they can't compete with women on an equal footing, once the boys' clubs have been dismantled. Personnallly, I blame toxic masculinity, but the reason for men's educational wea…
/r/MensRights13/05/13 11:06 PM
13

Bullets are a relativley modern invention and a man dying to protect his family didn't mean they didn't obey him Wow that is stupid. You know they had spears, before? Or bows, swords, halberds, maces, baselards, slingshots, morning stars, knives, crossbows, glaives, axes, falshions, nunchakus, bills, javelins or clubs. nor had an equal status in society. You're right, they didn't have equal status. One had to work and die to support and protect the other, while the other had to stay home. There …
/r/MensRights13/05/13 01:35 PM
15

Tell her you've been sexually harassed by rich old white cis bi men, that might do the trick. If you're not a woman, your next best shot at getting official victim status is to be oppressed by males. Check and re-check your privilege, constantly apologize, symbolically renounce "toxic masculinity", and nod your head when she starts ranting.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:08 AM
5

The author seems to be some sort of nazi. (sign at the top, off-topic ramblings about jews)
/r/MensRights11/05/13 12:56 AM
11

Replace men with blacks and laugh yourself silly.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 09:48 PM
5

This part nicely cut through the usual feminist bullshit: Then, when a woman asks, “Hey, everyone objecting to #killallmen because it’s violent– why aren’t you shouting at rapists? Go do that” and it gets a bunch of retweets, suddenly opposition to women acting like jerks means that you’re somehow pro-rape.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 10:34 PM
8

There's two questions in these kinds of discussion: Is there a double standard regarding rape? and Is the (feminist) standard of rape a good one? I, for one, don't want to expand the ridiculously high feminist standards for "enthusiastic consent" to women, demonize the "female gaze", etc.
/r/MensRights04/05/13 09:46 PM
4

That's great. Are we reaching the mainstream or what? With Karen being made, it's like we were all being made.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 11:49 PM
1

Nice story, troll. As I get dressed I get assaulted. There's grabbing, yanking of the penis and nails to the back. Hey, maybe next time you can leave cissors next to the night table, to conduct research on whether or not victims or castration are ridiculed? Rock on, Rape-man.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 12:47 PM
6

It is the expectation that for every fault of "one side", there must be a corresponding fault on the "other side". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_world_fallacy I guess the appeal of this viewpoint is that it reduces the complexity of any issue to "two sides", and it rewards the thinker with a sense of having fairly considered the issue, and an expectation of reconciliation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation
/r/MensRights30/04/13 11:18 PM
1

Trickle-down equality. Thats's funny, I like that.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 08:17 AM
6

Any alliance with feminists would require men to accept the blame for all past and present oppression, and you can fuck right off with that.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 11:16 PM
6

Your analogy is really off. The person is the car bomb. You are talking about responsibility, I'm talking about consequences of actions, about hurting others and presenting a danger to them. Sure, the legal term might not be innocent, but morally it amounts to the same thing. Consequentially there is no difference between her (assuming she really is insane, because the insanity defense can be abused) and a sadistic sane person who commited the same crime for kicks. The criminally insane resemble…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 07:44 PM
12

If a man ever dared to publicly say these things, he'd be hunted down and killed like a wild animal. You're going a little overboard here. Completely ignored, sure.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 06:07 PM
9

I see zero reason to believe from this article she did anything wrong wat Investigators said Teresa Moses of Richmond beat and starved the boy and forced him to bathe in household cleaner and feces. Authorities said Moses tortured and beat the boy regularly, and determined he died from battered child syndrome. Did all the calls for innocent until proven guilty She was proven guilty. Not responsible is not the same thing as innocent. It just means that punishing you won't teach you anything.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 05:52 PM
3

Six out of seven are quasi-straight men's issues. Here's something to think about: At least six out of seven men are quasi-straight.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 11:35 PM
2

Hold on, are we sure we can blame feminists for the opposition to this? However, the legislation has been met with criticism from women, Democratic lawmakers and family court lawyers, who are expected to appeal to the governor to reject the bill. State Rep. Cynthia Stafford, a Miami Democrat, called the bill “one-sided, anti-woman and mean-spirited.” Carin Porras, a Fort Lauderdale attorney and chairwoman of the Family Law Section of the Florida Bar, told The Miami Herald the legislation is “not…
/r/MensRights26/04/13 12:38 AM
5

I don't even know where he gets this femininity=sacrifice thing. No idea. Maybe because their sex bears the children? But a sacrifice is something you do willingly. It's not like women said "hold on men, we're going to bear the children". The author seems confused on what the meaning of sacrifice is (or maybe it's the translation): Is the image of a crushed red women's bicycle in London's rush hour traffic a picture of a "sacrifice" for the climate or the "heroic deed"? It is not at all obvious.…
/r/MensRights24/04/13 07:56 AM
1

So he got married at 15? I thought it was capped at retirement age.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 10:46 PM
1

1000 a month is not enough. You're going to be up at nights alone, doing shit on your own. You need more money than that. Yeah a thousand is for the baby, but how much are YOU getting? Lol yeah don't forget to think about yourself, honey. Especially your monetary compensation for... your decisions? Shutting up about adultery? Fucking a rich man? The whole thing is just so noble and wonderful.
/r/MensRights22/04/13 03:49 PM
4

Do you think us/men have it worse than them/women? That's hard to evaluate, and the loser of the Oppression Olympics' issues need adressing as well, but I'm going to say yes. What freedoms are you/we interested in maintaining or establishing? The freedom to not be used as cannon fodder by my government in case of a war just for having the wrong genitals; and the freedom not to have to pay for children I never agreed to have. Who is taking away our rights, and how? Government. They're not really …
/r/MensRights18/04/13 11:15 PM
10

So... she only cares because it's her son. It's a moral epiphany on the level of a criminal regretting his deeds after he gets caught. Spiritual growth from selfish to selfish. there's almost a pretense that it could have "happened to anyone". That's what she's going for - the any mother angle. There are women like her who will suffer similarly when their sons' spotless reputations get tarnished and they can't brag about them any more at the social club. She can't defend him as a man, so why not…
/r/MensRights18/04/13 12:11 AM
9

All comments, not just top, must assume the "validity and necessity" of feminism in /r/feminism , so no, they do not tolerate dissent.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 08:39 AM
2

Are you sure this isn't satire? Through how many hoops do they expect men to jump just to get a meaningless qualifier? This chart seems designed to make the no option look good.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 05:31 AM
4

Understandably, self-esteem over their looks is something that affects a huge, huge number of women who are told their looks are all that matter by groups like PUAs. Oh this is fucking rich. You're seriously blaming PUAs, a fringe, mostly internet, exclusively male-targetting group, for the way she feels about her looks? Here's an idea: try something women actually read, like women's magazines, romance novels. Even feminists can figure out this much. But, hey, the important thing is that you man…
/r/MensRights23/01/13 04:27 AM
1

"Them blacks 'll fuck anything." Offensive under any circumstances. Nope. Say a black lawyer was defending a black accused of rape. "And why was my client accused of this horrendous crime, despite neither being placed at the scene of the crime, nor having a record, nor personnally knowing the victim? Because blacks will fuck anything. They just walk around looking for women to rape. Your honor, this trial is a travesty." Same with this knife block. Did you catch my edit? I was not talking about …
/r/MensRights13/01/13 02:33 AM
1

So when I sarcastically say that men are scum, that doesn't make it less offensive? edit: To make it absolutely clear, I meant AngryHarry's comments are sarcasm.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 12:53 AM
0

_It's_sar_casm
/r/MensRights13/01/13 12:48 AM
4

The article is horrendous, but the comments are something else entirely. “Justice” is a male shell game. (Like money). Can I just make a point about coal mines though :) It was women who were sent down the mines on the most dangerous contraptions the truth about men raping women and womens corpses (including how common it is, and a commonality of thought and action across time and place that we are not supposed to know about) is out there, but you arent going to see it on the news.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 01:43 AM
5

I sympathize with their suffering and their need for justice (presumably they had experienced or witnessed rape) If you read a neonazi's fantasies about killing other races, would you similarly assume that they likely experienced trauma and were mostly worthy of the utmost compassion?
/r/MensRights11/01/13 01:02 AM
1

It's like some men are hurting them while some other men are protecting them...very confusing. How can two identical things do the opposite of one another?
/r/MensRights11/01/13 12:54 AM
5

The first thing they do when they manage to take control of a movement/split up is ban MRAs. They're intellectually bankrupt and treat us worse than enemies. All those "middle ground"/"save the good feminists"/NAFALT posts that keep showing up here are deluded.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 10:14 PM
12

Feminism has this polarizing effect on communities. The GMP wasn't supposed to be about feminism. r/anarchism and r/communism weren't supposed to be about feminism. Atheism wasn't supposed to be about feminism, but somehow now we need atheism+. And so on. They're wrong, they're aggressively antagonistic, and they're in our way. Since they keep shouting "with us or against us", it makes it real easy for us. It's a no-brainer.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 07:40 PM
13

It's all about the empowered woman, with the family a distant second victim. Somehow, the workhorse caught some weird unidentified disease which made it produce less than it used to, and the people who matter are suffering.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 11:16 PM
1

Feminism Rising is satire.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 10:55 PM
15

"IAMA FEMINIST, but after a while, the smell of my husband's burning flesh started to inconvenience me." Still better than nothing I suppose. This was a middle class, educated woman who is part of the system and knows how it works, trying to explain to them that it was a freaking accident. Just imagine how it goes in cases of reciprocal DV (which is the most common form).
/r/MensRights21/12/12 10:52 PM
22

Record her false allegation threats. Get some friends and push her out.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 01:55 PM
4

Crying woman = evidence of abuse
/r/MensRights20/12/12 03:52 PM
8

Don't use the word stupid, that's ableist.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 12:35 AM
13

Yes, I'd say it's "about as offensive", which equals the value of "who the hell cares about what's offensive".
/r/MensRights04/12/12 11:10 PM
9

Double posting cos I can't stop laughing at this quote. Turns out a woman needs a man like...a toilet needs maintenance.
/r/MensRights04/12/12 07:51 PM
8

Looks like a functioning toilet was worth enduring the entirety of male oppression.... And now for something completely different: Why feminism is the most important social justice movement in the history of humanity.
/r/MensRights04/12/12 07:39 PM
86

"Here, perform this annoying task to show support for us, you disgusting male!" "Wait, I changed my mind, don't, it perpetuates harmful stereotypes, dickhead!" And the cherry on top: It seemed to be mostly women who were involved in organising these events. Can't men get up and do this for themselves? "YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE IT WITHOUT ME ASKING YOU TO!"
/r/MensRights04/12/12 05:41 PM
0

Why is this shit getting upvoted? You'd be hard pressed to find anything they don't own. My car. Boom roasted.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 07:07 AM
1

Man, you know I don't want to read all that shit. Nevermind, I didn't even understand the part you quoted correctly. It's the female median that is lower. I was thrown off by the "number of female sexual partners in lifetime, for men". Inverted the two. Yeah, so basically it's all down to massive underreporting/overreporting, and the data is completely useless?
/r/MensRights24/11/12 07:51 AM
2

Just making sure I understand: the average is the same, but a few "alphas" with lots of partners push the male median down, while women are less scattered? edit: Ignore the above, it stemmed from a lack of reading comprehension. Do not read it. Ah, do as you like, and ye harm none.
/r/MensRights24/11/12 07:17 AM
11

/r/communism just banned any and all "ableist" language, including "stupid", as in "stupid argument".
/r/MensRights23/11/12 12:50 AM
6

"He is totally different. He is very gentle, the opposite of macho," Carranza said of her new husband. "He would not bring me into such a situation." Yeah, the victims "brought her" into a situation where she had to saw off their body parts with a chainsaw. How hypoagenty can you get? "This leg ordered me to commit the gruesome murder of its owner" I'm sure that if you buy this woman enough flowers, she won't turn into a HOMICIDAL MANIAC again.
/r/MensRights20/11/12 04:58 AM
4

Let's not be too quick to judge her. Maybe she was hitchhiking.
/r/MensRights20/11/12 04:46 AM
1

Grade 3, the kids of my class were playing tag at recess, and the one slow girl kept getting tagged "it". So that's what they call objectification.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 09:58 AM
1

nope
/r/MensRights03/10/12 10:58 AM
10

^ manhood101 spam. Ignore.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 11:05 PM
1

I'm not sure I agree with that, and I'm not a conservative (libertarian, personnally). It is true that nearly all the mods belong to the left/far left. I take their, and your, accusations of coopting with a grain of salt. I don't think it makes much sense to leave one's political beliefs at the door, especially when the house belongs to a leftist.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 03:37 PM
2

And you looked childish for fifteen comments and noone learned anything. Good job.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 03:22 PM
1

Everyone else doesn't.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 03:14 PM
1

no. you should really explain your statement instead of playing hard-to-get.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 02:28 PM
2

I could debate those stats in my sleep by now. If they insist on using the lifetime numbers, it gives something like 80% male perpetrators. Still sufficient to blow their 98% claim out of the water. I try not to use the word rape anymore. I just say "forcible sexual intercourse". Feminists can't do shit about that terminology. Incorrect. Some older studies, like the national crime victimization survey, use a peculiar definition of intercourse : Intercourse is an act of vaginal, anal, or oral pen…
/r/MensRights01/10/12 11:54 AM
10

If you want to complain to the women's center, complain they don't have an equally puerile poster reminding women not to make false accusations of rape I think it's a tactical mistake to try to counter "don't rape" messages directed at men with "don't falsely accuse of rape" directed at women. It makes it look like we acknowledge only men rape. The better way to counter it is "don't rape" directed at women. Feminists have no idea how prevalent female-on-male rape is, and therefore winning the ar…
/r/MensRights01/10/12 11:24 AM
1

Needs to be in the title, else they'll just downvote and move on to the next submission without reading the comments. And you're welcome.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 04:02 PM
2

You might want to put in the title that you disagree with the feminist authors you submit, else people will downvote because they think you're a feminist trying to teach us how to shut up in the face of oppression. Putting it in quote marks also works. For next time, just a thought.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 03:47 PM
12

She's 16 years old, and the school already thinks she's a neonazi. She can drop the label later.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 03:27 PM
2

Noone finds this shit entertaining.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 03:18 PM
3

Besides, people can remove consent at any time, so the form is only valid for the time it takes to sign it... Once it becomes commonplace to sign forms during the entirety of lovemaking, I'm sure it won't be perceived as killing the mood anymore.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 10:29 PM
1

^ His last paragraph is a joke, stop downvoting. The joke doesn't work because people want to believe it so bad. "One day, all my karma will be worth millions in bitcoins !"
/r/MensRights26/09/12 07:59 PM
5

If you look, you'll see that one network is being specifically advertised by this article; it's the only one mentioned and it gets TWO links. Actually, it gets FOUR links. There are two more in the "best job"-paragraph. Yep, it's a scam/ponzi scheme. They are asked to pay 10 bucks, then 50, then 200, before they "start making the real money". One commenter said she lost 7000 bucks.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 03:40 PM
7

How did you not hear about patriarchy if your mother was a radfem ? Probably for the best though, it seems that a lot of men raised by radfems are insane. With "Shall I cut off my own dick/kill myself?" levels of self-esteem.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 10:37 PM
3

NotC's answer is a good summary, but if you have the rest of the day/week to spare, you can read this : http://freethoughtkampala.wordpress.com/2011/09/11/elevatorgate/ Very thorough.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 10:16 PM
1

I presented the founding document of feminism, and it is rabidly anti-male and male-blaming. What you presented is an article in a newspaper in the twenties. And you think the article represents the "collective feminist majority" ? okey-dokey.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 05:00 PM
4

/r/DebateaCommunist is decent. It's heavy on pure theory, but they don't fuck around with free speech. Take it from me, a convinced capitalist.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 01:13 AM
0

lolwut ? You're actually presenting the moderation in SRS as an example to be followed ? Only a dead/comatose mod is a good mod. "As little as possible." Chinatown. The fearless vampire killers. A redhead in a bathtub. Charles Manson. The Beatles. Mark Chapman. Errr...bottom line : moderation is bad.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 04:42 PM
11

Oh really ? Then why are queries to feminists that start with "why don't you care about men being discriminated in X,Y and Z ways ?" answered with "The Civil Rights movement didn't care about white people !". Where do you think we got the habit of "raising the spectre of racism", as you put it ? Take a look in the mirror. You're fine playing the Oppression Olympics with men when you think you can win. You're fine comparing women to blacks when it serves your argument.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 11:23 PM
-1

A dude got FIRED simply for having a connection to your joke of a website. Whose fault is that ? On one hand, you urge avfm guys to go public with their names, on the other you hold them responsible for getting fired as a direct result of low-level, non-inflamatory activism ? Beyond ridiculous. So what did you win when you joined that circle jerk you're in? Applause from the choir? a reacharound from elam? lol I'm not even an avfm commenter. Go bother someone else, jesus. No idea what your probl…
/r/MensRights22/09/12 09:21 PM
-2

Case in point : this. JtO didn't do much, feminists reacting stupidly did all the work. Many moderate feminists called them out on it. Lots of people heard about this, and it made us look good. All in exchange for what ? Putting a bunch of posters on a construction site. That's efficiency. The MRM is so small at the moment that the cliche is true. The SPLC affair resulted in a large influx of new subscibers, so did elevatorgate. Whatever they do, we win. Whatever we do, we win. The only losing m…
/r/MensRights22/09/12 09:00 PM
7

90% ? Come on, some people are starving.
/r/MensRights22/09/12 06:22 PM
4

This is all wonderful and all, but in the end, they didn't put their money where their mouths were, so who cares. Early women's rights activists were in essence MRAs, the crazy took hold in the 60s and 70s. Yeah, I don't think that's true. Read the Declaration of Sentiments at the Seneca Falls Convention(1848) : He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise. He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she had no voice. He has withhel…
/r/MensRights22/09/12 02:53 PM
-7

Nevertheless, the whole Vancouver episode makes feminists look like assholes a lot more than the MRM look unprofessional. There's no such thing as bad publicity for the MRM at this point.
/r/MensRights22/09/12 02:35 PM
1

Jesus you're panicking...it's just lie, lie, lie, contradiction, stupid shit, lie and lie. The reason why made to penetrate isn't included as rape is because of it's close approximation to the definition of sexual coercion. There is a lot of overlap in definition there. So, after changing your original position and deleting a post that made you look bad, you decided to go for stupid gambit #4 : "claiming "sexual coercion" was somehow overlapping with "made to penetrate" : Hey moron, the whole de…
/r/MensRights22/09/12 01:21 AM
1

It's like the drive to Abilene, except everyone goes directly from Abilene to prison when they realize the food was bad.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 09:56 PM
1

Why do you keep lying ? You just deleted your response to me when I showed you were lying. You claimed "made to penetrate" was counted as rape by the study. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/105n67/university_of_houston_doing_it_right_imgur/c6bhvvt You'd have to seriously lower the men's statistics under the "other sexual violence category" to be able to include made to penetrate as rape any way and it would only negligibly effect the stats for "rape". So now you've changed your mind a…
/r/MensRights21/09/12 09:41 PM
1

Did you read the definition ? It obviously is not. Your denial is a weird thing to behold. A little furter down, they went on to define "made to penetrate", and it counts as "other sexual violence", not rape. In the widely quoted graph on this subreddit (table 2.2.), the lifetime figures for raped men is 1.6 million, while the lifetime "made to penetrate" figure is 5.5 million. How can that make sense if "made to penetrate" counts as rape ? Why are you lying ?
/r/MensRights21/09/12 07:04 PM
1

The report includes forced male penetration as rape Do you mean "made to penetrate" ? If so, that is just blatantly untrue. -Among men, rape includes oral or anal penetration by a male using his penis. It also includes anal penetration by a male or female using their fingers or an object. [endquote]
/r/MensRights21/09/12 06:33 PM
18

"I'm not enjoying myself 100%. There will be blood."
/r/MensRights21/09/12 12:25 PM
25

Wel, as long as they extend those super-accusatory powers to men, we can always counter-claim this "mental rape" thing, since the only difference between normal sex and rape is inside people's heads apparently. Funny thing is, it's not a "he said, she said" situation ; there is no contradiction : they can rape each other. How is anyone supposed to prove that a rapee is lying ? Can't be done. By design, no evidence exists of them changing their mind about the consensual sex. If this became law an…
/r/MensRights21/09/12 11:42 AM
1

I've never met a feminist who isn't up for vigorous debate. So there are at least many exceptions to your claim. Try /r/feminisms , by all means.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 09:55 PM
5

Where is he going to find feminists willing to debate, though ?
/r/MensRights19/09/12 09:43 PM
0

It depends on how much of an unprovoked attack it is. A mugger is fair game, for instance. But if the fight is the result of a somehow mutual escalation (like most bar fights are), even if the other one was more aggressive, I wouldn't consider it acceptable.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 11:36 AM
1

It's a one-liner, lazy question pretending not to understand what the other person is saying. That's the way I interpret it, anyway. And in case you haven't noticed, it was explained nonetheless, despite the perceived hostility of the question.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 02:16 AM
16

They don't really think the men that reject them are faggots, though. They don't ask "Are you a faggot ?" out of curiosity ; it's a clear attempt to shame them into changing their minds, or at least humiliating them as a form of revenge for their wounded egos.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 09:07 PM
10

Women do need to be treated appropriately. I would call that "Treating women like women, not treating women like men". You would call that "Special privileges". How is it not special privileges to treat people differently based on their gender ?
/r/MensRights18/09/12 05:30 PM
1

clever.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 01:35 PM
2

You're welcome. [Here's a parting present for you, my friend.] (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ConMan) Don't be afraid to click around if you recognize a pattern or a movie. You'll be back here in no time.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 03:37 AM
10

http://freethoughtkampala.wordpress.com/2011/09/11/elevatorgate/
/r/MensRights17/09/12 09:00 PM
37

Elevatorgate convert here. Skepchick just didn't make any sense. Atheism+ continues the free MRM advertising tradition. It's all good !
/r/MensRights17/09/12 06:28 PM
7

A feminist also told me : "If you believe in equality, fairness, justice or gravity, then you're a feminist."
/r/MensRights17/09/12 02:10 PM
5

Ain't nobody above an ass-whoopin'.
/r/MensRights16/09/12 01:46 PM
4

We met.. He bought me a drink... We danced... He raped me. Message : Don't buy women drinks. Was already doing that. Next.
/r/MensRights16/09/12 01:19 PM
1

Some questions sound more hypocritical than others.
/r/MensRights15/09/12 09:18 PM
1

I'm just going to steal from a comment I just read : Do you not realize how fucking lazy most redditors are? Nine times out of 10 they're not going anywhere unless there's a nice clickable link right in front of them. Typing? PFFFF FUCK THAT TOO MUCH WORK LOL.
/r/MensRights15/09/12 06:33 PM
-1

Be a mensch, give him the link.
/r/MensRights15/09/12 06:13 PM
1

That would make the holy spirit a pedophile.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 05:38 AM
7

In order for me to reach high orgasm, my girlfriend needs to bake me a cake, then convince her hottest friend to have a threesome. Accept no substitutes.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 11:49 PM
2

Not to play Hate Olympics with our gay friends, but I still think feminists hate straight men more. Because they consider them "least oppressed", which automatically translates to "most oppressive" by the magic of kyriarchy theory.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 03:01 AM
24

Yeah, not true : Sec. 41305 (c.1.B): to create public education campaigns and commu- nity organizing to encourage men and boys to work as allies with women and girls to prevent violence against women and girls conducted by entities that have experience in conducting public education campaigns that address domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 02:32 AM
2

Yeah, the only way to make his statement true would be to argue for some sort of soft power or something, probably akin to Typhon's take on traditional wives, but I don't really feel the need to do that.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 02:16 PM
2

Do you think a common baker or blacksmith in those days had more power than the wives, female relatives and concubines of noblemen? That misses the point. His friend was arguing that the baker's wife had more power than the baker over their common home.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 01:39 PM
1

"Bathroom etiquette" ? Fucking anal retentive.
/r/MensRights03/09/12 03:10 AM
14

12.5 % growth in a month...doubling of growth every month.... By ~2167, the combined mass of all Mensrights' subscribers will be greater than the mass of the universe ! ...then we win.
/r/MensRights01/09/12 12:57 AM
15

Many mothers, even those who sign on for male circumcision for their child for religious or cultural reasons, find the experience traumatic. Those poor mothers....victims of their own empathy ! "Doctor, please operate in a soundproof room, and clean up to the last drop of blood when you're done. You know how sensitive us women can be to the suffering of our children."
/r/MensRights31/08/12 08:54 AM
2

Apologies, they are indeed insane.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 08:03 PM
1

Where ? That seems a little too crazy, even for them.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 07:52 PM
2

She could have gotten hundreds of millions. I suppose a few millions is ...fine ? /TheWorldWeLiveIn
/r/MensRights29/08/12 12:35 AM
3

You're ridiculous. Likelihood of you getting your panties in a bunch if this was a woman asking /r/feminisms the same : 0
/r/MensRights28/08/12 08:39 PM
3

LoL. You've done it now, MensRights ! You're nothing but a bunch of help law student apologists !
/r/MensRights28/08/12 08:09 PM
7

yeah, sure, whatever.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 06:29 PM
8

Nice. Not a loaded question at all. Here's the thing : Noone cares about your particular brand of religion. Noone gets special treatment. A neat little concept called equality before the law. Any idiot can claim his Spaghetti Monster deity tells him he should be exempted from the law when convenient. TL ; DR : Get lost, douchebag.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 06:23 PM
8

Conclusion of the Al-Jazeera article : Afghanistan remains one of the worst places on earth to be a woman. 15 men and 2 women killed for going to a party : This incident clearly shows how hard women have it. Why is the world so fucking absurd ?
/r/MensRights27/08/12 03:04 PM
2

Morality is about what happens between your legs - Derp
/r/MensRights27/08/12 09:47 AM
1

The baker is a change-giving robot. The fuckbuddy is precisely the definition of an object to be used. Living statue, robot, fuckpuppet. I fail to see the difference.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 01:13 AM
6

There is nothing to understand. You constantly "negate" the parts of a person that you are not using. When you buy bread, you "negate" the baker's amazing sexual talents. When you have sex just for sex, you "negate" personality and intellect of the other person. When you work, your boss "negates" the parts of your personality that enjoys your hobbys. Etc, etc..
/r/MensRights26/08/12 12:56 AM
25

[...]fathers can be absent. They can be at work, at home, in prison or at war, living or dead. And this is how much society cares about men. You glided along the oviduct, surviving happily on the stored nutrients and genetic messages that Mom packed for you. Yes, thank you mom, for, having a womb. Over the next nine months, you stole minerals from your mother’s bones and oxygen from her blood, and you received all your nutrition, energy and immune protection from her. Stole. Original sin, now in…
/r/MensRights25/08/12 08:58 PM
11

That mod's favourite hang-outs : /r/anarchism /r/SRSWomen /r/BodyAcceptance The Dark Triad.
/r/MensRights25/08/12 02:11 PM
0

^ Maturity in person.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 10:16 AM
2

I'm not in the business of killing ideas. As long as there is no gun forcing me to comply to those ideas, I'm fine.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 10:05 PM
2

What about southern elephant seals ?
/r/MensRights23/08/12 10:01 PM
2

Conscription has nothing to do with the law ?
/r/MensRights23/08/12 08:51 PM
18

Neither. "Equality" in general is either too meaningless or too vague. "Ending all discrimination" sounds like everyone sould be forced to love everyone else. Equality before the law is good enough.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 07:31 PM
2

It never made any sense, even if all wolves behaved like captive wolves. What makes the alpha wolf alpha ? He's physically stronger, therefore he has more kids he is socially dominant But the way PUAs use it, who they call "alphas" has no correlation to the number of kids they have (the true human "breeding alphas" would probably be fundies who married early), or how physically strong they are. Even the high social status they claim to posess as alphas is only valid in a few human social setting…
/r/MensRights23/08/12 01:14 PM
2

Interesting. Is there any animal where the alpha term makes sense ?
/r/MensRights23/08/12 09:42 AM
3

Provid the link to the sex, please.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:05 PM
13

The nazis had math textbooks where the kids calculated how much the mentally ill patients cost the state. Dehumanization is fun.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:32 AM
35

I'd like those stats for FGM, please. I remember reading that 85% of employers of genitally mutilated women reported a greater willingness to work in their employees. They worked longer hours, complained less and took less sick days than non-operated women. Time to ask a hard question : How many clitorises can our crisis-stricken economy afford ?
/r/MensRights21/08/12 11:34 PM
1

Well, in 2009, she was saying this : In the past, this talk was entitled “Reject Contemporary Feminism:” But I have changed the title. I don’t think we should reject contemporary feminism. We should reform it, correct its excesses, insist that moderate and conservative feminists be given a voice, and then set about helping to write the next great chapter in the history of women’s quest for freedom. Thank you.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 08:45 PM
1

What ? I thought she stood behind the "equity feminist" label, and attacked mainstream feminism as "gender feminism".
/r/MensRights21/08/12 08:14 PM
20

Yes, it's individuals. Don't collectivize guilt. Can we burn John Travolta at the stake and forget all about this horrible music ?
/r/MensRights21/08/12 06:55 PM
8

I guess "equity feminists" would be alright, if true egalitarians insist on keeping that silly name for sentimental reasons.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 06:19 PM
6

I would tend to agree, because it's just too ridiculous. "1.Remember not to cut someone's jugular. 2. Remember not to shoot someone with a loaded gun repeatedly. 3. Remember not to viciously torture people for fun, then drop their dismembered bodies in the nearest lake. 4..." However, I remember a response poster to this one "how not to falsely accuse", with the picture of a black guy. So now I'm confused. Responses to responses to responses to responses, down the rabbit hole we go.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 06:11 PM
3

I wish the feminists could have their own separate rape laws so that the reasonable people could just go on living their lives without worrying about going to prison for touching one's SO while s/he's sleeping/drunk.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 06:53 PM
5

Every advantage is illegitimate, according to them. Almost as if all human characteristics were a zero-sum game, they they see smart people as having stolen the stupid's intelligence...
/r/MensRights19/08/12 07:50 PM
2

How can the wealth of the middle class be "fucked over" by those financial crises if they enjoyed the luxury of "multiple fridges multiple tvs, ipods,ipads,iphones and much more" ? From 1979 until 2012 there have been 15 major financial crises. As opposed to "the 1st half of century", where there was no financial crisis at all... ever heard of the Great depression ? Or the 1899–1900 recession ? 1902-1904 recession ? panic of 1907 ? panic of 1910-1911 ? Recession of 1913–1914 ? ........and on and…
/r/MensRights19/08/12 07:41 PM
2

Do you mean classical liberal ? Else, you don't make sense. Liberal feminism is just mainstream gender feminism : Popular liberal feminists : Betty Friedan Hillary Clinton Gloria Steinem Rebecca Walker Naomi Wolf Meg Whitman Martha Nussbaum Elizabeth Dole Liberal feminist organizations NOW NWPC Feminist Majority Foundation Ms. Magazine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_feminism
/r/MensRights19/08/12 07:23 PM
0

no
/r/MensRights19/08/12 09:31 AM
4

I dream of unicorns myself.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 10:55 AM
-2

I've seen and heard some trash come from a female just as it does males. Gasp- My absolute statement is thoroughly refuted /s
/r/MensRights17/08/12 10:30 PM
-3

Disagree. Politeness, manners and playing "nice" are stereotypically feminine qualities. Beating each other up in the mud is masculine.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 09:48 PM
2

I don't know, maybe it's your metabolism. I'm sorry. mampf mampf
/r/MensRights17/08/12 02:23 PM
5

Every man in my family eats like a pig, and noone is fat. Two facts which might explain it : -we're all tall -we're not americans
/r/MensRights17/08/12 02:07 PM
-2

Things I love about being a man : eating what the fuck you want, body abides being needlessly rude as an acceptable form of communication naked chicks everywhere having a functional, powerful body being a loner laughing at your own(and others') feelings the grudging respect two men who are long-time enemies usually have towards each other being magnanimous
/r/MensRights17/08/12 12:33 PM
4

Yeah, like men's death in war is a women's issue /s
/r/MensRights17/08/12 10:41 AM
1

Well, the cake is pretty big. But yeah, the more money the state gets, the more time and energy we waste fighting each other to get our "equitable" share. And that doesn't even take into account the massive waste due to "bad plumbing", plus the aforementioned drop in motivation for the over-productive.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 06:14 PM
7

I retreat to the private darkness of the toilet cubicle to register my solidarity with their struggle. And I honestly believe that if most women could see me evacuating my bladder seated, they would see a strong man. A real man. What in the ever-loving name of the Morbidly Obese Fertility Goddess is this !?!?!!
/r/MensRights16/08/12 03:47 PM
9

TRAITOR !
/r/MensRights16/08/12 03:44 PM
5

misdirected attempt to bring attention to their platform which has little to know reference within the context of Fringe That can't be right. Jesus.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 11:18 AM
3

In contrast, equity — giving bigger rewards for bigger contributions — is more effective in large groups. "Equity", as you define it, is the only system that even takes into account results and goals. That's the main difference, IMO. Equality is better for close relationships, when people take care of each other and reciprocate things and divide resources and opportunities equally. Equity makes sure the cake grows, equality divides it "fairly", ie negates differences to prevent conflict. Equity …
/r/MensRights16/08/12 09:40 AM
2

I think abortion is fine. An unborn baby is not yet part of the human community, and can be dispatched without justification. I don't think a failure to address Mensrights will result in a collapse of civilization. Women in the past were often treated like chattel, a holy kind of chattel is still chattel. I don't particularly like the traditional family
/r/MensRights16/08/12 08:50 AM
-3

That's gotta be miserable, to fear sex and sexuality. All the rape hysteria doesn't help, although it looks like it is both a consequence and a cause of their prudeness. Those feminists who claim they would rather die than be raped are modern-day chastity princesses. Preferring "virtue" over life is so 1300s.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 12:43 AM
2

I will always apologize for raping people. It's called manners.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 10:05 PM
1

ROTFLMAO Sure, let's here that case then. Hey, I never said I was entirely convinced by it, but your unsupported assumptions annoy me. Nevertheless, Here it is, maybe you'll learn something : The KPD and the NSDAP were competing for the exact same people, with all the "bourgeois" parties squeezed in between. They both had revolution as a goal. not only is "socialist" in the NSDAP's name, the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei is a "worker's party". Here is an extract from the 25 poin…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 08:39 PM
1

Men do not dump women. Even if it is clearly over, you should never think of it in those terms. Fine, I will now always think of defecating when dumping someone. I will go out of my way to use the term "dump" in every future dump. Sexist bitch.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 07:24 PM
1

Obviously both sides are a hodge-podge of ideas. We're talking very broad generalizations here. It's safe to say that Individualism is more at home in the right, and Collectivism on the left. Obviously that includes totalitarianism and tribalism and political hate. A pretty strong case can be made that the nazism of Hitler was a left-wing movement (It's called national-socialism, after all). The communism of Stalin, or of the Khmer rouge, cannot be labeled right-wing by any stretch of the imagin…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:57 PM
1

Nemos is not a feminist. His gf is.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:38 PM
0

Well, you're an imbecile.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 05:49 PM
1

Individualism is right wing. Totalitarianism is left wing.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 05:06 PM
2

You left out the part where feminists copied marxist theory word-for-word, only replacing "bourgeoisie" with "men" and "proletariat" with "women". But, you know, I'm sure your conspiracy theory "The rich did it" can come up with an explanation. Marx is Emmanuel Goldstein...I'd try that line of defense.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 04:58 PM
1

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/y9gbv/ask_a_mra_thread_feminists_and_other_nonmras_come/ You might want to try there.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 03:39 PM
2

I believe I read something from her once. It was an anon on a feminist blog who said : "I think men are alright".
/r/MensRights15/08/12 03:36 PM
2

Who is responsible for patriarchy according to feminism ? Men. Anyway, if you want to discuss this, find a less abandoned thread.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 01:43 PM
1

That makes sense.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 12:13 AM
1

What sort of troll ? Just in general ? Or like NBRA ? I mean, this comment was trolly, yesterday or so he claimed manboobz was paul elam, but he also occasionnally makes half-valid points, wtf is his angle ?
/r/MensRights14/08/12 05:07 PM
3

Today's feminist claims are tomorrow's legal rape definitions.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 04:34 PM
0

Not a court, talking about feminists. For instance, Grabepan downthread defended it some time ago.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 04:00 PM
1

Colonel Mustard, who actually raped somebody else in the drawing room with a shoehorn. Bullets: °° ◦。¤✪◎⌾⊚◉◕◔◐◑ʘʘ๏⊙⦿⊙☉❂○●◯⊗⊕◍❍⍟○◯⊛◎ ▫•·▢▣▤▥▦▧▨▩■❏❐❑❒■□⌑⌻⌼⊞⊠⊡ ◆◇✦✧♦♢❖◈⋄◊ ★☆✮✯*✪✰⋆✩✫✬✭✱✲∗✳✴✵✶✷✸✹✺✻✼ Assorted Useful and/or Decorative: ☮✈☼✄✂♂♀☾☽♔♚♛☀ ☼ ☁☂☃☠™ ® © ¢ ℅ ⦅ ⦆ ❛❜❝❞‘ ’℃ ℉ °‽ ‼ ⁇ ⁉ ⁈ ⍰ € £ … ⋯ Æ æ ❤ ❥♡ ♥ ⌛♪♬ ♩ ♫ ⁂⁑⌇≀☒⌧☒✖ ✗ ✘×☓✕ ╳ ☑√ ✔✓ ⍤ ⍥ ⍨ ⍩ ☻ ☺ ☹✿❅❀❁❃✾❄❆❇❈❉❊❋❂ Numbers and Numbering: ½ ⅓ ⅔ ¼ ¾ ⅕ ⅖ ⅗ ⅘ ⅙ ⅚ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ⁄ ═ ≠ ≡ ± × ÷ º ¹ ² ³ ⓪①②➂➃➄➅➆➇➈➉ ⑪⑫⑬⑭⑮⑯⑰⑱⑲⑳ ➊➋➌➍➎➏➐➑➒➓ ⓫⓬⓭⓮⓯⓰⓱⓲⓳⓴ ⒈⒉⒊⒋⒌⒍⒎⒏⒐⒑ ⒒⒓⒔…
/r/MensRights14/08/12 03:58 PM
5

Na, they will actually defend the position that two people can rape each other. It's good for the stats, presumably. Two rapes with one stone.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 03:52 PM
4

I also see how feminists still try to push for EQUAL rights with men in other areas of life Such as video games.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 03:36 PM
2

Why even bother presenting the arguments if you don't want to argue with the opposition ? Stupid. I do not comment on or downvote intactivist-dominated posts. Noone asked you not to. It's fucking stupid. Does marxism lead to stupidity or is it the other way around ?
/r/MensRights13/08/12 09:05 AM
12

Look, we've had this discussion with far more feminists than you've had it with MRAs, and there is no misunderstanding : Feminism blames all men for everyone's problems and claims that women are always the victims. A few feminists, "equity feminists", manage to avoid that, but the overwhelming majority do not stand for equality. Do you believe in "patriarchy" and "rape culture" ? That's the standard test to determine if you're a white hat or a black hat 'round these parts. Most MRAs just want eq…
/r/MensRights12/08/12 11:16 PM
9

What about anorexia ? If anything, that's telling me women are more mentally instable than men. What about women being underrepresented in STEM ? If anything, that's telling me men are more mentally capable than women. How come all of women's problems are society's failures while men's problems are their own ? How come the biological argument is suddenly fair game when men's issues are under discussion (isn't gender socially constructed ?) ?
/r/MensRights12/08/12 10:40 PM
13

Young men need jobs so they can pay child support Yeah, absolutely noone would care for men just for being men. Their utility is all that matters. Make that a high-risk, long-hours, high-paying job and anyone who is remotely human will live happily ever after. and contribute more meaningfully to the households they are living in. Men are expected to be grateful for being ruthlessly used at gunpoint.
/r/MensRights12/08/12 07:09 PM
3

We can point out the hypocrisy, at least. But I agree it's nonsense.
/r/MensRights12/08/12 06:43 PM
11

"Hell yeah I raped her !" "You can go now. Thank you for telling the truth."
/r/MensRights12/08/12 06:07 PM
6

She defends the idea that we live in a patriarchy today by saying that men were always oppressed by patriarchy... Then why was it men's fault ? More importantly, why is it still men's fault ? If we were all oppressed, why insist on this stupid oppressor/oppressed dichotomy ?
/r/MensRights12/08/12 12:36 PM
1

More like the saudis of Canada.
/r/MensRights12/08/12 08:40 AM
2

We're talking about the rapee here. You claimed : If a woman is raped she is either stoned to death, beheaded, jailed, or forced to marry her rapist" certainly has no religious backing. I'm waiting for that overwhelming religious opinion or quranic quote of what happens to the woman.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 09:43 PM
11

What has he done to deserve to be shamed for trying to get rid of an ancestral male fear ?
/r/MensRights11/08/12 08:18 PM
11

I'm not oversimplifying because it is simple. The choice is as follows : A few bucks now or a few years worrying about stupid shit ? What are HER reasons to recommend the latter option ? It clearly worries him a lot, and she wouldn't lose anything.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 05:34 PM
3

What happens then ? Explain what you mean by "it certainly has no religious backing". What do the religious say ?
/r/MensRights11/08/12 05:17 PM
13

You don't need a "reasoning" to simply ask a doctor or pay a few bucks to get it done.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 05:09 PM
3

Didn't you say Paul Elam was Futrelle ?
/r/MensRights11/08/12 01:21 PM
2

They say 1 in 33 raped, not sexually assaulted. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/y0pt9/just_got_done_with_sexual_assault_training/c5rhzzq
/r/MensRights11/08/12 12:05 PM
3

and they also specifically pointed out the statistic that 1 in 33 men will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime The statistic they use say 1 in 33 raped, so you misunderstood. And this is only true because they define rape as "being penetrated", therefore excluding "made to penetrate". The only way a woman can rape anyone with this definition is by using a bottle, dildo, etc.. Google the source on this page : http://rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims You get here : ht…
/r/MensRights11/08/12 11:55 AM
1

You and your wicked traps !
/r/MensRights10/08/12 07:29 PM
2

And how about the size of the sample? 400 out of 40000(1%) is very respectable. How much people are polled in the academically-approved stats that you normally use ? 10000 ? To represent 300 million, that's 0.003 %.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 03:49 PM
1

Only 12% idiots ? I know why I like this sub !
/r/MensRights09/08/12 03:31 PM
3

I like the egalitarianism but we are generally hearing the white, atheist, young american voice here. Also known as the voice of reddit.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 03:22 PM
8

That she calls him a "worthless piece of shit", with assorted complaints that prove she actually means it (He's not making enough money, he's too skinny) is pretty damning for their relationship. Maybe she's a completely different person when she's off the meds... It looks bad.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 12:32 PM
3

That's the spirit ! Alternatively, they out-omega'd you. Is it better to be the second-to-worst at winning or the best at losing ?
/r/MensRights09/08/12 11:47 AM
0

That's funny I remember saying that what bothered me about our leftist mods is that they pretend to be neutral ("Left and right are so outdated. Here, read some Stalin.").
/r/MensRights09/08/12 11:26 AM
3

I mean, playing the Oppression Olympics is never helpful Isn't feminism originally based on winning the oppression olympics against men ? You could say that their founding principle is that women are more oppressed than men. When they say "don't play the oppression olympics" whenever someone brings up men's problems, they sound an awful lot like a former world champion who refuses to allow a new competition for fear of losing his title.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 12:26 AM
31

Second biggest religion after majority atheism : agnosticism. Welcome to reddit.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 10:59 PM
-1

LoL. Let's keep the dangerous discussions away. STAY AWAY FROM THE LIGHT, THREAD ! * wildly shakes *
/r/MensRights08/08/12 04:22 PM
12

It isn't. The point is how easily they dropped the "all objectification is bad" mantra once women started doing it, then went on a binge of rationalizations, one stupider than the other. It's called "being full of shit".
/r/MensRights08/08/12 04:06 PM
1

Do you really think that "patriarchy" teaches that men are "stupid" and, best of all, "incapable" ? That would be the patriarchy that put men in charge of everything ! Who the fuck do you think is talking here ? This is just the most ridiculous one, but all the other assertions (insults), come directly from feminism.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 09:24 AM
0

NOW you decide you all want to have a meritocracy. Brilliant. God they're so full of shit. They swap arguments with "male chauvinists" in an eyeblink if it benefits them.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 07:42 AM
2

I remember identifying as "liberal" because the only alternative was "conservative"... /libertarianworldproblems
/r/MensRights08/08/12 12:12 AM
6

Dammit, wanted to say nearly the same thing. Ah, what the hell : "It's called freedom, you moron. I got shit to do."
/r/MensRights07/08/12 09:49 PM
-1

That Al Jazeera is a Muslim network? Nobody claimed that Al Jazeera was a "muslim network", whatever that means. He only said Futrelle would show muslims how oppressed western women are. Nope. No no no. Can't tell if stupid, or in denial.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 07:36 PM
1

I'm so insulted I completely forgot how right I was about the original point.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 07:12 PM
-1

He said : Al Jazeera using David Futrelle as a useful idiot to show Muslims how oppressed western women are! The audience of Al Jazeera is predominantly muslim. Your objection is irrelevant PC bullshit.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 06:34 PM
81

You're dirt. It's your own fault. I wish you weren't dirt. Thank me for complimenting you. Feminism has spoken.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 05:27 PM
34

Why it's different ? Because it's complex. "Too hard to understand. Must be okay." ~ average feminist
/r/MensRights07/08/12 12:06 PM
-6

Do you liberals ever stop bitching ? I don't want the MRM to be completely engulfed by either the right or the left. I want the MRM to be something that everyone values across the political spectrum like free speech Free speech is anathema to the modern left. Your own post is a none-too-subtle attempt at controlling the discourse. Typical.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 12:51 AM
2

Agency is when women forgive us for raping them. /s
/r/MensRights06/08/12 11:51 PM
1

That's what prices are for. So that we can divert resources to what we need the most. Point stands, and is mathematically correct. Here are my other rebuttals in this thread, if you care to try : http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/xqtba/how_much_of_this_bullshit_is_our_fault/c5oxq7j http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/xqtba/how_much_of_this_bullshit_is_our_fault/c5oxhyh
/r/MensRights06/08/12 10:52 PM
1

It got close They took a 20% GDP cut in 3 years... and it was all back three more years later. We in the west would need to take a 98% GDP cut before we start starving... Ain't gonna happen, assistance or no assistance.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 10:26 PM
1

Are you seriously arguing that Argentina, at any point in time, fell into the kind of Road Runner post-apocalyptic world that you, typhon, moona, hardware, jeremiah et al. are describing ? Give me a fucking break. An economic crisis does not a jungle make.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 10:12 PM
0

Everyone in this thread except for me is insane. The apocalypse is not coming, chicken little.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 10:01 PM
1

Our economy is a ponzi scheme. A 200-year old Ponzi scheme is not a Ponzi scheme. All the suckers are dead, and yet they never lost their cash. Most of the swindlers are dead. All those alive are swindlers, since they wouldn't have been alive without the scheme (okay, maybe 1 out of 20 would be). Really? Okay, let's remove oil from the equation tomorrow. What happens? It's a mistake to think so drastically, instead of gradually : Oil, for instance, will not disappear overnight. It will just cost…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 08:38 PM
1

Take it away and we die on a massive scale. That is true, but it has been true since at least the Industrial Revolution. Why should it collapse now ? The current system does not "run" on male disposability, even though it profits from it, just like it does not "run" on oil. Your -all in this thread, wtf- fears are irrational. The sky is not falling, as always. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/xqtba/how_much_of_this_bullshit_is_our_fault/c5oxq7j
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:07 PM
4

The phrase "Real women don't kill their children" wouldn't create harmful or restrictive limitations either, but wouldn't make sense since women aren't culturally encouraged to kill their children Neither are men encouraged to rape. Masculinity, on the whole, teaches to beat up/kill men who rape. It is so extreme that a man whose wife/daughter was raped is basically expected to kill the rapist, which is insane on at least two levels. violence by proxy : where else does the obligation fall on som…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 05:13 PM
3

Both are unhealthy in different ways. Then why are you advocating more of the same ?
/r/MensRights06/08/12 04:21 PM
5

You don't think there are any stereotypes about masculinity and "being a man" that contribute to men beating up rapists ?
/r/MensRights06/08/12 04:12 PM
7

But there's aren't any female gender stereotypes that support the idea that women should kill their children. There is NO stereotype that encourages men to rape, either. The message of this tatoo is an ur-patriarchal one. Ever heard of chivalry ? "Let us rape the fair maidens. But first, let us create all this mythology about protecting the innocent, and very strict courting rules." Also, the actual percentage of women who kill their children is small, especially compared to the percentage of me…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 03:58 PM
1

Why are all those other apocalyptic predictions wrong ? Peak oil, Global warming, Jesus' second coming... I understand that it's a great help in motivating people for a cause (and I do believe in this particular cause), but it plays on emotions and a strange human willingness to believe that the end is nigh. why don't you tell us why you think everything will be honky dory and economic collapse is not going to happen. As the pressure on the system rises, it will adapt itself gradually, instead o…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 03:45 PM
1

Why don't you chill ? Criticism is a form of respect.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 01:44 PM
1

Your scenario relies on ignoring a shitload of alternative outcomes, nearly every step of the way. "First this and this must happen. Then this will probably happen. Combined with that, it will lead to this. Which somehow brings on economic collapse. Ta-daa!" If I put probabilities to all of your what-ifs, the chance of an economic collapse is in the low 0%s. That's just one scenario. Wow. Perfect example of the mindset I'm attacking. You describe a highly unlikely end destination, and then say :…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 01:29 PM
1

Maybe not complete collapse of civilization, but a complete economic collapse for sure. How ? Explain to me how a "complete economic collapse" is possible today. See this response here.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 12:43 PM
1

The other outcome is that we all die. Definitely as a civilization, probably as a species as well. Hold your horses. How is that supposed to happen ? All those popular apocalyptic theories (like global warming) seem to go : 1) problems 2) ???? 3) MASSIVE DEATH FOR ALL ! How is a large walk-out MGTOW style supposed to collapse civilization ? Bankrupt the state, slow down the economy, yes, but destroy existing technology and kill us ? The Roman empire example is flawed. You guys say : "Well, if it…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 12:38 PM
6

Other messages like "Real men don't cry" are harmful to men for obvious reasons. The message "real men don't rape" does not restrict men's gender roles in a way that is harmful. I thought all forms of gender policing were bad, since it's socially constructed, or something. By your logic, gender policing is cool if we use it to promote something "good" ? "Real women don't kill their children." It's not "restrictive", is it ?
/r/MensRights06/08/12 11:10 AM
3

My understanding of privilege is that it is mostly an attempt to get people to see things through the eyes of another. A thought experiment on empathy, if you will. Horseshit. Only the so-called "privileged" are supposed to participate in this little empathy experiment. Privilege as a concept denies universality, one of the most basic moral principles. It is so unfalsifiable (by "being invisible to those who possess it") that noone even pretends to be convinced by the circular logic ; you just h…
/r/MensRights05/08/12 11:18 PM
3

I just realized how boring a normal wedding ceremony is. I suggest we add this to our list documenting the systematic oppression of men.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 05:43 PM
-2

but SRSters lose credibility here, just like MRAs lose credibility there. Credibility ? SRS bans MRAs. There's no equivalence.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 01:42 AM
10

I must say, it has to be the radfem university professor who uttered the immortal gem : FREE SPEECH FAVORS THE POWERFUL The caps are hers. This is what we're up against. We might as well be fighting against another species for all the sense they make. http://radicalhub.com/2011/08/04/pornography-and-the-myth-of-free-speech/
/r/MensRights05/08/12 12:32 AM
2

Thanks for the info. SRS is vile in that it claims to be for the good of humanity, when in fact in simply uses other forms of biggotry to give them enough credit to exercise their own, and they are conscious of this. No disagreement there, but I still don't consider them on a par with Radfemhub as far as vileness is concerned.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 10:43 PM
18

Most people who comment on anti-SRS get banned from SRSdiscussion without even having commented there. One of the most paranoid, anti-free speech sub I ever saw.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 10:29 PM
6

I think it's safe to say that a majority of /r/MensRights is atheist. Maybe something like 30% left-wing-minded 30% libertarian-minded (massively overrepresented, for some reason) 30% right-wing-minded, far from all of which are religious
/r/MensRights04/08/12 08:19 PM
0

I heard of SPLC, agent orange and radfemhub, but not how they relate to SRS.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 08:04 PM
8

They don't advocate for genocide : not the same. Heck, if you mean "excuse the radfems for their murderous ideas", then most of the mainstream deserves your aggression.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 08:02 PM
5

you were indistinguishable from some of the most vile human beings on the net. They're stupid trolls. Let's not call them "scum" like they do. Other people might care that "I am no longer one of them, I see now". But I don't. Even if he was a fanatic SRSer, those people are not comparable to, say, the radfems who advocate for genocide.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 07:53 PM
2

She went on to say that these were not in fact choices but something akin to gender role brain washing. "I'm sorry, I don't discuss politics with zombies."
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:23 AM
9

Yeah, but they only found three cases of consensual sex in the history of humanity.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 09:58 PM
1

Somebody else -not her- submitted it and now you lost out on this delicious karma :(
/r/MensRights03/08/12 03:59 PM
3

I knew Phil Plait was a dim bulb when he made his "Don't be a dick" speech. Concern troll. "That which can be destroyed by the truth should be." P.C. Hodgell
/r/MensRights03/08/12 01:26 PM
1

Owww why delete it ? It's a great video, and users are not usually supposed to link to their own vids, so it would be great to have it. Maybe resubmit it ?
/r/MensRights03/08/12 01:55 AM
3

Are you kidding ? She's here all the time, and everybody swoons before her majesty. Check out the name of the user who submitted the last link right before you.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 01:17 AM
2

I think she's on our side I don't know, man. Was Patton on the allies' side ?
/r/MensRights03/08/12 01:07 AM
11

"Bad Stuff" ? "Somebody Else" ?
/r/MensRights02/08/12 10:24 PM
6

Not giving a shit more than what's necessary to say this.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:20 PM
4

God, I can't stand Ozy. If a guy said what "crunkfeminist" said, he wouldn't be a "Nice guy", he'd be the Soul of Rape Culturetm .
/r/MensRights02/08/12 10:42 AM
4

Agree with this. Common sense, really. And yet, try defending this in a non-anonymous social setting and not look like M. Fucking emotion-based witch hunt.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 10:10 PM
6

Well, we are a pretty rude bunch. However, we bite like teenage dogs bite. If you actually look at your "wound" instead of running away crying(like many do), recognize it doesn't bleed, and bite back as needed, you'll be part of the club in no time :)
/r/MensRights01/08/12 09:58 PM
0

My first comment : Why don't you get rid of that bullshit first explanation(social value) and chalk it all up to the main reason people go to loud parties (sex)? Whatever.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 09:50 PM
5

I wish I knew how to cry anymore, my little organic friend. "The world is a comedy to those that think; a tragedy to those that feel." ecclesiastes 10:13
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:32 PM
8

The only way a modern man can connect his sexuality with holiness is through a joke.... don't-know-whether-to-laugh-or-cry-face
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:03 PM
13

The great part was when she called her own sexual urges "holy". What man could say that about his sexuality and not break down laughing ? "I've got the holy spirit right there in my pants, honey" Seriously, feminism teaches that "society" views women's sexuality as dirty, ffs. Step out of Cognitive Dissonance Land for a sec, pls.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 06:29 PM
13

When I read the book, the two parts that stayed in my mind(and my hard drive) were (I'm too lazy to translate them myself, so this is an ameliorated google translator version): The lacrimal glands are tiny liquid containers, which, like the bladder, can be trained to obey the will. It is possible for an adult, not to wet his bed and not to cry. In the male child this training is performed (through self-humiliation of the woman - "A boy does not cry," "You're not a girl"!). In the female, this tr…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 05:31 PM
3

No. The Dublin hospital was actually the "clean one" in Semmelweis' studies about puerperal fever. Schwyzer says 1% maternal death, and that seems consistent with both 1750 and 1900. The ridiculously high rates (10-30%), due to handling corpses, were mid 1800s. Pathological anatomy started in 1823. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yearly_mortality_rates_1784-1849.png
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:02 AM
1

The original claim was "women are more valued in a social setting". The claim is one of superiority. I just need to show that men value both men and women equally in a social setting. Men don't value "women's presence in a social setting" particularly. If they did, they would find other, quieter venues to appreciate the fairer Sex's social graces (a knitting club, perhaps ?). Just because you don't have women as friends it doesn't mean no men do. Wildly missing the point. Do most men prefer plat…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 05:54 AM
1

Yes, yes, women can face discrimination too, have specific issues, face pressure, etc... However, whether you like it or not, the next step is to play the Oppression Olympics. Feminists proclaimed women the "victors", and therefore "oppressed" while men are the "oppressors". This is false, but it hasn't stopped society from giving women more and more legal privileges, on top of the ones women already possessed from the get-go (being free from forced military duty, for example). Can you think of …
/r/MensRights31/07/12 10:56 PM
1

This is almost exactly the same thing as I was saying, you just added a reason for why their company is more valued. reread my comments. You seem to be a little slow. Of course it's what I was saying. Anyway, nevermind. Going to bed.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 10:25 PM
1

Oh God, SEX ! ffs. The chance of SEX with those women. Give me an example where men purposefully seek women's company without a chance of sex.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 10:11 PM
0

Because women's presence is more valued in a social setting. Not true. It's the exact same reason that many more women are prostitutes than men - except that it's their sexuality that's more valued this time. Now you're making sense. Why don't you get rid of that bullshit first explanation and chalk it all up to the main reason people go to loud parties ?
/r/MensRights31/07/12 08:31 PM
40

So, men should sacrifice themselves now because women used to regrettably die in childbirth ? My head hurts.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 08:18 PM
1

There should be no way ever that a woman should be able to cry rape if she didn't want to have sex IN HER MIND. Last time I discussed this, I got a feminist to admit that, in such a situation, both people could rape each other, because they both didn't want to have sex, but didn't do anything about it. I thought it was funny.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 11:49 AM
2

The arms, for instance.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 11:06 AM
22

Don't forget to slam-dunk with : Wiktionary : misogyny : hatred or contempt for women Ignoring them is misogyny. Awwww.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 06:24 AM
7

Try substantiating your position.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 06:04 AM
2

I got you, buddy. Same study (my comments in bold): Sex of Perpetrator in Lifetime Reports of Sexual Violence : Most perpetrators of all forms of sexual violence against women were male. For female rape victims, 98.1% reported only male perpetrators. Additionally, 92.5% of female victims of sexual violence other than rape reported only male perpetrators. For male victims, the sex of the perpetrator varied by the type of sexual violence experienced. The majority of male rape victims (93.3%) repor…
/r/MensRights30/07/12 09:20 PM
17

Oppressed by dissent. I think India has DV laws that list something like "contradicting her" as abuse. http://www.498a.org/dvfaq.htm
/r/MensRights30/07/12 04:11 PM
0

Hubris. A condition invariably punished by the gods. Did the Gods ever melt diamonds ? Humanity ! Fuck yeah !
/r/MensRights30/07/12 02:09 PM
1

If that is true, all you can say is that there is some correlation. No reason to go Chicken Little.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 01:47 PM
1

For example, the birth rate in many Western counties is now below the replacement level. Think about the consequences of that for a moment. So what ? The West has no competition. The world is already "western" and becoming more and more westernized, and for good reason. China ? Westernized. India ? Westernized. South America ? Westernized. Africa ? Plagued by poverty and war. Only way out : westernization. Middle east ? Intellectually, economically and militarily bankrupt. Only way out : western…
/r/MensRights30/07/12 01:40 PM
1

Occam's razor recognizes this trivial argument as "a wizard did it!". You're supposed to keep asking questions. Occam's razor is not meant for for the faint-brained. edit : added link
/r/MensRights30/07/12 12:55 PM
3

No hostility intended. The "certainly" was funny. "I certainly am an OK guy."
/r/MensRights30/07/12 11:56 AM
2

Occam's razor forgives easily those that wronged it.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 11:53 AM
2

Who said disprove ? I said disapprove. Occam's razor looks down on your objection.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 11:48 AM
13

Feminism is a shit test.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 11:38 AM
4

It's certainly a thought provoking post. Good job complimenting your own post, there, slick. What is more likely : That civilizations sometimes fail, in a "the Bank always wins in the end"-type way, for a variety of reasons. Some occult, specific reason caused their demise (feminism, "race mixing", pacifism, illuminatis, anti-intellectualism, religion, dictatorship,... take your pick) Occam's razor disapproves of your theory.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 11:01 AM
0

The draft cannot be truly abolished. It can only hibernate during peacetime. I come from France and Germany, who both abolished it recently. Nevertheless, you can be sure that if the state needed more soldiers to fight a prolonged war, it would send us, and only us, and no feminist would open her gob. They had about a century of wars to find a conscience. I think perhaps you missed the word "necessarily" in my comment. The past is on my side. The present is on my side (VAWA, AA in favor of women…
/r/MensRights29/07/12 08:12 PM
1

It's based on the assumption that equal rights is a zero sum game, where somebody advocating for women's rights necessarily harms men unless somebody else balances it out by advocating for men's rights. Here's a game for you : Group A has some political power(the vote), while group B has no onligation to fight(conscription). Later, group A took a 50% power cut for the benefit of group B, who has now the same power than group A, but is still free from conscription. 10 cents question : What the fu…
/r/MensRights29/07/12 07:48 PM
3

You can always run, man. As an old german folktale goes : "Something better than death we will find anywhere".
/r/MensRights28/07/12 10:11 PM
3

A lot of MRAs use this as evidence of an evil plot by women to use men. I don't think it was. I think you had women who had been raised within the same belief system as the men were, and didn't really understand how much protection they were getting from men. Then why was the main reason why women were opposed to the right to vote that they didn't want to take on men's responsabilities ? http://newhumanist.org.uk/1816 The difference between them was a disagreement not so much about the nature of…
/r/MensRights28/07/12 01:40 PM
2

Who gives a crap ?
/r/MensRights28/07/12 10:26 AM
4

RAPE !!!
/r/MensRights28/07/12 10:10 AM
4

Yeah, but still conceivable.
/r/MensRights28/07/12 09:51 AM
3

^ Victim blaming apologist.
/r/MensRights28/07/12 09:47 AM
13

No - Feminism 101 failed her. And now her ability to see the common humanity in her "privileged oppressors" is gone.
/r/MensRights28/07/12 05:06 AM
29

Or "privilege". men who didn’t want to acknowledge another manifestation of male privilege, namely the fact that men do play power games with sex. Saying "no" is playing a privileged power game.... If she were a guy, the creepiness of those words would be inconceivable.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 10:16 PM
3

Cool, thanks. A twitter response to the guy was : You sir are disgusting. How dare you ? The self-righteousness is unbelievable. Yes, how dare he question the unstated assumption that women are automatically worth more ? Any amount below "unlimited worth" is clearly misogyny. Reminds me of the flak Factory got for explaining the MGTOW position "Maybe women aren't worth it".
/r/MensRights27/07/12 07:59 PM
1

Blablabla obvious bullshit. No dictator. As if communism was theoretically defined as being under the power of a dictator... Are you talking theory or real life ? Give me an example of this "socialism" as it is practiced in a country. No forceful taking of property so it can be used for the nation/redistributed or whatever. (in short, far less nationalism/patriotism) So, "like communism, but without the bad stuff". Socialism is more an economic and cultural system; Communism is more a political,…
/r/MensRights27/07/12 02:03 PM
3

Please, please, please, don't explain the difference.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 01:29 PM
1

Men are animals who form their relationships based on sexual attraction – an attraction that (cue ominous music) isn’t returned. Gold.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 01:11 PM
5

FUCK moderation.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 11:28 AM
6

How much of the "radical" feminists are actually secret MRAs ? You just divided Poe's law by zero.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 08:58 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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