TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

JcbAzPx Archive

View 0 posts and 352 comments by JcbAzPx on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-4

Nah, she was personally fine with going on Joe Rogan, but she would have been lambasted by the party insiders and twitter mob if she did. Just like what happened to Bernie. So she wasn't allowed to go on.
/r/MensRights02/12/24 01:55 AM
1

States generally only push collections to avoid paying welfare. If the single parent isn't on welfare, going after child support isn't a priority.
/r/MensRights07/09/24 03:12 PM
1

If it didn't happen during the cold war, with hair triggers and warhawks doing their level best to pull them on both sides, it's unlikely to ever happen.
/r/MensRights17/06/24 05:44 AM
1

If there is selective service, there will eventually be a draft. More importantly, they wouldn't really care about boys signing up for it if they weren't intending to use it relatively soon. Frankly, it benefits them not having as many on the rolls since they can deny gov. services to men who don't sign up.
/r/MensRights17/06/24 05:41 AM
1

This is not entirely true. Morality filters have been programed in separate from the learning data so that it won't say things that would make it look bad. I'm pretty sure this is one of those.
/r/MensRights23/12/23 05:37 AM
1

It does show it's not a bias picked up from their learning material, but rather one hard coded into them. Unfortunately some filtering is completely necessary as most chatbots become deeply racist shitheads left to their own devices. This is probably a bit much, though.
/r/MensRights23/12/23 05:34 AM
14

This sort of thing has been happening for a while. There a reason why terrorist groups have such an easy time gathering foot-soldiers.
/r/MensRights04/12/23 01:16 AM
0

Do you think waste disposal companies are turning away women candidates? Trust me, if they had people that actually wanted to work there, they'd hire them in a heartbeat.
/r/MensRights20/11/23 07:04 AM
2

All I'll say is this is something that can't be undone. If it turns out he wants it later in life it would just be a tradeoff of remembering the pain for being his own choice and much less likely to die in the process.
/r/MensRights11/11/23 09:32 PM
1

I mean, there are already men in the military that are weaker than most women. It's really not something that will make that much of a difference in the modern military. This isn't like professional sports where only the top .001% can have a chance.
/r/MensRights18/10/23 07:00 PM
1

Okay, but that's almost all down to application of hormones during pregnancy. Afterward a woman could get the majority of the way there with some radical procedures. At the extremes someone that got that development in the womb is going to be at an advantage, but outside of that a woman could certainly become stronger than the majority of men if they are willing to go through the admittedly difficult process.
/r/MensRights18/10/23 04:45 PM
1

Men are on average stronger than women, but it's not as much as people try to make it out to be. Plus, with the right hormones, it's entirely possible for a woman to get the same sort of strength advantage men have. If they want it.
/r/MensRights18/10/23 12:44 AM
1

It only reduced the instances of HIV because the men who were circumcised stopped having sex while their penis healed. I don't think that would apply to infants. It is, however, very much a revenue stream for the hospitals and doctors that perform it.
/r/MensRights18/10/23 12:25 AM
1

Men have to sign up for selective service. This is a fact. Your hallucinations will not change that fact. Frankly the only chance of ever getting rid of selective service is to apply it equally to women as it is to men.
/r/MensRights01/10/23 05:49 PM
1

Selective service will never go away. Given that, it should be applied equally to all.
/r/MensRights01/10/23 07:11 AM
2

It depends on a lot of things, but if you are a white man in the western world you are more privileged than other men in your same social class. Wealth and social standing have a much larger effect on privilege than race, though.
/r/MensRights15/05/23 10:56 PM
36

I'm not even sure what the logic is here. Men are being deliberately bad at their job so they.... what? Don't get paid? It makes no sense. At least the trope of being bad at chores to get out of them makes logical sense even if it isn't real.
/r/MensRights25/09/22 06:34 PM
1

What did they say? Really, the only thing you can do is keep working with the lawyer you managed to retain.
/r/MensRights18/09/22 06:28 PM
0

I'm sure many people believe as you do, but actions speak louder than words, and the no exceptions laws seem to be pretty popular amongst the ban states.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 08:40 PM
8

That already falls under medical malpractice laws. It is a medical procedure after all.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 08:28 PM
5

Quite a few of the new laws coming out only have emergency medical exceptions. A lot of people claiming to be pro life seem to be more interested in forced birth.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 08:26 PM
2

I guess it's your right to be in denial. I'm just sorry your kid won't be able to enforce his own rights.
/r/MensRights21/02/22 04:25 PM
1

I don't know that rejecting reality really counts as an interpretation.
/r/MensRights21/02/22 05:52 AM
1

And ended up providing a perfect example of something you should get not at all. Just like mutilation.
/r/MensRights20/02/22 09:34 PM
1

Also, I don't think pox parties are legal anymore; just get him vaccinated.
/r/MensRights20/02/22 08:52 PM
2

Too bad he won't get a say.
/r/MensRights20/02/22 08:25 PM
2

For chicken pox it is infinitely better to be vaccinated. However, even if we take that example at face value, both will lead to problems later in life. Chicken Pox is the source of Shingles. Much better just to not have them at all.
/r/MensRights20/02/22 06:52 PM
13

There is actually considerable money involved. Not only from the fee to perform the surgery in the first place, but the foreskins can be sold off to the cosmetics industry for even more cash.
/r/MensRights19/02/22 08:25 PM
1

These are not mutually exclusive positions.
/r/MensRights06/02/22 03:17 PM
1

Be careful, this can be used to disqualify you from many government services.
/r/MensRights06/02/22 06:10 AM
0

Interestingly, this is an issue where the misandrists and misogynists are on the same page. They're on opposite sides of that page, but they agree nonetheless. One side wants to avoid being forced into war and the other side wants to keep as many women out of the military as possible.
/r/MensRights06/02/22 06:07 AM
1

There will be a point where virtual reality will be nearly indistinguishable from actual reality. We're a long way from that, but when we get to that point the psychological experience will be the same as you will be able to fool your senses completely.
/r/MensRights30/10/21 05:31 PM
13

Quite a lot of trans hate comes from a particular group of man hating feminists. They hate trans women for, as they see it, 'infiltrating the sisterhood.' Basically trying to steal a bit of the privilege that comes from being female. Then they either hate or pity trans men as traitors or lost, confused sisters that made the wrong choice respectively. Obviously it's not the only hate they get, but it's particularly difficult to deal with since it comes from a source that is inherently trusted by …
/r/MensRights30/10/21 05:36 AM
2

Unfortunately, it seems the people in charge have been using it as a guidebook rather than the ominous warning it was intended to be.
/r/MensRights17/10/21 04:21 AM
1

Sort of. It still only looks back a year instead of just a month. Anyone outside that is not considered part of the work force. Given how long it's been since the pandemic firings started, that is a considerable amount of people.
/r/MensRights19/09/21 08:10 PM
1

That only accounts for people "in the labor force", i.e. people that are actively looking for a job.
/r/MensRights19/09/21 08:08 AM
1

They got more money from US Soccer, but less overall when you included World Cup prizes. Their whole argument is that US Soccer should make up the difference in FIFA payouts.
/r/MensRights16/09/21 03:35 AM
1

why not pay everyone nothing? They tried that a long time ago. We violently disagreed.
/r/MensRights16/09/21 03:32 AM
1

Convincing someone of the truth is always a worthy pursuit.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 08:15 PM
2

It's possible this isn't deliberate. The reddit search is nearly unusable to begin with.
/r/MensRights10/02/21 09:31 PM
1

I get what the comic was going for, we do need a structural fix to society rather than flimsy patch jobs that do more harm than good. It wasn't portrayed very well, though.
/r/MensRights05/11/20 11:03 PM
1

He pumped a kid with estrogen in an illegal experiment. He gets no benefit of the doubt whatsoever.
/r/MensRights07/10/20 10:56 PM
3

This is a poe's law thing. It's no longer possible to tell the satire from the serious crazy.
/r/MensRights07/10/20 09:58 PM
2

Not sure what you're trying to get at here. Do you believe that prisoners deserve to be used as medical experiments against their will because they're prisoners?
/r/MensRights07/10/20 09:46 PM
4

But even I don't believe for a second this doc was trying to "turn this boy into a girl so he'll play nice" motif that some commenters are trying to argue. I mean, the only way he could have come to the hypothesis that led to this experiment is the idea that testosterone == bad; estrogen == good. Thus good must be added to counteract bad. Either that or the doctor was just sadistically torturing the poor boy.
/r/MensRights07/10/20 09:41 PM
2

Now's probably not the best time to start up any sort of Roe v. Wade case, let alone one about child support. There's about to be a huge fight over it again and you'd likely just get caught in the crossfire.
/r/MensRights28/09/20 11:40 PM
1

♣
/r/MensRights27/08/20 07:08 PM
1

The last resort: pretend it was your idea the whole time. Lovely send off.
/r/MensRights27/08/20 06:10 PM
1

Again with the projection. It's been pretty obvious from the start that your only goal here was some form of one upmanship, and when you didn't get it you start lashing out.
/r/MensRights27/08/20 05:34 PM
1

There's no need to be a sore loser despite your username.
/r/MensRights27/08/20 04:49 PM
1

Sure you would. You're suddenly actually interested in what's actually going on here a week later. Right.
/r/MensRights27/08/20 04:03 PM
1

You say you agree then begin writing nonsense that is obviously in opposition. You're just trying to be contrarian without any understand of the subject whatsoever.
/r/MensRights27/08/20 01:29 PM
1

See, now that is textbook strawman. You should write for McGraw-Hill.
/r/MensRights26/08/20 11:55 PM
1

Because it is false. I will not believe a false thing just because someone is adamant about their falsehood. As you say, reality doesn't care about your delusions.
/r/MensRights26/08/20 06:12 PM
1

You have an obvious obsession with significant amounts of projection. It isn't healthy.
/r/MensRights26/08/20 05:15 PM
1

Jesus man, that's a lot of delusion going on there. You might want to seek some professional help for that.
/r/MensRights26/08/20 02:54 PM
1

Yes, you've been strawmanning for a while, but I didn't really want to bring it up. Bottom line is your amended argument has no bearing on the discussion started days ago in this post. Your original argument was flat out wrong. It would be best at this point if you just let it go. Fixation like this isn't healthy.
/r/MensRights26/08/20 12:52 AM
1

At this point you're just uselessly repeating yourself. You don't even understand the frankly dated science you're using to prop yourself up (seriously, it refutes you; it is actually embarrassing). Hell, you don't even understand what we've been talking about this whole time. It's time to give up.
/r/MensRights25/08/20 07:07 PM
1

How about I remind you what we're actually arguing about here. I've done it before but you seem to have forgotten what this thread is actually about. The stance I'm arguing against and you are inexplicably vociferously arguing for is that male nudity has no value since women are incapable of having any reaction to it. I'm not sure why you hate men so much to dedicate so much effort into vainly trying to prove their bodily autonomy has no value, but here we are. Really you aren't even any good at…
/r/MensRights25/08/20 01:39 PM
1

Okay, if you really need the hand holding here you go. This: The mean ages of male and female patients were 24.7 (20–28) and 23.6 (20––26) years, respectively. All 20 volunteers reported sexual arousal from visual stimulation, but the degree of arousal differed by the type of stimulation and gender. Mean arousal score to mood type (type 1) AVS was 1.86 in men and 2.14 in women (P<0.05), but the mean score to physical type (type 2) AVS was 2.14 in men and 1.86 in women (P<0.05). Men showed a pref…
/r/MensRights25/08/20 12:03 AM
1

No, really. Try again. You got it exactly wrong.
/r/MensRights24/08/20 11:37 PM
1

You may want to read what you quoted a bit more carefully. It doesn't say what you think it does.
/r/MensRights24/08/20 11:01 PM
1

Those don't actually support your argument either. They show differences in expression of sexuality, but they do not ever touch on actual effects or the causes of arousal. You need to learn how to interpret data before basing your conclusions on them. Otherwise you fall into problems like this.
/r/MensRights24/08/20 05:45 PM
1

Support and don't contradict are not the same thing. These studies do not apply to what you're arguing for. They don't reach the conclusions you think they do.
/r/MensRights24/08/20 04:17 PM
1

Have you read any of those studies? If you had you wouldn't be saying any of this. Your entire premise is completely unsupported by them. This is how people lie nowadays. They link their lie to a study they know no one will read or try to understand.
/r/MensRights24/08/20 01:55 PM
1

You know, anybody could put anything into an online blog or article that they want. Not all of it is true and most of the true stuff is only a tiny piece of the whole. Plus all that doesn't even support your conclusion. The only thing it shows is that men and women express themselves sexually differently. It doesn't show anything toward the actual triggers for arousal. You need to step out of your internet bubble and seek actual knowledge.
/r/MensRights23/08/20 04:25 PM
1

So if I made up a blog about how you're wrong and posted a link as evidence you'd believe it? This is why I say you should seek education.
/r/MensRights23/08/20 05:03 AM
1

Oof, that's a lot of projection.
/r/MensRights23/08/20 04:55 AM
1

I'm not going to dedicate my life to your ignorance. You'll have to fix that yourself.
/r/MensRights23/08/20 03:57 AM
1

You would know if you would educate yourself.
/r/MensRights23/08/20 01:05 AM
1

There's no argument to be had, you're just being contrarian for contrarian's sake without any knowledge of what you're talking about. Take some time to actually learn and maybe then there can be an argument.
/r/MensRights22/08/20 06:35 PM
1

I don't have time to delve the depths of your ignorance. You have to take control of your education yourself.
/r/MensRights22/08/20 05:37 PM
1

Dude, this is anatomy 101 stuff. I really suggest you educate yourself if you want to argue about human sexuality.
/r/MensRights22/08/20 03:54 PM
1

The trigger for arousal in all human beings is testosterone level. A certain level automatically triggers the arousal response. The only difference between men and women is that women start with a lower level of testosterone and take more time to build up to the trigger level. Women can be aroused with only visual stimulation the same way men can be aroused without any visual stimulation at all. The reactions are not exactly the same, but they are similar enough. Lets take this argument back to …
/r/MensRights21/08/20 09:52 PM
1

Im not saying women don't have any reaction to male nudity what im trying to say is that male nudity alone doesn't cause sexual arrousal for most women. You're not saying they don't react, you're saying they don't get aroused? Getting aroused is the reaction we're talking about here. That's probably why you're getting downvoted, you're trying to say women aren't human.
/r/MensRights21/08/20 01:55 PM
1

I'm just saying. Obviously no one can force you if you really don't want to.
/r/MensRights20/08/20 11:43 PM
2

This year's illogical nonsense could easily become next year's H.R. 9042. You don't need to dedicate your life to it, but there's no reason not to know whats going on outside your circle.
/r/MensRights20/08/20 11:36 PM
3

It's not a good idea to bubble yourself. All other viewpoints should be considered if for nothing else than to know what you're up against.
/r/MensRights20/08/20 11:25 PM
3

Well yes, obviously women express themselves sexually very differently than men. That, however, does not at all support the conclusion that women are not affected by male nudity. It is a fallacy created by the 'women are wonderful' effect equating unnatural purity to women in regard to sex. In general the triggers for arousal in men and women are the same. The difference is in degrees and is a lot more subtle than most people are willing to admit.
/r/MensRights20/08/20 07:58 PM
20

Women generally don't get aroused by men's bodies to the same degree. Absolutely not true. Ask any male stripper about how aroused women get by men's bodies.
/r/MensRights19/08/20 08:41 PM
30

The difference, while real, is not all that significant. Women are still turned on by visual stimuli. The idea that women don't have a reaction to nudity is absolutely erroneous.
/r/MensRights19/08/20 06:56 PM
1

Right now they're at the point of thinking that it doesn't matter what they do, they can't lose. Almost exactly the same as Clinton did the last time around. I kind of hope they're right this time, but at the same time I won't vote for Biden. I'll probably just pick the Green party candidate again.
/r/MensRights14/08/20 08:34 PM
1

Making stuff from hydrocarbons doesn't affect the environment, releasing them does. The only reason plastic is an issue is single use plastic that doesn't decompose. Industrial plastic is generally fine.
/r/MensRights11/08/20 07:43 PM
9

Pretty sure that was the point.
/r/MensRights10/08/20 10:01 PM
1

It is very poorly worded, but it sounds like they're raising the minimum wage in general and citing single mothers to gain sympathy and support for the raise.
/r/MensRights06/08/20 08:56 PM
7

It is possible for a woman to make a shit ton of money. So if we assume that, then her not wanting to give it up to take care of a child is also not out of the question. The only weird part here is a family court siding with the father.
/r/MensRights04/08/20 01:45 AM
13

Feminists fought hard to make Family Court what it is today. They deserve their share of the credit.
/r/MensRights30/07/20 06:29 PM
4

As long as selective service still exists there is a non-zero possibility of the draft being used in the future. The longer it exists, the closer it gets to certainty.
/r/MensRights25/07/20 12:29 AM
2

I'm not sure how effective threatening them with their eventual goal is.
/r/MensRights17/07/20 07:26 PM
2

I wonder about the assumption that only men are buying. It's perfectly possible that women were purchasing some as well.
/r/MensRights17/07/20 07:22 PM
1

Still most countries don't offer the vaccine to boys, citing "herd immunity" Anyone citing herd immunity to deny vaccine access to half the population clearly doesn't understand what it is.
/r/MensRights15/07/20 12:05 AM
0

The title is the only thing there.
/r/MensRights12/07/20 04:15 AM
2

Volunteer armies seem to work pretty well in peacetime. Maybe they could try that.
/r/MensRights09/07/20 06:05 PM
2

Slaves were technically compensated with food and shelter. Changing that to a monetary equivalent doesn't really make it better.
/r/MensRights09/07/20 05:21 PM
5

You can vote third party, but people seem stupidly allergic to that. You could also write in something like Bugs Bunny, but those aren't counted. Write-in candidates still have to be officially on the list and running to be counted.
/r/MensRights09/07/20 05:07 PM
33

Sometimes a skyscraper is just a skyscraper.
/r/MensRights06/07/20 11:13 PM
3

The original article is a bit misleading. Most of that 68,000 comes from immigrants from countries that allow the practice that had it done to them long before they went to Germany.
/r/MensRights27/06/20 12:26 AM
62

I mean, we can do both.
/r/MensRights24/06/20 01:55 AM
1

In absolute numbers, yes, but only because there are a lot more white men than black men in total. Per capita, black men are killed at a higher rate. Also it seems as though black men are more likely to be killed in custody or while restrained, which is much worse than say being killed in a shootout.
/r/MensRights08/06/20 09:32 PM
1

It's probably illegal, though check your local laws. Just don't count on anyone actually enforcing it.
/r/MensRights08/06/20 09:23 PM
3

He is a much less charismatic Reagan.
/r/MensRights04/05/20 07:45 PM
1

Sure, assuming you have the other sides's help during the primary.
/r/MensRights08/04/20 04:09 PM
23

He's not the only chance, but he's the only one the party insiders actually like.
/r/MensRights08/04/20 12:26 AM
5

If what this guy says holds up, then it may not have actually been legal at the time. At least in the UK. If you notice, he's not arguing for a new law, he's arguing the application of current law.
/r/MensRights03/04/20 07:50 PM
2

If your intent was not to excuse them, you failed.
/r/MensRights03/04/20 07:38 PM
3

If feminism really meant what it said, they'd be out in the middle east fighting for the rights of women that really need it.
/r/MensRights03/04/20 07:34 PM
0

Is a movie feminist just because it has a female lead?
/r/MensRights29/03/20 02:48 PM
1

Oh yeah, you'll be first against the wall for sure. Sorry.
/r/MensRights25/03/20 02:05 PM
1

That's not true, but if you want to be on the wrong side when the starving people start killing to eat, hey that's your choice.
/r/MensRights25/03/20 01:27 AM
1

"Sorting that out" involves giving it to everyone. Means testing requires an inherent amount of unavoidable red tape.
/r/MensRights24/03/20 10:02 PM
1

Oh man. I could easily see Hillary pulling a Dick Cheney to get herself into the white house.
/r/MensRights16/03/20 11:36 PM
2

I think he meant Biden is a conservative, which he is. He is a part of the conservative wing of the Democratic party.
/r/MensRights16/03/20 11:33 PM
2

Now I have a reason to not buy their stuff besides being broke.
/r/MensRights10/03/20 06:19 PM
3

You can also be both a barista and a dancer, but that doesn't mean that a dancer making a bad cup of coffee is representative of all baristas.
/r/MensRights10/03/20 04:52 PM
2

Despite the cynicism behind only changing their mind after their virtue signalling threatened their bottom line, at least Disney is capable of changing their mind. That's more than some companies.
/r/MensRights04/03/20 01:34 AM
3

Why exactly would an anime profile pick mean it's not a Japanese woman? You do realize anime comes from Japan, right?
/r/MensRights19/02/20 07:10 PM
1

They didn't even have all that much of that sort of thing. It was just bland and boring all around other than Sam Jackson and that alien cat thing.
/r/MensRights19/02/20 07:03 PM
11

Plenty of criminals have bad childhoods. That doesn't change what they did to become a criminal.
/r/MensRights13/02/20 11:30 PM
1

For anyone curious, here is a lawyer that explains generally what would change as far as the law is concerned if the era is ratified. https://youtu.be/6-hSqXzwapA
/r/MensRights13/02/20 09:44 PM
9

Mostly they didn't want to be eligible for the draft.
/r/MensRights13/02/20 09:38 PM
3

It's the same one. States recently took up ratifying it again. It has technically reached the number needed to be ratified but there has to be a legal fight over the expiration first.
/r/MensRights13/02/20 09:35 PM
8

There are plenty of deluded men that are fanatically pro mutilation.
/r/MensRights10/02/20 02:24 PM
13

That sounds like threat enough to me.
/r/MensRights10/02/20 02:20 PM
2

PETA is crazypants on purpose. It's best to just ignore them.
/r/MensRights05/02/20 12:54 AM
3

It should be noted that the "no rights or obligations" part would only apply to Arizona. If she moved to another state, that state would be allowed to track the other parent down and force them to pay child support.
/r/MensRights27/01/20 08:12 PM
2

There's kind of a dueling mob thing going on. CNN ran into the bigger sportsfan mob that is just as willing to take to social media to register outrage at anyone denigrating their favorite pastime. You can kind of see it going on here in Reddit, too. In just about every Kobe thread, you'll find a few heavily downvoted posts bashing him.
/r/MensRights27/01/20 08:01 PM
4

So he's basically a really high end troll.
/r/MensRights22/01/20 10:45 PM
2

I'm not sure you understand the biology you're trying to hang your argument on. Girls generally mature faster than boys which would make statutory rape worse for boys than it is for girls. If you really want to excuse this double standard, you may want to take a different tack.
/r/MensRights17/01/20 01:49 PM
2

They just didn't add any sugar or other flavoring. Same with Graham crackers. They would be horrified to see what has become of their creations.
/r/MensRights09/01/20 09:32 PM
2

From what I understand, the ruling was not injunctive so it did not require the government to change the way it does things. Presumably, though, if they wanted to make a change, they would have to take this ruling into consideration. It's very strange.
/r/MensRights07/01/20 07:53 PM
2

Canada
/r/MensRights04/01/20 07:39 PM
3

I can't imagine there is anywhere in the world where this isn't a violation of some sort.
/r/MensRights19/12/19 04:38 PM
2

Ah yes, the true spirit of separate but equal.
/r/MensRights16/12/19 07:55 PM
2

You may need a new text reader if it's that far off.
/r/MensRights16/12/19 07:40 PM
2

1 year on Neptune would be fine as long as it's actually on Neptune.
/r/MensRights22/11/19 05:32 PM
2

I didn't post an article. I think you have me confused with someone else. At any rate, this isn't something to campaign against or anything; just another example of a privilege that most people want to deny that women have and men don't. It's a push back on the narrative that women are oppressed in all things.
/r/MensRights12/11/19 12:33 AM
3

Either way would be fine. It's only really a few dollars a year difference. Just be consistent.
/r/MensRights11/11/19 10:50 PM
5

They should be taxed the same as all other hygiene products.
/r/MensRights11/11/19 10:39 PM
10

It wasn't taxed as a luxury item. It was taxed at the normal rate. There is a lower rate for stuff like food. They have now applied it to tampons and absolutely no other hygiene items.
/r/MensRights11/11/19 10:13 PM
1

I'm not a doctor or a psychologist, but I'm pretty sure it's impossible for a toddler to have gender dysphoria.
/r/MensRights08/11/19 07:48 PM
3

I feel sorry for them. It must be terribly difficult to try to find satire that's crazier than real life right now.
/r/MensRights08/11/19 07:41 PM
1

If she started with "here's an insane thing that we should never think to do" it might be a bit better. Still pretty creepy, though.
/r/MensRights08/11/19 07:38 PM
3

Perhaps, but the people running the show are the ones this applies to. If "good" feminists don't want to be associated with it, then they should either clean house or pick a different name.
/r/MensRights08/11/19 07:27 PM
4

The real reason is that there is a lack of generational wealth for black people. If you account for socioeconomic status the numbers become much closer between the races if still a bit weighted by racial bias.
/r/MensRights08/11/19 07:23 PM
1

Probably, but not definitely. There are real people that believe exactly this.
/r/MensRights07/11/19 11:45 PM
8

The "no more sperm" printed on their shirts is a bit of a clue for you there.
/r/MensRights05/11/19 12:54 AM
5

Well, were I in their shoes I would be insulted that hollywood thinks the only way to get a good female driven movie is to piggyback on successful men.
/r/MensRights04/11/19 06:35 PM
6

There's no reason for individual changing rooms to be gendered. There is already a personal private space, the extra segregation is redundant.
/r/MensRights01/11/19 06:32 PM
1

This is what adblock is for.
/r/MensRights11/10/19 08:37 PM
6

Plenty of huge masculine gay dudes so you'd be okay on that count, but probably a good idea to not claim it if you're not actually gay. That could create some awkward situations.
/r/MensRights09/10/19 08:37 PM
12

I'm not sure why you'd want to come in here just to prove them right, but thank you... I guess?
/r/MensRights09/10/19 08:32 PM
1

Whatever you want to believe buddy.
/r/MensRights05/10/19 02:20 AM
1

Which will also be appealed. This isn't done yet.
/r/MensRights05/10/19 12:36 AM
1

The DOJ didn't, but the House of Representatives is.
/r/MensRights04/10/19 10:01 PM
5

Belt and suspenders; there's no reason not to have both available.
/r/MensRights04/10/19 08:27 PM
3

There is a racial bias in sentencing. It's not as large as the gender bias, but it is there.
/r/MensRights04/10/19 08:24 PM
2

The accurate flowchart would be much simpler. Are you mansplaining --> No.
/r/MensRights04/10/19 08:18 PM
5

The original idea (by Kellogg as others have mentioned) was to use circumcision as a punishment the first time they were caught in the act. That was the mechanism by which it would curb masturbation. Eventually it was just considered a tradition that you do to infants so that they would match their fathers. Incidentally, Kellogg also called for girls to have their clitoris burned by acid for the same reason. Somehow, though, that one didn't catch on.
/r/MensRights04/10/19 08:11 PM
7

No, only 15 states don't have a law against it and it can't be said to be perfectly legal even in those states, because the federal law against it that was ruled unconstitutional by a Michigan federal judge is still going through the appeals process.
/r/MensRights04/10/19 08:01 PM
3

What really nails it home was the confusion around how to be outraged over 4chan's recent innocuous phrase prank. They all knew they were required to be outraged by fliers stating "islam was right about women", but when they tried to express that outrage they would all bsod and just give out gibberish.
/r/MensRights01/10/19 06:58 PM
1

Since when has ability to cook been taken into consideration for cooking jobs in the military?
/r/AntiFeminists30/09/19 09:39 PM
1

You would still end up spending either a night or a weekend in jail. Even if you win a case for unlawful arrest, nothing would happen to the cop and you'd still have had your night in jail.
/r/MensRights27/09/19 08:29 PM
1

While true, nothing would happen to the cop. The city (or whatever jurisdiction the cop works for) would just cut you a check from taxpayer money.
/r/MensRights27/09/19 08:26 PM
1

Can I get off this timeline? I think I'm in the wrong place.
/r/MensRights25/09/19 08:52 PM
3

I think we all know the answer to that is no.
/r/MensRights24/09/19 08:54 PM
3

The date rape drug detecting nail polish was pure paranoia. Notice she never said she found any.
/r/MensRights17/09/19 06:43 PM
24

I think that's the biggest problem with discussing these sorts of things is that a lot of people will equate blackout drunk with passed out drunk and conflate the two.
/r/MensRights17/09/19 06:25 PM
2

The trick is to not put much pressure on it. They're designed to pull the hair slightly as it's cut so you just go over the area very lightly and let it do the work.
/r/MensRights16/09/19 09:55 PM
2

Killing off one of their key brands would frankly send a much larger message than a general boycott anyway. Most of these companies are essentially boycott proof but they still value the health of their individual brands.
/r/MensRights16/09/19 09:52 PM
2

I've been a straight man in a gay bar before. I don't remember even needing to consider the concept of consent.
/r/MensRights10/09/19 11:41 PM
1

A good time to get into "construction" in Melbourne I suppose.
/r/MensRights29/08/19 08:44 PM
3

On your second point I would settle for it having any penalty at all.
/r/MensRights29/08/19 07:31 PM
1

That doesn't really explain the increase in casual false accusations. That's more an explanation for an increase in actual occurrences of the act.
/r/MensRights29/08/19 07:28 PM
1

Men's rights isn't advocating for anyone else or pretending that they do. Feminism is not wrong for focusing on women, but they are wrong to say that advocacy for women is the only way to help everyone. I'm fairly sure that men's rights doesn't try to claim that women's rights are our sole responsibility and that women shouldn't be bothered trying to defend their own rights.
/r/MensRights15/08/19 11:14 PM
4

The best way to get a law like this off the books is malicious compliance. Make the results of the law so ridiculous that it can't be defended anymore.
/r/MensRights15/08/19 07:57 PM
3

This is the way the world is now. We can either sit back and watch as others use that power to shove everyone they don't like into a dark corner or we can use it against them and show them why it shouldn't exist in the first place.
/r/MensRights15/08/19 07:52 PM
6

He would never be able to clear his name with the school since they don't allow accused to defend themselves. However it would make good evidence in the lawsuit he'll have to file against the school later.
/r/MensRights12/08/19 10:54 PM
8

The real reason is they make money doing it and selling off the foreskin to cosmetic companies.
/r/MensRights06/08/19 06:05 PM
10

You're missing the point entirely. The license is immaterial. You get punished for not signing up regardless.
/r/MensRights06/08/19 05:35 PM
38

Ironically, in that caricature they are actually less despotic since you can still choose not to serve and only lose your voting rights.
/r/MensRights06/08/19 05:31 PM
3

You're right in that is how it should be, however selective service exists and it is never, ever going away. Given that, it's only fair to have women sign up the same as men.
/r/MensRights06/08/19 05:28 PM
5

Is that what you think you did? Interesting.
/r/MensRights03/08/19 01:46 AM
4

That's just about the damn stupidest thing I've ever heard. One person paying more than they need to (even Bill Gates) does absolutely nothing. That's the whole point of advocacy in the first place.
/r/MensRights03/08/19 01:43 AM
4

You've never heard of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation? Even giving it away billions will last you a while.
/r/MensRights03/08/19 01:34 AM
4

Bill Gates is already planning to give away everything before he dies. Not sure about Musk.
/r/MensRights03/08/19 01:31 AM
5

The only people who get all the days are the billionaires sitting on top of the pile.
/r/MensRights03/08/19 01:26 AM
32

Is she insane? Yes.
/r/MensRights30/07/19 07:48 PM
9

It's more like what Red Lobster is to fine dining. They try to hide their poor quality by having higher prices to make you think it's better than it is.
/r/MensRights30/07/19 07:33 PM
3

It grossed a billion because it was hyped as a lead-in movie to Endgame. There's no way to know for sure how it would have done on its own merits, but I can say that it wouldn't have made anywhere near a billion.
/r/MensRights29/07/19 02:24 PM
9

That is not a part of comics that should be emulated. It was the beginning of the decline they're currently seeing.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 10:03 PM
13

I think the point was that the reverse has been called rape before. For couples, it's probably best to have an understanding beforehand about potential sleep sex.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 09:47 PM
0

While true, that is also irrelevant. America did not start mass circumcision because of the non-religious practices of Islamic nations.
/r/MensRights16/07/19 04:13 PM
1

Why do you think I care so much? I just think the new version will be worse than the old. It's not some crusade I'm on, though. You are always free to do as you like.
/r/MensRights15/07/19 08:20 PM
0

??? America isn't an Islamic country. Especially back when circumcision was first popularized. That has nothing to do with how it started here.
/r/MensRights15/07/19 08:13 PM
1

So, you and your daughter would probably have a better time watching it than the cgi version. That's all.
/r/MensRights15/07/19 07:27 PM
1

From what I've seen, the original has better animation and it's not like they're going to change the story.
/r/MensRights15/07/19 07:00 PM
5

While it's hard to know the religious origins since that was so long ago, in America, at least, we know that's exactly how it started. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harvey_Kellogg#Masturbation_prevention Obligatory yes that Kellogg.
/r/MensRights15/07/19 05:09 PM
0

Probably better to just watch the original.
/r/MensRights15/07/19 04:50 PM
2

More to the point the law should be all or nothing. Either there should be a law for all public restrooms or it should be fully voluntary. As to changing the culture instead of the law, that would be an exceptionally slow process. We would not likely see the change in the lifetime of anyone alive today.
/r/MensRights15/07/19 04:46 PM
16

He's probably talking about default subs.
/r/MensRights12/07/19 08:25 PM
12

They both look like unfinished torture devices.
/r/MensRights10/07/19 06:19 PM
3

The universe does not owe you risk-free drunken hookups with mentally unstable near-children, buddy. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. The risk of false allegations does not require any sort of hookup, drunken or otherwise. In fact, it doesn't even require any contact whatsoever; avoiding contact just gives you plausible deniability.
/r/MensRights09/07/19 12:33 AM
2

I get that it was meant as a take that to victim blamers*, but they seem to conclude that men have nothing to worry about. Which seems to be completely at odds with how they consider the original source of the satire. *Who are not exclusively male, though that's another conversation entirely.
/r/MensRights08/07/19 08:27 PM
1

Have you considered why we were giving them all that free shit? Not only does it generate good will, it keeps them beholden to us. It's the nice way of doing empire building so we don't have to waste lives bringing them under heel.
/r/MensRights25/06/19 11:46 PM
1

Public schools in general are becoming less and less affordable as states are pulling funding away from them. Even in the states that still provide the funds, you have to have been a resident of that state for a considerable amount of time to take advantage of it.
/r/MensRights25/06/19 11:35 PM
1

Right now there's only two ways to get a bill through congress. Play up how much it will help women and/or children; play down how much richer it will make already rich people. Since clearing college debt can't make rich people richer, you have to play up how much it will help women. It is the sad reality we live in, not necessarily malicious on the part of Bernie.
/r/MensRights25/06/19 11:31 PM
1

So what happens if there's a nervous little girl on both sides of the street? Are we supposed to walk in the middle of the road while yelling at them about how good we are not for walking behind them?
/r/MensRights24/06/19 08:00 PM
2

I don't see that implication. At any rate, I agree that it would be best for their ability to sever their rights and responsibilities to be the same however that ends up looking.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:53 PM
2

I don't understand. How would both parents being able to sever their rights and responsibilities be unequal?
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:45 PM
2

They likely could leave a child at a safe haven, since those are anonymous, but a father cannot leave a child up for adoption without signed consent from the mother or the mother's guardian or a copy of the mother's death certificate.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:34 PM
1

There's something wrong. My HUD doesn't seem to have booted.
/r/MensRights13/06/19 11:14 PM
3

Physical violence is bad (and illegal) no matter how much an asshole the target is.
/r/MensRights12/06/19 06:56 PM
2

It would be nice if feminists actually believed that instead of using it to mask their actual actions.
/r/MensRights10/06/19 07:32 PM
2

If this stuff was actually getting to court, we wouldn't be having this problem. The problem is that the punishment is mob action with no attempt to even deal with it legally.
/r/MensRights20/05/19 02:16 PM
3

Specifically for A Wrinkle in Time. Derived from a book that was a childhood favorite for quite a few 40 year old white men.
/r/MensRights08/05/19 07:35 PM
4

Also a much better character in the comics, or so I've heard.
/r/MensRights08/05/19 07:30 PM
4

Given her characterization at the very beginning of Guardians, this isn't too far off a normal response for her. It's still a bit gratuitous but not out of nowhere.
/r/MensRights02/05/19 12:43 AM
4

Vic's fighting back. He's got a defamation lawsuit going.
/r/MensRights22/04/19 08:29 PM
1

It's generally not (though I'm not sure about the local laws in this case), but it will be ignored as long as it benefits women.
/r/MensRights22/04/19 08:22 PM
1

The closed captioning can't decide what language is being spoken.
/r/MensRights16/04/19 09:05 PM
3

The default state of an accused person is innocent. If they are not guilty it means they do not lose their innocent state. That's why a judge cannot declare someone innocent, they already are innocent. Obviously it is impossible to know for certain what actually happened in most cases, but in the eyes of the law, anyone not proven guilty is innocent.
/r/MensRights16/04/19 08:59 PM
6

Sarcasm relies on a lot of vocal and visual signalling that is impossible to portray in print. Use of a sarcasm switch is proper in most cases.
/r/MensRights16/04/19 08:27 PM
1

So obviously the answer is to force women to work against their will.
/r/MensRights03/04/19 06:16 PM
6

That's a mean thing to say about first graders.
/r/MensRights29/03/19 07:45 PM
2

Amber and silver alerts can be turned off separately from emergency broadcast alerts at least on android.
/r/MensRights23/03/19 05:25 PM
11

I think you might have copied the wrong url. This is that post: https://np.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/b2phjh/men_of_reddit_what_are_some_of_the_pressures_that/eiud54r/
/r/MensRights19/03/19 02:18 PM
1

Please, no one's going to be coming for your guns. The Democratic party won't be able to ban guns any more than the Republican party was able to ban abortion. It's just not in their best interests to actually solve that problem.
/r/MensRights19/03/19 01:54 PM
2

I think you might want to look into that projection issue you have.
/r/MensRights19/03/19 02:58 AM
0

Whooosh.
/r/MensRights18/03/19 10:32 PM
1

This and this.
/r/MensRights18/03/19 09:27 PM
5

So obviously it is necessary to require all infants be cut up so you don't feel awkward about your penis.
/r/MensRights18/03/19 09:22 PM
1

Your parents tattooed you at birth? That's messed up man.
/r/MensRights18/03/19 09:19 PM
4

The thing you're missing here is that no one but you is talking about your dick. Everyone else is talking about cutting up babies. Seriously, no one cares about your dick.
/r/MensRights18/03/19 09:18 PM
2

Look, I don't care either way, but if it has to be banned (and trust me, it won't ever be possible to use this on women) then it should be applied equally.
/r/MensRights11/03/19 10:18 PM
4

You seem to have missed this so I'll leave it here for you: It is understood the soldier who complained said he would not be allowed to comment on a woman’s breasts or backside, even as part of an exercise
/r/MensRights11/03/19 08:03 PM
2

Easy, they randomly select about 90% of negative reviews and call them bots.
/r/MensRights11/03/19 07:54 PM
1

That foreign total is kind of odd. The country breakdown doesn't seem to have the bulk of the total listed. Where did all of that extra come from?
/r/MensRights11/03/19 07:45 PM
9

Alita is nothing like Avatar. While it comes from a preexisting story, it is a good source and the movie does it justice. Definitely not bland.
/r/MensRights07/03/19 04:56 AM
2

That would be the ideal, but it's never going to happen. The chickenhawks in power love to have the draft in their back pocket, just in case, even though they're too afraid to actually use it. There's no way they'll let it go, even if they have to put women on the list too.
/r/MensRights07/03/19 03:29 AM
9

That's like blaming the men's rights movement for incels. A lot of people do. I'd say that's a standard stance on reddit in general.
/r/MensRights06/03/19 06:33 PM
1

Reading the story shows that these are board members, not managing directors. Despite the emphasis on pay in the headline the author seems to be complaining about not enough women making it to the managerial positions.
/r/MensRights04/03/19 04:27 PM
5

At least it will be easy to do, considering it's already done.
/r/MensRights01/03/19 11:42 PM
6

Granted, but killing off one of their properties does at least send a message they might actually listen to.
/r/MensRights01/03/19 11:30 PM
1

In many states when cops respond to domestic calls the man is arrested automatically regardless of evidence. Even in cases where the woman involved admits to being the aggressor.
/r/MensRights28/02/19 10:11 PM
1

Well, you would be the one going to jail.
/r/MensRights28/02/19 08:56 PM
4

Yes, he was a very strange man. Definitely ahead of his time.
/r/MensRights26/02/19 07:40 PM
2

I think it's already been proved with Wonder Woman that if you make a descent movie it doesn't matter what the gender/ethnicity of the lead is. Movies only have to worry about that when they're using said attributes to try to push a bad one.
/r/MensRights26/02/19 07:04 PM
29

Wonder Woman is a bit more complicated than that. While there are certainly elements that would trigger today's hypersensitive crowd, the creator had said he was trying to prepare comic book readers of the time for the coming matriarchy that he saw as inevitable.
/r/MensRights26/02/19 06:41 PM
29

Doubly ironic since one of the main reasons the equal rights amendment wasn't ratified is women didn't want to have to sign up for the draft.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 09:51 PM
4

That kiss was not a sexual act.
/r/MensRights20/02/19 09:22 PM
11

The whole point of the intersectional trend is to disguise that white women are one of the dominant majorities.
/r/MensRights14/02/19 12:46 AM
1

A: Legislators don't care. B: This is literally a thread about sperm being stolen and used to inseminate. There is no protection even if you are picky in your partners.
/r/MensRights12/02/19 12:17 AM
1

Do they not vote for their representatives? How, exactly, is this supposed to work? Edit: "as candidates" I kind of get it now. Still not sure how it would work though.
/r/MensRights01/02/19 01:18 AM
2

Well, there are higher margins on women's razors....
/r/MensRights24/01/19 04:16 PM
2

Your barber is only half right. Disposable razors like Harry's don't work too well with thicker hair, but Gillette isn't any better. In fact, I'm almost certain the actual blade parts are made in the same factory. It's just the outer cartridges that are different.
/r/MensRights21/01/19 08:48 PM
9

take responsibility No matter what, this is the one thing that will never happen. For either side.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 02:20 PM
13

They could create a lounge area outside the changing room to facilitate post-game interviews, but anything beyond that should be reserved for team only. Your idea was, unfortunately, already ruled illegal. Apparently, not giving female reporters access to naked male players is sexist.
/r/MensRights02/01/19 10:37 PM
26

The true answer to this is to not let any reporters of any gender into the locker room. They don't have any business being there in the first place.
/r/MensRights02/01/19 06:08 PM
23

It's for basically the same reason the foreskin is removed. Mostly religious/cultural with hygienic justifications that aren't really true.
/r/MensRights21/11/18 08:04 PM
2

It was more correlated to religious affiliation than race. It just happens that blacks and hispanics tend to be more religious per capita than other races.
/r/MensRights15/11/18 03:05 PM
3

At least two thirds of her votes were "Not Trump" votes. I'd say no more than 20% were "because woman."
/r/MensRights14/11/18 11:37 PM
14

Conservatives in the Democratic party usually get the vast majority of black votes anyway. Obama's numbers weren't terribly unusual.
/r/MensRights14/11/18 11:35 PM
2

From what I understand it's basically left up to the individual groups what they do beyond selling cookies. So some of them will be more like the boy scouts with various activities and some will do cookie sales and home ec only.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 09:19 PM
3

That doesn't change that it's a lot too late to start complaining now. Not only is it a weak legal argument at best, it's creating a really bad image for them and likely will create the loss of members they're trying to prevent even if they somehow won the case.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 09:14 PM
6

Sure, if you can prove it. Problem is, you can't just show it to be untrue, you have to show that they didn't believe it was true when they said it. There's a reason perjury is rarely punished.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 09:04 PM
1

The article in a nutshell: It's going to sound like I'm saying women need special privileges and all men suck, but that's because all men suck and women need special privileges.
/r/MensRights17/10/18 10:35 PM
1

May want to wait for the final vote before doing a victory lap on this one.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/10/18 11:45 AM
15

If she stopped the behavior, she admitted it at least to herself. That's more than most would do.
/r/MensRights04/10/18 09:47 PM
5

Assault is any attack, battery is any physical attack. It doesn't have to be with an object. Basically you can assault someone without ever touching them; for battery you have to make contact.
/r/MensRights04/10/18 09:45 PM
2

I think the takeaway here is that Feminists don't think women are adults.
/r/MensRights16/08/18 06:45 PM
14

Sounds like he wants to avoid guesting on livestreams. Probably any sort of chat interaction too. There's no way to even tell the gender of randoms you're playing with in a match, so I doubt he's talking about that.
/r/MensRights15/08/18 02:31 PM
1

That would be the alert that the phone is about to shut down. The indicator is on the other side between the time and the signal strength.
/r/MensRights17/07/18 07:28 PM
1

You're not wrong about the time, but that battery indicator is far from fully charged.
/r/MensRights17/07/18 07:23 PM
0

Is a photo not proof?
/r/MensRights16/07/18 10:38 PM
0

The fact that this is even a question shows a deep ignorance for how vaccines actually protect a population.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 10:22 PM
3

Really, though, the way he advocated it, it would have at least been effective for the duration of the healing process. It was supposed to be used as a punishment when the child was first caught in the act.
/r/MensRights13/07/18 09:16 PM
1

If he's old enough it's entirely possible the doctor didn't even ask first.
/r/MensRights13/07/18 09:10 PM
8

I believe Montana calls it sexual assault, or something like that. She was not charged with it. Edit: It is Sexual Intercourse Without Consent and I don't see that on her list of charges.
/r/MensRights02/07/18 09:49 PM
1

Probably a firing followed by lots and lots of pointless seminars.
/r/MensRights29/06/18 08:42 PM
2

Not everyone is special forces. If there's room for below average men there's room for above average women. Obviously, if they can't cut it they shouldn't be there on the front line, but even in the "sexist" olden days there was still places for the less physically inclined.
/r/MensRights18/06/18 09:26 PM
1

That's not really a position held by any significant percentage of the population. Even China has stepped back from the closest thing you get to that level of population control.
/r/MensRights18/06/18 09:05 PM
7

I'm also not sure where the post wants to go, but I personally support not lowering standards in order to artificially boost the numbers for women. If they can pass the current standards then more power to them.
/r/MensRights18/06/18 08:54 PM
1

This isn't really a recent thing, though. I've been seeing this pop up occasionally for years. Granted, there has been a recent uptick but it's been going on for a while.
/r/MensRights16/06/18 04:22 PM
1

I've seen that setup in my area and we definitely don't have any laws for unisex bathrooms.
/r/MensRights15/06/18 07:30 PM
1

Then why do I earn 75 cents for every dollar made by men at my job at urban outfitters. I know you're probably lying, but on the off chance you aren't then report that shit. It is already illegal to pay you less for the same work.
/r/MensRights14/06/18 01:51 AM
7

You really can't tell if we are for or against gang rape? Really? Edit: Now that you've switched out both the gang rape mentions to "chase" I'll tell you; personally, I don't care which way it is as long as both situations would be treated the same. That's the real point of highlighting double standards, to try to bring some consistency to it.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 02:59 PM
3

Taking down Weinstein wasn't a bad thing. However, I knew this would devolve to witch hunting pretty much immediately.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 01:19 AM
4

That's part of the joke.
/r/MensRights18/05/18 02:10 AM
10

I see you like ironic usernames.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 09:25 PM
13

I don't think we have any information on their spouse's sex life.
/r/MensRights24/04/18 06:40 PM
1

The real problem is that he refused outright. If he had given them a more generic design and they rejected it, he would have had a lot less trouble.
/r/MensRights20/04/18 07:59 PM
1

One must also admit that it is a bit different. There's no such thing as hetero cakes. There is such a thing as men's hairstyles.
/r/MensRights20/04/18 07:12 PM
1

Historically? No.
/r/MensRights20/04/18 06:25 PM
1

Yes, exactly.
/r/MensRights04/04/18 02:02 PM
1

Being unable to afford the uniform is worse than being unable to afford the hottest fashion.
/r/MensRights03/04/18 09:45 PM
2

You can find a doctor to do illegal surgeries. For this? Well, if that poor boy is real, he doesn't stand a chance.
/r/MensRights22/03/18 09:33 PM
0

It's sad. Snopes used to be really reliable in debunking the email spam myths.
/r/MensRights20/03/18 07:24 PM
11

I never understood how that term came to be. It sounds like an insult to me.
/r/MensRights15/03/18 09:19 PM
2

It can't exist period. There is nothing in this world that doesn't offend somebody somewhere. Of course, what they actually mean is the right for their personal chosen group not to be offended. That one requires censorship and is why there is a side attack on the first amendment using privately owned platforms to do the censorship for them.
/r/MensRights05/03/18 07:50 PM
2

If it was a business decision it would have been immediately undecided as soon as they lost most of their business.
/r/MensRights19/02/18 09:50 PM
6

There's porn drawn on cave walls. There's really no such thing as "sex before porn."
/r/MensRights08/02/18 10:11 PM
1

What's with the creepy music?
/r/MensRights05/02/18 08:22 PM
1

If you really want to hit them where it hurts, just use an adblock (like uBlock origin) everywhere. It won't do much, but it hits them harder than just not using google and youtube.
/r/MensRights05/02/18 07:25 AM
1

I think an important difference between the two is that being communist isn't inherently illegal, whereas sexual assault or sexual harassment is. That makes it much harder to fight against the abuses of the me too movement than it was against McCarthyism, and McCarthyism wasn't exactly a cakewalk to fight.
/r/MensRights30/01/18 08:40 PM
7

It's a part of human nature to form up into tribes and demonize the "other". That's why rule of law is so important to civilization. To curb the worst of our bad tendencies.
/r/MensRights11/01/18 06:00 PM
10

Repeat the lie often enough and it becomes the truth.
/r/MensRights11/01/18 04:48 PM
5

At this point can they really even be called liberal? Their viewpoints are more religious than political now. They essentially have the same viewpoint that the worst of the religious right did back in the '90s. 'All sex is bad and men should be punished for it.'
/r/MensRights10/01/18 09:31 PM
1

Even in said world that doesn't preclude having a men's rights group. If feminists really cared about helping men they would be happy to have the help of men's rights activists.
/r/MensRights30/12/17 08:50 PM
16

Even a well written one may run into problems, as many of the commenters for deletion were skeptical at best that there was anything that could match the category. I do agree, though, that creating a better page would be more productive than complaining about it.
/r/MensRights21/12/17 09:44 PM
28

I think the difference now is it can hit the executives too, instead of just the rank and file. That's what will really affect hiring practices.
/r/MensRights19/12/17 06:11 PM
1

Probably.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 06:57 PM
7

Given the that the school has a maths teacher, I would imagine that it is not subject to title IX.
/r/MensRights08/12/17 10:10 PM
8

I imagine the idea was to make them on demand, not stockpile them and sell later. A pretty horrible thing to do either way.
/r/MensRights05/12/17 09:15 PM
26

Unless your case is that only pregnant women are entitled to medical care, then it must be acknowledged that medical care for prisoners is neglected universally in America. This is not a gendered issue.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 09:05 PM
2

You were the one defending it. Not me.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 06:14 PM
2

Oh, right. The rape was just on the deleted scenes in the sequel. I guess that makes it ok then.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 05:58 PM
2

Remind me, which of those has a comedic scene of a man raping a woman?
/r/MensRights25/10/17 07:19 AM
2

Do you have any evidence?
/r/MensRights24/10/17 10:23 PM
1

Can you name one that was made within the last ten years?
/r/MensRights24/10/17 07:44 PM
3

I've never seen anyone able to provide any evidence of this that isn't from a previous century. At any rate to say one man starving to death on the streets is more privileged than another man starving to death on the streets because his pigmentation is different is asinine. Privilege is a class issue in which race is only a noticeable factor at the upper end.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 06:56 PM
0

Well then, you might get the international copyright police after you someday, but as far as a rape charge, nope. Not even in Sweden.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 06:41 PM
1

That depends, did you personally threaten her in order to get her to make those videos?
/r/MensRights06/10/17 05:29 PM
1

Personally, I've just abandoned the word. It has become too soiled by the crazies that now claim it. And really, it was originally just a weaselly "lets pretend we're not liberal" word in the first place. Now that it is actually not liberal, let the crazies have it.
/r/MensRights03/10/17 08:27 PM
2

First step to that is calling it out.
/r/MensRights08/07/17 12:32 AM
3

If someone is dead set on their particular view, it is unlikely that any amount of reasoned discussion or evidence will sway them. The best thing to do, in my opinion, is if it is a private conversation, agree to disagree and move on. If it is some sort of public forum, give your best argument and hope to sway someone listening/reading along.
/r/MensRights08/07/17 12:04 AM
2

I sincerely hope she doesn't actually represent all of Sweden.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 10:38 PM
4

Her entire campaign was (paraphrased) "vote for me, because woman." So, of course the first go to excuse when she didn't win was sexism.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 09:31 PM
1

Thing is, if some asshole is all there is, then they get to be the "official" representative by default.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 09:13 PM
1

Do you happen to know who that would be, by chance? I don't think I've ever heard of such a thing.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 07:55 PM
6

Ah, so they're still in the process then.
/r/MensRights31/05/17 11:39 PM
25

Are there any men's only clubs left? I thought they were sued out of existence by feminists.
/r/MensRights31/05/17 10:38 PM
21

There's no need to centralize all the relevant information unless there is going to be a draft someday. And I guarantee you that at some point the right set of circumstances will make it seem necessary again.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 10:22 PM
21

Again, if that were true, selective service wouldn't exist.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 10:12 PM
30

That's not exactly an insurmountable obstacle. Even as dysfunctional as they are now, laws still get passed all the time. If they truly intended for there never to be a draft again, selective service wouldn't exist.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 10:06 PM
43

The US will never have another draft. That's not true at all. As long as selective service is in effect someone will take advantage of it someday.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 09:41 PM
1

He's saying it would be a bluff. If it's called then they lose and are in about the same position they are now. It's a good bluff, though. About 90% of a school administrator's job is avoiding lawsuits. Every horrible policy they come up with is almost always attributable to that. If you can make them believe you're looking to sue, there's a good chance they'll sweep it all under the rug and move him somewhere else. Which may or may not be a good thing.
/r/MensRights03/04/17 08:12 PM
2

I'm not going to say they unequivocally couldn't. There's no way to know that one way or the other. Given the evidence provided, though, I would say I'm skeptical at best.
/r/MensRights17/03/17 06:26 PM
3

I don't think this class would make someone less ignorant.
/r/MensRights17/03/17 04:56 PM
1

Phew, that's a loaded question. You want to ask when I stopped hitting my wife next? At any rate, no ones being "discriminated" against if they don't get the ok spot at the grocery store or wherever and if those places want to pretend to be "eco-friendly" by marking off a spot, I've got no problem with it.
/r/MensRights16/03/17 10:23 PM
1

That's up to whoever owns the parking lot. As long as they have minimum required handicap spaces and aren't discriminating against a protected class, they can do whatever they like. If that means the owners of gas guzzling beaters have to walk a few extra feet, that's just too bad. Also, there are plenty of low emission vehicles that are much less expensive than even some of the older cars. They just aren't very cool looking.
/r/MensRights16/03/17 05:06 PM
0

Why shouldn't they?
/r/MensRights15/03/17 05:37 PM
2

I've heard it was originally meant to be a horror plot. They probably should have changed the beginning a bit more to make it a romance, but it's really a stretch to call it rape.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 03:12 PM
1

It's fully theater. It provides no actual safety at all. In fact, we would be significantly safer if we went back to 90's style security, since you wouldn't have as many people uselessly standing around in an unsecured area waiting while the TSA sits on its collective ass occasionally getting up to harass innocent travelers.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 10:18 PM
3

Or, you know, we assume that part was already done.
/r/MensRights25/06/16 12:10 AM
0

Your sock puppet then. You certainly defended it as your own argument.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 06:16 PM
1

I didn't call anyone sick, far as I remember. Right, it was "repulsive." That's perfectly reasonable and level headed.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 06:02 PM
1

It doesn't matter what you do or don't support. That is the subtext of that argument. That is what is meant when someone says that in a discussion of circumcision.
/r/MensRights26/11/15 02:08 AM
8

The problem is, the ultimate conclusion to that argument in an anti-circumcision thread is that we should force everyone else to have one so they don't feel bad about theirs, and that is wrong.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 10:01 PM
2

Not to mention, since these are all juvenile cases, it would be statutory rape.
/r/MensRights02/04/15 11:06 PM
3

Sure Curves says that, they have to. I would bet my life savings ($1), though, that if a man actually tried to sign up they'd find some way to stop him.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 09:16 PM
1

Well, obviously you just handcuff them to a treadmill. Then you're parent of the year.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 07:48 PM
2

I wouldn't hold my breath on that.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 06:31 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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