TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Jerzeem Archive

View 0 posts and 360 comments by Jerzeem 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)
8

We underpay for the teachers we need and want. With some exceptions, we overpay for the teachers we have.
/r/MensRights28/08/25 12:52 PM
4

My understanding is that there were a lot of people making threats based on political affiliation on mainstream subs and they got so prevalent that the admins had to decide between banning these (major subs that fell on the 'correct' side of the political aisle) or implement automated tools to remove the threats against public figures. They're still tuning the automation, I think.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 03:30 PM
11

"she's one of the boys" is not equivalent to "he was well trained". "He was well trained" is a lot closer to "she knew her place". "She's one of the boys" is about belonging and fitting in with the group. The others are about having crushed the person's spirit so that they do what you want.
/r/MensRights11/04/25 01:53 PM
3

Well of course they're triggered by that. They are supposed to be the ones that get to choose between the Lady or the Tiger
/r/MensRights03/02/25 03:52 PM
3

On your right hand? I know someone who is looking for you.
/r/MensRights17/11/24 05:19 AM
15

Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
/r/MensRights20/06/24 03:45 PM
8

They frequently do. It's something that a lot of women complain about too. "When a man goes to the doctor his complaints are immediately taken seriously!" Well, yeah... Have you seen what it takes to get a man to go to the doctor in the first place?
/r/MensRights28/01/24 03:55 AM
67

Boner jokes are still funny, they're just hard when you use them...
/r/MensRights17/01/24 09:21 PM
4

Is this really the hill you want to die on? Sounds like a death threat to me. Report it!
/r/MensRights05/12/23 07:15 PM
12

That first one is an oof. "I'm never on the same project long", is not something to brag about. If you are good, project managers fight to keep you on their project. If project managers are shuffling you around to a new team, it's because they will take less of a productivity hit getting someone else up to speed on the project than keeping you around. Sometimes it means that they will take less of a productivity hit from having an empty chair on their team than keeping you around.
/r/MensRights07/08/23 03:40 PM
3

We're in a simulation, just log out and roll a new character.
/r/MensRights25/06/23 03:58 PM
22

I think that's the joke.
/r/MensRights12/03/23 02:40 PM
1

You missed a word. Someone who is legally blind may still have some vision. Legal blindness occurs when a person has central visual acuity (vision that allows a person to see straight ahead of them) of 20/200 or less in his or her better eye with correction
/r/MensRights17/02/23 06:36 PM
4

Water (unless you isolate a single water molecule) is always touching other water, which makes it wet.
/r/MensRights27/01/23 09:25 PM
6

It's possible, but it's extremely rare. Infidelity is orders of magnitude more likely.
/r/MensRights02/01/23 07:36 PM
1

So... would you say your definition of 'real linguist' was descriptive rather than prescriptive?
/r/MensRights22/12/22 07:25 PM
2

Good bot.
/r/MensRights24/09/22 11:31 PM
1

I know we always take stuff out on the people closest That is not true. Whoever taught you that has set you up to be abused. Adults do not have to 'take stuff out' on anyone. It's entirely possible to be extremely angry or upset and not abuse anyone because of it.
/r/MensRights09/09/22 02:27 AM
2

For anyone who doesn't recognize the interaction.
/r/MensRights26/07/22 10:45 PM
0

Sun Tzu said (among other things) something like, "Bitches hate being set on fire. So if you want someone to run away, try setting them on fire." I may be paraphrasing slightly.
/r/MensRights20/06/22 02:33 AM
4

I think that was Napoleon.
/r/MensRights20/06/22 02:24 AM
1

I have a different perspective. My wife used to throw tantrums about ridiculous things. I ignored them (and she got off hormonal birth control) and she stopped doing it. Now she acts like an adult and recognizes when her emotions are out of whack because of hormone fluctuations. That's not to say that I don't spoil her, because I do. But I'm doing it because I want to spoil her, not because she will throw a fit.
/r/MensRights09/06/22 07:32 PM
7

https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Constitution/#A3S08 Every bill passed by the legislature shall be presented to the governor for approval and shall become a law if the governor approves and signs it, or fails to veto it within seven consecutive days after presentation. If during that period or on the seventh day the legislature adjourns sine die or takes a recess of more than thirty days, the governor shall have fifteen consecutive days from the date of presentation to act on the bill. In all cases…
/r/MensRights04/06/22 10:12 PM
8

He has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt she purposely lied and that it was her lie that caused his loss. That's the standard for criminal liability. I think the standard in a civil trial is lower. It should be 'by preponderance of the evidence', which just means more likely than not.
/r/MensRights25/05/22 05:15 AM
5

There's not technically a draft right now in the US. Men are required to sign up for Selective Service (which is the system that is used if a draft were needed in the future) with a potential felony conviction, 5 years in prison and a $250k fine as punishment. They are also ineligible for financial aid for college, most federal employment, security clearance for contractors, job training under the WIOA, and for immigrant men, citizenship. So quite a bit of carrot and stick there. The issue with …
/r/MensRights25/02/22 04:30 PM
1

I think this is a moral panic, like the Salem witch trials or the Red Scare or the Satanic Panic. Those generally burn themselves out in a decade or so.
/r/MensRights15/12/21 06:48 PM
1

This is one of those things where I'm supposed to just ignore women complaining about something? That's certainly a thing that I can do. Have a nice day!
/r/MensRights13/10/21 06:44 PM
1

We agree on that point. Where we disagree is on why. I've claimed it's because women largely won't/don't buy pants with pockets. You've told me repeatedly that I'm wrong. I want to stop being wrong, so I need to know what the reason is. Please tell me what the reason is. I'm not looking for a gotcha moment or trying to badger you. I'm legitimately curious why you think what you do.
/r/MensRights13/10/21 04:42 PM
1

Ok, I'm trying to understand. Why do you think there aren't pants with pockets for women? Why don't clothing companies want your money?
/r/MensRights13/10/21 04:29 AM
2

Oh, I know it's annoying. My wife complains about the same thing. I'm not saying that you wouldn't buy pants with pockets. I'm saying that as a group, women haven't bought/won't buy enough to make it profitable, so companies don't make them. Companies are just following the demand. That means the people to complain to/at for women's pants not having pockets is not clothing companies or men, but rather other women.
/r/MensRights12/10/21 08:03 PM
7

Nah they’d sell. Historically, they have not. You think women want to go around with 2/3 of their cell phone sticking out of their „pocket”. I think they carry their phones in their purses, hands, or have someone else carry them for them. They don't put their phones (or other bulky items) in their pockets because it 'ruins the line of the outfit'. Is it a conspiracy? Of course not. So you think it's not a conspiracy not to sell pants with pockets, but that they would sell well. That would mean t…
/r/MensRights12/10/21 05:17 PM
7

Stop buying pants without pockets. Start buying pants with pockets. This may mean you have to buy men's pants. Do you know why clothing manufacturers don't make women's pants with deep pockets? It's not a giant conspiracy, they just don't sell well.
/r/MensRights12/10/21 04:56 PM
1

It's called Variability Hypothesis or the Greater Male Variability Hypothesis. If you're interested in what the genetic mechanism for it might be, look into Barr bodies and X-chromosome inactivation.
/r/MensRights18/09/21 05:32 PM
6

Theoretically we could get rid of selective service completely, although there hasn't been a lot of progress in that direction, but if there came a time when we needed it again, it would be re-instated. Making it so that it applies to women as well not only makes it more likely to be discontinued, but will also make it less likely to be re-implemented in the future.
/r/MensRights25/07/21 03:37 PM
10

More than 50% anywhere that doesn't deliberately try to get rid of female children (Looking at you China.) Men are much more likely to die in their teens and 20s compared to women.
/r/MensRights30/06/21 05:30 PM
31

In terms of grip strength at least, men who are at the 50th percentile are stronger than women at the 90th percentile. That is, men who are stronger than 50% of other men are also stronger than 90% of women. Men in the 10th percentile are roughly as strong as women in the 90th percentile (with some variance depending on race.) That is to say, even a weak man is still stronger than most women. A strong woman is still weaker than most men. And if you compare equivalent percentiles, you find that m…
/r/MensRights15/05/21 02:36 PM
13

She wasn't charged with raping children. She was charged with pimping out children. She's not a sex predator, just someone that makes money from children being raped. That almost makes it worse. A pedophile at least has the (poor) excuse of being sick. She's just greedy and evil.
/r/MensRights23/03/21 03:01 PM
67

You still get insulted for it, but it's good-natured insults that you know they don't mean.
/r/MensRights18/02/21 12:05 PM
10

It's been over 20 years since I was in high school (I'm not sharing how much over 20, thanks) and I still remember the really good teachers I had for calculus and physics, and I still remember the really terrible teachers I had for art and language classes. Interestingly, I can still remember the names of the good teachers, while the terrible teachers I cannot.
/r/MensRights16/02/21 01:53 PM
2

Or "Not until I met you."
/r/MensRights03/09/20 05:55 PM
7

And those organizations should get the government money instead of the faith-based ones that discriminate because of their faith. He didn't say they shouldn't exist, just that they shouldn't get tax money. Your characterization of his position seemed deliberately stupid and like you were trying to pick a fight. I apologize if I misunderstood and you legitimately didn't understand.
/r/MensRights19/08/20 04:28 AM
14

That's not what he said. He said he doesn't like that they still get federal funding while discriminating against gay couples who want to adopt. That actually means that fewer kids are being adopted because the agencies reject couples that would be qualified if not for being gay.
/r/MensRights19/08/20 04:16 AM
237

This is not a new change. In my college English 101 class I wrote a joke persuasive paper about how pyramid power was real. The biggest red mark on the page was because I used 'mankind' instead of 'humankind'. This was in 1999.
/r/MensRights09/05/20 01:17 AM
18

This was striking to me: His appeal comes as the CPS starts to publish statistics quarterly, instead of yearly, in a drive for transparency. But concerns have been raised that such changes make it harder to scrutinise. Kate Ellis, a solicitor at the Centre for Women's Justice, said the introduction of quarterly figures made it difficult to compare statistics against previous annual figures. They're too stupid to add up 4 quarters to compare to the previous years?
/r/MensRights30/01/20 06:57 PM
3

It's only exploitable if there is some benefit to being one gender over the other. The only way for there to be some benefit to being one gender over the other is to discriminate against one of the genders. If there is no sexism, then there is nothing to exploit, and there is no issue with swapping gender every 30 seconds.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/01/20 02:54 PM
2

I had a better idea. Make it a slasher movie and have them slowly get picked off by a cannibal murderer and call it the Brady Brunch.
/r/MensRights17/01/20 10:58 PM
2

They should make a television show about a single mom who meets a single dad and they get married.
/r/MensRights17/01/20 08:49 PM
30

He's under the age of consent, that means that whatever he says (even if it's, "OH GOD YES, I'M GONNA RAM IT IN ALL YOUR HOLES!") it is still legally a no.
/r/MensRights30/12/19 11:36 PM
13

Abolishing it won't help. If we ever get to the point where we need a draft, it will be re-instituted, whether it's been legally abolished or not. The solution is to include everyone in the draft pool. That will make it much less likely that it actually gets used.
/r/MensRights28/08/19 06:48 PM
35

I thought that all of the "Men's" sports were already gender neutral.
/r/MensRights08/07/19 04:18 PM
3

Having false memories doesn't mean you're mentally ill. Almost everyone has false memories of one type or another. Some are minor and widespread, like the spelling of the Berenstain Bears books. A bigger famous one is people who remember a baseball game on the radio being interrupted by the announcement of Pearl Harbor (which was December 7th, 1941.) The people who have that memory KNOW that it didn't happen (the interruption), but they still have the memory. Or people who remember going to see …
/r/MensRights28/06/19 06:42 PM
2

Technically she is correct. Without men, there would be 0 unplanned pregnancies. Of course, without women, there would also be 0 unplanned pregnancies, so women are ALSO the cause of 100% of unplanned pregnancies!
/r/MensRights16/06/19 01:20 AM
5

That was back child support. It was money that he was ordered to pay while she was raising the child that he did not. She got the money needed to raise the child from somewhere else and this money was in recompense for that. There are good arguments against the way child support is managed in the US, but this is not one of them.
/r/MensRights11/04/19 03:29 PM
3

Does she have resources that you can actually collect if you win a lawsuit? If not, are you willing to lose money on suing just so that you have the judgement hanging over her head?
/r/MensRights05/04/19 02:44 PM
2

"N'interrompez jamais un ennemi qui est en train de faire un erreur."
/r/MensRights13/03/19 06:37 PM
3

I've been alive forever and I wrote the very first song
/r/MensRights13/03/19 03:38 PM
13

There's not a link for that because according to the FBI statistics he is incorrect. Note that the statistic there is arrests for fraud, but it shows 61.3% of the people arrested for fraud are male. It is possible that women are just better at not getting arrested for committing fraud despite committing it far more often, but I would expect not expect that to sway the values as far as he claimed. If he has a source, I would dearly love to see it.
/r/MensRights04/03/19 07:15 PM
2

Yes, it's a big deal. The US Constitution is the document from which the government draws its legitimacy. It lays out the rules that the government has to follow and the things it is allowed to do. If a law passed by the government is declared unconstitutional (by the body empowered to do so) that means the law lacked that legitimacy. In effect, the law should never have been a law.
/r/MensRights21/11/18 07:08 PM
6

Most of the people who commit suicide are suffering from depression. Depression is a mental illness. Depression is a disease. People don't choose to get cancer. People don't choose to get depression. Do people choose to stay in relationships with violent partners?
/r/MensRights07/11/18 06:03 PM
8

Suicide is a choice in the same way that dying of cancer is a choice.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 04:03 PM
5

I thought Handmaid's Tale was a metaphor for the draft.
/r/MensRights04/07/18 03:33 AM
2

That's a great John Adams quote. Thank you for sharing it!
/r/MensRights05/06/18 10:13 PM
4

That's understandable. Pretend you have 110 people applying for 10 jobs, 100 men and 10 women. If you insist on gender parity in hiring, you're going to get the top 5 men and the top 5 women. BUT, the top 5 men are the top 5%, while you get all the way down to the middle of the pack for the women. (It's also important to take the Dunning-Kruger effect into account when analyzing your own performance. If you're good at a thing, you are better at recognizing your own flaws, which makes you think y…
/r/MensRights30/04/18 04:58 PM
183

I would bet all the money in my wallet against all the money in your wallet that when the time comes for that grace period to expire it will get extended. And then when it comes time for that extension on the grace period to expire it will get extended again. The indefinite extension of a 'controversial policy that was made more palatable by being temporary' is a not-uncommon political tactic. (I don't carry any cash in my wallet though, so don't get super excited if I'm wrong.)
/r/MensRights14/02/18 05:40 PM
7

The alleged victim told police that he raped her and that they did not have an intimate relationship and she didn't even like sex with men. The messages showed that she frequently messaged him asking for casual sex, fantasized about having violent sex with him, and texted her friends about how much she enjoyed having sex with him. Is it possible that he raped her? Absolutely. But if the only evidence was her testimony and you have evidence that she was lying about so many of the things she told …
/r/MensRights15/12/17 03:35 PM
2

For someone who has grown up with constant access to the internet's accumulation of knowledge, suddenly losing it would probably feel a lot like being lobotomized. At least I've heard that. There are studies about the differences in how millenials vs older generations learn and think.
/r/MensRights07/04/17 08:33 PM
1

Good idea. We need the support of men to pass laws that protect women's reproductive rights, so instead of passing laws that protect everyone's reproductive rights, let's try to pass stunt laws that piss men off. I'm sure there's no way this will backfire.
/r/MensRights20/02/17 10:01 PM
29

A few problems with what you said. First, slander is a tort, not a crime. Second, in defamation cases, the defendant (that is, the person who said the thing) is responsible for proving that what they said is true if they want to use the statement's truth as their defense. The plaintiff in a defamation case is responsible for proving that the defendant said/wrote the statement and that other people heard/saw the statement (and that the statement was damaging, if it's not defamation per se.)
/r/MensRights23/02/16 05:51 PM
6

Those aren't criminal acts. They're civil torts. She can be sued, but there's not a criminal act to get a DA interested.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 06:28 PM
10

3 possibilities in descending order of the probability I think they have: 1: They're still working their way through the system. 2: They're being settled with strong NDAs attached to the settlements. 3: They're being lost and the losses are not noteworthy. I think it's most likely (by a gigantic margin) that these cases are all still making their way through the legal system. Some of these will take years and years. There have been civil cases that took over a decade to be resolved.
/r/MensRights01/12/15 05:29 PM
6

While I disagree with witchhunts, it's a little silly to think there's not a target already on the back of everyone who posts here.
/r/MensRights06/11/15 04:32 PM
4

I'm just going to make a gender-flipped version. "Oh, just so you know, I have a gun, so don't try anything funny," says the man. "I'm not really comfortable meeting you for hookup sex anymore," says the woman. "What a fucking cocktease," says the man in a (sex denied, likely to rape the first woman he comes across) rage. She made an implied threat, he withdrew consent, she went into a rage. She sounds like a rapist to me.
/r/MensRights27/10/15 03:42 PM
19

A policeman is always in a bad situation and could always be attacked. Everyone could always be attacked. Should we all act the way police officers do when challenged in any way? Fewer police officers are shot and killed each year than are children under the age of 6. Police work is not nearly as dangerous as they try to portray it. At least if we're talking about in the US. I haven't looked at statistics for other countries.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 12:37 AM
1

You think gene therapy is science fiction? It's already undergoing clinical trials in the treatment of a number of diseases, like cystic fibrosis. You didn't answer the question, and I think the reason is that your answer would be, "NEVER! Born a man, always a man! Born a woman, always a woman!" and somewhere deep inside, you know that makes you a bad person and you feel shame because of it. I could be wrong on that though. Prove me wrong: at what point, from the medical technology standpoint, w…
/r/MensRights11/10/15 06:50 PM
3

Lets look at this statement for a second. You say their DNA is what makes them men, correct? Will you accept that they are men once there is gene therapy that allows them to transition? That is, once their chromosomes match the gender they identify as. Or will you fall back to some other requirement? "They're not women/men, they're just dressing up!" Then medical technology advanced so that they can surgically transition. "They're not women/men, they have the wrong hormones!" Then medical techno…
/r/MensRights11/10/15 06:25 PM
94

Some feminists claim there is no need for a mens rights movement because feminism will take care of all those issues. Having made that claim, they should be talking about this issue and expressing their outrage.
/r/MensRights05/10/15 03:08 PM
3

What do you think we are? Atheists?
/r/MensRights01/09/15 03:50 PM
8

The argument is that the pressure of raising or paying for a child they don't want is less on a man than the pressure to abort if they wouldn't otherwise decide to because of that same burden on a woman. In other words, they feel like allowing men to opt out of paying for children would give men too much power to coerce women into having abortions. I think it's a pretty pathetic argument, but there it is.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 03:00 AM
57

When you make a claim and someone asks for a source, they're not doing anything wrong, whether they're a feminist or not. They're asking you to back up your claim. You made the claim, the onus to support that claim is on you. Your comment reads like you think asking for sources is some kind of attack. It doesn't have to be. I ask people for sources quite frequently. Sometimes it's because I don't believe them. Sometimes it's because I want to examine the methodology. Sometimes it's because I'm j…
/r/MensRights18/08/15 06:50 PM
3

The whole time I'm just trying to figure out how the hell he tied the noose.
/r/MensRights07/07/15 06:45 PM
3

I expected this to be more negative. I don't think people telling 'SJP looks like a horse' jokes even think she's unattractive. It's just a meme at this point. It's like when you make fun of the guy with one arm at work. You don't mean anything by it, it's just a thing you do. Then he hangs himself in the closet and everyone has to do sensitivity training.
/r/MensRights07/07/15 06:21 PM
1

They used to get interrupted in similar fashion quite regularly. It hasn't really happened in the last 5 or 6 decades that I've heard of though.
/r/MensRights28/06/15 04:22 PM
195

I can imagine it's be pretty shitty to have to live with yourself for sucking a comatosed man's dick, but it isn't rape. Well, it is rape. The person doing the sucking just isn't the victim.
/r/MensRights20/06/15 03:53 PM
2

What you mean is, "I've never experienced a girl displaying those traits." It's entirely possible that you've encountered them, just not while they were acting out. Or were you unaware that people don't act exactly the same way at all times? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume that's not the case. The other possibility is that you're certain all the women you've encountered have never done such a thing. The only way to be certain of that is if you have followed (or had followe…
/r/PussyPassDenied16/06/15 04:23 PM
1

If you take 'likely' to just mean 'greater than 50% chance', then it works out to just over 4.5%.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/06/15 04:15 PM
14

Not typical, but the behavior is common enough that in a classroom with 15 girls in it, there's likely to be at least 1.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/06/15 03:59 AM
1

Anecdotes are not particularly useful, but I'll share one from my mother anyway. When she was a junior in high school, back in the 70s, she was signing up for her senior classes. She wanted to take precalculus, because it looked interesting and hard. She was told by the counselor that she couldn't because 'girls don't do that.' My grandfather went into the school and pitched a fit, and rightly so. "Let her take whatever fucking class she wants!" And they did. I would like to point out that there…
/r/MensRights14/06/15 05:05 PM
8

An imaginary one.
/r/MensRights02/06/15 04:24 PM
3

You're right, I was thinking of mean. Not sure how I made that error.
/r/MensRights01/06/15 12:28 AM
14

Because there are so few female CEOs that a couple of outliers at the upper end drives the female median way up. You could look at a few other statistics that skew things the other way. CEO pay is a bad metric to use because it is so individualistic. For example, the top earning CEO made more than the next 3 combined.
/r/MensRights31/05/15 11:49 PM
15

In a public discussion like that, you're not generally trying to convince the person you're arguing with. You're trying to convince the people who are reading but not involved. Showing that you are a reasonable person is a good thing.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 05:39 PM
11

I don't think he's apologizing, he's expressing sympathy.
/r/MensRights27/05/15 04:49 PM
8

And here I thought the skyrocketing tuition was the single biggest issue facing college students right now.
/r/MensRights11/05/15 02:20 PM
13

"She stays with the man who beats her. He's gone for hours at a time when she could easily walk out the door. She must be ok with the beatings, or she would leave."
/r/MensRights15/04/15 04:03 PM
7

Dogs are pretty close to wolves, right? Hey, wasn't one of the early comparisons used to stir up hatred of Jews in Nazi Germany comparing them with wolves?
/r/MensRights28/03/15 02:08 AM
22

If that were the case, why aren't you over there in those third world countries fighting? It's dangerous over there and that's what (expendable) men are for.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 05:01 PM
18

Include the caveats, "Within the last 20 years," and, "In a first world country," and you're correct.
/r/MensRights24/03/15 04:56 PM
6

So a female teacher would have power over her students and could be sexist against the male students, right?
/r/MensRights03/03/15 04:34 PM
19

I can't sit here waiting 10 mins between replies... Yeah, that happens when your contribution is, "Haha, you suck!"
/r/MensRights02/02/15 05:59 PM
136

Hmm, let me make sure I'm clear on the sequence of events: Crazy person goes to Rolling Stone magazine and tells them she was gang-raped at a fraternity party. Rolling Stone publishes the story. UVA suspends all fraternity and sorority social events. Crazy person's story falls apart. UVA says, "We'll un-suspend social events (which were suspended because of a crazy person lying in a magazine story) if you agree to these new rules." A couple fraternities say, "We're not signing anything, un-suspe…
/r/MensRights14/01/15 03:46 AM
-5

Deny women control of their bodies based on a provably false belief and I absolutely think it's something to go batshit over. "These drugs are abortifacients so we don't want to cover them." "Uh, these drugs aren't actually abortifacients, here's the medical information showing that they are not." "We don't want to cover them (I won't comment on the motivation), so we're going to say we believe they are and you're going to go along with it and pretend like they are in the decision, ok?" That sho…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 10:30 PM
19

I would throw the Hobby Lobby bit in there too. That one (I thought) was less about feminism and more about 1: keeping religious beliefs that are provably false out of the law and 2: limiting how much control a company has over its employees healthcare.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 04:26 PM
1

XBone got a timed exclusive, so someone on the Daily Dot - no, I'm not linking it - is basically suggesting that limiting console gamers' access to games with a strong female lead is sexist against women. It's even worse than that though! Would you believe they expect people to PAY for a game that has a strong female lead? I can't believe they think that would ever in this world be acceptable!
/r/MensRights06/12/14 06:48 PM
19

Distribute the Crucible? That sounds like the kind of high brow protest that would only work at an institute of higher learning, not at a college!
/r/MensRights23/11/14 05:14 PM
3

*Unless there were a religion that required you to have those tattoos.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 10:50 PM
1

I wonder if the man's attorney has reached out to the guys from Duke's Lacrosse team yet...
/r/MensRights11/11/14 07:19 AM
3

To be fair, when I was younger I hoped that bad things would happen to bad people. I still feel that way sometimes, but it happens less and less and I still feel ashamed of some of the things I said and did in the past. Be the change you want to see in the world, right?
/r/MensRights13/10/14 03:37 PM
10

Personally I hope that she and others who share her beliefs eventually realize how much pain they are causing others, feel shame for how they behaved in the past, and attempt to make amends for what they've done. I don't want her to end up all alone; I want her to become a person whose beliefs make her worthy of the love and respect that everyone should enjoy in their lives.
/r/MensRights13/10/14 02:54 PM
1

There are definitely some employers who pay their female employees less than their male employees and justify it to themselves that the male employees are far less likely to take maternity leave guaranteed by FMLA. The way to ultimately fix this is to amend the FMLA to include mandatory (that is, the employee MUST take the time off) paid maternity AND paternity leave. This would eliminate any financial incentive to hiring fewer women or paying them less.
/r/MensRights12/10/14 06:16 PM
10

I would also check into rape shield laws about what kinds of exculpatory evidence the DA is allowed to exclude. Is it possible that the victim sent texts to the accused thanking him for a wonderful night before or after that are being excluded? In some cases, that sort of evidence isn't allowed to be presented by the defense. If the law allows that sort of evidence to be excluded, it's only reasonable to assume that it might exist for the case you're hearing. Seems like baked in reasonable doubt…
/r/MensRights05/10/14 05:16 AM
2

This is because the prosecution typically drops cases when it's probable that a jury would return such a verdict.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 04:56 PM
2

I think you also have to be able to show damage from the statement.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 04:54 PM
6

Just like any debate the goal isn't to convince her. The goal is to convince the people reading or listening or watching. The people who haven't made up their minds. The people who see a feminist descend into apparent madness just because someone questions their position. Don't debate her in private. Only do it in public.
/r/MensRights08/09/14 03:56 PM
0

That's just by volume. There is additional development that occurs up to around 24-26 years of age. I will see if I can find an online source for it.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 11:58 PM
1

One slight correction, criminal prosecution usually requires 'beyond all reasonable doubt'. It does not require 'beyond a shadow of a doubt'. Could another person have committed the murder? Well, there was also a group of neonazii skinheads at the bar who were antagonistic toward the KKK members and the victim, one of its members was also seen in the shadows. That additional fact would probably be enough to throw a reasonable doubt about who killed the victim. A shadow of a doubt could be someth…
/r/MensRights27/08/14 11:33 PM
1

"some would argue X" is a nearly worthless statement. Some would argue that the world is flat. Some would argue that their teeth are harder than diamonds. Some would argue that Batman, Spiderman, and Santa Claus are real and hang out with them every Sunday for a game of Jumanji. ... Great now I'm thinking about Robin Williams and I'm sad again damnit.
/r/MensRights27/08/14 11:09 PM
8

If I had been in a fight where the other person tried to gouge out my eyes, I certainly would have.
/r/MensRights25/08/14 04:03 AM
7

"You can't consent to be in those pictures because you're too young to understand the consequences of being in the pictures. So we're going to charge you with the crime of taking pictures of a person too young to understand the consequences of being in the pictures that you took."
/r/MensRights09/07/14 06:57 PM
3

If these were multiple different points, it would be the Gish Gallop. This is a case where person A said, "X never happens," and then person B listed a bajillion examples of X happening.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 04:56 PM
5

They know the difference. They are changing which one they use while talking because if you disagree with them about anything, you must always be wrong about everything. If you weren't always wrong about everything, you might have a point that they need to think about. Thinking about alternate viewpoints tends to be destructive to ideologies that are internally inconsistent.
/r/MensRights22/06/14 01:34 PM
20

Just to make sure I'm clear on your argument, you're saying that the feminist subreddits are NOT good representations of feminism as a whole and we should not judge feminism based on what happens in those subreddits? I have two questions for you in response. First, who is a good representative of feminism as a whole? Second, are you willing to extend the same consideration (not taking shitty people as representative just because they happen to be relatively public figures) to other movements?
/r/MensRights11/06/14 06:51 PM
33

Here it is... They want to talk about how many women were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan and how that's something to rally behind. Just offhand, can anyone tell me what percent of 6717 (the total US dead in Iraq + Afghanistan is according to wikipedia) 139 is? Is it a lot? I mean, it must be a pretty sizable chunk of the dead or they wouldn't bring it up, right?
/r/MensRights08/06/14 11:42 PM
2

My guess is that they don't contact the police because they don't want the negative publicity. Contacting the police puts it in the public record and stuff. They may not have caught up to the information age, where it doesn't take a police report for things to go public anymore.
/r/MensRights20/05/14 01:38 AM
1

My first post was asking for clarification. Your response was that I was bringing up 'fringe cases'. 20% is hardly fringe. Please provide the context that changes the meaning of "... the youngest possible high school teacher is double the age of a graduating student," from "there are no teachers below 34 (2x a graduating student's age of 17)" to something else. I would hate to have misinterpreted your statement. "Your argument is wrong because you're subscribed to default subreddits." Is that th…
/r/MensRights19/05/14 05:21 AM
1

...the youngest possible high school teacher is double the age of a graduating student. This statement is equivalent to claiming, "There are no teachers teaching high school below the age of 34." You want something other than an anecdote? Here you go. 22% of teachers are below the age of 30 (as of 2011.) That conflicts drastically with the 0% you claimed.
/r/MensRights19/05/14 04:07 AM
8

I think I may be misunderstanding something that you're saying. There are 22 year old high school teachers. Graduating students are generally 17-19.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 06:12 PM
16

Because fake violence is funny. Tom and Jerry were funny. Bugs and Elmer were funny. Slapstick comedy is funny. That doesn't mean real life violence should actually happen. But taken as a fantasy, something no one should actually engage in, violence can be funny. Maybe it shouldn't be, but it clearly is.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 04:05 PM
18

Gotta bang on the table harder.
/r/MensRights01/05/14 05:49 PM
0

Yes! You get it! You think they should be ashamed of having such thin skin and should stop trying to change the world to fit their narrow view of it. (Which is just you wanting the world to change to fit your view!) They can try to police the language of others (within certain limits) and you can try to police their policing of language (also within certain limits.) As long as it's just an exertion of social pressure, it will eventually come to some sort of balance. I think street preachers shou…
/r/MensRights29/04/14 12:18 AM
20

I think you may have missed my point. I absolutely think you should be allowed to say offensive things. For example, I should certainly have the right to say "PocketknifeMT's grandmother is a racist bitch." However, I don't think that I should actually say something like that and if I did it I deserve to be shamed for the behavior. (No offense intended toward either of your grandmothers. I'm sure they're perfectly nice people and I apologize for using them in this demonstration.)
/r/MensRights28/04/14 06:45 PM
50

Is this a "We'll punish you if you do this" speech code, or a "This language has negative effects and here's why you shouldn't use it" speech code? One of those is far more acceptable than the other. For example, you teach children that it's not ok to go to cancer wards and dance around singing, "You're all gonna die, lalala!"
/r/MensRights28/04/14 05:19 PM
8

I strongly believe the initial circulation of that tweet was intended to humiliate her Tweeting something is publishing it. This isn't victim blaming. The very purpose of posting something to Twitter is so that other people can read it. If something is going to humiliate you if other people read it, you should not post it on Twitter.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 04:06 PM
5

He doesn't control how many notes and reblogs he gets. When a paper puts an accusation on the front page but a retraction on page 24, it is intentional. On social media, the author doesn't control how much exposure each of them get.
/r/MensRights16/04/14 03:56 PM
11

If you don't understand why someone holds a viewpoint, it's far more difficult to convince them to change it.
/r/MensRights16/04/14 03:54 PM
1

Could be worse. He could have linked this
/r/MensRights29/03/14 03:01 AM
1

Nope. Your brain reaches full size at around that age, but you keep developing (and changing psychologically) until you die (there are a few other things that can stop your development, but generally it's until death.)
/r/MensRights22/03/14 12:07 AM
5

Banning words is double-plus good.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 06:23 PM
3

[humour]
/r/MensRights11/03/14 07:17 PM
0

Some of them are ok. The first one is funny. I don't see anything wrong with 12. I'm not sure who would take offense to 17. 21 is funny. 23 is cute. I would wear 26 to the gym just for the looks I would get. Likewise with 28. Nothing wrong with 32 either. I agree with 38.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 04:52 AM
2

Focusing on relaxing the punishment makes it even easier to be accused of being a 'rape apologist'. That accusation makes it very difficult to get any public traction (at least until it gets overused, which I think is coming before too much longer.) Focusing on applying the same law to everyone makes that accusation way more difficult to make. It will still get made, but it's easier to see as an attempt to shut down discussion.
/r/MensRights25/02/14 06:24 PM
0

OMG, SO DID YOU!! At least you didn't say Jehova.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 01:12 AM
2

Link to Godwin's Law All internet discussions that last long enough eventually compare something or someone to Nazis or Hitler.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 12:02 AM
0

Did you mean to type "It's not my job to educate you, shitlord!" ?
/r/MensRights14/02/14 12:00 AM
3

At the level of RBCs? There's no discernible difference based on sex. Do you mean is there some hormone left? It would depend on whether you're talking about whole blood or one of the separated components. In neither case is there enough to worry about, although there is probably still some in whole blood (which isn't frequently transfused nowadays.) In the case of components, they should get filtered out in the centrifuge.
/r/MensRights12/02/14 07:49 PM
36

A mature red blood cell doesn't have a nucleus. It has antigens, so you worry about type, but there's no sex marker in RBCs.
/r/MensRights12/02/14 04:44 PM
45

I think everyone who has played competitive online games is a rape survivor according to this definition.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 05:19 PM
2

It's not even to provide the care themselves, it's that they had to be browbeaten into not preventing others from providing medical care for people who required medical care.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 07:03 PM
1

For much the same reason we don't do medical testing on prison inmates. The potential for coercion is too high.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 08:18 PM
7

That just labels her without being useful. Understanding is part of moving forward. Not that I disagree with you.
/r/MensRights19/01/14 07:09 PM
4

I think she's allowed to do that too. We're just allowed to laugh at her for it and tell her she's an idiot.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 05:22 PM
1

You're correct, I misread. Editing to reflect.
/r/MensRights08/01/14 08:11 PM
3

You're mostly correct. To expand: Squaring a complex number with both non-zero real and non-zero imaginary parts does not result in a real number. Complex means "a + bj, where a and b are real." 0 + 4j is complex (as well as imaginary). 3 + 0j is also complex (and real and rational and an integer and a whole number and etc) EDIT: Strikethrough and bold.
/r/MensRights08/01/14 07:28 PM
6

or maybe he left out an 'is' after 'teaching'.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 02:39 PM
11

You can only play the hand you're dealt. It's not like they have any other cards.
/r/MensRights21/12/13 03:23 PM
3

Wouldn't this kill like 80% of facebook's content?
/r/MensRights17/12/13 04:56 PM
2

Nah, Tailgunner Joe was a good guy!
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:29 PM
13

I think it's a portmanteau of feminist and hypocrite.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:27 PM
5

It's like the walk-n-talk from West Wing, only for lazy people.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 10:39 PM
1

There were quite a few sharp and pointy or long and bludgeony objects in the direction she was walking. Is it possible he was worried she was about to pick up a weapon and continue to attack him? I mean, she'd already shown that she had no problem with physically attacking him.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 04:21 AM
2

Holy shit! How did you find out about The Royal Cilantrists?! It's supposed to be a SECRET society!
/r/MensRights23/11/13 06:03 PM
30

"The men's centre is everywhere else!" Ok then, treat it the way you want women's spaces to be treated.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 06:18 PM
1

When you're arguing with the extreme radfems, you're not trying to change their minds. THEIR minds are already completely made up and likely beyond any realistic hope of change. You are trying to convince the audience of more reasonable people that the extreme radfems are incorrect. It's sad, but the more they look like raving lunatics, the better it is for the MHRM.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 09:54 PM
16

You don't need a separate app. This app will do exactly what you want already.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 05:33 PM
15

This is like saying, "I want to be the guy that got shot in the heart and lived!" No, you don't. It sucks ass. First, there's the trauma of the event (shot/falsely accused), which you will never forget. Then there's the rehabilitation (actually recovering/alleged victim recanting). Finally, there are all the lingering aftereffects (reduced lifespan, memory issues, lifelong cardiopulmonary issues/always being remembered as the guy who 'got away with rape'). You want to be the guy who didn't get s…
/r/MensRights07/11/13 07:56 PM
3

You're correct. He can apply for parole at 20. If he doesn't get it, the longest he could remain locked up is until he's 23. At most, barring any future legal maneuvering, he'll serve ten more years.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 06:13 PM
13

Also, he'll only stay until he's 20, which isn't terrible. However, that also puts him at a disadvantage for when he actually needs to go out into the world. 23, according to the article. The article also goes into the prosecutor's motivations. It's not that he wants the kid punished as some form of retribution, he just thinks the child is dangerous and needs a structured environment of some kind until he can be 'fixed'. From the article, after the verdict, the prosecutor talked to the kid. "I t…
/r/MensRights06/11/13 05:34 PM
1

STEM majors are way less likely to end up crazy radfems (as compared to, say, Gender Studies majors.) They also end up in jobs that will continue to be relevant and necessary (and pay much better.) The world needs more STEM majors in general.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 11:23 PM
3

I think he may have been agreeing with you as well.
/r/MensRights14/10/13 11:43 AM
8

Quote the rest of the paragraph that you took the quote from please: And there are heartbreaking numbers of male survivors of sexual abuse out there. At the end of its most recently completed season, one Glee plotline featured two characters who had experienced sexual abuse — one male, one female — coming forward. The show consulted closely with RAINN in responsibly constructing that arc, and after the show aired, the organization was flooded with calls from men who identified with what they had…
/r/MensRights11/10/13 05:16 PM
10

Pretend you're a radfem for a moment. Are you really going to stick around on a site that had the audacity to post a piece of trash article that APOLOGIZED for writing an article about a 14 year old girl who was raped (by an 8 year old boy)!?! Of course not, you're going to find a publication that still represents the TRUE MOVEMENT! THE MOVEMENT YOUR SISTERS BLED AND DIED AT ANTIETAM FOR!!! Erm, sorry, I got carried away there a little bit. Shift the tone of the media. Shift its demographics. Ch…
/r/MensRights11/10/13 04:05 PM
22

Carrot and stick. Bash them when they say terrible things. Reward them when they say good things. The apology piece WAS good. It shifts the public perception. If the response to the apology piece is continued derision and scorn, are they more or less likely to moderate their tone (and come closer to acceptable positions) in the future?
/r/MensRights11/10/13 03:52 PM
32

I thought the apology piece was actually quite good. If we're going to vilify them when they say hurtful sexist things about men, we need to admit when they admit something reasonable and supporting of issues that are important to MRAs. Certainly the original piece was loathsome, but that's why the apology piece was written.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 01:58 PM
6

Colleges are the key to most social movements, I think.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 07:38 PM
9

It's a Warren Farrell quote taken out of context. I think he was looking at why girls are harmed more by incestuous interactions than boys are. He suggested that perhaps societal reactions to incest amplify the harm of it beyond what it actually causes. This is taken out of context as, "Incest isn't so bad."
/r/MensRights29/09/13 04:00 PM
1

They are definitely not incompatible. However, when you make the statement, "X of Y women are victims of domestic violence." instead of "X of Y people are victims of domestic violence." the issue is suddenly and unnecessarily gendered. That's a criticism that could certainly be leveled against the MRM. The defense I can envision is that there are already lots of groups dedicated to supporting female victims of DV, while there are almost none for the male victims. Female victims of DV get listene…
/r/MensRights27/09/13 06:32 PM
1

I concur. MRAs tend to think that addressing only one gender's suffering from an issue that affects both genders implicitly states that it doesn't affect the other gender at all. Thus the complaints about this campaign specifically. DV affects both genders (in nearly equal numbers), but this campaign seems to imply that it only affects women. That's a problem severe enough to require attention. At the same time, feminists seem to feel that a Mens Rights movement existing at all is problematic.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 04:41 PM
2

Apply the same standard they used. Is it ok for men to comment on what goes on in 'women's space'? If so, then no line is crossed. If not, then it's not ok for them to get a say because it's not their space. My understanding is that we don't have a problem with women commenting, as long as they're polite and add to the discussion. They get downvoted or removed when they are obnoxious or trolling, but so do men. Should there be actual misogyny on this subreddit? Of course not, and it generally ge…
/r/MensRights27/09/13 03:56 PM
40

Why would you want them taken down? Leave them up, point to them, and say, "This. This is what feminism is now. It's not about equality or rights. It's about hating men and wanting to maim them."
/r/MensRights25/09/13 02:47 PM
9

Do you have a source for this? I would love to be able to repeat it.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 03:15 PM
7

Like the sweet sweet voice from Candy Crush? Or rape, it might be rape.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 01:29 AM
5

I suggest replacing 'true feminist' with 'your average run-of-the-mill feminist'. Using 'true feminist' screams No True Scotsman.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 02:31 PM
4

The jury won't be told. That means the possibility always exists that the alleged victim is a serial false rape accuser. Rules of evidence have also been used to exclude exculpatory evidence, like texts saying how much the alleged victim enjoyed the encounter. Since I can't know that those aren't the case in any rape trial I'm on the jury for, I think I would have to have reasonable doubt that the rape was committed.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 11:39 AM
2

I heard that PZ raped a little boy and his dog too. Also an accordion.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 11:35 AM
6

I think you missed the important part: What does not getting prophylactically circumcised lead to again? I can answer for you though. It leads to an increase in some rare conditions, most of which don't present until puberty and an increased transmission rate for STIs from unprotected sex. You can get the same or (drastically) better results from proper hygiene and using condoms. There is the very rare case where circumcision is actually necessary, but the vast majority of men don't need one for…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 11:48 PM
3

In all fairness, the guy could have taped the threat, and then gone ahead and beat her knowing he could use the tape to discredit the resulting 'true' complaint. That sounds like a really good reason not to make false accusations. I would much prefer that false accusations land the false accuser in jail though.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 11:08 PM
7

Do you have a source on your UTI rates? The numbers I saw were more like .02% for circumcised and .24% for uncircumcised. Yes, that's 12x as many. That's the highest rate difference I could find, but there were some other factors involved in the study. Specifically, a greater percentage of the uncircumcised boys in the study were catheterized prior to the infection, which rather increases the risk of a UTI. Your 1/3 and 1/20 numbers seem suspect to me. Do you also advocate prophylactic mastectom…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 09:35 PM
13

Not eating leads to malnutrition. What does not getting prophylactically circumcised lead to again? Do you think parents should be able to tattoo swastikas on their sons foreheads if they want to? Or just on their foreskins?
/r/MensRights22/08/13 09:24 PM
4

It only reduces the risk of STI transmission in unprotected sex. It does nothing to transmission rates using a condom. I seem to recall the difference in transmission rates being 'borderline significant' in the studies I read, although it has been a while. The difference in transmission rates for protected sex vs unprotected sex are huge. Saying, "You should get circumcised, it prevents STDs!" is like saying, "Keep this flask in your vest pocket, it will keep you from getting shot!". If the bull…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 09:20 PM
23

Sometimes, judges do things that are blatantly unconstitutional. It sure would be a ridiculous claim to make if the judge has that document. Of course, if the document doesn't exist... Upon whom does the burden of proof rest in this case? Producing the document would certainly prove the judge's innocence, but the judge is the accused and not required to prove his innocence, I don't think. I'm not familiar enough with how this part of the system works to know for sure.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 12:14 PM
29

Alahverdian was also deprived of a jury trial, which he demanded in writing over a month before the bench trial, in violation of the sixth amendment to the Constitution. Ohio law requires a written waiver of a jury trial. Bold mine.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 11:41 AM
12

Except a serial rapist getting a ridiculously short sentence, of course.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 04:38 PM
11

I was pretty much nodding my head in agreement until I got to this line: Bly’s “wild men” are basically a bunch of fags. I still read the rest, but it pretty much soured the whole thing.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 04:04 AM
7

That's terrible. They're bad people. We just talked about it. From the way you just changed the subject, can I assume that you now understand why posts about Anita Sarkeesian are relevant to MRAs?
/r/MensRights20/07/13 10:16 PM
2

Well, you see, it's like this. Modern feminism has set itself up in direct opposition to the men's rights movement. Not just in opposition to what MRAs want, but in opposition to the movement itself. Kind of like Republicans and Democrats, anything MRAs want, feminists will almost always automatically take the other side. As long as this is the case, it's important to reduce their influence and power in the public sphere. In other words, showcasing when feminists LIE, CHEAT, and STEAL reduces th…
/r/MensRights20/07/13 08:35 PM
17

She's a very visible (and dishonest) feminist figure who is an excellent tool to polarize public opinion (especially among gamers, who are sizable and growing demographic). Exposing her negative attributes forks the feminist movement with that demographic. They can either repudiate her, which undermines the points she was making, or they can defend her, which associates them with her negative characteristics.
/r/MensRights20/07/13 05:18 PM
19

I think that might be the point. All of this is stuff that is completely normal, making everyone a rapist. If there's not an actual rape culture to rail against, just redefine rape until there is.
/r/MensRights20/07/13 02:44 AM
16

I hope no one (falsely) reports that Karen Smith has raped them. She would be left in the interesting position of having to claim that the accusation is false after claiming that there's no such thing as a false accusation.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 02:33 PM
4

Don't dox her. Call the story into a legitimate news organization, have them write it up and publish it and then post links to the story. That's within the rules, right?
/r/MensRights09/07/13 12:19 PM
3

You missed the 'mountain folk' bit. He's not talking about winning in court, but just avoiding the situation completely by disappearing.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 08:31 PM
7

Do the lighter weight classes fight for shorter times?
/r/MensRights07/07/13 02:03 AM
0

My grandfather had to fight to get my mother into a calculus class in high school because, "girls don't take classes like that." Of course, that WAS back in the 1960s. My sisters had no difficulty enrolling in whatever math or science courses they wanted in the 90s, so...
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:42 PM
1

I would watch that. Oh, I guess I kinda do...
/r/MensRights25/06/13 06:10 PM
97

The statement doesn't need any addition to be hypocritical. "Men need to not tell women how to act" is, in itself, telling men how to act.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 03:16 AM
9

And a horse, Sleipnir. Which Odin rides.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 01:16 PM
3

The threat of action is intended to preclude its necessity.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 03:40 AM
2

I agree with you. When I hear the word feminist, I think of someone who belongs to a group that was once required to foment necessary political and social change, but now has gone the way of most big-tent movements and is now controlled by extremists who whine about irrelevant shit (among other less positive activities). When that is the opinion held by everyone, the current incarnation of feminism will either reform itself into something useful or disappear.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 12:23 PM
5

This policy makes me feel harassed...
/r/MensRights16/05/13 07:33 PM
2

Lying to the police.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 10:47 PM
4

Can one of the police officers lie to you and say that he's your court-appointed attorney?
/r/MensRights07/05/13 10:46 PM
2

Pitchforking?
/r/MensRights21/04/13 04:36 PM
35

Ring ring. "Men's Domestic Violence Hotline. How can I help you?" "I'm concerned I'm going to abuse my wife. I mean, she keeps hitting me with things. The other day it was with a cast iron skillet. I had to get 6 stitches. I'm worried that if she keeps hitting me, I'm going to snap and hit her back. How can I keep from abusing my wife?"
/r/MensRights20/04/13 12:07 AM
-5

She is a female professor. I can sort of understand getting upset about using female and male alone to refer to persons of those genders as standalone nouns(I think it's stupid, but I sort of understand it) but even that isn't the case here. Here it's being used correctly. Depending on WHY the college decided to react the way it did, this might belong here. We don't have enough information. Did the administration react the way it did because she complained about a 'hostile work environment' (ie …
/r/MensRights13/04/13 12:32 PM
1

Is this you?
/r/MensRights02/04/13 03:52 PM
5

Sociological research tells us that when people with likeminded beliefs congregate together, they collectively move to a more extreme position. While true, this applies to basically all groups, including feminists. The author implied that it's bad for MR's groups to exist because of this, but didn't make the tiny step required to apply it to feminist groups as well. I guess those are ok. I'm going to guess 'because patriarchy'.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 04:07 PM
0

Maybe 'appreciated' is the word you're looking for?
/r/MensRights23/03/13 12:27 PM
5

One small caveat: statutory rape IS 'consensual' sex that involves a minor. If the minor doesn't 'consent' then it's just rape. 'Consent' is marked out like that because minors can't legally consent (without marks), which is why statutory rape exists.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 03:48 PM
9

Probably the same guy...
/r/MensRights18/03/13 08:13 PM
10

You should learn her name. She's a mass-murderer too. Her body count.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 02:17 PM
11

It's from SRSWomen, of course it's a troll!
/r/MensRights11/03/13 03:52 PM
4

First you replace the merely competent. That silences complaints about there not being enough at the conference. But without that to complain about there must be new complaints. Then the complaint becomes that the top honors have disproportionately gone to the privileged group.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 03:00 PM
1

Kind of like how businesses are allowed to preferentially hire men/pay men more because they don't take maternity leave?
/r/MensRights06/03/13 03:46 PM
2

Talk to a lawyer. Plan on not doing anything until your child turns 18. While this may mean justice is long in coming, it will also protect you from retaliation.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 03:41 PM
3

'reasonable person' standard applies, I think.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 04:54 AM
7

More like, "History is written by the victors."
/r/MensRights02/03/13 05:15 PM
8

Try saying the phrase 'floppy donkey dick'. I can't do it without feeling the urge to grin like an idiot...
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:43 PM
2

I would strongly advise against this. I also strongly advise against having her killed or slipping her any drugs that might cause her to miscarry. While having those desires would certainly be understandable and what you are incentivized to do based on current US law (18 years child support vs a couple of years in prison for assault), they are bad things and should definitely not be done. In fact, don't even consider them.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 04:10 AM
8

Small correction: Conscientious Objector If that's not what you were talking about, please accept my apology.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 04:10 PM
8

There are many who agree with you, but it's more difficult to state that with certainty than the 'stronger, faster' comment. If you accept it for the sake of argument, you still have to determine if the difference is genetic, or is it the result of their upbringing? If women were treated the same as men, would the differences in leadership capabilities disappear? In other words, nature vs nurture. Nature differences we can't do much about, societal shifts can eliminate nurture differences.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 02:36 PM
2

What if someone says their only flaw is that they can't admit the existence of their own flaws?
/r/MensRights23/01/13 05:46 PM
1

link
/r/MensRights17/01/13 01:29 AM
14

My sisters refer to my mother's mother as 'the birth vessel'.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 05:36 PM
2

However, there should not be a law forcing insurance companies to cover either birth control pills as a contraceptive or ED medication. That's a perfectly sound position to take and I can't fault you for it at all. Have a nice day!
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:16 PM
8

We regularly use medical technology to bring how our bodies naturally work more in line with how we want them to work. That's a slight shift of your description, but I think it's more appropriate. ED is how you expect a healthy person's body past a certain age to work (something like 70% past the age of 65). They would obviously prefer that not to be the case.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:14 PM
5

Providing X while not providing Y, when X and Y provide similar benefits but to different groups, could be seen to favor the group that gets X over the group that gets Y.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:02 PM
1

WHY ARE WE YELLING!?!
/r/MensRights01/01/13 02:40 PM
10

"Pregnancy is the natural result of sex. It doesn't require medical interventions because the body is working as it was intended. If you don't want to get pregnant, don't have sex." Is this a fair extension of what you said? That seems remarkably similar to the following statement: ED is the natural result of age/stress/whatever other factors. It doesn't require medical intervention because the body is working as it was intended. If you don't want ED, don't smoke/be stressed/get old/etc.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 02:37 PM
12

Viagra is treating your problem with impotence so you can have sex, have kids in normal way. Are you suggesting that Viagra is only prescribed to men who are trying to have children? I think the demographics of Viagra use would surprise you then. Most of its users are over 65, with spouses within a few years of their own age. They aren't trying to get pregnant. They are trying to enjoy sex.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 02:33 PM
10

A WebMD article about the other conditions the pill can be used to treat.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 02:24 PM
5

Pregnancy is a medical condition. Birth control is used to treat it prophylactically. With ED, you have difficulty having sex (or are completely incapable). This isn't inherently harmful, it's a quality of life issue. Without birth control, there are greater risks attached to having sex. You're not incapable, but it still seems silly to pay for one gender to facilitate having sex and not the other. Easier access to birth control reduces abortion, helps break the poverty cycle, and reduces how ma…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 02:17 PM
33

Issue: Can't have sex without exceptional effort (occasionally at all.) Treatment: Viagra Issue: Can't have sex without risking pregnancy. (Or skin issues or hormone related mood swings, or weight gain, or heavy or irregular bleeding) Treatment: Ortho tri-cyclen. Both of them are used to facilitate having sex.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 02:09 PM
80

Denying women taxpayer-funded birth control (which has uses beyond contraception) while simultaneously granting men taxpayer-funded Viagra (which has no use beyond treating ED) could be construed as somewhat lopsided.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 01:14 PM
26

But we do prosecute people for insurance frau- oh, I get it.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 01:37 PM
44

Eat baby, Keep kittens.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 08:09 PM
1

You can still do just fine in STEM...
/r/MensRights13/12/12 08:08 PM
3

I think his point is that with the current climate, you can't be sure that there isn't exculpatory evidence that is being excluded. There's a video of a man raping a woman, which makes for a pretty ironclad case, right? But how do you know there's not an email she sent him afterwards thanking him for helping her act out her rape fantasy. That e-mail you're just not being shown. The cases mentioned have similar evidence that was suppressed. It's not just a far-fetched possibility in rape cases, i…
/r/MensRights06/12/12 06:17 AM
1

I disagree. Naming her will attach public consequences to her actions. She could have chosen to seek the protection of anonymity available online. She instead chose to act in public without that protection. That is quite brave of her, but it is an act that has consequences. I would never advocate depriving her of the right to choose her own course of action nor deny her the consequences of those actions.
/r/MensRights06/12/12 05:51 AM
34

While I don't disagree with your distaste for how 'trigger warning' is used, I have to disagree with your description. Some people suffer from PTSD. I am one of them. They can be triggered by all manner of things. Firecrackers going off do it for me. Being triggered is pretty unpleasant, you react on a subconscious, physiologic level. Frequently they feel like they are reliving the experience. I relive being shot and waking up in the hospital connected to all manner of machines. It's not really …
/r/MensRights21/11/12 10:46 PM
7

I would reword it as, "Be excellent to each other."
/r/MensRights13/11/12 04:15 AM
2

Blackstones formulation
/r/MensRights03/11/12 01:56 PM
51

You might even say, "It starts somewhere." ?
/r/MensRights30/10/12 02:01 AM
6

He's not saying that men never hit women. He's saying that it is socially acceptable for women to hit men in some cases while the reverse is never true.
/r/MensRights07/10/12 01:18 PM
3

IIRC There is no difference in STI transmission rates between circumcised and uncircumcised men when it comes to protected sex, only unprotected sex. So if someone uses the difference in transmission rates as a reason to circumcise their children, they (the article-write) is implying that they want their children to have unprotected sex.
/r/MensRights07/10/12 01:15 PM
3

I think there's a problem there. If you assert that you can DNA test the child because it's yours, you have claimed the child. If the DNA test shows that it's NOT your child, you didn't actually have the right to run the DNA test. Oh dear, I seem to have gone cross-eyed.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 10:53 PM
1

A murderer confessing is far less likely to free someone innocent from prison than a false-rape-accuser confessing is.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 08:38 PM
7

Sounds like she's trying to blackmail you to me. Did she try to get something from you?
/r/MensRights17/09/12 08:45 PM
8

But you better implement it in kernel space or one blocking system call will lock up the whole damn thing.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 09:40 PM
11

Smelled like a troll to me too. when I got to the 'I'm not a feminist, I'm just a me, unlike you, who aren't a me, but rather part of a group that is oppressing the me's...', I felt like it was kind of obvious.
/r/MensRights09/09/12 11:53 PM
5

I might have gone with, "Oh come on, you're not that innocent."
/r/MensRights09/09/12 12:20 PM
44

Didn't SRS take over /r/lgbt? I thought /r/ainbow was the place that the old lgbt migrated to.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 12:57 AM
2

Sometimes /mr can have difficulty distinguishing between those with dissenting opinions and SRS troll-types who like to come and stir up trouble. As a result, they tend to react to any dissent without regard to reddiquette. In fact, you could look at it as, they tend to start punishing everyone who dissents as though they were guilty of trolling before the trial even begins, instead of presuming their innocence. It's kind of what we're talking about, only with no crime and with an insignificant …
/r/MensRights05/09/12 02:19 PM
2

That report is actually British, not from the US, so I'm not sure when/how/if they're changing those definitions. I was taking the opposite extreme, since the wikipedia article used the most extreme values from the range to inflate numbers. Again, the actual statistics are not that important for the point I was making. Using a ">" will quote text: Ideally no innocent man should be punished by robust rape laws. Right now it's not necessarily that the laws are too robust, it's the pre-trial impact…
/r/MensRights05/09/12 03:27 AM
14

I disagree with your inference, but I see how you could make it. Do you have a source on 75-95%? I see it on Wikipedia, which says it comes from this British report. It gives the detection rate for rape at between 22 and 93 percent for 2001/2002 and 7 to 60% for 2004/2005. That is a HUGE range 22% detection means ~4 unreported rapes for each one reported while 93% would mean roughly 7 unreported rapes for every 100. The Wikipedia editor seems to have taken the most shocking value there and ignor…
/r/MensRights05/09/12 01:31 AM
1

First Wave(1860ish-1920s): Women fight for and get de jure legal equality (right to vote, right to own property, etc), but are still denied de facto equality in most areas. Second Wave(1960s-1990s): Women fight for de facto equality which requires de jure inequalities (in their favor) in some areas. It is usually regarded as stopping with the internal fight between sex-positive and sex-negative feminists in the 1990s (which weakened the cohesion and power of the movement). Third Wave: The goal s…
/r/MensRights05/09/12 12:13 AM
13

I don't see where he said that and I doubt anyone here thinks that. I seem to remember hearing a statistic of 8-10% somewhere. What percentage of false rape allegations resulting in jail time or extra-judicial punishment would you consider acceptable? Since rape is one crime where you can't doubt the victim, it is treated as guilty until proven innocent, which means that the accused starts being punished (socially) as soon as the accusation is made in almost every case.
/r/MensRights04/09/12 11:58 PM
4

Assuming for a moment that he did that and the murderer didn't make it up, that is being an asshole. A pretty huge asshole. The kind of asshole that makes you wish that assholery were a crime punished with the death penalty. But it isn't actually a crime. Even if it were a crime, the woman would then have needed to call the police to report it, not SET HIM ON FIRE.
/r/MensRights04/09/12 12:03 AM
3

Investing additional time, money, and effort into being with a woman who is willing to complain because I didn't open her door for her is just throwing good money after bad. I open the door for my fiancee some of the time, but not always. Usually it's because her arms are full (or would have trouble for some other reason), but sometimes it's just because I feel like it. She appreciates it, but doesn't expect it.
/r/MensRights02/09/12 02:00 PM
18

"You never learned how to open a car door? I'm sorry, I think our life experiences are too different to continue this outing." Then drive off.
/r/MensRights02/09/12 04:43 AM
3

Sometimes you are actually unique. Well, at least I am.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 04:37 AM
3

She seems to have skipped over the section on 'decoherence'...
/r/MensRights24/08/12 04:31 PM
2

Because the troops exist to defend us. They aren't being used in that capacity right now, but that is their purpose.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 03:13 PM
1

Nope. Forever war is the one where in the future, everyone is gay and being straight is deviant.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 04:03 AM
203

"Service guarantees citizenship! Would you like to know more?"
/r/MensRights19/08/12 12:14 PM
1

Awesome, thank you muchly!
/r/MensRights05/08/12 03:55 PM
1

Do you have a source for this? I would like to read more.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 02:42 PM
0

How much are we talking about them spending on security? Enough to hire everyone who owns a firearm in the country? Is it MORE or LESS than they spend under the current tax system? Also, why did Rome waste all that effort on bread and circuses? Couldn't they just have hired more security to keep the poor in their place? I realize that weapons have advanced somewhat since then, so that you have better force multiplication, but those weapons exist on both sides. How well do the rich's companies co…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 01:05 AM
0

Except the people who can pay for personal trucks, of course. Except that the people who would otherwise starve can band together and take the rich person's food (and put his head on a pitchfork for good measure.) Remember, no police because taxes are too low. Unless the rich person is spending a HUGE amount on security, and even then, once the poor get desperate enough it doesn't matter. They have the choice of a slow death from starvation or a quick death from a gunshot, with the chance of som…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 12:48 AM
3

Feminism gets blamed for it because its adherents seem to have no problem with gender roles when they benefit women, only when the gender roles are to women's detriment.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 11:53 PM
20

I think you like candy corn, but only around Halloween, yet you detest the little candy pumpkins, even though they're the same candy in a different shape. Wait, was that at all relevant?
/r/MensRights23/07/12 11:50 AM
2

I didn't think of that as a possibility, thank you!
/r/MensRights22/07/12 11:29 PM
11

I can think of 2 possibilities: 1- Men are socially conditioned to protect women even if it means sacrificing themselves. or 2- Men are generally better people. My money is actually on #1.
/r/MensRights22/07/12 10:58 PM
2

'Lose' lost an o?
/r/MensRights22/07/12 02:10 PM
0

My cousin used to work there. Not sure whether to be ashamed or not.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 12:03 AM
15

My guess? Die.
/r/MensRights12/07/12 10:13 PM
1

My favorite set of videos on this issue is from C0nc0rdance: Circumcision 1 and Circumcision 2 People in the comments (both here and on facebook) have been wrong on certain facts from both directions. Everything in the video is sourced in the description.
/r/MensRights12/07/12 07:28 PM
3

companionship
/r/MensRights02/07/12 01:50 AM
6

Interestingly, I never had an experience like that in any engineering, math, or other hard science classes.
/r/MensRights18/06/12 08:03 PM
2

I disagree. While what is true is true regardless of what people believe, without advocates for science it doesn't get taught and we will eventually start to backslide scientifically. As for whether the universe is digital or analog? It's totally digital. There are discrete values that things can take, they can't assume any intermediary values (assuming that your resolution is high enough).
/r/MensRights17/06/12 01:55 AM
3

Wait, partiality is a positive quality? If partiality were a positive, why would feminists have a problem with sexism?
/r/MensRights17/06/12 12:30 AM
1

Persistence hunting (what humans evolved to do) involves chasing an animal until it basically dies from exhaustion. That doesn't really require a whole lot of logic to do.
/r/MensRights16/06/12 08:28 PM
2

My guess is that the second one was intended to be 'empathizing'. I think women tend to score higher on emotional IQ tests, but I don't have anything but vague memories from intro psych courses to back that up.
/r/MensRights16/06/12 08:08 PM
3

Nobody looks at this campaign and thinks "all young men are rapists". I disagree. I find it probable that there exists some subset of people who do think this. If you actually believe that there is a general mindset that all men are rapists you're delusional. A general mindset? No, of course not. There are some people who do believe that though. There are also people who think that all penetrative sex is rape. Are they crazy? I certainly think so, but they do not and they would like to get other…
/r/MensRights16/06/12 03:38 PM
4

The same people who think the 'don't rape' campaign is a good idea are likely to be offended by this parody ad. Your statement, intentionally or not, was in support of the 'don't rape' campaign. At least, I read it that way. Your defense of the 'don't rape' campaign works just as well gender-flipped for the 'don't falsely accuse of rape' parody campaign. People outside the targeted demographic also see the ads and think, "Why does that demographic NEED to be targeted? They must all be rapists!" …
/r/MensRights16/06/12 02:31 PM
1

GIMP?
/r/MensRights16/06/12 01:21 PM
9

I see the ad campaign and I see an ad campaign that is targeting a "some females" problem. I don't even see a campaign directed at women who are tempted or inclined to falsely accuse men of rape. I see a campaign directed at young women who may never have considered that for people more legally and socially vulnerable for them a false rape accusation can be far more subtle and unintentional than going to the police and lying. What about the campaign makes you think it's accusing all women? If yo…
/r/MensRights16/06/12 01:20 PM
1

Relevant Gandhi quote: “If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so does the attitude of the world change towards him. … We need not wait to see what others do.”
/r/MensRights16/06/12 01:16 PM
-2

If they're both drunk, then they're both rapists. Being drunk is not a defense against a rape charge.
/r/MensRights13/06/12 12:02 AM
2

So, you could have a club that charged men $500/year for a membership and charged women $10,000,000,000/year for a membership, right?
/r/MensRights12/06/12 01:38 PM
5

I'm going to reiterate the point I made the last time this story was mentioned. Saying that you are going to falsely accuse someone of hitting you when they can record it is just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard of someone doing. It is going to simultaneously piss them off (and rightly so) and give them an incredibly solid defense against any DV charges you might try to have them charged with, EVEN IF THEY NEARLY KILL YOU. It's like giving them a 'beat the shit out of me and get away with…
/r/MensRights12/06/12 12:26 PM
5

I always heard it used (in MMO's) to refer to men who played female characters and did not blatantly indicate their RL gender. The gender swap was (woman playing a male character) 'shenis'.
/r/MensRights11/06/12 01:50 AM
1

I think saying that you're going to falsely accuse someone of domestic violence in a format that could be recorded is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. That recording is probably enough to supply reasonable doubt whether he actually beat her or not.
/r/MensRights07/06/12 11:07 PM
5

I would guess so, yes. A traditional circumcision involves nipping off the foreskin and then sucking the wound with a mouthful of wine.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 03:11 AM
-1

It's ok, it was a religious thing.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 03:04 AM
2

I thought it dropped to like 1/4 of the raw gap? I didn't think it disappeared completely. I was just looking into this, the only papers I can find that say it disappears completely are non-peer reviewed ones from political think-tanks. The peer-reviewed papers (that I could find) all show 5%+ 'unexplained' gaps after controlling for other factors. That's much better than the 20%+ raw gap, but probably still significant.
/r/MensRights05/06/12 11:03 PM
1

Well, what normally happens to babies after they are born?
/r/MensRights03/06/12 03:33 AM
0

I'm in favor of advancing medical technology until we have womb-tanks that can carry a child to term without a woman. Then men can have exactly the same rights with respect to having children as women. The woman doesn't want to have a child? Fine, instead of an abortion, it goes in a womb-tank and the man gets custody. Freedom from biologically imposed inequality!
/r/MensRights03/06/12 02:17 AM
5

Do you want out of the relationship or do you still want your wife in your life? It sounds like as long as she's in your life you (and your daughter) are in danger. How old is the last incident? You might try contacting the prosecutor and telling them that you changed your mind about prosecuting her. I don't think CPS will try very hard to give her custody if she's in prison.
/r/MensRights03/06/12 02:14 AM
37

My sister refers to this as, "Getting an MRS degree." She thinks it is pretty ridiculous.
/r/MensRights01/06/12 02:04 AM
4

Do you play backgammon? I can play a game of backgammon with you as thanks, if you'd like that.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 07:58 PM
1

I think the point firex is making is that since you continue to owe the lender the difference between the resale value and the loan amount, what does it matter whether the resale value is $10k, $5, or nothing? They aren't out any money whatever you do since you still owe the difference, you're just throwing away your own money.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 07:56 PM
2

Disneyworld is nice though.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 07:45 PM
17

Then realize that the people labeling us man-children are people we don't really want to associate with and play another set/round/game/etc.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 07:41 PM
17

She was able to sue the school and win because it failed to protect her from being raped. He should be able to sue and win for failing to protect him from being falsely accused of raping someone.
/r/MensRights24/05/12 08:39 PM
3

So... Now he sues her and the school district.
/r/MensRights24/05/12 07:57 PM
3

Your analogy seems strained. You are suggesting that granting men similar reproductive rights to those already afforded women would coerce women into having abortions. If they would have abortions without support from men who don't want to have children, they should probably already be making their choice without factoring the men in. All this suggestion is is that men should have the similar options to those that women do.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 08:26 PM
1

That's... certainly a novel take on it. If you agree to give me $50 right now on paypal I won't smash my hand with a hammer. YOU DIDN'T SEND ME $50!?! WHY ARE YOU COERCING ME INTO SMASHING MY HAND WITH A HAMMER!?!?
/r/MensRights23/05/12 07:19 PM
3

Then you get 100 other people to come and do the same thing.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 02:48 PM
2

Unfortunately women have to opt-out of having children. I've heard the procedure is somewhat less than pleasant as well. I still think it would be an excellent idea, but definitely an opt-out.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 02:12 AM
1

Wait, are you my fiancee?
/r/MensRights21/05/12 12:01 AM
1

I don't want to detract from your point, so I wrote a haiku to correct your spelling: Dresses like a bat Becomes as the law himself a vigilante
/r/MensRights19/05/12 02:15 PM
31

YKINMKBYKIOK. Just be careful!
/r/MensRights13/05/12 02:06 AM
18

'Distinguished physics professor' just seems to fall short when describing Feynman though.
/r/MensRights13/05/12 01:20 AM
7

We're all bots here.
/r/MensRights13/05/12 12:53 AM
134

Unless it's consensual with clearly defined safewords, of course.
/r/MensRights13/05/12 12:52 AM
2

What are you more concerned about? Punishment for the false accusation, or preventing the women who make false rape accusations from doing it again? Maybe false rape accusers should go on the sex offender's registry. Alternately a new registry could be made to protect men from women who have shown a propensity to lie about being raped.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 11:17 PM
3

Her with some variety of assault and him with false imprisonment?
/r/MensRights10/05/12 12:41 AM
3

I have to wonder if that person meant to say, "I heartily doubt..." As it is written, they seem to be saying that they agree that men face sexism. 'Hardly doubt' is just a short step away from 'don't doubt' or 'have no doubt'.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 12:39 AM
3

Alternately, you interacted with A-Z and don't think any of your interactions constituted sexual assault, but without knowing which of them is accusing you, you can't detail what your actual interaction was.
/r/MensRights09/05/12 06:46 PM
63

Don't make them men-only. Women can join, their membership fees are just one hundred quadrillion dollars per year.
/r/MensRights09/05/12 06:42 PM
11

It would be terrible if someone tore the sign down.
/r/MensRights09/05/12 12:25 AM
6

I've heard that unless you're a nurse anesthesiologist, you're going to get shit as a male nurse.
/r/MensRights08/05/12 02:40 AM
3

IT'S BLUE, I MUST CLICK IT!
/r/MensRights07/05/12 03:25 PM
5

On the downside, when you teach someone that they are worthless, they cease to value themselves and punishments have reduced efficacy as deterrents.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 05:19 PM
1

I was thinking about this as I typed it. "Shouldn't the pressure to falsify statistics be relatively constant across time?" But I don't think the pressure is constant. With easier access to information, people are more likely to blame elected officials for spikes in crime (since they now KNOW about them). This puts additional pressure on the officials who put additional pressure on police to 'lower the crime rate'. I'm not a crazy person, I promise!
/r/MensRights02/05/12 09:57 PM
1

You could have tried, "I'm sorry, we don't have any Grey Poupon." erm, not to make light of a traumatic experience.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 09:52 PM
1

I'm not saying they are wrong. I'm saying that I've seen a few stories about police officers under-reporting crimes to make an area look safer than it actually is. I have no idea how widespread the practice is. It just makes me question the statistics.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 09:50 PM
1

I question the validity of statistics that are deliberately falsified for political reasons.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 09:38 PM
5

"I am not ashamed that I have a penis," might be considered bigotry by SRS?
/r/MensRights02/05/12 09:03 PM
1

I thought you had to be careful about the difference between statements of fact and statements of opinion. In the restaurant example, you could say, "The beef was dry and flavorless," which would pretty clearly be your opinion. Saying, "There are rats and roaches in the kitchen," would get you into trouble (unless there actually were rats and roaches in the kitchen). I'm going to have look up some cases because what you are saying sounds so far divorced from what I remember that I am having diff…
/r/MensRights01/05/12 12:09 PM
2

I didn't think, "I thought it was true" was all you needed to beat libel/slander? I thought that it had to actually BE true to serve as a defense? Steps to proving libel (in the US): 1: Prove the statement is false. 2: Prove harm. 3: Prove the statement was made without 'adequate research into its truthfulness'.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 02:38 AM
3

And they do. And you lose. And they get the DA to press charges. And you get arrested. And you get convicted. And you go to prison. How valuable a thing are we talking about here?
/r/MensRights29/04/12 06:47 PM
3

Stealing something that belongs to another person doesn't cease to be a crime just because you are the one who gave it to them.
/r/MensRights29/04/12 06:26 PM
0

Pickle jars.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 11:57 PM
1

HKINYKBHKIOK.
/r/MensRights20/04/12 01:42 PM
1

Don't you go to prison if you stop making child support payments?
/r/MensRights18/04/12 10:03 PM
-1

Only those with souls deserve rights, didn't you know?
/r/MensRights17/04/12 11:21 PM
9

I have less problem with that hypothetical scenario. I'm not saying that murdering someone is good, but if you went through the proper channels to try to protect yourself and the system failed to protect you, you do what you have to do to not die.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 11:20 PM
1

That song doesn't bother me nearly as much as "Hit 'em up style" for some reason. No idea why.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 11:15 PM
4

Easier to prove rape if the person has NEVER previously consented to sex.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 12:20 AM
10

Maybe if we take domestic abuse more seriously, fewer people would have shitty home-lives followed by their deaths. Which one gets laughed at though? "Man beats his wife with a frying pan." or "Woman beats her husband with a frying pan." One of them gets treated like a punchline and one of them doesn't.
/r/MensRights16/04/12 12:19 PM
1

Sounds like Poe's Law to me.
/r/MensRights16/04/12 01:30 AM
1

If she has lied about 19 rapes, she should probably be in prison, where it's apparently ok to get raped...
/r/MensRights16/04/12 01:24 AM
9

Not sure whether you're trolling or are actually unaware that I was talking about legality. Giving you the benefit of the doubt and explaining: If someone has a gun and is threatening you, you can legally shoot them (with a few other constraints). If they drop the gun, you can't shoot them anymore. If they have a knife and are threatening you, you can use lethal force against them. If they drop the knife, you can't use lethal force against them. If they physically attack you, you can defend your…
/r/MensRights14/04/12 11:57 PM
2

Once someone is down on the ground, unless you are ALSO down with them, you're generally not supposed to keep hitting them. This likely varies by state though.
/r/MensRights14/04/12 10:32 PM
3

Slight exception to one minor point: Are rights earned?
/r/MensRights14/04/12 10:25 PM
1

boutonniere, I think. Very close
/r/MensRights11/04/12 02:03 PM
2

That's terrible! Psychopaths aren't necessarily bad people!
/r/MensRights08/04/12 10:07 PM
1

Shark meat in urine?
/r/MensRights08/04/12 07:01 PM
10

Does the author have cause of action here? They were accused of something untrue with the intent of causing them harm. That's a crime, isn't it?
/r/MensRights08/04/12 12:23 AM
0

So... secret trials? That doesn't sound like such a good idea to me. Not that how it works now is a good thing, I just don't think secret tribunals are a good idea in general.
/r/MensRights03/04/12 01:30 PM
1

It's possible he is one of those people who thinks that ad hominem and fallacy are synonyms.
/r/MensRights13/02/12 01:33 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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