TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Lawtonfogle Archive

View 7 posts and 2,577 comments by Lawtonfogle on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 2,577 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

Social science is biased to the extent that it should be ignored.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 07:12 AM
12

Male and female skeletal structures are different NO, GENDER IS ONLY A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT. Seriously, the people who think manspreading is an issue do not care about facts at all.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 05:52 AM
8

Men don't report other violence they experience. But it's pretty hard to 'man up' and hide being murdered, so we get a better picture of that. Men are more often the victim, but never allowed to play the part.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 05:49 AM
–

I thought the general response was to deny there being any differences between what men and women find sexually attractive.
/r/MensRights17/11/16 04:21 AM
1

Its like magnets. The stronger they are, the harder it is to hold them together and the worse the outcome when the structure breaks. But weak magnets are really easy to hold together.
/r/MensRights12/09/16 02:56 AM
–

The funny thing, real men still give up their seats for real women.
/r/MensRights12/09/16 02:54 AM
1

I see a lot of reference to feminism being kind of the enemy of men's rights. Because the modern day version is. Look at feminist groups who protest against moves towards equality when the inequality benefits women. Listen to their selective outrage over issues to draw attention only to those where women will benefit from such attention. Look at how there are groups wanting to make prison easier on women, ignoring the gender disparity that already strongly favors women in the criminal justice sy…
/r/MensRights01/09/16 04:22 AM
1

That would entail ending welfare.
/r/MensRights01/09/16 04:20 AM
1

We agree to legalized theft through taxation, even though for most people money is a direct translation of their time. We would never force a person to give their time directly (well, short of prison sentences and drafting men into the military), but once we add a single layer of abstraction, it becomes acceptable to take it. If we ever developed a social currency that could be taken, I wonder how society would change.
/r/MensRights01/09/16 04:17 AM
1

Feminism seems very similar to conservative ideology when you look at the expectations, duties, requirements, and rights of men.
/r/MensRights01/09/16 04:14 AM
1

They are fairly logically consistent when you look at their actual motivation: "what can I do to make the world better for me". Much like trying to redefine *isms to be power + prejudice, they are tweaking definitions in a way that most benefits them. This double standard on abortion is a good example of creating a system they create a logical but yet absurd outcome. Having sex is consent to provide for the children once born. Having sex is not consent for the pregnancy. Thus technically if the …
/r/MensRights01/09/16 04:12 AM
1

It only went away because it was hurting profits. Had it stayed low key and the media never decided to attack it, it would be around even today. They try to make it like it was about morals, but it was only about money.
/r/MensRights12/08/16 02:45 PM
8

8% is the lowest of the studies out there (the 2% is just made up). Other studies find much higher, and that doesn't even count cases like this which seem to have been deescalated before it went to court.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 11:12 PM
2

Being pregnant and having an abortion for a medical reason fall into the same class of medical issues, but birth control only to prevent pregnancy and abortions done without medical need are not the same. They are still medical issues, but so is getting braces. Think of medical issues being broken into three groups. Emergency (you'll die without help, this is the class of issues that a hospital has to help you with even if you can't pay). Broken body (something is broken from the normal on your …
/r/MensRights19/02/16 01:31 AM
–

Yes, but if you think about it for a moment, it shows a very big problem with Feminism. See, the point was to create some bill that attack's men's reproductive rights like the bill's creator thinks women's reproductive rights are attacked. But they settled on a legitimate medical issue. Fixing something that is broken in men. Meaning that for a healthy male without need of medication, they couldn't find a single reproductive right to attack (satirically). They have having to scrape the bottom of…
/r/MensRights17/02/16 01:28 AM
3

Good luck with that. The CDC is far to biased an institute to trust (at least sections of them are, one only needs to read certain key reports to see a very strong anti-male bias that invalidates any legitimacy).
/r/MensRights17/02/16 01:25 AM
1

Completely pointless as long as judges are willing to hand out sentences far below the minimum and prosecutors are willing to offer really lenient plea bargains.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 04:15 AM
–

Was he even convicted or was it a plea deal? OP may not know the details of exactly what happened in court.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:44 AM
–

What they don't realize is the way they push men to hurt themselves I think they are smarter than that. I think they do realize it. They just don't care. Men are expendable.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:39 AM
–

At which point you're using "protecting" as a surrogate for "controlling". Age of consent laws, especially when applied to an individual who is developed enough to feel sexual desires, is largely about control. Sometimes protecting and controlling go hand in hand. And sometimes the desire to protect results in too much control that makes things worse.
/r/MensRights21/09/15 12:12 AM
2

Yeah, I was thinking I might be giving the DA some bad ideas.
/r/MensRights21/09/15 12:11 AM
–

The problem is making a law that say 'when the case is clear cut that she did in fact lie' using legal speak. It is very hard if not impossible to make such a law, and remember, if you are the politician who makes such a law and an actual predator uses it to escape punishment, there goes your life.
/r/MensRights21/09/15 12:01 AM
3

As far as social situations go, he is a sex offender. Anyone who looks up his name will see what happened and will treat him as if he was a sex offender. They may offer him a pass right now, but when he is 40 and it says 'arrested and pled guilty to rape of a 14 year old', people are not going to be thinking of how young he was. They'll treat him like he had just raped a kid. Best shot is to change names and then change countries to one that doesn't have anything like a sex offender's list, if t…
/r/MensRights20/09/15 11:53 PM
–

Can you be convicted of murder if all of the above is proved in court? I am not a lawyer, but I do not think so. But there was a murder and someone will be convicted: the person who tied them up. Should this girl be convicted of rape because she purposefully arranged for a 14 year old to be raped?
/r/MensRights20/09/15 11:50 PM
1

I think those laws should change. And what happens when an actual predator gets his victim to claim that she lied about her age. Can you write a law that will be able to not punish someone when the girl really did lie about her age but will punish a predator who has manipulated a girl into lying about lying? It would give any predator able to afford a good lawyer a loophole to escape.
/r/MensRights20/09/15 11:48 PM
–

The problem is that the law is going to have a really hard time telling the difference between a 14 year old who lied that she was 18 and a 14 year old who was manipulated to claim that she lied that she was 18.
/r/MensRights20/09/15 11:43 PM
1

The whole issue is the girl lied about being old enough to consent to sex and the guy had no way of knowing this. And a good predator who is already great at manipulating children will get her to lie about lying about her age. Either you put in a loophole that predators exploit or you say that 'ignorance isn't an excuse'. Most people, when not presented with an individual case but with the general idea, pick 'ignorance isn't an excuse' and thus we have laws like this.
/r/MensRights20/09/15 11:42 PM
–

and more that the laws and criminal justice system are fucked up. There are only two outcomes here. The victim lying does not make the act consensual. This is the entire problem with taking a consensual encounter and making it non-consensual. The law is supposed to be to protect underage girls from predators, And a really good (or really bad) predator would get their victim to say she lied about her age. The only way to fully protect the child is to give no way for her to consent, including cons…
/r/MensRights20/09/15 11:40 PM
0

It is only a problem for those who had a lot to gain from dating and marriage.
/r/MensRights02/08/15 03:38 AM
1

What, the opinion of hollywood is very important part of any educated persons day. They find out what hollywood thinks and then thinks the opposite. It works out so often that the times you then have to correct for when hollywood is partially right costs less time than the time you save implementing the method in all other cases.
/r/MensRights02/08/15 03:37 AM
-1

From my understanding, statutory rape is rape because the younger party is unable to consent. No matter what lie they say, even if they lie about their age, changes that. At 14, the 14 year old cannot consent. No consent. Not possible. Absolutely not. So... that means this was non-consensual sex. That this was rape. She did not consent, her lying did not change that, and thus he had to have raped her. The only issue I see here is that by being strict liability, he doesn't have to have had the me…
/r/MensRights02/08/15 03:29 AM
–

We are both getting downvoted. It seems we have irked the average SJW with our talk of health. As to what you said, of course exercise is healthy for you for lots of good reasons. And building muscle can definitely make someone go from 'meh' to 'hunk'. But when one is considering calories, exercise burns far less than people think when they consider how much exercise is needed to work off some sweets.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 03:51 AM
1

One side effect of socialized health care is that we do nanny you. in many/most cases the parents will exert more influence over the children than such a culture would. You shame the parents. Or better yet charge them with child abuse. When our kid is more than twice the normal weight of 6 year olds his own height and the cause is that you feed him too much, then you are guilty of child abuse.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 03:48 AM
–

"Starvation diet" Wut? You just eat 100 to 200 calories less than you need, ensure it is mostly protein, unsaturated fats, and complex carbs. You'll feel a little hunger, but no starvation. And this is most definitely better than being fat. Exercise can be the difference in a couple hundred calories, but when you are eating 4K or more and you only need 2K, you are NOT going to be doing enough exercise to make a difference.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 03:46 AM
–

One hour a day, 3 times a week. How often do you piss about on reddit? Thought so. To not be overweight, you don't need any time to exercise. Weight loss is mostly based on diet, not on exercise.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 01:22 AM
–

to play devil's advocate not everyone is overweight at their own fault. some people have disorders regarding the way their body processes food that really screws up their metabolism, and some people just have naturally lower metabolisms. some people have health complications that make it difficult or impossible for them to exercise properly. Some people are born without arms and some people lose them through no fault of their own. But if there was a movement where the MAJORITY of people were amp…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 01:21 AM
2

14 is too young. Are those European countries with 14 (or lower!) age of consent having massive problems? Last I checked, the US, with a higher age of consent, has far more teen pregnancies and abortions. Not sure how the sex crime appears (Sweden has the highest rape, but then they count things as rape that all other countries count as consensual).
/r/MensRights18/06/15 11:29 AM
8

They need removal, not overhaul. Last study I read reported they do not benefit society and may actually make people more likely to offend by blocking them from connecting with the community at large (which is what stops people from committing crimes in the first place).
/r/MensRights18/06/15 11:27 AM
3

Not all the points are incorrect. The whole 'can show violence, but no nipples' is pretty solid. My favorite version of that is that showing pictures of children being killed is legal, but only if they are clothed.
/r/MensRights03/06/15 03:44 AM
-1

A vote to be pleased so they earn your loyalty or a resource to exploit until there is nothing left to use up. Comparing them is pretty silly.
/r/MensRights01/06/15 05:46 PM
3

Better yet maybe he'll eventually be able to sue his father in court and have him charged under child abuse laws.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:26 AM
1

Statutory rape was originally only a crime against white pure females in the US who were really young (below 8 to 12). Feminist expanded it to cover far more girls and eventually boys, but the latter was really done as an attack on gay men and not women (note that age of consent for homosexuals cases has historically be higher and romeo and juliet exceptions have often excluded homosexual couples from being protected), as seen by how the courts have since handled such cases.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:23 AM
1

Consent can be revoked.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:16 AM
14

She said she would have sex with me years ago. It wasn't rape. She agreed to have sex, it shouldn't matter what the threat was if she didn't. It wasn't rape. If the conception of legal consent was applied to sex, it would show just how stupid our system is.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:15 AM
4

Consent in court is all kinds of different than consent in sex. For example, consider that some one who can barely read is allowed to sign a contract with a multi-billion dollar corporation. That consent is perfect valid, even those the power difference here is far greater than the power difference between a 10 and 20 year old.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:09 AM
2

Age of consent (or minimum age to marriage) is never mentioned in the Bible. OTOH, incest is banned and would get you stoned.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:05 AM
0

More so that making one wrong bigger might motivate people to fix it.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 09:55 PM
1

But being fat is a choice 99.99% of the time, being short is a choice 00.01% of the time. Shows who really is shallow.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 11:45 AM
-3

Why? Actual evidence isn't a standard for many rape cases now (unless you are rich or famous).
/r/MensRights19/05/15 11:42 AM
13

Since kidnapping can be a sex crime (not kidnapping + rape or kidnapping + molestation, nope just kidnapping), it isn't too crazy to start applying this to other crimes. Well, too much MORE crazy, it is all crazy to begin with.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 11:41 AM
0

But no one considers 'God did it' legitimate science (well maybe a few religious folks, but even most religious folks separate the two). But feminist are insisting that 'The Patriarchy did it' is legitimate science.
/r/MensRights13/05/15 02:28 PM
2

Except for the woman owning the right to the man's body to produce for her child for the next 18+ years even if she raped him and even if he isn't the father.
/r/MensRights13/05/15 11:42 AM
0

It is also a medical procedure for the child. Does the parent not have the right to be present for such a case unless there is a medical need not to (such as in intensive surgery where only trained staff are present)? Notice how the rights of the man are always secondary to the rights of the child, but the right of the child seem to be secondary to the rights of the woman.
/r/MensRights13/05/15 11:41 AM
8

Being drunk doesn't make you unable to consent. If you are a man. A woman is assumed to be unable to consent in such a scenario.
/r/MensRights13/05/15 11:38 AM
3

The problem with the concept of 'Patriarchy' is the same as with the concept of 'God'. It can be used to explain anything. Scientist unsure of new evidence? God did it. Scientist uncover theory to explain new evidence? God did that too. Women are disadvantaged? Patriarchy suppressing women. Women are advantaged? Patriarchy treating women like children and holding men to higher standards. Imagine if I argued that society is racist against white because it holds them to a lower standard, which is …
/r/MensRights13/05/15 11:37 AM
–

Because a Middle Eastern feminist or an African feminist actually has some legit complaints.
/r/MensRights11/05/15 11:27 AM
3

The Jester's Point, where one's humorous satire wraps around so far that it begins to lay out pretty real truths.
/r/MensRights11/05/15 11:26 AM
-1

We already hear how suicide hurts women more because they attempt more. They outright ignore the fact that a completed suicide means no more attempts in favor of pushing their women first women only agenda.
/r/MensRights31/01/15 04:31 PM
1

Why is the man responsible by default so much? Feminism. (Far more complex if you ask this about historical cases, but for modern day, that is a one word summary.)
/r/MensRights31/01/15 04:30 PM
7

"Women get custody because the patriarchy forces them to be seen as the default parent. Your privilege is that you aren't forced to be the default parent." This stuff is so easy I have to be careful to not do it while I'm dreaming.
/r/MensRights31/01/15 04:28 PM
7

It isn't about which is right or wrong. It is about the fact that if you reversed the gender, the way this would have been treated would be totally different. Only once the public admits to the disparity and admits it needs to be fixed can we begin to talk about which way is the right way to handle this.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:03 AM
1

Normal person: Wait, since a mother is presumed to be the better parent and gets the child by default, isn't that female privilege? Feminist: First, it is so horrible of you to use the word female as if we aren't people. Secondly, what you are describing is actually male privilege because males get better careers because they are expected to work long hours instead of being at home enjoying raising their children. Because males by default love their careers more, they get to do what they want wh…
/r/MensRights27/01/15 01:09 AM
1

No at all. It is akin to getting rid of social constructs that favor women once men finally are able to take advantage of them. Or to use another social issue, imagine if after the SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage, a state decides to just get rid of marriage (not saying that is possible, but let's pretend they can). That is clearly not the same thing as accepting gay marriage.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 02:44 PM
39

Just ask Mrs. 'Women are the real victims of war' Clinton.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 02:38 PM
2

Is cutting off a baby's hand morally equivalent to cutting off both hands? One will clearly leave the baby at a great disadvantage. But we still ban both unless there is some major medical need. We still think anyone who wants to do either for cosmetic or cultural reasons is a psychopath.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 07:54 AM
1

Or because the fields they are concerned with tend to be math related or correlate strongly with math talent. Now maybe gender differences in math talent is social and not biological in origin. But that seems to be a far bigger issue that some 'notion of a genius'.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 07:49 AM
2

It would need to be detailed in the results and would also be limited in application to where it was done. The problem is that people always extend social science studies that are done on one group to apply to a much larger group. Ever heard the joke: Psychology is the study of college students in need of beer money?
/r/MensRights14/01/15 12:13 PM
9

73 people at one location is not bad. It isn't any large study, but it is still enough to run basic statistics over. Researcher bias, the lack of the study being double blind, and many other criticisms are far better than pointing out a sample size of 73.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 04:47 AM
1

Not as morbid as strapping them to a table, injecting them with chemicals so the body stops moving, and then putting other chemicals in that may be doing all sorts of nasty things before the person dies. Seriously, consider yourself laying there, watching someone stick a needle in your arm, knowing that you are currently being executed. A state that could do that could do anything.
/r/MensRights09/01/15 01:26 AM
1

And? I said 'if a woman is convicted of rape', meaning there is definitely a judge involved.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 11:30 PM
1

I'm clearly trying to push some agenda that isn't at all clear? Now that isn't clear. I'm pointing out the problems with your arguments as you bring them up. If they don't follow any pattern, that says something about what they are being typed in response to.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 02:05 AM
1

one which should be dealt with separately from that of pedophilia and adult abortion. It isn't really separate though. Not fully separate, as there are many underlying themes that are relevant. This is very different from sex with a minor, where it is clear what the right choice is - to not have sex. Actually there is a very clear choice for abortion, especially if very early in a pregnancy. The risk to the child to have an abortion is much much smaller than the risk to birth a child. The impact…
/r/MensRights05/01/15 01:54 AM
1

Here in the real world we deal with something called nuance, and we note the subtle differences between the choice to have sex and the choice to have an abortion, which might means we come to different conclusions when thinking about them. And where is the 'nuance' that would make them different? Older guy got a girl pregnant... now he has even more reason to pressure her into an abortion than he ever had to just pressure her into sex. Parents may also have a major reason to pressure an abortion…
/r/MensRights05/01/15 01:31 AM
0

It tends to be used as one. If "My body my choice" only applies to adults, then it is consistent. But it can no longer be used as an argument to justify abortions for minors. The point being that they must also be an exception to pro-choice arguments. This is not to say that that means they can't get an abortion. It only means that their must be separate arguments for adults and minors. As I already pointed out, if this argument is true for sex, then it is true for abortion. In essence, we are s…
/r/MensRights05/01/15 12:17 AM
0

They can't make the choice but they can make the choice because it is their body? What in the world? My point is that 'my body, my choice' logic does not apply to a certain group of women (those under 18), thus invalidating the logic in its entirety (there may be other arguments that lead to similar conclusions, but that one argument does not).
/r/MensRights04/01/15 11:58 PM
1

Is it "My body my choice" OR they are not old enough to make an informed choice And as to the whole 'adult is effectively making the choice', that would be just as true for abortion.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 11:36 PM
1

Flip it around. Begin to paint every problem a woman experiences as a result of sexism against men. Also, not responding. I'd rather explain the basics of why the sky is blue to a five year old, because at least I'll be dealing with a human interested in learning.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:26 PM
1

"My body my choice" is nothing but BS. All you have to do is consider the choice for abortion and the choice for sex and then apply it to a young woman right below the age of consent (say 15 or 16). Suddenly feminist are tripping over themselves not sure how to respond.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:24 PM
–

But we should remember that the exoneration of a guilty many is better than the conviction of an innocent one. In the former, you only have to fear that the criminals will take away your rights and work to protect yourselves against them. In the latter, you not only have to fear the criminals, but you now have to fear the government.
/r/MensRights03/01/15 02:29 PM
19

You guys pro statutory rape? Her body, her choice. Or does that logic no longer apply? By the way, what does that even have to do with this case here?
/r/MensRights03/01/15 02:28 PM
2

So consent to sex is now consent to parenthood, but only for the man? Funny how the man is the one who keeps getting screwed over when handing out rights.
/r/MensRights02/01/15 07:36 AM
1

Social Security pays if if he dies. Not always. Welfare kicks in if he's too poor or unknown. Which isn't enough to live or thrive, just barely survive. Why should one kid get $10k a month while another gets only the bare needs met? It's not the mother and child being supplemented, it's the father, who isn't contributing. He did not consent to parenthood and thus has as much duty to support the child as you do (which is taken based on taxes which are calculated based on income).
/r/MensRights02/01/15 01:55 AM
1

Actually you can tell a woman or man what to do with their body. Normally only after they have broken a law and are being punished. Thus if a woman is convicted of rape, it would definitely be possible to have the punishment include being forced to have an abortion if the man so desires (assuming the trial is over quick enough). The whole 'your body your choice' is a bunch of BS, as shown by even some of the lowest level laws such as being forced to wear a seat belt.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 04:51 PM
1

teaching boys that everyone has a right to decide what they do with their body, and that a decision on whether to terminate a pregnancy is ultimately up to the person hosting it in their body. So next time a 15 year old girl decide she wants to be a mother and wants that 25 year old guy over there to be the father, we'll all step back and say 'her body her choice'? I don't think so.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 04:49 PM
1

How is that any different than a pregnant woman whose husband dies and she is unable to afford the child? Or a woman who doesn't know who the father is? Or a father who is literally too poor to pay anything?
/r/MensRights01/01/15 04:47 PM
1

That isn't how humans work. Also, her choice could have been based in part of his characteristics.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 04:46 PM
3

Because it makes it a slam dunk case and they look like heroes. Also, if they only find a little, say a few images of someone they know was 17 at the time but which is often passed around as an 18 year old, they can be used to get a plea deal. "Well, agree to 5 years probation and we won't even require the sex offender's list, or we'll see how the jury likes to hear about your child porn collection along with the little girl's allegations. You would be looking as a minimum of 10 years, and you'l…
/r/MensRights01/01/15 04:42 PM
6

They say they have a search warrant, but that I'm not allowed to see it until after the investigation. Sounds like bs to me. Go ask r/legaladvice (you'll have to give your location). Overall, I was really cooperative and gave them my passwords for everything, from the virtual servers on my PC, to my Gmail. Bad idea. They likely could not have gotten that password from you, and you aren't earning any brownie points with the police for doing this.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 04:36 PM
1

Still don't get how films of murder is legal but films of sexual abuse is not.
/r/MensRights31/12/14 12:15 PM
1

A system that can be made into a kangaroo court where feelings matter more than facts? I'd rather not. I bet your tone would be different if these cases could swing the other way and have the accuser kicked out if their was evidence they lied. Note that nothing stops an alleged victim from seeking a restraining order from the court.
/r/MensRights31/12/14 03:57 AM
0

Takes too long? Then maybe the courts should stop bothering with consensual drug use and focus on actual crimes then.
/r/MensRights30/12/14 12:14 PM
1

Young males Well that is most undeniable proof that the entire organization is extremely sexist. /s
/r/MensRights28/12/14 01:28 PM
1

The point is that even libertarian wants some blocks on 'her body her choice'. Being a child is one of them. Having a child in your body is for many another.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 06:14 PM
1

Rape and pillage the town? If CO says so... Torture and kill over a 10 million people? Well if the CO says so... Punishment for dissertation is a tool of the weak and immoral.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 09:11 PM
1

The real question is if the rape victim should be allowed to have an abortion. Why should the rapist be the one to decide if this guy has a child out there or not? Even if you break all parental rights, ect., the guy still is now going to have a child out there.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 04:52 AM
1

Really? If a 12 year old wanted to get married, would libertarianisms say 'her body, her choice'? I don't think so.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 04:41 AM
-2

I don't blame the admins. They are trying to run a business. Feminists (and some other groups, though they aren't as relevant for this particular issue) are the crazy ones who can damage a business which happens to draw their ire. Reddit admins want to avoid public ire while running their business. This is also the reason that jailbait was a subreddit for such a long time. It was good for business til it hit the general public, and then it became bad for business.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 11:00 PM
2

People will buy it based on the success of it's predecessor regardless of the quality of the 2nd. The gaming industry is banking on this really hard at the moment. People really need to stop doing this.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 04:19 AM
1

Any analogy breaks down if you analyze it with a toothpick.
/r/MensRights16/11/14 04:03 PM
3

How likely is this because she was 47. Make her 27 or even a decent looking 37 and see what happens instead.
/r/MensRights14/11/14 12:18 AM
1

Yeah, but that is a good thing to have happened. In fact, having that happen makes you lucky. But if a boy does anything, then it ruins you for life. Why? Because society hates women and this is another example of society hating women. Am I doing it right yet?
/r/MensRights11/11/14 07:40 PM
1

He isn't wrong if you assume the graph is correct. It is because the graph is actually mixing different things that you get units all screwed up. Basically, if the feminist graph is right, OP is right. But the graph isn't right.
/r/MensRights11/11/14 12:04 AM
3

The problem is that we haven't a clue about the non-reports of false rape accusations. Anytime someone tells a family member of friend they were raped... we have no way to measure this.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 10:33 PM
1

It doesn't make sense because the original numbers don't make sense. The original feminist mantra, when you critically analyze it, breaks down. And that is before you even question the accuracy or bias of their sources.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 10:17 PM
3

Take 100 alleged rape. Now, some X are false. How in the world do you arrive at that X? False rape numbers are only about those reported to some degree. The false rape allegations that aren't reported aren't counted at all.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 10:15 PM
1

Just look at coverage of the recent suicide bombing by Boko Haram. A lot of headlines I saw didn't mention it was a boy's school til I listened to the NPR report. Imagine the discussion if this was a girls school.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 10:13 PM
4

A 4 year old often can't understand the benefit of a medical procedure. In almost every case, they probably can't understand. But they can understand 'no benefit'.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 10:10 PM
4

Also not very attractive. Also tampering with witness. A male in the similar situation would likely be looking forwards to a far heavier book.
/r/MensRights24/10/14 01:49 AM
7

They do know. There are still people who are sex offenders from back when they didn't. Also, not all do. For example, Texas has a law that allows a close in age exception if the couple could get married. So until gay marriage is legalized there, Romeo and Juliet would be fine, but Romeo and Romeo are going to jail.
/r/MensRights24/10/14 01:46 AM
2

Did they know they were having sex against your will -> rape -> Doesn't matter if they were too drunk to know what they were doing. What? If they were too drunk to know what they were doing, then you would have never gotten on the branch. Also, the whole statutory rape thing fails to take into account two minors or when federal laws apply and a whole bunch of other complications. Better to have 'were you under 18' and then just say 'consult a lawyer'.
/r/MensRights24/10/14 01:44 AM
1

That is quite a different argument. Not that I agree with that argument either. But that is a different argument.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 02:56 PM
1

Because one is legal and one is not.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 02:43 PM
2

That difference only exists because one is illegal and the other is not. So basically... Person A: Why is one legal and one not legal? What is the difference? You: The difference is that one is legal and one is not legal. Even if you gave other, better reasons for there to be a different, that one reason is as silly as what I just wrote.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 11:54 AM
3

I'm trying to point out your argument is circular. Violent videos shouldn't be made illegal because they are easy to happen upon because they are legal, which is because they are easy to happen upon because they are legal, which is because they are easy to happen upon because they are legal, which is because they are easy to happen upon because they are legal, which is because they are easy to happen upon because they are legal, which is because they are easy to happen upon because they are lega…
/r/MensRights17/10/14 02:05 AM
3

No, I'm saying that if you made real violence videos illegal, they would be hard to find. Not sure how you got anything else from what I was saying.
/r/MensRights16/10/14 11:29 PM
3

I bet if we made real videos of violence as illegal as child porn, they would be pretty hard to find as well.
/r/MensRights16/10/14 11:02 PM
0

She did until all the men took it. It is also not her fault that the patriarchy system has left her without enough to survive. ... ... do I really need to indicate sarcasm in this post?
/r/MensRights13/10/14 11:36 PM
2

There are some rule books* that seem to indicate that shekels are the favored currency of the admins, but they have almost completely fallen out of style with the player base in recent years. I think the dollar, euro, pound, or yen is better choices to keep your loot in. *authenticity of the rule book in question is debated by many, some saying the admins would never make a player character and others who suggest the admins abandoned us after the game was first launched.
/r/MensRights13/10/14 11:33 PM
0

Does it say something about society that an iconic moment in history, which was once viewed as a positive event, would now be a crime if it were to take place again?
/r/MensRights13/10/14 01:02 AM
2

No! Wrong! Bad! You are supposed to only focus on the racial break down of prisoners, never on the gender breakdown! /s
/r/MensRights12/10/14 01:12 PM
2

I don't think it is a UK bias. I grew up around guns. Lots and lots of guns. Was a hunter for a while, still shoot for fun. Was taught how to shoot before I was 10, ect. But my father didn't just teach me how to shoot. He was clear on teaching gun safety as well. Guns, while perhaps fun, are not to be treated like toys. Think of them more like a boat or a car. It can be fun to use them, but if you act stupid with them, people can die.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 09:40 PM
20

Eh, forget your entire argument for a second. Why not talk about women being entitled to sex. You know, apples to apples. Because I've been hearing lately that withholding sex (as a man, from a woman) can be considered sexual violence. Now if that isn't being entitled, I'm not sure what is.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 12:33 PM
14

Except pointing a pistol at someone's head, even as a joke, is actually very horrible. As in, that alone would be enough for me to seek criminal charges against anyone who did so. Always treat every gun as loaded and never play around with them.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 12:27 PM
2

How about set it to when they can drive?
/r/MensRights04/10/14 05:33 PM
19

Just remember this goes both ways. A rich rapist can pay to get away with raping a poor individual, but a rich false accuser can pay to get a conviction against a poor individual.
/r/MensRights04/10/14 05:24 PM
1

You forgot to count every act of drunk sex as a man raping a woman. Which probably ups it to the majority of the university student body each year.
/r/MensRights04/10/14 04:02 AM
1

They usually look creepy because the more attractive ones are given more of a pass (true of most crimes), for both male and female offenders, though I personally think that an attractive female is given more of a pass than an attractive male.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 10:55 PM
1

If someone was killed attempting to rape someone else, most people wouldn't shed many tears. Wait, that would only be true for a male on female rape... :(
/r/MensRights02/10/14 02:45 AM
1

Its like conservative politicians and abortion. Those in power don't want the issue to change because they then lose a large part of what gives them power.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 12:29 PM
1

I think it is more that people don't see sacrificing your body in a job as equal to other ways a person is exploited. Not sure why it was in r/funny though.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 12:23 PM
0

Men are expected to sacrifice their health and time for careers to support their family far more than women are. A woman may be in the same boat, but she has less social pressure to do such.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 12:22 PM
2

If men only, straight only, Hispanic only, ect. businesses were allowed, then this should be too. But those businesses would be sued out of existence.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 12:19 PM
1

Considering the level of intolerance that some feminist have displayed in the past, would it be that impossible for them to have been pretending to be a MRA just to make the group look bad?
/r/MensRights23/09/14 12:13 PM
9

Well you see, women still need their safe spaces from men. Everywhere in the world is a safe space for men, so they don't actually need anywhere to be a safe space like women do. ...or something like that...
/r/MensRights23/09/14 12:03 PM
3

Or it could be feminist realizing that they will lose if they exclude males completely, and thus give just enough ground to make it look like they are including males while denying the vast majority of male victims. They are in effect picking the plan that allows them to say both 'see, we include male victims as well' and 'women are still the primary victim by a large margin'. This is a small oversight like saying that rape involves someone being forced to have sex with a stranger is a small ove…
/r/MensRights19/09/14 04:22 AM
3

Neither are all women who are raped raped by a man, as a woman can penetrate another woman with a number of objects. But the majority of made to penetrate are by women. What is sickening is the way this is pointed out. Instead of saying the majority are by women, they point out that the majority of male victim non-contact sexual assault and rape are by men. They purposefully gloss over the fact that the majority of male victim contact sexual assault (which should be rape to begin with) is by wom…
/r/MensRights18/09/14 02:19 AM
12

Personal stuff is in general not appropriate, but it gives a perfect counter to the argument being raised by that idiotic teacher. When someone makes a 'for all X, Y is true', all it takes is a single counter example to disprove the statement. It also sounds like the individual then pointed out that the statics show that 1 in 6 males are victims of sexual abuse by the time they are 18. Saying this guy was wrong for bringing up his personal experience is like saying someone is wrong for jaywalkin…
/r/MensRights11/09/14 02:27 AM
1

I've heard this is because it is 18 in California and that ends up impacting a great deal of our pop culture media (say movies coming out of Hollywood).
/r/MensRights07/09/14 09:21 PM
1

Except in most states, if you sleep with a 16 year old you are legally in the clear.
/r/MensRights07/09/14 09:20 PM
8

Who cares if she distributed it. She did create it.
/r/MensRights07/09/14 09:19 PM
155

It is child pornography. The production of all child pornography harms the child. There needs to be intervention to stop the harm of children. Or we could stop painting this issue so black and white and realize that a nude image of an under 18 isn't the same thing as a someone videotaping themself raping a child.
/r/MensRights07/09/14 09:17 PM
8

How dare you compare rape to something like sleeping on someone's couch. It is disgusting that you would compare such a horrible violation of a woman with something as benign as sleeping on someones couch with permission. Do you hate all women this way? Would you be fine with your mother/sister/daughter being raped? What a feminist would respond when their analogy is critically analyzed.
/r/MensRights07/09/14 09:16 PM
11

For as bad as the police are, they have some chance of calling liars out on their lies.
/r/MensRights07/09/14 09:12 PM
1

Assuming you knew the image wasn't willingly released when you looked at it, did you have some disregard for her sexual integrity when you looked at it? I don't like the whole 'hating women', because the same thing happens to men as well. It is like saying rape is 'hating women', ignoring their are male victims. But at the same time, I don't see looking at those photos as a moral act (assuming they knew about these images). In fact, I think it can be considered akin to the sexual violation that …
/r/MensRights07/09/14 09:12 PM
2

Ah, but see women survive it when they do attempt it, and thus get to attempt it again and again, and thus make the majority of attempts to be women, and thus why aren't you posting about the worse tragedy of suicide affecting women? Op, you aren't a shitlord are you?
/r/MensRights05/09/14 03:10 AM
1

What about a FTM or an MTF? What about a Lesbian? It is all around saner to just ban any discrimination than to start handling the 'but we can't hire them because of who they are attracted to/what they have between their legs'.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 03:07 AM
2

If the child loses their father for any reason: sucks to be that child, hope your mom can pay all your bills. Best interest of the child would have all child support going into a big pot and that pot being split among the neediest children. Anything else is best interest of the mother demanding her lifestyle be supported.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 11:39 AM
2

Women start making more money and it becomes acceptable for men to be the stay at home? Whelp, I guess it is time we retire alimony.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 11:37 AM
13

Don't worry, feminist will report this as two more cases of a rapist escaping justice.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 11:35 AM
7

The sexual violence statistics cannot be trusted because a woman sexually abusing a child is treated as a positive experience in our culture and is not taken seriously. Meaning the official statistics on it are extremely under reported.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 11:33 AM
7

Don't worry, they'll find some way to redefine violence to make this work out. Perhaps only count violence that results in a criminal conviction of some sort, which allows women off easy due to how they are treated in the court systems.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 11:32 AM
6

"Young man"? WTF you talking 'bout OP. This individual was still legally a child (though I have no doubt he would have been charged as an adult had the woman's lies been effective). Also a reminder. Since this woman's false report didn't make it to court and she wasn't convicted of filing a false reports, she isn't part of the '8%' statistics feminist like to claim. In fact, since her report of a sexual assault didn't result in a charge, feminist will likely count this as one of those rapists wh…
/r/MensRights02/09/14 12:30 PM
3

Well, we are all getting objectified by HR. Not sexually objectified, just plain old 'you are an object that has costs X and produces Y' objectified.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 10:58 PM
1

Where do we attach the .mnd file which is a scan of the other parties brain at the time that proves they actually willingly signed it and it wasn't under duress. Without that, this is all null and void by saying 'I felt scared that I would be hurt if I didn't agree'. Also, this doesn't help you if you don't have sex. You can be a virgin and still be accused, since evidence doesn't matter.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 03:13 PM
1

And how many of them are getting stuck down? They pass ones so big that they know they will be struck down by the courts. Also to note, this is a general trend. There are pro-life politicians who want to end abortion and wouldn't mind leaving office after that. And there are feminist who want to end rape regardless of how much political power they would lose. But those do not seem to be the ones in the drives seat most of the time.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 12:54 PM
1

It makes as much sense as saying pro-life politicians want abortion to continue to happen so they can use it to get votes.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 12:46 PM
4

A discussion on the over medication of child for issues like ADHD (which most of the time would better be called boys being boys) does not fit well into a discussion about feminism and their reaction to a certain mass child sexual abuse scandal. At least, I don't see how they fit.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 04:40 AM
1

I do, but now is not the time nor the place.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 02:52 AM
–

I'm beginning to question if they even really care about reducing rape If they reduced rape (or else reduced the inflated stats), they would lose political power. It is in their best interest to keep rape happening. Think of it like politicians who are against abortion but who normally do very little to reduce abortions (and if they do do something, they tend to pick something the courts will shut down, so that it doesn't reduce abortions but gives them credibility with their voting block). Why …
/r/MensRights31/08/14 08:03 PM
2

Nope, still doesn't make any sense. Why, because clearly evidence is not needed for these laws to be used against men. Never have sex? Woman can still claim you raped her. Never touch a woman? Still can be charged with assault.
/r/MensRights31/08/14 08:00 PM
2

Then you don't know shit about psych researcher or statistics. If you want to hate on something, hate on the bias of the sampled population, not the size.
/r/MensRights25/08/14 11:19 PM
2

In which case just about any picture of an attractive person, regardless of age, gender, ect. is sexual because someone out there is going to find that picture sexual. BAN ALL THE PICTURES!
/r/MensRights25/08/14 02:20 AM
4

Makes you wonder if the people who complain so much about these things being sexual are doing so because they hate the feelings being caused inside of them. To put it shortly, anyone who sees sexual inside a normal picture is the one who put it there.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 01:23 PM
10

They spell it 'child support' but pronounce is 'spousal support'.
/r/MensRights22/08/14 03:21 AM
9

The scary part of this is that she didn't really plan well. Had she planned better, he could have been ruined.
/r/MensRights22/08/14 03:20 AM
3

Should urination in public be acceptable? No. Should it be a sex offense? No. Driving while drunk is something we can agree that is bad, but it is not and should not be a sex offense.
/r/MensRights16/08/14 06:52 PM
1

How does that help? Lets say you piss off some woman, and she complains you had sex while drunk. Except you never had sex. But forensic evidence isn't required, just her word against yours. You would have to have a 24/7 video record of everything you do to beat such an accusation.
/r/MensRights16/08/14 05:31 AM
3

Some people seem to be forgetting a very important point here. You can't record a consensual sexual encounter that never actually happened, but you can still be charged with rape for such.
/r/MensRights16/08/14 05:29 AM
1

In feminist speak, women have no privileges, just rights that they won after a long fight against the MRAs who still seek to take all of them away.
/r/MensRights16/08/14 05:27 AM
9

If you are so drunk you can't get in a car, but I put you there, turn it on, and get your foot on the wheel, and you happen to go 100 yards before crashing in the road, then I should be charged. But if you are drunk, but still able to get yourself in the car and drive off, then you should be charged. The same should apply for drunk sex/rape. If you are drunk, but are actively engaging in the sex, then it isn't rape. But if you are drunk to the point you can't participate in the sex, then it is r…
/r/MensRights11/08/14 02:31 AM
2

It is only being applied to men. Even the rule is a bit twisted. In this case, even a man and women who are not related cannot be teachers. You have to either have two men, or a man and woman where the woman is a family member or spouse of the man.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 02:28 AM
1

I'm still a ways away from 30, but I've met mid and even younger teens in college who would be a intellectual peer. They are rarer, but they exist. That being said, do we hate on intelligent 30 year olds who sleep around with young adults (early 20s) who are all looks and no brain? I've met teens who were more street wise than adults who had a sheltered life.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 07:34 PM
2

Actually, the new guys also get a lot of crap. Because anyone new often gets that. The men just don't consider it harassment (or if they do, society demands that they remain manly, bury any feelings about it, and keep going).
/r/MensRights09/08/14 05:20 PM
1

And I have met 18 and 20 year olds who also lack the capacity to consent to sex with a thirty year old for similar reasons. And some of the sheltered upbringings I've read about would include adults far older than this. If anything, we need to base the law on being too sheltered/naive/ect. for best result. Otherwise, we are basically just legitimizing taking advantage of mentally forcing someone.
/r/MensRights04/08/14 02:53 AM
1

What I was saying is that the actual question, can they consent, is a simple yes. The tricky question is in what situations we begin to invalidate that consent, but to say they can't consent means arresting two teenagers of the same age for sexually assaulting each other.
/r/MensRights03/08/14 12:00 AM
2

So if two 16 year olds were caught having sex, would you throw both of them in prison for sexual assault since they can't give consent? Or would you say that a 16 year old can give consent. In the larger scheme of things, if a 16 year old has to drop out of school to raise a child, perhaps forever forgoing any dreams of higher education, does it matter if the father baby is 16 or 26? If anything, a father who could support the mother to continue her education by paying for child care and college…
/r/MensRights02/08/14 05:37 PM
6

So, let's just say that they are correct. 2% of rape accusations are proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be false. How many rape accusations are proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be true? 3%? 4%? So in other words, of the rape accusations that we know for sure one way or the other, false rape accusations make up 33-40%. And that isn't even counting their being less resources on proving them false than proving them true.
/r/MensRights02/08/14 12:51 PM
10

So how about banning violent felons from being parents. They must surrender all parental rights. Oh wait, we don't do that for the convicted, yet here we are doing so for those found not guilty?
/r/MensRights02/08/14 03:33 AM
1

If she produces a legally valid ID stating she is 18+, you are still in trouble if she ends up not being such.
/r/MensRights02/08/14 03:31 AM
2

In most states 16 is flat out legal. It only gets more complicated when you go younger than that.
/r/MensRights02/08/14 03:29 AM
2

Because that is what hollywood paints it like, because in hollywood it is 18.
/r/MensRights02/08/14 03:29 AM
2

So where you live restricts the rights of consenting individuals.
/r/MensRights02/08/14 03:28 AM
1

That is a shameful use of the word 'scholar'.
/r/MensRights01/08/14 02:25 AM
8

Social conditioning. It was once acceptable to allow your daughter to marry while still a child. Doesn't mean it is right.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 03:16 PM
7

If someone complains that the picture is sexual, tell them the only people who would think such a picture is sexual is a pedophile.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 03:15 PM
2

In which case where is my criminal registry of all the other dangerous deviants? I especially like to know everyone convicted of dealing drugs so that I'll never accidentally talk to them about such a topic.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 11:03 AM
1

It use to be. Then the professionals were legally required to become part of the long arm of the police, and now it is no longer the correct solution.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 11:01 AM
-1

And this is why you don't go to counselors. All that doctor patient confidentiality has been sacrificed, and they are now only to be considered an extended arm of the law. A lot of pedophiles who have never molested children and just want help to keep not molesting don't go to counselors/therapist for this reason.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 11:00 AM
0

It was the counselor that did it. The mother was concerned, and sought out counseling (which honestly is the correct course of action). Not with mandated reporting. Also, how do you think the sister feels? While it didn't go into details, it was not likely anything significantly worse than playing doctor. Yet now the sister will likely blame herself for everything bad that happened to her brother. She still loved her brother and could easily blame herself for destroying his life.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 10:58 AM
2

And now sexual offenses are meaningless. As in, there are sexual offenses that are legally literally equal to molesting a preteen (read the next few paragraphs to see what I mean) that are in actuality less of a crime that a traffic violation. Good job America.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 10:53 AM
3

No pity. No one had to hurt her. She just wanted the wins under her belt and knew how to get them.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 10:52 AM
2

Welcome to pedophile hysteria. Please take your seat in the area clearly marked pedophilesmales.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 10:51 AM
1

SC.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 09:58 PM
1

Child has been clearly defined to mean under 18. Every major statistic concerning bad things happening to child uses this definition. Child prostitution means anyone under 18. The UN Convention on the Right of the Child in Article 1 clearly states it means everyone under 18. Major statistics use this definition as well. You cannot change it just because it is unconventional since most places allow an adult to have sex with a 17 year old (which is to say, have sex with a child) or because the mil…
/r/MensRights16/07/14 09:56 PM
1

US.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 09:45 PM
0

No it wouldn't. You would still have 'under 18 is a child'. And 'it is illegal to take advantage of children (for financial, personal, sexual, ect. gain).' But, a young teenager could still consent, but it would be illegal for an adult to take advantage of it (not illegal if it was another young teenager). The crime of taking advantage of it would be child molestation. If the adult forced the young teenager to have, that would be rape. It also has the benefit of people who are accused of child r…
/r/MensRights16/07/14 12:36 PM
1

Unwelcome comments regarding a person’s lifestyle choices and practices, including those related to food, health, parenting, drugs, and employment. So... I can't say you are wrong for giving meth to your kids? I think I'll stick to reasonable IT sphere that just have a 'don't discriminate' policy.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 12:03 PM
1

That is what they are scared of.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 12:00 PM
1

if i commit murder when i was 11 If you kidnapped someone at 11 and kept them til you were 21, do you think they are going to let you off? This wasn't a single wrong act, but 10 years of wrong.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 11:58 AM
1

which wasn't wrong. Yes it was. They go off of very shoddy evidence, and it is wrong to do such. Imagine if some white individual accused a black guy of stealing from him, with no other evidence, the jury convicted based on just the testimony and the prosecutor sought the maximum penalty since the black guy didn't plead guilty. That would be wrong.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 11:56 AM
1

They prosecuted based on evidence presented and a jury decided it was enough to throw him in jail. And this bar has been lowered far too much. It has become 'might he have done it, better jail him to be safe'. It should be 'are we sure he did it, is there enough physical evidence beyond eyewitness testimony to show he did it, if not better be safe and say non-guilty'. The prosecutor is morally guilty for taking part in a rigged game. As for legally, the prosecutor could have gone as far as to co…
/r/MensRights16/07/14 11:54 AM
1

Think of how a homosexual is likely to view a Christian. Most of them probably don't care too much, would only share their view if asked, and would be quite hospitable. But they seem to sit back when the few who do care go and pass laws outlawing homosexuality and denying them equal rights. Thus, the homosexual gets a bad view of all those involved. This is how many men are beginning to feel about feminist. Now, maybe Tqbfjotlds did mean all women, in which case he is ignoring quite a number who…
/r/MensRights16/07/14 11:52 AM
1

She stayed 11 for all 10 years? Now that is a major news story. Why isn't anyone covering this?
/r/MensRights16/07/14 11:49 AM
1

Fine, but lets do one other thing. Require good concrete physical evidence to convict someone of rape. Eyewitness testimony is not and should not be enough. If someone said "I saw Jane kill John," but there is no body nor missing person, what is the chance of Jane being put in prison... what is the chance of her even being arrested? It should be the same with rape, physical evidence of rape (thus evidence of consensual sex does not count*) is what is required to get a rape conviction. *For cases…
/r/MensRights16/07/14 11:47 AM
2

It is comparable to kidnapping. If you kidnap someone at the age of 11 for a day, you'll get a spanking and restriction. If you kidnap them and keep them for 10 years til you are 21, you will go to prison. False accusations of any crime that result in jail time should be considered an on going kidnapping that stays a criminal act for as long as it occurs.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 11:44 AM
1

It is the sex toy equivalent of "I think black people are great and equal in every way, but...".
/r/MensRights16/07/14 11:20 AM
-1

Statutory rape still dilutes what rape means. It is akin to 'drunken rape' which is taken to mean any level of intoxication instead of being passed out. For both men and women offenders, we need to change the working to child molestation or something similar to that.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 11:16 AM
0

Where I live, the minimum is 25 and the maximum is death. In general, women don't get charged at all though.
/r/MensRights16/07/14 11:14 AM
1

Unless stupid people want to punish kids for having sex with other kids which is just a horrible idea. If you add 'that they aren't married to', you have defined much of the original support behind age of consent laws. For example, in many states, there is an exception that says the age of consent laws do not apply to married couples.
/r/MensRights13/07/14 03:40 AM
1

Had a friend who was in college at 14. Made better choices that many of the adult freshmen. Some 14 year olds can take care of themselves. Some adults I wouldn't trust to wash my clothes. Perhaps we need to use something other than age. Science has advanced enough that we should be able to develop a maturity test if we actually tried.
/r/MensRights13/07/14 03:38 AM
1

As far as sexuality goes, we should probably have a legal adolescence that adheres to the 1/2 + 7 rule, or something like that. Nope. The greatest factors that result from sex are pregnancy and STDs, both life changing. These happens regardless of ones age. A person is either able to or not able to understand and act according to these risks. And if they are unable to, they shouldn't be having sex, regardless if it is with a same age peer. Now, how we react to this should differ. Two too young i…
/r/MensRights13/07/14 03:36 AM
3

It reminds me a lot of 'a drunk person is inherently unable to give consent'. Not only is there issues of both people being of the same state of mind (such as both being under 18), there is the issue that this is redefining rape and making it meaningless.
/r/MensRights13/07/14 03:32 AM
2

I think the message I got from it all was that women with smaller breast should consider themselves abnormal and should be ashamed of them. I think that is more of a secondary effect. The core message is if a man is attracted to someone that in anyways even mildly resembles a child, they are a pedophile. The side effect is that a lot of women do look like this, and they are now being told that anyone attracted to them is inherently broken.
/r/MensRights11/07/14 03:32 AM
2

I don't get what is so hard to understand about this. Likes NO breast implies pedophile. Likes breast of any shape/size implies not pedophile. There is not some 'the bigger the breast are, the less you are a pedophile' rule. If you like breast of any size, then you are attracted to a secondary sex characteristic and thus not a pedophile.
/r/MensRights11/07/14 01:02 AM
1

I'm guessing this is her parents doing and not her choice in the matter. This is teaching her that even when she does something consensual with a guy, he's seen as a monster doing things against her will.
/r/MensRights11/07/14 01:00 AM
1

Most, just not the ones in positions of power.
/r/MensRights11/07/14 12:58 AM
1

This in lies the problem, it is by law not against the minors will. It differs depending upon the age and the situation, but in general, minors are not the possessors of their own will, at least by law. Personally, I don't like it. Let everyone be master of their own will. If they don't want to offer up evidence involving their body, that is their choice.
/r/MensRights11/07/14 12:57 AM
7

14 and 8. Spin this as a 14 year old boy being sexual with an 8 year old girl and there would be a demand for his blood to be spilled. I don't think anyone should be executed either way for this, but this isn't as harmless as a 10 year old playing doctor with an 8 year old. And regardless of that, there is a clear double standard in how this case is treated.
/r/PussyPass09/07/14 09:36 PM
1

The necessity of such is not known until after the encounter is over.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 12:11 AM
6

There is a place in most locations where mail victims of domestic violence are taken. While not solely for men, they make up the vast majority of those who use the facilities. We call this place jail.
/r/MensRights06/07/14 01:15 PM
2

He fell Which could have resulted in him dying. People have died from falls.
/r/MensRights05/07/14 10:27 PM
-3

You are using the law to justify the law. Give me the reasoning behind the law.
/r/MensRights05/07/14 10:23 PM
2

Wait, so you are saying MRAs say "Hey, avoid rape by not drinking anything you haven't kept your eyes on and staying out of dangerous areas alone," and "Hey, avoid false accusations getting you kicked out of college by avoiding sex while in college." Seems to me that they are being very consistent in their view.
/r/MensRights05/07/14 03:57 PM
3

This is why I honestly am scared of having sex in college. Wait, you think you have to have sex to be charged? Considering the level of evidence they accept for rape, the woman saying you had sex will be considered proof it happened regardless of what you say.
/r/MensRights05/07/14 03:54 PM
-4

Who cares? Once you are attacked with lethal force, you should be allowed to fight until the threat is fully eliminated. She could have had a weapon that she could have then pulled the moment he stopped. She lost any rights when she initiated an attack.
/r/MensRights05/07/14 12:47 PM
4

No, actually they go hand in hand. After a certain point the evidence would start to degrade. Memories are lost. Any new leads are now dead as the evidence they would have uncovered is long gone. At some point it becomes injust to have the trial so delayed. Imagine a man accused of molested a 6 year old when said 6 year old is now 26. Unless there is some photographic or video evidence (which doesn't degrade anywhere near as fast as memories), it would be injust to even arrest under such a charg…
/r/MensRights03/07/14 12:32 PM
4

This is highly unrealistic. This is like saying never be in a vehicle on the road because you can die. For most of us, we aren't rich enough to check all this. Things like an apartment lease or telephone contract can be signed without a lawyer. You just better read it fully and make sure it is all okay. And if it smells and you can't afford a lawyer, walk away. Now, when a lawyer brings you something like this, lawyer up if at all possible. But don't be scared of every single paper out there.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 11:42 PM
3

He's probably going for as much as possible so he'll actually have some custody left once the gavel falls. If he went after 50%, he'll end up with less than 50%. Had it been possible, he should've gone after 200% custody.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 12:27 PM
1

They are fully random. Calling a polygraph unreliable is like calling flipping a coin as a lie detector (tails = lies) unreliable.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 12:25 PM
2

On the bright side, if it gets admitted, you can get an expert witness to tear it to shreds. Well, if you can afford one :(
/r/MensRights01/07/14 12:24 PM
1

I thought most everyone here was aware that the Obama Administration considers all males old enough to hold a gun militants.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 01:56 AM
2

There are only two kind of men. Men who rape and men who die before they get the chance. /s if it wasn't clear, poe's law and all that.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 01:53 AM
1

Wow... I don't think anyone got the sarcasm. I was saying they were militants because that is what the Obama administration describes every single male old enough to hold a gun as.
/r/MensRights29/06/14 11:54 AM
3

Consent laws vary by state. It is important to know what legally counts as consent and what doesn't. This is quite different than a moral argument of the same topic.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 01:16 PM
3

Just to remember, this could very well count as a single false accusation for statistics. One of the reasons they can cook the books to get such low numbers.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 01:00 PM
-15

#bringbackourmilitants just doesn't have the same ring to it. Edit: Hey guys, ya'll do realize my comment was a sarcastic quip at the fact that the Obama administration defines all males able to hold a gun as a militant. I was pointing out the fact that not only do we not care about the males over there, they are automatically painted as being evil.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 12:56 PM
3

If the CDC is this biased, how can any source be trusted? 8% false rape claims... what the chance of those books being cooked?
/r/MensRights28/06/14 03:23 AM
1

Just refuse to ever accept it as an acceptable dictionary to be used. Even once they fix it, their history taints them.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 03:20 AM
1

Actual definition is non-medical or parental duty (such as bathing a young child) touching of the genitals, breast, or inner thighs of the child and any touching at all by the child of the adult of the same.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 01:18 AM
1

No, it defines it as anything sexual (including touching of either genitals) between a preteen and an adult. Of course there are things like a older teenager molesting a child that aren't caught, but this gives a lower bound because a case like a 12 year old and a 14 year old does not count as abuse.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 12:00 AM
61

They are scared that the level of evidence required to convict a guy of rape will be the same level of evidence to convict a gal of falsely accusing (which would be just saying that she did so).
/r/MensRights26/06/14 09:31 PM
–

I pointed out that why is it so hard to see men as evil enough to COMMIT rape but not see women as evil enough to just lie about it. Because men evil raping demons, women good truthful angles.
/r/MensRights26/06/14 03:41 AM
2

depends upon whether you define sexual abuse as something only men do or not. Of course feminists have been doing that with 1 and 2 and partner violence and anything else they can get away with. Evidence? Studies I have read put female child molesters numbers as being significantly less than male ones (though the female ones are significantly greater than what the population in general thinks they are).
/r/MensRights26/06/14 03:40 AM
1

If that is true then all forms of plea bargains are also wrong. Pretty much.
/r/MensRights26/06/14 03:33 AM
0

And it is just as wrong.
/r/MensRights25/06/14 11:32 AM
1

This is the number known false. There are many more where there is some evidence, but it isn't clear. And there are cases where rape occurred but where the wrong individual was identified (rape is very traumatic and can mess with your memory).
/r/MensRights25/06/14 01:01 AM
2

Except 'do X to get your sentenced reduced by Y' is the same thing as 'not doing X is punished by adding Y more years to your sentence' when you normalized for baselines.
/r/MensRights25/06/14 12:59 AM
3

But a vasectomy does nothing to stop it. Child bearing is fully a woman's right. She gets to pick the father, so any child he would have fathered is going to be with a woman who is just going to pick someone else.
/r/MensRights25/06/14 12:58 AM
1

Society does that plenty enough for us. Assuming they stop laughing long enough to ask questions.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 12:12 PM
1

That depends how large that 30% is. If that 30% accounts for 99% of all traffickers, it is quite different than if that 30% accounts for 3% of all traffickers.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 12:09 PM
0

Sentence to X with Y off if you do Z is the same as sentence to X - Y and you get Y more years if you don't do Z. As to your last bit, that is rhetoric used to justify prisoner abuse.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 12:13 PM
1

Nothing really voluntary about it. 'do this and get out 5 years earlier' is the equivalent of 'don't do this and you'll spend 5 years in prison'.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 04:16 AM
-1

But people have a right to reproduce. Society must be there to support their right to have children. Well, women do. A man doesn't have any such right, sucks to be him.
/r/MensRights22/06/14 01:09 PM
5

You don't get it, do you? Preventing a woman from forcing you to aid her in doing what she wants counts as oppressing women. Only a sexist evil man would demand his rights be expected, especially in concerns to reproduction.
/r/MensRights22/06/14 01:08 PM
28

"Here are the reasons why I, as a middle class white individual in a first wold country, can still consider myself a massively discriminated against and disadvantaged individual." -Feminism (well, a who bunch of it).
/r/MensRights22/06/14 01:01 PM
–

You double down on the stupid. "I noticed you have an ad that seems to be suggesting that alcohol consumption is the reason women are raped. I find this very offensive that you are suggesting anyone or anything other than rapist are responsible for rape. The underlying message that women shouldn't blame men who rape because it was the drugs/alcohol that did it reflect negatively on your entire university. I didn't take University of New Hampshire to be a major rape apologist. I just hope this wa…
/r/MensRights19/06/14 11:27 AM
1

Men may actually be more likely to be victims of sexual violence, but they are taught to not report it and it is a fewer number of men being victimized more each. Even a young boy understands that he should* be grateful for unwanted sexual attention from a woman. *'should' being what society says, not what I support.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 10:52 AM
1

Mentally speaking, while they mature faster, it is only by 3 years over about 3 decades. So talking about a preteen/teenager, we are only talking about a year to year and a half more mature. When you look at a 14 year old vs. a 15 year old, is there any great improvement in maturity? Not really. In college the effect is about 2 years more maturity, but if you look at college students, you'll notice that their maturity is far more decided by their life circumstances growing up than gender. Girls …
/r/MensRights17/06/14 01:45 AM
4

Neurologically as well, at least in the mylenation department.
/r/MensRights17/06/14 01:41 AM
1

It has to do with the development of the brain. Last I remember hearing from a psychological physiology professor, girls are slightly faster, finishing developing about 3 years ahead of guys (25 compared to 28 for the finishing of the mylenation of the prefrontal cortex). The funny thing is that our society treats girls as less mature when they are the victims, even though they would be slightly more ahead (perhaps a year more mature, which still isn't much of anything).
/r/MensRights17/06/14 01:40 AM
1

I know it sounds like a slippery slope fallacy, but what comes next after this? Regulating who can and can't have sex with legal licenses to fuck people consensually? If bills like this can get passed, who's to say what couldn't get passed? Why not? We have already well accepted the notion that you can have two people who want to have sex, but due to differences in their ability to process the information and make decisions, it is rape. Right now we only use age to determine this (and perhaps ra…
/r/MensRights17/06/14 12:52 AM
1

If we really cared about the child, then the other child who is barely able to afford clothes for school needs the money more and it benefits the second child more to have that money. Thus, child support should be paid into a single pot and from there paid out to any at need children.
/r/MensRights17/06/14 12:48 AM
0

For the teenagers about to be adults, I think the punishment women get is close to what it should be. For young children, the punishment men get is the appropriate punishment for both genders.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 07:34 PM
1

Well, when they define any sex where alcohol is present as rape, basically colleges are major rape factories. It suddenly makes sense why 1 in 3 women are raped, given their definition of rape. If anything, I wonder why it isn't higher.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 02:25 AM
1

No, the stat is clearly on it's face a simple division of all female pay divided by female work hours vs. the same for men. If only if were that honest. For full time comparison, any work over a certain hour limit (35 or 38 or so) is considered full time. Man working 60 hours a week getting paid 60k vs. woman working 40 hours a week getting paid 50k is turned into 'man make 10k more for full time work than women'.
/r/MensRights08/06/14 11:53 AM
1

Child means anyone under 18 except when it doesn't (like the two preteens who are to be charged as adult in that recent stabbing). And it tends to mean under 8 when at a restaurant. For alcohol, one is considered a minor until 21, though child isn't often use (but minor and child are very similar and in some cases used interchangeably). I'm not the one who did all this. Blame who ever did this for you needing to qualify if your use of child means 'anyone under 18', 'anyone under 13', or some oth…
/r/MensRights07/06/14 05:01 PM
1

So you see, we already have an issue with words being redefined and us having to clarify.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 10:53 AM
1

By a child do you mean a '17 year old teenager' and by grooming do you mean 'courting' or 'dating'? Once again, thanks to new standards and definitions, when someone is caught molesting a child, you have to look at the details to find out if it was a college guy and his 17 year old girlfriend or if it was some 40 year old raping a young child (which, by the way, is something that normally even with grooming the child does not accept and consent to, the grooming keeps them quite).
/r/MensRights07/06/14 03:52 AM
13

But we still have to be careful to understand that at 16 an individual still has agency and can still desire sexual interaction, even with someone who has a position of power over them. Perhaps in a case like this, we should punish the teacher for extreme unprofessional conduct without calling it rape (unless there is evidence that the power held was used as a threat to coerce sex). A punishment for such would be a lifetime ban on hold positions of power over minors and perhaps some other penalt…
/r/MensRights06/06/14 12:09 AM
3

The heart shape comes from a plant that had a heart shaped seed that was used as a primitive form of contraceptive.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 04:28 PM
1

They use to not have age limits. They probably didn't intent for teenagers to drop be dropped off, they just couldn't agree what age counted as too old or thought it didn't need to be added.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 11:33 AM
1

Could you work with the parents to do this to a child that is old enough to be in on the plan. For example, do it in a state that doesn't include age limits with an older teenager. Need to check with a lawyer first just to be safe.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 01:26 AM
7

But the one man who gets a light plea deal because the prosecution didn't have strong evidence and fear he would have otherwise walked... that case can be quoted for forever about how men aren't punished for child molestation while they ignore every case involving a woman because 'anecdotes don't matter <sup>unless they are mine</sup> '.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 02:35 PM
1

Last time I read the legal code, both genders can marry under 16. While normally the girl is the younger individual in such cases (especially in the ones where a marriage occurs), there is nothing in the law preventing a younger boy from marrying.
/r/MensRights23/05/14 08:32 PM
1

You are misreading this. If a 14 year old or older is married, they may have sex with their spouse (regardless of age or genders). Compare this with Arizona, who says that if a child of ANY age is married, they may have sex with their spouse. Actually getting marriage at that age is far trickier. In most places, it is illegal to marry younger than 16, so these 'hold overs' were likely grandfather clauses for marriages that existed back when the age of consent laws were originally passed. As for …
/r/MensRights23/05/14 11:27 AM
1

The falsely accused is the witness in a false accusation case. So their is a complement. Oh, they aren't believed when they say their are innocent. Do you have any idea how many children who say they were molested aren't believed?
/r/MensRights20/05/14 10:53 AM
1

The point is that there are witnesses who can report molesters. Not often.
/r/MensRights19/05/14 11:20 PM
1

Does this really need one? It should be like saying that having Godzilla's head shopped onto Miley's body during that wrecking ball video needs me to say that it was photoshopped.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 12:01 PM
1

Except the law can already catch them. I know it is nicer to pretend that the majority of child molesters are caught, as it makes the total number much smaller. But this isn't realistic at all. and all they have to do is tell someone. You are dancing around victim blaming children for not telling someone of their sexual abuse. There are vastly complex reasons why children don't tell.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 12:00 PM
2

I've never understood the objection of this sub to the term "benevolent sexism," except that it should be made clear who it's benevolent to, that is, women, and that in just this way regular sexism is also benevolent sexism...to men. Because it exists as double plus good speak to paint an issue. You might get someone to theoretically admit that sexism is beneficial sexism against men, but in its normal use it is always either sexism or beneficial sexism against women. Why do we not see cases of …
/r/MensRights17/05/14 12:37 PM
2

I'd might accept the foster parents keeping the child IF the father has a right to form a relationship with her AND those responsible for the non-consensual adoption are convicted and sentenced to prison for kidnapping a child for 9 years.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 12:32 PM
2

But false accusations don't real.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 12:11 PM
-1

I'd rather children being molested be freed and get into therapy than 'serve justice' onto molesters. As such, any child molester that admits to molesting a child should have no penalty put on them. This will encourage more molesters to step forward, meaning that more children will be able to be put in therapy and start rebuilding their lives while they are still young (much better success rate than waiting well into their adulthood to seek help). This whole 'better to help the victim than seek …
/r/MensRights17/05/14 12:10 PM
5

If they were in a position of power and no evidence they use the power? Lifetime ban from having positions of power over children. If they were in a position of power and there is sufficient evidence they used that power to coerce sex? Rape charges should be sought.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 12:02 PM
3

Restricting a man's reproductive ability does nothing to stop children being born as women hold all the actual reproductive rights. You have 50 men and 50 women, who do you have to ban from reproducing to ensure you only have 5 children instead of 50?
/r/MensRights15/05/14 12:57 AM
4

Even if it is completely false and male teachers are less likely to be falsely accused than average... if the general social impression is that it is more likely, it will scare men away from teaching.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 10:58 AM
4

In effect, if the only way you would have stumbled upon the linked threat is through this post, then you should refrain from taking any actions in that post. If you are a regular in CMV, then you reading this thread does not make it wrong for you to take part in the linked thread.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 03:03 AM
2

She took that very hard and began berating me about women's rights and the whole nine, threatening to leave. Double down on the crazy next time. Insist that a young woman should be allowed to do anything she wants with her body and that other people, especially old men shouldn't make any rules or laws stopping them. Then begin ranting about how age of consent laws are merely old men trying to repress and control the sexuality of young women who no longer find the old geezers attractive. Anyone w…
/r/MensRights13/05/14 02:28 AM
4

Just a side note, we should really avoid screenshots of ANY website as they can be faked by editing the html/css in browser. Perhaps a screenshot with a link to a website that can be independently verified by someone else visiting. For example, I can post a screenshot of your thread with you saying anything I like in your original answer. If I was dedicated enough, I could even redo the front page of MRs to all highly up voted extremely sexist topics (I'm a bit surprised I don't see this being d…
/r/MensRights11/05/14 05:01 PM
0

Why not just push for a law that only those who are registered with selective services can vote. We don't discriminate based on gender, we are just saying that if you want a say in how the country runs, you gotta ensure some of your skin is in the game? I wonder what the response to that would be?
/r/MensRights09/05/14 03:15 PM
1

What exactly does registering do? I mean, if they need a draft, they already have all the information on everyone documented (perhaps it helps gather information on the undocumented). I've seen where you need to use your registration to do things, but it is more so a 'prove you did it'. Never did the registration take care of some issue that would have been present otherwise.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 03:10 PM
4

If anything, this is an 'attractive person' privilege, assuming we are playing that game.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 11:49 AM
1

See, men and women both have parts in the process. Hence sex. You have 50 men and 50 women. Who must you prevent from reproducing to ensure that there are only 25 babies born? Women have the womb, thus they are fully responsible. No matter how many men you prevent from reproducing, you still end up with a max of 50 babies unless you prevent all men (at which point you get 0 babies).
/r/MensRights06/05/14 01:41 AM
1

They opt into support. Once they opt in, they are stuck supporting the child.
/r/MensRights05/05/14 09:39 PM
1

Since it is opt in, the woman is fully aware there won't be support unless she can get the guy to opt in. There isn't any 'she decides to keep the baby then he opts out' this way.
/r/MensRights05/05/14 09:38 PM
1

So I guess that means if you get in an accident, you shouldn't have the ability to sue the other party even if it is their fault because you agreed to it. Oh, and do you have a right to medical care since you agreed to the risk?
/r/MensRights05/05/14 09:37 PM
1

I agree in that men who are unable to financially support children they sire should be chemically castrated. That makes no sense as men have neither the ability to reproduce nor no reproductive rights. Women are in charge of reproduction (unless you are counting rape and then kidnapping the woman for 9 months, but I think you'll get plenty of support for chemically castrating those who kidnap and rape).
/r/MensRights05/05/14 09:36 PM
2

In effect, opting in would be as simple as signing the birth certificate. To argue for automatic opt in leads to issues such as the husband being legally considered the father due to opt-in.
/r/MensRights04/05/14 01:08 PM
4

The courts basically already can strip away a father's right to be a father if the mother so desires. Unless she is caught prostituting her children for drug money, she wins in family court.
/r/MensRights04/05/14 01:06 PM
4

All of this ignores the actual baby. When a parent dies, guess what society does? Ignores the child. When a parent is in poverty and can only make the legal minimum while another parent is paying their children thousands a month, what is the legal system doing? Ignoring some of the children. Why is ignoring a child allowed in those cases?
/r/MensRights04/05/14 12:13 PM
5

Nope, consent to sex isn't consent to parenthood.
/r/MensRights04/05/14 12:11 PM
4

It allows some of the more common objections to be overcome. For example, some will point out that with legal parental surrender, the father is making a choice that makes the mother more likely to choose abortion and they personally hold coercing a woman into an abortion, no matter how slightly or why it is done, is a wrong of the highest level. With opt in, the man isn't making a choice that makes the woman more likely to abort, if he opts in, she is less likely to abort. In theory, they are th…
/r/MensRights04/05/14 12:09 PM
3

You have to turn it around. Ask her if privilege is invisible. When she says yes, suggest she learns to go discover (and check) hers. If she says it doesn't exist, just stick to 'just because it is invisible doesn't mean it doesn't exist'.
/r/MensRights03/05/14 06:38 AM
3

It's safe to say that the vast majority do, though. Not really. Even those who abuse for sexual reasons may not be pedophiles. You may have a sexual sadist who gets sexual enjoyment out of the harm they cause. You may have someone fixated on incest, the age doesn't much matter. You may have a situational offender, basically they would have done it with the first person to say (or be coerced into saying) yes, which happened to be a child.
/r/MensRights03/05/14 06:34 AM
5

Men and women also use different changing rooms in the public swimming pools here in New Zealand - shock!! What if that was blacks and whites!! One day may they both be looked at with equal scorn. Private rooms for those who have body issues or religious reasons, a public room for everyone else. If anything, it is actually safer (as there are now twice as many adults in a given changing room, meaning that a molester of either gender has far less chance to act).
/r/MensRights03/05/14 06:32 AM
1

You put in 50% more time but only ask for 20% more pay? Or do you mean 20% more pay per time?
/r/MensRights03/05/14 06:29 AM
5

I would say that is more that she stops consenting. Any previous consent is still valid, it just applies to acts before she stopped consenting. I think of retract as to mean 'take back what was given', not 'stop giving'. But yeah, mostly saying the same thing and just debating semantics.
/r/MensRights02/05/14 02:44 PM
5

You can't retract consent. If they trick you, the consent doesn't exist to begin with, so it can't be retracted.
/r/MensRights02/05/14 12:45 PM
2

Is it illegal if they aren't a victim? If not, I'm not sure this is much different from age of consent. Doesn't matter how old you thought the other person was, if they were under the age of consent, it is still illegal and your ignorance of their age isn't a defense. At the very least, it is more sane than the laws that make buying outright illegal but keep selling legal.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 11:25 AM
1

The less crime that exists in the society, the less force people should be allowed to use to defend themselves. (This seems rather axiomatic, doesn't it? For example: In a hypothetical society where there was only one violent crime per-year, and that crime is one murder, in practice it would be unconscionable to permit the use lethal force in any case, even-though we know it would be justified in theory, but only once per-year. Even if there is only one murder, how would you account for all thos…
/r/MensRights27/04/14 03:41 AM
1

Death from human error =/= death from human error that results in perceiving a threat where there was none.
/r/MensRights26/04/14 12:06 PM
1

We are talking about young children, many of whom aren't strong enough to leave a bruise. If you don't like it, then perhaps you should be making sure there are no children who have to resort to such.
/r/MensRights26/04/14 12:02 PM
3

This is why lethal force needs to be allowed for self defense. You should not have the victim of an attack having to determine what is or isn't too much force, especially since you don't know when the attacker will pull out a 'greater' weapon.
/r/MensRights25/04/14 11:35 AM
10

Back when I was young (before middle school), I found the secret to this was that you get one single hit. You get suspended, but with just a single blow for a one time incident, you don't get expelled. So I used this on the biggest bully who had been bothering me for the last two years and whom the school refused to do anything about (including moving me to another class). So after I was attacked once again (where the teacher couldn't see it, surprise surprise), I grabbed the biggest pencil box …
/r/MensRights25/04/14 11:34 AM
2

I wonder if the world would be a better place if those who commit suicide tried to take out the source of their problem as well. Oh, at first it would be more violence with the homicide/suicides, but then you would have people caring more about those who are bullied, caring more about those who have their rights stripped away, caring more about those who return from the battlefield...
/r/MensRights25/04/14 11:25 AM
1

This line of thinking is exactly what caused what I mentioned before, my government trying to senser pornography with flat chested women for your exact reasons. That they might be used by by pedophiles. There is a big difference. Flat chest women who are porn stars agree for their pictures to be used. They consent, and thus I don't have a problem even if a pedophile finds it attractive. If anything, that is all the better, because maybe the pedophile will develop a fetish for flat chested adult …
/r/MensRights23/04/14 11:59 PM
1

For it to be pornography it's got to be sexualised. A great deal of nudity which has no sexual focus in and of itself is used by many as sexual material. If the father/mother was making the children be naked to take photos with the intent of distributing them for people who've no business seeing them, then yes, that is child pornography. So the pictures are or aren't child pornography based on the intent of the one producing them, not on the actual actions to produce? The problem here is that th…
/r/MensRights23/04/14 12:38 PM
1

Age is a pretty objective difference. Also, there is a major difference between small breast and prepubescent. Sorry mate, nudity =/= pornography. So wouldn't much of softcore pornography (child or adult) not actually be pornography?
/r/MensRights23/04/14 11:45 AM
1

I'm saying there is no great objective difference between many such images and what many would consider softcore child porn.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 11:05 PM
1

Are you saying that the only danger in soft core child porn is that the child may end up being stalked?
/r/MensRights22/04/14 11:40 AM
1

The images merely existing, especially in the past before the internet, really wasn't a big deal. Other than any SO I bring home, I don't expect anyone else to see it. But the public internet has changed that, and with so many parents sharing photos but not realizing how public those photos are, there is the ability for sickos around the world to begin collecting such photos. What those sickos do with those photos can cause the children therein features significant distress. (This is effectively…
/r/MensRights22/04/14 01:07 AM
1

There is a whole lot of what we consider softcore porn that is really just nudity. The line is not so clear, and when the child cannot consent to the material being released onto the webs where people will treat it as sexual even if the intention was not, you run the risk of the child experiencing significant distress when they realize what some sickos out there will do with their picture.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 01:03 AM
-7

Or perhaps you realize there are people out there who are sick enough to think it is porn, and if it gets released, then the child(ren) exposed may experience significant distress as there will be pedophiles who treat this as softcore porn. Treating it like porn because you realize there are those who are sick enough that they really would doesn't make you sick, only cautious.
/r/MensRights22/04/14 01:01 AM
1

So what happens if a parent wants to share those pictures with friends on facebook but does so in a public way, meaning those pictures get released to the public. Can just anyone own these pictures or should it only be legal if you are the child's parent (or at least family/close family friend)? Should owning it be legal but sharing it be illegal? What happens if a parent shoots a video where the child is protesting it (even if it is just normal camera shyness)? There are a great number of thing…
/r/MensRights22/04/14 12:59 AM
6

To clarify, you mean 9 months.
/r/MensRights20/04/14 01:04 PM
–

I'm going to stick with people. In my circle of friends from college, their gender doesn't matter, I can outright debate just about any topic with them and we keep it logical. But when I bring up an emotionally charged topic with most anyone else, they break down to emotional based arguments right away. Perhaps due to social factors the topic of rape culture is more emotional for women, thus more women are likely to respond emotionally, but there are plenty of topics that are emotional for men t…
/r/MensRights16/04/14 12:30 PM
4

It has a very small margin of error if it is a random sample. The problem is... this isn't a random sample.
/r/MensRights16/04/14 12:24 PM
1

Of course he now admit it is wrong, after it has made its way around all the online circles who will share this thing (but not share it being wrong). It allows him to now wash his hands after he did his dirty work. You have to remember, humans are at their core emotional, not logical, so this evidence will, for those who wish such a survey to be true, stick with them far more than any announcement that it was rigged. So the real question is if Wil was stupid enough to not notice such a rigged su…
/r/MensRights16/04/14 12:21 PM
1

At least one error. When it adds the paid and unpaid time, it switches that of the men with that of the women.
/r/MensRights16/04/14 12:47 AM
1

Especially if you dress up made up data as some legitimate study to support their cause.
/r/MensRights16/04/14 12:40 AM
6

Less sexual frustration = less sexual violence. Wow, who could've predicted that!? They can't admit that though. It would require a vastly different view of our laws and social norms concerning sexuality.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 11:05 PM
1

After reading about the McMartin day care case, I would think that no conviction for any sex related crime should ever occur when there is no evidence other than witness testimony, even when there are multiple witnesses. While in many of such cases the accused is likely guilty, there are plenty enough examples where they aren't, and it is better to let the guilty walk.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 12:08 PM
1

It is a felony not to register with the SS if you are a man.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 12:04 PM
2

If you are a minor, tell the police anyways. While normally parents/guardians look out for the child, they don't always choose the best path. You can also try to contact social services directly and report the incident.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 12:03 PM
1

An addendum that the mods may not be able to officially make is that at least one Admin has taken a stance against this sub and the like, meaning that any rules you see no being enforced elsewhere have a much higher chance of actually being enforced against this sub, meaning the mods have to enforce rules that would barely receive a slap on the wrist elsewhere.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 12:01 PM
2

FYI, here is a great definition of 'patriarchy'. “Patriarchy” is the simple minded polemic used to assign false causation to complex social phenomena, championed by gender war partisans.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 11:57 AM
9

Can't wait to hear how not having sex with a drunk woman is misogyny.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 11:48 AM
9

I gotta say that given her age, I feel this is appropriate. I would also say the same if this were a male perpetrator. Why should her age be a factor? His age should be a factor, not hers. If he was 14 and she wasn't in a position of power, then the punishment may have been more fitting, but neither of those apply here.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 11:00 PM
1

Depends upon what classification you are using. While there is the scientific psychology definition, law enforcement use a different one and the media uses what ever it wants when ever it wants.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 10:58 PM
2

It depends upon the situation. If they literally take no to mean yes, then while you may not convict them, you bet put them in a mental ward til they are no longer a threat to society.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 10:56 PM
10

Most people can't answer the 'why' of why it is better to let the guilty go free. It simply comes down to who we should fear. We should fear bad people who do bad things (highly simplified view, fyi). But it would be bad to have a justice system that we fear, which is why it is better for the guilty to go free (more bad people that we already fear to fear) than to imprison the innocent (now we have to fear the justice system itself). And the weird thing, most people agree. Even feminist agree...…
/r/MensRights19/03/14 11:17 PM
2

Explaining why the boy may have behaved a certain way is not being apologetic about rape. You also seem very violent, you should consider therapy.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 12:16 PM
2

Wait, who said I was defending it? I was just pointing out that he may very well have been bragging because of the gender roles forced down his throat at such a young age. Saying he might have been bragging isn't defending the actions, especially since I point out the full extent of the trauma isn't likely to hit him til later in life.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 12:15 PM
5

big Probably morbidly obese. It doesn't matter what they do as long as society says they look hot.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 01:03 AM
-1

However, this period of sexual abuse started when the child was 8-9. I submit that this boy experienced something akin to Stockholm Syndrome during this 5 year long traumatic experience. That is old enough to already have the cultural standard that a successful male has sex driven into you. Also, often the trauma for childhood sexual abuse does not occur til some time after puberty once the child has gained enough life experiences to reflect back on what happened.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 01:02 AM
3

Why keep it for children? People are more irrational, not less, when they suspect a child is a victim. Parents have often manipulated a child to tell a lie about some crime (especially a younger child). The real question that should be asked is if justice is the top priority of the justice system.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 11:59 AM
2

Aren't we supposed to chant a name 3 times before the user appears?
/r/MensRights16/03/14 05:32 AM
0

Yeah, this is the difference between looking for a roommate and renting out an apartment. I don't like discrimination nor the mentality that results in it, but I rather people have the freedom when it is something so close to their daily life.
/r/MensRights16/03/14 02:33 AM
–

Where is /u/EverythingIsRape when you need them? Because this makes me want to say that fertilization is egg rape.
/r/MensRights16/03/14 02:28 AM
0

It comes down to if you can convince a jury of your peers that it was a reasonable suspicion.
/r/MensRights15/03/14 03:26 AM
-3

What if they have a gun? You can't be sure they would have used it. Best to require you to be shot at least once before you can use 'they had a gun' defense.
/r/MensRights14/03/14 10:09 PM
7

Ugh. Parents need to get over their weird aversion to their kids having sex. It's natural. That's literally the whole POINT of puberty. Not just parents. Our whole society needs to get over it. Just look at video games. "Let my 8 year old play a game where you kill people? No problem. Killing people is something I want him accustomed to." "Let my 8 year old play a game where he sees a titty? HELL NO! That is unnatural and my child should never have to deal with it!"
/r/MensRights14/03/14 10:07 PM
1

To write it? No. To have a change of getting the interview for a paid position to write it? Perhaps.
/r/MensRights13/03/14 12:49 AM
3

Yeah, but the only reason people will help girls/women recover is because they expect sex in return for their effort. Boys are still respected by not being expected to trade their bodies for treatment. If you don't see how this is sexism, then you are a idiot. ^<sup>/</sup> ^<sup>s</sup> <sup>Am I doing this right?</sup>
/r/MensRights12/03/14 12:22 PM
2

No need to be so coy. Much of line news has become little more than click bait, and a story about SNL and MRAs make decent click bait. That we are linking and discussing the issue is enough to show that they are successful. The only non-news is the stuff that doesn't generate clicks. It is sad that often the stuff we need to hear falls in that category.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 12:15 PM
0

Consent to make is not consent to release. You are arguing under the same mentality that if a woman consents to something, then it isn't rape no matter how far the guy goes (which was a very popular idea not so long ago).
/r/MensRights11/03/14 02:30 AM
1

An interesting question, but if male sexuality became as valued as female sexuality (as opposed to female sexuality becoming as disliked as male sexuality)... would the same thing begin to happen when it was a male teacher caught?
/r/MensRights10/03/14 11:45 PM
11

Was it because he should have reported through the official channel 12 times instead of 10? Those last two are really important between being a patriotic whistle-blower and a fame seeking scumbag, no? Or was it because he didn't stick his head in the sand and keep soaking up the paychecks while our rights were violated left and right?
/r/MensRights10/03/14 11:42 PM
3

We all realize it to such an extent that the question must have been merely rhetorical. Of course, this is reddit, where we answer all your rhetorical questions anyways.
/r/MensRights10/03/14 11:38 PM
0

Women are given lighter sentences because their sexuality are valued while male sexuality is seen as disgusting. But... if we values both sexualities, wouldn't that mean that this would be the sentence for both genders?
/r/MensRights09/03/14 01:37 PM
1

If I put 3 bullets in a gun 6 chamber revolver, spin it so I don't know if there is a bullet or not, point the gun at someone, and pull the trigger, then while I may not be charged with murder when it doesn't fire, I'm not going to be allowed to walk as well. While the risk isn't as high and the damage not as great, you are never 100% sure you don't have STDs, and thus poking holes still falls under a risk. Would a man poking holes in a condom but not getting her pregnant because it isn't that p…
/r/MensRights08/03/14 03:26 AM
1

Actually, wouldn't the argument apply in all cases unless the guy knew the woman didn't have STDs? Even if she was clean, but he wasn't sure, there was a potential for risk. Or is sabotaging a condom fine if you are a sterile male?
/r/MensRights07/03/14 11:11 PM
0

Try a few weeks if she is on birth control, if even that.
/r/MensRights07/03/14 11:09 PM
1

Who advocates that cosensual sex can be a crime? It is just extending the logic behind age of consent. A 'soberness of consent' and 'enthusiasm of consent', if you will. P.S. Who do you think one of the biggest advocates of age of consent laws were?
/r/MensRights07/03/14 11:08 PM
–

While it would not be impossible for a young child to finish a game, I would think that the likelihood is less than the likelihood of a parent exploiting gender issues to get money.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 11:16 PM
1

They can be filed by anyone but people will not take a man who reports DV seriously, so he has far less incentive to falsely report. So few will even file a real report.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 01:31 AM
2

Shouldn't you np this link?
/r/MensRights05/03/14 12:32 PM
1

One is usually a serious crime against a minor who can't fully comprehend whats occurring and is being raped and the other is a civil issue that belongs in civil courts not courts of law . Producing or distributing porn of people without consent is just that, regardless if the consent cannot be given because of age or if consent was just not given but could have been. Teenagers sexting each other was not what CP laws were originally intended for and laws are evolving to catch up to that area. No…
/r/MensRights05/03/14 12:30 PM
6

Try debating with a fundamentalist that they cannot base their arguments off of the Bible because you don't accept it as literally true. You'll get basically the same result.
/r/MensRights05/03/14 12:21 PM
6

Seduction and charm can be considered manipulation. The problem is the whole 'manipulation is rape'. That is just not true. Consider advertisement. Big business can use advertisements to manipulate people far better than the average individual can seduce or charm another, yet it is not considered theft when I choose to buy their product. This whole problem began when we bought into the notion that a yes given without threat can still be a no. A yes given without threat is always a yes. The indiv…
/r/MensRights05/03/14 12:20 PM
-8

Lying isn't gendered but falsely accusing is. Then again, maybe men would falsely accuse as well if the legal system believed they could be sexually assaulted, but for right now, they wouldn't even bother trying.
/r/MensRights05/03/14 12:14 PM
0

Children aren't biologically or legally adults That they have hit a magical mark or not has little bearing, especially when the law doesn't even consider it all that magical. nor can they legally consent to sex Factually incorrect. In the majority of the US and the majority of European countries, the age of consent is set around 16 or below. Let me explain the obvious to you, If an adult consents to taking a nude and sexually provocative picture it was in fact consensual pornography, end of stor…
/r/MensRights05/03/14 04:27 AM
3

registering for 2 1/2 years. Any registration is for a lifetime. Even if the law where you live then says it is temporary, many places that you move to will require you register because you had at some point registered in the past. That means there is a significant chance a short registration period will result in a lifetime registration period.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 01:01 PM
2

They do put laxatives in 95% of the women's but only in 5% of the men's.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 12:04 AM
0

You may try to insist they are different, but at the end of the day they both involve non-consensual pornography. Also to note, just about every one of your argument applies to both as well. You can claim they don't because you assign different emotional values to the two topics, but that is nothing more than special pleading.
/r/MensRights03/03/14 11:41 AM
1

We let statutory rape set a standard of yes means no for the female because they could get pregnant (which may have been a legitimate argument before birth control). While the laws have slowly changes to protect boys too, this was done only as a token gesture of equality and when you look at enforcement of these laws, the ones protecting boys might as well not exist. Given this, is it any surprise for a gendered 'yes means no' law affecting adults to come about? And in much the same way, if ofte…
/r/MensRights02/03/14 01:14 PM
1

It is that women have one more out than men, and it is a really big out, and it is an out that would be political suicide to try to fix in some form, because telling female soldiers what to do with their bodies if far less acceptable than telling male soldiers what to do with their body. That being said, I'm all for this integration because it will set a federal level example. An example of what? Time will tell.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 01:11 PM
1

Yes, they could be prosecuted. And repeated sending of unwanted nude images is sexual harassment. Not sure if it is a one time image sent to an adult, but that is probably considered sexual harassment, at least if it is a man sending it to a woman.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 01:05 PM
1

There should be no "revenge porn" laws period . Someone obviously consented to taking nudes and/or sending them and more importantly, freedom of speech is freedom of speech. This only makes sense if child pornography should be legal as well. As long as the law is allowed to put a 17 year old in prison for taking pictures of him/herself and sending them to a SO, then revenge porn makes just as much sense. Actually.... revenge porn laws make more sense. If we did away with child porn laws but crea…
/r/MensRights01/03/14 01:04 PM
1

Here is a hint: There are many people who are dump with technology.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 01:02 PM
4

'Accidentally' walking in on your female child changing: A form of rape. Forcing a man to have sex against his will: Not rape, just sexual assault. Don't you love feminist definitions?
/r/MensRights01/03/14 12:58 PM
2

The fun part is the reverse is true as well. Take negative sexism against women and turn it into positive sexism against men.
/r/MensRights27/02/14 10:37 PM
5

You always hear about the girls being raped, how they are targets of sexual violence, how we need to help them. Yet rarely do you hear mention of the status of the boys, you never heard of them needing help. Many people assume they must still be ok, perhaps even taking part in the violence against the girls. But the truth is... you can't help the dead.
/r/MensRights27/02/14 10:15 PM
1

You might want to read the story to see that the story is about someone who is UNDER 18. I then claimed that AT 18 isn't a child. Do you not understand the difference between X = 18 and X < 18?
/r/MensRights26/02/14 01:20 AM
1

At 17 it isn't rape. It is abusing a position of power which should be illegal, but lets be clear that this is a world of difference compared to if he was 7.
/r/MensRights25/02/14 11:29 PM
3

Because boys having sex with women does not drive the 'price' of sex down.
/r/MensRights25/02/14 11:28 PM
2

The history of 'age of consent' definitely shows it strongly favored girls (and historically often only applied to girls).
/r/MensRights25/02/14 01:39 AM
0

18 isn't a child. We are talking about someone under 18 who will be forced to marry once they turn 18.
/r/MensRights25/02/14 01:38 AM
1

Most countries do and do not consider a 17 year old a child depending upon a number of factors, not all of which are consistent.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 06:29 PM
1

If you go by the law, it does basically become that stupid, sometimes even in the same place (the worst case is a child being charged as an adult for producing child pornography of themselves).
/r/MensRights24/02/14 06:28 PM
15

Except we are talking about a child here. Flip the genders to make it a court forcing a female child to marry a man who had sex with her to avoid being punished and you would still people flipping shit like crazy.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 01:04 PM
22

... except when they arebenefit a woman.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 01:03 PM
2

My main points are that... It is a better system than today's child support. This does not mean it is a good system. That all the pro-child support individuals do not fight for this shows the hypocrisy of their 'best interest of the child' mantra.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 11:11 AM
4

Support payments scale proportionately to your income. They shouldn't. At the very least, the money needs to go into a giant pot that all poor children are cared for out of equally. Best interest of the child indicates that no one child should receive some life of luxury at the cost of others. Just another piece of evidence that 'best interest of the child' is bullshit.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 12:06 AM
1

This still doesn't help when your pay check (and the pay check of every other childless person/coupe out there) has a portion taken out of it to pay for the children of single parents (namely single mothers as they are the majority of single parents).
/r/MensRights20/02/14 01:42 AM
9

Government intervention in the means of social support programs that result in a woman having far more bargaining power in relationship dynamics. If it weren't for laws that provided support for children and forced fathers to pay for children (even when they aren't the biological father), it would be a very different issue. Men would still be valued for their money and women for their attractiveness, but money would hold more value and being a male willing to commit would also hold (more) value.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:29 AM
6

When considering how society conditions men to hide their feelings even form themselves, your argument basically becomes "Because men are socially conditioned to tolerate far more, they should tolerate far more." I don't like that argument.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:23 AM
4

The negatives of claiming to be raped only seem to apply when someone very popular is being accused, such as a football star.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 01:54 PM
0

If it was a 12 year old minority boy convicted of paying a contact to kidnap someone, I suspect he would get a decent bit of punishment.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 01:51 PM
3

It isn't about how individuals are reacted to but how groups are. If I say I am a member of group X but also say I would never date a member of group X, then there is something else going on that needs to be examined. This is not about if someone will date a specific member of a group but if they categorically define the group to not be worth dating.
/r/MensRights15/02/14 02:15 AM
1

The question which can't be answered is if she agreed by actions or not. If she was passed out or near enough, she couldn't have. But was she that drunk? We don't know. The bigger issue is we don't have evidence either way, so the default should be innocent til prove guilty (with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt).
/r/MensRights12/02/14 11:25 AM
0

Yes, get them to read. At the same time, we need to reform society and laws so there are far less negatives associated with jury duty (make it illegal to penalize anyone in any way, shape, or form for serving jury duty). We want more people to be taking part, not less. Skipping out on jury duty is worse than dodging the draft (at least with the draft there is moral stances such as pacifism or the gender inequality that give dodgers some standing).
/r/MensRights12/02/14 11:23 AM
2

As to point 6... Logic will win you the debate, but emotions are what converts the other party. In the vast majority of cases, you are going to need to rely on an emotional argument, not a logical one. This means finding out where their feelings are and slowly pulling their emotional feelings your way. Look for personal experiences... especially bad things happening to men/boys they care about that wouldn't happen to women/girls. A common one to start with is sentencing disparity as so many men …
/r/MensRights12/02/14 11:20 AM
10

It is easy to find an internet feminist or a personal friend claiming to be a feminist who agrees for true equality. But when you look at feminist who hold power, it is a different story. Doesn't matter how many Republicans (or Democrats) tell me they are for X either online or friend to friend if any Republican (Democrat) politician is constantly against X.
/r/MensRights12/02/14 11:15 AM
1

If three drunk people get in a car, and they put their passed out friend in the car even though he said he wanted to sleep it off at the party before passing out, and then they get in a bad wreck, who are you going to blame? I think the driver takes the most fault, but the other two drunk people who choose to get in still made very stupid (even if not criminal) choices to ride with someone drunk. But the passed out individual is not to blame because they never agreed to be a part of this (the th…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 04:17 AM
1

And there are still plenty of people who think homosexuality is a mental illness. Due to how you were raised, you are unlikely to change your opinion in your lifetime. Just remember, society progresses with ever funeral. Our own deaths will be no exception to this.
/r/MensRights12/02/14 03:01 AM
1

By 'too drunk to agree' I mean too drunk to agree verbally or by action... aka being a non-participant/passed out. If you reread my argument, you'll see that I states that agreement can be shown by actions as well. How about this: when you get drink you take responsibility for giving up your judgement and anything after that is your own damn fault?! Would this include actions done to you while you are passed out? What about actions done to you that you attempt to protest but are unable to form a…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 03:00 AM
2

This is true, but not surprising due to the amount of single mothers and the amount of time mothers spend with children. At the same time, I would love to see a well sourced statistic that says, on average, how long some demographic (mother, father, sibling, stranger, ect.) needs to be around a child to abuse them (broken down by different abuse types). Also, it would be interested to know how well this correlates with time spent with child. For example, I would expect neglect to increase the mo…
/r/MensRights11/02/14 10:05 PM
2

Actually, you aren't mentally ill. Per the newest DSM, you either have to hurt someone based on your attraction or have to be significantly distressed (and to note, significant distress about anything is pretty much some mental illness). An attraction devoid of distress and harm is not a mental illness.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 10:02 PM
2

Short answer: It shouldn't be illegal, rape laws should cover all of the 'bad' cases (parent raping children). But people are emotional about it. Long answer: 10: <insert random argument normally used against homosexuality> 20: GOTO 10
/r/MensRights11/02/14 09:57 PM
10

If they are both female, then you find males who 'let' them drive away. You also charge men who stop a drunk woman from driving with kidnapping as well.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 09:51 PM
3

The 'agreers' should be at fault. Anyone who agrees to engage in sex, including but not limited to the initiator, is at fault. Thus if you have 4 people having a big orgy, and 1 didn't agree due to being too drunk to agree, but the other three agreed to it (as shown by words or actions), then the 3 are at fault while the 1 is not. (See, there wasn't even any need to bring up gender.)
/r/MensRights11/02/14 09:51 PM
3

Well see, rape isn't a problem because you have to define rape as being forcefully made to have sexual intercourse by someone you have never encountered before. Otherwise it is just sexual assault. So rape basically never happens and people need to stop saying it is a problem. And yet, while the above paragraph is completely unacceptable, people don't seem to be bothered by the fact that male rape is being redefined so it only counts as sexual assault.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 11:37 PM
1

Do you mean the commander wants his squadron, for example to be ready for military action which is more important than prosecuting a non-inherently-military matter, which could compromise military action? You sacrifice individually for the group. Bringing up crimes, even that of rape, tends to split the group. Until the external threat to the group caused by hiding the issue causes greater problems than the bringing up the issue, it will be suppressed. We are now at the point where the external …
/r/MensRights07/02/14 11:21 PM
6

I never meant for it to be a sign of sexism in the tech industry.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 01:02 AM
1

It may not harm any other charity, but it can strongly influence how much need their appears to be and end up reducing the help received by those who do not benefit from your donation.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 01:01 AM
1

Reverse the genders and do you think much else will happen? No. The problem here is something inherent with the structure of the military. For starters, it has to do with a commander being more concerned about having a fighting force that carrying out justice, and as such much justice is tossed aside in favor of less just alternatives. This happens for rape as well as other crimes and against both genders.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 12:45 PM
1

Very simple to be dangerous with. Not the same as being very simple.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 12:41 PM
1

I'm pretty sure after 15 hours learning C I hadn't even touched on pointers yet. 15 hours learning Java and we still hadn't learned objects. Why? Because those were introductory courses that just get you started. I see this as the same way. They teach you to code like grade school teaches you math. At the end of it, you'll know the basics, but you'll still be stuck when asked what the square root of -1 is, much less expected to know the importance of imaginary numbers. You'll probably not even b…
/r/MensRights06/02/14 12:40 PM
1

It is neither and both at the same time. Simply put, you can be of the opinion that incentives are good or bad, but they need to be equally applied either way.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 12:33 PM
29

Hackers, technical people, they are born, not made. At the very least, oppressive parents can easily kill off a hacker by limiting their options, especially during the before-puberty phrase where they have near total control over their child's life.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 12:27 PM
1

Only if you do it for life. As far as the US's current system goes, compared to systems in certain other countries, it causes more victims, but with a bit of a time delay.
/r/MensRights05/02/14 12:57 AM
6

The thing is, a fish doesn't need a bicycle because it has neither the physical ability nor the intelligence to make use of it. But for the fish who have evolved the ability and intelligence to do so, bicycles are great.
/r/MensRights05/02/14 12:56 AM
1

I've heard that children are legally required to support their parents and that socially this is the expected role of men, but I haven't heard that the law specifies the man alone is legally required to support their parents.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 11:43 AM
4

As long as two consenting partners are happy with their relationship, let it be. The interesting bit is that the government is stepping in and changing the relationship by allowing single individuals (namely single moms) to be parents with some financial support without having to enter into a relationship. Even if, as a guy or as a gal, you choose to not have children and to not enter into situations where you have to support them... you still have to support the others who choose to have childr…
/r/MensRights03/02/14 12:20 AM
2

Socially required or legally required?
/r/MensRights03/02/14 12:15 AM
1

Letting the states handle rape and DV instead of the fed is fine by me. In fact, anything that doesn't have federal impact should be handled by the states.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 12:11 AM
8

If you do these things you can to lessen the chance you get raped, is that whoever is waiting for a victim then finds someone else. Not true for crimes of opportunity. Remove the opportunity and the crime doesn't happen. If they commit the crime later when another opportunity presents itself, they would have done so anyways.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 12:06 AM
1

Given the failure of the anti-porn, anti-prostitution crusade of the 1980s (modern day temperance movement) they have been recently at work creating a discourse in which all prostitution and porn equals slavery and trafficking. It wasn't a failure. They gained a permanent foothold via child porn and now they just have to constantly show how certain power difference are compared to an adult and a child to argue for the banning of porn and prostitution. The thing is, the argument largely are consi…
/r/MensRights01/02/14 07:01 AM
3

There is one big issue here... money can be taxed, sexuality cannot. And we see this being done.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 04:34 AM
16

Which is code for 'standard order for the men', probably because only men would ever become irresponsible when drunk, right?
/r/MensRights30/01/14 02:16 AM
0

You're just presuming a child who does not have adult agency recognizes or is even expected to recognize that way out. Many victims very well know they have a choice, but they hate the consequences (they often do not want something bad to happen to their abusers). It is as much same choice. Also to note, humans do not become rational creatures upon reaching 18 years of age. They are constantly gaining more experience, but there is a difference between adults of different ages just as much as bet…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 03:31 PM
-4

Child victims of sexual assault almost always have the option to tell another adult. Just because there is a technical way out doesn't mean you can say there was a choice.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:30 PM
3

chose to have kids. Why is everybody else you work with supposed to do your job for a choice you made ? Why does your employer have to fork out the cash for an employee that isn't even there ? I would agree with two weeks of unpaid leave for women to give birth and that's it. Heavy-handed ? I dunno...seems pretty generous to me when you consider that if I ask for two weeks to do something nobody is going to pay me for it. Or give equal leave to everyone to use for kids or for other reasons. Even…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:08 PM
-2

How about... People should be able to take days off for what ever reasons they care.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:06 PM
9

France I believe. If not there, somewhere near by.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:03 PM
9

Something about disrupting a family and infringing on the woman's right to choose the father.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:00 PM
–

Imagine - no vasectomy scar. No condom. You get targeted by someone looking for a sugar daddy. You get a paternity accusation thrown at you. You show proof of birth control and demand a DNA test. Hopefully it's not a match (no medical procedure is guaranteed to be perfect). And then you find out the laws have been made that a DNA test isn't allowed unless the mother consents and you are presumed to be the parent unless you can prove otherwise with a DNA test. The weird part about this extreme hy…
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:00 PM
1

It is kinda like advertising. The more science put into advertising, the more I hate it because it works so well that it shows there are way that do control how human behave (though not in the cartoon-ish mind control way many imagine). But apply it to sexual behavior instead of shopping behavior, and mix in our cultural norms about such, and it is going to be very negatively viewed.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 01:32 PM
7

Your intentions are still unclear. Make sure you clearly communicate you are not going to rape, molest, or murder them. You also are not going to do that to any of their family. Or their friends. Or their pets.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 12:37 PM
2

I think it's fine to be angry. Anger is a fuel. Treat it like fire. Properly contained and channeled, it can do great things. But if you do not control it, it will consume you and all you care for. Even if you only have it a little out of control, it will scare away everyone you had previously mesmerized.
/r/MensRights27/01/14 11:41 PM
20

Victim? All I see is some dude crazy enough to try to kill people by setting them on fire. - Media
/r/MensRights27/01/14 11:39 PM
3

People do it with creationist. Feminist are just hard mode.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 10:53 PM
0

We begin to question having such a high one.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 12:42 PM
2

So instead put the 13 year olds in prison for 10 years and force them to be sex offenders for life? So much better.
/r/MensRights19/01/14 02:44 PM
1

Um... how about nobody takes naked photos of people under 18, and then this wouldn't be an issue. And there can't be excuses to get you off the hook... otherwise there will be underage porn producers claiming "she was my girlfriend, for that one day anyway". How about setting it to the age of consent instead? You are acting like pictures of 17 year olds are so bad that it is better to put people in prison than to give a possible loophole for pictures of 17 year olds, when the 17 year old is deem…
/r/MensRights19/01/14 02:43 PM
5

Really, I'm sorry about drunk driving. I didn't know it would end with me crashing into your car and paralyzing your child. I'm not only going to never do it again, I'll fight against drunk driving. So we're good, right? No hard feelings.
/r/MensRights16/01/14 03:11 AM
4

17? Meh, perma ban from being a teacher. 17 and 16? Meh, perma ban form being a teacher. 17, 16, and 14? Okay, now we have to do something. First time statutory rape might can get a pass because people fall in love even when society says they shouldn't and then they do stupid things. But after you do it a third time and it includes someone who is getting pretty close to being a preteen, there is a more serious underlying issue that needs to be rehabilitated, which for now means a significant pri…
/r/MensRights09/01/14 04:09 AM
0

Many of them are not.
/r/MensRights08/01/14 12:33 AM
-1

Male privilege means you never have to be a victim. Male privilege means you never get to be a victim.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 12:39 PM
1

We already do tests for the baby for things that affect far fewer than 4% of babies.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 12:36 PM
1

It could also prove who the mother is, to lower the small chance of a baby mix up.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 12:36 PM
6

An interesting point, but even wanting it doesn't mean you consent. Consent implies there being a choice. When that choice is removed, you lose the ability to consent, even if the option chosen for you is what you would have chosen had you had the choice. Also, if you have a choice, it counts as consent even if you end up regretting your choice.
/r/MensRights04/01/14 05:49 AM
1

Which is kinda the point. Just like the figures that compare full time work without realizing there is a vast difference between 40 hours full time and 60 hours full time, and then trying to claim that both sides should be paid equal because they both work full time.
/r/MensRights01/01/14 08:16 PM
1

As for your situation, there are very few people who would be concerned about a homosexual being in the locker room to the point where they'd ask for him to be removed. I live in the South of the USA. So this statement doesn't apply. Also, regardless of if it does or doesn't apply, should it matter how many complain? I'm sure there were plenty of complaints when blacks started changing with whites.
/r/MensRights01/01/14 01:13 PM
-1

Who says I want to do that? I just see that as one thing that people fighting for 'equal pay' would do.
/r/MensRights01/01/14 11:44 AM
1

However, there is a problem when it comes to changing clothes in the locker room for gym class. While it wouldn't be an issue for most girls, some would be very uncomfortable changing clothes around a person who has a penis, and would be uncomfortable seeing that person change clothes in front of them. Oh, and there is a guy in the class who is uncomfortable about changing with homosexual people due to a history of having been molested (yeah, homosexuals are no more likely to molest than heteros…
/r/MensRights01/01/14 11:42 AM
2

I guess my concern is heteronormative(SP?) children that are in puberty they as well need safe spaces. Learning to change in a locker room when I was young was stressfull enough I can not imagine (I try hard but it is still beyond my grasp) adding this to the mix. Imagine how bad it must be for a homosexual child. I guess homosexual children shouldn't be allowed to change at all then? Should we just remove them from the school as a whole because they mess up the narrative of cis-straight assignm…
/r/MensRights01/01/14 11:40 AM
0

Questioning warrants consultation with a doctor. I don't think that a girl should just be allowed to say that she's thinking about transitioning and be permitted to use the boys' room, and vice-versa. Why not? I say they should be. If anything, by allowing free movement between changing rooms, homosexual children will have far less to worry about.
/r/MensRights01/01/14 11:37 AM
2

If a 15 year old (regardless of gender) can consent to a 16 year old (regardless of gender), why do they stop being able to consent to a 17 year old. Or if they can consent to a 17 year old, why not an 18 year old?
/r/MensRights31/12/13 11:55 AM
-6

Women will be less likely to be hired and will be paid slightly less because of the bonuses they get, and they will be less likely to advance after taking leave due to a natural loss of experience (the time gone plus a small amount of already gained experience lost due to lack of use)... until laws get passed that make them have to be treated the same regardless.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 11:52 AM
0

No, you don't, the decision is down to the account holder. For now. Can't you just see the arguments in favor of requiring consent of the woman? Perhaps it'll start as some 'make sure you aren't an older male child trying to turn off the filter' or such.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 11:50 AM
1

Well good for you. Im curious how you balance the ideas of traditional male/female roles vs progressive ideology of gender neutrality. Hey, I think that X's should A while Y's should B, but I won't stop a X from B'ing or a Y from A'ing. Basically you can be of the view that one is better, but each should still choose for themselves what they want.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 07:28 PM
2

Well, you can still choose that battle, but you have to choose complete different weapons if you want to win. In some cases, doubling down on the argument til the point that the original argument holder either rejects it or begins to accept an argument their peers reject works better than just trying to show them the error of their argument. Basically, most people hold their arguments for emotional reasons, not logical ones. Attack accordingly.
/r/MensRights28/12/13 05:50 AM
4

You'll find that all the bad logic that the people you disagree with use so much, if you look closely, is also being used in large amounts by the people you agree with. Humans, in general, such as logical justification for their views.
/r/MensRights28/12/13 05:48 AM
8

You are a sex offender now... how exactly are you going to do anything?
/r/MensRights28/12/13 05:43 AM
54

What is funny is that many people honestly believe a male is more likely to rape than a female is to lie.
/r/MensRights28/12/13 05:42 AM
19

When the woman Elizabeth Coast initially said she was raped, without any form of proof at all, how could he have been arrested or even convicted. This is why some fight so hard to dismiss the notion of punishing false accusers, because they fear the same burden of proof will be applied to false accusations as current is applied to rape.
/r/MensRights28/12/13 05:41 AM
1

You sure? For starters, she (or he) can normally give consent to someone without a specific age range, showing the capacity to consent to sex in general. Also, many places allow for marriages and consummation of the marriage at ages below the age of consent. For example, in Arizona, there is no minimum age of marriage and any child who is married can consent to sex with their spouse. As such, to say that they cannot consent when the individual isn't their spouse shows a major contradiction in th…
/r/MensRights27/12/13 07:26 AM
1

The flip side of this is that the court has to accept the possibility of a criminal father being a better parent (or being able to better provide for the child) than the other parent. In this rape-custody cases, it means that the wellbeing of the child is placed above that of the mother. Sorry, you don't get something for nothing. Or the more likely possibility that having both parents in the child's life is of a greater benefit for the child than having only one, even if the other is a rapist (…
/r/MensRights27/12/13 07:19 AM
2

Every dime put into the welfare system is taken out of the economy. When welfare recipients spend money, they're spending what was earlier removed. Depends where you take it from. Not all money is going back into the economy. If you take it from the middle class spender or lower, you are taking it from the economy. But if you are taking it from those with enough money that they often park it somewhere, then you are forcing the dollar to stay in the economy when it would have been taken out.
/r/MensRights27/12/13 07:13 AM
0

So if the law said that consent based on being given false information is not consent and thus rape, you would accept it?
/r/MensRights27/12/13 06:47 AM
0

But consent isn't just consent. This is why if a 15 year old says yes, it still isn't consent. False pretenses is one thing that invalidates consent, making it rape just like if it was a child who said yes (which also invalidates consent).
/r/MensRights26/12/13 01:17 PM
1

tory provisions that themselves prohibit any gender discrimination in terms of pricing. Women routinely use more healthcare resources, in part due to their greater concern over their health and due to maternity care. Since insurance companies will no longer be allowed to discriminate on prices, part of this disparity will either shift to men, while women's prices lower slightly; or men's prices are raised to the same point. This isn't really in and of itself a major problem. You may disagree wit…
/r/MensRights22/12/13 03:22 PM
-2

"Real women don't trade sex, they give it." Seriously, we just need some stupid but inciting reply that is given automatically in response.
/r/MensRights22/12/13 01:28 PM
5

It is really a gamble because it may pay off the in the long run. The thing to remember is that health care providers cannot turn away those in need of emergency care even if they can't pay. So this cost ends up getting passed along to you. Add in insurance companies who are making a killing, and your prices for health care are extremely expensive compared to what it would have cost had none of these extra costs been added. Now, the ACA is going to try to limit insurance companies. Will this wor…
/r/MensRights22/12/13 12:28 PM
13

Don't worry, they have a fall back plan of siphoning wealth off of childless singles (disproportionately men) and giving to the women who no longer need a provider when everyone is their provided. That said, this is still small potatoes compared to other siphoning being done.
/r/MensRights22/12/13 05:07 AM
3

The problem is when you mix in consensual cases (regardless of what the law pretends) and non-consensual cases. It results in a case like this being viewed equally to a 18 year old guy with a 15 year old consenting girlfriend
/r/MensRights22/12/13 05:03 AM
3

anonymous reporting system on college rape If this was an anonymous reporting system that wen to the police who would then turn over the evidence provided to the system that determines if there is enough to act on (as in investigate, not arrest) or not, I and most others wouldn't mind. The problem is this isn't reporting to the police but to non-professionals who can abuse their power to harm innocent individuals.
/r/MensRights20/12/13 12:08 AM
3

Be unattractive. ...wow, that is finally the solution for some problem.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 01:15 PM
32

We created placards with anti-sexist rhetoric to replace the calendars, being cautious to touch them only with gloves on. They look printed. Every printer leaves a signature on everything it prints (tends to be invisible to the human eye) that gives information about the printer. If you contact the manufacturer, you may be able to find out who sold the printer, and might be able to find out who owns it right now (really depends upon the specific printer and what records the seller keeps). Grante…
/r/MensRights18/12/13 01:10 PM
15

Cyber bullying is when the majority of students not only pick on the unpopular kid at school, but then go on their facebook and call them a worthless loser who should die, or a fat slut who won't be anything other than a prostitute, or any other number of things that are clearly meant to cause emotional distress to the target. This is especially bad the more elaborate the attempt it, such as tracking down social media accounts that the victim has tried to hide or even fake an online friendship t…
/r/MensRights14/12/13 04:22 AM
2

Prostitution generally isn't people's first hand choice of profession; they turn to prostitution because they are in a bad place in life. And that describes about every low wage job ever.
/r/MensRights13/12/13 12:49 AM
1

every world in the dictionary They didn't have consensually questionable cuddling. But on a serious note, is she avoiding rape charges because she was penetrated during the rape and not penetrating?
/r/MensRights11/12/13 10:38 PM
1

I'm not sure I follow. What I mean is you tell them that we should spend our resources on educating child molesters to stop molesting young girls, not teaching girls or their parents how to avoid molesters. I don't see how this would really cause a fist fight unless there are that many people who just have an uncontrollable urge to punch stupid. P.S. I only include girls as a way to make the comparison fit better. I fully realize that boys are very often the victim, I'm only ignoring them in thi…
/r/MensRights08/12/13 05:14 AM
1

They don't need the internet to find victims.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 12:53 PM
6

0 to 10 years where I live. Unless they have evidence that anything sexual occurred when she was 12, in which case it is a minimum of 25 years up to the death penalty.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 12:52 PM
–

Next time you hear someone talking about protecting children from child molesters, do this, but only talk about girls. People will be unable to tell if you are serious or trolling. A few will be bright enough to get the point being made.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 12:45 PM
2

There is a good chance of this. It seems the police care less when it is a white man with a minority girl than the opposite. Be interested to see if there are any studies that either offer evidence for or against this.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 04:49 AM
1

How about instead a false accusation should be considered a kidnapping attempt and any time spent in jail or prison would upgrade it to an actual kidnapping of the same duration. Any sexual abuse experienced in jail or prison would also fall on the false accuser because they are partly to blame for it (much like if you go rob a bank and someone helping you ends up dying, you'll get tagged with murder even if the other individual was in no way killed directly by you).
/r/MensRights03/12/13 04:41 AM
5

I would suggest you search in child sexual abuse claims, especially those that are connected to a divorce. You get a lot of lies, and just one success can put someone in prison for life (child rape carries life as a possible standard sentenced while rape tends to have an upper limit as standard).
/r/MensRights03/12/13 04:37 AM
1

16 vs 12 is not as big of a difference as you seem to think. While we say 18 year olds are adults and 12 year olds are still little children, the reality is that 16 and 12 year olds are close to each other than a 16 year old is to an full grown adult (which neurologically takes til about 25) or a 12 year old is to a baby. Now, as to why a 16 year old is dating a 12 year old... that really depends upon where you live. If you live in a city or even a large town, there are plenty of other 16 year o…
/r/MensRights02/12/13 10:41 PM
1

YOU can control 100 percent that no woman will ever abort or bear your child. Just keep your dick in your pants. That is your choice. Because men being victims of rape literally never ever happens. Also, what would happen if you told women their only choice if they wanted a child or not was to keep their legs closed?
/r/MensRights02/12/13 10:17 PM
1

wtf? Kansas v. Limon was directly targeted and homophobic. Furthermore it was the Kansas Supreme Court that struck it down, not the federal one. I'm talking Lawrence v. Texas. In retrospect, this was in 2003 and not 2004; it seems I misremembered the date. Further more, the law had nothing to do with age of consent above 18, rather it excluded homosexual sex from the Romeo&Juliet exclusion of Kansas. Given that this wasn't the court case I was pointing to, that this was struck down only at the s…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 02:39 PM
1

You "don't want to allow them to kill the fetus" but accept no responsibility for pregnancy and childbirth medical expenses. Isn't that convenient -- for YOU. You seem to not get the whole 'cause and effect' thing. Because they get the choice to have an abortoin, they should pay the costs of it. Obviously (at least to the rest of us) this reasoning doesn't apply if the first part (that they get to choose abortions) isn't true. If A then B does not in any way shape or form mean that If not A then…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 02:30 PM
1

The US age of consent has generally been lowered, or left the same, over the last 50 years. The only exception I can think of is when it was below 16, it was raised to 16. Every case I've seen it has been raised. In 2004, the SCOTUS effectively struck down any age of consent laws that applies to those over 18, but they did so only as a side effect of allowing consenting homosexual adults to have sex (as a side note, it is still legal for a state to allow an underage heterosexual couple to have s…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 06:02 AM
1

If I don't want to allow them to kill the fetus because I see it as a child, I hate women. If I say she should be required to pay for it as it is her choice... I still hate women. Wow, I guess unless you roll over and offer everything up on a silver platter, you hate women.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 05:56 AM
2

Language can account for how well you can perceive different shades of a given color. Is it so hard to believe that it can also matter for other areas of human biology? Of course, no matter what your language, you aren't going to see in infrared or ultraviolet.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 05:37 AM
1

(a 16 year old going out with a 12-13 year old strikes me as a bit odd) Odd doesn't mean non-consensual. We need to determine using the demographics involved if there is a power different that bans consent. How odd it is (or isn't) shouldn't factor into it.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 05:17 AM
–

Unfortunately the legal system calls it rape. For a while now society has been on a rampage redefining many forms of consensual sex as rape. For example, raising age of consent from 16 (which is mature enough to drive a speeding hunk of metal that can kill others) to 18 to saying prostitution is non-consensual to making any amount of alcohol consumption before sex count. Feminist seem to have taken reasonable forms of rape like actual child molestation, sexual slavery, or taking advantage of som…
/r/MensRights30/11/13 04:31 AM
3

Why all the negativity aimed at bitcoins? They are becoming far more useful as a currency and can be used far beyond what you seem to be suggesting. If anything, it appears you are trying to create an anti-bitcoin post using a mensrights issue to get a bit more acceptance for your drivel.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 01:14 PM
1

Is the service of a police officer the right of anyone?
/r/MensRights29/11/13 01:11 PM
1

Should we throw people under the bus for having (consensual) sex with people of age? She most certainty abused a position of power and should not be allowed to teach anymore but I would be vocal if a man was jailed for having consensual sex with a girl who was of age. The very reason for an age of consent is because of the notion that someone above it has too much power for there to be consent with someone under it. Under that same logic, teachers who sleep with students should also be declared …
/r/MensRights29/11/13 01:09 PM
6

Might you suggest to her a mirror?
/r/MensRights28/11/13 03:14 PM
20

As are many of the men involved. People seem to just think that trafficked boys magically disappear when they grow up, which allows them to feel pity for the women involved (using 'they were forced into it' excuses) yet still hate the men involved.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 03:12 PM
1

This is like saying the right to privacy (which isn't even as directly spelled out) only applies to the collective. Yet that is the basis by which abortions are legalized.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 03:11 PM
5

"Creeping in"? Ever since they decided the Bill of Rights was only 9 amendments long they have been too far left.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 03:10 PM
2

It is her body, her choice, her responsibility, her cost.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 11:18 AM
1

I'm saying by making teenagers immune to being put on a sex offenders list for stupid things but not stopping the same from happening to adults, you shift the injustice of it onto the men who still be put on the list for stupid things.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 11:56 PM
2

The plot is somewhat about her gaining agency as shown by her final kill.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 11:54 PM
3

Worst of all, there are actually a lot of people who think it is real and used by MRA's and similar-minded people. [tinfoilhat]Which is why it is still allowed to exist.[/tinfoilhat]
/r/MensRights26/11/13 03:39 AM
4

The idea that rape (or child molestation) is worse than being murdered gives reason to the notion that we can help rape victims by killing them.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 11:33 PM
1

Wouldn't this happen with anything where you have control removed from you for any amount of time?
/r/MensRights25/11/13 11:32 PM
0

When a woman has drunken sex, it is something that is done to them. Except this is stupid because drunk sex can be put on a scale with one end being active participation, and thus something the woman does and should therefore be responsible for. Now, if the woman is passed out drunk (which is the other end of that scale), then it would be rape, but to insist that all drunk sex happens only at one end of the scale is, as I already said, stupid.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 07:02 PM
–

Yeah, only a woman being raped can be considered on par with murder. A man being raped is more like petty theft or something and is an insult to murder victims and female rape victims to be compared to them. /s Seriously, when you hear talk of male on female rape, there are plenty of people who see it as only one reduced if not equal to murder. Yet people do not see male rape the same way.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 06:58 PM
2

The worse part is 'Think of the Children' isn't even applied where it would do good. Free psychological/psychiatric care for all individuals who feel themselves at risk of harming children (with mandated confidentiality so the people will actually talk, because people are smart enough to not talk if they know it will end up in a report to the police)? Oh, costs too much money and is too big of a hassle regardless if it has been shown to reduce child abuse rates.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 12:00 PM
9

The thing is, when someone like this does go out and commit a harsh crime, I cannot blame them. Their life was taken from them and destroyed. They were likely sexually abused in prison with the average of society telling them they deserve the abuse. So when they then lash out at that society, I see the response as a natural consequence of how others treat them.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 02:40 PM
2

The only way to change it is by making the laws specifically omit actions done as a minor and prohibiting putting them on predator lists. You just shift the injustice to adults instead. We need to reform how plea bargains work (they don't).
/r/MensRights24/11/13 02:38 PM
-1

It's still not their body Yet we as a society force their body into a little cage, force it to eat what is often horrible food, and force them to do numerous other things.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 02:32 PM
0

How attractive was she? That seems to play even in the heterosexual female teacher molestation cases.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 04:21 AM
0

It is not their bodies. What about female on male rape cases. While these cases are not a major issue compared to the numerous case of consensual sex leading to a man being a father against his will, we do have a standard of removing numerous rights when convicted of a crime. Suggesting that the choice of termination be removed is not as bad as some other suggestions for rapist (like castration, and I'm not talking chemical).
/r/MensRights24/11/13 04:19 AM
13

Plea deals are the issue here. Police can lie to you. Combine that with plea deals being offered and a lack of proper legal counsel, we have a nightmare. End plea deals and require cops to not deliberately lie.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 04:15 AM
3

They had far better choices in 2012 than the one they picked. Not only do they decide to risk part of their Evangelical vote, they also decide not to get the moderate vote. But the real screw up has been the last half year or so. They should have focused on the NSA leaks and channeled the outrage at Obama, but instead they are mostly silent on that and focus on the health care law. The NSA leaks would have had not just moderates but even some progressives joining their sides, even if only for a …
/r/MensRights22/11/13 12:54 AM
3

Are you suggest that if a law cannot catch everyone who breaks it that it shouldn't be a law?
/r/MensRights21/11/13 10:09 PM
13

For non-consensual images this is the case. For other things, not so much.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 12:52 PM
8

I don't know about here, but there is some parts of the IT forums where drawing your own circles is considered a step above an auto encircle tool.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 12:51 PM
2

This is still very important in realizing the accused may be innocent. It seems people on both sides of the debate forget that it is possible (and it seems quite likely) for the accused to be innocent and for the victim to be the victim of rape. When someone says that n% of rape claims are false, we need to realize that far more than n% are wrong, just not malicious, and that there is in many cases a rapist getting away while an innocent man takes the fall.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 02:41 AM
0

Is it? I'm not aware of the law that does ban it.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 10:41 PM
0

Which is stupid.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 10:40 PM
0

Well around here double jeopardy would prevent that.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 10:40 PM
0

That was my point, the police would possess the evidence for the sake of a trial. Then it should be destroyed once the trial is over.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 12:44 PM
0

And yet if someone were to link a video of child sexual abuse everyone would agree it was a horrible crime and the linker should be punished. It seems to me that posting a video of the sexual abuse of a non-consenting individual is only acceptable when the average person finds the victim attractive.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:48 AM
-2

And this law may go and turn out to be a stupid ban on fiction. But the notion of banning real rapes is good. Notice I said the 'latter' of my previous comment is the one I support? Not the former?
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:47 AM
-5

So then why not we just allow child porn then? Or is there some rule we have to follow when allowing people to get off on videos of the sexual abuse of others as to which sexual abuses you can get off on and which you can't?
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:45 AM
0

This is akin to allowing the police to possess child porn to the extent needed to convict a child molester.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:44 AM
0

Hopefully just non-consenting adults. If it bans fake rape, that is clearly going too far. Might as well ban violence on TV at that point.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:43 AM
0

Kinda a big jump from pedophiles* to pirates, no? *Since we are talking about people who are engaging in child abuse, shouldn't we call them child molesters?
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:42 AM
-3

Why should someone go to jail or face any consequences for having videos of rape Same reasons they deserve to go to prison for owning child porn even if they did not create it.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:21 PM
0

Take the Ohio student public sex act video that went viral some weeks ago. Would possessing that have been a crime if the test for date rape drugs had been positive? But then, how could one have known it was rape? Even regular posters on here like lokidemon731 said it may have been rape? How do they define a depiction of rape? What if the individual involved happened to be 17? Ideally, the laws would work the same way.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:20 PM
-1

This is why fake films should remain legal. Only video of actual crimes should be made illegal.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:19 PM
-2

It would, ideally (I don't know about this particular law, which may be stupidly written) work the same way as child porn laws. If you stream child porn and get caught, do you get to walk away free? I think not.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:18 PM
-1

A much smaller underground market than the above ground one that is there if it isn't banned.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:17 PM
1

It is effectively extending child porn laws to cover non-consenting adults. Those laws are very enforceable, and will continue to be so.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:17 PM
-14

There is a vast difference between a rape scene in a movie and a video of someone being raped. I agree with banning the latter. Banning the former is wrong.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:16 PM
0

This is just an ongoing takeover of the internet by government. If this is an ongoing takeover, was banning child porn the start? It make sense for the government to ban material that required an act of rape (or other forms of violence) to produce lest a market be created for that material.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:15 PM
6

Stories should not count. If this law involves drawings, stories, or acted out scenes, then it needs to be reformed to remove all of those.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:14 PM
1

Rape porn that involves actual rape or other non-consensual activities? Should be treated like child porn. Rape porn that is just acting? Should be legal. Can't tell the difference? Innocent til proven guilty, in other words if there isn't enough evidence it is the real thing, then you let them go. But if someone is honestly watching videos of rape porn and can be proven to be doing such, they are creating a market for it and should thus be punished on part with watching child porn (which create…
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:13 PM
5

It's still a false rape charge by all definitions, so punishing false rape charges would include such scenarios. No guilty does not mean innocent. And innocent doesn't mean mens rea on the part of the accuser. The justice system, at least where I live, works nothing like you seem to think.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:11 PM
9

They are scared that the same level of evidence they current use to convict a man of rape will then be applied to convict them of false accusation. They seem to miss that we want equality, not for us to be given special privileges to take advantage of the justice system.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:09 PM
1

We need to keep the name because we can't let people forget that child support money doesn't magically appear, but for most males paying it, requires them to trade potions of their life, much like a woman who has to spend part of her life raising the child. And at some jobs, there are even health risks.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 06:37 PM
1

Except newer studies have been done. And the women's studies set flat out ignores them. I was pretty much implying this would happen.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 01:14 PM
2

Well, you probably don't want to teach your son to shoot, because he'll be far more likely to be investigated, charged, and convicted if he shoots a woman stalking him despite a restraining order compared to if your daughter shoots a man doing the same.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 04:42 AM
2

It is almost like this concept of 'rigid gender roles' is a problem that hurts just about everyone and which causes all sorts of problems and should be done away with.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 04:38 AM
2

And for those without children? How about mandating some amount of paid personal leave? You can use it as you see fit based on your current life situation.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 04:35 AM
2

Or will these people still complain about a gender wage gap then, call it sexist and demand it be even and equal? I have my doubts. They will do this, based on studies that show that women make 77 cents to the dollar. Oh, those studies are years out of date? Well, we haven't done newer studies and we have to base it off of the most recent facts, right? More raises or else you hate women.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 04:34 AM
54

It wasn't a mistake, it was a decision. Aren't mistakes a subset of decisions? Namely the subset you should avoid choosing.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 12:37 AM
1

Woman's sizes go up faster because they are sold in smaller size increments due to numerous reasons. That said, while it has little to do with gender equality, I would find shopping for female clothing so much easier if they used some standard size between brands and such. If I'm a size X in males pants, regardless of cut, I only have to go up or down one to find a fit. A size X in one woman's cut is a size 2X in another and a size x/pi in another.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 10:05 PM
2

looks under the age of 18. Funny that even if the person is an adult that pedophiles happen to find attractive, you can't have porn of them. Basically they're forced to remain as pedo's preying on kids until they get caught, because that's the only way they'll receive any form of help, once their lives are ruined. I often argue that for non-offending pedophiles, there should be greater social acceptance so that they will admit to their desires, be able to be held accountable, and be given free t…
/r/MensRights05/11/13 10:48 PM
1

Lots of unknowns. Can they reach out and get US citizens? Probably not without cooperation of US LEO. Would US LEO arrrest on this? I dunno, presumably not if they know of SCOTUS decision. Appearing tough on sex crimes is a pretty good political move no matter what else.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 10:39 PM
4

Fuck these guys who are interested in sex with a 10 year old. ...and who go after someone they think it is a real child.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 10:28 PM
1

All men are pedophiles is part two of demonizing men. Part one was all pedophiles are child molesters, and they basically succeeded at that. Expect more research coming out soon to support the notion that all (or very large numbers) of men are pedophiles. I don't want to say it is only an attack on male sexuality. Child molestation is obviously bad and there are really good reasons to fight to stop it. But there does seem to be some who are trying to edge it from stopping child molestation to de…
/r/MensRights05/11/13 10:26 PM
2

I'm not pro pedophiles, but at least these guys aren't going around trying to fuck real kids. But they were seeking to get a child to engage in sex acts online. That is one level worse than using child pornography. If these predators were caught using drawings or computer generated images that they knew were fake (unlike this one that they thought was real), then maybe you'd have a case. But here, the predators were going after who they thought was a real child.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 10:23 PM
3

How about the US government actually host something like this and let pedophiles buy access to it (being that *absolutely no real children are involved), and then they take the money they make and user it to fight child sexual abuse? That being said, it may very well have been illegal if the person thought it was real. It'll be a very interesting court case except I expect any charged to take a plea deal.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 10:21 PM
3

Except it really doesn't, we have just been conditioned to think it does. And for those who suffer same sex abuse or who do not classically fit into one of the two sexes or those who are trans, it only creates more problems.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 02:27 PM
2

If a woman finds herself in need of economic assistance to raise her child, let us return that obligation fully to the state where it belongs, and was, until the conservative state decided to shift the burden to women’s sexual partners to reduce the welfare burden on government. At the end of this, I think this is actually going to be a bad plan when you combine it with MGTOW. She seems to be advocating for a government based child support, a child support that comes from taxes, of who single ch…
/r/MensRights03/11/13 02:21 PM
1

The problem is in the devising test. You can't actually test for any factor we like to speak about (happiness, intelligence, ect.). Also, any 'general' test you develop for it tends to be so strongly tied in with the culture, that it becomes hard to separate it out. And then you have to account politics messing with your results (some things never being researched because the results could be too controversial or that those with the funding just don't care about, while other things get so much r…
/r/MensRights03/11/13 02:02 PM
3

I've seen it seriously applied to situations that are nothing more than 'you should tell him/her your feelings and stop trying to use telepathy'. But how in the world that is related to MR? I haven't a clue.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 12:22 PM
1

17 year old and anyone not in a position of power? Meh, I'll allow it. 17 year old and someone clearly in a position of power? Nope.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 10:49 PM
2

Only if they think the lawsuit won't be laughed out of court. The courts deciding these laws weren't meant to apply to men wouldn't be all that surprising (I can see the feminist argument now, sexual harassment requires both harassment based on sex and institutionalize power, otherwise it is just legal flirting).
/r/MensRights01/11/13 10:46 PM
5

Interviews exist for a reason. Ask both of them to explain core concepts of software development to you and ask both to explain some project they are proud of. You also a GPA for the college kid, which depending upon the school they went to, can be an indicator that they are worth the attempt. But read what some of the big companies do. They go to schools and get interns in their second and third summers. They put them through interviews and have the best try out, paying a decent rate. Then, the…
/r/MensRights31/10/13 11:28 PM
-1

That'll work well when feminist begin rallying to give the female school more resources to help overcome the patriarchy's oppression.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 11:22 PM
2

Depending upon how the family court in an area works, this becomes a legitimate use of the argument.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 10:48 AM
-1

I actually like the last quote. No agree with it, but like it. Why? Because consent is treated with a double standard by our society. When there is a power difference we don't like as a society, we say any sex is rape. But every other power difference we are fine with we don't apply the logic to. In this case, here is a person trying to apply the logic to another area. One I don't personally agree with (there is no power difference between average men and women strong enough to invalidate consen…
/r/MensRights31/10/13 10:29 AM
6

What would happen if a college helped fund a haunted house of FGM? I suspect feminist wouldn't be as tolerant of it as you are of this. Of course, having an actual example to compare it to is better than talking in the hypothetical.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 10:21 AM
2

And by 100k/year you mean not a 100k/year (maybe more, maybe less), but you are just saying such so that there is even less chance of you being recognized. Don't worry, I understand you denying this; tis the smart thing to do afterall.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 12:45 AM
0

If you look into that case, there is a lot more screwed up than just a botched MGM. In fact, I wouldn't use it as evidence against gender being fluid because of how screwed up other details in the case are (and those are the ones we know of).
/r/MensRights31/10/13 12:32 AM
4

You answer it with 'whenever it is OK for one person to punch another'. By doing so, you turn it into the question you mentioned.a
/r/MensRights26/10/13 11:57 AM
0

We still do. We have machines that are slaves for us. Right now, that is fine. But once we have AI in our machines that reach a human like level, we will be right back enslaving sentient beings.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 11:55 AM
1

Heroin really isn't comparable to sex (or even kissing, which really shouldn't be considered defacto sexual). Of course, I think if we were talking a 14 year old boy instead of an 8 year old boy this would be an easier conversation to have.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 10:11 PM
0

This is the fault in MGTOW. When men decide the game is too rigged and head home, the government will be brought in to take their resources anyways.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 10:07 PM
6

Had she been caught fondling his penis, she would be facing a minimum of 2 times that.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 10:04 PM
21

18% of men who will admit to it. Men are less likely to admit to anything perceived as a 'weakness' than women.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 02:55 AM
7

But the other was empty. Seems that the empty one is the better option, regardless of any genders involved.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 02:54 AM
2

Actually, creationist have quite a good bit of funding and yet lack any serious publications.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 10:26 PM
15

Ah, the wonderful world of science at least being biased in what it is funded to study which is then abused by people who think lack of evidence is evidence of lack.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 02:37 AM
1

It was never researched so we will never know. Also, He-Man is largely gone from the culture of today, Barby is not. Without scientist caring about it, we will largely not know what is the source of bodily insecurity in boys these days.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 02:36 AM
37

According to women, girls want to be pretty because society tells them they should want to be pretty while society tells boys they should be muscular because boys want to be muscular. Exact same reasoning reversed with no logical explanation of why they are opposite of each other.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 02:34 AM
1

Oops, someone felt threatened by the situation and didn't inform you and instead answered how they thought you wanted them to.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 11:59 PM
2

I could see some places having a law that a 16 year old sister can't sleep in the same bed as her 20 year old brother, but those laws are likely rare because such situations that would result in such laws are so rare.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 11:38 PM
1

Well that is because of a different scale, where female sexuality > male sexuality. There are some of the more extremist feminist who have effectively admitting that women on boy pedophilia is worse than two consent adults having sex (such as the people who think all PIV is rape or who think that any male is in a more powerful position than any female).
/r/MensRights16/10/13 12:03 PM
4

Somehow I have a feeling that any lawyers advice here would be to seek official legal counsel on the matter by someone who practices in the relevant areas of law involved.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 11:44 AM
11

With fostered children it is. With biological or adopted, I've never heard of it being true, but it may be, especially if the children are older (which is not the case here).
/r/MensRights16/10/13 11:43 AM
0

But... that is not the sub where the comments were taking place. In the sub where the comments were taking place, what would have happened if the genders were reversed?
/r/MensRights16/10/13 01:24 AM
2

How drugs out there are 100% perfect?
/r/MensRights16/10/13 01:20 AM
22

Chemical castration should be offered up free and anonymous to the public. Many pedophiles hate their desires but don't know how to fight against it and fear the system too much to seek out help. While it is not without side effects, allowing those with unacceptable attraction to choose to take the drug themselves anonymously would reduce the number who end up committing a crime to begin with. As far as forcing it on those who have offended, it combined with good therapy significantly reduces an…
/r/MensRights16/10/13 01:19 AM
1

So, just so I'm clear on what I'm reading, Feminist thought has actually killed people.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 10:46 AM
2

And every woman who has earned her way into a higher position will now lose respect as those around her wonder if she actually earned it or if it was a gift due to equality. It won't be immediate, but it will eventually happen.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 10:42 AM
1

My understanding is this depends upon different states and different judges.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 10:36 AM
33

A woman who had sex with a 15-year-old friend of her cousin's has walked free from court after a judge found she had been motivated by "an unmet need for love and affection". You commonly hear people say child molesters wouldn't be interested in children if they had sex with a woman, but this is never used to excuse their behavior when talking about a male child molester. Of course, such a statement if very wrong when you study why child molesters actually molest, but that is irrelevant to seein…
/r/MensRights14/10/13 12:14 PM
1

Emotional reactions to an argument are how the majority of people judge them. And argument from pathos can beat an argument from logos.
/r/MensRights14/10/13 12:10 PM
13

Date rape is not a thing. Uh, date rape is a thing. Some things called date rape shouldn't be called such, but date rape is definitely a thing.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 06:21 PM
2

It would have been fine if he had dropped the 'than men'. But he didn't, thus showing a sexist agenda.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 04:00 PM
-1

If that ever happened, might be better to claim wife husbandry (tvtropes it).
/r/MensRights09/10/13 01:56 AM
1

The point of my comment is that comparing rape and physical assault is incorrect as they are two different classes. Rape should be compared with the worst forms of physical assault, while physical assault should be compared to sexual assault in general.
/r/MensRights09/10/13 12:39 AM
2

In that case, it should be agreed to before hand. If you are in any other arrangement where you give up your career for benefits and to help others, and then things go south, do you get to have the same type of deal? Only if it was agreed to beforehand.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 12:11 AM
6

Don't worry, soon having sex will be a means to a common law marriage even when living apart.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 12:10 AM
-2

Love is just a chemical reaction in the brain, it feels amazing for several years, but it rarely lasts forever. I could say the pain a child feels from being molested in just a chemical reaction in the brain, but that does nothing to reduce the reality of it. Telling people in love that it doesn't actually matter is not going to work. Instead, you need to convince them that they don't need marriage to prove their love and that their love is strong enough to survive without marriage. Make partner…
/r/MensRights08/10/13 12:08 AM
2

And rape is a harsher degree of sexual assault compared to being groped.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 12:04 AM
3

Which may be a result of how or society reacts and conditions us to all the matters involved. Of course, that isn't someone one can actually change, so you cannot dismiss the pain and damage even if cultural in nature.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 12:04 AM
5

It actually depends. Getting raped is the 'high end' of sexual assault. As such, it is always worse than a 'low wend' physical assault. But there are cases where getting raped is the preferred choice, when it involves a 'high end' physical assault like getting shot, perhaps multiple times. When you compare 'low end' physical and sexual assault, you'll find that people will at least sometimes pick the sexual assault.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 12:02 AM
2

I really don't think it was needed for that post.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 11:59 PM
1

You are confusing mensright with feminisms.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 09:49 PM
4

Real incest can result in babies that have more hereditary diseases. So can many other relationships that are fully legal. No need to ban it if all consent.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 09:46 PM
4

Well this one clearly shouldn't be a crime. Two consenting adults and all that jazz.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 09:45 PM
5

It was originally a 13 year old girl, I can confirm that. But even worse, I believe it said she was drunk during the incident. There is also a line saying if it was rape, it was 'good rape'. Drunk child rape? Good if woman, bad if man.
/r/MensRights29/09/13 09:50 PM
1

3rd wave feminists are just about uniformly sex-positive. No they aren't. There are many sex positive and sex negative ones. The sex positive ones tend to be the more rationale ones who often could be called humanist or equalist except for the pressure put on by other feminist to keep the name feminist.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 12:17 PM
2

The problem here is it isn't just feminist. The law and social opinion behind child pornography is such that anyone under 18 who engages in sexting is by default at least a victim (and often, per the law, a child pornographer). Sex negative feminists and moral conservatives are together backing this. Sex positive feminist along with moral liberals are taking the view 'her body, her choice what she does with it'.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 12:16 PM
5

It shouldn't even factor into this, because any custodial parents knowing the genetic history of the child is in the child's best interest. If the father thinks the child is his when it isn't, he will interpret the child's healthcare through his own genetic knowledge. He is at risk of A but not at risk of B, he will likely assume the child is somewhat the same and take that into account in how he raises and cares for the child. But what if the child's actual father is at risk for B but not for A…
/r/MensRights23/09/13 01:21 AM
2

It is also important to teach your teenager to respect the bodily autonomy of others. Teaching them that authority figures can do what they want with the genitalia of minors is not a healthy lesson to learn.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 12:19 PM
3

My body my choice apparently only applies to women. Apparently? It does only apply to women.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 12:17 PM
-1

Rape is sex when a person does not consent. None of this 'well the consent didn't count' BS. Now, a drunk person who doesn't consent is raped. That they are too drunk to fight back doesn't change anything, it is still rape, just as if someone was too scared or shocked to fight back. It is rape completely due to the lack of consent given, it has nothing to do with the drunkenness. Drunk sex, where both parties consent, is not rape because there is consent.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 12:14 PM
–

You should only judge people based on the evidence of them you have at hand. There is no evidence of her being a thief or a member of the KKK.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 12:10 PM
1

Coerced sex isn't even the correct term. It is more like 'bartered sex'. As in 'I'll do X if you do Y, even though I don't want to do X and you don't want to do Y'.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 12:57 AM
0

That is what is best for the child. Perhaps holding the best interest of the child as the ultimate goal, to the extent even rights are ignored, is what is stupid?
/r/MensRights22/09/13 12:37 AM
2

For female rapist it makes sense. When you commit a crime, you lose control over your body.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 11:43 AM
2

Charge her with rape, and legally allow a man to decide if his female rapist must have an abortion or not (once you commit a crime, you lose control over your body, such as being forced to go to prisons).
/r/MensRights20/09/13 11:41 AM
1

Ban abortions. The problem is that feminist have changed the definition of 'child' so that it only starts counting as a child when it is in the best interest of the mother.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 11:41 AM
2

By having unprotected sex you already knew that your partner might get pregnant. If she does and doesn't want an abortion you should pay for the kid. After all its YOUR kid too. If you don't want kids take safer routes. If you choose to have unprotected sex with a man bareback and get pregnant, and he wants it, then you don't get to have an abortion because you knew the risks involved.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 11:40 AM
1

Actually either. In general the second option is seen as better as it results in neither party having control over the other, but both parties having control over the other is also a 'fair' option, though against our standard principals of rights.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 11:38 AM
1

Hmm... I'm pretty sure you can pretty painlessly kill a 5 year old.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 11:23 PM
2

In all honesty, I would expect that a similar proportion of men would do the same if in the same situation. They just are never in the same situation.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 12:40 PM
5

The problem here is that these studies are based on application of the law, and do not take into account social effects, namely that female molesters are allowed to pass and will not be punished as the child (especially when male) is told to see the attention/molestation as a gift. These studies cannot be applied past the subject pool. The vast majority of child molester who are punished are male. But you cannot say this implies that the vast majority of all child molesters are male.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 11:57 AM
5

What is funny is that they got some parts right. Take this: Paedophiles can be bisexual but more commonly will prefer children or the one gender, males or females. Most people have some misconception that pedophiles are mostly bisexual, but studies have shown that pedophiles tend to actually prefer one or the other. But yet, they get other parts so wrong. For example: They will have vast image collections, and hidden away a collection of child erotica and child-adult pornography. This is false. …
/r/MensRights19/09/13 11:55 AM
2

And just for the record, I don't know how far your knowledge of history or current events goes, but women are given advantages in education and the workplace for a good reason, and the reason is that men historically have, and currently get those advantages by default. No they didn't. The rich got them, not the men. You might want to take a second to look down, not just up.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 11:46 AM
3

You don't go for the full conversion. You find out what the person thinks and push them slightly out of their comfort zone. Any further and they can react negatively and actually end up going in the opposite direction. So, given an individual you know nothing else about, it is best to not do much at all unless they approach you, and in that case, you pick something that should appeal to the majority of the population. For example, use 'best interest of the child' something most people agree with…
/r/MensRights18/09/13 01:49 AM
3

Not if you are fired with cause or you quit without cause.
/r/MensRights17/09/13 02:41 AM
1

You can't do that either because those options can be coerced if not outright forced. Instead, we need to run a massive education campaign that charged does not equate convicted, and this needs to be done for all crimes. Sex crimes are the ones most needing it, but 'no smoke without fire' is a common thinking for a lot of people about most crimes.
/r/MensRights16/09/13 11:22 AM
1

You don't disengage fully from sex then get dressed then sit down and talk about it. You stop but are left in a position that would still be quite sexual/intimate in nature.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 12:27 PM
2

The problem is that we identify those charged with a crime to prevent secret arrests.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 12:13 PM
4

Non-consent to what? Think about a guy getting a blow job and the women (who may not be experienced at this) begins to use her teeth. Most guys will stay to stop doing that, but they don't mean the blow job, but using teeth.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 12:11 PM
5

There is a difference between doing something to someones body against their will that results in a discharge part of their body that can be restored and murder.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 03:47 AM
1

Abortion is treated as murder or not based on the feels involved, logic need not apply.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 03:46 AM
1

Seeing that coming would have been rape, so be glad you didn't.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 03:44 AM
3

And that is the day society will finally admit there is nothing (or very little wrong) with being a pedophile... or at least a female one. We have already gone over this before. Society, especially a subset of the feminist portion, words under a Blue Orange Morality, where they hold completely different standards. Thinks like consent aren't actually important and are only treated as important as a smokes screen. Instead, they work off a far more simple standard. Female sexuality good, male sexua…
/r/MensRights15/09/13 03:39 AM
1

That would be 'child molester', not 'pedophile'. As far as a legal since, they likely don't use either word and define it based on some degree of sexual assault.
/r/MensRights14/09/13 03:14 AM
1

Because it can be quite difficult to defend against charges from long ago.
/r/MensRights13/09/13 03:48 AM
1

Not guilty means there is not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. But, it doesn't imply that the accusation is false either. To be sure of that, we would need evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of a false accusation. If you don't have strong enough evidence either way, you just let both parties go their own way.
/r/MensRights13/09/13 03:39 AM
1

The problem is that there is clear bias in when the opposing point of view is even allowed to be stated and how it is stated when allowed.
/r/MensRights10/09/13 11:23 PM
1

Even better is the double standard on 'her body, her choice'. Present a 15 year old who wants an abortion. "Her body, her choice!" they will cry out. But then offer them that if it is her body and her choice, that means that if she wants to stay pregnant... or perhaps even get pregnant, it is her body and thus her choice. And being her body and thus her choice to become pregnant, it is her choice if she wants a 20 year old as the father. Suddenly, her body, not her choice. (Might want to start a…
/r/MensRights06/09/13 02:46 AM
2

Thinking like a rapist is being a rapist. She might not have raped yet, but she is a rapist. (I'm sure it shouldn't take too long to find a feminist author who actually agrees with me... well except about guys, not girls...)
/r/MensRights06/09/13 02:40 AM
0

Honestly, it is probably a good definition of abuse. The problem is that you never see how many men have been abused, because the number would be as high if not higher. Why? Because abusive things happen all the time and are largely unreported. The problem happens when we start erasing the differences between abuse and abuse worthy of intervention.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 10:31 PM
7

Political goals are never so simple. They have both agreeable goals and non-agreeable ones wrapped together. In this case, the non-agreeable one is finding a way to punish the Johns who tend to be male while not punishing the prostitutes that tend to be female.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 01:59 AM
4

Yes and no, depending on what people are meaning here by coerced. When people talk about prostitutes being coerced, they can mean a lot of different things. Some are talking about human trafficking, where it is have sex or be physically assaulted. Others are talking about people who feel they have no better job, and thus are 'coerced' under threat of financial penalty (aka, no more income). The thing is, people legitimately use the last argument against prostitution, saying that many people do i…
/r/MensRights04/09/13 01:58 AM
3

company I read this as computer, making what you said even more eccentric.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 12:47 PM
7

A square circle? I choose you, non-Euclidean multidimensional geometry.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 04:59 AM
4

Hmm... on second thought, that might not go over so well. In retrospect, I probably shouldn't come up with devious things to do with a pregnancy test on the fly. Won't end well.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 03:44 AM
22

There are quite some funny things that can be done with this, even as a guy, from silly to outright evil. For example: Leave one in your trashcan where it is easy to see. Better if you are known to be single. Toss one into the woman's bathroom at work, near the trashcan but not in it. Watch the gossip get going. Take one to a school and drop it near a trashcan (but once again, not in it). For more evil results, use a middle school instead of a high school. Know some parents with a teenage daught…
/r/MensRights31/08/13 05:23 PM
1

Actual quantities are meaningless unless you can convert them into similar units. For example: Men work 100 time units and make 100 money units. Women work 90 time units and make 85 money units but also receive 10 flexibility units. Are those 10 flexibility units worth 5 money units? If they were worth less, women are underpaid. If they are worth more, women are paid more. But actually determining their value is very difficult, especially when people tend to value them differently.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 05:16 PM
-8

For the record, I believe that as long as the age of consent is 18, then both of these people are rapists. Why? See them both as someone who abuses their power to take advantage of others, but don't water down what it means for someone to be raped/be a rapist.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 02:43 AM
4

To be fair, 15 isn't 'little boy' or 'little girl'. That is less than a year away from being legal (except student/teacher is illegal until the younger is 18 and even then is a violation of professional ethics). All in all, that there was less than a half year before reaching the age of consent and since there were no drugs/violence/force/threats used would lower the punishment. But, her being a teacher is pretty bad and significantly raises the punishment while also making the interaction far m…
/r/MensRights29/08/13 05:08 AM
2

As opposed to? Cis-men? Or you could just say 'all the men'.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 05:00 AM
0

Women could not refuse to have sex with their husbands on the grounds that the act of marriage was seen as persistent and ongoing consent to sexual relations. You didn't get married if you didn't consent to sex. Moreover, sexual morality laws (such as sodomy laws) were designed to protect women from husbands asking for any "bizarre" or "unusual" sexual acts, given that consent was considered to be present and ongoing. In much of the US, a husband could not legally ask his wife to engage in anyth…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 11:12 PM
1

Honestly, it shouldn't matter how hard it is to disprove. If you can't prove (give evidence beyond a reasonable doubt) that it happened, then no one should be being called/labeled/ect, a rapist.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 11:08 PM
2

I believe in many countries outside of the U.S. it is legal to consent from 16+ but in the U.S. it is technically and legally a crime if you are more than 4 years older than a person below 16 (again, I could be wrong on those numbers). In general, yes. Note the below 16. 16/17 is legal in most states. Also, this is for sex. Making a nude photograph will get you thrown in jail unless you are 18+. And no, it doesn't make sense. Have random sex and perhaps have a child at 16? Go ahead. Make nude pi…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 02:57 AM
1

Out in the country, there are overall less people to date, and even more importantly, when you are real young, less people to even be friends with (due to there being so few people in walking/bike riding distance). Becoming friend with someone 4 years older/younger isn't so rare around 8-12 years old. And it is only reasonable that some of those relationships would develop romantic feelings in the following years. I never lived in the city, but from what I hear it is different as there is more t…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:43 AM
2

Not actually. A minor is someone under 18. Most people 16 and older can consent to sex, and there are exceptions that allow those younger to consent, even to an adult, though such exceptions are rare. But, even in those cases, a student cannot consent to sex with a teacher. I think this is important to note because this was actually a worse abuse of power. This wasn't some woman having sex with a teenage boy, this was a teacher who was abusing her power for a sexual purpose, which is inherently …
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:36 AM
4

If you can read this, you are privileged. You not only can read, but you can read English, which offers massive advantages in many areas. And not only that, you are online, with access to a wealth of knowledge. Compared to the average person, you have enough privilege to drown in. "Check your privilege" is something privilege millionaires say to slightly richer privilege millionaires as an attempt to draw the attention to themselves instead of those who are honestly privilege poor. Lucky for tho…
/r/MensRights26/08/13 11:48 PM
26

Some of them might be sociopaths, but just because you turn your anger outward is not evidence of that. People turn their anger towards what they think is their problem. Boys who commit suicide are tricked into believe the problem is themselves, that they are broken. Boys who turn violent on others end up thinking the others are at fault (though even then, they tend to target people who are no more responsible for the situation than they are).
/r/MensRights26/08/13 11:41 PM
1

but the ruling itself can work for both genders. Someone is new here. Overall, I agree with the first line. Think of it like consenting to oral sex doesn't mean you can force the individual to have vaginal sex. But don't think this will help protect men and don't think this won't be abused.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:07 PM
21

Rape is a terrible crime. It will forever scar its victim, the harm caused by the crime runs deep and is truly harrowing in scope. When we call something rape that isn't rape, or say a thing was rape when it was not, we are basically spitting on the wounds of real victims of this horrible crime. This is one of the biggest problems with statutory rape. The other is that actual child rapists, as in hands down, everyone agrees it was rape, are allowed to plea down to statutory rape, which not only …
/r/MensRights24/08/13 01:09 PM
-1

Where I lived, up until last year, actually said that. Well, not directly, but they didn't include Romeo and Juliet laws. Now they have one, but if both parties are 12 and under, the Romeo and Juliet laws no longer apply. While two 12 year olds having sex is abnormal, I don't thank the appropriate response is charging both of them with rape. I meant that 18-14 relationship is only questionably wrong, but breaking a court order to have sex, with someone the court specifically said not to, most de…
/r/MensRights23/08/13 12:07 AM
0

You never see people like you making this argument when it's a man in question. You haven't seen my posting history, have you? I personally am fine with loving consensual relationships with larger age differences. Definitely nothing 10 years or larger, but I'm okay with 5 years as long as both parties are respectful. Honestly, I see far more room for abuse between a 18/30 than a 15/20. Then again, I was raised in a place different from most on here, and so my experiences may be different.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 12:04 AM
-1

Let's be honest here: I don't believe you. I doubt that anyone here honestly believes you. I think you're a hypocrite, that this is just another form of special pleading. You're only making the 'but the law is wrong!' argument because a pretty girl might get sent to prison. I don't think you'd be making it if this were a boy fucking another boy, or a boy fucking a younger girl. Well, on the bright side, I'm sure you aren't stalking my posting history. Because if you were, you'd see that I often …
/r/MensRights23/08/13 12:01 AM
3

having sex with someone when it is very specifically illegal to have sex with that exact person is... it's not rape, but it's very much a rapist's attitude So when the law says no one under 16 can have sex at all, it is fine to say two 15 year olds should both be put on the sex offenders registry right next a 40 year old who raped a 4 year old?
/r/MensRights22/08/13 11:06 AM
1

Should someone in a relationship with another only a few years younger get no sentence, be treated like a rapist, or be given a punishment somewhere between the two ends?
/r/MensRights22/08/13 10:58 AM
5

So the question here is, which response is correct (or perhaps it is an average of the two)?
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:08 AM
3

You can always offer a confidence interval. Even if it is (0-0) at 95% confidence.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:06 AM
10

If anything, longer sentences cost society more while also making the people less likely to adjust when let out. While there are a few people who shouldn't even be let out again, they are in the vast minority of people who who are made more dangerous because of such long sentences.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 12:09 AM
4

No, that is just trying to push the agenda by getting people to think of overweight females as cute.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 04:26 PM
6

'too drunk'. As in, just a little drunk is acceptable. So according to feminist, these vans are encouraging rape. Even the ones who wrote these message know how must BS there is in them.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 04:16 PM
3

The parents of the younger girl are the ones pressing charges, and they have the legal right to do so. Perhaps they shouldn't. Many parents would legally prevent their children from having sex til married if possible, but that doesn't mean they should have the right to control the body of another person. The parents should get as much say over if someone should have sex as they should over an abortion, which by the time someone in a teenager means basically none. Or do you think teenagers should…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 12:21 PM
2

Falling back on an unjust law is stupid. Under your reasoning, men don't get raped because the law explicitly state you must be penetrated, not enveloped, for it to count as rape. And with gender bias in sentencing what it is, the only way we can even hope to get something like equal enforcement this century is to have clearly spelled out limits for what's legal and stick to them like glue. We can just remove the law and stop enforcing it. We have other laws against rape. Why do we need a law ag…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 12:12 PM
3

The correct response is that the Matriarchy sexualizes male characters while forcing players of both genders to play with female power fantasies. Or maybe I got that backwards.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 04:07 AM
5

If they were in a relationship and the younger party doesn't want to press charges, then I say no charges should be pressed regardless of age. Why? Doesn't matter where you set the cut off at, there will eventually be two cases right on either side of the cut off and you will not be able to give a reason why one should be child rape and the other consensual sex. If we must make it illegal, we need a rolling penalty, so that even if 14/18 is illegal, it is a slap on the wrist and some community s…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 03:58 AM
2

The last bullet point is quite false. Couples constantly engage in sexual activities while one party is, either at the start or end, sleeping. As long as all is agreed upon and consented to before hand, there isn't a problem. People want to keep trying to make definitions of rape that don't actually fit how people act. Also to note, this is likely going on the complete opposite side of the spectrum. When my little sister goes off to college, I'm going to tell her to watch her drink at all times,…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 03:55 AM
17

heretic rapist!
/r/MensRights13/08/13 12:25 AM
1

I feel we recognize it in all areas where it seems to exist. Who wouldn't? More evasive yet?
/r/MensRights11/08/13 10:00 PM
6

Not implicit consent, reading body language. The catch is, if you are going to read body language for consent, then you better be reading it for when someone changes their mind or doesn't want to consent. Also to note, it is not very hard to ask for a confirmation before doing anything. If you need help making 'asking for confirmation' sexy, I'm sure /r/sex has some tips they can give you on how to do it in a manner that doesn't destroy the mood.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 04:04 PM
1

Yes, if the claim is just 'porn'. What we don't know is how different types of porn work. We do know that porn, on average, is strongly correlated with a decrease of rape. BUT, it is possible for subsets of porn to be correlated with an increase in rape, these just need to be a minority. But I don't know of any studies that break down types of porn, so while we know the overall effect is to lower the rate of rape, we don't know any of the details.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 04:02 PM
1

Because of sexism in the previous levels of school meaning their grades are not as high as females so that less of them can even make the cut (or get a needed scholarship). Those that can go still are applying (thus the 40%).
/r/MensRights09/08/13 10:09 PM
-2

Yes, lower paying jobs have lower stress, and women do not feel pressured to be the primary provider so they are more open to taking lower stress/lower pay jobs than men are. Men, at least those who want to be seen as fitting their expectations, are not given the same options to go easy. This is best codified in law by those places that determine child support off what a man could be able to earn (often working the most stressful if not most dangerous job for his given skill set) instead of what…
/r/MensRights09/08/13 01:53 AM
5

Who says it is simply choice? Perhaps the gender favoritism in school means that more of them realize they don't even have a chance of being accepted?
/r/MensRights09/08/13 12:06 AM
6

It doesn't indicate a crisis in the acceptance portion. It does indicate a crisis sometime before that which causes men to under apply for college.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 09:24 PM
2

Because he was there with a similarly aged woman. It is like a shield of sorts.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 10:18 PM
1

You couldn't have been older than 24 or 25 and you were clearly at the ballpark yesterday to spend some time with the lovely young woman you had your arm around. He was clearly there with a woman who was right there beside him. That is about the best way to not be accused of being a pedophile in a park.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 10:18 PM
3

I think most of you missed the point I wasn't being serious about that being their intent. Of course it isn't, but it would be funny if we began insisting that was their point.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 11:13 AM
0

I wonder if there is some fact to this. Last year, I heard some about a feminist who was one of the leaders of the movement who became interested in the topic when she noticed what it meant to be feminine and that she herself was feminone.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 02:27 AM
10

"Maybe you have a point. Kinda like how the founders of feminism looked pretty hideous and thus couldn't benefit from the positives of sexism. Hey, there was even a well known feminist author who wrote that she was pulled into feminism when she noticed what it meant to be feminine and that she was being excluded because she was feminone." Keep building on the comment to make it more extreme depending upon the topic.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 02:26 AM
-28

Oh come on, you can do better than that. We all know that the admins are supporting SRS because SRS are making feminist look bad. SRS cry racism/sexism/ableism/skinnyism/*ism at every little thing, diluting calls by feminist and equality who point out real sexism/racism. Now, when anyone says something is sexist/racist, instead of taking such a claim serious, make jokes about SRS invading. SRS is a counter feminism movement that works by making feminism look ridiculous. And of course the admins …
/r/MensRights06/08/13 02:23 AM
2

I don't watch it, but I think if the porn was created under legitimate consent it shouldn't be treated differently. Agreed. But I think if it is created without consent, it should be treated as child porn. Remember, child porn is bad because children can't consent. Thus, actual rape porn, where at least one person is not consenting, should be treated the same. We can't say that it is better or worse because of how old the victim is.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 03:00 PM
0

The question is not which is the minimum for either gender, but the average (and standard deviation and confidence interval) of each. Of course, you'll never see data like that in a news story.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:05 AM
1

The real question here is which sentence is correct. Statutory rape of a teenager and child rape should not be considered as similar as they are by law or by society.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:04 AM
-1

14 very well can be past puberty. While individual cases do differ, on average that is about 4 to 5 years after when puberty starts these days. What you need to remember is that as for maturity, the brain is still developing til the mid to late 20s. As for a 21/17 relationship, that really depends upon the relationship itself. I come from the middle of no where country where such relationships are far more common and are far more often an actual relationship. From what I hear about the city, you…
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:03 AM
0

Additionally, there may have been only one victim. Absent drugs/alcohol, a 16 year old can consent in most states and in many modernized countries.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 12:02 AM
2

If that is the case, marriage at any age is too young.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 10:47 AM
1

What about commenting without voting?
/r/MensRights29/07/13 10:46 AM
5

I'd say it is possible in a hypothetical relationship where both parties try to make it possible. But in one where the woman's sex drive controls the sexual interactions, unless the man is near asexual, it ain't happening.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 10:46 AM
2

Then that is obviously not the highest as you know this is applies to a specific group. What is the highest in general. Also, what group is the 3.7% from? Perhaps these are people who are not suspicious.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 10:17 AM
2

What was the maximum? If it was 93.7%, that means something quite different than if it was 7.3%.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 04:15 AM
6

Phobia is like philia. On some words, they have one meaning. On other words, they have a quite different meaning even though they are following the same format. Consider an audiophile.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 11:37 AM
1

When we get to the point of people facing jail time for not paying child support on children who aren't there, the ACLU should be involved.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 10:16 AM
5

People also don't like it when considering if accused rapists get custody. You tell people who complain about accused rapists getting custody that the best interest of the child, not the feelings of the mother, should be used to determine custody and they all quickly show how little they actually believe that logic.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 10:09 AM
-1

Men are not machines that you put X into to get sex out of, even when it is sex. This is a thread showing an attitude of entitlement to sex. Had the OP been male, this would have never been accepted and people would have been shamed for acting this way.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:27 PM
2

Meh. All the comments are nothing compared to the one person saying a 19 year old woman cannot rape a 23 year old man and acting like they would find such a woman not guilty despite the evidence. Which is a comment I just read in that thread.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:26 PM
0

I suspect many are. Or more so, they constantly put out work regardless thanks to gender roles, so they would quite enjoy if their SO's would consider putting some sex in.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 10:06 PM
8

One of the biggest reason for age of consent to have been expanded to adulthood (old age of consent laws use to barely even cover preteens) was older men impregnating and leaving lower class teenage girls. This resulted in conservatives (who didn't want to have to pay for them) teaming up with feminist (who wanted to punish the men for leaving) to increase age of consent laws. This is also why so many laws have or until recently had loopholes for marriage. If the father married the mother, peopl…
/r/MensRights25/07/13 09:52 PM
1

I'm not saying any of that. What I'm saying is ... that's the way things are. Wut? Adding a 'from a biological view' doesn't change this.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 09:49 PM
1

Not no one. But the people getting pregnant at 16 are the least likely group to be able to handle marriage that young.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 09:47 PM
16

A new approach to ending teen pregnancy! Brilliant!
/r/MensRights25/07/13 09:46 PM
2

including forcing him and his brother to perform sexual role-play with each other, wasn't the primary cause of his suicide is beyond naive. I'm going to go out on a limb here and claim this study should be fully discarded and not used as either evidence for or against any theories. Perhaps gender can be mutated, but it doesn't work when someone is forcing you to sex roleplay with a sibling?
/r/MensRights25/07/13 11:36 AM
2

They are already forced to censor certain content, no? It seems the discussion should be what content should be censored.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 11:04 PM
0

Our experience of reality is mutable. Namely with the help of drugs. I do suspect most of those mutating reality in this way are not working to understand it.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 11:02 PM
2

There is some actual rape porn. Likely to be hosted on gore sites, not on porn sites. The real stuff should be illegal.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 11:44 PM
1

It happens far more than it is reported on. But here is one case I have found. http://www.denverpost.com/ci_4783650
/r/MensRights19/07/13 10:57 AM
1

In which case we still need to stop having prison be the replacement for a mental healthcare system.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:32 AM
1

Actually, I think it should. Just as it is better for the guilty to go free than for the innocent to be imprisoned, it is better for the guilty to get of with less than they deserve than to get worse punishment than they deserve.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:31 AM
0

No, at least two groups. Religious conservatives were a big part of the push for age of consent laws, which is why you see so many that have exceptions for marriage. Actually, if it wasn't for Lawrence v. Texas, we'd still have many of these laws going up into adulthood.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:30 AM
2

Truth be told, age of consent laws were never meant for cases like this. Back when they were made the thought was that couples should just get married to legalize it (and child marriage was allowed back in the day). They were only meant for men who would use girls for sex and then leave them when they got pregnant (it took many years before boys were even considered worth protecting under the same laws and even now we are having trouble getting women prosecuted equally under the laws). And in ge…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:27 AM
5

Or a 12/13 year old couple... in which case they are both dead (yes, some states will charge both with rape, especially if the female is the older party).
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:24 AM
2

What about statutory rape where a high school senior is going to be executed for a relationship with a freshman, even if the relationship was serious and committed.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:24 AM
10

He is free because there is a reasonable chance that what you said may have been what happened, and one pillar of our justice system is that reasonable doubt is enough to result in a not guilty verdict.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 12:01 AM
5

Not really, assuming it only happens once per every 64 cases. Now, if it happens half the time or something, yeah, there is something else going on.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 11:59 PM
2

Except, consent is actually a very complex topic that so many people try to simplify because they don't want to appear like a rapist. For example, there is a point where one is too drunk to give consent. It isn't after the first drink, but it does exist. So where is it and why is it there? Same with age. There are other power differences our society tends to allow, but assuming you go with some age of consent law, should actually be banned. Why do we have a double standard in that regard? Also, …
/r/MensRights16/07/13 04:10 AM
2

If a young girl has sex, she is the one left to carry the baby. So as long as the man practices safe sex, no problem then? Uh... I think there definitely still is a problem.
/r/MensRights15/07/13 05:02 AM
2

If you believe in censorship , the suppression of dissenting opinions and views , or hold fast to the idea that we shouldn't be exposed to anything that anybody anywhere may find offensive then fine ... refuse to buy the book. There is a major difference between laws censoring the book and stores choosing to self censor the book. The latter should not be banned, though we should pay attention to what it says about our culture when self censorship does occur.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 02:24 PM
1

Child pornography should be banned because there is an actual victim. As a society, we should not mix up child pornography with things like this book which has no actual victim. To do so mixes up our reason for banning child pornography. We should not ban things because they are controversial, disgusting, or conflicting with the moral standards of the time. We should ban things that harm others. By mixing up something that harms others with something that doesn't, it switches our reasoning from …
/r/MensRights14/07/13 02:22 PM
2

I wonder, had Lolita been stripped of its status as a classical work, if it would be allowed or not today?
/r/MensRights14/07/13 02:16 PM
2

having a 5 year old perform sex acts on her You think at least around here we would say 'molesting a 5 year old'. But no, if the molester is a woman, they just get the child to 'perform sex acts'. sigh
/r/MensRights14/07/13 12:14 PM
5

Do you mean non-consensual sex rape or consensual except for legal technicality rape?
/r/MensRights14/07/13 03:35 AM
5

Except for the part where if you are in some countries in Europe, one is legal and one isn't. Also in many US states, one is legal if you marry first, rarely does that apply to the other. Finally, from a scientific point of view, there is a large difference between being attracted to someone who is clearly too young to be fertile and someone who is.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 03:33 AM
8

One donates denotes statutory rape, one denotes actual rape. Edit: I should stop posting after midnight.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 03:30 AM
2

There are differences if sound is included or not, so check your laws regardless.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 04:24 AM
2

Except the part where, short of being physically harmed yourself, a female claiming fear/sexual harassment will have the upper hand even when they are the only one doing wrong.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 04:23 AM
2

Except isn't it 'all men and women who meet the standard accepted'.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 10:32 PM
2

When completely unprompted and when dealing with preteens and younger, a report of sexual abuse is rarely a lie. Granted, as society changes and the thought of lying about sexual abuse (or even threatening to lie about it) is exposed more to children, this likelihood of them lying about it will increase. What people need to remember is that we should have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt before we convict and that a man hanging out with a child is far more likely to be either family or friend …
/r/MensRights12/07/13 10:27 PM
10

That you thought he wasn't being sarcastic til you saw the /s is quite telling of what the opinion about the group he was mimicking is.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 10:22 PM
4

Take care printing them, especially from a school printer, as most printers will mark at least what printer printed them and when. This can be used to determine who printed it.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 11:35 AM
5

Yeah, just getting happy with a stapler on a board where you can stable up papers sounds far better and more legal.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 11:34 AM
3

In most states, 16 is the age of consent. What is stupid is how most the USA (and most of Europe) says that a 16 year old is able to consent, but a few states still have some very conservative anti-sex views that ruin things.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 11:29 AM
3

Then this little thing called 'society' happened and that stopped applying.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 11:27 AM
4

Statistically, this will be counted as one of the rapist that got away.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 11:59 PM
2

In and of itself, it isn't. It is when men get attacked for objectifying beauty by women who claim they do not objectify at all that it becomes one.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 11:58 PM
50

Hey look, real rape culture. And look who is actually supporting rape culture.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 11:49 AM
2

4% is basically the cases proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Had we used the same standard to measure rape, there would be far less rape in feminist statistics.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:25 AM
5

By then they are adults and society doesn't care about them anymore.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 12:07 AM
1

This is why my mother, who was a schoolteacher, retired now, had kids coming into her grade 5 class that could only read at a grade 2 level. From what I heard of schools in my area, if that was the worse she had, she was lucky. Then again, you said Canada and I'm in the US.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 12:07 AM
-1

Photos? No. Names? Yes. Why? Because we need to have a public record of who is being charged or arrested for crimes and what crimes they are being charged with or arrest for. That being said, the media and the population at large should treat them as innocent til proven guilty in a court of law.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 12:05 AM
1

Because men are responsibilities, not rights, within our current legal framework (with regards to reproduction).
/r/MensRights09/07/13 11:55 PM
1

Look at the current reproduction rights men have? Effectively none. They are told that if they don't want to be fathers, they shouldn't have sex. So apply this to the theoretical situation where men could get pregnant. He would still have zero reproduction rights and thus abortion would be illegal.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 11:12 AM
2

SRD would be very interested in such a subreddit.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 11:14 PM
-4

If men could get pregnant, abortion would be illegal.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 11:12 PM
5

Age of consent laws were not intended to prevent children from being taken advantage of sexually by an older adult, they were meant to control a person's sexuality (the SCOTUS ruled in 2004 that you couldn't do that for adults, but the laws did exist before then to control adults as well). While we have recently begun adding close in age exceptions to the age of consent laws, not everywhere has it, and shit like this keeps happening. See also children being charged for sexting. Because consensua…
/r/MensRights08/07/13 11:08 PM
1

We still have to get down to defining what we mean by rape as well. Are we talking sex while being slightly tipsy? When a woman changes her mind during the sex act but does not let her partner know about it?
/r/MensRights07/07/13 01:29 PM
2

Fine, but a woman who lies about rape and gets a man testicles crushed also doesn't get the 8th amendment to apply to her. So for her cruel and unusual punishment, I suggest a decade in a male prison as part of the general population. Oh wait, now you care about cruel and unusual punishments...
/r/MensRights07/07/13 01:27 PM
6

something something something Mortal Kombat is a male expression of his desire to sexually dominate women something something something.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:38 AM
0

It is relevant to a discussion on cheating, which is what the post I responded to was talking about.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 01:09 PM
3

There is a vast difference between 'You have all the choices, if you choose to have a child, it is your responsibility' and 'Hey, let's abuse the child I'm raising.'
/r/MensRights06/07/13 04:50 AM
-2

We should add this equally applies to anyone who withholds sex for the purpose of manipulation, as that only servers to destroy the marriage and family as well. Before someone tries to misquote me, please note I said 'for the purpose of manipulation'. I am not talking about any of the other reasons a person may choose to do this.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 04:42 AM
12

A few years ago I took a class on child abuse. We have to read a number of scientific papers, and one was about how they do estimates of abuse since it was so unreported. One standard way was assuming every single case was true. They had one single exception, claims related to custody. In those cases, they assumed none of them were true. If a child comes up to you, unprompted, and reports abuse, believe them. If you hear reports of abuse tied to a custody battle, don't believe anything without e…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 04:40 AM
2

That if he sees a fetus as a child or not is quite relevant to how he is going to feel concerning the abortion.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 03:11 AM
-16

But understand this: she isn't 'killing your child'. She is terminating a pregnancy. Those are the same thing. Oh yes, if you don't believe a fetus is a child, then of course they are separate. But if you are talking to someone who does, you are going to have to do a lot more than that to convince them that a being they consider a person is not to be considered a person. That is something we normally do not do.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 11:39 PM
3

You can see the actual effects by this being a far more active place than many feminist subs. I use to post there, but things got so restrictive that I stopped.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 06:47 AM
2

You forget the part where in some cases the law attempts to keep mothers out of prison for the good of the children.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:54 AM
5

By the older definitions that the common populace uses, many if not most MRAs are actually feminist. It is only when you get to the newer definitions of the word that the problems arise... but if you ever watch society at large, those new definitions tend to be at odds with most people. If anything, MRAs are often better classical feminist than others (wanting victims of DV to be treated equally regardless of sex, wanting custody to be equal regardless of sex (though other factors may change the…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:52 AM
–

There really can't be proof. In which case there shouldn't be convictions. A difficulty in proven guilt is not just reason to lower the standard of guilt that needs to be proven.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 10:45 PM
1

In which case that is effectively a marriage. If you only focus on relationships that do not legally count as marriages, it is far easier to get out of them than relationships that do legally count as marriage.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 10:43 PM
1

No it isn't. Why? Because those intent on abusing a child will most often not randomly target a stranger child and start abuse, but will become close to a child and then start abusing them.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:09 PM
2

No there doesn't. If it gets to court, the average jury will try to decide if the kid is lying or if the man is lying. They will side with the kid and that will be the end of you. The average doesn't seem able to understand 'I think the kid is telling the truth, but there isn't enough evidence for guilt beyond reasonable doubt... so not guilty'. To them, not guilty is calling the child a liar, and they aren't going to do that.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:05 PM
1

I think the catch is that in a LTR, you can get out far easier.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:02 PM
1

Hey, where I grew up, male and female firefighters get equal pay. Which is actually nothing, as all firefighters there are volunteers.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:35 AM
3

"Say yes even when you don't want to," How about a NO to that? How about instead we say... 'Be willing to sometimes do something for no other reason than to make your partner happy.' That applies to sexual and non sexual things.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:32 AM
1

To think that a 14 year old is as much of a child as a 4 year old or that a 19 year old is as much of an adult as a 39 year old is unreasonable. Most people will agree 4/39 => 39 in prison for a long time. But, 14 and 19 are close enough that, especially if no abuse if found after being investigated, it should be legal. 19/49 is legal, even when there is a clear power and financial different. 14/19 could be two kids in high school (or two college freshmen, I knew a guy who started college at 14)…
/r/MensRights01/07/13 11:55 PM
1

Any 19 year old if any gender shouldn't be sleeping with a 14 year old of any gender, depending on the law that can be prosecuted or not. Do you mean as in 'it shouldn't because it is morally wrong' or 'it shouldn't happen because it tends to be an unwise choice'? I'll advise people to not do certain things even though they have the right to do it.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 03:50 PM
1

But men can be forced to provide for the child up til 18 (and in some cases I've heard of college also being included, not sure of the accuracy of such claims though).
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:53 PM
1

More like time to take the evidence before a lawyer and ask them what your options are. Likely, it will be sue, but there is a good chance they will tell you how and may ever work for a cut of the payout.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:55 AM
0

What it will be and what it should be are two different things. What it should be is an investigation into the relationship. If abuse if found, then punish. No abuse in a long term relationships? Leave them alone. I don't care if it personally offends or disgusts you, we have already determined that your personal feelings are no reason to violate the rights of others. That is how it should be, be it m/f, f/m, m/m, f/f, or some other option I'm not aware of.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:54 AM
5

You forgot the part where they get her drunk first.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 10:47 AM
3

You likely can't because there is that much sexism in every level of the justice system for child sexual abuse. The child is less likely taught that it is clearly wrong. The child is less likely to be believed if they report it. Once they are believed, it is less likely to be escalated to the law. The law is less likely to investigate. If they do investigate, they require much more evidence before they go to charge the woman. If they do charge the woman, they are far more likely to offer a deal …
/r/MensRights29/06/13 10:46 AM
3

Nope, it is sexism against women. See, boys are being told they can enjoy sex while girls are being told that they must remain pure for their future husbands. /s
/r/MensRights29/06/13 10:43 AM
1

A good troll has to have positive karma and lots of it. Pissing people off is not trolling.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:07 AM
2

It reminds me of when I was a kid and my mother use to ask me how many kids in my class were black. I had to sit down and actually think about it like if you had asked me how many kids had long hair; it wasn't an important detail to me. But she wanted to know because she had been raised in a much more racist environment that taught her to care.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:56 PM
–

I think a better way of looking at this, when you consider all the cases of sexual abuse and extremist feminist literature (like all PIV sex is rape), there is a sinister theme. It isn't that sexual violence and lack of consent is bad... no, this is a case of Blue Orange Morality. See, at the core is a belief that male sexuality is bad and than female sexuality is good. The most extreme cases of this are that child abuse by a woman is seen as beneficial and desirable to the victim while even con…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:50 PM
2

I often purposefully leave off the first / just to avoid creating a link when I don't see one as needed.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 09:09 PM
8

"13 year old girl raped by wrestling coach's sons. Community turns against rape victim. Father is driven out of his job as k-12 Principal. They wore t-shirts to school supporting the rapists" It should be reposted like this to r/news and lets see how people react.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 11:33 AM
1

Care to point out the parts that disagree with what I said?
/r/TheRedPill23/06/13 09:40 PM
1

I was just comparing how a slutty man might want a virgin bride to how a slutty woman might want a "virgin nice guy beta provider" when she's 30. Both of those are obvious hypocrites. Especially when they take in one step further and think they deserve such individuals. At which point the self entitlement is thick enough to cut with a spoon.
/r/TheRedPill23/06/13 01:30 PM
1

I have a penis, so if I want a girlfriend without a penis, I'm a hypocrite. No, that would make you a heterosexual in the vast majority of cases. If a girl sluts it up, but at 30 decides she wants to settle down with a nice guy that didn't sleep around, is she a hypocrite too? If she is looking to settle down with someone who focused on their career and hasn't be sleeping around a bunch, then yes. If she demands one of her multiple partners to settle down on her time, also yes. If she is looking…
/r/TheRedPill23/06/13 01:27 PM
1

That is rubbish! Maybe that is your opinion (would be sad), but the only ruin this produces is for men that view women who sleep around as "sluts" unworthy of marriage! I have no problem with an individual who has not slept around looking for someone who has a comparable number of partners. Now, if you have a man who has slept around quite a bit wanting a virgin bride... yeah, that is a problem with a large side of hypocrisy.
/r/TheRedPill23/06/13 04:02 AM
13

You also have welfare, for when child support doesn't happen or isn't enough. Then again, personally I don't think a child should suffer, but at the same time, there feels to be a difference between helping to support a family where the father was taken by tragedy vs. supporting one where the mother thought she didn't need a father to begin with. In a perfect world, everyone who be financially sound and have fulfillment in what intimate relationships they did have. Sadly, we don't live in a perf…
/r/TheRedPill23/06/13 04:00 AM
5

But see, this is sexism that hurts women by telling them they aren't are responsible for their actions, so we need to give more money to support women like this one who have been misled by society to think she isn't responsible for her own actions. By giving them more money we can teach them they are responsible for their actions. But we can't change the law to do the same because that would be showing hatred for women.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 03:17 AM
7

Since it is the use of their body against their will, I think rape should work. Imagine a woman being told she had to consent to sex or be put in jail. No feminist would consider her consent valid in such a case and it would be deemed rape.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 01:37 PM
-8

Instructions unclear, seat stuck in lid.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 04:01 AM
1

Nope. She abused any teach ethnic she had.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 04:00 AM
1

Hopefully it will be at birth so there isn't any time for the emotional connection to become strong, as breaking that can actually harm the child (the stronger the bond, the more harm done).
/r/MensRights22/06/13 01:59 AM
2

Not even religion. It is about what evidence we accept for objector status. We should still accept religious evidence, we just need to accept moral evidence as well.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 12:13 PM
1

Why did it take the daughter that long to tell? The mother died years ago, but the daughter as a teenager should have known better. I wonder if there was some legal screw up that mean the girl wasn't allowed to testify she had lied until she turned 18 or something like that. Also, did the state ever checked to see if she had been raped? If not, that should be a great reason to sue the state.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 12:10 PM
1

The problem is that actual child molestation doesn't tend to leave a victim. There is a chance for DNA evidence if the molestation is bad enough to include penetration, but not always. And even if you can prove penetration, without DNA to verify who did it, what should you do?
/r/MensRights21/06/13 12:08 PM
-2

Gets all 14 years... Suspended since she needs to raise the child...
/r/MensRights21/06/13 12:03 PM
1

Because the writes of the report are sexist and hate women. Had the writes not been so sexist, they would have included how women are forced to trade their bodies for shelter, having to degrade themselves into nothing more than sex objects, while the men are given are allowed their dignity while they live in the wilderness. Or something like that... sigh
/r/MensRights21/06/13 12:01 PM
1

Which is funny, because feminists usually state that we should be supporting and encouraging an individuals sexuality, not repressing or shaming it. You should know by now that individual implies female. Female sexuality si good, male sexuality is bad. In fact, the more extreme the feminist, the worst this gets. Look at the most extreme who think that all penis in vagina sex is a man raping a woman and who think women cannot rape (be the victim man, boy, or girl). In fact, the Vagina Monologues …
/r/MensRights19/06/13 11:41 AM
3

The problem is when feminist look at the man characters and instead say 'see, here are the males wanting to role play their power fantasies where they can take what they want because they are savages are heart' instead of 'hey look how society brainwashes males into want big unrealistic muscular bodies'. The core problem is they look at two similar trends and interpret them very differently to fit their ideology.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 11:38 AM
5

To be fair, OP said that in a comment, not in the OP.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 07:46 PM
7

The problem here is that if you bring up the relevant science, people start accusing you of defending pedophilia. This is one reason social sciences still cannot be trusted, because social influences on them are too strong. That being said, your way of handling this is only going to get your more downvotes. Also... He knew it was bad, but he most likely enjoyed it and kept going. Read the trauma myth. Most survivors of sexual abuse either have neutral or physically pleasurable feeling at the tim…
/r/MensRights15/06/13 01:59 PM
1

16 is the age of consent where I live. So the only crime here would be a violation of teaching ethics, for which she should likely lose her ability to teach, but not any more (unless actual fraud is found, such as altering grades for sex, in which case the crime is much worse).
/r/MensRights15/06/13 01:55 PM
2

Evolution doesn't work that way. Evolution doesn't have a reason. It does have a reason, one which you spell out in your next three lines. It does not have a purpose, but there is a reason things evolve. We gain things that are beneficial, we lose things that aren't, and things that are in between just tag along if they exist. But all this is sprinkled with chance. A may be better than B, but if B evolved first, then depending upon the relationship between A and B, A may never come about in that…
/r/MensRights14/06/13 08:12 PM
5

In fact, it isn't even really the opposite sex as much as the sexes working together. Sadly, the journalism on this is horrendous. Birth defects spike in women who bear children right before menopause. If you extrapolate from that data, it can be easy to see why having babies later in life would not be beneficial at all, especially in a setting where any group has less resources and thus babies from younger and older women had to compete for resources. While older men also have worse off childre…
/r/MensRights14/06/13 08:10 PM
2

First, let's get a something straight: women do NOT have some special privilege that let's them opt out of motherhood. Yes they do, it is abortions. Just many in our society use special pleading to say that their control of their bodies is the cause of their opt out. Yet a man doesn't get control over his body (if he doesn't work to support the child, he ends up in jail).
/r/MensRights14/06/13 03:13 AM
2

Once the baby is born both parents have equal rights and responsibility for the child. Funny how it is once the baby is born before the mother has responsibilities, but the fathers responsibilities begin at conception (thought they may be ended if the mother chooses to end the pregnancy).
/r/MensRights14/06/13 03:12 AM
2

because the kid "wanted it". If he really was 18, then don't you mean 'because the man wanted to have sex'. Yeah, a teacher having ex with an ADULT student is a violation of their teaching ethics, but it is not rape.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 03:10 AM
3

Over simplifying it greatly with this one. If we are talking about older children (think 17 year olds), people 'molest' 17 year olds because the laws are stupid. If we are talking about actual children (7 year olds), some molest due to being evil, others molest due to be delusional and thinking that their actions are actually good. Think of it this way, the crazy guy who wants to cut off your hand because he is convinced it is going to kill you is not evil, just crazy. In fact, he is actually wa…
/r/MensRights14/06/13 03:05 AM
0

Well the part where you want to tell 17 year old women what they can and cannot do with their own body. Chances are, if a 17 year old guy hooked up with a hot college women, you wouldn't be having any moral problems (though you might fake having them).
/r/MensRights14/06/13 03:02 AM
1

Except all the 16/17 year old minors who can consent in most states.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 03:01 AM
1

What about college professor and student? Are there great ethical concerns? Yeah. But being a breach of teaching ethics would not make such a case rape.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 03:00 AM
2

Minors can consent, but in limited cases. Teacher/student relationships never (to my knowledge) fall into those limited cases. Cases where minors can consent: Being an older minor (16+ in many places, 13+ in some countries), but note this tends to only count relationships without a power different (student/teacher is thus illegal). Being married (in some places being married allows you to consent younger, in other places, being married allows you to consent to your spouse regardless of age). If …
/r/MensRights14/06/13 02:59 AM
1

20.Changing jobs regularly That's the new normal of this economy.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 09:25 PM
1

The problem is when those specialist get perverse incentives, often times unintentionally, to find abuse.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 09:21 PM
2

A red ball attempts to climb a hill and is aided at times by a yellow triangle that helps it up the hill by getting behind it and pushing. At other times the red ball is forced back down the hill by a blue square. After watching the puppet show at least six times the babies were asked to choose a character. An overwhelming majority (over 80%) chose the helpful figure. Because being able to pick things that work together is the same as understanding sexual politics.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 11:34 AM
4

First off, being falsely convicted of child rape is far worse than rape, because you will be raped far more than once, you will be be denied freedom, and if you do survive, everyone will hate you and say you deserve it. Secondly, false accusations leading to convictions require multiple failures by multiple people who need to share in the blame, unlike a single act of rape.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 10:19 PM
1

You gotta out feels them. Tell them that the only women who were truthful about being raped are those who were beat up or who were killed by their rapist. All the others were lying. Saying it very convincingly, step back, and watch the fireworks show.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 10:16 PM
2

It should be noticeably less than the punishment received by the full grown adults attempting to bring about vigilante 'justice'.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 10:15 PM
3

If she can accuse someone of sexual assault, she can understand all the social dynamics that is required for a stiff punishment. A kind half her age can accuse someone. I completely reject this line of feels; please use some logic.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 10:13 PM
2

You can tell a person's true personal belief because they will forget that little fact as soon as the law matches up with what they want.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 11:55 AM
25

Actually it would be much worse. False allegations that lead to jail would compare to a woman being kidnapped for years and repeatedly raped AND society hating her and blaming her for it.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 11:52 AM
8

Second, I don't think it's fair to include society's reaction to a crime in determining the severity of the crime itself. You really need to go and study up on why crimes are bad. Certain crimes are far more harmful almost solely because of the way society reacts. A great example of this is child sexual abuse. One of the greatest differences in if a child is going to suffer greatly or if they will be resilient to the abuse is the way society reacts (with the reactions of those closer being more …
/r/MensRights10/06/13 11:50 AM
2

How do you supposed we punish an 11 year old? That is still a preteen. We need to punish the parents perhaps, but the biggest and largest problem is those who either don't let the courts handle it or try to bias the courts so that justice can't be found. Those are the ones who need punishment the most, especially if the accuser is an 11 year old girl who probably can't understand all the social dynamics of the situation.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 11:46 AM
1

Common law marriage... You might end up marriage without even doing anything. Might want to consider that.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 11:43 PM
3

Men have all the responsibilities and none of the rights.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 12:57 PM
2

Kid approaches dancer for kiss =/= adult approaching child for kiss. Major difference there.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 12:48 PM
1

Sexualizing children That is wrong. Also wrong to think that being under 18 means you don't have sexual desires. Striking a balance is hard, especially when you have one group that yells pedophiles when the younger party is a female under 21 (not 18, 21).
/r/MensRights09/06/13 12:47 PM
1

Basically the ways our laws work are screwed up. As long as consensual sex can be declared rape by legal fiat, they will remain screwed up.
/r/MensRights08/06/13 06:01 PM
1

The best interest is likely to allow the father to raise the child then. There have even been cases where fathers convicted... yes convicted... of raping their child have been allowed to keep custody because 'best interest of the child' wins (in that case, the mother and all known family was dead, so the only other option was foster care, where the child would have actually been at higher risk of being sexually abused than saying with her chemically castrated father... also the girl, who was a t…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 09:41 PM
2

I don't dislike corrective surgery. I dislike the attitude of a person who thinks they must fix things when there is no need to fix them. Also, there are long term costs to cosmetic surgery (think about breast enhancements and the long term risks that come with them).
/r/MensRights06/06/13 09:20 PM
3

Having sex with people while having sex with someone else who thinks the relationship is monogamous is dangerous to the other person. It isn't rape, but it isn't ethical behavior by any standard. That being said, which gender do you think such a law would mostly be used against?
/r/MensRights06/06/13 09:12 PM
1

Brand new poster, only other post is in feminism trying to start a war. Downvote bombs incoming (for OP).
/r/MensRights06/06/13 09:09 PM
1

Not role model, father. Especially after he has served his time in prison (or if he hasn't been convicted, in which case it should be a no-brainer). If the father is actively trying to go rape someone else, then they should be in prison.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 02:21 AM
1

Yet people want to ban the father from having rights when he has been accused/convicted of rape, even though he is of no danger to the child (unless he is also convicted of child rape, but that is a special case where he should be in prison for decades), even though the best interest of the child is to have two parents.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:59 AM
1

Does a rapist have rights to the child? Does an accused rapist have the right to defend himself? Well this is simple. See, you go with best interest of the child. As long as the individual is not a child rapist, then they aren't really a threat to the child, so the best interest of the child is for the father to be present in the child's life. If the mother dislikes this... well you'll have to just deal with it, just like men do every time best interest of the child ends up overriding their wish…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:58 AM
3

The problem is the whole 'store that information'. We are entering a time where we can tell more things than ever before about your DNA. The State should not be allowed to just collect it without due cause, and in this case, there is not due cause (no one harmed the baby the DNA is being taken from).
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:50 AM
1

Seems like that article was written by people who are just trying to ignore reality. Reality is that puberty hits earlier these days and that, thanks to puberty hitting earlier, people are becoming sexual beings earlier.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:01 PM
1

Real charges on bogus laws. They would have to focus on the real criminals, not the victimless crimes. I'm not seeing the bad side to this.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 12:00 PM
3

It if screws things up this just shows that things have already gone wrong. Personally I'm fine with grinding the courts to a halt. They'll stop going after victimless crimes and only focus on the real criminals.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 11:59 AM
2

The indignation people have about the concept of "friendzoning" is regarding the mindset that friendzonees appear to have; that if they treat a girl a certain way - the way in which they were taught is "nice" behaviour - then they are entitled to win her affection, following which, complaints seem to stem from people thinking that they did not get what they were owed. This wouldn't be a problem except for that this mind set is basically being taught by society as the way to win over a woman. Bas…
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:45 AM
1

Sad that you have to be an educated lawyer to even have a chance.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:39 AM
1

Not getting a free test would be a small claim as the cost is pretty low. So why not?
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:38 AM
0

Yeah, that full page ad is going to keep me from going back willingly. Or was there something else I was supposed to see but never got to?
/r/MensRights31/05/13 11:04 PM
2

If you are concerned for looks, have a single URL to a page that sources each claim very specifically.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 12:29 PM
5

Violence? No. Betrayal of a relationship? Depends upon what type of relationship (for the standard monogamous relationship, I would say yes). In the worst cases I would compare it to cheating as far as the extent the relationship is betrayed (of course, the reason for the withdrawal is important).
/r/MensRights30/05/13 08:14 PM
1

Funny title, considering that article is nothing about pedophilia. In fact, the DSM which is the big official book clearly states to not account such relationships (and it rarely clearly states anything and tends to leave it up to therapist's discretion).
/r/MensRights29/05/13 09:33 PM
1

Is this a TED or a TEDx talk? Quite a huge difference for a single x.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 09:28 PM
1

There are a surprising number of people out there who believe that who have written their own statements supporting it.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 10:40 AM
1

People need to realize we have reached a point of an 'information black hole', where there is so much stuff out there, you can basically pick any premise and bury people with supporting examples... enough examples to reach a critical point where rebuttal seems foolish (without even more counter examples), thus the 'black hole' of information. Add in echo chambers and you get a dangerous mix of people continuously justifying false ideas.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 01:57 AM
4

What makes you wonder is how so many of them sexualize something completely non-sexual. Them: It is child porn. Normal people: It is a kid running around naked. We did that when we were younger to our parents embarrassment. Them: But it is sexually enticing. Normal people: It falls somewhere between annoying and funny; there is nothing sexual about it at all. Them: Well we think there is. Normal people: ಠ_ಠ People who see monsters everywhere... maybe they are just seeing their own reflections?
/r/MensRights29/05/13 01:53 AM
-1

It takes the logic behind statutory rape, applies feminist notions of inequality, and results in a logical conclusion (logical in that it follows from the premises, not that the premises themselves are logical).
/r/MensRights29/05/13 01:47 AM
11

The legal "logic" behind it is that the support is for the child, not the mother - so why should the child suffer for the rapist's sin? Ideally the mother would be unfit for custody. Maybe visitation rights... except if you gave the same to male rapist, you get all the people who protest it.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 01:40 AM
1

You call BS based on a single personal anecdote...? We live in a society that hypes sex up and parents need to be informing their children of this Well we could go back to teaching children that if they enjoy sex (married or not), they will be going to hell. But I'd rather not.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 12:28 PM
1

Are they in a loving relationships practicing safe sex? I'd rather she being in such a relationship than having sex with a 15 year old who doesn't want a relationship and is trying to get her to not use a condom because you don't get pregnant if you drink enough Mountain Dew. Would I rather all children waited til they were 25 to have sex (when the prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for decision making, finishes developing)? Yes. Is abstinence realistic? No.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 03:14 AM
1

Well, yes, and generally speaking people got changed in their sleeping bags if they felt awkward. Everyone accomodated :) That's what I did.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 02:54 PM
1

To some extent we are socially conditioned to feel awkward about certain things. But many children are still raised to be ashamed of their body enough such they can't change in front of anyone. To handle those cases, we need to respect everyone's privacy.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 02:47 PM
1

I think there's need to worry about the sexes desire for some kind of privacy when getting changed, yes. You can get changed/ect. person by person. If we accept that homosexual individuals exist (kinda hard to deny that...) then it doesn't matter if you are changing in front of someone of the same sex or opposite sex. The notion that you are safe from people who may be sexually attracted to you if you change in front of the same sex only is denying the existence of same sex attraction.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 02:19 PM
1

And as you point out, there is no need to worry about anything happening once we combine the sexes.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 03:27 AM
1

Why separate per tents? Are you going to make sure the homosexual boys are not able to tent together as well? If not, then what justification is there to separating boys and girls? As it stands, you aren't likely going to have younger boys/girls having sex. They still think the other has cooties and is icky. And as for the teenagers, the ones who might try to sneak in sex would be the ones who already are having sex. Not to mention, if you've never been camping with the scouts, the tents tend to…
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:39 PM
1

Yes. Any problems that may be experienced due to sexual attractions have already been determined to not count because homosexuals have been able to join. As to problems that may arise due to body differences, would you suggest not allowing a child who lost a limb to be unable to join? It also allows for transgenders to not feel included, especially those who have not yet begun to transition and still are, form a physical side, fully the opposite sex. Then again, I'm also okay with the notion of …
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:36 PM
2

There is 'perhaps not a good idea' and then there is 'child rape'. That our laws even confuse these is stupid. Also, as long as they practiced safe sex in a loving relationship, it can actually be far less damaging than many things children are already allowed to do. For example, compare children killed by being allowed to drive vs. children killed by having sex with someone they are in a loving relationship with.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:29 PM
5

Water can find you even when you don't plan on it. Best to know how to swim unless you live on Dune.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:26 PM
-7

Step 7: Ignore and shame men who fall on hard times. Act surprised when they hold a gun to their head and pull the trigger. Well, I would be a bit surprised. Not the head I would expect the gun to be held to.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:25 PM
1

"No means no." Nobody's gonna argue with that. Well there are cases such as rape role play. But those cases should always be extensively discussed before hand and there should always be a safe word that basically counts as the 'real' no/stop/ect.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:22 PM
1

There is a very easy way to solve it. Lets assume right at the point that the woman decided to say yes because she was scarred, the police kicked in the door and had everything on video tape. So now, what ever the man did, was it enough to get him charged with attempted rape? If yes, then there was reason to fear for her to say yes. If no, then there was not reason to fear, and her choosing to say yes counts as consent.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:21 PM
1

14 is old enough to have sexual desires. Wanting sex and even having sex is not some inherently evil act that will permanently scar ones soul. We need to get rid of the sex-negative attitudes our society has.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 10:54 AM
1

People fall in love with others who aren't exactly their age all the time. There is no need to make loving relationships illegal. Only ban the abusive ones.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 10:53 AM
3

Any age gap you allowed, there will always be a few couples right over the line. As such, I suggest looking at if the relationship is abusive or not. 12 and 18 sounds like it would be abusive in the vast majority of cases. But in that one where it isn't abusive, then what is the problem? Many states allow 48/16, which is a far greater difference than 18/12. Remember, sex is not some inherently evil act that damages one soul, even though our laws act like it is thanks to sex-negative individuals.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 10:41 AM
4

It's irrelevant, it's against the law. That is horrible reasoning. The law is wrong in this case and it is also wrong in a case identical to this one except with an 18 year old man. Yes, there is a double standard in how the victims of age of consent laws gone bad are treated, but in both cases, the core problem is the laws being used to apply sex-negative morals.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 10:37 AM
2

She is a victim in this case. The problem is a man (by this I mean a same aged one) in the same situation is not treated like a victim, even though they would be a victim if the only thing you did was to reverse the gender of the older party.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 10:35 AM
1

Would they? No. Should they? Yes.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 10:33 AM
1

Because society cheers when 18 year old boys fuck 15 year old girls! We were talking about 18 year old girl and 15 year old boy, not the other way around. In your situation, of course the boy would be in prison.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 11:08 PM
1

We arrest them because they are a threat to society. If they are in a committed long term relationship with a single person, they are not a threat to society. If you had some 20 year old who was trying as fast as he can to impregnate every freshman girl in high school, you might have an argument. But if they were in a single relationship that was illegal, then they are not a threat and thus shouldn't be punished. What if, years down the line, she realized just how fucked up it was that her older…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 11:03 PM
2

Nah, doesn't mean it is wroth much. I got two degrees, a B.S. in Com Sci and a B.S. in Psychology. I am well aware of the minimum level of other courses you have to take to get the degree. While I personally took far more math than I needed, the minimum requirements for psychology was very low. It was absolutely sad. If a kid did good in BC calc at high school I would likely rank them as being a level above in math. Even the statistics course wasn't about statistics but about using statistical p…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:43 AM
1

No, they just have to show knowledge of the field. Math into com. sci. or vice versa is quite common. Others into com. sci. happens quite a bit as well, if they know the fundamentals. Also, com. sci. will get you into most any field if you have great grades and have a decent understanding of the related field. There is almost always some computer based cross over with other fields.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:35 AM
0

The same crimes should have the same punishment. The point is that they aren't the same crime. 18 year old with 14 year old. In one case, the relationship is new, the 18 year old is preying on the 14 year old, manipulating her into having unsafe-sex, is physically abusing her, and will leave her as soon as she gets pregnant. In the other case, the 18 and 14 year old have been dating for 2 years (during which they abstained from sexual contact) and the 18 year old has waited until the 14 year old…
/r/MensRights22/05/13 11:38 PM
1

You are missing the part where they can already do that. If you were in an illegal relationship, the statute of limitations doesn't even begin ticking until you become an adult. As such, as it stands, the younger party in such a relationship can already blackmail the older party. My purposed law does not make this any worse, it already has all the problems you are suggesting.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 03:54 AM
1

That puts WAY too much power in the hands of a "victim". No it doesn't. As the laws stand, the victim already has that much power. At current: Older individual dates too young individual secretly. If too young individual gets pissed off, they can report older individual. With new laws: Older individual dates too young individual. If too young individual gets pissed off, they can report older individual. The only thing that would change is that if the relationship is discovered, the 'victim' gets…
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:51 AM
11

I was thinking more along the lines of the father saying Nice instead. But close enough.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 11:51 PM
8

Most people don't even realize the spirit of the law for age of consent. Many of them have loopholes that allow for adults to have sex with teenagers if they marry first (since then the marriage laws in many, but not all, places have also changed). It was never to ban dating or relationships, it was to require marriage before sex was to occur (and often shotgun weddings were accepted in the past). This is because when age of consent laws were being written, there were many many teenage girls bei…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 10:26 PM
9

Had the younger girl been a boy, it is pretty clear what would have happened.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 10:21 PM
4

Yet when a really wealthy individual decides to play a sugar daddy for a broke college girl still too young to buy alcohol, very few people even raise an eyebrow.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 10:20 PM
-2

I say leave it up to the victim. Give her (or him in cases where it is a him) up to five years after becoming an adult to decide if the relationship was abusive or manipulative. If, even then, the victim considers it a positive relationship, then no charges are to be filed. Cases of incest, positions of power, or where rape/abuse is documented will be charged like they normally are now.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 10:18 PM
2

In which case we should still kill victims of child molestation while they are young, as the soul destroying form that tends to happens months, even years, later as the child slowly begins to understand what was done to them. As such, kill them soon after being molested and the soul is intact (it just has a time bomb stuck to it that would have gone off soon). If anything, you would be doing them a favor because you prevent their soul from being destroyed, and they would have died anyways (perha…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 10:14 PM
1

Logically, the "opt-in" makes perfect sense to me – but something on a base level (moral, instinctive?) seems wrong about it to me. I believe that would be social conditioning.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 10:11 PM
1

It isn't always a choice thing - in some places you still cannot have an abortion. In which case the father would not be able to give up any rights to the child because in such places the fetus is considered a child, and thus from conception the father has a responsibility to the child. The only case where a father could maybe get out of child support is if a contract was signed before the woman and man ever had sex (such as in the case of a sperm donor). Basically put, in places that determine …
/r/MensRights21/05/13 10:09 PM
1

If you read about the Rape of Nanking, where the soldiers would kill the men and boys, rape the women and older girls, and in some cases, even take girls too small to be raped and cut open her vagina so they could rape her anyways, then your argument falls to pieces. Suggesting these rapist were somehow the victim is horrendous. The ONLY argument that is morally supportable that says anything even remotely similar to what you are suggesting is one based on the notion that women should not be dra…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 11:52 AM
2

If you are a man, having sex means you consent to forever supporting any child that may exist, even if measures were taken to prevent it. If you are a woman, you get to choose if you want to support the child or not. Amirite?
/r/MensRights21/05/13 11:48 AM
1

The actual pregnancy is more risky these days...
/r/MensRights21/05/13 11:47 AM
1

because that's very unfair for the child. If the mother chooses to bring in a child to this world without the father opting in to support the child, and in a situation where the mother needs the fathers support, then the one being unfair is the mother.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 11:46 AM
1

There is no opting out that is needed. Our current system is so perverted that it makes people think men need to opt out, but in truth, it should be opt it. Women have all the rights when dealing with pregnancy, so by default, they have all the responsibilities. If a father wants to opt-in, that is his choice. Just like if a mother wants to listen to what the father wants in regards to her reproductive choices, that is her choice.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 11:44 AM
1

Nope. S/he is saying that just how a biological difference gives women the power to abort but men get no say in it, it also means that it gives all responsibility to women and none to men. It is the other people who want men to also have responsibility, who are going to end up having to demand for the ability to make reproductive choices. Many people are fine with women having all the rights and all the responsibilities.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 11:40 AM
1

Also there is some play with the age of consent and how it changed social expectations. A decently well (which back then meant barely above minimum wage) off 20 something year old man dating a teenager was considered acceptable if he was planning on marrying her (and as you said, if any babies happened, he better had marry her before the baby was born). But law and society has changed so that now it is only acceptable for another teenager to date a teenager, and thanks to minimum wage being shit…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 11:38 AM
1

I disagree. There are some actions a child, especially an older one, can do that deserves a hefty jail sentence. There are also actions that deserve a stern talking to but nothing more. So it stands to reason that there are actions in-between these two extremes that deserve punishments in-between these two extremes of punishments.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 11:14 AM
18

Well then, shouldn't we do the rape victims a favor and kill them? I mean, if you are telling someone it would have been better for them if they had died, what do you think they are going to be thinking about? Shame even the government is effectively encouraging suicide.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 10:10 AM
4

He shouldn't stoop to their level That would only count as stooping to their level if he actually bought into the argument. Instead, he is only using it to shock them and hopefully allow himself a chance to actually speak and say his real point.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 04:16 AM
5

Racially discriminatory laws which affected everything from access to education, housing, health care, voting rights, Because painting all white males as having the same history works so well...
/r/MensRights19/05/13 11:31 PM
33

college is all about figuring out what your professor wants you to say and then saying it. Go to a better college then. Very first semester, I had an English teacher sit me down and tell me I would need to pick a different topic because the one I had chosen was far to emotionally evocative that she wouldn't be able to grade it without issue. I spoke with her a bit about how I was going to support my, at first appearance, outright blasphemous point. At the end, she wrote an entire letter to me ex…
/r/MensRights19/05/13 11:29 PM
42

You are Irish. The Irish were massively enslaved, with women and even young girls forced to be nothing more than breeding stock. It became so bad that the slave trade actually lobbied against it because it was cutting into business. Go on the offensive, attack them for daring to think that just based on your physical characteristics they can determine how your people have been treated.
/r/MensRights19/05/13 11:23 PM
4

it seems like it discriminates more heavily against women! It is discrimination against men on that it places men as the buyers of sex. Both genders enjoy sex, so cultural standards that make one gender have to work for sex hurts than gender while it helps the other by allowing them to actually profit for something that they would enjoy doing. There is a downside for women in that they now have to be careful in how willing they are to have sex because they are supposed to be demanding a certain …
/r/MensRights19/05/13 02:46 AM
1

But how strongly. If women are 20% of the military but have just 22% of the assaults, while men are doing the majority of assaults on other men, they are still less likely, individual per individual, to commit it against a man. Also, reporting bias is likely unequal between the two. If a man is sexually assaulted by a man, more people will consider him a victim than if a woman does it because of the expectation that men have to want sexual contact with women.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 01:03 PM
-1

It also makes one wonder who is doing the assaulting. If women do 1/2 the sexual assaults of males, then per their population, they are the most dangerous group.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 09:16 PM
1

The ratio of men to women is something like 5 to 1. The ration of men who have been sexually abused to women who have been sexually abused is something like 7 to 6. It seems women would do an even worse job when you compare the numbers.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 11:40 AM
3

Per NPR, it is something like 14k men and 12k women.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 11:33 AM
1

So we are comparing cases where a false accusation has led to an innocent man being in prison, where damage has been irrevocably done, but where intervention can occur to reduce/eliminate the problem from getting worse, right? This can be compared to an ongoing case of child molestation, where a child molester has already groomed and begun molesting a child, but the sooner they stop and the sooner the child gets into therapy, the better of the child will be (even though damage has already been d…
/r/MensRights16/05/13 01:49 AM
10

Or we could just go back to the actual definition of rape, which is the use of physical force overpowering physical resistance. What about terror? What about people who are drunk to the point of being passed out? What about statutory rape?
/r/MensRights16/05/13 01:41 AM
1

Well, polygamy could come back, then they no longer would have to settle.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 09:30 PM
2

Except datable candidates are likely rich enough that even losing this much income doesn't hurt their ability to afford the finer things in life.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 10:59 AM
13

The problem is how she looks at the male toys as better preparing the boys. Better preparing them for life risking work, for war, and clearly not preparing them to spend time with the kids. That said, I do think the toys are too gender targeted. Where is the easy bake for boys (my youngest brother likes cooking, though he now cooks real food in a kitchen). My little sister likes video games, and if you give two seconds thought, it isn't hard to pick games that aren't too gendered either way. Yea…
/r/MensRights13/05/13 11:30 PM
19

Actually, the photons would be coming off the seen item and onto the person. If anything, the seen object should be rubbing itself all over the viewer's eyes. Thus, leering should be considered sexual assault that harms the one seeing things.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 11:37 AM
4

Wait til you see how many are sexually abused.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 11:33 AM
1

The problem is that others do care, they claim certain groups have it worse, and that we should focus all resources on them until they no longer have it worse (which will be never as the stats are already twisted around).
/r/MensRights11/05/13 12:02 PM
5

You cannot ignore the Halo effect though. Our culture associated beautiful with good and ugly with evil. If you find someone very unattractive, you are likely to think less of them in other areas of life unrelated to their attractiveness. The reverse is true for attractiveness. For example, the more attractive you are, the easier courts go on you. This is NOT to say that unattractiveness should be considered an attack, only that we do need to watch what subconsciously happens once we designate s…
/r/MensRights11/05/13 11:59 AM
4

And you know what the response will be? About the same as friction's, a goal post shift. You aren't going to be able to win this battle in this fashion.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 09:38 PM
-3

There are scientist who are making tests to determine if mentally disabled adults are able to consent to sex. There is no reason those tests could not be applied to everyone, once they are finished. If you pass the test = sex with anyone within X years of you or with anyone who has passed the test. If you haven't passed the test = sex with anyone within X years of you. I'm thinking X being set to something like 2. Also, allow long term relationships to be an affirmative defense if both the accus…
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:21 PM
2

What happened with the girl that made the story up? For what the girl did, the greatest wrong are the people who have forgotten the whole 'innocent til proven guilty in a court of law'. They were the ones who judged him, all over the words of a girl who doesn't have enough rational facilities to be allowed to do much of anything.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:17 PM
2

Except for the part about it being recovered later on by a different team.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 09:35 PM
11

They used a plugin like that to format the article to the web page layout. You don't need to format. You just type in the text and it will auto format alongside the rest of the text. 15 minutes rewriting the article. 5 minutes copy, pasting, and putting on imgur. 20 minutes is a long time to roll in my book, but overall it is a pretty small effort.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:04 PM
25

The police technicians couldn't retrieve the deleted video however. couldn't That has got to be the worse misspelling of 'didn't want to' I've seen in a long time.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 09:05 PM
3

The core problem of false memories resides in both of them. The younger are more likely to have them, but they still occur in the older as well. Look at women who testified one man raped her when DNA evidence later proved it was another man who actually raped her, and her memories of the event were partly false (she was raped, just she remembered the wrong individual).
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:23 PM
2

It doesn't help the author's case that at least one article they're linking to argues for the abolition of child pornography laws. Well, its the woman's body, so it should be her choice, right? ^^^^^^^^<sup>.</sup> <sup>(In</sup> case people don't catch the points I'm making, I use 'woman' due to the recent Plan B news articles that talk about how all women, including those 14 and younger, should have access to Plan B combined with the standard 'her body, her choice' mantra of the pro-choice gro…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:16 AM
4

Look up the McMartin day care case. Given a bad interviewer, you can get almost as many witnesses as you want claiming something.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:12 AM
7

If a child is being sexually abused, you can often see signs of it in their drawings. This doesn't have a single notable sign as far as I can tell.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:11 AM
7

Meaning that physical evidence is not always necessary. You just need to study about false memories to know that witness testimony is a horrible form of evidence and should be needed.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:05 AM
1

"Now that homosexual marriage has become de rigueur the next push will be to legalize relationships between adults and children Anytime someone says this is a great time to say that the Bible already approves of such (if they get married first, given no minimum age of marriage).
/r/MensRights03/05/13 10:17 AM
5

10 years in a male prison with the label of a child molester (a female child molester is likely still not as low a level as a male rapist). Of course, this is only after conviction with a fair trial where actual evidence is used.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 10:13 AM
3

What are the chances the man was raped in prison, in large parts thanks to her?
/r/MensRights03/05/13 10:12 AM
1

I would support changing the laws such that if those caught helped lead to the arrest of the producer and the saving of the child, they would receive lesser sentences. But then, I think saving the child and stopping production is more important that just prosecuting. But I wouldn't go as far as to drop charges or anything like that.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 12:52 AM
-1

Which means the title is very misleading.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 10:48 PM
2

I believe that abusive relationships involving minors should be illegal, even if the abusing partner is the same age. But, I do not define abuse based on age, though I do find that increased age difference is correlated with relationships being more abusive.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 10:14 PM
1

I studied child abuse and namely child sexual abuse in college. There is a few books out there to read on the subject as well. One interesting one named Jailbait (I was informed by a redditor that there are actually multiple books out there with that name, some far less tasteful and informative than others, so go to amazon and pick the one that says it is actually a look into the politics and such behind the change in age of consents throughout US history).
/r/MensRights01/05/13 10:12 PM
7

I actually support legalizing possession of real child pornography because multiple studies have shown that countries with less restriction on porn have lower sex crime rates. How about a middle ground? Virtual/drawn/computer generated child porn. No actual children are used, and computer graphics have approached near life like already. Also, you can make children involved 'too perfect'. You ever heard of some of the anime lovers who go way too far and began to 'date' anime characters and who sh…
/r/MensRights01/05/13 12:04 PM
1

The trick comes via abortion. Should a X year old woman have the right to her body in regards to abortion? Many if not most will say yes. Then it only follows that they should also have a right to their body in having sex to begin with, especially if we are talking safe sex. You start with X at the highest age where consent is invalid. At some point, people are going to say no to the first question, and that is where the age of consent will end up.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 11:49 AM
2

Depends upon many different factors involved in the relationship. There are some 16 year olds who I wouldn't be okay with having sex with some other 16 year olds due to differences in life experiences and maturity.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 11:47 AM
1

The government has decided that people under 18 are legally unable to consent to sexual acts of any sort. Be careful as the law differs a good deal. In most states the age is 16. And in quite a few states, if you are married, there is no age required for consent to your spouse. Even here it seems to be 'under age 17', not 'at or under age 17'. Also... First-degree rape to have sexual intercourse with someone (1) less than age 11 or (2) less than age 13 if the actor is age 18 or older. So if the …
/r/MensRights01/05/13 11:46 AM
1

Most cases of statutory rape fall either clearly into the rape category (someone raping a young child who clearly did not consent but who gets 'statutory' because of a good lawyer/plea deal) or the consensual sex category (most cases of statutory rape involving teenagers), so I'm not so sure I agree with the title. That said, this is a major breach of professional trust and the life time ban from teaching does make sense. But a 15 year old girl would have the choice over her body to have an abor…
/r/MensRights01/05/13 11:42 AM
1

Does this actually help rehabilitate? If not, I'd rather not do it.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 11:38 AM
8

That we consider pedos so bad is also saddening. Why? Because someone who is a pedophile may not have acted on their attraction. They may be innocent. And contrary to popular belief, there is a really good therapy options out there that will keep the vast majority from ever acting. But the hate in our society keeps them from being open (and thus being held accountable by others) or seeking help. It isolates them which only increases their chance of actually harming a child. (This holds at least …
/r/MensRights01/05/13 11:10 AM
-1

malicious I'll take Weasel Words for 200.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:57 PM
8

Some sex positive feminist have begun fighting against age of consent laws in general, and some feminist have fought to get boys recognized. The problem are the sex-negative feminist who have hijacked the public discourse and are basically making sex, or at least sex involving a penis, to be some horrible thing men (and boys) do, regardless of any factors of the actual situations.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:44 PM
3

Do you see the patriarchy treating this woman as a child, saying she can't be held responsible for her actions and being given a sentence in regards to what a child would receive? Look at how she is mistreated by a sexist system.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 08:57 PM
34

Feminism pioneered rape hysteria and continues to push the issue very hard. From what I've read, it was a coalition of sex negative feminist who formed a temporary alliance with moral conservatives that got all the rape and sexual abuse fighting started. What also made it worse is that there was quite some truth to what they initially fought for. For example, rape laws that require the victim to fight back or laws that said a child must be both a virgin and white to be protected under the law (a…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 08:56 PM
1

It seems the law here is completely messed up in priorities. It'll let cases where the children are clearly harmed slide, and yet there are cases where age inappropriate relationships but non-harmful relationships are treated as on par with child rape.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 03:38 AM
2

Look into the McMartin day care case. No child was actually molested but dozens of children were fully convinced they had been molested due to corrupt therapist. Their lives were definitely ruined (or massively negatively altered) by the witch hunt.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 12:41 AM
1

Not just feminist. Anyone who uses any argument of consent being invalid due to power differences would find it very hard to not logically apply it here as well. "They wanted it," is not a defense of statutory rape.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 12:00 PM
109

Due to the chance that tricking a child like this can actually implant false memories of abuse and caused some of the same major psychological trouble down the road that actual molestation can (because it is in effect a great breach of trust and using the child), the mother should face a sexual assault of a minor charge.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 11:55 AM
6

It takes away the right of a woman to choose who should be the genetic father and who should be the social/financial father. Or something like that...
/r/MensRights27/04/13 11:35 AM
2

There has to be some line of reasonableness though. Otherwise, we are going to need EULA and ToS level detail spelled out in consent forms. "I said you could have sex with me, I never said you could touch my clit/balls. Sexual assault!"
/r/MensRights25/04/13 10:28 PM
4

I'd say this isn't true, because there are some unreasonable rape laws that reasonable people break. Especially with age of consent related things. What reasonable 18 year old would think his 17 year old girlfriend cannot consent to sex with him, even if they have been dating for over a year? Also, there are likely a few cases where boys, especially the attractive athletic ones, are taught that they should get everything they want.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 09:55 PM
1

They are saying that all that is preventing normal people from raping children is watching some elves/pixies having sex. Says a lot about them if they really believe that...
/r/MensRights22/04/13 01:26 AM
2

Hopefully studies on the issue are smart enough to only look at crimes that were crimes before and after the change.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 01:57 PM
1

Really, we should be dumbfounded that 'consensual sex = rape'. That one even adds in the ages shows that they given up a great deal of ground.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 03:25 AM
1

If the police do it, then it is an adult officer offering proof they are an adult... so there shouldn't even be a crime, even with strict liability. Because the adult was pretending they were a minor while still actually acting as an adult is just crazy...
/r/MensRights21/04/13 03:23 AM
1

Doesn't matter, as there will always be a good relationship that is outside of what ever boundaries are given by the Romeo and Juliet laws. Perhaps if you get a chance, talk to some really old couples that have been married since Rome collapsed for a very long time. I've spoken to a few, and while many of them are in acceptable age ranges, some of them would be considered statutory rape by even the most liberal laws. 14/20 ended up in a life long happy marriage isn't too uncommon (at least not t…
/r/MensRights21/04/13 03:21 AM
1

I've seen figures that indicate that women and men are raped around the same amount. If we assume that rape does happen more than false accusations (one does wonder where an incorrect accusation falls, which is a case where a rape did happen but for some reason, the wrong rapist was identified), then the general premise is very much possible, though it doesn't justify anything else being said.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 04:33 AM
4

My point was that even if you are all positive about it, they remember the one negative person. They may already be so jaded due to past treatment that anything positive you say is taken as sarcastic condemnation.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 08:51 PM
11

You forgot transexuals, which doubles that number. So lets see, besides the normal gym, I'm seeing 16 types of gyms. Lets home ageism doesn't into into the equation...
/r/MensRights19/04/13 08:50 PM
55

How about a fat people only gym? One problem with fat people exercising is how they are judged. And even if only 1 in 5 judge them while the other 4 encourage them, that 1 in 5 really sticks with them and weights them down.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 06:34 PM
11

They suck just as much as the rest of us when it comes to emotionally charged subjects.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:27 PM
4

The core problem is that people do not realize 'not guilty' does not equal 'innocent'. You can be relatively sure he is guilty, but still vote not guilty because you haven't hit the 'beyond a reasonable doubt' line.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:26 PM
2

And if someone who divorces a lot marries young, then they will be a poster child because they will rank up multiple divorces while the couple that marries in their teens and stays together for life will only rack up a single long term marriage. No one seems to remember the really old people in the community that were married in their teens (or heaven forbid, when she was in the teens and he was in his twenties) and who have been together for 50+ years.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 10:05 PM
2

The people who define them that way are the same who claim that there is such a thing as 100% exclusive hetero/homo orientations. You act like there isn't. Granted, far more people than most realize are bisexual and many bisexuals definitely lean one way or the other, but there are also people who are 100% hetero/homosexual. An even more complete answer is that all sexual orientations seem to arise from culture and that even our view of love and romance and sexual desire is dictated by our cultu…
/r/MensRights16/04/13 10:00 PM
6

That is not true for all children though. Some are more sexually aware before puberty, and in some cases, even puberty doesn't make them sexually aware (and they become asexuals). The key thing is that the basic biology is already there. Puberty gives it a dose of hormones to get it up and fully running, but some children already have the system pretty strongly developed. For example, one of the things that our society does to make child sexual abuse worse is to insist the child cannot feel phys…
/r/MensRights16/04/13 12:19 PM
5

The problem is not people marrying young. That only means you have more years to divorce. If you marry a year before you die, you are not likely to get divorce. If you marry 50+ years before you die, well then it is much more likely. The core problem is that relationships have such a high chance, year per year (that adds up quite quickly for young couples) to break up.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 12:14 PM
1

25? I heard by 18. Granted, maybe they aren't counting what probably should be considered consensual encounters.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 01:26 AM
4

Please keep Dwarf Fortress out of this. :P
/r/MensRights09/04/13 10:28 PM
4

With compensation for time missed (his classes are likely all messed up, so he should at the very least be given a free semester (and half the summer), all expenses paid along with the option to have any current grades forgiven. But even that doesn't account for a delay in starting his career, so add on to it payment for half a year, set at the average of what he would make with the degree he currently is in. And then you add on emotional damages. This is assuming he is not guilty.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 10:24 PM
1

He has likely been raped because of that woman's actions which landed him in prison with about the worse designation you could have.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 02:24 AM
0

No. Women can't rape men because only men have the penis. Where have you been?
/r/MensRights09/04/13 02:21 AM
3

TEDx, not TED. Regardless of how you feel about TED, TEDx is like the attempt at cloning that went horribly bad.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 02:18 AM
2

Yet they are routinely segregated based on gender. For now. As our society becomes more logically consistent with the notion of equality, we will one day find that as horrible. Also to note, you still have to have a men's restroom, and very few people would kick you out of the opposite restroom if it were an emergency.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 12:20 AM
2

You don't feel safe in a shelter. While you may feel safer than being out on the streets, you don't feel safe. And I'm not against making them safer, only in discriminating to do so. Imagine if you had a sheltered that banned a certain race for the safety of the other. That would never fly and would be (rightly so) considered racist.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 12:01 AM
2

"By body my choice." Pregnant young teenager. "Her body her choice." Young female teenager who wants to be in relationship with older guy. "RAPE RAPE RAPE! Social pressure! Patriarchy!" But she wants birth control... "Her body, her choice." ...so she can have safe sex. "RAPE RAPE RAPE! Social pressure! Patriarchy!" YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY On a more serious note, the whole 'my body, my choice' is used very inconsistently.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 12:08 PM
14

Some people are uncomfortable changing near people of their own gender as well. The catch is, when you need a homeless shelter, you gotta make some tough choices.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 12:01 PM
10

Because homosexuals/transgenders do not exist... This shelter also allowed children. I think we've seen more than one story of women in power who sexually prey upon children. If we are going to go ahead and assume the that men should be treated as threats to women form the get go, we might as well go ahead and assume women are threats to children and that lesbians are threats to women as well. Equality and all that jazz.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 11:59 AM
1

Instead, the government should take the children and the parents should pay the government child support. Ignoring other problems I see with such a plan, assuming the children are of any significant age, what about all the damage removing them from their parents will do?
/r/MensRights08/04/13 04:43 AM
1

Prostitution can be empowering for those who want to do it. But any job is demeaning when you are forced to do it out of need/desperation, and the more it directly effects your body, the worse it is. This puts need/desperation based prostitution pretty high on the list of 'not empowering things'.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 04:41 AM
4

Yeah, it does empower them. I never said it empowers them better than having a great job and making good money, but it beats having your children go hungry or having to shack up with someone (which ends up effectively being prostitution). In the worst cases, it is one of the children providing the trade. rather people who raise children (that will then go on to contribute to the economy and more) are provided incentives to do so. It's the same reason we subsidise education - to invest in the fut…
/r/MensRights07/04/13 02:23 PM
1

Sexually mature, as in able to reproduce. Mental maturity has only been something important in the last few thousands of years (some may argue it has only been important in the last 200 years). You cannot, in such short a time, overturn so much evolution that happened before. Also to note, even society doesn't tend to care if they are mentally immature as long as they are 'old enough'. Dating a mentally disabled person isn't seen as wrong, and even dating a young adult who is 'old enough' but st…
/r/MensRights07/04/13 12:07 PM
2

Being attracted to sexually mature members of your species is just like being attracted to sexually mature members of your species. We tend to call that normal.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 04:42 AM
-1

which is abnormal and unhealthy as those who are the targets of attraction are not able to reproduce. BS. It being abnormal (atypical) and it not resulting in reproduction has nothing to do with if it is a healthy attraction or not. Homosexual attractions are atypical and they do not lead to reproduction, but homosexual attractions are healthy. That being said, I do agree that the movie is filled with BS.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 04:41 AM
1

Pretty much near all are... if you go with the modern definition of being attracted to someone too young is deemed pedophilia, regardless if that person is a sexually mature 17 year old (and in some cases, even including sexually mature young looking adults). If you go with a more reasonable definition, most men are not.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 04:39 AM
11

They effectively are, by the way welfare works. Not to say we should let children starve, but by empowering single mothers with welfare, mostly on the back of single childless workers (male or female, gender doesn't matter when the IRS comes knocking).
/r/MensRights07/04/13 04:28 AM
1

Fine, as long as only women fight in combat and work the worst jobs and have to support their men who stay home to raise the children.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 11:13 AM
1

They do in some cases. There even have been cases of a convicted rapist getting custody of a child. But, when you actually go and study the details behind the cases, it is not that extreme. For example, once case was a teenager girl who had been raped by her father when she was younger. The father ended up being chemically castrated and put into counseling 3 times a week, and the daughter put back with him. Why? Because that is where the daughter wanted to be and they couldn't find any other rel…
/r/MensRights05/04/13 11:09 AM
1

Well, if too drunk to consent (but you consented anyways) isn't rape, what about too young to consent (by you consented anyways)? Keep in mind that the vast majority of stories you hear about child molestation involve, at least at the start, actions that are clearly rape even without ages taken into consideration.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 12:20 AM
3

Depends fully upon the social reaction. 6 year olds get caught playing doctor, parents give them basic birds and bees lesson, they are told to not do that again, all turns out well. 6 year olds get caught playing doctor, one set of parents try to push rape charges on the other, years of mandatory counseling for both, with one being told over and over again they are a victim while the other is told over and over again they are a victimizer, horrible results.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 11:25 PM
3

All of my highest up voted posts have at least one embarrassing spelling mistake. It saddens me so...
/r/MensRights03/04/13 11:19 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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