TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Liv47 Archive

View 1 posts and 2,103 comments by Liv47 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
14

GeneralLiv47/r/MensRights27/07/16 05:20 AM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 2,103 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Your coworker is an outlier that doesn't understand that the movement is about sexual assault not about women. I had tweets to show that men were welcome to post their stories, but it seems that whenever it comes to me around here, the moderation team suddenly has standards. Do yourself a favour and search #MeToo on Twitter and look at the responses yourself. You'll be surprised how open most of those folks are.
/r/MensRights19/10/17 02:55 PM
1

There are about 2.5 billion men between 18 and 64 in the world. That means you have to convince half a billion men to fuck robots for political reasons. On top of that, you'd have to convince the correct half a billion men whose partners or prospective partners could have some effect on legislation in their respective nations. I just don't see it as being viable, considering the men's rights movement can't seem to muster men in the hundreds of thousands, let alone hundreds of millions. And then …
/r/MensRights19/10/17 11:40 AM
1

I'm not putting that much effort in. I already have to fact-check every post response I receive. Tweet links have been removed.
/r/MensRights19/10/17 02:56 AM
2

Please do start, it seems logical to me.. Well, okay then. Uh... let's see. First, there's the problem of figuring out what scope this needs to occur on. If it's just a "movers and shakers" situation, you'd have to ensure that nobody in a position of power and influence can ignore your protest. That can be a problem when you have a large prevalence of men in a position of legal authority. If it's a "we have to hit all women everywhere situation", then whooh. I don't envy the task ahead of you, b…
/r/MensRights18/10/17 09:54 PM
1

Let me see if I understand this properly. You believe that by directing your sexual energy to human-shaped toys and away from actual women (at a time when sexual assault is one of the most prevalent conversations), you'll convince women to change how they view men? There are so many ways that such a train of thought is logically flawed that I'm not exactly sure where to start...
/r/MensRights18/10/17 08:02 PM
1

...what does this have to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights18/10/17 03:21 PM
2

[TWEET REDACTED BECAUSE REASONS] Here is a spirited young man determined to shame women for not naming their abusers, neglecting the fact that not all victims learn the names of their attackers, and that some victims are forced into silence because of the relationship to their assailant or because of the clout surrounding that person (such as Weinstein, Cosby, Trump...)
/r/MensRights18/10/17 02:58 PM
3

I edited my above post to provide links to Tweet chains that shows that there is support for men in the campaign - in fact, people of all stripes. associating all post with rape I do not know what this means.
/r/MensRights18/10/17 02:46 PM
2

Then I guess I have to go by what I see. And until I find a post with responses like you've described, I can't really give it much weight, especially when I've seen everything but. [TWEETS REDACTED JUST FOR FUN]
/r/MensRights18/10/17 02:40 PM
3

I am perusing the MeToo hashtag on Twitter right now, and I've been through 12 chains of tweets thusfar, and have found no examples yet of men being taken to task for being open about abusive experiences. I have, however, found more than 20 users attacking the hashtag (calling it a "pity party" and a publicity stunt), and 1 user who has actually insulted a woman who told her brief story. The commonality between those 21 people are that their profile pages have things like "#MAGA" and distinctly …
/r/MensRights18/10/17 02:39 PM
3

Would you share the link to that? I would be interested in seeing their comments.
/r/MensRights18/10/17 02:26 PM
2

I am not seeing that. James Van Der Beek is just one of a number of men in Hollywood coming forward about sexual assaults early in their careers. Transgender people (such as myself) have also spoken up amid the MeToo campaign.
/r/MensRights18/10/17 02:14 PM
1

Whatever helps you sleep at night, kiddo.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 06:13 PM
1

I guess you can make up whatever soothes your ego. If you need to believe that I fell before your manly greatness, go ahead and believe that.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 05:22 PM
1

If you claim the sky is neon purple, and I regard the claim as simply too incredible to even debate, that doesn't suddenly mean the sky is purple. Likewise, just because I am fed up dealing with you because I think you're a moron, doesn't suddenly validate your views just because you say it does. Baiting me with "answer or I win" will not convince me to keep this daft discussion with you going. As well, it's highly undignified to chase after someone shouting "PUSSY!" when they no longer want to …
/r/MensRights12/10/17 12:44 PM
1

I'm glad you're not surprised. If you were surprised that being a giant douche gets people disinterested in discoursing with you, that would have been very worrying.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 10:44 AM
1

Well, aren't you a cunt. Just for you, I'm going to neglect to click the link. I don't care any more.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 08:30 AM
1

The fact that you only care about winning is interesting. I don't concede. I've just stopped caring because you're an asshole.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 08:29 AM
1

TL;DR. But hey, at least you got all that out of your system. Bye~
/r/MensRights12/10/17 12:42 AM
1

How is pointing out that most foster kids are boys helpful here when the victim in the article was a girl?
/r/MensRights12/10/17 12:39 AM
1

People who work for hobby lobby do in fact buy their own contraceptives, you know this right. No one can stop an employee from buying stuff he/she chooses to buy. What the fuck is a hobby lobby? OK, but can you understand why others wouldn't or why the business wouldn't fail? No. I don't understand what would make people happy or at least tolerant of having someone else literally cram religious values down their throats. Maybe I'm the crazy one. It's not really a hypocritical position though: Yo…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 11:27 PM
1

Yeah, and we have an umbrella term to cover all kinds of serious harm including murder. Aggravated assault. We've gone over this; murder is not a form of aggravated assault. Several conditions behind a murder can lack the "aggravated" part, just to point it out right away. Furthermore, you don't have to assault them to kill them. Just trick them into drinking poison, sabotage the brakes on their car, or lock them in the back of a sedan in the path of a train - whatever fancies ya. None of those …
/r/MensRights11/10/17 11:21 PM
1

It's based on the explicit reasoning offered in the 1996 report itself which then became the basis for definitions going forward. You should read the report if you want to be sickened. How do you know that it's what became that basis? Do you think lawmakers read her hate-spew and thought "this one's onto something"? Are you arguing "to prevent, restrict" and "to allow, permit" are not antonymous definitions? Seriously? "Let" is a peculiarity. If you look at the origin of both, you see that "to h…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 08:24 PM
1

Well, if they knowingly paid me more money, so that I could afford the medication that they're morally against, they'd be contradicting themselves. So yeah, I'd quit. Because what else are they hypocrites about?
/r/MensRights11/10/17 08:06 PM
1

There's a few outliers in either direction, but it was effectively meant to minimize male victims while not being explicitly gendered. That is based on opinion, not empirical proof. You're supposing that feminist brainwashed the legal system this way, when that is not a proven fact. It's on the level of a conspiracy theory. A nationwide subversive campaign at the same time by feminists at a time before the proliferation of the internet is on the level of something out of a poorly written movie. …
/r/MensRights11/10/17 07:37 PM
1

This is what you are. A feminastie There we go. with a bad, pervert, rape fantasy as normal as they come. Ooh, how salacious! Here I was assuming you didn't have an imagination. It was totally evident when you started discussing about your butt hurt on words womyn, feminasty, etc. ...wait. So... I'm a pervert because I care ab...out.... language? Huh? It is not worth discussing with a feminastie roastie with a rape fantasy. Eff off. I had to Google roastie. I wish I hadn't. You've got quite the …
/r/MensRights11/10/17 07:07 PM
1

That's the point I was making. If employers want to fuck people over because Jesus said so, then workers will abandon those jobs in exchange for employment that doesn't do that to its people. Unfortunately, those intolerant business owners may not lose their businesses over it. So just walking away won't show how many people would be affected by this.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 07:02 PM
1

Person A forces person B to engage in penetrative vaginal sex against person B's will. Is it rape or not? That's disingenuous. If the assailant is the one doing the penetrating, it is rape. If the assailant is being penetrated, it is "made to penetrate". If a woman is forced at gunpoint to fist a man, that's not rape - it's made to penetrate. See how this splits? It's not "male victim vs female victim". No, but I don't misrepresent what words mean in a way that actively obfuscates communication.…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 01:45 PM
1

I neither did call you a feminst nor a feminastie. So, if you take offence at that, then your heart probably have to be with them, I don't know. You say you are neither an MRA nor a feminist and are offended by both. It is indeed ironic that you are behaving totally butt hurt on a topic in which you have nothing to do. I still believe in facts and not spreading falsehoods to promote a political narrative, loser. Nice bullshit logic. I can understand your sentiments here when you totally lost it.…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 01:34 PM
1

What if you own a construction company and you don't want to sign the contract to erect a church? Should your employees still be forced to build it? THIS is the issue. That makes no sense. How would they be forced to build anything without a contract? Bullshit analogy. I'm just saying, where do you draw the line here? Any time someone asks this, I answer the same way: "Somewhere." I don't believe in the slippery slope. I don't believe that affirming marriage equality will lead to people marrying…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 01:23 PM
1

Would you consider it problematic if every time a man was murdered we called it murder, but when a woman was murdered we referred to it as "aggravated assault" or even "unlawful killing" just because the victim was female? Seeing as the actual identical methods kill men and women alike, yes. It would bother me, since you'd be using two separate phrases to describe indistinguishable events. Rape and Made-to-Penetrate require different actions to complete, and thus are different acts. They may tra…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 03:44 AM
1

Do you consider murder in the first degree worse than aggravated assault? Murder is the premeditated and unlawful killing of another person. Aggravated assault is the infliction of bodily harm on another person, whether premeditated or not. If you beat someone to death, the courts will charge you with both aggravated assault and murder. In actuality, murder is a form of killing, as there are several caveats that change a murder charge, including the manslaughter charges. So yes, but that doesn't…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 02:57 AM
1

Because it's not viewed that way for the same reason rape and sexual assault are not viewed as morally equal. Rape has a certain moral effect that sexual assault does not. Flicking a nipple for sexual reasons without consent is sexual assault, but it's not rape, and rape is viewed as worse than sexually assaulting a nipple. When you say sexual assault, it covers a lot of things that, while all bad, are not viewed as heinous as rape. You're missing the fact that rape is a form of sexual assault. …
/r/MensRights11/10/17 02:15 AM
1

These are morally equivalent terms, unlike "rape" and "made to penetrate", which is a key point of my argument. Koss's attempt to minimize reports that men are raped by women was key in her dodgy definition (which was then broadly adopted). Why do you believe "rape" and "made to penetrate" are not morally equal? They're both sexual assaults. That's like saying a mug and a stein are nothing alike, when their differences are purely aesthetic. This means a lot more than you're letting on, because c…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 12:43 AM
1

Good point. I guess that means we don't have to mandate it by law, because if they don't provide wages and benefits that employees are satisfied with, they'll just lose all of their employees and their company will be replaced by one that does. That's your logic? What? I believe slavery should be illegal. I don't know about you. You have a very interesting idea of what constitutes slavery. If you're a construction worker, but you don't want to build the church your company was contracted to erec…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 12:29 AM
1

Is there relevance to this particular thread?
/r/MensRights11/10/17 12:18 AM
2

Or because you don't want to and it's a free country. That's the best alternative you have? "Because fuck you"? That's a great way to lose all your employees. And I believe you shouldn't put a gun to someone's head to perform medical care. And I believe that if someone isn't willing to practice medicine, they should quit and just become a right-wing commentator, because clearly their politics are more important than their patients. They cost money because they require effort to produce. If they …
/r/MensRights10/10/17 10:57 PM
1

Based on my research, most rape cases are handled at the state level, so a CDC or FBI definition of rape means almost nothing other than statistical purposes. Many US States exceptionally include Made to Penetrate in rape law simply because the punishment should be the same (New York, for example). They are still different terms, but the actual acts are treated the same, because the effects are the same on the victim. Let me give you an example to drive my point home here. If you were to get int…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 10:27 PM
1

Your basic problem is that I joked feminasties. I'll use feminastie, feminut, womyn, etc. on puropse just to remind stupid of their own follies and for some sense of humor. You can free to feel butt hurt about it and I don't care a hoot about you. Except that you're using it at me and I'm not a feminist. Like, I literally could not give less of a shit what your opinion of feminists are. You're just being a moron and trying to cover it up by claiming it's because you're being "ironic". Fake news.…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 10:08 PM
1

Except that, as far as I can tell, rape has always been defined the same way. So I have to wonder where we're getting this idea that rape meaning "forced sexual penetration into a victim" is somehow new.
/r/MensRights10/10/17 10:03 PM
1

That is what many feminasties believe. Men should not emulate their modus operandi. Well, ya do. Almost like clockwork. Might want to get a fix on that. If you considered objectivity, you should've also considered possibility that some random feminut whacko did this. Quite a possibility these days with lot of radfeminuts. See, the thing is, I did consider that possibility. But based on what would be necessary for such a "feminut whacko" to be successful, there would have to either be a whole com…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 09:20 PM
1

[Mary Koss] specifically excluded men raped by women as rape victims by definition. A definition still used by almost all research on the subject and by the CDC to this day I'll point out. This is directly from the link you provided. "Rape" specifically defines the unwilling penetration into someone. So--- In the United States, an estimated 19.3% of women and 1.7% of men have been raped during their lifetimes; an estimated 1.6% of women reported that they were raped in the 12 months preceding th…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 09:06 PM
1

Yeeeeah, feminists did as much damage to women as men through their conduct with the topic of rape. So I'm not sure I can call that a good example of systematic anything. The National Crime Victimization Survey concluded that rape had declined in the last 30 years, without doing anything to demonize men. Education and awareness programs were instituted in the 1980s to help people know what to do if they're being attacked or see someone who needs help. In addition, it's also suggested that the pr…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 08:35 PM
1

Yes, am biased pro men's interests when I'm in this sub. Yeah, you're useless to men's rights then. Objectivity is the only thing that will help men's rights. The lack of it is why you're all in the shit situation you're in now. Womyn is one of several alternative spellings of the English word women used by some feminists. You mean, feminists were bullshitting? Yeah, try and wrap your monkey-brain around this idea; someone who disagrees with you is not a feminist. Of course they're full of shit.…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 08:24 PM
1

I'm just unconvinced it's more prevalent here than other places. I didn't deny its existence - but its used as an excuse to ignore our arguments here, but not in other places with other movements. It's hard to validate the views of a group who don't clearly - as a group - stand for one system of beliefs and denounce the poison elements. Here at MensRights, everything is basically hands-off. Mods don't pull down comments, even when they're frankly sickening. They don't ban users (unless you infer…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 08:10 PM
1

I'm not sure this is a fair categorization. I mean, by that metric, a person who always picks women over men to hire people isn't sexist if they don't verbalize it. It's hard to explain it without either oversimplifying it or writing 35 paragraphs on it. Verbalizing isn't necessary, but if the reasoning is clear, then sexism is an applicable term. Typically, offering no reason is a silent admission. Other things used can be dismissive of needing a reason, such as "because that's how I feel" and …
/r/MensRights10/10/17 07:53 PM
0

OP is considering the possibilities here, which many found interesting. The OP appears to have considered only one possibility; that the company intentionally omitted masculine titles "because men". I really don't call that considering. How can we confirm whether a feminastie in the development team decided future is for womyn and men does not matter. Because it would then have to go through an entire line of people to be approved. You're suggesting that an application form was carefully designe…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 07:33 PM
2

Well, then roughly nobody in the west is a victim of sexism. That's surprisingly accurate. Everyone in North America is just so sensitive and thin-skinned that hearing someone say something unkind to them, or get something given to them that isn't given to others, constitutes sexism, racism, or homophobia. Sexism, racism, and homophobia are ideologies. They are not actions. The only time you can say something sexist is if you included the phrase "because they're women" in any sequence of logic (…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 07:05 PM
0

We are talking about genderbased titles here. Says who? The four titles on a formal fill-in form are "Mr.", "Ms/Miss", "Mrs." and "Dr.". By refusing to even acknowledge that the "Dr." title is missing, you are misrepresenting the situation, and thus are lying to others about the problem. You don't want to be a liar, do you? Question is where is title for man's name. There was no question. The thread title is "Nespresso form doesn't care about a title for men", which in itself is misleading becau…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 06:56 PM
2

Thing is: we can't really shout down things we don't see. Things here on the public thread we can downvote and argue against, but private messages are hard for the community to police. Thing is, it never starts at the private message level. There's a "paper trail" for every user that has ended up harassing or threatening me privately. I don't report the publicly available reddit comments responding to me with bile and vitriol because the moderators here only seem to ban people that hurt their fe…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 06:48 PM
2

I mean, that happens to men a lot, but that's a pretty narrow definition that doesn't apply to the majority of things men or women face. As narrow as you feel it is, that is the definition. If it doesn't apply to the majority of what people face, then those things people face are not sexism. They're something else. Well, you can believe that men deserve to be in politics but women don't, not because men are better, because of "separate spheres" or some other bullshit. That's still sexism. No, it…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 06:35 PM
1

Your needs are no concern of your employer. You both deserve equity and nothing more. If you want more, you have to give more. Simple as that. How is refusing to offer birth control at all fair and impartial? The only reason to refuse birth control is "because God said so". Remember, birth control doesn't end pregnancies (you can continue taking it while pregnant), and doesn't even guarantee that pregnancy won't happen. It substantially reduces the chance that unprotected sex will result in a pr…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 06:28 PM
2

Coming to erroneous conclusions that will not be swayed by pesky things like "evidence". You're also blithely ignoring evidence. You're insistent that MRM isn't anything like what the media portrays you, and yet, the evidence that contradicts you is sitting right here in this subreddit. The moderators very proudly keep it up, as they claim (though I don't believe them) that it is to shine a big spotlight on ignorance and intolerance. It ends up just becoming an archive of ammunition for others t…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 06:09 PM
2

Dr. is not a gender specific title. So? It's a formal title for someone. When you graduate med school, you are officially styled as a doctor, a title that replaces your Mr./Mrs. As it was also missing, one can surmise the absence was a mistake, not a "let's annoy men" plot. Now that will be counted as misogyny, womyn cannot address themselves with their own first name ! No, dummy. Bobby is her first name. Unisex names are very common. Hollywood has a perfect slice of the variety. Cameron Diaz, D…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 05:54 PM
1

The media has branded us negatively by associating us with groups that have nothing to do with us A media outlet coming to its own conclusions? It's almost like you're describing basically every news TV show that exists. I mean, you could argue they're just ignorant, but ignorance doesn't really explain it when I (and no doubt many others) have explained to every media outlet that we're not the same people and we don't even like each other, and they keep doing it anyway. Yeah, but then they find…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 05:45 PM
-2

Well, when we're talking about government action that specifically codifies inequality into law, I have no problem calling that sexism, even if it's what you might call unintentional sexism. Sexism and inequality are not the same things. Sexism is when someone actively treats you like less of a person because of your biological sex. Inequality is when people don't have the same amount of stuff (rights, hamburgers, et cetera). I don't believe in something as logic-deprived as "unintentional sexis…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 05:32 PM
1

I'm reminded of my mother, who would answer my sisters whining "Why don't we get any?" with "Because you didn't ask for any."
/r/MensRights10/10/17 05:27 PM
1

The notion that we are "embedded in conservative politics" is actually an outright lie. Ah-heh. A lie is when you know what you are saying is untrue but say it anyway. My observation is very much that the men's rights movement is a conservative movement. Its prominent voices are almost entirely right-wing. Contributers to this very subreddit shit on liberals (liberal cucks, libtards, leftist shills, and more, are all terms used to refer to politically liberal individuals or those that express le…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 05:23 PM
-3

It's just that sexism against men is so common and normalized in our society that we don't even recognize it when it happens right in front of our faces. It's more that we seem to have no idea what sexism is anymore. Men having more difficulty with one aspect of daily life, while women have more difficulty an a different area, is not sexism. It's just an imbalance in social matters. This idea that "I don't get everything that person gets" equates to sexism keeps blowing my mind. Did you see the …
/r/MensRights10/10/17 05:07 PM
1

I think the issue is that the men's rights movement is embedded in conservative politics, and is taking part in the "mainstream media is fake news" train that's been steaming ahead at a full clip. As such, moderate and left-leaning outlets always tend to address MRAs in a somewhat hostile manner. It's like staying at a hotel, calling the bellhop a skeezy cunt, and then being surprised when he dumps your bags at the door and leaves ya there to deal with it yourself. Yes, he's supposed to give you…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 05:00 PM
2

I don't think it was an active measure. I think the lawmakers in the United States are just stupid. YOUR THEORY: "Birth control for women is guaranteed by law. Perfect. ...d'you think we should add a provision for men who use contraception?" "The fuck you say? Men don't get help." MY THEORY: "Birth control for women is guaranteed by law. Perfect. ...hey, is there birth control for dudes too?" "Birth control for men? Men don't give birth, silly."
/r/MensRights10/10/17 04:26 PM
14

Your abortion. Your birth control. Your leave hours, regardless of reason. Your family medical insurance. Your care. There is no war on women. This is what your responsibility looks like. Oh, my, where to start. First of all, lets ignore the abortion remark for the moment, since employee insurance plans (as far as I know) has never covered them. The birth control thing. Allowing your employer to decide what medical coverage you get is fucked up, since that means people working for businesses tha…
/r/MensRights10/10/17 04:19 PM
2

Since "Doctor" is also a title, differentiating between the titles bears some slim relevance. Besides, you can have both a "Mr. Bobby Edwards" and a "Mrs./Ms Bobby Edwards".
/r/MensRights10/10/17 03:49 PM
11

Sounds to me like a glitch or some kind of error with the form. Perhaps contact Nespresso and alert them to the missing titles. It's not just "Mr." missing, as "Dr." is also a title used on formal documents.
/r/MensRights10/10/17 03:48 PM
2

May I ask what significance is held by pointing out that most foster kids are boys? That seems more like a random factoid than something with a causal relationship.
/r/MensRights10/10/17 03:47 PM
1

A sexual fetish is a fixation on a particular object, be it inanimate or even a part of the body. We don't consider whole people to be objects, so no. It's not called a fetish. Preferring muscular women is called "sexual preference", nothing more. Now, if you go for any woman, so long as she's wearing leather, that's a fetish.
/r/MensRights09/10/17 04:33 PM
1

Americans are very squeamish. They shy away from harsh realities very easily. That's the reason shellshocked soldiers are "treated for post-traumatic stress disorder", because shellshock would be too hard for Americans. Retarded changed to Learning Impaired, and Crippled became Differently Abled. In the same sense, the word gender replaced sex in school for kids, since the word sex was oh-so-naughty. They didn't realize in the 1950s that the unique states of gender and sex would become important…
/r/MensRights09/10/17 03:38 PM
3

They are not fighting for the men that express emotions They're not fighting for men at all. Feminists are fighting for women. I will never understand how the conversation ever turned to "why are these feminists not standing up for men's rights?" because it never should. Call me crazy if you must, but I can't fathom a time when I would want a group of people that can't see the world clearly and don't experience my daily life, to represent my needs in a society full of so many little imbalances. …
/r/MensRights09/10/17 02:17 PM
1

You're the one making a false equivalency between a hysterical feminist subreddit (one of hundreds), and a support group for epileptics that values a respectful, peaceful talking space. It's not a damn war zone. Unless you like the idea of distressing someone until they have a seizure? Or did that not occur to you? Hence, ass-trash. (Plus, it's apparently just standard procedure to do name-calling and shitty behaviour here, so... when in Rome?)
/r/MensRights29/09/17 12:25 AM
0

ughh..you are insufferable. jesus. I generally am insufferable to people who can't create rational arguments, so I'm not surprised that you're struggling here. you know what I find amusing? the fact that you can come into this sub and troll, (yes troll, you don't belong here, youre not subbed. you come to mock, ridicule, and argue) I guess your idea of a contributor is someone who just sucks the ideological cock, huh? Well, I'm afraid there's no room for me to get in there, what with you lot all…
/r/MensRights29/09/17 12:22 AM
0

No, you tool. I was paraphrasing intent. Jesus Genuinely Fucking Christ. Did you just get skipped when God was handing out brains?
/r/MensRights28/09/17 11:43 PM
1

When someone is attacked verbally or even irrationally confronted for the way the speak, totally derailing and skipping the main point just for pc sake, I am 100 percent in the belief that they have a right to go apeshit. Then you have no credibility in my eyes. You believe "Think before you speak" deserves "FUCK YOU I'MMA CUT YOU BITCH". He didn't go there looking for trouble No, he only opened a reddit account so that he could complain about how his girlfriend gives him the cold shoulder. If y…
/r/MensRights28/09/17 10:55 PM
1

/r/epilepsy isn't a fucking feminist subreddit, ass-trash. What planet were you hatched on?
/r/MensRights28/09/17 10:48 PM
2

"Attacked". LOL, so spineless. He asked for advice on how to keep his girlfriend happy, and he didn't like the response, so he lashed out like a child. He also violated the subreddit rules and picked a fight with a mod. He picked a fight and lost. Equality.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 10:48 PM
1

Like a mature adult? I'm pretty sure I said that.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 10:45 PM
1

You said he was "attacked". That implies that he was the target of something. The women in that thread responded to what he said, not who/what he is. You said he "retaliated", implying that you believe his paranoid and psychotic breakdown was justified. That means you regard "you asked for advice, so here it is" to be a grievous assault and that he was in the right. Meanwhile, in reality-world, this asshole joined reddit and immediately went looking for validation. He wanted someone to soothe hi…
/r/MensRights28/09/17 09:49 PM
1

If that's what you call "attacked", then you have a very thin skin. And if you think his "retaliation" should just be swept under the rug as a "Well, boys will be boys" situation, then you're just fucking stupid. Run along, little one.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 09:24 PM
1

No. I mean, "he should be exhibiting some qualities of maturity that differentiate the adolescent from the adult." Why am I not surprised that you went there, though.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 09:02 PM
1

In order to be called a man, he should probably act like one first.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 08:11 PM
2

Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 07:41 PM
2

From the sidebar of /r/epilepsy : Personal attacks, bigotry, fighting words, otherwise inappropriate behavior or content, comments that insult or demean a specific user or group of users will be removed. Regular or egregious violations will result in bans. My original position was "wow, what a shit subreddit". And then the exchange was posted, and I ate crow. After reading the exchange and seeing the full breadth of the situation, I'm on the moderator's side. The mod had every right to be a cont…
/r/MensRights28/09/17 07:29 PM
1

No, she was a whore but I met her at a bar. She paid me for sex. That's not what "whore" means. If she paid you, then you were the whore. Anyway you know transpeople have a high suicide rate. Fake news, bitch.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 07:00 PM
2

That is equal parts sad and pathetic. You are clinging to the claims of a whore (someone who gets paid to make men feel good) that you don't have pathetic disappointing genitals. I'd laugh if it wasn't so depressing. I'm also in awe that your defense against insensitivity to women is to be insensitive to transgender people instead. You are genuinely unable to help yourself. You got yourself into this mess, and now you think being an even bigger piece of shit is going to get you out of it. Good l…
/r/MensRights28/09/17 06:51 PM
2

Why, are you looking for someone to donate you some balls so that you finally have a pair?
/r/MensRights28/09/17 06:44 PM
1

That would be the part where you're pissing and moaning about how one person suggested you switch from calling her a "girl" to calling her a "woman", which shouldn't have broken your friggin' back. Even if you thought it was irrelevant, shit advice, all you had to do was lie and say you'll take it into consideration and no one would have been the wiser. But nope, that would be the sensible thing to do, and your ego doesn't have room for that.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 06:36 PM
1

Specifically, check out the part where he calls the moderator a "mouth-breathing man-hater". It's fascinating.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 06:31 PM
1

And that's why you'll never get help with anything. It's someone else's fault that this situation has spiralled out of your control. Has nothing to do with your selfishness, stubbornness, and unwillingness to actually be better, despite your plea to /r/epilepsy for help being better. All you wanted was for them to soothe your ego and tell you that you're doing nothing wrong. And that's why you came here after they didn't do that.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 06:26 PM
0

I'm flatly in amazement that your first instinct though, was so come to MensRights and sob into the echo chamber. It's almost like your thought process was "what community hates women and won't check my post history?" Like, I get that the place doesn't have a stellar reputation, but try not to be too obvious about it, huh?
/r/MensRights28/09/17 06:13 PM
1

First of all I have an open relationship with my girlfriend. I have to wonder which one of you is happier with that arrangement. And I wonder whether your girlfriend will still be so open after she finds out about this tirade you've gone on in her name. Second of all none of your fucking business I shouldn't have to defend myself against attacks Attacks? You asked for advice on how to get your girlfriend to cheer up at you, moron. I'm just trying to help my girlfriend with her epilepsy. No, you'…
/r/MensRights28/09/17 06:09 PM
2

He called a moderator a "mouth-breathing man-hater". Considering I was 3-day-banned from MensRights for saying "Everyone needs to take responsibility for their own failings", I consider this whole stone-flinging-in-the-glass-house thing to be hilarious.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 05:58 PM
0

Whoa, now. I saw the posts that the moderator provided. Unless they blatantly re-wrote all your posts to turn you into a gigantic piece of shit, I'd have to say that if altruism was your goal - you missed it by a mile. Calling them "a bunch of mouth-breathing man-haters" stinks of ...oh, what's the opposite of altruism? Egoism. There we go. First of all, from what I can see, 2 users first accused you of sharing your "selfless concern" for your relationship with your desire to date ex-girlfriends…
/r/MensRights28/09/17 05:53 PM
1

So instead of using your brain, you just spewed bullshit at them? When has that ever accomplished anything productive? "I have nothing but respect for my girlfriend, but as you can see, the word girl is used to refer to both adolescent and adult women in a colloquial or non-formal context without any negative connotations associated with it. If you wish to politicize this conversation, please do not include me in it, good day." That took me thirty seconds to write. Can you not keep your civility…
/r/MensRights28/09/17 05:36 PM
2

I should have guessed there was more to the story; there always is, in this subreddit. I'm officially unable to trust anyone who posts their personal sob stories here now.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 05:33 PM
2

The story we're getting now, from the moderator, is that some users were giving you a hard time about the "girl" thing, and that you flipped the fuck out and went full-MGTOW on them, and that is why you got banned. See, this happens every time I see a guy's sob story on MensRights. It never turns out to be the whole story that we get, and the real truth turns out to be that you're your own worst enemy. Stop being a gigantic cunt. Rather than pissing out your shittin' hole when a woman protests t…
/r/MensRights28/09/17 05:22 PM
3

Women call grown men "boys" all the time, especially when referring to sexual escapades, without negative connotations. Apparently that subreddit is just staffed by people who think the river only runs one way.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 11:20 AM
0

1/3 Oh, for the love of Pete. The fact that there is such a huge number of judges contributing to the data gives more credibility to the idea that there is systemic bias happening in our criminal justice system. That would be true only if the judges collaborated on a system of sentencing, which they don't. You're also running on the assumption that "average" means "normal". Average is nothing more than a mathematical computation. Remember that "same crime" doesn't always factor in the severity o…
/r/MensRights27/09/17 12:42 AM
-1

What?
/r/MensRights26/09/17 11:12 PM
0

Men are given 60% longer prison sentences than women for the same crimes This statistic is accurate when taken from the scope of the whole country, but there isn't one overall court with one judge presiding over all criminal cases in the United States. Can you provide evidence that this occurs within the same court, or with the same judge? Does Judge What's-His-Name from Wherever, Idaho, give men longer sentences than women? If not, then there may be a flaw in how the statistics are being interp…
/r/MensRights26/09/17 11:11 PM
-6

Brock Turner got six months for a more egregious crime, and served only three months. Cherry-picking is the hallmark of shitty discourse.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 07:57 PM
1

What if she pokes holes in them? What if you're in a committed relationship and she has been on birth control and decides to "forget" to take it? What if government agents are secretly compromising your condoms? What if space aliens are teleporting your semen into your girlfriend? C'mon, you're chasing a white tiger on this one. They might have happened, but there's hardly evidence that it's a problem of epidemic proportions. What if she gives a blow job and saves it for later? What if she raids…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:38 PM
1

Keep an eye out on the midterm elections. Congress and the Senate in 2018 will be sending people to the polls. Either pick a Republican that will vote sensibly and not just do what Trump tells them to do - or vote non-Republican (Democrat, Independent, whatever).
/r/MensRights14/09/17 01:21 PM
1

The reality is that those groups are among the smallest, too. Trump's loyal supporter base isn't 60-million strong, even though that's how many votes he got. Considering his dismally low approval ratings in his first few months, I am inclined to believe he's got maybe a few million supporters, while the rest were just hardline Republicans who stuck with their senator and prayed that Trump wouldn't be doing what he is currently doing.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 01:12 PM
1

you've argued the feminist side for months No I haven't. I've argued against illogical arguments made by MRAs here. I was banned from AMR for not siding with their support for feminist stereotypes, which, if you weren't fake news, you might have noticed. Here is a question: Do you believe in wage gap, patriarchy, women in the western world being truly oooressed or other nonsensical fairy tales? Wage gap: Myth. Patriarchy: Myth. Oppression of Western Women: Myth. Mansplaining: Ehhh-- Manspreading…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 12:57 PM
1

The factors related to Trump's victory are much simpler than that. He kept campaigning, while Hillary kicked up her heels, riding on the laurels of the mainstream media's presumption that Trump couldn't possibly win. He baited Hillary at every debate, and rode on lofty promises lacking in any actual plans. He didn't gain any voters with all of these tactics. All he did was ensure that enough Democrats stayed home instead of hitting the polls, for him to secure a win. People only like to raise th…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 12:47 PM
1

I'm not even American, let alone a Republican, and I could name all the primary candidates. My roommate and I actually predicted Trump would win the day Clinton was announced as the Democrat candidate. You are bigoted trash no better than the KKK. You post to against mens rights for Christ sakes. No one who isn't a fucking bigot posts there. What a non-argument. I posted there a handful of times, while I've been posting here months before and months since. So on top of the false equivalency, you…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 12:29 PM
2

I don't know if this is that. A gay guy expecting "all men are trash" to get him a date is going to find out that he poisoned his own fish.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:07 AM
6

She looks like Steve Bannon's daughter.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:20 AM
1

I was going to just write "TL;DR;DC", but right above the reply button was this, which my eyes couldn't unsee: I started out thinking you were arguing in good faith. I even believed you weren't a feminist. However it's clear from this post that you hate men and boys. You're a very, very sick person, and I hope you get help. Dumping your grievances on me like I'm supposed to answer for all the problems in America, and then getting pissed off that I don't submissively agree like a 1950s housewife?…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:13 AM
1

Men don't want women in the military, at least those who are honest about it. Men in the military certainly don't want more women in the military, because it puts their lives at increased risk. Right, because the modern military is all about raw brute strength, not flying little robots around and piloting tanks and planes or anything. :/ (PS, if you want a clear example of a sexist attitude, you just made it, right there.) The reason MRA's bring up men being forced to fight and die in wars is to…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:08 AM
2

Okay, so some men are the more successful comedians >.>
/r/MensRights14/09/17 02:11 AM
1

Unfortunately media does influence how people behave whether we like it or not. That's because we've been conditioned to believe the media from childhood. TV-addicted parents are teaching TV-addicted kids, and studying TV addiction. That's like a coffee nut studying the effects of caffeine and responding "Well, people are just going to be wired one way or another!" You're claiming slicing off a part of a baby's penis -- and sometimes killing them in the process -- isn't cruel? I'll get to that b…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 02:11 AM
1

It's a men's rights issue in any country where male "rights" are contingent on signing up for the draft or where men (or boys) are forced to fight against their will. I find it bewildering that 50 years ago, men were annoyed that women were allowed into the military, and now, men are angry because not enough women are dying in wars for it to be "fair". Only men pay taxes: By the end of her life, the average woman will have a negative fiscal impact of $150,000 Assuming that's true (which I don't …
/r/MensRights14/09/17 01:30 AM
1

Oh, is this about getting the last word in? Your ego can't handle leaving something alone? Does baby need a bottle? :< If you must have the last word, please feel free. Just know that I regard you with the same level of respect and consideration as you've shown me today (read: none whatsoever).
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:17 PM
2

Giving the alt-right a stage is how the United States ended up with the worst leader in its entire history. So maybe there are some risks to consider :/
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:13 PM
2

If you need me to add clarity, I don't think it's justifiable for hate to be a one-way street. If one thing is fair game, it all is.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:11 PM
0

Here I thought that someone who enjoyed picking fights as much as you might have a sense of humour. Lesson learned. I'm not going anywhere though, but get ready to not be responded to by me any further, because seriously, fuck yourself with a rake.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:02 PM
-1

Learn what terms mean before you use them, unless you just like looking like an idiot.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 10:47 PM
-1

I didn't say it should be banned. I simply said it was an issue, especially for boys. And I'm contending that it really isn't. The issue is that we regard television as though it should be teaching kids how to behave, which is genuinely fucked up. Male genital mutilation, which sometimes causes death. That's a very dubious example of oppression against men. Increased risk of being abused, sexually and otherwise. Citation? Discrimination against boys in schools. Examples? Drugging of boys in scho…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 10:44 PM
0

That's not what I said at all. I didn't even mention the author in my initial post. So you're now reading nuance in words I never used. Too bad for you. I'm playing devil's advocate because the typical position is that "no one should hate each other". Stop trying so hard to win an argument, you have nothing to gain here.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 09:37 PM
-1

And? People say stupid things all the time. What do you want me to do about it?
/r/MensRights13/09/17 09:34 PM
0

I'm saying you took a sentence out of context and created your own context. No, you're saying that there's something wrong with doing that. I'm saying there isn't. It happens all the fucking time. Taking part of what someone says and using it as a launchpad to make your own point is only wrong if you don't understand nuance. I did not think that the author's point was that people can hate whomever they please. If I thought that, I wouldn't have felt the need to comment.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 08:58 PM
1

Men are the more successful comedians. And the best comedians are not afraid to criticize themselves. So you tell me if this is a sexism thing.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 08:53 PM
1

Are you choosing to be this ignorant, or am I being really rude to someone with special needs? Read my entire post, instead of cherry-picking at tiny bits. I have no idea how you fashioned this idea that I support this man's specific view. I said what my view was. You just didn't bother reading it because you want to get mad about something.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 08:51 PM
1

I'm not talking about portrayals in the media, though that is certainly an issue as well. It really isn't. You guys gotta let entertainment be entertainment. So what if there's a dopey husband stereotype? How does that actually hurt anyone? I'm talking about institutional discrimination and even cruelty (in other words, oppression). Would you care to provide an example of such? Keep in mind that my standards are such that I can't even regard women in western society as being oppressed. So if you…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 08:49 PM
1

Actually, I was talking about the title. You're talking about the title and its byline. Keep in mind as well that I hadn't had access to the article yet. And don't forget that I gave my own opinion and didn't say "I agree with that guy". It's disappointing to see someone so woefully behind the rest of the conversation.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 08:25 PM
0

I don't agree that every aspect of Western society has normalized it. I think that modern men behave in predictable enough ways that media-related sectors of society take shots at men because of the "low-hanging fruit" principle (stereotypes about men are just funnier than the ones about women, sorry. That's just kinda what happens when men are better goofballs). But to say that all of society has made hating men a common occurrence is beyond the state of affairs that I see.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 08:09 PM
4

this is really going to put someone over the bend if they're wont to cherry-pick Thanks for joining us - sorta.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 07:25 PM
1

I do not know how child support payments are co-ordinated in Canada.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 07:14 PM
1

Father could be known, know he was a father, and still not be on the birth certificate? I have no idea. Never heard of that being the case, but it's not like that kinda thing makes news.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:59 PM
1

Daily conversations, just not with trolls like you. How cute. You didn't correct me, you were hostile because I posited a correct viewpoint counter to your feminist delusions. You do realize that the comment chain is visible, right? It's not like you and I had some secret conversation and that no one can see what really took place. These are my exact words in response to your remark that "it's flatout stupid" to suggest that people don't like being put on the spot. I imagine you get into a lot o…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:58 PM
1

Which is why some prefer the simpler version - giving men the same rights women already have. I know of no right that women have that men don't, just as I can think of no right men have that women don't. We just like to toss around the idea of "should have the same rights" because the level at which people benefit from those rights changes from person to person. Again, given that 25% of Canada's adoption system involves any male input at all per the source, I don't think it's that rare. The circ…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:48 PM
2

That's awfully presumptuous. Yes, I did read the second line. I did not agree with the second line, but I did see and process the existence of those words.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:38 PM
1

No one has argued to ban abortion. Was it not you that argued that either men should be given an opt-out or that women should have theirs revoked? I'm listening for a better idea. Giving women and only women their right to relinquish already born children is a shit choice. You claim giving men the right men already have is also a shit choice. You claim taking that right away from women is a shit choice. Wait... now you're claiming that women shouldn't be allowed to give a child up for adoption? …
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:36 PM
5

That's why I was careful not to say I agreed with the author.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:12 PM
1

That wasn't what was claimed, and even if it was, that requires extensive proof. You yourself have claimed that biology does not entitle the father to rights in Canada - and that if he is not in the child's life he can't block the adoption. This is true even if the only reason he's not in the child's life is no fault of his own. You're now delving into parts of society that the law can't touch without up-ending everyone's lives. The government would have to know about everyone's private lives in…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 06:11 PM
1

It's unreasonable to think correcting someone in the name of an author would start a fight Have you been in a conversation in the last 18 months? that's where your lack of anything resembling a spark of intelligence begins Oh, the irony. "Correcting someone won't start a fight, and that's why I'm starting a fight with you over correcting someone!" And a rudimentary insult, to boot. Class act, you are. No one, but you who took offense to someone saying facts are important That's presumptuous, con…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:53 PM
1

That's why some are in favor of parental relinquishment. Women always have that as an option, while men never do unless the woman chooses for them to. "Parental relinquishment" is not a viable solution to the problem, and neither is banning abortion. Please remember that just because you can't think of better options, it doesn't mean that we should be forced to pick between one shit choice and another shit choice. Did he leave because he wanted to, or because he was forced out? ...seriously? You…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:46 PM
3

I'm right there with ya. It's like trying to attend a play when the entire audience is rioting.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:20 PM
1

That might work with something more obscure than Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol. X3
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:19 PM
1

Please, tell me where I've been unreasonable to you. I went back and re-read this comment chain, and you're the one who made this personal by telling me that I'm just stupid for thinking that singling out a meaningless detail doesn't put someone on the spot. This is on you, bud. Don't dump your insecurities on me, I don't want 'em. Also, what kind of princess hears "I imagine you get into a lot of fights" and gets so pearl-clutchingly offended that they immediately accuse the other person of bei…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:16 PM
1

Possibly, yeah. I'm now very frustrated with myself when something I thought was an absolute truth turns out to be very difficult to find. I used google and everything. That's how I felt when I hit my adult years and all the feminist ideologies started looking sour and crazy. That often happens when the aggrieved party is male. Citation needed. I mean told about the adoption. Not told about the child. My bad for not being specific. That would be shades away from impossible. Do you have any evide…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:05 PM
1

You mean more complicit. You surround yourself only with people who agree with you, or people lacking the spine to stand up to you. You clearly need more people in your life who disagree with you, because it's given you one hell of an ego.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 04:36 PM
24

Yeah, that was less fascinating than I expected. He's just a guy that hates guys, which is weird because he's also gay. So not only does he hate himself, but he hates the people he loves, and won't go near the people he respects most. What a tool.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 04:34 PM
1

It makes no logical sense for a woman who is planning on giving a child up for adoption to leave the father in the picture. That carries risk and no reward. It makes no logical sense for a woman who doesn't want a child to even tell the father she's pregnant. Your rationale is full of holes that stem back to the moment this hypothetical woman discovered she was pregnant. Source? Hit up the Wikipedia page for "Single Parent" and go through the bibliography. Most references are in print. In the Un…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 04:32 PM
1

Thought this would be easy to find. Having trouble. I'm working on it. I know it was in Accounting Today some years ago but I'm having trouble finding it. It may have been a myth. That sorta thing happens. I could just as easily cite the prison time for not signing up with the selective service - 5 years in jail (which is also never done). I could cite marijuana laws in Canada too. But it doesn't quite mean the same thing here, because those are just blanket disinterest in enforcement, usually b…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 04:03 PM
1

It isn't putting her on the spot to say "It's Dickens". It's flat out stupid to say otherwise. I imagine you get into a lot of unnecessary fights. But hey, if that's the opinion you wanna have, best of luck to ya.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 03:40 PM
2

The typical action of a mother who intends to give up a child for adoption? Why would she put herself in financial risk by doing that? It makes no logical sense. The notion that mothers who intend to give up their children for adoption intend to randomly put themselves at financial risk for no apparent benefit would imply that women are either stupid or can't think towards the future. Now I'm confused, because you're the one that said that women cut men out in order to give children up for adopt…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 03:38 PM
2

It's a shame that the OP posted a screenshot of the article and not a link to the article itself. Half-blind politics are fascinating (that's why I keep coming back here).
/r/MensRights13/09/17 03:12 PM
1

It's the law that wasting your employer's time in the United States is illegal under federal law. It hasn't been enforced since the 1940s (World War 2, and all that). I was not able to find where that exists in US law. Citation, please? If I said it was usually the case that employees who waste employer time are prosecuted, you'd rightly call me out for bullshit, even though it's clearly against the law. You're talking about enforcement of a law that would require someone to report this crime. I…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 03:10 PM
1

You're saying that when a woman cuts the father out of the child's life (as is typical in the United States when she wants to put the child up for adoption or surrender the child to the state) This requires a citation, because I don't believe for one second that the typical action in the US is for the mother to "cut the father out". In the face of overwhelming evidence, my conclusion is that men not wanting to be fathers is a far more common reason for single parenthood. You're going to have to …
/r/MensRights13/09/17 03:00 PM
0

There is no wage Gap to debate was the point. It was an example for fucksakes. Don't turn this into a discussion about that. As for the literary reference I would probably tell her I believe you mean Dickens. Why? Why waste the time putting her on the spot? Do you think she'll never see the name again? Do you think she'll start teaching about Charles Dickenson and setting off a chain reaction that makes the whole world forget that it's Dickens? you are letting her Play the full fool, why not hel…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 02:54 PM
0

This is exactly the kind of thing I talked about. Instead of absorbing what is said to you and making a discussion about it, you attack all criticism and try to discredit it. Using weasel words and faulty correlation, you aim to craft a response that doesn't require you to actually defend anything that has been done (because you know that what I've said is true and that those actions I talked about are, in fact, indefensible). You are deranged if you think pr would change the minds of those luna…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 02:49 PM
1

I want to see a statistic that, in Canada, the majority of women who give up their children for adoption the child goes to the father, and then he can sue for child support. You don't need to see a statistic. It's a law. If the father is part of the child's life, and the mother wants to give the child up for adoption, the father can intervene and take full custody, and yes, get child support. That's not often the situation because so few single mothers in Canada go to term and give up the baby w…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 02:36 PM
1

The only circumstance that a woman can give up her child without consulting the father in Canada is when the father is not present in the child's life, or if she chooses to terminate her pregnancy.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 02:32 PM
2

If you crash your car, you're still liable for the damage you do with the car, regardless of whether or not you wanted to crash it. Your actions have consequences on other people, which you then must take responsibility for as a contributing member of society. You can't "put the child up for adoption" as a father that wants out before the baby is born, because the child is not up for adoption if one of the parents is not willing to do so. The only methods of getting out of parenthood are prevent…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 02:29 PM
95

As much as I "hate" playing devil's advocate (read: it's a lot of fun sometimes), this is really going to put someone over the bend if they're wont to cherry-pick. Women do have the right to hate men. Yep, I said it. They do. There can be no law that says "you're not allowed to hate other people", even though society considers it a big taboo. Being hateful is merely shitty behaviour, not illegal. If you need me to say this too, "Men also have the right to hate women. It's shitty, but not illegal…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 02:12 PM
0

Pay equity is an important issue worth debating though. What about all the meaningless day-to-day stuff that you'd never even think about if the topic wasn't raised to you? Non-political stuff, for example. Hollywood-level stuff. Let's say, for example, that you're in a library in December, and just some woman you're chatting up amid the bookshelves says "You really ought to read A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickenson, it's far better than watching one of the movies about it" - you might be temp…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 02:07 PM
0

I should point out that this subreddit is on most shit lists in the mainstream. Given the laundry list of complaints against it, who can really say they're surprised? The frequency at which MensRights gets exposure would be great for you guys, were it not for the fact that every time you're brought up, it's because one of you decided to infer that women should bear the entire burden of child care, or that transgender people should be brainwashed into conducting themselves in the stereotype assoc…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 01:59 PM
2

The user "BooBailey808" was part-wrong, but part-right (more accurately, mostly wrong, but notably right about one thing). Harsher sentences are definitely not toxic masculinity (contender for stupidest coined term of the 21st century) but aren't really sexist, since different courts with different judges dealing with different cases result in a differing range of sentences. All it would take to tip the balance are courts with tough justices in places where women are rarely having run-ins with t…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 01:41 PM
2

There's an element of intrigue. One thing I've found to be extremely common is that men tend not to pick their battles. Everything is a battleground, everything needs to be corrected, and the only thing that's important is making sure everyone is always 100% factual. I too, would be interested in seeing what would happen if guys were more selective about picking fights and arguing fact. Sure, lies and inaccuracies aren't helpful, but how many times can you think back in your own life where you g…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 01:29 PM
2

You're the one freaking out that Google Assistant didn't understand your fake anguish over the fake death of your dad... and yet I should "go outside". Mkay, have fun with that.
/r/MensRights21/08/17 05:38 PM
1

You evidently don't know how Google Assistant works. And Google doesn't think women are more important; it's a piece of software.
/r/MensRights21/08/17 03:36 PM
2

google isn't a person and they aren't in parliament. Thank you for repeating my point.
/r/MensRights19/08/17 04:22 PM
1

The middle ground is for people who are either to stupid, or to cowardly to pick a fucking side. It's also for people who find both sides to be intolerable, intolerant, sociopathic and dangerous. I, for example, do not like how either "camp" looks - in most arenas of politics. The liberals vs. conservatives: count me out. Feminists vs. MRAs; no thanks. Star Trek vs Star Wars; can't we just get along?
/r/MensRights19/08/17 04:21 PM
2

The middle ground is for people who are either to stupid, or to cowardly to pick a fucking side. It's also for people who find both sides to be intolerable, intolerant, sociopathic and dangerous. I, for example, do not like how either "camp" looks - in most arenas of politics. The liberals vs. conservatives: count me out. Feminists vs. MRAs; no thanks. Star Trek vs Star Wars; can't we just get along?
/r/MensRights19/08/17 04:21 PM
-1

Has this thread been brigaded by Nazis? You think the presence of intolerance here is new?
/r/MensRights18/08/17 06:42 PM
0

So... you're fine condemning extreme liberals, but not Nazis/neo-confederates/white supremacists? Don't you think extreme actions on the left are also motivated by people who "are just fucking tired" of something? Isn't that how all extremism starts? I think it's probably only a matter of time where people will have to choose a side, and either side with the men's rights/ white supremacists/ nationalist, or the SJW/Left/ Liberals... I don't think there will be a middle ground. This tells me a lo…
/r/MensRights18/08/17 06:41 PM
2

I guess the upvote is for "contributing to the conversation" rather than "agree"? That's what the upvote button is for. People who use the upvote as an "I Agree" button need to exercise those fingers instead. Up/Downvotes are to express how valid a contribution something is in furthering the discussion.
/r/MensRights18/08/17 06:38 PM
1

Aww, did the poor little troll get its fee-fees hurt? Nope. No one cares what you do here. No one cares what you do anywhere. No one cares about you at all. Then why are you devoting so much time to being a giant dick to me? If no one cares, no one would have replied. But you did. So you must care. I have to wonder how much I ruffled your swastika if you've decided that flinging shit at me is the best way to respond.
/r/MensRights18/08/17 06:24 PM
3

Ooh, a "kill yourself" reply. You're just running the gamut of shithead responses. Not sure how much success you're hoping to have, but I want you to know that you're not capable of keeping me from visiting and commenting in this subreddit, nor any subreddit. So have fun in your efforts, loser.
/r/MensRights18/08/17 06:16 PM
-2

Is this really the best response you have? And yet, I'm the troll. How hilarious.
/r/MensRights18/08/17 05:56 PM
-2

What a common reply. Anything that isn't flattering to you is trolling, no matter how valid and true it is. Why don'tcha try not silencing dissenting opinions for a change and see what that does for your public image?
/r/MensRights18/08/17 05:28 PM
3

...is this really what's left in the gender conversation here? A Google app that learns from what people say to it has different responses to different phrases, stop the fucking presses and make it political before the whole world goes feminist! (/sarcasm)
/r/MensRights18/08/17 05:17 PM
-8

Maybe if MRAs stopped believing the nonsense that becoming more tolerant will cause a decline in your preciousness, that'll stop happening. Slate isn't the first outlet to make the comparison, and they certainly won't be the last.
/r/MensRights18/08/17 05:14 PM
-1

MensRights has a serious image problem. Users are frequently abusive, and content posted rarely satisfy the subreddit's own content policies. On top of that, moderators (who claim to have a hands-off, ban-free approach) will issue bans to users who state views or opinions that personally offend them. In order to be spared from the "interesting" fallout of expressing your own opinions, you have to tow the party line, even if you don't believe it. Users that don't play by "the rules" here are give…
/r/MensRights16/08/17 10:34 PM
1

Let's have a look at "Handsome Her"'s rules and see how ridiculous they are. Rule #1: Women have Priority Seating As a private business that very clearly describes itself as "by women, for women", this doesn't even come close to surprising me. It would be like getting offended or surprised that hospitals prioritize seating to the injured and sick (courtesy notwithstanding). Rule #2: Men will be charged an 18% premium to reflect the gender pay gap (2016) which is donated to a women's (indistinct)…
/r/MensRights16/08/17 10:15 PM
1

I clearly am not doing it for the reward and prestige :/
/r/MensRights16/08/17 08:26 AM
1

Websites with 10's of millions of daily readers that publish feminist articles and publicly identify as feminist sites? Yeah that MAINSTREAM FEMINISM. Perhaps you could illuminate me as to where Buzzfeed flatly describes itself as a feminist website. Links are appreciated! "Investigate the facts" dumbass, Gawker quietly reformed as The Gizmodo Media Group and still runs Jezebel which is their version of Salon. I love when you guys start the insults first. I don't feel as bad later. "Investigatin…
/r/MensRights15/08/17 11:52 PM
1

Gawker... as in the outlet that went out of business because they attempted to sexualize a famous man (who went on to have a small resurgence in popular memory because of the ensuing lawsuit). That Gawker? Gee yeah, I can totally see how men being rendered in a sexual context is just devastating. How dare the MSM heighten sagging careers with sensationalism. Also, who the fuck is Seth Rollin? My point here is that Buzzfeed, Salon and Gawker are not "mainstream feminism". They're corporate do-wha…
/r/MensRights15/08/17 10:51 PM
1

... as demonstrated by what research? Lots of men feel their accomplishments are ignored as well, but such anecdotes don't exactly demonstrate an actual objective reality. "Lots of men" Fighting assertion with an even more vague assertion, capital! The OP points out that humans can be sexualized and objectified without it leading to their accomplishments being ignored (by most people). Actually, he was pointing out a double-standard, but his own terms. David Beckham is sexualized, but it does no…
/r/MensRights15/08/17 02:10 PM
-1

Feminists got mad at the Daily Mail for putting out an article called "Legs-it" where they were looking legs of British politicians. I'm willing to bet those Feminists are not the same people ogling men. Also, doesn't that just prove my point? A woman can't even be a politician without someone wanting to compare her legs. I would be surprised (and moritifed) to hear that a publication did the same thing to male politicians. David Beckham is one of the most decorated players of all time and someo…
/r/MensRights15/08/17 01:57 PM
2

The OP is not an example of hypocrisy. First, David Beckham doesn't have his achievements overlooked because he's pretty (in fact, it seems to have done him a world of good, since it got him married to the 4th-most attractive Spice Girl). And second, David Beckham is not an example of what a typical man goes through. You literally have to pick the prettiest man in the ugliest sport to get an example of a sexualized male, though as I said, you weren't able to get an example of a man whose achieve…
/r/MensRights15/08/17 08:08 AM
-4

See, this is the weird logic I can never understand. Feminists say women's achievements will be overlooked because women are sexualized. The response isn't to criticize what feminists sexualize, and thereby contextualize the accuser; it is to point out that a man that gets sexualized. David Beckham is probably not sexualized by the people who are criticizing sexualization. David Beckham's career recognition is not affected by his appearance. David Beckham is the Maria Sharapova of "men in sports…
/r/MensRights15/08/17 03:55 AM
1

Pedophilia is not something to be defended. It's wrong to do it, so it's wrong to want to do it. Yuck.
/r/MensRights11/08/17 06:14 AM
1

You have to be kidding. Pedophiles rape children. That's my problem with them. I'm so done here. Holy shit.
/r/MensRights10/08/17 11:26 PM
1

Being important to founders doesn't necessarily mean the.reason they were founded. Though I can see that interpretation since they could presumably otherwise simply join a preexisting organization which serves their other aims. That is some epic cherry-picking, because literally the statement before the one you quoted was this; The American College of Pediatricians is a national organization of pediatricians and other healthcare professionals dedicated to the health and well-being of children. I…
/r/MensRights10/08/17 04:09 PM
2

The majority of the public agrees, the government agrees, and the American Association of Pediatricians agrees. Just to name a few. So when the overwhelming majority within a democracy wants something, it is considered the will of the people.
/r/MensRights10/08/17 02:54 AM
2

what I see is not critical thinking, a sharing of food for thought, but a dog whistle for additions and subtractions from the 3x5 card of allowable opinion. I am not entirely sure I understand what this means. I would imagine the people that have a problem with SPLC would consider acting in a way differently from the way SPLC is trying to incite hate and shut down thought. Refreshingly rational and logical, thank you. Object to SPLC if you must, but the wacky obsession is bordering on parody wit…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:30 PM
0

I never claimed that I didn't make a reference to SPLC. I've only claimed to be surprised and amused at the dedication to the least important part of my post and total ignorance to the rest of it. If you don't want a response, don't give me something to reply to. Duh.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:56 PM
1

Okay, sugar. Hope that bubble of yours doesn't pop too harshly. But the comment chain is available for people to make up their own minds (assuming people do that any more), so I don't exactly feel heavily compelled to argue with you any more. My advice to you is not to go on with such single-minded obsession. It makes you look desperate.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 05:32 PM
7

Evidence of this being reason for formation? It is spelled out on their website, at their About Us page What has ACP published regarding gay parents that would highlight this objection? Here's one, and here's another one, and another. There are even more, linked at the bottoms of those articles, all posted to its own website. So they're quite proud of this. I could see same sex parents having part of the drawback of single parents: not getting benefit of both genders, though this could be mitiga…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 05:27 PM
1

That's the only part of the comment that you have talked about thusfar. Seems like you're making a big deal out of it to me, sugar.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 05:02 PM
1

If my layman understanding is at least fairly accurate, then a brain scan would just be redundant, since there would be nothing new to see. (Or a recording of brain wave patterns. However that would work.)
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:39 PM
1

Actually, it's entirely thanks to the hospitals, which sets the precedent by which pharmacies set their prices as well. They get away with charging fifty times more money for what a medication costs them to buy from the manufacturer, because there is no oversight on medication pricing. Since so many Americans have drug insurance, most people in the U.S. believe that these exorbitant prices are just... normal. And that's sad.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:38 PM
1

I'll have to leave that in your hands. Studies began in the mid-90s, so there is quite a bit to sift through, and I'm not a neurologist, so most of it is Greek to me.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:34 PM
2

You're comparing transgender diagnosis with emergency medicine? That's really apples-and-oranges. Can't back you up on this one. The medical community is satisfied with the diagnostic process for identifying trans people, and patients are fully briefed on the possible effects of transitioning, which they have to sign a document stating they fully understand before they can be given their prescription. Seeing a brain scan would do very little that a trained medical professional can't do with thei…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:18 PM
2

It might be more expensive in American markets. Prescription drugs are pretty expensive there, I've been told.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:08 PM
1

To pay for hormones out of pocket would cost about forty dollars a month. Costs nothing with a drug plan.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:02 PM
1

Dude... You pushed the SPLC to shore up your argument, and got called out for it roundly. You guys made this a thing, not me. Don't lay your problems on me. Since then, you have been working overtime trying to somehow justify it, and you want to claim that everyone ELSE is freaking out..? You're the ones losing your shit over it. I'm just sitting here, amused as fuck. It's such an awkward sense of pleasure. Honestly, after I read the posts from other people calling you out for it, I just figured…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:00 PM
2

Probably the cost of the test. I don't know how they run the test, so it's probably cost-related.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 02:55 PM
1

So in one post you condemn rushed medicine, and when it becomes inconvenient to be consistent, you change your tone about it. Well done.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 02:54 PM
1

Had I known that you'd all be pissin' through your shittin' holes over it, I would have saved it for when I felt like watching The ManTriggering.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 01:08 PM
3

That's fair; the better analogy would be administering chemo based on the symptoms of a tumor without confirming that a tumor is actually there. Again, no; destroying cancer alters the physical structure of the brain, and needs to be observed. In addition, a tumor is in a specific location, which can be targeted in order to minimize side effects on the healthy portions of the brain, whereas transgenderism is simply a part of the neurochemical soup, and exist in all parts of the brain.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 12:50 PM
3

My problem with that is you seem to think that makes them incapable of being right. Would you care so much if they weren't religion affiliated? Yes. Absolutely. As a transgender person, this pisses me off. As for politics, everything is political any more. If these people want to make meaningful change to the health community then being politically active is a good way to get their voice out and drum up support. You don't believe that rolling back the right to access medical care is a "meaningfu…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 12:46 PM
3

Canada.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 12:43 PM
2

An oncologist needs to physically see what needs to be cut out of the brain in order to save the patient's life. Since transgenderism doesn't have a location in the brain that can simply be surgically extracted, and since hormone therapy does not alter the structure of the brain, a physical view of the brain would be worthless; it wouldn't give the doctor any information about what is going on in the brain.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 12:07 PM
1

Before this thread was posted, I didn't know anything about either group. I looked up ACPeds, because I like to know as much as I can about someone before judging them. What I saw on their own website would have been enough to tell me that they should not be trusted with any decisions relating to children. I did not look up anything about the SPLC, because it was not relevant to this article. It still isn't. This is just a waste of my time, because you boys are evidently too busy clutching your …
/r/MensRights09/08/17 12:03 PM
3

"Mental issue" is not a medical term. It is therefore useless. I also have no idea what point you're trying to make.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 11:54 AM
1

It was a list of notable references that detail the organization's troubled history. I'm sorry that I don't have a condemnation from Breitbart for your tender sensibilities.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 11:16 AM
7

You've talked yourself into a corner because you can't tell the clear difference between a citation and a reference, so you're trying to pretend like there is no difference. Fortunately, we have access to the dictionary nowadays.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 11:12 AM
1

How could I, when I haven't even read why they were added to the list? For all I know, the SPLC could have added them to the list for a shocking reason that I don't know about yet, or for a stupid reason, or none at all. I didn't give the sentence much thought at the time of posting; it was simply added for a sense of completeness in citing the Snopes article. Now I'm finding out that it's fucking MRA kryptonite, and it's probably the funniest thing I've learned since that time I looked up the a…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:54 AM
6

For me to be a hypocrite, I would have to have derived my opinion of ACPeds from the findings of SPLC, which I haven't even looked at. I went on statements and actions made by ACPeds, which are all public record. So those people "pointing out" my "obvious hypocrisy" evidently don't understand what a hypocrite is. And it leaves me very curious whether no one is mentioning all the other points because they can't figure out how to discredit them without discrediting the organization they're trying …
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:45 AM
5

Holy fuck, have you boys had your shots? This foaming at the mouth doesn't look healthy.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:35 AM
7

The single-mindedness today is truly impressive. If I knew I could make MRAs froth at the mouth this easily, the last twelve months visiting this subreddit would have been a fuckton less depressing. I made a short laundry list of charges against ACPeds, and all y'all wanna talk about is the Southern Fucking Poverfuckty Law Center. I can't wait to flex my newfound powers.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:25 AM
3

<sigh> Are we really doing this? First of all, you didn't say "disease", you said "mental issue". Second, by definition of the word "disease", every single affliction is a disease, from clubbed fingers to depression to farsightedness. "Disease" is an extremely broad term. Transgenderism is classed under the "Disorder" area of the disease supercategory. Specifically, it is a neurological disorder. Mental illnesses impair a person's ability to function, which is something that transgenderism does …
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:19 AM
7

You talked about the Southern Poverty Law Center, which I've been stunned over MR's obsession with. I didn't realize all I had to do was evoke their name to make the hair stand on the back of your necks. I would have just started linking to their website instead of wasting my wit on the shitrags of this subreddit. Furthermore, I didn't argue anything. I criticized. If you need to know about the difference between an argument and criticism, feel free to consult whatever sufficiently right-wing so…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:04 AM
6

It's a badge worn over a cloth sack stained with the blood of the innocent. ACPeds is working diligently to revoke people's rights, against the tide of the vast majority of the medical community. You'd think a group that hates gays and trans people would make at least a slight effort to manage some PR, but I guess not.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:59 AM
9

So I described things that have happened, without driving home any opinion on anything. And the response is "you hate men and men's rights". Yeah, that's a pretty standard response for this subreddit. One of the more gentle ones, actually. I'm the opposite of shocked, though.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:57 AM
5

If you have demonstrable proof that the Chairman and I have both committed murders, it would, sure.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:52 AM
5

You have a good deal of persistence. It's too bad you don't know what a citation is.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:49 AM
5

That only shows that trans is a mental issue. ...what? Either you don't understand transgenderism, or you don't understand mental illness. I donno where "lefty" came from Well, have a look at my first post in this thread and the responses to it, and then imagine repeating this experience every time dissenting views with supporting evidence is presented. That should explain where "lefty" came from.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:48 AM
4

Nope.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:43 AM
3

Not my fault. No one more reputable is even bothering to notice the American College of Pediatricians. Just those two folks, and you lot.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:42 AM
7

Holy Shit, Batman. Who could have thought that 13 words would make this place froth at the mouth. It's not exactly a shock to me that the organization has a soiled reputation, but sadly all the groups they've labelled as hate groups come with a healthy dose of independent reasons to be considered hate groups by the public. They've even called MensRights a hate group apparently, and while that's a tad too harsh a charge, I can't help but recall the number of anti-Muslim threads and comments, anti…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 08:40 AM
7

The problem is that people are being misled into believing that ACPeds is a legitimate medical community, when it is, in reality, a religiously-based political group consisting of a few people in the medical field.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 06:42 AM
1

So a scientific consensus can never be wrong. Sure it can. It just has to be proven wrong using facts. That happens all the time. We used to think that the Earth was the centre of the Solar System. We then learned more about space, and now we know better. We used to think that you could measure someone's brainpan to find out how smart they are. We then learned more about the brain, and now we know better. We used to think that gender was a rigid, polar binary. Then we learned more about neurolog…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 04:41 AM
7

Okay, you evidently need to have this explained to you. When someone says that 9 out of 10 doctors agree on something, they didn't have 10 doctors convene in a room and talk it out. They asked doctors for their professional medical opinion and 90% of them reached the same conclusion through the scientific method. The majority of scientific and medical professionals in North America have reached the same conclusions about gender identity, based on the data we have available to us now. So, when th…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:58 AM
5

You're either really clumsy at oversimplifying something, or you don't understand how this gender identity works. There is no one of repute who believes "that girls should be boys and boys should be girls". It doesn't even make sense. Fewer than 1 in 300 people are affected by gender dysphoria. Supporting transgender identity is scientifically accurate, if the study data suggests that, and assuming the study was conducted in a thorough and unbiased manner. Someone who believes that cats arrived …
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:18 AM
4

The scientific and medical community disagree with them, and you. Y'know those commercials that say "9 out of 10 doctors agree"? Yeah, 9 out of 10 doctors agree that transitioning as a child is not child abuse, and can in fact be highly beneficial to the child's state of mind, especially when the family is supportive.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 03:10 AM
-1

Because I did not cite the Southern Poverty Law Center. That is not what citing is. What YOU JUST DID was citing, with the links there. Who I did cite was Snopes, which is where I sourced the information about SPLC and ACPeds. So I have no error to retract. Are we done?
/r/MensRights09/08/17 02:03 AM
7

They formed because the AAP didn't try to object to gay parents. Still wanna give them a fair shake? Or do you think gay parents have it coming or something?
/r/MensRights09/08/17 01:19 AM
2

I did not "cite" the SPLC, nor state it was an objective source. From your initial post: The group is considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center So you're a liar. That's not citing them. That's mentioning them. It is a fact that the organization considers ACPeds a hate group. Also, my statement in no way regarded SPLC to be an objective source. But what we know about ACPeds (a Christian group of about 150 pediatricians who broke away from AAP over their position on gay parents), …
/r/MensRights09/08/17 01:18 AM
7

LOL, shill. Huh? I'm not taking anyone who links to a politically biased shithole like Snopes seriously. Who do you cite when you need facts checked? I bet you that any fact checking resource would reach the same finding. In fact, lemme rummage around and see just how many of these fact checkers there are, and I'll letcha know if I find any that give this statement a thumbs-up.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 01:11 AM
7

What's not too "lefty" for you? Scientific American? Perhaps a graduate thesis from Harvard for seasoning? And for dessert, National Geographic. Sorry, I couldn't find any scientific info on Breitbart or Infowarz otherwise I would have linked something from there too.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 12:45 AM
11

Y'all seem to be rather single-minded in this SPLC thing. It blows my mind that someone would regard a demonstrably unscientific political group with any level of respect, simply because someone they disagree with doesn't like 'em. One day, when the survivors of the gender wars huddle around the fire for warmth, we'll get to hear the story of why such pettiness was of any use.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 12:39 AM
5

...so? Irrelevant. You're giving someone credibility who doesn't deserve it in order to spite people you ideologically disagree with. So unscientific.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 12:37 AM
13

So... your litmus for a good scientific or medical resource is "hated by the PC"? Funny, my gauge is on whether or not they use science. ACPeds does not use science. So if you want to trust a political group to dictate science that they didn't do, then I look forward to seeing your proposal to bring back bloodletting and drilling holes in people's heads.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 10:59 PM
5

Doctors often give patients medications that are not beneficial and are often even detrimental. That word "often" makes me wonder what you consider "often". In addition, why is this important? Are you suggesting that because there are doctors out there that write off-label prescriptions or unnecessary ones, that people who want HRT as a treatment have to go without, and continue living with soul-crushing depression and suicidal thoughts? Psychologists don't prescribe medication. They can assess …
/r/MensRights08/08/17 10:54 PM
11

Given that ACPeds launched with a mission of doing as much damage to the rights of gay parents (and prospective parents) as possible, I'd argue that they didn't start with any credibility.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 10:33 PM
2

Complex neurological tests are not needed when you have a properly trained psychologist. You don't need a brain scan to diagnose depression, bipolar disorder, and many other ranges of neurological conditions. Are you aware that children reporting gender dysphoria at some point generally grow up to be cis (I think it's around 90%)? Citation? And people that have gone through the procedure 100% with an operation report dissatisfaction most of the time? Citation? In a group consisting of people wit…
/r/MensRights08/08/17 10:05 PM
-8

I did not "cite" the SPLC, nor state it was an objective source. The fact remains, however, that they do list it as a hate group.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 10:03 PM
0

I'm not a neurologist myself, but as I understand, the research found subtle brain wave variations that might point to behaviour. It is distinct between men and women. A transgender man or woman doesn't have a typical male or female pattern.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 09:23 PM
19

Their statement depends on no science whatsoever. Neurological studies point to distinct unique differences in men, women and transgender people that validates the majority of the medical and scientific community, who concur that transgenderism is a condition. In addition, there is no science that suggests that children cannot grasp identity before turning 18, therefore banning youths from getting help is a keen way of pushing the suicide rate higher.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 08:51 PM
78

The American College of Pediatricians (not Pediatrics) is not a leading voice of medical professionals. It is a small and politically-motivated group. The majority of pediatricians do not agree with ACPeds' issued statement. ACPeds is a rather new organization, formed (by their own claims) to "promote heterosexual parenting". The group is considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, misusing information from, or incorrectly citing, The American Psychiatric Association on numerous …
/r/MensRights08/08/17 08:17 PM
1

You're just proving his point (and mine). I'd pity you, but that's an awful waste of energy.
/r/MensRights31/07/17 05:19 PM
1

You are absolutely amazing. Moving goalposts, and now appealing to emotion fallacies. Not upset. Annoyed. By you. Because you have completely failed to make a logical argument, and are yet acting as if you've fucking proven a point somehow. MensRights has an opinion about fucking everything, men's rights-related or not, so why the hell is this any different? If this subreddit stuck firmly to men's rights issues in the first place then I wouldn't be so fucking baffled. And annoyed. The only thing…
/r/MensRights28/07/17 05:35 PM
1

But not only is it impossible to constantly have press releases about every single bad thing that happens in the world, it will split the movement. What the hell are you even talking about? Press release? What??? THIS IS WHAT YOU SAID, WHICH I DISA-FUCKING-GREE WITH. Unless it is specifically related to Men's Rights there is no reason this sub should have any sort of opinion on it. I am absolutely fucking gobsmacked that you've managed to drift all the way to official cocking press releases like…
/r/MensRights28/07/17 05:13 PM
1

Someone who is mid-transition is still transgender, hun. They aren't a burden to the military. So the logic behind finding them to be that is totally unsupported by any factual evidence.
/r/MensRights28/07/17 02:47 PM
1

Every organization focused on making the world a better place should have a position on bad things, yes. I don't know how you believe that's unfeasible. Are you saying you don't have an opinion on everything? I do. It's really not that difficult. All you need is a set of beliefs and a moral compass; the rest literally falls into place on its own. I have no idea where you're getting this whole "strategic" thing from. Banning trans people from the military is morally wrong. And if you do not moral…
/r/MensRights28/07/17 02:06 PM
1

Welcome to the real world. Boys being raped should be considered with equal urgency, regardless of the perpetrator.
/r/MensRights28/07/17 01:40 PM
1

You're not making a lot of sense. Discussion is part of the equation. Saying that MensRights and the MRM are mutually exclusive doesn't help the discussion, and in fact gives a free pass to consider this place to be worthless.
/r/MensRights28/07/17 01:39 PM
1

I do not understand how you can have such a backwards view of transgender people if you're trans.
/r/MensRights28/07/17 01:37 PM
1

Saying nothing when a wrong is committed is the same as supporting that wrong.
/r/MensRights28/07/17 01:36 PM
0

You've literally spent four lines saying nothing. A trans-woman gets to compete in a sport, and you lot start pissin' out your shittin' hole, but when trans-women and trans-men alike are due to be banned from military service, you're suddenly tight-lipped? Is there any reason you shouldn't be outraged by a discriminatory ban? Is there any reason not to unite with the rest of your country in saying how wrong it is? Or shall we be left to wonder if your desire to remain silent pertains to a certai…
/r/MensRights27/07/17 08:32 PM
1

How convenient. When there's a victory for LGBT rights, you guys can't wait to strip it down and dress it up as a strike against men's rights even when there's nothing relevant to it... but when those rights are revoked, it's suddenly nothing you should have an opinion on. How con-fucking-venient.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 08:20 PM
2

Speaking from experience, transitioning does not pose any barriers apart from ones that are imposed upon us by others. I don't know what kind of medical complications you think exist for people who are transitioning, I truly do not. I have to wonder if you believe that trans people are just irresponsibly put on HRT without anyone checking to make sure it won't kill us first. As for social complications, those are placed on us by those who are driven and motivated by the way a person looks. That'…
/r/MensRights27/07/17 08:13 PM
1

The saddest thing I have seen in the comments here is that the "this is irrelevant" comments have lots of upvotes, while the "this affect transgender men, so it is relevant" side are being downvoted into oblivion... it kinda puts a spotlight on how the subscriber-base feels about transgender people... PS: This post proves its own point.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 08:07 PM
2

Am I missing something, or did this fella make a giant gender issue out of someone assaulting another person at a stoplight?
/r/MensRights27/07/17 08:04 PM
2

Are you contending that this subreddit and the men's rights movement share no connection? That MensRights should not be regarded as a litmus to the men's rights movement as a whole? 150,000 subscribers definitely sounds like a pretty solid sample size.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 08:01 PM
2

Your username is "RapeMatters" and you've only now noticed this problem in relation to this issue. I'm impressed.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 08:00 PM
2

The biggest issues with this place are... well... you can make a list out of them. One) The moderation process appears to be non-existent. There are no evident rules of conduct, and if there are any of note, they are not enforced. Users can make remarks like this and the content will be permitted to remain, "for others to educate them out of their ignorance" (direct quote from moderator), and the user will continue to be allowed to post without any action taken by the moderators to curb that att…
/r/MensRights27/07/17 05:31 PM
0

I can be a nasty cunt once you get to know me. I don't have to get to know you to believe that. What's with all the down votes little sister? Might have something to do with me arguing for sense and reason, not pushing the narrative. That tends to happen when I go to a subreddit that ignores fact in order to support an emotional ideology.
/r/MensRights25/07/17 03:40 PM
1

Ooooh, good comeback. /s
/r/MensRights24/07/17 02:46 PM
1

That's not the point I'm trying to make. Why does The Daily Mail and The Sun think the best way to congratulate her for being cast is to have big headlines that espouse her body instead of her acting talent? Given that I do not know what she appeared nude in, I cannot say for certain, but numerous actors and actresses have appeared nude in films. Actors with a decent pedigree in acting don't do it because they think it'll get them attention. They do it because the film has a good story, a good s…
/r/MensRights20/07/17 09:19 PM
3

You win. I'm messed with :( And I type the way I talk because just typing out words like a schmuck isn't very personal. It might have som'n to do with my writing experience. I used to edit dialogue for a webcomic.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 07:32 PM
3

...you can't be serious. I just got finished saying that I thought of people obsessed with actor's nudes to be shallow and stupid... and you're asking for Jodie Wh--- Ugh. I can't even.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 07:09 PM
2

Pics of what? Willem DaFoe? No, I do not. I imagine Google has them if you are brave enough.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 06:24 PM
1

No idea. I don't tend to dip into an actor's history to find out how often they were naked before deciding if they're a good actor. Generally, because I'm not a shallow fuckrag that judges someone's worth on their body. Here's a better example. How many articles were published about Willem DaFoe's nude scenes when he was cast in something? Betcha that's a big zero.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 06:10 PM
2

It's pathetic that an actress gets named to star in Doctor Who and one of the first things that The Sun and The Daily Mail do is publish nude photos. Did Chris Hemsworth have photos published like that when it came out that he would play Thor? I somehow doubt it.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 04:36 PM
1

she has an adams apple for chrissakes. ...you really need to brush up on your biology. Men and women both have Adam's apples; men typically have more pronounced ones. From pictures and screenshots of recorded interviews, Brianna's appears to be a relatively normal woman's Adam's apple.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 09:35 PM
0

this is why the burden of proof doesn't work this way. You really need to look into how burden-of-proof works. It lies with the accuser. You are accusing Brianna Wu of lying and hiding transgenderism. The evidence you cite is full of inconsistency and dubiousness. I'm not accusing you of lying. I am asking you to validate the evidence. if i email them, you say now i faked it. Not if you present the unedited email exchange between you and the Ole Miss office of records. This tumblr image shows an…
/r/MensRights18/07/17 06:10 PM
0

in debate (and law for that matter) once something is presented as truth How are we to know it has been presented as truth? seriously, the contact info for you to disprove it is there in the image. you can verify it directly with the university yourself. she claims to have gone there. that's the only record they have of any brianna wu. The image is from a tumblr page (as shown by the url), and there is no information about who sent this email to the university, nor is there anything confirming t…
/r/MensRights18/07/17 05:58 PM
1

You find stalking amusing. Yuck.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 04:52 PM
1

Except nobody gives a fuck publicly what you are... straight or gay. Tell that to homophobic people. Nobody wants to see you making out/ being affectionate in public... gay/ straight/ whatever. Keep that shit private. You seem confident that your views are shared by everyone else. By this standard, if someone finds guys expressing affection for other guys disgusting, they should be ashamed of it... who are you to judge what others should and should not find disgusting. I was referring to obvious…
/r/MensRights18/07/17 03:02 PM
0

Umm... actually, the burden of proof lies on you. I'm not saying it's fake. I'm asking you to prove that it's genuine.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 03:00 PM
1

Research the statistics. How much of the discrepancy is discriminatory?
/r/MensRights18/07/17 02:59 PM
-1

Have you been able to verify that this image has not been doctored or altered? It's obviously been edited to merge the email screenshot with the stuff at the top.
/r/MensRights17/07/17 02:48 PM
0

I presume you have some evidence that Brianna was born male? Also, her having a last name "Wu" doesn't have to mean she is Asian. There are white people with the last name "Lee" as well.
/r/MensRights17/07/17 02:07 PM
1

I'll leave the others here to decide whether your distinctions' extremely minute accuracy here (against vs. anti, etc.) You referenced the wrong subreddit, just one example among many of how you seem to be highly adverse to being accurate. your imposture of triumph here is more about your overwhelming conceit than any real or rhetorical standing in the community You're hilarious. Like I care what you think of my "standing". That's what posting a string of non sequiturs earns you. I'm reminded of…
/r/MensRights17/07/17 09:34 AM
1

Strawmen everywhere. You must buy them in bulk. I have to wonder if you even know what a strawman argument is, or if you're just using it because all the cool kids are saying it. First somebody said that OP's story was unfair to the mother who had to pay child support. You replied something about him being new here and only scratching the surface of the hypocrisy here. Oh, how I wish I'm not about to enjoy this. But you're completely incorrect. The following remark was made to which I replied. S…
/r/MensRights17/07/17 06:38 AM
2

I feel for your man. He clearly needs a better situation. But abolishing child support is far from the answer. 100% of child support payments should go to the needs of the child. I would support a system by which child support payments are converted by the government into a penny-for-penny "Needs voucher". This would eliminate the chance for a single parent to use the child support money on anything but supplies from major chain department stores, which would cast down fears that neglectful sing…
/r/MensRights17/07/17 06:06 AM
0

My argument that your being tolerated here—as you vociferously smear the entire sub—doesn't give you any moral highground is somehow "lacking useful data"? Wow, way to fail to understand a sentence. You insinuated that I thought I was some kind of hero. I corrected you by stating that my only interest is dispelling falsehood and challenging unsubstantiated, narrative-based bullshit. And this is the mental diarrhea that I get in return. Where's your own useful data? Oh yeah, you're a feminist, I …
/r/MensRights17/07/17 05:57 AM
1

I've been to your various houses here What does this mean? seen the utter lack of any meaningful policing of hateful feminist extremes Hard to criticize feminist subreddits when you've been banned from them (assuming you're talking about feminist subreddits when you say "houses", but still not sure). Any even slightly countervailing or questioning post in those places is instantly deleted and the poster banned. Yah. I know. no matter how many passive-aggressive sobriquets you call me Aw, did I h…
/r/MensRights17/07/17 05:00 AM
1

I'm mudslinging the entire subreddit by pointing out that hypocritical duality exists here, which isn't even hidden from view? Okay, sunshine. You chase that dream.
/r/MensRights17/07/17 04:38 AM
-1

Your mockery and shaming tactics are familiar to me and haven't worked in years. I love how far off the rails you're willing to go. Your next gambit will probably be to tell me that no woman will ever fuck me. Oh, I'm sure that's not the case at all. I didn't say that no stupid women existed in the world. Enjoy your crumbling ideological edifice, as the men who built it for you wise up and start dismantling it. We've already begun and your desperation is palpable. A remark of "desperation" is re…
/r/MensRights17/07/17 04:20 AM
-2

It's a drop in the bucket compared to the insanely more hypocritical subs you frequent more often. You mean r/DeFranco? I claimed feminism for decades before I really looked into it, something you clearly refuse to do. Oh, here it comes. You are a typical feminist with a huge blind spot for both male suffering and female privilege including female criminality and the resulting pussy pass it gets. Bam. I never get tired of this line. When MRAs resort to this line, I know that they've run out of a…
/r/MensRights17/07/17 03:42 AM
-2

So this is not reflective of MRA opinions? Or the multiple articles about her published in Breitbart, like this one from February 2015 and this one from September 2015? I'm starting to wonder if MRAs think at all, considering one quick Google search would have showed you what you're attempting to deny.
/r/MensRights17/07/17 02:48 AM
-8

I've heard the rumour that Wu is transgender, which she denies. I see no evidence that she is anything but born-and-identified female; only meaningless conspiracy theories with no motive. I also find it hilariously interesting that MRAs think the worst thing you can say to a woman to offend her is to call her a man. ...isn't that a little bit logically backwards? Also, are you referring to specific mental issues or are you just presuming she has issues because you disagree with her worldview?
/r/MensRights17/07/17 02:14 AM
1

No one is an independent life form. Fuck off naked into space and survive 24 hours. Then I'll change my mind. ...what? Your interpretation of independence is a bit extreme. The United States of America is an independent nation, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum. Santa?! Nevermind were missing one ho. Maybe I should call your mother! XD Are you even allowed to be up this late? Birth isn't a medical procedure? Abortion isn't a medical procedure? Children don't often require medical procedures throu…
/r/MensRights17/07/17 02:03 AM
0

Xir What is this?
/r/MensRights17/07/17 01:42 AM
1

Right I forgot. It's not a child to you people. It's not an independent lifeform until it's born. It cannot even sustain itself until 6 months into the pregnancy. If you disagree, that's fine. We don't have to see eye to eye. Unfortunately for those like yourself who subscribe to such a cartoon-like view of reality Oh-hoh. Here we go again. the truth is that the effects of bringing a child into the world HUGELY affect men. Unless it's a medical procedure, you're not comparing apples and apples. …
/r/MensRights17/07/17 01:29 AM
-2

...Brianna Wu is running for the U.S. House of Representatives? Didn't she used to make video games?
/r/MensRights17/07/17 12:44 AM
0

You guys are acting like Capaldi will be the last man to play The Doctor. I can't tell if it's paranoia or just short-sightedness in the face of such routine rage in this subreddit, but unless the show is outright cancelled in Whittaker's tenure, I anticipate more Mister Doctors to come.
/r/MensRights17/07/17 12:29 AM
3

The Master went from male to female. Why can't The Doctor?
/r/MensRights17/07/17 12:26 AM
8

The Doctor is more than simply a worldly character that is above matters of sexuality. He never once attached his ego to his gender. And now that the Doctor is a lady, I will hope that philosophy continues. As for this being a "feminist pandering political move", I don't see that. There has been interest for a long while to see an actress take on the role of The Doctor, but showrunner Steven Moffatt has blocked that from being a reality at every turn. Now, I skipped the majority of the Capaldi e…
/r/MensRights17/07/17 12:24 AM
1

Circumcision is about as invasive as it gets - it's actually removing a part of the boy's body. That isn't what I'm contesting. The OP wants that decision given to the father, not the boy. That strikes me as being bizarre. This is nonsense. It's an empty assertion. Unless you would like to provide a less empty assertion, then I guess I don't have a choice but to stand by my statement. Hey that's not a bad idea. Yeah, this is where I call you delusional and rescind my request for further comment …
/r/MensRights16/07/17 11:37 PM
-1

Depends on who you ask and where you are. In some places, gays enjoy nearly equal rights to their straight counterparts. In others, significant basic rights challenges exist. Transgender people also have substantial hurdles in that realm even in places where gay rights have been affirmed (such as The United States).
/r/MensRights16/07/17 09:14 PM
1

If pregnancy was a biological process that men went through, I might feel differently about this, but the person who is incubating an unborn child is the person who should be the decision maker, since that person's body is serving as the vessel in which the child is developing. That doesn't mean that the other parties gets dibs on a different part of the baby's life as compensation.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 09:02 PM
1

It's not your body, so the "My body, my choice" thing doesn't apply. It applies to pregnancy because trying to force an abortion or forcefully prevent one is an invasive matter about the woman's body as much as the child developing inside. There is no logic to using a caveat that someone must "understand the implications of" circumcision in order to be allowed to make a decision on it. Not only is there absolutely no statute that supports that kind of limitation, but circumcision is a matter dec…
/r/MensRights16/07/17 08:06 PM
1

The logic is that it's stupid that things which affect males should be decided solely by women. Are you implying that fathers are not permitted to have a say in the decision of his son being circumcised?
/r/MensRights16/07/17 07:36 PM
3

Validate the letter first. Contact the office in Arkansas and seek clarification. Ask for the name of the mother, and see if you recognize it at all. If there's anything amiss about the situation, you might be working yourself into a worry unnecessarily. And don't pay a dime until you can confirm that this woman has a child with you.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 07:09 PM
2

I can't even assess the validity of this theory. It's just the stupidest thing I've encountered all day. There is no logic in use here.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 07:05 PM
14

He's going to need that child support. Raising a kid is expensive, and he's going to find he can't work the same heavy hours he used to.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 06:58 PM
-6

If you think this is the first instance of hypocrisy in gender politics from the MRM side, you haven't been in this subreddit very long.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 06:57 PM
5

In the first article, the man wasn't killed for being straight. He was killed because someone took an extremely over-the-top objection to catcalling. Are you saying that catcalling women is part-and-parcel of being a straight man? Because I don't agree with that at all. In the second article, Jian Ghomeshi was fired from CBC due to sexual assault allegations that later became very public amid a trial (for which he was acquitted). Are you saying that sexual assault is part-and-parcel of being a s…
/r/MensRights16/07/17 04:53 PM
12

When straight males have to risk their lives to be public about their heterosexuality, I might concur. As it stands now, straight men don't face challenges related to their sexual orientation that exceed the stress of simply finding a partner that likes them (which isn't unique to straight people or men). When straight men have to fight for the right to marry a woman, I might concur. As it stands now, straight men are only limited in marriage by the women willing to marry them. When straight men…
/r/MensRights16/07/17 04:25 PM
1

The first thing you had to do in this thread was to call somebody a cunt. That shows me you're thin-skinned, and incapable of dealing with other people having opinions. I posited that duplicate threads are needless and actually take attention away from an issue because the discussion is being split between various pages. And your first impulse was to get pissy and bitchy and drop a c-bomb like you thought that by itself would offend me so much that I'd go away. I don't even remember far back eno…
/r/MensRights16/07/17 12:49 PM
1

You don't come across as even slightly, remotely patient. When your first act in a thread is to call someone you don't like a cunt, the word "patient" isn't applicable.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 12:38 PM
1

You're representing your fellow MRAs just amazingly, I want you to know that.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 05:09 AM
1

It's toodle-oo. 0/10 for effort.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 02:00 AM
-1

It depends when a mod happens to stop by. So yeah, random times are totally viable. I have to wonder how the mods here were chosen, since "being online often" apparently isn't a requirement. Who was banned for having an opinion? We don't ban opinions here. If we did, you would probably be banned. Actually, I was, for 72 hours. You were the one who answered my indignant response to it. If you're convinced it wasn't because of my opinions, have a look at the message sent to me with said ban. Your …
/r/MensRights15/07/17 09:08 PM
1

So it takes days to clean up duplicate threads, but only a couple of hours to ban someone for having an opinion? You do you, but that sounds mighty unusual.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 08:06 PM
1

And that makes it logical to make individual threads for every source that wants to report on it? Isn't one thread about the same event kind of sufficient? It's not even exploring different facets of the situation. They're all just different news/opinion outlets saying the same thing.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 07:46 PM
0

Funny that a right-winger wants to make a Soviet joke, given that the conservative world appears to be run by the Kremlin.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 04:07 PM
1

You're useless to talk to. You're just parroting meninist nonsense.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 04:06 PM
1

Okay, so the first one is subjective. You perceive condescension. That's fine; I won't tell you how to perceive, but I have no condescension - or at least, I had none until you started being pissy babies about me typing words at you. As for inaccurate, you're going to have to back that shit up with a little evidence of your own.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 02:53 PM
0

So which one was this? Condescending? Overconfident? Inaccurate? Or oversimplified? And by the way, when you mimic feminists, you make yourself look twice as foolish as they were. "Mansplaining" was a stain on the English language, and your answer to it is to come up with an even stupider "word" to abuse. Quite sad. MRM has now become Meninism.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 02:46 PM
1

I was using it as an example of how an organization can change leadership and policy without being hypocritical. Do you also think about him while some dude is using as a cum dumpster? The saddest part of this insult is that you didn't even get it right. I'm presuming that you meant to ask if I thought about Trump even while I was being used as a cum dumpster. The answer to that question is no; I'm usually a little too busy to think about Trump during bukkake sessions.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 02:43 PM
0

I presume you are then blaming President Trump for everything President Obama did. Since it doesn't matter if an organization changes hands. You evidently want to treat fluid institutions and organizations as though they are individual people with indeterminate lifespans. Cosmo is not a person born in 1886 making decisions with a single mind. It's a magazine whose editors come and go, whose contributors come and go.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:40 PM
-1

How are you defining "cuntsplaining" here? I only ask because it's not actually a real word.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:37 PM
1

you we're saying about shit talking people who can't stand up for herself I said she isn't here to respond to what is being said. It's cowardly to talk trash about someone who won't know about it. Dollars to donuts that not a single person here would retain their balls in order to belt out their abusive tirades. Leaving her innocence or guilt aside, not one person here has the stones to say any of this shit to someone's face. Don't say something you aren't willing to say IRL - that's how I get b…
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:36 PM
0

Your detailed response has given me lots to think about.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:27 PM
1

Suffrage may have faded, but feminism did not. It started in the latter half of the 19th century. The only reason that Feminism was not a forefront issue in the 1930s and 40s was because of the Great Depression, then the second World War. Unlike today, feminists from the early 20th century had a strong sense of priorities. There was still feminism and feminists, clear through to the 1950s when civil rights returned to the center stage.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:27 PM
1

So instead of offering visible evidence of this being an actual problem, you go with "Well, you just don't know anything then". (-b'-')-b
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:22 PM
1

Again, you don't know the MRM very well at all and are obviously quite ignorant. I like how this is starting. "Marry the state" is a common phrase used to describe a mother who divorces or rejects the father to go on wlefare. If it's so common, then why is that definition unavailable when I Google the phrase? The fact that you don't know this is very suspicious. Because I've never met someone who has told the father to take a hike? Because I don't know a single mother on welfare? Or because I'm …
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:21 PM
0

This is the internet. You don't walk on the internet.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:15 PM
0

Just because there wasn't anything that caused a twitch in either your clearly feeble mind or shriveled heart doesn't mean there isn't "substance." And another one bites the dust.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:14 PM
0

Getting mad that I'm correct isn't really going to help.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:13 PM
1

Another MRA using "feminist" as an insult because they've run out of passable attempts at witticisms. You discuss in poor faith, choosing to turn something into a mudslinging competition and an opportunity to sling paranoid rants about how evil your ideological sisters are. You're literally a meninist; a poorly-rendered parody of an already-unlikeable facet of society. And if you think insisting that you've "slayed" me with "logic" is going to drag me back into arguing points with you, you're in…
/r/MensRights15/07/17 05:08 AM
0

I was serious when I mentioned bailing out. The narrative-lead preaching has drawn out my desire to continue.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 04:49 AM
-1

Kinda sad that you're obsessed with vote tallies as a judgment of someone's worth. Not surprising at all, but still kinda sad.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 03:27 AM
-1

I'm not calling anyone "the victim". I'm asking if the poster's statement clarified to state that MRA philosophy is to engage in a sustained harassment campaign to "break" someone in response to them saying a thing on Twitter that gives you a sad face. But of course, I'm on MensRights! Anything that isn't fellating the echo chamber is whatever the MRAs want it to be. From trolling, to feminist schilling, to playing a victim. I'm just going to start hitting block without responding, whenever some…
/r/MensRights15/07/17 03:25 AM
0

People who think men set up society to privilege other men and oppress women "as a class". A hateful idea that erases the history of men serving women and protecting women with their lives. Anyone who actually believes in patriarchy theory and rape culture (ie men are ravenous beasts), and who by extension thinks fathers are unnecessary if not harmful is a danger to children. This is not a majority of women; hell, it's not even a majority of feminists. 1 out of 5 Americans being feminist may not…
/r/MensRights15/07/17 03:18 AM
1

I do not know. I would imagine if there were any women who refused to be drafted, they would have been dealt with in the same way as a man who refused to serve. It's hard to refuse a call to action directly from The President.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 02:22 AM
1

Spatterguards are footwear.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 02:20 AM
1

Thinking chocolate is tasty is not a trait; that is an opinion. And yes, you can respect a person rather than the little pieces of their skill set or physicality. The reason is that a person is not a neatly organized collection of clearly labeled pieces, like a chunk labelled "Guitar Player" and another chunk labelled "Pastry Chef".
/r/MensRights15/07/17 02:19 AM
0

I'm not sure what you believe has been admitted, but you're continually making yourself look quite silly with this. So I'm going to commit an act of mercy for both our sakes; so that you can resist the temptation to say something idiotic again, and so that I don't have to read it if you can't.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 02:17 AM
1

I feel the same way about radfems and children. And by "radfems" I mean the majority of feminists at this point. The Betty Friedan/Christina Hoff Sommers types lost the fight as soon as the CIA started funding Gloria Steinem. Unfortunately, your assertion does not carry sufficient evidence to carry all the way to feminism being a majority of radicals. It is short-sighted to presume in places where essential facts are missing. I encourage you to watch Karen Straughan's video on the subject. It's …
/r/MensRights15/07/17 02:13 AM
0

Only if I can propose "Liv's Law": When a person is forced to resort to using terms to describe an opposing view to their own as an insult, that person has exhausted their wit.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:44 AM
1

Glad you were here to provide useful input. That's sarcasm.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:40 AM
-1

Oh look, an MRA that wants to be a cheeky asshole. I'm so shocked, I might faint.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:24 AM
1

I don't respect traits. Traits do nothing on their own. I respect people.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:23 AM
1

We can't wear shorts? Shorts are pants. They are short pants.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:22 AM
1

President Roosevelt issued the call for women conscripts to become nurses due to a shortage in January of 1945 that lasted through until the end of the war in August.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:21 AM
1

You'll have to offer an example. And I never claimed I supported people giving her a taste of her own medicine. Just that I don't give a shit about a piece of human filth receiving some comeuppance. Being okay with it is supporting it. Like, if someone starts building a castle on your property, but you don't stop them, then you are allowing them to do it. Just because you don't want a castle on your house doesn't mean you're not supporting it, unless you do something to try to stop it from happe…
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:16 AM
-17

I'm not surprised, given how your vision appears to be based not on light or movement, but on what you want to see.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 12:32 AM
1

according to you, misrepresenting the truth signifies nothing. And according to you, making a clerical error while typing a rather long post signifies a complete collapse of the boundaries and structure of reality itself. And... I'm the one who is unhinged? Hm. But you will attack me anyway, because you're grasping for relevance. I'm still quite curious to know what you're calling an "attack". I mean, if your skin is so thin that you cannot handle a criticism of your views, I can stop and save y…
/r/MensRights15/07/17 12:31 AM
-1

Yep, you sound like a leftie all right. /sarcasm I'm just laying the block down on you because you're literally too insane not to be tempted to reply.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 12:19 AM
1

This is the worst ultimatum ever. Because you decided to start off as a salty little shit, and continue into the evening as a pungent twat, I'm stopping here. And I'm choosing here as my stopping point, not because it pleases me to deny you the quotation you desire, not because it delights me in refusing you any satisfaction to a conclusion to this heart-warming discussion, but because you can't even spell the word "apology". How embarrassing!
/r/MensRights15/07/17 12:17 AM
1

I knew someone was gunna call me a feminist eventually. Someone always does! When the clever insults run inevitably dry, and it becomes clear that challenging my intelligence isn't going to do you much good, you run right to the comfort zone of "FEMINIST! FEMINAZIIIIII!" We're in familiar territory now. You think men sitting comfortably on the subway is "sexism against women" I don't, personally. As long as your legs aren't taking up all the fucking seats, and you're wearing pants, I don't care …
/r/MensRights15/07/17 12:06 AM
0

Pretty sure most MRA's would be thrilled if feminists stopped their hate campaigns and sought actual equality. Your idea of "actual equality" and theirs don't match, and both of you have an idiotic picture of it, to be honest. So I doubt that's gonna happen. Just being real about it. My heart bleeds lol. She's a hardcore misandrist who spreads hate against men and boys. And that is your excuse for supporting people being gigantic pieces of shit to her. No rising above the hate, no showing the wo…
/r/MensRights15/07/17 12:00 AM
-2

Aw, you charmer you.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:33 PM
-15

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize you liked having important issues washed aside by repeated reposts of the same thing.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:33 PM
1

The entire part where you were talking about a mother with a teenage son, you were referring to Jody Allard. Clem Ford has an infant. And FYI, Attack Helicopters aren't recognized as a gender, so I don't have to care about your "get the fuck out of here troll" remarks. It's like hearing "Fake news" now - just glances off.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:32 PM
2

Hey, I'll take any cordial agreement I can get! This is about as pleasant as any convo I'm in right now is going to end. Thanks for sharing your mind!
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:29 PM
1

So I wrote "Ford" instead of "Allard", and that means my grasp on reality is compromised? You're grasping - at what, I know not.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:27 PM
1

Ah, so your position is the "should be". I think I understand now. I couldn't disagree more wholeheartedly without sounding crass, but at least we're on the same page. Also, I'm not a right-winger and I'm also not an American. I was talking about international trends. But nice assumptions there. At least you tried. 90% of the guys that try to knock me down a peg have been American conservatives. Try not to take it personally.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:22 PM
-6

Oh let me guess. We don't care about the mental health of the son who already told his mother that her LAST post made him suicidal. We just care about using him to something something concern troll something something? That's a mouthful. Too bad it still leaves the brain starved for something useful. Please tell me more about my own mind. Short stories aren't really my specialty, Cupcake~ It's fascinating to get remotely psychoanalyzed by a moron who has spent the last 24 hours straw manning eve…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:20 PM
-3

I'm saying the same thing every time I see the same story reposted multiple times a day. It'd be nice if people checked first before posting.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:14 PM
0

Clementine Ford doesn't have a teenage son! I know what hardcore Feminism does to men, which is why I'm concerned for her son. You don't even know which feminist you're mad about! All you're concerned about is using whatever possible to do as much harm to someone as possible. And that makes you no better than the eeeevil feminists. Which "other broad" do you think i'm talking about here sweetcheeks? That's Jody Allard you're bumbling haphazardly through this conversation about. Why are you even …
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:52 PM
0

What? What on Earth are you even talking about? You are conflating what is with what should be. Where? Murders happen. That doesn't mean murder shouldn't be illegal When did anyone say it shouldn't be illegal?? or that people shouldn't advise other people not to kill each other. Where the hell are you getting any of this? Did you fall asleep and dream my post instead of reading it? And the fact is, violent crimes are generally declining. Whenever right-wingers say that, I always ask them the sam…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:34 PM
0

I'm also not your sweetie. Whatever you say, cupcake! And where have people used her son as an insult weapon? I'm actually deeply concerned for her son, having been on the receiving end of hardcore Feminism that resulted in a suicide attempt following an evening in jail with a broken nose ...are you serious. I've been talking about Clementine Ford's kid (which you can see when you re-read my posts, assuming you read them in the first place), and you've been talking about that other broad? Are yo…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:26 PM
1

I've seen Playboy, in its pre-feminism days, when models posed naked. It may have been tasteful, but not all porn is raunchy. Cosmo, on the other hand, has featured a total of 5 nude centerfolds in its 52 years as a women's magazine (and certainly in its 131 years in operation as a publication). With genitalia not on display, these five men, including Burt Reynolds and Arnold Schwarzennegger, were featured between 1972 and 1990, in each their own individual issue.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:22 PM
1

I understand that you baited me with a woefully chosen word. Unless I'm mistaken, the choice of the word common was yours. So why you'd even bring it up is beyond me. But these crimes are - to use a very accurate word so that you'll finally put a lid on this stupidity - prevalent. Prevalent enough that we have laws banning them. Murder is a crime because it occurs with sufficient frequency to establish a common penalty system for people caught committing it.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:14 PM
1

Are you projecting a fear of "genitalia"? No. That's not what's wrong with me. I got a host of "wrong with me"s, but that ain't one of them.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:10 PM
1

I beg to differ. It appears to be quite the standard among couples, despite attempts to politicize private relationships in order to curb the fighting. Human beings fight. That's just the type of creature we're dealing with. People fight with anything they can get a hold of. That's why so many people like democracy. It's not just freedom; it's freedom to argue and fight and disagree and be contentious with one another. I'm not saying I'm the biggest fan of this fact, but the evidence does speak …
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:09 PM
2

Finally! Someone sees what I'm getting at. Magazines are corporate money sinks. The editors don't actually care what's in them, as long as they sell copies. The feministy stuff was probably not selling or grabbing ad revenue like it did in 2014. In order to be a hypocrite, you have to do a reversal on your beliefs. To do that, you have to believe in something.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:06 PM
-23

Is there just going to be a hundred posts about this woman? If so, I'll come back next week when you've finished picking the bones clean.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:44 PM
1

The public has a deference toward pretty people and not ugly people? Say it ain't so. Joking aside, I am aware of these stereotypes, many of which are not valid everywhere you go. Some of these "men are" stereotypes come from smaller places, and word spread like a rumour. As a matter of course, it needs to be pointed out that there is no number known to quantify the ways that men can be different. I'd imagine it would have to be probably about as many ways that women can be different. So being a…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:41 PM
1

Holy fucking tomatoes, Batman. That may be the most abundant mix of irrelevant and stupid that I've seen in one place. I'm not even going to bother acknowledging the content of what I just read. It's too far detached from logic.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:36 PM
1

...that's your argument? That murder isn't common because the majority of people aren't murdered? I'm guessing you don't think cancer is a problem because even though 14 million Americans have it, the other 300 million don't.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:19 PM
0

...Cosmopolitan never had porn in it. Women's lifestyle magazines has celebrity gossip, health and beauty tips, interviews, fashion, trending entertainment, and of course, The Cosmo Quiz. You're comparing apples to melons here :/ Unless you think people fap to the Healthy Living section...?
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:11 PM
-1

First off you just answered your 1st question in your 1st paragraph. N didn't bring up any information for why women deserve more respect for men. So yes we have to presume that N is sexist for preferring women to men because she makes no attempt to counter the argument, only to double down on the "means to an end" in her second post. That's not how that works. Remember, rational people use the principles of "innocent until proven guilty". I refuse to assume she is sexist until she demonstrates …
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:08 PM
0

Then let me echo George Washington; The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetuated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 05:42 PM
1

You're suggesting that it isn't common for someone to commit an act of premeditated murder, motivated by emotional compromise? In short, you believe it's totally rare for someone to get so mad they decide to kill the person who has made them angry? The statistics disagree. They say it happens several thousand times a year in the United States alone. Now, how many MRAs specifically kill feminists? I dunno. Haven't tried to find stats about that. I imagine that'll be a difficult find.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 05:38 PM
1

Who the hell would be afraid of men? Y'all are teddy bears. Sometimes rude teddy bears, but teddy bears nonetheless.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 05:35 PM
1

You've got my agreement here. I don't know quite where those particular dads got that idea from, but the sons of those men are going to grow up with a badly warped sense of reality because of it. And then there's the fallout of how the boy will respond and emotionally cope if (and it's a bit less of an if these days than it used to be) his teacher is charged and jailed for it.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 05:31 PM
1

Fair enough. That part about gender politics was tongue-in-cheek, but I really don't know enough about them to make a judgement. I mostly think it's baffling that they're even a thing. And sorry if I offended, it wasn't my intention. I was actually pointing out that a summation is the closing statement made in a court room. The more accurate word you were seeking was summary. The only thing you offended was my incurable grammarnazism. I just wanted to say I disagree with that, because my definit…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 05:28 PM
1

Countering one narrative with another is like explaining a lie using a different lie.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 05:05 PM
1

Are you asserting that he would have to be unstable somehow to make a conscious decision to murder someone? Remember, this wasn't a shooting spree. Grace Mann was suffocated to death, probably pleading for her life in terror as her killer watched the life drain out of her. It takes a great deal of fortitude to attempt something of that nature, especially considering it was her housemate who committed the crime. This was not a random attack. This was not just "some crazy" that snuck into her domi…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 02:32 PM
1

I'm taking a page out of your book, actually. I ain't using made-up words.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 02:28 PM
-2

Okay. A woman drunk and aggressively refusing to leave someone else's is liable to get her shit kicked in. It's a direct and pertinent threat, as you do not know what a drunk person is capable of deciding to do. The wrestling couple. If it had been (uh... shit, I only know one female wrestler and she's dead :< ) fuck, I dunno, the Stunner-ette, whatever. That'd be worth a slap to the face. Naked couple. She whips out a cell phone to get a snapshot of his dick, so he flings the phone across the r…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 02:27 PM
4

When I was in the fifth grade, my teacher was out for the last two months with a surgery, and we got a substitite for the whole two months, and she was this gorgeous twenty-something with the best boobs I'd ever seen up to that point. Students being hot for the teacher is not unusual, unless you have a horse-faced teacher. Is it appropriate for a teacher to reciprocate? Newwwp. But some dads seem to be in high spirits about it, because that's where a lot of the "lucky kid" remarks come from.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 02:15 PM
-1

You haven't asserted through any of this that respecting women more than men is sexism unless you explicitly respect them more because they're women. It's just as easy to presume that, as a feminist, "N" respects women more because women comprise the larger and more visible demographic of fellow feminists. It's a desire to assume bad faith in feminists that has men in North America playing this weird game online. Aping feminists is just turning y'all into meninists - and remember that meninists …
/r/MensRights14/07/17 01:49 PM
-1

Im not your hun My mistake, sweetie! if you'd have done more research you'd have found her refusing to apologise to an autistic man for getting a twitter mob to harras him, multiple tweets to /#killallmen, she recently signed a book "have you killed a man yet today, and if not why not" and recently, live on TV, called a women concerned with men's issues a cunt on live TV Funny, the little research I did turned up all but the first one you mentioned. So you really didn't give me anything new to w…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 01:32 PM
1

So you act like an idiot to show how much you hate idiots. Gotcha.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 01:25 PM
-2

If you need mental health support to handle such traumatic things from feminists as hashtags to stop you from going off the deep end and murdering women... I'd surmise that a social worker and antidepressants wouldn't do much to calm those troubled thoughts. Would they have happened if men had better mental health services? Maybe. You don't have to be insane to kill someone.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 01:23 PM
1

You're offended that an ideology thousands of miles away from where you live that you don't fully understand, has a position that you haven't fully researched, spoonfed to you by right-wing anti-Muslim media. And you call their sensibilities "delicate"? You do you.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 01:16 PM
0

According to a bunch of dictionaries (and common use of the word IME), "sexism" means "discrimination on the basis of gender or sex". In other words, you are sexist if you treat people differently because of their gender. So, according to this definition, it's definitely sexist to respect one gender more than another. And feminism is very clearly a sexist movement as it treats men and women differently. The tweet chain says nothing about respecting women more because they're women. Additionally,…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 01:12 PM
-3

Except the radical MRA's are MGTOW, and not #KillAllMen. The story of Grace Mann tells me that radical MRAs do kill, and they'll kill with political motives. And when MRAs bear such close ties to Republicans and Richard Spencer's "Alt-Right Movement", it isn't just Democrats and Liberals that worry. Moderates, Centrists and Unaligned folks get uneasy too. The alt-right is about as far over to the right wing as you can get without switching the flag from red-white-and-blue to white-blue-and-red.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 01:01 PM
1

Guys... being a feminist that makes political statements isn't child abuse. Best of luck, but don't be too shocked if this doesn't go anywhere.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 12:55 PM
0

Oh right on the attack, good old Liv - can't make an argument without getting nasty. Why can't you hold a conversation without trying to denigrate your interlocutor? Where did I attack you? I'm looking at the post, and I didn't even call you out on anything. My point was clearly the hypocrisy. You obviously are ok with their hypocrisy since you just defended it I didn't defend Cosmopolitan Magazine. I pointed out, in fairness, which I seem to be the only person here interested in, fairness, that…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 12:53 PM
-4

In MensRights, you can be trolled and harassed for expressing an opinion, regardless of who or what you are, as long as you disagree with their views. If you want to avoid being hit, you'd better be prepared to agree that; any responsibility to finance the development of a family is shouldered by the mother of the child access to a child is the right of every father, even ones who are not supporting the child women have all the privilege in the world and "male privilege" is an absolute myth femi…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 12:40 PM
-6

Why do you assume I'm okay with demonizing men's attractions? The reason I didn't care about Playboy was because Playboy is a fucking dinosaur. Had they done it to a magazine I like, I might have cared. You could do it to Cosmo too, and I wouldn't really give any kinda shit. But would you be doing it out of fairness? Or you wanna cheese the feminists back? What's the saying; "An eye for an eye makes the world blind"? But, note how they took your precious Playboy nudies, but left you the Sports I…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 12:22 PM
0

You're not fooling anyone. I saw through the false rhetoric the first time you tried it.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 12:02 PM
-16

... .........dude. Cosmo is a lifestyle magazine for women. They're not news. They're not expected or required to publish anything factual or fair. This is the same magazine that publishes eight-question quizzes that can tell you what unattainable movie star is your most perfect match.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:53 AM
1

My troll radar is twitching, but I'll suspend judgement for a moment... Oh, come on. A trolling accusation? Already? Like, we haven't even done the bit where you call me incompetent or a feminist or a cuck or whatever. Here is the result of 10 seconds search on Twitter. Oh, never mind. Not only did I get ya looking down your nose at me, you also confirmed that I did, in fact, find the correct Twitter page (a search that took me less than 10 seconds, mind you! So I guess that means I win? Is that…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:48 AM
-7

Feminism has nothing to do with achieving equality. That is a goal limitation imposed by good sense. Feminism is the advocacy campaign system by which activists pursue the acquisition of women's rights. It's also not sexist to respect one gender more than another. Sexism is the belief that one gender is superior, not more deserving of respect.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 10:52 AM
2

not going to disagree with you there but that's not what we're talking about. It's not what you're talking about. Remember, you replied to me. I said that there was an anti-Muslim sentiment, and you thought a good rebuttal was to point out that there was also an anti-feminist sentiment (as if I couldn't have noticed that before on my own). So really, dafuq were you talking about? All religions teach division, they all claim to be the right and only one, they all teach that one sex is in a more e…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 10:41 AM
1

If you're referring to The SlutWalk, that's because it has a story around it and a specific reason to use the word slut - which, if you notice, it's not as though women are calling each other sluts in a sisterly fashion. They didn't "take the word back". They went out, in Toronto, in 2011, many dressed like sluts, to protest the attitude of Toronto cops who decided that saying "women should avoid dressing like sluts" to avoid being raped (which is the fucking stupidest argument ever; a rapist wi…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 10:28 AM
0

You've self admitted that you don't know who Cankles Mcbabystopper is "Self-admitted" is an adjective, not a verb. But yes, of my own volition, I stated that I did not know who Clementine Ford was before reading the article. so why not carry on reading up on her before you berate us for showing concerns that her son might just be psychologically damaged enough to kill himself when he's older due to her poisonous attitudes to men. Because gender warriors have one of two ways of being "read up on"…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 10:22 AM
0

The twittersphere and other online platforms are buzzing that Jody Allard's sons should be removed from her systematic abuse (rape culture-obsessed third wave feminist) I have never heard of this woman's name before, and I think I may have found her Twitter page? I have no idea. Feminist writer, says she has kids, very left-leaning, mentioned rape culture -- I think this might be the same one. Now, I went about 4 or 5 days deep, because any more would just take too fucken long and I really don't…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 10:12 AM
3

Eh? Feminists never used the phrase - a phrase created for an 18-year-old romance movie starring Hugh Grant. I'm not sure how "reclaimable" a phrase is for a feminist when it comes from a movie starring The Guy Who Got Arrested With A Hooker.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 09:48 AM
0

So your suggesting that all the STEM jobs have been mysteriously filled by women and now men have the lower earning service sector jobs. No. As I've pointed out, there is a rather large library of factors that add up to someone's annual earnings. For instance, there are about half a million more male workers in Canada than female workers, and women make up roughly 60% of the minimum wage workforce. We also know that average hours per week worked has declined over the last 40 years, down about fi…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 09:44 AM
-2

Because no one has ever had a feminist for a mother before. Assuming he'll be incapable of coping with a political ideologue at home and will commit suicide is a pretty damning prediction to drag a baby into. It's in poor taste. I never accused anyone of cruelty. I suggested that /u/dukunt was a cunt for dragging an innocent baby into a one-sided smacktalking session. As if it wasn't spineless enough to shit-talk someone who isn't here to stand up for herself... and don't gimme any of that "well…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:51 AM
28

Cosmopolitan Magazine had a different Editor in 2014 than it had in 2016. It was in the 2012-2016 time that Cosmo had a noticeably strong political period. The articles were also probably written by entirely different people.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:14 AM
-1

Google "I'm just a girl, standing in front of a boy".
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:10 AM
7

Um... guys. The "I'm just a girl, standing in front of a boy", is a line from the 1999 film Notting Hill (which has been reused since that time on a number of occasions, notably in 2015's Deadpool). After all, I'm just a girl, standing in front of a boy, asking him to love her. Maybe I'm just doing that stupid thing again where I assume good faith, but I don't think this tweet is a feminist tweet. I think it's a cheeky joke about what people thinks it takes to show dominance in this culture, fra…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 08:09 AM
1

it also has no shortage of anti 'feminist' sentiment.... I'd describe it as a more complete anti-Left sentiment, as this subreddit has demonstrated in a more detailed way than I could ever summarize. I can't tell you how many times I have read a thread or a posted article and thought "this is a political left/right issue; why is this on a gender rights forum?" And since apparently moderators only ban you if you dare suggest that men ought to take responsibility for their own shortcomings, all of…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 07:59 AM
1

My parents had tees that read "ASK THE WIFE" and "I'M THE WIFE" that they wore to all the classy events like Demo Derbies, the Fair, Fireworks displays (pretty much anywhere he can buy beer in a plastic cup).
/r/MensRights14/07/17 07:46 AM
-6

Oh, come on. I didn't even know who Clementine Ford was 3 hours ago and even I'm not that lamely confused. The user above me, that is to say, the individual whose comment I replied to, decided that the most surely awesome way to make an intelligent witticism about Ms Ford was to drag an innocent baby into it. And I called him a cunt for it, using his username to set it up. See, it's so lame to have to explain a joke.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 07:43 AM
-5

I looked through the litany of posts in the article from women who claimed they hit their men. Can I point out that hitting someone and abusing them are not the same thing? Abuse is a system of behaviour. From the remarks made by those women, many of them were not exactly doing it for the funsies. From the raging alcoholic that refused to leave, to the play wrestling lover that gave his lady the fucking Stone Cold Stunner, to the guy who started recording video while he and his belle are nekkid …
/r/MensRights14/07/17 07:39 AM
2

You might want to research the content posted here before committing yourself to anything. This subreddit has been home to no shortage of anti-Muslim sentiment.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 07:02 AM
1

No one has a concrete gauge of when modernity transitioned to post-modernity. Some believe that it happened at the end of the 20th century. Others place the marker at the end of World War II. It's also interesting to point out that the wonderful thing called "modernity" is, somewhat ironically, a very long-lived period of human history. The 20th century marked the "Late Modern" period, with two preceding periods that extend as far back as the 16th century (the Early Modern and Classical Modern p…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:58 AM
2

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. That is the "Post Modern Nightmare"; because what you said sounds like something that no human being intelligent enough to be able to distinguish between two different keys on a keyboard would say. But thanks to the last 18 months, I am now fully confident that not only is it possible that someone would say that, I'm confident that "My intuition trumps your facts" has been said in earnest - with the expectation of being taken seriously.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:52 AM
6

Not just British. Jeremy Irons British.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:48 AM
3

You should read the original version. It deals less with the father's death and more with the intrigue of his son's rise to the throne. The original version's a tad different. It hasn't got lions; it's set in Demark, and it was written by Shakespeare.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:42 AM
2

I feel like my head is bouncing between two brick walls. On the one side, I have threads here that tear a strip off feminists that freak out over words that aren't even rough or awful, just judgmental. And on the other side, threads like this one. Let's have a peek at the responses in the image, to the question given, "How do you feel about men who cry?" (BLUE): To be honest I'm sick of it, a lot of it has been going on lately crying, whining, throwing fits. I don't see a rights issue with this …
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:38 AM
1

The cold hard truth is that feminism is a leftist ideology that was loosely modeled after the marxist-inspired revolutionary liberation movements of the 1960s. Feminism is a political ideology modeled after suffragettes of the early 20th century, who believed (quite astutely) that women and men had no useful reason to have different sets of basic rights. Whether you agree or disagree that the current generation of feminism is reflecting those ideals is a subjective matter, and entirely irrelevan…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:08 AM
-2

This is a head-scratcher. Is the OP suggesting that he is part of the effort to make Ms Ford "crack", or merely advocating harassment? I'll skip my admonishment of her writing material, since I highly doubt that if she wanted to read criticism that she'd come here to read it. I just want to note that this is supposed to be that thing you guys all rise above in order to accomplish your own goals. So why are we cheering at a feminist collecting ammunition to write a million-seller book, when y'all…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 05:00 AM
-4

Classy. A feminist earns your ire, so you talk shit about her infant son instead. Unrelated question: is your username pronounced duh cunt, or is that just a coincidence?
/r/MensRights14/07/17 04:54 AM
2

So... let me get this straight. MRAs spent 6 years angrily shouting their arguments to debunk the Myth of the Gender Pay Gap, notably pointing out that the entire conclusion drawn by the feminists was flawed because it was based on statistical data that was not designed to identify a wage gap, and twisted out of shape, blogged, tweeted, reposted, and shared around until no one knew where the number even came from. Everyone could quote it: "78 cents to a man's dollar", but nobody could say where …
/r/MensRights14/07/17 04:47 AM
11

I hate to shatter someone's world where this is the wife's plan to keep a leash on her husband. This is a his/hers novelty t-shirt combo. Shirts with marriage/relationship-related jokes on them were common in the 1990s, as t-shirt printing got better and cheaper. It's a joke based on a stereotype; when a couple goes out somewhere that bores the husband, his tendency is to wander off, be it at the mall, or an autumn fair, or a yard sale, whatever. Y'know, or you could politicize this, because cle…
/r/MensRights14/07/17 03:57 AM
1

<checks watch> You just learned this today? What did they teach you in school?
/r/MensRights22/06/17 10:54 PM
1

You're not even a good troll. Is there anything you're good at? Actually, don't answer that.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 10:24 AM
1

Riiiight, because strolling into Man-Cave Central and challenging MRA dogma is the best way to be validated. Mmmmhm. Hell of a brain you got there. Pity that it's only decorative.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 10:11 AM
-1

Waaah just saw your other comments ITT. I can't take criticism! Waahh! Fixed. You're a troll This comes from a user named "DeadBabyCorpse", who wants to be taken super cereal.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 09:51 AM
1

Why, I do decl-ay-ah~! Don't tell me you're going to get offended now, after you fired the first shots. I mean, that's par for the course here, but surely you have some standards.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 09:50 AM
0

How cute. He doesn't know the difference between "doesn't like it" and "is offended by it". Dunno how to help ya, bud. I can fix "misinformed", but "stupid" is a whole 'nother problem.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 09:46 AM
1

Resorting to playground insults, huh? And here I was holding out hope that you'd be one of the good ones. Oh well. Guess this is just a pissing match at the boys' club. Have fun telling each other how correct and justified you are. I have better things to do, like polish my marble collection or masturbate.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 09:44 AM
1

Sorry, but I'm not buying into this conspiracy theory business. I like facts. Facts are good.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 09:31 AM
1

No I've no proof of that. I suggested that if feminists working in gov stats. that involve information on honour killings perhaps they were covering it up, or police protocol might be not to record an honour killing. So you're asserting that a decades-long conspiracy between feminist government employees and feminist cops have resulted in the total erasure of an unknown number of male honour killings in the United Kingdom? That's one hell of a conspiracy theory. In the US feminists have a protoc…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 09:20 AM
1

I asked for proof of your assertion that feminists are covering up male honour killings in the United Kingdom. Do you have direct proof of it, or don't you?
/r/MensRights10/06/17 09:05 AM
1

You keep saying it's been proven, but I'm not seeing any real proof. Your link from AVfM was about Iran, not the United Kingdom. I dunno what you think a Tory MP in Shipley UK is going to do about honour killings in the Middle East. But hey, if you need to be right so badly that you have to move goalposts to do it, you do your thing. I'm not in this to win or lose an argument. I'm only interested in exploring fact. So if we arbitrarily change from a Western Nation to the Middle East, then sure. …
/r/MensRights10/06/17 08:57 AM
1

Y'know, usually when someone makes themselves look retarded this many times in one night, they tend to pack it in. Not you, though! What you lack in wit and intelligence, you apparently make up for with persistence and stubbornness.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 08:37 AM
1

You were expecting me to put effort into a response to the brainshittings you offer? I'm already wasting my time, and now you want me to waste my creativity? On you? Most guys don't fuck transgenders with anger issues Curious how you like to point out that you think I'm unfuckable, and yet you're following me from one thread to another like you want to suck me off. I mean, you did say "most" guys, not all of them. I mean, I'm flattered, but I don't want you touching my junk - you'll make it dirt…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 08:34 AM
1

I would, but I'm really tired. Your mom is a beast in the sack.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 08:24 AM
1

Mm. No. But you still look stupid.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 08:23 AM
1

You just posted the same comment thirty times. So I guess the question "how stupid are you?" has been answered.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 07:51 AM
1

Yyyyyeah, you realize I was referring to users who advocated jailing pregnant women for being pregnant, forcibly neutering, and even enslaving women, right? I mean, you did read the conversation before adding your two cents, right? ....right?
/r/MensRights10/06/17 07:48 AM
1

Holy shit. This was funny at first, but... like seriously, how stupid are you?
/r/MensRights10/06/17 07:31 AM
1

yup. If artificial breast milk exists and you can save millions of lives by removing boobs... whats the problem? We've already discussed this. Removing healthy tissue from a healthy baby is retarded. I'm assuming this is the part where you forget that we just went over this part too, and you start clapping like a kid with Downs seeing a butterfly, eager to tell me I'm a hypocrite, even though I don't support male circumcision. You fucking idiot, you idiotic fuck. This is like a mother trying to …
/r/MensRights10/06/17 07:10 AM
1

We're done. Oh, thank god. Chatting with you is what I imagine eating out of diaper feels like.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 06:45 AM
1

and the foreskin protects the penis which produces sperm which creates more babies. Yes. I know. It's apparently also used to whine on the internet. Also formula milk exists. So.... I guess boobs are redundant. You really want to go down this path? I did. You don't seem to care about it. I wouldn't care about it either if I was intact and my entire gender was protected by federal law. Asking me if it's "a non-issue for men" is not the same as asking me if I support it or oppose it. God, every pi…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 06:44 AM
-4

There's a huge "Smile more, honey!" vibe coming off that, and I don't like it.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 06:34 AM
1

Why don't we cut off breasts? Give me a reason lol See, I know what you're about to do here, and you're going to look so fucking retarded by the time I'm done. Ahem. So first, I'm just going to point out that I don't support circumcision. I was pretty indifferent until I looked more into it... like, months and months ago. Now then. Why don't we cut off breasts? Because a baby girl's breasts will one day produce milk, sometime during puberty. Guess what breastmilk is for. More babies! Oh, and the…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 06:09 AM
1

This coming from someone talking about circumcision in a thread about how women need to step up and be more sexually satisfying when their man can't get it up. You've just taken ignorance to the next level. (-b'-')-b
/r/MensRights10/06/17 05:34 AM
1

Do you think circumcision is a non issue for men? I don't give a fuck what you do, just do it factually and honestly. Full stop? No, this is a full-stop -> . Also you didn't read the source. I changed it almost immediately to a better one Trust me, nothing was better than discovering your link literally said the exact opposite of what you were asserting. It was magnifique. So! Let's go back and try this again, shall we? The page says it was created for the “benefit of the circlist members” and “…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 05:31 AM
0

how else do you want them to be aroused if your natural body isn't doing it for them? Serious question. If you aren't attracted to me, get the fuck out of my bed. Serious answer. wow circinfo.org a page written by a confessed circumfetishest and pedophile sounds like a totally valid source lmfao. It's "circinfo.net", dumbass. Do you even read, bruh? Well well, a wordpress page that doesn't even know how to spell "fetishist". Killer rebuttal. Too bad the actual contents of it don't actually suppo…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 04:37 AM
1

First, a vagina, properly lubed, can passively accept a penis, unless maybe yours seals shut when you're not aroused and fucking. Now I'm strongly convinced that you don't know anything about the vagina. How embarrassing for you. Second, maintaining an erection. Maintaining. That's the key word. Men being forced to penetrate, which doesn't technically mean more than once, does not mean the same thing as maintaining a solid erection for the entirety of a satisfying consensual encounter. Newsflash…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 04:16 AM
1

Hm. Am I living under a rock, or am I living under a troll? Hm, hm, hm. Existential question, dude. I'll mull it over.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 03:17 AM
1

You're proposing that women be neutered and forced into slavery. Scumbag.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 03:16 AM
0

The first generation to pay for public schools did not use it them self. Also people who were homeschooled or private schooled or who are immigrants are not exempt from funding the public school system so your analogy is flawed. All people have access to the public school system, whether they choose to take it or not. And all children are required by law to enter some form of education program. Next you're going to argue that you shouldn't have to pay taxes for cops because you've never had an e…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 03:14 AM
1

Believe as you wish. For vaginal intercourse, a woman can choose to be completely passive, a man must at least maintain an erection. You're not displaying much knowledge about how a vagina works, bud. Maintaining an erection requires psychological involvement and arousal. By that logic, men who are forced to penetrate are psychologically involved in their own rape. I'm just going to let that stew for a moment. Masculine gender roles in western society still generally put men as the more active p…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 03:04 AM
1

If they can't rise to the occasion be sexier. ...are you serious? Also any fucking sources for your stats? My fucking source is this fucking subreddit because you fucking guys are the ones that led me to the fucking statistic. Fuck fuckety fuck fuckfuck. But here is a statistics reference page that actually reports a complication rate of less than 1%. All circumcision results in a complicatuon called "we cut off part of a man's penis for no reason." Okay, now you're just being obtuse. I can play…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 03:00 AM
-1

Hmm, insulting dismissive ridicule without addressing the point. Classic feminist. That's what this subreddit is, I guess. When I try to have actual discussion, it's met with insulting dismissive ridicule. So if that's what this sub is about, I might as well take the gloves off too. Are we doing a variation of that children's game where the floor is lava, but instead of the floor it's the logical point of the comment you can't touch? You tell me. How logical is it to assume that most sex is perf…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 01:36 AM
1

In South Carolina...child support obligors imprisoned for civil contempt comprise approximately thirteen to sixteen percent of the jail population, almost 1 in 5 at the high estimate. Just want to make one tiny correction. 16% is almost 1 in 6. Currently, the disincentive for women to become pregnant is quite low as she will receive financial support regardless of the father's ability to pay and regardless of the father's willingness to become a parent. Either the state will give her money, or t…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 01:22 AM
-3

Idk what you mean by men aren't able to preform and blame it on women. There are in total 3 reasons guys don't want sex Yeah... I'm not really talking about guys who don't want sex. I'm talking about guys who want to, but can't quite rise to the occasion. Bonus: can't feel it cause his genitals were cut up at birth. The way you worded this makes me wonder if you're speaking about something without experience. Circumcision 99% of the time doesn't result in any complications, and can go on to have…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 01:01 AM
-1

How many men just lay there or 'starfish' during sex vs how many women, do you think? Given how many sexual positions there are, I wouldn't guess that many. Certainly not enough to blame women for men not keeping it up. Also, the fellas here are looking for someone to blame for their problems, and how dare you have an opinion on that! Aw, muffin.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 12:13 AM
2

I don't think the wisest course of action is to put your faith in a man with his reputation just because he's brave enough to speak on men's issues. I dunno if you've noticed, but every time he makes an ass of himself, the men's rights movement gets a solid mention along with it, connecting his behaviour with the greater politics he stands for. Happens all the time. When Germaine Greer and Andrea Dworkin said all the insane shit they became famous for, they left permanent stains on feminism that…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 11:19 PM
2

Knowing that feminists cover up abuse amd being able to back it up is mra 101. I'm not an MRA. Dunno if you haven't noticed, but I don't hold political banners. So steeping myself in dogma that lacks evidence is not exactly something I'm interested in doing.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:28 PM
1

One more what?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:37 PM
2

The abstract contains the jist of it. Feminist researchers intentionally bias their data on abuse. Abstracts do not show proof. It summarizes the article. You know this already. I need to see that the content of the article itself isn't using faulty logic. Thought you couldnt read studies. I said I need my glasses. I can't see small or tightly-packed text without straining (which causes headaches). The above-linked article is double-spaced, which helps a LOT. I'll need some time to go through it…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:19 PM
-9

Do men take responsibility for anything related to sex? Now you want us to believe that it's the woman's fault that a man can't perform? Is there anything that right-wing media won't blame on women?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:14 PM
1

You have been given one of many papers on it. If you could quote from that paper what is relevant, because I don't have my new glasses yet, and that paper is ridiculously long. Just getting through the first page gives me a migraine (not because of the content, but because reading off a computer screen is a slight minefield for the time being). Not according to the study, study found its in general. And that study is located where?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:10 PM
7

<slowclap> I wonder how long it'll take before this is crossposted to AMR. You literally just handed them primo material.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:03 PM
2

You didn't know feminism has been covering up abuse. It would have to be someone with niche knowledge thats not well known in the maistream. You haven't proven that feminism is doing that. You're saying that a conspiracy theorist is the only kind of person qualified now. Its pervasive to the point that both women and men percieve women being treated equally as misogny. That isn't even true of "most" women and men. Some women and men believe that, sure. But that's hardly the definition of pervasi…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:00 PM
2

And for rape, I assume you fully acknowledge that a man can be held liable for a pregnancy regardless if the offender sues in civil court as you only referenced Seyer/Olivas. In addition, those two cases, no matter how rare, do not lessen the fact that they occurred, set precedent, and were found to be fully legal under United States law. I never said that U.S. law was perfect. You are mistaken on the demographics of child support. It is not a group of "Johnny Bravos" who purposefully deny payme…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:45 PM
1

In order to serve mens issues, a person would have to know the topic. So, in order to serve men's issues, that person would have to be an expert in men's issues. In essence, you're saying that only an MRA can handle the job. They would have to be able to have a lot of information at their fingertips. You mean the way everyone currently has a lot of information at their fingertips? There is research thats been called the women are wonderful effect. I know about the Women Are Wonderful Effect. And…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:07 PM
1

Once you add in the 80-140,000 men in prison that are raped by other men in prison, yes, that is a generally accurate statement, based on the facts available as of 2011. In 2012, the United States strengthened provisions of an act intended to safeguard prison inmates during their stint. I don't have any newer data. If you do, feel free to share.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:05 PM
2

I don't come across people as rude or rude in the same way as I don feminists. Its a specific sort of haughty, condesending attitude. Yeah, I know. I've talked to feminists too. Maybe you should have a boo at my post history and note all the times I lambast guys here for using feminist dogma and intersectional misdirection tactics. Condescending or not, if it ain't fact, I'm not going to just blithely accept it. Thanks. Honour killings aren't gendered anywhere else, presumably they wouldn't be i…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:49 PM
1

What does that have to do with people requiring a "knowledge of men's issues" in order to serve the public? I feel like a big chunk of conversation is missing here.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:32 PM
2

Well obviously if you are rude people are going to tell you about it. Yeah. And only here will I find people who don't like my attitude calling me a feminist. Anywhere else, I'd just get called a bitch. Interesting. Does it not, do you have a citation? Bam. Enjoy. Sure, its fairly typical of feminists to cover up abuse of men. There has been controversy over it since the 1970s. But you have no proof that anyone is covering anything up. What you have is a conspiracy theory to validate your narrat…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:27 PM
1

Are you saying all men are stupid? Because if all men are stupid, then I suppose I would by definition be a misandrist. That's - of course - assuming that I hate stupid people, which I never said. I said I lack empathy for them. Cute attempt, though. Keep trying, you'll catch me off guard someday. EDIT: Nothing to say in regards to the facts I posted? Shall I take that as silent agreement, or did you just TL;DR it like a ponce?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:22 PM
2

Are you saying that you and this person were not asserting two directly oppositional sides to an argument? No. That's not what I'm saying. I'm a pretty good reader and that sounds like two opposing views to me. Reading and Reading comprehension are a bit different, hon. Then you went into an extended discussion, each of you expanding on your reasons for your views. Except that my goal was not to force him to concede his opinion. You're just assuming that, because you're apparently having an enti…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:20 PM
1

You know from your rude tone on this thread you are coming accross as feminist. Ooh, never heard that one before. /s If there is no record of honour killings of men, there must be a reason for it. Well, given that the letter of law does not exclude men from the definition of honour killings (you can read the text yourself if you don't believe me, link is still above), I would say that it's because no honour killings of men have happened. 93% of rapists in UK are men, because the law makes it tha…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:45 PM
1

most people don't have the required empathy for men or knowledge of the issues. That sounds a lot like an assertion. I would be surprised if you were able to support this with anything factual.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:42 PM
2

Your Daily Mail link lacks sources. I'm not shocked, given how reliable the Daily Mail is. So, I went looking myself, surprise surprise. The first thing I found was a document published by the FBI in 2012, which you can read here. It shows that women are very much the principal victim of sex crimes, with more than 80% of total victims being female. I went looking for the actual Department of Justice survey, and happened upon the Bureau of Justice Statistics instead. Interestingly, Google simply …
/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:40 PM
2

More men are raped than women and it is highly likely that more men are harassed than women "in the street." Citation, please? Because this seems highly suspect. Even when you account for prison rape (which is male on male, remember), the figures I've seen do not support your assertion.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:04 PM
2

Technically anyone that isn't overtly feminist can be nearly guaranteed to fill your conditions. Based on my estimates, that's about an 80% chance of finding someone (statistically).
/r/MensRights09/06/17 05:28 PM
1

I didn't claim that I was being calm or impartial. That's something you did, and quite dishonestly. So, fuck yourself. And have a nice day.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 05:27 PM
10

Your point is manned by a diverse crew, at least.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 05:26 PM
1

Yeah. Your tax money is pretty filthy.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 05:25 PM
1

You do that.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 05:24 PM
2

Citation, please?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 05:24 PM
2

So are you backpedalling from your claim that you 'refuted the fuck out of' my arguments? My statement is the same as it was before. And it's going to become an even bigger problem, and I'm fucking elated. Attempts to shut it down have failed almost as often as you have. Canadians don't matter. Y'all are nobodies, and you need to come to terms with it. Canadians are still respected abroad, because we didn't pick a raging orangutan as a leader.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 05:23 PM
1

I disagree completely with your assessment of how to gauge conversations. After all, in the conversation you just had, the other person won. How does one win a conversation? You sound like an idiot. That's like saying you can win at breakfast, or win at watching television.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 12:31 PM
3

Does anyone remember the good ol' days when unwanted hugs were met with shoves or slaps? That's the way you deal with an unwanted hug. Not turn it into a bloody headline.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 12:18 PM
2

You are what drives men to antifeminism. People like you are going to ensure Republicans are going to have an 8 year term, with or without Putin. Fixed it for you. People like you are what propelled Trump's campaign to victory, and if you lot continue being cunts, you'll help someone far worse than Trump come to power. There are a number of reasons why Donald Trump won the election. People like me pissing off people like you is almost certainly not one of them. I don't demand anything from you, …
/r/MensRights09/06/17 11:50 AM
0

We started this 'conversation' because you were a hypocrite and here you are again, 'boys in the boys club,' generalizing. Besides, if it's bad that the 'boys' do it, it's bad that you do it. It's no excuse. But the boys get away with it. Hence "boys in the boys club". I replied in the hope you could be reasonable not because I don't like your attitude. It was you who said that you can't find people to have a reasoned conversation with and yet, presented with the option of doing so, you resort t…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 11:20 AM
12

Thanks for mansplaining that to me. Given that I live near a large facility involved in manned spaceflight, and used to work there, it was helpful to know that NASA is a "purely scientific" endeavor. Or that spaceflight is dangerous. I may have to take to my bed with the vapors after learning those two things. Because the one thing that gives an MRA more credibility is mimicking feminists and damsels. If you really think that NASA is apolitical, I encourage you to go back and read Chaikin (for e…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 11:15 AM
-1

So this is a Whataboutism. ...and that's supposed to make me care more? First of all, parroting feminists and calling a hug "sexual harassment" isn't really doing you any favours. Secondly, we're talking about a weird moment between a has-been comedian and a bimbo that can't resist spelling her name with a dollar sign.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 11:00 AM
2

Sure. Davies confused about blackface. Davies arguing that sex ed increases teen pregnancy rates Davies freaking out over Romeo & Julian Davies contesting that the committee for women that he was elected to shouldn't exist. Davies speaking at an event for JfMB
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:55 AM
-2

However you should respect yourself enough to care what your post says about yourself as it is revealing who you truly are. When people are typing anonymously online, when there are little consequences for showing negative behaviours, you see who they really are. So? This subreddit is a stain on the internet. I really don't think anyone but you little princesses will care if I toss shade back and those who toss shade. Funny how it's only wrong if I'm doing it, but all the boys in the boys club g…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:49 AM
2

You've already heard it over and over. You're either too retarded to understand or being obtuse just to avoid addressing it. Exactly as I thought. In other words, you don't have anything. You expected me to immediately jump into defensive mode, and when I put you to task to back up your claim, you can't. I'll take that as a confirmation that you are a feminist. You can take it as confirmation that I'm a chain link fence, for all I care. You wouldn't be the first ignorant MRA to call me a feminis…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:41 AM
1

If you're stupid enough to have sex without a condom, it shouldn't fall on the rest of us to pick up your slack.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:26 AM
1

I assumed she was American; sue me.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:59 AM
2

Projecting your own vomit again. You're the one advocating the aggressive stripping of basic human rights from menfor shits and giggles. Really? And what right am I seeking to take away? I'd love to hear this one. You are a feminist, why deny it? Clearly, because I love having these inane back-and-forths that entirely waste time and derail from the discussion. But hey, what can I expect from someone that can't even compose a simple argument. Do you know what troll means, you colossal retard? No,…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:56 AM
1

Free healthcare is one thing. I live in Canada; I know all about free healthcare. But having a Deadbeat Fund to fund welfare for kids whose fathers decided to fuck off is not practical. I do not have kids, but my taxes still pay for schools. I was going to rebut this, but it's not even a relevant argument. You're suggesting that a program to pay for kids when Dad decides he doesn't want to be a decent human fucking being is valid because essential facets of society are tax-funded. It's an illogi…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:49 AM
1

"People disagree with my nonsense - obviously must be the same guy with multiple accounts." When all three accounts are on the same thread, all advocating the aggressive stripping of basic human rights from women for shits and giggles? Yeah, can't help but be suspicious. Are you still trying to pretend you're not a feminist? When standing next to someone who says "Let's ban abortions and jail women who abort for life as murderers", there's maybe a hundred people that wouldn't look like a feminis…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:41 AM
1

It's cute that you think I'm worthy of going down in the history books. You're thick as fuck, but the sentiment is adorable.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:37 AM
1

Are you expecting me to shrivel up and cry because you called me a bigot? You calling me one doesn't make me one. I'm not sure if anyone explained how this works. Also, getting a limb chopped off is not a gender issue. Also, manspreading is the stupidest social problem ever discussed in the 21st century. But hey, I could simply not agree with you complicitly enough and you'd still be slinging mud like a fucking four-year-old. You stopped being worth my time a while ago. Hope your day job doesn't…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:35 AM
2

Oh look, he learned how to wield the word "feminist" as an insult. How cute. "how would I feel if that man was a women." I don't need a thought experiment to know the answer to this question. But then, I wouldn't expect you to know that, because for all the insistence you have that I lack empathy for the opposite sex, you have solely the experience of one gender to draw from. So. You can shut the fuck up now. Hopefully one day you will not be a facemeltingly stupid kinda-person. I say this for m…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:24 AM
1

Nice shade, hon. Here's a fun newsflash for ya; if you gauge discussions based on whether you win or lose, you'll always lose. You're leaving the argument because you're losing, and it's clear for anyone who has read this far. If it's so clear, why are you so eagerly pointing it out? Including me- a woman, with children, who receives child support. What do you want, a medal? It's 5am and you're on reddit tossing shade. I pity your children; they must get neglected a lot.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:19 AM
-1

Oooh, my poor fee-fees. I got called an "A-hole"! How-ever-will-I-go-on?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:11 AM
1

Why not just admit you hate men and boys? Because I don't. I hate stupid and illogical people. If I wasn't banned from all the decently-sized feminist subs, I wouldn't look nearly as biased as I do now. But hey, when one side is super-crazy about banhammers while the other side just lets everyone go at each other with sharp sticks, the conversation dynamic is going to be somewhat obvious. It's blatantly obvious from your commentary so far. Yawn. Lazy misrepresentations involve more effort than t…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:03 AM
1

I do not know what you mean by this.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:55 AM
1

So you'll let your tax dollars make weapons of death, house and feed murderers and rapists, and pay corrupt politicians that sell away your clean air and water without ever letting you see a cent of that profit. But you draw the line at vacuuming out a fetus the size of a coin. You do you, bud.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:54 AM
2

So does she. Let's ban abortions and jail women who abort for life as murderers. I'm really starting to think you are running two other accounts, because I've now had to answer this kind of anti-woman bullshit for a third time in an hour, just in this thread. I notice you had no counter to my argument, and I am not surprised. I can't even take your arguments seriously, because you're almost like a comic book villain. But not like a good villain. One of those cartoonish villains with useless bumb…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:49 AM
1

Unless a man is a serial rapist, what stops the "seeding spree" is women acting responsibly and using birth control. Are men responsible for anything? We are already forced to pay for others' kids in the form of property taxes funding schools. Unless we kill the kids as prevention, nurturing them is a good thing for society. The difference is that you used the public school system as a child, and are now paying into it as an adult for the next generation. An exchange of services has occurred, if…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:44 AM
0

I was going to write up a detailed response, addressing all your points. And then I read this; The fault is not that of Johnny Bravo. It is with the mother who opts to reproduce without adequate financial security. Those women who do that should be neutered, denied welfare, and have wages garnished or be forced into indentured servitude to pay for the child's needs, to be distributed by the government. If she refuses to do this she should be executed and her organs sold. And now I hope you fall …
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:38 AM
3

Are you retarded? If anything could give me brain damage, it would be hanging out with you guys. She has two options, he has none. And yet you're crying about the two options that she has are painful, and that men are to blame for that? Boohoo. He has an option. Keep his dick in his pants. Who's crying now? Yet forcing a man to forego half (or more!) of his paycheck is not a violation of his rights? Aw, poor muffin can't handle caring for a child because it cuts into his XBox budget. Boohoo. Thr…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:29 AM
2

Um, you literally said that you couldn't imagine a MGTOW not being an MRA. See, now you're changing the text to validate yourself. What you contested was this; That's a nice rebuttal. You claimed "MGTOW" = MRA's. MGTOW = MRA meas that the two terms are interchangeable - which I disagreed with. You can be an MRA without being a MGTOW, but being a MGTOW makes you an MRA on principle (as MGTOWs believe purely in the advancement of men). So, the first quote is accurate, though it's being used to arg…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:24 AM
1

But you don't have a problem with your tax dollars paying for hospitals, even though some people who use the hospital's services wound up there because they did something they regret, like bellyflopping from their rooftop Backyard Wrestling-style. In case you're not picking up on the metaphor, Planned Parenthood is not just an abortion clinic. They offer numerous services for expecting parents and couples trying to start a family.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:07 AM
-1

I know which subreddit you're referring to. I may migrate, because holy jumpin' fucken Jesus in a handbasket. I haven't seen a shitshow this bad since the Mister Hanky Christmas Special.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:55 AM
2

That's a nice rebuttal. You claimed "MGTOW" = MRA's. Perhaps do some research before spouting off? That isn't what I said, but how surprised can I really be that I'm being misquoted in this subreddit? As mentioned numerous times, MRA's have no desire to take away rights. You're thinking of feminists, who oppose equal rights (eg shared parenting rights). I was trying to appeal to your gynocentric interests by showing what "equality" would actually look like. That's not what equality would look li…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:51 AM
-5

At this point, I really don't care what my post says about me. You think you can pull a fast one with shit logic and intentional misinterpretations and still illicit respect from me? Fuck you.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:20 AM
2

One-quarter of honor killings in the UK are men. This was mentioned by Davies himself before Parliament. The more you learn... So you got that number from him... and he got it from... where? Remember, politicians are not sources of statistical data. No offense but I'll take Davies' word over some Feminist on the Internet: ...why wouldn't you just go to the fucking website yourself? I gave you a link to the page for fucksakes. But no, hell, why take the word of THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE when …
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:18 AM
-5

I'm sorry, did you need me to paint you a picture? When I say "you lot", I am referring to the people who are reading the fucking post, you addle-brained fuckwit. I'm beyond done with this subreddit. For every one person I've seen here post and discuss in good faith, there are a hundred of you; slight of wit, and suffering from a deplorable excess of ego. I'm not even going to continue to refute your statement. It's beneath me to do so.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:49 AM
-1

Your position is: "It's OK to force a man to do something 'for the good of the child', even though the child was created against his wishes and without his consent, perhaps even without his knowledge. But it's not OK to force a woman to do something 'for the good of the child', even though she alone chose to have the child and it was her unilateral decisions which lead to its creation." Entirely incorrect. I made my position clear. I don't care about the mother or the father. It's the child's we…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:44 AM
2

a law that would extend protections to female victims of honor killings -- but only women. In the United Kingdom, about a dozen honour killings occur per year. Insofar as I can gather, there are zero male victims of honour killings in the UK. Furthermore, I had a peek at the Crown Prosecution Service website, and I don't see any indication that these laws are gender-specific. Or take the recent law in a certain UK district that turned "misogyny" (including things like "unwanted speech") into a h…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 05:46 AM
0

I'm talking about those cases where a couple goes to an IVF clinic together and his sperm is put into storage as part of the process. Some time later the relationship/marriage ends, later still the ex-wife/ex-girlfriend goes to the clinic and forges the husband's signature in order to access his sperm. She gets pregnant, has a kid and he still has to pay for it. You're suggesting that a woman can walk into an IVF clinic by herself, sign a man's name to a release form, and no one would clue in? I…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 05:08 AM
2

What is the issue with any of this? No-one in the MSM has any concern invoking 'white' as a pejorative term Why is that relevant? I didn't make any mention of the mainstream media. If the mainstream media jumped off a cliff, would he do it too? whether you agree with him or not, there's nothing innately distasteful about his perspective on sex education I find stupidity to be extremely distasteful. And his assertion that sex education is linked to increased teen pregnancy not only sounds fucking…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 04:34 AM
2

Organizing for women is fine, so long as it doesn't codify misandry and discrimination into law -- which is basically what feminists do. And I presume you have examples of codified misandry. I'm not 100% up on British law, but I'm sure if there was a blatantly misandric law instituted by feminists, I would have heard about it (considering how often I browse this subreddit). MRA's are not like feminists Hnnnrgh- in that we don't wish to demonize women or take away their rights. You don't wish to,…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 04:12 AM
3

I've read about Davies and seen him speaking. The man you're touting as the champion of gender equality is the same man that pestered EHRC chairman Trevor Phillips with questions about "blacking up" (for non-Brits, that is also known as "going in blackface"). It's the same man that believes that abolishing sex education in schools will reduce the teen pregnancy rate. Same man that got into an uproar over an LGBT-themed re-imagining of Romeo & Juliet. The same man that can admonish a Women and Eq…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 03:52 AM
1

Really? Because multiple outlets are reporting that he lost his seat. Are you sure you're viewing up-to-date results? Edit: I am now seeing the confusion. I'm not sure which result is accurate. I think I'll just wait for morning when the dust has settled.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 03:39 AM
1

I do. On one hand, you have a growing stage of misandric feminists, as the feminist movement continues to stagnate. On the other hand - and please be objective - but the men's rights movement doesn't exactly disavow its worst supporters. And, there are more lesbians than there used to be.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 03:04 AM
4

Feminists have been instituting change from positions of extremely limited authority for decades, guys. Don't act like a British member of Parliament losing his job tears your movement asunder. You'd be amazed at what you can accomplish without power.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 03:00 AM
1

why isn't it an entitlement program like welfare, where everyone pays into the welfare of all children equally? Why is the burden of care being placed on people who had actually literally nothing to do with the child, simply because the father would rather spend his money on himself? First, the current taxation in the United States would not afford a program of that nature. Taxes would have to increase (and since we know the mentality of the current administration, the tax increase would not bef…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 02:58 AM
-4

If a woman becomes pregnant by any means, including: theft, e.g. taking a used condom from where it's been discarded and using the semen in it deception or dishonesty, e.g. lying about being on the pill when she isn't; poking holes in the condom before sex; or offering to have oral sex and then impregnating herself with the resulting semen fraud, e.g. by forging the man's signature on a form to get access to his semen stored at a fertility clinic without his knowlege rape, i.e. forcing a man, or…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 02:51 AM
-8

You're mad about the word "snub" now? I'm half expecting users to start posting complaints about how their diapees are wet. Like, come on. This is getting even more absurd than the feminists.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 02:43 AM
3

Telling your friends that men should be allowed to "opt out" of child support is probably not going to go any better on round two. I think some users here already know that I don't agree that men should be able to opt out, but that's fortunately not what we're discussing. You want to know how to convince progressive (presumably liberal-minded?) friends of something that is distinctly non-liberal. You'd need to start by finding common ground between their views and yours, and ease your logic into…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 02:37 AM
1

Shame about Davies, innit. ...well, for you guys. I personally thought he was a cunt. But you lot seemed to like him quite a bit. I can't imagine losing his seat will dissuade him from continuing his agenda. But after Theresa May told the people of England that anti-terrorism was more important than preserving human rights, are you really surprised?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 02:28 AM
2

FYI, I didn't say that you said that. If I thought you said it, I would have said "you said-" followed by what you said. Said said said said said and I am now delirious. Now, about that HuffPo article you linked. Interesting choice. And despite my instinct, I did not kill it with fire; I read it. And um... I'm not impressed? The article claims that men get 63% longer sentences on average "for the same crime", and then limp-wristedly tries to explain it as being because of plea bargaining and whi…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 02:24 AM
0

Actually, this sentence appears to show nothing. As someone else pointed out, the woman never attempted to make the battered wife argument. It would only "show progress" if she tried the battered wife claim only to have it up-ended and get convicted anyway. And even then, that doesn't so much "show progress" as it does throw a court system into question. women are, on average, sentenced to just 2/3 the jail time that men are for the same crime. Y'know, I've heard this statistic tossed around a l…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 01:52 AM
0

I think you missed my point. Being gratified that justice was served is one thing, but this consistently jubilant reaction when a woman is jailed baffles me. For a group insisting that feminists are so evil, you lot have a robust tendency to emulate them.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 12:31 AM
-5

Sorry, do you lot think that both articles were made and posted by the same person, or even the same type of person? Is that where we're at? Groups of politically charged people painting everyone with the same brush, freaking out over a poll article about a sex toy, and an opinion piece about a sex doll? This is the new low we've reached?
/r/MensRights08/06/17 11:57 PM
0

There are three articles about women getting done for murder on the front page of this subreddit alone, and you guys still get bowled over at hearing that she's been found guilty. All I can think of is the frantic feminists that parade proudly around when someone gets convicted of rape. When I say that, I mean "you boys are making yourselves look like feminists when you post stuff like this" - especially with something like "Pussy Pass Denied" attached to it. If you lot don't pick your jaws up o…
/r/MensRights08/06/17 11:53 PM
1

That explains the American President's bizarrely long ties, given that his wife won't even walk beside him any more.
/r/MensRights08/06/17 11:48 PM
1

If you wanna wear a dress, wear a dress. What are you worried about haters for?
/r/MensRights08/06/17 11:46 PM
17

I'm scratching my head here. More men were selected for the program than women and you're calling shenanigans because you think they selected too many women? You believe that a purely scientific endeavour like NASA is going to start playing gender politics when they know that the smallest error can destroy a multi-billion dollar rocket carrying actual, living people? Like, you realize that NASA has two serious incidents involving the loss of a craft and its crew, attributed to easily prevented m…
/r/MensRights08/06/17 11:43 PM
2

Oh look. Ann found a cave in Satan's lair to boil her skulls. Breitbart is the perfect place for a sociopathic troll like her.
/r/MensRights08/06/17 01:28 PM
1

What you're seeing are two different groups of feminists with different goals. That's kinda the way. MRAs act like there's only one kind of feminist, just as feminists act as though only one breed of MRA exists. Conservatives lump together all Liberals, and vice versa. It's handy when you need to discredit the general demographic but only get crazy from the crazy ones; just pretend there's no difference!
/r/MensRights08/06/17 09:44 AM
1

That's also incorrect, because in court, they make the distinction between "innocent" and "not guilty". "Innocent" means it was proven that you did not commit the crime. "Not guilty" means that they could not prove your guilt (without stating that guilt was disproven). Bless your heart for trying, though.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 06:24 PM
2

"No evidence" does not mean "not enough evidence", dear.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 02:53 PM
2

Wrong. "Unproven" in the case of a criminal accusation means that the evidence for the accusation is insufficient for further action. It doesn't mean that no evidence exists at all. It can mean that there's zero evidence, but rape accusations with zero evidence available are rare, and have thusfar produced no convictions.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 02:48 PM
1

You're trying absurdly hard to convince me of that, but you're also trying to convince me that someone who rapes can also have a conscience. I have very specific reasons for finding that to be a brutally flawed piece of reasoning.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 02:15 PM
1

If you were deranged enough to actually rape someone, I doubt you'd be of sound mind enough to be a good person and 'fess up. You're talking (I hope) from the perspective of someone who isn't going to rape someone.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 02:09 PM
1

You'd lie because you're an idiot. As soon as they find out you're lying, you'll have handed them your conviction. You will have done more damage because you lack critical thinking, plus all the inmates will know whose ass to tear open.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 02:08 PM
1

I have a hard time believing that anyone whose mind allows them to commit the act in the first place would suddenly sprout a conscience and confess. It sounds like a crime drama where the story writer was replaced for the final act.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 02:02 PM
1

That makes you an idiot. Lying to get out of a false accusation has to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard of, hands down, no contest.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 02:01 PM
1

You said you would lie and say you're gay in order to get out of a rape accusation. You being willing to lie to get out of a rape charge says a lot about you, primarily because people who aren't guilty don't need to lie. But also, people who lie get caught. So if you're not guilty, but the only way to get out of the charge is to lie, one you're found out, it'll just confirm to everyone that you are, in fact, guilty as fuck. You're only as clever as the person who interprets what you say.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 01:56 PM
1

I hope you're in favour of boiling convicted rapists in oil, because otherwise you look like a total cunt.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 01:53 PM
1

So, you're saying that you would rape someone and falsely claim you're gay in order to get away with it. That's unsettling.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 01:51 PM
2

"Unproven" and "Disproven" do not mean the same thing. When something is disproven, or proven false, it means that something contradictory is proven to be true. "Unproven" means that the statement has not been verified, but has also not been disproven.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 01:48 PM
1

Increasing? It was at 45% in January, 44% in February, 43% in March, 42% in April, and 40% in May. In addition, his approval rating has consistently dropped every day for the last nine days. Are you seeing things...? I'm anti-rape, but i'm also anti-false accusations. And though there are so few false accusations that you have to do mental gymnastics to make them relevant, you want to make rape harder to prosecute in order to protect the accused. When there is already a 63% chance of a rape case…
/r/MensRights07/06/17 01:43 PM
1

According to Fivethirtyeight, it's not much bigger. It's 38.6% (as of today).
/r/MensRights07/06/17 01:28 PM
2

Truly stunning. 37% is lower than Trump's approval rating, and that's an abysmal figure.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 01:16 PM
1

I'm not seeing you proving your assertion, just tossing shade at people who disagree with you.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 01:09 PM
1

Does 37% sound like "almost all"?
/r/MensRights07/06/17 01:09 PM
2

So you're now asserting that almost all reported rapes lead to convictions. You're going to have to show your work, son, because you're quoting something I've never seen in my life.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 12:58 PM
2

Almost all rapists get convicted. I've literally never read that anywhere, so you'll have to show me where you based that assertion from. Seeing as about half of rapes aren't even reported to police, how could even "almost" all rapists get convictions?
/r/MensRights07/06/17 12:50 PM
1

We know, based on statistics, that of all the rape accusations made in the US, that about 2% of them end with a criminal conviction. At least 1% end with a conviction that lacks jail time. And about 3% end with the revelation or conclusion that the account given by the accuser is false. The remaining 94% of rape cases either end without an accusation or without an arrest. Interestingly enough, this statistic is also similar to many other crimes. Murder, for example, has a curiously low convictio…
/r/MensRights07/06/17 12:21 PM
1

I'd pity your pessimism, but you sound too full of yourself to tolerate pity. And I don't live in a neighbourhood so slummy that there would be someone out on the sidewalk (especially at this hour) playing find-the-lady.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 09:56 AM
1

Making someone pay an artificially higher tax because of their gender is wrong. If your health coverage is tax-funded, and you pay the taxes associated with your earnings, you get covered, end of story. So it literally doesn't matter how much more or less cost women place on the system.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 09:34 AM
-1

Apparently there is a disagreement there, because you're saying feminists have embraced those things, while others appear to be saying that they have not.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 09:08 AM
9

The woman in the top picture looks like a braying donkey.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 08:34 AM
1

I can't dismiss the beauty pageant mentality could be at work, but operating on the assumption that this is what is happening here is not operating in good faith, and definitely sides with conspiracy. And you're right; even considering this hasn't dissuaded me.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 08:27 AM
0

Actually, those ideas stemmed from antiquated ideals built into the law before feminism entered the public consciousness. Have a look at your own country's laws on rape, and on child custody, and look at when they were enacted. Unless your nation was founded in the 20th century, those laws were very likely not instituted after 1900.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 08:25 AM
1

Then perhaps someone would care to get to the explaining part so I can get to the "not failing to understand" part. Because I asked how the "95% claim" defies the idea of "privilege" when the statistic itself is misrepresentative when used as a blanket statement about all men who work (since most men with a job don't have a twenty-fold higher likelihood of being killed while working). I mean, if the 95% stat is going to be forced into relevance by sheer brute force, then I'm just going to point …
/r/MensRights07/06/17 08:15 AM
3

This is what happens when a social group gets itself tied in a knot this badly. Laci Green is a sex-positive feminist, so her sexual proclivities are going to be more liberal and open-minded. Anyone here surprised that a sex-positive feminist is more liberal about sex than an intersectional feminist is letting their bias show.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 06:56 AM
3

...is this how petty things have gotten here?
/r/MensRights07/06/17 06:51 AM
1

Ah-hah. So that's what you're hung up on? Well, I never said anything about men being privileged en-masse. I don't live in a bubble, dear. I don't subscribe to overly trendy ideas like gender and race privilege. Can we stop talking in giant useless blanket statements now?
/r/MensRights06/06/17 10:37 PM
1

You're misusing these statistics to promote a narrative. I am interested in discussing fact. Men are 9 times more likely to die in a workplace accident than women are. Men who work in an office are not 9 times more likely to die in an accident than women in an office. Men who work at a restaurant are not 9 times more likely to die. Men who drive buses are not 9 times more likely to die. Men who deliver pizza are not 9 times more likely to die. Using that statistic in such a blanket manner puts a…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 10:20 PM
6

You're also suggesting that 47-67% of rape cases close with the guilty party walking away free. And then remember that only 2 of those 3 other percent ever see jail time. No one is suggesting that the justice system is perfect, but there are too many facets to this for any party to believe they're intentionally getting a rough break.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 10:13 PM
1

Are you nine times as likely to die in a workplace accident? I somehow doubt you work in an industry where the accident rate is that slanted; only a few industries have that imbalance - which is where most of the workplace deaths occur. Remember that when you say 95%, you're referring to 95% of a number. In 2015, workplace fatalities accounted for 4,836 deaths in the United States. To put that in perspective, you're three times more likely to be murdered with a firearm (and six times more likely…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 10:09 PM
1

How?
/r/MensRights06/06/17 09:56 PM
16

"Not shown to be true" doesn't mean "are false". Insufficient evidence is just as likely to clear a guilty man as an innocent man. Characterizing rape accusations that way is a very slippery slope, because anyone could pop out of the bushes and mention that guilty men walk away from rape charges without ever seeing jail time, and suddenly you're left arguing useful facts instead of misleading pop trivia. Are you finished trying to derail this conversation? Can we talk about the OP's remarks now?
/r/MensRights06/06/17 05:49 PM
1

I don't think anything you quoted proves that she's not telling him he can decide when he's older. She did tell him he can decide when he's older, but it's rather presumptuous of you to think that she's just stopped there, job done, when the article very much seems to describe otherwise. I have no issues with her as a mother or them as parents but they are attempting to free their child from developing limits [due] to gender without explaining why these limits [develop] or why some choices can b…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 05:07 PM
1

What? No it doesn't. It only proves that men and women do extremely dangerous work in different numbers. Men and women do the same work in a lot of fields. Just not things like mining and fishing. Again, misrepresenting facts and statistics to fit a narrative doesn't help you.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 05:01 PM
18

Uh... no, that's not how that works. Also, I said that false accusations are more rare than actual rapes. I'd love to see statistics that back up your assertion that 97% of rape accusations are false because that sounds fucking hilariously untenable, but not right now because it's not relevant. Rape accusations in and of themselves are not even that frequent.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 04:58 PM
4

He wears dresses because he likes dresses. She is showing the pictures of him in his favourites to show that kids aren't born with those gender norms programmed in. She's showing them to tell others that their kids aren't weird or immoral for being kids, no matter what stigmas we try to place on those things as adults.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 03:15 PM
1

She's not letting the child decide for himself, she's telling the child he can decide for himself later...that's the extent of her answer per the article. Normally I simply say I disagree, but this is actually factually untrue. For now, I'll chalk it up to an honest misunderstanding, and explain why I regard it the way I do. Crystal went on to say that though Cian is a boy and understands that he is a boy, she doesn’t want his gender to influence what he wants to wear or what he chooses to play …
/r/MensRights06/06/17 03:12 PM
1

Letting a child decide for themselves is not the same as doing nothing. That's what you're choosing to miss.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:50 PM
1

Look im getting the sense that you are trying to say I have an issue with men in dresses, I DON'T. But you now know what it's like to have someone take what you say and make presumptions based on what you didn't say. It's a slippery slope to guess at what she did or didn't do based on what isn't in the article.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:46 PM
2

Just because she is "hands-off" in regards to the development of his personal identity doesn't mean she is "waiving her responsibility". It's not a mother's duty to micromanage the kind of personality or identity that her children manifest. And you don't know that a discussion hasn't been had, or that one won't be had in the future. It's also highly presumptuous that you believe he needs that discussion now, at this stage of his life. I find it kinda curious that when it comes to boys, MRAs insi…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:21 PM
0

How would finding out why from a kid his age be of any use? Have you ever tried to ask a child about how they reached a decision? It's like trying to ask a horse for its autograph. This mom is actually playing it smart and letting her son explore existence free from the shackles of shallow gender expectations like clothing styles. When he's older, more serious things might manifest, like a desire to transition. It might not. But that's a down-the-road situation for Future Mom to deal with.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:14 PM
1

What guidance would you offer a pre-school boy that wants to be a girl? How would you explain it to him?
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:07 PM
11

The biased language in this article made it a little hard to enjoy.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:05 PM
1

How do you know that is what "seems to be happening"? And even if she was, how do you quantify the "gravity" of self-identity? Either the child will not see it as having the sense of weight you believe it has, and doesn't think about his gender identity (most kids don't), or the kid will be open about approaching his parents and saying how feels because his parents made him feel like it's not wrong to be open about it. If I'd had parents like that, I might not have had a massive identity crisis …
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:01 PM
9

That is a fascinating, if irrelevant, statistic.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 01:57 PM
-1

There aren't so much "lies" as "misrepresentations of fact" and "mishandling of information", as well as a growing tendency to use political tactics in use by feminists to try and out-argue feminists (which is a bit like trying to put out a fire with a blowtorch). For example, it's true that more than 95% of workplace fatalities are men, but that statistically means nothing. Using the statistic to imply that men get the short stick in the workplace is to say that you're 20 times more likely to d…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 01:55 PM
1

There are some things that you can't offer guidance on early. Guidance on schooling, friendships, discipline - those are all things you can offer a child at any time. But guidance about their identity or sexuality is an entirely different game with a different set of rules. You can't steer them, only let them know as much about what is ahead of them as possible.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 01:24 PM
6

According to the article, the boy likes wearing dresses. This isn't exactly uncommon, even for boys who grow up identifying as straight and cis.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 01:21 PM
2

Getting banned from that subreddit was like, the first thing I did here.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 01:20 PM
20

Someone correct me if I'm mistaken, but the number of rape accusations is much fewer than the number of actually committed rapes, which in itself affects a very small percentage of the population. This seems like an extreme measure to suggest that all guys undertake when false accusations happen to so few people. Like, okay, using Google Chrome and letting Big Brother track your every movement is a fairly easy step, but wearing body cams? Are you going to wear the bodycam when you've picked up a…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 01:17 PM
1

If I really had a brain I wouldn't have bothered with the thread in the first place v.v Being suicidal over a penis s-- not even the actual size, but people CALLING IT SMALL like what?? WHAT IS THIS EVEN
/r/MensRights06/06/17 01:10 PM
1

I'm really not sure what to make of this response. Why insist on validating liberal or feminist action with fact and then get so touchy when the same standard is set for the men's rights movement?
/r/MensRights01/06/17 02:34 AM
1

It can't hurt to note anything worth mentioning - especially since the movement appears to have an image problem.
/r/MensRights31/05/17 12:06 PM
1

Is there a direct causal relationship between the men's rights movement and these actions?
/r/MensRights31/05/17 12:05 PM
3

I'm going to address the elephant in the room. What have MRAs actually accomplished? I don't intend that as some kind of rhetorical question, I'm genuinely interested in an answer. What goals were set by the movement that have been met?
/r/MensRights29/05/17 02:06 PM
1

Socialism eliminates the need for the male other than reproduction. How?
/r/MensRights12/05/17 10:56 PM
2

My post was in response to some idiot who said the MRM should be socialist. Pay attention, for christ's sake. ...you didn't connect this thread in any way to any other post. Response to whom? What thread? Where? When? I read your full post (both sentences) before adding my thoughts. It's kinda your fault for not stating that there was a connection to something else. We're not psychics, bud. I am counterattacking leftist scumbags who are trying to push their political ideology onto this sub. Anyo…
/r/MensRights12/05/17 04:44 PM
1

Please explain why that is relevant, because I'm only seeing a correlative fallacy here.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 04:10 PM
12

I won't even ask the question because I know the answer. This has nothing to do with Men's Rights.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 12:43 PM
1

Under ordinary circumstances, I'd be game for a decent head-to-head. Unfortunately, someone here (not you) has decided to abandon good sense and start trolling. Let's just agree to disagree on this while I recuse myself.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 09:10 PM
1

That doesn't even make logical sense. You couldn't hurt my feelings even if you put both of your brain cells to work.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 09:04 PM
1

Are playground insults all you have?
/r/MensRights11/05/17 08:57 PM
1

I'm not going to rebut someone who tells me to "give my head a shake". Have a pleasant day.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 08:52 PM
1

you stayed away from using information on male and females in a certain sport, surely if you believe women can compete with men in most sports you would use stats from both sexes in one sport to back your opinion up. I sport for fun, and don't have much interest in the dazzle of professional leagues, so I never really put any time into interpreting league statistics. My focus was on the function of the human body itself. What people are capable of, and the differences between them. Paul's remark…
/r/MensRights11/05/17 08:45 PM
1

usually when people disagree they say why I pointed out fallacies in Paul's argument, and his cherry-picking of evidence. In the end, I don't even believe that people supporting mixed gender sports want men's and women's teams to go away, so arguing that they should be sounds absurd. EDIT: Should also point out that I didn't expect to need to cite sources for stuff I learned in high school.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 08:09 PM
1

I have not cited anything yet; I don't regard Paul's arguments to be sufficiently supported by evidence to warrant doing that kind of work. See, cherrypicked evidence is as good as none at all, and the burden of proof lays on the claimant, not the opposition.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 02:26 PM
3

Well, this is the sort of movie that appeals primarily to a male audience, and a long-standing romanticism with this tragic character has led to the perplexing belief that he was somehow the hero, battling the odds to see his little girl on her birthday. The assaulted shopkeeper wasn't significantly hurt The gangbangers pulled a knife on him, then trying to gun him down The golfer tried to peg him with a golf ball The army surplus store guy was a bigot who tried to tie him up in his shop His wif…
/r/MensRights10/05/17 11:32 PM
4

Mister D-FENS was really the villain of the movie. He may not have been guilty of starting everything he was involved in, but he was no hero. He assaulted a shopkeeper over a matter of 35 cents He antagonized gang members instead of negotiating peacefully (what would have happened if he hadn't started swearing at them?) He held a fast food restaurant up at gunpoint because the breakfast menu was no longer being served ("the customer is always right" is a myth) He fired a bazooka at a constructio…
/r/MensRights10/05/17 11:06 PM
-1

men run faster, throw further, lift more, weigh more and reach greater heights in most sports. this is not based on this video, it based on how it is. You'll need to support that assertion with fact. And why only "most" sports? Would they not logically be superior at those feats in all sports? Running doesn't change from sport to sport. Lifting doesn't change from sport to sport. And "weighing more" doesn't even help in "most" sports. Maybe boxing and football where weight plays into defense. i …
/r/MensRights10/05/17 07:02 PM
-1

women are inferior athletes in most sports, this is shown over and over again to the point where its not even debatable. Citing one team and handful of video bites does not a good argument make. if you are into any sport you can see the difference in men and women. Any sport? You did watch the video, right? I despise the guy, and even I still sat through the whole thing. trying to dismiss the difference in chemicals and body composite like ayy its just because men are bigger is almost irrelevant…
/r/MensRights10/05/17 06:06 PM
0

Oh, quintessential Paul. Cherrypicking clips of women's soccer to prove his point that women can't play sports. Because the Australian women's soccer team didn't fare well, means that women athletes are all just inferior as fuck. Right, well done, Paulieboy. (This is a fallacy known as a fallacy of composition) For every boneheaded clip of a woman flunking out of Graceful Sports Star Academy, I could dig up one of a guy epically eating astroturf. Men are physiologically stronger than women, whic…
/r/MensRights10/05/17 05:11 PM
1

I don't wanna go that far. It's hard to start a conversation with a bigot, so it's hard to start a conversation with someone you're just assuming is a bigot. I like to assume good faith whenever possible. If possible...
/r/MensRights10/05/17 12:59 AM
1

Canada has much to be admired. The current SJW feminist authoritarian madness is decidedly not in keeping with Canadian values. Just remember that openness and inclusiveness are not part of the "SJW feminist authoritarian madness"; it's part of Canadian values.
/r/MensRights10/05/17 12:11 AM
1

I would also hope that free speech rights are supported by the majority of the Canadian public. An alarmingly high number of professors and student unions don't seem to value free speech at all. They would be wise to rethink this knee-jerk support of censorship, since laws opposing free speech will eventually be used against everyone. The trick with free speech is that there is a line between speech and propaganda. One is the expression of your views, while the other is the projection of those v…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 11:19 PM
1

I agree with this. Being used as a political tool (by both sides of the aisle) is not a good feeling, and trans-trenders just muddy the issue for people who genuinely transition for the sake of their mental health and their identity.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 11:11 PM
1

That's just it though. Is this "society evolving" or is this a tiny percentage of the population -- radical feminists -- enforcing their views on everyone else by fiat? Are they actually increasing respect for the trans community? According to Peterson at least, he has received dozens of supportive emails by trans people, and indeed one even appeared on a news broadcast with him (in support of his views). That could only be answered with a broad general poll. Is the respect for transgender peopl…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 10:55 PM
1

I support it as well, as it hits home for me.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 10:37 PM
1

Here's where we disagree. I think the "asshole" is the person demanding that everyone else change their behavior under threat of punishment in order to accord with my fantasies about gender. If their default behaviour is disrespecting people based on factors beyond their control, simply because they don't wanna evolve with the rest of society, then a government job isn't really what they should be expecting to keep. That makes it a crime by definition. It's my personal take. Using drugs doesn't …
/r/MensRights09/05/17 10:36 PM
1

Now you're just being coy. I used the fox example to highlight the absurdity of your argument. Some gender identities are equally ridiculous. These are not oppressed groups. These are teenagers trying to get noticed. The differences in those terms should really be incidental, since they all only require one action from a respectful person; don't tell that individual that they're not what they say they are. You don't have to have a special nature den for someone who identifies as a fox, because i…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 09:51 PM
1

If his "identity" as a fox "Fox" is not a gender, so it can't really be a gender identity. So it's not the best example. You may think the fox example is absurd, but you should take a look at the dozens of new "gender identities" people are coming up with. A gender identity doesn't require that you treat that person any differently than other students. And the pronoun you'd use to talk to someone directly in a conversation is "You", so that's not much of a problem. And if you really don't like u…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 09:07 PM
2

It's more complicated than you are acknowledging. If some student demands to be referred to as a fox because he's otherkin, and that the professor use "zer" otherwise I'll get you fired, that amounts to bullying in the opposite direction. Threatening a professor can result in a hearing that can get you expelled. Well, Karen Straughan has argued, and I agree, that patriarchy theory is itself a hateful concept, because it supposes that men would be so psychopathic and sadistic that they would want…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 08:42 PM
2

Peterson's argument on the subject of "zer" etc is that these terms did not arise organically but are being shoved down the throats of the public by ideologically driven man-hating zealous. Well, I'd love to see where he bases that argument from. It ought to be an interesting read. It could be argued that it is at least as "insensitive" (indeed, Orwellian) to micro-manage speech under threat of punishment, even if said punishment doesn't come directly from the state. If the only argument though,…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 08:18 PM
2

Well if what you're saying is true I have no problem with the bill, but as I said I haven't read it. I do wonder why Peterson is making such a big deal of it if it's as benign as you say. He probably read it online and didn't look into the body of the bill on his own. I can understand why; it's a long read, and I'm sure being a professor in a university is a time-consuming career. But for that very reason, it's best to see it with your own eyes. If a University introduced a policy that forced pr…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 07:46 PM
2

So to confirm, if a student asked a prof to use a pronoun, and he/she refused, the prof would not be subject to punishment? It's possible that he could be subject to punishment, but not by mandate of Bill C-16. The university would very likely find the professor's conduct to be in contravention to their educational environment. However, to truly be considered discrimination that Bill C-16 is referring to, the professor would have to either refuse the student any of the school's services to which…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 07:12 PM
1

Jordan Peterson claims otherwise. ...but have you read the bill yourself? Have you verified it? Or are you going to accept the legal interpretation of a clinical psychologist? I haven't read the legislation personally but there seems to at least be some controversy over how these laws would be enforced, especially when combined with provincial "human rights" legislation. I recommend looking at the bill on your own, rather than taking what one person said about it. I heard Dr Peterson's claims as…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 06:50 PM
1

Wow, how about that. A rich person telling a group of rich people about the shit poor people go through. Imagine that. I wonder if anyone might have run for President on the backs of the poor, undereducated working class.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 06:33 PM
3

That isn't what Bill C-16 does. Not using preferred pronouns is not hate propaganda - it's just rude.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 06:31 PM
1

I had that same question about Chelsea Clinton.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 06:24 PM
2

Perhaps you could quote the part that you believe supports your view.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 05:42 PM
2

That's not how it works - not even a little bit. It isn't how transgender therapy works and it's not how the bill works. Your 5-year-old would have to go through all the normal processes that any transgender person would have to in order to begin transitioning. What bill C-16 does is adds gender identity and expression to the list of things prohibited for discrimination - so anything or any place that isn't allowed to discriminate against sex, race or ethnicity, also have to respect gender expre…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 05:38 PM
3

He is objecting to the inclusion of gender identity as a legally defended status alongside race, sex, and ethnicity. And he wants to do this in the Canadian Senate. Dude's going to get skewered by the responses.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 05:07 PM
1

Your average college graduate isn't the child of a former president. I don't know why rich people get held up as the litmus for the rest of us (as in, the logic that they have to be like us to speak on our behalf -- especially when no one is listening otherwise). They have the loudest and most prominent voices, and if they want to use those voices to represent someone or something they think could use the help, where is the logic in judging them? That would be like criticizing Bernie Sanders for…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 04:58 PM
0

That doesn't really fix anything. That just adds more broken logic. Points for trying, but that's about it.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 04:53 PM
2

I was referring to Ivanka Trump.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 04:52 PM
1

How? Working for a charity foundation isn't white privilege. Working for your parents isn't white privilege. Making money isn't white privilege. What exactly did she and her parents say that makes her salary ironic...?
/r/MensRights09/05/17 04:30 PM
1

...and?
/r/MensRights09/05/17 03:41 PM
0

She's a spoiled rich kid helping her father fuck over everybody.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 01:56 PM
0

Ivanka doesn't routinely peddle a victim narrative regarding her own circumstance No, she gets Daddy to tweet threats when she gets dropped from clothing chains, apparently.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 01:55 PM
6

This is a pretty misleading image macro, which doesn't surprise me at all. Like, the daughter of a former President going to a good school and earning lots of money? No way, say it ain't so. Also, why is "white privilege" a gender issue?
/r/MensRights09/05/17 01:54 PM
1

Misandry is the hatred of men. The belief that all men should be killed to reduce crime is the belief that all men are criminals. The belief that all men are criminals is not founded in logic, but exists only as a hateful stereotype. Therefore, wanting all men dead to reduce crime is still misandric. I should point out though, that meme-ing it kinda takes away from the impact that a call for genocide levies. It might have shocked me more without the cartoon.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 01:50 PM
1

The popularity of tomboys has sparked a sharp rise in the number of girls wanting to swap gender, according to a leading NHS psychologist. This is not how transgenderism works. Popular arguments that suggest it is unappealing to be female include a perception of being tied to domestic labour, body image pressures and a gender pay gap. This statement in the article seems to exist in a vacuum, as the article makes no attempt to establish any causation between the supposed lack of "appeal" in being…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 12:47 PM
1

I find that difficult to believe.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 11:12 PM
2

Says a lot about you.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 11:04 PM
1

You're saying all those people sought to crash the government and blow a mortal wound in the Republican party for lulz?
/r/MensRights08/05/17 11:03 PM
1

In my experience, I'm not really that rare. But in my experience, if someone wants to be hurtful, they'll say whatever they think will do the most damage. So it's not to say that it never happens - I just don't think it's the epidemic you're making it out to be - and I don't think it's worth getting suicidal over. Maybe I'm just weird because I don't get distraught over not being pretty (nor do I over being told so).
/r/MensRights08/05/17 04:32 PM
1

I'll pass. I've already had more conversation about penises in two days than I've had in the last two decades.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 04:12 PM
1

The patriarchy must be strong with u/5th_Law_of_Robotics :D You're the one saying 'patriarchy', not me. If somebody hates [insert demographic] because individual members of it "make them", then they were going to hate [insert demographic] anyway. Saying the same thing a second time doesn't count as explaining it. Because, firstly, hatred is a choice you make. ...I don't think you understand how emotions work -- which is rather telling. No significant demographic has a minimum standard of behavio…
/r/MensRights08/05/17 02:07 PM
1

I'm wracking my brain trying to figure out how that makes a shred of logical sense. Perhaps you could shed some light on this. How does being forcefully motivated to do something mean that I was just going to do it without the motivation?
/r/MensRights08/05/17 06:37 AM
2

Oh, rest assured, I'm reading more than enough nasty comments to make up for his absence...
/r/MensRights08/05/17 05:21 AM
1

Fucksakes, you have the reading comprehension of a dairy cow.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 05:18 AM
1

I don't think you owe me anything. At least we can agree on something. Similarly, this subreddit is teaching me a lot about MRAs. Specifically, to avoid them like a plague.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 05:04 AM
1

You started running your mouth before reading the comments. Why do you think I owe you anything?
/r/MensRights08/05/17 04:44 AM
1

Oh, I wanted an answer to my question. I just didn't want an answer fraught with logical inconsistencies. In the last 48 hours, I've met maybe two people on this subreddit that haven't turned out to be complete fuckwits. I'm afraid you aren't one of those two people. Good day.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:31 AM
1

Says the motherfucker who doesn't read a thread before adding his two cents.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:29 AM
1

I'm sure you have a point that surrounds the topic of your mom's hospital that is making my encroaching insanity all worthwhile? If so, fucking get to it, because the sooner I can not see notifications in my inbox from this subreddit, the better.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:29 AM
1

Responding to this would require me to basically just repeat myself. And the thought of going back into this is making me physically sick.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:26 AM
0

It seems like every time I come into these discussions and make a point, people argue the irrelevant shit. Like, could you just make your point, please?
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:08 AM
1

I've stated what I disagree with in this thread about a hundred times. If I have to do it again, it's going to be explained in the most condescending manner imaginable. So, you're better off just reading my other comments. I didn't write them for my own amusement, y'know.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:05 AM
1

Yes. I really do think that nobody in my social circles thinks less in any way of a man whose penis is not average-sized. Now, either I really know how to pick a social circle, or we're not all as horrible as you think.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:02 AM
1

Thank you for establishing that. Now to the question. What does university level racism have to do with employer standards?
/r/MensRights08/05/17 02:55 AM
1

So, your state is provably indicative of the rest of the country? I'm doubting that, since they - according to your own statement - have no trouble finding out-of-state nurses.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 02:53 AM
1

It isn't. The fact that you think so means you haven't read anything I've written here.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 02:51 AM
1

...what? There's a difference between having a preference for size and mocking someone for not having said size. You're conflating two issues, like those weirdos who claim that gays are sexist because they don't fuck women.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 02:50 AM
1

I'm at a loss to understand how that changes anything. You're suggesting that Canadians are just too polite to discriminate... and... that's bad? Like, where do you think our famous politeness comes from? The wisdom to know that not everything is really worth being an asshole about.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 01:45 AM
1

Thanks to affirmative action's diversity quotas, there are many above-average Asian students who are denied entrance to universities because of their race Citation needed.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 12:56 AM
1

Canadian society. We're too diverse to consider anyone's dimensions to be worth ridicule.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 12:55 AM
1

And despite you assertions to the contrary, a lot of women place importance on the size of a man's penis. The "a lot of people" argument doesn't fly with me. Even if your personal preference is for the less-endowed man, you're in the minority. Citation needed. I can't even tell you the number of times I've heard a woman tell a man "I bet you have a small dick" Oh, I bet you can't.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 12:53 AM
1

So I triggered your feels with my hate facts. No, but I'm not exactly motivated to co-operate with you when you act like such a smug, overconfident cunt. You haven't convinced me that you're anything but petty.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 10:34 PM
1

You were a regular poster at "against men's rights" until you pissed off the wrong mod over something or other. I posted there for a couple of weeks, because folks such as yourself were posting bullshit and just jerking each other off about how evil everyone but you is. Feminists, Liberals, Muslims - you're just looking for other people to blame for your insecurities. It's dismally sad that you can't find fulfillment outside trashing people who don't share your views.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 10:31 PM
1

What part of "reported they were not willing to live with the daily side effects" means "cancelled the study"? Are you fucking daft?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 10:28 PM
1

You corrected a literally insignificant detail, and somehow this is vindicating to you. My point was that one has been in development, but that it's not ready yet. And you're trying to insist that I'm wrong about that... because it's the researchers that bailed out due to the side effects and not the test subjects as I had interpreted it? How the fuck does that make any sense?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 10:27 PM
1

It changes it massively. How? You can't just say "well it does" and then leave it at that. That's like saying "because I said so".
/r/MensRights07/05/17 10:25 PM
1

The correction of "participants didn't like the side effects" to "researchers didn't like the side effects" doesn't even change my argument. How pathetically petty. Like, thanks for the clarification, but I kinda wish it had come from someone who wasn't a rip-roaring cunt.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:30 PM
1

God, you're petty.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:27 PM
1

I didn't say that the test subjects cancelled the study. That's you putting words in my mouth. Why is it that you redpillers are driven to just make up conversations?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:27 PM
1

This is how new feminists are born. MRAs treat moderate people like this - constantly telling us we just "hate men" and are closet feminists or shills - until the thought of men just turns our stomach. People like you are making people like me start to hate men. At this point, I have to try to assume good faith. ...not out of you, though. I already know you're a soulless fuckwit.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:25 PM
1

That's an absurdly minor detail to use to insist that I'm wrong and you're right. I mean, if you're that desperate for a win, go ahead.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:20 PM
1

No. I was shadowbanned by AMR. So there isn't really anything I can tell them.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:13 PM
0

...wait. Based on the many side effects. That's the same thing I just said. The test group found the side effects to not be worth it. Like, you even used the same CNN article that I did.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:13 PM
1

Ooh, dirty talk. I'm flattered, but I'm not a fan of giant dicks.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:44 PM
-1

Blah blah blah, the response to this comment has been said a hundred times already, so I'm not repeating it again.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:17 PM
1

I cannot fathom how you made it this far in society.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:16 PM
-1

"Get fucked" is an insult for a reason. You... think that insult is only used on women...? What's our culture's default image of a sexual predator? A man. What does that have to do with his penis size? Default image of an homosexual (considered sexual deviants by many in society still)? Man ...the fuck are you talking about? I'm stopping here. The anecdotal stuff is just burning up the logic centre of my brain.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:15 PM
0

It can't be very general if that attitude doesn't even pervade into the society I live in.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:12 PM
1

There's the love and adoration I've come to know from this subreddit. Preach on, bruh.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:11 PM
1

That's kinda shallow.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:10 PM
0

And where did you get that information from?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:09 PM
1

If they say they're going to kill themselves over something as nothing as being told she's fat or a slut? Yeah. Give your head a shake. Words are not a reason to end your own life.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:09 PM
1

If I have to explain this to another person who doesn't know to read first, I may go mad.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:07 PM
1

I'm not really into the kinky stuff.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:06 PM
1

What enticing choices. I propose a third option. I have perspective that you can't see because of your lack of objectivity.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:05 PM
1

Hmm, I see, that doesn't have much to do with me It's nothing to do with you. I was only being blunt to avoid my really bad mood seeping through. That said, it is entirely possible he posted it twice because he messaged me a response one time Nah. He replied to your comment, tagging my username (which one's inbox will notify one of). Then he went back and replied to me directly. Because I'm apparently too stupid to read a Username Mention. but then I am not too sure what you mean "lording over m…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 08:29 AM
1

Your endgoal was to be a dick. And you're just sore because I'm not grovelling and sobbing about being wrong. Yeah, facts emerged that validated the story that I had been unable to find. You're the one obsessed with people exhibiting humility. I make it a regular point to fact check people as much as possible. Today, someone fact-checked me. And just as I've never demanded an apology or concession from people I've disproven, the person who disproved me did not demand such an apology. So go fuck …
/r/MensRights07/05/17 08:23 AM
1

It's not the what, it's the how. No apology for you! I laugh at your demands. EDIT: If you think you're going to cajole me into issuing an apology to the entire thread over making a remark that has progressively been clarified and corrected as needed, you're either delusional or stupid.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 08:15 AM
1

I deleted the post. I deleted it because it pleases me to disappoint you. I relish in your lackadaisy.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 08:13 AM
1

Not your fault. It's the other guy acting like a little shit, following me around threads and lording over me like a grammar school teacher.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 08:12 AM
1

Because you asked for it. And I kinda think you're a cunt. So my knee-jerk reaction is to do anything except what you want. So, no edits, no apologies. I'm not even backing down. But that's incidental. I still think the reaction to this show is absurd.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 08:10 AM
1

Hey, I got a better idea, STOP FUCKING TELLING ME WHAT TO DO
/r/MensRights07/05/17 08:08 AM
1

As is being pointed out repeatedly. Thank you.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 08:06 AM
1

You're joking. ...like, you're... joking. Right?... I'm so confused. You think I owe you an apology for not caring enough about a TV show? Like... you realize I still regard this dismissively, right? Why do you think I would even be apologetic? The people on TV had to agree to go on. They win no sympathy from me. Like that kid from American's Got Talent who backflipped onto his face on national TV.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 08:05 AM
1

Yes, thank you for saying the same thing twice in one thread to the only two other active people in it! I can't imagine how I wouldn't have gotten that other reply, seeing how you only mentioned my username. And yes, I'm kinda bein' a dick, because you're kinda bein' a dick.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 08:05 AM
1

Biggsville, IL. I'm afraid this is probably not the school.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:54 AM
0

Apologize to whom? The guy?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:53 AM
1

By your litmus, anything would qualify, for the sake of your faulty sense of smug superiority. Hey! I got an idea. Get assfucked by a cactus.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:52 AM
1

No. But, sorry to break it to you... America isn't the center of the universe. Numerous other nations had already moved against child prostitution because the adult variety was legal there and there were no consent laws.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:49 AM
0

No. It's a TV show. The participants agreed to be on the show. So, I don't have anyone to really apologize to. The dude would have to have agreed to it all.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:47 AM
1

I've never had to look for anything that old before. As for the article, it's not confirmed yet. I've been through Google trying various terms to pin down any reference to a "Union Elementary" in "Monmouth, IL". The town exists, but not the school. So unless it was demolished in the last 13 years...?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:43 AM
1

...the United States? You're saying I'm incorrect, because American history trumps the rest of the world...? I think you're trying to make a bigger argument than you've got.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:40 AM
1

Good find! I'm still perplexed as to why I cannot find the school. It's a weird mystery.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:26 AM
1

Lol, so because I'm not biased and can see that the men here make some good points I'm ignorant? Okay. If you can see only the good, those rose-coloured glasses must be comforting. I just read your replies and it's clear to see that you have a serious bias in your arguments. Some of the arguments you make I don't know how you could possibly stand by. And it must therefore be my position that is the problem and it must be me who has the bias. Also lol, you're judging the intelligence of people ba…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:21 AM
0

Aw, that's cute. He still acts like a petulant little fuck. If I felt oppressed or victimized by you, I would truly be the most pathetic creature on this planet. Fortunately for me, you don't have the power to be oppressive, and you don't have the clout or means to victimize me. You just act like a piece of shit. Now, since you're not talking about the topic, I'm no longer talking to you. If you wanna talk shop, I'll think about it.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:12 AM
0

No. Google it yourself. I'm tired.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:09 AM
1

So why didnt age of consent go up to 50 to prevent prostitution? Becau-- Red herring. But I h-- Im aware of this argument made by suffragettes, but its a red herring. If you'd j-- Does child prostitutiion still exist? ...so a measure has to work in order for it not to be a conspiracy? Are you stu-- Really? I guess it didnt work. Remember, prostitution was already illegal, so child prostitution was still illegal before the age of consent was raised. WRONG!! The United Kingdom acknowledged the lib…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 07:07 AM
0

No, evidently you don't get it. See, I recognize your username very clearly. Your track record for treating people who don't agree with you like absolute garbage speaks for itself. I have zero reason to trust you. You've treated me like shit a number of times. I should theoretically have less than zero reason to trust you in light of that. But I'm a realist sometimes, and you can't have less than zero of something.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:46 AM
1

Well, you're proving that you can stand in a rainstorm and tell people it's a sunny day. And your presumptuousness certainly makes you a solid fit for the community. And, I look down on stupid people. If you can't tell the difference between men and stupid people, that's your problem, not mine, puddin'.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:44 AM
1

For someone who chides me so much for making light of this issue, it's odd for you to be LOLing at the OP for claiming he has an average sized cock. I'm taking him at his word, and so should you. Tsk tsk.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:16 AM
0

This love affair you have with me is unhealthy. Why don't we see other people?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:14 AM
1

Ironic, considering how much you're sobbing and wailing at me having a contentious opinion. I can feel the tears through the Internets. Your emotions bring me no joy. And your cheap shots bring me no worry.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:13 AM
1

Thanks
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:12 AM
1

Oooh, good one. /s
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:12 AM
0

You're kind of acting like a whiny baby now, so... Again, if you can't do the most basic clicking on pre-googled search s trings, get out. Again I don't click on links I don't recognize. You haven't given me a reason to trust you.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:11 AM
1

I've done nothing but engage with you. Oh, how high-road of you. Overlooking the fact that you demanded clarification - which I gave you - to which you proceeded to bitch and moan for FUCKING HOURS about how I didn't give you the clarification beforehand. But you're the one who has been "engaging" with me. You engage like a broken bike lock. From the very start of this conversation you've been petty, childish and incredibly rude. Yeah. I have. And no regrets. You've earned every ounce of ire and…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:09 AM
0

Women's sexuality is and has been seen as innocent, virginal, like a flower, etc. Right, and women who engage in sexuality are seen as hussies, sluts, whores, immoral, et cetera. What is men's sexuality characterized as? Gross, tainting, impurifying, damaging, unhealthy. Or, primal, aggressive, ...brief? Suffragettes wanted to control male sexuality through age of consent law The first age of consent laws were enacted to prohibit women from having sex until 12-13. It was raised in England in the…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 06:02 AM
-2

I've heard penis jokes. I've read articles about women asking for tips on sex with guys with short stacks. But frankly, the whole "shaming" thing is very much a 2010s concoction run amok. When guys talk about comments on their genitalia, I have never heard anyone refer to it as body shaming in any way. Nor have I ever been left with the feeling that any of the guys I saw or read on felt permanently broken because of some teasing.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:48 AM
0

Ooph. An existential question. I wasn't ready for that. I suppose I'll have an answer to that closer to the end of my life. If I get the chance, I'll come back and answer that for ya.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:43 AM
1

I don't click links if I don't recognize the URL. You can go ahead and enjoy all those sausages though! I'm on a seafood diet.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:42 AM
1

And I'll meet you on the playground, after school.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:39 AM
1

In what world is having what you've said repeated back to you supposed to piss you off? Even though I clarified my point, just for special little you, you're still acting like we're at the beginning of this conversation and you haven't taken in any new info yet. Like, again, HOOOOOOOURS. Dozens of replies back and forth, and you are still speaking in terms that you don't understand what I was saying, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE CORRECTED YOUR IGNORANCE. You just bred new goddamn ignorance to replace it. …
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:38 AM
1

That is a stunning fault of logic. I admire your gusto, but you didn't nail it. Everyone with the right talent would qualify, while specific preferred candidates would actually get hired, depending on the needs of the company - be it manpower, expertise, or a more balanced workforce. A company that favours a policy of a balanced staff background may let a few employees on board who are not more qualified than other potentials. That benefits the needs of the company, even if it doesn't provide th…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:26 AM
1

I can't stand by such a cold and impersonal approach. People run companies, people work for companies. We're not cogs in a machine.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:18 AM
1

Oh my god, you just are incapable of giving it up. You can't stand the idea of admitting that you needed a basic idea explained to you, so you're concocting this absurd nonsense. I'm dictating to you the literal meaning of what you have said This is the gear you've been stuck on for hours. HOURS. Like, you've actually made me hate someone for the first time in my life. I loathe you. Every time I see your username, I die a little inside, because I know I'll have to refuckingpeat myfuckingself afu…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:11 AM
0

I got upvoted? Hm. That's a rarity. This guy has experienced a lifetime of racism Uh... where did he say that? your dumb ass boils that down to him not reacting well to one singular comment. We all have insecurities, princess. Having a crisis of dick size is a fucking cozy ass insecurity to have.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:03 AM
0

I wasn't shamed and abused over something as superficial and nonvisible to the public as genitalia, Captain Presumptuous. It's called tough love. You babies dish it out, but you can't take it. The OP needs to shake his head, remember that the opinions of other men about his cock should be full-on meaningless. In fact, the only people's opinion he should care about penis-wise is his own, and whoever he's going to be using the penis on. It's a waste of life to commit suicide just because someone s…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:56 AM
-1

That's all you got out of that post? That's your contribution?? That is how you thought you were going to make a meaningful addition to the conversa-- fuck it. I want the three seconds of reading time back, plus the minute of typing time spent telling you how disappointed I am that you happened today.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:50 AM
2

I can't help but agree that the OP freaked out when he didn't need to. I'm not sure that only a straight white man could know what penis envy feels like. But I'm sure most men could agree that killing yourself over it, or something drastic, simply makes no sense.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:34 AM
1

If I'm dumb enough to need a qualifier then so is the rest of this subreddit. You mean you and the one other person that consistently failed to grasp the concept - even after having it explained to you. You quoted my accusation of you using ad hominems I did that because the grammar of the sentence without the first part would have made the rest of it nonsensical. Unlike you, I like making sense! I dunno if anyone's told you, but "While the other..." doesn't effectively start a sentence. My obje…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:31 AM
1

If you wanna push me, I got no problem playing by the house rules and pushing back.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:19 AM
2

I have not had insecurity issues with a penis size, no. No, my insecurities were of a different nature.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:18 AM
1

I know for a fact you don't know what small dick life is like I actually laughed at that. It does sound funny. But you'd be correct in saying that I don't know what that particular issue is like. But... that's not what the OP is dealing with. Derp. If you had any real problems that were comparable you would have already listed them in detail. Why? I don't want to trawl the Internet for sympathy. Honestly, speaking to heartless monsters like you makes suicide seem like a good option. Oooh, I'm no…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:17 AM
1

I'm just struggling to take this at face value. For women to be a union, they would have to all want the same thing. Men used to have a union but now we're banned from unionizing You haven't been looking around then; one Google search brought me to a list of men's closed organizations. Yes, there are a lot more women's organizations, but men largely feel comfortable gathering in public, whereas women seem to prefer closed gatherings (when they're out protesting).
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:12 AM
1

Then you've only succeeded in wasting your time by telling me. There's literally no reason for us to keep discoursing - which couldn't make me happier.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:03 AM
-1

Good for you. ...am I supposed to be affected by this revelation?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 03:48 AM
0

On mobile, can't quote. If you can't quote and don't remember the quote, don't say you're quoting someone. Duh. I took the literal meaning of what you said Oh my god. Are you four years old? This is just going in circles. If you wish to differentiate your view from this then you must disambiguate by adding a qualifier. If you're dumb enough to need one, you have... well, someone's pity, I imagine. You're not my problem. I don't get anything out of you becoming more or less ignorant. So I couldn'…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 03:47 AM
0

What shit is getting thrown out?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 03:35 AM
-2

<slowclap> So your logic is that I could never ever hear about men being mistreated in regards to sex because I have opinions. Clearly you haven't heard of this thing called the Internet, where people can publicly share information? The thing we're on right now? Did you just assume that you can only learn things from your buddy at the head shop? I have very little patience for shitholes that want to ruffle my feathers, so if you have an opinion on the matter, state it, instead of telling me I'm …
/r/MensRights07/05/17 03:33 AM
1

You're welcome! Funny that you talk shit at me, but when I retort, suddenly you're the victim. (-b'-')-b
/r/MensRights07/05/17 03:11 AM
0

Now you're just downright infuriating. I'm not trying to make you sound like a sexist, I'm interpreting the literal meaning of what you've written. As in, you took input like a computer and didn't include any of your own existing knowledge about how employment works. That's kinda your fault, not mine. All it would've took is an "all other things being equal" on your first post. Funny how I didn't put that because I assumed you weren't stupid. That was my mistake. Won't make that error again. I'l…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 03:10 AM
1

What does revenue levels have to do with hiring practices? Never mind. I'm too exhausted to go further off the rails.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:59 AM
3

All of those things also apply to men too. Anyone who thinks men can't be vain and appearance-oriented beyond their genitalia is deluding themselves. Men have an entire body worth of hopeless vanity to stress about.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:57 AM
2

Probably for the same reason that botox, bodybuilding, cosmetic surgery and crash diets exist; because shallow people desperately want a "perfect" image.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:42 AM
1

Why? If the candidates even have mostly similar knowledge and skill, it comes down to preference. Unless you think candidates with similar skill sets should just be fed into a random-job-giver-outer.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:40 AM
0

Eh, whatever that means. Sure, hon.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:38 AM
1

Yeah. Really. >.>
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:37 AM
-1

I don't read everything that gets posted here. If I did that, I would have gone insane around Christmas time.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:37 AM
-2

Fallacy of false equivalence. A reasonable person could intuit that you think you should hire women over any man simply because they're women. You're just assuming you're a reasonable person. Given how fiercely hard you're trying to make me sound like a sexist so that you can have gloating points, I'd say that's a tough sell. By in no way insulting, belittling or condescending to you? I'm glad to be among such stellar examples of humanity then. By arguing with bad logic and poorly understood con…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:37 AM
0

Because you're desperate to find something to shake my argument with. Too bad you're not using facts and logic. That's really your best chance.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:33 AM
0

Where do you think someone draws their opinions from? Their liver? Jesus Christ, for someone who likes insulting women's intelligence, you sure don't have a lot of spare brains.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:32 AM
1

...what?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:31 AM
-2

Given that I'm from Canada, not Australia, no. I know nothing of any Sydney Univesity veterinary scholarship. Nor am I distinctly aware of the job situation. So what happened? Feminists lost their shit, of course. Yeah? So? Ignore them. Reacting to them just plays into their hands. Aussie boys have access to a veterinary scholarship now. Good for them. I hope it yields some fertile crops, as it were.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 01:54 AM
-1

You're projecting. Just because I find you to be a very poor debater doesn't mean I find the same to be of this person as well. My post to him is to-the-point and doesn't direct any ire toward him. You're just sore that you couldn't twist my words in a way that I couldn't see through.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 01:51 AM
-5

Whhhaaaa...? I've heard a few scattered stories of men being spoken down to about sex, but I cannot bring myself to believe that there is an overarching culture in western society that automatically associates male sexuality with filth and perversion. You've been watching too many movies.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 01:48 AM
-1

Putting words in your mouth by... quoting you? I take it you're also new to the idea of "quoting". This is what you "quoted": In other words, hiring a woman because she's a woman and not because of any other trait she may possess. That's not a quote, dear. That's a sloppy, imprecise, overly presumptuous paraphrase - at best. You make no mention of any other distinguishing factors Because they're factors that any employer would already be looking for, depending on the job. Why do I have to painst…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 01:46 AM
3

I know of no "general" cultural attitude toward men with small penises. That's like saying there's a "general cultural attitude" toward muscular men, or women with large breasts. That's a painfully stereotypical way of thinking about sexual interest. Also, I read his post. He made it a point to note that he's not actually one of "those men", but boasts an "above average" size.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 01:40 AM
1

You think I don't know what it's like to be shamed, harassed, abused, and kept on the fringes of social development while my peers race ahead of me? You think I don't know what it's like to grow up without friends, without anyone who didn't want to do me harm? You think I don't still experience rejection because of who and what I am? How presumptuous. I am as I am today because I beat it. I endured the abuse and became better for it. You're not going to become better for your experiences by layi…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 01:37 AM
-5

You're suggesting that his entire life is plagued by people making fun of his penis. That honestly sounds like the premise to a really awkward comedy movie.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 01:25 AM
-1

In other words, hiring a woman because she's a woman and not because of any other trait she may possess. My god, it's like you have one gear. That's not what I said, no matter what "other words" you try to spin it with. I guess I have to point out that you also should determine if the person is a good potential employee. I didn't think I would have to point that out. I figured it, too, would be basic knowledge. Finally, it would be appreciated if you would stop the personal attacks. Oh, the numb…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 01:24 AM
-1

If someone doesn't say all, they probably don't mean all. We live in a world where nothing is absolute. Anyone stupid enough to hear "the people" and immediately thinks it means "all the people" is running on empty, logic-wise. Btw, there is actually a shortage of large animal vets. And?... If there's a general shortage, then who cares who signs up?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:58 AM
1

It's sad to see that you think that I think that. But what can I expect? Seems no one here ever reads more than half of my post, and it's generally the half they want to hear because they're either in the mood to get mad, or in the mood to get sassy.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:51 AM
-1

There is not a fevered rush for more vets and nurses. There's a clear need for new talent in the Science and Tech fields. Besides, you're now dipping into more specific careers, not fields. You're comparing apples to bags of oranges.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:50 AM
0

Then you must work in a shithole by default. Read about it on MIT, and Gallup, or The Guardian, or Forbes. Whatever tickles you. I don't make up facts, I just use them.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:47 AM
-5

How on earth can you argue that hiring someone solely on the basis of their gender is not sexism? How did you arrive at the conclusion that I was arguing in favour of hiring based solely on anything? Right - you filled in the blanks by yourself, because why get information when you can just have an imaginary conversation and make it up as needed! Whether you hire them because you think women make the workplace more productive That's not what I said. That is to say that women in the workplace are…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:42 AM
1

Can you imagine that scenario and not get that heavy feeling in your gut that you're witnessing something too awkward to even giggle at? "Come down off that chair! Why would you want to kill yourself?" "Because, they made fun of my penis!" Honestly, that's like committing suicide because someone made fun of your ratty hair or cleft chin. You can't do anything about it, and you can't do anything about them. So why cave in like tunnel in an adventure movie? I don't even know why a small penis is e…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:30 AM
0

Sixty words is too much for you? Should I have drawn a picture instead?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:24 AM
2

For killing her pets? Who created this show, Hannibal Fucking Lecter?
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:22 AM
1

If you understand what Im saying, how come you are so completely of in your answers? The irony of this is that your grammar collapsed mid-sentence, so I have no idea what you're asking me. How come I'm so completely of what? And if you understand me, how come you have such a hard time formulating an answer that will make me understand what you are unsucsessfully trying to convey by repeating yourself? Because my language doesn't dumb down any further than this, and reddit doesn't let me draw pic…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:10 AM
-17

Hiring a woman just because she's a woman is sexist I've said multiple times now that it's not "hiring a woman because she's a woman". It's "hiring a woman because diversity in the workplace improves the atmosphere of the workplace and in order to increase diversity, more women are needed". But again, if I can have literally typed that shit out repeatedly and y'all still claim I'm not counterpointing him, then there's nothing I can do to help you. You're either going to understand this time, or …
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:04 AM
2

So it's a tasteless TV show that exploits people regularly.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 12:01 AM
1

Maybe if women took as much further education ...what? They do. I don't know where you're getting this. They're just not going into Science, Tech, Engineering or Medicine. specialise in one field ...huh? Where are you even getting this from...? and took 40 hour weeks instead of 35 hour weeks they would earn the same? ...I'm not sure if you know how "average" works, but women on average just in general as full-time workers work for 7.8 hours a day, or 39 hours a week. Men work an average of 8.2 h…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 11:37 PM
1

I understand you just fine; you're just clumsily aiming at my argument and throwing a wild pitch off god-knows-where.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 11:33 PM
1

I really don't care what you have to add at this point. Discussing with you is like talking to a deaf man while he's dreaming. You're fundamentally misunderstanding what sexism is and how is works - and you're calling it your "perception" and it's my fault that you think that someone who hires a woman when he could hire a man just as easily is a sexist. I literally don't even want to explain it to you. You living your life in ignorance would not affect my remaining days in the slightest. I alrea…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 11:18 PM
1

Men make up over 9% of nurses (more than 270,000 jobs) - an increase to twofold over 1970, and men in nursing earn $60,000/yr on average compared to $51,000/yr for women. How's that for a bonus?
/r/MensRights06/05/17 11:14 PM
4

Now I'm just confused. It's a comedy show, but it's not a comedy show any more. It's just a talk show - even though the audience is still laughing at the guests? And... ...nope. I don't get it. Brits watch some fucking weird things.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:57 PM
-1

Oh, am I missing the mark on what you're saying? How awful that must be for you. It must be infuriating to have someone blithely fail to comprehend what you're trying to discuss. That's sarcasm.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:55 PM
0

I'm only forced to do so because your arguments completely and absolutely fail to argue against my points in any logical fashion. It's not even that they don't succeed in being more logical in arguing. They totally miss the point as if I hadn't even bothered typing. It's like you're living a daydream and conversing with the version of me that exists in your imagination that keeps talking about how women should get more STEM jobs because they're better than men. It's really quite amazing to see s…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:38 PM
-1

Oh my god. You can't even follow a sentence. I'm not even bothering to respond to the content of your post here, because I would literally just be repeating myself. Utterly astounding.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:32 PM
0

"Standard feminist talking points"? What does that even mean? Which talking points are standard feminist material? Also, why can I not call someone "honey" or "sweetie"? Would you prefer I just call you guys what you call me? Because that'll increase the volume of foul language, not mitigate it.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:31 PM
3

Is this where we're at? Comedy and satire do not reflect real life. It is there to parodize and satirize real life, not mimic it. The people are characters. No one actually got abused. ...wh--- why does someone have to point this out?
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:28 PM
-2

I was unable to take this thread seriously. This line is why. At this point I am just venting. I think I am damaged for life, despite having what's statistically considered above average in North america. The idea that someone in a bar making fun of your cock for no reason is enough to break you for life... I'm going to be honest. Life isn't going to get easier from here on out. If someone making fun of your cock is too much for you to bear, the remainder of your life is going to get really toug…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:23 PM
-1

If that's the case, would the employer's original man-hiring spree not also be regarded as gender discrimination? To leave it in a state where there was a stark disparity between male and female workers? See how out of control the "sexism" argument gets? The slippery slope starts right away. You're acting exactly like a feminist. You might wanna look to that before you develop blue hair and a tumblr account.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:04 PM
-1

Lol, is it a rule for feminists to be condescending assholes, or is it just the norm for them? I have no idea. You'd have to ask one. But if you're asking if I like being condescending, which I'm assuming is the case because everyone just calls me a feminist now. And you wonder why there are more feminists than there are MRAs. You keep telling people they're feminists, whether they are or not. But the answer is yes. I love being a condescending bitch when someone throws the rules of good discour…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:55 PM
1

Read my other responses. I've responded to this at least 3 times now.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:52 PM
1

That would only be correct if the employer uniformly believed that only one gender would benefit the workplace and that the other gender would be a drawback or a burden. So ten years down the line when all his male employees have moved on or retired, if he still believes he needs to hire more women to improve his workplace, then perhaps he is a sexist. However... and you'd better pay attention to this because I'm getting tired of explaining basic concepts to this subreddit... If an employer is s…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:52 PM
-51

You don't seem to understand how hiring people actually works, and explaining it would literally be so long and boring that doing so for the benefit of one person is beyond my commitment. There is more to a working environment than the job, especially when you have to work alongside dozens of people. I can't help you understand the dynamics of that.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:47 PM
1

You said the article should just be ignored because it is Breitbart. Is that what I said? Lemme go have a look-see and make sure. Hmm, okay, so I went and nosed around at my responses, and nope! Never told anyone to ignore the article. I did question the wisdom of choosing Breitbart as the source when it's clearly available elsewhere! But I guess I shouldn't expect you to actually read a response, considering how you literally made up a conclusion to attribute to me that doesn't fall in line wit…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:44 PM
1

Now that I got you to (indirectly) answer my initial question I answered your question multiple times! You just enjoy being a shit and ignoring what I write so that you can text-dump presumptuous nonsense. I'm going to refute your lies about me Oh boy. I can't wait. She is not wrong because I insulted her, she is wrong because of the content of her ideas, which I disagree with. Apparently you need to have ad hominem fallacies explain to you. See, insulting someone doesn't make them wrong. It rob…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:39 PM
-5

Because highly female-dominated fields have low requirements, demand low investments, and pay a fraction of the male-dominated fields. You think a woman getting a scholarship to help her pay for 8 years of diagnostic medicine compares with a man looking to get into Early Childhood Education? It's like a 2 year program and costs a sarcastically whopping $7000.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:27 PM
-4

From my expeience its when you mix minorities just for the sake of diversity that things stop working. ...and what experience would that be...? Beliving that a woman will magically make the work inviromen any better than a man would is sexist as it is implying that the woman is superior in making the workplace better just because she is a woman. You really need to read before you reply, kiddo. I already went over this. Employers don't hire women because women are better. They hire women because …
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:23 PM
2

Seems to me you're getting very defensive for some reason? You're the one who attributed my views to the liberal media (with no supporting evidence) and then started referencing media sources that lied about shit - as if I'm supposed to personally take responsibility for news outlets I don't watch telling lies I don't believe. I'm sure HuffPo and Salon were very helpful in getting that information Politifact, fuckface. Do you even Google, bro? When big lies from journalists are documented the ty…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:13 PM
-10

Tho the demand for specifically a female worker should not happen at all since your gender is not going to make you a better or worse worker. If you don't understand why diversity in the workplace is beneficial for the workers, I can't help you. You're just going to have to work alongside a mix of men, some women and minorities and figure out for yourself why it's a more stable working environment than piles of sweaty testosterone as far as the eye can see. Also, they are still at a dissadvantag…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 08:53 PM
1

Okay, so you're actually just ignoring what I said and making up your own conclusion. Why did you even bother asking me? Also, Godwin's Law confirmed again. Does anyone ever not mention Hitler in this fucking subreddit?
/r/MensRights06/05/17 08:41 PM
1

It was published in Breitbart. That's the issue. Even decent MRAs hate the site and don't consider it to be a good fact source. Let's start with how Saldana in the article actually owns up more than blames anything. She points out that she doesn't think Clinton lost the election because of sexism. And she also doesn't think that every casting choice in movies is fuelled by sexism. But the fact that she merely said once that sexism is worse than racism is America somehow made the fucking title, n…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 08:28 PM
3

I've answered your question several times. OP resorted to insulting Saldana to devalue her position. He also presumed her position on sexism being "the anti-female kind" only. And he posted a link to a Breitbart article, which is the equivalent of showing up at a family Thanksgiving, dropping a fat steaming diaper right on the turkey, and telling people that the earthy aroma will be good for their sinuses. -- I honestly don't believe that the OP even bothered reading it, since he just copied and…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 08:14 PM
-43

I think that's a mite dishonest. It's not because of what gender the man is; it's because of the sheer volume of that gender going into the field. It's a little thing called "supply and demand". If the demand for a woman worker is high, there is nothing unfair about incentivizing the demand to be met.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 07:37 PM
-3

The Real Reason We Do Not Have a Male Pill The real reason men don't have a birth control pill is because, according to studies, men who took part in the clinical trials reported that they were not willing to live with the daily side effects associated with the contents of the pill needed to do its job.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 06:27 PM
-10

Men aren't rewarded for choosing STEM because men are currently competing for STEM degrees. There's very little logic to encouraging a larger disparity.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 06:16 PM
2

The motivation was she said something stupid. I can plainly tell you insult anything you don't agree with, so it doesn't surprise me that you'd regard her personal opinion to be "stupid". You are saying stupid shit non-stop and I called you a half-wit without knowing your race or sex or whatever. If you tell me you're black, does that make me racist suddenly? It just makes you ignorant, insulting, over-opinionated, self-righteous, over-entitled, and a rip-roaring asshole. I never said it "smells…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 05:17 PM
-3

Calling an individual woman a name is not sexism. I can't believe I need to explain that. The motivation is what makes it sexist, honey. I can't believe I need to explain how sexism works to grown adult; it's not what you say, it's why you say it. I don't know too much about them, but I see nothing wrong with this post. Maybe you should investigate the steaming garbage pile before you tell people it smells nice.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 04:50 PM
3

Check out the headline the OP picked out. "Half-witted actress Zoe Saldana". How does that not literally prove the point she's trying to make? By belittling her as just a 'half-witted actress', the OP is trying to invalidate her opinion by invalidating her as a person. Plus, it's Breitbart, the literal scum of the Earth.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 04:41 PM
3

My reason for raising the issue is because this particular article is so easily questionable. It's not to say the subreddit is plagued with fakery, but not staying vigilant could lead to it. It's brutal; fake news is more believable than ever, and scam artists are getting better at it. Real news is ridiculously easy to prove. If you can't find proof of it readily, the chances are high that it's a sham.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 04:34 PM
1

Hon, you found a Google Groups page with a text document that matches the reposted article verbatim. The source of this article is what I am interested in. So let's visit the Groups link at the top, "Review Atlas". We know the link is broken. So let's search for the story. A valid news article wouldn't be taken down from a website if it was a real story. Surely, if they changed the format of their site, they must have archived the articles. Searching the keywords within ReviewAtlas turns up zero…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 04:24 PM
-1

Her campaign revolved around rallying the support of women, African Americans, illegal immigration, LGBT and Muslims. Always either ignoring, excluding or vilifying white males. The level of presumption here is off the scale. If you're willing to believe something like this, there's nothing I can do to help you. Believe it or not, you've been wrong before and you're wrong now. Read that last line one more time please. I love how this totally isn't petulant. As a matter of fact, I did read it one…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 04:14 PM
1

I looked into it, actually. TownNews.com redirects automatically to "townnews365.com" which is not a news site. It's also of interest to note that my search did not return any reference to "Union Elementary School" in Monmouth, Illinois. The closest is a "United North Elementary School".
/r/MensRights06/05/17 04:05 PM
2

Story lacks a date. Story lacks any links to corroborating articles or news info (which it should have since it's not the original source) As far as I can find, there is no Union Elementary School in Monmouth, Illinois. TownNews.com is not a news website. I tried it.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 03:03 PM
2

The Onion.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 02:54 PM
1

Well, I dunno what to tell ya. Perhaps Trump's record of lying and failure in the last 6 months will open up to 3 years of rampant success. If not, I hope a learning experience grows out of it for the American voter.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 02:30 PM
1

I had other posts about relevant issues, but they didn't incense your boys enough with stories of how feminists suck and women need to be taught their place, so nobody commented on them and I quietly removed them. Also, if you want to see my submissions, click on my profile and then click "Submitted". I have one page worth of entries. If you can't find it, then you have genuine brain damage. Mwah. people that just want to concern troll the sub were never going to help anyway. And you're being he…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 02:07 PM
-1

You've and OP have both made zero posts in this sub Wrong, bitch. so that's how much we'll be losing if you decide to go and sulk elsewhere. Nice. That's how you get people to support you; by being more extreme and less likeable! Gee, I wonder why no one wants to help you! What a mystery.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 01:56 PM
0

From what I see, it's striking a chord, but perhaps not the one you were hoping for. I'mma be smug and say I told ya so early, so that it doesn't hurt so much later on when the MRAs hit this thread in full force. Prepare thine notifications box.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 01:53 PM
1

These people treat everyone they meet that disagrees with them as the enemy, they are fanatics and I will stop them. Sorry, but when I read something like this, I think of a serial killer. Or a looney who is trying to convince their psychotherapist that they're a superhero and that they need to be let out of the jacket.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 01:52 PM
-1

Yeah, that's how you do it. Instead of address the topic, just call the OP a troll! Problem solved! Now you no longer have shit threads and overly-angry shut-ins poisoning your progress-minded discussions! Wait; remind me what you guys have accomplished in 7 years?
/r/MensRights06/05/17 01:48 PM
0

Uhmmm where did Trump get involved in this? Never mentioned his name, but you immediately latched on as "proof" that WaPo is necessary. That's a load of bullshit. Way to try to presume intent. You accused the Post of making itself a de facto fact-checking source. I was establishing that everyone is checking facts now, not just "WaPo" (Jesus fucking Christ, can we spell names out? Are we that lazy now?) [Then] you go on a rant about how everyone, even YouTube bloggers, [is] becoming "fact checker…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 01:42 PM
-2

I think it's you who has missed the point. Hillary Clinton didn't say she didn't want white men to vote for her. She only implied that she wouldn't need them if they chose not to support her. She believed that she could win, even if every one of them played Gender War and revenge-voted Trump. You're placing a presumed intent where one was not confirmed to exist, and that plays further into the Gender War crap. What the real problem is, is that once all the dust settled and we learned who the win…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:52 AM
1

Breitbart; the Germaine Greer of the Alt-Right. Why do you keep embarrassing yourselves by quoting this garbage...?
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:46 AM
0

Perhaps you should find out why the woman was mentioned and not the man before you cry "Discrimination!". For instance, the BBC article you linked doesn't deal directly with the death of the woman, but the backlash after a public official insinuated that the woman died because of her immoral lifestyle. Because she drank alcohol, lived in with her boyfriend, and didn't have the best attendance record in university. So it seems like the woman is a story because prosecutors blamed her murder on her…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:44 AM
2

I subbed to get a better understanding of what to do in case of a fake rape accusation Get a lawyer for that. a divorce Actually, a lawyer can help with that too. a cheating spouse Lawyer. a child that is not my own Lawyer. (Though, if you sign the certificate, he's yours, even if he didn't originate from your genes.) NOT feminist bashing. As someone who agrees with this sentiment, I have to say, you might be wasting your breath and opening yourself up for a world of interesting responses. When …
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:40 AM
0

The last time that I saw someone post about sex dolls here, it was about the latest in synthetic partners for women to indulge in, and the response from the users here was anger and disappointment against the sex robots. But when we're talking about sex dolls for men, suddenly it's okay? It's "pathetic" for a feminist to get up in arms about it, but it's totally fine for you guys to flip your shit at sex dolls for women? The double standards here just keep getting worse and worse.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 10:03 AM
-9

I'll never understand what makes someone think that an image macro about Feminism will change anyone's mind about anything. "What will make people see the humanity of this issue? Ah-hah! There's only one way to get people to take it seriously; make a joke out of it."
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:55 AM
0

How they are able to continue getting away with being considered "objective" is beyond me. If they successfully report the facts without charging them full of emotion or spin, then they can be considered objective. That's not the same as possessing no political bias. Most papers follow the political lean of the person running them. The Post is a left-leaning paper; that's not really a secret. They're also a "fact checking" website (LMFAO) Uhmmm...? No? Just because they are going out of their wa…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:50 AM
-2

Honestly, the entire world is getting a little tired of the smugness oozing out of American men, especially the white Christian ones. It might be more tolerable, had you elected a less embarrassing President. But now, when the peacock-proud men of America announce "I voted for Trump, and he won, bitches", we all kinda look tiredly back at them and reply, "...you're proud of that? Still?" EDIT: It's sad that we're still using downvote buttons as "disagree" buttons. One day, you'll learn how to us…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:38 AM
-5

I don't see an issue. The most likely single parent is a single mom, so seeing no third-wheel boys at a father/daughter affair and girls roaming a mother/son engagement doesn't seem unusual.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 09:23 AM
2

Awww what a shame. Actually, that does slightly suck, because if he just starts a new reddit account to get around the ban, I'll have to cross fingers that he doesn't decide to revisit his past pincushions.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 05:17 AM
2

That's absurdly creepy.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 05:13 PM
1

You're using the deaths of people as a political tool.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 02:11 PM
1

Why de-humanize the victim?
/r/MensRights04/05/17 11:47 PM
0

This is a very bizarre way of going about it. Politicizing the dead? It's morbid, if you think about it.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 06:44 PM
-1

Saying "Half a Dozen Women Kicked and Stomped and Beat a Woman" would physically sound awkward to say. It's like any other time when you use the same or a highly similar word in a sentence twice.
/r/MensRights03/05/17 07:11 PM
0

I gotta ask the question. "So?" I mean, what is the hope here? That female combat deaths rise to meet the male combat deaths? I'm confused about the endgame with raising this issue.
/r/MensRights03/05/17 07:09 PM
1

You haven't explained how they demonstrate hatred for men.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 11:48 PM
1

As evidenced by her policies and many of her statements, which I discussed Which policies show she doesn't give a shit about men? Which statements show she doesn't give a shit about men?
/r/MensRights28/04/17 01:44 PM
1

That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 08:46 AM
1

You used Wiktionary, fuckwit. You somehow picked a less reliable resource than Google to refute Google. If Hillary Clinton is a bigot then by that standard, this subreddit is plagued by bigotry. Just going to put that out there.
/r/MensRights27/04/17 12:16 AM
1

You're either obsessive to a fault, or you know you're wrong and are trolling. The fact that I can't tell which is true is more revealing than anything else.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 09:06 PM
2

Oh my god, you just don't know how to stop. When you are immovably partial to your own demographic trait (sex/gender, skin colour, etc) that is called having a prejudice. These two definitions are redundant. I've said it for the last time. You're not making yourself look less pathetic by chasing the issue further.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 06:57 PM
2

You're doing mental gymnastics worthy of an Olympic fucking medal, in a desperate attempt to not be wrong. I'm not going to bother arguing this any further because you're obviously the type of person who will ignore everyone and everything else as long as you think you're right. But then, this is what happens. When one of you political zealots is faced with being incorrect about something, you move goalposts, change or derail topics, or resort to ad hominem, and then declare yourself the winner …
/r/MensRights26/04/17 06:43 PM
-5

Wow. So someone's response to "Be decent, please" is "Go fuck yourself, please"? I hope whoever wrote the bottom note steps on a rake.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 05:22 PM
2

This is the definition you gave when saying it could not apply to Hillary Clinton: BIGOT (noun): a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions. It came from Google, not me. I didn't just make it up, sweetheart. That was your definition. It does not mean the same thing as this: "Bigot: One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ." Let's break this down so that you can wrap your brain around this, because I'…
/r/MensRights26/04/17 04:04 PM
0

Those are contradictory statements.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 03:56 PM
1

But you have absolutely fuck-all to substantiate that. Sooooo... how does that help bridge the gap at all, if your first instinct is to sling mud?
/r/MensRights23/04/17 05:34 PM
1

Obsolete in US English parlance. ...what? "Bigot: One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ." That's the same thing. It's the same goddamn thing. Intolerant to opinions different from one's own. Merriam-Webster's definition: "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and…
/r/MensRights23/04/17 05:33 PM
9

Question: where in the article does it say that women use sexist jokes "because men are dumb"? If it's in there, I missed it.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 06:14 PM
1

BIGOT (noun): a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions. Either you've got the wrong word, or you're slinging mud hoping that no one will look into it.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 05:49 PM
1

That's lacks a logical stepping stone. "does not back" doesn't mean "opposes".
/r/MensRights22/04/17 05:37 PM
1

You don't think the stain on the men's rights movement might have precipitated her unwillingness to publicly comment? You're making a lot of presumptions here. "Clinton's misandric inclinations" itself implies that you know she's motivated specifically against men. The problem with this is that favouring women's issues doesn't immediately equate to hating men.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 05:15 PM
1

Nice rebuttal.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 05:12 PM
1

I never said I detest this subreddit. Predicting its behaviour and criticizing it are different from hating it.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 05:11 PM
1

That was a major chunk of her agenda. And her agenda was elitist PC junk. If I recall, the major parts of her platform involved economic responsibility by way of rescinding benefits to companies that leave the U.S., further addressing man-made climate change, reinforcing LGBT rights, being inclusive in addressing issues of citizenship and immigration, and reducing the impact of ObamaCare on the federal budget. Funny, I have the link to the video, but it's gone. So, in answer to your question, Hi…
/r/MensRights21/04/17 09:39 PM
1

Whether or not a candidate has at least as much concern for the members of the opposite sex as she has concern for members of her own sex? Isn't that one of the litmus tests by which we measure male candidates? No. That's how sexists measure candidates. You should be measuring a candidate on the validity and practicality of their agenda. Did anyone even think to ask the former Senator what her take on the sentencing disparity is? Or did everyone assume that because she mentioned women in prison …
/r/MensRights21/04/17 08:55 PM
1

So she hates men because her platform didn't kiss your ass enough? And that explains why she is counter to men's rights... and that explains why this article (which never mentioned her at all) is related to men's rights. Fuck me, that's some brilliant mental gymnastics there.
/r/MensRights21/04/17 08:32 PM
1

So far, you've laid assertions down that Hillary Clinton doesn't like men. I'd ask you for proof of this, but knowing this subreddit, I'd get links to InfoWars in response and a firm declaration that anything else is FAKE NEWS. This article is entirely irrelevant to men's rights. It's an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory that the article didn't even touch on. I should also point out that the timeframe mentioned in the article was February 2012 to August 2016; Clinton left the State Department at…
/r/MensRights21/04/17 07:47 PM
-1

She stayed married and loyal to a man accused of multiple sexual assaults. How anti-male could that possibly be?
/r/MensRights21/04/17 06:58 PM
-1

Feminist does not universally equate to Anti-Male, as much as you want that to be the case. That's no different that Feminists equating MRAs with misogynists. You're not serving your cause, and you're making yourself look mighty petulant in the process. So in other words, this has nothing to do with men's rights.
/r/MensRights21/04/17 06:53 PM
-1

How does this relate to men's rights?
/r/MensRights21/04/17 06:16 PM
1

You guys are the ones talking about the President, and then accusing me of being disingenuous.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 09:50 PM
1

Usually when they start acting like pieces of shit that toss use ad hominem instead of addressing my views on the topic, I lose the motivation to play nicey nice. If you talk shop, I talk shop. Kay?
/r/MensRights17/04/17 02:57 PM
1

Trivialized? Where the hell are you getting a daft idea like that? I've never said that circumcision is a "non-issue". Either you've read someone else's post and have mistaken them for me, or you've read one of my posts half-assedly. Either way, I have nothing to respond to here, because it's just insults and whinging about something I didn't fucking do, so turrah.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 02:55 PM
0

It doesn't speak to YOU as men's rights, but again, here you are passing off your opinion as a means to police because you don't like that these people consider this relevant to men's rights. Holy shit. Every time I give my point of view, you say this. I'm going to assume you're baiting me. It's relevant to men's rights because it highlights a double standard and precautionary provisions that are being given to women on the basis that they are women. So... because one person found one poster in …
/r/MensRights17/04/17 02:51 PM
1

You're either a troll or the worst human being on earth.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 05:22 AM
1

Uh. No. That isn't logical. If the mother dies, the unborn child most likely dies unless it's old enough to survive in an incubator.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 05:22 AM
1

Your trolling is about a 6/10, good try bud.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 04:35 AM
1

posting in T_D says you support trump. Posting in NMS says you play the game. Posting in against men's rights says you're at least tolerate of those who think we're rapists. This is all I need to know about you. It's best if we don't continue discoursing, if you operate on this basis.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 04:35 AM
1

...what
/r/MensRights17/04/17 04:31 AM
1

I'm still surprised that it's come to this; boys using Title IX against other boys. It's hard to ignore how truly odd this entire case is, and how Thomas' suicide doesn't fit with a guilty student.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 01:59 AM
1

You're fallaciously fusing two issues together. I'm not getting sucked into another goddamn child support debate. I've taken enough abuse from MRAs about the fucking child support issue.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 12:57 AM
1

There's a warrant out for his arrest. The cops aren't going to say that. However, if he remains at large, the cops will wonder, "If you're innocent, why did you run?" Why? Because they always say that when people run.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 12:31 AM
1

I see plenty of people watching MMA, boxing, and other contact sports for entertainment. They're willfully engaging in an event that can lead to physical harm. Ecch. Pugilism. I've never understood it. I can't gain joy out of that stuff. Even violence on TV and in movies that's too realistic gives me an unsettled feeling.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 12:30 AM
-5

This sign was probably mounted at a bar where women have needed a discreet way to bail on a creepy date, but where no men have yet made staff aware of a need for a code for them. Naturally, guys can't use the same code at girls, because you don't want anyone getting wise to it. But if it was called for, it should be there. You humans have a tendency to be reactionary as opposed to precautionary. "Why address something that hasn't happened yet?" When that bar has a man pleading with his eyes for …
/r/MensRights17/04/17 12:26 AM
1

Okay. But I still wouldn't derive pleasure out of the suffering of others. That's sadistic.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 12:04 AM
-17

Pondering the relevance to men's rights.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 12:03 AM
1

I wish it was sarcastic. I don't want to presume your views, and I can't put it past some people to not actually say "Yes". I'm glad you and I seem to agree on the basics. We just seem to diverge at the core "Consensual Pro-Life/Choice" matter - which is fine.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:57 PM
1

I would assume those ladies don't claim their income.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:52 PM
2

You aren't answering my question. There is an actual law in place that allows hospitals to refuse a pregnant woman suffering complications from having her pregnancy aborted - and also allows them to refuse to transport her to a hospital willing to do it - even if it means she dies. You can look it up. It's called HR 358, or the "Protect Life Act, 2011". Do you, or do you not, agree with that legislation being in place?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:49 PM
1

I enjoy every video I watch of them getting their degenerate asses beat. I have never enjoyed seeing or hearing about anyone being assaulted. Even the transphobic protesters at GW University who were allegedly assaulted didn't bring me any sense of joy, and I thoroughly resent their hate speech. I didn't even enjoy seeing Richard Spencer get clocked in the face on live TV. All I wanted was for him to develop an aggravated rash on his anal ring so that he knows the feeling of what sort of pain in…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:47 PM
2

You haven't addressed the "Let Women Die" law. Would you let a pregnant woman die rather than terminate the haywire pregnancy that is killing her?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:41 PM
2

We shall see.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:32 PM
2

I don't even know where to start. Part of your comment is fraught with logical omissions, and the rest is a baffling interpretation based on the fragments you left behind. What of non-consensual pregnancies? What about when the pregnancy poses a mortal risk to the mother? Do you support the "Let Women Die" bill (which should be called the "Let Women Die" Law, now)?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:31 PM
0

Yawn. I've answered this a ton of times already. Read response chains before posting.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:11 PM
2

I'll keep that in mind for when the threads of feminist protests go up here. Can't get mad! They have a right!
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:10 PM
2

Thunderf00t is the only YouTuber that does these feminism response videos that I can enjoy watching. He's so calm, and his accent is cute~
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:08 PM
2

Stefan Molyneux is the worst thing to happen to the name Molyneux, and that's after taking into account the jack-knob who made Godus Wars.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:07 PM
1

Oh, you smooth talker. Lucky for me, I don't have to bend to your whim. I'll continue discussing here. If you don't like it, there's a "block user" button you can use. Cheers.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:02 PM
0

Are you trolling?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 11:01 PM
1

Pretty much all these include specific exemptions for this. The one I mentioned did not. Also how many men have been drafted and killed as a result? Since we're talking about loss of bodily autonomy leading to death... Interesting question. No idea. I s'pose you'd have to pull the records for all the military personnel who were drafted versus volunteered. Fun fact, though: Gerald Ford ended conscription in 1972, and Roe v Wade was determined in 1973. So, since that time, 0 conscripted soldiers h…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 10:58 PM
3

Good catch, thanks
/r/MensRights16/04/17 10:53 PM
1

Abortion rights are routinely under attack in the United States. I've mentioned this before; almost a thousand bills are put up for consideration in federal and state legislatures every year to try and limit or ban abortion in some way so that women can either not access one when needed, or have to go through hell-in-a-handbasket for it. Do I need to point out again the bill submitted that would have made miscarriages illegal?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 10:53 PM
2

They have a right to protest the legitimacy of someone's existence? Really? So... the feminists out there protesting men. I suppose that must be okay with you too. Because both bother the hell outta me.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 10:51 PM
1

And the mainstream media's isn't largely one sided? I mean, they do mind their P's and Q's but they never interview the targets of this violence within context and never without distortion. Um... okay? I didn't mention mainstream media. This is a common style of argument on this subreddit; that the flaw of Example A is fine because Example B is just like it. I don't subscribe to that. Uh......The violent attackers were Antifa. But Lauren and Doctor Doom insinuated that the crowd was made up enti…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 10:50 PM
2

Everyone always wants to be that person, when someone says they need something unorthodox, who dips into their pocket and replies, "Y'know, it just so happens..."
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:49 PM
3

Perhaps he was very serious about a well-balanced breakfast.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:37 PM
1

What a waste of an egg.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:32 PM
3

In this day and age, to go to a university and preach intolerance is a roundabout way of saying "Hey, emotionally turbulent twentysomethings! I'M ITCHING FOR A FIGHT."
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:27 PM
2

Well, that was a one-sided interview with a lot of sensationalism. True to form for Lauren Southern. Seems like they're trying to assert that anyone who disagrees with their point of view is a far-left "antifa". The violence was inexcusable, but Lauren herself said that the Trump supporters came prepared for a fight - which in itself isn't very promising when the idea was to promote free speech and the sharing of dissenting ideas. I'll have to nose around and see what else is being said about th…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:18 PM
1

He poisons every topic he discusses. Lemme watch the vid, then I'll letcha know how bad it is.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:54 PM
19

Those are fields, not jobs. the "wage gap" argument asserts that men earn more than women for doing the exact same work. So you'd have to compare two people working with the same job title in the same field of work, not just people who are in the same field. The areas where men earn more than women are jobs that require significant education and investment, and all earn very high amounts. Men also work at least 15% longer hours than women, increasing their earnings. The areas where women out-ear…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:52 PM
15

2012 called; it wants its narrative back.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:42 PM
1

IANAL (you should get one, assuming you don't have one already due to the upcoming hearing), but this is where I'd start. All those messaging apps make it quite clear who placed the call and who received the call. Hopefully that should not only get you off the hook for the violation, but also work in your favor at the hearing on Wednesday. /u/Solarnynja (so that he gets the post in his notifications)
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:38 PM
9

This title is grossly misleading. These students were not seeking to spark a debate about transgenderism. They were outside holding signs that quote the Bible and denounce transgenderism as "ravaging" gender norms. Beyond that, how does this have anything to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:25 PM
1

That clearly shows an American organization.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:06 PM
3

This is the video in question. (The "get shot" remarks start around four minutes in.) Here, you can find thunderf00t tearing his stupidity a new asshole.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:03 PM
1

Masturbating is not a reproductive matter. I've never heard of anyone reproducing through masturbation. But it does point out a good argument of "How would you react if a bill was submitted that would tell you what you can and cannot do with your body?"
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:45 PM
1

And you​ have two items for women: abortion and the pill. I'd argue efforts to ban those aren't really an effort to deprive women of their autonomy. You forgot the one where they tried to make miscarriages illegal. Something not even within control of the mother. You also neglected that in at least one instance, the mother's life wasn't even important. Yeah no one actually wants to do this. I'm trying to make you think about this from a different angle. You're using a shit-awful way to try and g…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:44 PM
3

You haven't seen that video? He stares at the camera for minutes on end and just asks his audience if they want to see their loved ones "get shot", over and over. It's cringeworthy.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:42 PM
5

Stefan Molyneux. The "Do You Want To Be Shot?" guy. This ought to be enlightening.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:27 PM
2

You're the one dragging this conversation all over the place in a desperate attempt to find something that'll stick. So far, you have utterly failed to validate any of your statements or provide any sort of valid criticism.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:26 PM
1

That it isn't a thing.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:25 PM
1

Website redirected to "bloodstainedmen.com", and wouldn't even load. CAFE is a highly controversial organization accused of hate and homophobia (and I have not heard about them campaigning against circumcision). The only result that even seemed relevant when I searched for "Men's Rights Toronto" led to a search result page within the Huffington Post, to which no articles referred to a group called "Men's Rights Toronto". And when I searched for "The National Organization For Men and Boys", Googl…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:23 PM
1

You can't do those things to children, even with their consent. What's your point?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:13 PM
1

Have you read the Zoe post? Show me the exact quote where he says that. Be very precise. You're totally absurd. I didn't say that Gjoni directly accused her. It was 4channers that made the connection after he wrote his big expose on her and Nathan Grayson's relationship - in which Gjoni writes Friggen Nathan Stupid-Red-Pants-Wearing Kotaku-Writing Grayson like a big red flag. In addition, an edit made after publishing had to clarify; To be clear, if there was any conflict of interest between Zoe…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:12 PM
1

there are A LOT of people that will argue that it shouldn't be illegal. So if grown men can't agree amongst themselves whether it should be banned or not, how is that anyone else's fault?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:02 PM
1

It's described in Canada as being "uncontested in courts", and I haven't heard any serious rabble from men's rights groups about banning circumcision here. If they wanna do it, best of luck to them. I'm not going to nursemaid them into doing what's best for them, though.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:00 PM
1

...what.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:57 PM
1

Why? Now I'm just confused, and when I get confused, I get irritated.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:55 PM
2

Nope. Still have selective service. Even when it isn't being used it's based on men not having full autonomy. Okay, so we have two items on the list. I wouldn't agree that it's any effort to oppress men or deprive them of autonomy. If you think about it, you have to work for basic survival necessities like food and shelter. So does anyone actually have autonomy? And girls can get abortions before 18 so... With parental consent. Then we could ban abortion and say women have bodily autonomy Why is…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:55 PM
2

Nobody ever claimed that Zoe Quinn got favorable reviews for sexual favors. That's blatantly false. Have you never heard of The Zoe Post, written by Quinn's ex-boyfriend Eron Gjoni? How it exploded on 4chan? A cheap, shitty game built off a template was getting mentioned by her lovers. Again, false. Kotaku journalist Nathan Grayson was accused of offering a positive review because of his relationship with Quinn, when in reality, Kotaku had not reviewed the "game" at the time of the accusation. B…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:47 PM
1

At the age of 18, when a male becomes a legally recognized adult, he does. But you've pinpointed circumcision as a compromise to that autonomy prior to him achieving it. I'm not sure that's the same as saying that men have no bodily autonomy.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:39 PM
-1

Antagonize some more, LOL.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:37 PM
1

Speak up to whom? US lawmakers? Feminists? I didn't say I didn't want to help; I just recognize the volume my own voice carries.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:36 PM
1

"Under the patriarchy"? ...did you really just?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:34 PM
0

I would like doctors who cut children's genitals to go to jail, no matter the sex. Do you? I would rather it just stop, but if doctors refuse to obey a ban, then yeah. Jail. The parents too. do you still stand by that or not? There's nothing to stand by; it was just a list of things parents are allowed to decide for their kids because children have no autonomy of their own. great, why did you trivialize it? Eggh. Leading question. I don't consider the matter trivial. I guess I'm just more pragma…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:34 PM
1

I'm not going to be of much help; I'm not 'Murrican.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:30 PM
1

Well, if the current lawmakers won't do anything about it, you need new lawmakers, correct?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:30 PM
1

You're mistaking a comparison for just a list of parental controls over their children. All of the things I listed were examples of a child not having autonomy. If you want to get rid of circumcision, you'll have to force the issue by banning it. Religious people don't let go of their barbaric practices easily, if you haven't noticed.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:29 PM
1

You won't get an argument from me there. But should and is are different matters. Should won't turn into is unless you're willing to do something about it.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:22 PM
2

Yes. Like how it's illegal for women.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:21 PM
1

Do I need one? No. But I am not in the United States House of Representatives.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:20 PM
-4

And every one of those things is restricted by legislation. So the only thing missing here is that people aren't pushing anti-circumcision bills. Why don't any of you try to become US lawmakers? Be the change you want to see. Now literally could not be a better time.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:19 PM
0

I wasn't making a comparison. Read my other responses; don't wanna type the same thing a dozen times.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:18 PM
1

Everything you've described was made illegal, except starving your kids. Cutting on a girl's genitals, beating your kids, even psychological abuse, was dealt with by legislation. Circumcision would need to be addressed in the same manner. Why do you think that should change when involving parts of my genitals? I don't. I'm not talking about should; I'm talking about is. If you want to talk should, then circumcision should be banned. Seems analogous to cutting a child's fingertips off in order to…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:18 PM
2

That... wasn't my point. Children are not autonomous until the age of consent. Circumcision would have to be banned and criminalized for anyone under the age of consent in order to curb it.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:10 PM
1

That's not the same as legislation meant to restrict. But I'm afraid I am at a loss about vasectomies, in that I do not know which circumstances might medically require one (which would be a basis to introduce legislation to ban refusing the procedure). If you know of any, it would be helpful in starting a conversation about that.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:08 PM
-8

Ooh, saucy. Someone wants to split hairs. I was making the point that your parents own your autonomy until you're of legal consent age. But okay, if you wanna shriek like a banshee about particulars, you do you.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 05:05 PM
1

Men can be denied vasectomies if the doctor doesn't want to perform it. I did a search for vasectomy laws, and did not uncover such a measure in law. Do you know where I can find it?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 04:47 PM
4

I found him. Should be interesting to push his buttons and see what happens.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 04:38 PM
2

In the United States, Anti-abortion bills are quite popular, which is the topic of this thread. Literally hundreds of bills are introduced across the country every year that attempt to restrict abortion rights by either banning it outright, limiting access to it, or instituting draconian prerequisites in order to gain access (with a few even mandating "spiritual counseling" and a waiting period). In addition, bills have been submitted that would allow medical practitioners to refuse to prescribe…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 04:34 PM
1

I don't think you understood the question. What written pieces of legislation are introduced to lawmakers that limit men's autonomy? You have listed circumcision (which isn't legislated; it's simply not illegal), and conscription (which ended in 1972 despite draft registration still being mandatory).
/r/MensRights16/04/17 03:40 PM
-2

You say it happens "all the time", and then refer to two things that are antiquated. What bills have been introduced to limit men's autonomy in the last century?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 03:16 PM
-11

Your parents also got you immunized, decided when to cut your hair, chose your clothing, and your diet.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 03:14 PM
1

So... because you say so, that then makes it true. You've offered no evidence, no explanation of context, and you don't seem to care that what I believe is completely up to me, not you. That would be like me calling you a baby-eater, and then just saying "everything you say makes me think that, therefore it's true, so don't deny it" without backing that shit up with anything at all. If you're going to sling illogical bullshit, I'mma call you on it. I dunno if you've noticed, but that's kinda wha…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 10:42 AM
1

Telling someone to crack open a book is a sign of feminism? Seriously? If this is the pinnacle of your evidence, this is going to be disappointing.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 10:24 AM
1

Well, I'm going to be fairly shit as a feminist perspective, considering how little I respect feminist methodology, and how few circles of feminism I don't regard with disdain. I'm really not sure what I would have to do in order to prove that I'm not a feminist, but I also am not sure why I should have to.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 10:15 AM
2

I didn't call anyone a rapist. You're just grouping me up with them. If I post in The_Donald, am I suddenly an Ultra-conservative Republican? If I post in NoMansSkyTheGame, am I suddenly a No Man's Sky fangirl? If I post in r/funny, does that mean I'm funny? C'mon. Logic.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 10:10 AM
1

That's a nebulous cop-out. "What'd I do?" "EVERYTHING." C'mon. Either nut up and start giving examples and explaining yourself, or admit you dragged the remark out because you thought it would be an easy cheap shot. You wouldn't be the first person here to call me a feminist because it was the worst insult they could think of.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 10:05 AM
2

You really ought to wait for a response before repeating your question. I type with fingers on keys, not a neural interface.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:59 AM
2

I never came across a thread that accused anyone of being a rapist. I didn't go digging for old threads. I hit "new" and just peruse - or I found a thread here that smacks of grave illogic and disturbing narrative, and after letting my opinions be known, reposted it to AMR to find out how they'd react. But this seems to me like you're the sorta person that can't help but pick sides. In a way, I envy you, being able to sit on a team with your buddies to back you up. In another way, I pity you, ha…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:58 AM
2

Testy, to inquisitive, to downright saucy in just one conversation. Hm, this feels familiar. Do I have to point out that I post in here with questions, support, and criticism? What makes you think I wasn't doing the same there? Why do you think I got banned, smartass?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:54 AM
1

...you're dictating to me what my politics are? I'm trying not to cringe right now. ...so. Why are you convinced I'm a feminist?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:48 AM
1

No. No. NO. I'm not getting drawn into another child support debate. Fuck that shit. I have my views, you have yours. Every time a conversation on this starts where I get sucked in, I end up taking a massive lashing for not feeling sorry for the rich and irresponsible. I only mentioned it so that it wouldn't be mentioned for me with a heaping spoonful of attitude. You're painting the entire group by a few spergs. Where are you getting this idea from? I know this is going to sound ironic, but I f…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:46 AM
2

Because it's not about ideology to me. I'm not here to foster brownie points by trashing "the other guys".
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:38 AM
1

Well, I'm not a feminist, so, no. I don't believe in Patriarchy or Rape Culture. I need to macro that shit to my keyboard, I swear to God.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:32 AM
2

My views do not conflict with the advocacy of men's rights. Apart from the desire for men to be rid of child support with no viable solution to replace it in order to ensure child welfare, I can't think of anything off-hand that I would directly oppose. I take serious umbrage with the abuse of narrative, the dismissal of fact, employment of fallacy, and frankly juvenile "bitch about feminists" threads. It's unbecoming of a rights advocacy group. Inevitably, someone will point out that feminists …
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:23 AM
1

Why is there no doubt? There are multiple forms of feminism; do you believe them to be all Marxist? I might believe that the crazier versions might have some basis in nuttery, but they're a tiny minority of a small minority.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:18 AM
2

I'm not sure I feel comfortable discussing administrative action. But I took action for as long as I believed it would be addressed - and stopped once it proved ineffective.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:16 AM
1

It was months ago, and I am not interested in starting a witch hunt. The subreddit does not do anything about misbehaving users, so I opted to take a break instead of doubling down on them. The users in question have not resurfaced as far as I am aware.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:10 AM
1

I think Socialism may have had a chance to inspire feminists in the 1970s and 80s, but I have serious doubts that the entire movement was resculpted to follow a Marxist philosophy.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:07 AM
1

Outrage culture is part-and-parcel with gender politics. Both sides work like eager beavers to ensure that the smallest apparent transgression is treated like A DECLARATION OF WAR. Trust me on this; the less you engage feminists with MRA logic, the happier you'll be. It's like trying to put out a fire by beating it with a greasy skillet.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:06 AM
1

The community's more interesting minority took turns trying to harass, threaten, and abuse me. I took a break, and came back a fair sight more cynical and less willing to take anyone's shit. Is that suitably quip-less? Are you going to keep calling me a feminist?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 09:03 AM
-1

Caring and Advocating are not the same. I care; I don't advocate. That requires doing something. And I've never lobbied for anything.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:57 AM
1

I have to point out that suffrage continued outside the United States for decades, overlapping with at least two American feminist generations.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:55 AM
0

I made the mistake of thinking for myself, and apparently that's not welcomed in gender politics.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:53 AM
0

You're confusing men's rights advocacy with gender politics. Lobbying against circumcision is men's rights advocacy. Assuming that only men's rights groups care about it is gender politics. Hope that clears it up a bit. Am I a GamerGater? I'm a gamer that was incensed by the insincerity of the media and its smear of the gaming community. Hope I've cleared that up too.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:49 AM
-1

Advocating to end genital mutilation isn't the same as playing in gender politics. Don't make a victim out of yourself. all feminists like you You're offending feminists a lot more than you're offending me.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:25 AM
0

If you needed more proof, /u/Gageman11 -- there it is. Question narrative? FEMINIST. Argue illogic? MAN-HATER. Don't acquiesce? WORTHLESS SCUM. Delving into gender politics either turns you into a prat, or demands that you start off that way.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:22 AM
0

Well then. Focus on abolishing the draft. It's the sensible approach.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:15 AM
11

Not waiting for the cops to show up at your door to arrest you would actually look very good as well, considering the circumstances.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 08:09 AM
1

I didn't say it's been changed. I said it's being changed. By 2018, women will have to register.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:57 AM
1

"prejuding" She does realize that prejudice is a word, right?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:48 AM
-1

I think maybe gender politics isn't for you. It's not for everyone. My advice is to get out while you can. Your friends and happiness are more important than becoming an activist. There are plenty of lonely, miserable people here to pick up the slack.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:46 AM
2

And if I were you, I would get some sources, instead of just making shit up. You haven't even told me what you think happened, in part because I think you don't know.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:44 AM
0

You need to read entire comments before replying to them. Also, keep up on the news. They haven't updated the page yet because the legislation hasn't finished working its way through the bowels of the legislature.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:43 AM
1

If it's anything like that video that claims to prove that Hillary Clinton was shipping protesters to Trump's candidate rallies, then I'm sure it's got more holes than a cheese grater.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:41 AM
2

2012: Anita launches her kickstarter for Tropes vs Women in Video Games, and never fulfills her promise to her backers for the 6-episode series. The first of the episodes that she does produce is released in March of 2013. She claims to have received death threats as a result of the episode. (Not GamerGate-related.) Feb 2013: Zoe Quinn begins working on her game Depression Quest. She submits it to Steam Greenlight twice, the latter effort ending with a successful launch on Steam in August 2014. …
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:38 AM
2

Now I'm really confused. You think GamerGate was a movement? Never mind. I'm beside myself trying to figure out how you managed to get such recent history so badly wrong.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:04 AM
1

Now I'm starting to wonder if you know when GamerGate started. The Game Reviews issue because public discourse in 2013, before the release of Quinn's game Depression Quest. Anita was pitching a video series on sexist tropes in gaming, but it wasn't fuelled by GamerGate. Anita just did what she does best - stick her nose into a situation she doesn't understand. The whole thing from the beginning is "GamerGate". It didn't become GamerGate after Feminism happened. It was just coined "GamerGate" aft…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 07:02 AM
1

After everything you've been saying today, all the shit you've talked to people, myself included - you expect me to believe that you're genuine in any way. I can't facepalm hard enough to encompass how baffling this is, without causing myself brain damage.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:44 AM
2

What was simmering? The feminists? Or the reviewer bribes?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:41 AM
2

So.... in your tiny mind, GamerGate was about leftists sneaking into... what? ....to do what? Sorry, if I seem confused. I only know reality, not your fantasy world where everything is about ruining men.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:37 AM
2

The fuck are you talking about? Feminist sources start the GamerGate history at "Zoe Quinn made a game and people harassed her". It actually starts at "Game developers were bribing Reviewers, and the gaming community found out about it". I have no idea what you think it was about.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:35 AM
1

Ugh. Don't flatter yourself.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:34 AM
5

The title on this is a bit misleading. She wasn't praising the bill itself (she has her own Bill to stick with); she was remarking about the message that its irony represented. Legislation meant to curtail a woman's right to bodily autonomy is introduced in state legislatures all the time - and it takes a feminist uproar to get people to notice. (There just happen to have enough feminists wandering around to make an uproar rather common.)
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:33 AM
1

You can't be serious.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:29 AM
1

You've got a love affair with "I know you are, but what am I?"
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:28 AM
1

My god, you actually don't know. GamerGate started because game publishers were buying review scores in publications. Grassroots investigations revealed that major gaming outlets were padding review scores in exchange for kickbacks. One such revelation turned out not to be entirely true - Zoe Quinn. She was accused of using a relationship with a game reviewer to get a good review from him, only that it turned out that he didn't even review her shit-awful game. Enter 4chan, who were not yet aware…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:26 AM
1

Cute how you were so proud of yourself mentioning GamerGate a few minutes ago. Not going to stubbornly defend it as a sneaky invasion of the toxic leftists?
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:21 AM
3

By not being a Crazy McCrazyness? That'd be a good start.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:19 AM
1

Nice try, but you could say that stuff to anyone and be at least half-right. I wasn't born yesterday, pumpkin. We've all been afraid or uncertain; that's the nature of the world we live in. Only those who are unburdened by intelligence dare to suggest they have nothing to be afraid of or uncertain about. What does "overreact emotionally" supposed to mean, anyway? Does that even mean anything? Do I believe life isn't fair? Should I ever have expected it to be? I'm not about to share my history wi…
/r/MensRights16/04/17 06:18 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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