TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Mikeavelli Archive

View 0 posts and 290 comments by Mikeavelli on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

I took a gender studies class in college quite a few years ago (around 2010?), and didn't have nearly this bad of an experience. A lot of that has to do with the way the class was structured and run, which was much different than what the original article, or TheToadShroom is describing. Class was divided into three sections: primarily male issues, primarily female issues, and primarily trans / intersex issues. Group discussion was actual discussion. The professor had a very clear position she w…
/r/MensRights08/02/18 11:38 PM
2

The safest option would have been to negotiate his resignation coupled with a generous severance package in exchange for an agreement to not sue.
/r/MensRights05/02/18 08:54 PM
43

He doesn't have to pay the ~$1.6k in child support, but he does have to pay the ~$10k he owes his lawyer to defend him against the bogus lawsuit.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 08:34 PM
2

Agreed, this is sort of what you sign up for when you take a gender studies course. I'd be a bit peeved if this were a graded test where I have to fill in the "right" true/false bubble based on rote memorization of studies the professor favors, but it looks like this quiz is being used as a springboard for in-class discussion of these topics where a bit more nuance can be applied.
/r/MensRights06/12/17 06:13 PM
2

Well, fraud is fraud. That's a pretty direct comparison. Parents who commit fraud against a third party aren't immune to civil or criminal liability simply because they have a child. I don't see why parents should be immune to liability simply because they've committed fraud against each other.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 11:52 PM
1

Statistically, you have a better shot as a black woman than as a white man. The gender gap in prisons is much larger than the race gap.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 04:26 AM
12

It was a defensive stabbing. Those kids created an atmosphere of fear that gave her no choice.
/r/MensRights07/07/17 12:49 AM
36

Being attacked by a knife is normally considered to be deadly force. As well, New York has a Castle Doctrine that allows the use of deadly force in response to you being attacked inside your own dwelling. According to the article, the attack occurred inside an apartment complex. It's a bit vague on exactly where that attack occurred inside the complex, it seems very likely that he would either be inside his dwelling, or unable to safely retreat.
/r/MensRights10/04/17 07:45 PM
6

Citizens United proves you don't have to be an actual person to be legally considered one.
/r/MensRights29/01/17 04:01 AM
3

The primary aggressor model was developed in response to the increasing number of women being arrested for domestic violence. See this paper for a good example of the academic backing for the model. It has the explicit goal of training police to favor arresting men. If you don't have researchgate access, just google the name of the paper. There are free PDFs of it available elsewhere.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 05:54 PM
5

The weirdest thing is I was just reading comments in a very feminist-friendly sub. The sort of place that would scream misogyny if these comments were posted there. What do you suppose they were talking about? They were characterizing red pillers and MRAs as unattractive, and blaming that for adherence to the philosophy.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 12:35 AM
1

That's what I was mirroring, yes.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 07:20 PM
2

Because police use the primary aggressor standard, which was developed in response to the rising rate of women being arrested for domestic violence when police were using the same standards they use for everyone else.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 04:33 PM
2

Domestic violence shelters devoted to men have a history of getting protested. There's a famous one in Toronto that was openned by a mens rights group that was protested every step of the way. The UK also had to threaten to shut down womens shelters who refused to house men a few years ago. A move that was protested heavily by a few feminist groups. OP is a bit out of date (mens shelters are slowly but surely gaining acceptance and funding), but she's not wrong about the history of oppression su…
/r/MensRights14/12/16 04:28 PM
7

Republicans are all about punishing college kids for premarital sex though. There have been a few articles written about the bizarre union of feminists wanting to end college rape, and conservatives wanting to end college sex, each supporting these draconian laws.
/r/MensRights11/12/16 04:30 PM
4

The word "entitlements" is literally used in the text of the law assigning benefits. It has become a bit of a dirty word because of political rhetoric, but it is still appropriate and accurate.
/r/MensRights10/12/16 07:16 AM
1

Dunno, I think I might just be paranoid.
/r/MensRights01/12/16 02:24 AM
1

I'm comparing it to the Putative Father Registry scheme set up in some states. At the surface, it sounds like a move to protect the rights of fathers (register and the state is forced to warn you about any prospective adoption proceedings!). In practice; the existence of the registry isn't advertised, the time limits are unreasonably short, and the whole scheme is used as a way to blame fathers for not properly following the law instead of accepting that the burden of tracking down putative fath…
/r/MensRights01/12/16 02:09 AM
1

Honestly, the intended effect here seems more like a "you had an opportunity to get a waiver signed, and intentionally failed to do so. Now stop complaining." Measure, rather than a measure that's actually supposed to help.
/r/MensRights30/11/16 06:10 PM
3

For those following along at home, in order to produce a comparable number for murder, you do the following: reason that, since someone getting punched could result in them falling badly, hitting their head/neck at the wrong angle, and dying, any kind of assault counts as attempted murder. acknowledge that many people won't use the phrase 'attempted murder' to describe their experiences, and might not report it to the police, so a survey of individual experiences needs to be conducted. Being sho…
/r/MensRights20/11/16 05:16 PM
1

They'd have to be selling really well. Most mainstream publishers aren't going to want to be associated with a PUA book.
/r/MensRights15/11/16 03:50 PM
6

The Department of Education has placed a lot of pressure on schools to implement left-wing policies. The most famous one of these is the 'dear colleague' letter that ties title IX funding to the adoption of stricter sexual assault policies. With Trump in the white house, the Department of Education is going to get new leadership, which will likely ease off the pressure, or even reverse it.
/r/MensRights15/11/16 03:46 PM
35

Most states do have a percentage limit for these sorts of payments. The thing is they don't automatically adjust, so if you lose your job or otherwise start getting paid less, you're still on the hook for the old payments until you can go to court and get it adjusted. You also need to pay for a lawyer to get this done at the exact moment when you suddenly don't have as much money as you used to. A judge can also decide that you're willfully underemployed, and refuse to adjust payments, or even s…
/r/MensRights29/10/16 07:49 PM
22

Actively opposing alimony and child custody reform. Take a look at the sort of lobbying done by NOW.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 07:44 PM
30

If you're planning on having kids and want some parental rights in the event of things going bad. Unmarried fathers still have to pay for their kids either way, but get even more shafted when it comes to seeking any kind of custody.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 07:43 PM
9

England and Wales don't actually have a constitution. Apparently the right to confront your accuser has been losing ground in recent years. First to "terrorism," and now to sexual assault.
/r/MensRights27/10/16 06:50 PM
6

On Wednesday night, students also elected to their executive a candidate with the policy: "All triplets on campus will be forced to wear large, novelty pirate hats so that they can be identified at all times and from a distance." I don't think the students actually take any of this seriously...
/r/MensRights20/10/16 03:36 PM
5

I'm glad that there are a fair number of level-headed commenters and voters here. The nastiest stuff usually gets downvoted pretty heavily.
/r/MensRights13/10/16 07:17 PM
1

So, according to this, common law marriage is based on a number of factors depending on the province. As far as children are concerned: Laws regarding child custody, access and support are the same in Canada regardless of whether or not a child’s parents were legally married. For the full details on this very important topic please visit our child custody page. Most of these appear to come from the assumption that children are a product of the union. It's not clear if pre-existing children from …
/r/MensRights02/09/16 11:01 PM
1

This is why I'm fixated on the "unconscious" part of the story rather than the "drunk" part. Someone who's legitimately incapacitated due to alcohol should be in a state where they're incapable of driving, which seems to be the case here. From the description, I'd expect him to stumble, fall down, crawl a bit, and pass out before he got to his car. Passing out during sex, being physically incapable of having sex, unable to remain standing, there are a ton of details that show he's too drunk. If …
/r/MensRights18/08/16 06:09 PM
2

Ideally, the standard for being unable to consent would be being so drunk it would be physically impossible for two similarly intoxicated people to be having sex, making this scenario impossible.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 03:08 PM
27

Most people agree that there exists some line where a person is too intoxicated to meaningfully consent to sex, we're just sceptical of where that line should be drawn. For me, I don't have any problem drawing the line at "so drunk the person is passing out."
/r/MensRights18/08/16 03:05 PM
194

She told a joke/anecdote about it as the speaker at a feminist conference, and recieved applause.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 07:38 AM
2

When he fell unconscious, it became her responsibility, as the completely sober partner, to end the sexual encounter. Even as an active participant, he's unable to consent. It would be the same thing, legally and ethically speaking, as allowing an underage child to perform sex acts on you.
/r/MensRights17/08/16 09:22 PM
1

Because it boils down to the question: Does falling unconscious during sex invalidate consent? When you argue that he's the initiator and active party, you're making the argument that he implicitly consented. The current standard (legal, moral, etc. One I think should be in place) is that unconsciousness due to intoxication invalidates consent. If this were not the case, then people like Brock Turner would not be convicted of any crime. All he'd need to do is argue that his victim was an active …
/r/MensRights17/08/16 07:43 PM
2

This isn't "my opinion," that's how the law is defined. See NDAA Recommendations on the prosecution of sexual assault If no physical force was used but the victim was unconscious, the prosecution should proceed under the theory that the perpetrator raped an unconscious victim.When dealing with a victim who was unconscious, the primary challenge will be showing that the victim actually was unconscious for all or part of the rape. Meeting the element of penetration also will usually be a challenge…
/r/MensRights17/08/16 05:22 PM
1

The fact that he was falling unconcious during the act is really the only relevant factor. An unconcious person cannot "initiate" anything, and it's her responsibility to disengage and leave when that happens, because that is the line where it's unambiguously clear he can't consent to anything. Anything he's done before or afterwards is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights17/08/16 04:05 PM
10

Dude was drifting in and out of conciousness, so she did pretty much exactly what this guy did.
/r/MensRights17/08/16 06:14 AM
16

Jessica Valenti is just a professional troll in the same vein as Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. It's best to just not bother listening to whatever she's saying.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 06:06 PM
5

I agree with most of your post, but this comment: Preferably a non lethal hit if you have the skill to do so, but noone would blame you for making the kill in that situation. Isn't recommended. Most firearms instructors clear this up the first day, where 'shooting to wound' is really just 'shooting to miss.' At worst, it can be interpreted as evidence that you weren't actually in fear of your life, and used to secure a conviction against you. See also here for a more comprehensive piece on the i…
/r/MensRights15/08/16 03:59 PM
1

Automod removes direct links to SRS, but these examples are linked to right now: this one is actually pretty funny. As is this one. There's also this one, which isn't a joke per se, but is still just tough-guy-on-the-internet-shittalking in the same vein.
/r/MensRights11/08/16 04:00 PM
-11

It's a joke, even the part where they say it's not a joke. That's fine, I don't actually care, and am a big fan of offensive jokes. This would be a funny post to link to when they start going off about how 'just a joke' isn't a good excuse for things that offend them though.
/r/MensRights11/08/16 03:42 PM
1

It's a rhetorical position, rather than a legal one. It comes about in response to dramatically inflated claims of the prevalence of rape ("1 in 5 women will be raped," or "90% of rapes go unpunished," which appears to be taken from the same original statistic), which asserts that the accusation of rape is the the same thing as guilt, and any unpunished accusation is simply a failure on the part of the legal system. By that standard, it's also perfectly valid to assert that unpunished rape accus…
/r/MensRights09/08/16 07:46 PM
6

Wouldn't the large groups of thugs that exist in the movie for the sole purpose of being killed in a gunfight count as "disposable?"
/r/MensRights13/07/16 04:56 AM
0

You just think there's a technical distinction here when there really isn't. The fact that he was fingering her at the time he was stopped by the witnesses was't disputed, he admitted as much (he just claimed it was consensual), and DNA from insider her was found on his fingertips. The only way he would have lacked intent to commit the crime is if he wasn't aware that she was unconscious, which is exactly what he claimed as his defense. The Jury, as a finder of fact, is allowed to decide he is l…
/r/MensRights26/06/16 07:14 PM
0

In the turner case, there were two witnesses that testified she was unconcious, and she was found to have a BAC of .24%, which would be enough to convince me as a juror. It's still general intent because he intentionally fingered an unconcious woman, and the jury determined that his story ("she was concious and consenting") which would have made him innocent if they believed it, was just him lying. University tribunals are a whole different ballgame. They're held by people without the training t…
/r/MensRights26/06/16 06:36 PM
3

Strict liability is usually only applied in cases of statutory rape, where it doesn't matter if they're consenting, or if they told you they're of age, or if you checked their (fake) id, etc. These wouldn't even be brought up at trial, because they're irrelevant. All the prosecution has to prove is that you had sex while they were under the age of consent. General intent is different, you have to intend to commit the crime, so a mistake of fact (the victim consented, or you thought the victim co…
/r/MensRights26/06/16 04:19 PM
8

Sexism in the way you're talking about refers to institutional sexism, and jokes made by individuals are a really poor example of that. A quiz like this reeks of a rogue professor with an agenda to push, rather than someone who's legitimately interested in showing the nuanced definition of various "isms" used in academia.
/r/MensRights25/06/16 05:24 AM
0

Sure? I'm just harping on how more time at the same company doesn't have much to do with getting paid more.
/r/MensRights12/06/16 12:38 AM
1

Government yeah, that's why I mentioned it already. K-12 teachers have payscales, but University professor salaries are normally negotiated.
/r/MensRights11/06/16 11:40 PM
1

Your situation agrees with the point I'm making. Long term incentives usually run from hiring time until they're vested. There's nothing stopping you from job hopping the day after your incentives vest unless there's some kind of rolling incentive program that continually provides new options for three years in the future, which would be quite rare. Job hopping in three years would be consistent with the two year hopping average talked about in the article I posted. And yes, individual circumsta…
/r/MensRights11/06/16 11:29 PM
-4

This is nonsense. Job hopping consistently results in a higher salary than staying with the same company and building up loyalty. A cost of living increase just keeps your pay on par with inflation. A merit-based pay increase is usually referred to as getting promoted, which should change your job title and responsibilities along with the pay increase.
/r/MensRights11/06/16 08:06 PM
-17

Doesn't it? Outside of a few fields (mostly union jobs or government jobs), your job title has a lot more to do with your paycheck than the amount of time you've been with a company.
/r/MensRights11/06/16 06:38 PM
2

Ehh, I've been through the armed forces drinking culture and the college drinking culture (woo GI bill!) - and the armed forces are much worse about it. Even at a formal event, people will get shitfaced.
/r/MensRights08/06/16 04:45 PM
10

Say your piece, and let them shout. The point is not to convince the person you're arguing with, it's to convince the audience.
/r/MensRights07/06/16 07:06 AM
1

Evolutionary Psychology is a field of psychology which tries to explain current behaviors as being a result of evolutionary pressures. For example, our tendency to work together in groups might stem from the fact that early humans who were able to cooperate tended to have more children than humans who were loners. It is commonly criticized as having a wealth of evidence for just about every argument (even contradictory ones), and lacking in the ability to conduct falsifiable experiments to test …
/r/MensRights01/06/16 03:46 AM
4

Robin Wright has a huge amount of acting skill. Did you know she played Buttercup in Princess Bride, and Jenny in Forest Gump? That's the sort of range she's got, whereas Kevin Spacey plays a charming, manipulative sociopath in just about every role he's ever done.
/r/MensRights20/05/16 04:31 AM
15

This is a bit like wondering if everyone who has sex is going to be prosecuted for rape. If there isn't clear and overwhelming evidence of willful dishonesty, there won't be any prosecution. Simply lacking evidence for the original accusation isn't going to be prosecuted. It would probably be about as common as perjury, which is very rarely prosecuted, since defending against it is so easy to do.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 11:19 PM
14

Proof of willfull dishonesty beyond a reasonable doubt. Conversation records, video evidence, testimony from acquaintances indicating intentional deception, that sort of thing.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 11:01 PM
2

45% tariff on foreign goods sound familiar? Or did he backtrack on that one?
/r/MensRights07/05/16 06:19 AM
–

Even ignoring all the racist stuff, he's got a hugely protectionist foreign policy which appeals to working class america on the basis of 'keeping jobs here' but isn't a sound economic policy, and would be disastrous in the long term. He's also really pro war with ISIS, and and Hillary is at least towing the line of "limited involvement."
/r/MensRights07/05/16 06:10 AM
3

Depends how much Alimony payments are. If they're less than the cost of rent: women will move in, alimony stops, everyone wins.
/r/MensRights03/05/16 05:36 PM
5

It goes back and forth about how bad Alex really is, but near the end of the second season she sells Piper out again in a way that pretty conclusively shows she doesn't care about anyone or anything but herself. The creators tried to walk a fine line between making them likable, and showing how fucked up they were. A running theme in the show is that Larry, and most of Pipers friends on the outside, are just as narcissistic as Piper. He just never really got confronted with it or had to change s…
/r/MensRights28/04/16 05:07 PM
18

Yeah, but a lot of the characters in Orange is the new Black are violent, cruel, and psychopathic. The main character is a narcissist, her ex-girlfriend drug runner is a textbook manipulative sociopath, almost everyone in there is in prison because of the choices they made, not because they're helpless victims of circumstance. They're humanized yes, and I'd prefer that same amount of humanization be given to male prisoners as well instead of being upset that women get that treatment.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 02:05 PM
9

A big reason is mandatory arrest laws for domestic violence. They started about 30 years ago and were intended to cause more men to be arrested. What ended up happening was the arrest rate for women skyrocketed. To address this problem, the 'primary aggressor' model was created to heavily bias law enforcement in favor of arresting men. The number of women incarcerated has nevertheless continued to rise disproportionately. If I had to guess, this platform is either going to be a push against mand…
/r/MensRights28/04/16 01:03 PM
21

It already happened. Yes, you're completely correct. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Lynch Her subsequent recovery by U.S. Special Operations Forces on April 1, 2003, received considerable media coverage and was the first successful rescue of an American prisoner of war since Vietnam and the first ever of a woman.
/r/MensRights21/04/16 03:25 PM
6

Other fun points: Among the problems with establishing a 50-50 starting point, Gonzalez said, it would make it difficult for low-income parents who can't afford a lawyer to mount a legal challenge of the premise. Which is exactly where we are right now with the presumption that the mother will be given custody. They win custody because that presumption isn't challenged, and it's incredibly expensive to challenge it. She also said it could be used by a parent in a paternity case, where the parent…
/r/MensRights28/03/16 10:59 PM
8

People might think you're exaggerating, but here's one of the more famous published papers on the subject Reading this was the exact moment I stopped considering feminism to be legitimately concerned with equality.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 06:44 PM
16

That happens in video game fights, not so much IRL.
/r/MensRights19/03/16 08:06 PM
2

Given this experience, and the implications of gender-exclusionary social organizations in a campus working toward broad inclusivity, we recommend that any review of social spaces and final clubs include the role of fraternities, sororities and other unrecognized single-gender social organizations at the college,” the task force wrote. Article implies they focus on men, report is gender neutral.
/r/MensRights19/03/16 07:12 PM
19

The whole point of training like this is to overcome the natural 'freeze' instinct. Beyond that, the size difference was so huge that there isn't much she could have done to avoid it.
/r/MensRights19/03/16 05:55 PM
1

Washington state had consent as an affirmative defense up through last year until the Supreme Court reversed it. The legal reasoning for interpreting it as the reversal of the presumption of innocence is discussed here. The tl;dr version is that criminal law requires the state prove every element of a crime. Since a lack of consent is part of the crime (sex is not illegal, only unconsensual sex), the state cannot put the burden of proving it on the defense.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 12:33 AM
3

The big ones are construction, handyman stuff, plumber, electrician, etc. Be warned that they'll destroy your body by the time you're in your 40s, so you'll still want to pick up a formal education somewhere along the way allowing you to transition into a desk job by that point.
/r/MensRights07/03/16 09:51 PM
12

Nah, they tried with that one. Ghostbusters looks like a low-budget flop of a movie that's depending solely on the all female cast buzz to market it.
/r/MensRights06/03/16 03:56 PM
3

Still fraud, just perpetuated by the state rather than the mother.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 04:37 PM
17

Isn't depriving a spouse of money itself a sign of abuse? I know I've seen it on those 'signs you may be in an abusive relationship' lists.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 04:42 PM
1

Don't they have a puppet democracy for show or something?
/r/MensRights20/02/16 11:34 PM
8

Bastard?
/r/MensRights15/02/16 03:08 AM
0

On one hand yeah, on the other hand this is the sort of thing they did to Tim Hunt or NASA Shirt Guy. It's not something worth getting upset about.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 03:05 AM
7

I'm fond of the theory that Cosmo intentionally prints bad dating advice to screw up relationships so that their readers will constantly need advice about how to "fix" their screwed up relationship.
/r/MensRights12/02/16 09:13 PM
5

Yup, the methodology behind the 'games cause sexism' study was the same as the 'games cause violence' studies.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 07:19 PM
25

Not your place as a man to... This is the sort of thing characters say on TV to show that they're sexist and it's okay to hate them.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 02:25 AM
2

I think the whole problem is best summed up in this exchange Any kind of protest from male voices about gender issues, even when its valid, is dismissed as misogyny.
/r/MensRights05/02/16 06:09 PM
1

Oh wow. Getting kicked out for being a man who disagrees with feminism wouldn't have gotten him any traction in a lawsuit, but if that's what caused it, then they're trampling over him for religious reasons. Protected class ahoy!
/r/MensRights04/02/16 01:42 AM
1

It's referenced in the form here: http://hypeline.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Garza3.jpg which is posted along with the OP article. He's pretty obnoxious, but nothing I'd consider threatening. Typical loud college student.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 01:34 AM
1

Militarily occupied nations don't give a lot in terms of economic power (See: Colonialism. Or, Afghanistan/Iraq for modern day examples) - and while China might be able to roll over the mosty-demilitarized Western Europe, they're boxed in by Russia, India, and Pakistan, all of which have strong militaries and nuclear weapons to fall back on if they lose a conventional war. I don't really see a total war happening between the US and China under almost any circumstances. The US wouldn't be able to…
/r/MensRights03/02/16 05:57 PM
2

We could, but they've got nukes, and can just retaliate. MAD applies either way.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:02 AM
9

Kinda doubtful. They've got us outnumbered by a good amount, but they don't have a blue-sea navy capable of projecting force over to the United States, or an Air Force capable of challenging US Air Superiority. They've got ICBM's with nukes I suppose, but MAD still applies, and the Chinese heads of state aren't any more fond of Nuclear Winter than we are.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 01:54 AM
9

Yup, even the dissenting justice did so on the basis of misrepresentation of facts prior to signing. Hiding of income and such, no-one was convinced by the pregnancy argument.
/r/MensRights31/01/16 09:14 PM
1

It's mostly a concern for people who own their house for personal use, and aren't renting it out.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 10:23 PM
4

You think the fact that in every western country (I haven't seen other country stats) 90% of the dangerous work is done by mem due to chance? Nope, I'm just pedantic about statistics. It's pretty common around here.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 04:29 PM
7

He's talking about the picture comments as a sample size, not dangerous jobs in general. 5 people isn't a large enough sample to conclude the 100% gender divide is based on an actual correlation, rather than random chance.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 04:20 PM
4

The official response is that 'female on male violence is different from male on female violence.' This trend was first discovered after all the mandatory arrest laws came into existence started resulting in a lot of women getting arrested for domestic violence. You've probably heard of the Duluth model that came about in response to this, with the explicit goal of reducing the number of women being arrested. They already know domestic violence is roughly equal across genders, they just don't ca…
/r/MensRights26/01/16 04:11 PM
2

Did you forget what post you're in the comments section of?
/r/MensRights19/01/16 08:09 PM
3

There's a formal way to write, and it is your English teacher's job to teach you how to write in that way. This is the sort of writing you'll be doing in academic papers, job applications, professional correspondence, etc. And if you leave high school thinking it's appropriate to put slang in a college admissions essay, you're going to be very confused about why you didn't get accepted.
/r/MensRights19/01/16 07:52 PM
3

Agreed, high school is a place of learning, and using slang isn't worse than any other error.
/r/MensRights19/01/16 06:48 PM
4

Maybe it was more along the lines of, "these loud, passionate idiots are an embaressment to our movement. How can we filter them out?"
/r/MensRights19/01/16 06:45 PM
6

Parental kidnapping exists and is a crime, but it's very rare to see charges brought. Usually it has a high threshold like taking the child outside the country or preventing lawful visitation for more than x number of days. Usually it only happens when the non-custodial parent straight up disappears and needs to be tracked down by the police. Things like failing to stick to the visitation agreement are almost never criminal.
/r/MensRights10/01/16 08:20 PM
2

I don't have a problem with people suing tabloids, which seems to be the angle she's going for.
/r/MensRights07/01/16 08:23 PM
3

Ah. Then yes, we have a bit of a situation
/r/MensRights28/12/15 07:48 AM
-2

Who is this person and why should I care what they think? This looks like something a troll wrote, and put next to the image of a well-dressed older woman to give it the illusion of legitimacy.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 07:08 PM
2

The preferred remedy for this is to stop putting people who pee on trees onto lists. The fact that we do something ridiculous isn't a good argument in favor of doing something else that's just as ridiculous.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 08:36 PM
1

If someone does press charges, it will be helpful in the criminal trial. If no-one presses charges, it will be helpful when he launches a libel suit. If he's actually done some shady shit, but not shady enough to be criminally convicted, it's in his best interest to lay low. Telling his side of the story draws more attention to it, keeps it in the headlines longer, and will ultimately do more damage to his reputation.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 04:20 AM
1

Presumably, he would show it in court, and nowhere else. I don't know much about law, but I'm pretty sure any good lawyer would recommend against releasing that sort of thing to the public.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 12:32 AM
7

Honestly, no idea. He came back from his first duty station with an administrative discharge, and hasn't wanted to talk about it. There may have been more going on there.
/r/MensRights21/12/15 01:56 AM
8

A buddy of mine has gone through two CPS investigations in two different states because his ex-wife was working the system in a custody dispute. Even though CPS officials were actually quite sympathetic (false accusations are common after divorces), he still went through years of investigations, lost his job in the military, and is still unemployed as a result of it all. He also ended up getting not only being cleared, but also getting sole custody in the end. He's solely turning his life around…
/r/MensRights21/12/15 12:24 AM
3

Depends the state. Most of them have an 'x amount of money for x years, formula that's based on how long you were married, and what the couples incomes were. Rest-of-your-life payments usually kick in after the couple has been married 15-20 years.
/r/MensRights21/12/15 12:19 AM
1

It's allowed if she's actually a whore though. There is precedent
/r/MensRights19/12/15 07:48 PM
4

The random NPC generator was calibrated so that the gender based perks (deal more damage against men or deal more damage against women) were worthwhile no matter which one you picked.
/r/MensRights15/12/15 05:11 PM
10

I don't quite agree with this... Married with children, where both parents are failures at life? Fresh Prince of Bel Air, where both parents are successful and good at parenting? Family matters? Full house? same deal. There were, and are, plenty of positive male role models on TV.
/r/MensRights15/12/15 05:08 PM
4

You get into it deep enough, they eventually admit they just want GTA banned. The feminist bullshit is just a smokescreen.
/r/MensRights15/12/15 05:03 PM
26

Once both biological parents were in agreement that they wanted their child back, the adoptive parents lawyer probably informed them that it was a lost case, and they stopped fighting. From the article, it looks like this was settled out of court, and custody was returned to the mother because that's what the adoptive parents decided to do. From the quotes, it seems like they're really sick of the media circus around this. The father is still going to have his day in court.
/r/MensRights24/11/15 04:59 PM
-2

Eh, you look at divorce rates, plenty of people have messy, money-grubbing breakups, but plenty of others don't. It's not a matter of avoiding marriage completely, just finding the right one.
/r/MensRights10/11/15 06:50 PM
15

I really strongly agree with you, especially the edit. I've been living with my girlfriend for over a year now, and we've been dating for three. Most people are wondering when we're going to get married, and while there's a variety of decent reasons we're holding off (we're both working and in grad school is the main one), the economics are a big part of that decision. The economics of marriage are such that there's no benefit to couples with similar incomes (the intended 'marriage credit' to fi…
/r/MensRights10/11/15 05:09 PM
15

Looking at the history of jurisprudence in this country, it's best to assume nuance isn't going to be given due consideration until proven otherwise.
/r/MensRights12/10/15 10:39 PM
1

Killallwhitemen is a popular hashtag in the US. No one in the US has been arrested for it.
/r/MensRights08/10/15 03:07 PM
7

He got his own series, voices himself in the animated series, and is getting drawn into the official comic books. He is living the dream at this point.
/r/MensRights07/10/15 04:19 PM
3

RDJ Fought for his co-stars to get more pay. I think he could get retired gracefully, the rest of the Avengers (Especially Thor and Captain America) have built up enough star power to keep things going forward, but at the time he was the face of the MCU.
/r/MensRights07/10/15 04:18 PM
1

From the sounds of things, he's had two very meaningful relationshipa before this one, and got swept up thinking it was real again. He's leaving the 'honeymoon' phase of the relationship, and realizing that he's not actually that interested in her as a person. The top comment in that thread gets it right. Neither of them are villains, but they're definitely not right for each other
/r/MensRights22/09/15 03:50 AM
2

In case people don't believe you, here's at least one case where it really happened
/r/MensRights15/09/15 04:40 PM
13

I'm 30 and in a long term relationship. Occassionally female friends need help with something, and I'm helpful. Male friends too. It's just being a helpful person. It was different when I was young and single though. Yes, the majority of the time when I was being helpful for a woman, there was some level of flirting involved.
/r/MensRights07/09/15 07:46 PM
2

You are not required to testify to anything in a court of law unless you've been subpoenaed. A judge is never going to issue a subpoena to compel a woman to testify about the circumstances of her alleged rape unless there's some truly exceptional circumstances.
/r/MensRights30/08/15 01:52 AM
3

I think we're saying the same thing using different words here :).
/r/MensRights28/08/15 07:33 PM
3

I agree with you on this, but consider it a criticism of drawing any conclusions from the blog post at all. I submit that women either don't consider attractiveness as important a metric, or are simply bad at evaluating attractiveness. stated income seems to matter quite a bit more, for example.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 07:16 PM
7

Literally the sentence after the line you quoted. The female chart is skewed yes, but a higher percentage of women will message men they consider to be unattractive, whereas women rated the most unattractive won't receive any messages at all.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 06:45 PM
–

That blog post, and your interpretation of that blog post, don't seem to agree with each other.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 06:34 PM
1

Thank you. The armchair revolutionaries get a bit disruptive. There aren't any problems in the US bad enough to justify violent revolution. The way black people are treated comes close, but even there it would be counterproductive imho.
/r/MensRights27/08/15 12:45 AM
7

Holy shit you're not joking. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/25/saber-kushour-rape-deception-charge
/r/MensRights23/08/15 11:13 PM
13

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15491274 He put it a little differently from the study though. Women tend to have a stronger ingroup bias, and therefore tend to get along with other women and ingroups better, but don't interact with outgroups as well. Whereas men have a weaker bias, can interact with outgroups better, but have weaker bonds within the ingroup.
/r/MensRights22/08/15 04:01 PM
9

Meh, they were higher in the decades after WW2.
/r/MensRights19/08/15 08:36 PM
86

I'm wearing cargo shorts right now, and they're amazing. I have so many pockets, and they're all huge. Haters are just jelly.
/r/MensRights19/08/15 06:33 PM
1

Ironically, this is exactly the sort of circumstance the marriage contract and alimony was intended to cover. we were told by the doctor I might not be able to play this season or ever again," she said. One partner willingly gave up future earning potential in order to take on a more domestic role, depending on the earning partner to continue to provide for both of them. After committing to this particular course of action, and becoming medically incapable of earning the same as she could pre-ma…
/r/MensRights19/08/15 12:07 AM
3

No-one actively lobbies for weaponized rape accusations. They lobby for lower standards of proof in rape cases in order to convict more rapists, which has the unintended consequence of allowing for weaponized false accusations. In washington state, for example, consent was an affirmative defense to the accusation of rape until this year. Meaning, you had to prove consent, it wasn't something the prosecution had to disprove. http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/washington-supreme-court-shifts…
/r/MensRights13/08/15 01:37 PM
3

It's certainly not the total cause, and I actually agree with you that the threat is wholly overblown. We've got a lot in common with more moderate feminists. But, the organized group that actively and visibly lobbies for this sort of thing is feminism. For comparison: Why do democrats attack the republican party for being pro-life? A huge portion of the population supports restricting access to abortion, but the political force lobbying for that to become law is the republican party, so it bear…
/r/MensRights13/08/15 05:37 AM
51

Feminists advance public policy aimed at protecting women, and allow the behavior exhibited in this post to occur unchecked, either because they don't think it exists, or because they don't care about it. For example, she threatens to lie about rape and assault because she knows it is a serious threat that will fuck with a man's life. People will still assume he's guilty even if these text messages come out, and she won't experience any consequences for making the accusation.
/r/MensRights13/08/15 02:11 AM
1

This is already the case in most places. A frequent lawsuit made against universities is for breach of confidentiality, regardless of any other factors.
/r/MensRights27/07/15 07:13 AM
2

And this has been found to be illegal. You can't lower the test without lowering for both genders.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 07:23 PM
4

After mandatory arrest for domestic laws were implemented, they came under fire from the exact groups who pushed for them... Because when police officers adhered to the law, women began getting arrested in greater numbers
/r/MensRights23/07/15 07:35 PM
1

You and /u/tiqr don't actually disagree on anything. Why are you arguing?
/r/MensRights21/07/15 05:03 AM
-2

They kinda do. There are a lot of complaints I have about the feminist movement, but the idea that they ignore third world problems isn't one of them.
/r/MensRights19/07/15 09:05 PM
2

For chrissakes, FPH'ers need to own up to their own actions. You're like a child who screams 'I'm not touching you!' While being an obnoxious brat, and expects that to matter when they're punished for it.
/r/MensRights18/07/15 02:13 PM
2

None of that justifies harassment. It's glossed over because it's completely irrelevant. They knew full well what they were doing, were aware that putting the link in their sidebar incites their users to to go off the subreddit and harass those individuals personally.
/r/MensRights18/07/15 04:01 AM
1

They put it in the sidebar of their sub with 150K members, and identified the imgur staff as persons to be harassed and mocked. When a number of those subreddit readers went and harassed the imgur staff after reading that sidebar, the sub was banned for inciting harassment. Because they did incite it. The cause and effect is very clear and unsurprising.
/r/MensRights17/07/15 06:31 PM
2

They deny it because they don't consider what they did to be inciting harassment, because they're idiots. https://np.reddit.com/r/casualiama/comments/39mqr0/we_are_the_rfatpeoplehate_mod_team_ask_us_anything/cs4o92m
/r/MensRights17/07/15 06:22 PM
2

edited in their AMA where they brag about it.
/r/MensRights17/07/15 04:07 PM
1

Edit to add the AMA and change links to np Recap of the whole thing is available here They brag about it in their AMA
/r/MensRights17/07/15 04:00 PM
–

The FPH mods incited harassment against the imgur staff. This wasn't a subtle thing or disputed fact, its something they bragged about.
/r/MensRights17/07/15 03:05 PM
5

She wants internet money
/r/MensRights16/07/15 11:26 PM
4

I've found a perfectly sane, smart woman who I love deeply and have been with for over three years now. We're still not married though, and won't be for a while, for a lot of different reasons.
/r/MensRights16/07/15 05:32 PM
3

AMR is pretty bad, but they're mostly just snarky and don't even try to understand the points of the MRM. The dedicated racist subs are in a completely different league of active dedicated aggression.
/r/MensRights16/07/15 02:55 PM
16

Harassed. IDK why he used that word instead
/r/MensRights14/07/15 02:55 PM
1

Unit conversion is serious business. NASA lost a space shuttle over that nonsense once.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 10:03 PM
3

My girlfriend is in school working towards a high-paying, stable career right now. I've let her know I'm perfectly fine being a house-husband taking care of kids and the dog all day. She thinks I'm joking o.o
/r/MensRights10/07/15 04:22 PM
14

Unfortunately, it does. Companies can fire you for any reason so long as its not specifically prohibited. If the state doesn't have a 'you can't be fired for defending yourself in a fight' law then Panera can fire him. Happens all the time with fast food or convinience store employees who stop a robbery, and end up getting fired because it's policy to never use violence for any reason. Here's one example.
/r/MensRights10/07/15 04:00 PM
6

What exactly is 'Men going their own way?' Groups like men following the tendency of not getting married because we know it's a bad deal for us, but not necessarily ideologically motivated by activist communities?
/r/MensRights08/07/15 07:54 PM
10

Women who are unmarried and childless through their 20's probably also come from a higher socioeconomic background, have better education, and probably spent their college years focusing on schoolwork, rather than looking for a husband. It seems like they're comparing childless, unmarried women to all men. I suspect if you compared childless, unmarried men to childless, unmarried women, you'd see things even out even out close to 1:1. So, if women make the same sacrifices men have tended to make…
/r/MensRights08/07/15 07:32 PM
9

I'm torn about this sort of thing. I don't think anyone should be jailed for joking around, including the killallmen idiots, but actually charging someone who says that under these laws might finally get them to pull their heads out of their asses about this sort of thing.
/r/MensRights01/07/15 06:49 PM
2

In a concurring opinion, Judge McCloud goes on to explain the Due Process concerns.
/r/MensRights29/06/15 08:57 PM
11

In general, the Socratic method is more effective than directly challenging people who are filled with bullshit. Things like: But if women make less than men, why don't business owners just exclusively hire women? Saving 33% on payroll would be HUGE! The typical answer here is because business owners are sexist A few of them probably are. Why aren't the non-sexist business owners saving 33% on payroll and driving their sexist competition out of business? Normally they leave in a huff at this poi…
/r/MensRights25/06/15 11:34 PM
11

Seattle University already has a Male:Female gender ratio of 41:59. What the fuck.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 10:51 PM
6

Fruity alcoholic drinks. Drinks that taste good in general. This xkcd speaks to my soul
/r/MensRights19/06/15 06:36 PM
1

I mean, I could understand it being corporate policy for the lights to be on as a safety measure to make sure no-one trips over anything. I wouldn't agree with it, but I would understand. They're straight up saying it's corporate policy to prevent rape culture? That has to be some kind of joke.
/r/MensRights19/06/15 06:35 PM
5

It shows up with famous people sometimes. The Buzz Aldrin punching a dude thing was all over the news, which resoundingly agreed that yes, the instigator deserved it.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 01:39 AM
5

Compared to the third world, women aren't disadvantaged in any real way. But then again, by that standard, neither are men. We've got it pretty good in the west by most standards. Regardless, that's just the flip side of the coin of the overly simplistic oppression narrative that a lot of feminists push. Reality is nuanced, both genders have gender-related problems, and people in general have a lot of time appreciating other people's problems when those problems don't affect them. MRA's aren't i…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 06:13 PM
7

Even SJW types have changed their tune a bit recently. They grudgingly admit that men do in fact face problems, and will even agree on some issues that need addressing (oversentencing in the prison system, males facing domestic violence, circumcision most of the time) - from time to time. A lot of people still think of /r/mensrights as a hate group, but most people who take a serious, unbiased look at the sub realize that isn't the case. Compare this to FPH where they would literally ban you for…
/r/MensRights10/06/15 11:20 PM
3

Gotcha. Not enough to get them banned in and of itself, but it does support the argument that it exists for the sole purpose of harassing this subreddit.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 11:02 PM
1

/r/AMR appears to be banned now
/r/MensRights10/06/15 10:49 PM
12

They put pictures of the imgur moderators on their sidebar yesterday, specifically singling them out for harassment. Throwaway accounts are one thing, but when it appears on the sidebar of the subreddit it pretty clearly happens with the approval of the moderators. A few of the moderators are still publicly posting, and aren't denying it at all.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 10:48 PM
3

Assault victims do indeed get told, "If you didn't go to the bad part of town, you probably wouldn't have gotten robbed." Or, "If you didn't get drunk so much, you probably wouldn't have tried to fight that guy and gotten your ass beat."
/r/MensRights10/06/15 07:56 PM
12

Article just says he fell, so it might not have been suicide. When things get this ugly I wouldn't rule out foul play. And, as a last laugh, it looks like he did hide the majority of his assets in overseas accounts before he died.
/r/MensRights07/06/15 09:20 PM
11

Sexual education always takes place before it is appropriate for children to actually be having sex. If you wait until they're older, you run the risk of children being in a position where they're thinking of having sex, and don't have any information on the matter. Its much like when parents were complaining about the hpv vaccine being given to girls who are too young to be sexual active. Of course they're vaccinated before they even think about having sex, that's the point. That said, I agree …
/r/MensRights06/06/15 06:30 PM
5

This absolutely. Courts and law enforcement are wising up to the games people play in custody disputes. Unstable and manipulative people can appear very convincing for a few minutes in front of a judge playing he said she said, but they fall apart when confronted with documentation of their lies and manipulations. Being a model father to your child is a great thing. Being able to prove it is an unfortunately required thing. If his ex is at all reasonable, she'll get with the program and redouble…
/r/MensRights06/06/15 02:05 AM
-7

a significant number of strippers and porn stars come from a background of being sexually abused when they were younger. This doesn't really say anything about her history either way. I'm on the fence between 'shameless attention whore' doing this intentionally for art exposure like Paris Hilton, or 'public mental breakdown' from the pressure of being in the spotlight, like Brittany Spears, or Charlie Sheen.
/r/MensRights05/06/15 03:44 PM
3

I like this post. Discussion is good, and helps the movement. A. I actually agree with you on many of these points. Dating, sex, and rejection are difficult issues, and most of these articles seem to be clickbaity stuff intended to attract the male equivalent of Cosmo readers. That said, Marriage as an institution is definitely weighted against men every step of the way. At the moment, there's very little incentive for men to get married, and severe financial penalties for men who get divorced. …
/r/MensRights02/06/15 06:13 PM
21

Its more of a racist thing than a sexist, part of NYC's ongoing war on minorities, like 'stop and frisk.' That said, it's also a de-facto sexist policy, since men are disproportionately targeted by these sorts of policies as well. And yes, people are getting arrested for 'inconveniencing other passengers,' which is intentionally worded to be as vague as possible so the police can arrest whoever they want taken off the subway. Manspreading is included in that.
/r/MensRights01/06/15 11:36 PM
1

Yup, the Rapper defense - the same laws that let them sing about killing cops, ex girlfriends, ex wives, etc. Allows this guy to post lyrics on facebook threatening her without being thrown in jail. But seriously, if I were her I'd move and not leave a forwarding address. She's very reasonably afraid for her life. What this guy is doing may be legal, but he really needs a therapist.
/r/MensRights01/06/15 06:24 PM
1

Very similar things happen with the Repressed memory craze of the 1990's. A little earlier, there was the Day care sex abuse hysteria.
/r/MensRights27/05/15 10:18 PM
8

This sort of thing literally gets people arrested in the UK. I don't think she should be arrested because that would be stupid, and it was stupid that other people got arrested for tweets like this. But you have to wonder how long she's going to be able to go on like this and remain in a position of authority.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 05:15 PM
0

It's the sort of thing you think up in the shower a day or two after needing to use it. Then someone says the exact same thing a month later and BAM you've got the exact right thing to say.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 07:47 PM
15

The clothing you wear is a form of non-verbal communication, yes. This isn't hard to understand. Are you just trolling?
/r/MensRights13/05/15 04:54 PM
18

I would be able to control myself if someone were shouting at me all day in an attempt to get my attention, but my ability to concentrate on learning would suffer, as would the quality of work I produce. As such, I would ask them to stop shouting, and want the rules of school to be such that students who are shouting all day are removed from the classroom as a distraction. Why do you think non-verbal communication is any less distracting?
/r/MensRights13/05/15 04:46 PM
1

In many jurisdictions, falsly accusing someone of a crime in public (as opposed to filing a police report or making the accusation to an officer, which is 'privilidged' and not subject to defamation laws) is presumed to cause damages, and he wouldn't need to prove a specific hit to his reputation beyond the fact that she said it in public.
/r/MensRights09/05/15 09:04 PM
30

After you've lawyered up, delete this post. Social media postings occasionally come up in courtrooms. Nothing you post here will help you. Something you post here may hurt you. Do not discuss it with anyone aside from a lawyer.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 07:43 PM
4

It's reasonable to assume she was appearing nervous. Almost everyone appears nervous when the police come to their door. Domestic violence marks aren't necessarily visible through clothing, and an officer can't assume she's not getting hit just because he can't see any physical damage when she opens the door. The officers themselves aren't actually at fault for this. They obeyed the law, and would have been reprimanded if they hadn't investigated fully. The problem is with department policy, whi…
/r/MensRights06/05/15 04:43 PM
59

If she's living in a mandatory arrest jurisdiction, it's not wrong to assume her husband would have been arrested, even with no evidence or desire for arrest from either party. Hence the mandatory part. This isn't even police overreach or officers failing to do their job. They did exactly what they're trained and required to do. Mandatory arrest is like any other 'zero tolerance' policy, producing ridiculous results like this that are probably worse than the problem they're trying to solve.
/r/MensRights06/05/15 04:06 PM
17

The justice system is slanted against men in all kinds of messed up ways, that in some places are actually direct from legislation. That's a big tangled complex subject with many examples out on the web about it, and not one I'm as versed in as others, but there it is. The gender disparity in prison is on par with the racial disparity which people are literally rioting about right now. The best argument for establishing that this is due to gender bias in the courtroom rather than other factors i…
/r/MensRights05/05/15 07:36 PM
6

It's actually possible for a student to sue their parents to force them to pay for college. It happened last year. I looked it up half-remembering this and thinking she'd been laughed out of court, but apparently the last public information about the case is that she won. They probably stopped appeals and came to some kind of private agreement. It's a very strange case that depended on the parents being divorced, and likely other factors I haven't been able to figure out. Probably shouldn't be r…
/r/MensRights05/05/15 06:55 PM
–

Different survival strategies are still strategies.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 05:13 PM
2

Definitely get a second opinion from another doctor. Since he's telling you it's the only solution, he's not as well-read on the subject as he otherwise could be. You could have a particularly advanced case with troublesome symptoms that really does need to be addressed by circumcision, but if that's not the case other treatments certainly exist. Another doctor can give you more advice. Specifically ask what the risk of not performing a circumcision is, and whether jumping straight to surgery is…
/r/MensRights25/04/15 10:48 PM
2

It's a minimum standard designed to only screen out the very worst performing officers.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 07:58 PM
6

Most of it was proven bullshit. The scary thing is that some people are still in jail because of it, even though it's been well established in other cases that the satanic panic abuse was completely falsified.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 04:37 PM
1

If I'm reading social trends correctly, video games are going to be the reason why its your own fault you're poor, and a waste of our welfare dollars.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 02:31 AM
46

Gamers who lived through the 'violence in video games' debacle remember this cycle very well. It started with a host of agenda-driven studies designed to confirm the biases of the researchers. This eventually attracts the attention of real, unbiased researchers who decide they're going to conduct their own studies. Unsurprisingly, once you correct for bias, the link goes away completely.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 08:38 PM
4

Good point.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 07:36 AM
14

I dunno how I feel about this one. Yes, her comparison is shit, but sanitary products are clearly necessitities. Why pick this battle?
/r/MensRights04/04/15 03:54 AM
3

It's basically the reverse-gendered version of "You're being hysterical."
/r/MensRights29/03/15 05:00 PM
3

There's a picture of him with the article...
/r/MensRights28/03/15 08:47 PM
7

Again, the teacher is incapable of teaching the class due to his behavior. That's the line that has to be crossed in order for him to be kicked out of the classroom. Have you been through college? Everyone sees this happen once or twice, there's that one asshole who has to contradict the teacher on everything. Eventually it starts dragging the class down, and the teacher makes a comment like, "We have to move on to stay on schedule, if you're still interested in discussing this we can talk after…
/r/MensRights28/03/15 08:46 PM
16

He is not entitled to disrupt a classroom filled with students who have paid to attend that class. If the teacher is incapable of teaching class due to his behavior, then they're perfectly justified in banning him from the class.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 07:45 PM
23

Reason did an interview with him. They're trying to be sympathetic, but it still doesn't cast him in a good light. Vigorous use of the n-word has become a staple of True's interactions with other students and online postings. In a recent interview with Charles Johnson, he admitted to "nonviolently protesting and disrupting some events on campus, and just walking through the halls and calling people nigger. Because if they are actually going to accuse me of being sexist and racist, then I might a…
/r/MensRights28/03/15 07:23 PM
10

Reed college had that reputation long before this, I'm afraid.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 08:35 PM
-1

The average applicant to MIT has a 4.0 gpa and is otherwise ridiculously qualified. Its entirely possible the school to decide on a 50/50 gender split and still not run out of qualified applicants.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 06:58 AM
5

Agreed I had a similar story back in high school. Plenty of extra curriculars, good gpa, bit of a brownnoser. Also got bullied for it a bit. I got in an honest to god fight sophmore year. It was more or less justified in that I was hitting back when being bullied, but that doesn't actually make difference since zero tolerance was policy by then. What happens? I'm suspended for a week and they sweep it under the rug.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 06:38 AM
-8

Well, she was 13. That really is young enough to be largely absolved of responsibility for just about anything. Abuse really is very likely as a root cause for this sort of thing.
/r/MensRights05/03/15 02:42 AM
3

Immigration proceedings against non-citizens often flip the burden of proof. That said, the way we treat immigrants really isn't a shining beacon of our justice system, and this is more an argument for immigration reform than it is for the acceptability of a reversed burden of proof.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 09:43 PM
5

Ancient history shows that it will tend to get worse until it gets so blatantly wrong that it's even offending the moral sensibilities of the supporters. See: Witch trials, Lynchings, the McCarthy red scare, Japanese internment, child daycare sex scandals, and the post-9/11 terrorism panic. Those are just the most famous in America, this sort of thing has repeated many times over throughout history
/r/MensRights04/03/15 09:41 PM
12

wait what? I'm all for the female Thor, it makes sense in the context of the comics where Thor is just someone who's worthy of picking up Mjolnir. But a Thor comic where the hero and villain peacefully resolve their differences because they're both women? THAT is destroying comics.
/r/MensRights24/02/15 08:36 PM
1

Stop downvoting him guys :P. While I don't agree with you on a few points, you've got an overall sound position and are trying to be a voice of reason.
/r/MensRights16/02/15 09:45 PM
54

Presumably, his intention to reside in Australia ended when his relationship with the mother ended. The judge simply rejects the idea that the Father changed his mind based on the degradation of their relationship, or considers it irrelevant. He also cannot move to Canada because the mother has rescinded her sponsorship of his work visa, and he can't afford to get the paperwork sorted out on his own. The judgement seems to be concluded on the basis that, now that she's in Australia, it would be …
/r/MensRights16/02/15 08:41 PM
-8

meh, comic books have a long history of jumping on the bandwagon. This is nothing new.
/r/MensRights14/02/15 10:23 PM
7

Parks & Rec has poked fun at just about everything. It's like a slightly classier south park that way. I see no reason to work up any outrage at this.
/r/MensRights14/02/15 12:42 AM
9

Well yes, but we (maybe just me?) aren't too fond of the widespread outrage feminists have over trivial nonsense. I think the point of this post is to point out the hypocrisy of being outraged in a reversed-gender scenario, not to actually be outraged at it.
/r/MensRights12/02/15 05:51 PM
8

Frozen presents both positive (Kristoff) and negative (What's his name, the evil guy) male roles, both of which contribute to the overall narrative. No character of either gender is portrayed as wholly competent or wholly idiotic. Rather, they're portrayed as making mistakes, and learning from those mistakes; a positive message if ever I've seen one. Yes, Kristoff is frequently a buffoon. He also rescues Anna from certain death, more than once. He's also an expert outdoorsman, and his assistance…
/r/MensRights08/02/15 05:28 AM
5

He knows the law. In most states, and the UK, nonconsent due to alcohol use is because a victim is incapacitated. Legally, this means the woman is unconcious, or very close to it. Simply being drunk, or even very drunk isn't enough to make you no longer responsible for your actions.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 04:12 PM
4

Being a proud multidimensional bot that don't need no traditional geometry.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:54 PM
28

It's roughly the same as different Christian denominations claiming members of other denominations aren't "true" Christians. There's no consistent set of beliefs you're required to have in order to be a feminist, so you get a lot of people with diametrically opposed beliefs who can nevertheless claim to be in the same group. CHSommers has an academic background that made her well acquainted with feminist writings, and cites feminist thinkers when making arguments or writings essays. Even though …
/r/MensRights06/02/15 05:22 PM
2

There's a really bizarre intersection. For example: A practical effect of feminist policies on college campuses is that college kids are having less sex. A lot of conservative groups, who are just against pre marital sex of any kind, will support feminist policies because they achieve the same end, even if they have vastly different reasoning behind their support. Of course, this doesn't mean feminists are conservatives. They're all over the political spectrum and don't have a political agenda t…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 04:10 PM
1

I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. As I guy I was promiscuous as I could manage through my early and mid-20's, but now that I'm a bit older and found someone I can trust (even though she was apparently pretty promiscuous in college too) - it's not really a challenge staying faithful. People grow up and mature.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 06:02 PM
3

Newspapers are very careful, and have legal counsel on hand to advise them. They are allowed to print things like "jane doe said john is a rapist," because jane really did say that in an interview. They can't say "john is a rapist" until that has been proven. Similar tactics are used for any other potentially libelous story.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 04:08 PM
15

Most prisoners (male and female) come from a background of abuse. Most were abused as children as opposed to adult domestic violence by a partner. By the time they're adults, most of them have gone through the cycle of violence to become abusers themselves, which is probably why they're in prison. It's a fairly strong argument in favor of reforming the justice system to work towards rehabilitation, rather than punishment, but it's ridiculous as an argument towards not putting women in prison.
/r/MensRights31/01/15 10:37 PM
9

The worst part about what happened to Bill Frezza is, if you were following the UVA aftermath, all the Frats had to (as punishment for an incident that never happened) sign a new agreement with the college that consisted largely of implementing his recommendations.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 02:51 AM
2

Crossing state lines to skip out on child support is a federal crime. http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/subjectareas/child_support.html I'm not a fan of child support laws, but I'm also not a fan of people not knowing the law.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:19 AM
1

I was looking this up a few days ago, and the links are still at my fingertips. Incarceration rates by Gender shows ~91.5% men and 8.5% women. The comparison you're looking for is discussed in Estimating Gender Disparities in Federal Criminal Cases which cites men being 15 times more likely to be incarcerated than women, and goes into a great deal of detail about why this is. Most people know there's a bit of a disparity, but not many people realize just how bad it is.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 05:49 AM
3

Yeah, the imbalance is split across gender lines around 95% male 5% female. The only way to interpret that is a widespread gender bias in the court system.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 05:38 AM
2

We must hang out with different guys. It's not a topic that comes up in real life very often anymore, since I'm a bit older, but it was definitely a thing up through my early 20's.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 11:01 PM
7

Even the author of the site you're linking to seems confused about the ACLU's stance on this one, noting that they've supported gender equality in the past, and should be expected to support it in the future. Was there something going on behind the scenes here?
/r/MensRights22/01/15 08:03 AM
2

Alright feminism, its time to close up shop. Every significant gender battle has been won. I can think of no other reason why this would make national news, more than once.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 05:23 PM
4

I like the idea of a statewide standard, but the affirmative consent standard does nothing to protect the rights of the accused. So, thats a problem. I'm so very glad I'm out of college and don't have to put up with this shit. Fighting against this nonsense just gets you ostracized, it seems like the only hope is for some senator's son to get accused of rape so they finally see firsthand how awful this system is.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 09:32 PM
2

Most places its a political talking point. In WA, its a judge saying it as a result of a lawsuit, and the legislature is in contempt if they don't fix it. http://blogs.seattletimes.com/politicsnorthwest/2014/09/11/supreme-court-finds-legislature-in-contempt-on-education-funding/
/r/MensRights17/01/15 05:01 PM
2

The legislature is currently in contempt of court for failing to properly fund the education system in washington. They have slashed the budget so much that it is literally illegal.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 04:58 PM
5

That was a really common thing back when yesallwomen was trending. I got one person to realize how much of a hypocrit she was being, and about a dozen others jumping on my feed about how offensive I was being by pointing this out. No defense or explaination, 'shut up, you're offensive'
/r/MensRights11/01/15 05:04 PM
3

Extremely trollish, the question seems specifically crafted to rustle jimmies.
/r/MensRights10/01/15 08:02 AM
1

Compare and contrast with this case http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062501690.html
/r/MensRights09/01/15 07:20 AM
12

Just about every article about homelessness I've ever read cites all of those reasons as problems causing chronic homelessness. The information about men suffering from those issues is collected and easily accessible. Articles author is just unethical.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 09:45 PM
0

This was my reaction too. A tendency to use tragedies for political gain is what makes me sick about various social justice movements. That isn't something we should take part in just because a tragedy happened that could support our position.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 02:55 AM
1

It's part of the University of Michigan's definition of sexual violence.
/r/MensRights19/12/14 12:21 AM
13

Trigger warnings have an appropriate time and place. When used appropriately, they do not silence or stop discussion, they warn (hence the name) listeners who may have had traumatic experiences that they may wish to not listen. A great example of this is NPR, which publicly broadcasts nationwide. They've got a lot of segments that might actually trigger traumatic memories; dealing with war, rape, and other atrocities. The important thing here is that they haven't stopped broadcasting anything, t…
/r/MensRights17/12/14 08:49 AM
78

There was a fantastic discussion about this in /r/law. Basically, this is a subject that comes up during the practice of certain kinds of law. If you're going to go into criminal law, you cannot just avoid discussion of rape, because it's an issue you're going to have to deal with. If If you're unable to handle it, you need to pick a different specialization. Trigger warnings are something law schools cannot ethically accommodate.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 03:36 AM
3

Lawsuits by unjustly expelled young men are becomming quite common. The grounds are usually title IX violations, (if his case has become public as a result of actions by school officials), or a failure of the university to adhere to written procedure. Does the president actually have the power to overturn an appeal? If its not part of the written Procedure, he has a very strong case.
/r/MensRights13/12/14 03:00 PM
8

It has a moderate liberal bias, but usually enough journalistic integrity to see past that in cases like this one, where the evidence contradicts their gut feelings.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 02:56 PM
2

The legal test (in the actual legal system, not ridiculous college administrative tribunal) - is "incapacitated." This would include unconscious or falling down drunk, but would definitely exclude someone who came to your room and instigated sex. Anything in between is made on a case-by-case basis, which is why it's so hard to get good statistics.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 02:50 PM
1

From The study Definitions of rape and sexual assault. The NCVS, NISVS, and CSA target different types of events. The NCVS definition is shaped from a criminal justice perspective and includes threatened, attempted, and completed rape and sexual assault against males and females (see Methodology). The NISVS uses a broader definition of sexual violence, which specifically mentions incidents in which the victim was unable to provide consent due to drug or alcohol use; forced to penetrate another p…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 02:34 PM
13

This is the attitude we keep railing against when the other side does it. No need to perpetuate it.
/r/MensRights06/12/14 04:47 PM
1

Germany does that
/r/MensRights06/12/14 06:54 AM
10

Why do they need a special law for acid attacks? Isn't this just assault? Can I get away with stabbing someone because there isn't a specific law prohibiting stabbing?
/r/MensRights05/12/14 05:22 PM
2

Well yeah, it's happened and gone to court. If the same thing happens with some other notable e-celebrities I'll condemn them along with everyone else. But until we see an actual case hit the courts I'm fine with not being outraged either way.
/r/MensRights17/11/14 10:37 PM
2

This is really the best answer. People that far down the ideological rabbit hole aren't going to listen to reason.
/r/MensRights17/11/14 10:36 PM
4

I never really bought the 'false flag' accusations. Celebrities on the internet get death threats all the time, so I'd be more skeptical if one came out revealing that they'd never gotten one. I think they're real, they just shouldn't be taken seriously enough to merit international attention.
/r/MensRights17/11/14 08:44 PM
7

My reaction over the actual shirts is not being offended. The male tears shirt is tasteless, but I dont want her to lose her job over it or anything. What ground game is there to do? Letter writing in support of his shirt and letting them know that plenty of us support him?
/r/MensRights17/11/14 03:50 PM
0

I'm all up on the prosecuting for False Allegations, but remember this is the Italian Justice System we're talking about. They only just recently admitted that Geologists failing to predict an earthquake isn't manslaughter.
/r/MensRights14/11/14 12:39 AM
14

The real wtf conclusion from that is that the author thinks this means women are disproportionately affected by the prison system.
/r/MensRights07/11/14 06:20 AM
7

The worst thing that could happen is a politician gets wind of this social movement, decides they can score some points with the electorate by restricting video game depictions of women, and it has to go to the Supreme Court to get knocked down The worst thing after that is if the industry gets spooked, and puts up a code of some sort to head off future attempts at government restrictions.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 06:39 AM
2

There are a fair number of studies constructed along the following lines: Expose a group of subjects to violent video games Expose a control group to non-violent video games. Assess their propensity towards violence with a series of tests (usually a questionnaire of some sort) immediately afterwards. See where the test group and control group differ in opinion. Some better-constructed studies will do things like: repeat the experiment, or just the questionnaire several times over a course of day…
/r/MensRights03/11/14 08:33 AM
1

He did commit a crime. He was arrested and convicted for breaking into her room, and assaulting her roommate. She was just upset that he got a pretty light sentence for doing that, and called up mob justice. She was not, strictly speaking, lying.
/r/MensRights02/11/14 05:56 PM
1

Trans issues were basically the same content you'll get from SJW's all over the internet, but the presentation was much better and more effective. It was organized as an academic discussion and everyone present in the room had specifically made the choice to sign up for that class and learn about it. Gender and sex aren't necessarily the same thing Gender is more of a continuum than a clear straight/gay/bi distinction We went through a few case studies and documentaries of the life stories of tr…
/r/MensRights30/10/14 08:03 PM
6

I took a 300-level Gender Studies class because I needed a humanities credit and it fit into my schedule. It went over: How is gender defined, how is sex defined, and how do those definitions affect the real world. The attention to trans issues actually took up about a third of the class, and was handled well. After that, we discussed female sexuality and the writings of Bell Hooks, who I actually quite liked, even though she's literally the person who coined the term White Supremacist Capitalis…
/r/MensRights30/10/14 02:58 AM
3

My university does call it gender studies, not women's studies.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 01:06 AM
2

Yes, absolutely. Exactly what someone gets charged with depends on the exact circumstances of the case, the state you're in, how good your lawyer is, and probably a bunch of other variables I'm not aware of. But in the context of the original conversation, calling manslaughter "accidental murder" is a fair description for the layman.
/r/MensRights28/10/14 07:26 PM
7

This is largely semantics. The bar fight getting out of hand could accurately be described as an accident, since there was no intent to actually kill the person. Similarly, accidents that involve a criminal level of negligence (DUI deaths, for example) are treated as Manslaughter.
/r/MensRights28/10/14 07:00 PM
4

If your girlfriend says they do exist, but should not be focused on, then its not a fallacy. She's acknowledging they're a problem and that their behavior is unacceptable. This is different from pretending it doesnt exist.
/r/MensRights20/10/14 03:00 PM
3

Had to go look that up. 10 out of 16 million total. You've got a good point.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 07:04 AM
3

The big argument in favor of allowing women on the front lines is that they're already there. There was a woman on npr a few months ago explaining that women are frequently denied recognition, awards, and points towards promotion because they were not officially serving in a combat role, even though they were. Army policy overrules objective reality, as anyone familiar with the military will tell you.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 06:41 AM
0

People did for ww2.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 06:35 AM
30

Women in foreign countries serve in combat roles all the time. Israel is a particularly good example. The draft does not cover particularly well paying or easy roles, it covers roles that the government has to literally force people into under threat of imprisonment. This isnt necessarily all combat roles either. Logistics, communications, medical, etc. Are all necessary during wartime.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 06:30 AM
2

most sports with weight classes depend disproportionately on upper body strength, like boxing, wrestling, or other one on one fighting events. there probably exist at least one sport with weight classes that could be successfully integrated this way, but I can't think of one off of the top of my head.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 01:43 AM
3

Lets play a game: Referred to generically, 'violence' can mean a whole host of different things. But because my particular area of interest and activism is in challenging the violence that targets whites, I've lately been taking care to deliberately name it for what it is - black violence against whites. Although it is frequently blamed on mental illness and depression, it's actually a choice. We need to be vigilant not only in remembering that, but also reminding those people who would seek to …
/r/MensRights14/10/14 04:19 PM
20

a lot of us think that acting as moral police is unnecessary, and people that honestly get upset over this sort of thing simply need to get a sense of humor. We post images like this not because we are upset, but to point out the hypocrisy of feminist claims.
/r/MensRights09/10/14 12:25 AM
7

Options. Have the police there to take note that she's refusing to honor the court order. They can't force anything, and you shouldn't try, but if there's an official record from a cop of her outright refusing, you've got a better leg to stand on. Remain calm, and leave after you've been denied. Do not say anything rude or demeaning, and do not escalate into a confrontation. From there, get a lawyer, and file a motion to have her held in contempt of court. Request the official record from the po…
/r/MensRights26/09/14 08:00 PM
5

they did actually. There was a big stink back in the 90s about hiring standards for firefighters. Everyone learned that it was actually a pretty bad idea when fire department started having to hire women who could not physically do the job they were hired for. since then, the crusade has quietly fallen apart.
/r/MensRights25/09/14 02:51 AM
20

In the Article, he is asking everyone to drink responsibly, and points out that there is already a very robust system of rules and procedures to enforce men drinking responsibly.
/r/MensRights25/09/14 01:35 AM
6

Yeah, people get death threats on the internet all the time. I'm more surprised it took this long.
/r/MensRights03/09/14 05:59 AM
4

Lynch mobs are often wrong. They go after innocent people for no reason while the actual guilty party is never identified. The Reddit lynch mob has very famously done this on more than one occasion. The justice system isn't perfect, but it's better than the mob.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 06:05 PM
-2

You're editing your posts too :P I did go check out the IA video, and I'll admit it's more than just her sex life, and she really does deserve to be at the center of the shitstorm, rather than just another participant in it.
/r/MensRights28/08/14 05:38 PM
-3

oh good, we're just as circlejerky as SJW's now. If you're claiming the moral high ground, you do need to be mad about the right things, for the right reasons.
/r/MensRights28/08/14 04:23 PM
-6

Not in /r/gaming, not in /r/mensrights, not on facebook, certainly not in this post. I'm glad the industry she's in can actually take it seriously, but most of the Streisand effect garbage getting gloated about here is about her sex life, thinly veiled as a discussion about journalistic ethics. Before you downvote me again: Is the journalist who wrote articles on her behalf mentioned in this post? The magazine/website he wrote for? The consequences he suffered as a result of all of this?
/r/MensRights28/08/14 04:12 PM
-6

Perhaps I have spoken poorly: What should happen: Unethical journalists lose their jobs, indie game gets bad publicity for being unethically promoted. I never even hear about it, because I don't follow gaming journalism anymore. What has happened: I know Zoe quinn is a whore because everyone on reddit/facebook/media has been saying so. I still don't know who exactly unethically wrote articles on her behalf. I could look it up, but it's not anyone's core message, even though that's the thing that…
/r/MensRights28/08/14 04:00 PM
7

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/28kj9t/colleges_dirty_little_secret_their_insurers_are/ This report is what finally convinced my friends. The ones who could be convinced anyways.
/r/MensRights28/08/14 03:13 PM
-16

I've been under this impression that people were being censored because most of this comments were about how its public knowledge that she slept around while in a relationship, and calling her a whore. The whole thing was started because her ex was pissed she was sleeping around, and made their dirty laundry public, so the internet went personal army on her. None of this is particularly relevant to the public interest, and gloating about it just makes us look bad. The trading sex for reviews acc…
/r/MensRights28/08/14 03:04 PM
2

No, due process shouldn't be streamrolled, the current situation is indeed a huge source of injustice, but don't stop living your life for fear of getting caught up in it! Avoiding all college women while you're enrolled would be like refusing to drive a car because you're afraid of getting killed in an accident. Sure, it's a somewhat valid concern, but it sacrificing such a huge portion of your life because of fear is irrational.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 05:42 AM
6

You've been hideously downvoted because this is mensrights, but you've got a good point. Despite the widespread attention and negative publicity, rape accusations still represent a tiny portion of all sexual encounters. Indeed, part of the reason colleges fuck it up so much is because it happens so rarely, so the administrators in charge have no idea how to handle it. It's always going to be a danger, and it's important to fight for real equality, but don't stop living your life just because you…
/r/MensRights23/08/14 11:57 PM
1

because it's a comic, not an essay
/r/MensRights11/08/14 02:52 PM
1

There are a lot more unnecessary restrictions placed on abortions compared to other procedures, depending on the state. Check out Texas laws for a good example of what they're complaining about. Its almost to the point where there are so many "restrictions" that its effectively banned for low income women.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 07:15 AM
1

I had a roommate who had a no contact order from his ex. bad divorce, messy situation. Every individual time he called her, he would get in trouble as a separate charge. he never got locked up, or permanently arrested for any of it. the only real effect it seem to have was ammo for custody hearings
/r/MensRights10/08/14 04:20 PM
2

Anything in the code of conduct. Campuses will conduct investigations for normal assault, underage drinking, harassment, stalking, etc. All of these things would expose them to a lawsuit if they didn't at least pretend to address it. In most cases, the punishment for violaters is not total expulsion on the first offense, and the process isnt under the political microscope of being a rape case, so the whole thing is much less objectionable.
/r/MensRights07/08/14 03:07 PM
1

Apparently it's the year gerrymandering was invented
/r/MensRights06/08/14 03:39 AM
18

It's unlikely that they face false accusation charges. That would normally only happen in a case where they admit to making false charges (A text message saying, "I'll tell them you raped me") - or if the story were completely fabricated (Guy was in another state at the time of the alleged rape). The only reason to name them in a civil suit is to get it on legal record that they slandered him.
/r/MensRights05/08/14 04:43 PM
0

the irony here is palpable.
/r/MensRights01/08/14 12:46 AM
2

I'm saying I understand what he means, and agree the behavior he's describing is real, but the intention behind it is where he's wrong. Opening up the FGM conversation with "what about MGM?" does usually result in sidetracking the conversation, and it does actually happen pretty often. I (and I think you?) think people bringing up MGM are doing so because they're against both, but see the male issue being ignored. It's easy to mistake unintended results with intentional derailing, especially whe…
/r/MensRights31/07/14 08:31 PM
2

It happens all the time on /r/politics - I don't think it's intentionally calculated like he's suggesting here, but it does end up happening regardless. You've probably never seen it because the place is a cesspool we'd all be better off unsubscribing from.
/r/MensRights31/07/14 07:21 PM
1

They're not all like that. Most aren't actually, the crazy ones just stick out in our heads. Eventually you develop a sense for them, and can manage to break it off after a few dates instead of spending months or years with them.
/r/MensRights28/07/14 04:54 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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