TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

MisterDamage Archive

View 23 posts and 1,614 comments by MisterDamage 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)
349

Marriage/ChildrenMisterDamage/r/MensRights04/10/21 11:11 AM
207

Legal RightsMisterDamage/r/MensRights16/06/15 09:40 PM
164

Social IssuesMisterDamage/r/MensRights01/05/18 02:30 AM
99

Social IssuesMisterDamage/r/MensRights15/07/18 08:05 AM
95

Social IssuesMisterDamage/r/MensRights02/06/16 09:58 PM
62

DiscriminationMisterDamage/r/MensRights30/09/21 11:08 PM
57

Social IssuesMisterDamage/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:33 PM
54

False AccusationMisterDamage/r/MensRights15/12/16 04:02 PM
54

Social IssuesMisterDamage/r/MensRights17/01/16 02:02 AM
48

MisterDamage/r/PussyPass29/04/17 11:56 PM
47

Social IssuesMisterDamage/r/MensRights06/11/19 05:21 AM
45

Social IssuesMisterDamage/r/MensRights06/10/15 11:16 AM
36

Edu./Occu.MisterDamage/r/MensRights16/04/17 03:58 AM
21

MisterDamage/r/MensRights06/03/17 07:45 AM
15

GeneralMisterDamage/r/MensRights10/05/20 12:46 PM
14

MisterDamage/r/MensRights01/10/13 10:48 AM
12

OutrageMisterDamage/r/MensRights05/09/14 11:13 PM
12

Marriage/ChildrenMisterDamage/r/MensRights03/05/18 09:18 AM
9

Social IssuesMisterDamage/r/MensRights12/07/16 12:43 PM
7

QuestionsMisterDamage/r/MensRights07/05/17 01:25 PM
7

QuestionsMisterDamage/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:27 PM
3

MisterDamage/r/MensRights08/03/14 07:48 AM
2

MisterDamage/r/MensRights04/07/18 07:49 AM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,614 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I pay an extra 20 bucks to pick a particular seat and now I'm being moved to a random seat literally no one else wanted because testicles? Fuck that.
/r/MensRights30/12/23 10:17 AM
1

Using the red cross symbol for this is very serious business internationally and a clear violation of the Geneva conventions. guide-huminitarian-law.org "The perfidious use of the distinctive emblem of the Red Cross, Red Crescent, Red Crystal, Red Lion and Sun, or other protective signs recognized by the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols constitutes a grave breach of the laws of war."
/r/MensRights24/12/23 11:20 AM
1

I don't think it's remotely too much. It's directly analogous to hiring a group of goons to terrorize a person.
/r/MensRights12/08/23 06:35 AM
1

99% of "unarmed black man shot" are incidents like this Incidents where an officer illegally arrests someone because of an immutable characteristic and they don't immediately submit to their illegal use of force? I wasn't aware the statistics were so bad. Can't say I blame them for being pissed, I suppose.
/r/MensRights12/06/23 02:54 AM
1

He didn't get control of the gun until after she drew the gun and tried to kill him with it. Naturally, he's going to try to stop her at that point. I don't think there's any "just die already" law that requires her victim to simply let her murdalize him.
/r/MensRights11/06/23 08:49 PM
2

Your analysis goes fantastically awry at "Officer draws her firearm". using lethal force to fend off self defense is clearly not legal when the original arrest is illegal. He's very clearly in mortal danger, particularly given she's escalated to lethal force. Letting her create space between them while she's still armed might as well be suicide under the circumstances.
/r/MensRights11/06/23 12:35 PM
1

Oh? In which countries is it illegal?
/r/MensRights23/04/23 04:17 AM
10

I would argue way before 12. I mean, strapping a newborn to a board so they can't wriggle too much and lopping off part of their genitalia, with the full approval of the law doesn't exactly spell "unconditional love" in my estimation.
/r/MensRights22/04/23 06:59 AM
1

Some kid recently told me the concept was a feminist plot to subjugate men, an opinion which I think is bizarre.. Feminists use the real man notion to manipulate men, but I doubt their idea of what a real man is has anything to do with how you define the notion. To a feminist, a real man is a man who does as she tells him at all times. Which would where the kid you spoke to got the notion of feminists plots and subjugating men. To be fair to the kid, in the modern world, he wouldn't have heard a…
/r/MensRights12/03/23 07:23 AM
1

So we can murder the faithless whores spawn. Cool.
/r/MensRights24/02/23 03:16 PM
1

And then what? You have knowledge you are forbidden to have, so what are you going to do with it?
/r/MensRights24/02/23 01:58 PM
9

It worked out exactly as she intended. He's talking to her about her office conduct and now he's fired and disgraced instead of her having to alter her own conduct.
/r/MensRights20/02/23 06:39 AM
3

This will only work once or twice, and don't try it too soon after you've already done so: Get a bottle of chilled, preferably icy cold, water and just dump some over your head and face. remove glasses and electronics before attempting. This will give you a wake up when you're starting to have micro sleeps. What you're attempting is dangerous, dude, so be careful.
/r/MensRights19/02/23 04:15 AM
2

You can do this in the right context. In most contexts, we are required to be stoic and invulnerable.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 10:33 AM
1

Sabaton "To Hell and Back" This is named after Audie Murphie's autobiography and features some indicators of his PTSD
/r/MensRights12/02/23 10:31 AM
2

Dude, that relationship is toxic. Get out now.
/r/MensRights06/01/23 03:39 AM
10

It makes sense because the decisions aren't being made by the children. The decisions are being made by adults who then gaslight the child into conforming to that decision.
/r/MensRights01/01/23 02:38 AM
1

Please speak to a therapist. None of us can properly answer the questions that you have. Some of us are damaged, some of us are cynical and some of us are Feminists with malign intentions. Seek professional assistance. It's not weakness, finding help when you need it is strength and recovering from the kind of evil you were subjected to is power.
/r/MensRights31/12/22 12:04 PM
2

Alas, if I were to claim to be Autistic, I'd be one of those poseurs OP dislikes. I was suggesting that someone who actually is might want to do so. Unfortunately, OPs account is suspended, so I don't think they will be making an alternative subreddit anytime soon :(
/r/MensRights28/12/22 08:58 AM
8

May I suggest you create your own Autism subreddit? If you can identify people who need help on r/autism or who you believe are genuinely diagnosed, you can invite them to join and simply block anyone who gets out of line. Maybe it would help to create your own community from scratch by surfing r/autism and watching for people who might belong.
/r/MensRights26/12/22 06:38 AM
3

Because hating people that aren't white is racist and hateful. Yes, they actually believe that hating white men is not racist, hateful or even sexist. I've seen them literally comparing hating white men to Jews freed from a concentration camp hating SS concentration camp guards.
/r/MensRights22/11/22 06:14 AM
27

Carefully check the laws in your local area regarding audio recordings. Surreptitiously recording what happens may well be a criminal offence. If it is not legal to surreptitiously record, clearly inform your interviewer that you intend to keep an audio record of what takes place. *[edit] If they refuse permission, take comprehensive notes: Such notes have value as evidence, particularly if they are taken at the time, or immediately after the interview. You appear to have a few days before the i…
/r/MensRights21/11/22 11:41 AM
88

They're going to ask you question designed to get you to confess to something. Above all else, make them tell you what you're accused of. Then make them prove that it happened. Make a point of not answering their questions, nothing that you say can help you but anything you say can sure as hell be taken as evidence of literally anything. For example, you volunteer that you were reading a book called 'Dating in Japan'. This will be taken as evidence you were reading misogynist material and nothin…
/r/MensRights21/11/22 10:49 AM
1

When a man is beaten, that is fair. When his assailant is not prosecuted, that is objective. QED
/r/MensRights13/11/22 03:05 AM
6

If anything, that's worse. Way worse. The fact that she must testify reflects the fact that, as the accuser, she (or, rather, the prosecution presenting her case) must prove something. Compelling the accused to testify would reflect much the same thing: that the accused must prove something. That is not what due process looks like.
/r/MensRights27/10/22 10:33 AM
4

You don't get due process if you can't question the person who accused you. Claiming it is unfair to be required to testify really is calling for an end to due process.
/r/MensRights27/10/22 10:23 AM
1

You keep saying there is no evidence of them doing wrong. But there is. The men were the people that "last saw" the dead person. This is enough for questioning. So ask them some questions. You don't need chains to ask questions.
/r/MensRights03/10/22 07:10 PM
1

How long do you have to deprive a person of their liberty before you consider it a big deal!?!? No ones protection or security was endangered because there was no threat in the first place. The justice system worked. What justice system? I only see a bunch of thugs in odd clothing doing whatever the hell they please without any justification whatsoever. In this day and age, the notion that someone could simply disappear into the populace is absurd. All they needed to do was ascertain the ID of t…
/r/MensRights03/10/22 07:40 AM
2

You think the men should have never been arrested. I disagree. They needed to explain what happened Um, no. They didn't. Even in North Wales, you don't have to say anything when questioned by police, despite the atrocious "it may harm your defense if you fail to mention..." thing that goes on in UK law. Arresting someone to ask them questions instead of, y'know, just asking them some questions is Stasi level police state bullshit. You think being arrested is equal to punishment That's because it…
/r/MensRights03/10/22 03:19 AM
2

Overreacting to chains and cages? LOL I suppose being in a cage and having your hands chained behind you doesn't seem so bad when you're on the other side of the bars and putting the chains on. Empathy just isn't a thing when turning peoples lives inside out is just part of your day to day employment.
/r/MensRights02/10/22 10:35 PM
2

No. I'm saying when a person is crushed like this, it's okay to ask the people involved questions about what happened Fair The guys weren't punished, were they? Handcuffs, cages, involuntary transport... sounds punish-ey to me. A dead person crushed by a bookshelf and 2 dudes helping get the bookshelf off. What do you think that image looks like? Two good citizens helping another citizen in distress. There was exactly zero evidence they were actually involved in causing her predicament. Arrest i…
/r/MensRights02/10/22 08:28 PM
1

Thank god for the 5th amendment. Never, NEVER talk to the police. They can lie, they can cheat, they can and have withheld medication from diabetics in the hope of eliciting a confession.
/r/MensRights02/10/22 10:15 AM
0

You need a specially trained people Well, that leaves cops out of the equation proper recording equipment You'd be amazed at how portable that equipment is these days. They figure out if you lie and so on Cops have no idea if anyone lies, so they just assume everyone does. You're massively overstating their abilities. Some officer taking notes on a notebook bodycam the guy could just bail in the next few hours too There is absolutely nothing they can accomplish that requires chains, a police sta…
/r/MensRights02/10/22 08:05 AM
0

If the police were there so fast that the only possible people who could have done it were still in the room, the police would know who/what killed her in the first place.
/r/MensRights02/10/22 07:59 AM
0

No, not just the people in proximity, everyone. everyone in the hotel. Everyone on that street. Everyone in the city. hmm, transportation these days is really fast, so you need to close the borders and arrest everyone in the country.
/r/MensRights02/10/22 03:33 AM
3

The problem I have with this article is that it focuses on dispelling the fear people may have of being charged with crimes rather than providing protections for bystanders who provide medical care.
/r/MensRights02/10/22 03:31 AM
1

So you're saying never try to help. That's the message I took from it too.
/r/MensRights02/10/22 03:28 AM
-1

So you can't take a statement without chains, transportation to a cage and an interrogation room? Huh. You learn something new every day.
/r/MensRights02/10/22 03:27 AM
0

Cool, the moment a crime takes place, we arrest everyone, that way, the guilty party can't get away :)
/r/MensRights02/10/22 03:23 AM
1

OK, let's think about this a bit. Perhaps, then, there should be a standard of evidence required before allowing arrests to take place. I think the appropriate standard is "more likely than not to have committed a particular crime". That's a little cumbersome, so lets abbreviate it to "probable cause". That should eliminate arrests based purely on proximity.
/r/MensRights02/10/22 03:22 AM
1

He doesn't want you to dictate to him what he will say: which violates the preferred pronouns agenda of the politically engaged LGBTQ set. That's the extent of his input on the subject of LGBTQ rights.
/r/MensRights04/09/22 06:27 AM
7

What a coincidence; so is toxic masculinity :)
/r/MensRights22/08/22 11:38 AM
25

With "studies" like this, you should look for payments from men to their ex wives being counted as if the men still have the money and the ex wife never got it. It's all bullshit. Carefully curated, mounds of particularly odiferous bullshit.
/r/MensRights31/07/22 10:58 AM
9

This is what a scam looks like.
/r/MensRights22/07/22 09:29 AM
2

It's a mutilation performed on an infant, barely hours after birth. Welcome to the world, here's a surgical procedure on your most sensitive parts without anaesthetic and we'll strap you down so you don't writhe too much in agony. If you wanna do this to yourself once you're an adult, go wild. But don't expect to do it to an infant and not encounter some hostility.
/r/MensRights06/07/22 09:27 AM
53

misandry
/r/MensRights16/06/22 06:18 AM
27

What, all those things are more important than being a life support system for a wallet? those MONSTERS!
/r/MensRights05/06/22 12:09 AM
74

Well of course. What kind of selfish monster would avoid paying child support by killing themselves?
/r/MensRights04/06/22 11:36 PM
7

Women who choose to be prostitutes so choose because they consider it to be the best choice available to them. If you outlaw prostitution, therefore, you force women who would otherwise make that choice to choose things that are worse than prostitution.
/r/MensRights04/06/22 02:42 PM
2

If you're on trial and you're potentially going to be convicted based on a womans testimony that you raped her, you may indeed need to prove your innocence in order to stay out of jail.
/r/MensRights01/06/22 05:47 PM
1

A lack of evidence only helps if they're guilty. If they're innocent, a lack of evidence prevents them from proving that.
/r/MensRights01/06/22 04:14 PM
1

"Get help when you need it" You need help man. Professional help. Nothing to be ashamed of in getting help when you need it. Nothing to be ashamed of in needing help. Randos on a message board can't deliver the help you need, it's possible the VA can assist in some way, look for ways to get the help you need via government programs or even just suck it up and ask family for assistance if you can't afford professional help.
/r/MensRights30/05/22 08:24 AM
1

If I told you I was 12 feet tall, you'd presumably want to see some evidence, yes?
/r/MensRights28/05/22 09:27 AM
1

If feminists aim is to have a world where men and women are equal Objection! Assuming facts not in evidence!
/r/MensRights28/05/22 07:56 AM
19

I think it's clear from the article that she was the source of the violence in their relationship. When he fled, did she allow him to disengage? did she take a breath and try to calm down? Accept his retreat as an acknowledgement of her victory? No. She pursued him. God forbid he should decide he doesn't want to be screamed at before she's done screaming at him. In so many relationships, violence is preceded by one party provoking the other endlessly, refusing to allow the other party to escape …
/r/MensRights10/05/22 07:23 AM
2

I don't buy this. Parole is for early release, not for release at the end of your sentence. If you serve your full sentence, you get released without parole restrictions. Something smells about this story
/r/MensRights25/04/22 04:00 AM
1

It's perfectly rational, seen from their point of view. The father is more a life support system for a wallet rather than an actual human being, in their estimation and draining as much cash from that wallet as possible into various places: lawyers, court appointed guardian ad litems, not to mention generating ongoing business for the court itself oh and the children, I suppose, if they absolutely must, is as viciously rational and pragmatic as it comes. Generating ongoing business for the court…
/r/MensRights15/04/22 11:04 AM
0

This is a very bad time to be doing so however. Global security is starting to unravel and with Russia turning expansionist, you should consider the odds of getting combat pay in addition to the benefits.
/r/MensRights11/04/22 09:31 AM
1

There are 2 basic objections to transwomen: Transwomen entering female only spaces, and their impact on womens sports. After literal decades of feminists seeking out and destroying all male only spaces, I couldn't give a single flying fuck about the first objection. As a man, the second has absolutely no impact on me. Feminists are going to have to decide if they still want women's sports to be a thing. All things considered, I wish any transwoman well and don't particularly care one way or anot…
/r/MensRights20/03/22 03:38 AM
21

If they want to enslave me and force me into combat against career soldiers without providing me with any training? Fuck yes I want to leave. The Ukraine war will be over in a matter of days, it's far too late to be recruiting actual soldiers. They're press ganging cannon fodder in an act of murderous pointlessness.
/r/MensRights26/02/22 07:58 PM
2

Given the number of empty seats in most of those carriages, this is not about taking up other people's space. It is about policing male posture. Nothing more. It is pure misandry
/r/MensRights22/02/22 08:06 AM
6

The dude in the thumbnail, indeed all of the men in this video, are sitting in carriages with multiple open seats, many with multiple empty seats in a row. Any people sitting next to them are doing so voluntarily. IMO, nothing is being pushed whatsoever except for female privilege.
/r/MensRights22/02/22 07:59 AM
3

"No Fault" divorce does not remove fault, it simply assumes the husband is at fault and acts accordingly.
/r/MensRights02/02/22 09:58 AM
13

What was this judge smoking? Feminism.
/r/MensRights02/02/22 09:56 AM
2

No, he was overturned because a conviction is necessary to the Community Corrections Order that he left in place.
/r/MensRights02/02/22 09:55 AM
9

Sounds to me like your mom has handed you a perfect opportunity to shut your sister down at any time. Any time your sister starts up in the presence of you and your mom, immediately respond, pointing out how she is wrong. The objective here is not to argue a point, it is to trigger mom's "alright children calm down" response so as to shut your sister up
/r/MensRights06/01/22 09:05 AM
-1

There’s way more men who want experienced women than men who are attracted to inexperienced women. There are 2 basic strategies for reproduction: spawn as many offspring as possible and give no shits whether any one of them survives; this means that many of your offspring will fail to survive, but through sheer numbers, you guarantee that at least one will survive. The other is to partner up, have a few children and give your all to making damn sure that each and every one survives. AKA marriage…
/r/MensRights27/12/21 01:23 AM
4

Differing strategies. Some people breed many offspring each having a low probability of survival to themselves reproduce while other people breed few offspring each with a high probability of survival to themselves reproduce.
/r/MensRights26/12/21 11:34 PM
8

Men and women want different things in a partner. For men, reproduction is all about getting access to a woman's reproductive equipment. For women, reproduction is all about being near helpless for many months and then having a baby to raise, making acquiring food and shelter problematic, as both require significant time investment which she no longer has in abundance. She needs someone to provide for her while she raises his child. Because of this, Men want a woman who is not already pregnant w…
/r/MensRights26/12/21 11:15 PM
80

I was amused by his characterization of OP as "super condescending"... when OP merely reflected Mz Gender Studies' own condescension back at her.
/r/MensRights26/12/21 09:52 AM
10

Oh look, it's the amazing mobile goalposts. Where will those goalposts be 5 minutes from now?
/r/MensRights25/12/21 09:14 PM
16

Given the definition of rape, which varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, It may or may not be rape, but would typically be classed as sexual assault. The most common definition would require a woman to use a physical object to penetrate a man's anus in order to commit rape; Simply forcing a man to get an erection (or taking advantage of his erection without forcing him to be erect) then having sex with him against his will is typically not defined as "rape" but would likely be sexual assaul…
/r/MensRights11/12/21 05:13 AM
2

... wut?
/r/MensRights05/12/21 09:37 PM
3

Because according to trad cons, men are for sacrificing for the greater good. whether voluntary or not.
/r/MensRights05/12/21 10:12 AM
4

TradConDalorian This is not the way.
/r/MensRights05/12/21 02:28 AM
1

In a high school corridor, extremely crowded, a girl in my year who I had never interacted with at all but who was as large as most boys in our year, did a little covert jab punch into my gut. I have no idea why, I was unpopular, but had no grudge against her nor, as far as I know, did she have any grudge against me. I suspect it was just "I'm a girl and I can get away with hurting this nerd" I lost my senses entirely with shock and rage and hit her with this weird, sideways rotating arm that ca…
/r/MensRights18/11/21 07:12 AM
1

In a crowded nightclub, I found a unicorn: An empty table, at which I sat down. Cue psycho bitch "Get out of my boyfriend's seat!" I couldn't see any good outcome from engaging with this lunatic, so I shrugged and walked away. Enjoy your table bitch. She followed me, and when she caught up, said: "I don't like smart arses" And slapped me. The next moment is one of my oldest and clearest memories. My fist closed, I considered the likely result of what I was contemplating doing. She would have gon…
/r/MensRights18/11/21 06:58 AM
1

No we're not. We're talking about the power of a few. If the people of a nation despise their government to the point they'd rather be conquered than choose to place their life in the hands of the representatives of that government (and this is what enlisting amounts to), clearly, they'd rather be conquered.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 11:00 AM
1

If the government is incapable of inspiring enough devotion in it's citizens to prompt said citizens to pledge their life to protecting it... it doesn't deserve to survive in the first place Having that "oh shit button" simply serves to prop up unworthy governments. The one thing I actually like about getting old is that my life is solely my own to preserve or dispose of.
/r/MensRights09/10/21 10:14 AM
3

and have never let someone play the "but I'm a woman/mother" card. I once saw her absolutely cut down a woman who tried that on. It was a joy to behold :)
/r/MensRights05/10/21 01:31 AM
3

Interrogating a person when they are in discomfort is pretty standard. They left him in the back of a car for 6 hours. Do you think he got bathroom breaks? So you put him in the interrogation room, in pain from the bruising they deliberately leave untreated, either in pain from needing to pee or uncomfortable and humiliated from having wet himself... Getting him to fess up so he can get into a bathroom and pee/clean himself up then start getting treatment gets OH so much easier. Of course, they …
/r/MensRights01/10/21 04:36 PM
4

In Australian vernacular, "knock up" means "get pregnant"
/r/MensRights27/09/21 11:12 PM
6

Retarded leftist writes about extreme right wing communities as if they are orders of magnitude larger and more influential than they really are as well as conflating objection to ludicrously overbearing government overreach with those things. Because doing so makes his own profession more important.
/r/MensRights24/09/21 09:59 AM
2

"Our" Uh huh. goal shouldn't be to get more sympathy points vs the other biological gender No ones arguing for more "sympathy points". Indeed, it's strange that you should project that narrative upon what is actually there.
/r/MensRights23/09/21 02:03 PM
6

To be fAIrrRrrRRRrrr... Most are likely women... Because men die sooner.
/r/MensRights23/09/21 02:02 PM
3

"57 washing machines of elderly men were hospitalised or died of COVID"
/r/MensRights23/09/21 02:01 PM
19

"Specifically protect women..." If the law protects both women and men, apparently, women aren't specifically protected. Technically true. The best kind of truth.
/r/MensRights23/09/21 11:09 AM
1

Most of this I would see as survivable, but her refusal to recognise your trauma of having been raped is surely a sign that she doesn't care enough about you to be a good long term relationship prospect. Trying to find a way to minimise that experience is not a sign of someone who cares about you or your experiences. I'd call that a hard no.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 01:11 AM
4

If you feel you must. However, saying "self defence" or "she hit me first" will not only get you arrested, but will guarantee you get convicted.
/r/MensRights19/09/21 10:34 PM
7

So often people don't understand how police work. First things first: never talk to the police. When cops arrive at a domestic disturbance and one party says "they hit me" and the second party says "but they hit me first", literally the only thing they hear is the second party admitting to hitting the first party. The rest is just meaningless noise in their ears and they have all the evidence (an admission, by the perpetrator no less) they need to make an arrest. "They hit me" is nothing to them…
/r/MensRights19/09/21 07:48 PM
11

If the 2 to 10 number is accurate, the same principle would put the number of rapes at only those rapes for which someone is convicted. To get 2 to 10 percent, you have to ignore those rape accusations for which there is no conviction because the accused was actually innocent but the accuser was never prosecuted or convicted of making a false accusation. You have to ignore those rape accusations that never proceed to trial because the prosecutor knows he cannot convict but the accuser is never c…
/r/MensRights07/09/21 09:43 AM
11

The vast majority of "spiked drinks" cases turn out to just be excessive alcohol consumption. In this case, you've got the worst of both worlds if she proceeds to file a complaint with police, because there is no longer any question of doing a blood test to see what, if anything, you added to her drinks. What she gets out of this is the same thing she got the first time she did the same thing to her "friends". Attention. She got your attention and solicitude. Now she's getting it from someone el…
/r/MensRights19/08/21 11:31 AM
1

the problem for saying that yelling about how awful feminism is, is only going to result in this sub being banned? All you're doing is engaging in dog whistle politics and your definition of what feminism is, is not what's commonly interpreted as feminism, reddit and external groups don't care about your definition and railing against something that is going to be defined as rights for women, despite you meaning something different isn't going to matter. It's this short sighted negligence of rea…
/r/MensRights08/08/21 09:07 PM
2

True. And it's not going to change. This kind of inequity is perfectly acceptable to feminists so long as it's mostly rich men getting in the neck. Rich women can go under the bus so that more women can inflict the same inequity on men. And as long as feminists are fine with that (forever, effectively), it's not going to change.
/r/MensRights30/07/21 03:44 PM
1

This genuinely scares me. If CRT and CT is as reasonable on paper as this seems to me, free speech is on life support and someone is reaching for the off switch.
/r/MensRights26/07/21 01:01 PM
6

And once you've defined your terms, you can have a debate that doesn't abruptly morph from "It's fine to get tipsy and have sex" to "so you want to get her drunk and fuck her while she's passed out in the gutter". Which is how these discussions usually go.
/r/MensRights09/07/21 08:20 PM
6

So don't sleep with them when they are hammered. Somehow morphs into... Don't sleep with women when they are super hammered This "debate" always goes this way. the neo puritans use some vague word whose definition morphs depending on what stage the "debate" is at and the people they are arguing with are always too fucking dumb to realise they're being played.
/r/MensRights09/07/21 07:51 PM
9

Bullshit. Define intoxicated. 1 drink? 2 drinks? just one sip? and unless you define "intoxicated" as "literally passed out on the floor", you need to figure out how people are supposed to know their partner even is "intoxicated". This is a much more complex subject than just some hyper stupid "intoxicated == rape" idiocy.
/r/MensRights09/07/21 07:47 PM
3

I'm actually really suspicious of the whole "A woman obviously feels vulnerable in a room full of men" thing. It has a superficial appeal to it, after all, unless she's Rhonda Rousey, she's likely weaker and less capable of violence than the strongest, most capable man in the room. But the reality is that the strongest, most capable man in the room would get fucking dogpiled in an instant if he got physically aggressive with her and she absolutely knows it
/r/MensRights01/07/21 12:34 AM
2

You know... This can go two ways: My first reaction is /r/thatHappened like, sure, the first place a guys mind goes when told she is a feminist is not "Oh god, she's going to falsely accuse me of something" but "let's give her something to accuse me of" Then I started thinking about the wording of this. She even says right out that they're saying "It means that I can hit you back" (emphasis mine). Like she's really not even bothering to rephrase it for them so she can credibly express her "conce…
/r/MensRights01/07/21 12:28 AM
3

I used a bit of lotion on my hands before class started. The girl sitting next to me giggled and said "isn't that a girl thing?". It's just lotion, men have skin, skin can get dry, what does gender have to do here? You should check out Bill Burr's bit on lotion
/r/MensRights23/06/21 05:08 PM
1

The idea that paternity fraud is an issue of importance has its origin in the men's rights community. Many jurisdictions now make provision for men who are assessed child support to end that obligation if it is proven that he is not the biological parent of that child. Without the men's rights community, this would never have been considered or regarded as a reasonable outcome.
/r/MensRights18/06/21 07:38 AM
10

As we get older, our lives fill up. Not only is it more difficult to make new friends, old friends slip away as they fill their lives up with the same things that we fill our lives up with. Family, work, what little shreds of our hobbies we manage to cling to. These things don't leave a lot of room for new people.
/r/MensRights08/06/21 02:53 PM
2

So, that sounds like an endorsement of Trumps infamous "grab them..." line.
/r/MensRights08/06/21 05:49 AM
8

Rich men do deserve pussy? Bold position to take in this day and age.
/r/MensRights06/06/21 05:41 AM
3

This post. This post right here. This is why when an MRA criticises a woman, feminists conclude that he hates all women. It's because they see all men as being representative of all other men. It's projection on a grand scale.
/r/MensRights01/06/21 06:29 AM
2

Yeah, that wasn't as predictable as the fucking sunrise, was it.
/r/MensRights26/05/21 04:51 AM
5

as recommended by the supervising family consultant with a view to the girls, being reunited with their father as soon as practicable I'm pretty sure that "as soon as practicably" translates as "Fuck no, not ever you evil penis having devourer of innocence".
/r/MensRights25/05/21 06:04 PM
41

huntsman spiders Harmless. deadly crocs, kangaroos Avoidable, unless you're a dolt a legal system that will tear out a man’s heart Absolutely no escaping this. Even avoiding women altogether doesn't completely eliminate the risk.
/r/MensRights25/05/21 03:52 PM
2

There's nothing wrong with being manly, taking proper care of ones family or being stoic/emotionally open. But feeling like you have to be one of these kinda misses the point. You get to decide this for yourself and be damned to anyone who dares disagree with you.
/r/MensRights24/05/21 06:26 AM
16

According to Hayley Foster, who is the CEO of Women’s Safety NSW,... “The offender on the other side can be very clear, calm, coherent and very convincing.” This is common amongst advocates for treating women as victims regardless of any evidence or lack thereof: They want authorities to consider men to be perpetrators on the basis that they are clear, calm, coherent and convincing and women to be victims on the basis that they are not clear, calm, coherent and convincing. Contrariwise, if a man…
/r/MensRights21/05/21 07:33 AM
6

neither an AVO nor a previous allegation are a "criminal history". In order to issue an AVO it must be shown that: "you fear the defendant and that there are reasonable grounds for you to fear the defendant." This is insufficient grounds to convict a person accused of a crime, which is why an AVO is issued rather than putting the offender in jail. Her boyfriend had no criminal history. That's not what an AVO is for.
/r/MensRights21/05/21 07:11 AM
10

But even if its alleged if its coming from more than 1 source I am inclined to believe it is true. This is why previous convictions are inadmissible in court prior to sentencing. It biases the jurors against the accused. In this case, your bias against the accused is due* not to a previous conviction, but to a previous allegation, untested in any court. *edited: due, not doe (a deer. A female deer)
/r/MensRights21/05/21 07:05 AM
47

I would have preferred to have been offered the option when I was old enough, 13 maybe, to make that choice. It's not like any of the health justifications matter prior to adolescence.
/r/MensRights20/05/21 03:53 AM
2

If you've never had good sex, it might indeed seem like something the woman is little more than a passenger for. Which is largely why those people don't have good sex.
/r/MensRights10/05/21 06:40 PM
5

They lost 90% of their traffic when they banned porn. Now it's just the occasional feminist blog with maybe 7.5 followers.
/r/MensRights07/05/21 01:45 PM
2

It may be psychologically healthy, but even now, it is in no way acceptable. There are emotions that men are permitted to express, provided we do so in moderation, but any strong negative emotions in men are punished immediately and harshly. The notion that we are allowed to express emotions nowadays is a lie.
/r/MensRights04/05/21 03:56 PM
13

Lawyer. Think about transferring to another school before shit goes sideways. Dealing with the law is fucked up, but much less so than the monstrous bullshit that is a title IX investigation. Once you've been expelled for being "responsible" for a code violation, getting into a new school will be a lot harder. Discuss this with your lawyer too.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 03:54 AM
3

If you dislike the sub that badly, go elsewhere.
/r/MensRights25/04/21 08:32 PM
1

You're labouring under an outdated concept of politics. You feel like we're all supposed to be part of the same country, that we should be able to disagree courteously and treat people who disagree with us in a civilised manner. That was last century. It ended over 30 years ago. We are now embroiled in a take no prisoners, no quarter war for the soul of our civilization, and the good guys don't even realise it yet. There is no disagreement permitted, you're either a member of the tribe and willi…
/r/MensRights05/04/21 11:07 AM
5

It's about the distinction between third degree criminal sexual conduct and fifth degree criminal sexual conduct. Third degree requires the victim be involuntarily incapacitated, fifth degree applies where incapacitation is voluntary.
/r/MensRights02/04/21 12:01 PM
6

So after the retrial he may be found guilty of a different crime. Will be. In the opinion, the judge pointed out that the fact pattern agreed to by all parties meets the definition of fifth degree criminal sexual conduct. He's done. Just not as badly as the prosecutor would have liked.
/r/MensRights02/04/21 11:58 AM
8

You really should read the court opinion. The specific crime the accused was charged with was, from the opinion: The question before us is whether Khalil’s conduct is third-degree criminal sexual conduct: This particular offence, requires the victim be involuntarily incapacitated. However, also from the opinion: The state chose not to charge Khalil with fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct which criminalizes nonconsensual sexual contact, a charge both the State and Khalil conceded would cover th…
/r/MensRights02/04/21 11:52 AM
1

This year? Thaaaat's cute!
/r/MensRights01/04/21 12:45 PM
1

So what? It's just the back of the bus.
/r/MensRights01/04/21 12:44 PM
7

If you read the article (don't, just sayin) it gets even worse: “We can’t make it seem like men are being the heroes here. “If all men are to all stand in solidarity they kind of have a get-out-of-jail-free card – I’m obviously on the girl’s side, but will [boys] still go to the locker room after school and talk... Like, we're intrinsically guilty and even this disgusting exercise is not enough to escape our collective guilt. I feel like going to the locker room and talking inappropriately about…
/r/MensRights30/03/21 08:02 PM
1

... I prefer to change minds and avoid interaction with toxic people. You could simply say "I'd rather argue the person than the point" AKA ad-hominem fallacy.
/r/MensRights20/03/21 01:10 PM
1

Liars frequently do.
/r/MensRights20/03/21 09:20 AM
1

Attempted suicide and completed suicide do not necessarily have the same objective. The notion that a woman who ODs on sleeping pills only to be found hours later by a relative arriving home is trying to accomplish the same thing as a man who eats a shotgun shell is contemptuous of both the man and the woman, the woman for being incompetent at killing herself and the man for not knowing that spraying his brains all over the wall behind him would result in his death. Women attempt suicide more of…
/r/MensRights20/03/21 08:31 AM
1

Effectively, the time and place to discuss issues of feminism and womens rights is out in the open and whenever they please. On social media, in public, whenever, wherever. Whereas the time and place to discuss issues of mens rights is in the dark. In private. But only when there is no specific current outrage about some crime against a woman. Which would be never. That's not hyperbole, that's just reality. We can't let the opponents of men's human rights dictate the time, venue and relative pub…
/r/MensRights20/03/21 08:24 AM
1

Confession by projection
/r/MensRights20/03/21 07:36 AM
1

No one is blaming anyone except rapists. You're the one who wants to expand the circle of blame to people who have nothing to do with the actual crime.
/r/MensRights19/03/21 02:15 PM
1

Whose blaming anyone?
/r/MensRights19/03/21 02:13 PM
1

The dishonesty in this image is astonishing. They use the broadest possible means of determining how many people were raped, then compare that number to the narrowest possible means of determining how many people were falsely accused. If we determined the number of false accusations on the same basis as they have determined the number of rapes, every figure in that image that wasn't red, would be black.
/r/MensRights19/03/21 06:23 AM
9

Imagine caring about injustice, considering it to be an issue worth talking about. How dare she?!?
/r/MensRights17/03/21 05:08 PM
5

Operating a tank is not like flying a jet. Many American and British tanks do not use autoloaders (numerous reasons for that) so someone has to grab rounds from storage and load it into the gun. This is physically demanding work. Maintenance of a tank is a continuous, ongoing process, which often requires the ability to lift or move heavy objects. And both jets and tanks need to support or be supported by infantry, which is a bunch of people walking around with heavy firearms in their hands and …
/r/PussyPassDenied11/03/21 03:57 AM
30

It's deliberate torture. Someone's getting a real charge out of fucking with peoples heads.
/r/MensRights10/03/21 04:19 AM
3

The "infertility" was a lie. The very next morning, she's all "you put a baby in me"... she either fully expected to get pregnant (and deliberately timed your wild fling to coincide with her fertile days) or she was already pregnant and knew it beforehand. You need a paternity test and a lawyer to advise you.
/r/MensRights04/03/21 02:25 AM
1

Exactly. No one does this. I've never seen this in over 30 years in the workplace. Someone who grabs other employees uninvited has Very Serious Issues™
/r/MensRights02/03/21 06:10 PM
11

It has three posts in the last month. Says it all, really.
/r/MensRights02/03/21 10:13 AM
3

If you're going to castrate and burn his works, there's something you just removed which perhaps needs burning as well. For him to see.
/r/MensRights26/02/21 02:33 PM
2

She investigates the meaning, finds out what it actually is... Then proceeds to justify responding on the basis of her self constructed strawman meaning. She knows exactly what the term means but has exactly zero intention of being honest about the subject and has no shame whatsoever about her dishonesty.
/r/MensRights24/02/21 10:44 PM
27

Is it really incompetence when functioning as intended?
/r/MensRights23/02/21 12:56 AM
137

Putative father registries often exist purely to point to after the fact and say "you shoulda..." The laws tend to require forms to be available at certain government offices... but aren't. The laws tend to require advertising of the registry... and aren't. I've seen an article about one such registry in which the people who are supposed to maintain the registry were actually confused about why a man who might be a father would be contacting them
/r/MensRights22/02/21 09:11 PM
2

This sub will look at a vocal minority of extremist than say it's all the feminist saying this. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/695m34/karen_straughans_response_to_those_arent_real/ So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations…
/r/MensRights17/02/21 06:49 AM
2

It's all predictable strategy, any disfavoured organisation or group is to be associated with some other, less favoured group, to make them look bad. So Proud Boys are associated with white supremacists, because, obviously. That having worked, you associated Proud Boys with MRAs to capitalise on the success of smearing the Proud Boys. It works because even if people know the media are out to lunch when it comes to stuff they know about, when it comes to stuff they don't know about, people assume…
/r/MensRights13/02/21 07:55 PM
6

OK, well, I didn't need to be quite so harsh. Sorry.
/r/MensRights11/02/21 02:49 PM
23

old. What, you think peasants got forced to go to battle with knights because they were so damn privileged?
/r/MensRights11/02/21 10:00 AM
17

3 years (with good behavior), low security resort prison
/r/MensRights03/02/21 01:37 AM
3

"Predator's Exposed," the group behind the decoy, then made their way to Newland Avenue expecting to catch Gray's ex-partner, who is in fact already on the Sex Offender's Register. This looks like the victim was on the sex offenders register. However, later in the article, it becomes clear that the perpetrator of this fraud has herself been convicted on three charges of sexual assault. I find myself confused. Are both sex offenders, or has poor grammar falsely accused the victim of this scheme y…
/r/MensRights01/02/21 08:41 AM
1

I think you've misinterpreted my post. Or you hit reply on the wrong post. I expressed my offense at OPs assumption that there is a lot of anti-LGBT talk amongst MRAs and suggested OP should post examples of such talk before having feelings about such talk.
/r/MensRights26/01/21 11:21 PM
2

So homophobia and transphobia is now relegated to vague feelings of discomfort? I have always taken it to refer to conduct that's actually discriminatory and regarded them as serious accusations as a result. If vague feelings of discomfort are all it refers to, that puts those accusations in a whole different category for me, one that makes them considerably less serious issues for me. Fortunately though, I remain convinced that they refer to serious character flaws rather than trivial nonsense.
/r/MensRights26/01/21 11:16 PM
2

Mens rights is about... (wait forrrr it, waaaiiit forrrr iiiiit) Men's rights. Now if you happen to be LGBT and a man, we're about your rights as a man. Your rights as an LGBT person are important, but are dealt with elsewhere.
/r/MensRights26/01/21 11:04 PM
3

it's sneaker porn Wow, rule 34 really is a thing.
/r/MensRights26/01/21 11:02 PM
3

No, he's a prude. He refers to any sort of sexual talk, not homosexual/transexual talk. Automatically hurling the worst slur you can think of at someone isn't smart, it's just acting like a cunt.
/r/MensRights26/01/21 10:58 PM
0

I feel like you should be doing less feeling about facts and more pointing to facts and then decide how you feel about it. I am unaware of anything of the sort so until you can point to examples that actually win the support of MRAs rather than false flags that immediately got downvoted, your feelings really aren't my problem.
/r/MensRights26/01/21 10:50 PM
1

The armed forces have many non combat roles and many roles that, while they take people into combat zones, are not directly combat facing. If women are drafted along with men, guess who gets to risk dying and who gets to push paper...
/r/MensRights23/01/21 09:46 AM
1

Go on...
/r/MensRights22/01/21 04:17 AM
7

All masculinity is good. Toxic masculinity is about assigning maleness to negative characteristics for the purpose of maligning men. Toxic masculinity isn't about masculinity at all, it's about negative behaviour that can invariably seen in women as well as men.
/r/MensRights20/01/21 11:53 AM
4

Given the story, I'd have to conclude that failing to put the two characters together in that way would leave the story kind of unfinished. It's a love story about Diana and Steve Trevor, intended to complete what was unfinished in the first movie; that being the case, I think it's necessary to the story.
/r/MensRights28/12/20 10:00 AM
1

Searching someones documents is not testimony, this implicates the fourth amendment, not the fifth. The fourth amendment protection may be overcome upon probable cause to believe that a crime has occurred. If it is found by a court to be testimony, the prosecution has a problem because a victim who will not testify is difficult to secure a conviction for. If the victim then chooses to testify, any testimony on their electronic devices becomes subject to cross examination and thus must be made av…
/r/MensRights28/12/20 09:52 AM
9

If your servers are not cheery and attentive, they don't deserve more than the minimum tip.
/r/MGTOW224/12/20 04:47 AM
3

As it turns out, legbeards don't shave
/r/MensRights21/12/20 07:49 AM
-1

You can call people "fuckers". You can tell people to "shut the fuck up". If you say either of these things while calling for "unity", you're a fucking idiot who needs to shut the fuck up and let the adults do the talking.
/r/MensRights18/12/20 12:14 AM
14

Seems to me the person who was filming sensed something coming and started filming. The buildup was what prompted the videographer to start filming.
/r/PussyPassDenied05/12/20 01:01 PM
2

They also leave out commute times for paid labor, while leaving commute times for unpaid labor in
/r/MensRights27/11/20 10:06 AM
1

"If you're a celebrity, he'll let you grab him right by the dick"
/r/MensRights27/11/20 08:03 AM
3

If your nation can't muster enough soldiers voluntarily, the war isn't worth winning and the nation isn't worth dying for.
/r/MensRights26/11/20 09:35 PM
1

You win complete ownership of a patch of ground 6 feet by 6 feet by 2 feet.
/r/MensRights26/11/20 09:33 PM
1

LOL. At least he wasn't saying he'd buy one.
/r/MensRights26/11/20 09:32 PM
7

I wonder what the reaction is to an MRA posting on their sub. My guess is, it would be hard to hear yourself over all the echoing in that chamber.
/r/MensRights22/11/20 01:11 PM
3

The intent behind the words in the quote are "me first"
/r/MensRights21/11/20 07:16 PM
4

A carbon fiber is a long, thin strand of material about 0.0002-0.0004 [inches] in diameter and composed mostly of carbon atoms” so we wonder what kind of men Hickey-Moody has been dating. Thank you so much :) I needed a good laugh.
/r/MensRights22/10/20 12:19 PM
5

Men bond with each other over their admiration of carbon fibre surfaces (* yes, the author actually believes this. No, I do not). This bond excludes women, because women are incapable of admiring carbon fibre (* see previous note). Therefore carbon fibre is bad. Or something.
/r/MensRights22/10/20 12:15 PM
3

The vilification of porn is a demented by product of neo puritanism. People should not have to be ashamed of their sexuality nor be prevented from indulging impulses that harm no one.
/r/MensRights01/10/20 10:58 AM
6

"I can’t help but wonder if a large majority of men won’t opt for the conflict-free humanoid over the real thing, with all of our baggage and hormones and mothers-in-law" TFW you are such a shitty human being that lonely people having some solace scares you.
/r/MensRights26/09/20 03:29 AM
10

This is nothing more than a system of control. It is how men are harnessed to build communities. That control, is servitude, that harness is a slaves chains. It takes men working hard, risking their lives, denying themselves so that their loved ones can survive and prosper to build a community. Prior to the industrial revolution women were not only engaged in other activities necessary to the community, they were physically unable to perform the roles that fell to men because those roles require…
/r/MensRights25/09/20 09:42 AM
3

Strongly recommend you confine email addresses to direct messages rather than public fora such as this. I Regret posting it can have unintended consequences.
/r/MensRights18/09/20 11:37 AM
2

Legally speaking, the crime of loitering requires more than just "remaining in a place with no apparent purpose". A loitering ordinance must specify some specific behaviour beyond simply being in a public place. United States Supreme Court precedent City of Chicago vs Morales ordinance's definition of loitering as "to remain in any one place with no apparent purpose" does not give people adequate notice of what is prohibited and what is permitted, even if a person does not violate the law until …
/r/MensRights18/09/20 11:33 AM
1

I've seen many articles exactly like that. Of course, the object of those articles wasn't precisely to sympathise with them though.
/r/MensRights15/09/20 10:55 PM
2

That's a choice. One you should have had the opportunity to make for yourself rather than have it imposed by another.
/r/MensRights13/09/20 12:43 AM
1

The medical profession as a whole is deeply invested in withholding this information from putative fathers. The chances that they would cooperate with any suggestion that they insert themselves into this issue are remote. Even medical ethicists who agree that there is a moral obligation to provide that information to a putative father insist that that obligation does not fall upon the doctor in question. There is unanimity, however, that where misattributed paternity is discovered, it should be …
/r/MensRights13/09/20 12:42 AM
2

especially when the people who are suddenly crying foul have spent centuries oppressing you "you" are not centuries old and neither are the people "suddenly" crying foul.
/r/MensRights12/09/20 05:50 PM
6

blow me fuck face.
/r/MensRights31/08/20 02:15 AM
17

European court of justice That's not a court of justice :(
/r/MensRights28/08/20 06:29 PM
5

In reality, a man in the UK is 230 times more likely to be raped himself than falsely accused of rape. Oh suddenly feminists not only acknowledge rape of men exists, but pretend they actually care about it. [cough]bullshit[cough] Aww, nope. They just want to pretend false accusations of rape never happen so they're comparing it to something else that they think never happens.
/r/MensRights26/08/20 07:03 PM
5

Isn't it nice how the article takes her "sacrifice" and his "selfishness" as a given.
/r/MensRights10/08/20 10:54 PM
4

Surely it's not such a big deal to sit at the back of the bus instead of the front? /s
/r/MensRights31/07/20 02:08 AM
0

However, if you're a Person Eating Tasty Animals, it's possible you do ;)
/r/MensRights27/07/20 12:53 PM
7

For me it is down to consent. when you circumcise an infant, said infant cannot consent. It should be a matter of "my body my choice". If a person of sufficient age wants to be circumcised, that is no one's business but their own. Circumcising infants, on the other hand, should be regarded as deplorable.
/r/MensRights26/07/20 08:17 AM
5

If the men you choose uniformly turn out to be losers, violent or just plain assholes, that is not my fault. I cannot make the men you choose into decent human beings. Only you can make you choose men who aren't appalling in one way or another.
/r/MensRights25/07/20 07:52 AM
2

The one in which the bitch is an audacious cunt.
/r/MensRights19/07/20 12:01 PM
1

If "Kill all men" is acceptable because it's more an expression of opposition to the patriarchy, then it follows that men are disposable (can be "killed") because they are part of said patriarchy. It is essentially the mirror image of female objectification: if men objectify women, clearly feminists who repeat this sentiment annihilate men.
/r/MensRights06/07/20 12:11 AM
3

We live in a "patriarchal society"... apparently... and yet in her own words, these patriarchal structures are telling people that "unintended force" isn't a legal argument. This isn't "men holding other men accountable"? Then who is? Are you saying that the legal system is matriarchal?
/r/MensRights01/07/20 03:34 PM
1

Maybe related to wanting to remove weak genes from the gene pool? Kinda sorta. It's a revulsion response that prevents her from breeding with that male.
/r/MensRights01/07/20 03:31 PM
2

There's a reason that takes strength. No one wants to hear what he has to say. The chances, outside anonymous, male friendly spaces like this, that he will be mocked and/or vilified for having feelings approaches 1
/r/MensRights30/06/20 01:05 PM
5

Justin Bieber was accused of sexual assault at the four seasons hotel in Austin, Tx. He has receipts showing he spent the night in an AirB&B on the night of the alleged assault and at a Westin hotel the next night, proving he wasn't at the place he is alleged to have assaulted the accuser. He had other evidence including social media posts from the night in question that limited the hours during which he could have been at the alleged location. Apparently this offends Miss Scheurle.
/r/MensRights25/06/20 11:22 AM
1

Taking out a restraining order gives her a significant advantage in divorce proceedings. She filed for a restraining order to put him at a disadvantage, nothing more.
/r/MensRights18/06/20 06:02 AM
2

WTF!?!?! I mean, providing emergency relief food only to women is bad enough, but this one took me by surprise. This is just reprehensible. The UN just went from bad to knowingly evil in my estimation.
/r/MensRights13/06/20 02:44 AM
2

Is she trying to justify fucking an underage male? Why is his mom on the hook for his child support?
/r/MensRights10/06/20 06:30 PM
11

Presumably, this indicates a settlement, equally presumably, the settlement is subject to an NDA
/r/MensRights10/05/20 12:46 PM
7

It's amazing what can happen when you're encouraged to report and authorities are poised to believe you're a victim rather than a perpetrator. When the only resources available to you are related to preventing you from or stopping committing acts of domestic violence, reporting your abuse to the authorities is not only more difficult, but fraught with risk. Men reporting themselves as victims of DV risk being assumed to be DARVO (Domestic Abuse Reverse Victim and Offender) offenders
/r/MensRights03/05/20 06:34 PM
3

That works sooo much better if the victim doesn't see it coming.
/r/MensRights28/04/20 04:39 PM
9

You need to envisage the smug shit eating grin the person writing this was wearing when they did so to fully understand what is going on here. They know it makes no sense. They know it is completely unjust. It's not that they don't care, it's that they think that men deserve this shit just for being men.
/r/MensRights21/04/20 04:40 PM
7

Less dog whistle, more fog horn
/r/MensRights28/03/20 08:04 AM
3

Until it all comes unstuck and it's slumped over "yeah I thought it was a good idea" LOL Bill Burr rocks!
/r/MensRights27/03/20 11:50 AM
5

Nor will she see you come home physically and emotionally burned out, take it for weakness and use the opportunity to pile more stress and misery on top because she wants someone who brings home the big bucks without having to put up with someone who pours everything into their job.
/r/MensRights27/03/20 11:47 AM
2

Guy can't find better work, so lets put him in jail. Yeah, that's going to fix the problem. Do they think he'll have an easier time finding work after he's spent time in jail?
/r/MensRights26/03/20 04:55 AM
1

Heh. Rape culture IS a thing. In prisons. And everyone knows it.
/r/MensRights18/02/20 11:28 PM
6

The real victims are the women who decline to play the sordid game, not the women who willingly debase themselves for bucks.
/r/MensRights09/02/20 10:11 PM
25

My opposition to oppression is moral and immovable. Which is why I oppose people who say that they hate men and I oppose people who say that they hate white people. The first is sexism the second is racism. Both are reprehensible and moral people should object when those sentiments are expressed.
/r/MensRights02/02/20 07:47 AM
2

Grabs a person like "dude, that's enough" after he's turned away from the woman and is literally walking away? Don't be ridiculous.
/r/PussyPassDenied23/01/20 07:20 AM
1

Speak to a lawyer immediately. You can frequently get an initial consultation free of charge
/r/MensRights21/01/20 01:52 PM
24

first, the math doesn't add up; a 6 seated car with four people and there is only one space she can sit, that between two guys? um, no. Second, men are, on average, taller than women. statistically, they likely needed more leg room than she did. So why is it she thinks they should sit in the spot with less leg room?
/r/MensRights19/01/20 04:14 PM
2

The reason why the court didn't allow her priors be known during the trial is also the same reason why the accused's priors The reason why the accused's priors are not permitted is because they are irrelevant to the question of whether they committed this crime. In this instance, the alleged victim has repeatedly testified falsely, a fact which is relevant to whether or not their testimony can be trusted and would be admissible in anything other than a rape prosecution. This miscarriage of justi…
/r/MensRights28/12/19 12:54 AM
2

My friend practices law in Australia. LOL He told me all of this. And you didn't understand a word of it. He even told me a radio broadcaster got jail for making someone's priors public knowledge over the radio Ask your "friend" if the charge was perjury, like you said. If you're referring to Derryn Hinch, it was not perjury, but contempt of court. And yes, the persons accused's* history is taken into account at the time of sentencing, not during the trial. This is true. And irrelevant to this d…
/r/MensRights27/12/19 05:23 PM
0

No one is saying she doesn't deserve justice. Justice is a jury that is fully informed about her credibility when they make their judgement. The only "logic" behind this is "He's accused of rape? Why bother with a trial, just lock him up"
/r/MensRights27/12/19 08:51 AM
3

It is a legal thing. Something you know very little about. The jury should not know. It is only the evidence against you for this crime that matters. Exculpatory evidence ought to be admissible. Her previous non sexual conduct can shed light on the likelihood that she is telling the truth. This is crucial information for the jury to be aware of, particularly in a rape prosecution as the alleged victims testimony makes up such a large percentage of the evidence. Once you are found guilty for this…
/r/MensRights27/12/19 08:47 AM
6

Using "incel" as an insult appeals to exactly the ideals of masculinity that are identified as "toxic". Reject both labels.
/r/MensRights15/12/19 10:10 AM
7

Police wont necessarily see things that way. You would have one person claiming one thing, another person claiming a different thing and specific training as well as a powerful cultural imperative regarding which of these people needs and deserves their protection.
/r/MensRights14/12/19 11:08 PM
1

Choices have consequences. The interesting thing about these choices on the other hand is that only women get to make these choices.
/r/MensRights14/12/19 01:06 AM
2

because they have demands like pregnancy and children. Those aren't demands, they are choices.
/r/MensRights13/12/19 05:10 PM
1

Then perhaps our ideas ought to be the ones challenged here.
/r/MensRights08/12/19 10:16 AM
1

This article was particularly interesting for the methodological problems that likely cause undercounting.
/r/MensRights17/11/19 04:24 AM
2

Your nephew has parents, grandparents, immediate and extended family for support. Your wife, if accused of sexual misconduct, could easily have no one at all if you choose to abandon her to give your support instead to someone you have not solemnly promised to support for better or for worse, forsaking all others. Why marry at all if you don't expect your spouse to stick by you when everyone else turns on you?
/r/MensRights13/11/19 06:57 PM
2

You realise the alleged victim wasn't living with them, right? Can you comprehend a simple hierarchy of loyalties: Our own children Our spouse extended family The destruction visited upon his home and possessions and the subsequent incarceration of her father is directly attributable to her endorsing the allegation by abandoning him immediately upon learning of the allegation. If she had remained in their home, this would have complicated in her fathers mind the act of vandalism he was contempla…
/r/MensRights13/11/19 05:54 PM
2

SHE LEFT. No, when you spouse is accused of appalling crimes you stay with them to support them and figure out what happened. Your spouse is not your secondary loyalty, they are your primary loyalty and they get the benefit of the doubt and, more importantly, your support when they are accused of appalling crimes, until there is clear evidence that the accusation is not a fetid crock of shit.
/r/MensRights13/11/19 05:29 PM
3

You're deluding yourself. She kicked him to the curb then his lawyer advised him to cut off contact. This timeline is clear as day in the text we've been given without any room for discussion. My sil who is 14 got pregnant and when her parents found out she lied and told them that I was the father. My wife left to be with her family It's literally the very first thing that happened once the accusation was made.
/r/MensRights13/11/19 03:03 AM
3

There's a difference between taking an accusation seriously and immediately kicking them to the curb. You can support your spouse while being alert for evidence one way or the other. You should be looking for evidence one way or the other, in an attempt to clear them if nothing else, but until the accusation is more than simply he said/she said, an honorable person has an obligation to stay with their spouse and offer them the benefit of the doubt. Immediately leaving him to live with her family…
/r/MensRights13/11/19 02:57 AM
6

You don't leave your spouse to live with your family because you believe they might have done something. That's more than just picking a side, it's the clearest possible public accusation of guilt. It is abandonment in its most irrefutable form.
/r/MensRights12/11/19 06:04 PM
6

My wife left to be with her family when this broke This is abandonment in his most vulnerable moment. When he needed her support, support to which he should have been entitled until such time as there was proof of his guilt, she betrayed him and their marriage by abandoning him.
/r/MensRights12/11/19 05:51 PM
8

When you marry, you fundamentally change your allegiance structure. At the very least, your spouse should get the benefit of the doubt and abandoning your spouse in their most vulnerable moment, when they need your support the most, is an act of betrayal.
/r/MensRights12/11/19 05:47 PM
7

This marriage is already headed there. It looks to me like his wifes disgust with him started at roughly the same time he started trying to improve his conduct. Which suggests to me that there might be a connection that he can use to reverse the rot. He doesn't need to go back to being selfish, saying mean things and using dirty tactics in their verbal squabbles and rejecting that sort of thing does not necessarily mean becoming a pushover. Which is what he has become. He has accepted punishment…
/r/MensRights11/11/19 11:50 AM
11

Learn the power of no. Pushups? No. Stay away from home until bedtime? No. Massage? Not until you learn to be nice to me bitch.
/r/MensRights11/11/19 10:56 AM
2

It seems your google fu is stronger than mine. Thanks for the link :)
/r/MensRights07/11/19 03:37 AM
3

She knows her husband will come home/to bed after her, knows that he will have to go up the stairs, yet she turns all the lights in the home off, resulting in the noise he makes stumbling up the stairs and this is his fault?
/r/MensRights03/11/19 04:12 PM
1

Abortion is where the line between laws prohibiting behaviour that is "malum in se" (bad in itself) and laws prohibiting behaviour that is "malum prohibitum" (bad because it is prohibited) break down. We all agree that murder is evil, or "Malum in se" and jaywalking is clearly wrong only by virtue of the state prohibiting that conduct, or "malum prohibitum". The central fact of abortion is that any legislation relating to it is an exercise in line drawing where no clear moral line exists. Some p…
/r/MensRights08/10/19 08:59 AM
1

"We can take this, we've got broad shoulders." But they can't take exactly the same conditions that men endure.
/r/MensRights08/10/19 08:46 AM
4

In the trailer, he is described as "a wannabe cop". As it happens, he later found employment in law enforcement and worked as a cop until his death. It's nice to see a dream realised.
/r/MensRights07/10/19 10:00 AM
1

And I can sympathise with the women who don't feel safe while blaming the feminists who made it that way.
/r/MensRights07/10/19 06:32 AM
2

Feminists asked for it. Now they have it. Ha! Feminists =/= women. Learn the difference between the two words.
/r/MensRights06/10/19 11:21 PM
1

It seems to me that self reports are not necessarily reflective of the true numbers. If someone attempts suicide, fails, is ashamed either of attempting suicide, failing to commit suicide or both, it is reasonable to suppose that they might not report the attempt even anonymously.
/r/MensRights06/10/19 09:10 AM
3

To a cop "She hit me and I hit her back" is an admission of guilt and nothing more. "She hit me" will be an uncorroborated accusation that she will deny. "I hit her back" is an admission of your own conduct, admissible in court. Except they'll leave out the last word. All a jury will hear is "I hit her".
/r/MensRights03/10/19 11:33 PM
3

When you're in school, don't reveal to your professors that this is your objective. Try to fly under the radar as just another aspiring partner at Richie and Rich attorneys at law
/r/MensRights29/09/19 12:11 PM
1

See, dangerous driving is an actual crime. Unlike being a single male in a park. If the person had reported "single male in a park masturbating", now you've got something to be suspicious of. But this wasn't that, this was just "Ick! Male!"
/r/MensRights27/09/19 09:45 PM
1

Exactly the same situation applies: the person said they were suspicious and provided no other context than a single male in a park. Maybe he was in the park by himself the previous day. Hell, 53 days ago, he was likely on a public street by himself. Children are often to be found on public streets, so better question him about that. A single male in a park is in no way suspicious yet the cop, trying to justify himself, provided this as the justification for interrogating him. It's not a justifi…
/r/MensRights27/09/19 08:13 PM
1

Better question him about yesterday too. and last week. Chances are, he doesn't remember what he was doing 53 days ago, that's pretty suspicious, don't you think?
/r/MensRights27/09/19 07:21 PM
1

This isn't an opportunity for a fishing expedition, it's a report of someone doing something perfectly innocuous. Confirm that the individual is in fact doing something perfectly innocuous and your "investigation" is fully complete.
/r/MensRights27/09/19 04:23 PM
4

Receives call. Goes to location. Investigation: I see a man sitting on a bench (legal) reading a book (legal) in a park (legal). I see nothing suspicious. Investigation ends. Write report. File report. Done.
/r/MensRights27/09/19 07:19 AM
3

Consider the situation of the woman's husband; he has two children with his wife. If he divorces her, he's on the hook for alimony and child support. The father of his wifes daughter literally did nothing wrong, so make the best of it, yeah? What, exactly, could he have done differently and not have got screwed? He could have not been nice to kenodinks, but why do that really? So maybe he wins in the end, but that's not his doing, that's the faithless spouse and the government that deported the …
/r/MensRights24/09/19 07:36 AM
1

If you've never had to develop the ability to self govern, suddenly having the necessity to do so can have unpredictable results.
/r/MensRights15/08/19 10:29 AM
3

In my country you can apply for a gun licence under certain conditions, including no use of those drugs I mentioned above So if you have a license and want to keep it, under no circumstances should you seek help for depression or anxiety. Got it.
/r/MensRights09/08/19 04:07 AM
11

Real men™ only buy stuff from people that hate them.
/r/MensRights01/08/19 09:34 AM
5

David Reimer would have disagreed with you it seems. He also lost his penis as a result of a botched circumcision and was raised as a girl. He transitioned back to male at 14 and committed suicide at 38 years of age after years of severe depression.
/r/MensRights31/07/19 11:28 AM
11

To work, dehumanising language needs a physically identifiable characteristic, so the person being dehumanised can be singled out as "not human". "NPC" isn't a characteristic, it's a behaviour. You can't know someone is an NPC until you interact with them and since the NPC is not, in fact, a computer generated game mechanic, behaving as if you are a computer generated game mechanic is a choice. Judging people on their choices is not analogous to judging people on their physical characteristics.
/r/MensRights31/07/19 10:59 AM
1

I'm in favor of men winning awards but I oppose torture, even if the victim is a chair. I feel conflicted.
/r/MensRights20/07/19 06:55 PM
2

Many forms of gender discrimination are more capitalism than sexism. The question is, is it OK to tolerate one kind when it's not OK to tolerate the other kind?
/r/MensRights30/06/19 07:05 AM
2

It's a double standard. If double standards are bad when they hurt women, they are bad when they hurt men. If you the system only thinks they are bad when they hurt women, that's systemic hatred of men. Now, I would be down with the libertarian point of view if it goes both ways but don't try to pretend that this is treated as being OK when it happens to women.
/r/MensRights30/06/19 07:04 AM
6

Which is why men have to protect themselves. Because no one will do it for them.
/r/MensRights12/06/19 06:50 PM
1

You set it to suit the people who don't have any choice in their attire. That way, the people who do have choices can dress to please themselves.
/r/MensRights02/06/19 11:47 AM
1

"I don't fully understand it, but for whatever reason if a man is also uncomfortable having a one-on-one meeting with a woman or working with a woman... When your dogma requires you to tell such transparent lies, maybe it's time for new dogma.
/r/MensRights18/05/19 07:37 AM
1

Costs to men have never been costs. Men have always been acceptable casualties, that has been our history since wooly mammoths walked the earth.
/r/MensRights18/05/19 07:35 AM
4

I did see a whole thread of you commenting on that post and I got sick and tired of trying to have a discussion with someone who barely skimmed a comment that made up all of 10 lines of text. What did you do, read every third line?
/r/MensRights13/05/19 06:17 PM
5

And you haven't read it. I'm tired of having to reiterate bits and pieces of it to you.
/r/MensRights13/05/19 04:43 PM
4

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/bnvel4/the_circle_of_diversity/enaebhk/
/r/MensRights13/05/19 04:34 PM
5

Dude, for gods sake, read the article. You're getting it in dribs and drabs from me and that's just ridiculous.
/r/MensRights13/05/19 04:31 PM
5

When the change happened, no one wanted to go to the co ed version. It wasn't just the men that weren't interested in going, the women weren't either. If the women weren't interested in going to a function with raunchy jokes and gambling that was open to men, why would you assume there would be sufficient interest in one for women only?
/r/MensRights13/05/19 04:01 PM
3

You already have the stuff for one fundraiser that no one wanted to go to.
/r/MensRights13/05/19 03:57 PM
3

Star wars has always had women in it a female protag doesn't change anything Yes it has always had women in major roles and No, it doesn't change anything, that's not what I was getting at. You'll notice I took issue not with TFA but with TLJ. Rey could have been a good protagonist, particularly with a training sequence once she found Luke. Instead, Luke was summarily shoved out of the continuity after shitting all over his established character arc and the effort made in TFA to find him. All th…
/r/MensRights13/05/19 12:59 PM
5

Justice boner: Engaged! :)
/r/MensRights13/05/19 09:58 AM
10

What would really give me a justice boner is if he's doing better than that violent harpy.
/r/MensRights13/05/19 08:48 AM
1

You have to gatekeep. You have to use pejoratives like "muggle" for outsiders and your community must collectively police membership for conformity to the communities interests and ideals and ostracisee people who do not want to assimilate.
/r/MensRights13/05/19 08:38 AM
2

Numbering each step of the cycle starting at the top (1) going clockwise so the right hand side is (2), the bottom is (3) and the right hand side is (4) In video games, Anita Sarkeesian is this cycle at stage 2. She didn't need stage one because gaming is as open a community as has ever existed. Gamergate is this cycle at stage 3 In the MCU, shoehorning captain marvel into the story is stage 1, Brie Larson declaring she doesn't want to hear from white male critics and demanding an LGBT character…
/r/MensRights13/05/19 08:35 AM
11

You're not looking at this from a business angle, that's an absurd claim to make when you clearly don't comprehend the first thing about business: which would be expenses. Having a womens event would have costs which would not necessarily be recouped by ticket sales and donations if there wasn't enough interest. The club has facilities and skills that are obviously well suited to hosting the event that they do host. They don't necessarily have the facilities and skills to host an event that woul…
/r/MensRights13/05/19 08:22 AM
12

That has nothing to do with capitalism. If the service club sees no profit in hosting a womens only event, a group of women can rent the clubs facilities to host their own even. That is capitalism. This is just a bunch of people who want to take other peoples stuff because other people are being happy without them. Feminism: the haunting fear that somewhere, men [shudder] are enjoying themselves without women to make sure they're not having too much fun.
/r/MensRights13/05/19 08:17 AM
3

I don't think so. Observe the number of times the article cites "unwelcome looks"; both are on the same side "I can bare my breasts and pick and choose who gets to look at them. You'll find out if you've been picked or chosen when the police show up.
/r/MensRights21/04/19 07:46 AM
1

We argued that if the class had been more diverse or even just had women or people of colour, then the book wouldn't have ended so badly Literal race/gender supremacy.
/r/MensRights17/04/19 09:39 AM
1

Well, yes, but this isn't deliberate sex, this is accidental sex. It could just as easily be some rando walking down the street as some chad whose too busy fucking women who deliberately set out to get laid.
/r/MensRights17/04/19 08:08 AM
1

Unless she cheated with a one pump chump.
/r/MensRights17/04/19 07:43 AM
1

woops, slipped. I can see how that would happen
/r/MensRights17/04/19 06:24 AM
2

She really doesn't care about the divorced dad thing, this is a desperate rear guard action against the people who have rejected mainstream politics. "No, it's not mainstream politics that has become toxic and indifferent to the concerns of ordinary people, it's the ordinary people who need to change."
/r/MensRights16/04/19 11:52 PM
12

Any evidence is not the same as a notarised document, consenting to sex and to recording the encounter accompanied by said recording. This does not mean that that is the only evidence worth having.
/r/MensRights24/03/19 06:48 AM
1

Buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz
/r/MensRights20/03/19 05:52 PM
1

Does this apply in Germany?
/r/MensRights18/03/19 06:41 PM
1

I've never seen another mans penis in a public toilet, despite using public toilets with urinals and troughs. Why? Because I don't look. You don't want to see mine? good. So don't look.
/r/MensRights16/03/19 05:39 PM
3

Imagine being an adolescent male, wrestling a girl, and not popping a woody. At which point he's a sex offender.
/r/MensRights05/03/19 06:51 PM
1

Do I reach out to her ex-husband? Her family? Her friends? I can't talk to her per judge's orders. Please speak to your lawyer before doing this: it could easily be construed as an attempt to communicate with your wife
/r/MensRights28/02/19 12:38 PM
1

I don't know that rational leftists are the ones who passed the law that saw count dankula prosecuted for and convicted of hate speech. Hate speech is a purely left wing phenomenon, which has a lot of support in the left wing halls of power. That said, the rights support for freedom of speech is a purely practical matter, when the right controlled the cultural narrative, had the loudest and most influential public voice, the left was the champion of freedom of speech. As we can now see, the left…
/r/MensRights28/02/19 11:58 AM
1

The unintentional irony is, that when men do exactly what she suggests (see the Pence rule), feminists lose their shit.
/r/MensRights08/02/19 02:34 AM
2

although a sizable portion of the risk that appeared to be due to father absence could actually be attributed to other factors, such as teen motherhood, low parent education, racial inequalities, and poverty, adolescents in father‐absent households still faced elevated incarceration risks
/r/MensRights05/02/19 03:27 PM
1

I'm angry that someone with one of the biggest megaphones on the planet is calling me despicable names and accusing me of violence and bigotry. Try to keep up.
/r/MensRights17/01/19 08:44 PM
1

God, imagine being angry about someone portraying you as an evil piece of shit. You're "wound up" because I'm angry about being profoundly and deliberately insulted... And can't figure out how dumb it is to get "wound up" over people being insulted by deliberate insults.
/r/MensRights17/01/19 07:55 PM
2

For someone who consistently applies snowflake to other people, you're awfully offended that anyone might find the ad offensive.
/r/MensRights17/01/19 07:24 PM
2

Have you never talked with a girl and she's told you the awful things one your friends sent her? Have you never talked with a guy and he's told you the awful things girls have said to his face? Things are shitty all over, it doesn't follow that people who want to sell me shit need to be attacking me just for being a man. Do you people get upset over Wounded Warrior commercials because you already pay taxes for the VA? Wounded warrior commercials have more sense than to attack me for not being a …
/r/MensRights17/01/19 05:17 PM
5

Does no one here know that creepy guy from college? "That creepy guy" is either inept or just unattractive. If he's inept, he's inexperienced and it will pass. If he's unattractive, that's outside his control and he has a right to be a sexual person. Either way, give the poor guy a break.
/r/MensRights17/01/19 02:09 PM
1

Fast, cheap, accurate. Pick any 2
/r/MensRights06/01/19 09:43 PM
4

Don't dismiss your partners feelings as if they mean nothing. Good advice; this is precisely how she got into this mess. The solution to a partner who isn't meeting your needs is to leave. Because his feelings matter too. He doesn't want to adopt, that's his choice which she has viciously deprived him of. If you can't live with the choice that your partner makes, you don't un make it for them, you leave and find someone else (in that order). Your theories about bullying are nonsense. Baseless sp…
/r/MensRights27/12/18 02:13 AM
7

at worst, grabbed him some pussy without permission Only if you ignore what he actually said... "They will let you" doesn't say "without permission" to me.
/r/MensRights18/12/18 05:32 AM
7

Did she somehow manage to not notice that hillary lost in '16?
/r/MensRights17/12/18 11:26 PM
6

It's just you. When I read your headline, I checked the top posts in this sub sorted by "hot" and found exclusively mens rights oriented articles.
/r/MensRights17/12/18 11:20 PM
1

The queen has given you permission to keep said item in your refrigerator.
/r/MensRights17/12/18 11:14 PM
2

Most universities regard a person accusing their accuser of misconduct as "retaliatory" and punish the student accordingly. First to the office wins. Maybe the guys complaint doesn't go anywhere, that really not the point here.
/r/MensRights10/12/18 01:04 AM
3

When people pounded on his dorm room door calling for the woman he was with, is was obvious where this was going to go. Unethical Life Pro Tip; something like this happens, race to the title IX office to report her before she gets there to report you.
/r/MensRights09/12/18 01:06 AM
1

Retain a lawyer. Once you're in the meeting, it's too late to figure out that you need help with this.
/r/MensRights07/12/18 08:10 AM
22

Hey, it's easy! Just don't be an asshole. BecAUsE noTHiNg MalICiOUs EvEr hAPpENs.
/r/MensRights03/12/18 08:08 PM
15

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Apex_fallacy
/r/MensRights02/12/18 07:49 AM
1

Explaining your reasoning/providing references when you cite "studies" only exposes your argument to analysis and response. Feminists aren't about discussion, they just want to lecture.
/r/MensRights29/11/18 04:47 PM
1

He takes this seriously coming from two of the most powerful men in the country. .. why aren't THEY getting out of the way of women instead of telling other men to do what they won't?
/r/MensRights19/11/18 01:20 PM
2

Except when a man finds himself stuck between prejudice and trans folk, no need to go after the prejudice when you can just toss the man under the bus.
/r/MensRights15/11/18 04:40 PM
1

How else will it improve? Why not just let people live their lives the way they want to, without force-fitting them into some cookie cutter ideal of how things should be? Be nice if you were willing to extend to men the same consideration. How else will it improve? But apparently we're just crash test dummies.
/r/MensRights15/11/18 04:27 PM
2

You don't have to be the one who makes it an issue to find yourself in hot water over something like this. We're supposed to just ignore the risks to men inherent in these situations? So western society has a nudity taboo and unnecessarily sexualises innocent situations; are men supposed to just lie back and think of diversity when they're left stranded between the contradictions society embraces?
/r/MensRights15/11/18 03:45 PM
1

The “Particles for Justice” letter also accused him of misrepresenting the topic of his talk. “Finally, we would also like to underline how grossly unethical it is to misrepresent the topic of one’s talk to workshop organizers to promote an agenda which is antithetical to the workshop itself,” it stated. In response, Strumia said that the abstract of his talk was: “I will present and interpret data about gender differences and discriminations that emerge from studies of bibliometrical data about…
/r/MensRights14/11/18 11:51 PM
4

Dln't kid yourself, a Dem win in the house was always on the cards, it's historically what happens to a first term president. But don't let that interfere with a good rant about the utterly irrelevant.
/r/MensRights14/11/18 09:50 PM
8

It's paid directly to the custodial parent.
/r/MensRights12/11/18 08:43 AM
6

I've seen this but only ever by women IME
/r/MensRights10/11/18 03:15 PM
7

That's her job. When one journalist has had their turn, it's her job to take the microphone and give it to someone else. The journalist refused to surrender the microphone: it's not his, it belongs to her employer and as such when she's instructed to take it and give it to the next person, he's obliged to surrender it, not repeatedly move it out of her reach and certainly not initiating a shoving match over it.
/r/MensRights09/11/18 09:30 AM
1

They know that they see apologies not as an act of contrition but as a sign of weakness, a signal to attack even more aggressively. As such, they project their own mentality on anyone calling for an apology.
/r/MensRights30/10/18 11:24 AM
2

That is the issue at hand. Yes, I have been constantly returning to the issue at hand despite your attempts to veer off into irrelevance.
/r/MensRights23/10/18 12:35 AM
2

It falls under the umbrella of Men's Rights that men not be held to a higher legal standard than anyone else. I have every intention of happily eliminating any and all male privilege while insisting that no one gets to put their own group into the place vacated by men. Laws matter. More specifically, how laws are enforced matters. It is crucial that people understand that when they pass a law, that that law must apply as much to themselves as to anyone else, and to examine the text of that law a…
/r/MensRights23/10/18 12:27 AM
2

You keep telling yourself that. I'm sure you'll be convinced... eventually.
/r/MensRights23/10/18 12:06 AM
1

So why not try to repeal the law? It seems to me that you really don't think that the law that is being invoked is "a bunch of bullshit", what really chaps your ass is that the law in question applies equally to everyone.
/r/MensRights22/10/18 10:50 PM
1

The only thing I particularly care about WRT this article is that the law protects you the same as it protects me. I said it before "equal protection under the law". If you don't like this particular law, feel free to seek to have it repealed. But it's not the law you want repealed, just the part of it that applies to you.
/r/MensRights22/10/18 08:43 PM
1

Were you really that sloppy about reading the article?
/r/MensRights22/10/18 08:27 PM
2

It is the law, not heaven that forbids it. Since it is the law, it must protect me just as it protects you. Otherwise, the law itself is illegal.
/r/MensRights22/10/18 08:16 PM
2

I'm not the one who wants to exclude anyone.
/r/MensRights22/10/18 07:51 PM
2

FTA: According to its GoFundMe page, the monthly meetup If you had paid attention to the article you're crying about, you would know that it's not about an online forum, but about a physical meeting in a physical location. If what you want is an online forum, There are numerous tools available to make that happen, from reddit to wordpress and multiple other tools and you can exclude men to your sexist hearts content.
/r/MensRights22/10/18 07:49 PM
3

"Equal protection under the law". If "white male" people don't get safe spaces, neither do you. So change the law or live with the consequences.
/r/MensRights22/10/18 07:51 AM
5

There are lawyers who fashion themselves into career representatives, seeking out businesses who don't provide federally mandated disabled parking then finding a disabled person to represent against that business. It's an effective way to enforce the law.
/r/MensRights22/10/18 06:03 AM
6

The simple solution to this is to get involved. No one can stop you. Just being different from the majority doesn't make you "oppressed".
/r/MensRights22/10/18 05:55 AM
3

Psychologically he can't afford to understand your point. Doing so would undermine too many of his underlying assumptions.
/r/MensRights15/10/18 10:29 AM
6

These men won’t take anything on the chin when they get caught out I can't think of any celebrity who, when accused of "wrongdoing", took it more squarely on the chin than Louis CK and yet, she thinks this man who didn't whine, didn't wriggle, didn't hire expensive lawyers, should simply stop working and... what? die?
/r/MensRights09/10/18 03:27 PM
6

It's not appropriate to step in when only one of the people wants to fight? You did notice that he refrained from fighting back more than long enough for people to step in and separate them before deciding he had no option but to hit her, right?
/r/MensRights29/09/18 08:54 PM
3

Ramirez claims that Kavanaugh "was laughing," and that she heard someone in her drunken state yell: "Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie’s face. It was his full name." This is the point at which the accusation became incredible to me. People don't talk like that. It's just too convenient. Also, if she needs hearsay for an identification, just exactly where is an investigation going to look?
/r/MensRights24/09/18 08:07 AM
1

While it's important to highlight the weakness of the statistical argument here, I think it's equally important to point out that what they're proposing is essentially that long cherished ideals of justice ought to be abandoned because very few people would be affected by doing so. However, justice is, in the end, about individuals. Individuals accused of committing crimes and facing life altering consequences if found guilty. Just because there are (supposedly) very few men in the situation of …
/r/MensRights23/09/18 01:23 PM
1

Serena Williams, claims that men are given more leeway than men, that women can't do half of what men to. These statistics are directly responsive to that assertion.
/r/MensRights17/09/18 03:42 AM
1

That's not license to destroy "any man", it's license to destroy one man.
/r/MensRights07/09/18 12:43 AM
2

No, I don't. You don't like my sentence structure, block me broski.
/r/MensRights06/09/18 05:40 AM
7

Yeah, no. Your trauma is not license to destroy any man who you come across. Deal with your trauma, don't deal with your trauma, I don't care, but an allegation against a man of abusing a woman is as good as a loaded gun and no one who shoots someone gets an "I wuz traumatised" pass.
/r/MensRights06/09/18 02:52 AM
74

Math is a tool of the patreeeeeeeearchy!
/r/MensRights02/09/18 12:48 PM
9

That's not how you say that! That's not how any of that gets said!
/r/MensRights02/09/18 12:47 PM
1

An unwanted request for sexual favor is potentially any request which the requestee declined. Now find a single sexually active male who can meet the standard "never made unwanted requests for sexual favors" This is why most sexual harassment policies specify repeated unwanted requests for sexual favors.
/r/MensRights14/08/18 10:43 AM
1

Yeeeah, that's not an uncommon reaction
/r/MensRights07/08/18 02:04 PM
1

www.reddit.com/r/srs "Shit Reddit Says". Devoted to posting messed up stuff other subreddits say.
/r/MensRights07/08/18 10:53 AM
3

He has a contract which the college is likely in breach of.
/r/MensRights28/07/18 08:45 AM
5

She clearly doesn't even visit the MRA sub The only times she sees MRAs speaking, it's because one of her fellow travellers quotes an MRA (typically bereft of context). It is therefore unsurprising, to say the least, that they don't see us saying things that they don't particularly want to see us saying.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 02:01 PM
24

You misunderstand my objection. My argument is not that "they started it" (seriously, wut?) My argument is that they think we're not speaking up about Terry Crews because they deliberately set out to deprive us of the public voice which would have alerted them to our support for him.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 11:12 AM
34

It's a direct consequence of de platforming. First they de platform us, then they "don't hear us" speaking about Terry Crews... Wonder why?
/r/MensRights16/07/18 07:41 AM
4

Threats have an emotional dimension, she is his significant other, someone whose words have more emotional impact than any other person; in the most emotionally vulnerable moment of his life, she told him not to walk away from the car, she did not decline to speak to him, she directed him back into the car. That's not a potato, that's not even akin to holding a gun to his head, it's akin to actually pulling the trigger.
/r/MensRights15/07/18 10:57 AM
7

If I threaten someone and they commit a crime as a result of that threat, am I not in some sense responsible for that crime?
/r/MensRights15/07/18 10:47 AM
6

"How very dare you" /sultry I think I'm falling in luurrrve.
/r/MensRights15/07/18 04:04 AM
1

The problem with linking these sorts of articles is that they are click bait designed to create outrage so as to attract clicks and earn money thereby. Use archive.is for these sites
/r/MensRights14/07/18 06:21 PM
1

The real question is where was his father /sjw
/r/MensRights14/07/18 01:45 PM
4

Here's part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mUyTbEzBMI Watched both parts, this was an EPIC journey (and at times Karen looks kinda weary from that journey) well worth your time.
/r/MensRights13/07/18 07:48 AM
1

Not including this post, there are 33 posts referencing Terry Crews in /r/mensrights top crews post 4815 points next, 1304 points next, 1155 For context, this is in a sub where 300 karma is a big number. What the hell more are you looking for?
/r/MensRights04/07/18 08:48 AM
1

You have a problem with selective reading
/r/MensRights26/06/18 09:04 AM
1

My data is worthless For the reasons I've already outlined
/r/MensRights21/06/18 02:00 PM
1

Your data is worthless. 3rd marriages, 2nd marriages, single mothers, unmarried fathers with children by multiple women, women forgoing children entirely, all of which is in addition to women who delay child tearing not by choice but for lack of a suitable spouse. You're talking about something completely beside the point actually under discussion.
/r/MensRights21/06/18 11:43 AM
1

You know all those men on their third marriage? Your data doesn't support your conclusion.
/r/MensRights20/06/18 01:31 PM
9

This gets presented by feminists as an unironic statement of hatred in 3... 2... 1...
/r/MensRights20/06/18 08:23 AM
3

We can pretend that there’s some philosophy that young men adhere to that has them sacrifice having children on principle wheeeeee! I'm dizzy now. Put some more spin in there!
/r/MensRights19/06/18 11:56 PM
5

What young man has property, or savings, or a pension to lose in a divorce? Very few. All of these things take years of sacrifice to obtain. When a young man looks into the future and sees years of sacrifice followed by having the proceeds stripped from him and having nothing to show for it, not even the opportunity to be a father to his children, he nopes right the fuck out of there.
/r/MensRights19/06/18 10:35 PM
3

Walls made of cloth are still walls. Most toilet cubicles I've encountered have a gap between the floor and the wall and every one I've encountered has a gap between the wall and the roof; but sensible people don't take photos over the top or from beneath the cubicle wall.
/r/MensRights19/06/18 09:41 AM
2

it'd be like a woman on a toilet with no walls No expectation a woman on a toilet with walls, in a public space. Reasonable expectation. Easy.
/r/MensRights19/06/18 09:21 AM
4

Yeah, insane feminists say insane things. That's fine, they can suck it. You can be in an expressly private place and yet have your photo taken quite legally, because you have no reasonable expectation of privacy when your living room windows face the street and your blinds are open. OTOH, peepers who put cameras in public toilets can be prosecuted because despite not trespassing, having every right to be in the place that they left their equipment, the victim did in fact have a reasonable expec…
/r/MensRights19/06/18 09:16 AM
9

The critical phrase is "a reasonable expectation of privacy"; a cubicle in a public toilet or changing room (at a beach, for example) is "public" but there exists a reasonable expectation of privacy in those spaces anyway. A woman's skirt may, or may not, create this same reasonable expectation, which is why writing laws about it can be difficult.
/r/MensRights19/06/18 09:04 AM
10

CCTVs aren't deliberately positioned to circumvent a womans attempts to keep her underwear from being visible, a man following a woman up an escalator filming from a deliberately low angle has done so specifically for the purpose of violating her privacy and I think that ought to be illegal. However, writing laws that forbid that kind of deliberate attempt to take non consensual lewd photographs without forbidding innocent photography that captures a windblown skirt can be tricky and so such law…
/r/MensRights19/06/18 08:56 AM
10

Why? Do you have an expectation of privacy in public? Making laws that forbid "upskirting" without creating barriers to otherwise lawful photography can be difficult; you can create a situation in which a woman can turn a perfectly innocent photograph into a jail sentence simply by carelessly/inadvertently/deliberately displaying her unmentionables. By contrast, I think it's fair to forbid deliberate attempts to circumvent a woman's attempts to conceal said unmentionables. Standing at the base o…
/r/MensRights19/06/18 08:47 AM
4

were these other bills passed without the debate and scrutiny that he's saying they need?
/r/MensRights19/06/18 08:31 AM
14

This "adequate resources in both households" doctrine has never once been applied to men reduced to poverty by child support awards in excess of his actual income, but let women be subject to the requirement to support their own children and suddenly it's a critical issue in need of address. How odd.
/r/MensRights16/06/18 07:43 AM
5

FTA: In the proposed feminist porn there will be fat, skinny, young and old people Feel like rethinking: and there is a hot chick having a killer orgasm... Well, my dick doesn't discriminate based on ideology. ?
/r/MensRights11/06/18 01:17 AM
1

your legal team has seen many many custody battles and they know what works and they know what doesn't. If they're telling you not to do this, chances are their opposing number suggested this strategy for the purpose of maneuvering you into making a mistake that they can capitalise on. The judge has stated that decisions should be shared, your exes actions in unilaterally making this decision might work against her, but only if you play by the rules and don't give her legal team a means to use i…
/r/MensRights10/06/18 11:25 PM
1

TIL ownership of production methods and regulation of the economy have nothing to do with how profits are distributed.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 05:15 PM
3

To be fair, men are to blame for everything. It's a side effect of being the ones who actually do things
/r/MensRights10/06/18 05:28 AM
1

When the reboot was announced, nerdy cultural artifacts were eclipsing the cultural artifacts of the popular set. Games were bigger than hollywood, super hero movies were huge news in movies. This is just basic social climbing: slapping down the upstarts who thought they were just as good as the popular kids.
/r/MensRights08/06/18 10:59 PM
1

It's actually called capitalism, which has been shown to be far more successful than the theory that giving all the money to the workers and fuck the bourgeois will stimulate the economy.
/r/MensRights08/06/18 05:26 AM
1

Indeed. They invest their money, this creates jobs, which means people get paid, which accelerates the economy. Of course, you could insist that no money be left over after the workers have been paid... we've seen how that works out. No jobs, no people being paid... you think the economy might slow down just a tad?
/r/MensRights07/06/18 10:08 PM
1

When money is paid as dividends instead of salary, it is used to buy goods and services, boosting the economy.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 11:08 AM
1

I understand the economy just fine, Your assertion that paying someone more increases the velocity of money is nonsense.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 07:47 AM
1

No, it doesn't. No even a little bit.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 07:24 AM
1

This is just shuffling money around, not increasing the economy.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 01:42 PM
178

Because it's men who have laundry lists of qualifications for their partner.
/r/MensRights06/06/18 01:37 PM
5

They've found that pointing out that 1 in 4 homeless are women only served to highlight the fact that men are the ones really at risk. It's much easier to blame men for frmale homelessness than deal with its real victims
/r/MensRights04/06/18 02:09 PM
11

There are some authors with the "wrong" political convictions who are being disinvited from some cons after being invited by the con in the first place, after sjw types make unsupported accusations of abuse. In one case, a NYT bestseller author was accused of serious sexual misconduct at a previous con, before the accusations were refuted by con committee. Cons are the current battleground where disapproved opinions and the people who express them are being silenced.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 10:09 PM
3

I'm pretty sure OP speaks english as a second language. This becomes particularly pronounced when they're challenged.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 04:14 PM
1

Dude, you're not nearly as expert on the mens rights movement as you think. You've been here for "a few weeks" and think you're in a position to criticise us? You don't understand us! All I'm doing is asking you to substantiate your accusations against the mens rights movement and all you can do is ramble on and bash everyone who is pro men. Just be reasonable and support your accusations with facts instead of this MGTOWs are MRAs nonsense. You can't substantiate your accusations because your ac…
/r/MensRights01/06/18 10:57 AM
3

The behavior that I show right now is simply holding you accountable for your claims. Support them with facts, that's something that we at /r/mensrights are big on. The biggest "problem" that mens rights activists have is that people like you refuse to distinguish between different parts of the mens movement. MGTOW is not MRA are not redpillers. But people like you conflate different groups because it's convenient to pull a bait and switch when you want to criticise someone when you can't provid…
/r/MensRights01/06/18 10:47 AM
5

You're confusing feminist bashing with women bashing. They're not the same thing. There's a lot of criticism of feminism here and I don't apologise for that but your "Nine out of ten posts on this sub are devoted to women-bashing..." hyperbole is stupid bullshit.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 10:42 AM
2

You get this was an example right Then you should have led with a good example. When you lead with a bad example, people not unreasonably conclude that you can't find any good ones. Until you can both find a good example and understand that this is not the correct place to chastise MGTOWs, you really need to siddown, shuddup and listen instead of preaching at people who have heard this sermon before.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 10:37 AM
5

The kindest thing I can say about this is that you're suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect. Sure, MGTOWs can be MRAs, but you're talking at us like we're MGTOWs. This is /r/mensrights, it's a place for discussion of mens rights. MGTOW is something else and is in fact, off topic here.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 10:26 AM
5

You claim to not be a feminist in disguise and don't understand that MGTOW and MRA are different things? We can't change what MGTOWs do because we aren't MGTOW.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 10:17 AM
2

But I also see the theme that women are bad in general Accusations without evidence. We get this same concern troll on a regular basis, what makes this one different?
/r/MensRights01/06/18 10:01 AM
3

Was it good for the goose? For decades, it was. Congratulations ladies, you got what you wanted. Enjoy.
/r/MensRights27/05/18 08:05 AM
8

The officer arrested her despite her passing a breathalyser twice and this commentator can't imagine a motive for a false accusation? Really?
/r/MensRights25/05/18 03:53 AM
3

"By three of her female friends"? This is a new and unexpected usage of that word, I'm not sure I know what it's meaning is in this context.
/r/MensRights21/05/18 09:07 AM
5

We've been suffering abuse indefinitely. Civilisation's single most critical problem has been how to get men engaged in actually working. For a single male, survival is no big deal. It's easy. A minimum of work can get you everything you need. In ancient times, the solution to this problem was whips and chains. Work hard or (and) feel the lash. More recently, it's been what Jordan Peterson calls "enforced monogamy". Socially enforced, not by government. A man with a wife and child has a stake in…
/r/MensRights21/05/18 12:40 AM
238

They came so close "what a guy has never said" but managed to miss by so much.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 01:08 PM
6

Feminists lie about mens rights. In other news, water wet, fire hot, ice cream tasty.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 09:06 AM
34

He made 20.1 million since 2001 and she's still not happy. Some people aren't happy unless they're making other people miserable.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 08:54 AM
4

You'd think people would get past "I'm taking my bat and my ball and going home" before graduating high school.
/r/MensRights14/05/18 06:37 PM
37

When the platform is suicide prevention, you don't put someone who advocates that men kill themselves on that platform.
/r/MensRights14/05/18 12:40 PM
8

I hope the fire got put out without incident?
/r/MensRights14/05/18 12:40 PM
3

It's a way to make an advantage enjoyed by women (They can be openly sexual without scaring the bejaysus out of folk who aren't attracted to them) look like a disadvantage.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 04:04 PM
1

We draw the line in precisely the same place we do when women don't want to be parents: Choice.
/r/MensRights04/05/18 10:35 AM
21

Or better yet, don't fuck her
/r/MensRights29/04/18 12:45 AM
2

You believe her based on what? That kids cost money? No one said they don't. She has no reason to believe he's lied apart from owning a nice house. But the thing about nice houses is, they're still there after the income that bought them dries up. He owns a business, well woop de doo; business income changes. Maybe she believes what she's saying but theres no reason to believe she's right
/r/MensRights27/04/18 05:01 AM
1

And how would she know this? Has she spoken to his accountant? Has she seen his financial statements? Does she have anything other than greed?
/r/MensRights27/04/18 02:16 AM
5

You can say that. And I can return your hatred in its full measure.
/r/MensRights26/04/18 08:35 PM
1

it’s a direct quote of her letter Which clearly states that he pays the maintenance he's been ordered to. edit: from the letter "you do pay - to the penny - what the CMS order you to pay, so on paper you can "prove" you pay towards your children's upbringing "properly"."
/r/MensRights25/04/18 11:06 PM
6

He is exploiting loopholes in the system to not report his full income I see that accusation, I'm not seeing any evidence of this. AFAICT, the letter acknowledges that he is paying what he's been ordered to pay.
/r/MensRights25/04/18 06:00 AM
2

How do you develop a set of morals that involves cutting up infant penises without religion?
/r/MensRights15/04/18 05:31 PM
1

The barber disagrees apparently.
/r/MensRights10/04/18 11:34 AM
10

He claims to be unqualified and unskilled in cutting womens hair. That's what professionals do, they don't do shit they're not confident they can do well.
/r/MensRights09/04/18 03:32 PM
1

This suit was filed in the Federal Circuit Court. Meaning the same laws being applied in this case apply in Victoria the same as it applies in NSW. I'm afraid being in Australias second best city instead of Australias best city wont help much. ;)
/r/MensRights09/04/18 03:28 PM
1

The law that likely applies ca be found at https://dhr.ny.gov/law however I was unable to find the relevant sections
/r/MensRights30/03/18 10:43 AM
5

When a man's family and friends find out he's going to jail for unpaid child support, they often pitch in collectively to get it paid. This tells the fucksticks yhat operate the system that he had the money all along thus justifying both the debt and the jail sentence
/r/MensRights29/03/18 01:44 PM
9

They removed something I can't get back. I'd like a say in that decision.
/r/MensRights25/03/18 02:55 PM
5

With Count Dankula about to go to jail for joking, I think we're post humorous enough.
/r/MensRights25/03/18 11:48 AM
15

I'm also circumcised, having been circumcised at birth. I'd like a say in the matter of what was done to my penis.
/r/MensRights25/03/18 11:47 AM
2

Sheila Wild, founder of the EqualPayPortal and former Director of Employment Policy at the Equal Opportunities Commission: sometimes, in order to achieve equality, it’s necessary to be unfair And... ...defend their corner with the best evidence they can find to support the view that fairer recruitment policies make business sense and benefit us all. First, they're not talking about what's fair, as demonstrated by S. Wilde's remark and second, the author assigns the value "fairer" to the desired …
/r/MensRights14/03/18 03:38 PM
3

The "women's only" cars are "for women" but not only for women. The practice applies during rush hour, when the trains are so full that people are being told not to board if there is no more space. They're full of men because there's no reason they shouldn't be full of men and there isn't enough space to worry about sexist bullshit. So some other man groped you (by being in a train so crowded he couldn't avoid coming into contact regardless of what he might want), it doesn't follow that men who …
/r/MensRights13/03/18 10:49 PM
3

With gendered bathrooms, men get their own bathroom of equivalent size... Usually. Although we're starting to see instances of this sort of discrimination with bathrooms as well, where single occupant bathrooms are designated female or all in exactly the same way that the seats on these buses are designated female or all. If the bus had pink seats down one side of the bus and blue down the other instead of pink seats at the front, your attempt to compare the two would work. Unfortunately, it doe…
/r/MensRights10/03/18 07:40 AM
2

The incident we're discussing this in the context of took place in an ostensibly "gun free zone". "Gun free" inasmuch as only criminals are allowed to carry guns. A gun that you left at home because you would otherwise be in violation of the law does you no good. This law is enforced by the same police whose job it is apparently not to protect you. Police whose job it apparently is to arrest you if you dare carry with you the means to protect yourself effectively.
/r/MensRights27/02/18 07:57 PM
1

Stop trying to disarm them and maybe they would.
/r/MensRights27/02/18 04:10 AM
3

In this case, it's not men expected to risk their lives, but police officers. I don't care about the officer's gender, we accept and support their authority for exactly this reason; so that they will take those risks to protect us and, even more importantly, our children.
/r/MensRights26/02/18 04:17 PM
2

They're basically the same https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(law)
/r/MensRights25/02/18 09:05 AM
11

Civil court, standard is balance of probabilities
/r/MensRights25/02/18 12:26 AM
2

http://www.nhuf.no/?q=node/28 Wikipedia and the above link disagree with you. Do you have a source for your assertion that homeschooling is illegal in Norway?
/r/MensRights17/02/18 08:33 PM
5

They would find it funny. Right up until the moment someone actually makes that joke. At that moment: "REEEEEEEEE"
/r/MensRights16/02/18 08:23 AM
2

defines wanting to know what she's doing as abusive defines keeping secrets and expecting her to keep secrets as abusive
/r/MensRights10/02/18 01:38 AM
6

This is precisely the objective of the movement to establish balance of probabilities as the accepted standard of evidence for campus sex offence adjudications. With that movement seemingly at its high water mark, it's time to get that standard out into the justice system proper.
/r/MensRights08/02/18 02:19 PM
2

How long do you think a determined legal team could stretch out title IX litigation... three years or so?
/r/MensRights07/02/18 11:03 AM
1

If it weren't his in laws home, I would agree. As is I think he needs to get the whole family (wife, kids) into a rentalbecause the first thing that will happen once the trigger is pulled is he's out on his ear with no say in the matter. In fact, getting the family into her parents home looks like his wife setting him up to be the non custodial parent.
/r/MensRights06/02/18 04:36 PM
1

Jesus, where to start... First, move out of her parents home. Make it a condition of deleting the evidence but if she agrees, make a production of "deleting" the evidence while secretly keeping a copy. This is not dishonest as it satisfies her stated goal (you can't blackmail her with information you've told her yo don't have) while protecting your interests. Quit two of your three jobs and make the "marriage" work for at least a year so you don't get saddled with maintenence payments based on y…
/r/MensRights06/02/18 01:24 PM
2

How on earth would someone call Alexa a slut? Don't you have to specifically call it Alexa for it to recognize it's being addressed at all?
/r/MensRights04/02/18 09:25 AM
6

Because your quote is 2 words too long.
/r/MensRights31/01/18 10:29 AM
6

He was absent from work for three months. You usually get fired when that happens
/r/MensRights31/01/18 10:28 AM
2

This is why you say "I don't consent to searches" Instead.
/r/MensRights31/01/18 08:46 AM
4

To be fair, I doubt he kept his job once he was in jail and having served a stretch in prison, I doubt he'll be able to go back to work earning as much as he used to. So, you know, having taken that achievement from him, they don't have to give him credit for it.
/r/MensRights06/01/18 06:22 PM
6

Taste the projection
/r/MensRights05/01/18 11:51 AM
1

The one where you stated at the outset you were going to make arguments up and present them as mine? Pass. Learn this: in an argument on the internet, what you say not only matters, it is the only thing that matters. You say you don't know anything about the subject? I believe you. You say your argument will be bullshit? I believe you. You can refuse to walk those statements back but until you do, you're not only not in a position to have an opinion, what opinions or arguments you do express are…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 12:57 PM
1

Wow you're just gonna keep on missing points Your're not in a position to be making any. "I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know" My view is "someone on the internet claims ignorance of what I'm talking about so their perspective is irrelevant"
/r/MensRights01/01/18 12:44 PM
1

If you tell me that your argument is going to be bullshit, why wouldn't I believe you?
/r/MensRights01/01/18 12:26 PM
1

Why would I bother rebutting something you stated at the outset was going to be bullshit?
/r/MensRights01/01/18 12:22 PM
1

That's an awful complex argument for something you admit to knowing nothing about.
/r/MensRights01/01/18 12:14 PM
1

I didn't say anything about what the left is, I said something about what twitter is. Twitter obviously leans left and that fact is relevant when it comes to the flexible manner in which twitter's rules are enforced. But you, by your own admission, have nothing to add to that discussion.
/r/MensRights01/01/18 11:05 AM
1

That makes your quibble with my post seem kinda pointless
/r/MensRights01/01/18 10:48 AM
1

Don't pretend that Twitter doesn't lean left. I'm left on a lot of issues myself and I can see that much is plain.
/r/MensRights01/01/18 10:09 AM
8

One of them was "men can't be raped"
/r/MensRights31/12/17 10:51 PM
49

I found the tweet, reported it and was told the account was suspended until the owner fixed it. I'm pretty sure I wasn't the only one who reported it. Probably she deleted the tweet and was reinstated. I imagine left wing blue ticks get priority response to request for reinstatement.
/r/MensRights31/12/17 12:01 AM
1

I don't frequent /pol/ so I wouldn't know. But I can't help wondering, did you read it so you could avoid ever making a valid argument?
/r/MensRights29/12/17 02:29 AM
1

You've gone from argument by assertion to formal fallacies. You're not getting any more convincing as you go.
/r/MensRights28/12/17 02:37 PM
2

It was effectively a civil dispute settlement to decide which of them would leave campus Speaking of ridiculous and disingenuous...
/r/MensRights28/12/17 04:05 AM
2

Argument by assertion? How very convincing. Feminism is an ideology, not a gender or skin color. You voluntarily associate yourselves with a movement that relentlessly advocates for exactly the outcome found in this story. If you cannot see the difference between that and being white and male, theres no helping you sweet cheeks
/r/MensRights28/12/17 03:54 AM
15

To be fair, women don't tend to take up 2 seats by themselves. 1 seat for them, 1 for their luggage. Now surely that's fair, right?
/r/MensRights27/12/17 07:36 AM
13

They're not trying to convince men that this is rape, they're trying to convince women. It's not rape, not under any legal definition. Not only is the woman in this image clearly capable of informed consent, with all that clothing on, they can't engage in any activity which would meet the definition of rape. But the people who made this image want her to believe that this can be rape so as to create a climate of fear about how common rape in fact is.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 12:50 PM
2

Capitalism has created more wealth amongst the poorest segments of humanity than any previous economic arrangement. I'll happily cop to being responsible for that.
/r/MensRights21/12/17 02:17 PM
4

The really infuriating thing to me is that the judge allowed her to point a gun at her own head (I'll quit the ADF if you rule against me), and use that gun as an excuse to rule in her favor ("If the mother were to leave the ADF, I am of the view that it would change who the mother is")
/r/MensRights19/12/17 05:23 PM
4

False accusations like this one only add to that problem. They only create a more hostile environment for actual victims, and weaken the ability of authorities to grant the benefit of the doubt that a victim is telling the truth. What the author is missing here is that in this case, there is, in fact, an "actual victim". The actual victim in this case is just the wrong shape to be recognised by the writer as a victim.
/r/MensRights16/12/17 06:38 AM
5

Actually, I believe this one. having all your ex partner's assets and no obligations to your ex partner sounds like an enviable situation to find yourself in... provided you don't give a single solitary damn about your ex partner.
/r/MensRights15/12/17 04:25 PM
3

We should no more feel bad about this than any other woman who chooses to offer sex as a way to climb to the top. I feel bad about the women who did the right thing and missed out on roles and careers because some other woman boinked the director. No sympathy for the person who pays a bribe whatsoever.
/r/MensRights04/12/17 08:16 AM
5

Nothing idea. She can revoke consent at any time. She can even tell you she's revoked consent if she really wants to.
/r/MensRights04/12/17 05:01 AM
2

I've never heard of a convicted man having his bindings and hairstyle recorded in a newspaper article except by having his photo shown.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 10:41 AM
3

The fact that this implies she's shitting on her dress makes me uncomfortable.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 12:27 AM
52

Moreover, it’s just… creepy. “Daddy-Daughter Date” sounds like a porno. You can’t escape the incest-inspired overtones of these dances and "dates." Yes, you can. You just have to not be an objectively terrible person.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 08:09 AM
20

It's simpler than that, "Don't blame the woman"
/r/MensRights17/11/17 03:57 PM
11

Feminism does hate men, but a single very obvious troll is not evidence of this.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 11:11 AM
3

On at least one occasion he just whipped out his dick and started cranking it without asking in the presence of two work colleagues No. He asked and instead of saying "no" they laughed. They didn't leave, they didn't say "no", they didn't say "stop". Calling them "colleagues" is a stretch, they were performers also engaged to perform at a comedy arts festival. Imagine this instead: Bob from the next cubicle over asks you while you're in line at lunch if you would please crank one out on his face…
/r/MensRights10/11/17 03:07 PM
13

There are three elements to his crime He is male He was socially inept on several occasions He has (hetero) sexuality You can be male and socially inept but you're safe as long as you totally suppress your hetero sexuality You can be socially inept and sexual but you're safe so long as you're not (a heterosexual) male You can be Male and (hetero) sexual so long as you're not socially inept. The reporting confirms that he asked permission at all times. The reporting confirms that he always accept…
/r/MensRights10/11/17 04:56 AM
2

Would you consider it okay for your co-workers to just proposition you with sexual acts? That would depend on whether he or she took "no" for an answer. The only accusation that bothers me at all is the one from an unnamed woman; unfortunately, the reporting is unclear whether he asked multiple times and she then said yes once (harassment, obviously) or he asked multiple times and she said yes each time (not so obvious). All the other instances reported are so innocuous as to not be newsworthy. …
/r/MensRights10/11/17 04:33 AM
1

EVERYONE!
/r/MensRights08/11/17 02:31 PM
1

It's a charity and they can serve whoever they want Yes they can. And I can start a charity for white, heterosexual men only. But make no mistake, neither my charity nor theirs is discriminating on the basis anything other of naked bigotry and no one needs to treat it as anything else.
/r/MensRights05/11/17 02:18 AM
6

The article doesn't start out well: If men are overly concerned with the appearance of impropriety... Implying that being concerned about ones reputation is unreasonable and then when asked how things can change he launches straight into punishment mode: Organizations need to make this clear to employees: If they only do things with people of the same sex, that is discrimination If men decline to risk their job and reputation, they can face punishment for that too. Truly, any time a risk must be…
/r/MensRights28/10/17 02:48 PM
2

There's contact details on the back of your man card
/r/MensRights27/10/17 03:01 PM
2

I don't like his policies in the slightest, but Obama stands out in sharp contrast to Hillary Clinton and, to a lesser extent, Donald Trump, as a president who managed to avoid the scandal of personal involvement in illegal conduct. Hillary Clinton clearly demonstrates that even the media's obvious bias cannot prevent attention being drawn to personal involvement in illegal conduct. The only reasonable conclusion is that despite his appalling political convictions, only innocence can explain the…
/r/MensRights22/10/17 10:55 AM
7

Wait, there was? Why didn't I notice?
/r/MensRights22/10/17 12:32 AM
1

"Most often, women are the victims of reproductive coercion, ..."
/r/MensRights18/10/17 03:20 PM
3

I've found that appearing to be at leisure acts as an invitation to people to intrude on your time. Yes, I'm standing here next to my motorbike scoffing a sandwich because I have a precious whole ten minutes to myself before I have to go back to work. No, you cannot have my fucking parking spot just because you're "busier than me".
/r/MensRights17/10/17 04:10 PM
2

TL;DR: False accusations never happen so just don't hit on anyone and you'll be fine. Good luck living in fantasyland, better hope you don't suffer a rude awakening though.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 06:11 PM
1

A university is free to institute any process it pleases and you will have agreed to complying with that process upon enrolling. If it were me, I'd want to know for certain that declining to attend would not be construed as an admission of guilt resulting in immediate expulsion. This is the sort of question that your lawyer can clear up for you.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 05:27 PM
2

I was referring to the creation of a hostile environment in the library by the woman's conduct.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 05:22 PM
2

You clearly haven't read or understood the post. Actually, my mistake was not failing to read or understand the post, it was assuming I was dealing with someone who has the brains of an average turnip. My apologies, I'll rephrase using words small enough that even you can follow: Shouting accusations of anti social conduct at someone purely for being and moving around in a library creates creates a hostile environment in the library, denying the target of the shouting equal access to the library…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 05:21 PM
6

...title IX does not prevent anyone from making complaints. Indeed it does not. Which would be why it does not prevent him from making complaints about being denied equal access to community resources such as the library.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 07:19 AM
5

Nonsense. Once they spring a "counselling session" on you, or whatever they decide to call it, it's too late to get advice on how to deal with questions designed to make you look guilty. You can't go into a situation like that unprepared, they'll eat you alive and spit out the masticated remains of your education.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 07:17 AM
2

And then there's the ETLA (Extended Three Letter Acronym) :)
/r/MensRights11/10/17 06:38 AM
5

We don't look closely at each others dicks and until we watch porn, we never see another man's erect penis. We think (I thought) that's just what a penis looks like.
/r/MensRights08/10/17 07:31 PM
4

This is how I figured out I was circumcised, and suddenly vague remarks my parents made decades earlier became clear to me. From sex education I understood I was supposed to have a foreskin and identified the glans as the foreskin and concluded the glans was under the foreskin... Sex education said nothing about what a circumcised penis looks like or what a circumcision scar looks like. Porn did that for me.
/r/MensRights08/10/17 07:28 PM
2

Apparently bicycles need fish
/r/MensRights04/10/17 08:30 AM
17

Four. Likes. Four. Wut?
/r/MensRights01/10/17 06:29 PM
2

She slept with another man while they were an unmarried couple. His devastation was rooted not in the unworthy motives that you attribute to him but in her failure to be faithful to him in the same way that he was faithful to her.
/r/MensRights01/10/17 04:39 AM
5

The same way that the identity of accusers is protected. Whatever that actually is. TBH, I think that neither's identity should be protected, that justice should be done in the open. So many mens rights issues are a result of judicial processes cloaked in darkness which desperately need the cleansing light of day to shine upon them. Family court stands as the single most egregious example of this. But as long as the accuser can be anonymous, it follows that the accused ought also be anonymous an…
/r/MensRights22/09/17 01:59 PM
127

You can protect the identity of people accused but not convicted. Those convicted should be identified but if the accuser can be anonymous, so too can the accused until such time as they are convicted.
/r/MensRights22/09/17 01:25 PM
1

aren't links to other subs supposed to be "NP" links?
/r/MensRights20/09/17 07:58 AM
1

So with that leadup celebrating deplatforming ideology, I hardly expected the first specific complaint to be about the_donald banning users who don't sing with the rest of the chorus. God these people are dense.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 04:58 PM
10

This is born of an inability to see men as anything other than a monolith. Some few men are powerful, influential, rich and generally have enviable conditions, therefore all men have these things. What this perspective is incapable of seeing is that powerful men are not the men who die on battlefields. Wealthy men are not the men who die in the workplace. Influential men are not the men who have to live with the consequences of the decisions that influential men make. Like sexism and racism, fem…
/r/MensRights11/09/17 11:48 AM
2

The only reasonable conclusion you could draw from the discussions here is that MRAs are biased against sex reassignment for minors. I admit it, I don't like the idea of 12 year olds making potentially unalterable decisions about their body in much the same way that I don't like the idea about adults making unalterable decisions about infant circumcision. If you're an adult, it should be up to you. If that's barbaric, well, just call me Conan and I'll answer to it happily.
/r/MensRights08/09/17 08:52 AM
-13

She's human. A human who's made a mistake. A terrible, unforgivable mistake. Here's the hard part: you need to forgive her. Eventually. Not right away, you can't, shouldn't. But eventually. Not for her benefit, for yours.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 06:08 PM
2

In January, two women were ordered to pay a chiropractor $112,100 after they falsely accused him of indecent exposure. The two women were friends and one owed the chiropractor $12,000 in unpaid bills. The false allegations resulted in the chiropractor facing criminal charges (which were subsequently dropped) and having his license to practice suspended for two years. I'm wondering how a $112,000 payment even covers the two years income he lost by having his license suspended.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 05:13 AM
1

A curate is a sort of low ranking priest. The curates egg is said to be "good in parts"
/r/MensRights04/09/17 03:24 PM
17

There is no unified MRA position on this. You will find some MRAs who acknowledge more than 2 genders and some that don't. Neither stance makes a person an MRA or not an MRA. We're about supporting rights for men. If you are a man, we support your rights. Whether you're a man by birth or by choice, those rights are the same so we really don't need to take a position on this, nor should we: the MRA who rejects more than two genders still supports the rights of trans men because the rights of tran…
/r/MensRights29/08/17 03:55 PM
2

Does life insurance typically pay out for suicides?
/r/MensRights25/08/17 08:29 AM
31

you missed this one
/r/MensRights23/08/17 08:25 PM
7

As James Damore would put it, empathy is more widely distributed in the female population than the male population but you cannot make individual level statements based upon these population level findings. James Damore was vilified and deliberately deprived of his job based upon the accusation that he made exactly the sort of statements that Reshma Saujani actually made but which he was very careful to avoid.
/r/MensRights22/08/17 11:37 PM
2

If you want scientific references on this subject you could try here
/r/MensRights22/08/17 11:32 PM
5

The article notes approvingly that DeVos has been criticised for meeting with mens rights groups, linking to "criticism" that merely states without evidence that mens rights groups harass victims. So no, they haven't seen the light at all. They're just salvaging a completely untenable position.
/r/MensRights17/08/17 09:03 AM
2

http://archive.is/6Mmfu
/r/MensRights17/08/17 09:01 AM
3

The same statistical issue applies to Uber and Taxi drivers, locking the bathroom allows them to prevent drivers who are not customers from using it. As an Uber driver myself, I don't support this practice, but that's part of what it is.
/r/MensRights13/08/17 08:20 PM
2

I had someone identify me as a trump supporter (no posts to thedonald) and red piller (no poststs to theredpill) based purely on my posting to this subreddit, being libertarian and generally right of center. This isn't unique to this subreddit though, it's a fairly standard tactic that the left uses because there is no such thing as principled opposition to their agenda, seeing as they have a monopoly on truth, justice and goodness.
/r/MensRights13/08/17 05:28 PM
5

Bill the offender's estate for the cost of the bullets.
/r/MensRights12/08/17 10:18 PM
6

Here's hoping that this means Cassie's decision to present what she learned honestly hasn't flushed her career in film making.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 05:11 PM
1

He's been cleared of rape by the criminal standard "beyond a reasonable doubt", which doesn't necessarily mean that he'll be cleared on the lesser standard of "on the balance of probabilities". Besides, dropping the case would be admission that they have persecuted him for another student's misconduct, which would require them to expel the other student. Naturally, they neither want to admit to persecuting him nor do they want to expel a student for making a false allegation of rape.
/r/MensRights05/08/17 03:26 PM
-1

You needn't look further than the religious right still pushing to allowing creationism in schools because religious teachers won't teach evolutionary theory. Religious teachers do teach evolutionary theory though. And there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to or be expected to. If they decline to do so, on the other hand, they should be fired. That's where the line should be: the actual conduct of the teacher in question. If it is indeed impossible for a religious teacher to teach evoluti…
/r/MensRights05/08/17 03:11 PM
3

Men don't do this because what goes around, comes around. There's no need to posit a conspiracy of silence, it's simply a bad idea if you are subject to retaliation.
/r/MensRights04/08/17 02:24 PM
29

When women began to outnumber men as veterinarians, the average income of a veterinarian fell. Feminists claim this is the result of sexism. Color me shocked. The real cause is that a toy poodle is not an income generating asset, so there is less money to spend on health care and the working conditions of city vets are better than the working conditions of rural vets. Naturally, therefore, people spend more money on the health of income generators and rural vets are harder to find.
/r/MensRights31/07/17 10:23 AM
3

For the most part, political opinions are less about thinking logically than signalling ones submission to the herd. When you refuse to say "baa", you signal that you reject the herd and are thus whatever the herd deems evil.
/r/MensRights31/07/17 10:16 AM
1

I'd watch that movie
/r/MensRights30/07/17 09:59 PM
15

I can see where this is unethical, they really should be using ellipses where they skip over material to indicate that's what they're doing and refrain from paraphrasing inside quotation marks, but I don't think this significantly misrepresents the meaning of her comments
/r/MensRights30/07/17 01:25 PM
2

"Do X or spend 3 years in jail" is what's known as duress. It's indistinguishable from "Do 7 years of do 4 years and get sterilised"
/r/MensRights21/07/17 11:20 AM
1

In the 19th century female underwear deformed womens torsos and made breathing difficult. Pretty much any surprise made it difficult to catch your breath and made fainting likely under those conditions
/r/MensRights21/07/17 10:42 AM
2

She's 27 left swipes into a "tinder spree" and wondering why her mom is asking about grandkids...
/r/MensRights11/07/17 06:37 AM
9

I don't buy a seven year old knowing they're transgender without input from their parents.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 08:06 AM
5

The gun control issue has been "being discussed" for decades. Somehow I don't think that "discussed" is actually the word she wants to use.
/r/MensRights24/06/17 01:17 PM
2

Except that's not an option. Because you don't know she's going to refuse to work before she does so.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 12:11 AM
1

Depends on whether they're being paid as wait staff or entertainers...
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:42 PM
3

If they're getting picked on for being boys, I'd call that a men's rights problem. Consider the weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth over women alleging they're being picked on for playing video games...
/r/MensRights17/06/17 08:59 PM
11

Did you miss the disabled seating sign above the head of the woman sitting next to him?
/r/MensRights15/06/17 11:01 PM
1

I recall one article, many years ago, about "nappy terrorism" such as WoodChucking mentioned above. Although the article recommended the food court because there are tables there and it causes maximum offense. :)
/r/MensRights13/06/17 07:49 PM
25

Our civilization is neglecting the needs of the people who build and pay for our civilization. Civilizations that have fallen did this when they were in their decline and fall...
/r/MensRights13/06/17 05:37 PM
7

I particularly liked the way she instantly spotted the problem. You could almost see mr White Knight's mind skipping it's tracks.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 03:15 PM
15

"That's the lesson you took?" This guy didn't even notice that the victim was male!
/r/MensRights09/06/17 01:40 PM
9

Pictures and videos of MRA speeches are always predominately white, even in areas that aren't, if not entirely (including protesters) a white audience. There are very few Black MRM leaders or organizers. Cursory glances at social media using MRM terms positively are almost entirely white. Being white is not racist and it is not problematic. Suggesting otherwise is itself racist.
/r/MensRights31/05/17 06:18 PM
7

There is no overlap.
/r/MensRights31/05/17 06:17 PM
7

So don't pull that "conspiracy, its a trap" bullshit with me. Politics isn't bullshit, it's how our nations are ruled. Using obvious political strategies is not "conspiracy" it is playing the game. If you don't want your opponent using the media to communicate their ideas, you make them waste their very limited time in front of news cameras responding to your ideas instead of communicating theirs. That's what the Roosh V nonsense is about. Every single time Daryush makes the news, he is labeled …
/r/MensRights31/05/17 05:55 PM
13

First, you're framing it about their perspective. What do you want? Do you want radical elements, like White Nationalists, driving our discourse or solutions? Being our spokes people? We have a message, they want to prevent us from disseminating that message. Calling us racists is a simple way of forcing us to spend our time countering their message instead of communicating ours. We counter it not by responding to their message but by communicating ours. Their accusations of racism are without m…
/r/MensRights31/05/17 04:36 PM
12

It's a trap! How many times have we disavowed Roosh? How many times has Roosh disavowed us? Yet they still beat us with the Daryush stick. Wasting precious airtime saying what we're not will only deny us the opportunity to communicate what we are. They'll still beat us with the misogynist/racist/istoftheday stick regardless.
/r/MensRights31/05/17 03:59 PM
5

It's about signalling your membership of the group. This shit is nothing but wearing gang colors. Ideas are not something to be debated, ideas mark your membership of a particular group and it is socially disastrous to be identified as a member of the wrong group so people like to get out in front of any accusation that one is a member of the wrong group by clearly signalling their membership of the right group. It's high school all over again. There are the right people and the wrong people and…
/r/MensRights29/05/17 08:52 PM
1

[rolls eyes] whatevs dude.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 04:31 PM
1

I'm not asking you to tone it down. You did though. Multiple times you said I shouldn't accuse this sub directly and that I wouldn't gain traction that way. And without evidence, you wont. Gender is the defining thing in these threads and comments I'm referring to Gender is the reason that women are licensed to do the evil things that are being referred to. Well, men were not mentioned. In context, there is no reason for them to be. I don't particularly want to live in a society where men are li…
/r/MensRights23/05/17 09:40 AM
1

I was trying to tone it down I'm not asking you to tone it down. I'm asking you to produce evidence for your continuing accusations of misogyny. And you continue to assert our hatred of women despite your repeated failure to produce any evidence supporting that charge. Take a closer look at what I quoted and my analysis of it. You don't address how that's wrong at all It seems to me that you stated that it wasn't misogyny "In context, if one is willing to read discerningly (and it's not hard) th…
/r/MensRights23/05/17 08:47 AM
1

But this sub is becoming far too comfortable with speech bordering on misogyny "speech bordering on misoginy is also known as speech that is not misogyny. Both of the examples that you raise are not misogyny. It's baffling to me that you insist on employing examples of language that do not express misogyny for the purpose of highlighting misogyny. The only possible reason that you would do that is that examples of misogyny in /r/mensrights are impossible to find, either because they're not here …
/r/MensRights23/05/17 05:16 AM
5

What exactly are these "certain privileges" that I enjoy?
/r/MensRights21/05/17 07:42 AM
1

The world's a sad place. Haven't you noticed?
/r/MensRights21/05/17 05:19 AM
1

I'm less confident that they bothered to actually use those tables.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 04:10 AM
1

I have tried hard to clarify that point many times in this thread already You have tried much less hard to back away from the statement that the sub is becoming "a place to nurture hate towards women". I note with approval that this time you have avoided reiterating that statement either by direct statement or by insinuation. So long as you use language that either directly, or by inference, accuses the sub of misogyny, you're not going to get traction. I find myself unsympathetic to your argume…
/r/MensRights21/05/17 04:05 AM
1

So point to behavior that actually supports your accusation of misogyny instead of behavior that does not. You're not going to convince anyone of anything they're not already convinced of while you're pretending that anger at individual women = misogyny. It doesn't.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 09:48 AM
2

It is kinda natural to start projecting some of that anger and start hating women a little bit and the rabidness with which everyone wants to go after this 14 year old girl rather than the fucking adult seasoned professionals administrating the whole legal ordeal is a prime example. You seem to lack the ability to comprehend the reason people are objecting. You repeatedly jump from anger at individual women to hatred of women as a group. They are not the same thing. You're assuming misoginy with…
/r/MensRights20/05/17 04:20 AM
1

1st, I'm making an assumption: That "expected life" is based on average age at death. If so, it's worse yet because average age at death is younger for men because we die from many causes that women do not. Combat deaths, workplace deaths and so on. Many of these causes are moot at the point of retirement. It seems to me that a man who has retired has outlived most of the reasons that he is likely to be outlived by an average woman so he will in all probability outlive the male average age at de…
/r/MensRights20/05/17 03:13 AM
25

I sincerely hope that this sub, and this movement, doesn't simply become an excuse to nurture hate towards women. One woman is not women. It can be a natural thing to project negative feelings onto a group One woman is not a group. She is an individual. Hating someone who did something appalling, who tried to saddle an innocent person with the lifetime brand "sex offender" is not hating all women.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 05:31 PM
1

but speaking on TV about how he's fine after whatever happened to him could So you're not saying he should keep it to himself? What exactly are you saying then?
/r/MensRights16/05/17 04:59 AM
2

You just want them to keep quiet about their experience because people might believe them. I really don't see a distinction here.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 11:12 PM
5

I am NOT OK with telling victims of rape that their experience of the crime is invalid.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 04:57 AM
2

Personally, I don't agree that what happened to him is trivial. However, I would have thought that in the sense of the individual incident, his perspective would be more important than mine. I don't think we need to take that perspective in a broader, society wide sense.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 03:51 AM
4

Atticus Finch is the bad guy
/r/MensRights15/05/17 12:20 AM
16

I never really got why people got so worked up over Milo not getting worked up over being raped. Doesn't the victim get to decide what their own reaction is?
/r/MensRights14/05/17 11:32 PM
2

Sometimes you have to work really hard at maintaining your most cherished beliefs. When you're doing that, it shows.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 06:17 PM
12

you have to wonder if any of them even saw the movie. I don't actually. I know very well indeed that they haven't.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 06:14 PM
13

Even then only if you ignore the fdom aspects
/r/MensRights11/05/17 11:32 AM
20

Whitby urged us to act now, before it’s too late. “We need to have these discussions instead of waking up one day when robot companions are normal and question whether it was a good idea or not," Whitby literally wants to legislate what goes on in people's bedrooms. Not what two consenting adults are doing with each other, but what one adult is doing to a literal object. Wondering whether it's a "good idea" or not does nothing to ameliorate the intrusion into other peoples private space. As we a…
/r/MensRights11/05/17 08:27 AM
1

That makes me feel all warm and fuzzy :) I guess I'm just a bad person :(
/r/MensRights08/05/17 04:01 AM
3

"...while many of her victims still sit in prison, waiting to be released, Annie has already served her time and been released on parole." This part stopped me dead in my tracks.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:50 AM
2

In point of fact, many of her victims are still in jail after she's served her time and been paroled...
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:49 AM
1

Thanks. Got it on Vimeo now. :)
/r/MensRights07/05/17 02:14 PM
3

Slate
/r/MensRights07/05/17 01:14 PM
9

I'd say that Stefanovic's exercise was about calling out women for being bitchy about other women's clothes. I'd call it calling out the limited palette that men have to work with in business attire.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 05:32 AM
1

In this case, neither Montano, at 17, nor Sanchez Milian, who is a relatively young 18, was a full four years older than the girl. Thanks, I missed that.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 05:10 AM
1

15 isn't 16 any more than 3 years and 11 months is 4 years. The table you're relying on isn't law. The law states "at least 4 years older". 3 years and 11 months is not 4 years.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 04:16 AM
2

Now read the law, It says exactly nothing about someone being 18 years of age. It says, and I quote "at least 4 years older" From Maryland Criminal Attorney Blog: it may or may not be illegal for an 19 year old to have sex with a 15 year old or a 18 year old to have sex with a 14 year old depending upon when the participants birthdays occur. A violation of the statute only occurs if the participants’ birthdays are four years or more apart. But don't take a random criminal attorney's word for it,…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 04:08 AM
2

We haven't been given their birthdates, and the fact that the prosecutor declined to prosecute this charge should have given you a clue as to what's happening here. If her birthdate is 1 June 2002 and his birthdate is 1 July 1998 then she is 14, he is 18 but he is not at least four years older. In this example, he would be 3 years and 11 months older. YEAH, TAKE IT. Back at you moron. http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmStatutesText.aspx?article=gcr&section=3-308&ext=html&session=2015RS&tab=sub…
/r/MensRights06/05/17 03:49 AM
2

its fucking illegal if she's 14 You're a moron: Like most states, there are some situations in Maryland where people under the age of consent may legally have sex, as long as there is only a small age difference between them. In Maryland, persons aged between 14 and 16 may consent to sex as long as the other partner is not more than 4 years older That was the single simplest act of fact checking I've ever done.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 03:14 AM
2

I AM for free speech after all Exactly. If we only support the right of people to say things we agree with, we don't support free speech, just our speech. I think the things that the protesters have to say are stupid and regard them as willfully ignorant but they must be permitted to speak their stupid, ignorant and disgusting minds.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 02:02 AM
1

There isn't, but there is /r/buzzwordbingo because this post inspired me to create it.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 03:31 AM
6

"They never told each other they sucked, they didn't laugh when someone fell & they complimented each other's efforts" Aaaand this is how I know the entire thing is a lie designed specifically to demonize boys.
/r/MensRights27/04/17 03:01 AM
1

The single largest obstacle to the mens rights agenda right now IS feminism. The Red Pill movie, a major victory for publicizing mens rights issues; opposed, lied about and by feminists. Child custody and family court fairness, we are opposed by organized feminism. We are slandered mercilessly by feminists on major media platforms to which we have no access. Every time we turn ariund, we find feminism waging a declared war against us despite the fact that feminism by it's own principles ought to…
/r/MensRights26/04/17 02:53 PM
9

uuuuhhhhh, right. [sidles desperately away] [whistles innocently] Troll? What troll?
/r/MensRights22/04/17 03:55 PM
12

Eh, come on, you're going to tell me it's not true?
/r/MensRights22/04/17 03:36 PM
2

Your first step must be to identify their objective. It's not enough to know that they want to harm you, you must know why you have become a person of interest to them. Without that information, you cannot predict what they will do and if you cannot predict what they will do you cannot counter their actions. They will have reasons that make sense to them. They might well be monstrous reasons, but from their perspective, they will make sense. Their reasons will have some basis in your own life, a…
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:23 PM
1

No, you didn't overreact. No one goes up to a complete stranger and starts accusing them of taking pictures of children because they think that conduct is innocent and ordinary. She was suspecting you of untoward conduct and investigating that for the purpose of reporting the matter to police, whether this is a matter of gender bias or not, her actions were hostile and had they continued to their logical end point, would have caused you considerable inconvenience and distress.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:39 AM
3

Sometimes you need humor to drive home the brutality of the practice. If it works, I can live with some (admittedly, bad) tasteless humor.
/r/MensRights21/04/17 09:27 AM
1

Hell, Sillymod even flat out said no right wingers are allowed in the mod team, because if they allow right wingers, said right wingers would immediately start censoring leftists. If true, this looks a lot like projecting their own instincts upon people who disagree with them.
/r/MensRights19/04/17 07:28 AM
0

It tells us what the Democrat parties "Visions and Values" are WRT white men. And they call us racist and sexist for voting for someone, for anyone else. They are stating, clearly, distinctly and in their own words, that white men should not vote Democrat.
/r/MensRights19/04/17 07:26 AM
4

I do so love it when moralizing busybodies take away peoples choices and declare "I'm doing this for your own good". If someone is accepting this sort of deal there is no getting around that fact that it is the best choice that is available to them. Take this choice away, and they are left only with options that are worse than exchanging sex for rent.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 10:08 AM
34

More that they actively don't want to find the father. Adoption agencies exist because there's money in it. Women wont want to adopt if they discover that the father might end up collecting child support from her instead.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 02:58 AM
2

Tell you what you are? I haven't done that. This entire discussion is about what MRAs and the MRM are. The modern men's rights movement emerged from the men's liberation movement Remember this? Men with a sense of responsibility are in favour of child support Meaning MRAs aren't Men with a respect for liberty are LGBT-supportive Meaning MRAs aren't This entire discussion is about you trying to assert that feminists are reliable arbiters of what the MRM is just because that feminist happens to be…
/r/MensRights09/04/17 02:48 PM
2

Honey, I would love to see you explain to a man that doesn't call himself an MRA that he's not allowed to say anything about men's rights because he's not in your camp. I'd love to see you explain to 1-in-6 American men who call themselves feminists that you deserve the right to dictate what their rights are, and how they should regard the world around them. Honey, I never said anything of the sort. So I don't need to say something I don't believe to anyone. But if they, like you, tell me what I…
/r/MensRights09/04/17 01:59 PM
2

Oooooh! pretty burning straw man!
/r/MensRights09/04/17 01:16 PM
1

He can (and does) opine endlessly on the way men must live. I have no objection to him doing that. The MRM is a movement with an identity and a history which he cannot be relied upon to accurately report. He can say that the MRM is made of blue cheese if he really wants to, it doesn't follow that he should be taken seriously.
/r/MensRights09/04/17 01:03 PM
1

Neither his gender identity nor his genitalia qualify him to define the MRM for us. His voluntary embrace of a philosophy that regards the MRM as dangerous hateful reactionaries however, disqualifies him from being regarded as an unbiased and reliable source of information.
/r/MensRights09/04/17 12:50 PM
3

I'm not hung up on his genitalia, that's your deal.
/r/MensRights09/04/17 01:14 AM
3

Seriously? You must be baffled awfully easily. Let me explain in simple language: Men can be feminists, women can be MRAs. Feminists are not reliable sources for information on the Men's Rights Movement.
/r/MensRights09/04/17 01:08 AM
4

Both of them comes from a gender studies professors one of whom: ... has spoken out as a strong advocate for Title IX. Having interests in both gender studies and sports, he has analyzed it both from a feminist and sports perspective And the other self identifies as a feminist See introduction, first line of page 2. No, feminists do not get to define what the men's movement is or where it came from. They see us as their enemies and are deeply invested in portraying us in the worst possible light…
/r/MensRights08/04/17 11:03 PM
4

Maybe try contacting your state political representatives, it's possible they might be able to put a rocket up the ass off whatever department is supposed to manage this.
/r/MensRights07/04/17 09:08 PM
3

and it led to a valuation that was about 30x less than the valuation the market sustained a short time later She got $15 million, the company is now worth 90 million. Assuming the property settlement was 50/50 and the company made up the majority of the settlement, you're off by an entire order of magnitude.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 12:38 AM
1

You have no reason to believe that there is missing information. So far as the article we're basing this discussion on is concerned, the only information he withheld is that he was contemplating going public. You don't get someone's money on the basis of what they were thinking at the time. if you could, she could have simply thought the same thing and made the same money. Furthermore, you're completely rejecting the idea that there is any risk in going public: what, you think a business can pre…
/r/MensRights05/04/17 11:38 PM
1

An IPO is a risk, the market may have bought for what the court valuation said, it mmay have bought for less. In the event, the market decided it was worth more. He could not know in advance what the outcome would be. His wife didn't take that risk, his wife cashed out in advance. So question: if the IPO had been disastrous and he turned out to be less wealthy than the court decided he was, should he get some of the settlement back?
/r/MensRights05/04/17 11:12 PM
1

Basic intersectionality would educate people that they don't want to be perceived as gay, who would want to deliberately disadvantage themselves.
/r/MensRights05/04/17 10:18 PM
13

It's always better to resolve a conflict without involving the police. Thete's no telling who'se side they'll take and even if he's vindicated in the end, he still has an arrest record which could exclude him from many professions, Uber included in some cities.
/r/MensRights05/04/17 03:20 AM
2

If you're renting, move out, terminate your lease and find somewhere else to live. Avoid being in her presence at all, ever again. If you absolutely must meet with her, do so in a public place within clear view of security cameras and record the meeting if legal where you are. Get a lawyer now.
/r/MensRights03/04/17 10:53 PM
1

The issue here is that the technology is unpatentable How is it unpatentable?
/r/MensRights02/04/17 11:44 PM
3

Oh fuck me! I thought they were kidding!
/r/MensRights02/04/17 11:32 PM
5

"...Employers should concentrate on ensuring that their staffs are trained in workplace rights laws and that the workplace is free from harassment and discrimination rather than trying to build unlawful fences around their female staff." Because women never lie and if those evil men simply did the right thing they would have nothing to worry about. Fuck me, the stupid!
/r/MensRights02/04/17 11:28 PM
3

She's judgement proof. At 13, she has no income to garnish and no assets to seize. He's out of luck.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 03:31 PM
1

Because asian people tend to adhere to ostensibly "white" values such as education and hard work, asian people are treated by these sjw types as honorary whites. Considering asians, statistically speaking, are better at adhering to these values than whites though, I'm not entirely sure what it is about these values that make them "white" rather than "asian".
/r/MensRights25/03/17 07:04 AM
2

Their very first "sorta racist" comment strikes me as nothing of the sort. They're essentially saying "Don't ask us difficult questions or we'll call you an ignorant racist". Their assumption of superiority is undermined by their obvious inability to effectively respond to obvious questions.
/r/MensRights25/03/17 06:59 AM
6

there is no option for defense to have an input with questioning For me, this is a deal breaker. As a juror, I would be inclined to completely disregard such "evidence"
/r/MensRights19/03/17 05:45 PM
3

No leading questions allowed, just like if it were in a court room. In a regular court room, you can ask leading questions of an adverse, or hostile, witness. Does this provision also apply?
/r/MensRights19/03/17 05:07 PM
6

Precisely. And he's busy insisting that post divorce, exactly the same division of labor should continue... Men should earn the family income, women should raise the family children. But this is a deal that makes sense for men only in the context of being married. Once a divorce takes place, naturally, he wants a deal that makes sense in the changed circumstances. Women, by contrast, like this arrangement which kind of tells us exactly who is making sacrifices and being oppressed and who is not.
/r/MensRights17/03/17 05:10 PM
3

And as usual, SJW looney tunes only applies when SJWs like the victim. AKA white males need not apply.
/r/MensRights10/03/17 03:52 AM
9

I've never been offered free condoms.
/r/MensRights09/03/17 06:34 AM
4

You are equal. You get paid equal money for equal work. If you interpret equality as oppression...
/r/MensRights09/03/17 06:30 AM
4

At least they're being consistent with their treatment of men.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 07:19 AM
2

It's obvious after she has passed out. Maybe it was obvious and the cabbie should have known she was about to pass out and maybe it wasn't. That "maybe it wasn't" is known as "reasonable doubt".
/r/MensRights05/03/17 06:29 AM
8

She was conscious when she got into the cab she was unconscious when the police interrupted him She was partially unclothed when police arrived She was probably (as in no reasonable doubt) clothed when she got in the cab Physical contact took place between the two during the 11 minute window for which her state of consciousness is unknown The judge ruled that it is possible that her clothes were removed by herself or that she consented to removal prior to passing out. The judge ruled that it is …
/r/MensRights05/03/17 06:24 AM
5

She was unclothed, it doesn't follow that she did not undress herself before passing out, nor that she did not consent to physical contact prior to passing out. The question in this particular case is "could she consent while so drunk that she was about to pass out. The judges interpretation of the law seems to be that as she was not unconscious for the entire period, it is possible that she consented and was able to do so in the 11 minutes prior to being discovered unconscious by police.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 06:14 AM
2

I can just see the next time this cop finds himself testifying against a suspect "Officer Gallardo, isn't it true that you made this arrest to fuck my client over so that my client wouldn't talk shit or complain on you just like you did to another person on October 4 2016?"
/r/MensRights04/03/17 05:46 AM
1

I don't think it's their choice of clothes that's getting them derogatory labels... ;)
/r/MensRights28/02/17 03:51 PM
18

I have NEVER seen a feminist acknowledge that male spaces are healthy Uh, ooooohhhh kaaaaaayyyyyy. (Don't click that link if you want to keep believing that one. Political activism is about getting a message out. We have our message, other people have theirs. If we spend our time getting other peoples messages out (this one is a race rights issue, not a mens rights issue) our message gets buried. And that's the objective behind this "point". To bury mens rights under other peoples rights. gay me…
/r/MensRights25/02/17 07:49 PM
1

Your local chapter should be in the phone directory under AoEMP
/r/MensRights16/02/17 08:51 AM
8

The phone number to apply for your mansion and hot babe showers is on the back of your man card. It's the one marked "Association of Evil Male Patriarchs"
/r/MensRights16/02/17 01:31 AM
27

To be fair, they did disprove the 53% number...
/r/MensRights15/02/17 04:40 AM
3

So how do you create a toilet that you can sit on but cannot stand and urinate into?
/r/MensRights14/02/17 03:43 PM
18

Many women "hover", crouching above the seat without coming into contact with the seat. The results are what Rumpadunk describes.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 03:42 PM
3

I'll stop standing as soon as they stop hovering.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 03:41 PM
4

If a woman has her hands around my throat, I can tell she's trying to kill me. If someone tries to kill me, I try to kill them right back.
/r/MensRights11/02/17 05:37 PM
2

Not a single finding of guilt but so very many clear statements that the accused are, one and all, guilty as charged. It is the adjudication of alleged sex offenses, alleged domestic violence and divorce cases that will usher in the end of Blackstone's formulation: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
/r/MensRights11/02/17 05:26 PM
22

The patriarchy.
/r/MensRights10/02/17 10:17 AM
2

That would make him a FAZI :)
/r/MensRights09/02/17 04:54 AM
3

We have a place for battered women, domestic violence shelters. For the sake of fairness, we also have a place for battered men, jail. Both places protect the battered person from their batterer. Both places provide the battered person with a meal and a place to sleep. Sounds fair, right?
/r/MensRights29/01/17 05:02 AM
41

"I think some men push back [against the idea of toxic masculinity] because they don't hear the message of hope and support that is in that critique ... that men themselves will benefit from abandoning toxic masculinity. This is why it is a war on men and why it can only backfire. The message here is not one of hope, it is one of hate. As a man, I must abandon toxic masulinity... as if I had toxic masculinity in the first place. If I were to say the same about muslims or black people, he would q…
/r/MensRights29/01/17 04:52 AM
0

Their millions are the result of government grants, redistributing income to advance "social justice" AKA seizing money from working men and redistributing it to millionaire feminists. It's precisely how socialism works in practice if you substitute the phrase "powerful men" for "millionaire feminists"
/r/MensRights27/01/17 05:03 AM
1

Rachel Maddow on the 2016 election...
/r/MensRights26/01/17 04:58 AM
5

They come out of the Patriarchy Slush Fund*, underwritten by the gender pay gap (unpaid womens wages are diverted to the PSF). Any peculiarly masculine expenses can be paid for out of the PSF, simply apply to your local PSF chapter with receipts and you're good to go. Sorry, cocaine is a girly drug, so it's not claimable. Crack cocaine is a more manly drug and can be claimed from the PSF. *Hereinafter referred to as the PSF
/r/MensRights22/01/17 04:37 AM
1

I'm not aware of a specific incident but it wouldn't surprise me excessively if it were true.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 12:54 AM
10

Are you sure it wasn't for neglectfully allowing mommy to hit the child?
/r/MensRights21/01/17 08:43 AM
1

Well gosh, someone indicates by swiping right that they're interested then refuse to take so much as the first step in following up that interest. How dare men resent getting set up for rejection.
/r/MensRights21/01/17 05:20 AM
6

A century in which youth and beauty are important to a woman who wants to attract a permanent mate.
/r/MGTOW15/01/17 04:12 PM
2

What was stopping women from buying men's razors? Now men's razors will increase in price to cover the revenue lost to sales of the more expensive womens razors and women smart enough to buy the cheaper product get burned right along with all those evil men. Maybe it's being smart enough to buy the cheaper product that they object to, not the gender that cheaper razors were marketed to.
/r/MensRights01/01/17 06:48 PM
3

Yes. It's a measure of how clever they really are.
/r/MensRights01/01/17 05:35 PM
4

This is just a variation on a racist announcing "I've got lots of friends who are [whatever race they just denigrated]". No one who actually has friends in the given group actually says this.
/r/MensRights01/01/17 05:18 PM
2

You should consider asking her to attend marriage counseling with you, but not before finding out if a marriage counselor would have a duty to report marital violence to the police: If matters go into the legal system, whether because you reported it or someone took it upon themselves to report to the police, the outcome is completely unpredictable except inasmuch as it's unlikely to be a good outcome.
/r/MensRights31/12/16 08:25 PM
3

I found point 10 to be illuminating: it simply reeks of entitlement to a man's money and says a great deal more about the author than it does about PUAs
/r/MensRights30/12/16 04:12 PM
27

I love that they're getting stressed over the wage gap lie. I can see how believing that they're getting paid less might be a source of stress, but it's one with a simple solution: the truth will set them free!
/r/MensRights30/12/16 03:51 PM
7

In Star trek: Deep Space 9 their depiction of the Cardassians illuminates the purpose of a trial: DUKAT: How barbaric. On Cardassia, the verdict is always known before the trial begins. And it’s always the same. SISKO: In that case, why bother with a trial at all? DUKAT: Because the people demand it. They enjoy watching justice triumph over evil every time. They find it comforting. SISKO: Isn’t there ever a chance you might try an innocent man by mistake? DUKAT: Cardassians don’t make mistakes. …
/r/MensRights26/12/16 01:38 PM
1

Say rather, it doesn't matter all that much if it's true. So the ratio is lopsided, even if true, these things have reasons and the article assumes the least likely
/r/MensRights26/12/16 01:22 PM
7

"One of the features of rape cases is that there are rarely any independent witnesses. The case often hinges on 'he said, she said' evidence There's nothing mysterious here. The author of the study itself points out the very obvious cause. Prosecutors don't particularly want to bring marginal cases, Jurors don't particularly want to discount his evidence just because she contradicts him. then there's a gap in the chain of events, "report to conviction ratio" skips the investigation stage of the …
/r/MensRights26/12/16 10:47 AM
11

Subscale 4: She Lied AKA the false rape accusations never happen subscale.
/r/MensRights26/12/16 10:41 AM
7

If he dies, she should be prosecuted for murder.
/r/MensRights24/12/16 05:08 PM
1

As I understand it other European countries operate in a more or less Judge Judy style. Parties bring their cases to a court. The judge interrogates them and makes a decision. This makes the judge the weak point of the system. Convince the judge that accused men are always guilty or convince the judge that (s)he will be hounded out of his or her job if (s)he doesn't conduct himself as if all accused men are guilty and it's game over. The person testing the evidence must have a personal stake in …
/r/MensRights23/12/16 06:26 PM
5

If women create their own space, they wont need men to step down from theirs.
/r/MensRights23/12/16 04:13 AM
3

Whitby urged us to act now, before it’s too late. “We need to have these discussions instead of waking up one day when robot companions are normal and question whether it was a good idea or not," he says. What "Whitby" doesn't seem to realize is that whether or not "society" ought to be making peoples most intimate and private choices has already been discussed and experimented with.
/r/MensRights22/12/16 09:20 AM
22

voting against their own economic self interest, let's not forget! I have to wonder, though, just exactly how much someone who calls them a "basket of deplorables" cares about their economic interests.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 05:22 PM
2

We're supposed to believe that these are the people with our economic interests at heart? Small wonder they can't make headway with white men when they make it perfectly plain that they can barely tolerate our existence, much less arrange the nations economy to our advantage.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 05:17 PM
3

Even stand your ground laws wouldn't protect her here. Stand your ground only means you're not obliged to flee rather than use force in self defense. It is not license to continue using force after the threat has abated.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 03:30 AM
9

We're not talking about gender identity rather, we're talking about the physical characteristics of people who were assigned a given gender at birth. Leave it to other people to try to shut down particular avenues of discussion because that avenue is "transphobic". It's not. We're not even talking about trans folk except inasmuch as they were assigned a particular gender at birth. Whether they want to change that assignment or not and whether they should be allowed to (they should, just for the …
/r/MensRights18/12/16 06:35 AM
0

He was released in 2009 after DNA evidence ruled him out as a suspect in the case. What would you regard as "sufficient evidence"? Looks to me like they just don't want him to be properly compensated for 31 years that got taken from him.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 02:46 AM
27

Lawrence McKinney, 60, of Memphis, Tenn., was convicted of rape and burglary in 1978 and was sentenced to prison for 115 years. He was released in 2009 after DNA evidence ruled him out as a suspect in the case. Patsy Bruce served on the parole board that denied McKinney’s first exoneration hearing, and she said she’s still not convinced he’s innocent. Rape: a crime so heinous that even innocence is no excuse.
/r/MensRights15/12/16 04:05 PM
1

I was wondering how they got from "they let you do it" to "raaaaaaape!". Now I know. prior consent.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 02:50 PM
24

This amounts to permanently locking the homeless out of society. If you have thousands of dollars in fines and non payment penalties, you can't obtain housing, if you can't obtain housing, you can't hold down employment and if you can't hold down employment, you can't pay the fines. Circle closed. This is no different from giving bus tickets to the homeless, it's about shifting the problem around, making them go somewhere else and be someone elses problem.
/r/MensRights11/12/16 06:00 AM
2

In fairness, public media is not an appropriate venue to disclose evidence because it cannot effectively be cross-examined by the other party. The accusations against him have been widely disseminated in public. It's hardly unfair for him to protest his innocence or to point to evidence responsive to the accusations against him
/r/MensRights08/12/16 03:40 PM
7

And all of the alleged conduct which he claims justifies cancelling the film happened after he cancelled the film. He should share the secret of his clairvoyance with the rest of us!
/r/MensRights06/12/16 01:45 PM
3

Actors read scripts before auditioning for roles. IMO directors and screenwriters should consult with the affected actors before making changes of this nature after the role has been cast.
/r/MensRights05/12/16 04:19 AM
33

Intoxicated means "consent cannot be given." Even someone who buys into "rape culture" doesn't support this argument. There are degrees of intoxication where consent cannot be given and there are degrees of intoxication where consent can be given. The willingness of people such as yourself to define all degrees of intoxication as indistinguishable from effectively passed out on the floor demonstrates how untrustworthy you really are. From the complaint against the judge that you very kindly prov…
/r/MensRights01/12/16 02:22 PM
3

making a false report to police isn't a crime?
/r/MensRights28/11/16 10:50 AM
2

I'm sure as hell not involving myself in a situation which includes a violent woman, except as an honest witness. Getting physically involved, as a man, can only end badly.
/r/MensRights28/11/16 08:32 AM
29

They have all the ingredients, they have him repeatedly pleading with her to "stop it" they have her hitting him with a bag then trying to borrow a heavier weapon to go after him with but they just can't see that this guy is in danger and reacted out of a perfectly reasonable fear for his safety. It's like it just doesn't compute for them if it doesn't fit into their comfortable little Man=bad, woman=good paradigm.
/r/MensRights27/11/16 04:59 PM
5

Seeing a woman getting hurt gives her the vapors so that would follow...
/r/MensRights27/11/16 04:56 PM
85

"We know that men can also be victims of violence and abuse but..." but we don't give a single solitary flying fuck about those worthless privileged wimps
/r/MensRights27/11/16 10:40 AM
1

A campus centre for non-LGBT people would be empty, because there's no demand for it. This one's a little weaker because LGBT people can meet and discuss their issues anywhere, and I don't know why the college has to provide a special place for them, but it's not the worst idea ever or anything. It's been tried before and it was called segregation. You know, separate, but equal. But it's not the worst idea ever or anything. "not the worst idea ever" is kind of a low bar to be trying to clear.
/r/MensRights27/11/16 12:02 AM
10

I love the part where the writer mistake a slaves leash for a "cloth phallus". It's no accident that the only man who can get away with dispensing with the leash is the man at the top.
/r/MensRights21/11/16 12:33 PM
2

"Even Trumps answer to people who felt so threatened by other people's equality... was 'I can bring your jobs back'" What part of this statement suggests to her that the problem that got Trump elected is "other people's equality"? This woman knows. Flat out stated the real reason that Hillary lost in places that voted for Obama twice yet still claims that the problem is "other people's equality". She's lying to herself and she knows it.
/r/MensRights19/11/16 03:36 AM
5

One comment, currently at -5 and replies to that comment are unsupportive. Overall, the response has been respectful of his choice.
/r/MensRights14/11/16 02:55 AM
1

One reality cheque, coming right up ;)
/r/MensRights13/11/16 11:34 AM
13

According to the article the police weren't going to take a report until witnesses insisted.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 08:42 AM
1

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.zenaapps.backgroundvideorecorder&hl=en
/r/MensRights09/11/16 11:07 PM
6

“White males may be in trouble but that’s their own fault. They have all the advantages already.” And they believe this even in the face of evidence to the contrary and the obvious absurdity that school age children should be held accountable for advantages enjoyed by CEOs and political representatives. Feminism is a religion, with dogma that is completely unresponsive to contrary data just as any other religion.
/r/MensRights07/11/16 12:34 PM
-1

Allow? What are "we" gonna do, mandatory sterilization at 35? mandatory abortion if you fall pregnant above the forbidden age? You realize that society is a lot more comfortable inflicting injustice on men than women, right? The moment feminists look at the above options, the hunt is going to be on for a solution that encumbers the male instead of the female.
/r/MensRights07/11/16 12:13 PM
2

An article like this, in a mainstream publication, with "54 reading now" has zero comments? Impossible.
/r/MensRights01/11/16 01:39 AM
3

Whoever started the petition described Roosh V as an MRA. Given his own statements on the matter, that's worse than simply uninformed. When their petition summary itself is full of lies, just how seriously should their position be taken?
/r/MensRights31/10/16 07:11 AM
12

And she answers with a non sequitur. "Because the basic human form is female"? First off what does that even mean? Embryo Development " female development will occur unless maleness is actively induced by the Y chromosome" The above leads female triumphalists to conclude that female is "the basic human form" and that "All men started out as female". This is bullshit, but that doesn't stop them from believing it.
/r/MensRights29/10/16 04:33 PM
1

The thing about journalism and neutral point of view is that it's really easy to do if you just put in a minimum of effort. I really don't care that the reviewer is ignorant and lazy rather than malicious, it's enough that the reviewer is both incompetent and feels superior because of that incompetence. That is contemptible without being malicious.
/r/MensRights24/10/16 03:13 PM
1

A "balanced" review would have compared Valerie Solanis to the evil MRAs he is at such pains to highlight. There's maybe a nod vaguely in the direction of journalistic integrity but that's about it.
/r/MensRights24/10/16 12:15 PM
3

How do we tell which inaccuracies are deliberate and which are mistakes?
/r/MensRights24/10/16 10:18 AM
3

Apparently monitoring spending is abuse as is running up debts in the other partners name. But if your partner is running up debt in your name, it's abusive to monitor their spending... wut?
/r/MensRights24/10/16 01:05 AM
10

What I found most interesting was her failure to identify how the terms were misunderstood and provide an alternative definition. It's so much easier to avoid being refuted when you're studiously avoiding making an argument.
/r/MensRights14/10/16 08:10 AM
1

Intent is not an element of the crime that Hillary was cleared of either.
/r/MensRights11/10/16 04:02 PM
10

I see an opportunity to wear away at the rules that prevent business owners from doing just that by pointing out the inconsistencies. If the government weren't interfering whenever someone who isn't a heterosexual white male stubs their toe on a bigoted business owner, it wouldn't occur to anyone to run to the government and cry about it when this happens. Men expect equal protection under the law? Say it isn't so!
/r/MensRights11/10/16 03:20 PM
1

Never admit anything to a police officer. In the words of Miranda, "...Can and will be used against you"
/r/MensRights07/10/16 02:58 AM
5

It's good to see that justice prevailed in the (very) end. A shame that it took so damn long for the wheels of justice to reach such an obvious destination.
/r/MensRights06/10/16 04:45 PM
2

then proceeded to ask if I'm single and "no wonder why!". It actually hurt Hurting you was the point. The only thing you need to understand is that she's a hateful person saying hateful things purely to hurt you. She wants to do that because you knowing something that she doesn't and you offering to share that knowledge made her feel inadequate, both because you knew something she didn't and because you cared enough about another person to offer your advice where she would have been perfectly ha…
/r/MensRights02/10/16 11:31 AM
2

Oh no! it's a Womens Liberation Front suicide squad! Next thing you know, we'll have a Womens Front for Liberation squad on our hands as well!
/r/MensRights02/10/16 11:23 AM
2

Only if women are an oppressed group. If women aren't an oppressed group, the statement is literally true. If not in the way that they mean...
/r/MensRights01/10/16 07:20 AM
0

If so it would have to be a secret worse than being a drug and alcohol addict who is dangerous to their children. The fact that she led with that one relegates your baseless speculation to the realm of fantasy
/r/MensRights01/10/16 06:52 AM
5

Going to court would only give Jolie a larger platform from which to trumpet her totally unsubstantiated allegations. They both know full well that there is a substantial portion of the public who will believe everything she says about him purely because he's a man and that expressing belief in the allegations carries social cachet while expressing disbelief carries social detriment. The outcome is fore ordained with allegations such as this regardless of the lack of evidence. If there was some …
/r/MensRights01/10/16 03:46 AM
11

Courts are typically reluctant to "interfere" with an "established custody arrangement". It doesn't matter if he's guilty or not, the accusations will have achieved their objective (establishing a custody arrangement) by the time the time limit on the "temporary arrangement" expires. Meanwhile, Jolie wants to "heal her family" (direct quote from Jolie herself). Presumably this "healing" is similar to the process of recuperating from an amputation. What happens to limbs that are amputated? They a…
/r/MensRights01/10/16 03:39 AM
1

Which procedures should not be performed/performed differently if the patient has been a victim of domestic abuse?
/r/MensRights26/09/16 05:10 AM
6

This is an unreasonable and impossible standard. You're expecting people to carefully distinguish the amount of force required and you're making a distinction between anger and fear that not only has no basis in reality but is completely irrelevant. They are both legitimate emotional responses to danger and it is the danger that matters not the question of whether a persons response to that danger is driven by fear or anger. Add adrenaline and an instinctual fight or flight response, it is impos…
/r/MensRights24/09/16 03:59 PM
9

Now you're pretending you're not adopting the argument that I responded to. Don't be so dishonest. Better yet, don't expect a response from me until you're willing to discuss this honestly.
/r/MensRights24/09/16 03:15 PM
11

Power is irrelevant if the more powerful individual refuses to protect themselves.
/r/MensRights24/09/16 03:10 PM
10

It would be like if I got slapped by a ten year old He wasn't getting slapped by a ten year old and the person attacking him was an adult, not a child. You're substituting your strawman (a ten year olds ineffectual slaps) for what actually happened (an adult attacking another adult).
/r/MensRights24/09/16 02:59 PM
19

He didn't get slapped by a 10 year old. Look to your own cindery strawmen.
/r/MensRights24/09/16 02:07 PM
23

So she can just beat on him until she decides to attack him in a way which will do permanent damage? OK.
/r/MensRights24/09/16 12:47 PM
4

DNA proves only that DNA is present. It proves nothing about consent or even the presence of anything other than the accused's DNA. Photos do nothing to connect a particular offender to a crime. Teeth marks can help but the correlation between the marks and the offender's teeth degrades over time. Meanwhile exculpatory evidence is all but non existent after just a few years. This makes delaying reporting the alleged crime an excellent way to railroad innocent persons
/r/MensRights15/09/16 02:30 AM
0

Rhetoric: the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially the exploitation of figures of speech and other compositional techniques. ... talking in rhetoric like you are doesn't help people see how things are. You're contradicting yourself. Self contradiction doesn't strike me as a particularly persuasive technique
/r/MensRights15/09/16 01:44 AM
4

Yup. That shoe sure does pinch when it"s on the other foot eh?
/r/MensRights07/09/16 06:42 AM
8

As it happens, you can if you go to Hawleywoods at Newtown (Sydney, Australia). And feminists set the precedent that allows it.
/r/MensRights07/09/16 06:14 AM
15

Holy shit, I thought this was the driver recording to protect himself, not the rider bragging about her bad behavior!
/r/MensRights28/08/16 09:57 AM
1

You would sacrifice the very principles upon which our civilization was built, for what? Abandon those principles and we're no different than Islamists, NAZIs and Communists. All share your contempt and terror of people who express different ideas. Any manifestation of a dangerous, expansive ideology, whether Nazism or communism or Islamism, should be barred by force This is exactly the philosophy of Islamists, Nazi's and communists, so you're in some interesting company there.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 11:11 AM
5

There are a number of statements of purported fact there. Since I don't want to hunt down evidence for every single one of a number of self evident statements, perhaps you could identify which of the following statements of purported fact are speculation: US women are more competitive on the world stage than US men are Most countries take men's sports seriously and fund it well Many of them don't do the same for women's sports they qualify for more events and win more medals
/r/MensRights27/08/16 10:41 AM
1

When the odd dressers are the vanguard of the harassment gangs [citation needed] Any manifestation of a dangerous, expansive ideology, whether Nazism or communism or Islamism, should be barred by force. "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" This applies both to Islamism and your disgusting philosophy.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 10:14 AM
1

Men will find asking for consent easy just as soon as women find being asked for consent sexy.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 08:26 AM
3

Cops have the power to force a suspect to remove a jacket, that's a very different thing from having a right to do it.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 08:21 AM
1

You use force against modesty gangs and harassment, not individuals dressing oddly.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 08:20 AM
1

I hope that "whatever the fuck they want to wear" becomes the standard outfit for everyone.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 08:18 AM
1

"One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." Rev. Martin Luther King Jr
/r/MensRights27/08/16 08:15 AM
1

Lawmakers are impotent without men and women with guns willing to do the unthinkable in order to enforce their disgusting edicts. I don't give police officers a free pass just because they're following orders. However, I agree with your objection to the phrase "men with guns". As you say, there are women on that police force as well and they are just as guilty as the men.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 08:12 AM
2

Yes, this is oppressive whether it happens to a man or to a woman. When you dismiss this as not "legit" because it was legal, remember that nearly 200 million people were slaughtered in the 20th century with full concurrence of the law. The law in question is the kind of bullshit that can be applied against men far more readily than against women and I think we're fortunate that it got applied to women before men so that the public can fully appreciate just how abhorrent this sort of treatment i…
/r/MensRights27/08/16 08:10 AM
1

So? Frankly, setup or not, this was an outrageous abuse of state authority. Better that someone go in with their eyes open to challenge this bulldreck.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 08:06 AM
11

No, they only said that body shaming is hateful. They said nothing about themselves not being hateful people.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 01:33 AM
1

Um, if you find plethysmographs to be sexy, I suppose that's OK.
/r/MensRights26/08/16 02:16 AM
0

Morning wood or Nocturnal penile tumescence is caused by you snoring like a wood chopper! So what does plethysmography tell us about sexual arousal that voodoo does not?
/r/MensRights26/08/16 01:03 AM
1

Is there any evidence that plethysmography is even as reliable as voodoo? If so, exactly what am I aroused by when I'm trying to pee with morning wood?
/r/MensRights26/08/16 12:12 AM
3

Yup, there's a reason I referred to the things they accuse the higher ranking movements of doing as "allegedly did". This is third rate propaganda, not journalism.
/r/MensRights23/08/16 01:41 AM
5

He has all these terrible things the first three allegedly did yet with MRAs all he can come up with is "they think false allegations of rape are a problem, they disagree that women are oppressed by society they spammed an anonymous rape reporting tool and they made obvious statements about false allegations of rape." How very dangerous!
/r/MensRights22/08/16 03:00 PM
1

PSA: The link gave my phone cancer
/r/MensRights21/08/16 11:52 PM
1

Seems to me getting em back on would be a little finicky but I think we're gonna need an adjudication from someone who actually wears pantyhose.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 11:30 PM
0

often isn't the same as always. Add pantyhose to the ensemble and things get a little trickier.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 09:38 PM
7

There's also the more complex clothing that women wear. There's no equivalent of just flopping it out and peeing for women; all the clothes below the waist must be lowered/raised and as I said, women's clothing is often much more complicated to raise/lower than men's.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 11:19 AM
19

Congratulations, you're now a sex offender and can never again secure a job with decent prospects unless you're the business owner. Also, good luck getting business licenses in many professions with a sex offender strike against you. Heck, in most places, you can't even drive a taxi with a criminal conviction.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 11:16 AM
1

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Tampering-with-evidence.htm Note carefully the words "possible investigation"
/r/MensRights18/08/16 12:34 PM
1

DNA Tests are reasonably reliable, if there is an error it would due to deliberate substitution of paternal DNA for your friends DNA
/r/MensRights10/08/16 02:04 AM
1

Even if it was Russia, they're still not denying the emails are real and the "Russians did it" talking point tacitly admits they're real. Personally, I was underwhelmed by the revelations in the emails and don't see anything out and out illegal there. The only real new information they unearthed is that the Democrats are lots better at doing what everyone has known the Republicans do every four years (Ushering the party anointed through the primary process while giving the party faithful the ill…
/r/MensRights30/07/16 05:20 AM
3

Interestingly, schoolchildren on trains in NSW are required to offer their seats to any adult who is standing How odd that This individual thinks children less capable of standing than men.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 09:25 PM
0

Why go fishing when you can simply post them yourself?
/r/MensRights29/07/16 07:03 AM
85

Equating women with children, the elderly and the disabled. Feminists just have no respect for women.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 02:10 AM
1

So you're going to post gobbledygook rather than debate? That's just odd.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 08:47 PM
-3

This makes no sense. It is inconsistent with your previous comments and parts of it are completely incoherent.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 01:01 PM
0

So George Clooney can criticize a female gay person but Milo can't? How does that even work?
/r/MensRights20/07/16 12:51 PM
9

Any popular person is going to have people following his example and going over the top with it. What you're effectively saying is that he can't make negative comment about anyone lest his followers (or those masquerading as his followers, I challenge anyone to tell the difference) say something worse.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 12:41 PM
3

The social justice of Star Trek, which geeks admire, is not the social justice that makes of white men a monster, indicted by his gender and the color of his skin.
/r/MensRights12/07/16 01:53 PM
5

Try posting this to /r/legaladvice But the short answer is, you need a lawyer.
/r/MensRights08/07/16 11:00 AM
8

It's about cultural conflict in which the MRM is deeply embedded. The MRM is, at least in part, an attempt to influence contemporary culture while the goings on at Marvel are an attempt to influence contemporary culture in a different direction. The people making these changes are trying to influence the minds of men by taking the fictional characters, the myths and legends that men admire and turning them into reflections of a profoundly misandrist mindset. It's deliberate cultural misappropria…
/r/MensRights08/07/16 10:34 AM
5

This is just the belated realization that all those shitty ass sexists are their audience, not any realization that it's not about sexism.
/r/MensRights01/07/16 08:36 PM
2

I'm not finding anything to disagree with here and I'd be the last person to suggest that false reports of rape don't happen. However, with every single alleged rape victim examined at a given hospital being determined not to have been raped, my skepticism kicks in and I want reasons for the statistic to look like that. Maybe the reason is that there was something going on in that community that was prompting false accusations of rape but even given the notoriously misandrist legal system in Ind…
/r/MensRights28/06/16 10:32 AM
2

Dunno, it's not my submission. I'm just objecting to what I regard as a fairly unlikely interpretation of the facts presented. Skepticism of such things is, IMO an important thing for the MRM as a whole.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 07:58 AM
4

The highest number for the rate of false reports I've seen in any study is ~50%, and that number is a serious outlier. 100% is just silly.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 10:00 PM
3

Even if something stirred up a lot of false accusations, there should be some real ones mixed in.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 09:58 PM
7

Because nobody ever lies about being raped. The university/cops are part of rape culture and must be admonished for their evil by giving their victim an award for women of courage.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 11:04 AM
6

So if women didn't want hook up culture, it wouldn't exist? Because men have always wanted and tried to fuck lots of women, it is women who set the terms of sexual relationships by choosing what kind of relationships they will engage in. If what women rewarded (with sex) was men who seek long term stable relationships, that's the kind of relationship men would be trying to establish. Women get the kind of men that they want.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 11:02 AM
3

They want to make it such that the sort of evidence you're talking about is rejected out of hand as "consistent with having been raped". They're absolutely serious about this.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 10:58 AM
1

I love the part where they add a silent "Unless you're a white man" to the phrase.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 10:30 AM
2

IMO this works to compel the powerful to ascribe to a nation's daughters the same lack of value which they ascribe to it's sons if they want to conscript people to fight their wars. That's worthwhile all by itself.
/r/MensRights16/06/16 11:53 AM
4

The defining characteristic of property is that it can be destroyed at the whim of the property's owner. An army can send it's soldiers into situations from which they are unlikely to emerge alive. The traditional punishment for a soldier who flees from combat is death. A person would have to work really hard at their mental gymnastics to perceive a distinction between a conscript soldier and someone who is literally property of the state that conscripted them.
/r/MensRights16/06/16 11:51 AM
1

"Legal" can be a tricky concept sometimes; it's illegal for cops to do a lot of things, but a lot of things that cops routinely do violate federal law: title 18 section 242 "Deprivation of rights under color of law" but as this law is never enforced, those things, such as walking into someone's home because they have an arrest warrant for someone they believe to be there but do not have a search warrant, are never ever enforced, it might just as well be legal. This is much the same; they know th…
/r/MensRights12/06/16 01:31 AM
2

Because the award of $300,000 was not child support. It wasn't back pay for under paid child support. It was simply a lump sum payment for being the ex wife of someone who got rich.
/r/MensRights11/06/16 01:40 PM
3

Re #21 Bitch, projection is thy name Sorry, after reading this list of one shitty thing after another, my tact left the room and told me "Go wild" as it left.
/r/MensRights10/06/16 11:34 AM
2

Re #17 Actually, if you're wrong, I'm actually going to correct you. Particularly if it's going to effect my workplace and make me have to re do shit if we get this wrong. "mansplaining" is just an excuse to tell men to shut up because penis. You don't like being wrong you can actually shut the fuck up and not be wrong in the first place.
/r/MensRights10/06/16 11:31 AM
2

Re: Properly fitting pants Women should wear clothes that flatter their ass and the shape of their legs, comfort be damned, it's your duty as a woman What? That's offensive? EXACTLY!!!!
/r/MensRights10/06/16 11:28 AM
5

IMO "better wording" would be "The accused should enjoy the presumtion of innocence until proven otherwise"
/r/MensRights09/06/16 04:11 AM
5

According to google, the primary meaning of deliberate is: done consciously and intentionally. And a policy statement is certainly a promise. edit: the phrase used is "we need to be deliberate", not "we need to deliberate". The presence of the word "be" significantly alters the meaning
/r/MensRights09/06/16 01:44 AM
5

"We need to be deliberate about understanding the different paths that can land women in prison," I'm having trouble reading the practical upshot of this in any way other than the title characterises it.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 01:23 AM
2

It means the equal protection clause is about as safe as the second amendment.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 12:30 AM
1

One upside of excluding SWM's is that there will be no one to contradict the pay gap zombie statistic that the article's necromancer resurrects.
/r/MensRights08/06/16 07:29 AM
1

Head down man. There is no arguing with emotional bullshit, try and you're just going to be tarred with agreeing with the things the book argues against. Basically, if you oppose this, you'll be labeled a rapist. Do your very best low key SJW imitation when discussing the book, take your passing grade and move the fuck on.
/r/MensRights07/06/16 07:42 AM
3

According to the wikipedia article re: Olaudah Equiano's autobiography "The work has proven so influential in the study of African and African American literature, that it is frequently taught in both English literature and History classrooms in universities". Is there any need to rail against the color of Shakespeare's skin when you can simply call for the inclusion of the works of worthy authors? Judging from quotes made in support of the petition, that seems to be the real complaint here.
/r/MensRights05/06/16 01:12 AM
2

I'm glad at least one member of the group had the sense to reject the racism and sexism of some other members.
/r/MensRights03/06/16 01:47 PM
58

I found that line equally ridiculous for a different reason: if they're different games, WHY THE *&%# WOULD YOU NOT EXPECT DIFFERENT PAY!!!!
/r/MensRights29/05/16 12:45 PM
1

Inasmuch as they're punished at all, I'd say you're right
/r/MensRights28/05/16 06:28 AM
1

sooo, the first rule of rape culture is... ;)
/r/MensRights22/05/16 02:29 AM
1

Haven monahan = Tyler Durden?
/r/MensRights20/05/16 06:56 AM
1

Yeah, should have made that more clear... I'll edit my quote to show it's a quote of a quote.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 10:29 AM
23

Proposed by a barber... Rent seeker ahoy!
/r/MensRights15/05/16 09:32 AM
2

several people objected to the idea that Rodger was actually an "MRA." That's a bit complicated Yeah, no. It's not complicated at all. It's simply wrong.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 09:27 AM
2

Cool. Looking forward to reading the insightful articles you'll be posting.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 12:59 AM
4

Simple solution: post articles with more insight. Nothing's stopping you.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 11:49 PM
2

IMO they don't make more because they're married, they're marrued because they make more
/r/MensRights10/05/16 01:29 AM
2

I hate to be trite and obvious, but you've gotta leave. Sooner rather than later. I get that there are likely reasons you haven't left, probably good ones. But the instant this comes to the attention of the authorities, you're hosed. They will be looking to you as the perpetrator and she will be looking to excuse her behavior. The authorities will enable her in this. Try to imagine looking for a job with a criminal record as a domestic abuser. Please leave. Before she fucks you up more than just…
/r/MensRights08/05/16 02:31 AM
7

They keep using that word...
/r/MensRights29/04/16 11:05 PM
4

As it happens, you haven't watched a man die. Not in this thread, anyway.
/r/MensRights22/04/16 10:41 PM
5

Not just that, they repeatedly grasped at exactly the same straws, requiring him to reiterate material he had already gone over. I'm not certain if that was tactical or they were simply having difficulty with they notion that their treasured "facts" were nothing of the sort.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 10:10 AM
1

"Let them eat cake" Nice.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 10:05 PM
1

They're not "here". They're in Bangladesh. Which has an undeveloped economy. Jobs don't just appear out of an angels arse because you don't want to feel like your ignorance of economic realities will make their lives worse rather than better.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 02:44 PM
1

Do you think they'll get better jobs because economies run on angel farts and unicorn droppings or because you want to pretend your motivation isn't the protection of people you actually care about?
/r/MensRights09/04/16 07:00 AM
1

Cool. Protect Americans and fuck the Bangladeshis. Not sure why you think this is morally superior to cheap labor.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 01:26 AM
1

If they're going to pay minimum wage anyway, why have the work done in a third world hellhole instead of someplace closer to the point of sale and not have to pay for shipping... This is great for poor people in the USA, not so much for poor people in Bangladesh.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 01:17 AM
1

Because if Wal-Mart or Joe Fresh weren't monopolizing their time they would choose better options? I'm a little lost on why they aren't choosing these better options in the first place. I really find it difficult to believe that they would be better off if yhose jobs went away.
/r/MensRights08/04/16 11:06 PM
4

Pimping is something that happens when prostitution is illegal. Prostitutes need pimps when they have no recourse to the legal system. This ldea rests on an absurd proposition: that making it illegal to sell sex eliminates the circumstances that make selling sex the best option. In reality it simply pushes them to their next worst option. As usual when the state sticks it's nose into private matters, it only makes things worse. *Edit: I missed a letter typing on my smartphone
/r/MensRights08/04/16 07:09 AM
1

Whistling as you walk past the graveyard.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 08:36 PM
2

460,000 women claim they were raped 460,000 Men claim they were falsely accused Of those, All of the women who claimed they were raped are truthful Of those, All of the men who claimed they were falsely accused are liars except those whose accusers are convicted of falsely accusing them Feminist logic.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 06:48 AM
3

Courts get to determine that for the purposes of legal consequences; we the public get to draw our own conclusions based on the evidence before us.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 03:57 AM
1

I agree, just that's it's only a little extreme.
/r/MensRights20/03/16 03:47 AM
2

Not charging her for the other death was probably the right decision given there wasn't enough evidence. We're not bound by that decision however in forming the opinion that she killed two people and took a real good try at a third.
/r/MensRights20/03/16 03:33 AM
2

If by stretch, you mean standing on your toes to reach the top shelf. i.e. not all that much of a stretch
/r/MensRights20/03/16 01:30 AM
1

The only facts established are that he found his daughter and that his ex accused him of planning to kidnap the child. Nowhere does it say that he took the child away from its mother or that he attempted to leave the country with the child.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 09:32 AM
6

Mrs Morris was ruled to be "a sensible woman" who was "probably in need of emotional and psychological comfort" during her own spending sprees. Looks to me like he overlooked her bad behavior because vagina and punished his because penis.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 07:04 AM
3

What they're actually saying is that hours or length of employment are not accounted for, but they're saying it in a way that makes that look like a good thing. It's a good thing that the data they use deliberately ignores critical information... Let that just sink in for a moment.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 12:32 AM
6

That's not our endgame. It's about fairness for everyone, not fairness for just one group. So 50 years from now, womens lib has succeeded and the MRM has succeeded and the right of everyone to be free from gender based discrimination is being taught on campus. Or better yet, no one needs to be taught that.
/r/MensRights06/03/16 09:58 PM
3

The editor who missed it was a professional too. What did they do, run it through spell check and call it good?
/r/MensRights05/03/16 09:40 PM
7

Hit my target heart rate. The judge is outraged that he didn't act on something he knew nothing about, what a piece of shit.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 04:40 AM
1

This argument is common, once you manage to pound hard reality into their head. Maybe it's all that pounding that prevents them from recognizing the economic absurdity of the claim.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 04:24 AM
2

All sorts of things are true. That doesn't make them on topic here. This video is explicitly red pill (i.e. it refers to, and I quote: "the red pill male") and might well be well received there but true or not, it's no more on topic than any of the many other things that while true, are completely unrelated to mens rights.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 07:32 AM
5

Con artists cashing in on widely believed bullshit.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 08:49 AM
1

No, it only proves that numerical "dominance" =/= privilege
/r/MensRights29/02/16 02:14 AM
4

Being married means making compromises. Interior decorating is something men typically don't care about so they frequently compromise there with the expectation of consideration elsewhere. Having the interior decorating decisions set aside for the husband in one particular room creates space for the things and activities that don't fit with the decorating decisions in the rest of the house. It's a set aside for masculine stuff and activities so that they don't interfere with how the rest of the …
/r/MensRights27/02/16 09:15 PM
5

Unless you're convinced, as Click apparently was, that the gun wielder is not going to discharge their weapon. Which kinda circles back to the original question... :)
/r/MensRights26/02/16 08:47 AM
1

edit: [deleted entire post text] Well, that's embarrassing. Sorry about that.
/r/MensRights13/02/16 09:55 PM
2

The obligation is on women to make the first move because tinder pattern matches guys as creepy... The article you provided on pattern matching points out exactly why acquiescing to this memeplex is a bad idea.
/r/MensRights13/02/16 08:10 PM
1

She says she's bi and enjoys PIV. I have no reason to doubt that Except where she says "It was normal sex. Normal, boring, vaguely dehumanizing hetero sex.". Yeah, I don't read those as the words of someone who enjoys PIV sex.
/r/MensRights13/02/16 12:04 AM
5

Gals is derived from "girls" which means pre adult female. If you say "Guys and gals" you're implying that none of the women in the room are adults. That's demeaning, perpetuates gender bias and reinforces the idea of a society where men are the adults, i.e. patriarchy
/r/MensRights12/02/16 11:46 PM
1

They'll look like retards if they try and someone links to the archived tweet saying he calls himself an MRA purely to piss MRAs off.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 07:22 AM
2

That's exactly what you do when you agree And how, exactly, does one not agree for ones spouse to do whatever the hell they want? We have two consequences, Alimony and stunted job prospects, one is paid by the person who has least input into the decision and the other is paid by the person with the most input into the decision. That the greater burden should be borne by the person with the most input only stands to reason.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 10:41 AM
3

It's not a formal rule. I prefer archive links though because I don't like directing ad revenue to sites that detest me. I appreciate baserace providing the archive link but the ffs is rude and unnecessary IMO.
/r/MensRights05/02/16 01:22 PM
2

You can still think someone is a total cunt and disagree with everything they say while still respecting their right to free speech. Disagreeing with somebody doesn't mean you have to be a total asshole to them in order to make it look like you're against them In order to pull that off, you have to have a rational argument with which to counter the one you disagree with. If all you have to offer is invective and emotional manipulation and the person you disagree with has a rational argument to o…
/r/MensRights05/02/16 01:15 PM
32

Yeah, there's no way this ends up having disastrous unintended consequences (predictable consequences are NOT unintended)
/r/MensRights05/02/16 12:52 PM
10

Then why bring up the fact you were driving a car at all?
/r/MensRights31/01/16 11:41 PM
4

Probably because the mother immediately involved the police (as in, police showed up at his door within hours of his confiscating the phone). This isn't a guy who tried to steal his wife's property, it's a guy who attempted to discipline his child for sending "inappropriate texts" and whose ex thought it the ideal opportunity to fuck his life up. You think maybe she'd have got better results just asking him for it?
/r/MensRights27/01/16 08:38 PM
2

This is a planned and deliberate assault on male sexuality. "I can't have sex with you until 24 hours after I've reported your name and address to the police" Yeah, like that's gonna fly. And they can impose this shit on a person indefinitely!.
/r/MensRights22/01/16 09:58 PM
2

No, your arrogant assumptions about our bloodthirsty nature came through loud and clear.
/r/MensRights22/01/16 06:30 PM
1

That's not losing your temper. Hard on the heels of a groin shot, it's straight up self defense. His attempt to use her fall as an opportunity to attempt to flee would go a long way to protect him should a prosecutor be so lost to reason as to prosecute him.
/r/MensRights22/01/16 07:54 AM
2

... which part of the word "yes" are you having trouble with?
/r/MensRights18/01/16 10:03 AM
2

I disagree. You have to be self aware to project this hard :)
/r/MensRights17/01/16 10:15 PM
3

When Milo is talking he's got three people talking over him but it's the feminist liar claiming it's the right wing that doesn't want to hear contrary views. The moment Milo emulates their own conduct they're all "let's hear the liars view" If these people wanted a patsy who would let them shout him down, who would let them get away with conduct they don't tolerate when returned in turn, they chose the wrong guest :)
/r/MensRights17/01/16 09:26 PM
15

Threatening to make false accusations of domestic violence should be a deal breaker. You will be arrested if she follows through and even if you are not charged this arrest will stunt your career prospects. It will have serious and permanent repercussions for you. You must leave. You must do it immediately if not sooner. Get yourself and your stuff out of your shared residence before she knows you are leaving. Don't ever voluntarily enter her presence again. Please think about what she did; woul…
/r/MensRights17/01/16 09:55 AM
7

When I saw the following quote in the most recent link to a feminist response to "manspreading" science, I decided we needed a link to the sauce, rather than the unabashed bias we're being fed: "Men have to manspread, according to two mansplaining men. A new “science-y” report researched and written by men claims men spread out on public transit because of their bodies’ proportions — so the dude taking up three seats on the subway is acting on his biology, not his bro privilege."
/r/MensRights17/01/16 02:06 AM
1

So we here at /r/mensrights are feminists? Cool.
/r/MensRights17/01/16 01:53 AM
1

All three statements work just as well turned on their head. "Men are treated like objects, there is a lot of material for you to read about this." True. "You don't think men are objectified because you haven't been made aware. It's been normalized under the course of centuries that men are worth less than women" Not only is this true, her original comment is false. See the Titanic. "In today's society, men's lives are worth less than those of women. They die more often of most causes (female sp…
/r/MensRights17/01/16 01:52 AM
2

I loved the way the author falls for the classic false dichotomy: error or bias without considering the possibility that the people who were banned were banned because they violated Wikipedia rules.
/r/MensRights16/01/16 01:24 PM
1

Maybe he didn't believe them when they tried to tell him he was trans.
/r/MensRights15/01/16 03:19 PM
1

If her story is true, she was in a place she shouldn't have been and he was in a place where nudity is allowed.
/r/MensRights07/01/16 05:14 AM
1

Responsibility for what? Seeing a penis is, as you imply by calling Aussies prudes, trivial. There's nothing there to be responsible for and even less so when you're in a place where it is entirely appropriate for penises to be visible. And since we're into the name calling phase of this, I figure I can safely declare victory over your fallacious crap and wash my hands of you.
/r/MensRights07/01/16 04:02 AM
1

This is exactly the reason feminists get away with their "toxic masculinity" bullshit. People refuse to hold women accountable for their own conduct. She was in a place that it was completely inappropriate for her to be. You claim she went in because she thought there was no one in the change room. As it happens, she was wrong. This is why basic human decency keeps men out of women's change rooms: because he might be wrong and because if he is wrong no one is going to go looking for a man to bla…
/r/MensRights07/01/16 03:34 AM
1

My actions and agency put me in a cross walk crossing a street on a red light that doesn't make it my fault when a car hits me. You're simultaneously comparing seeing a penis with being struck by a motor vehicle and calling Australians prudes? Let's see if we can't fine tune our analogy a little eh? I'm crossing the road against the lights and a car misses me by inches and sounds their horn right as they pass even though the danger is past. Is the problem here the driver sounding their horn unne…
/r/MensRights07/01/16 02:33 AM
5

Whose actions, whose agency, put her in a place men are routinely naked?
/r/MensRights06/01/16 08:45 PM
1

“There are 1011 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it’s only a hundred billion. It’s less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.” – Richard Feynman, 1965 Nobel Prize in Physics winner.
/r/MensRights06/01/16 09:38 AM
1

Mary Sue
/r/MensRights05/01/16 04:07 AM
9

Exactly. It's hypocrisy to insist women may do whatever they wish with their body while simultaneously policing the direction a man's eyeballs may point.
/r/MensRights01/01/16 10:32 AM
3

Source?
/r/MensRights01/01/16 01:57 AM
0

"Every time you walk past a man, hit him with your shoulder" Good luck with that one :)
/r/MensRights27/12/15 12:39 PM
13

I know a woman who is deeply involved in the domestic violence industry, firmly convinced that abused men are abused exclusively by other men and reacts to the suggestion that there is evidence to the contrary with sufficient anger to repel any effort to direct her attention in the right direction. They literally cannot be shown.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 11:17 AM
1

She claims herself that she did it with malicious intent. What more do you want?
/r/MensRights25/12/15 05:12 AM
5

"Richardson sees these types of arguments as problematic. When it comes to the physically disabled person using a sex robot, she said, "it means that his needs are more important than recognizing the full subjectivity of another human being." " This woman clearly doesn't recognize the "full subjectivity" of men. It's more important to recognize the full subjectivity of a woman who literally doesn't exist than to meet the needs of a man who does? Her disregard for men is on display for all to see…
/r/MensRights22/12/15 08:49 PM
2

I didn't do any jumping. I simply took one short step and there conclusions were.
/r/MensRights22/12/15 02:09 AM
1

Amusingly enough if he had perused our subreddit, he would know that we largely agree with him about the reasons a man might become a feminist. Imagine his horror! It's nice thst he acknowledges that a commitment to justice is not a reason to identify as a feminist.
/r/MensRights21/12/15 03:37 AM
1

Since I don't regard suicide as a crime, I'm having a hard time including suicide in "gun crime"
/r/MensRights19/12/15 01:54 AM
1

Since you're so snarky about me not even making it to the second paragraph, perhaps you should have made it to the eleventh paragraph first.
/r/MensRights16/12/15 08:55 AM
1

Then why isn't that what he's charged with? And how do you bombard someone with youtube videos?
/r/MensRights12/12/15 04:11 AM
3

FTA The charge against Mr Economou alleges that he set up and maintained a website with the domain name eleanordefreitas.com. He is also accused of sending or arranging to send a letter to Mr de Freitas' home, before sending a series of emails to his solicitor. It is also alleged that he 'uploaded various recordings and comments onto websites such as YouTube, vimeo.com and liveleaks.com'. None of what he is charged with amounts to "badgering" IMO
/r/MensRights10/12/15 12:00 AM
10

By sending letters to his lawyer? OK.
/r/MensRights09/12/15 11:53 PM
6

Doxxing is a serious offense against Reddit site policy and attracts bans not from subreddit mods, but from site admins.
/r/MensRights09/12/15 06:34 AM
31

Reading that on an archive is too sweet :)
/r/MensRights08/12/15 08:27 AM
3

Sooooo... All women have experienced bad things therefore we can't point out that not all men do these things? Kind of a non sequitur.
/r/MensRights07/12/15 11:54 AM
1

Count Me In
/r/MensRights06/12/15 03:19 AM
1

Wow, accuser makes a statement that exonerates the accused and they don't immediately drop the investigation? WTF? If the accuser stated on the record that he asked and she said yes, there's no conviction ever going to happen short of massive bullshittery on the part of the prosecutor (We're charging you with 27 different offenses and you're going away for 15 years unless you confess and do 3 months) but they have to go ahead and try it on anyway. Just totally corrupt.
/r/MensRights06/12/15 02:23 AM
3

ew!
/r/MensRights05/12/15 10:54 AM
3

Sure they do. It's two headed and the plaintiff makes the call
/r/MensRights18/11/15 07:21 AM
15

How so? The boy in question refused to consent to the procedure. Purely cosmetic surgery should be allowed under these circumstances?
/r/MensRights17/11/15 05:55 AM
4

Don't you just love it when government departments simply shrug off the law as it applies to their own conduct? Laws? those are for the little people, not federal agencies!
/r/MensRights15/11/15 12:40 PM
7

This is not someone who you can successfully challenge with facts. He lives in his very own fact free universe and trying to dismantle that universe will only get your grade nuked. Keep your head down, give him the answers he wants, get your grade then laugh about the idiot who gave a good grade to you.
/r/MensRights13/11/15 08:01 PM
12

"I'm not comfortable with her behaviour," Kim Pentico of the National Network to End Domestic Violence told Adelson. "What I am absolutely not willing to say is she's committed domestic violence without speaking with him and learning more about that relationship. Yeah, there's a double standard here. Pentico is basically saying there may be prior behavior on the part of the victim that excuses this conduct, something that wouldn't be the case had the victim been female. She just described domest…
/r/MensRights12/11/15 08:54 AM
6

You don't get the "some men did this but we're not necessarily referring to you" exception when the screenshot explicitly says "AND LOOK HOW YOU HANDLED THAT". Here's a hint: people saying "men get raped too" likely aren't the "YOU" that the screenshot refers to.
/r/MensRights12/11/15 08:46 AM
0

You're right inasmuch as it isn't conscious IMO, it's more a confidence thing, I think.
/r/MensRights12/11/15 02:26 AM
8

Open minded tolerance are hallmarks neither of the left nor the right, they are largely tactical characteristics of whichever group doesn't control the social narrative
/r/MensRights12/11/15 01:01 AM
2

And if you want to be more than a fwend, it becomes mawwidge ;)
/r/MensRights12/11/15 12:56 AM
1

Though the subject has been explored in depth by some publications Hey, they even mention one of the publications later on... Rolling Stone in November was forced to step away from a provocative article focused on accusations of a gang rape at the University of Virginia Now that's some hard hitting reporting! Yechh
/r/MensRights11/11/15 09:59 PM
13

Marriage as a personal responsibility to provide for the support of another person in perpetuity, divorce notwithstanding. That's wonderful if you're the one who gets to have someone else do personal responsibility for them, not so great if you're the one doing personal responsibility for someone else.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 09:56 PM
10

Saying you're allowed to retire on $27,000 per year but you have a >$30,000 per year obligation to someone who declines to provide for their own support is nothing but smug bullshit.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 09:48 PM
3

By not clicking on their links and using archive links instead of direct links when linking to their click baity articles.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 09:45 PM
11

that he ignored That's not in the article. Despite the fact that he was in arrears, the court reduced his obligation to $500 which suggests to me that it was less "ignored" and more "was unable to pay". Courts don't halve your alimony obligation when you're in arrears unless the original obligation is obviously retarded.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 09:14 PM
2

You can't stop other people from judging your husband, but if he knows that you will land hard on anyone who does so in your hearing, that will encourage him to be confident that he can find the right job rather than whatever job happens to be going right the hell now. It should also discourage people from attempting to shame him for being temporarily out of work. Tell him and show him is my advice: Tell him that he should be looking for the right job and show him by defending his decision to ke…
/r/MensRights10/11/15 12:00 PM
-2

The sad thing is, this could be a fun movie if they decided to get creative and have a writer do a plot for a new movie with new characters et al. As is, it's just pointless drivel.
/r/MensRights31/10/15 01:24 AM
6

It indicates sarcasm
/r/MensRights26/10/15 11:15 PM
3

Movember is a movement to celebrate North American guys not practicing basic facial hygiene for a month in order to raise money towards saving a group of extremely privileged people—themselves We're not even allowed to raise money toward it by ourselves; that's tacky or something. This twit seriously thinks that north american men raising money for other north american men harms people suffering in a real way (having cancer not being real suffering, apparently). Even his apology does not acknowl…
/r/MensRights25/10/15 09:36 AM
1

In order to get Marsha's broken nose fixed, he had to provide goods and services if equal value to another member of society. Chances are, just as Marsha got a fixed nose out of the deal, the person who he provided services of equal value to also went away wealthier. If someone is paying you to do something, you're not the only one getting wealthier.
/r/MensRights25/10/15 09:07 AM
1

IMO it's less about pressure than motivation. A man with a wife and children has a positive stake in society and it's future which a single man does not.
/r/MensRights25/10/15 08:36 AM
3

to the more serious, such as picking up after his unpaid debts, picking up the tab more often than not These are, after all, things a man is supposed to do for a woman. Can't have him acting like a child... [ahem] can you spell "projection"? yeah, thought so. This behavior is strange: After all, just talking about the future or what you want or don’t want doesn’t mean it’s going to happen or that you are certain you even want it to happen. It's just talk, and you deserve to be able to have these…
/r/MensRights25/10/15 08:29 AM
6

In return, the Post says, Julie agreed to try to resolve the couple’s marital problems. She stopped trying, why would a court hold him bound to the reciprocal obligation; why should a court hold him bound to the reciprocal obligation when she has abandoned hers?
/r/MensRights24/10/15 11:45 PM
1

You need adblock for youtube. I don't get any ads at all
/r/MensRights23/10/15 01:35 AM
3

politicians are fat and cunts... confirmed.
/r/MensRights22/10/15 08:03 AM
0

It's cute that progressives have found a way to be exactly as morally horrifying as those that they oppose by defining a person doing business as a business so that it's not the person doing business, but the business itself that now has no rights.
/r/MensRights22/10/15 08:02 AM
2

For all I care, they can do this every day of the week. I don't want to get coffee in a place where people hate me for my gender.
/r/MensRights22/10/15 07:53 AM
18

If that were the case, the mens room would be signposted as "closed" not "women".
/r/MensRights18/10/15 03:42 AM
1

Viagra
/r/MensRights16/10/15 02:18 PM
1

The right to slaughter their offspring, from what I've been reading.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 02:15 PM
2

Blow up dolls fall squarely in the middle of the uncanny valley: they look somewhat human but not enough to be conventionally attractive and not dissimilar enough to be cute.
/r/MensRights13/10/15 12:49 PM
2

I'd say math is on the other side. By your reckoning, either you leave the seat down all the time (yuk) or the seat would have to be operated vastly more often than would otherwise be necessary: twice per male urination. By contrast, every time the toilet is used for urination by a male consecutively, at least one seat operation is saved. If it's a non issue, only operate the seat when necessary.
/r/MensRights12/10/15 10:15 AM
0

Heh, and if there is, is there any evidence it didn't come from her friends/fellow travelers?
/r/MensRights06/10/15 08:48 PM
2

I was impressed that they deleted the link after receiving a comment pointing out the irony of an article of this nature linking to a "men's referral service" whose mission was to deal with abusive men and which did not acknowledge the possibility that a man might be abused.
/r/MensRights06/10/15 11:53 AM
9

Wow, I find it incredibly toxic that men's rights groups can't even meet without attracting negative attention. Can someone tell me again how privileged men are?
/r/MensRights05/10/15 12:49 AM
11

maybe in actuality I am the only person that is delusional. No. Just, no. Some of us (that would be me: guilty) have nothing to add and just said it with the upvote button (and downvotes for the people accusing you of "stuff")
/r/MensRights04/10/15 06:45 AM
5

I don't have much to add besides this: the people here accusing you of "needing help" or whatever are not representative of our movement as a whole. Look to the upvotes (and downvotes) to see where most of us stand. This is an awful story which I wish had a happier ending.
/r/MensRights04/10/15 06:43 AM
3

I found it to be rather a big departure from his well-publicized near-absolutist beliefs about free speech and free expression. I suspect he's got a few hang-ups about sex. Pretty much everyone has absolutist views about free speech and expression when their own views are in the minority. That tends to change when their own views are no longer minority views; witness the left and right switching positions on freedom of speech as the right loses control of the cultural narrative and the left gain…
/r/MensRights19/09/15 05:54 AM
2

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/0*qzGTPYpbdBtzjM77.jpeg Here, have your image, dammit ;)
/r/MensRights19/09/15 05:50 AM
11

It's the "best thing" if what you're trying to accomplish is to cover up the hatred that pervades feminism. We're not about that.
/r/MensRights10/09/15 09:36 PM
1

I didn't say I approved of their conduct, I don't. I'm referring to the discrepancy between the official response to the two situations, as should be pretty damned obvious.
/r/MensRights09/09/15 09:08 PM
11

We've seen the kind of conduct that is tolerated when Warren Farrell is speaking or a male friendly perspective is being aired, why would anyone think this considerably less severe conduct would receive a different response?
/r/MensRights09/09/15 12:53 PM
5

In a very real sense, dicaparly is looking at the issue from a different perspective than you. For someone who is wealthy enough to endure a day or two of discomfort and humiliation without suffering long term consequences and who can afford legal representation, Never talk to the police is absolutely the only rational course of action. For someone who financially speaking is barely surviving week to week, it's often not quite so cut and dried. They have to make a choice between bad and worse an…
/r/MensRights06/09/15 05:37 AM
5

uh huh yeah OK um... Wut Oh. Fuck me. OK, you got me.
/r/MensRights06/09/15 05:31 AM
4

Cops need to speak to the man so that they can revoke his man card. I mean, asking for directions?!?!? WTF!
/r/MensRights05/09/15 04:20 PM
13

Real classy to start the article with a pic of a [naturally, white] man crying too It's hilarious that the "male tears" thing appears at the head of a page full of feminist tears over the idea that the fourteenth amendment applies just as much to men as it does to SJW approved demographics.
/r/MensRights05/09/15 03:45 AM
1

Will that real estate be under water after the next big quake?
/r/MensRights05/09/15 02:13 AM
1

/me whimpers
/r/MensRights05/09/15 12:58 AM
3

In Australia, this is neither insane nor radical. It's simply feminism
/r/MensRights05/09/15 12:14 AM
1

People arguing bullshit frequently find themselves getting tired of having to argue their point over and over again; it goes with the territory.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 09:12 AM
1

The Sad Puppies in fact were protesting the use of exactly the same tactics that they employed, for the purpose of shining a spotlight on the use of those tactics. The Sad Puppies opponents would rather not give an award at all than see the "best editor" award go to a female editor who doesn't share their elitist ideals.
/r/MensRights24/08/15 10:53 PM
2

The people who decide whether or not men need male only spaces would be men. I don't see any reason why a woman speaking from a female only space gets any input on the question.
/r/MensRights23/08/15 12:18 PM
8

And yes, you're welcome to call me a fag, fudge packer, homo, etc. My skin's not made of tissue paper. So you're saying the only person I'd hurt if I did that is myself, by degrading myself through the use of language intended to hurt. I thank you, but shall decline your invitation ;) Also, apology accepted, inasmuch as you can apologize for something you didn't yourself participate in.
/r/MensRights22/08/15 07:12 AM
1

If the supply of people able or willing to do a job is restricted, allowing them to demand higher wages, there are reasons for that. Either the job is unpleasant and demanding or there are significant educational resources required to be able to do the job. Labor scarcity doesn't just materialize out of the patriarchy.
/r/MensRights19/08/15 10:57 PM
1

Start with not slitting your wrists, please. Note that your aunt gets it, so you're not alone there. I think you need to talk to your wife about what is going on, your daughters are just parroting what she has said in front of them and that's not acceptable, particularly when what she's saying is so very unfair. If talking to her does not work, your next step should be to speak to a marriage counselor, since the two of you are so very far from the same page on what should be expected of each oth…
/r/MensRights19/08/15 10:45 PM
2

Saving this to quote at a later date.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 12:54 PM
5

It's interesting to note that the phrase "You can't yell fire in a crowded theatre", so often used to justify hate speech laws, was first articulated by United States Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in the case Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919) Charles Schenk Was an anti war activist who distributed leaflets opposing conscription for World War I... The principle that underpins hate speech laws was first used to punish an anti war activist. Now, you likely believe that hate…
/r/MensRights16/08/15 05:56 AM
0

I can think of at least one way to give the boss of a plus-size clothing firm some tough love...
/r/MensRights06/08/15 11:13 AM
3

there are plenty of white people who live in "urban" environments and are just as depraved as the non-whites who live there Did you mean "deprived"? Mobile phone, amirite?
/r/MensRights05/08/15 10:22 PM
6

The men's rights movement should be allying only on the basis of mutual advantage. We should ally with other political groupings on an ad hoc basis for specific goals that the men's rights movement supports and which the other political group also supports. We don't need to get all entangled with anyone elses issues unless those issues are also our issues.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 05:21 AM
8

So there's some reason to think that unauthorized people will use the women's washroom but not the men's washroom? If so, say the women's washroom can be accessed from an area which is publicly accessible but the men's washroom can be accessed only from an area restricted to employees only, this makes sense. We have no reason, however, to think this is the case.
/r/MensRights31/07/15 10:01 PM
3

http://orig11.deviantart.net/3a2a/f/2007/231/4/a/teal_deer_by_kunika.jpg
/r/MensRights27/07/15 01:19 PM
3

Not stupid, just being the bigger person. I'd have thought about doing that too but wouldn't have liked myself much if I'd done it.
/r/MensRights25/07/15 10:10 PM
1

Really not convinced that was where he was going when he said that.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 10:09 AM
1

Sexist Oppressor!
/r/MensRights23/07/15 05:43 AM
10

I fear that from a strictly personal point of view, your optimum strategy would be to roll with it, do your very best right up to the last minute they're paying you so as to get the very best references possible. You're going to need a new job either way and if you rock the boat on this, they're going to screw you when a prospective employer calls asking about you. Maybe it would be better from a mens rights point of view to make an issue of it but if you do that you're going to get screwed. IMO…
/r/MensRights21/07/15 10:54 PM
2

Many of them recoil from her, implying they've not given consent.
/r/MensRights18/07/15 11:35 AM
7

I've reported the video under "Other sexual content" with the description "video depicts sexual assault"
/r/MensRights17/07/15 11:34 PM
2

"I'm just getting in touch with my feminine side!"
/r/MensRights15/07/15 10:21 AM
7

It:s a troll. Don't feed please
/r/MensRights15/07/15 04:55 AM
3

Which would be great if he had any say in this. As he doesn't, the entire point is moot.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 01:46 PM
31

Can't be done. New law would have to be written to make this possible. Family courts consider child support an entitlement of the child, not of the custodial parent. That being the case, one parent cannot absolve the other of financial responsibility on behalf of the child.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 01:16 PM
75

It's shocking that this should even be a question. The agreement she signed specified that the embryos would be destroyed in the event of divorce. The idea of compelling a man to become a father ought to horrify any person of sound ethics.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 11:51 AM
3

Bad East Asia? ;)
/r/MensRights13/07/15 08:25 AM
9

There's money in them thar hills...
/r/MensRights12/07/15 04:33 AM
1

I'd be shocked if you stayed un banned in that last sub long enough to accumulate significant negative karma
/r/MensRights10/07/15 09:32 AM
5

Well, girls mature faster than boys and are therefore better positioned to make a rational decision and they have a wider array of choices if the encounter should result in pregnancy. [Waves hand] These aren't the distinctions you're looking for
/r/MensRights10/07/15 12:27 AM
3

No, that's not a tangent, that's the very heart of the matter.
/r/MensRights10/07/15 12:19 AM
5

Actually, I think it has more to do with minimizing the resources the suspect has to defend himself with. An unemployed person desperately trying to make ends meet is a lot less likely to refuse a plea deal than someone who is still employed. Doing it this way makes absolutely certain that the suspects employer knows the nature of his employee's legal troubles... Just to be clear, I regard this as more corrupt than simply being a bunch of unprofessional douchebags.
/r/MensRights09/07/15 10:36 PM
17

Interesting that there is a discrepancy between the accounts as to whether or not he was arrested. Sounds to me like they "un arrested" him and are trying to obfuscate the true sequence of events.
/r/MensRights09/07/15 06:26 AM
4

You want to do all that stuff, feel free. Seriously. You think that makes you a man, well, more power to you. I don't consider any of that necessary to be manly. Here's a thought, you do what you think is manly and I'll do what I think is manly and we leave each other free to do that without judging each other unmanly for not conforming to our individual ideas of manliness.
/r/MensRights01/07/15 09:37 PM
1

FTA: An alleged offender must have a "reasonable" belief that a victim had consented. The new definition means the defendant must detail the steps they have taken to find out whether the victim has consented. This fundamentally upends the burden of proof, eliminating the need for the state to seek out evidence of its own as it now need only find a way to contradict the defendants testimony.
/r/MensRights30/06/15 09:59 PM
3

Will Joss Whedon get the blame and be devoured by Twitter feminists? This part was funny at least.
/r/MensRights25/06/15 01:44 PM
2

The guy had to be removed from that home in one way or another, both for the girl's safety as well as his own. Uh, yeah, how, exactly, does him having a place to live make him less safe? And the reason he's dead is because the cops were trying to be humane and give him a little bit of respect and privacy Why did he need to give him privacy to take away the guns? They didn't. They needed to give him privacy because he had to get changed. He had to get changed because they weren't there to take hi…
/r/MensRights21/06/15 09:14 PM
2

He only needed a minute. Let that sink in. The real problem is that the cops didn't take his guns away fast enough. There are procedures and laws that cover persons who are mentally disturbed. Those procedures and laws typically involve seizing the persons guns immediately. This situation involves neither those procedures nor those laws, This situation was solely about shoving a guy out of his home because someone didn't want to live in the same house as he did. Which is why the cops were more c…
/r/MensRights21/06/15 01:05 PM
1

Because guess what - he'd be much safer without the guns than without the house Gosh, what a humanitarian you are. Yeah, if you're male, you get to argue about whether or not you deserve to be homeless after the cops have forcibly ejected you from your home. And good luck collecting all your possessions and finding some way to transport them someplace safe in all of 20 minutes. More likely, your most expensive possessions are now dumped on the sidewalk in front of what used to be your home or, i…
/r/MensRights21/06/15 12:00 PM
1

It's a little late to be claiming I'm the only one drawing conclusions. In any case, this guy was being deprived of the right to reside in his own home (and go where? no one cares... unless he kills himself rather than trudge away aimlessly) based upon her accusations. You're giving her the benefit of the doubt which in this instance is exactly backwards.
/r/MensRights21/06/15 10:24 AM
1

If you say so dude. If you want to be taken seriously though, you might want to start by not doing exactly what you're accusing someone else of doing.
/r/MensRights21/06/15 09:41 AM
2

So you're not jumping to conclusions? I'm going to give her the benefit of a doubt Winds up for the jump He was also drinking when the cops showed up. Therefore he drank 18 cans and a bottle... stuck the landing! 10/10 from the ukranian judge
/r/MensRights21/06/15 08:44 AM
1

Whose jumping to conclusions now eh?
/r/MensRights20/06/15 07:27 PM
3

One in three American children don’t live with their biological father. If we talked about it more, gave it credibility and treated it as a duty and not a job, maybe we’d take it more seriously. More men would treat it like a major responsibility. This is, overall, a good article. However, the above quote points to one of the most serious problems we have. When men are summarily ejected from their family, it's not an injustice being done to them, it's because he didn't take fatherhood seriously …
/r/MensRights20/06/15 07:26 PM
2

And who told us he was drinking an 18 pack and a bottle of soco?
/r/MensRights20/06/15 07:07 PM
91

Wow, she attempts to drive her husband off the road, puts a complete stranger in hospital after destroying his car but she is the one being cast as the victim. Disgusting.
/r/MensRights20/06/15 12:07 PM
3

Neither one had any place else to go. She had another partner and wanted him out of the house. Mission accomplished I suppose.
/r/MensRights20/06/15 01:41 AM
10

You treat people like that the same way she wants to treat men: You use them for your own purposes and abandon them when their utility has dried up, and not before.
/r/MensRights19/06/15 09:05 AM
5

“I have found in my career in industry that constructive criticism can really improve opportunities at work. Johnson could be holding women back by not giving them honest feedback,” she said. The stupid! It burns!
/r/MensRights17/06/15 09:48 AM
5

Jirgas typically take the form of a council of male elders assigned to resolve disputes But the patriarchy serves men, right?
/r/MensRights17/06/15 02:07 AM
5

I get that she's angry, and rightly so but this isn't an interview. Megyn Kelly is a great interviewee with strongly held opinions to express but that isn't really an interviewers job. It's nice she feels strongly about this and wants to make a lot of noise about it and I salute her for that but I do wish she had given K.C. Johnson more space to tell us what he knows and to tell us what his opinion is.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 10:29 PM
2

"Besides, there's no reason we can't be civil, is there?" chunk "None sire" Lovely :)
/r/MensRights16/06/15 11:53 AM
87

The message to this sub is clear: The moderators are required to be far less hands off. If simply messaging the admins is insufficient to get us banned (and I'm confident that's already underway) they will make fake MRA accounts and commence harassing themselves from this sub.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 08:54 PM
1

There's no question that this was harassment and no, you're not being a "wuss". Alas, there's no guarantee the legal system (as distinct from the law) would see things the same way, so remaining quiet may have been the optimum strategy under these circumstances. I urge you to seek counseling regarding the childhood experiences that you have referred to, it's not weak to need help and even if there are those who would think so, they don't need to know. And they're idiots anyway.
/r/MensRights08/06/15 02:56 AM
1

There's a huge difference between friendly physical contact and what OP describes. It is overtly sexual and it is between a supervisor and her subordinate. The sexuality and the power relationship puts it on a whole different level from putting your hand on someones shoulder or arm while describing the benefits of buying product name
/r/MensRights08/06/15 02:50 AM
3

If you're roleplaying a rape scene, you have to have a safe word (red, or any word inappropriate to the situation will do) because no means "you're doing great" and stop means "more! harder!"
/r/MensRights05/06/15 08:44 AM
4

At 11 minutes past midnight they were arrested for "manspreading". I can just imagine the inconvenience they inflicted on the other 12 passengers on the train.
/r/MensRights02/06/15 11:10 AM
571

This really is the epitome of how government sees fathers. The moment he finds his daughter, the government does not see a father, they see someone to pay for their vile scheme. It really is the only thing they regard fathers as being for.
/r/MensRights01/06/15 10:55 AM
1

I care about verifiable facts. What most women or most men would feel in a given situation is neither verifiable or factual. Examining ones own assumption about what one group or the other might feel about something is patently ridiculous unless what you're examining is why you're presuming to make assumptions about an entire group's feelings. Particularly when groups don't have feelings in the first place. Groups have individuals which have individual feelings which may or may not align with th…
/r/MensRights29/05/15 09:50 AM
1

Sure, but I've already told you that I find it repugnant. What we can't know is what most men or what most women would feel.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 09:25 AM
1

You can't examine it because you can't know the answer to either question. There's no "there" there.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 09:08 AM
1

The underlying assumptions are sexist and as such, really not worth my time. When you judge people's "privilege" or "oppression" based on their membership of a group such as gender, race, size, age and so forth you only end up hurting people who are already hurting and helping people who don't need the help.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 08:55 AM
1

I don't share your assumption that male=privilege , female=oppressed. Naturally you would see "performance art" which operates on the same assumption differently from me.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 08:00 AM
2

A repulsive message is still repulsive when cloaked in the guise of "art"
/r/MensRights29/05/15 03:50 AM
3

I've never felt the need to oppress anyone just to have a good time. Quite the contrary in fact. For a man to admit needing to oppress women to have a good time would be social suicide. So where, exactly does the real privilege lie?
/r/MensRights29/05/15 02:50 AM
5

You're right. I had no idea that what she said was so vile and disgustingly twisted. In fact I think the idea that men should be sent to the back of the bus so women can feel good about themselves is not her idea but yours. It says something about just who exactly is privileged that this idea is even thinkable. Try it the other way around and see how people react.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 02:27 AM
6

You're failing to understand why the example is prompting objections. Ms Ford is making assumptions about privilege that have no basis in reality.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 01:40 AM
8

In her article, referencing an incident where men were ordered to the back of the theater, ms ford claims that if the front two rows are exclusively male, some men must be sent to the back. First, there is no evidence this was so. Second, she assumes without evidence that it is a result of privilege. The poster you originally replied to refuted this obvious fallacy and your response was to assume he misunderstood her argument. Plainly it was you who has failed to comprehend what is being said.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 01:17 AM
9

When you assume privilege where it doesn't exist you have to do more than produce a little handwavium when some rude bastard goes and points out the obvious flaws in your argument.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 12:58 AM
11

Teachers alternating between boys and girls is a good idea That kinda depends on why girls are getting less "verbal space" as ms Ford puts it. If girls aren't getting verbal space because they're not putting their hands up to ask for it, they're not getting verbal space because they don't want it. Alternating between boys and girls amounts to discrimination in this scenario because if two or three girls are putting their hands up and seven or eight boys are putting their hands up, all a girl has…
/r/MensRights28/05/15 10:30 PM
2

"And now, they’ve alighted on the rare opportunity to turn her own PC tools against her. Forget ironic misandry: For a certain class of white male (and his allies), crying racism, co-opting the Change.org petition, and appealing to the cops provides its own ironic thrill." This much is perfectly accurate. From a celebrated leftist: "“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” ... You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules."
/r/MensRights26/05/15 09:08 AM
3

"Maybe she'll sign into law the paycheck fairness act and then we can all just blow our own brains out because it's all over" Karen, you crack me up :) this was an amazing Q&A session and her ability to respond intelligently to questions that come at her without notice is astonishing. Karen really is the men's rights movement's brightest light at the moment.
/r/MensRights25/05/15 10:52 AM
1

That's the problem. Something has gone terribly wrong.
/r/MensRights21/05/15 10:48 AM
2

It is unclear if this seemingly new rule was intended to prevent Sulkowicz from bringing the mattress she had used as a symbol to protest her rape since September. Oops
/r/MensRights19/05/15 11:40 PM
8

That's because they changed it
/r/MensRights19/05/15 11:24 PM
10

In hopes he'll run out of money and have to take a plea
/r/MensRights19/05/15 06:13 AM
1

Seems bicycles don't have much use for fish. Funny that.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 12:11 AM
12

They're not. That's the whole point. The problem they're trying to solve is people accused of rape not being convicted. This does exactly that.
/r/MensRights16/05/15 12:56 PM
3

A male relative should work nicely. ;)
/r/MensRights16/05/15 07:09 AM
1

If people the same color as me were getting slaughtered by their "protectors" at the rate black men are, I'd be behaving badly too. I think they're past the ballot box and the soap box and opening up a whole different kind of box.
/r/MensRights16/05/15 07:08 AM
3

You've heard about it by another name: "The war on drugs" Also, yeah, get the sarcasm, couldn't resist putting in my .02 "worth"
/r/MensRights16/05/15 07:04 AM
9

Underneath the article, you'll find a link called "save". If you click on that, you can find saved articles later by going to your user page and selecting the tab called "saved - reddit"
/r/MensRights16/05/15 12:35 AM
2

I've never heard him referred to as an MRA and he's an obvious kook. I'm having trouble taking you seriously.
/r/MensRights16/05/15 12:20 AM
5

Um infowars is how you characterize the mens rights movement? I smell a concern troll.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 11:19 PM
3

They don't need new policies to accomplish that.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 01:16 PM
5

This is what happens when you demonize male anger and celebrate (you go grrrrl) female anger. She feels entitled to indulge her anger because she's been told it's righteous.
/r/MensRights13/05/15 11:39 PM
5

119 men also failed the first phase, this is not unusual.
/r/MensRights12/05/15 11:49 AM
2

Their entire "theory" ignores sexual selection (women choosing bigger males more often) It actually notes this briefly, only to dismiss it saying "The problem with many explanations is that they do not really give a satisfactory reply to the difference every day we see around us" And does not go any further than this. It's a bizarre case of selective blindness, this ability to state the refutation of their theory and declare, in contradiction of reality that it does not explain reality. Weird.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 04:44 AM
2

Games are social and competitive, and can replace a lot of face to face interaction, but it's still not the same No kind of social interaction is the same as any other.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 11:22 PM
3

Going to a gaming convention is not the same as going on a date is not the same as joining two other people in a hobby activity is not the same as going to school is not the same as preaching the word of cthullhu on the street. No two kinds of social interaction are "the same". Which brings us to the question that Zimbardo failed to answer by failing to understand what he is "studying": if there is such a thing as too much gaming, why is it bad?
/r/MensRights07/05/15 09:14 PM
2

if you follow /r/amifreetogo you'll find that where there has been a 911 call from or about a residence, police will enter the home. I believe they regard it as an exigent circumstance which gives them an exception to the warrant requirement. From the POV of someone who follows these things (and deplores violations of the fourth amendment such as this), the story is entirely believable and consistent with police conduct I've observed previously.
/r/MensRights06/05/15 09:06 PM
0

No, it's not that you're missing something, you're seeing something that's not there. I don't think anyone brought up race
/r/MensRights05/05/15 04:44 AM
1

Every part that Ovedya2011 disagrees with, can't you tell?
/r/MensRights02/05/15 11:13 AM
7

Clearly some shared them. Whether some simply didn't delete is unknown at this time
/r/MensRights27/04/15 04:11 AM
8

Literally the entirety of your argument is speculation, speculation that the girls would no report being pressured, that if they did, school officials would not only reprimand the girls anyway but would fail to justify the lesser punishment by reporting that to the media and having cleared these unlikely hurdles, the media would fail to report the far more sensational story. Bullshit.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 12:11 AM
12

Feels before reals. Cool story bro.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:48 PM
11

I went to one which insisted upon facts and evidence. What kind did you go to?
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:34 PM
8

Without evidence, I'm not going to assume they were.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:25 PM
36

From the article: Eight suburban Kansas City boys have been suspended from school because of nude pictures of female schoolmates found on their cellphones. The article goes on to note that the images were shared using text, twitter and instagram but does not assert that all boys suspended had done so.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:24 PM
1

Maybe, but if the victim just wants it over, that's how it needs to be.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:18 AM
1

Other people have offered good advice which you should consider carefully, I just want to say that you should not consider your post "odd", unwelcome, off topic or any other negative. This sub exists largely to answer or discuss exactly questions such as this.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 08:40 AM
3

Right, you don't know one so it doesn't exist. Ever met a quasar or a black hole? You saying they don't exist?
/r/MensRights23/04/15 09:39 PM
11

Kelly Bennett and Kelly Fox How much time do you want me to spend pointing out all the fucking feminists who believe that men are pigs without even having consensual sex. The internet is overflowing with the evil that feminists peddle about men, you can't find that shit, you're not looking
/r/MensRights23/04/15 02:02 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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