TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Moustachiod_T-Rex Archive

View 5 posts and 201 comments by Moustachiod_T-Rex on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
4

I don't understand why you seem to be attacking me? I'm on your side.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 12:54 AM
139

Able bodied adult men in a warzone are assumed to be combatants. That isn't just some ditsy soundbite, it's how the US government counts deaths. It's quite horrific and should make us thankful to not be males in a country where we can incinerated just for existing, then posthumously labelled terrorists. I believe this is why news organisations report in that manner - it's based on the silly idea that women and children are by definition innocent, while men are by definition rabble-rousers who ha…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 02:06 PM
12

I think facebook links are ridiculous anyway. "Oh no someone somewhere thinks something bad". Well yeah, that won't ever not be true.
/r/MensRights16/06/14 10:45 AM
7

In my opinion this is an issue with the feminist concept of 'concern trolling'. Anybody with a moderate opinion can be labeled as or implied to be a concern troll and their arguments are ignored and either they're kicked out of the community or forced to radicalise. Within communities it causes spiraling extremism and even the gentlest criticism of the status quo becomes intolerable. I think it's the single most harmful part of contemporary internet feminist culture.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 02:41 AM
0

I really don't think that's the intention. One of the follys of feminism and MR and a lot of these sorts of ideologies is that they ascribe intention where there isn't any. There aren't many male teachers because of a complex set of sociopolitical factors, not because the matriarchy wants a child rearing monopoly.
/r/MensRights20/05/14 12:36 AM
2

The subreddit has rules, he moderates it according to those rules. The rules aren't really that strict. You are able to criticise feminism openly in that subreddit, as long as it's not a post or a top level comment. There are very few feminist spaces online in which you can do that to any degree. Reddit was always going to have a feminist subreddit, and /u/demmian 's /r/feminism is about as good as a feminist subreddit is realistically going to be. See /r/feminisms for how it can be worse.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 10:18 PM
1

Yes, I agree completely.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 10:16 PM
-18

The reason is that the feminist definition of 'sexism' is 'power + prejudice', so according to their ideology, you by definition cannot be sexist against men, as men are seen to be the empowered group. There's nothing inconsistent about /r/feminism. It might be hateful and stupid and negative, but I think it really is one of the best moderated subreddits in that it really is a pure subreddit for feminism where posts and top level comments that aren't made by feminists are removed. I feel sorry f…
/r/MensRights10/02/14 12:58 PM
9

Men's rights groups literally want to rise up in bloody revolution and overthrow...the patriarchy?
/r/MensRights13/01/14 03:24 PM
-3

I have police records of being sexually assaulted and in those reports I have you stating repeatedly that I wanted it. I wonder what would happen if I were to file a lawsuit... or worse, mail it to every newspaper in the state And that lawsuit's name? Albert Einstein.
/r/MensRights30/12/13 10:46 AM
17

It reads like it's written in the style of a newspaper editorial. If that was the task, then I don't see anything wrong with it. I also suspect that the writer's claims about rape prevalence may have been satirical.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 12:25 PM
21

That's stupid. You can revel in your victimhood once you've gone to these basic reasonable steps to have your friend unbanned. I'll be happy to whack you off. But till then, you're being stupid.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 01:26 PM
1

I'd send her transcribed comment to her via an email or facebook, and advise her to look at it again in 4 years.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 01:22 PM
0

Attempt to destroy somebody's life You could oversimplify just about any criminal act into 'attempt to destroy somebody's life'.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 01:56 PM
5

I think shows like Law And Order have really skewed the public's perception of what fair punishment is. 20 months is 608 days locked in a small cell. It's almost two whole years out of a person's relatively short life.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 09:39 AM
0

Gillard was voted in by the right wing faction of the Labor party, it is true, but she also has socialist roots. As for why she is so unpopular, mostly it is because Labor voters have never forgiven her for betraying Rudd I am not sure how true that is. Most people recognise that it wasn't really she who betrayed Rudd but rather the 'faceless men' who turned against him.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 03:52 PM
0

I think most of their objections tend to be religious in nature.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 03:42 PM
2

Yes, to my bitter disappointment, however that can be said of any current Labor politician, and definitely any Liberal politician.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 03:31 PM
-4

A male prime minister would have made the same policy decisions. Governments, especially left wing ones, love sexist family policy. I don't know that it's fair to say she 'threw men under the bus'. I didn't like her speech at all. I feel like there's a lot of confirmation bias, where attacks on male politicians are because they are politicians while attacks on female politicians are because they are women. But she didn't really totally lose male support.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 03:17 PM
3

Gillard really wasn't that bad. The misogyny rhetoric was awful, but as a leader of a nation she didn't do anything particularly wrong. Lots of infrastructure spending, eduction and healthcare reforms. She is 'grossly unpopular', but so was Kevin Rudd when she stole his job. In my opinion, the unpopularity is more because of the conservative press (mostly News Corporation) through which most political discourse is filtered. I don't expect that Rudd will be any better or worse than Gillard. The L…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 02:45 PM
12

people at the school would be up in arms. Maybe they would be, but we don't know. I'd like to see OP try to put up a similar piece of sexist humour, rather than see him go straight to the principal and try to get his teacher into trouble over something that ultimately doesn't really matter.
/r/MensRights10/04/13 05:10 AM
44

I think sometimes Men's Rights gets confused about what it really wants. Do we want to ban mildly sexist humour? Or do we just want to ensure that there's no double standard, where humour sexist against women is not tolerated yet humour sexist against men is allowed? Personally, I'm for the latter. We don't need to be a bunch of oversensitive pricks. Take the occasional jibe at us! It's when society or an institution condones only one type of sexism that you should be concerned. Maybe your schoo…
/r/MensRights10/04/13 04:53 AM
9

Hi Tamen_, Being made to penetrate isn't rape because being made to penetrate isn't rape because being made to penetrate isn't rape Signed, CDC Official
/r/MensRights07/04/13 11:06 AM
10

Male cosplayers are more likely to get sexually assaulted. Where is this stated? The Australian comic con had to specifically put in Etiquette guides to remind the women at the conference NOT to do this. Those guides are for behaviour towards celebrities ('guests'), not cosplayers. I don't know that they have a specific code of etiquette for interacting with cosplayers. I appreciate the sentiment of this post, but I can't abide factual inaccuracies.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 11:02 AM
4

At least they didn't call them dudebros. You're a dudebro. I'm a dudebro. Dudebros for EVERYONE.
/r/MensRights06/04/13 01:48 PM
4

Don't worry, I'm sure you literally raped 10 women with your unchecked privilege just while writing that comment.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 07:48 AM
2

Apparently their target market is Rebecca Watson.
/r/MensRights16/03/13 05:31 AM
24

Did you know that 8 out of every 3 women live in poverty?
/r/MensRights09/03/13 05:07 AM
2

Sometimes I read this subreddit and associated MR literature and become angry with the world but going out and interacting with people makes everything better.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 11:28 AM
1

That is an interesting survey result, though women do see the doctor more per year and have more money spent on female-specific healthcare and research. I suppose if you take my original comment as being strictly and narrowly defined as healthcare access, your survey statistic would support that I am wrong, and is why I usually prefer to talk about outcomes. Healthcare outcomes for females are far better than they are for males. Much of this comes from government and charities focussing on femal…
/r/MensRights03/03/13 01:37 PM
-2

I think that's genuinely a good point to make and consider. However, men and women do make different decisions. How much of these differences in life decisions are caused by innate biology as compared to social indoctrination isn't really known for sure. While it's sad that there isn't a good female representation at many of the highest levels of society, that clearly hasn't led to problems for women in general. It is not women who suffer from a lack of healthcare, or almost any social malady. A…
/r/MensRights03/03/13 12:26 PM
3

I read though that usually when they say 'suicide attempt' they have a very broad definition that includes 'thinking about committing suicide'. As in, it's not necessarily an actual attempt. Does anybody know whether this is correct?
/r/MensRights25/02/13 01:30 AM
1

But that wouldn't make for a very good example sentence, because it just reads like an informal definition.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 04:55 AM
4

Could you please describe where we may access these court documents, if they are available to the public at all?
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:00 PM
6

Thank you for taking the time to make it, regardless of any criticisms of it. Those insets certainly are emotive. They trigger an emotional, not rational, response. As I said in another comment, emotive images and text are great as a rallying cry internal to a group, but outsiders look at it much more critically. Graphics like this are most effective against people who don't already share your ideology when they appear to be unbiased. Bloodied faces of kids do not make it appear unbiased.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:31 PM
4

Because how do you feel when you see a (flawed) feminist argument that uses manipulative and essentially meaningless emotive evidence? If you're like me, it makes you annoyed at the feminist that created it. "They only resorted to this because their statistics are flawed" you might think. In the case of this post's graphic, it's difficult for us to see what's wrong with it because we already agree with it. We see those emotive insets as being justified and bringing light to an underpublicised is…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:28 PM
26

Whilst debunking that original graphic is very important, I object to the emotive use of those insets of the bloodied faces of falsely accused kids. It's manipulative. It's a point better made with words and a citation. I also think that one of the key problems with the original graphic is that it the number of 'rapists' comes from a very highly flawed crime victimisation survey (I believe?). Explaining why the source used to create the graphic would be a much more succinct way of debunking it, …
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:20 PM
23

This is interesting. We can discriminate on age, or almost any other demographic factor, but not gender? Why not? Sex discrimination for health insurance was recently nationally illegalised in the USA, where previously women typically paid more for insurance than men. I don't see the American federal government scrambling to make automotive insurance cost the same for men and women (where men today typically pay more).
/r/MensRights21/12/12 02:04 PM
2

And here I was thinking OP was a cool guy.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 03:16 PM
63

No, please don't throw around the word 'rape' as feminists do. Something can be sex related and horrible without being literally rape.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 03:59 AM
3

It's a little bit sad, I subscribe to /r/malefashionadvice and a lot of what they go on and on about would look absolutely ridiculous in most parts of Australia. Like wearing a blazer. You can't wear a blazer in Australia.
/r/MensRights23/11/12 05:09 AM
8

How is it a 'discussion' if they've already come to the conclusion?
/r/MensRights23/11/12 05:06 AM
5

Well for the citation see page 28 of this document, but I think someone legally-inclined needs to take a look at it before we draw any conclusions.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 03:25 PM
7

I feel sorry for Demmian. He/she actually gets an enormous amount of criticism from the feminists. They're the main reason for the divide between /r/feminism and /r/feminisms. Demmian actually bans hate-speech (including misandry), while many feminists take the 'misandry don't real' position so get annoyed with Demmian's moderation.
/r/MensRights11/11/12 05:43 AM
8

The thing about marks and scratches is that they don't entirely work in your favour because it just looks like she fought back.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 09:36 AM
7

Literally 5 in every 2 women are raped per second in their life per year.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 01:49 AM
6

I think this subreddit needs to get back to basics. Identify a broad problem that actually harms men. Discuss the problem. See if we can fix it, or raise awareness about it. No more facebook screenshots, no more ridiculous hyperbole as the most upvoted comments.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 02:46 PM
28

I kind of agree, but certain crimes can damage a person's character far more than other crimes. Especially sexual crimes. Also, I'm no lawyer, but as I understand it pretty much any alleged criminal can petition a judge to supress their identity. That's hardly very re-assuring, but at least there's some ability for the judicial system to react to cases where the accused could be seriously damaged by the accusations even if found untrue.
/r/MensRights24/10/12 12:34 PM
1

That was an excellent piece. I quoted GWW on my blog once a few months ago, it was very well received.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 02:28 PM
1

Not entirely, Demmian and by extension the whole sub promotes a particular brand of egalitarian feminism. People on /r/feminisms and SRS hate Demmian because they see him (her?) as an MR shill (for deleting what seem to usually be extremist misandric-style feminist comments). But then he also bans people for making comments about feminism as a whole, and people who 'derail' posts into talking about MR. I genuinely feel quite sorry for Demmian, he's basically hated on all sides.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 03:04 PM
7

If a kid is 'rejected' by anyone because of the presence or absence of a piece of skin like that, then I'd say that the problem is with the rejectee, not the kid or his parents.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 12:53 PM
3

From what I understand, the term 'bra-burning' was actually invented by a feminist, and then it was picked up as an anti-feminist term. However, you are right, nobody ever actually burnt their bras.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 11:54 AM
41

I hate hate hate hate hate these sorts of pop-sociology 'facts' casually thrown around like that. It needs to be referenced, and it needs to explain what it means by 'sexual assault'. It's like the CDC survey which counted any sexual act performed after consuming any amount of alcohol as being 'rape'. Or that 'women are four times more likely to attempt suicide than men' stat, which actually counts 'thinking about suicide' as a suicide attempt. It's dishonesty in statistics and it's as atrocious…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 01:08 AM
0

I do understand your point. I am actually not an MRA for that very reason, I call myself an egalitarian, and sometimes find myself at odds with both MR and feminism. I agree that men's rights doesn't do enough for women's rights, but also feel that feminism doesn't particularly do much for men's rights either. Within feminist theory, the deconstruction of gender roles is alleged to release men from sexism as much as women are. In practice, I just don't see that as being a reasonable belief. I wi…
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:58 PM
0

It's there, and it's pretty strongly recognisable from the perspective of an MRA. I am not really that interested in arguing with you, it's quite clear that your opinions are quite disparaging towards Men's Rights. And it's ok that you feel that way.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:48 PM
0

Some of the comments there are implicitely anti-male, and Valenti certainly has a record of misandry. But she appears to be on her best behaviour in that thread, as is SRS. Good on them, I suppose.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 08:23 AM
0

SRS has linked to this thread several times from the AMA. They believe this post has been downvoted by their members and that quashing the MRM threat is a great victory of theirs. In truth, MR just isn't interested in being a downvote brigade, so this post has a score of 0. Let them have their fun. If anything, our victory is that Reddit downvoted their post to 71, meaning that almost all their traffic will have come from subreddits that linked directly to it. IE /r/feminism/s, 2xc, and SRS. Alm…
/r/MensRights11/09/12 08:19 AM
7

Yes, literally 5 in every 2 women are raped each month.
/r/MensRights09/09/12 04:18 PM
12

Made me smile, but the problem with it is that most people outside of MR won't have any idea what you mean. 'feminism is empowering!' they scream, between bouts of shouting about how 4 in every 3 women are raped each year.
/r/MensRights09/09/12 01:58 PM
15

Being against MR doesn't equate to believing men don't deserve rights. It probably does in many cases equate to believing that men don't face significant (as compared to women) deficiencies in their rights. Which is an incorrect belief, but very different to how you characterised it regardless.
/r/MensRights09/09/12 01:57 PM
1

That's an unfair generalisation. And even when it's true, I'd suggest that that's not actually their intention, it just seems like it is because they have a skewed worldview.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 11:36 AM
3

Please don't characterise any opposing viewpoint as being from someone from an opposing movement.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 10:47 AM
1

I agree with everything expect the first sentence - ideally I'd like to see people ditch MRM and Feminism and just call themselves 'egalitarians' and take an evidence-based approach to all issues of equality.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 10:44 AM
1

One thing I like about /r/mensrights is its intellectualism and wordiness. It's in painful contrast to most/all feminist subs, where they seem to love posting talking-points, then in the comments engage in a competition to see who can shout out catch-phrases. They quash any significant discussion. And I say this as someone who identifies as neither an MRA nor a feminist. The circlejerky 'MR isn't so bad' posts aren't very intellectual (though they are at least wordy). However, they are good for …
/r/MensRights22/08/12 10:40 AM
3

That's part of why 'internalised misogyny' was invented.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 10:34 AM
7

MR has a bit of an image problem on Reddit, but an enormous image problem everywhere else.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 10:34 AM
17

And which one do you think will get more funding?
/r/MensRights19/08/12 11:43 PM
1

That was an excellent article and it should have many more upvotes.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 11:23 AM
0

No, what they're saying is that there wasn't any real evidence that what it had really occurred.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 01:40 PM
-1

You're right, I am sorry. When I see feminists do this, swarming like ants to spilt sugar, over some 'horrible thing happened to woman' media story, I get annoyed. I suppose they do it for the same reason we do; because they perceive themselves to be the oppressed minority, so they internally justify that they are arguing with emotive one-off media stories rather than statistics and facts.
/r/MensRights23/07/12 11:46 AM
2

I will keep that in mind in future, thank you.
/r/MensRights23/07/12 11:43 AM
10

I disagree, provided they were both intoxicated. There are times when not saying no is equivalent to saying yes. This is the implied consent you talked about. You argue it wasn't there. From the information we have, I don't think it's nearly so clear-cut. We have to assume that if she had said 'no' or given any clear indication that she didn't want it to happen, he would have stopped. Clearly she did not. Perhaps if he were not such an inexperienced sexual partner he would have read her more acc…
/r/MensRights20/07/12 09:09 AM
2

It sounds like he was intoxicated too.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 09:04 AM
22

Personally, I'd like to see a world where we can laugh at those jokes going either way, rather than the sick double standard of them being funny when about one gender but not the other.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 08:28 AM
8

I feel like patriarchy theory is really just a construct built to fill the vacuum left by an absence of demonstrable disenfranchisement of women.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 10:11 AM
17

I find it interesting that if you go into a feminist discussion area, they all have stories about that time they were raped or almost raped. They trot out these stories whenever they are even just obliquely relevant to the discussion. At some point it just has to stop being believable. I suspect that many of them twist stories about. So 'that black guy who walked behind me on my way home' becomes 'that time a black guy chased me because he wanted to rape me'. And 'that time I had drunken sex wit…
/r/MensRights18/07/12 10:32 AM
19

We'd all like to believe that.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 10:26 AM
1

Thank you!
/r/MensRights14/07/12 12:19 PM
1

Not very far :( But thank you.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 11:03 AM
3

Is there a way to see past subscriber figures? It would be interesting to have a graph.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 07:48 AM
-10

This.
/r/MensRights03/07/12 08:55 AM
3

Yeah, I see this claim all the time. Especially about rape in general. It doesn't make any sense to me. I think I saw a paper that debunked it once, but not sure.
/r/MensRights27/06/12 11:03 AM
-2

I'm sorry you are being so heavily downvoted.
/r/MensRights25/06/12 11:03 AM
3

AMR isn't so bad, at least they're funnier than SRS.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 08:15 AM
3

It is filled with angry feminists (and social justice people in general). That's the point.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 08:15 AM
1

They're about as Marxist as Obama is socialist.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 03:15 PM
2

The Greens and ALP are generally pretty good. You're kidding yourself if you think the Liberals would be any better. Men's rights issues have little support on either side of politics anywhere.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 01:52 PM
3

I agree, but there are men out there who want trophy wives.
/r/MensRights01/06/12 01:52 PM
11

That's a really good point. I could almost see that being in the sidebar.
/r/MensRights01/06/12 01:51 PM
1

Thank you!
/r/MensRights31/05/12 02:53 PM
3

I know, I'm sorry. I just felt angry at the ridiculous things they say. Is there a subreddit that catalogues all the stupid at SRS? Or would that be redundant?
/r/MensRights31/05/12 02:51 PM
8

I like how rightsbot is the only member of /r/mensrights that is consistently upvoted.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 02:37 PM
1

Sorry! Here. Didn't include it in the post title because I didn't want to encourage a downvote brigade. I prefer to let them fester in their own stupidity.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 02:33 PM
2

It's very typically feminist to accept unreferenced statistics that supports a pre-conceived notion. I'd like to see where the data is from. 'Domestic violence' can be so broad, I'm sure many of us have been falsely accused by a parent of pinching a sibling after that sibling decided to play victim. Should we be counted in the survey from which that data came? I don't think so, so I'd like to see how they define those forms of abuse before I spread their statistic.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 02:30 PM
5

By the mods, or the poster herself, do you think? I'm guessing the mods. Censorship is unfortunate. A quick search reveals that there have been many 'IAMA radfem AMA" posts.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 01:39 PM
2

And neither is 2xc, wink wink nudge nudge.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 04:03 PM
4

I'm sorry to hear that.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 04:01 PM
11

TL;DR User SocialEngineers alleges 2XC censors opinions given by users with male usernames, particularly when their posts relate to controversial topics. SocialEngineers' evidence isn't very strong, but it's hard to doubt that there's some truth to his conclusions.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 03:40 PM
9

Yeah, stupid koalas. Nobody likes koalas, koala, so go back to /r/koalas.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 03:30 PM
11

Of course, I stated that disclaimer in one of my other comments. I believe SocialEngineers' experiment is interesting and something to spark discussion, but not really evidence.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 03:28 PM
12

I don't think /MR does much invading, per se. It's rare for a MR post/comment to link to a 2XC post/comment. I see the words 'MR INVASION' thrown around a lot on 2XC, but it's accurate only a fraction of the time. It seems to be used as a way to quash dissenting views.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 03:25 PM
44

Perhaps, we do love to upvote female comments, but usually those in support of men's rights. It's not uncommon for top comments to be "I'm a female and I support ...", and we love girlwriteswhat despite that there are plenty of brilliant male men's rights youtubers. However, 2xc sometimes does the same, where their top comments are "I'm a guy but I think the WAR AGAINST WOMEN is terrible and I feel sorry for you all and I apologise on behalf of us brutish men for your eternal subjugation and for…
/r/MensRights28/05/12 03:21 PM
13

2xc isn't supposed to be anti-male.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 03:05 PM
26

It was posted in 2X originally, you can see it in the other discussions tab. Poorly received by them, of course. I suspect such an experiment on /MR would be quite poorly received by us too though, unfortunately, so that it hasn't been upvoted on 2XC isn't very damning. Also, the evidence seems quite flimsy. I'm sure its conclusions are not incorrect, but the evidence isn't really strong enough to support them. I don't think I've ever made a post critical of feminism outside of /MR that has had …
/r/MensRights28/05/12 03:03 PM
7

It is unfair to make generalisations about females. I believe equality should be sought by treating others fairly, even when they treat us unfairly. Or else we're really just as bad as they are.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 03:49 PM
3

I understand where you're coming from, but it's really annoying when feminists say that sort of thing to men.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 03:16 PM
1

Blunt and to the point. I like it!
/r/MensRights30/04/12 03:16 PM
-11

True, but remember that verbal abuse is still abuse. He shouldn't have shouted at her in her face in the first place (as he accepts).
/r/MensRights22/04/12 04:39 AM
-1

Can't we just be ok with people choosing their own careers, rather than trying to partake in (unavoidably sexist attempts at) social engineering? I understand the concept of 'Equal Occupational Fatality Day' as a way to satirise various feminist complaints. But as something we should actually strive for? no no no no no
/r/MensRights14/04/12 04:20 PM
1

Ughh this attitude is what's wrong with 'murrica
/r/MensRights02/04/12 10:54 AM
2

I don't think arming the population with non-lethal weapons is a good solution.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 03:26 AM
1

Hint: Don't vote for Tony. Whoever's in charge, we're always going to be facing sexism against us. This problem isn't unique to Gillard and it's not unique to Australia. In America, most if not every politician on both sides voted for VAWA. The same VAWA that was then partially found to be in violation of their constitution. People hear "This law will protect women!" and they nod and agree "We have to protect women!". It's a mindset that needs to change and, in my opinion, is changing very slowl…
/r/MensRights28/03/12 01:28 PM
3

I am not a fan of those policies, but overall, she's done an excellent job. Better than Abbott would have done.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 01:12 AM
3

I'm not a troll.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 01:11 AM
-3

As an Australian, I'm actually a big fan of Gillard.
/r/MensRights27/03/12 01:00 PM
5

Then she went on to try to shoot Andy Warhol, so you know obviously she couldn't possibly have meant any of the threats of violence she made.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 03:17 PM
3

It was a canadian policeman who, giving personal safety advice, said "don't dress like a slut". He shouldn't have said it, especially not in those words, but it's hardly the horrible incident feminism has made it out to be.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 09:04 AM
11

Well the article, if you would read it, seems to describe the events as a means to channel huge government grants into colleges which agree to run these events with a not-for-profit organisation the board of which is made up of the owner of the oversized-women's-shoe company that is contracted by the college to supply ($90 per pair) shoes to the men who partake in the event. Essentially, it's a very complicated and clever scam.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 06:16 AM
1

I love your username!
/r/MensRights10/03/12 11:13 AM
2

I am not sure I understand your views on circumcision, do you dislike it because you think it is unethical, or do you dislike it because it is jewish?
/r/MensRights28/02/12 02:36 PM
8

I don't think 'divorce her' is necessarily the best option. Especially since he has two children.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 01:18 PM
0

While you're at it, please also say 'no' to horrible fonts.
/r/MensRights11/02/12 01:44 AM
3

I totally agree, I think much of the issue that /MR (quite rightly) has with these sorts of things is the double standard. We become as outraged as the feminists would be if the genders were swapped. But how many people here genuinely believe this stuff isn't ok? Didn't feminism usher in an age of hyper sensitivity? You only have to put the slightest hints of domestic instability and suddenly the advert gets mega-attacked, whether from feminists or mens rights. I guess, in a perfect world, we wo…
/r/MensRights10/02/12 01:23 PM
10

Well he kind of is, it's not 'getting away' with murder, it's getting a reduced maximum prison sentence. People convicted under this law still do spend quite some time in prison. But other than that, it is despicable that these sorts of laws exist. Murder cannot ever be an appropriate response to anything.
/r/MensRights09/02/12 11:16 PM
1

I think it's perfectly reasonable that people would want to decrease the amount of death they are responsible for. Most vegetarians I have met seem to understand this. And it's not slightly less deaths, it's more than an order of magnitude less death considering how many pounds of grain goes into one pound of meat. I am a vegetarian because I want to minimise harm.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 03:00 AM
1

Cows eat food. It takes x pounds of food to create one pound of meat. Those x pounds of food have their own cost in life, water, and environment. Eating meat is extremely inefficient as you're essentially filtering the nutrients through an extra layer of processing.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 01:41 AM
1

I know, it's unfortunate that there is a huge unavoidable cost of life. Being a vegetarian isn't perfect but it has a much lower cost of life than eating meat.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 12:10 AM
1

They aren't pure herbivores, they are almost entirely herbivores. Their basic nutrition is consistently met by vegetables.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 12:07 AM
-1

Thank you for your valuable scientific insight, please forward it to the thousands of professional nutritionists that have studied this. I'm sure they would be amazed by your incredible perception and the USDA would change its stance on the issue overnight.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 02:43 PM
1

Similar for me! My concern about leaving places that piss me off though is that by leaving, that increases the proportion of crap in that place. That's why I haven't yet unsubscribed to /r/worldnews. People calling other people out for their stupidity is what causes those people to, eventually, change.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 07:57 AM
-9

The Inuits did not only eat meat, they did have a largely meat derived diet, and they are an interesting group to study. However, it is absolutely scientifically unquestioned that vegetarianism is a healthy diet. People arguing against vegetarian on the internet can be compared to creationists arguing against evolution. It's a bunch of uneducated dolts trying desperately to grab at any part of the sinking ship of their belief system. Copy pasta from Wikipedia: "In prospective studies of adults, …
/r/MensRights28/01/12 07:30 AM
-8

I'm a vegetarian and I have a degree in evolutionary biology, even. I know what I'm talking about! But when the topic of vegetarianism comes up, most people write these impassioned arguments based on preconceived notions that refuse to let them accept that maybe eating huge amounts of meat is not a good thing, and that we are not 'designed' to be carnivores.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 07:23 AM
-3

I don't think that's debatable in the slightest. Plants are crucial to our diets. You cannot survive just on meat. The reverse isn't true, you don't need to eat any meat at all to be perfectly healthy.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 06:40 AM
18

Reading is ableist. I seriously saw that argued recently, that we shouldn't encourage people to read books because it's ableist against the people who can't read. The saddest part was that it had hundreds of notes (on tumblr).
/r/MensRights28/01/12 06:11 AM
-22

We have a very long digestive system compared to carnivores. Our dentition is not particularly designed for eating meat. Our nearest common ancestors with the other great apes is certainly almost entirely a herbivore. We can eat meat. Whether or not we should eat meat is debatable.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 06:09 AM
1

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, AUSTRALIA SAYS NO The multi million dollar national advertising campaign that painted women as, with exception, the victims and men as the aggressors. This recent AVFM article is very worrying. Or this where the SA Office For Women created an advertising campaign that stated that in 95% of domestic violence cases, a male is the perpetrator and a female is the victim. This was a rare victory with the ombudsman declaring that the Office For Women was wrong.
/r/MensRights09/01/12 01:36 AM
26

As a fellow Australian, I totally agree. We're bordering on a Scandinavian level of institutionalised feminism. Thank you for being awesome and sticking up for what you believe in. I'm sorry it cost you your job.
/r/MensRights08/01/12 02:39 AM
7

13 should be a huge point. I don't understand why it's not a bigger deal than it is. Few other men's rights issues can be so succinctly and irrefutably summarised as "This number is bigger than that number".
/r/MensRights03/01/12 10:17 AM
13

Wow I used to read Hardy's blog (she isn't really that bad, or at least wasn't when she ran her old blog) and have seen her on television a few times. I've never really thought of her as the kind of feminist that /MR would particularly take issue with. I'd also read some of that hate blog, which was really vicious and stupid, and also kind of funny. It was weird how passionate that person was about how much they hated Hardy.
/r/MensRights27/12/11 01:35 AM
4

Merry Christmas to you too :)
/r/MensRights25/12/11 04:49 AM
8

I'm so sorry for you. Just know that everything will be better one day, as horrible as the situation you are in now must be.
/r/MensRights25/12/11 04:46 AM
6

I posted a comment criticising that aspect of that comment and was thoroughly downvoted.
/r/MensRights25/12/11 02:36 AM
-1

I don't think there's any right answer to your question.
/r/MensRights24/12/11 02:27 PM
2

/r/mensrights used to be quite a major part of Reddit. /MR posts were frequently on the default front page. As Reddit became more mainstream it lost most of its mens rights focus, unfortunately, and we're far outnumbered by the feminist or female-centred subreddits. I find it a bit sad as it was casually browsing Reddit that informed me of many male issues. There are so few platforms through which mens rights people can get their issues heard, as opposed to feminism which has been extraordinaril…
/r/MensRights24/12/11 10:44 AM
5

We don't have dick guilt. Well some of the male radfems do. But most people here don't. I think it would be quite helpful to the world if people stopped feeling guilty and assigning guilt based on genders (and racial groups and age and everything else, but mostly genders).
/r/MensRights24/12/11 10:40 AM
6

I didn't say every person, I just know for a fact that we do have feminists come here, say things like "WOMEN ARE CUNTS", and hope to get upvoted so they can submit their comment to SRS as proof of MensRight's supposed misogyny.
/r/MensRights15/12/11 01:16 PM
7

Err no, this really is a feminist trying to discredit MRA. It happens quite often. There are some misogynistic loonies here, but Supervictim (the name partially gives it away) ain't one. You give feminism too much credit to assume that they wouldn't go to lengths such as this to try to discredit mens rights. (not that all feminists would, just that some, especially those extremists at SRS, do).
/r/MensRights15/12/11 01:10 PM
3

Hahahaha! You people are so uneducated!
/r/MensRights22/11/11 10:26 AM
3

Yes.
/r/MensRights21/11/11 01:42 PM
2

I haven't read the book but as I understand it it isn't particularly about evolutionary psychology.
/r/MensRights21/11/11 01:10 PM
8

Evolutionary psychology, as a discipline, gets far more respect than it deserves. I'm not commenting on the article or feminism or anything but, as someone who has an evolutionary biology degree, I have never seen an evolutionary psychology paper that is the slightest bit convincing. I think they get a lot of funding because it is very much a pop science area, with the media lapping up press releases about the 'latest discovery' that explains some vaguely defined behaviour.
/r/MensRights20/11/11 03:46 PM
3

I think this is a great idea.
/r/MensRights09/11/11 01:47 AM
17

My problem with SRS is that they shame and downvote people who are clearly joking, which is kind of ok (I can understand that the difference between a sexist joke and sexism is sometimes pretty small), but what's not ok about it is that as part of their shaming and downvoting they are jokingly racist and sexist to just about every demographic other than the one made fun of in the linked-to comment. So someone makes a rude joke -> SRS gets angry -> SRS makes rude jokes -> we get angry with them. …
/r/MensRights06/11/11 02:25 PM
3

Do I have to have my skin melted off for the law to protect me?
/r/MensRights01/11/11 01:52 PM
22

Sigh. I quit wikipedia because of the BS politics of it. I guess it's time to dust off the old account. The problem with editing wikipedia while anon or with a new account is that if anyone with an established account disagrees with you, you pretty much have no say in the matter.
/r/MensRights30/10/11 11:39 AM
8

You don't know who Orwell is? Is that part of your trolling or do you genuinely not know? Because I'm frightened for your upbringing and education if you sincerely have never heard of him.
/r/MensRights28/10/11 12:40 AM
1

I understand that that must be extremely frustrating for you to go through. However, as someone else pointed out, stop watching crappy television. It rots your mind. Get some nice, clever, long term, non-formulaic drama like Lost, The Sopranoes, Battlestar Galactica, or The Wire. Maybe some of those are too mature for your daughter, but I think you'd be surprised.
/r/MensRights27/10/11 08:23 AM
2

I know this might seem petty, but it reflects badly on the community to have people mis-spell and use bad grammar and such. It makes people think we are just a bunch of angsty incoherent 14 year olds and gives them an excuse not to take us seriously. Please consider installing a spell checker or using a browser that includes spell checking such as Opera. That is a very bad analogy. First of all, being a bigot and lynching someone are very different. Secondly, apologising for being a bigot and ad…
/r/MensRights25/10/11 03:07 PM
8

Me too. She deserves out gratitude, not our continued anger.
/r/MensRights24/10/11 11:24 AM
2

While thank you for making this post, I don't think it's fair to judge a community based on the quality of its comments.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 10:45 AM
1

The only people who seem to think that gay rights stuff doesn't belong here are people from /r/lgbt.
/r/MensRights14/10/11 01:42 AM
1

I'm a hard-hitting go-getter.
/r/MensRights14/10/11 01:17 AM
1

That language is really quite beautiful. I love it when people put real effort into what they write and say.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 02:03 PM
9

I go to an Australian University. I hate the existence of the women's room. I personally know the girl who was last year's women's officer (from high school) and she is, to put it in someone else's words, batshit insane. Her mother is also a/the leading member of the biggest feminist organisation in the state. I was kind of tempted to apply for the women's officer role this year (as a male) in some kind of protest against the whole system, but when I looked into it I discovered, unsurprisingly, …
/r/MensRights10/10/11 12:18 PM
4

That's really interesting, thank you for going to such effort, and for using such a reliable primary source. I see people citing numbers from peer-reviewed studies, however for just about every case there are studies that support the feminist side and studies that support the mens rights side. So I find it hard to use those sorts of stats. However, here you seem to have gone as directly to primary government literature as possible, which is excellent. In fact this sort of thing could almost be a…
/r/MensRights08/10/11 01:11 PM
2

No, because more than half of full-time work isn't reserved for men. I'm really not understanding what the issue is here. Forcing males to make up most of the teaching workforce is not a good thing. It's sexist against women. Vice versa if it were a female quota.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 02:09 PM
3

Sorry I so wasn't thinking when i made that post. But still, the basic point I made remains: if more boys than girls are dying at birth, then shouldn't that be skewing population statistics?
/r/MensRights07/10/11 12:34 PM
3

Are they allowing only men to sit for male-reserved seats? And men make up far more than half of the reserved seats...so that's sexism right there.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 12:33 PM
1

I have to admit I only read the title of the article, but if they truly are reserving 67% of teaching jobs for men, then that is obviously sexist and wrong.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 11:12 AM
2

I'm confused, if 25% of male babies died, wouldn't there be 25% less males than females in the adult population?
/r/MensRights07/10/11 10:49 AM
14

I am really happy for you :)
/r/MensRights04/10/11 03:16 PM
1

I asked my doctor whether they were giving Gardasil to people of my demographic for free. He said "no". One more thing for me to worry about.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 03:49 AM
1

You could say the same about any group with any opinion.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 06:31 AM
2

You think that because PETA is in favour of 'animal rights' it should ban itself from euthanising unwanted pets? That's an interesting argument, but PETA has quite soundly justified why a large proportion of its (very small) intake of unwanted pets is euthanised. They are against no-kill shelters. I don't know why people love to cloud the issue of PETA with this talk of putting down pets in their shelters. It's a tiny proportion of what they do. They have uncovered and caused legal action agains…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 01:45 AM
2

That's untrue, they don't really liberate animals except by protesting for the closure of places that harm animals. They have a tiny intake per year of about 2000 pets into their (few) shelters, a large proportion of which end up being put down.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 01:42 AM
3

Both are attention grabbing, but I would argue that one is ultimately for a good cause and the other certainly isn't.
/r/MensRights19/09/11 01:25 PM
3

PETA doesn't oppose euthanisation. I wish every dog and cat could go to a loving home, but that's not realistic. Euthanisation is painless and happens routinely all over the world. I don't understand why people turn this into a huge issue, it really isn't. PETA may have impounded "2366 animals in 2009" but that is a tiny number. PETA aren't really in the business of providing animal shelters, and their opposition to no-kill shelters has a pretty sound rationale to it. That infographic is pretty …
/r/MensRights19/09/11 01:23 PM
1

I don't understand why you consider this to be such a huge issue. The number certainly isn't "99%" though it is quite high. I would love for every doggy and cat to go to a loving home but that really is not possible. PETA is not in favour of the no-kill movement because it is just not practical. Animal shelters aren't even a major part of the work they do. Even if you disapprove of animal euthanasia for some reason, at least you should respect their huge number of under-cover investigations into…
/r/MensRights19/09/11 01:08 PM
1

Why?
/r/MensRights19/09/11 12:26 PM
3

I don't understand this dichotomy of Reddit. PETA kills some of the animals it receives in shelters. That's normal. A lot of shelters do that. PETA operate investigations into people and places who abuse animals. Those sorts of horrific stories that make it onto the front page like "Chinese animals skinned alive" and "Indonesian Slaughterhouses torturing Australian cattle". What has PETA really done to make people so upset? The only thing I ever hear about is that they euthanise some animals in …
/r/MensRights19/09/11 12:26 PM
5

I am very sorry for her :( It would be wonderful if MensRights people took on that cause a little bit more. It might even upstage the feminists.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 10:41 PM
6

It's rare that I read a load of rampant speculation that I actually agree with.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 04:46 PM
-1

Yes, it's a terrible problem. When it happens. I don't see people running murder workshops or theft workshops. We care about rape because: it is an emotional crime. You're (at least in some cases) hurting a person in the deepest way you can. it is hyped up to an incredible extent. See: 1 in 4.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 04:43 PM
4

I am not saying that '60%' is wrong, because I just don't know. I don't think anybody really knows with certainty what the number is (and that itself would depend on what you consider 'rape' to be). My point is that if you throw around questionable statistics, you're as bad as the feminists.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 02:39 PM
-15

I think you are exaggerating to say it is a 'very serious problem'. Same with 'stranger danger' and all the other hyped up causes of our distrust of fellow man.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 02:37 PM
21

That's an interesting point. The world cares about male on female rape. A few stalwart defenders care about female on male rape and male on male rape. I have rarely heard a word about female on female rape.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 02:36 PM
-9

The idea that gender is a social phenomenon was long ago scientifically disproven. It's a popular opinion but an unscientific one.
/r/MensRights13/09/11 10:47 AM
0

One in eight is also untrue. Most of the studies that calculate it are pretty damn biased.
/r/MensRights13/09/11 10:29 AM
11

Same. It's one of my biggest issues with feminism, that these people can so willfully parade about numbers that make absolutely no sense if you think the tiniest bit about them.
/r/MensRights13/09/11 10:28 AM
13

Ignore him, he's a stupid troll.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 04:08 PM
2

I don't think people should be complaining about this. I don't know what OP's intentions are in posting this, but: the man was vindicated. This is a happy story. We should be happy. Stop being sad and, even more importantly, stop being rude. People saying "lol let's rape them all" are not helping one bit.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 03:29 PM
1

No
/r/MensRights11/09/11 02:04 PM
2

Haha :)
/r/MensRights11/09/11 04:50 AM
10

I'm pretty sure you're feminist trying to absorb upvotes so you can point out "Hey fellow feminists! r/mensrights hates women!". Or maybe you're just a regular troll. Either way, please go away.
/r/MensRights11/09/11 03:30 AM
6

That doesn't make it right. Comments like that get r/mensrights branded as 'extreme', which makes people not take it seriously.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 11:41 AM
6

Rainn is very much not a reliable source. It shouldn't be used for the same reason extreme mens rights websites shouldn't be directly referenced.
/r/MensRights06/09/11 12:26 PM
2

2X is mostly filled with fair people, but in an environment that is conducive to unfairness.
/r/MensRights29/08/11 12:23 PM
5

That's an interesting method, I hope it works. I remember my first rejections of any sort of comparison between FGM and male circumcision. Then I realised they weren't all that different (except of course extreme FGM is much worse than a standard male circumcision, but extreme FGM isn't a very common type of FGM) and my mindset towards circumcision changed entirely. I wish you good luck :)
/r/MensRights27/08/11 12:44 PM
2

No, not for me. For others. You're just going to get downvoted because people (especially americans where circumcision is common) just don't see it as an issue.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 12:10 PM
1

Making less confrontational posts.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 11:11 AM
-1

I agree with you, but there are a lot of people who disagree. Or people who haven't even considered that circumcision could be wrong and will have a knee-jerk reaction to dismiss the issue entirely (that was me a couple of years ago). I don't think posts titled "Circumcision is immoral and should be banned" is going to help very much, it's just going to attract people saying "I agree" in the comments and a bunch of downvotes from people who disagree.
/r/MensRights27/08/11 09:26 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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