TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

NUMBERS2357 Archive

View 3 posts and 527 comments by NUMBERS2357 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)
2

I think there are two concepts that get conflated: the idea that if you fail to live up to certain ideals, you have less worth and/or are permanently downgraded in status due to said failure. the idea that you can't, or shouldn't, express emotions or "be vulnerable" in certain situations. The first is the big issue, and I would note that feminists on the left are guilty of perpetrating it too. The second is more of a matter of personal preference. There is a connection between the two (being vul…
/r/MensRights24/09/19 12:41 PM
1

Not a fan of Liz Plank but are you really going to link to a video that talks about "superior Nordic genes"?
/r/MensRights18/09/19 05:29 AM
3

There isn't even any evidence of this perpetrator existing and now we're making up further actions by them in order to fix holes in the story. Blackouts can cover a bit of the time period before when the drinking that triggered the blackout started.
/r/MensRights16/09/19 04:58 AM
4

In the interest of gender equality, I will say the same thing that I say to women who go on reddit and ask whether their drink was spiked. If you didn't actually see anyone spike your drink, or get a test that came back positive, then statistically it's unlikely your drink was spiked. A 0.2 BAC is pretty high for someone who never drinks alcohol. From UCSD, description of effects of 0.2 BAC: 0.20 BAC: You​'re feeling dazed and confused and may need help to stand or walk. If you injure yourself y…
/r/MensRights15/09/19 04:40 AM
2

There's obviously a lot wrong with what she says. But forget all that - her book is called "for the love of men" and she is going on in this interview acting like she's sympathetic to men, but go and read her Twitter feed. Nowadays it's mostly her plugging her book, but other than that (and before she had a book to plug) a huge amount of it is expressing contempt for men. If she actually had love for men she wouldn't spend so much time attacking them.
/r/MensRights14/09/19 04:38 PM
1

A little late to the party, but I think the whole "we need a positive model of masculinity" thing is a total red herring. I don't think it's needed and it's a distraction from more pressing, more concrete things that can be done to help men. Even if you accept the need for such a thing most discussions that follow strike me as a bunch of vague platitudes and buzzwords.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/08/19 06:02 AM
2

I agree with this, and will semi-trollishly add, this whole picture can be an appeal to authority. Lots of these logical fallacies are obvious and/or well known, but this picture is a way to bolster your argument by referencing something with Socrates on it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/19 03:13 PM
3

My answer to what's the biggest issue facing men, is that there's more violence against men than against women, and people care about it less. Based on the stats I've seen (at least for the US) this is pretty clearly true. But I get a lot of pushback on it from feminists. For an obvious reason - feminists talk a lot about violence against women. To say that violence against men is a bigger problem violates a pretty core idea for many of them. So what usually follows is some special pleading, and…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/19 06:47 AM
5

This is because, on the left, feminism is far and away the dominant frame that people use to discuss these issues. People will read what you say in that frame if you don't distinguish it. If you ask me to say the biggest issue facing men, I wouldn't say "feminists" or something. I wouldn't mention feminists. But the ensuing discussion always alienates feminists because it goes against some of the things they believe.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/19 06:25 AM
8

Could it be that the obsession is unwarranted and that the frequency is simply a function of men be really mad about it for no reason? "Obsession" seems like poisoning the well, but that aside... This is a tiny, niche subreddit and so gets relatively niche content. It has 364 readers to r/menslib's ~83,000. And it's filling an underserved market - left criticism of feminism as being unfair towards men. Speaking for myself, this sub doesn't represent the full range of my political views, it's one…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/08/19 06:12 AM
-1

Have you thought of every possible name, so that you're sure of this? The name is the first thing people will see, and it's the thing that's going to stick in most people's heads the most. Realistically, most people won't even read the description below the name if the name doesn't appeal to them. Worth spending a little time on!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/08/19 07:34 AM
2

In response to a phrase urging leniency it is. The modern trend over the last few decades is towards more and more discipline, including bringing the criminal justice system into what were previously school disciplinary matters. The left decries this when nobody points out the gendered component.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/19 11:56 PM
0

You can always start a new sub and have this one redirect. It's been around for about 10 minutes it's not like changing names now would be a massive disruption. And if I'm right about the name not being catchy enough, the difficulty in setting up a different subreddit isn't going to change that fact. You'll just have a subreddit that doesn't have as much reach as it should.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/19 11:54 PM
1

Probably not. Not sure what would but IMO worth giving a lot of thought to, and hard to come up with a good one.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/19 11:52 PM
1

TBH you'd probably get a farther reach if you came up with a shorter/catchier name. Nobody is going to call themselves a "left wing male advocate" in the wild.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/19 08:55 PM
1

True that a lot of discussions around immigrants demonize men more than women. As another example, not relating to Muslims - at the border, when people want to minimize the treatment of detainees they focus on older/male detainees. For example, when the child separation stuff first started all of the official pictures they released were of 15-17 year old boys. When people want to generate sympathy for the detainees, they discuss the women, the older girls, and the smaller children of either sex.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/07/19 04:46 AM
3

This is such a weird ... America will turn Muslim because Muhammad figured out how to make a virus-like religious culture back in the 600s that is more devious than anything anyone's managed to come up with since? Anyway, for some stats: Number of 1st and 2nd generation Muslim immigrants to the US went from 1.7 million to 2.5 million from 2007 to 2017 In that same time, the percent of Muslims saying society should discourage homosexuality went from 61% to 33% (and the gap between Muslims and eve…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/07/19 04:39 AM
1

Most feminist websites, subreddits, etc either ban or strictly regulate any dissenters. That type of attitude tends to cause a dichotomy - some people go with the group and become feminists, others are turned off and find refuge with people who will agree with them, in spaces dominated by extremists. I think if there's a left-of-center non-feminist group out there, they can hopefully be the middle ground between the two that doesn't exist currently. But tbh I don't know if there's enough of a co…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/19 01:49 PM
1

I'm not sure what it means to have a "zero tolerance stance". Like you personally refuse to talk to any feminists? You think they should all be thrown in jail? Something else? Anyway, ideologically, like it or not if you're on the left then feminists provide a lot of support for your ideas in realms other than gender, and the biggest alternative right now isn't a gender-equal liberal policy, it's Trump. And tactically, lots of women are drawn to feminism just because feminists seem to them like …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/19 01:46 PM
24

Should be mentioned that having your drink spiked isn't actually common.
/r/MensRights08/12/18 01:20 AM
-1

It has also been more than 20 years since a Democrat nominated a man to the Supreme Court, and the sample size for all of this is low. But clearly Democrats are sometimes accused of rape or other sexual misconduct, outside the SCOTUS context.
/r/MensRights07/10/18 05:03 PM
6

Nobody accused Gorsuch of anything.
/r/MensRights07/10/18 08:37 AM
1

Luckily this wouldn't fly in the US, as schools can't force kids to say shit.
/r/MensRights28/11/16 03:25 AM
-22

There's no proof she's a false accuser, people just kneejerk want to call it that.
/r/MensRights28/11/16 03:24 AM
1

Ben Shapiro also says Breitbart is alt-right, and he's very conservative. Not that Mother Jones is actually suspicious - plenty of sites are liberal or conservative but don't make shit up. (to be fair Shapiro said he has no evidence that Bannon is himself a white supremacist as opposed to working to elevate them, not that that changes anything. He also has various other negative things to say about him). There is a difference in. "We are a platform for the Alt-Right and push their narrative ever…
/r/MensRights17/11/16 12:34 AM
0

Which part are you saying he didn't say? He said his website is a platform for the alt-right. Are you saying he didn't say that (or that it's factually inaccurate)? Are you saying I'm mischaracterizing it? Are you saying they don't have the headlines I mentioned, or the "black crime" thing? Like this one - and read the comments (and note the number of upvotes) if you wanna see how readers interpret it.
/r/MensRights16/11/16 06:08 AM
0

No we have white nationalists like those on Breitbart to thank for Trump. It's one thing to say quoting the Declaration of Independence is racist. Another to protest a movement whose leaders explicitly call for the expulsion of nonwhites and Jews from America, and a website that attacks journalists specifically for being Jewish and has a section called "black crime".
/r/MensRights16/11/16 03:54 AM
-11

In other news, Breitbart is a white nationalist website.
/r/MensRights15/11/16 06:27 AM
2

He also called for intervening in Libya on Twitter before Obama did so.
/r/MensRights13/11/16 08:54 AM
1

the assertion that drone strikes would somehow be worse under Trump than under Clinton is baseless. I didn't say they would be. I don't know. But it doesn't change my point - the people talking about that Clinton quote aren't going on about drone strikes, they're going on about that quote. Clinton is undoubtedly more hawkish than Trump, mostly because she's the only one who has been a politician long enough to prove she's actually hawkish. So if someone ran who said "read my lips: if elected Pre…
/r/MensRights12/11/16 09:37 PM
1

Well even if there are Republicans who are less conservative than others, whatever label you give them, I don't see how their existence will change who Trump nominates. You gave the example of being pro-choice. I imagine that at best a tiny minority of the people around Trump pressuring him on Judges are pro-choice. Not to mention, the Judges themselves usually have a consistent judicial philosophy, such that if they're pro-life, they're more likely to be anti-gay rights. Of the 4 dissenters in …
/r/MensRights12/11/16 09:17 PM
1

I know centrists. I don't know people who call themselves "Republican Conservative Centrists". Who is the most prominent politician/pundit/etc who calls themselves that?
/r/MensRights12/11/16 09:06 PM
1

If people think it was bad under Obama, how much worse under a guy who brags about that shit. And who supports every military intervention in the Mideast there is. And wants to bring back more torture than ever, who is contemptuous of individual liberties and has praised dictators specifically for their violation of same, etc.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 09:05 PM
9

Crazy to me how people can be so outraged by that quote and totally ignore when Trump called for the deaths of underage kids falsely accused of rape, and then refused to say they shouldn't be after they were exonerated by DNA evidence. Or that time Trump said he'd kill the families of terrorists. Either way, it doesn't matter at this point what Hillary said, because she's just a private citizen now. Trump's the one who's gonna be President, he's the one we should focus on.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 07:41 PM
1

Not sure what difference you're talking about, I have never heard anyone describe themselves as a "Republican Conservative Centrist". Forget labels - conservatives want someone who mostly agrees with Alito, or Scalia. That's what they'll push for, whatever you call it. And that's also what Trump said in the debates.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 07:08 PM
1

I really doubt it. There are many issues he doesn't care much about, and judges seems to be one. And on the other side there will be enormous pressure for him to nominate a conservative - Republicans might not even confirm his person if he didn't. There are many of his supporters for whom this was basically their sole issue.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 07:03 PM
2

You can be against both!
/r/MensRights12/11/16 06:59 PM
36

Because nobody running for President said the 10% thing. If Hillary said the 10% thing it would have been a very major story.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 06:59 PM
4

Referring to anyone accusing someone of rape as "crying rape" is just like the feminists who call any defense of a rape defendant "blaming the victim", as if an accuser is automatically a victim.
/r/MensRights11/11/16 01:22 AM
-2

She probably said it because a crazy misogynist who bragged about sexually assaulting women won the White House. I normally hate this sort of thing, when you walk into an elementary school and there's all sorts of signs for girls specifically, like that Simpsons episode where Marge's note to Lisa says "I Am Very Proud Of You. Love, Mom", and the one for Bart says "Be Good. For The Love Of God, Please Be Good". But under the circumstances I think it's acceptable.
/r/MensRights10/11/16 06:29 AM
43

And here is another reminder, of the time that Trump called for the death penalty for 5 underage kids falsely accused of rape, and continued saying they were guilty after they were cleared by DNA evidence.
/r/MensRights08/11/16 05:59 AM
10

I have no idea what the particulars of this kerfuffle are, but it's completely obvious to anyone who pays any attention that the vast majority of people care much, much more about depictions of violence in video games when the victims shown are women. Game after game involves the protagonist cutting down nameless male NPCs by the dozens, or even the hundreds, with machine guns and any other method of mass death game designers can dream up. Not a peep from anyone. A game has you kill one woman an…
/r/MensRights08/11/16 05:57 AM
2

Also...do you really wanna live in a world where smokestacks were never invented?
/r/MensRights04/11/16 04:22 AM
1

If Hillary was really all about disappearing people she should disappear Lena Dunham until after the election.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 04:20 AM
24

A movie called "Ocean's 8" was gonna suck no matter what. So they'll make it all women, try to make it a political statement to go see it, then indignantly blame sexism and resolve to do it again when it flops.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 04:20 AM
3

This is the sort of thing I wouldn't care about from a certain type of person or group. People who like to shit talk, stir things up, who can engage in some friendly banter. Especially since there are differences between the genders, that creates friction, and I think some friendly banter is a useful way for people to blow off steam, or smooth things over. But part of that is taking it as much as you dish it out, and lots of people who like this sort of thing are probably scandalized by the oppo…
/r/MensRights31/10/16 04:40 AM
5

Yes it will embolden them. But I'm still voting for her, because there are other important issues, and Trump is bad on shit relating to men too. Also, long term, even if he wins, he'll do such a shitty job that those same groups will end up emboldened anyway. And if she wins there's a good chance they overreach, she ends up unpopular for a variety of reasons, and that hurts them.
/r/MensRights30/10/16 08:37 AM
1

I agree they don't have a positive right to, only a negative right. I would also extend this to single women - you can go fuck someone and get pregnant, fine, but if you can't find the right guy the state doesn't therefore owe you anything. Also, this: I am all in favour of different family structures. I’m especially in favour of those that undermine an age-old institution set up to allow men to claim ownership of women’s reproductive labour and offspring. IE she's against fatherhood. I wonder i…
/r/MensRights27/10/16 06:03 AM
1

Jessica Valenti sucks, and this entire attack on Bernie was bullshit, but this leak doesn't mean much. It shows 2 things. First, that there was a conference call between the campaign and journalists - something they do openly to try and get journalists to write up their talking points, and journalists do openly to get stories (same way Trump might hold a conference call to talk about something in Wikileaks to get some journalists to write about it). Second is they knew ahead of time, also not su…
/r/MensRights24/10/16 11:39 PM
30

Notice that neither the title nor the comments there mention the gendered aspect of it.
/r/MensRights22/10/16 10:25 PM
5

I predict that all the "feminist, but oriented towards issues affecting men" type subreddits, who spend most of their time lecturing men on why they're bad, will ignore this story.
/r/MensRights22/10/16 05:39 PM
1

My sense is this is the sort of thing all campaigns do all the time. Call up sympathetic journalists and give them talking points, hoping they'll follow through with them. And they often know about things being published ahead of time because they get called and asked to comment. I'm sure Bernie's people did it all the time, and Trump's too. (not that I agree with the talking points in this case).
/r/MensRights22/10/16 05:19 PM
1

Possibly relevant: Obamacare requires insurers to cover domestic violence counseling for women only.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 06:44 PM
42

If people's view is that there's unfair things told to both genders - well, then it sounds like we should all get together and decide not to tell either gender those unfair things! And as it turns out, there is a pretty big and influential political movement out there that is determined to oppose the people who tell girls they must cover up their shoulders. Unfortunately, that same movement is the number one group out there implicitly saying it's OK to commit violence against boys, in exactly th…
/r/MensRights21/10/16 06:38 PM
34

He said the woman had told him how the boy 'expressed disdain for his penis'. She's saying this like she's proud of him, or of her own work as a parent. The right thing to do in that situation is, of course, help the kid accept his own body, not act like this makes you all woke. She's trying to destroy his life to fulfill some hateful ideology.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 06:09 PM
6

In general, talking about "masculinity" is a way to blame men's problems on themselves. And that's definitely the case here. Lost your old job, can't find one like it? Well it's because of your own bullshit issues you're wrapped up in around "masculinity", not the economy or anything, so ... you know ... fuck you.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 04:54 PM
222

When you tell boys this, they are aware that they are excluded from it. They understand that it's implicitly saying that it is OK for someone to hit them. I don't know why society thinks it's good and normal to tell children "it's not wrong for someone to hit you" because of their gender.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 04:50 PM
7

I think I see "she's a victim too" from at least one person on just about 100% of stories involving a female murderer and a male victim.
/r/MensRights20/10/16 09:53 PM
8

I'm pretty sure they just ripped this line from a Louis CK routine.
/r/MensRights20/10/16 07:30 PM
2

Two responses: Just have examples in mind of well-respected, mainstream feminists saying wrong shit. An example would be NOW (National Organization for Women, huge feminist organization with 500k members) opposing equalizing child custody laws, but there are more out there. Most people recognize that prejudice isn't just about crazy, over-the-top bigoted types. For example, you can be racist without being David Duke. If you say feminists are anti-men, and they say "crazy feminazis are only a fri…
/r/MensRights20/10/16 08:19 AM
7

I think many men actually do have experience with de-escalating, minimizing, etc. Maybe the situations men do it in are different, but it's a strategy to avoid being subjected to violence, and men are more likely than women to be the victims of violence.
/r/MensRights19/10/16 07:28 AM
2

"Toxic masculinity" is a set of traits that encompass how feminists see men. So when someone says "be a man" feminists assume they're talking about those traits.
/r/MensRights18/10/16 08:15 PM
10

Two things I might do as a form of protest: If they ask you multiple choice questions later that you have to answer "correctly" in order to "pass", repeatedly put in the wrong answer and refuse to "correct" it. If there's anywhere you can write something, such as a feedback form or exercise where you're supposed to write out an answer, write that this is all a BS moral panic.
/r/MensRights17/10/16 06:12 PM
69

If all the "microagressions" on college campuses violate Title IX, then this certainly does.
/r/MensRights17/10/16 06:10 PM
1

If he said he's automatically attracted to women, and nothing more, it'd be one thing, but he follows it up with "I just start kissing them ... I don't even wait." There's no space in there for "cues". You can't "just start" without waiting if you're looking for a cue. And I think you're misogynistic if you think it's OK to treat women that way. Come on, tell me that if this was Elton John saying exactly the same thing about men, that it would make him a man-hater! Of course it would! Same if a …
/r/MensRights16/10/16 03:55 PM
8

By the age of 15, I had taken on board a heap of anti-male propaganda. Yup! I often look at men and think that they seem to be victims of this drive to perform their gender. What are they afraid of? False-consensus effect, i.e., people think everyone else's psychology is like their own. This guy wasn't comfortable with the masculine stuff, so he assumes the same of other men. But most men doing masculine stuff really are just behaving the way that comes naturally to themselves.
/r/MensRights15/10/16 10:49 PM
3

It can be both...a large majority of men don't do this sort of thing, but the ones who do, do it repeatedly over the course of their lives. So the number of women who have dealt with it, whether "it" is rape, assault, harassment, etc, is much higher than the number of men who have done it, or even seen it being done. To me, a big problem is when feminists rope in a huge amount of stuff as being part of "rape culture" and therefore as giving aid and comfort to people like Trump. Like actual locke…
/r/MensRights15/10/16 10:43 PM
7

the OCR, better known for its aggressiveness in protecting the rights of accusers, has forced the college into a settlement involving wholesale revisions of its adjudication process to make it fairer to those accused of sexual misconduct. When the OCR is pissed at you for not having due process protections, that's when you know you've really shit the bed. Various colleges have thrown out: presumption of innocence right to representation time to gather evidence definitions of violations remotely …
/r/MensRights15/10/16 10:39 PM
10

Jobs program.
/r/MensRights15/10/16 04:09 PM
1

Talking about it and being a twat and actually doing it are two very different things ... assume guilt purely on how a person talks You make it sound like I'm assuming guilt based on his mannerisms or something. He's not "talking about it", he's "saying he does it". Sure saying you do it and doing it are different, but since when is this some crazy piece of evidence to take in mind? If there was a leaked email of Hillary bragging to someone how she does influence peddling, you wouldn't say "oh s…
/r/MensRights15/10/16 04:05 PM
1

He said: You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. If he does it "automatically", that means he does it without waiting for any cues. You can't do something automatically if you're also waiting for a cue that it's OK to do it. And the comments on the tape qualify as misogynistic.
/r/MensRights15/10/16 03:49 PM
1

It's not really one's word against the other's when there's also video of Trump saying he does this sort of thing.
/r/MensRights15/10/16 03:47 PM
9

One other thing I'd add if you're still reading this: There's a certain set of norms people follow when talking about groups they see as victimized, including women. They see those groups as reacting to circumstances around them, and they think the solution is to make society change. This usually involves more concrete, and more drastic/harsh, proposals for action. For men it's often the opposite: they trace shit affecting men to their own actions, and think the solution is getting men to change…
/r/MensRights15/10/16 07:31 AM
9

It seems like they're getting at some good stuff here, but it's buried under a heap of BS. The problem with all the "we're feminists but want to help men!" rhetoric can be seen by comparing reactions to sexism against men vs that against women. When it's against women, the story is that women are put-upon by society, doing their best to adjust, and the solution is for society to cut that shit out. When it's against men, the story is that the men are twisted deep in their psyche and hurting thems…
/r/MensRights15/10/16 07:19 AM
7

A lot of "toxic masculinity" talk is really just dislike of men, dressed up with some language about culture because it seems all Nazi-like to blame biology.
/r/MensRights15/10/16 07:11 AM
5

This is the dumbest shit ever. Not only does he have no evidence, his story contradicts Trump's. Gilberthorpe says she was flirting with him, Trump said he'd never met her. Who remembers a non-sexual assault from a plane ride from 35 years ago? Not to mention Trump really wasn't famous 35 years ago. This guy is British, and for some reason was on an intra-US flight, first class, when he was 17 or 18. In the past, he claimed that he pimped underage boys to a sex party involving British politician…
/r/MensRights15/10/16 06:21 AM
0

If you think I'm a PC moron because I called Trump misogynistic, I don't know what to tell you. But your original argument was that the women may have given off some cues to show they were receptive, and I pointed out that by his own admission they didn't. You didn't respond, presumably because there is no response to be had.
/r/MensRights15/10/16 06:11 AM
0

Fact is, you don't know what did or did not come before the groping. They may -- or may not -- have given him all sorts of cues. But we do know! He told us explicitly: You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. No looking for cues, it's just automatic based on looks, with no waiting. The other thing that comes to mind is that he may be no genius, but is he really so stupid as to be telling reporters that he com…
/r/MensRights14/10/16 04:32 PM
1

I heard this sometimes also, but I've never seen a source for it. I've never heard it claimed that military service was ever a precondition for voting, except in Starship Troopers. And the US didn't have national conscription until the Civil War (though states had a requirement to serve in the militia, at least at times. Not that serving guaranteed you a right to vote.). During the Civil War, rich people paid for others to serve in their place, as was allowed at the time, and they weren't stripp…
/r/MensRights14/10/16 05:50 AM
15

It's probably a hard balance to strike between not turning into an "anti-feminist" thing, if that's not your goal, and not turning it into a "feminism, but with a focus on 'male issues'" thing. Many of the people who show up will want it to be one or the other. For every person who wants to troll feminists, another person will take grievous offense any time you say something that even slightly disagrees with feminists. Also you'll get asked about Trump a lot, so, don't make excuses for his sorry…
/r/MensRights14/10/16 01:36 AM
1

As for "every" girl, that is bullshit as he didn't do it to every girl He didn't do it to every girl, but that's just because ... I mean ... of course he doesn't grope literally every girl. But he talks like every girl would let him. And he picked out ones based on attractiveness, not based on them seeming receptive to it. So the only way he didn't non-consensually grope someone is if every girl is OK with it (or he got astronomically lucky and the ones he picked just happened to be OK with it. …
/r/MensRights14/10/16 01:30 AM
2

This reminds me of the old Alan Dershowitz line: "Some people regard rape as so heinous an offense that they would not even regard innocence as a defense". This was intended as a criticism of feminists, but I guess it applies to Trump too!
/r/MensRights13/10/16 06:06 PM
3

There's a huge difference between someone wanting it, and letting it happen. In particular if the person is a famous, powerful person, and you're some random nobody. Or if you're on some TV show where good relationships with celebrities is important and everyone's been told to be nice to them, and you're a replaceable employee. What's more likely, that every girl out there actually secretly wants some gross-looking 60 year old guy to grope them, or that if he does they don't raise too much of a …
/r/MensRights13/10/16 02:35 PM
4

So he says he does it to various women, and various women say he does it to them, and everyone's reaction is that both must be lying? This is the polar opposite of feminists' approach to sexual assault - don't believe unless there's video evidence.
/r/MensRights13/10/16 05:28 AM
16

He also called for the death penalty for 5 kids accused of rape, who were later cleared by DNA evidence and another person confessing. And when asked about it a week ago, still said they should get the death penalty.
/r/MensRights13/10/16 05:05 AM
17

Trump was caught on tape bragging about doing this sort of thing!
/r/MensRights13/10/16 05:04 AM
2

Being introverted is correlated with depression. Does this mean that you should tell introverts not to be introverted anymore? No. Different people are different. Maybe those differences are even correlated with certain bad outcomes. But the answer isn't to demonize those differences. Not that I agree that it's necessarily damaging to "suppress" or "hide" emotions. I'd question where you are getting that from. Even if there's a correlation between "talking about your emotions" and "psychological…
/r/MensRights12/10/16 08:47 PM
2

Oh, I agree they use that logic for women. They just don't use it for men. For men, they see those men exhibiting masculine traits as the bad ones, and those not doing so as the good ones. For a few examples of what I'm talking about: The #masculinitysofragile hashtag, trying to link being masculine with being fragile. Some people will tell you that it's really just about attacking societal pressures or some shit, but it's clearly not. To borrow someone else's point, when bic made pink pens for …
/r/MensRights12/10/16 07:54 PM
4

Good for him, I don't care if some men want to wear makeup, or make money for advertising it. Though there are definitely feminists who don't like when men do traditionally "masculine" things; I can't wait until they start acting like if you're a man who doesn't want to wear makeup, there's something wrong with you. All while allegedly support everyone's right to act how they want free of pressure from society.
/r/MensRights12/10/16 07:10 PM
4

I don't think this should be considered any sort of hostile environment thing, it's clearly a political statement, but I'm sure any pro-Trump shirt with profanity would be viewed that way.
/r/MensRights12/10/16 02:23 AM
3

He says this: The concept of “equality” incorporates freedom from fear and oppression for everyone, including men; so by definition, a true feminist would support opposing and changing any unfairness that men, as well as women, experience as a result of their gender and then For sure, not all feminists are male-positive, and no doubt those women who are not particularly well disposed towards men have their reasons. Now I judge people by their actions, not by what the dictionary says their self-d…
/r/MensRights10/10/16 05:23 PM
3

Big difference between misreading a signal in a situation where you might expect someone would want to kiss you, like at the end of a date or someone you've been flirting with, and just walking up to a stranger and groping them.
/r/MensRights10/10/16 06:05 AM
3

I'd be fine with this, if it were consistent. But the same people who think "he or she" is a microaggression because of transgender people, who are less than 1% of the population, insist on referring to rapists with male pronouns, and victims with female pronouns. If you want to say a rapist is "typically a man", and presumptively say "he", do the same with, say, murder victims, CEOs, inventors, etc. If you're against that, don't presume rapists are all men.
/r/MensRights09/10/16 07:22 PM
3

I don't know what actions you are talking about; but Clinton has also been in office, so has had more chance to act. The main thing limiting the amount of bad shit Trump has done in office is the fact that he hasn't been in office. Trump reiterated his call for the death penalty for 5 kids falsely accused of rape, sent to prison, and cleared by DNA evidence and another person confessing. "But he hasn't been elected yet so he hasn't been able to implement his monstrous ideas, and I judge based on…
/r/MensRights08/10/16 07:01 AM
1

I have friends who curse a lot sure. Men who use words like pussy, make crude sexual remarks. But none who describe in detail sexually assaulting people like it's NBD.
/r/MensRights08/10/16 05:12 AM
4

ITT: a lot of people normally very worried about due process and false accusations, now falling over themselves to act like this case wasn't a massive miscarriage of justice that everyone would be yelling about if Trump wasn't involved. If it was any other situation, nobody would be making excuses, saying maybe they were guilty.
/r/MensRights08/10/16 04:23 AM
2

He's a bad person. Fuck him. By the way, today he also doubled down on his call to execute the Central Park Five, who were falsely accused of rape as underage teens, and thrown in prison until DNA evidence cleared them and someone else confessed. That's right, he thinks: people accused of rape and cleared by DNA evidence are still guilty and rape should get the death penalty even if you're underage at the time.
/r/MensRights08/10/16 04:17 AM
3

This is not how I or any of my friends talk. Even in college, and he was 60 at the time.
/r/MensRights08/10/16 04:15 AM
5

This reminds me of the study supposedly showing men's brains don't view women as humans if they're attractive, or something. I've seen it shared on feminist sites/subreddits many times, like "OMG men's brains are built to objectify women!!!" So they're OK with saying there are biological differences as long as those differences are "men are bad people".
/r/MensRights07/10/16 06:35 PM
1

"victim of genocide" I wonder if this will be a new thing. Also realistically in America today Mr. Moneybags over there is likely to have a corporate commitment to "diversity" and be sympathetic to those groups anyway. This gaggle of "oppression olympics" people aren't actually threatening him.
/r/MensRights04/10/16 02:00 PM
2

All the liberals who claim to care about mass incarceration are gonna be totally silent about a case where a group of people - without knowing the facts or legal landscape - tried to pressure a judge out of vindicating someone who deserved to be vindicated. Would it be any different if it was someone convicted of rape, appealing the verdict? Is it any different from the same situation but with a crime other than rape?
/r/MensRights04/10/16 04:18 AM
5

When he says things like this in the interview linked there: All I can do is seek the information that’ll make me stronger, that’ll help me overcome my toxic masculinity, my male privilege, because that’s something you never think about. It just sounds grammatically weird to me ("help me overcome my toxic masculinity"; how often does someone refer to "toxic masculinity" as a thing that a specific person has?). I suspect he was just doing the interview to say the "right" things to put it all behi…
/r/MensRights04/10/16 04:10 AM
1

I kind of imagine that they scheduled this movie to come out before the new Ghostbusters was a flop, and now are questioning whether "remake old movie with all-female cast" is such a good idea; but it's too late to back out now. I have nothing against a movie with these actresses...but if they were making Ocean's 14 I'd grumble about how Hollywood sucks these days and not see it. The fact that they added a gimmick on top doesn't change that.
/r/MensRights03/10/16 05:22 PM
1

Clinton will treat rapists worse, Trump'll treat everyone worse, rapists probably will have it worse under Trump.
/r/MensRights03/10/16 03:11 AM
7

An important piece of this is that it's both traditional gender roles, and feminism, that contributes to the issue. I think it's important to emphasize why feminists are wrong on this one. Because many feminists, upon reading this, will instinctively respond that feminists are on the right side. Feminist rhetoric about "violence against women", and about female perpetrators of violence, reinforce the idea that violence by men, or against women, is worse than the alternatives. Feminist rhetoric a…
/r/MensRights02/10/16 10:27 PM
16

The student newspaper’s editorial board endorsed the new program yesterday, insisting it was “not a reeducation camp being administered by an oppressed group in the service of the feminization of American society.” Thou doth protest too much. I bet if I was there and disagreed with their political views, and their views about what personality traits are "toxic", I'd get a lot of hostility in return.
/r/MensRights30/09/16 07:00 PM
1

Hillary Clinton is going to make the movie Wicker Man look like a PARTY for men. She's really not. Even if she wants to discriminate against men, she's also anti-mass incarceration to the extent that her bad treatment of rapists is probably better than Trump's, because Trump'll treat everyone bad. I mean, he did call for the death penalty for children accused (wrongly, it turned out) of rape.
/r/MensRights30/09/16 02:18 AM
6

Because one of them's gonna be President at the end of the day, I might as well have a part in deciding who.
/r/MensRights29/09/16 11:24 PM
1

OK last response from me because I doubt we'll convince each other of anything... Source? I can't find one for this. Here is his ad, here is background on the case it's about. What do you mean by that? But I know that under Hillary we would cause more mass incarceration - from false rape accusations, and from "hate criminals" who did nothing more than compliment a woman when she was in a bad mood. It's the height of insanity that feminsts are trying to enact laws that call an expression of appro…
/r/MensRights28/09/16 05:18 PM
2

brutal anti-male regime represented by the Dear Colleague letter. Trump is not. I of course disagree with the Dear Colleague letter (which Trump hasn't commented on AFAIK). But what is and isn't brutal? Trump is all about "law and order", he called for the death penalty for children accused of rape, he wants national stop & frisk, he wants more mass incarceration. That's the shit that's actually brutal. What happens on college campuses is peanuts in comparison, even if I still think it's bad. Hi…
/r/MensRights28/09/16 06:13 AM
2

Because she's so much better than Trump. And even if 90% of my reasons for voting against Trump were based on lies, which they're not, there would still be plenty of reason to vote against him. Trump is also bad on gender issues, btw, wanting to continue "law and order" type policies that mostly target men, and he was the guy calling for the death penalty for underage kids accused of a rape they were actually innocent of. Also, I doubt you're a lifelong Democrat, because people who always voted …
/r/MensRights28/09/16 02:06 AM
2

I am going to be voting for Hillary without reservation, but I also am aware that the media will turn it into "decent, humane, moral, smart feminists vs horrible ignorant cretin basement-dwellers who hate everyone and can't deal with feminists' intellect, charm, and down-to-earth good looks". And "feminism reigns triumphant, time to start teaching kids in school it's NOT OK to criticize feminists", and "Title IX means you can't be a Republican", and "equality means women never go to prison, only…
/r/MensRights27/09/16 07:29 PM
4

The same old thing - DV against girls is bad because violence against girls is bad. DV against boys is bad because they might commit violence against girls. This program appears to do nothing for the boys themselves, it just treats them like they're now tainted, and are potential threats, like DV is a zombie epidemic thing, "now you're one of them". Nothing to help the kids with the fact that they're all victims child abuse, no treating them with the sympathy you'd afford victims. Notice the art…
/r/MensRights27/09/16 02:13 PM
5

First, gorillas represent a very masculine image, and I feel that this would not be inclusive to all of our residents on that floor So I guess "inclusive" means "excluding certain people" ... or at least in this case, doing something that is theoretically tangentially related to excluding certain people but is too stupid to accomplish anything. Second, this animal could be triggering to some people as their [sic] are stereotypes that surround this animal I like how "triggering" is just added in …
/r/MensRights27/09/16 06:25 AM
1

Meanwhile Trump wants to expand it nationwide.
/r/MensRights27/09/16 06:22 AM
1

It's always funny to me when some feminists are laughing at the idea feminists are anti-marriage, while others call marriage inherently sexist and oppressive, and others call marriage a "rape protection racket".
/r/MensRights26/09/16 05:04 PM
10

It's hard to have men's issues be taken seriously when everyone in the media has such a hair trigger reflex of adding in "women hit especially hard" to any story about any negative thing. Suicide hurts men more? Well then the focus is on how women's suicide rate is rising. Say men are especially hard hit? So many people's reflex is to keep questioning - "well, did that study consider X?... If you look at it this other way... It's different when it's men... Actually this is a result of sexism aga…
/r/MensRights25/09/16 05:47 PM
3

Yup...I would add that I think people want to avoid the fact that there's sometimes a clash of interests between men and women, and you can't help one group without hurting the other/vice versa. Examples would be preventing rape vs due process for the accused, or child custody & child support/alimony. The whole "we want to help men but not criticize feminists" thing seems to come from an assumption that everything is win-win and the only thing standing in the way is people being jerks. Many femi…
/r/MensRights23/09/16 02:41 PM
1

And only 3 months, 6 days till Christmas!
/r/MensRights19/09/16 07:38 PM
1

So, in other words, she is.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 06:27 PM
2

Are you saying she isn't advocating for paid leave for fathers too?
/r/MensRights16/09/16 01:37 PM
1

Only one of those guys is actually sitting in such a way as to invade other people's space, and not by a lot.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 04:22 AM
1

You know there's also a female candidate for President advocating to include fathers in paid family leave. And on top of it, she knows what she's talking about and is the most ethical, transparent, and pro-liberty major candidate out there!
/r/MensRights16/09/16 04:19 AM
1

lol but yeah
/r/MensRights14/09/16 02:00 PM
3

This is stupid. It always bothers me how people say "only rapists are responsible for rape" but then shit like this comes along and they say "also men who don't rape anyone are also responsible".
/r/MensRights14/09/16 01:32 PM
1

Isn't this basically a Democratic child care plan that Ivanka made her Dad propose?
/r/MensRights14/09/16 04:00 AM
2

I just want to say, there's a difference between acknowledging the theoretical possibility of a man being raped/abused, and doing something about it in reality, especially when there are competing claims of abuse between a man and woman (as often happens), or when there's a situation society regards as a gray area.
/r/MensRights08/09/16 09:54 AM
15

It literally invites first year students, more vulnerable to the campus environment and at the highest risk of sexual assault during their collegiate career, to come into a stranger’s apartment. Take out the hyperventilating and this becomes... It literally invites first year students ... to come into a stranger’s apartment. I mean ... isn't this what freshmen are looking for? Do you really think inviting people into your house shouldn't exist in society? Good to see such insightful anyone in ou…
/r/MensRights07/09/16 10:15 AM
6

It's not new. Maybe larger than in the past, but not new. Anyway, it's a combination of things. In part the federal government backing them up. In part who controls academia and such. In part people being more liberal in reaction to the Bush years. I also think part of it is outreach. If you're a 15, 16 year old girl, you probably feel put upon by society for being a girl (even if there was 0 sexism against women in society, if you're a teenager you'll still feel this way). You go online to vent…
/r/MensRights03/09/16 12:26 AM
5

They went free that very day!
/r/MensRights02/09/16 09:20 AM
5

If there is a feedback thing at the end, make your thoughts known. Tell em it's a witch hunt, their "facts" don't stand up to the barest scrutiny, and you completely reject everything in the so-called "training". And call them Nazis for good measure.
/r/MensRights01/09/16 02:48 PM
2

Perhaps the CEO should work a shift on the assembly line to know what it's like to be a worker he's getting rich off of.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 04:08 PM
4

There are many websites, subreddits, writers, etc out there whose position is some version of "I/we care about stuff hurting men, but we're not those other guys, we also recognize sexism against women, support feminism [usually added but not always], etc." Basically, people who could write the exact thing you just wrote. They all have the same problem. In order to get at sexism against men, you must be willing to criticize feminists. Because sexism against men that exists in society also exists …
/r/MensRights27/08/16 04:06 PM
5

“The most probable reason is gender discrimination. Young women’s lives [in South East Asia] are very different from young men’s lives in almost every way.” The male suicide rate in this age group is 21.41 per 100,000, compared with 27.82 for girls. So everywhere else in the world where men's suicide rate is higher, what's the most probable reason there?
/r/MensRights25/08/16 10:44 PM
1

This policy is bad, but not as bad as some other schools' policies. 1. It defines sexual harassment as "unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature" including "verbal, non-verbal, or physical" conduct. No requirement that a reasonable person would find it objectionable, no requirement that there be a "hostile environment" or that it's repeated times or it's sufficiently severe or anything. (it mentions hostile environment but doesn't say it's a requirement). If you take it at face value, this is insane…
/r/MensRights18/08/16 06:09 AM
1

The 5th amendment protects you from saying shit, but it doesn't protect your actions. They can, for example, take your fingerprints and not violate the 5th amendment. So I don't think it protects your emails (though I'm not sure). Also it's only for criminal prosecutions, not for civil.
/r/MensRights17/08/16 04:59 PM
5

Regardless of whether it's illegal or not...is there anything stopping judges or juries from taking it as incriminating, considering that there's no real reason to ever delete emails these days, and you have to go out of your way to do it?
/r/MensRights17/08/16 02:46 PM
1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAA1xgTTw9w
/r/MensRights17/08/16 05:28 AM
3

The fact that more women than men go to college is the reason there's so much focus on women in STEM. It's a way to avoid admitting that men can be discriminated against.
/r/MensRights17/08/16 12:34 AM
67

Seems like a violation of Title IX.
/r/MensRights17/08/16 12:32 AM
5

Not even remotely your place to tell people what's what when it comes to how women are represented in the media So much here... It's people's "place" to not say certain things? I thought they wanted a "conversation" about this stuff. Conversation requires people to say things! "when it comes to how women are represented in the media" - such a huge subject that you're not supposed to talk about! If someone says in the newspaper you murdered a woman it's not your place to protest because that woul…
/r/MensRights16/08/16 02:54 PM
21

Read this about a massacre by Boko Haram, about an attack that killed 500 people. It has the following line in the story: Even nursing mothers had their male infants snatched from their backs and shot dead before their eyes The writers of the news story never followed up on this or treated it as important enough to mention anywhere except the end of the news article, right before something about cell phone towers. This wasn't a top story, and nobody ever mentioned anything about it again. If you…
/r/MensRights15/08/16 08:17 PM
27

On one hand, he clearly seems like someone who it's a bad idea to be in a relationship with, drunk in the morning and yelling and breaking shit. It wouldn't exactly be shocking for someone like this to be physically violent towards her. On the other...it just bothers me because people say the things on this video are abuse, and yet I know that if I was in this situation and my SO was acting like this, nobody would ever, ever say it was abuse. Including and especially feminists, who would find so…
/r/MensRights15/08/16 04:54 AM
2

This is like going on to a thread where a girl is upset at being called a slut and saying "but it's WOMEN who call other women sluts." It's just an excuse to not care.
/r/MensRights14/08/16 11:53 PM
1

Reminds me of this from a pro-SJ site a few days ago.
/r/MensRights12/08/16 05:48 PM
1

I believe Title IX makes equal access a condition for school funding. Just take away federal funding for Michigan State effective starting whenever if they don't change the policy. I'm sure the college will take effective action!
/r/MensRights10/08/16 03:51 AM
-1

"Middle class" is so subjective, only like 1% of people consider themselves upper class, plenty of really rich people would say they're middle class if you ask. But according to this analysis of her proposals (they do ones for all candidates) taxes would go up <0.1% unless you're in the top quintile. And I think in order for shit to pass Congress, more tax cuts would have to be added, thus possible tax cut but not a particularly big one.
/r/MensRights08/08/16 05:22 PM
-2

More healthcare, larger social safety net, more financial regulation (actually just less deregulation than the alternative), possible a tax cut but not a particularly big one, tax increase for richer people, also not that big. Harder to get into college, easier to be expelled once there. More aggressive prosecution of police who kill them (again maybe just compared to the alternative), easier to form a union, possibly some better government-mandated job benefits, less prosecution of drug offense…
/r/MensRights08/08/16 04:46 PM
21

But it's only fair that both sexes are objectified equally. OK fine! Tell your own website, that gets pissed at the same thing you're doing, but directed at women, as evidenced by this very article. The article seems to be saying "it happens to women, so it's fair to do it to men," but then it's fair to do it to women.
/r/MensRights08/08/16 04:57 AM
11

The thing about owing a debt to feminism is telling. You can't, of course, have a debt to an ideology in any close-to-literal sense. You can have a debt to individuals, and certain activist types see themselves as basically the face of feminism. They're saying, "you owe a debt to me because I'm your [self-appointed] guardian." And the way to pay that debt is, of course, to fall in line and not criticize them, and give them verbal (and financial) support.
/r/MensRights07/08/16 02:45 AM
3

A lot of stats about violence like the one you're debunking here are repeated in order to give the impression that women are the greater victims of violence (or whatever else) when they're not.
/r/MensRights06/08/16 05:24 AM
1

What BS... The [students accused of sexual assault] who make arguments under Title IX … claim that the system is rigged against them. Vassar student Peter Yu’s complaint after his expulsion argued that he’d experienced gender discrimination because “Vassar’s guidelines and regulations are set up to disproportionately affect the male student population of the Vassar College community as a result of the higher incidence of female complainants of sexual misconduct against male complainants of sexua…
/r/MensRights04/08/16 10:10 PM
3

I don't care about "objectifying." I think they should have pictures of shirtless male athletes if that's what they want to see! And they don't need to pretend it's because they're really into the triple jump or whatever. Someone being sexually attractive isn't inherently dehumanizing. I just think it should be the same for women.
/r/MensRights04/08/16 07:34 AM
27

Remember when there were those pink pens marketed to women and everyone flipped out about how ridiculous it is that they always have stereotypically feminine stuff like pink to sell things to women? To me, the word "empowering" is the EXACT same. You never see the word on anything for men, it's one of the most girly, feminine words there is. It has literally no meaning. I guess it's supposed to mean giving someone power or confidence, but it's used on products and in advertising and shit in ways…
/r/MensRights04/08/16 07:31 AM
3

So I'm sure there are many more emails like the one linked here, out there on school servers that haven't been made public, in many college rape cases. In order to uncover them in a lawsuit you need to get to discovery, and in order to get to discovery you need to get past the initial motion to dismiss. Circuit rulings like the one mentioned here are key to getting there. The facts in these cases are particular enough that it might be hard to have circuit court precedent that covers lots of pote…
/r/MensRights01/08/16 08:50 PM
6

Page 158, it approvingly cites Susan Brownmiller's Against Our Will, which says on page 1 "Rape is a conscious process by which ALL men keep ALL women in a state of fear." If you're gonna quote that, the verdict isn't too shocking.
/r/MensRights25/07/16 06:21 AM
22

Three things this shows: Efforts to "empower girls" in school go hand in hand, and lead to, efforts to hold back boys. Because if you're conspicuously only giving encouraging messages to one sex, it sends the other sex a message. Because if you value equality over progress, holding back one group becomes an obvious move. Abd because if you don't care about shit affecting boys on principle, things like this won't be pushed back against. For every overt sexist, there's a bunch of people subconscio…
/r/MensRights24/07/16 06:44 PM
3

The reason it's not seen this way is that people assume men are guilty. If you ask people why they're especially concerned about violence against women when 75-80% of murders are against men, or why they're not concerned that 95% of police killing victims are men, they have various reasons. They're worried about "gender-based" violence (which has no inherent meaning, why is violence mostly attacking women gender-based, but not violence mostly attacking men?). Or it's because women face "structur…
/r/MensRights22/07/16 10:14 PM
9

I think college rape is a moral panic, but Trump does have a dark, fearful vision. It's almost like you can be blanket anti-hysteria and fearmongering, no matter which side it's on.
/r/MensRights22/07/16 10:10 PM
2

Unfortunately, the Republican platform is also appeasement towards Vladimir Putin.
/r/MensRights21/07/16 02:59 AM
8

As far as I can tell, he didn't actually harass her, he just mentioned her and then other people harassed her. You don't think harassers follow posts from all sorts of other prominent Tweeters? Since someone will mention it - yeah, Twitter's private and can let on anyone they want. And I can criticize it, and want to patronize a site that supports the free exchange of ideas, not sites that describe any disagreement with feminists that doesn't apologize for itself in advance as harassment.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 06:50 AM
1

What we need to do, of course, is to keep sending messages of encouragement to girls, and messages of discipline and cracking down to boys, that'll help!
/r/MensRights18/07/16 05:59 AM
1

If this happened, it would just cause people to drop the pretense that they actually care about male victims, rather than claiming to in order to appear non-sexist while knowing the benefits will mostly accrue to women.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 12:52 AM
4

If you ask "is rape culture real", then the answer will be as much about "what is rape culture" as it is about any real-world facts. As to real world facts: Rape is less common than people say (it's not 1 in 5 or 1 in 4), and it's less common than in the past (which most feminists will agree with - even though it puts the lie to the 1 in 4/5 claim, considering people were saying "1 in 4" 30 years ago, and rape has allegedly gone down 60-80% in that time). And it's less common on campuses than of…
/r/MensRights17/07/16 12:50 AM
2

Having more women in the police would make the problem worse, since it would increase the sympathy people have for the woman in any of these situations. Female cop shoots a black guy, and the same people will say "oh she was in danger, she had to shoot him!"
/r/MensRights16/07/16 06:18 PM
13

Same people who always say "only rapists are responsible for rape", also talk about "rape culture" and such in ways to try and pin responsibility for rape on all men.
/r/MensRights15/07/16 05:24 PM
2

I think they effectively exist in many colleges, not because they're explicitly written into the rules, but because of the approach the schools generally take to accusations. Many "affirmative consent" laws, while theoretically having room for nonverbal consent, in practice will never find that it exists, because the laws don't give any examples of any actual nonverbal conduct that would count as consent. To find consent in those situations would mean that a woman is saying that some action she …
/r/MensRights15/07/16 09:51 AM
7

Having watched like a quarter of this - interesting how many of the same issues came up then and now. Also interesting how they all seem to decry people like MacKinnon and Dworkin as anti-male, but today many feminists would deny that. And how the "Antioch rules" are obviously too extreme for them, but many feminists would back them.
/r/MensRights15/07/16 08:34 AM
29

Does this ever actually happen? If there was a story from someone for who this happened, I think it'd be good to hear.
/r/MensRights14/07/16 08:54 PM
13

you are using the word "disproportionately" wrong if you say that white men (versus black men) are a disproportionate number. I didn't say "versus black men". White men are disproportionately killed by police, because they're a higher portion of police victims than they are a portion of the population. The word "disproportionately" doesn't imply "as compared to black men", and there's no reason that you must compare white men to black men specifically.
/r/MensRights12/07/16 04:49 AM
13

Not only could you, I did!
/r/MensRights12/07/16 01:14 AM
26

White men I said. They are 31% of the population, and probably pretty close to 49% of those killed by cops.
/r/MensRights12/07/16 12:48 AM
74

If you look at the stats, white men are disproportionately killed by the police, in the sense that they're a higher % of victims of police killings, than they are a % of the population. In the same sense, black women are actually not disproportionately killed by the police. Black men definitely are, and white women really aren't.
/r/MensRights11/07/16 09:57 PM
6

This is clearly illegal. From Title IX: No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, except that: (and then it lists a bunch of inapplicable exceptions. Note that affirmative action is NOT one of the exceptions.). You can file a complaint with the school. From the website: Retaliation occurs when an adverse a…
/r/MensRights10/07/16 08:39 AM
1

People are saying this doesn't necessarily mean women call each other sluts more often than men call women sluts. That's true - but this data also corresponds with my own experience, and most other people who I've ever heard talk about it.
/r/MensRights08/07/16 09:59 PM
10

How are they going to fashion all of their messages of encouragement, empowerment, confidence-building, etc, exclusively towards girls if they can't use the word "girls"?
/r/MensRights01/07/16 07:26 AM
1

“This isn’t the Boy Scouts; we aren’t saying this is what you have to do to be a good man.” and yet... The Men’s Retention Committee formed DUDES to help close that gender gap while also demonstrating that Redlands men aren’t male chauvinists. So actually, you think people in your group aren't male chauvinists! So which is it? It always starts like this, but soon afterwards they decide it should be some sort of required thing to attend, and if you don't like what they say you're one of the backw…
/r/MensRights30/06/16 06:59 AM
3

It might completely shock some people to hear that society has already taught boys this, for a long time. If you want to change hearts and minds, perhaps answer the question I and many others had as a kid - why is it OK to hit me, but not girls? That's not some in-the-clouds hypothetical, either.
/r/MensRights29/06/16 08:58 PM
2

It's almost as if non-feminists have heard all these really basic arguments before, and have counter-arguments which never get answered.
/r/MensRights29/06/16 11:18 AM
1

Words like "unsafe" and "violence" have really been watered down recently.
/r/MensRights29/06/16 05:56 AM
1

Teach them to respect everyone, regardless of sex, sexuality, age, race, or religion. Feminism is about equality. It's usually feminists saying to "respect women", as if that's qualitatively different from, somehow over & above, respecting men.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 09:24 PM
2

In a Democracy, people have opinions on issues that don't directly affect them, all the time. People not in the army have opinions on when we should go to war. People who are unlikely to ever go to prison, and who have never been the victims of a crime, have opinions on conditions/sentencing for prisoners. People who pay little to no tax have opinions on how much taxes rich people should pay. Non-engineers have opinions on infrastructure spending. Non-car drivers have opinions on the gas tax and…
/r/MensRights27/06/16 05:11 PM
3

Not sure if you're still on this thread, but a few things I wanted to respond to: What irks me, though, is that I have yet to find similar sympathies on this board. Why aren't there discussions about the similarities between feminism and men's rights? Feminists are all branded as "feminazis" and - well, that isn't true. Women's rights are valid. Women have had to struggle. Women still struggle. I think women have to struggle in ways that a lot of the users on this board simply refuse to see. But…
/r/MensRights27/06/16 04:30 AM
1

Good for them; it's a state school, so banning the club was clearly unconstitutional. They could probably sue over it.
/r/MensRights25/06/16 01:40 AM
3

I'll just add that you really can't consider one without the other. In this case in particular, many feminists will tell you we need to be stricter against boys. "No more 'boys will be boys'"
/r/MensRights25/06/16 01:29 AM
13

"to her surprise"
/r/MensRights24/06/16 04:53 PM
1

The same people saying this stuff, also say that the only people responsible for rape are the rapists themselves. So, um, which is it, is rape my fault or not?
/r/MensRights24/06/16 05:34 AM
3

This is one of those things that was always mindblowingly obvious to me, to the extent that it'd shock me that anyone would question it. Anyone who's been in school, ever, should immediately realize it. And yet feminists routinely say, or insinuate, that the opposite is true. It's similar to the fact that men are more likely to be the targets of violence than women.
/r/MensRights22/06/16 11:32 PM
1

A few things... Why is this an archive.is link? This website isn't sympathetically covering them... From the video, around 1:55, "I would say things like, 'oh god, what if he wants to play sports?'" And the tutu thing...remember when it was all about just letting people be whoever they want? But one thing I'll give them credit for is this: And even something that’s like Progressive like ‘Sesame Street,’ all the monsters are boys unless they have like a bow in their hair or a sparkly necklace on.…
/r/MensRights22/06/16 06:20 AM
9

It seems like the "benevolent sexism" questions were really obvious "women are better than men!" type things; whereas the "hostile sexism" questions were often things I would agree with because they apply to all humans, or because they're really testing agreement with feminism. (for the record, 2.67/0.33)
/r/MensRights18/06/16 03:59 PM
5

Why does this happen every time? Just calling for a woman's accountability is synonymous in your mind with expecting a lower sentence. Because what does accountability mean, if not a lower sentence? This is what I asked in my comment, and I don't see what it would possibly be. She's not being charged with a crime, which is normally what you'd expect "accountability" to mean in the context of the criminal justice system. Honestly, I can't really decide whether she should have "accountability" unt…
/r/MensRights17/06/16 08:01 AM
13

WHERE is the accountability on the girls part? Exactly what do you mean by accountability? You say you want him to go to prison. Do you think he should get less time because you think she exercised bad judgment in getting drunk? To take your example, do you think if someone mugged you when you were blackout drunk, do you think your drunkenness should be a mitigating factor for his punishment? Do you just wish the judge would admonish her? I'm not sure why that would happen.
/r/MensRights17/06/16 02:54 AM
1

More than anything else, I wish everyone would internalize the fact that there's more violence against men than women. There's no good reason to focus so much on domestic violence, except that it affects women more, and so people can carry out their desire to ignore male victims, by claiming they're just a minority of the total.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 06:35 AM
1

Last post from me because I don't think we're getting anywhere: people isn't gloating, sorry. Especially when it's followed by a context that has a strong "BUT" feel to it. Thanking people can be gloating. "Thanks for your help" isn't gloating. "Thanks for pointing out how awesome I am" certainly can be. The "thanks" is just a rhetorical device for reaching the real purpose - look at how great I am! It would be like if the Cavs won the Finals, and Lebron said "thanks everyone for recognizing tha…
/r/MensRights13/06/16 08:59 PM
0

I'm not hiding from the rest of the tweet, a tweet that I know you're familiar with since you already referenced it. I'm doing exactly what you asked me to do: quote the part that's gloating. It really isn't different with the rest. Segueing from gloating to campaign rhetoric doesn't mean he wasn't gloating. And for the record, I didn't share a pretty ribbon on Facebook, nor do I care if anyone else does (nor did the gay people I know on Facebook either, actually). Of course, you won't respond t…
/r/MensRights13/06/16 08:38 PM
0

"Appreciate the Congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism." Of course, you won't respond to the point about hate crimes, or how he's said Obama is supporting ISIS, or how his surrogate said it's a false flag.
/r/MensRights13/06/16 07:35 PM
3

It's almost like you can be against those who use these events to demagogue against men, and also be against those who use them to demagogue against Muslims.
/r/MensRights13/06/16 07:29 PM
0

I know gloating when I see it, and he was gloating. That's my reaction, not something based on what some people online said. And now today he's trying to imply that Obama supports ISIS, and Roger Stone said it's a false flag attack. All this from the party that, as I mentioned, didn't want to give gay people hate crimes protection, and used to talk about natural disasters as punishment for homosexuality, now suddenly they're so concerned about gay people.
/r/MensRights13/06/16 06:11 PM
5

He was pretty much gloating on Twitter earlier. But I don't know if it will boost his numbers. I guess it helps his narrative about terrorism, but it also is a hate crime against a group that people generally like these days but the right openly hated for a long time - as recently as 2009, most Republicans in Congress voted against classifying crimes against gay people as hate crimes. Plus, Hillary has more experience in government, so I think crisis shit also counts in her favor for that reason…
/r/MensRights13/06/16 01:16 AM
43

Reason why I'm posting it here is, men's sexuality is demonized by many people, and this is especially true of gay men. Combine that with the fact that people see violence against men as less of a big deal than violence against women, and it's not surprising you see so much violence against gay men. As far as I can tell, this was a nightclub that catered mostly to gay men. If there's gonna be something on here when some feminist hates on men just for being attracted to women, there should be som…
/r/MensRights12/06/16 09:09 PM
2

Is this a reference to something, like was there some controversy about these pictures?
/r/MensRights09/06/16 09:21 PM
14

This headline is inaccurate. From her letter: I told the probation officer I do not want Brock to rot away in prison. I did not say he does not deserve to be behind bars. The probation officer’s recommendation of a year or less in county jail is a soft time­out, a mockery of the seriousness of his assaults, an insult to me and all women.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 09:19 PM
4

How is it against the rules to have a petition to remove an elected official? You say they are going to "ruin a man's career". If someone posts something about defeating Hillary Clinton, or Donald Trump, then they're trying to "ruin a man's [or woman's] career", but nobody thinks that's against the rules.
/r/MensRights07/06/16 04:09 PM
4

If I were you I'd try to make modest, concrete arguments. If you open with "rape culture doesn't exist" then people won't listen because they're already committed to the idea, and because it's such an abstract question (what is "rape culture" exactly?) that it's hard to really argue over in a way that will win anyone over. I also think specific examples from personal experience, or clashes with other values people hold, can help. It would help to strike the right balance between asserting argume…
/r/MensRights07/06/16 08:19 AM
8

It's good for people to acknowledge that: boys who roughhouse aren't psychopaths boys who roughhouse can also want to have deep emotional conversations, etc. But people who make both of these points, often don't recognize this third thing: boys who don't want to have deep emotional conversations with you, also aren't psychopaths There are some feminists who say "men are pigs." Others say "we don't think men are pigs, we think men are as capable as women of exhibiting various feminine traits." Bu…
/r/MensRights06/06/16 10:03 PM
0

I think many false rape accusations are things like: made in haste or panic, without thinking through the consequences made in some non-criminal context, like in a divorce (where lawyers encourage abuse allegations as a way to gain an upper hand) or on college campuses, where there's a lot less of the stuff she mentioned prosecuted in a situation where the accuser would rather not go through with it for the reasons you mention, but once the ball's rolling it's out of her hands not a lie, but rat…
/r/MensRights05/06/16 05:37 AM
1

A lot of this is true, but not necessarily the most important things that should be on a list like this. For me, the number one thing to tell boys is that it's not wrong to want to have sex, even if you want to have sex for purely physical reasons. I.e., it's not wrong to wanna fuck a girl just because she's hot. The message kids get is that a guy wanting to have sex with a girl is inherently predatory, or "entitled", and the only way around this is to have a deep relationship with the girl, to …
/r/MensRights03/06/16 10:42 PM
1

Jessica Valenti of all people admitted that frequently, a woman will lie about being raped. She just doesn't think it means they weren't raped. I'll add that I think part of the issue comes from a combination of alcohol (which leads people to substitute ideas about what they would have done, for what they actually did, since they don't remember what they actually did), and fearmongering about rape along with friends and adult figures pushing the narrative that the person was raped. And rape defi…
/r/MensRights02/06/16 07:54 AM
1

?
/r/MensRights02/06/16 07:50 AM
1

I post on r/mensrights frequently, and I don't think I ever post on any pro-Hillary subs. I'm hardly some brigade coming from some other place, though that description could apply to some Trump types who didn't know about this sub until relatively recently and found it through r/The_Donald or whatever else.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 07:48 AM
-1

Yeah good point. Personally I'd also point to abortion as somewhere where I agree with Clinton and not with Trump (I don't think he actually cares about abortion, but I think he'd appoint a conservative pro-life Justice). And gay marriage - it's possible that if Trump is President, the gay marriage case could be overturned.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 09:47 PM
11

She was unfairly railroaded. It sounds like the guy wasn't drunk enough that he couldn't have stopped it, and he wasn't overpowered or threatened. He just felt social pressure to go through with something he didn't want to; and he regretted it later. But this wasn't rape, the same way it's not rape when the genders are reversed.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 08:10 PM
1

Doesn't she have a lot of earning power? Why would she need support? She could probably go crank out a movie for >$1 million tomorrow if she wanted to. Also, this: On Thursday, the actress was reportedly spotted shopping at Tiffany’s after legal documents showed she was filing for spousal support from her 52-year-old husband.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 08:07 PM
2

I think a Clinton administration would do things that are bad for men, less because of anything she may or may not think (I know about the quote about women in war but I don't read too much into it tbh), and more because of the general party structure that will take over/remain in place if she wins. To take current Title IX shit, it's all the government's doing, but I imagine Obama doesn't really care much about it. It's all the lower appointees who come into power when their side wins. But othe…
/r/MensRights01/06/16 08:00 PM
1

This isn't colleges, it's law schools. And at Harvard, for example, there are more men than women.
/r/MensRights27/05/16 04:36 AM
1

Either way, as long as it's evenly applied. If you really looked at smaller groups (either in the sense of going by subject, or by subsets of people like poor men) then you'd still see men benefit on net. What I'd be worried about is looking at smaller groups becoming a way to avoid the big picture. I could imagine people who would say that women generally should get an advantage for college generally, now saying that actually it's low income men who need help (and then add, "as do low income wo…
/r/MensRights22/05/16 07:54 AM
13

Don't more women go to college now than men? If anyone should be benefited due to "diversity" these days it's men, not women.
/r/MensRights21/05/16 09:28 PM
0

No more so than Hillary. She's just done a better job of making you forget that. Well we'll just have to disagree, but I don't know what I've forgotten. To bring it back to MRM for a minute, The Hunting Ground (an activist "documentary" with proven falsehoods) would've never been shown on CNN (a journalism outlet) if that standard was the law. We would not be talking about a "wage gap" all over media, because it is absolutely false and misleading. I think that documentary is BS, but I also think…
/r/MensRights19/05/16 11:18 PM
1

No more so than Hillary. She's just done a better job of making you forget that. Well we'll just have to disagree, but I don't know what I've forgotten. To bring it back to MRM for a minute, The Hunting Ground (an activist "documentary" with proven falsehoods) would've never been shown on CNN (a journalism outlet) if that standard was the law. We would not be talking about a "wage gap" all over media, because it is absolutely false and misleading. I think that documentary is BS, but I also think…
/r/MensRights19/05/16 09:03 PM
1

I'll be voting for Hillary. I think she'll do some bad stuff for men, but I also think Trump is an authoritarian who, among other things, threatens to crack down on a free press, wants to murder innocent people intentionally as a foreign policy, has said bigoted shit against various groups, praises Putin and the Tiananmen Square massacre, is anti-vaccines, is as corrupt as anyone in DC, and generally lacks the temperament to be President. As for men...I don't think he's all that great. He's the …
/r/MensRights19/05/16 04:31 PM
2

Kudos for standing up to this stuff....but calling some guy a "cuck" for disagreeing with you is some questionable shit.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 11:59 AM
-4

He said "they're rapists, and some I assume are good people." If he meant "some" immigrants are rapists he would have said "some" before "rapists", same way he said "some" before "good people". I think it's BS that he is somehow limiting this to illegal immigrants, it's just an excuse to hate on a minority group. Even if you really thought this sentiment doesn't extend to Mexican people generally, that's still a group of 10 million people, and he's just blanket calling them rapists, the sort of …
/r/MensRights19/05/16 11:31 AM
-2

Trump is also the guy who called for the Death Penalty in the Central Park Five case against 5 underage black kids before there was a trial. And they ended up getting railroaded and served ~10 years in prison until evidence that they were innocent surfaced. Not to mention calling Mexicans rapists. People who think it's just politics...is that stuff just politics too?
/r/MensRights19/05/16 10:38 AM
3

Reminds me of the acronym DARVO that people claim shows what abusers do. It stands for Deny, Accuse, Reverse Victim & Offender. Of course, the issue is, how do you know which person is the victim, and which is the DARVO-ing offender? I think we know the answer to that. It's worse when people say that "gaslighting" is a form of abuse. It amounts to "I have the right to flip out and yell at you, and if you say anything to defend yourself now you're the abuser." I think this also shows the expansio…
/r/MensRights18/05/16 11:03 AM
1

Yeah I'm not agreeing with it, just posting it. I think it shows what I was saying, that their distaste for MRAs is stronger than their journalistic principles.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 10:24 AM
0

This is ... inaccurate. I mean, there are "red pill" Elliot Rodger types out there - but also many others who are politically liberal, and see "traditional gender roles" as bad for men. Articles like these always dump all political views they don't like onto MRAs. You often see them claim, for example, that MRAs are all anti-LGBT, which in my experience is very not true They just don't think standards of journalistic integrity include accurately describing MRAs; rather, they just want to demoniz…
/r/MensRights15/05/16 12:27 AM
0

More disastrous than "men are the primary victims of war", "I have a lot of experience dealing with men who sometimes get off the reservation in the way they behave," Clinton? Yes, unequivocally so. I don't love Hillary, I fully expect her to try to use Title IX to punish college students who criticize feminism. But I still think Trump will be much worse. I'm tempted to write out a whole anti-Trump rant, but I'm not trying to make this into a Trump vs Hillary argument. Neither of us will convinc…
/r/MensRights08/05/16 07:38 PM
0

What exactly? The MRA/Trump connection? Part of why I posted this is that I've seen other people start to make that connection, I don't think my help is needed on it. Especially if I'm right that Trump will lose big, feminists in the media will gleefully make the connection in order to bury the MRA.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 07:27 PM
4

I heard this story probably 15 years ago. I guarantee if you spread this story around all the feminists would talk about how this nerd is just "entitled". To what, they couldn't even say, but they have to dismiss things like this somehow, and "entitled" is what they've settled on.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 06:27 PM
0

I'm gonna vote for her because she's gonna be the best candidate for the job.
/r/MensRights30/04/16 08:42 PM
3

chicks Makes it sound like she's gonna make some 22 year old blonde college girl Secretary of State or something. I don't really care how many women are on the cabinet - but I'll point out it's not like those people are chosen on merits already, it's all political. For Trump it would be whoever shines his shoes and calls him "Mr. Trump" with the most heartfelt emotion. I care much more when they start trying to exclude men from being Comp Sci majors, despite having worked their tail off to get t…
/r/MensRights30/04/16 06:04 PM
3

Someone actually called the person who did this study and posted what they said on r/oney a few months ago. The person who called found that the researchers asked people to click on a long bar the length of the screen, to show willingness to do various things, with clicking near the the left side meaning less likely, and the right side more likely. All the way at the left was a "0" on a scale of 0-100, and the right was "100". They counted any response 10 or higher as a "yes". That's how they go…
/r/MensRights29/04/16 11:56 PM
1

If you wanna get rid of a gf you don't like, you could just do this.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 11:53 PM
1

I'm pretty sure her big card will be "I'm running against Donald Trump."
/r/MensRights27/04/16 07:50 AM
31

I'll go a different tack from everyone else - don't raise a fuss over her shirt. If the subject comes up, argue for your views, say why you find feminism alienating, and if you do a good job she might just take it off herself. Nobody's perfect, decide whether it's worth it to be in a relationship with someone with differing views on this stuff, and if the answer is "yes", then it's "yes".
/r/MensRights26/04/16 08:47 PM
5

Of course the world doesn't "need" Bear Grylls, anymore than it needs a crossdresser (which of course accomplishes nothing for anyone). And if you're mystified by why anyone would like "masculine"-seeming stuff - well, maybe it fits a lot of people, same way your cross-dressing shtick fits with other people. But I don't see Bear Grylls saying that Grayson Perry's fans are just morons who are into useless hobbies and need to get with it.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 08:45 PM
6

I think for men like that, it's still fashionable to decry lots of "masculine" stuff. Basically you have to have some cognitive dissonance - pretend that you're an enlightened type who's over that masculine stuff while using it to get where you are. It is the non-CEOs who are in a bad spot. It's also people who are "masculine" but whose "masculine" traits are looked down upon by people. Gamers, nerds, people on the autism spectrum, shit like that. If you're saying masculinity sucks, you're shitt…
/r/MensRights26/04/16 08:43 PM
2

I don't think this should be considered abusive. I think that people like this tit for tat thing, but I don't think they will ever actually apply the same standards for men and women. If there were a case where both people were calling the other names, then she's just standing up for herself in this horrible abusive relationship (and if he says he's not worthless, he's gaslighting her), and he's demeaning her, and you know it's that and not the other way around because "context".
/r/MensRights26/04/16 08:19 PM
9

Yeah, looking through this, he says every mention of 2% he could trace goes back to Brownmiller.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 10:04 AM
14

At some point feminists, aware that this was an issue, just started saying "2-8%". That range comes from 2 places: some FBI report saying 8% of rape allegations are "unfounded" (a stat both over and underinclusive) Susan Brownmiller's book, Against our Will, which said with no evidence that it's 2%. Some people used to say 8%, some 2%, and they coalesced around "2-8%" as a sort of compromise (not that this was worked out by anyone, people just tended towards it over time). So feminists keep repe…
/r/MensRights26/04/16 07:29 AM
3

I think a requirement to investigate can still be an infringement of free speech, since it creates a "chilling effect". We can't ban you from saying it, we can just say it's maybe against the rules, and have a long investigation, and the end of which we'll say "ok you get off...this time." "Chilling effect" isn't just something people say when bloviating about it online, it's a justification the Supreme Court has used for finding speech to be protected by the Constitution.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 07:20 AM
5

According to the lawsuit, the Complainant "presumed" this sex was nonconsensual, and reported it to the director of the athletic training program. Just presuming it was nonconsensual based on nothing...I'm gonna guess that the man was black.
/r/MensRights20/04/16 03:01 AM
5

I think it's interesting that this is a place where feminists and conservatives are allied, and those opposed to feminism are not, contra accusations, on the side of "traditional gender norms".
/r/MensRights19/04/16 04:52 PM
32

A big question is this: how do you reach out to feminists, or vaguely pro-feminist-but-not-that-committed people, and get them to have these "taking off blinders" moments? FTA she says: Fortunately, it was not textbooks that delivered me from my ignorance, but conversations with the homeless, the mentally ill, former prisoners, drug dealers and many working class and middle class men. Most students lack that exposure, and are therefore unable to fathom how privileged they are. but most people wi…
/r/MensRights19/04/16 04:48 PM
1

I don't think this is some sort of tongue-in-cheek, reverse-the-genders-and-how-does-it-feel thing. The same people putting this sort of thing out are the ones who talk about the need to "teach men not to rape". And the normal reaction to this sort of poster isn't that it's inherently ridiculous and shows the absurdity of other things; rather, the reaction is that it's some sort of bold truth-telling that reflects what society should really say. The bolded part at the bottom that I originally to…
/r/MensRights18/04/16 07:41 PM
1

I think many male feminists are in it to say "aren't men so terrible? But not me, I'm one of the good ones." Often it's to get girls, though not always - sometimes it's just about straightforward moral superiority. Female feminists are on to this and so criticize male feminists for doing it. Not in the good way of "don't put down men", but in the bad way of "you're one of the bad ones too, stop congratulating yourself". And so in response, in order to stay in good standing, male feminists have t…
/r/MensRights18/04/16 05:51 PM
1

I don't think this is actually true. I think it is aimed at men like me. It doesn't have anything to do with preventing anyone from raping anyone. It has everything to do with just being dickish towards men in general as a signalling thing. It's the same as some article, "why white men suck", written by a white man. Honestly, it probably hurts the anti-rape cause, because if you want to target those "opportunistic rapists" then you just have to tell them that "XYZ is rape, and you'll get in trou…
/r/MensRights18/04/16 04:45 PM
4

The people who put this out are so pro-men that they think men (without qualification) have "violent sexual urges" and the only question is whether they have the willpower to overcome them.
/r/MensRights17/04/16 04:30 PM
9

So the question is, what takes precedence for you - speaking up about things you think are important, or being considered a feminist? Similarly, what is a deeper truth to you - the things you are saying about men, or the conviction that feminism is always right? Also, he says this: Men and boys must learn that it's okay to talk about their feelings. Boys and men are ignored. For me it resulted in years of depression, abuse, loneliness and isolation It's always "men must learn to talk about their…
/r/MensRights11/04/16 01:40 AM
3

Does this violate public accommodation laws? It seems like it would.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 01:29 AM
7

I don't agree with this, and there was a recent event that showed it - the DeAndre Johnson incident. He was in a bar, there was some pushing to get to the bar, a white girl calls him some unspecified racial epiphets and punches him in the face, he punches her right back. All the feminists and everyone else took the girl's side, and nobody anywhere pointed out that she had punched him.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 02:35 PM
1

The highest post about it on this subreddit is here. On there, some upvoted top level comments include: It's a hate crime then right? What state? . She should be charged with a hate crime. . I'm saddened to learn he will not be pursuing criminal charges. . the roles were reversed, the dude would already be arrested and awaiting expulsion
/r/MensRights31/03/16 03:35 AM
1

...I know, that's what I'm talking about.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 09:07 PM
2

I have no idea if they would, but they should. On all the stories on here about the dreadlocks girl, everyone wants her to be criminally charged. And if the "I need some muscle" lady, or someone she called over, had acted similarly to Lewandowski people would have called for her to be charged as well. Anyway, I think if it's a sentence of less than 6 months, there's no requirement of a jury trial; at least that's how the Constitution has been interpreted.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 02:13 PM
3

To add to what others have said: In response to criticism, the filmmakers have threatened to have their critics at Harvard disciplined by the University: link. Here is another article (really, if you Google "'hunting ground' site:reason.com" you'll find a lot of stuff there).
/r/MensRights29/03/16 03:23 PM
9

I wonder in places like this, do the unisex bathrooms become de facto men's rooms? I bet most women, upon seeing that choice, will go for the women's room. I guess if it's full they'd switch, but I think if I were a woman I might even wait for the women's room rather than use the men's room, unless the line was really long.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 03:10 PM
3

I don't know why people encourage that stuff. Honestly, that's right down the path for eventually being a "Nice Guy". Thinking you're one of the "good ones" for saying all this transparent flattery about women, and then when girls aren't nice to you in high school (because they're just as fickle and superficial as all high schoolers are), getting either resentful or neurotic and self-hating.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 10:28 PM
3

If someone made a subreddit for this I'd be there in an instant. I don't know if there's enough support for the idea, but it's worth a shot. I think that such a group could make certain criticisms of conservative policies more easily/forcefully than feminists. Lots of racism against black men, for example, deals in gender stereotypes same as racial ones, and feminists are a little handcuffed from really going after it because they believe those gender stereotypes. Similar idea with gay men.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 10:23 PM
2

I normally like Kevin Drum - he even quoted me once in an article of his. But I don't get how people think "men are pigs" is some brave attack on gender roles - if anything, it's an embodiment of them. It's also an embodiment of the conservative politics he hates: blaming poor people for their supposed moral failings rather than their surroundings fostering that behavior, resorting to gendered stereotypes to explain things, acting like stagnating income is men "screwing up and getting fired', el…
/r/MensRights25/03/16 10:00 PM
2

Why are people surprised when banned from feminist subs? On r/feminism it's de facto against the rules to not be a feminist. It's not some huge surprise they'd do this, it's par for the course.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 05:37 PM
2

Luckily this won't stop her from beating Trump in the general election.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 08:57 PM
-3

It's a garbage website. Trump's campaign manager assaulted Fields, and Breitbart denied it happened even with video evidence that it did. People who say it was just the bustle of a crowd are making excuses for the Trump campaign. Show another example of a reporter showing up with bruises after an event because of the "bustle". And even so, if it was that, you'd expect the campaign to apologize for the inadvertent pushing, rather than call her delusional and angrily deny them ever having seen her…
/r/MensRights18/03/16 07:01 AM
1

It is a due process issue here. They aren't just suddenly deciding to punish students without evidence; they're following directives from the federal government to do so. This makes it into a due process issue.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 12:57 AM
3

If sex-selective abortion is a "life lost" then it's feminism that's killed more people than all the wars of the last century. Also, "suicide" as "violence against women"? If they meant the list to be gender-based violence...well then, wars should go on that list too!
/r/MensRights16/03/16 11:55 PM
1

OK well you can think that - but it's been the accepted version of the Bill of Rights's original meaning since forever. And has never been overturned. You can say it's wrong, but saying that a widely accepted, universally followed 200 year old Supreme Court precedent is wrong isn't an answer to OP's question; and it has nothing to do with whether family courts are "suits at common law" or not. And I don't think what you said follows. A reasonable reader would recognize that the states have been …
/r/MensRights15/03/16 03:21 AM
1

Barron v Baltimore Also from Wikipedia: While the Seventh Amendment's provision for jury trials in civil cases has never been incorporated (i.e., applied to the states) almost every state voluntarily complies with this requirement. IE, states do have the ability to deny a jury trial for a suit at common law.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 12:40 AM
2

Whatever BS logic they come up with, bottom line is, she gets a £5,000 birthday party and a massive house without ever having to work; he gets prison time for not being able to pay for it and a "legal aid barrister", which sounds like the British equivalent of a public defender.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 12:38 AM
1

The Bill of Rights originally only applied to the Federal Government. The Supreme Court, after the 14th Amendment, held that some of the rights in the Bill of Rights were valid against the states, based on various factors. Over time, "some" came to mean "almost all." The 7th Amendment is one of the few that have never been held valid against the states. As a result, if you were in some sort of federal family court, you would be entitled to a jury. But not in a state court. The thing about $75000…
/r/MensRights14/03/16 01:38 AM
8

People can't claim that women are more often the victims of violence than men, because it's not true. So instead, things like this focus on how they feel; oh women feel threatened. Weird, because feminists are always going on about respecting women's descriptions of their own experiences; but "more threatened than men are" isn't an emotion you can have. You can feel threatened, but how it compares to another isn't a fact contained solely in one person's experience. And even if it's true, given t…
/r/MensRights05/03/16 11:15 PM
1

When I say it'll be a disaster, it will be for reasons going way beyond PC vs anti-PC stuff. He'll be a disaster because he'll be terrible for the economy, for individual rights, for the US's power and prestige in the world, etc. Compared to that, the PC stuff is small potatoes. Anyway, I'm not sure which group you mean by "crazies" - you mean student activist types? Perhaps they will be reinforced, perhaps not (I think there's stuff going on with Sanders vs Clinton that's hurting them; and the …
/r/MensRights05/03/16 10:56 PM
2

Saying "well it's anti-PC" can't just be a blanket excuse for anything. And I think Trump is doing more to help the PC cause than anyone. Many people who were anti-PC when it was just crazy student activist types to worry about, now aren't when you have Trump supporters running around. Anyway, I have no idea how many Trump supporters are racist, but in terms of the policies he's pushing it doesn't matter, he'd still be disastrous for the country.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 09:46 PM
1

I guess it regenerates, which means feminism is futile. That, or everyone has to watch the Ghostbusters trailer repeatedly 24/7 to keep it beat down.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 09:35 AM
-1

Trump supporter == dead to me. ...well, maybe not anyone who's a Trump supporter, but the ones who go around calling people "cucks" and saying fucked up racist shit, yeah.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 09:33 AM
4

I just want to say - I think that many of the things hurting men in society is supported both by feminists and conservatives. "Women and children first", conservatives love. Same with "law and order" policies that hurt men in the criminal justice system, or not caring about male DV victims. And the entire Donald Trump campaign, at least online, seems like one big redpill thing - mostly men attacking other men as weak in order to make themselves look bigger. I think feminists get more attention i…
/r/MensRights03/03/16 07:03 AM
1

So, you would pick a female justice who might have a longer life over a better qualified male justice Yup! I don't think being a "better justice" has much to do with who they pick. Presidents pick someone who will agree with them, not the person with the greatest legal mind (and fully qualified candidates are not lacking anyway, it's not like I'd pick someone who can't do the job). There are plenty of great judges who are on the circuit court level, who will never move up to SCOTUS - not because…
/r/MensRights29/02/16 05:09 AM
-2

Contra Ginsburg, people have, in fact, "raised a question about that." But that said, if I were President I'd probably be biased in favor of nominating women, because it's a lifetime appointment and they live longer. Same way I'd expect there to be more male soldiers or firefighters.
/r/MensRights27/02/16 08:04 PM
7

The picture accompanying this article weirds me out. Not because it's sports related, but because it's so corporatized. "Individualist masculinity" sounds great to me, it sounds like a cure to some of the BS society throws at you, in terms of what you're "supposed" to be in life, and this doesn't seem like a cure to that. But hey, that's me, and I don't think it's wrong for someone else to have this shit as their respite. I'd decorate my room differently, but this is better than nothing. Anyways…
/r/MensRights27/02/16 07:48 PM
1

Let's say the President is giving the State of the Union, and he (it's usually a he) says...
/r/MensRights26/02/16 09:41 PM
2

She describes an alternative justice model as "a community-supported process whereby survivors are able to outline their needs and also perpetrators are pushed by communities to take accountability in alignment with survivors' needs, but also in alignment with working to change their beliefs." Honestly - wtf does this even mean? It sounds like they just want men to pay lip service to feminism, and they can't force everyone to, so they say that men who are in certain situations must do so - in th…
/r/MensRights22/02/16 09:39 AM
4

people complaining over buzzfeed and feminist articles or even Facebook posts I think this actually serves a useful function. The current-day feminist movement has a constant drumbeat of contempt and hostility for men, and that stuff is often the form it takes. I don't see why anyone should ignore that while discussing how society views men. And I think that this stuff makes it harder to talk about "serious" issues, because it promotes the view of "lol men don't need help, screw em". But if you …
/r/MensRights22/02/16 01:46 AM
0

The only other alternative is to not have rape be illegal. Or, I guess, a poll of Internet feminists to decide?
/r/MensRights20/02/16 07:44 PM
18

People who say that anyone who believes in equality is a feminist because of the dictionary - bring up the definitions of racism and sexism, which mean any race/sex based prejudice (not just towards minorities/women). Suddenly they'll say the dictionary isn't the end-all be-all of what words mean.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 03:27 PM
1

Yeah the "bystander" thing seems like "the only person who's responsible for rape is the rapist. Also all other men because they were 'bystanders.'"
/r/MensRights13/02/16 06:13 AM
1

Not only dumb and unfair to men, but also counterproductive for women. That sort of attitude - which is hardly radical or new, but is actually something most boys are taught from a young age - is what leads to red pill type people. If the system isn't working for some group of people, they'll rebel against it. If the system says "women are beautiful delicate flowers", people will rebel by saying "actually women suck." A lot of juvenile frat anti-women antics is basically this.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 08:13 PM
11

The moment he said what he said, the two minutes self criticism* at the end was so predictable. Of course he was gonna end up backing down and writing some self-pitying mea culpa about how he's terrible and "acknowledges his privilege" and the feminists mocking him are his awesome superiors he should have never doubted. You either have to decide you don't care what criticism you receive from feminists online (or at least that sometimes you'll say "I think you are wrong on this one," even when th…
/r/MensRights05/02/16 07:38 AM
17

I like how that's the opposite of what people normally say. Usually it's "it's not just run of the mill attacks, it's threats". Now, "it's not just threats, it's run of the mill attacks!" Yes, there should be an exception to the First Amendment saying you can't insult Lena Dunham's appearance.
/r/MensRights05/02/16 07:24 AM
12

4:46 is on point - the same people who are like "WHY DON'T MEN SHARE EMOTIONS", when they do, are like "HAHA MALE TEARS"
/r/MensRights01/02/16 05:08 AM
1

It seems to me you have a need to make fun of another to make your point. Invalidating each other is very common in some groups of men. Hope it gives you what you are looking for. And it seems to me like you like to psychoanalyze your critics. It's not just that I made fun, it's that I "have a need" to make fun. Like I'm supposed to now break down, like "YES it's all true! I was just covering up for the deep shame I feel from my childhood..." or something. But if you go back through my comment h…
/r/MensRights27/01/16 07:36 AM
1

I like the barely disguised contempt throughout the whole thing, and at the end Why are you so afraid to recognize your own privilege? It doesn't mean you're a bad person... Well you all seem to think I'm a bad person!
/r/MensRights27/01/16 07:28 AM
5

People still do that? I haven't seen anyone do it in like 15 years.
/r/MensRights27/01/16 03:10 AM
4

I want to add that this disparity persists if you only look at unarmed victims. A big unstated reason that people don't agree with what you say is the assumption that men are more likely to be criminals, and so probably are more likely to deserve it, or put themselves in a situation where it might happen. Putting aside that they wouldn't say this about black people - even if you take unarmed victims, as a proxy for innocent victims, white men are overrepresented.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 06:55 AM
1

This is a little much. Some of this is stuff that isn't that hard, that you should just be expected to do, like going to couples' therapy if you think you should, or not being dependent on parents, passing a driving test, etc. And some of it seems like weird cultural signalling, like the best thing a man can do is walk away from "stimulantia," apologize, "practice vulnerability," all the references to swallowing one's pride, poetry, "letting go," the picture at the top, etc. "We want to celebrat…
/r/MensRights26/01/16 06:53 AM
4

Forget the "gay" part - not surprising that there's feminists out there that would call a man touching a vagina misogyny.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 05:08 PM
5

Didn't first wave feminism bring us prohibition the first time? Along with various other groups...
/r/MensRights24/01/16 03:27 AM
1

No, but I think self-interest affects people's point of view, and influences what their principles end up being. I think the above is also true for men and MRAs - MRAs are the only group who defend men when there's some story saying, in some sense, that men are bad people. For example, when a survey comes out saying "NEW SURVEY SAYS 100% OF MEN WOULD RAPE EVERY WOMAN IN THE WORLD IF THEY COULD GET AWAY WITH IT," MRAs say "that's BS" (rather than "we need to educate men that raping everyone is wr…
/r/MensRights17/01/16 06:55 PM
2

I think many women out there sympathize with many of complaints on this subreddit about how men are treated, and are open to listening to MRAs POV. But at the same time, they support feminists - not necessarily because they like everything feminists say, or even follow this stuff that closely. And if you asked them "what about this crazy thing many feminists support?" they'd agree with you. They just hate people like this guy, and feminists are the ones most vocally condemning the sort. They're …
/r/MensRights16/01/16 02:18 AM
3

Wow, last poll I saw was in America and it was like 18%, a few years ago. I wonder how much of it is the UK being less feminist, and how much is its popularity decreasing. Though I think part of it could be "I'm not a feminist, I'm a womanist" types who nonetheless support most feminist ideas.
/r/MensRights16/01/16 02:11 AM
8

I think that author should have to pay for the kid, with the justification that the child is an innocent party.
/r/MensRights12/01/16 05:19 AM
2

The original article, calling the boys young-looking, and saying the girls have "power" and "glamour"...I think it's probably a combination of not wanting to say anything negative about the girls, the shock people have when going back to college/high school and everyone looking so young, and society's ideas of 20 year old girls vs guys. But beyond all that, it's quite the advertisement for frats. "Scrawny 18 year old guy? Not an athlete? Join a frat, and 18 year old "glamorous" girls in short dr…
/r/MensRights09/01/16 08:18 AM
3

I think this shows that stereotypes that hurt men, hurt even more when paired with some other thing going on, like the guy being gay or black or something. Like, the idea of men as horny idiot who will "fuck anything", people apply doubly to gay men; and stereotypes of men as violent, are even worse for black men. I think part of the reason these things persist is that people refuse to accept that, often, the prejudices against these groups are extreme forms of prejudices against men generally; …
/r/MensRights14/12/15 07:17 PM
6

For the numbers? I don't remember all the sources I was looking at yesterday when I wrote that...but here is one key part. Men are 78% of homicide victims. Here is suicide info, and once again men are 78% of suicide victims. Given the US population for 2013 (316.5 million), we can turn the # of homicides into a rate - 3.87 per 100,000 people. Per that suicide link, the rate for that is 12.6 per 100,000. So, for every hundred thousand people, there are 3.87 homicides - 3 men and .87 women. And 9.…
/r/MensRights13/12/15 11:50 PM
19

Ugh..for a lot of reasons, but mostly the beginning "I'm a girl, which means (statistics about violence)." Men are more likely than women to be victims of violence. Often the same surveys they quote to give the reverse impression, actually explicitly show it. One survey in the US said 1 in 2 women, and 2 in 3 men, are assaulted at some point in their lives. Only the first part was quoted, in a way that made it sound like this was clearly higher than for men. EDIT: Also, "greatest danger of all" …
/r/MensRights13/12/15 09:47 AM
2

I think you oughta be able to use physical force in this situation - but of course, a guy like that (i.e. big black guy), if he did it would be a scandal and he'd be in jail forever.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 12:13 AM
2

I think people try to make things about race often, to hide the gender (anti-male) component. There's often an overlap (both race and gender make one more likely to be assaulted, and more harshly treated by the criminal justice system), and people highlight one to hide the other. Same way black women, hashtags aside, are not disproportionately killed by the police. Black people are, but those so killed are so heavily male that black women end up on the safer side. (since people implicitly assume…
/r/MensRights09/12/15 07:54 PM
0

My first reaction to this was, "well it wasn't her saying it, it was some young girl's letter, it's not like she was callng all the Presidents (including Obama) 'boys'". But I also noticed one kid's letter said "girls rule, boys drool". They didn't read that part, presumably because they don't want to read things that they don't agree with...
/r/MensRights02/12/15 01:21 AM
1

Doesn't Britain have really stringent libel laws? Sue em for libel! That's knowingly spreading a false, damaging statement, to keep yelling "rapist" at someone within earshot of lots of people.
/r/MensRights23/11/15 06:09 PM
11

This reminds me of how people say society views white men as the "default", and have no race/gender while other people do. Regardless of whether you agree with that, I think there's a certain type of politics that is seen as a "default" and non-political, and other things are political in relation to it. Currently that politics is mostly in line with what SJWs want, but it hasn't always been, and won't always be. Also, what is gonna be on the front page, if not politics? Much news is also politi…
/r/MensRights15/11/15 08:14 PM
13

For the record, Suey Park has backed down from this stance and distanced herself from social justice types, and said among other things that it's a toxic environment that pushes people to act like this, and she got more vitriol from inside that group than anywhere else.
/r/MensRights12/11/15 04:15 PM
6

The actual cheap labor is people in prison, and migrant farm workers and shit, not female vice presidents who work for Fortune 500 companies and got passed over for promotion to the c-suite in favor of a man.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 11:42 PM
13

People should keep track of shadowban threats from this guy. If he is doing this a lot, then it's clearly an abuse of a power the admins give him, to just shadowban people he dislikes, and at some point it would be worth going to the admins to point this out. I know many people here think the admins are biased in favor of feminists, but I remember once a feminist sub changing the names of titles of posts (strictly not allowed). Someone complained and the admins came down hard, and the sub immedi…
/r/MensRights09/11/15 09:17 PM
1

I bet that 0 feminist groups will care about this, even though you'd think that by their own principles they'd be against charging 6 figure sums to people wrongly convicted as the price of asserting their innocence.
/r/MensRights06/11/15 07:24 PM
1

Funny part is, Bernie Sanders agrees with most of the legislative agenda of feminists.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 06:07 PM
1

I think a way to see this is to look at traits which are both "masculine", and looked down on by society. For example, anything related to being a nerd. Feminists hate nerds more than anything! They never say anything about society treating them badly, and mostly just call them entitled and misogynist. ("nerd" has gotten so watered down as to be practically meaningless now, but I think you can just look at people who fit the non-watered-down version and see what I'm talking about). Another examp…
/r/MensRights02/11/15 02:46 PM
5

I hope its message isn't the same thing feminists always say to be "sympathetic" to MRAs - something like "these men have valid complaints, they're not all dbags, but really their problems would be solved by feminists, 'we' need to do a better job of explaining to them why feminism solves all their problems!" Whereas I'd hope it'd say "yes some of these guys are dbags, but they make legitimate criticisms of feminism, and the answer to their problems isn't just 'more feminism', because sometimes …
/r/MensRights31/10/15 04:37 PM
3

Maybe not arrested but something PEOPLE I DISLIKE SHOULD BE GIVEN THE CHAIR!!!! ...maybe not that but something
/r/MensRights31/10/15 04:32 PM
3

BTW here is their "consent flowchart" or whatever. Also has this: Think about how you can be a strong ally, even if you have to confront your own beliefs and challenge your own assumptions about gender and what’s acceptable. Also, under the conflict part, I wonder what the same group running a website for girls would say. It would be all about standing up for yourself, whereas here it's all about being conciliatory, not contradicting the other person, etc. I think there's some good to both - but…
/r/MensRights27/10/15 08:14 PM
2

If you don't like the sex, then don't have it. Not that hard. ...of course, if she just did that she'd be no better off, because the men would have sex with some other woman who wants to. For all the talk about men being entitled, men are just having exactly as much sex, and the type of sex, as they can get women to have with them. If women as a group became more picky, men would work harder. This is what happens when you have consenting adults doing shit - people are selfish and try and get the…
/r/MensRights27/10/15 07:53 PM
6

As far as I can tell, it's not legislation in the sense of Congress passing something, but the Department of Education doing something. This is a new tactic on their part - they can't get at Yik Yak directly, so they want to get the feds to get colleges to police it. Same as "we can't ban Republicans from Facebook, but we can make colleges ban their Republican students from posting on Facebook!" If you read the original, it's clear it's not just Yik Yak. They want to ban certain speech by colleg…
/r/MensRights23/10/15 04:46 PM
11

There's a lot I could quote to ridicule, but I'll just do this for now: require and ensure that each syllabus within an academic division or school at the university include information on the resources available to students for reporting bias, discrimination and Title IX violations as well as include a diversity, equity and inclusion component (e.g., readings or lecture) to the course itself, What does it accomplish for every syllabus to have the same stock language about Title IX? Like, you ha…
/r/MensRights21/10/15 07:01 AM
7

Jeez, you want boys to not be hostile towards girls, and the way to do it is to turn girls into arms of the disciplinary system? The message to boys will be that rules of civility apply to boys, not girls, and that girls get to get boys in trouble but not the opposite. What hurts girls is what matters, what hurts boys doesn't. This is supposed to improve gender relations?
/r/MensRights19/10/15 08:50 PM
6

"Politics" also describes many of the things they say abusers of women do! Arguing for "traditional gender roles" is political.
/r/MensRights08/10/15 07:02 PM
1

IMO something shouldn't be illegal due to being "hate speech" (and in the US it's not, luckily. If it was here, I bet people would be gunning for this subreddit.)
/r/MensRights07/10/15 12:44 AM
1

There are, but in the US this wouldn't fit any of them, and I agree with that.
/r/MensRights07/10/15 12:43 AM
3

This violates freedom of speech. I know the UK doesn't have as strong free speech laws as the US, and I'm glad that if it exists it's to be enforced evenly - that said, I don't think anyone should face government sanction for tweeting something like "kill all white men".
/r/MensRights06/10/15 05:20 PM
1

"Censor videogames until this totally unachievable-because-it's-so-vague-it's-meaningless thing happens"
/r/MensRights29/09/15 08:44 PM
2

This reminds me of Freddie deBoer saying something recently about the urge of liberal online types to have this detailed classification of people they hate. I'll add that usually it's a male archetype because they're the ones it's in vogue for liberals to hate these days. What I really don't get i this sudden insistence that people not just be on your side, but also have exactly the same politics you do. If someone is supporting Bernie Sanders, they're already perhaps in the top 20% most liberal…
/r/MensRights29/09/15 04:36 PM
19

For someone who likes to throw this sort of thing around, Bill Nye definitely shows a "deep lack of understanding" of the political system. If you look at polls, women and men have very similar views on abortion. Women are more pro-choice, but only by a few % points, and only in some polls and not others. If you looked at what outcome you'd expect, legally, on abortion based on polls, it's more pro-life than the Supreme Court's rulings. The thing that's going on with abortion isn't white men mak…
/r/MensRights28/09/15 01:55 PM
1

Does that even remotely surprise anyone? I bet if you asked Bernie Sanders, he'd say he is one too. The Dems are unlikely to nominate anyone who doesn't say they're one.
/r/MensRights25/09/15 03:56 PM
7

For a lot of people, "violence against women" is what they really care about. "Gender violence" or "domestic violence" or whatever is the way to say it and sound like you're being gender-neutral or something (almost like a PC thing), but the point is to talk about violence against women. If you look, you'll see lots of people and organizations using the terms interchangeably - but "violence against women" came first. People didn't switch because they're becoming more inclusive or something - the…
/r/MensRights21/09/15 01:37 PM
3

Interesting piece of this is that women are no longer excluded from combat, so this justification no longer applies.
/r/MensRights12/09/15 01:44 AM
2

Where does it say it's a false flag? I must be missing it...
/r/MensRights12/09/15 01:42 AM
2

Imagine if the Taliban perpetrated a school massacre and killed almost exclusively boys out of the 141 dead, and nobody reported that fact. It's so repressed that I can't find a news link saying it, just a Buzzfeed article with pictures of some of the victims, who almost all happen to be male (and most of the female victims are teachers, not kids). Another link here. If you read articles, you'll see hints of it here and there, but nobody willing to actually say it.
/r/MensRights07/09/15 07:16 PM
7

Remember the child migrant crisis from last summer (2014)? 75% were male. Source. If it were 75% female, you can bet it would have been a much bigger deal, with the number of female migrants specifically touted as a reason for action.
/r/MensRights06/09/15 10:09 PM
1

That's not stalking. Harassment, maybe, or perhaps just 2 people having a long texting conversation.
/r/MensRights29/08/15 02:33 AM
9

It isn't - and shouldn't be - exclusively concerned with responding to feminism This just made me realize something. When feminists agree with something on here they say "this is why you don't need a separate movement - feminists are already addressing these issues! You should be a feminist!" When they disagree, it's "why, instead of focusing on the issues, do you spend your time just bashing feminism?"
/r/MensRights07/08/15 03:10 PM
11

I think this comes from a good place, but I take issue with some of it. In particular, people often talk about men like the only issues they face are from being pressured to act in stereotypically "masculine" ways. And I don't think that's true, but most of the stuff on here for boys fits that category. For me, I'm not the type to show emotions all that much. Contra what many people think, this isn't just me being influenced by the patriarchy or something, and it doesn't mean I faced no pressure…
/r/MensRights06/08/15 08:17 PM
2

The justification for banning r/coontown is that it "generally make[s] Reddit worse for everyone else" and "prevent[s] us from improving Reddit". But in reality, I think you can make a case that r/mensrights makes it harder for reddit than r/coontown does. People focus on r/coontown because it's something everyone can hate, and nobody will defend, other than by talking about free speech generally. At a time feminism/social justice stuff is sweeping the Internet, and many people dislike it but ar…
/r/MensRights06/08/15 05:18 PM
3

I like how it's OK to discriminate against men so they say "male", but not black people, so they say "urban". Yeah, "urban", that'll throw em. Of course, the black men who are gonna be discriminated against by this are still men (and still "urban"), so it's not like this won't fuck em over somehow.
/r/MensRights05/08/15 07:11 PM
6

This is fucked up and rage-inducing - but is there any evidence she's a feminist?
/r/MensRights04/08/15 09:01 PM
17

If your immediate reaction to your own newborn infant is to worry he'll rape someone, you are anti-male.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 07:04 PM
4

The school folded, for the same reason all others do - the threat to withdraw federal funding is too big for them to risk it by standing on principle.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 07:00 PM
14

This reminds me of the recent college football player who punched a woman after she punched him, and then backed away, and was kicked off the team. In this case, they didn't just punch back and leave but beat the crap out of him - will they receive the same treatment?
/r/MensRights29/07/15 03:22 PM
16

But will this place be "reclassified"?
/r/MensRights16/07/15 08:46 PM
14

I often hear stories about how men in the military are screwed by the system, particularly around divorce and family court. But I think its a barrier to fixing this stuff that while stuff affecting women have mounds of stats to back them up, stuff like this just has anecdotes. Some stats about military men and divorces would really help this stuff get attention.
/r/MensRights06/07/15 10:33 PM
9

I wish someone with more time/skill than me would do this - but I bet if you looked at the history of sex offender registries you'd find lots of feminist support for the idea, back in the 90s or whenever they were enacted.
/r/MensRights06/07/15 03:57 AM
7

The thing is, many people who are liking this actually do think that boys are loud, and immature, and don't care about feelings, they just say they don't. The issue isn't just stereotyping a gender, but actions. People who talk about "toxic masculinity" say that some boys are the bad, masculine kind, and some are the good, caring, mature kind, and they're not anti-boy because all boys have the chance to be quiet and care about feelings, and not care about sports and not be loud. What we should b…
/r/MensRights02/07/15 01:39 AM
1

Not that I'd go to such a bar, not just for gender stuff but for their math making no sense. But if I was there with a group, I'd get one of the girls we were with to buy me a drink, and pay her back anyway.
/r/MensRights01/07/15 12:11 AM
2

I hear people say this, but I've never seen it. And boys are actually more harshly punished than girls, not less, for misbehavior in school. And of course the same is true in the criminal justice system. All the criticism of the phrase "boys will be boys" from feminists has already been implemented. It's where we got zero tolerance policies, "scared straight", and the school to prison pipeline. And, from my time in school, just a generalized haze of suspicion over boys like they're the bad guys …
/r/MensRights21/06/15 06:16 PM
1

Yeah but if they did that their HQ would be burned down and sowed with salt so nothing could ever grow there again.
/r/MensRights19/06/15 10:40 PM
11

I doubt that she means it in that way, more just as an insult to men. In the AMA she says she's stopped saying it - because of transwomen who have dicks who felt insulted by it. And so she apologized for insulting them.
/r/MensRights14/06/15 10:04 PM
3

Even if they haven't responded to this specific incident, I see people on here complaining about how male rape/DV victims don't get as much support, and pointing out and pushing back against instances of unequal funding, all the time. There's probably a story about it on this subreddit more than half the time I look at it. Of course, it's often feminists behind those moves, and the posts point that fact out. And if you read the comments from feminists, or on similar stories on feminist subs, the…
/r/MensRights12/06/15 10:20 PM
1

Saying "get back in the kitchen" is not illegal. The issue with these things about harassment, is that they always say "look at these trolls! This harassment! Like this one that says "I'm going to kill you", and this other that says "feminism is stupid", and this one that says "you should be raped", and this one that says "here's a study showing you're wrong"... They conflate actual threats with disagreement, and it makes me think that it really is about stifling debate. Otherwise they wouldn't …
/r/MensRights05/06/15 12:59 AM
-3

I don't see why anyone would want this. I think it's dumb they have one for women and not men, but ... who cares, ultimately? Nothing will change if they do this, same as nothing changes if they do the one for women. Also, not gonna happen anyway.
/r/MensRights31/05/15 09:00 PM
6

It's poor form to invoke the Holocaust and other mass killings like this. To mention your opponents losing and be like "it's like the Holocaust!" just rubs people wrong, and it's a little cringeworthy. And it goes on and on about different feminist populations dying. You may think it's unfair, but lots of people won't take it seriously if it uses language like this.
/r/MensRights30/05/15 03:51 AM
3

People are all about ending mass incarceration and giving people second chances instead of tying them up in the criminal justice system...unless it's a crime against a woman, then lock em up and throw away the key.
/r/MensRights22/05/15 05:55 AM
11

"Political beliefs" - I somehow doubt they wouldn't discriminate against a woman who says she's not a feminist.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 05:56 PM
1

I'd put one next to it saying "campus rape is a moral panic".
/r/MensRights14/05/15 10:27 AM
4

"Women and children". If something affects the genders equally, then the majority of those affected will be "women and children."
/r/MensRights07/05/15 07:58 PM
11

Don't talk to the police, or tell "your story" to anyone.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 07:56 PM
1

Not to mention the definitions of sexism and racism, which don't say anything about "power + prejudice".
/r/MensRights06/05/15 07:32 PM
1

Where is this from?
/r/MensRights06/05/15 03:39 AM
7

I can't believe you're being so over sensitive when your WORDS are doing ACTUAL VIOLENCE to people.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 09:16 PM
1

Soon Ezra Klein will be claiming that feminists are the ones pushing for more lax child support laws.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 10:11 PM
7

“Out of that 40 percent, there are maybe 20 percent that we would consider, and out of those 20, 10 have girlfriends, so all the girls are fighting over that other 10 percent,” I know that people think this way, but I'm surprised it's brought up as some objective truth. That half of the men in college are undateable. I'm sure many of the men think that too - but if they said so it would be some international incident, not mentioned in passing as obviously sensible.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 03:07 PM
25

Glad to see this in the NY Times. Although, before long you'll see this held up as an example of "feminists helping men." Someone should (or hopefully already has) compile a list of examples of feminists making the child support system more draconian, not less, as a counter for when feminists inevitably claim credit for any improvements.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 03:04 PM
3

Is it sexist to say that women are superior to men? Yes, in a way that hurts men and women. I think this is revealing...she can't just bring herself to say it's fucked up and bad for men. It still must also be bad for women.
/r/MensRights18/04/15 03:48 AM
4

I think it's because they say men have problems, but also have an expectation of what those problems are. They expect the men to say "I want to be more like women and embrace feminism but other men are stopping me!" It's like what DougDante says about self-criticism and improving loyalty to the feminist cause. When men's problems don't fit well into the feminist mold of what men's problems should be, you get blank stares, denial, and vitriol.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 03:39 PM
2

I don't get people who distinguish "on the Internet" from anywhere else. The Internet is the main place discussion of political issues, including feminism, happens. Internet feminism is feminism, it's the other stuff that's an outlier.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 03:37 PM
5

OTOH donating to the "he for she" isn't like donating it to women, more like lighting it on fire.
/r/MensRights13/04/15 07:32 PM
12

This is basically "you're not a feminist? Oh well it's because you really are one. We'll let you say you're not one, but we all know you really are one."
/r/MensRights10/04/15 02:23 PM
24

I dont get how you can really ban salary negotiations. If I go interview there and they say "we'll pay you 70" and I say "I know I can get 80 elsewhere, so I'll only take the job if you give me 80" - what happens? They say "we don't negotiate over salaries" and I say "oh well in that case I guess I'll take less money to work here"?
/r/MensRights08/04/15 04:34 AM
3

Whether that's true or not seems irrelevant. That's like if she made a video saying "give women the vote!" and if someone said "but women can vote" - "oh well they couldn't until (relatively) recently."
/r/MensRights08/04/15 04:33 AM
5

I was actually talking about feminist messaging, of which I received a lot. It's a pretty big exception, given how much influence feminism has in the education system.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 02:33 PM
8

I don't know where people get the idea that boys aren't "taught not to rape". I was, many times. And more generally given the idea that rape was somehow my fault, and that I wasn't doing enough to stop it, ie, I'm culpable somehow. I'll also point out that the advice she is tired of hearing, lots of that is disseminated by feminists. As a non-feminist, I wouldn't go around saying that shit.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 06:44 AM
21

Of course, "diversity" doesn't just mean "diversity", it is code for certain political views. They only care about "diversity" on some axes, and not others - nobody who ever talks about diversity actually cares about having conservatives around, for example. Or poor people. It mainly means race and gender. And it also means this whole other set of values that are only loosely related to diversity, like talking about privilege and shit. So basically she is saying she will only hire feminist types…
/r/MensRights06/04/15 03:22 PM
1

Have strong arguments as to why the non-feminist side is better for women. Feminists have this for men; even if we think it's BS, it lends them credibility with many. And it shouldn't be tied to gender essentialism, or anti-gender-essentialism, but there should be 2 versions, as there is with feminism.
/r/MensRights01/04/15 06:21 AM
2

I have nothing against edit a thons, with women, men, children, or Sacramento Kings fans. But it's an edit a thon specifically to promote pro-feminist stuff on Wikipedia. That's bad due to intoducing bias, but it also won't fix the problem. You can't get gender equality by having women only edit "women's" articles. In fact, given this event is actually open to men, it seems like they don't care about the gender gap, they just want Wikipedia to be feminist.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 06:51 PM
1

if you ask people "were you sexually assaulted" then way less than 1 in 5 people say "yes." Instead, they ask if some overly broad set of descriptions of things happened to you, including in some cases cat calling, or any sex while drunk, or more often something vague enough to be interpreted that way (for example, if you were "drunk, high, or passed out and unable to consent." Does the "unable to consent" part modify "passed out", or all 3? And "consent" is a legal term anyway, so it can be a c…
/r/MensRights28/03/15 05:49 PM
1

I don't think this is the case, and I also think that higher education is a bubble that's going to burst eventually. People will realize that charging everyone 50k/year to have 4 years of education that, for many, don't help with job skills but just give you a credential, is a ridiculous way to run a society. You already see this with lots of programmers teaching themselves much of what they know outside of school, and silicon valley tycoon types starting to turn against colleges. One weird thin…
/r/MensRights26/03/15 08:52 PM
2

Two reasons. And they don't require you to say women aren't oppressed, or even that they're not oppressed more. It's a mistake to go down that route, because you can't get people to agree that oppression against men is a big deal until you're talking about it, and this is a conversation that happens before you talk about it. You're trying to get them to accept your conclusion as a precondition to listening to your argument. First, amount of attention towards injustices isn't a constant. It's not…
/r/MensRights25/03/15 09:50 PM
1

One of the things on the list substitutes "Jews" for "MRAs" so you can make the same criticism about the article.
/r/MensRights24/03/15 02:34 PM
1

It says men went 52-45 Romney, women 55-44 Obama. That's men are +7 for Romney, women +11 for Obama, for 18 points. That methodology of deciding the gap might seem a little weird, but it's the same as how you come up with a 25 point gender gap on Hillary (in both cases, the maximum gap is 200 points).
/r/MensRights23/03/15 07:37 PM
0

The gender split in the 2012 election was 18 points. It's bigger than that, but if you attribute 18 points to women being more pro-Democrats, and 7 points to Hillary-specific stuff, then it's still mostly about the parties.
/r/MensRights23/03/15 02:37 PM
2

It looks to me like a story about Dems liking Hillary, Republicans disliking her, and the (not that big) gender split being mostly about more women being Dems. Nothing in here is unusual for someone being the frontrunner for one of the parties.
/r/MensRights23/03/15 06:03 AM
1

I have positions on gender issues, but I'm not part of any larger movement, like feminism or MRAs or whatever. Being "for men's rights and women's rights" isn't a group I'm a part of, more like a description of my motivation for taking certain policy positions.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 03:08 PM
-9

Egalitarianism is not, in fact, a thing. At least not a relevant one. Feminism is important because there is a movement of people out there who call themselves feminists and push certain social norms, policy proposals, etc. They have lobbying organizations, journalists who support them, academics who write things about it, etc. And that stuff, not what the dictionary says, is what's important about feminism. "Egalitarianism" is the idea that people are equal, but everyone in countries like the U…
/r/MensRights16/03/15 11:34 PM
15

I used to be a feminist, now I'm a nothing. This was before I'd ever heard of MRAs (and before reddit was more than some minor website nobody'd ever heard of). When I was a feminist, I believed what people said that feminism just means equality, and people who don't call themselves feminists are just scared of women or all Rush Limbaugh or something. When I started actually reading feminist stuff, there was plenty of specifics that I disagreed with (acting like violence against women is more com…
/r/MensRights16/03/15 06:41 PM
13

Of course, boys are the ones falling behind in school. You think they'd ever have a "no girls allowed" day? Probably only to chide boys for their errant "masculinity" and why they need to respect women more because rape is their fault...
/r/MensRights16/03/15 06:31 PM
10

Also, note 82% are pro-equality. When people say "if you believe in equality you're a feminist" you can quote a poll like this. Words are defined by common usage, and it's clear from polls like this that common usage is not that feminism == pro-equality.
/r/MensRights15/03/15 06:21 PM
3

The thing saying that women are the overwhelming victims of "technology-based abuse" links to an article that says that studies show men are more likely to be harassed online (and then tries to explain it away, never producing its own statistics on the subject).
/r/MensRights15/03/15 07:57 AM
3

This reminds me of the West Wing, where someone asks a Republican why he's a Republican and he says, jokingly, "I just hate poor people." Fair enough as a joke...but there's a difference between that and putting something like that on T shirts and coffee mugs and broadcasting it over and over. At some point it means more than just a joke - it's a statement that you think has some redeeming value. Especially something that actually attacks men on the same lines society does, by making fun of men …
/r/MensRights13/03/15 11:14 PM
0

I'd just put a poster under the "feminism just means equality" one with a quote from Andrea Dworkin or something. Don't try and argue that all feminists are evil, but just that you can favor gender equality and not be a feminist, and to know why you're not one, here's some crazy shit feminists have stood for.
/r/MensRights12/03/15 10:06 PM
4

This reminds me of a study that was on here dividing "hostile sexism" from "benevolent sexism", and saying people interpreted a lack of "benevolent sexism" as misogyny.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 03:46 PM
6

Because the US prision system is organized brutality and torture, but that has nothing on a rich white woman walking down a street in a neighborhood that sees virtually no crime.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 04:03 PM
1

People have a view of the world where there's the privileged group, and the oppressed group, and that you should generally be on the side of the oppressed group. Men are privileged, women oppressed, therefore be an advocate for women. Men's Rights groups don't do that, so people attack them.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 03:30 PM
6

Who cares what some random comment thread on a website nobody's ever heard of thinks?
/r/MensRights05/03/15 01:48 AM
1

Also prison in general.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 03:10 PM
1

That's simply not true. The words "sexism" and "racism" refer to any prejudice based on sex and race, respectively. Not institutional/system-wide. That's just a matter of the definition of words. You can look to common usage, or to a dictionary.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 09:31 AM
3

Buzzfeed, which loudly & proudly associates itself with feminism.
/r/MensRights01/03/15 08:52 PM
17

The "women are more competent leaders" part doesn't follow from the evidence he cites. It's also possible that having both men and women around is best, and they're comparing a mix of genders, to all men. It's also possible that the causation goes the other way for some things - more women on the board is a sign that the company is doing well enough to focus on things like diversity, rather than fighting off bankruptcy, or the board fighting to keep their jobs or something.
/r/MensRights26/02/15 05:23 PM
3

I like how thin the attempt to distinguish this from affirmative action is. There are 2 reasons given why it's different. One is that it's a "quota." Well, so is affirmative action! It's also an "open secret" that affirmative action on race in many colleges amounts to a quota for various races. And Title IX of course works as a quota on things like athletic participation, nobody at Vox denigrates that, they're all about Title IX. Second is "critical mass". The Supreme Court's justification for a…
/r/MensRights18/02/15 08:03 PM
9

The movie trailer opens with a chorus of men screaming “stop crying, be cool, be a dick, don’t let women run your life, be a man”. The bolded part is pretty revealing. Is letting women run your life good? There are plenty of ways in which societal pressure is to have men let women run their life. When you're married, for example, there's lots of things that the wife is supposed to decide and the husband is just supposed to go along with. That is totally fine, and probably a sign of an "enlighten…
/r/MensRights14/02/15 05:13 PM
12

If she is so drunk that she could not remember (aka blacked out), then that is rape. Why? I've been blackout drunk and still pretty in control of myself, and able to make decisions, and if you looked at me you wouldn't guess I was blackout. Blackout drunk != so drunk you don't know what's going on. I think there's a pretty loose connection between the parts of drunkenness that would lead you to consider drunk sex rape (lack of volition) and the blackout stuff (lack of memory), it's different for…
/r/MensRights14/02/15 05:08 PM
5

If that stuff is terrorism, isn't statements from radical feminists about reducing the male population to 10% or whatever also terrorism? The difference between that and the imaged tweet is that the imaged tweet is restricted to feminists, vs the radical feminist thing being about all men; and the radical feminists often aren't anonymous but living openly.
/r/MensRights14/02/15 12:27 AM
9

Maybe I'm missing something, but he ends up being a victim of violence, and the video is supposed to be about violence against women?
/r/MensRights14/02/15 12:24 AM
22

Even many feminists have been saying that feminism primarily is about white middle class women, and they've been saying it for like 30-40 years. There's no "hijacking." I think that a lot of rich white women being vitriolic about feminism is a manifestation of white guilt - it's a way to transform yourself from being obviously rich and privileged to being on the side of the oppressed. Sure you may be poor and black and grew up in a crime-ridden neighborhood with police harassment, but I'm a woma…
/r/MensRights14/02/15 12:18 AM
1

If you look at actuarial tables, women's life expectancy at 50 is 3.62 years longer.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 04:56 PM
3

There should be all women on the Supreme Court ... women live longer and a President trying to maximize their pick's influence should pick a person with a long life expectancy. It's not like the Supreme Court is the country's 9 smartest lawyers. But sometimes that sort of logic, about innate differences between the genders, would justify more men than women having a given job, and hopefully in those circumstances people can agree it makes sense for more men to have that job.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 05:10 PM
12

I remember this - it was Stanford's "training" materials. The context of the entire packet of materials made it worse. I don't think it's online anymore, it used to be on The Fire's website. It had very little in the way of procedures, but it had an exerpt from a book called "Why does he do that?" or something, it said that maintaining your innocence is a sign of guilt, it had a poem from a DV victim ... everything about it conveyed "if you don't find him guilty then fuck you, you're complicit i…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 12:08 PM
29

The survey they mentioned is fake. Here is a story about it on this subreddit. Will Wheaton, who posted it to tumblr and started off the whole thing, later admitted it's fake. Emmett Rensin, the author of the article on Vox, clearly reads this subreddit form time to time, and presumably will look out for its reaction to his own article. Which means he'll probably see this - but I doubt they'll post a correction.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 06:55 PM
2

Is there a source for this that is just a neutral news site and doesn't talk about feminism? I want to be able to show this fact to the type of people who would reflexively disbelieve any news article that talks about feminism demonizing men and such.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 08:54 PM
20

My understanding was always that frats, not sororities, have parties because sororities don't wanna pay for random people to show up and drink their alcohol. For guys it feels like you have to either pay for alcohol at a party you're hosting, know someone else hosting a party, or go to a bar and pay there. For frats it's understood that that's part of the cost of having a frat, but not so for sororities. For girls, why pay for your own party when you can show up at any of a range of other ones t…
/r/MensRights20/01/15 01:42 PM
2

Maybe according to definitions some schools use these days this is sexual assault, but I don't think it should be considered that. He had sex with her because his alternative was to walk away from her? So do that! I feel bad for him, because the expectations put on men are such that he felt he had to keep this girl safe even if it mean sexual contact he didn't want. And I bet some feminists siding with him on this would have called it misogyny if there was a story of a Stanford student abandonin…
/r/MensRights16/01/15 12:04 AM
18

What’s the biggest difference between Scott’s and Amy’s stories? Scott’s story is about things that happened inside his brain. Amy’s story is about actual things that were done to her by other people against her will, without her control. You know, you see feminists write things about violence against women. And often they talk about how violence against women affects women's lives, makes them afraid to walk around at night, worried about men raping them, etc. That's all stuff inside one's head.…
/r/MensRights10/01/15 03:18 AM
12

This is all great, especially "untitled." But I think we need shorter versions of these arguments to help convince people in real life who won't always read the really long version. I think, more broadly, it helps to develop a terminology around this stuff. Having a phrase to refer to some idea helps spread it along, and helps develop the idea as everyone can organize their thoughts around a single concept, rather than everyone feeling like they're reinventing the wheel. Anyway, here's my first …
/r/MensRights04/01/15 04:48 PM
3

Two things: He has a very narrow idea of what "men's issues" are. Feminism exacerbates many of the things here. For the first, men get longer prison sentences than women for the same crimes, and are more likely to be convicted. Crimes against women get longer sentences than the same crimes against men. Boys in school get bigger punishments for the same "crimes", and get lower grades relative to test scores due to negative perceptions from teachers. None of this is about misogyny, it's all people…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 04:06 PM
1

Is there a source for the fact that it was 160 boys dead? I haven't seen that said anywhere except Daily Mail, which is questionable as a source...
/r/MensRights18/12/14 04:35 PM
35

it's funny to me, because this is the same thing as 'affirmative action bake sales' which have been banned from campuses.
/r/MensRights04/12/14 05:13 PM
1

Only a small but vocal minority I always doubt this when I see it, because it's such a common thing to say. People say it without any backing. It's just one of those things people have heard so many times that they just take it as true without much looking in to, it's like an automatic thing to say. It reminds me of people who say "oh well the vast majority of Muslims in the Middle East are totally moderate, don't believe anything extremist." They say it without any evidence, and in fact people …
/r/MensRights21/11/14 03:26 PM
3

It's not surprising that "online feminism", or feminism in general, or any other political movement would exclude some people. I don't expect the Republican party to welcome me to the RNC to give a presentation on how abortion should be allowed and Obamacare is generally a good idea. But don't pretend that you really care about men's issues and then turn around and don't listen to any men talking about what affects them, unless it agrees with what you already thought. And don't act like you spea…
/r/MensRights21/11/14 03:16 PM
5

BTW here is the same writer referring to herself as a "militant feminist". For when someone comes along and says "actually, feminism opposes this because it reinforces gender roles..." I think we should differentiate between gendered perceptions and gendered expectations. Feminists say they're anti-gender roles because they don't think men should do various things. But when it comes to how they think men are, they are still sexist. All the negative parts of how people see men - as aggressive, vi…
/r/MensRights20/11/14 03:51 PM
1

Lots of domestic violence is mutual, and lots is psychological/emotional rather than physical (or minimally physical). That stuff tends to go both ways, gender-wise, as opposed to severe physical abuse which is usually done by men. The psychological stuff is also vague and hard to quantify. If you recognize male victims, you'd have to recognize the nature of most male victims, which is psychological and/or mutual abuse. For mutual, they'd rather characterize the man as the perp. For psychologica…
/r/MensRights12/11/14 11:44 PM
1

Most feminists will even agree, sexual assault randomly happening while someone's walking around at night is pretty rare. The same people asking men to act a certain way while walking down the street, because they're worried, probably worry more when the guy is black.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:55 AM
1

It makes sense not due to level of danger, but because they can punish people by kicking them out of school, and since it's not a criminal or civil case nothing in the Bill of Rights is implicated (at least that's the theory). Plus colleges are where many of the activists are.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 07:53 AM
3

The standard answer is that massively muscled guys appeal to men, not women, and women often like less muscled types. But guys wanna be the super-jacked superhero. And those images are often drawn by men anyway. Two answers to that I've heard. One is that if you look at romance novel covers, they're all really jacked guys, so clearly that's a thing that can appeal to women (even if it's not the only body type that appeals to them). The other is, look at Cosmo covers. Those also don't depict what…
/r/MensRights02/11/14 08:18 PM
3

So a positive mention of feminism/MRAs, can also be deleted? If so you guys should make that more clear, that which post the comment is in is relevant as well as what it says.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 11:41 PM
0

That's fucked up...but it's also fucked up to put her in solitary confinement for over a year.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 11:40 PM
5

I get you wanna leave youself wiggle room, it's a judgment call, etc....but come on, you can't answer any of those questions? If I responded to this thread with this comment: the idea that this has anything to do with being a man is why we need feminism would you remove it? What if someone wrote: This has nothing to do with being a man And someone responded: Comments like yours show how feminists are so often wrong about stuff relating to men
/r/MensRights01/11/14 11:37 PM
6

So does that mean criticizing feminism, as a movement, is off limits now? Also, are you saying that it's not just a question of what people say, but on which thread? That's a whole different thing. And can you take a thread that, say, "has nothing to do with feminism"* and write something positive about feminism in it? Because I think that things like that happen a lot, but don't seem to be against the rules. (and if someone writes something positive about feminism in such a setting, can someone…
/r/MensRights01/11/14 11:12 PM
3

The thing that bothers me is when, for feminism (and someone might make a similar criticism for MRAs), I make an argument about why I'm not a feminists along the lines of "feminists support laws making it easier to find men guilty in college sexual assault cases", and someone comes in with "oh well not all feminists agree, it's not monolithic, etc". It seems to me a way to evade responsibility - maybe not 100% of feminists think this, but lots of large, influential organizations do. Lots of femi…
/r/MensRights01/11/14 09:40 PM
7

...so? I don't know the guy so I can't say for him specifically, but men/women can be sexist against their own gender.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 09:20 PM
2

I just wanna add, I think the "real" feminism follows from "puppy dogs and unicorns" feminism pretty directly. It's just that the "puppy dogs and unicorns" version has some unstated assumptions that people haven't reached the logical consequences of, and "real" feminism actually puts them into practice. Like, for example, that men don't really face sexism, except for being "collateral damage" from sexism against women.
/r/MensRights28/10/14 01:10 PM
4

I agree with the title, and the idea that the current MRM (of which I'm not one) has too much of the sort of thing they mention. I think that that stuff undermines MRAs, as does the Utah State shooting threat. Unfair maybe, but until there's more of a public face of MRAs, that sort of thing will predominate. It's an uphill battle because the media doesn't want to acknowledge reasonable opposition to feminism, but rather highlight the bad stuff, to discredit opposition. I think the vitriol gets m…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 08:05 PM
15

...isn't it due to sexism, at least in part? Many schools didn't even accept women, or accepted very few, until the mid-20th century. I agree that it doesn't mean the Nobel prize committee itself necessary valued men's stuff over women's. But that doesn't mean there's no sexism involved. I also, btw, don't think the entire gap is necessarily due to sexism, either.
/r/MensRights11/10/14 07:45 AM
7

I think some of the biases against gay men are sort of magnified versions of biases against men generally. The ones that comes to mind are being obsessed with sex to a ridiculous degree, and being sexually predatory. I think some of the biases against gay men are also a result of the idea that men are immature/not grounded, and in need of a woman's influence...basically the poster for this movie. So naturally men who just hang out with other men would be completely nuts. And then also there's co…
/r/MensRights07/10/14 12:45 AM
1

I want to add, what a movement does is more important than a brief definition. These things are inherently hard to define succinctly, which is why everyone has a different definition. You see the same thing with liberals and conservatives. People know that liberals are pro-gay marriage, min wages, and the regulatory state, and conservatives are anti, without tying it to the movements' definition - you know by the specific stances they take. Andrew Sullivan says that conservative principles requi…
/r/MensRights06/10/14 01:11 PM
2

I think it's a mistake to talk about which issues a group "focuses" on. For 2 reasons. First, nobody has an obligation to "focus" on everything. People here don't. You could say that you're only focusing on some things to balance feminism's focus on others, but you probably wouldn't focus on everything even if feminism was much smaller, if you're like most people. Even if you focused on all gender issues, you might ignore issues of race. Or war, or economics, or global warming, famine, drug-resi…
/r/MensRights06/10/14 01:07 PM
0

Feminism fights against many men's rights issues. That either means that those issues are not part of the "patriarchy", or that feminism doesn't fight the "patriarchy". There are plenty of examples where feminism supports the inequities facing men.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 02:30 PM
1

This is a good one. In general, heforshe adopts the same positions, rhetoric, etc, as feminism generally, and so all the thing wrong with feminism. As for the part of heforshe about helping men, I would aruge that they both ignore many male issues (as the above link discusses), and get wrong the ones they do focus on. Take, for example, men supposedly being unable to talk about their emotions due to cultural pressure. I think that part of this is that some people don't talk about their emotions …
/r/MensRights01/10/14 12:53 AM
2

I think the focus on the name is dumb. Feminism has that name for historical reasons, and if it had started to be called "egalitarianism" back in the 1960s, it'd be called that today. The problem isn't the name. If feminism really was about equality, people here would support it, name notwithstanding. I think that the name is probably indicative of the fact that it's more about women's interests than equality, but the name itself isn't the problem.
/r/MensRights22/09/14 03:48 PM
88

OK, the thing is, everyone knows there's a double standard WRT DV. I almost never hear anyone seriously doubt that people take woman-on-man DV as seriously as man-on-woman. Including many feminists. The question is where to go from there. I think the emphasis should be on how feminists agree with this double standard, and advocate for it. There are a few point you can make to this end: Duluth model The fact that much domestic violence is mutual, and so if you just believe any woman who says she'…
/r/MensRights21/09/14 12:34 AM
3

This article is like many others that try to give the impression that women are more likely to be victims of violence than men, while never actually saying it, because it's not true. Fact one is: "Most women experience physical abuse in their lifetime." The word "abuse" makes people think of DV, but it's referring to any assault. So it's inflating DV victims, and by making it sound like DV, giving the impression that the same isn't even more true of men. Notice it says "most", when the number is…
/r/MensRights17/09/14 09:34 PM
40

Punishing someone for being raped...you'd think that this story would be picked up, with all the ensuing outrage, by every feminist-oriented subreddit there is. I predict that 0 of them will pick this story up. The original story in USA Today wasn't posted on any feminist subreddits, either (though there was a self post on r/twoxchromosomes that received little attention and 57% upvotes). Feminists often claim that they're really the ones who are pro-men. I think that this is a chance to show it…
/r/MensRights04/09/14 04:23 AM
5

shying away from criticizing women Reminds me of how feminists often say "oh we're not arguing against men, we're arguing againts society." But society is just men and women...and as you and SnickerSnak says, this shows their dislike of criticizing women. So all that's left is the men.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 09:05 PM
6

Go onto a subreddit where you can ask women questions, and ask them there if using a dildo is better than the "real thing." It's not just a question of phyiscal feeling, it's also a psychological aspect, which is presumably greater with another person's body than with a sex toy. I mean, I'd rather have sex with a girl than have a girl use a fleshlight on me, even if it feels the same.
/r/MensRights02/08/14 06:15 AM
3

LMAO, so are the Quakers aren't they? meaningless term, pathetic appeal to authority. Forget appeal to authority, how about appeal to Hamas's own charter: "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of…
/r/MensRights01/08/14 12:53 AM
10

This isn't a federal issue, it's a state issue.
/r/MensRights12/07/14 06:06 PM
4

Tell that to a dictionary.
/r/MensRights22/06/14 06:26 PM
3

I suppose this article in the LA Times is also a 4chan hoax.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 04:30 AM
6

A few years ago on fathers day, most of the feminists blogs/websites/etc's fathers day posts was some variation of "on this fathers day, lets celebrate mothers..." followed by people talking about how great their mothers were. I didn't save any of the pages, I'm sure people with better googling skills than me can find that stuff.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 12:29 AM
103

According to the last source she cites, 38% of rape victims are male. Notice how she switches from "woman" to "someone" at that point, that "every 90 seconds" thing includes men. What oughta happen is someone should compile a list of arguments people make and counterarguments with sources, etc, so that this sort of thing can be countered. I don't know if this exists already and I just don't know about it.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 06:11 PM
1

I don't think it's necessarily hypocrisy. If they generally think that joking about bad things is wrong, and they're OK with it here, you could interpret it as hypocrisy, or you could interpret it as them just not thinking DV against men is bad. This is the reason this bothers me more than random people joking about DV against women; once a person has said they're against jokes making light of sad things, then that informs how I interpret other jokes they make. Whereas most people joking about D…
/r/MensRights03/06/14 12:21 AM
10

Notice child abuse isn't on there, and neither Jackson Katz nor anyone else (other than bell hooks, credit where it's due) will ever talk about targetting the perpetrators of that crime. Which, last I checked, is supposed to be a big deal, and one that perpeutates other crimes. In fact, in his TED talk Jackson Katz was careful to mention all other types of DV except for physical child abuse.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 02:53 AM
5

It now says this for the men one: Information and support is also available for men who have experienced family and domestic violence. I guess that's better, though I imagine that it's more likely that they changed the language to appease people who complained, than that they actually changed the training for the people staffing the hotlines, in the last few hours.
/r/MensRights19/05/14 04:58 AM
2

This is why I said "article's title", and not "title". The article's title, on slate's website, is "The perception that family law is unfair to fathers is not exactly true." (okay you could argue it's really the subtitle, but that's a quibble). And if you go on the website, hit the button on the top right bringing down the menu, and go to the "double x" section, the link for the article says "Men’s Rights Activists Say the Courts Are Against Them. They’re Wrong." And if you scroll down while rea…
/r/MensRights14/05/14 04:18 AM
7

The article's title says there isn't any bias, but the article really supports the idea that there is, it's just better than it used to be.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 12:56 AM
4

The equivalent group opposing shared parenting in the US is the National Organization for Women. It has over half a million members, it was co-founded by Betty Friedan, one of the founders of second wave feminsim, and their PAC website lists praise from members of Congress for their organization. It's not the WBC, it's as mainstream as you can get. EDIT: Also, traditionally after divorce the kids went with the father. It wasn't until the 19th century that this changed, and it was a feminist who …
/r/MensRights14/05/14 12:54 AM
2

Things that come to mind: National Organization for Women opposing shared parenting bills RAINN filing an amicus brief in the Supreme Court supporting routine DNA sampling from arrestees that gets kept forever even if the person is found innocent the OCR "dear colleague" letter saying rape on college campuses must be tried with a preponderance of the evidence standard, allow double jeopardy, and various other due process violations Gloria Steinem and Ms. Magazine supporting the "satanic ritual a…
/r/MensRights10/05/14 08:14 PM
1

From what I've heard, r/offmychest is a SRS-ish sub. Look at rule 2 on that sub. Here is some dramatic recounting of the whole thing.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 06:13 AM
1

I'll add...this isn't just random street harassment, or workplace comments, or something. It's on a casual sex app. The whole point of the app is to have sex with random people, so how are you gonna complain that someone you talk to on it is only interested in sex?
/r/MensRights24/04/14 03:23 AM
2

When it comes to protections in the criminal justice system, and how we view people accused of rape, it seems like the important stat is what % of the time the person accused is innocent, not what % of the time no rape happened at all.
/r/MensRights18/04/14 03:42 AM
27

Men are more likely to be victims of violence than women. If women go through life in fear of violence, part of the reason why is that they're told to go through life in fear of violence. By people like this guy.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 09:31 PM
8

It would be nice for there to be a citation for the Federal Register thing; I believe the Federal Register is monstrously big. EDIT: Okay, it's 78 FR 39870-01.
/r/MensRights01/04/14 11:48 AM
11

This has nothing to do with it, though. Hormonal BC pills are used to prevent, say, menstrual cramps or acne. If there was some medicine that prevented menstrual cramps or acne, but didn't prevent pregnancy, then it wouldn't be covered under the mandate. Hormonal birth control is being covered specifically because it prevents pregnancy, and the other stuff is just a bonus.
/r/MensRights01/04/14 11:46 AM
6

That's all well and good, but I think there's another problem that doesn't get talked about as much. Take, from this TED talk, what she says starting at 5:00. That kid's problem isn't that he's being pressured to "act like a man", it's that he's being punished for "acting like a man". In schools in particular, boys are punished not for failing to fulfill gender roles, but for fulfilling gender roles. There's definitely a perception of men/boys as being violent/aggressive/whatever, and normal beh…
/r/MensRights27/03/14 08:08 PM
4

I think that it's probably BS that either gender is better at leading a company, but I like the schadenfreude of them explicitly setting out to try and prove that women are better at leading companies ("but feminism is about equality!"), and then getting a result that suggests the opposite.
/r/MensRights10/03/14 09:06 PM
26

...is there any evidence that feminists support this sort of thing? Personally, I don't care if they do this at a nightclub, though it just proves that "service charge" is BS and doesn't mean anything except "the cost is actually the price above plus this part".
/r/MensRights10/03/14 08:30 PM
4

I'm in general suspicious of something that claims to help group X by being harder on group X. So I don't really buy the idea that the way to help boys is to discipline them more. Especially when the reasoning is right in line with gender stereotypes. Boys are already more likely to be disciplined and more likely to be seen by teachers as poorly behaved. They get worse grades for the same achievement levels. And this all persists in adulthood, as men get longer sentences for the same crimes. I t…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 10:55 PM
4

No one is America is more at risk of being raped or assaulted than college women. Forgetting that it says "assault" not "sexual assault", I'm guessing people in prison are more at risk. And you could probably break it down more so that certain segments of the prison population are even more at risk. But they're mostly men, and they're out of sight out of mind, so I guess they don't count. Whereas college women have political power, and get coverage on places like buzzfeed. Feminists care about m…
/r/MensRights10/02/14 05:36 AM
3

The "are dead by" part was in response to "65% of American men die between the ages of 68-72". I assumed this didn't literally mean that 65% of men die between 68 and 72, which would seem highly unlikely (and is contradicted by my source), so I took it to mean that at 65% of American men are dead by that age. I also don't know how "average age of death" is different from life expectancy at birth.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 08:15 PM
3

What do you mean by this: Many doctors prefer to look at average age of death. This is the age where people most commonly die- the age where the majority of people die. When average age of death (AAD) is considered, the gap is much wider. Doctors commonly use the 65% range- the range where 65% of people will die. 65% of American men die between the ages of 68-72. In comparison , 65% of American women will die between 83-90. Where are these stats coming from? Here is an actuarial table form the S…
/r/MensRights08/02/14 06:48 PM
1

In addition to what ibm2431 mentioned, I'd point to 2 other things. One is the list of services covered under Obamacare without a copay. There are not male-specific services, with the exception of a one-time screening for smokers over 65, but there's 22 for women. Some are for pregnancy, but some are blatantly sexist. Like covering tubal ligations but not vasectomies. Or HIV testing and counselling for all women, but only testing for men, and only for "high-risk" men. Or no cancer screening for …
/r/MensRights12/01/14 08:25 AM
1

About the definition of feminism, to people who say it just means equality, I'd make 2 arguments. One is that words are defined by their common usage, and according to polls most people believe in equality but aren't feminists. People who say feminism is just equality are going against the common use of the word. Even if they cite the dictionary, dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive. Other argument is that feminism is a political movement. It has organizations, PACs, lobbyists, etc, an…
/r/MensRights12/01/14 12:02 AM
3

This TED talk has an example, at 4:59. Taking the way boys want to write and saying it's bad, and the way girls write is good. Also in this Christina Hoff Sommers talk she mentions (IIRC around 10:40) efforts to make boys "play more like girls", at 13:20 she mentions they tried to get boys to play with dolls, there's other stuff in there. And I would add the ad in India linked in the article mentioning that being a real man is respecting women. This reminds me of this from the other day, a study…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 08:12 PM
2

I really don't see how that means what they say it means. Maturity and compassion are good traits. The troublesome part is when they take normal male behaviors, and say they show immaturity and lack of compassion, when they don't. What I don't like about all the talk of the "man box", and "toxic masculinity", is that they take normal stereotypically male behavior, which isn't in any way bad, and paint it as pathological and dangerous and weird.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 07:39 PM
2

I think once we're in the thick of the campaign, this gender political stuff is gonna get huge. And most of the media and such is either uninterested in it, or pro-feminist, with the exception of conservative media. Though feminism has gotten huge online, I think an opposing movement has slowly started to form, and is starting to get some recognition. The idea of extreme tumblr feminists, for example, has gotten hold, and has a catchy new name. But it remains to see how big it'll be when this ge…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 05:31 AM
9

I think this shows that most people look at gender-based attitudes as lying on on a spectrum of "pro-woman" vs "pro-man", not "pro-equality" vs "anti-equality". And this includes many people whose explicit goals are that of equality.
/r/MensRights04/01/14 09:45 PM
2

One of those fact checking websites said it's inconclusive. But if it did lower costs you'd expect the insurance companies to do it themselves, no law required. Plus, it would lower costs more to means-test it, or to make it over-the-counter so that doctor's visits aren't required. They did it this way because it's, in part, a giveaway to big pharma.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 08:39 PM
3

They mandated that insurance cover it, which means insurance will cover the costs by raising prices...and the ACA provides subsidies for people to buy their insurance. So the government is paying for it, just in a roundabout way.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 08:37 PM
1

If female authors get EZ mode review, then why would eliminating the first name and replacing it with first initial partially narrow the gap?
/r/MensRights16/10/13 11:09 PM
0

I dunno, I really think that its point is what they say it is. It's way funnier if considered as a gender-flipped version of the common sentiment you hear...but since when has the Onion been anything but sympathetic to feminism, or to general women-are-awesome-men-suck type stuff? Also the picture. If anything I think this shows that any story these days of the form of "don't you hate how in X situation women are totally reasonable and good and men are evil and crazy?" is regarded as some sort o…
/r/MensRights20/09/13 02:32 AM
3

Does a woman have to prove that she's capable of raising a child in order to accept sperm from a donor, the way you have to do so in order to adopt? Because if so, I can see the argument being that in the former case, he's not responsible because the resulting child is in a good situation, but in the latter, that's not necessarily the case.
/r/MensRights14/08/13 07:33 PM
3

Someone posts this article on a feminist subreddit that bans non-feminists. People talk about how this refutes what people on r/mensrights think, and suggests it get posted here, implying that the people here would have no counterargument. It does, in fact, get posted here, and it turns out people do have a counterargument, and a pretty good one. Nobody from the feminist subreddit either addresses the counterargument, or admits that the article is wrong, in either discussion thread. Basically, p…
/r/MensRights14/08/13 06:08 PM
7

I think this a story from when it happened, and this is a story from when she pled guilty in exchange for "nearly a year" of probation, 24 hours community service, and $80. But nothing anywhere actually says she's a feminist.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 01:28 AM
6

The way I see it, I just want some consistency. When it comes to health insurance, women have paid more because they cost more to insure, because they use more health services. Now whether insurance companies should be allowed to do this or not, I don't have a strong opinion - but when it's auto insurance and not health insurance, and men are paying more, nobody seems to have any objections. In fact they use the same arguments people use here about why it's OK for women to pay more for health in…
/r/MensRights31/07/13 08:51 PM
4

This seems unlikely to me...wouldn't "I'm a lesbian" also really piss people off then? It seems more likely that "creepy" is a personal insult...even if you think it's justified in a certain situation, it's still an insult, so of course people will be upset by it.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 06:39 AM
3

Like others have said, this is an inaccurate portrayal of problems affecting men. Further, this argument is just an excuse to not do anything to help men. Normally if something hurts women people propose doing something to help women. If something hurts men...people propose doing something to help women, on the theory raised here. At some point if your response to any issue is to help women, you're not after equality, you're just after helping women. Even if some male issues were best solved by …
/r/MensRights08/07/13 06:09 AM
2

And media outlets should be heavily fined for releasing ANY DATA about ANY innappropriate relationships, because kids arent stupid and word spreads. If those inappropriate relationships are the subject of a court case, then I'm pretty sure this is unconstitutional.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 10:04 PM
3

That one line sums up something I've tried to say to a bunch of people before. When feminists say they want to work with men, or that men and women should work together rather than have opposing movements, I often reply that feminists don't, in fact, want to work with men. They want men's support, but in a subordinate position, not an equal position. The only thing I'd add to "guilt and contrition" is "telling other men why they're wrong", as if men are rejecting the message because it's not bei…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 07:23 AM
2

I think the opposite problem to this doesn't get enough attention, that is, normal behavior for young children gets classified as dangerous or violent or something. And the people who rail against "boys will be boys" are often the same people who turn around and punish a kid for chewing a pop-tart into a gun shape, or who disallow rough-housing which is a normal, healthy thing for boys to do. The problem is an inability for society to distinguish the good from the bad, which I think ultimately c…
/r/MensRights31/05/13 08:45 PM
31

Here is the text of the chapter in question, it says this: Intercourse is the pure, sterile, formal expression of men's contempt for women
/r/MensRights28/05/13 11:57 PM
4

The situation we're discussing is here is a child who has been born, it exists, what do we do. For one thing, I don't think you can ignore people's incentives and what happened to lead to this point. It's a moral hazard. Like the argument I've heard against privatizing Social Security - if you do so, and someone puts all their money in the stock market and goes broke and has no retirement account, then people will say what you said - "here's an old guy with no money, he exists, what do we do". Y…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:23 AM
3

For the argument comparing men backing out of supporting a child to abortion - many people will rebut this with "well abortion isn't about choosing to become a parent or not, it's about bodily autonomy". But if you look at arguments in favor of abortion, it's pretty clearly not just about bodily autonomy. People don't just get abortions because they don't want to go through 9 months of pregnancy (though clearly this is a factor), they get them based on desire to be a parent or not, and access to…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 03:50 PM
1

The third panel isn't entirely true. It seems that way, not because the asshole group talks more, but because people in the other group often would rather talk to the assholes. Because it's easier to assume that the other side is all idiots than engage in the smart people on the other side. If I go to a subreddit where I disagree with most of the people there, I'll often get way more responses with a snide, BS, angry comment than a response that strongly disagrees with the people there, but is a…
/r/MensRights08/04/13 05:47 AM
2

She didn't fire him, his company did. The one reason I'd say maybe she should have been fired is that she tweeted that her company supports her position. I imagine that took the company from the position of "let's not touch this with a 10 foot pole if we don't have to" to "shit, now we have to say something". Once she claims the company has a position on this rather controversial issue, then the company has to actually take a side. Even so, I don't like rooting for anyone to lose their job unles…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:52 AM
-26

I don't agree with Adria Richards, but I didn't really want to see her get fired either...
/r/MensRights21/03/13 04:51 PM
5

I suppose it comes down to why they're criminalizing the thing they're criminalizing. You can make that case for smoking, but if they did the dresses version it would likely be not because of the dangers of dresses but due to some anti-women ideology (like some Muslim country that outlawed dresses because they're too revealing or whatever). Though I'd argue that, in your hypothetical smoking case, it would be anti-woman. The fact that certain harmful substances are prohibited and others aren't i…
/r/MensRights20/02/13 07:35 AM
7

I bet if they criminalized wearing dresses, people (including me) would call it sexist. Even though wearing dresses isn't an innately female thing. I guess what I'm saying is that if society pushes boys to be drawn to weaponry, criminalizing it is a way to combat this rather than to criminalize being a boy. To use my dress analogy...you could say that society pushes girls to wear dresses (as opposed to pants or whatever). What I quoted would be analogous to "if society pushes girls to wear dress…
/r/MensRights20/02/13 06:21 AM
3

If he ends up taking her to divorce court for any amount of monies, one of the questions that he will be asked is "After the incident, did you and her move back in together/continue to reside together?" If he answers "Yes", he's boned. In the american legal system, when something so negative happens that it facilitates a break in a marriage(or even just a relationship), if the two parties get back together, it's considered "forgiven" and he gets NOTHING. Is there a name for this legal idea, or a…
/r/MensRights25/01/13 12:00 AM
1

Well, rape has gone down. Not because of "telling men not to rape" but because of unleaded gasoline.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 01:11 AM
6

Who is the "we" though? Governments have apologized. I think that's fair, because the US Government (or a former slave state) is an entity which has existed since the 1700s and which condoned slavery, so it can apologize for its own official actions. If I were in Congress I'd vote in favor of a resolution apologizing for some past transgression the US committed, but I wouldn't personally apologize for shit. Because the US government was complicit in slavery, but I wasn't. I don't think that's in…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 05:14 AM
10

I guess it's because we want to encourage people to have kids, and to pay attention to raising them well. Just incapacitating yourself for 6 months isn't worthy of getting paid leave, but having kids is a special case, because it will help society in the long run for people to have children, and to have children get attention from their parents at a young age.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 07:13 AM
10

I don't see why it matters. This isn't, or shouldn't be, some sort of contest between the genders to see who's better. If I say "there are more resources to help female crime victims than male ones even though there are more male crime victims" I'm not trying to somehow say men > women, so saying that men are more likey to be the perp doesn't have anything to do with anything.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 06:44 AM
9

As the person who allegedly made certain comments I can say this is definitely fake, see my comment in r/feminism: WTF? I never posted anything like that. I have no idea "what the mods are doing", I don't know any of the mods of any subreddit, and even if discussions are heated, I'd never say anything like "they need their own medicine". Look through my comment history if you like, you won't see either those comments or others like it. Someone PM'd me with: Hey do you know what the thing is that…
/r/MensRights11/06/12 02:27 PM
1

Do that and you get: Smart man + smart woman = love Dumb man + smart woman = pregnancy Smart man + dumb woman = marriage I don't really find this offensive either.
/r/MensRights30/05/12 02:32 AM
1

I don't feel spat in the face or anything, but it reminds me of Bill Cosby.
/r/MensRights24/04/12 03:43 AM
1

I think if you wanna know the false conviction rate for crime X, it's a good start to know the rate for crimes in general. I didn't say it was the same number, but I fail to see why it's not a good starting point.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 02:22 AM
1

I bet it's higher. Look at the following that happened in Virginia, when the state started testing DNA from old convictions to see how many innocent people were locked up: In September 2004, Mark Warner, then Virginia’s governor, ordered a random audit of 31 old criminal cases after a vast trove of biological evidence was discovered lying around in old case files saved by state forensic serologists. The testing of those 31 samples led to the exonerations of two convicted rapists. Warner, embarra…
/r/MensRights05/04/12 12:18 AM
2

Yeah, a great example of someone being falsely arrested and then strip searched would be...they guy in the case in question, who had a letter from the government explaining why he shouldn't be arrested, and yet was arrested and held for eight days.
/r/MensRights03/04/12 07:40 AM
2

they not only got a court order increasing the support amount, but they contacted DFAS (the payment processor for the US Military) and back-dated his child support from the day he was promoted, putting him $4000 in arrears. Isn't being $2500 behind on child support a felony? Wouldn't this mean that he's basically been forced into the position of committing a felony without doing anything?
/r/MensRights02/04/12 10:19 PM
1

It could easily be that there's some law or policy that any inmate has to be "informed of the risk of sexual assault" or whatever. And he's just signing to acknowledge that he's received that information, not that he's waiving away any rights.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:48 PM
6

Where in the video does it talk about the "rape waiver"? I don't feel like watching the whole thing, it's kind of infuriating...
/r/MensRights02/04/12 07:11 AM
1

It's one thing to mandate it be covered, I don't see why it's necessary to make the pill free, without copay (which was the original proposal that started this whole thing off).
/r/MensRights18/03/12 07:40 PM
4

Your cdc.gov "consequences" link doesn't say men are greater aggressors, far as I see. It says that more women were murdered (but murder is a small % of total domestic violence cases) and that women who have been abused were more likely to be injured during their most recent victimization than men who have been abused (but doesn't say who's more likely to be abused). Though I might be missing it. The uk pdf link says women are more likely to be victims, but it also comes from self-reporting of d…
/r/MensRights30/12/11 09:39 AM
2

From the reddiquette (under DO): Consider posting constructive criticism / an explanation when you downvote something, but only if you really think it might help the poster improve. Though don't take this to mean I downvoted you.
/r/MensRights01/08/11 11:21 PM
8

Some people feel schadenfreude in this case, I don't. I just think that alimony is BS either way, even if you have dumb views on gender related shit (the whole 'real man' thing). If she had been out there campaigning for 'equality', whatever she thinks it means, then it'd be different, but to me she's still someone having to pay when she shouldn't have to.
/r/MensRights31/07/11 07:57 PM
1

If he doesn't actually think her legs should be chopped off, and if you agree that that's obvious (enough that it's a straw man to say you think otherwise), then what's the complaint exactly? That you shouldn't joke about violence against women? He is not making a little witty aside here, he's venting his feelings. He is treating us to a kind of vigilante revenge fantasy, and being upvoted for it How do you know it's a revenge fantasy? It's not like you have some window onto his soul.
/r/MensRights29/07/11 11:05 PM
1

I don't see any reason there shouldn't be. The stated reason for child support is to support the children - it only takes up to a certain amount of money to support the children, then no more. The real reason, I think, is to stick it to divorced fathers, particularly the ones who would pay less with a cap (ie wealthier ones). If some rich guy had to pay some tiny portion of his salary to child support, then people would be outraged because he "got away with it".
/r/MensRights29/07/11 11:00 PM
2

The other point of child support is to recoup losses and assign responsibility where it belongs (with the parents-- no other actor has more of a claim to responsibility) I also get the idea of child support, in theory. But I'll say for the record, that when it comes to the sorts of fucked up situations you see on here, like a sperm donor or victim of statutory rape having to pay, the usual defense is that all that matters is the welfare of the child, and it doesn't matter if it's a shitty deal f…
/r/MensRights29/07/11 10:52 PM
1

Don't have time for a full reply now, but it's not really pressuring someone to have an abortion by not supporting the kid if it is born. By that logic, charging for an abortion is wrong as well, as would be charging for childbirth for that matter. Freedom to choose != freedom from consequences.
/r/MensRights24/07/11 05:36 AM
1

No, she isn't. But it's her choice and no one else, simply because she is set up to be the carrier, it's her body. If one day science gets to the point where men can be carriers too, I will support the man's decision to abort or keep. And when it's in the world, it's both parents responsibility no matter who's choice it was to carry it to term. I agree it is, and should be, her choice, but I don't think this refutes my point. Her choice means her responsibility. The problem with saying "what abo…
/r/MensRights22/07/11 05:59 AM
2

She's not being forced to carry the child to term... Also, I always found that the idea that child support is for the child, is selectively applied. For example, in many (I think most) places there's no restrictions on what you can do with the child support money. Wouldn't some restrictions be in the best interest of the child?
/r/MensRights22/07/11 12:30 AM
2

He cannot offer exculpatory evidence on his behalf, but can only “request” that the university’s assigned “Investigator contact individuals who are witnesses to an event.” I don't see anything explicitly denying the right to exculpatory evidence, but I don't see anything guaranteeing it either. Assuming this is accurate, it is basically the most fucked up thing ever. Think about it for a moment. Let it sink in - you're not allowed to offer exculpatory evidence. Someone comes to you, says "you're…
/r/MensRights21/07/11 04:40 AM
0

WRT to the "chilling effect" thing, it seems that if you're worried about that, a good idea would be to ask what you can do to alleviate the effect, or stop it from happening in the future. One thing might be to not make such a big hoopla when a famous person is arrested for rape, if you're not gonna have a good enough case against him to convict. Nobody seems to suggest that, but I bet someone will (and people have) suggest removing presumption of innocence, or some other unconstitutional shit.
/r/MensRights18/07/11 11:07 PM
1

I assume that the people who made the study accounted for this somehow, though I didn't actually read the study, just the result. I think it makes sense for this claim to be overblown, because people tend to be worried about unusual, exotic risks over which they feel they have no control (ie getting roofied) rather than more mundane risks which they feel they can control (drinking too much).
/r/MensRights23/05/11 11:23 PM
20

Luckily, slipping something in someone's drink doesn't really happen that often. Studies which look at this have supported the idea that most people who think it happened to them just got too drunk: A study in the UK found that only 2 percent of a pool of 1,014 rape victims had their drinks spiked with sedatives.[6][7] Another UK study of 75 patients, most of them women, who thought their drinks had been tampered with in pubs or clubs found that none had been given a surreptitious drug. They had…
/r/MensRights23/05/11 02:39 AM
3

If 51% is enough to expel the accused, an accuser with a 51% chance of lying should also be expelled, no?
/r/MensRights19/04/11 05:54 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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