TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Nebu Archive

View 14 posts and 200 comments by Nebu on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
366

DiscriminationNebu/r/MensRights06/02/15 04:48 AM
117

OpinionNebu/r/MensRights06/02/15 05:21 AM
77

Nebu/r/MensRights25/11/09 04:35 PM
46

QuestionNebu/r/MensRights26/01/15 05:35 PM
31

Nebu/r/MensRights17/01/10 10:30 AM
16

Nebu/r/MensRights01/07/11 05:49 AM
15

Nebu/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:22 PM
13

Men's Rights NewsNebu/r/MensRights01/05/14 06:05 AM
12

Nebu/r/MensRights14/10/10 10:16 PM
11

Nebu/r/MensRights17/10/13 01:59 AM
7

NewsNebu/r/MensRights05/03/15 03:56 AM
7

Men's Rights NewsNebu/r/MensRights25/04/14 02:50 AM
6

Nebu/r/MensRights20/09/11 05:17 PM
0

Nebu/r/MensRights29/07/11 07:50 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Do you think 2+2=5? Because, you really shouldn't.
/r/MensRights28/04/19 07:43 PM
17

Quoting a "1 upvote comment" into a top level thread and getting it to the front page of /r/MensRights paints the subreddit in a much more negative light, then simply downvoting it and moving on. The OP has done much more harm to the reputation of /r/MensRight than that original comment did.
/r/MensRights28/04/19 06:11 PM
4

Do you just want to judge it, or do you also want to bring it up to everyone's attention? If you only wanted to judge it, /u/XenoX101 's point still stands: go ahead and judge it, but don't bring attention to a view that nobody (including you) agree with. Like how would you feel, if I kept raising to your attention all the incorrect views that I don't even agree with? I don't think 2+2=5. I don't think 2+2=6. I don't think 2+2=7. Is it worth your time to pay attention to each of these incorrect …
/r/MensRights28/04/19 06:10 PM
18

Calling out ignorant participants in a group is useful for developing the group. This implies that the group needed to develop in that particular way. If nobody agreed with the quoted statement, then the group has already developed beyond the point where we'd need to call it out. And if the group has already developed beyond the point where we'd need to call it out, then it may actually be harmful to call it out, because it facilitates false flag operations where these comments now suddenly show…
/r/MensRights28/04/19 06:04 PM
5

On the one hand, this is a pretty strong clue that the genders have been reversed in this story: “The judge’s comments confirm a common view in society that the abuse of a young girl by a man is somehow less serious than the abuse of a boy by a woman. On other, most Facebookers will probably TL;DR.
/r/MensRights06/10/15 02:39 AM
1

Thanks. So I suspect the analogous thing to do would be to replace "feminist" with "Jew", the idea being to take the group of people being criticized and replace it with a stereotypically oppressed group, right? (And then male becomes gentile, patriarchy becomes nazism, etc.?) Here's what I could come up with: http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/2015/01/an-open-letter-to-two-scotts-on-nerds.html I mean, this proposition--that gentiles do not consider Jews human--is the primary axiom of the Jewish…
/r/MensRights27/01/15 03:57 AM
12

Who's a prominent MRA (i.e. that people have heard of and care about) whose writing we could perform this upon?
/r/MensRights26/01/15 03:39 AM
2

An alternative interpretation of my comment is: "If you're going to restrict freedom, your reasoning for doing so ought to be good enough that you restrict that freedom from everybody equally. If you can't justify the restriction of freedom for everybody, you shouldn't restrict this freedom at all." If murder is bad enough that men aren't allowed to do it, women shouldn't be allowed to murder either. If white people have the freedom to vote, black people ought to have the freedom to vote too. If…
/r/MensRights30/09/13 10:39 PM
19

would you rather they censor them both or not censor either? Yes.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 01:37 PM
1

As far as I can tell, the "INFB" posters tend to spark a discussion amongst the viewers, more-so-than/relative-to a discussion between the viewer and the poster. As such, I don't expect much "back and forth conversation". Instead, I'm hoping to spark public discussion, and allowing myself (and anybody else who is interested) in witnessing what is said in these discussions, whether they be pro-feminism, pro-MRA, both, or neither.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:11 PM
1

I think the key is to pick good slogans to write.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:08 PM
1

Thank you for your kind words. Socratic is indeed a good way to describe the tone I'm going for.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:08 PM
1

Okay. I guess my proposal is not targeted at you, then. :)
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:07 PM
2

If feminists are as you imagine them to be, then it's good that they will respond such a thing, because their hypocrisy will be more transparent to everyone observing the dialogue. I.e. the hypothetical outcome you're presenting is a good outcome.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:06 PM
1

You raise a fair point, but I think the overall cost-benefit analysis is a net good. That is to say, feminism already holds such a monopoly (as you've noted), and so the marginal extra damage is less than the potential gain if this gains traction.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:05 PM
1

I feel like the gut reaction to this one is that you're being sarcastic and are trying to insult feminism, which means it'll trigger a defensive reaction of dismissal, thus failing to change the hearts and minds of our targets.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:05 PM
1

My proposal has nothing to do with invading any subreddit.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:04 AM
1

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. After we wait for them to cringe, then what?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:02 AM
1

I think this would not be a good slogan to write, because it will be rejected by the people we're trying to communicate with.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:58 AM
2

I feel like in your attempt to villainize feminism, you're missing the whole point of the exercise here. If you believe that egalitarian feminism doesn't exist, then that is specifically WHY you should write "I Need Feminism Because I Don't Want To Be Arrested When I Call The Police On A Woman For Assaulting Me" on the card: To bring attention to that the oddity of the phrasing.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:57 AM
2

The idea is to pretend you're talking about the variant of feminism which claims to support men and women equally, and thus you would want that "egalitarian feminism", because presumably they'd be against the cops being biased against men when settling DV disputes.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 11:43 PM
1

I think the risk of bad PR for MRM can be minimized if you just present the core arguments for MRM, and not actually state the MRM by name. I.e. don't write "I need MRM because too many fathers are forbidden from seeing their children", and don't write "I need feminism because I believe in MRM", but rather, write "I need feminism because too many fathers are forbidden from seeing their children." In this manner, you raise awareness of MR issues, without endangering the MRM "brand name".
/r/MensRights02/07/13 11:37 PM
1

I'm reticent to do a "I need Men's Rights because..." because I feel like the main audience of these messages is other feminists, and not the general public. I.e. most people just don't care and don't want to get involved in "feminist stuff", and even more so don't want to get involved in what appears to be a war between feminists and MRAs. Given this audience, I feel like "I need MR because..." will have the dialogue start off in an "us vs them" tone, which will be counter productive. Instead, …
/r/MensRights02/07/13 11:35 PM
3

I could be wrong but I don't think OP is intending this as a sarcastic movement. Your interpretation of my intent is correct.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:56 PM
6

The core idea is not bad, but I'd remove all the dishonest elements. E.g. don't claim the game is made by a woman, if the game isn't actually made by a woman. There's no need to lie: Just put the game out, and let it speak for itself.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 10:23 PM
2

They have a false axiom (all men are pedophiles), and they mean well in the sense that they are doing the most morally good action they can think of given the information they have: Remove the children from the pedophiles.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 05:42 AM
0

To be fair, the burger can be tasty, high quality, fresh and hot, even if there is no changing table in the men's room.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:01 PM
4

I was actually primed to think the underage girl was "12" because the number "12" appeared in the headline.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 02:00 PM
2

I think the complaint isn't a sweeping under the rug of the claim that men rape more than women rape, but rather a complaint that the people phrase things in such a way to imply they think only men rape. Similarly, I find that generally when someone brings up "BTW, sometimes female on male rape happens", it isn't in response to "A woman got raped" but rather in response to "We should teach men not to rape women because that would end all rape".
/r/MensRights23/03/13 10:43 PM
9

"well I don't want to upset him so I'll go along with it" means that there are negative consequences for saying no (he will be upset). Pretty much all actions have negative (and positive) consequences.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 10:03 PM
5

She's not saying she didn't do it. She's saying she's not guilty.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 02:17 AM
1

To your knowledge, do you suffer from Asperger, autism or any other similar ailment? It's complicated. You can assume the answer is "yes" or "no" as you please. I've been explicitly tested for autism (which indicates that there was a general suspicion that I have it), but the conclusion was that I did not have it. They don't know what (if anything) I have. Do you, in other settings, have difficulties understanding why people react the way they do? Yes.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 05:52 AM
1

Okay, what point do you want me to address? It's easiest for me if you give me each point you want me to address in point form (i.e. use a literal bullet point list).
/r/MensRights26/01/13 05:15 AM
1

the damn point (which was about feminist allies, remember?). Okay, and what is your position on feminist allies, and what do you think my position is on feminist allies?
/r/MensRights26/01/13 05:05 AM
1

How about you start by wiping my memory of everything you've written so far? Okay, how can I go about doing that? Growing a sarcasm detector would be a start. I get the feeling that you're making requests that cannot actually be fulfilled so that you can give yourself excuses for remaining angry at me. I see you as my ally, so I am happy to accommodate you, but I guess you've set up your argument in such a way such that if we do become allies, you will have "lost" the argument, and so you're doi…
/r/MensRights25/01/13 08:41 PM
2

Do me one better : start arguing honestly, or stop pestering me. Well, I claim I am arguing honestly. I think if you'd stop considering me as an enemy, you wouldn't choose the most combative interpretation of everything I say. How about you start by wiping my memory of everything you've written so far? Okay, how can I go about doing that? Like exaggerating my claims until they seem easily dismissable? [...] Now, how are you going to convince me that you are arguing in good faith? Really, how on …
/r/MensRights24/01/13 09:11 PM
2

Hey, the tone of your response sounds angry (e.g. "Jerk off", "Fuck your false confusion", "you are nothing but a pompous waste of our time", "fuck you", etc.), so I guess I must have upset you. I apologize for that. Also, your usage of terms like "false confusion", "deliberately obtuse" implies you think that I have malicious intent. I claim that I don't, but I realize that my simply claiming so may not convince you. I'm not sure what I can do to convince you that I have no malicious intent. I …
/r/MensRights24/01/13 12:11 AM
2

I've met way too many dishonest "nice" feminists on this forum to extend much goodwill to you. I think this is just symptomatic of a problem with your attitude. You refer to "concern trolls" later on in your comment, and I don't doubt they exist and have given you a hard time. But ideally, the result of having encountered these trolls would not be a lost of faith in humanity, nor a reduction in kindness/goodwill to strangers, etc. Why did you put "nice" in square quotes? Because it was the freak…
/r/MensRights16/01/13 08:36 PM
1

I would have liked to ask you in what way you think I were being unreasonable, but it seems like you don't wish to speak to me further, which I am saddened by.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 09:23 PM
2

Here's what happens when a feminist plays "nice" Why did you put "nice" in square quotes? Do you feel that Erika Jarvis was not actually being nice? So why should we extend any sympathy for a movement so obviously dedicated to hatred, sexism and discrimination, and which uses Stalinist tactics to stifle all dissent? It's not obvious to me: There exists feminists like Erika Jarvis, and there are feminist who are anti-Erika Jarvis. And so I don't conclude that all feminists are anti-Erika Jarvis. …
/r/MensRights15/01/13 09:15 PM
1

The problem I see here is that you think there is "goal post" to be moved at all. It's as if you think I'm trying to "win" something here, and that my "winning" would equate to you "losing", as if I'm your adversary. There is no goal post, because there's no "win" condition for you to achieve as part of a discussion with me. We're not fighting or playing a game or anything (or at least, I'm not). I'm trying to learn from you (and if you mutually learn from me, so much the better). Do you think o…
/r/MensRights13/01/13 08:29 PM
1

You can't be an "equality" feminist if you believe in the Patriarchy and you can't be a feminist if you don't believe in the Patriarchy. Why not? I mean, imagine a feminist said to you "You can't be an MRA unless you hate women". Presumably you'd disagree with that definition, right? But what if she showed a large body of population (say, many feminists) who agree with her population? How would you convince her that her definition of MRA is "wrong" and your definition is "right"? Furthermore, wh…
/r/MensRights13/01/13 07:07 PM
1

the ultimate reason I really know that what I have in mind is more apt is because the things that make feminism unworkable and incompatible with men's rights are so fundamental to the very notion of feminism that you'd be hard pressed to find a feminist that does not labor under such assumptions. That's a circular reason, though. You're saying the reason you know that the "true" meaning on feminism is anti-MRA is because the parts of feminism which are anti-MRA are fundamental to it. What I'm as…
/r/MensRights13/01/13 08:16 AM
2

Why do you think the ideology you have in mind when you say "feminism" is more apt than the ideology I have in mind when you say "feminism"?
/r/MensRights12/01/13 09:59 PM
1

I think you have a very specific ideology in mind when you say "feminism". What do you think about people who self-label as feminist, and yet do not have the ideology you have in mind when you use the term "feminism"?
/r/MensRights12/01/13 09:04 AM
1

I don't think the MRA and Feminist movements should work in isolation. If anything, I'd like to see more cooperation between the two. That said, I think a statement like "the biggest opponents to men's rights issues appear to be feminists time and again" is dangerously misleading. It's factually true, in the same sense that the statement "the biggest opponents to men's rights issues appear to be humans time and again" is factually true, but it implies that the group of people who oppose MRAs is …
/r/MensRights12/01/13 04:53 AM
1

This on the other hand is part of the strawman - this assumption that only "haters" are criticized, or that the only people who talk about feminism are "haters," or that someone who calls out a feminist on one thing - or a dozen things - automatically hates everything about them. It's a strawman-lite, in that it's only slightly removed from it's bigger cousin where anyone who criticizes feminism hates women. I feel like you're putting a lot of words in my mouth. E.g. you said "The 'feminist hate…
/r/MensRights12/01/13 03:10 AM
1

The "feminist hate bandwagon" is a strawman. Do you mean there doesn't exist people who dislike anything associated with feminism? Or do you mean that there aren't enough such people for it to be considered a bandwagon, or what? The "us vs them" thinking is also a strawman. An ideology is not a person, so it's not "us vs them" but "us vs bad ideas." I disagree. When I say "us vs them", I don't mean "us vs an ideology", but rather "us vs a group of people", where in this case the group of people …
/r/MensRights12/01/13 12:22 AM
1

What does it mean for an ideology to exist or not exist politically, legally, or academically? Do you think I'm a nice feminist? Why or why not?
/r/MensRights12/01/13 12:12 AM
0

Surely the biggest criticism of the linked blog post is that it makes incorrect assumptions, uses unsound reasoning, and draws incorrect conclusions, right? And surely we would want to rise above that and verify our assumptions, or reasoning, and our conclusions, and hold them to a higher standard, right? So I'd advise against "us vs them" thinking, and painting feminists in general as enemies. You can disagree with this blog without hating feminism.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 02:53 AM
10

I don't think this is a very fair accusation. If there were someone who created a "Radical Men's Rights" blog which talked about forcing all women into being sex slaves or whatever, and someone came along and said "Why are you guys on /r/MensRight denouncing and opposing this kind of thinking en masse?" I suspect the reply here would be something along the lines of "We totally oppose the views espoused in that blog. That said, we're not gonna make front page posts about it every day, because tha…
/r/MensRights11/01/13 02:50 AM
2

Did /r/gaming and /r/games make a post announcing they'd do this? I wasn't able to find such a post.
/r/MensRights11/10/12 05:31 PM
2

Plus, they basically just go to /r/LifeProTips and plagiarize the top post as a new article.
/r/MensRights11/10/12 05:30 PM
1

By the way, pi is closer to 3.1416 than 3.1415 because the next digit is 9. Right, I sort of chose that one intentionally, 'cause most people just memorize digits without thinking about it. "three point one four one five something something", and if you tell them it's closer to 3.1416, they might stop to think about it, say "hmm, I guess you're right", and move on with their lives.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 05:39 PM
1

It's probably a very complex question depending on the type of belief (e.g. how you would react to finding out Pi is closer to 3.1416 than 3.1415, versus how you would react to finding out God does/does not exist). That said, for the types of beliefs which may affect your concept of self-labelling and self-identity (I am an "atheist"; I am a "feminist"; I am a "democraft"; etc.)[a] I think compartmentalization is a more likely step 4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compartmentalization_(psychology…
/r/MensRights24/07/12 05:22 PM
5

I don't think anyone is suggesting that one should be allowed to post on /r/Feminism and ask "Why not talk about something other than feminism"? But I think we are suggesting that one should be allowed to post on /r/minecraft and ask "Why do you guys like minecraft so much?", and I suspect such a post would be welcome there.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 05:13 PM
3

Wow. There are Redditors subscribed to this subreddit simply to disagree with feminists. Wouldn't you say it provides a better discussion to have differing views on the matter That's a terrible idea. That's like saying that people should be able to post to /r/askscience when they explicitly disagree with the very principles of science IMHO, there's a big difference between "disagreeing with scientists" and "disagreeing with science". (And, of course, "disagreeing with feminists" and "disagreeing…
/r/MensRights24/07/12 05:06 PM
16

There are people within feminism who have differing opinions. That is where the discussion lies. They don't need a bunch of MRAs in there just trying to disagree to promote "discussion". At the end of the day none of you are interested in a discussion with them, so why not just stay out? I am both a feminist (i.e. I believe women's rights are important issues) and an MRA (i.e. I believe men's rights are important issues). I can disagree with fellow MRAs in this subreddit, and we'll have a sensib…
/r/MensRights24/07/12 05:02 PM
13

There was, in fact, a study performed on this topic. Donkey_Schlong provided some articles here and I remember seeing a different study (which I can't seem to find right now), where they basically used a survey where people rated how strongly they believed in certain claims about a politician, then, of those who had a belief that was factually false, they contacted those people and showed them the evidence which demonstrated that the belief was false. Then they recontacted the same people a coup…
/r/MensRights24/07/12 04:56 PM
1

is this the standard definition? You're asking the wrong question. What you probably mean to ask is "Is this the legal definition of 'rape' in the United States of America?" (for example, or substitute any other country into the question).
/r/MensRights22/07/12 01:48 AM
1

I meant my comment was employing the best team to make a return is logical." does not lead to me assuming anything and your comment did not make sense. I'm asking you what do you mean by "not make sense"? It's a perfectly sensical statement as far as I can tell. Perhaps you disagree with it, but that doesn't mean that it is devoid of meaning. When you say "employing the best team to make a return is logical." aren't you're making the assumption that the best way to make a return is to hire the m…
/r/MensRights17/05/12 07:18 PM
1

No, you're making the false assumption that the best way to make a return is to hire the most skilled athletes. this doesn't even make sense. Do you mean that it's syntactically or grammatically incorrect, or do you mean that you understood it, but disagreed with it? In the same way that Navratilova and Wiilliams would never have been the world's best if tennis were single sex Navratilova and Williams aren't the world's best at tennis. They're merely the world's best... women. They were the worl…
/r/MensRights17/05/12 05:23 PM
1

This paragraph is in response to your arguing that we should pick other groupings like height for the basis of leagues to eliminate any gender inequality. I don't think I argued that we should pick other groupings like height for the basis of leagues. speaking only to equity investors, employing the best team to make a return is logical. No, you're making the false assumption that the best way to make a return is to hire the most skilled athletes. if women could compete at the same level as men …
/r/MensRights17/05/12 02:35 PM
1

The fact that people like spud webb exist in the NBA simply means that there shouldn't be a pro short league. It provides no basis to extrapolate into a single gender league as it provides no evidence that women at that height + build play that way. It provides some insight the other way however in that ther are more women spudd's height than shaq's and yet those pro women players themselves do no seek the higher salaries of male NBA teams. http://espn.go.com/espnw/news-opinion/6527710/women-pro…
/r/MensRights16/05/12 10:47 PM
1

So what? How does that matter to pro sports? it doesn't. This exactly my sentiment towards gender and pro sports. "So you suck because you're female. So what? All that matters is results." also as a society we do recognize the physically disadvantaged who attempt to play at a high level: short pro-basketball players http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-shortest-nba-players.php The "top 10 shortest nba players" article is exactly the type of recognition I'd like to see more of. These short basketball pl…
/r/MensRights16/05/12 03:00 PM
3

The reverse gendered joke would be more like "I wanted to get you a dishwasher..."
/r/MensRights16/05/12 02:01 PM
1

Here you have mixed two characteristics: eye color and ethnicity. eye color does not affect athletic performance. Well, we can easily find characteristics that do affect athletic performance. For example, why don't we celebrate the best basketball player under 5 feet tall? Why don't we celebrate the best golf player who was born with only one hand? Why don't we celebrate the best baseball player who was born blind? Clearly all of these people have a significant "unfair" disadvantage compared to …
/r/MensRights16/05/12 01:40 PM
0

Because people want to see women play golf But people can STILL see women play golf, even if there are very few women who play professional golf. They would only be unable to see women play golf if NO women played golf, professionally or otherwise. I don't think it's your or mine to question what people will pay to see Agreed, and as long as people exist who are willing to pay to see female golf players, that means there will be professional female golf players.
/r/MensRights16/05/12 01:18 PM
-1

Why would it be a mess if very few women were in professional golf?
/r/MensRights16/05/12 03:11 AM
1

I guess you're implying that the top teams will be all-male. I don't dispute this. But at the beginner and intermediate levels, I'm fairly confident you'll see a mix of male and female, and thus the make up won't be the same as a gender segregated team.
/r/MensRights16/05/12 02:15 AM
1

Would Navratilova/Williams been recognized as such a dominant players if 50% of their matches were against the top men of their eras? I think a prerequisite before answer that question is: SHOULD Navratilova/Williams be recognized as a "dominant player", if she is not within the top 500 players? (Disclaimer: I know very little about Tennis, and so the "500" number is just me repeating a figure I saw elsewhere in this thread.) Why don't we recognize the best female player to the same degree that …
/r/MensRights16/05/12 02:08 AM
-2

You have two professional leagues because you want to see the best female players too. It's why there's also a seniors tour. People want to see the best old players. Non-sequitur. You could easily see the best female player, the best old player, and so on even if there were only one league: Just start at the number 1 spot, and keep going until you find a female/old player. It's like how we can find the best male Asian golfer, or the best male Mexican golfer, etc., despite them all playing togeth…
/r/MensRights16/05/12 01:54 AM
3

What happens when no girls have the skills to compete with the boys? I believe that's addressed when ExpendableOne wrote "Separate them by skill".
/r/MensRights16/05/12 01:51 AM
11

Shouldn't men be celebrating this? I want to promote the idea that looks shouldn't matter, because I'm ugly. Men who aren't ugly? It's probably in their best interest to promote their strengths, i.e. that looks do matter. Either way, whatever ideologies we want to promote are distinct from how things actually work in real life. Could you guys imagine this scenario reversed? Really handsome, good natured dude is captured by an ugly hag woman-beast. Guy falls for ugly hag beast. Realistically, wou…
/r/MensRights09/05/12 08:15 PM
6

It wasn't just feminist subreddits. Here are a few I managed to find: r/MensRights/ also seems to be almost entirely devoted to demonizing women and feminism, and promoting various rare anecdotes of women being horrible people as if it is statistical fact, or as if women were all that way. Anyone who thinks r/MensRights/ is egalitarian is so deeply mired in cognitive dissonance and downright denial that I don't think anyone would be able to get through to them. Upvoted to 16 points, from /r/Dept…
/r/MensRights04/03/12 10:08 PM
0

I don't recall. I tried doing a search, but I can't figure out how to specify that I want to search for "mensrights", but only in the comments, and not within the subreddit of "/r/mensrights" itself
/r/MensRights04/03/12 09:32 PM
14

I'm not sure there is an anti-woman reputation here though? Anti-Feminist sure. In the few times I see /r/MensRight mentioned in other subreddits, I do see the expression of an anti-woman reputation.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 09:17 PM
2

the whole "girls are trained to be vocal about pain" thing was spiteful and uncalled for. I didn't see it as spiteful, but now that you've brought it up, I can see how that interpretation is possible. Since I did not initially see it, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that no spite was intended by that remark.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 07:41 PM
15

I'm not convinced that there's nothing we can do about it. I don't have the solution yet, but I'm open the possibility that there IS a solution.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 07:30 PM
26

I'm not disputing nor addressing whether or not feminism has a credibility problem, nor whether they are worse than MRAs, or anything like that. I'm saying that merely pointing out "other groups have the same problem as us" doesn't actually solve our problems.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 06:57 PM
6

I think the phrasing of your comment could be improved. It wasn't clear to me until halfway through that when you say "we", you mean something like "women", and not "MRAs". Also, you start off with "you" referring to the OP, steam-pug ("your post"), but then "you" starts referring to the people the OP is addressing "When you stop selfishly refusing to understand").
/r/MensRights04/03/12 06:52 PM
9

Edit: Well, I'm being down voted again, I don't really understand why. It's like if you don't follow the hive mind mentality here then your perspective is not important. At time of writing, you have 1 downvote and 5 upvotes, and it's possible that that 1 downvote could be a result of Reddit's fuzzing algorithm. As such, you give off an impression of being overly sensitive about downvotes.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 06:47 PM
3

I don't see the relevance of his second line in this discussion between you (Caperslol) and jojarjam. Even if they claim that they are for individual rights, that doesn't contradict nor invalidate that given their first line, they are attributing mistrust to an entire gender. I see it as no different from "I think Asians should have the same rights as us, but I don't trust Asians." I agree with jojarjam that SpeakToTheSky's first line comes off as sexist, and thus weakens their argument.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 06:45 PM
5

we might actually have a reason to trust women. Your comment implies that "trust" is a binary all-or-nothing proposition, and that the current position is "nothing". In my experience, most women are "trustworthy" to the same degree that most humans are trustworthy: I.e. most women are not interested in forming a conspiracy to promote power of women over men. It simply isn't a thought that occurs to them, just like how it doesn't occur to most curly-haired people to form a conspiracy to promote p…
/r/MensRights04/03/12 06:39 PM
65

Its feminists that have the credibility problem. /r/MensRights does have a credibility problem in many of the other subreddits. Regardless of whether or not feminists have a credibility problem, that doesn't address the question of what we should do about our problem.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 06:31 PM
1

Yeah, I disagreed with Geodebug regarding the subdued vs punch thing, but that's not sufficient to make them a complete idiot in my book.
/r/MensRights30/01/12 05:43 PM
1

Geodebug is not a complete idiot. (S)he has been courteous and has well argued points. It's okay to have different opinions.
/r/MensRights30/01/12 01:07 PM
0

Yeah, I'm pretty disappointed in /r/MensRights for the downvotes you've been getting.
/r/MensRights30/01/12 11:32 AM
3

Ok, thanks for clarifying.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 11:46 PM
1

Thanks, though to be fair that's just one person, and in /r/atheism rather than one of the self-labelled feminism subreddits.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 07:50 PM
3

Sorry, I didn't understand the rest of your comment (sounds like it's referring to an argument that I did not witness), but I just wanted to clarify one thing: But the thing is, he thinks he is. My whole point is that he might be lying. I.e. he says he's gay, but he doesn't really think he's gay. Just like I can say I have 3 nipples, but I don't really think I have 3 nipples. I would be willfully and knowingly lying about the existence of my 3rd nipple.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 07:48 PM
12

Hitting her and repeating "why she slap?!?" over and over are signs that he was a danger to the set. He didn't "hit" her. He slapped her, which is exactly what she did to him. In that regard, they are of equal danger to each other, because they both engaged in the same amount of violence. Repeating "why she slap???" (actually "how can she slap?") is not a sign of preparation to engage in violence to me, but rather as fearful justification of his action because he can see he's about to get his as…
/r/MensRights29/01/12 07:39 PM
5

I guess it depends on your definition of gay. If your definition is "sexually attracted to other males", then merely calling yourself gay doesn't necessarily mean that you really are attracted to other males -- you might be lying.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 07:01 PM
2

Do you have links showing "them" calling this subreddit "RapistsRights"?
/r/MensRights29/01/12 06:58 PM
6

I concede to your assessment of the video, but I still think if I rephrase "bunch of guys" to "2 guys", my point still stands.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 06:37 PM
11

The man wasn't 'mauled' but subdued because he was going apeshit. Other than the initial pushing match with the host (since they go out of frame for a second you can't tell what happened) the men came in to hold him down. Are you kidding me? I don't see him going "apeshit". He is clearly upset (as is she), but there is no indication that he attempting to perform any further violence than the slap he gave in exchange for the slap she gave. And you can very clearly see at 2:09, the person in the w…
/r/MensRights29/01/12 06:32 PM
5

Your untargeted accusation of hypocrisy makes false assumptions. Do you believe that the majority of people who bash feminists for bringing up women's issue in other countries simultaneously grant freedom to MRAs to bring up men's issues? Do you believe that the majority of people who grant freedom to MRAs to bring up men's issues simultaneously bash feminists? Do you accept the claim that MRAs, like feminists, are a diverse group, of which each member may have their own opinions? MRAs get bashe…
/r/MensRights29/01/12 06:21 PM
6

When he slapped back, that kind of broke the illusion built up around The Goddess and threatened the TV show's ratings. Hence the swift retribution towards the guy, but not the girl. (A bad choice, in my opinion. Simply airing a re-run would've been much better for their PR than showing some man getting mauled.) You make it sound like the producers saw the guy slapped, made a rational assessment of the situation, and instructed via wireless headset for a mob of men to attack the contestant in or…
/r/MensRights29/01/12 06:14 PM
2

That's why I wrote "hould do a large proportion of the generalist-tasks". She doesn't make all the sandwiches. Perhaps she does 75% of the sandwiches, and he does 25% of the sandwiches and 100% of the car repairs.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 04:41 PM
9

I'm not claiming that no one has ever heard a whisper they were not intended to hear ever, but what I am ready to claim is that there is a sufficiently intricate number of coincidences that need to be involved that it's perfectly plausible that no one has ever had their feelings hurt as a result of the "game" that the OP has played. For such an event to happen, recall that first of all, the OP must find a person whose beauty is so remarkable, that he believes it warrants being pointed out to his…
/r/MensRights03/01/12 09:12 AM
6

They are walking around pointing out people and commenting on them. Perhaps, but the neither of them are going around pointing out ugly people (at least, not intentionally). The guy is pointing someone out with the belief that said person is pretty. The wife did not point anyone out, she is simply disagreeing with the guy's assessment. They are certainly not walking up to people and telling them, to their face, that they are ugly, as you had explicitly stated earlier in the thread.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 08:34 AM
11

What you posted just now is a totally inappropriate ad hominem.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 08:00 AM
12

I'm saying don't go out into a public place and make a game of pointing out ugly PEOPLE I think people are aware that this is what you are saying. The confusion and downvotes seem to be due to the fact that nobody is suggesting to anyone to go into a public place and make a game of pointing out ugly people, and yet you continue to repeat your arguments against pointing out ugly people.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 07:59 AM
2

You should probably update 15 to say exactly this, then, so there are fewer flaws in the list to criticize.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 07:41 AM
1

I'm assuming "30. Even if I don't, a male is usually expected to pay for me." should be "30. Even if I don't ask, a male is usually expected to pay for me."
/r/MensRights03/01/12 07:32 AM
2

I don't understand "10. Other cases of abuse are not given the same priority. Child abuse is only sexual in nature."
/r/MensRights03/01/12 07:30 AM
2

In an ideal world, everyone would have all skills to perform all tasks, but in practice, different people have different skills in different areas. In some areas, people may in fact have zero skills (e.g. I have zero heart-surgery skills). My personal interpretation of the OP wasn't a reinforcement of gender roles: I didn't see the image as saying only women should make sandwiches and only men should fix cars. Instead, my interpretation was that this particular man can fix cars, and he feels tha…
/r/MensRights03/01/12 07:19 AM
4

It might not be an inability to make sandwich so much as a "We're both able to do general tasks, but I have 'specialist skills' as a car mechanic, so you, who do not have any specialists skills at all, should do a large proportion of the generalist-tasks to compensate for the specialists skills which are not evenly divided (because I am the only one capable of doing them), such that we end up with an equal division of labor."
/r/MensRights03/01/12 07:13 AM
2

Maybe it's not so much the degree to which a person of a particular gender is open to sexuality, as to whether their sexual arousal derives more from observing body shape versus observing behaviour.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 09:08 PM
2

It's an interesting question: Which is better "Everybody suffers equally and a lot" or "Group A suffers a little, group B suffers a lot"?
/r/MensRights30/08/11 01:38 PM
1

Assuming you're mainly referring to North American culture, we're more of a representative democracy than a pure one: We don't vote on specific laws, for example, but rather on people who we then "trust" to implement laws for us. Good evidence of this is that everybody pirates music, so if the majority were truly in charge of the law, pirating music would have been legal by now.
/r/MensRights30/08/11 01:36 PM
1

I don't see the cause-and-effect relation here. Are you implying that it's women who are in control of law creation?
/r/MensRights29/08/11 09:41 PM
1

But apparently, not old enough.
/r/MensRights29/08/11 09:40 PM
3

Clearly, you can't be 100% in control of your kids (e.g. you wouldn't want to control their breathing rates or their bowel movements), so really the question is: What aspects of a child's life do you want to control, and what aspects do you want to grant them freedom? I suspect (but am unsure) that the general consensus is: The more freedom you can grant a kid without them messing up their lives, the more successful you are as a parent. Are we in agreement thus far?
/r/MensRights29/08/11 07:28 PM
4

not being effective parents to where your 14 year old is having enough free time to fuck is a failure in my book. Are you saying that one measure of success in parenting is how much free time your kid has?
/r/MensRights29/08/11 06:01 PM
137

To be fair, it's the attorney's job to say whatever needs to be said in the best interest of their clients.
/r/MensRights29/08/11 03:30 PM
3

At the time of writing, this post has 21 comments, and none of them actually say "WHOA WHAT A LUCKY KID". The comments which are closest to that are: I open the pic, and all I think is "those girls are pretty hot." [1] but fuck, I would want to be that kid! :) [2] As I was a horny kid and I would've loved it. [3] The distinction being that while "Whoa what a lucky kid" may be projection of one's own likes and dislikes onto a stranger, the comments being made here refer only to oneself, and thus …
/r/MensRights19/08/11 11:39 AM
1

I think you're mistaken. There's 3 levels here: /r/AgainstMensRight highlighted this thread that I'm posting in right now, and it has 6 upvotes and 0 downvotes at the time of writing. The thread you and I are posting right now has 15 upvotes and 18 downvotes. The only two top level comments is the one written by you that I am replying to right now, and the one by devotedpupa discouraging MRA's participation in that thread. The comment you made is at 0. I understand that most people see themselve…
/r/MensRights12/08/11 03:23 AM
2

I was with you until you wrote "don't ever compare men's rights issues with black rights issues". Someone may write on their facebook wall "Fucking niggers are always stealing shit" and they may be referring to one particular black person, but I don't see why this would be an unacceptable form of racism, but someone writing "men", but referring to one particular man, should be seen as an acceptable form of sexism. mocking minorities is generally less culturally accepted than mocking half the pla…
/r/MensRights12/08/11 03:14 AM
7

They chicks conclude that "the guy should not have to pay child support if he was raped. He should have to pay if he wasn't raped" There's the issue of why it is always automatically assumed to be the guy's responsibility to pay for child support (e.g. what if the women in this situation had a significantly higher income than the man?). The fact that men are stronger than women, and that the woman he was allegedly raped by was in a relationship with him are pretty relevant issues in determining …
/r/MensRights12/08/11 01:20 AM
18

Also, and the fact that those girls were only worried about how big the women who committed the crime really irritated me. "...women also can commit an act of rape with force or deception." Also, many ways via societal pressure: The guy could live in a society where it is just assumed that all men constantly want to have sex, and so if he objects strongly to sex, he's a fag. And so he only gives minor protest before unwillingly going through the motions due to insecurity. The guy could strongly …
/r/MensRights12/08/11 01:18 AM
3

The OP is claiming that identifying yourself as being male is sufficient to get your comment deleted, regardless of whether you made "inflammatory comments" or not, and regardless of whether you came "to r/mensright to complain". So these men whose existence we are not denying would still be prevented from participating in /r/feminisms.
/r/MensRights18/07/11 06:49 PM
2

Why the hell would a bunch of men care about r/feminisms? Maybe because those men are feminists and wish to participate in discussion with fellow feminists?
/r/MensRights18/07/11 06:42 PM
4

Is it really that big of a deal though? There's a sizable number of people who dislike /r/MensRights, and one of them is gonna be the most prolific writer of the group. In this case, it just so happens to be Aerik. So what? I think our time and energy is better spent elsewhere.
/r/MensRights19/06/11 05:30 PM
1

Girls don't approach me on online dating sites.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 09:58 PM
1

in certain situations, we're more comfortable with certain genders. Right, all the more reason we should ask the patient what their preferences are like the OP tried to do, rather than impose our own expectations upon them, like the tour guide tried to do. I'm speaking to the principle. I think so is everyone else in this thread.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 09:57 PM
1

I had lots of problems with females accusing me of shit I wasnt doing. Why? And like what?
/r/MensRights13/06/11 09:49 PM
6

First of all, MPA is the accurate name for someone who calls themselves an MRA. If someone is calling themselves an Men's Right Activitist, but you feel that they are not actually promoting men's rights, then a less offensive term you could use is "self-proclaimed MRA". This is similar to how sometimes a person will call themselves a feminist, but rather than focusing on promoting equal rights for women, they may focus on promoting female superiority over males. Rather than making a blanket stat…
/r/MensRights12/06/11 01:05 AM
3

I wouldn't say the fear of rape is overblown, it occurs to many people (1 in 3 for women, 1 in 6 for men*) These figures are very surprising. It seems to imply that if I know, say, 20 women, almost certainly at least one of them has been raped.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 09:04 PM
16

If you're trying to argue a point, or persuade someone towards your viewpoint, name-mocking and ad hominems are generally considered poor form and will detract and weaken your argument. It's hard for me to take your post seriously, except perhaps to reply "Well, maybe that's true for MPAs, but most people here are MRAs, and we allow feminists to raise whatever issues they like, and we will try to accommodate their viewpoints in a reasonable manner. Freedom of speech and all that."
/r/MensRights11/06/11 08:51 PM
2

like being "safe" from terrorism, it simply doesn't exist, even though we would love for that to be true It's an interesting analogy, because I think it's generally accepted that the fear of terrorism is overblown. You don't have to put much effort to be "safe from terrorism", because chances are you're already pretty safe from terrorism. Most people won't get "terrorized" (for lack of a better word); they fear terrorism disproportionately. Could it be that the fear of rape is overblown, that mo…
/r/MensRights11/06/11 08:42 PM
7

What's an MPA?
/r/MensRights11/06/11 08:38 PM
9

The reporter says "It's a prank that, some would say, went too far" (emphasis added). Who would be willing to say that it hasn't gone far enough?
/r/MensRights09/06/11 02:50 AM
1

It's the same incident, not a copycat.
/r/MensRights09/06/11 02:49 AM
4

Any subreddit can "redefine" any term it wishes for the purposes of that particular subreddit. The fact the /r/feminisms (re)defined "sexism" in that matter leaves a sour taste in my mouth, but in general, I have nothing against "redefinitions".
/r/MensRights09/06/11 02:06 AM
2

So go post it.
/r/MensRights04/06/11 09:49 AM
2

The video says the girls are in 8th grade, so I'd assume they are approximately 13 years old.
/r/MensRights04/06/11 09:49 AM
9

We all must serve our emperor, who guards us form the huns. A man by bearing arms; A girl by bearing sons.
/r/MensRights09/03/11 02:29 AM
5

Ssssssssssssssssssss
/r/MensRights28/02/11 10:25 PM
1

I don't think it's useful to treat MRAs as a single entity with a unified vision, and thus it doesn't make sense to talk about what MRAs "want" or "feels", except perhaps the vague and tautological "MRAs want for men to have rights" and "MRAs feel like men do not currently have sufficient rights." So the answer to your question is "There probably exists at least one MRA in the world who wants women to alter their behaviour, and there probably exists at least one MRA in the world who doesn't want…
/r/MensRights25/11/10 09:05 AM
1

When pronouns come up, they tend to favour "him" or "he". I noticed this because I always thought of the rabbit as female until I heard the characters refer to rabbit as "he".
/r/MensRights24/11/10 11:01 PM
1

Okay, thanks for the clarification.
/r/MensRights24/11/10 11:00 PM
3

Simplification, maybe. but it's not a strawman. Nowhere in the quoted text do I see any evidence to support the argument "Disney wants to make movies for boys and girls" and nowhere in the quoted text do I see any evidence to support the argument "The author is arguing against the strawman 'Disney wants to make movies for boys and girls'". and what's good about these three anyway: (Snow White, Ariel, and Jasmine)? I dunno. We could get into it, but it'd be a pretty radical change of topic. Is it…
/r/MensRights24/11/10 03:46 PM
5

The title of this post is misleading; there is no indication in the article that "Disney wants to make movies for boys and girls", and there is no indication that it's to this particular strawman that the author is decrying "That's sexist!" I don't agree with the author's position, but I also disapprove of sensationalist headlines in this subreddit.
/r/MensRights24/11/10 03:08 PM
6

I fucking hate people who are in the process of realizing they're being hypocritical. Wait... shit...
/r/MensRights16/11/10 01:47 AM
1

This comment is 3 hours earlier.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 04:31 PM
1

I was trying to do that meme, where you'd be like "No, you're thinking of Rating. A ratio is a [make up some new misunderstanding for a similar word]".
/r/MensRights15/10/10 04:29 AM
1

Isn't that an appraisal of the value of something?
/r/MensRights15/10/10 03:55 AM
1

The hypothetical situation I brought up (girl reports some form of sexual assault, but doesn't want the boy to be punished, but the authorities punish the boy anyway) actually occured: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/sex-politics-goes-too-far/story-e6frfhqf-1225938378997 The mother says the girls have sent the boys text messages saying they're sorry and they wish they could take it all back.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 12:51 AM
1

For once mensrights can't blame everything on feminism. Rather here is a perfect example of male culture refusing to accept men as a victim. Especially since most redditors are male and would, stereotypically "love this to happen to me". Out of curiosity, what was your goal in posting this?
/r/MensRights13/10/10 05:43 PM
7

He even says he feels guilty for enjoying it when he thought it was a dream. It's not unheard of for a woman to get raped and feel guilty for enjoying it.
/r/MensRights13/10/10 05:35 PM
1

I think what we really "need" is for people to stop going around to highschools telling boys that any time a girl doesn't consent to something, then you're raping her. These people are contributing to the lowering of the bar for rape accusations.
/r/MensRights13/10/10 05:30 PM
3

I don't disagree with your points, but I wouldn't have used your "moderator" powers for this particular post, as it sounds like an Appeal to Authority fallacy.
/r/MensRights30/09/10 03:07 PM
1

Okay, thanks for answering my question. =)
/r/MensRights16/09/10 03:16 AM
1

She didn't intentionally put the man in court. She simply reported rape, because she did not give consent to sex, and the law says that non-consensual sex is rape, and according to her upbringing, one should always report any crime they've witnessed. Now it has become a criminal case, and out of her control. She cannot "drop the charges" as one might be able to do in a civil case. In a criminal case, the prosecution is the state, not the woman. She seriously regrets having reported the case, not…
/r/MensRights15/09/10 01:17 AM
1

Problem is, we have NO PROOF he is telling the truth or not Taking the example scenario I gave again, let's say the woman does not dispute any of the facts that the guy stated. The guy says he was under the impression that she was consenting. The woman swears, under oath, that she too thinks that the guy was under that impression. The guy swears under oath he put the moves, and she reciprocated, and was on top. She swears, under oath, that all of this is true. The woman maintains, however, that …
/r/MensRights15/09/10 01:06 AM
1

Okay, how about a guy sleeps with a girl. The guy is under the impression that she was consenting, because she didn't physical resist, nor say "no" or anything like that. He just put the moves on her, and she reciprocated (hell, she was even on top for part of the love-making session). Next day, for whatever reason, she says it was never consensual in the first place, and tells everyone that she was rape. Police take sperm sample and do in fact find his sperm in her. He's convicted as a rapist, …
/r/MensRights15/09/10 12:51 AM
0

It's unfortunate that you are being downvoted repeatedly instead of debated with. A rapist might ruin dozens of lives if free, or (s)he might ruin zero if free. An innocent man, if imprisoned might hurt only him his family, but he might have ruined dozens of lives if gone free (via perfectly legal means, no less). The point I am subtly hinting at is there is an unspoken assumption that a lot of people seem to be making, which is that someone who has raped at least once in the past is likely to d…
/r/MensRights15/09/10 12:34 AM
5

"I thought she was a different girl."
/r/MensRights22/08/10 12:42 AM
1

Yes, and 110 pound skinny white guys are generally not as strong as 195 pound muscular [some stereotypically tough race] guys. To be honest, I haven't done much research, but I've never heard of a man with no physical disabilities (e.g. not in a wheelchair, or blind) being rejected from the army. I thought the army, generally speaking, was more than happy to take whoever they could get. And if you're not strong going in, well, they'll make you strong.
/r/MensRights01/07/10 09:20 PM
6

Hell, I've even been known to clean house in a french maid outfit ;) Specifically to look sexy while doing it? Or is there another reason?
/r/MensRights01/07/10 07:39 PM
9

No, they just need to train harder. You think just because a skinny white guy happens to weight 110 pound, they don't put him on active duty?
/r/MensRights01/07/10 07:36 PM
2

Atomic parrot, by his own admission, is engaged in dialog poisoning regarding feminism and its excesses. Citation?
/r/MensRights01/07/10 12:27 AM
2

Does the same thing happen to the girl who cries wolf?
/r/MensRights30/06/10 11:57 PM
2

From the article: Riker claimed a man driving a silver Toyota approached her in the parking lot of a CVS store and forced her into his car near Powers Drive and Silver Star Road, police said. [...] Riker later admitted to police that she had been talking to the man on Facebook for the past two days So I think she did in fact say who the man was.
/r/MensRights30/06/10 11:56 PM
2

Seems like the rational for such a large punishment is due to repeated offense, rather than looking at one crime in isolation.
/r/MensRights16/06/10 04:44 PM
9

No one needs 4k a month to live. He's receiving approximately 16k a month.
/r/MensRights15/06/10 03:00 AM
3

porn is free only if your time is worth nothing. =-) Quite often, you don't even need to do anything to find porn. Banners and the like will find you (and you don't even need to live in Soviet Russia!) I could understand paying for porn if you have an obscure fetish, and the supply isn't meeting the demand... but if you have pretty vanilla kinks, then probably in the type it takes you to type in your favorite porn site's url, you could have just as easily typed in "porn" into a google search.
/r/MensRights19/04/10 11:18 PM
5

The boys are not her friends? I would assume that with a name like "The Colony Girls", the group does not allow males amongst their ranks...
/r/MensRights03/04/10 01:55 AM
0

If there's a court order forcing me to have them spend a couple of days over there, then I'd probably would make them go, unless the daughters were to go into hysterics and absolutely refuse to go except kicking and screaming, in which case I'd have to ask around for advice on what to do. I'd see what I could do to calm the elder daughter's fears, perhaps buying her a cell phone and letting her know she can call me or the police if there's ever any trouble.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 02:00 AM
1

I'm going to offer you a hypothetical which illustrates to you the possibility why "the judge feels the children may be in danger at night and not during the day". I'm not claiming this is the actual situation that the man and his daughters are in. Perhaps the father is a non-violent pedophile. In other words, yes, he gets off to young girls, but he's not gonna rape anyone or anything that. He won't grab the girls by the wrist, and forcibly lift their skirts to get a peek at their panties. But i…
/r/MensRights29/03/10 10:42 PM
3

The "He created links and shortcuts to child porn sites" is a pretty good clue that the article is trying to make things sound as nefarious as possible. "Oh no, he clicked the 'bookmark' button. That means he is CREATING CHILD-PORN RELATED CONTENT!!!"
/r/MensRights29/03/10 10:36 PM
1

It's sad that the man still faces persecution even after the authorities explicitly said he is innocent beyond any reasonable doubt.
/r/MensRights19/01/10 09:26 AM
2

Even if you take a purely cold, calculating, rational approach to this (which I, as someone on the autistic spectrum, am often accused of doing), there seems to be more for us to gain here to assume good intentions than bad ones.
/r/MensRights07/01/10 03:13 PM
2

He is accused of inappropriately touching, not merely touching. I recommend against posting this kind of stuff to MensRight. A lot of people don't take Men's right issues seriously, and I think this kind of stuff serves as ammunition to further mock this cause.
/r/MensRights05/01/10 08:16 PM
15

I can't wait for that Mother's Day tradition when SALARY.COM "pretends" that stay-at-home-momming is worth 150k per year. It'd be funny if this was used as evidence in divorce court. "Your honor, clearly this woman makes much more money than I do, so she should be sending me monthly checks."
/r/MensRights29/12/09 09:53 PM
1

I agree with almost everything you wrote. I want to address one disagreement in particular, though: Perhaps I've just known a lot of great feminists, but no one I know thinks that it's acceptable for someone to abuse their partner, regardless of gender. Rather than naming any one feminist in particular, I'm going to argue that (north american) society in general finds it "more acceptable" for a woman to abuse a man, than the other way around. The evidence I present for this argument are any mode…
/r/MensRights11/12/09 06:39 PM
1

Continued from part 1. Part 2: (2) "Men create wars" is a radical, essentialist argument, and not really part of equality feminism. This is cherrypicking of radicalism by the editor. If I were writing an article about men's rights, I wouldn't cite Brigham Young or the rappers of "Kill the Bitch" as an example of men's rights supporters or ideology. This is not honest criticism. I think the problem here is that you interpret the article as a criticism on feminism itself. For me, this article is m…
/r/MensRights11/12/09 06:26 PM
2

My reply is too long, so I'll split it in two parts. (9) The problem of gender inequality in schools is multifaceted and varied across cultures. Agreed. Women are graduating more from schools because women increasingly have to (and choose to) work to support themselves, and careers require degrees. Yes, but men also have to work to support themselves, and they need degrees to get careers too; so I'm not sure why you're emphasizing this as a "woman's problem" rather than a "person's problem". Not…
/r/MensRights11/12/09 06:26 PM
7

7 concedes that women are "more afraid" and that men are stronger. I do not claim that this therefore puts more blame on men; however, I am pointing out that someone you are arguing with (debating against?) will latch onto these concessions to weaken your argument. So it'd be nice if there were another way to phrase this. 5 basically says "life sucks for men too", but doesn't actually outright deny that men oppress women. In other words, it doesn't refute the myth that it's claiming to refute. 4…
/r/MensRights10/12/09 11:05 PM
2

We can continue to do things as you seem to prefer I think you are reading too much into my reply. I agree with almost everything you say in your 2nd, 3rd and 4th paragraph, but it sounds like you suspect I disagree. So I hope this clarifies my position a little bit.
/r/MensRights30/11/09 06:38 PM
3

The list goes on http://www.google.ca/search?q=define:+feminism And if you go on, later in the list it says: The word feminism means many things to many people. Though Catherine MacKinnon's understanding of what feminism ought to mean does not represent all feminism, her definition of feminist theory is helpful as a general characterization Thus providing evidence for the claim that the term "feminism" means different things to different people.
/r/MensRights30/11/09 06:02 PM
1

It's a fair point that she never explicitly says that she is a feminist, but she never explicitly says a lot of things about her from which we are safe to infer. For example, she never says that she is female, nor that she is a journalist (or is it "writer"? or "interviewer"?), etc. Here's a quote that implies she feels like she can be a spokesperson for feminism, ready to give the "real" definition: Even in my line of work, whereas once during interviews one might have spent time defining it [f…
/r/MensRights30/11/09 05:58 PM
1

Depending on your definition of "sexist", possibly yes.
/r/MensRights30/11/09 03:38 PM
1

I'm not sure if you're using irony or not, which makes me unsure of whether to upvote you or not.
/r/MensRights27/11/09 10:33 PM
1

I just realized I made a typo in the submission title. It should say "40% of aggressive violence victims are men".
/r/MensRights27/11/09 10:32 PM
6

I never understand people who can simultaneously: Believe they are for equality. Throw a hissy fit when you reverse roles in a slogan.
/r/MensRights25/11/09 09:32 PM
7

I don't think it's ethical for police officers to make accusations which they know are false, e.g. that they found this guy's fingerprints in the bedroom and they have a videotape of him, etc.
/r/MensRights11/11/09 03:34 AM
1

Where did you work?
/r/MensRights05/11/09 08:42 PM
1

Ok, thanks.
/r/MensRights08/10/09 04:35 PM
10

I could come up with two explanations for why DNA evidence would result in fewer rape-reports: Because men know that they are more likely to get caught, they attempt rape less often. Because women know that they are more likely to get caught, they falsely accuse of rape less often. I'm trying to figure out which explanation is more likely, and I'm uncomfortably edging towards number 2. Why? Because from what I've heard, when a person is raped, it's usually by someone they know (an acquaintance, …
/r/MensRights08/10/09 03:53 AM
2

Maybe if we started a movement where men ask, "So are you gonna ask me out or not?" instead of the standard, "Would you like to go out sometime?" it would speed the process, hehe. I tried that (inviting the girl to ask me out, instead of directly asking her out). Not very effective at all. The girls are still too terrified to take the risk, even though it's almost guaranteed I would accept, since I'm the one asking her to ask me out.
/r/MensRights26/08/09 12:43 AM
5

I have the right to have the overwhelming majority of personal risk suffered in defense of my country handled by others. REPLY: Women in the military have been trying to be allowed in combat for decades. It's the male military and governmental authorities that won't allow them. In other words, both sides suffer from gender inequality. The men who want to get out of military duty, can't; and the women who want to get in, can't. That's why I'd rather we focus less on "us-versus-them" and more on "…
/r/MensRights24/08/09 08:44 PM
11

I would like to know which 'risky behaviors' men are forced into? This is genuine interest since I do believe they have a choice. Here's one very common example: In north american society (I can't speak for other societies; no first hand experience) men are expected to initiate any romantic approach with women. When I asked women why they don't try asking out men whom they are attracted to, the reply is almost always a variation of "I'm scared of rejection." Well, guess what: men are scared of r…
/r/MensRights24/08/09 08:39 PM
10

Whose experience? In my field (computer programming), both at the university level and the workplace, people think it's splendid that there are any women here at all. We really don't care how competent they are. As long as they're female, we want them (which often means financial aid in paying for tuition, or consideration for employment over other potentially more qualified candidates).
/r/MensRights24/08/09 08:18 PM
1

If you miss a key point you're lost forever. Or you could rewind. Text and video both have their benefits. Text is more easily searchable, so if you have more than 10 paragraphs, I'd probably prefer text. But the nice thing about video (or basically audio, since the main content here is in the audio) is that I can start playing it, and then switch to another window, and work on something else while still absorbing the info.
/r/MensRights07/08/09 02:30 PM
-2

men seeking to enter the domestic sphere are afforded nothing, least of all encouragement. Eh, a family member of mine is a stay-at-home dad. With the exception of an extreme minority of women, he's completely accepted in the stay-at-home parent social circles. Yes, he's accepted, but is he encouraged? Are there affirmative action campaigns that try to assign him compensations above and beyond what he would achieve via merit alone, simply due to his gender, and that having more males entering th…
/r/MensRights07/08/09 02:01 PM
2

How did he convince the police/jury/whatever of his innocence?
/r/MensRights10/07/09 08:04 PM
3

Your idea is not bad, but I would add that if the woman goes around raping people, then in addition to taking the child away from her, she should also be required to make financial payments (either to the father, or the to government, which then funds the orphanage). Otherwise, you may have women who introduce financial strain into the system (especially in the case where the child is going to the orphanage), without having any repurcussions for her actions.
/r/MensRights18/06/09 06:23 PM
5

if you have two underage kids statutorily raping each other, he's responsible. Why wouldn't both parties be equally responsible? Shouldn't we be striving for gender equality here?
/r/MensRights18/06/09 06:20 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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