TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Nikola_S Archive

View 3 posts and 187 comments by Nikola_S 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

No. I explicitly said it was balanced.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 10:26 PM
5

How is being responsible for another person's debts a privilege? A privilege for men would be if a woman were responsible for her husband's debts. Here we see that economic rights were balanced: by marrying, a woman loses the right to her property, but gains the right to make debts in her husband's name.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 10:58 AM
1

If what they said would be convincing to a reasonable person, then yes.
/r/MensRights22/10/15 04:53 PM
1

You should not expect an establishment of an entire legal branch in a single Reddit comment. Probably, a reasonable standard would be created such that it is the most positive possible for a defendant. So, having sex with a person of age who looks underage should be legal (since there is no actus reus), and having sex with an underage person who looks of age should be legal too (since there is no mens rea).
/r/MensRights21/10/15 05:49 PM
2

And how do you fix it, because if you say 's/he lied' is a defense, then every girl/boy who has an older boy/girlfriend charged will claim that they lied about their age By proving that a person looks their age old to a reasonable person. the courts will have a hard time proving that the adult knew beyond a reasonable doubt. As it should be.
/r/MensRights21/10/15 06:22 AM
1

These extremists are not the humanity.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 04:27 PM
2

Not every woman wants to do it, but every woman is legally able to do it, and that's what is frightening. Also, practically no woman wants that this legal state is changed.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 08:30 AM
2

And, ironically, she was (positively) discriminated.
/r/MensRights27/02/12 03:49 PM
-2

It is very similar. As far as we know, this girl fully supported feminism. This picture was used for a long time to promote feminist causes. Of course, her attitude has nothing to do with the picture, but that is the point.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 01:26 PM
0

Not really. Real and realistic images are used in advertising, this one is neither. Anyway, it is common knowledge that the guy who advertised Marlboro died of lung cancer, so why wouldn't this be common knowledge too?
/r/MensRights27/01/12 12:51 PM
0

It shows the levels of lie and deceit that are used in feminist propaganda.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 11:41 AM
31

I disagree. It underscores very well the fact that stealing money from men by women is considered funny.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 03:40 AM
0

science is science Not really. In the current feminist climate, if research would reach the opposite conclusion, its results couldn't be published and wouldn't be spread. It is perfectly possible that there are several studies with the opposite conclusion we can't know about.
/r/MensRights04/12/11 07:07 PM
7

Please don't degrade the word "thinking" by applying it to this.
/r/MensRights10/11/11 04:41 AM
1

why would anyone have the right to tell you which gender roles to fit into? Why would anyone not have that right? Free speech and all that?
/r/MensRights05/10/11 06:46 PM
7

In order to show downvote arrows, enter this as URL: javascript:void $('.arrow').css('visibility', 'visible').css('display', 'block')
/r/MensRights22/07/11 01:31 PM
0

Well previously you said: If some men wield power, then yes, get what, men as a gender are the ones who control that so I'm glad that you've corrected yourself :)
/r/MensRights11/07/11 07:22 AM
1

No, it does not. It is a common fallacy of hasty generalization. If 80% of criminals are black, it does not mean that blacks as a race are criminals.
/r/MensRights10/07/11 08:08 PM
-1

You don't think that your woman being able to cheat on you and you not being able to do anything about it is a legitimate problem? It is absolutely not a problem. I don't think anyone could honestly think that, so let's end our conversation here.
/r/MensRights10/07/11 11:23 AM
0

I don't this the problems Letgoofmynose is talking about are legitimate problems in the first place. You don't think that your woman being able to cheat on you and you not being able to do anything about it is a legitimate problem? I do not think anyone should be formally punished for consensual sex between adults. Is it really consensual when the husband didn't consented? I think women should be able to compete with men in the work force. I think men and women should have equal rights as much a…
/r/MensRights10/07/11 11:06 AM
0

A solution to women cheating without any consequences.
/r/MensRights10/07/11 11:01 AM
1

And it is that kind of thinking that created the problems that mwPlusOne was talking about in the first place: whenever a woman cheats on a man or leaves him as easy as it naturally comes to her, she isn't held accountable to it, and it's simply accepted. If you have any other solution, let me hear it.
/r/MensRights10/07/11 10:46 AM
1

Why do you think so?
/r/MensRights10/07/11 09:51 AM
1

It depends on place and time, but generally we are talking about man getting the children, woman not getting alimony, and not being allowed to remarry.
/r/MensRights10/07/11 09:38 AM
1

men still rule the world and hold upwards 80+% of the power (these are rich men, but men all the same) This is a common fallacy. Perhaps 80% of people who hold power are men, but that doesn't mean that men don't hold 80% of power.
/r/MensRights10/07/11 06:31 AM
1

whenever a woman cheats on a man or leaves him as easy as it naturally comes to her, she isn't held accountable to it, and it's simply accepted. Making adultery committed by women illegal? It would be hard to make adultery illegal, but in past this was solved by woman being found guilty in the divorce. It is the no-fault divorce that introduced this problem.
/r/MensRights10/07/11 06:29 AM
-2

Also, if children are exposed exclusively to this kind of stories, they will start thinking that abandoning children is something normal and will be more likely to abandon their own children later on.
/r/MensRights27/06/11 12:49 PM
1

No, it's nonsense. I started a reply here.
/r/MensRights09/06/11 05:26 PM
1

I just wanted to submit this link asking for someone to refute it.
/r/MensRights09/06/11 04:50 PM
1

"Gender" is used instead of "sex" in order to make sexes seem arbitrary and less relevant.
/r/MensRights28/05/11 02:26 PM
1

Everyone's against you because of the money; it doesn't matter whether you are right. Although I often do wonder how much is what they are doing conscious and how much subconscious.
/r/MensRights02/03/11 04:47 PM
2

I'm quite amazed that the grand majority of them continue to write the same tripe, never learning anything. You assume that they don't know that they're lying. They do, they just do it for the money or whatever gain they have.
/r/MensRights02/03/11 07:25 AM
10

Explain to me, then, why there is a divide between whites and non-whites? Generally curious. Because in one period of history European countries happened to have such a technological supremacy over all other countries that they were able to subjugate almost all of them, and given that Europe is populated by whites, it stands to reason that most European rulers were white. "Yes. But everyone can vote equally." See above for why that was absolutely false less than a generation ago and still somewh…
/r/MensRights27/02/11 08:02 AM
14

Please point me to which fallacy that is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_exclusion If you really think white males haven't been the oppressors in history, then I want to know what history books you read. Standard school history textbooks mostly. Yep, most oppressors were white, but utmost majority of whites weren't oppressors. Have you or your family ever voted? Yes. But everyone can vote equally. I think that before Communism only rich could vote, but my ancestors weren't rich, and so …
/r/MensRights27/02/11 07:23 AM
13

Because white men have made the rules for western society for most of recent history. This is a common feminist (and not only feminist) fallacy. Just because people who made the rules were mostly white men, it doesn't mean that white men were making the rules. I am a white man, yet I never made any rule, nor did anyone I know, nor anyone from my family, or my ancestors, and so on. Because white men are disproportionately more privileged than non-white men. What are my privileges and how do I cla…
/r/MensRights27/02/11 06:30 AM
2

I view sterilization of humans as disgusting intentional self-crippling. It's forbidden where I live anyway.
/r/MensRights31/01/11 11:09 AM
1

And my biggest question is how the hell are they going to try to prove this. He said she said about something that happened 50 years ago?
/r/MensRights20/01/11 10:14 AM
1

They're.
/r/MensRights07/01/11 07:29 PM
2

Plant rights!
/r/MensRights07/01/11 03:35 PM
7

"Sweden is the Saudi Arabia of feminism" - Julian Assange. This quote could be used so well :)
/r/MensRights27/12/10 09:08 AM
1

His lack of trust was warranted; therefore it was not a trust issue but merely a lack of trust.
/r/MensRights27/12/10 08:49 AM
1

He doesn't really believe it; he just behaves as if he does because that brings him the largest personal benefit.
/r/MensRights27/12/10 08:48 AM
3

if rape happens at all it happens too frequently That is just fueling the feminist propaganda machine. It is impossible to eradicate all crime. Eventually you come to the point when resources spent to reduce rape would be better spent to reduce other crimes.
/r/MensRights16/12/10 06:38 AM
0

It does not happen too frequently. It has fallen drastically in past few decades. It happens less frequently than is usual. It is less common than usual. And you are part of the problem because you are claiming the opposite. Oh, and fuck you you feminist cunt.
/r/MensRights15/12/10 07:16 PM
-5

Is rape all too common: sure? You are part of the problem. Rape is not "all too common".
/r/MensRights15/12/10 02:03 PM
1

What it does does not include figuring things out.
/r/MensRights09/12/10 07:53 AM
1

The system does not work.
/r/MensRights09/12/10 12:51 AM
1

The courts will figure it out Why do you think that they will?
/r/MensRights08/12/10 01:55 PM
1

Continuing to have sex with a broken condom after the woman said no however is. And this is a Bad Thing we are fighting against.
/r/MensRights08/12/10 01:49 PM
0

Why?
/r/MensRights08/12/10 01:43 PM
1

Exactly. Why is it a bad thing to do to them what they would do to you?
/r/MensRights08/12/10 01:41 PM
1

The letter of the law is not followed in practice.
/r/MensRights24/11/10 11:00 AM
5

A sane man will destroy the system that makes men avoid marriage, cohabitation and kids.
/r/MensRights23/11/10 07:29 AM
1

How do you know that she wasn't phrasing her statement in the framework of the particular case. Because she used indefinite article "a man" instead of the definite article "the man". Those who go looking for ghosts tend to find them under every rock. Given the feminist track record, a higher level of concern is warranted. I will note that even if anits8 is correct and there is a global conspiracy by educated women to dominate men, they are sucking at it. Isn't the existence of said conspiracy so…
/r/MensRights18/11/10 07:31 AM
1

So if you are a rape-victim advocate you are a feminist? Yes, if you are a rape-victim advocate that advocates for women and against men you are a feminist. She said "that a man's ability to obtain sex through fraud with regard to who he is is more important than a woman's fundamental right to control her own body" and not, for example, "that ability of one person to obtain sex through fraud is more important than fundamental right of another person to control his or her body". I will gladly sha…
/r/MensRights18/11/10 06:46 AM
1

You haven't been reading carefully. From the 2nd link: The court may have closely followed the letter of the law, but rape victim advocates are outraged. "The message that the court sends today is ... that a man's ability to obtain sex through fraud with regard to who he is is more important than a woman's fundamental right to control her own body," said Wendy J. Murphy, a professor at the New England School of Law.
/r/MensRights18/11/10 06:02 AM
1

There are more Israeli cases than just that man: http://aroundthesphere.wordpress.com/2010/07/21/man-lied-to-get-a-woman-into-bed-in-other-news-the-sky-is-blue/ There is also this: http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet/2007/05/11/rape Or this: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/tm_headline=pilot--raped-woman-in-herpes-treatment-con-&method=full&objectid=18957193&siteid=50082-name_page.html
/r/MensRights17/11/10 07:54 PM
1

The next step for feminists is to introduce the concept of retroactively revocable consent, which means that if consent were based on some misunderstanding or falsehood, it can be retroactively revoked and what at first was a consensual encounter becomes rape after the fact. Either you pulled that out of your own ass or you have a citation waiting that you can zing me with. I'll not hold my breath waiting for the zing. Isn't this already the case? There was that Palestinian man who was sentenced…
/r/MensRights17/11/10 08:34 AM
7

this is just one woman's opinion Not really. This is one woman's opinion that is published and read by a multitude of other people whose opinions it might affect.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 07:32 AM
6

If he had to pay child support, we can infer that he did not in fact treat his children.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 10:47 AM
1

Women can die from complications of the abortion as well.
/r/MensRights05/11/10 11:40 AM
0

Biologically speaking you are no different from an idiot.
/r/MensRights05/11/10 10:57 AM
0

I'm attacking their acceptance of the word "gender".
/r/MensRights31/10/10 01:05 PM
1

IMO, it's OK that you slapped her back, but what you should have done is nothing at all - when she told that you were barging her you should have just left and paid no attention.
/r/MensRights31/10/10 01:00 PM
1

I wrote this before, but it appears that the comment went unseen: The first thing you will need to do is to see whether the reference linked really says that. If it doesn't, you can remove the text or change it to what the reference really says. If it does, you can add another reference, if you have one written by people who at least have the same academic titles as Bancroft and Silverman. Simply change the text to "According to Bancroft and Silverman ..." and add "However, according to X and Y …
/r/MensRights08/10/10 07:43 AM
-2

Of course it doesn't. But it does disprove your idiotic drivel about evil Serbs that who "as they gained territory they would systematically torture and murder Bosnian civilian males" and blah blah nonsense nonsense.
/r/MensRights08/10/10 03:08 AM
-2

My comment was sarcastic, and the ratio is cited already in the idc.org.ba link you submitted; it is only your hatred for Serbs and general lack of intelligence that prevented you from knowing that. Practically nothing of what you said is correct or even provable. It's a bunch of ignorance wrapped in malice. It's more fictional than Harry Potter. It is not real. Oh, and the link is in Serbian, not "in Croation".
/r/MensRights08/10/10 03:04 AM
-2

Indeed it is needed. Plenty of them, in fact.
/r/MensRights07/10/10 05:30 PM
-3

This is nonsense's nonsense. It never had even a passing acquaintance with reality or a brain. There is not a single sentence in this crap that even starts to resemble something that eventually might look like truth. Starting from the fact that a quarter of victims of the war were Serbs and going from there on.
/r/MensRights07/10/10 01:37 PM
6

I don't see why is this being downmodded. Even if for sociopaths other people aren't worth more than a coffee maker, if your coffee maker breaks down on you a hundred times, hell, even five times, you will stop buying coffee makers.
/r/MensRights05/10/10 07:20 AM
1

Sexes, not genders. Please don't bite into the feminist propaganda.
/r/MensRights25/09/10 07:42 AM
4

There are countries that do differently? And how?
/r/MensRights22/09/10 12:05 PM
-5

When a woman does the same thing, usually there are no consequences for her.
/r/MensRights21/09/10 07:06 AM
1

I can't find it now, but here there was this text about working women disproportionately more divorcing stay-at-home men.
/r/MensRights16/09/10 08:23 AM
9

There are no laws that make it easy for men to anally rape children.
/r/MensRights09/07/10 07:50 AM
0

are you proposing that you should be allowed to rob banks if it means you aren't murdering anyone? No, because that's stupid. In addition to being stupid, that's not at all what I said.
/r/MensRights07/07/10 07:24 AM
2

People here often suggest that, so it's a reasonable possibility.
/r/MensRights07/07/10 07:23 AM
0

If you're accused of murder, and your alibi is that you were too busy robbing a bank, you still get charged for robbing a bank. Even if you were forced to rob the bank because that was the only way to make yourself free from accusations of murder?
/r/MensRights07/07/10 06:28 AM
3

They do grasp it, they just don't want others to know that.
/r/MensRights25/04/10 12:09 PM
21

Can you blame her? Yes.
/r/MensRights24/04/10 08:46 PM
1

You don't look at the camera when someone is photographing you? Your passport photo must be very interesting.
/r/MensRights12/03/10 12:09 PM
-2

No, it isn't so. If that were the case, the family would look at the camera.
/r/MensRights12/03/10 03:32 AM
2

Probably a misnaming for the National Association of Secondary School Principals
/r/MensRights09/01/10 05:12 PM
2

Redditors over there could use some help.
/r/MensRights07/01/10 08:05 AM
1

You say that as if I am not an anti-abortion radical.
/r/MensRights05/12/09 12:09 AM
1

You would end up in prison (and rightly so)... How do you mean rightly so? So again, what would it solve? I have just enumerated. You wouldn't necessarily end up in prison, and some people might consider some of the gains be worthy of ending up in prison.
/r/MensRights03/12/09 09:09 PM
4

I'd catch the judge on her way home and beat the fuck out of her. Because that would solve... what? You would feel better. The judge would be punished for her crime. The judge might realize the wrong of her ways. Other judges might reconsider doing similar crimes if they would know that they could be beaten. If you would beat the judge so severely that she dies, you would have prevented her from bringing the same misfortune upon others.
/r/MensRights03/12/09 08:42 PM
1

Use of disproportionate force in self-defense is also appropriate, because it is not practically possible to accurately estimate the justifiable level.
/r/MensRights29/11/09 12:53 AM
5

Violence is perfectly acceptable for defending yourself or others from violence.
/r/MensRights28/11/09 05:15 AM
2

Only of the most of the most important ones.
/r/MensRights26/11/09 08:09 AM
3

Power is willful obedience. If you don't willfully obey, someone can force you to do their bidding, but they have no power over you. Our side has not lost as long as we don't accept any of this as true.
/r/MensRights26/11/09 06:51 AM
2

Recent research by the children's charity NSPCC found one in four girls, some as young as 13, had been slapped or hit by their boyfriends. In other news, four out of four boys had been slapped or hit by their male friends. Rarely is misandry such obviously displayed as in this case.
/r/MensRights25/11/09 11:39 AM
4

case law has made an exception for "changing the atmosphere of a business" If you would want to make a business with white atmosphere, having white walls, floors and ceilings, white furniture, white uniforms and fair-skinned staff, I don't think this would hold for very long.
/r/MensRights21/11/09 08:46 PM
1

Are you implying that I said that all feminists are insane or what?
/r/MensRights18/11/09 07:10 PM
1

But it does mean that the blog of the crazy person will be read by the followers. And it does mean that you should care about the crazy person that is able to gather a large group of followers.
/r/MensRights18/11/09 06:50 PM
1

?
/r/MensRights18/11/09 06:31 PM
-4

I don't care if some batshit insane lady says some stupid crap on a blog that nobody reads. Me neither, but I don't recall such a blog ever been posted. All the blogs I seen here were well-visited, judging from the number of post comments. EDIT: Why the downmods? I'm really curious.
/r/MensRights18/11/09 09:27 AM
0

By the way, the Wikipedia article is a PoS, especially the introduction.
/r/MensRights17/11/09 05:53 PM
1

Feminazis won't have an open discussion anyway.
/r/MensRights17/11/09 05:47 PM
-2

I've come to understand that even the most radical of viewpoints have a history and rationale and can be understood (if not accepted) in context This includes Nazism. Do you want to say that we shouldn't call Nazis Nazis?
/r/MensRights17/11/09 05:46 PM
5

I guess some people might be afraid that their child is swapped in the hospital.
/r/MensRights14/11/09 10:52 PM
1

You are, of course, correct, but there are some people who think or feel that women do have right to some sort of revenge. These people could be undermined by showing that "few thousand years of men getting a freebie on beating women" is a myth.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 06:59 AM
1

This is a common feminist trope. It looks untrue, but I don't know of any solid evidence against it.
/r/MensRights27/10/09 10:09 PM
1

The FAQ explains well why such stories serve a positive role: feminism has created the impression of men always being aggressors and women always being victims. These stories shatter that impression. By the way, a lot of MR problems exist because the society in general shares that impression. It is one thing to present statistics saying that women are equally likely to abuse their children as men, it makes much more impact to present actual women who abuse their children.
/r/MensRights02/10/09 04:35 AM
0

FAQ 1.
/r/MensRights01/10/09 02:12 PM
1

She was very quiet and the guy was drunk.
/r/MensRights01/10/09 02:08 PM
38

I feel more sorry for us, who have to suffer because of their issues.
/r/MensRights01/10/09 01:55 PM
5

That doesn't make it any less reprehensible.
/r/MensRights30/09/09 10:00 AM
6

I noticed while reading it that the author never once took responsibility for her own actions, and always directed the blame at her upbringing What actions did the author undertook that she should take responsibility for?
/r/MensRights24/09/09 08:07 AM
7

I am so going to use this :)
/r/MensRights16/09/09 06:29 AM
2

In my experience, this is not a good way to deal with extremists. If you offer a compromise, they will claim your compromise to be your extreme position, and then offer a new "compromise" between your compromise and their extreme position (often, recursively). If you hope for a compromise, you have to have an extreme position.
/r/MensRights13/09/09 01:35 AM
-2

God forbid if MensRights subreddit would have pro-male posts! We must not allow that! http://www.reddit.com/r/equality
/r/MensRights12/09/09 11:22 PM
2

Could the judge be sued now as an accomplice to kidnapping?
/r/MensRights27/08/09 04:38 PM
-1

That depends on where you drop it. If you drop it in the ocean, good, if you drop it in Sahara, no. If you are concerned over overpopulation you should fight it where the population is growing, not where it is shrinking. WTF any of this has to do with bystander effect?
/r/MensRights24/08/09 06:42 AM
-1

Unless we choose not to have children, the overpopulation will continue. What doesn't the author see about that? And if you choose not to have children, the overpopulation will still continue, with additional negative effect of the demise of Western civilization. What don't you see about that?
/r/MensRights22/08/09 05:32 PM
13

I don't find this all too comforting: The court heard that Mr Saxby was released without charge after Day dropped the allegation, although she still maintained it was true. She was found guilty of one count of perverting the course of justice last month. During the trial, the court heard how Day had a history of making up stories. The jury was told that while working at Royal London Hospital in East London as a nurse, she suffered stress-related hair loss and led her colleagues to believe it was…
/r/MensRights20/08/09 08:34 PM
6

You shouldn't accept an oppressive system just because it happened to be convenient for you this time.
/r/MensRights19/08/09 06:27 AM
5

I see this question as misguided: people will tend to behave the way their culture teaches them, and use opportunities that they have; and if feminist culture teaches women that they are oppressed by the evil patriarchy and makes laws that give women upper hand over men, they will exact revenge upon men and use the upper hand that they have. People of both male and female sex (I refuse to use the word "gender") are simply what evolution and culture made them.
/r/MensRights19/08/09 06:24 AM
0

You seem to think that "because of the litigious society we live in" a manager can't be "actually sexually harassing you"? You are wrong. Someone might simply not have enough money to bring on a serious lawsuit.
/r/MensRights18/08/09 05:59 PM
-1

The guy had no concerns for his safety, or his family's, and in any way was bonded and it was impossible for him to intervene?
/r/MensRights31/07/09 03:19 AM
-3

That'd be like some stranger coming in off the street into my flat and trying to remove my TV and I never even get up of the sofa and tell them not to. Just makes no sense. I wouldn't interfere out of concerns for my safety, or my family's. It makes perfect sense to me. In this particular case, it is not applicable.
/r/MensRights30/07/09 06:20 PM
1

On the same page: "The male culture behind S Africa's rape epidemic".
/r/MensRights29/07/09 09:25 AM
4

And again: the problem is the system that enables a man to be convicted based on accusers' word alone, without any evidence. If the system would require evidence, first, false rape accusations would become much rarer since women would know that the accusation alone wouldn't have much weight, and second, there would be no need to punish them more severely than any other crime accusation.
/r/MensRights23/07/09 06:38 AM
-1

The fact that it is not yet a person is irrelevant Persons have rights. Blastocysts do not. Both blastocysts and persons have rights. "Right to not have something in your womb" does not exist. Legal precedent disagrees. We have a right to self-determination and to seek medical care and treatment for conditions we consider to be negatively affecting us. However these rights must not infringe on other rights of other people. or killing babies and mentally disabled should be allowed too. False. Onc…
/r/MensRights23/07/09 06:27 AM
-1

Yes it is. The fact that it is not yet a person is irrelevant, or killing babies and mentally disabled should be allowed too. "Right to not have something in your womb" does not exist.
/r/MensRights23/07/09 05:40 AM
-2

A woman's right to control her body is inviolate, regardless of whether she consented to sex or not. An unborn child's right to exist is likewise inviolate.
/r/MensRights22/07/09 01:38 PM
0

Condom has relatively high failure rate.
/r/MensRights22/07/09 01:36 PM
3

Me…. now this is just me…. I would of sat there and laugh then kicked him out, finding him like that must of been embarrassing for him as well (especially if the wee wee is sized challenged). Women…. we cannot allow men to destroy us mentally we gotta be strong never ruin yo life because of some man stab him for a porno now the web thing especially the stuff belonging to her it is kind of hard to swallow but thats why you shouldn’t allow the first motherfucker that sweetens you up in your domain…
/r/MensRights17/07/09 07:59 PM
0

Nonono, first the gays, then women, then Jews. You got it all mixed up.
/r/MensRights12/07/09 12:15 AM
6

Or by feminism do you mean pro-female only? You're saying it as if it isn't true.
/r/MensRights08/07/09 07:49 AM
1

Let's not forget lucky, undeserving ethnic minorities.
/r/MensRights17/06/09 02:22 PM
1

It is not positive for you.
/r/MensRights17/06/09 06:06 AM
0

Your post is wrong in so many ways. For starters, you say that you would look to the former Soviet Union only for guidance on how to thwart democracy and individual liberty, well this is exactly an example of such a thing.
/r/MensRights16/06/09 08:28 AM
3

Feminists never mention things like this because, if they would mention them, their ideology would be shown to be false, their funding would cease, and they would lose power and influence they have.
/r/MensRights15/06/09 09:25 PM
2

Why would it? Nearly all children are raised by straight parents, and even if not it's our family ideal (for example, a number of children are raised by single parents but there are few books about them).
/r/MensRights15/06/09 04:04 PM
3

It started well, but finished with hugely anti-male conclusion. Would not recommend.
/r/MensRights15/06/09 04:03 PM
3

Still, I'd say that mothers' responsibility for children is historically more visible.
/r/MensRights15/06/09 03:44 PM
6

Better, upload a few names of some prosecutors or judges.
/r/MensRights19/05/09 03:14 PM
3

The real problem remains the fact that a man can be declared to be guilty based solely on accusations of a single woman and without any evidence. That must stop, and when it does false rape claims will become less of an issue.
/r/MensRights09/05/09 07:17 AM
-4

After thousands of years of subservience Downmodded. "Thousands of years of subservience" is a feminist myth.
/r/MensRights02/05/09 09:12 AM
5

The real problem here is the system that enables one to be put in jail solely on the basis of another's word. That is what needs to be stopped.
/r/MensRights28/03/09 06:17 AM
1

Yes, except that: - sperm can survive in the woman for up to a week, so add 7 days before day 12; - the menstruation can lengthen and shorten, and so can the day 12.
/r/MensRights16/03/09 06:54 PM
4

Some comments are golden: trulymadlyme 9:40 AM There is a surprising lack of guilt given to men who are crappy fathers. If I had it my way, all of these men would be branded with a scarlet "D." Your Screenplay Sucks 9:44 AM The solution here, like in most situations, is embezzlement. Married mothers need to up their hoarding efforts (as Ivanna Trump's classic For Love Alone says, it's not stealing if you're married. It's hazard pay). A couple of dollars siphoned out of the joint account here, a …
/r/MensRights26/01/09 08:17 PM
6

Make the site a wiki. If you are afraid of vandalism, make it so that only approved editors can contribute.
/r/MensRights23/01/09 02:15 PM
1

How about a male alien holding hands with female aliens, with several child aliens around them?
/r/MensRights18/01/09 09:03 AM
2

Worse, a generation of children is ruined too.
/r/MensRights16/01/09 02:43 PM
2

Downmodded. I may know them and understand them, I may even obey, but respect them I do not in the slightest.
/r/MensRights29/12/08 06:33 PM
6

Just wanted to submit this as an example of blatantly obvious sexism.
/r/MensRights29/12/08 06:09 PM
1

WTF is the defenses testimony Why only testimony? Where is evidence? Even with the defense's testimony, innocent man can be accused if he has less oratory skills than the woman or a worse lawyer.
/r/MensRights13/12/08 10:11 AM
-1

The world yes, the west no.
/r/MensRights10/12/08 07:51 AM
6

Someone asked, then deleted the account: How is that related to this? Come on. Because battered men who kill abusive partners won't.
/r/MensRights09/12/08 06:56 PM
5

Also: Battered women who kill abusive partners in cold blood because they fear more violence will escape a murder conviction.
/r/MensRights09/12/08 03:19 PM
1

No, no no no. You must not hate women, you should hate feminists.
/r/MensRights07/12/08 09:14 AM
3

I have to translate some of the comments to this news from here. Dragana I don't support this foul act, but I do consider that the world would be better if women would rule it!! What have men brought to this country except warfare, murder, legalisation of nuclear bombs and mutually assured destruction, climate change, polution of rivers, air, terrorist attacks... It will be that way as long as the woman doesn't stop them. Have they ever do something to improve the human population?! Mudrica [Wis…
/r/MensRights04/12/08 10:42 PM
1

Sadly, you are wrong. Politicians seem to care a lot about what feminists say.
/r/MensRights03/12/08 02:33 AM
3

just as women who show their breasts and come on to men fully intending to sexually arouse them are not responsible for rape. Sadly provocation is a defence in most any other assult, why not in rape? Hey, so far I haven't thought about it that way, but now... I can't find a reason why that wouldn't be right.
/r/MensRights02/12/08 06:58 PM
0

If racial tensions exist, and they usually do, they have an impact on education (not to mention that it may be true that different races have different IQs). Segregation will reduce racial tensions in the classroom, hence lead to better education. Separating blacks and whites is therefore not racism, it is pragmatism, and it is better for all children. To my knowledge, that gender has massive effect on education is not an universally accepted fact. To my knowledge, in most countries of the world…
/r/MensRights28/11/08 10:19 AM
0

You don't think classes would run smoother if coloured students would not be accepted?
/r/MensRights28/11/08 07:51 AM
5

From the article's comments: slurpster03 11/22/2008 12:55:26 PM I say we burn "child abuser" permanently onto her forehead.
/r/MensRights24/11/08 08:22 PM
0

I don't think that we can convince each other, just to say that I still disagree.
/r/MensRights04/11/08 04:57 PM
-1

Laws are made to serve people, people are not made to serve laws. In reality, the mother and the fetus do occupy the same place at the same time. Laws must be made to fit this actual condition, not the other way around. Please don't throw around harsh words like "slave". People don't have full control of their bodies, and this is simply a more obvious example of that. And, for example, a man's emotional investment in fatherhood may be so large that, yes, he would be harmed by abortion more than …
/r/MensRights03/11/08 10:33 PM
0

That is only your opinion, and I disagree. Anyway, fetus is not a part of woman's body, so her rights might end at the same place too. And, reducing the act of fathering a child to "claims over activity and results of sperm" is something I wouldn't expect in this subreddit. If I would have minor siblings and our parents would die, yes, I would expect to get the custody over them; and if we would all be minors, I would expect that our closest relatives get the custody and so on. And, I believe th…
/r/MensRights03/11/08 09:34 PM
0

Our right to control our bodies are limited by various rights of other people. My right to swing my arms ends at the tip of your nose. Why wouldn't a woman's right control her body end at the tip of my genome?
/r/MensRights03/11/08 09:12 PM
0

Now I'm not sure if I understand what do you want to say. A man can not prevent a woman from traveling to Canada to seek an abortion, but another woman can not prevent her too; nor can one woman force another to listen Mozart during pregnancy. Having that in mind, I don't understand this: The contents of the woman's body, and her actions during pregnancy, are outside the realm of the man's rights and interests. Who is the man in that sentence? Men qua men? A specific man? Absolutely anyone?
/r/MensRights03/11/08 06:41 PM
0

OK, theft was a bad example. But I still hold that mere fact that you can't do X doesn't mean that you have no rights in regard to X. For example, I believe that abortion should be illegal without the father's consent, except if the pregnancy would be medically dangerous for the mother. You may not agree with this, but I believe you will recognize this as a legitimate stance.
/r/MensRights03/11/08 06:14 PM
0

First and foremost, and relevant here, pedestrians have the right to, through legislature they elect, decide who has the right to drive and who does not. Pedestrians, as much as drivers, decide what are the conditions for obtaining a driver's license. Second, to use an example you mention, it is not a driving right that pedestrians have right-of-way at crosswalks, but it is a pedestrian interest.
/r/MensRights03/11/08 06:04 PM
1

No, I'm only accusing sylvan of faulty logic. It could have been: "Since only drivers drive cars, pedestrians have no interests or rights regarding driving cars."
/r/MensRights03/11/08 12:04 PM
4

Since only women bear children, men have no interests or rights regarding the bearing of children. Since only thieves steal, non-thieves have no interests or rights regarding theft. Yours is the faultiest logic I have seen this week.
/r/MensRights03/11/08 09:27 AM
3

From the Blogger Content Policy: HATEFUL CONTENT: Users may not publish material that promotes hate toward groups based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity. Do you think that reporting this blog would be successful?
/r/MensRights13/10/08 07:57 PM
3

Needs better design and URL.
/r/MensRights25/09/08 05:23 PM
6

A man having sex with a 5 year old wouldn't be set free even if the child doesn't remember.
/r/MensRights20/09/08 04:55 AM
4

Do they know that?
/r/MensRights17/09/08 07:40 PM
3

I'm surprised by the number of posts, below, in which men talk about infanticide as if it's a viable and humane option in the 21st century. There are no such posts below. There is one unsuccessful troll, one successful troll, but no one who really advocates what you say.
/r/MensRights16/09/08 06:45 AM
1

The title should rather be "How feminists destroyed the family".
/r/MensRights30/08/08 05:08 AM
2

I don't see how. Stereotyping yes, but not dehumanizing.
/r/MensRights24/08/08 06:47 AM
2

Would you please explain why do you think that traditional marriage is nothing but ritualized prostitution? (And, by the way, what do you consider to be traditional marriage?)
/r/MensRights12/08/08 07:40 PM
2

But you have responded to me ;) You can convince me easily (or not): have the debate with Phoenixdying and convince her that traditional marriage has nothing to do with prostitution.
/r/MensRights12/08/08 06:38 PM
2

Then the opposition is wrong. Sorry, but really not everyone is worthy of a debate. There is plenty of insightful debate all over Reddit, but there won't be any with her on this topic.
/r/MensRights12/08/08 05:12 PM
1

People who have this kind of opinions usually can not be convinced by a rational argument. You can see even more nonsense in her second post where she is calling women "baby making machines", and also, apparently, claiming that prostitutes use sex as a weapon.
/r/MensRights12/08/08 02:18 PM
1

You still hope we'll be in the EU?
/r/MensRights12/08/08 02:17 PM
0

Enjoy the Belgrade Pride :)
/r/MensRights12/08/08 01:04 PM
-1

Overpopulation of the world won't be solved by underpopulated areas becoming even more underpopulated, but by overpopulated areas becoming less overpopulated. As for the nonsense claim about traditional marriage, typical feminist crap, downmodded.
/r/MensRights12/08/08 05:40 AM
0

Feminists.
/r/MensRights10/08/08 05:14 AM
5

A man would get bigger punishment just for owning the video.
/r/MensRights12/07/08 05:19 PM
9

By the way, I'm questioning why people do post this kind of article so often? For every TV show about the ditzy wife, there's one about the incompetent husband. No, there isn't. There are signifficantly more shows about incompetent husbands than about ditzy wives.
/r/MensRights05/07/08 02:24 PM
1

A single exception does not negate a rule.
/r/MensRights01/07/08 06:09 PM
2

If we would have gender organization, we would become just like them, which is what they want. What we need is to oppose gender organization.
/r/MensRights18/05/08 07:21 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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