TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

OllyforLordCommander Archive

View 0 posts and 158 comments by OllyforLordCommander 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)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
4

Yeah except for that pesky constitution with its 14th amendment, not to mention the anti-discrimination laws that are really just frosting for that. Just because the majority of group X is composed mostly of [insert race, gender, religion, etc] doesn't mean that laws about X can be applied differently to different people based on their race, gender, or religion. That's a clear violation of both the due process and equal protections clauses. It's just that when men get the short end of the stick …
/r/MensRights30/01/16 02:01 AM
3

The selective service system is a pretty big one. So are unequal laws about IGM. Laws while often worded neutrally aren't applied evenly based on sex, race, and class. Resources and services for homelessness, domestic violence and rape victims, and health services in general tend to favor women disproportionately. Family law often favors mothers over fathers in how it's applied. Title IX policies at colleges are exploited to target and victimize men. Access to higher education skews heavily fema…
/r/MensRights27/01/16 12:15 AM
3

Female privilege in action.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 07:28 PM
1

Try doing math in your head when you pee, I'm serious. I had the same problem, took me awhile to get started in public bathrooms with other people, probably an evolutionary thing.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 07:22 PM
3

I find it hilarious that an SJW who very obviously got the basis for their ideology from feminism isn't a "real" feminist, and yet every PUA or redpiller or anyone who doesn't agree with feminist ideology is lumped together as "MRAs."
/r/MensRights26/01/16 05:16 PM
4

Or that the US military implicitly (and perhaps even explicitly) condones the trafficking and rape of boys in conflict zones, meanwhile every time the super bowl rolls around we're reminded of the gripping reality that some women in the US are prostitutes and feminists don't like that.
/r/MensRights19/01/16 03:48 PM
1

Charlie is that you?
/r/MensRights10/01/16 06:35 PM
4

Sorry, that's not how we should do things in this country.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 06:45 PM
1

She already had an incentive to never come clean, and apparently there was no disincentive for lying before. What we need are the latter, we shouldn't rely on the latent goodwill of liars to prevent false accusations.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 05:03 PM
0

That's called cruel and unusual punishment, that's not how we do things in this country. I really think the investigators should be punished if anything.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 04:46 PM
-1

I mean depending on the charges I'd very much want those nine in prison even at the expense of the free man. Even if that person was you, your father, your brother, or your son?
/r/MensRights02/01/16 06:21 PM
6

Why can't every bathroom just have stalls for everything and put urinals in some stalls to save water?
/r/MensRights02/01/16 03:26 PM
24

There are certainly sane feminists out there, they tend to be slandered as anti-feminists by the crazy ones. Koss is more representative of mainstream feminism than Sommers.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 12:16 AM
334

For all that drivel about not challenging lived experiences and how men just will never understand what women go through, feminists seem pretty eager to discount the lived experiences of men and make assumptions about what we go through.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 05:35 PM
3

The concept generally isn't so bad, it's just poorly and unfairly implemented. If you forego career prospects to be a home maker and caregiver so that your spouse can make more money, upon divorce you may lose all your financial support. Alimony is sort of like unemployment insurance in that way. It shouldn't be an outrageous amount, it should be temporary, and it shouldn't apply in every divorce.
/r/MensRights19/12/15 08:21 PM
1

Yeah, that's how bail works. You put up money as a deposit, and you get to leave jail.
/r/MensRights19/12/15 08:03 PM
5

We live in a rape culture. When adult women rape boys it's accepted by much of society and the media as not being serious. It's normalized. When men are raped in prison it's worthy of a joke.
/r/MensRights19/12/15 05:34 PM
1

You're right in the sense that once you give separate facilities to different groups, there are inherent inequalities, which is one of the reasons that segregation was so easily used as an outlet to treat black people like shit. Equality is more of an ever shifting ideal to pursue than a reality that we can recognize. I'd settle for equal treatment under the law and let society figure itself out.
/r/MensRights18/12/15 05:53 AM
1

Sanity Sunday is always a welcome relief
/r/MensRights18/12/15 05:22 AM
2

Look at it this way, you've been passively endorsing separate but equal every time you use a segregated bathroom or dressing room, unisex bathrooms and dressing rooms work perfectly well but most of us don't really care. If other things had been traditionally segregated by gender like buses, airplanes, etc. we wouldn't think it so unusual. To be a bit hyperbolic, calling the state of rights for black people under "separate but equal" policies by that name is like calling the Holocaust "resettlem…
/r/MensRights18/12/15 05:14 AM
1

You're being downvoted because you instantly assumed the only people who would discuss a hypothetical situation of theoretical separate but equal policies in anything but the most negative light are the ones that don't know the history behind it. Such condescension makes you look like an ass. Hence the downvotes. Ever consider that maybe we're talking about the THEORY of separate but equal? The historical implementation of what is farcically called "separate but equal" despite being terribly une…
/r/MensRights18/12/15 04:19 AM
3

Rights are already being lost regardless of what I'm thinking.
/r/MensRights17/12/15 05:19 PM
3

I know what separate but equal is, but in theory it's still better than separate but unequal. I'd rather split the train than get 1/4 of it.
/r/MensRights17/12/15 05:01 PM
10

Better policy than "fuck over the men"
/r/MensRights17/12/15 07:30 AM
0

And?
/r/MensRights15/12/15 12:07 AM
2

What's their to argue? You're wrong (or trolling) on the first point, and definitely trolling on the second by shoehorning transgender issues into this when it's completely trivial to the issue at hand.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 11:47 PM
2

Tldr: learn to read, it's not that long. I wrote it on mobile ffs.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 10:56 PM
4

He's trying to shoehorn transgender issues in, which doesn't make sense for more than 99% of people, and in this specific case when we're talking about an adult woman molesting a boy. No transgender people involved, no need to shoehorn in gender identity issues. But just fyi some people refer to gender as the gender role you actually play in society and sex as the physical characteristics of your body, it's just a more convenient way to talk about it in a small minority of situations. 99+% of th…
/r/MensRights14/12/15 10:36 PM
2

Troll guys, just move on.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 10:13 PM
5

In her head she probably thinks that's a valid criticism of Swift, not her revealing a massive bias against people who are nice and pretty that happen to remind you of people from high school.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 08:25 PM
1

I'm glad I'm not the only one who saw that. Mustard isn't nacho cheese.
/r/MensRights13/12/15 02:01 AM
6

I think they're saying that people shouldn't correct some behavior in girls because it's somehow sexist, as well as deluding themselves into thinking only girls are told not to be bossy, only at times when they aren't actually being bossy, and that this causes women to be...I dunno, apparently being told to not be bossy had no effect on these people because they're still moral authoritarians.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 07:31 PM
20

That shtick is so fucking stupid anyways. You think only female children get told to not be little Maos? Have these people ever had to mentor kids at all? Sometimes kids are bossy little shits and need to be told what's up, boys and girls alike. This whole focus on not correcting this behavior in girls is going to lead to another generation of entitled brats.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 06:11 PM
1

Privilege=penis+power, women can't have privilege, only white straight men.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 06:17 PM
15

Last time I checked equality didn't mean unfairly punishing innocent people that happen to be the opposite sex of innocent people being unfairly punished on the other side of the world. Kinda like how exterminating 6 million Christians in India wouldn't make up for the Holocaust. I'm sure some people think it's fair but it's just rationalized bigotry.
/r/MensRights09/12/15 12:51 AM
3

So, in other words there can be almost perfect equality under the law? We are talking about ideal possibilities here, things will have to change, but equality can be achieved in how people are treated under the law despite innate inequalities between people or how they are treated as individuals.
/r/MensRights07/12/15 08:39 PM
9

There can be almost perfect equality under the law, of course not everybody is born perfectly equal.
/r/MensRights07/12/15 06:53 PM
2

I'm surprised she didn't just bring up 9/11.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 06:00 PM
8

I was raised by a single father, and I'll be the first to say the rant above is an unsourced and baseless piece of bigoted drivel. You can make an appeal to biology and create a solid point, you just failed to do that in an intelligent and thoughtful way. What you call "colorful language" I'd call "unwashed idiocy."
/r/MensRights04/12/15 05:30 PM
2

Seriously many of they are in Midtown, not the financial district.
/r/MensRights02/12/15 06:50 PM
16

We have this is the US too, it's called the Duluth model and it was implemented with the full support of feminists. They seem to have a selective memory about that when they claim to care about male victims.
/r/MensRights27/11/15 07:31 PM
10

Oh you sweet summer child.
/r/MensRights27/11/15 07:21 PM
6

That's true, a lot of people assume guilt, but innocent until proven guilty is most important when it comes to conviction. You can't legislate how people will feel about the accused, and you can't eliminate unfair prejudice, but you can make sure that when deciding guilt that you have a mostly fair jury. That's why in the US we have a stringent jury selection process. The defense only needs one person on the jury to realize there isn't enough proof and to not assume guilt. Although this isn't a …
/r/MensRights27/11/15 07:18 PM
16

I heard someone on NPR prattling on about how they thought that single men in refugee camps are suspicious. Yeah, why on earth would a man want to avoid being forced to die in a brutal war?
/r/MensRights24/11/15 02:49 PM
6

No, it's because murder requires intent. You cannot commit murder by killing someone with your car by accident, even if you were drunk. Also juries don't choose the crimes the person is charged with, they just determine guilt for the charges filed.
/r/MensRights21/11/15 04:05 AM
1

Do you work at a public school? At my university you could record lectures, but in my HS you needed special permission to record in class.
/r/MensRights14/11/15 09:58 PM
1

Not just states, entire countries use that definition. Of course that's just a cop-out and we know better.
/r/MensRights14/11/15 08:26 PM
6

Is recording a lecture or speech covered by those laws? Recording your professor in a classroom isn't really the same as recording a personal conversation.
/r/MensRights14/11/15 06:20 PM
7

That only applies to phone calls, recording your instructor in a classroom is a matter of school policy.
/r/MensRights14/11/15 05:28 PM
21

It's almost like the mainstream media turns a blind eye to female on male rape. It's almost like a culture of rape acceptance. Maybe we could shorten that. Rape culture? Let's call it that!
/r/MensRights14/11/15 07:09 AM
11

but those reasons are really no different than the ones that explain why MRAs get a lot of hate on feminist subs. They are pretty different IMO. I mean, have MRAs ever advocated for laws or policies to harm women? I think the it's fair for us to have beef with some feminists and the people who give them a platform, even if we do support advocacy for women's issues. But when you see someone like Christina Hoff Sommers smeared as an anti-feminist, you know something is messed up with the brand. Th…
/r/MensRights09/11/15 08:40 AM
47

We know damn well why they use a gendered term for a non-gendered phenomenon, it's a sleazy underhanded way of vilifying men.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 07:04 AM
11

Never going to happen, I've posed the exact question before and the definition you'll get will always be something that breaks down to "negative prejudices and harmful gender norms that are supported by men and women" with the added bonus realization that calling that the "patriarchy" is about as sexist as calling all crime the "negroarchy" is racist. All arguments about male privilege or patriarchy rely on a willingness to ignore history.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 07:02 AM
6

So?
/r/MensRights03/11/15 08:44 PM
19

So people like Christina Hoff Sommers, all our female allies within the MRM, etc. deserve your lazy generalizaton? Women aren't the issue here, it's men and women who are close-minded to the idea that anyone besides women need advocacy.
/r/MensRights03/11/15 07:58 PM
6

I think you mean feminists, not women
/r/MensRights03/11/15 07:13 PM
27

No true feminist would blow bubbles with a cored Vienna sausage at 3am on the winter solstice in Cairo while wearing blackface, but here we are.
/r/MensRights27/10/15 07:06 PM
4

He's referencing a very gentle and kind old lady.
/r/MensRights26/10/15 06:16 AM
1

Yeah this is not going to help with the MRA/PUA/TRP lumping, but then again the people who do that already don't care.
/r/MensRights26/10/15 05:19 AM
1

I was a hardcore feminist and now Im not There's a middle ground between hardcore feminist and misogynist.
/r/MensRights25/10/15 09:10 PM
1

Its not nice to say we arent all the same, and everyone isnt capable of the exact same things Actually, admitting differences between people is fine. Generalizing that women can't manage their lives without men is degrading and unfounded. Women dont do personal accountability. Lots of them do, and lots of men don't. Generalizing this to women is degrading and unfounded. Thats not how their value system or thought process works. That's called pseudoscience. Thats not really in dispute by people w…
/r/MensRights25/10/15 07:10 PM
35

A serial killer would bail too. Nobody got time for that.
/r/MensRights25/10/15 06:49 PM
1

You can't see how a broad claim about how women need men to manage their lives isn't just unfounded, it's degrading to women? That's not egalitarian, that's supremacist.
/r/MensRights25/10/15 06:46 PM
1

You can't have something like your first paragraph and honestly think the MRM and TRP have similar ideals.
/r/MensRights25/10/15 06:39 PM
1

Lots of us recognized the frustrating nature of dating in America without becoming bitter misogynists and making it into something more than it is: some people are just self serving and manipulative, and some use sex as the bargaining chip. Yes it's cultural. The other user in this thread defending TRP literally said women aren't capable of managing their lives without men. I'm not sure how someone could embrace that sort of discourse and pretend the MRM and TRP have even close to similar goals.…
/r/MensRights25/10/15 06:34 PM
1

TRP isnt fringe, not by historical standards. TRP is basically just being what men were throughout history until a century or so ago. Understand that fringe isn't a bad thing, it just refers to what it is. The MRM by the same standards, is also a fringe movement. It's just how it is. Until they become more mainstream, they're fringe. Feminism started as a fringe movement and now it's basically religion. Yeah its added components of game that were probably not directly connected, but those things…
/r/MensRights24/10/15 11:37 PM
6

Outside of the Internet I think more people would associate the title with the matrix than with a fringe internet men's sexual movement... or whatever best describes TRP.
/r/MensRights24/10/15 10:54 AM
1

I had someone the other day refuse to continue a discussion because I brought up that MRAs took issue with how RAINN dealt with female on male rape or how some of their stats were misleading. That same person thought MRA stood for "men's rights association." You'd think to gain that amount of disdain for something you'd actually have to know the first thing about it, but stupidity never fails to surprise.
/r/MensRights22/10/15 07:15 PM
3

Trust me, he isn't getting it.
/r/MensRights19/10/15 09:11 AM
2

I'm not sure how this has to do with due process, you might mean bodily autonomy.
/r/MensRights19/10/15 09:05 AM
1

Probably the same reason people go out and take upskirt pics when there is an internet full of porn. Most of the time they try to do it without being noticed don't they?
/r/MensRights18/10/15 08:42 PM
1

/r/relationships is cancer. The only reason I subscribe is so my gf and I can have a laugh at the posts, sometimes the feedback is thoughtful but other times it turns into this sort of crap, double standards galore.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:13 PM
3

Except they would be getting fired for not doing their job. Do you honestly think that the duties of managing director don't include not publicly espousing sexism or racism or otherwise representing the company in a bad light?
/r/MensRights16/10/15 02:35 PM
2

It's also technically censorship and very justifiable to fire a vocally racist front desk clerk if that's how you're gonna play it. So I guess not all censorship is bad.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 02:18 PM
1

Yes, she has a right to an opinion and express it. She doesn't have a right to a job, nor does she have a right to use Google as a podium. She should be fired for expressing views which open up the company to scrutiny and criticism, which may alienate a large portion of the userbase, and which call into question her ability to perform her duties effectively. This is much more than me simply not agreeing with her and much less than what has gotten men fired in the past. Should she be fired becaus…
/r/MensRights16/10/15 02:16 PM
3

Well, a company refusing to give someone a platform for something they see as inappropriate is different from an individual or group interfering with another individual's ability to give a presentation via pulling a fire alarm or issuing a bomb threat. Is it censorship? Perhaps, but don't pretend that a company firing a person for their remarks which may affect the company is at all like a news organization claiming to be unbiased and then censoring news that doesn't fit their narrative, or a go…
/r/MensRights16/10/15 02:09 PM
2

Yes, she shouldn't be jailed for what she said. She should however be fired for it.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 02:03 PM
1

Wow you can read an entire sentence by yourself!
/r/MensRights12/10/15 01:24 AM
2

You're right about the SRY gene, wrong about needing a Y-chromosome to get it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/XX_male_syndrome
/r/MensRights11/10/15 07:44 PM
2

Are you familiar with science? Are you? Nothing that I brought up in my example should be unfamiliar to anyone who got to high-school level biology. You're throwing around chromosomes and hormones but I don't think you have evidence to back up your claims What claims? I'm asking a bunch of questions about a possible hypothetical situation to demonstrate a point. Or did you not understand before that a person can be born with female chromosomes and male anatomy? Were you that uneducated about the…
/r/MensRights11/10/15 07:34 PM
5

It's actually really easy to figure out. You are only confused because you're buying into their bullshit. Who's bullshit? This is something that's been a hot topic for discussion among the medical/mental health communities for awhile, not everyone learned about this from tumblr. The reason why they are so shrill about it is because they are disordered. Yes gender dysphoria is a real thing, and BDD is something that's not at all limited to transgender people. At no point did I deny that people wi…
/r/MensRights11/10/15 07:31 PM
1

How does the example I gave fit into your very limited and wrong understanding of the issue? I assume you ignored it because you don't understand it, the fact that you're automatically writing this off as "progressive kool-aid" really gives you a lot of intellectual credit here, but you might not realize not everyone attaches politics to their understanding of science and culture. For the record I've been learning about this subject since before I even knew about the MRM or tumblr flavor of the …
/r/MensRights11/10/15 07:08 PM
11

You realize that people with XX and XY can be born with penises and vaginas respectively right?
/r/MensRights11/10/15 06:46 PM
6

Do they act as and identify as a man? They aren't biologically male, but they're men, much in the same way that an intersex person or someone with XX and a penis or XY and a vagina who identifies with and acts as a man is considered, both socially and many cases legally, as a man.
/r/MensRights11/10/15 06:45 PM
3

How does your incredibly ignorant world view handle people with XX chromosomes born with a penis or XY and a vagina? Or intersex people? At some point you have to realize that while gender are sex are effectively the same thing for most people, they aren't the same for everyone. People without penises have identified and lived as men, and people without vaginas as women. The whole concept of ambiguous genitalia and intersex people is the only counter example needed to demonstrate why the whole i…
/r/MensRights11/10/15 06:43 PM
3

Even...donkey-brained?
/r/MensRights04/10/15 04:43 PM
2

Criticizing the comparison of two things rather than the content of the comparison is a mental roadblock that you should work on. Maybe criticize the equivalence, if one was made, which isn't the case here. Any two things can be compared.
/r/MensRights03/10/15 08:08 PM
-1

It's complicated, because hair styles can definitely be disruptive. I would be opposed to any sort of vague rules in general, because that subjectivity is a huge source of double standards.
/r/MensRights26/09/15 01:20 AM
-1

He's replying to a post saying that it's a private school and that's the rules with "feminists would throw a fit about this." It's not really clear of he's implying that we should do the same of simply repeating something we all know.
/r/MensRights26/09/15 12:31 AM
0

Not really, he's just repeating something everyone here is aware of.
/r/MensRights25/09/15 11:26 PM
11

It's not a private school...
/r/MensRights25/09/15 10:26 PM
7

It's not a private school...
/r/MensRights25/09/15 10:25 PM
1

And how does that make it any more reasonable for us to do anything similar?
/r/MensRights25/09/15 10:21 PM
5

I'm not sure how you missed the fact that a switched baby means the hospital screwed up and both parents are raising another's child while neither did anything wrong, paternity fraud means your partner cheated and lied to you. The implications are completely different.
/r/MensRights21/09/15 05:59 AM
3

Why is enforceability the deciding factor here, rather than whether or not taxpayer funded things should be used for recreation or not?
/r/MensRights19/09/15 07:58 AM
7

Publicly paid for dorms shouldn't be used for sex amirite?
/r/MensRights18/09/15 11:04 PM
7

"I agree that taxpayer funded Internet shouldn't be used for X." You'd have to support why it shouldn't be used for that. Do you think dorm beds shouldn't be used for sex for the same reasons? Is having sex any more or less appropriate than looking at porn? It's just as relevant to education.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 11:04 PM
1

Depends on the jurisdiction. Age of consent in some places is 18, which means consent isn't possible. Just because you think this type of case isn't serious doesn't really matter if the law isn't applied evenly in the first place. I'm all for more reasonable laws about consent, but men and women should be punished similarly if we are to punish anyone, and like the selective service system, it's hard to get half the population to give a shit when they aren't at risk of being subject to that unfai…
/r/MensRights17/09/15 04:08 PM
13

I don't think OP is commenting on whether or not age of consent laws should exist or be used, but that if they exist and are used, that they be used equally, and that offenders be treated the same under the law, and that it's not it's not ok for the MSM to label male on female statutory rape as rape, but female on male as something more innocuous. I'm all for more reasonable age of consent laws, but the laws we have now need to be applied equally.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 04:03 PM
25

3edgy5me
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:57 PM
2

No no no, don't you understand, vaccines are a second tier option, the first line of defense to protect womyn from the dirty rapists-to-be and their HPV infested dicks is to cut off their foreskins in infancy. Obviously vaccines are less effective than infant surgery at preventing infection.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 06:27 AM
2

You see, I don't hold hands with my gf because I love her, it's so I can make sure she can't run away.
/r/MensRights13/09/15 05:46 PM
11

Wait wait wait...since when is prophylactic removal of tissue to prevent infection warranted when less severe treatments exist? We have antibiotics for utis.
/r/MensRights13/09/15 05:36 PM
1

Meh, I give my dad presents on mothers day, I think single parents should get recognition on both days because they are filling in for both roles. That being said the person who made this poster likely never considered honoring single fathers on mothers day.
/r/MensRights06/09/15 08:06 PM
1

No, the old guard has its share of crazy also.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 04:35 PM
33

You should learn to read, whether or not the sperm was attained through oral sex isn't even in question in this particular case. “She asserts that when plaintiff 'delivered' his sperm, it was a gift — an absolute and irrevocable transfer of title to property from a donor to a donee,” the decision said. “There was no agreement that the original deposit would be returned upon request.” The defendant in this case isn't denying that she got the sperm via oral sex, but that doing so and using it to g…
/r/MensRights25/08/15 06:45 PM
14

The quote you think you understand is actually saying "a man shouldn't be charged with rape for having sex with a girl who despite saying no at any point during sex continues to participate willingly." And you've been a college guy but never dealt with a girl saying no and changing her mind/not really meaning it? I assume if you had you would not be so unforgiving of others trying to discuss this admittedly delicate topic.
/r/MensRights24/08/15 05:47 PM
19

I'm assuming you've never been a guy in college, lots of girls will happily leave the bar with you, go back to your apartment, make out, say "we're not having sex tonight" while naked in your bed and then escalate to sex on their own without skipping a beat. No demonstrably means more than no in some contexts. Pretending that no means no forever in every context is pretty disingenuous. No apparently means "try harder" or "later" in a lot of situations and that's something that needs to be acknow…
/r/MensRights24/08/15 04:29 PM
17

Your source seems pretty biased and goes to great lengths to interpret those quotes in potentially the most damning way. Not to mention that it completely misses the point and manages to construe the discussion about women often saying no while maintaining the intention to have sex can be confusing to men and indicates that a verbal no should not in isolation negate any other consent given later, as rape apologism. Where have I seen that before, dismissing honest discourse about the nuances of s…
/r/MensRights24/08/15 03:51 PM
0

Wouldn't different cultures having different views on female breasts reinforce, not detract from, the idea that they are only as sexual as you make them? Just to be clear we aren't talking about sexual in the scientific sense of "sexual traits," then you'd have to include a lot of other things.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 08:10 PM
0

If it's so commonly known that women only want to go topless to lure men into staring at them to call the cops on them surely there are examples of this phenomenon. Or maybe some women just want to go topless and should be able to legally.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 05:28 PM
0

just stop Sounds like something an sjw would say when presented with a reasonable counter argument that they don't agree with, you should hold yourself to a higher standard of discourse.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 05:26 PM
-1

I meant examples of topless women calling the police for being stared at in public.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 04:26 PM
-1

So would women showing vagina in public. Breasts are only as sexual as you make them, and are arguably as sexual as a hairy chest or a 6-pack, and men can derive pleasure from their nipples as well.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 03:49 PM
-1

Could you cite you instances of what you're talking about actually happening?
/r/MensRights18/08/15 03:47 PM
13

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation Claiming that small issues shouldn't be addressed because of other, more pressing issues is the exact same fallacy feminists use to demean men's issues. Afaic an issue with inequality under the law in something as simple as what you wear is an issue that should be addressed, and actually represents one of the few tangible things that feminists should focus on rather than things like the pay gap or 1in5 myths.
/r/MensRights17/08/15 10:54 PM
13

It's only fair that laws against public nudity apply evenly, this actually makes a lot of sense even if it applies to relatively few people. Think about it, only a fraction of men go out topless anyways even though it's legal, the fraction of women that want to do this should be allowed to. It's about time seeing boobs in public was not a huge deal. In a lot of places it's already accepted at beaches and some parks.
/r/MensRights17/08/15 10:18 PM
5

Women are allowed to run around topless in most US states...
/r/MensRights17/08/15 08:35 PM
3

Do straw men not bleed too?
/r/MensRights15/08/15 03:37 AM
2

I wonder if you'd feel the same way if you were beaten by your partner and then arrested when you called the police. Maybe you'd become one of the only feminists fighting to move away from the Duluth model, but would you stay a feminist when your buddies defend it?
/r/MensRights15/08/15 03:36 AM
15

You can put on a jacket. I can't take off my shirt unless I want to get fired.
/r/MensRights05/08/15 03:30 AM
6

These people don't understand what due process means, it's just another meaningless buzz word to them.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 04:04 AM
3

It could hurt their career, so can being accused, that's an unfortunate aspect of the politics of these things. But I don't think that's a good reason to keep silent. Victims should feel obligated to report crimes against them, if only to possibly prevent future crimes against others. All of this could have happened a long time ago and the police may have been able to gather evidence then and make a case, instead we have a media storm with no substance. If he's guilty, don't you think that the f…
/r/MensRights01/08/15 02:57 PM
6

I wonder if you'd feel differently if you were a celebrity being accused of rape... I don't think he's guilty or innocent, I'm just reasonable enough to withhold judgement about these things when the only evidence is something as unreliable as an accusation about an alleged decades old unreported crime. It's possible that he's guilty, it's also possible this whole thing was a lie.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 01:55 PM
6

I would accept literally any evidence before I form an opinion on the topic, because people are and should be innocent until proven guilty, not assumed guilty because they've been accused and it's difficult to prove. There's a place for assumed guilt: witch trials and the USSR. Someone who doesn't think he's guilty based on an accusation isn't a "Cosby apologist" they're people who believe in due process. People like you however are definitely anti-due process, which is deplorable. Simply put: i…
/r/MensRights01/08/15 11:43 AM
12

How do you know? There's no evidence of wrongdoing, just accusations, which shouldn't be enough for anyone who considers themselves a rational person to think of another as guilty. There could be 1000 people accusing him, it's no different from a single accusation, especially since the stories are all very similar and well publicized, it's not like these women came forward individually without any knowledge of each other. In fact I'm inclined to think that the more accusations there are that wer…
/r/MensRights01/08/15 09:20 AM
8

You're right, it's partially cognitive dissonance and partially projection, I think I sufficiently substantiated how the opinion that people who are anti-circ only do so because they think their penises are special in some way is both untrue and a massive projection. The only cognitive dissonance I see is in the minds of cut men who justify the practice on the grounds that they think their penises are God's gift to women. You can still be anti-circ and be happy with your own penis. Being happy w…
/r/MensRights30/07/15 01:15 PM
6

Rekt
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:42 PM
15

You're telling OP to do research when you don't even understand that FGM encompasses several procedures, not all of which are actually more invasive or remove as much tissue as circumcision, are you serious? I've never met a pro-circ person who understood MGM or FGM 1/10th as well as an intactivist, and you're no exception.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:41 PM
7

Good, we don't need you here, weirdos who are obsessed with cutting little boys' penises don't really help us at all. Rest assured that with your approval of circumcision over FGM makes you slightly more civilized than an African warlord, what a high bar to set.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:38 PM
11

Classic projection. Do you really believe that all intactivists are uncut with a superiority complex? If anything the cut men who are pro-circ are the ones rationalizing this barbaric practice based on the idea that it makes their penis better. For the record I'm cut and think there's no reason to do it to infants for a variety of well-supported reasons.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:36 PM
9

Legal and normalized genital mutilation appears to be an issue which exclusively effects men in some western countries, definitely a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:34 PM
11

So you're saying condoms are more effective and have less negative side effects?
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:32 PM
14

The problem isn't those of us who already won't do it, but the people who think of it as normal and acceptable and the doctors who condone of what amounts to a cosmetic procedure for infants.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:31 PM
19

Good luck with that dude-who-is-obsessed-with-cutting-baby-dick-so-he-feels-better-about-his-own-dick.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:28 PM
9

Of course he didn't read the article...
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:26 PM
7

You do realize that all forms of FGM (that's right, there are many types, all illegal, with varying severity) aren't "worse" than circumcision right?
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:25 PM
46

A lot of the "FGM is worse" crowd don't really have a great understanding of the issue and believe that all FGM is clitoral excision and infibulation, rather than a spectrum of procedures that vary greatly in invasiveness, so the idea that circumcision is worse than some forms of FGM just flies right over their heads.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:23 PM
2

Dude. You're still gonna defend Cosby? That's pretty damning, hardly implying that he's only probably a racist. Also we're not really in the court of law here, more like the court of public opinion which can differ pretty greatly. Not sure what your point is. You have your right to an opinion, we have a right to say that opinion is so stupid that calling it retarded is insulting to retarded people. Public opinion can be wrong, and waiting until there's more evidence is a pretty reasonable way to…
/r/MensRights28/07/15 11:13 AM
5

I don't think the person who he replied to is being civil, considering he refers to Cosby as a rapist and considers him guilty based on accusations alone. One might say innocent until proven guilty is the foundation of the judicial system in a civil society. Does it help to call names? Not really, but in this case it's not exactly an inaccurate label to apply. I reckon that many people who blindly buy into media narratives without critical thought are morons.
/r/MensRights28/07/15 05:29 AM
7

That's an improvement imo, the current trend in reporting deaths would read "239 people died in prison, 14 of them women."
/r/MensRights14/07/15 04:29 PM
17

What government work are you doing? Nothing related to medicine I hope.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 10:07 AM
21

Krokodil= desomorphine mixed with nasty shit, not heroin
/r/MensRights13/07/15 07:49 AM
3

I get my dad presents for mothers day because my mom is a toxic psycho bitch who deserves no praise whatsoever.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 02:04 PM
18

"That car salesman was pressuring me into buying that car I couldn't afford! It was theft!"
/r/MensRights17/06/15 07:06 PM
9

Clever and intense marketing by the fashion industry, which is run mostly by women and gay men. Definitely the patriarchy.
/r/MensRights17/06/15 06:49 PM
14

So you think arousal is consent?
/r/MensRights17/06/15 02:16 PM
2

Perhaps you're confusing harassment with sending mean messages to someone's anonymous reddit account, but what would I know, I'm just harassing you by telling you you're full of shit.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 07:00 PM
1

Admins can anonymously give gold.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 06:45 PM
1

Sorry, I might be misunderstanding you, but do you seriously think that saying bad things to an anonymous forum account is harassment?
/r/MensRights11/06/15 06:44 PM
2

Yes, I'm sure AMR, SRS, and other subs espousing the "correct" ideology will be banned for openly condoning of brigading and doxxing any minute now. Wtf does harassment mean to them anymore? Criticism and making fun of people is harassment now aparrently.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 01:11 PM
2

You're point of view is flawed. Reddit may be it's own website with its own set of rules, but when those rules are applied unfairly, or when a site that originally existed for a free exchange of ideas begins endorsing the erasure of unpopular ideas, then there is a problem, which can be addressed by protesting through hurting their revenue stream. Calling that "whining" is cunty. Censorship can exist outside the context of government censorship, and you'd have to be a massive cunt to think other…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 12:39 PM
2

You sound like a cunt mate.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 12:30 PM
2

"I don't like it therefore I have no problem with it being censored." You don't see why that's a load of horse shit?
/r/MensRights11/06/15 12:21 PM
47

But, but it's because the patriarchy tells society that women are incapable of being rapists! This hurts women! If only we had moar feminizmTM then women would be punished equally! Don't ask me to define patriarchy! That's harassment!
/r/MensRights10/06/15 08:58 AM
3

I think most of the objection isn't to selective service on its own, just that it isn't applied equally. Either everyone should have to register, or nobody should.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 07:30 AM
17

You know the definition of mutilation isn't "causing someone to feel mutilated" right?
/r/MensRights09/06/15 06:37 AM
33

They're afraid alleged false accusers will be held to the same standard of evidence they want alleged rapists to be held to.
/r/MensRights02/06/15 03:00 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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