TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

PartTimeBadman Archive

View 4 posts and 1,541 comments by PartTimeBadman on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,541 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
7

Insults and hostility, generally.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 12:25 PM
9

Let's not let facts or truth get in the way of some good ol' paranoia and witch-hunting.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 10:24 AM
2

I'm not assuming anything, simply pointing out that the logic here is flawed. I'd rather see her pursued criminally rather than civilly.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 10:15 AM
1

You honestly think she is going to make something of herself? Where did I even insinuate that? I said she's on welfare so she can't ever pay any money back and issuing a court order that denies her any wealth will mean she has no incentive to work and get off of welfare. If you'd rather continue paying her welfare, that's fine, but I'd rather my tax money went elsewhere.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 07:54 AM
2

...yeah, cause she's FOR SURE only moments away from a lucrative career... A poorly paying career costs the taxpayer much less than her being on welfare. The state is still paying for her on welfare. So...what's the downside to the suit? They're wasting money trying to recover wasted money from a person who has very little money. Could it be because you don't want a precedent set? What sort of precedent would that set, exactly? I know, it has to be the 'waste of money' trying to hold a woman acc…
/r/MensRights12/04/13 08:31 PM
8

...thus removing any motivation to get off welfare on her part, meaning she'll continue taking from the state.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 08:12 PM
8

I have numerous witnesses that observed us both before and after the alleged incident. Also there is no physical evidence that anything happened, i didn't even ejaculate. It certainly sounds like something happened and that you're withholding information on it. In any case, you need to ask your friends/family to lend you the money for a lawyer. The embarrassment of asking is far preferable to a criminal conviction, prison time and permanent residency on the sex offenders list.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 08:03 PM
1

It hasn't ever happened to me, but then I live in England where people are likely to excoriate you for not holding the door open. Is it really a noticeable problem in the States?
/r/MensRights12/04/13 07:30 PM
29

Let's not fool ourselves into thinking that the Nazis were the only ones to do it, though.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 07:26 PM
91

Because dehumanizing someone makes it much easier to treat them badly.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 07:07 PM
12

It's a gratifying gesture, but how is a woman on welfare supposed to repay any meaningful amount of money? This would be the state repaying the state.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 06:35 PM
2

If I was asked to step into a body scanner, I'd insist that I could just strip naked there and then, and then I would do so. If we're going to be treated as criminals, I'm going to ensure that it's done publically and with as much attention as possible.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 04:41 PM
1

I can't dissociate this from that shrieking harpy at the UofT protests.
/r/MensRights10/04/13 06:17 PM
2

Why are you using mental health as a shaming tactic? The staggering majority of mentally ill people would not act that way.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 08:47 AM
1

This entire thread proved my point nicely and you have consistently failed to defend yourself adequately. I wasn't especially interested in this petty fist-waving nine days ago, I'm certainly not interested now, so don't worry about replying.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 12:07 PM
1

If you're escalating the violence and they escalate it in return, you're going to reach a point where destruction is mutually-assured.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 05:44 PM
1

I don't know why you think total annihilation seems an outcome that shouldn't be strenously avoided, but if a possible outcome of your plan is total annihilation, your plan probably needs work.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 10:48 AM
-2

Given how frequently you reply to me, you clearly do.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 01:35 AM
1

If it makes you feel better, buddy. <3
/r/MensRights19/02/13 12:59 AM
0

Maybe it's because more people think that I contributed to the discussion than there are people who think I didn't contribute to the discussion. These are just musings, though.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 12:59 AM
2

"What you've heard" is grounds for contempt of court and a re-trial, so it is hugely unlikely you've heard anything.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 10:58 PM
1

What if your prediction that your barrage of violence will prevent future violence is wrong? What if Japan hadn't surrendered after Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What happens if they retaliate with even greater violence?
/r/MensRights18/02/13 10:54 PM
28

I thought I'd made it clear, both in my original post and in my response, that I dislike that men have been made out as "rapists and oppressors". It is a core concept of feminism. Maybe you should reconsider whether or not you're actually a feminist? My point is not that I can somehow single-handedly change the opinions of every radical feminist And my point is that no feminists even try. Do you think you're the first feminist to come here and ask why there's no cooperation? You're one of hundre…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 10:17 PM
2

I suppose you could phrase my opinion as, 'raise the bar as necessary.' If a girl is exceptionally good at a traditionally male sport and there's no way she can be fitted into a suitable female team, then by all means, let her play with the boys. I can't think of any sports women would naturally be better at in the same way that men are obviously going to better at football, wrestling etc. But no, making exceptions to disguise someone's failures is not acceptable. The female football star needs …
/r/MensRights18/02/13 10:02 PM
33

Everyone seems to have come across a bra-burning, castration-promoting feminist, but for the life of me I don't know where you're all finding them! There seems to be this idea that the feminists we complain about are separate to 'your' feminists; they're not, and this is my entire point. They are the same people, you just don't experience their anti-male ministrations. It makes me sad to be associated with that kind of hate when I've never personally witnessed any examples of it myself and I abs…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 09:53 PM
1

I'm going to apply the same rule of ignoring Rihanna/Chris Brown BS and only deal with the relevant parts of your post; ...
/r/MensRights18/02/13 09:35 PM
18

it seems very odd for a group with varied views on many things to have a universal response on anything Do you really not see why a group of mens rights activists might respond with sympathy to male problems, whilst feminists don't...?
/r/MensRights18/02/13 09:32 PM
-6

Not all opinions are equally valid. You realise why this argument only requires meta-commentary to rebutt, right? She's a bigot. Allow me to quote myself; Even if I ignore that you didn't read the article and 'let you have this one' that still leaves an entire list of authors there. Have you read all of Warren Farrell's books? Nope, not even a single one of them, which is why I make no judgements of him or his character in any way. You, on the other hand, have skimmed the first page of an articl…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 09:30 PM
-5

Warren Farrell is not a bigot. Feminists would disagree. Have you read all of these articles and the authors background work to ensure that these women are bigots? You answer this later; no. Therefore, this argument is invalid from the get-go. Bev Jo Even if I ignore that you didn't read the article and 'let you have this one' that still leaves an entire list of authors there. It seems like no-one is capable of actually detailing to me why there is any difference between this article and the fem…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 09:13 PM
-5

You're not answering the question. We criticized the University of Toronto questions for pulling Warren Farrell quotes out of context. This article does the exact same thing; please explain how they are different. Don't tell me to read the whole article, don't tell me anything about these quotations, tell me why it's acceptable for us to yank salacious feminist quotations and display them out of context, but not okay for them to do the same.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 09:07 PM
81

If you really think feminism is for everyone, pretend to be a guy and talk to a feminist about male-issues. Without fail, you will receive a harsh, abrupt, judgemental or shaming response. I used to believe that feminism had a space for everyone, that intersectionality would win egalitarianism, but it's simply not true. In order to fit in with feminists, you cannot have any opinion that disagrees with mainstream feminist rhetoric. You cannot question that rhetoric. You cannot question the people…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 09:04 PM
6

She's right. Her attractive female privilege has won her a life of luxury- really, I'd be furious if she was claiming it was due to anything but the fact she is attractive.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 08:15 PM
3

Were you expecting the Daily Mail readers to be calm and composed in their opinions?
/r/MensRights18/02/13 08:08 PM
-2

Because no one would read that. Right, and no-one should be reading these quotations out of context, either, because there is no way of discerning whether or not they're actually what the author intended. Thats like asking why wikipedia wouldn't Nope. Wikipedia is purports to be an online encyclopaedia with no biase, a fair portrayal of fact and from no singular perspective. The Backlash is an obviously biased platform for opinions with a clear, shared objective. Summarising can be okay, but thi…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 08:07 PM
-6

So, your response to someone pointing out that taking quotes out of their context is a bad practice and one we've criticised feminists for, is to quote a whole load more drivel at me, totally disregarding my actual point. I'll reiterate for you, nice and clearly: What is the difference between us taking these quotes out of context and feminists taking Warren Farrell out of context in exact the same way?
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:59 PM
2

That's a judgement that can only be made in retrospect, though, and should not be used to justify violence that hasn't happened yet.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:45 PM
3

It depends how that correction is done; if a girl is clearly so much better than her peers at a sport and she is happy to take the risk of playing with boys, why shouldn't she be allowed to play with boys? However, if that correction is forcing all boys into a handicap to give the girls an equal chance, then no, we should not try to compensate for biological differences.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:41 PM
-11

If your next post continues to be about Chris Brown or Rihanna, don't bother replying because this is the last time I'll engage it. Oof, struck out. Until next time.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:33 PM
-6

Most of the quotes include sources so you can see them in context. Why not just list the articles themselves and let people read them themselves in the entirety, if they're so salacious inside of their context as well as outside of it? Is it because you don't think your reader-base would bother reading them in their entirety? No, you'd never suggest we do any work ourselves- because then we might find out that your surgical excision of the tantalising parts of the articles might seem less tantal…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:16 PM
3

Cuckolded men have no idea and are lied to and told to invest in a child borne by another man. I don't think knowing that the child shares your name is going to be much of a salve when you find out the truth, either. I have a feeling I've just predicted some new radical feminist rhetoric- give children the women's name so if the child maintenance drone "father" turns out to be a cuckold, the child and woman won't suffer.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:00 PM
4

Whoosh goes the comedy.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 06:53 PM
6

We're not going to do your homework for you. I would advise against choosing men's rights for this sort of thing because really, the role of men hasn't changed very much as society has advanced. We're still the warfighters, the protectors, the breadwinners, the providers, women are the ones who have been liberated from their gender roles.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 06:48 PM
-1

You've seen less then nothing to indicate this man did anything prior to having his tongue bitten off. I'm not making statements of fact though, am I? I never said the man did anything to warrant having his tongue bitten off, the topic title is, "What drives a woman to do this?" A man forcing himself on a woman might drive her to bite his tongue off. Using TMZ.com as a reference I lol heartily at this. If you seriously think you can use a celebrity gossip website for anything other than the corr…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 06:45 PM
-6

They may as well have titled this, "Here's a bunch of quotes you can make yourselves look moronic with." If the UofT protesters can't say that Warren Farrell is pro-rape, nor can we say that anything on this website should be listened to. Either we're okay with taking things out of context and twisting them for our own means, or we're not.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 06:05 PM
7

There's no actual argument made in this article. Plenty of men raise kids that don't share their name, much less their genetic material, and have no ill-consequences for it. Simply saying that men won't be invested in kids if they don't share their name is not an argument.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 06:03 PM
-1

You're incredibly obnoxious. I'm going to ignore you. The most beautiful chords in the loser concerto. If you don't want to get called out for your Wiki pseudo-knowledge, don't incorrectly regurgigate Wikipedia articles you've learned in a vague attempt to sound intellectual.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 05:58 PM
5

If you're concerned that this man engaged in domestic violence Where did I say anything even approaching that? the whole "Chris Brown" episode must have drove you nuts. Totally irrelevant. After all Rhianna did engage in domestic violence against him before he escalated the conflict. I have seen nothing to suggest this is the case, nor do I care to see anything that would. If your next post is going to be as valueless and irrelevant as this one, don't bother replying.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 05:14 PM
1

A strawman is when you're building an argument against someone with something they didn't say, which sounds similar to what they did say. According to yourself, though, he didn't say anything about violence. He would've had to have done so for me to create a strawman of it. If my argument is a strawman, then you must've thought his post was close enough to suggesting violence that I could create a strawman from it. If you insist that I'm using a strawman, then you're acknowledging that his post …
/r/MensRights18/02/13 05:09 PM
1

I don't believe the government should be able to draft anyone, first of all. However, I actually agree that men should be the warfighters, if anyone needs to be. We are better at it. Women are necessary to replenish the population, men less so. I've said it before and I've said it again; it is only a matter of time until men start dying in irrational attempts to rescue or protect their female colleagues. We've already had numerous deaths due to unsuitable equipment, what happens when they have t…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 04:58 PM
0

It's called context. The only other possible interpretation is that the gentleman would love for them to try because he would love to lose his balls. Stop saying strawman. You're using it wrong. A strawman is an argument that is constructed to be near identical to your opponents, but easier to knock down. It is not just a general term for any time you think someone is making something up.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 04:39 PM
-2

Who said anything about violence? Quit strawmanning. The op did. Learn what a strawman is. He also didn't say he would "love" jack, he said: "I would welcome the attempt". Did you read literally the very first line of what he posted? I would love to see them try Oops! Quit putting words in his mouth that he literally didn't say. You're making false criticisms. Stop posting before reading. You're embarrassing yourself.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 04:29 PM
3

I just did.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 03:53 PM
-7

Yes, literally - but few words are used for their literal meaning in most contexts. That doesn't mean words just abandon their meaning entirely, either. If this had been a verbal conversation, then I would have no issue with his use of gladly- but it isn't verbal, it's written and any argument you will try to make to suggest that the literal meaning of the word is irrelevant, is irrelevant as a result. you managed to ignore the second part of my comment Because it was irrelevant.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 03:36 PM
3

What about when a bar-fly chick blows a guy, saves the sperm in her mouth and impregnates herself?? That's covered by my very first sentence.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 03:18 PM
3

I Don't like sperm-jackers. A friend of a friend was at a bar, and the local bar-fly blew him, saved the sperm in her mouth, went to the bathroom and impregnated herself. Poor Bastards in a horrible situation with a child from the local bar-fly that he despises deeply. Lol, of all the stories that have never happened, this one has never happened the most.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 03:17 PM
-5

Gladly doing something doesn't literally mean you are happy because you're doing it That is literally what doing something gladly means. Your argument is with the English language, not with me. Shrug.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 03:16 PM
-5

Why would you be glad to have to defend yourself from violence, if you weren't equally enjoying the violence? On all the occasions I have been forced to defend myself, I have never once felt anything even approaching positivity about having to do so and it strikes me as deeply unhealthy that there are men waiting, rubbing their hands and licking their lips, for the day that a woman hits them so they can retaliate.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 02:21 PM
0

We could go back to a time where people only have sex with people whom they have more than a cursory knowledge of. We could accept that babies are seldom made in ways other than a man inserting his erect penis into a woman's vagina and causing sufficient friction that he ejaculates and apply it to our thought-process and sexual habits. Your post is alarmist, paranoid and hysterical at times.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 01:17 PM
48

A man forcing himself upon her might. This reads very much like 'day one in court' and makes no effort to include anything other than prosecutional rhetoric. We don't know the facts here so we should be very careful about reading anything into this.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 01:13 PM
-1

I wouldn't relish in shooting them Thus making you markedly different from CaptainDarcyPants, who would love the opportunity to do so. I'm not saying that you shouldn't defend yourself, but getting excited and salivating at the thought of doing so is unhealthy.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 01:09 PM
-12

I would love to see them try. Seriously, it's all this in-between nonsense that bothers me. If all the women in the world rose up with a single mind, determined to do this, I would welcome the attempt. I can guarantee that it would not succeed, and the bullshit would finally all be over. It's posts like these that promote the stereotype we're violent against women. How can you say you wouldn't relish inflicting violence on a woman when you're literally saying you would "love" the opportunity to …
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:40 AM
3

Sounds like you're using condoms that are too big for you, friend. I don't mean this in a 'lol small dick shame' kind of way, but condoms should require 'peeling' off your genitals if they fit correctly.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:20 AM
2

You're really doing your part to challenge the notion that MRAs are paranoid anti-spermjackers.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:18 AM
8

"Violence against humans is bad." How can you justify your military with that mindset? The leader of the UN can't say that killing men is bad whilst simultaneously sanctioning actions that kill men. It's 'okay' to kill men because people will have to die for the UN to get what they want and it just so happens that men are better at it.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:15 AM
8

It's good to see you're staying grounded and not getting hysterical.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 02:28 PM
1

This isn't SRS.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 09:12 PM
0

They don't want boys pretending to be soldiers and kill people until they're old enough to do it for oil. Figures.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 04:11 PM
1

If the court system were at all balanced, the accused would not need to do any investigation of their own at all. I suppose really this comes down to an issue of theory versus practice; I think you'll agree that in a perfect world (or day I say, a just world...) investigation would only ever yield concrete proof beyond a reasonable doubt. To that end, the investigation could take the attitude of 'assuming this crime took place, what evidence would I find?' However, as you've highlighted, investi…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 10:35 PM
1

I appreciate the well-written and thoughtful reply and you have set out your argument in a clear and convincing way, but unfortunately I remain unconvinced. The courts still require guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which requires evidence of the crime, which requires a search for dead bodies rather than a head-count of living people. If our court system functions correctly- which I freely admit, it often doesn't- then the investigative methods wouldn't matter. Either they'll find evidence that the…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 04:11 PM
2

Because who is a feminist? A radical feminist who thinks all male children should be asphyxiated at birth is no more or less of a feminist than anyone else. Feminism has become so incredibly diffuse, with so many different attitudes, theories and general academic red-tape that trying to coordinate or cooperate with any reasonable faction is nigh-impossible.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:41 PM
3

It strikes me as quite reasonable to investigate under the premise that a crime took place as it's not like the intent behind investigation will change whether or not a crime actually took place. As long as he is treated as IUPG during the trial, which you indeed quoted as such; It is not until the time of trial that the defendant is guaranteed a right to a fair trial and is entitled to the presumption of innocence. A bloody knife doesn't become a smoking gun, just because they're busy searching…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:38 PM
2

I think it's "ludacris" that people think it's ludicrous that men could be the victim of rape.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:24 PM
11

It's because society has bent 'misogyny' to mean 'any activity which does not directly benefit a woman.' If they had objectified her, it's misogyny, if they ignore her, it's misogyny. Men can't win.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:23 PM
1

"A camel is a horse designed by committee." We don't really need feel-good rhetoric, use your time on something more productive.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:18 PM
0

Seems like pretty good advice, really.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:16 PM
2

Literally the very first line and I was on her side.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:00 PM
15

Ask her who mined her diamond necklace, who drilled for the fuel in her car and how many women died for the freedom to do so.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 11:59 AM
2

Time for an immediate police run.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 09:03 PM
0

Not /r/shitredditsays.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 09:02 PM
2

Not according to the police report.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:59 PM
41

It's the same, recycled, tired academic feminist boiler-plate we've heard a thousand times, with the same hypocrisy and saccharine vitriol we've had quoted at us the same number of times. As feminists, we have a responsibility to address the ways we talk about and do sexual violence work that exclude actual survivors. Absolutely correct. What an utter shame it's followed with; Rape is absolutely a gendered crime. We know sexual violence is overwhelmingly perpetrated by men against women. I could…
/r/MensRights04/02/13 04:28 PM
0

We landed on the fucking moon, we can correct some societal injustices with a bit of work.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 10:23 AM
2

This isn't /r/shitredditsays.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 12:29 PM
4

that is illegal, by the way, as libel, and ive reported it No it isn't.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 12:27 PM
2

15-28% failure rate. 4-27% failure rate. Edit: Did you even read your own link? However, more realistic estimates of typical use indicate that about 18% of couples will become pregnant in a year using withdrawal [3]. Right there, on the very first page.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 11:26 AM
3

15-28% failure rate. 4-27% failure rate. I'm pretty good at controlling myself, but with a regular sex-life I wouldn't depend on 'perfect' withdrawal every time. It can get very frustrating and takes a fair bit of focus- more than you might have after a couple of drinks, lets say. You are not counting on any sort of prevention, just on statistics and its false promotion it as a rival to condoms contributes to why so many people contract STDs and why pregnancies are getting younger and younger.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 11:24 AM
15

The 'privilege fallacy,' if you will, is the logical fallacy of highlighting someone's status in society as a means to discredit them, rather than discrediting their argument itself. If I might extrapolate this fallacy somewhat, saying that John Smith, white man, should check his privilege when debating about PoC issues is qualitatively no different to someone telling Barack Obama, black man, to check his privilege when talking about politics. If you can discredit for having an elevated status i…
/r/MensRights03/02/13 10:45 AM
6

Withdrawal is not a form of birth control any more than Russian roulette is a form of body armour. 15-28% failure rate. 4-27% failure rate. For those that disagree.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 10:37 AM
6

Also consider other variables; for example, the number of inner-city adult black men unjustly incarcerated, killed etc. in previous decades/centuries, leaving children behind. We're dealing with generations of fatherless children, here, it goes way deeper than recent social benefits.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 10:12 AM
18

I don't know why anyone gives the shrieking harpy any credence at all. Professional oxygen thief.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 09:28 PM
6

Because a man killing someone is just his return to his natural, predatory, rapacious state. A woman committing the same crime was driven to it, probably by an abusive man. /s
/r/MensRights01/02/13 03:53 PM
2

I won't be paying £45 for this. The NHS has more than enough bureaucracy and red tape that could be slashed to allow this vaccination to be distributed for free.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 03:50 PM
1

It's ironic that they're 'traditional women's rights activists' when really what they're advocating is the removal of women's rights. I have no idea why anyone would want to submit themselves to abject slavery, but hey, whatever keeps their boat afloat.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 08:21 AM
-1

This isn't /r/shitredditsays.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 08:15 AM
0

Why wasn't this in the news? Because it isn't newsworthy. A small group of people blocking the doors to a university lecture is hardly riots across the capital...
/r/MensRights01/02/13 07:34 AM
0

Male toilets generally smell worse than female ones.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 11:40 PM
1

Kind of weird how much your photo looks exactly like this one circulating Facebook.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 04:58 PM
11

...blimey. What kind of establishment proudly displays this?
/r/MensRights31/01/13 04:50 PM
40

We need more context for this to really be meaningful in any way. It strikes me as professional and proper for a medical institution to double-check rather than just go on instinct...
/r/MensRights31/01/13 03:25 PM
3

I believe in the radical notion that heterosexual males have the right to safe spaces free from homosexual males. I believe in the radical notion that white males have the right to safe spaces free from black males.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 05:21 PM
4

If you're planning for divorce, don't get married. Pretty straightforward, most would think...
/r/MensRights30/01/13 02:49 PM
2

Because gay men are opportunist rapists?
/r/MensRights30/01/13 02:47 PM
2

Very rambling and at times spiteful journalism- drawing parallels between Lumley and paedophile Jimmy Savile? - though I like her colleague's term, 'pre-rape.' Really it's just the same, tired cycle of victim-blaming and needlessly verbose excoriation of victim-blaming.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 11:32 AM
6

Of those responding, 82% of women would not let a man pay for her dinner on the first date, with 52% of those surveyed saying they would prefer paying for both parties. Ahahahahahaha-bullshit. Believe nothing in this survey. Edit: Actually, there is one truly disappointing statistic that this survey produced; 41% of women agreed men should be able to wear dresses Only 41%? A majority of the women surveyed thought men shouldn't be allowed to wear dresses? Charming.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 11:00 AM
2

Some of us believe there is a patriarchy and hanging your hat around anti-anything limits you to being a reaction movement, rather than a movement of our own.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 09:58 AM
1

You icy bitch, just let the poor guy feel. I bet you end up dumping him. Fuck you. He is fighting for your freedom, keeping the terrorists at bay and you keep blowing guys behind his back. just because he is sad his dog died? You cheap whore. I don't know how you sleep at night. You're complaining about a man crying too much? Go on XX chromosomes and get the fatalist mentality towards males pity party you deserve, freak. The problem isn't him so much as you want him to suppess his fucking humani…
/r/MensRights29/01/13 09:54 AM
2

I seriously hate people like that. I wonder if he would kill himself? You know, since he see's himself to be worthless? Maybe if I can convince him that he's doing some harm to women... You're really doing your part to improve the image of MRAs.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 09:47 AM
-14

Yes, I imagine it will be very, very grim. I suppose this is what equality looks like.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 02:48 PM
13

British politics is full of little quirky things like that- for example, calling someone a 'liar' in the House of Commons is grounds for removal, they are 'misleading the House.'
/r/MensRights28/01/13 02:03 PM
102

Wait, so giving people an enormous amount of money to do something trivial doesn't guarantee results?
/r/MensRights28/01/13 01:57 PM
1

Meh, anyone with a severe enough mental illness to think I am excusing her of responsibility isn't someone I really care about. (unless you consider the female psyche to be inherently flawed, as I do. A staggering lack of compassion and unfounded misogyny, both from the same post. I remember your username from similarly hateful posts which is why it surprised me that you were 19. Lighten up.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 02:41 AM
0

What point? You're not qualified enough in any field to make anything outside of statements of opinion and I was simply stating the opinion that it's a shame you have such a negative world-view whilst still in your teens. Makes me fear for the kids of today.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 02:32 AM
0

I think it says 'to let.' As in, room to let.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 08:14 PM
0

I think it's generally an intangible number because the definition of rape has relaxed over the years. We can't purely go off of conviction statistics because rapes often go unreported, falsely reported, or unjustly acquitted in court. Going off of testimony is a tricky one. Is an eighteen year old man who sleeps with his seventeen year old girlfriend a rapist? Not in the UK, but he would be in America. Would his girlfriend report him for it? Or feel that he was a rapist for doing it? Doubtful. …
/r/MensRights27/01/13 08:10 PM
-2

I assume it's some sort of empathy thing, 'we're going through this together' etc. I can't say I'd really go for it myself, but I can see more liberal couples going for it. It's not like it's being done involuntarily. Don't we have bigger concerns than what adults willingly do in their free time?
/r/MensRights27/01/13 06:50 PM
-3

Right, so it's not "seemingly pointless" then, is it? Clear the point is to simulate an equivalent amount of pain in the male spouse.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 06:19 PM
-5

How is it "seemingly pointless" if you state what the point is in the title...?
/r/MensRights27/01/13 05:32 PM
1

What about gang-rapes? They'd be reported as one incident but have multiple rapists. Your logic is barmy.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 12:39 PM
0

What an awful lot of hatred in an awful lot of text.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 12:36 PM
0

This post is like staring down a whirlpool of hatred. I saw you post in another thread that you're 19, it strikes me as quite a shame you'd be so cynical and jaded at such a young age.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 09:44 AM
1

Holy fucking shit, do not try to speak to her. That is one of the worst things you could possibly do. Please do not try to advise on these situations.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 01:16 AM
1

Tell your parents. I'm afraid that even from the way you've told the story, she withdrew consent and you continued; that is rape. Assuming this isn't a troll, this is going to be a lesson you're going to learn very hard. Tell your parents, lawyer up.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 01:13 AM
0

mongoloid Great vocabulary.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 09:10 PM
1

Maybe the intent-to-prosecute should come with a 'no publicity' opt-out, if the case can be reasonably defended? I'm not a legal expert so I can only speculate as to what could and could not be worked out but it doesn't seem too complicated of a puzzle to me.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 08:52 PM
0

Arrest those children immediately!
/r/MensRights26/01/13 07:35 PM
10

Why identify either? It seems fair to announce that someone has been convicted of rape, but given how damaging and pervasive accusations are, they should not be identified until a jury votes.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 07:30 PM
11

Academics have argued as such; that homosexual men are the ultimate misogynists, that they hate women so much they are rejecting them entirely etc. It drips with hatred and vitriol, but it's an argument that has been made by more than one intellectual.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 04:40 PM
29

Next up, we'll be fucking eachother, too, like the misogynists we are.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 04:04 PM
4

There are no rules against being upset and no rules about musing over relationship dynamics. Grow some compassion.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 02:17 PM
0

Hope you're gay, then, because that sounds like a very unhappy and lonely way to live a life.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 02:12 PM
7

Please dont post things like this. We're a supportive fraternity here, men get enough criticism, scorn and judgement without doing it to eachother. This is a strongspace where men should feel comfortable being vulnerable.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 02:04 PM
2

An insanity defence isn't 'I am insane and therefore cannot be held to account', its closer to 'when the crime was committed, I was insane.' Their current mental state is largely irrelevant.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 01:57 PM
5

If it means an end to selective service entirely then the KKK could be the ones pushing for it for all I care. Sometimes, ideology ought to give way to practicality.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 01:52 PM
3

Arguing that women have 'superior rights' is about as worthwhile as arguing that Asian people have more rights than Hispanic people. There are so many factors and variations that it is a pointless endeavour.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 01:16 PM
4

Don't measure your self-worth with someone elses yardstick. Validate yourself internally and others will validate you externally.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 01:11 PM
37

Thats what happens when you tell an entire generation of men they are evil, privileged monsters who should be ashamed of themselves. They'll reject all facets of adulthood and stay children.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 01:05 PM
1

Seems pretty fair to me. The idea of a 'mutual climax' strikes me as wishful thinking but otherwise women have every right to be upset with an unsatisfactory sex life.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 11:09 AM
4

This is /r/mensrights, not /r/welaughatfemalemisfortune.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 11:05 AM
19

Tell your boss the full story immediately. Once a rumour grows roots, the false accusation flower blooms before too long.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 10:37 AM
3

You're being very insulting to those with actual mental illnesses and essentially excusing her of responsibility. Why can't she just be a shitty person? Why does a womans negative behaviour mean she has 'mental problems'? The insinuation that women must be defective in some way to do something wrong is one we must confront at every turn.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 10:34 AM
6

I'm an academic and I assure the courts that I also need to be treated with special consideration as I am "high-needs" too. I invite dissent on this point.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 10:30 AM
1

You need only look at modern feminism to see the dangers of subjecting a practical movement to such excessive academic consideration. You end up with a disparate group of pseudo-allies infighting and a wholesale poisoned chalice.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 10:27 AM
12

The fact that she murdered a child and is walking free after three years- only a year longer than the average tax evasion prison sentence- fully in line with the trend of women getting incredibly light sentences, doesn't show any bias? Pull the other one, its got bells on.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 12:07 AM
11

Yes it does. These posts highlight the enormous disparities in the justice system.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 11:26 PM
-1

Rob a bank. There's a good chance our utterly toxic family court system will see you incarcerated for non-payment soon anyway... Do you have any family or friends who could lend you the scratch to lawyer up? I'd have a go at posting this in a FathersForJustice forum, too. Good luck and keep us posted.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 09:51 PM
6

Avoid marriage. It is a decrepit, unnecessary and dangerous social custom.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:11 PM
11

I'm pretty sure the fact that most fat people also happen to be gluttonous, lazy cunts is the reason they're fat.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:08 PM
0

You consider that transphobia? You realise that trans people are often attacked, belittled, mocked, assaulted, humiliated and killed, right? There isn't anything in that thread I'd feel even a little bit uncomfortable showing to a trans person. You are being hysterical and cheapening the term. Good riddance.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:03 PM
3

Lol, how could I forget about Jung's theories of extroverted, introverted and catroverted personality types?
/r/MensRights25/01/13 06:55 PM
18

If you really think you can viably compare 21st Century human interaction with cat behaviour, please go chase a laser pointer away from me.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 06:12 PM
22

They're an easy target and practically noone stands up for them. Those that do get told "nice guy detected" and are then shamed into silence.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 06:00 PM
9

It's an analogy. No. You think? It makes no sense because people aren't cats. The basis of an analogy is similarity; you can't just arbitrarily use subjects that have nosimilarity to what you're trying to elucidate on.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 05:58 PM
0

"Yes, he is a rapist- but she was leading him on."
/r/MensRights25/01/13 04:35 PM
31

People are not cats. You are a moron.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 04:32 PM
3

A great article, one we should distribute on Facebook etc. The Guardian are a liberal paper who strive for balance and generally have a good rep in the UK. Their online success is testament to the quality of their journalism and if we can encourage them to give male issues more exposure then it is imperative we do so.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 01:30 AM
6

That's kind of a crappy attitude to have. She has absolutely hit the nail on the head and the solution starts at home.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 01:29 AM
2

I think what this whole story shows is that men are just as deserving and needing of closeness, compassion and affection as their female counterparts. You really can see both sides of the pressures men face here; the need for love, even at the expensive of your physical safety, and the need to be strong, stoic and unemotional even when you're going through turmoil. Society needs to entirely disavow this premise that emotions are for women. There is nothing wrong with not being able to cope. Men …
/r/MensRights24/01/13 01:20 AM
35

He said yes. I gave him a hug. A long hug. I teared up. Thank you for sharing.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 11:08 PM
-2

Because men protect women. I can't believe I need to point this out, but all throughout human history, men protect women. Even if we ignore the enormous societal pressure for men to protect women, it is practically hardcoded into our DNA. If you seriously think that women will not receive preferential treatment on the frontline, you are deluded.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 09:43 PM
-7

I never said they wouldn't. I said that men would die unnecessarily as the females will become priorities for both sides. Male soldiers will essentially suicide to try and save a female soldier and opponents will target female soldiers as they are far more valuable deaths/hostages.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 09:04 PM
-4

A fucking terrible idea that will only lead to men dying unnecessarily. As terrible as it is that men are the war-fighters, it is for a reason. Men will behave and react differently, tactically, if they have a female squadmate. A female squadmate will immediately become 'the priority' and I foresee only bad things happening from this.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 08:31 PM
5

Back to your pit, cur.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 08:25 PM
5

Unlike you I have the resources and money to hire legal counsel. Well, unlike you, I'm intelligent enough to have never needed it. Acquiring legal counsel is hardly an accomplishment, I should hasten to point out, given that it takes a not-enormous amount of money and only really a miniscule amount of time... I have homes and rental property in 2 states. Bully. I have self-worth beyond that of my material wealth. to protect my financial interests. You should've focused on protecting yourself fro…
/r/MensRights23/01/13 08:13 PM
5

That sign insinuates that I would be looking around the bathroom for jokes. For that reason alone, it is idiotic and should be burned.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 08:00 PM
4

Let me clue you in. This should be good. But, sadly, most morons spend more time picking the color of their shitty little car So much anger. A lot of the "morons" (or 'men' as we call them here) you're talking about will be the people who frequent this subforum. r than planning the financial structure and consequences (prenuptial agreement) of a marriage. Ah, okay, so you don't know anything then. If you had any legal acumen, you'd be aware that pre-nuptial agreements often go unenforced in lega…
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:59 PM
3

That's funny, I don't see 'social sciences academic' listed anywhere there. Still, those office admin positions are a real health hazard. Sometimes that coffee can get so hurt it burns!
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:54 PM
3

Tell me, at which university did you read law? I assume your LLB is from a prestigious academy for you to be so confident.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:50 PM
5

Most men aren't in romantic relationships with their cars.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:48 PM
6

Wow. That is hugely unsettling and worrying behaviour and would probably be grounds for separation in and of itself, if I found my SO doing this.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:38 PM
3

"Your honour, this husband has a trail of abusive, controlling and duplicitous behaviour. As you can see, he maintained secret bank accounts, hidden from his family, as well as a rudimentary 'stash' of valuable documents."
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:38 PM
4

Not posting topics that associate MRAs and pick-up artists is a really good start.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:35 PM
8

Can we stop associating MRAs and pick-up artists?
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:32 PM
1

I disagree that people are trying to counter the notion of a patriarchy, people are simply highlighting that male privilege means mining, warfare, etc. are jobs that we expect and demand men do, but not women.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:28 PM
9

by seventh-year human rights student Arun Smith. There's the fucking problem. Nearly a decade of his life, utterly, utterly wasted in the name of empty-headed academic pursuits.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 07:08 PM
1

It' s worth just noting that whilst this is the correct definition, a lot (most?) of the time people totally misuse the phrase ' strawman' in a vague attempt to sound intellectual. If you're not educated in fallacies and debate, it is best to avoid using them.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 03:57 PM
0

It's often better to just start afresh. Clean palette, just keep things easily read and viewed.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 03:43 PM
8

If I might be critical, these are absolutely awful posters. They contain far, far too much information, the sentences are occasionally badly written, the fonts, sizes and spacings are bad (What software did you use?), the colour correction done on the images is awful, the stock photos are bad quality and generally it doesn't seem to stick to a 'theme.' That said, there is potential. You need to get a proofreader, probably some better software, a decent site to steal stock photos from and general…
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:05 PM
2

Maybe, just maybe- really, I'm musing here, spitballing- it's because more males like videogames than females.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 01:21 PM
17

It's called violence by proxy; using third parties- law enforcement, vigilantes, family members, colleagues etc.- to enact violence on a personal target.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 11:43 AM
4

I really want to know if there is a reasonable chance of recovering spousal support that I was not obligated to pay No. Not in a billion years. I will be hugely surprised if a judge actually signs off on your affidavit. The court system has a pretty well-defined habit of totally ignoring any agreements that would benefit the man.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 10:11 AM
4

Be prepared for the fucking of a lifetime should you decide to go ahead with the split. 'Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned' and the courts will facilitate whatever punishment she wants to inflict on you. She will get custody of the kids, you will most probably be arrested and charged with spousal abuse. You will be accused of hurting both the mother and child, you will have your name dragged through the mud, it will be a humiliating, gruelling, exhausting and upsetting process. I am not tel…
/r/MensRights23/01/13 10:02 AM
3

Replace 'men' with 'society' in the title and you've pretty much got it. A lot of people say that men are punished for acting feminine- playing with dolls etc.- but I disagree. Society forces men to be macho and punishes anyone who is immacho, not necessarily feminine. Suicide rates will continue to rise, though, as our society shows no sign of slowing down.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 09:55 AM
4

Well folks, I’m about to get to get shot. Peace I read this story from a different perspective recently and only realised it was the same case at this line. The kid is a hero. Good for him.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 12:00 AM
1

When you had sex you did not consent to giving a life. What a universe we live in where this is a debate people have.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 11:52 PM
4

Turn your head about 45 degrees to the right and you'll find a wealth of information.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 10:38 PM
1

Lol, thanks for the reference, but it's hard to believe that... I was only really interested in providing the citation you requested ...when you throw in a snide, passive-aggressive valediction like this; Now comes the part where you completely ignore that actual thing I'm rebutting and try to mince words with me Rather than just, you know, providing the reference. It's your internet, though, make yourself look ridiculous however you like.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 10:24 PM
1

It's not bigotry because I don't hate women and I don't have any interest in fucking them over or subjugating them. Maybe not consciously, no, but you've shoehorned in anti-woman paragraphs into each of your posts so far despite me purposely not engaging them. My only argument was that it doesn't make sense that a woman can leave you, take the kids, take the money, when you were a willing and financially stable father of your own children. Sure it does. If you're a shitty spouse, why should you …
/r/MensRights22/01/13 10:09 PM
0

ABC News isn't credible..? No, a short, soft news article about divorce, written by a journalist, that doesn't quote any academic sources or studies is not credible. And no it's not misogyny. I haven't researched the topic, so I'm speaking mostly from observations, experience and general knowledge. Let me stop you there then; that is called 'conjecture' and is intellectually valueless. Any 'hunches' you make, based on conjecture, are by definition prejudiced in some way and consequently only ser…
/r/MensRights22/01/13 09:30 PM
-1

Maybe we should set up /r/shitredditsays 2.0 so these posts have somewhere to go and can stop cluttering up /r/mensrights
/r/MensRights22/01/13 09:21 PM
-5

I think a big part of this is the size difference between men and women. A man cannon-balling towards you is going to break your leg a lot quicker than a woman, half the size, and so the rules regarding force etc. need to be enforced more stringently for men.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 09:18 PM
7

You'd think after wife number three... maybe it's time to call it quits. A real tragedy that this is happening to him but it's not as though he hasn't now been through the ringer four times.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 09:17 PM
7

If the opposition to men's rights was one of facts, we'd have a far easier time. There's no logical argument you can make to dislodge someone from an illogical position.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 08:56 PM
0

More than two-thirds of all divorces are filed by women. Women leave men Well, even if I treated that source as credible-- it isn't-- you're still not making an argument as for why child support isn't necessary. 'Women leave men more' isn't an argument and the supposed fact that 2/3 of divorces are filed by women isn't even strictly relevant because we're discussing marriages that have children. And I doubt that many of that 1/3 are getting child support from their ex-wife, but that's just a hun…
/r/MensRights22/01/13 08:46 PM
-1

Explaining your thoughts is hard, right? Here's a sad face just for you: :(
/r/MensRights22/01/13 08:21 PM
-1

That's right, I forgot you have an all or nothing mindset. Because I reject your unsupported conjecture as unsupported conjecture? Your word might be gospel to you, but trust me, you're just words on a screen to me so you could do better than acting pissy because someone disagrees with you. When children are involved, women file for 91% of divorces. So?
/r/MensRights22/01/13 05:52 PM
1

Your post is well-written, but ultimately unconvincing and again seems to rely on a false narrative; that only women end marriages. It seems unreasonable to suggest that people are leaving marriages for pecuniary advantage when there is a far simpler explanation; that divorce no longer turns you into a social pariah.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 05:00 PM
2

But if the contract is broken by a cheater, the cheater pays alimony, or extra alimony. This isn't a legal precedent and can vary hugely from judge-to-judge, let alone by states or country. Infidelity can influence whether or not a judge decides you ought to pay alimony, but it's misleading to suggest that that is the 'standard.'
/r/MensRights22/01/13 03:58 PM
8

I liked Prozac Nation, but Wurtzel needs to stay a long way away from journalism. Yuck. I don't see how this is really a men's rights issue, though?
/r/MensRights22/01/13 03:37 PM
4

That's a legal ramification of divorce, not of cheating.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 03:30 PM
3

You could equally spin this, "Female scientists more likely to get away with research fraud."
/r/MensRights22/01/13 03:10 PM
3

You intone the bold assumption that it's only ever women who end marriages or that women never end up paying men child support. Child support is necessary as children need financial support. The system is broken, but the concept is good.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 02:55 PM
6

And without the paperwork there is no legal ramification for cheating. What are the legal ramifications of cheating, exactly?
/r/MensRights22/01/13 02:32 PM
2

It is scandalous that people like this procreate, and so plentifully.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 09:26 AM
17

It's not the best way to run a forum, IMO, but it's their fort, they can set the rules.
/r/MensRights19/01/13 03:58 PM
1

I don't know, it strikes me as very rich to quote Malcolm X whilst claiming we're not responsible for our ancestors actions when Malcolm X himself demanded white people apologise for their ancestors actions. It also strikes me as rich to claim that our grandfathers built the railroads whilst also saying don't tell us off for what our grandfathers did.
/r/MensRights19/01/13 10:40 AM
5

"Mothers whose sons survived hung their heads in shame" Wouldn't they have been the victors...?
/r/MensRights19/01/13 10:14 AM
1

It's the usual man-shaming, but I do agree that an adult would get tested and it not be a big deal. Even if it wasn't a reasonable request, it's her body and she can set whatever parameters of access she likes.
/r/MensRights19/01/13 10:14 AM
1

Why not post a picture with the correct symbols? Because of visual impact. Seeing that many female symbols representing supposedly female deaths has a much greater impact than if they were male. I knew the correct statistics before I saw the swap and I still found it much more challenging when it was female symbols.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:17 PM
1

I quite enjoyed both of those, actually, and used both of them on some Facebook friends to general success. The poster one could be worded more succinctly and repeats itself a few times, but the suicide one is quite effective IMO. Maybe others disagree.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:05 PM
1

“transition should be as freely available as abortion,” Another case of Myproblemsarethebiggest-itis. Feminism isn't for everyone and really, the MRM can't be for everyone until everyone stops attacking it.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 01:26 PM
0

Why is it any more odd than 'against his will' ? Because it sounds like you're suggesting we rape women and thus 'make them mothers against their will.' Obviously this is not what you intended to suggest, so I asked for clarification so I could be sure I was answering the right question. It's the 'against his will' part that you're failing to convince me of. If he was raped, that's against his will. If she artificially inseminated herself, that's against his will. If he inserts his unprotected p…
/r/MensRights18/01/13 10:12 AM
9

I wonder what other forms of sexual assault could be granted clemency with a flimsy bit of paperwork.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 09:55 AM
1

Women are punished physically by pregnancy/abortion, men aren't. Paternal surrender isn't equivalent to abortion and it borders on hyperbole to suggest that it is. You won't make any arguments I haven't heard before. Pregnancy isn't fair. There isn't a solution here where everybody wins, the woman loses no matter what, but as long as the man is willingly penetrating the woman, he is equally responsible in my eyes. That isn't to say that the family court system isn't horrendously crooked, because…
/r/MensRights18/01/13 09:52 AM
2

Seems like a case of children would be left in dumpsters otherwise to me.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 09:44 AM
0

Because, Sir, men and women are 100% equal now in every realistic regard we are able, Huh? Would this subreddit exist if that were true? As for the rest of your post, as thoughtful as it is, it's not really what I asked for. Given that it is no secret how thoroughly the deck is stacked against men in the family court system, how many red flags the woman threw up, the fact he continued having unprotected vaginal sex with her after their relationship ended, why is any of it against his will? Accid…
/r/MensRights18/01/13 09:21 AM
0

I feel obliged to ask, why do use the phrasing "against my will?" If you willingly insert your penis into a human vagina, sometimes babies happen. This is one of the incredibly few ways in which babies happen, yet people do it willingly and are surprised when a baby happens. Babies don't happen through oral sex, anal sex, intimate touching etc. they happen through vaginal sex, which he willingly engaged in without using any sort of protection.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 08:23 AM
2

Actually, I don't think it's fair for a woman to abandon her child, either but I understand the reasoning is that it is better to give the option of abandonment in a hospital/safe space than for the woman to just abandon the child on the street somewhere.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 08:17 AM
1

Almost every sentence in that story was a red flag to me and he is foolish for not using his own protection. Is it fair that he's now on the hook for the child? Perhaps not, but it strikes me as even less fair that a child should grow up in such an environment. He is plenty old enough to understand the consequences of his actions and really, old enough that he ought to be at least self-sufficient anyway. Good luck to the abortion, I suppose is the best outcome here.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 10:54 PM
19

Well, I'm sure if it was a woman who was choked to death on a man's penis, that would be equally hilarious.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 01:17 PM
-1

Again, you're using very broadstrokes, feminism is doing this and that, and once again failing to connect the wage gap and reducing workplace fatalities. I really wasn't interested in this debate two posts ago and you've not done anything to stir my interest since then, so I will take my leave.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 12:53 PM
1

You can put an anti-anything narrative on anything, but I don't see a connection between the wage gap and the cost of reducing fatalities. Your reasoning seems very vague and conspiratorial and doesn't convince me I'm afraid.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 12:38 PM
1

Can you name another issue that isn't directly countering feminist legislation or doctrine that isn't already being covered by feminism? Lowering the number of male workplace fatalities.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 12:19 PM
-2

Most of the issues are anti feminist by definition. I disagree and whilst I respect that you are competent enough to do so, constructing an argument to dissuade me of this viewpoint is not worth either of our time.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 12:08 PM
1

Mmhmm. Well, I'm sure you're already suffering the consequences of having such a negative attitude-- certainly, your posts reflect that you are-- so I'll leave you to it.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 12:06 PM
2

Since you've edited your post after I've already replied... Men can't get upset? Sure, be upset. Don't start telling us to suck your cock or that we're bitches or cunts, though, because we won't tolerate it. Whatever I am though, invalidated and ignored is what happens. Maybe that's a reflection on you more than society? You invited us to check your posting history, I did; you consistently come across as a belligerent, whiny, insulting, unintelligent and inarticulate bumpkin. Hurt feelings isn't…
/r/MensRights17/01/13 11:57 AM
-3

all that is anti feminist. You could certainly construct an anti-feminist narrative, yes, but protesting these things need not be an anti-feminist act in-and-of-itself. Undoubtedly we'll need to bump heads with feminism over some issues, but we shouldn't make anti-feminism our marquee objective.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 11:51 AM
2

What a shitty attitude. Don't expect a warm reception if you're going to lower the bar.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 11:46 AM
2

This is something I've been thinking more and more about, recently. A conviction for a notable crime is essentially sentencing them to be raped.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 11:46 AM
-1

If you take out anti feminism, you exclude pretty much all activism, I don't understand the logic here, unless you're making an abstract point about all pro-men work being anti-feminism? The illegalisation of infant circumcision in Germany, for example, was not anti-feminist activism. Your 2.) seems to suggest you think anti-feminism is hate. Anti-feminism and hatred aren't mutually exclusive, nor is anti-feminism necessarily more productive than hatred nor vice-versa. Anti-women rhetoric is sti…
/r/MensRights17/01/13 11:42 AM
-7

1.) It's a convenient narrative to help marginalize and shame anyone who speaks out. 2.) As with all smoke, there is fire somewhere. You joined the MRM at a time when it is quite liberal and egalitarian, but it certainly has its roots in anti-feminism and, to some extent, has deserved it's reputation. What is now a vocal minority has tainted the reputation for us and it may take some time to fix.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 11:00 AM
3

Suck my cock. Want a more rational conversation? When my cock slides out of your mouth feel free to enlighten me. go put a gun in your mouth and die. You are a bitch. I am a man. Fuck. You. You. Fat. Stupid. Bloated. Cow. Fuck. You. Cunt. We pride ourselves on a higher level of discourse here. Please consider improving the quality of your posts before you continue posting.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 10:16 AM
19

Hysterical froth like this is exactly what we want to see. It means we're doing things right. A brief Google search into Krista Heflin will reveal what a... 'unique' individual we're dealing with.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 08:22 AM
10

It's two sides of the same coin. Feminist rhetoric tends to teach that men are uniformly oppressive and women are universally oppressed. For every man that wishes he could just say "I have a headache" when he didn't want sex, there's a woman who is sick of having to say "I have a headache" when they don't want sex. As there are women who expect their partners to be 'up for it' constantly, there are women who suffer because they aren't. It is important that we approach these issues as a whole, no…
/r/MensRights16/01/13 04:53 PM
10

There's no point comparing. There is no objectivity to suffering and no really objective way to compare the two, either on a social, personal or academic level.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 04:47 PM
18

Definitely not.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 04:39 PM
4

I read the whole thing and don't really see how this is a MR issue? Some criminal has been convicted. Hooray.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 03:43 PM
1

I don't know how we could possibly begin to start petitioning against the Chinese govt. They don't pay attention to their own people's complaints, why would they entertain the input of a bunch of foreigners? If Western feminism can't crack Asia, we don't stand a chance. It's a nice idea but a very, very impractical one.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 03:38 PM
10

No worries, I've made much more embarrassing cock-ups at much more important times. :P
/r/MensRights16/01/13 03:34 PM
37

She can go rot. My concern is for him.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 03:07 PM
4

they have the right to object. Sure, and if their objection is bigoted and moronic, they have to deal with that, too. We don't go on about about how people that were crashed into by criminal drivers should have stayed at home to because that would minimise their risk. We also tell people not to drive on ice, to wear seatbelts, not to drive if you're drunk, tired etc... You are not making a point in your favour. Its not as bigoted as mra's think it is. Wrong. You've simply bought into the rhetori…
/r/MensRights16/01/13 01:56 PM
1

I remember embarrassing this mouthbreather on more than one occasion. He's your typical spineless pseudo-intellectual who believes as he is told, rather than believing what he's learned.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 01:46 PM
5

Two things; 1.) Maybe 'how to avoid rape' advice is given because helping people evade harmful situations is more practical than making the entire world non-harmful. 2.) Satirical bigotry is still bigotry. If rape jokes enable rapists, then schemes like this enable bigotry.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 01:38 PM
3

One-baller This is the greatest colloquialism I have ever seen and I wholeheartedly hope it catches on.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 10:30 AM
12

If you do go, you'll be answering your own question. We allow this practice to continue because we continue making it a viable business strategy. Don't go to 'gendered' nightclubs and discourage your friends from doing the same.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 10:28 AM
1

Did you pay the $60?
/r/MensRights16/01/13 10:24 AM
-1

It wasn't. It's a poorly executed rhetorical device.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 10:23 AM
13

Actually, equality would be both partners deciding when they do and don't want to have sex. I don't know what kind of person you'd need to be to arbitrarily split relationship issues down calendar lines.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 10:21 AM
8

How much fuss are we supposed to give? It's a racist joke that isn't especially funny. As you've rightly highlighted, we're not SRS and we don't fetishize getting upset over insignificancies like they do.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 10:19 AM
6

No True Scotsman is a fallacy irrespective of who is doing it. Just as we are held accountable for the quagmire of bigotry that still purvades the MRM, we can hold others accountable for their radical elements.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 09:30 AM
5

Snore. 0/10, try harder next time.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 09:28 AM
79

I didn't realise she posted a third and final part to this but I am thorougly glad he saw sense. Hopefully he stays far away from her, forever.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 09:27 AM
-3

What are we, a bunch of teenagers, gossiping over who said who sucked during Music class? Christ.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 09:16 AM
1

What a convenient narrative.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 05:41 PM
47

That's a nicely executed reply, kudos to whoever wrote it. When a man seduces a woman he knows is in a relationship, he is betting on her disloyalty, not the quality of her partner.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 04:47 PM
2

That's an interesting analysis. I'm not sure I'm convinced, but I would be open to reading more.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 04:42 PM
62

Male privilege.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 04:35 PM
1

No, it's female privilege. If you reread both posts, you'll notice that I listed examples of the privilege he doesn't think exists, in the same order.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 04:31 PM
11

I don't doubt it. The legal system is a monstrosity and you have my sympathy. Please keep us posted on how things are going and remember there's an entire community here who will listen to you, if nothing else.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 02:31 PM
25

Whilst I have no advice for you outside 'lawyer up,' I think you've raised an interesting point; I glossed over any issues she might've displayed, because I was young, incredibly stupid, and wanted to 'save' her. We need to educate about this mentality as clearly it is dangerous and gets you in trouble. Whilst to nowhere this extent, I have had disastrous relationships because I was sure I could 'fix them' and I'm sure many other men here have, too. Societal roles tells us that men fix things; w…
/r/MensRights15/01/13 01:40 PM
-1

Can you explain what you mean by this? Are you talking actors, in commercials, overall? Any sector you like, male privilege and television have a hearty and well-established kinship. Chivalry for all intensive purposes is dead. Some of it still remains. Right, and that which is left can be called female privilege. No draft in war time, no heavy-lifting, getting seats on the bus, these are all examples of privilege benefitting women. There are many books written on this problem, none of which fem…
/r/MensRights15/01/13 01:36 PM
1

I generally agree with the concept that privilege is oft ineptly used as a 'shut up' tactic in debates- a phenomenon I've coined the privilege fallacy- but privilege still remains a key part of gender and society and should not be ignored. If the MRM is just happy with the state of the privilege debate, we should strive to change it. Only a fool would argue that men are the only benefactors of privilege and anyone who argues as such can be safely discounted.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 01:23 PM
-2

To me, there is no such thing as male privilege, female privilege, white privilege, etc etc How do you explain that most people on TV are men, 'ladies first,' the disparity between white people and black people in the justice system etc etc. then? Your entire post seems to be a hurt-feelings response to being told you have privilege, rather than an actual debate and generally doesn't hold up to snuff. Privilege is not new as a concept and certainly isn't the "new flavor of the political month." …
/r/MensRights15/01/13 10:44 AM
3

I heard there were some offended people here and turned up so I could be oppressed too. Who are the rapists and how can I humiliate myself trying to appear superior to them?
/r/MensRights15/01/13 09:49 AM
3

The problem you'll find is that Korean- and really, East Asia in general- culture is incredibly insular and very much set against speaking out or drawing attention to yourself. The family unit is far more important and far less likely to be fractured, especially for a Westerner.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 09:46 AM
-1

One less avenue for people to be bullied, shamed and humiliated. People can be so vile.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 09:36 AM
3

You're really trying to pick an argument, huh?
/r/MensRights14/01/13 06:48 PM
-1

Couldn't give a shit.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 06:48 PM
6

I get the intention behind it- that it's not supposed to be taken seriously, is just an appropriation of rape culture, other academic boiler-plate- but the topic is; Can I get some help explaining in a compassionate way why it's offensive, sexist, and wrong? My advice was in response to this.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 03:04 PM
4

Ask her if she really thinks a rapist-- a person forcing another person into having sex with them-- would be convinced by that poster.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 12:27 PM
0

And where did you read your PhD on gender psychology and warfare?
/r/MensRights14/01/13 09:45 AM
14

Utter, utter bullshit. Please don't spread this tripe.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 09:38 AM
1

AtheismPlus was started along the exact same lines, 'focusing on real atheism' etc. All that happens is pressure fissures, insular thought and groupthinking.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 08:45 AM
1

What do you think AtheismPlus was started for?
/r/MensRights14/01/13 08:31 AM
1

Something tells me that a convicted sex offender is probably not a great candidacy for fatherhood anyway...
/r/MensRights14/01/13 08:23 AM
1

People said it would be divisive, insular and exclusionary and the mouthbreathers that were pushing for AtheismPlus took these as guidelines to create one of the most obnoxious, least intellectual communities on the internet.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 08:15 AM
1

What in the fuck is an LBTJQ?
/r/MensRights13/01/13 03:39 PM
3

Atheism Plus is the evidence that that's an awful idea.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 03:18 PM
4

We've just got to figure out how men can be surrogate mothers and we're there.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 06:53 PM
3

We aren't women and we aren't sexual therapists. The most we can really input on this is anecdotal- and thus largely pointless- evidence and 'mainstream' studies, which leads to conjecture and little else. There's nothing wrong with simply leaving potentially damaging topics if they're of no immediate or long-term benefit.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 06:45 PM
3

It seems an awfully weak justification for a topic that seems to be shaped like a powder-keg. This isn't really a suitable platform for a discussion about female sexuality and it opens us up to a lot of scrutiny.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 05:24 PM
1

Bingo.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 05:22 PM
1

I wish to apologise if my post came across hostile. Re-reading it with fresh eyes it seems more abrupt than I had thought when writing it. Anyway. I will receive criticism for saying this- deservedly so, it's pretty slimy- but the most productive thing the MRM could do is achieve something minor and mostly gender-neutral and have some 20-40-year-old, good looking, articulate men give press-friendly statements. People are getting sick of feminism, men are getting sick of everything. People won't …
/r/MensRights11/01/13 05:19 PM
2

And yes, females have called me names like "wussy" for not going all-out in the pain department. Better to be a free wussy than an imprisoned tough guy.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 03:42 PM
2

but better than convicting those who did nothing wrong. 'Better to let a guilty man walk free than lock up an innocent man,' I agree with the concept, but I wonder what it would take for society to disavow it? What threat would be needed for people to prefer to lock up innocent people than the reverse?
/r/MensRights11/01/13 03:30 PM
3

How is this a men's rights issue? I foresee no positive consequences from discussions like this.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 02:28 PM
3

Being acquitted does not mean that you didn't commit the crime, it means that the prosecution could not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. There will be plenty of people who have raped others, been tried for it and got away because of prosecutional incompetence.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 02:23 PM
1

That's the thing, it isn't sociopathy, these women aren't incapable of guilt. There is simply no real stigma attached and no genuine threat of consequences to false rape accusations, thus they perceive nothing to feel guilt over. This needs to be reacted to as strongly and directly in society whenever it rears its head.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 09:15 PM
4

I sort of agreed with your point, up until; Especially hilarious when they run around in skimpy clothes, just ASKING for attention. This is certainly something that I think the average bear would find creepy.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 04:39 PM
1

Maybe your own 'calls to action' aren't any good? Emailing some jobsworth at a domestic violence charity is hardly activism.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 04:34 PM
3

When did opening the door for someone become a chivalrous act rather than just a polite one? It takes almost no effort to hold a door open and allow someone to pass through it, irrespective of gender.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 04:13 PM
0

It is the message conveyed in the poster, the assumption that all men will rape unless told not to, which has made me angry. Right, but as we already established, that's not what the poster conveys, is it? The poster is gender-neutral and makes no value judgements about any demographic. If you're angry about the poster, you are projecting as there is nothing to be upset over. The website is absolutely 'pro-women' as opposed to 'anti-men' and really this is just another case of hurt-feelings-cens…
/r/MensRights10/01/13 11:52 AM
1

Surely they'd want people to get married, have kids and divorce, then?
/r/MensRights10/01/13 11:48 AM
1

I heard it was because women dressed themselves and men were dressed by their wives. I've only ever buttoned shirts one way so I have no idea if I am doing them the 'right way.'
/r/MensRights10/01/13 12:17 AM
5

Cry whenever you feel it necessary. Sometimes things are just too much, no shame in it and I don't know anyone who hasn't been there at least once.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 08:30 PM
-5

No, but anyone with a brain and an internet connection can do a little research and investigate the website. So is it the poster, or the website, or the charity itself that's annoying you? Because really, you have no reason to be annoyed by the poster itself and anyone who looks at it and thinks, 'this is anti-men' is probably projecting. The (probably unintentional) ambiguity of who is saying 'this is not an invitation to rape me' is cleared up immediately once you actually look at the website.…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:30 PM
0

I'll rearrange your sentence for clarity; this one makes the equally ridiculous claim that all allegations are false unless proven true in court. The claim that all allegations are false unless proven true in court is ridiculous. 'All allegations are false unless proven true in court' is essentially a more verbose way of saying 'innocent until proven guilty,' which is the basis of most successful justice systems. Thus, your insinuation that such a concept would be ridiculous, is incredibly ridic…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:22 PM
0

You saying that that concept is ridiculous is extraordinarily ridiculous, is my point.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:14 PM
-9

Look at the website mentioned in the poster and tell me this in gender neutral. Rape Crisis is a female-interest charity so I'm sure there is some lean First, the website is not accessible through the poster, is it? So the website is actually irrelevant to your apparent upset; the poster. Second, the poster itself is gender-neutral. It doesn't say, "This is an invitation to rape her," nor does it have a caption or anything that would indicate the female is the one making that point.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:10 PM
2

this one makes the equally ridiculous claim that all allegations are false unless proven true in court. You realise that that is exactly what's meant by "innocent until proven guilty," right?
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:08 PM
3

I actually agree with you, but anti-women content is very popular here. I would rather /r/mensrights be about discussion, debate, hard news and support, but a tyranny of the majority demands more salacious and entertaining topics.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:05 PM
3

We're not /r/shitredditsays. This brigading really needs to stop.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:02 PM
-5

Looks gender-neutral to me. Rape Crisis is a female-interest charity so I'm sure there is some lean but I think you're overreacting a little here.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:58 PM
7

It's a pretty heinous deception and breach of trust, probably relationship-ending for most people, but there's no room in the law for liars without immediate pecuniary advantage. Stop sleeping with her and hope she isn't pregnant.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 11:41 AM
12

Welcome to /r/mensrights. Please read the sidebar.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 11:38 AM
6

I don't keep a journal, nor do I purport to, therefore I am an off-the-charts success. Logic.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 09:50 AM
1

Speak privately with some of the more prominent names already mentioned here. It sounds like you have done most of the groundwork. Good luck and keep us posted.
/r/MensRights06/01/13 06:11 PM
1

What do your parents make of the situation? Can they afford a decent lawyer? This is absolutely something that needs to be heard, either by the public or by a judge.
/r/MensRights06/01/13 05:50 PM
2

This is literally a perfect example of conjecture.
/r/MensRights06/01/13 05:20 PM
2

Hell hath no fury...
/r/MensRights06/01/13 05:13 PM
27

The solution is obvious; accuse those politicians of rape on a daily basis until they inevitably fail to prove their alibi.
/r/MensRights06/01/13 10:53 AM
6

Readdress this topic to her and see what she says. Communication, even if it's hostile, is pretty much your only recourse here.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 11:23 PM
1

Let me know when you've found people of the right academic acumen and well-established trustworthiness.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 09:49 PM
-1

That is very troubling behaviour, but it will only upset you as much as you let it. Don't spend time being reasonable with people who aren't reasonable and you'll be much happier for it.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 09:38 PM
2

It's obviously men hating women by not conforming to what these faulty papers say.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 08:01 PM
1

Lawyer up. Document these incidences and make speaking to a solicitor your absolute priority.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 07:59 PM
1

I don't think it's feminism that's caused the divides so much as the fact that marriage, as a concept, is generally destined to fail. Without religious or social fears forcing people to stay together and with the legal system being the monstrosity that it is, there's simply no reason to risk getting married any more.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 03:21 PM
5

My only advice would be not to strike someone in self-defence. If you're larger than the other person, which it sounds like you are, you should grab and restrain. It's difficult to paint someone as abusive when they're calmly pinning your arms to your sides. Document the incident and move on. Good luck to you.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 01:38 PM
-2

Honestly, I have no tolerance for people who complain about being fat. In 99% of cases it is totally avoidable. If you being fat makes you so miserable, get off the damn computer and go for a walk. Your mother should not be buying you sex-toys. That is a disturbing and highly questionable boundary for her to break. You should not be marking your self-worth and happiness using other people. That is not healthy and no-one ever succeeds doing it. Take twenty minutes to do something you're good at, …
/r/MensRights05/01/13 01:33 PM
4

If you're okay with your parents tattooing you without your permission then I'm not sure where to go from here. In all seriousness, that kind of undisturbable faith in your parents is not healthy and you should consider examining it with a psychiatrist of some sort.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 02:59 AM
-1

You sound about 13 years old, for one. Lawyer up. That's all the advice your friend needs and all the advice your friend should take.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 02:41 AM
0

You're a moron. You're what's not needed in the MRM.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 02:33 AM
3

My main point is that, provided that circumcision does not deprive the man of the ability to have sex and urinate, I don't understand how circumcision harms the male penis. I don't understand how you don't understand that literally chopping off a fairly sizable part of your penis is harming it. Just because you retain some of the functionality, it doesn't mean you're not majorly deprived because of it. Keep in mind that this practice has no reasonable benefit to it and is performed way before th…
/r/MensRights05/01/13 02:32 AM
2

You're right, I should spend my time like you do; getting angry at feminists. What a ridiculously hilarious man you are.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 02:19 AM
6

But then by this logic, shouldn't I also be upset that my parents cut my hair and trimmed my fingernails as a child? Does your foreskin grow back? Should parents, the legal guardians of children, not be allowed to give permission for other surgeries without the child's permission? If the child would die or suffer considerably without the surgery, then sure, let the parents decide for them. There was no medical necessity behind your circumcision, nor 99% of the other circumcisions that take place…
/r/MensRights05/01/13 02:14 AM
2

Does that mean that I am a lesser person than someone with an uncircumcised penis? Some men do feel that way. It should certainly irk you that your parents felt it right to rob you of a part of your own anatomy, without your permission, for no reason other than their own vanity. Does mine not operate properly? I don't know, does it? I'm sure you've lost a significant amount of sexual sensitivity from having your glans exposed your entire life, but I'm not a doctor/person who knows your dick.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 02:08 AM
2

Have you considered posting this to /r/thisiswhatsomefeministsaredoing?
/r/MensRights05/01/13 02:04 AM
8

It's defined as genital mutilation because it's an act that mutilates the genitals. It really is that simple. Your penis is permanently disfigured for no reason other than your parents felt like it.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 02:02 AM
0

Actually..I'm not sorry, at all. What a genius piece of rhetoric. Unfortunately, I don't want to "worship pussy," I want an end to the mutilation of infants. This will invariably require debate and discussion, two things that your brazen attitude doesn't allow. Be angry all you want, but again, this is not a community of who's ins and whose outs, we don't banish differing opinions and we don't shy away from educating those who aren't educated.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 01:59 AM
0

You're really doing your part to improve the image of MRAs.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 01:52 AM
1

She's a hack, writing shite stories to provoke pageclicks. The best thing we can do is ignore her.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 01:41 AM
3

This isn't /r/shitredditsays.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 01:34 AM
1

Do some reading.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 11:31 PM
1

you're being hyperbolic. No, I'm not, I'm drawing fair and reasonable equivalents, you just wish they were unreasonable because it's easier to reject the point that way. I'm not a hypocrite for being a supporter of circumcision and not for lopping off a breast. Spell out your reasons for why circumcision is okay and they will also justify removing breasts from young women. Try it. you people have little to no respect for culture and religion when it goes against your version of what is appropria…
/r/MensRights04/01/13 10:18 PM
1

We're not demonizing anything. I really don't understand how obtuse- or unintelligent- you have to be to think that amputating parts of a child, long before they can consent, for no reason other than superstition, culture or aesthetics, is acceptable. Guess what? It isn't safe. Boys die from it. Regularly. You know what is common and safe? Body modification! Shall we set up an infant tattoo studio? How about a baby piercing hut? Humans don't need all ten fingers and toes, why don't we lop some o…
/r/MensRights04/01/13 09:43 PM
1

The point is that we are knowledgeable about this whilst you simply aren't. Mutilation is mutilation, irrespective of surgical conditions- a luxury that not all men are afforded.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 07:25 PM
1

Unacceptable to you maybe but this is not a community that exists inside a vacuum. We tolerate and encourage different viewpoints and the discourse is much better for it.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 03:34 PM
17

It's very well-written satire.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 11:19 AM
0

You should really consider either rethinking your position on this or GETTING THE FUCK OUT. No, we don't do this, we are not an echo-chamber and we don't boot out those who are uninformed.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 11:15 AM
4

And you'd look a moron to do so.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 11:10 AM
0

You mean, it's boring once you realised couldn't pettifog the debate any further, with inappropriate Latin or weak (and hypocritically erected) strawmen.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 10:51 AM
6

Universities shouldn't target anyone. A decade of Labour government changed university from higher education for the best and brightest to an excuse not to work for a few years once you hit 18. No wonder they're so open to exploitation when all the mouth-breathing morons who can't do basic maths can get a subsidised place on a three year course in Arse-Scratching at Shitfest University without even needing to pass an entrance exam.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 02:45 PM
4

Seems like a Govt. initiative to combat people who prey on people using the internet. Read past the headline and it's actually pretty harmless. We should avoid this knee-jerk, reactionary-style posting.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 12:24 PM
2

She's right.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 11:46 AM
0

This is what I talked about when I said you use feminine conversational tactics. More man-shaming, eh? You try to paint me as a redneck with a closed mind... I don't care about strawman and ad hominems. I'm not painting you as anything, you're painting yourself. I haven't used the words, "closed," "mind," "redneck" or any resembling them. For someone who is so upset about strawmen arguments- haven't used any of these, either- perhaps you should look up what they are? Or perhaps not use the term …
/r/MensRights03/01/13 11:40 AM
3

Hopefully, I'd see how dangerous and harmful forming lynch mobs is and not do it myself.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 08:18 PM
0

Downvoted, and per your request my input...Fuck you. You're really doing your part to prove that MRAs are reasonable and civil folks.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 05:37 PM
4

I don't agree with the anti-feminist posts, either, but Demonspawn has made his argument in a cogent and civil manner and explained why he thinks this is a men's rights issue. This isn't a community solely based around activism, we encourage debate and discussion here.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 05:06 PM
0

The difficulty you'll face is that, whilst we can now viably claim that NAMRAAALT, there are a lot of policies in which those MRAs that are like that, pride themselves. Anti-feminism, for example; some people believe it's the most worthwhile pursuit, some people believe that it's holding the MRM back. The MRM is diffuse and without a clearly defined objective, it's only natural this will result in situations such as these.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 05:01 PM
0

In regard to co-ordinated voting and trolling, I'm seeing that with a feminist slant, not a traditional mra slant or whatever it is you are not admitting to suggesting. It's very curious how you openly admit to not understand what I'm referring to, but still insist it is a feminist practice. Analyse that for a few seconds. You have become so diffuse in your hatred of feminism that you're slinging all the shit at it in the hope some of it sticks.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 04:44 PM
-1

Well, no-one could accuse you of being angry and hysterical, that's for sure.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 04:42 PM
0

In my native language we also use quotation marks to indicate an emphasis or a slight alteration to the meaning of the enclosed words, like sarcasm or dozens of different things. Really? That's very interesting, what is your native language? English could certainly use an equivalent grammatical indicator. You act like a troll but for some reason I still see you as a slightly misguided person I think it's important you realise that not everyone who disagrees with you is a troll. How is any positi…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 04:40 PM
-1

I should keep you around to prove all my points for me, it's really very useful.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 04:16 PM
1

Peruse every submission earnestly and argue fairly for the things you value. Fair enough. I look forward to the debate.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 04:14 PM
-1

I appreciated your candor and succinctness. Why be pithy if you get pissed off when people enjoy it?
/r/MensRights02/01/13 02:09 PM
-4

There's no way you can pretend that "take it on the chin" is anything other than "man up." Who is pretending? I explain the difference here. Are we banning all metaphor now, because one metaphor is offensive? Keep digging. Nobody here is "threatened" by your tone arguments and veiled misandry. Seems this has devolved into catchphrases and buzz-word accusations, rather than actual debate.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 02:04 PM
-4

If calls for maturity (note; not machismo as is the case with 'man up') threaten you, what does that make you?
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:51 PM
-1

I lol'd.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:50 PM
-4

Who are you to decide who's "in" and who's "out"? You imagine yourself to be some kind of authority figure who can define the future of the MRM personally? I'm as much of a judge as anyone else is, either you agree with me or you don't. It's all food for thought. Yeah, and 99% of those are feminists. What does this have to do with your supposed "reformation of the MRM"? Just a note, " is a quotation mark, used to indicate when you're copying something verbatim. Wrapping them around a sentence no…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:49 PM
-5

Got it. No, you don't.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:37 PM
-4

Your saying people who have a problem with feminist concern trolling are against more liberal membership and transgender issues etc. You are saying mainstream means more liberal. No, that's not what I'm saying at all. That's what you wish I was saying because it's easier to reject the criticism that way. I am saying that trying to counter these possibly imaginary threats is a waste of time and makes the movement look paranoid and angry. You are saying angry bitter people are not allowed and we s…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:28 PM
-2

You are conflating unrelated things, What unrelated things? and trying to marginalize male victims How am I doing this? Conversely, how does bottlenecking the community to anti-feminism not marginalize other male victims?
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:08 PM
-4

I'm not complaining, I asked for those who downvote me to explain their reasoning, then re-stated for emphasis how some people downvote without explanation. I suppose an argument could be made that I'm complaining about how people don't explain their vote, but that's more of a meta-observation than a grievance.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:06 PM
-3

This is f_ckin' ridiculous. This is what feminists have thought and said about the MRM which was never true. You're allowed to swear, censoring does nothing because you're still saying the word, really. You can deny it all you like, I have spoken out many times in the past about this anger and the steadfast denial of it is worthless when your entire post just reeks of it. This is batshit crazy. Guess what, you can't just waltz in and throw out an entire movement to replace it with your own ideas…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:02 PM
-3

The only reason that Warren Farrell is being invited to speak and so on, is the noise that we are making, He is a Ph.D and author of several successful books. You are deluded if you think that his success is because of us. the only reason people are finding about about what the feminists did at the lecture, is the noise we are making, Debatable. I think the video spoke for itself and if I hadn't seen it here, I would've seen it through my two Facebook friends that posted it- two friends who are …
/r/MensRights02/01/13 12:29 PM
1

The mrm is currently in a phase of stirring up attention and controversy. Attention? Yes. Controversy? No, I think we're benefitting from controversy on the part of our detractors. The University of Toronto protest showed us in a great light- stoic, calm men who are just being screamed at- and radical feminists in a horrible one- frothy-and-foul mouthed hysterics, pushing and shoving the police. The AgentOrange files showed just how far the poison spread in the radfem community. The ban on circu…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 12:14 PM
-6

That's a weak appeal to authority, once again betraying the aged, stuck-in-the-past mentality that formerly embodied the MRM.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 12:03 PM
-7

I'm not convinced any such trolling exists, for one, but that's a different debate. Assuming it is true, I propose we do... nothing. All it shows is that we're becoming a threat to the status quo. What our detractors want is for us to waste time and effort in-fighting and trying to combat BS tactics. By trying to actively deter it, all you're doing is feeding the trolls. Our cause is becoming harder and harder to immediately rule out as a bunch of angry, white men. We need to embrace this, not r…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:53 AM
-5

Congrats, you're not part of the 'some of you.' Good for you for not giving in to your whims? Unfortunately, there are users here who have vowed to downvote my name whenever they see it. What did you think of the post itself?
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:39 AM
0

"A camel is a horse designed by committee." A men's rights book would be one hell of a fucking ugly camel. A collection of essays might have some merit, but even then, I think it would quickly resort itself to an echo-chamber.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:34 AM
3

Move on. Far too much time is wasted, in the MRM, trying to convince specific, unconvincable people for the sake of pride.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:30 AM
0

Yes, you said; Though I agree, it's got a seriously bad stigma attached to it, especially considering how bad it is compared to women being tested for cervical cancer. Whoops, incriminated by the very first word. You tacitly admit to adding to the stigma, but hope acknowledging it will negate it; it doesn't, you're still stigmatizing it.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:26 AM
1

Disappointed that I'm not listed there. Have I been posting here too long to be accused of feminist underhandedness? :(
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:23 AM
0

Masculinity has outgrown you. Be an adult and deal with it. You know where the unsubscribe button is, leave us to our Sodom & Gomorrah.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:08 AM
1

"These people aren't as angry as me, they must be trolls aboo-hoo-hoo-hooo." Grow up. Seriously. The MRM is outgrowing you and you don't like it. Make like a Vegas cardshark with a prosthetic hand and deal with it.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:04 AM
5

Unfortunately, for every one guy-like-you who it doesn't work on, there are literally dozens, perhaps hundreds, before you whom it did. This is a social deck-stacking we have no chance of breaking because so many men are so utterly p-whipped.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:01 AM
4

This may be a slightly different tack to most of the posts here, but what I'm curious about is what happens if this woman does get attacked and raped, or if the accused does go on to actually rape someone else- or even her. False rape accusations are as much a feminist issue as they are a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 10:58 AM
0

Do you want someone's finger up your ass?. Why even ask this? What does it add to the discussion? This is exactly what I mean about how we stupidly stigmatize prostate exams. Do I want a 'finger up my ass?' Yes, if it will help stop me dying from prostate cancer. There's nothing gay about it, there's nothing funny about it, it's a medical professional inserting two lubricated fingers into your rectum to gauge the size and swollenness of your prostate. It doesn't hurt, it doesn't harm, it feels a…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 10:55 AM
-2

You have a nice idea in theory, but encouraging cross-subreddit posting almost always ends badly. People can't help themselves, just look at SRS, SubredditDrama, Cringe et al.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 07:17 PM
2

This isn't SRS and we're not a brigading subreddit. Explain it yourself.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:56 PM
10

People who are saying; "It's fine, they're only joking" are missing the point. Making a man-on-woman rape joke is grounds for a very public dismemberment, but a woman raping a man? That shit is hilarious. Oh, you're gay? You just haven't met the right woman yet. All gay men are just waiting to be turned, right? This is just indicative of the wider apathy towards male sexual assault victims. No wonder it's considered kooky and quirky when a woman rapes a man, we're literally using it as comedy.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:27 PM
5

why not show some compassion for those for whom it's a bit more raw? Seems like an appeal to emotion to me. Seems like you're using hurt feelings to censor people. Don't we hate feminists for using pathos? Isn't that an underhanded tactic, beneath the broad chests of the men's right activist?
/r/MensRights01/01/13 05:42 PM
6

I'm not wasting my time. Aren't you?
/r/MensRights01/01/13 04:49 PM
8

Your blanket ad hominen deserves nothing but a big fuck you. And a heaped serving of paranoia, it seems. Surprise you though it may, some of us are above digital point-scoring. If people have downvoted you, people must not like what you're saying, it's called democracy and your soreness over it is everything that's wrong with the MRM. Please, be more angry. Waste more time in-fighting and being pissed off that /r/mensrights is becoming mainstream, not a petty anti-pesky bitches pillowfort. You'l…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 04:39 PM
4

In the UK, sexual health clinics give out free condoms and women can get the birth control pill on prescription from the NHS. I think a significant part of this issue is connotation; women need birth control to prevent pregnancy, men want birth control to perpetrate sex against others. We all know what a warm reception male sexuality gets...
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:35 PM
9

Thank you, truthjusticeca, for proving my point both efficiently and with expediency.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:18 PM
1

Snuck in just early enough to be my favourite post of 2012.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:15 PM
2

I don't understand how you can need an abstract concept, anyway. I need warm clothing, you would like feminism.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:09 PM
6

I actually think the biggest opponent here is the fact that, despite how many it kills and how easily it is detected, TV shows, movies etc. can't help themselves but make fun of prostate exams. It's an essential medical exam, but because it's a male being penetrated anally it's heehee buttjokes.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:06 PM
10

The MRM is getting younger and more liberal. Young, liberal people aren't cynical, bitter or aged like many of our cohorts and so understand the importance of being inclusive and equal in language as well as manifesto. This paranoia, delusion and hatred that still purveys the MRM is being diluted and this upsets some people. You're becoming outdated, it happens. Take it on the chin.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 02:58 PM
1

Touchy.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 01:04 AM
1

Being "discrete" doesn't make you any classier.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 08:07 PM
0

What about sympathy or empathy?
/r/MensRights31/12/12 07:55 PM
1

Well, it's not a viewpoint I hold so I can't elucidate to any major extent, but as I understand it, if no-one was ever violent, no-one would ever need arresting and thus there'd never be any need for violence. I should say that I actually misread the part of the post you quoted, omitting the 'ever.' Apologies for the error.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 07:54 PM
1

Some people argue that violent crimes are the only ones worthy of arrest and imprisonment, rather than civil penalties.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 07:46 PM
3

Any woman that kills a man, according to court logic, must be insane because men hurt women, not vice-versa. The only way a woman can be a perpetrator of violence is if she's defective in some way. The only way a man can be a victim of violence is if he's a minority, in which case it's because he was a minority. The deck is stacked, the game is rigged.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 03:07 PM
7

If he didn't want to be sexually assaulted and humiliated, he shouldn't have been born male. Maybe now he understands what all women go through every second of every minute of every hour of every day except a thousand times worse. /SRS
/r/MensRights31/12/12 12:29 PM
8

Don't flirt if you're not interested in sex. If you're dressed like a whore, you will be treated like a whore. Oh, for fucks sake. How about we flip these? Don't talk to women if you're looking for sex. If you're dressed like you've got money, you will be expected to pay for everything. See how utterly bullshit that is?
/r/MensRights31/12/12 12:23 PM
0

There has been a seismic shift, in the last few months, away from the bullshit, anti-feminist, anti-women, 'those pesky bitches,' hatred that ran rampant in the MRM. Events like the UofT protest have bolstered our numbers with sane, rational folks who are pushing the bigots aside. IMO, the best thing we can do is continue with this shift as for the first time, we have some credibility to dispel the notion that MRAs are inherently bad people.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 12:20 PM
1

figure four leg lock ...people used to do that in actual wrestling?
/r/MensRights31/12/12 04:10 AM
1

Yeah, I thought it was weird as I've been put into full Nelsons and put others into full Nelsons and not had any real harm come from it, but I assumed it was because we're just guys groping eachother rather than fit wrestlers grappling.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 12:25 AM
1

It depends on where he runs. Political discourse isn't just about being elected.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 12:12 AM
1

Why would they put a picture of him? Who gives a fuck what he looks like? A picture of Heinrich Herrman will draw people to the article, a picture of some paunchy old man will drive people away. This is basic production.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 12:10 AM
7

A woman suspected in the death of an immigrant who was pushed off a New York City subway platform has been ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation. She's got away with it, then. They'll find that she's insane, cart her to a lovely, comfortable mental-health centre and release her after a couple of years, if not months.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 12:04 AM
3

If it is still on-going, go to the police. The only way that this societal bullshit can be conquered is with action.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 12:01 AM
1

I take it full Nelsons are dangerous, then? Are there any other 'famous' holds you can't use?
/r/MensRights30/12/12 11:56 PM
1

Athletics aren't fair. No, they're not, which is why your claim that; If he accidentally groped her tit while trying to go for a suplex he'd probably be chastised though. It's not really fair. ...is so silly. If you think "I believe I will subconciously hold back in giving it my all because she is female" it is not cowardice to avoid competing. It's either cowardice or incompetence. Either he didn't give it his all because he was scared of the consequences, or he gave it his all and failed. Ther…
/r/MensRights30/12/12 11:54 PM
1

When you say 'called for a full Nelson,' what do you mean exactly? Are you not allowed to apply a full Nelson? Or are you obliged to go for a full Nelson if possible? We don't have wrestling as an academic sport in the UK, but I'd have loved to have done it in my youth.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 11:07 PM
2

he knows he'll be a 'molester' if he accidentally brushes her labia while shooting for a single-leg takedown Whilst guys are like Ken-dolls down there, right? There's no argument that can be made regarding 'inappropriate touching' that can't also be made on the girl's behalf. What if she accidentally grabbed or crushed his testes? A girl touching a boy inappropriately, even by accident, can pick up just as much of a reputation for perversion or sluttiness as a guy can.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 11:05 PM
2

Is it his fault for not awnting to seriously injure her? You said it yourself; no rational person wants to hurt someone whilst competing, but she is competing and thus accepts the risk of injury. Being male doesn't make you somehow impervious to injury and if he was legitimately concerned about hurting others, he wouldn't be a wrestler.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 11:00 PM
-1

Are you sure? Posts like this are becoming ten-a-penny. Maybe it's time we gave up the rationale and just became frothy-mouth-breathing imbeciles.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 08:34 PM
1

It's not really fair that the girl has to wrestle someone who is biologically predetermined to be stronger, quicker and better at wrestling than her. The guy didn't have the balls to wrestle someone who he has been deemed fit to wrestle. As much as the OP and everyone else here wishes the deck was stacked against him, I just don't buy it as inter-gender wrestling doesn't seem to be a rare thing in America. If you're not willing to compete, don't bother competing. Simple.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 08:27 PM
1

Well, I presume you understand the concept of how very young humans act in very irrational ways? And how this behaviour tends to level out as they get older? When humans have been alive for a certain amount of time, there is the social expectation that they will have realised that juvenile behaviour is inappropriate and seek not to engage in it.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 08:25 PM
0

People like people who admit they're wrong, I suppose. It was only +3 when I edited it.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 09:49 AM
1

I'm sorry that simple questions seem to get you so riled up. I would suggest you avoid any communication with other humans as questions tend to form a very significant part of any linguistic interaction.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 07:19 AM
5

Why?
/r/MensRights30/12/12 06:58 AM
0

Commonlaw rape is having sex with someone who does not consent. There does not need to be any coercion for it to remain rape.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 06:48 AM
7

I'm just highlighting how silly it is to jump immediately to the idea that this wasn't somehow a 'real' rape because they were in a relationship.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 05:17 AM
2

Traditionally no what.jpg
/r/MensRights30/12/12 05:07 AM
2

That's not what I was trying to do. That's why you didn't link directly to the post, right? We're not morons, please don't treat us as such. I'm just upset That's pretty much it. If you're looking for backrubs and pity, we're the wrong community for it, especially when you're voluntarily stepping into the firing-line by posting a long-winded and provocative post in a major subreddit. I mean, it's not "This is my pre-requisite that I tell guys about" Have you had sex with her? If not, how do you …
/r/MensRights30/12/12 04:53 AM
3

What if she said, "No I don't want to have sex," and he had sex with her anyway? Was she raped then?
/r/MensRights30/12/12 04:47 AM
0

Rape apologetics.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 04:45 AM
3

Haha, sure, but they're also a horrible disgusting idiot monster of a person for that mindset though, right? No, not even a little bit. If that's a condition under which they want to have sex, that's their perogative, just as it's mine to refuse to meet that condition and thus decline sex. Charged words but jesus christ is this lady a horrible idiot. Actually, she's not the one I'm thinking of as idiotic. We're not ShitRedditSays, we don't do brigading and childish 'go get 'em boys!' type posts.…
/r/MensRights30/12/12 04:41 AM
-1

If someone told me that before I had sex with them, I'd thank them for their honesty and politely leave.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 04:35 AM
13

If she's considered close enough to him in skill to be put in a match against him, then he should not hold back and win the match. Your post comes across like this loss wasn't as undeserved as you wish it was.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 04:35 AM
1

This is a rape analogy. Thank fuck they explained that one for me. This just tells you the level of intellect that the ignoramuses that distribute this stuff possess; they literally need eye-fuckingly obvious analogies pointed out to them with all the subtlety of an eye-fucking.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 04:10 AM
1

The compassionate side of me is drawn to this advice. Whilst many would view it as hugely unfair for you to continue paying for a child that isn't biologically yours, presumably you've bonded with this child? Cared for it? Spent time with it? Loved it? These are bonds that you don't have to sever. If the worst is confirmed, then you have every right to be hurt, heartbroken, whatever you want to feel. Think very carefully about what and who you would be hurting by doing this. Good luck, keep us p…
/r/MensRights30/12/12 04:07 AM
3

As a UK resident, I would certainly be interested to find out more. Seems the Daily Mail- or, rather, Buchanan- has blown his press load early, releasing this story before they have a name that can be Googled.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 03:57 AM
2

You are deliberately misinterpreting. I am misinterpreting nothing. If your post is not being inferred as you would like, then that's because you didn't word your post well enough. I'm quite happy to accept that your intention wasn't to equate rapists with provocatively dressed women, but your actions do exactly that. Suck it up and proof-read your post next time.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 12:32 AM
15

Which one of you, that have replied, gave this woman a breathalyzer? Just curious. Your inferences are subjective. Sound more sore. If the people who are already on your side don't like your work, how do you think those that oppose you will treat it? Please, take the criticism on the chin, don't be a passive-aggressive whiner.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 12:25 AM
9

converse Technically, it would be the inverse. The converse of girl power is boy power. To elaborate on your point; the disparity can be seen everywhere in childhood. A girl playing with trucks? What a cute little tomgirl! A boy wants a Barbie? What is he, queer? A girl wants to play football? We have to do everything to indulge this fleeting lark. A boy wants to do ballet? That's for girls, do a real sport. A girl plays with boys exclusively? What an adorable little character. A boy plays with …
/r/MensRights30/12/12 12:23 AM
28

It's a good thing that murder isn't as bad as bigotry, eh?
/r/MensRights30/12/12 12:17 AM
33

That last one is horrifically inappropriate. Overlaying a picture of a heavily-intoxicated girl being escorted to a car by a male with the message "Just because she's easy..." and then warning against accusations of rape? Fucking hell, you couldn't have made us look more like rapists if you tried.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 12:15 AM
2

Pull the other one, it has bells on.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 12:11 AM
8

I fear you're right, though I think there could be a reasonable expectation that women in power would (or perhaps do?) do the same thing to other women. I'm loathe to believe that this is a male dominance issue, more than a pure dominance one.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 09:42 PM
4

Here it is. That is much more recent than the one I saw. Apologies, then, I was mistaken.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 09:34 PM
6

I think part of the issue too is that people are taught that relationships are supposed to be semi-permanent, or that we should all be looking for long-term or for-life partners. I think you're holding back a fair bit, there. Society pretty much demands you enter into at least one 'for life' relationship, lest you be a spinster or a loser.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 09:03 PM
2

They have a crossover audience, but I wouldn't call it big by any means. There are what, two or three people who post to both? It seems the thread has been deleted (or at least I can't find it anywhere) but there was a thread that broke down the user demographics for /r/menrights and /r/whiterights was the second biggest cross-over, after /r/atheism. It was certainly many, many, many more than two or three users. I don't think this is true. Your explanation may be correct, I can't find the threa…
/r/MensRights29/12/12 09:01 PM
3

Yes, reddit can be proud of being diverse, if nothing else. I don't agree with pretty much anything /r/whiterights has to say, but stopping them from saying it would be heinously censorial of reddit.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 08:24 PM
1

It's one more tactic of desperation. No, sorry, it is an observation. /r/mensrights and /r/whiterights have a big cross-over audience and I believe /r/mensrights used to be moderated by some of the same people who moderate /r/whiterights. I agree with the sentiment, but to pretend that there isn't a significant number of MRAs who are also rights-for-whites enthusiasts is dishonest. edit This post has proven me wrong. Apologies.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 08:16 PM
28

I think it's interesting to note how many of these problems are caused by other men. I'm not suggesting that these inequalities are inherently our fault, but how is it that the justice system, for example, which is dominated by men is so vastly stacked against men? Circumcision; a religious practice, where once again men are the dominant factor. Why do those men seek to mutilate other men? As much as everyone here will point the finger at feminists, men have been implicit, complicit and illicit …
/r/MensRights29/12/12 08:11 PM
1

men rarely desire marriage with promiscuous women and promiscuous women often lack the ability/fortitude to settle down. ...what? Men marry promiscuous women all the time. Why do you think divorce rates are so high? edit: I should quickly include that women also marry promiscuous men; I make no distinction between them.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 08:01 PM
0

I have no idea? 'Most parents' have nothing to do with adults failing to act their age.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 07:10 PM
4

My children will have much bigger things to worry about than inequality, I can assure you of that.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 07:07 PM
11

lol, put down the thesaurus, Chaucer, artificially inserting complex language from outside of your lexical field does nothing to bolster your argument. Actually, outside of the playground, name-calling is not an "effective stratagem." In fact, its an extremely poor one; any argument worth making can be made with civility and respect. Deviation from this suggests you're either being hysterical and emotional, or your argument isnt strong enough to stand on its own merit. Either way, as soon as ins…
/r/MensRights29/12/12 06:34 PM
5

I would tell the girl to shut the fuck up, just as I would the boy if the roles were reversed. edited
/r/MensRights29/12/12 06:24 PM
3

What a frighteningly unconfident, self-hating individual. A real look into a vortex of self-loathing.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 05:47 PM
9

Because then you're no better than they are, making any criticism you try and make worthless and hypocritical. When you see two children fighting, do you assume one is right and one is wrong? No, you assume they're both wrong and tell them to cut their shit out. When you see one child pissing their pants, throwing a tantrum and being an obnoxious little shit, and one child calmly getting on with things, you assume that the angry child is in the wrong. 'But they're doing it too' doesn't work when…
/r/MensRights29/12/12 05:44 PM
13

This post would be so much more credible if you omitted the petty, "those pesky feminists" subtext. Virgin-shaming sucks, but I've seen more men engage in it than women. I've certainly never seen anyone who identifies as 'feminist' do it. Your rhetoric should seek to convince others, not to spite them.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 05:41 PM
2

I mismatched nothing. Your poor wordsmanship- or, I suspect, latent misogyny- has made you look ridiculous. The proper thing to do is admit fault for the linguistic cock-up, not try to wriggle and squirm your way out of it.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 03:25 PM
1

Just because you think it's unfair doesn't make it not true. "Black people are more likely to be criminals."
/r/MensRights29/12/12 03:05 PM
2

Offering sex in return for goods and services is, by very definition, prostitution. I daresay that most rational adults would rather have partners than live-in sex-workers.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 03:03 PM
1

She has control, but chooses not to use it. Men who rape have control but choose not to use it And as such they are just as bad. You directly and unambiguously stated that women who 'dress up' are as bad as rapists. I don't need to contend with actual effect because it's your statement. You are the reason MRAs are viewed as rape apologists and misogynists.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 02:26 PM
2

Call me crazy, but I'm pretty certain a rapist is significantly, perhaps even infinitely, worse than a woman wearing a miniskirt.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 01:53 PM
0

Do you really not realise the tautology of the point you're trying to make?
/r/MensRights28/12/12 12:49 PM
0

How do you feel about the Catholic Church, then?
/r/MensRights28/12/12 12:45 PM
1

Much appreciated, though I'm sure if more people had been involved there would've been much better submissions. A missed opportunity for many, it seems.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 01:40 AM
-2

We are planning on donating 20% of profits to charity. That is nowhere near enough for a company that claims; Our goal is to help end testicular cancer by raising awareness of the illness through apparel and accessories. If you're not donating 100% of your profits, then your goal is to profit. That is highly unscrupulous and misleading. Men's health is a serious issue, not a fucking market to exploit.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 11:32 PM
-5

Are you advocating for equality or fairness or more of "make the one with the penis pay"? The greatest inequality is to try and make inequal things equal. I'm advocating that the child, once born, should not be the one to lose out. If the mother decides she wants to abort, it's not ideal, but so be it, the problem is no longer a problem. If the father abandons, the problem is still a problem, he is just shutting his eyes to it. Yes people's choices often come with risk. I would say the risk is p…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 11:26 PM
27

A black-rights co-option and an equation of feminism to a far-right hate group. Great work.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 11:11 PM
1

Which testicular cancer charity is the money going to? edit: And how much of your proceeds? Do you make any profit? If so, you should declare it plainly on your website. I don't see any charity references anywhere. Very suspicious.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 11:08 PM
4

So, basically, the mods are setting up any users who don't read all the comments to be doxxed and defamed by Gawker. Wonderful.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:51 PM
-4

Youve already answered that the women carries the physical risks by her CHOICE to support. No, she carries physical risks just from being pregnant. She's also at risk when she has the abortion. What health risks do men face during pregnancy? None. Is there nothing physical about being incarcerated if you choose not to support? Please, quote where I said that I wanted men who don't pay to be imprisoned. Is there nothing physical about being hounded for money every month regardless of your choice?…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:50 PM
4

...so why are we being encouraged, then?
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:35 PM
0

Those are also facts, yes.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:34 PM
2

The UK. We have various PC names for them here, but they all amount to the same thing; homes for children whose parents can't or don't want to look after them.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:33 PM
0

Well, I think we've both circled the drain enough to just go ahead and chuck ourselves down it, then. Until next time.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:20 PM
0

Shrug. Words get used in different contexts. I'd never heard the word 'plane' used to describe a carpentry tool up until my dad needed to smooth down a table.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:18 PM
6

I'm confused. If the mods think they're researching for a hit piece, why are we being encouraged to give them ammunition? Surely they're just going to cherry-pick the less reasonable messages and attempt to torch us?
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:11 PM
-2

You may as well have posted in Mandarin for all the sense that makes.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:07 PM
-2

Well, once you're a bit older and wiser, you'll feel differently.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:06 PM
-2

The only thing I'm saying is that we live in a patriarchy.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:05 PM
-2

If you remove the incentive you may well decrease pregnancy. Whilst your theory might have some credibility, as it stands it's total conjecture and thus not really admissible as an argument. If proof existed that 'non-mutual pregnancies' would decrease if paternal surrender were legalised, then I'd consider it. Secondly if we are going to force people to do things to support children they dont want then why are you for abortion again? I've already answered this; the woman carries the physical ri…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:01 PM
-4

But if you applied this argument to abortion, you would say that since the child being healthy is paramount, you cannot place the mother's interests before the child. There is a difference between a cluster of cells and a birthed child. I would be totally opposed to a mother drowning her infant after birth or having an abortion the day before she was supposed to go into labour. Vacuuming out a barely developed foetus is totally different. Forcing a woman to carry a baby but not support it is mos…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 09:55 PM
-2

Exactly. The mother suffers the inconvenience of pregnancy/abortion, but with it she gains the right to choose whether she wants to carry that pregnancy to term. Yes. No, dummy, I'm referring to the fact that women are allowed to give their children up for adoption after birth. You quoted my post saying; having an abortion is not equatable to paternal surrender And responded as such; It's equatable to maternal surrender, which is legal. Grammar dictates that this reads; abortion is equatable to …
/r/MensRights19/12/12 09:41 PM
-2

but at what point does it stop being a patriarchy? When men don't hold most of the governmental power. Does it need to be a majority? But then wouldn't that be a matriarchy? Yes. Fact is, you could make an argument that the government is a patriarchy until a woman is president, AND at least 51% of congress members are female. You'd be making a pretty reasonable argument, too.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 09:36 PM
-1

The man has no corresponding right and responsibility during the gestation. The man has no risk or physiological consequences, either. The man doesn't have to change his diet or his lifestyle. The man actually suffers almost no inconvenience whatsoever, outside of what the female subjects him to. True. It's equatable to maternal surrender, which is legal. The only thing a dangerous, invasive medical procedure is equatable to is another dangerous, invasive medical procedure. Administrative paper …
/r/MensRights19/12/12 09:34 PM
-2

If it hurts men too, then it is not simply oppressive to only women, nor does it produce male dominance over women if it doesn't actually benefit all males. Whilst your Wikipedia definition and criticism is very interesting, I'm not Wikipedia. If you have an issue with their definition, take it up with them. It's a simple statement of fact Yes, it is, which is why it's curious you're taking such great exception to it.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 09:29 PM
1

Again, talk to feminists who use patriarchy to justify their actions and ask them what they think about privilege. Again, why is it my job to do this? I'm comfortable in my opinion on feminism, I don't feel any need to try and bob for bad apples just so I can complain how sour they are. The patriarchy as I just defined it, is completely meaningless, so it's really pointless to talk about. And yet, on you persist. ;)
/r/MensRights19/12/12 09:26 PM
-1

Then we should just have the mother offer the baby up for adoption if the father has surrendered paternal responsibility and the mother is unable to support the child by herself. It'll discourage women from bringing to term children they can't support, and it'll give the state a reason to revamp state care. I'm stunned. After years of being active in various different social rights groups, this is the most hysterical thing I've ever heard. I'm going to quote you, because this is just too ludicro…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 09:22 PM
-5

So now we're authorising state-ordered kidnappings? Do you know anything about the lives of kids who are surrendered? I've never lived in an orphanage, but I can't imagine it's anywhere near as pleasant as living with at least one parent.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 09:08 PM
0

NAFALT is a piss poor defense. All Feminists Are Like This is an even poorer offense, unfortunately. When do feminists say that in YOUR experience then anyway? This is a really, really weird question. There isn't a 'when' they say it, some of them just do. Some after being prompted, some of their own volition. This may surprise you, but feminists are as prone to saying different things as you and I are.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:55 PM
0

Yes, I'm selfish. I don't want to pay a lot of money to have some doctor CUT MY FUCKING TESTICALS WITH A KNIFE!!! It's a good thing they sever your vas deferens, and not your "testicals" [sic] then isn't it? Also a good thing they can be performed without scalpels.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:51 PM
-4

"Patriarchy hurts men too" isn't just something feminists will say out of nowhere, I had no idea you knew all feminists, everywhere, well enough to make this statement. Kudos on your social endeavour.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:48 PM
-2

But who puts them there? It doesn't matter. They are there, meaning we live in a patriarchal society. I don't care about any sociological co-options of the word, I am simply stating fact. If the 'patriarchs' actually favour women in the laws they create, is 'patriarchy' a meaningful term when you talk about creating a more equalitarian society? This is pretty much the basis of an essay I'm writing next year. I have no answer for you until then, malheuresment. Does it tell us anything useful abou…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:46 PM
2

It's Latin. Pater is father, arch is rule. Go argue with the Romans.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:41 PM
-3

If she wanted to support the child, and carried to term knowing the father does not want it, there is no reason to force him to. Except, the child may suffer, and the father was equally responsible in making it so he should share equal responsibility in supporting it. The way I see it, the baby is the only 'innocent' party here, and so should be the last one to suffer. It is along the same lines as a father who wants a baby with a mother who does not forcing her to carry it to term (but not expe…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:39 PM
-2

That is just another slogan to get people to still care less about men. ...feminists claiming that men are discriminated against, compared to denying any discrimination whatsoever, is getting them to care less about men? What the fuck am I reading?
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:31 PM
-1

Do explain how.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:16 PM
-1

As women are the ones carrying the physical risk of childbirth pregnancy, I believe they have the right to an abortion autonomously. Did you read this part? Edit Just a heads up, I've changed childbirth to pregnancy in both posts, oversight on my part.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:12 PM
2

Okay... and that has anything to do with male privilege how? No-one mentioned privilege until you did. Ctrl+f privilege if you want. Now go find me one poster on /twox or /feminism that doesn't use patriarchy to imply that all men are privileged Why is it my job to do this? I highlighted that some feminists share similar viewpoints to the OP and gave you an off-the-cuff definition of patriarchy, I'm hardly advocating for women's interest forums here.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:09 PM
-2

Saying the patriarchy harms men too, is an oxymoron. How is it? Men are expected to be the patriarchs and thus the providers, some men aren't capable of this and are seen as failures as a result. Therefore, the patriarchal society hurts men, too.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:02 PM
1

If we allow paternal surrender, women and children will suffer as some won't have the pecuniary advantage to allow a comfortable life. If we make abortions dependent on both parents, men, women and children will suffer as partners will invariably hold their baby or their money hostage. If we don't allow paternal surrender, but allow women autonomy over their pregnancy, men and children suffer as men will be forced into paying for children they didn't consent to. This is a situation in which at l…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 07:49 PM
-14

Patriarchy means 'rule by the father.' It makes sense because men generally hold all the highest positions in govt.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 07:27 PM
11

Sarcasm really doesn't fly well here, does it?
/r/MensRights19/12/12 06:32 PM
2

I propose that most mass murderers are all actually females If we could put females into male bodies over night World War 3 would break out over the same night. No, there's no misogynist undertones here, at all. I'm done feeding the troll now, anyway.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 06:30 PM
-11

You realise that there is quite a lot of feminists who argue along the same lines that you're arguing? That the patriarchy harms men, too?
/r/MensRights19/12/12 06:26 PM
2

A new account pops up, comes straight to r/mensrights and posts a highly inflammatory topic that would appeal to any of the misogynists amongst us? Nothing suspicious there at all, I'm sure you're here for discourse and rational interaction with no ulterior motive whatsoever.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 06:24 PM
2

redditor for 24 minutes
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:55 PM
-1

Men are three times more likely to attempt suicide than women Privilege.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:35 PM
1

Well I think hot, island flings are fine, but only if it's the guy who does it. Am I missing something? It looks as though she's saying men having flings is fine, a starkly different message to your title.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:34 PM
2

Thank you. Apparently, it's acceptable to throw out absolutely monstrous accusations about a victim of murder, with no basis in fact, as long as she dared divorce a man prior to her death. I can't believe the level of hypocrisy being displayed by all sides in the Sandy Hook tragedy.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:27 PM
2

Maybe Commonly known as conjecture, AKA being vindictive under the guise of rational discourse.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:24 PM
0

What about if someone asked us if we've posted in this thread? That would create a 'we' of you and I. <3
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:17 PM
13

It's a good thing they'll never see any of my notebooks from when I was a teenager. They'd probably explode from all the rape.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:14 PM
1

I was aware of it but hadn't seen a credible study that supported it. Thank you for providing.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:08 PM
3

America has proceeded to analyze with what typically passes for circumspection in this country; that is political posturing, grandstanding and the not so uniquely American tendency to exploit any given tragedy for a particular cause. Thank fuck he's not doing the same thing, right?
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:06 PM
-1

Aren't we angry at people for co-opting this tragedy to blame men? Now we're doing the same thing, but blaming women? Good job guys, way to be consistent.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:02 PM
-1

I think the natural next step is for there to be a male suicide awareness event. Suicide is currently the biggest killer of men under 35 in the UK and I'm sure there are similar numbers Stateside.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 04:47 PM
1

The mistake you seem to be making is that activism is an easy thing, or at least not physically and emotionally exhausting. No one person can fight for every issue. I never said everyone would be required to fight every battle and I'm not sure where you think I did. Roe v. Wade. Why are you acting like this subreddit is some sort of highly focused and organised thinktank and not a diffuse group of bigots, malcontents and the occasional rational person? The MRM is arguably the least unified socia…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 04:43 PM
-1

We spend vastly more money and resources on women's health than men's. This is part of the reason women live longer than men. Do you agree with that statement? No, because I don't know if it's true. If you can provide a source then I'll happily agree.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 04:32 PM
-4

A grassroots effort to raise awareness that didn't actually raise any funds Movember raised nearly £80m worldwide in 2011. ever seen a politician/actor/athlete wearing a pink ribbon? What about a light blue one?). I saw plenty that grew moustaches for Movember, which seems a far bigger display than simply pinning a badge on. And even that was bitched about endlessly by women who were upset this was taking attention away from their favorite cancers. Literally the only negative thing I read about …
/r/MensRights19/12/12 02:11 PM
0

If we might be serious for a moment, I'm sure you're not really the bigoted moron you've made yourself out to be here. Does it really not concern you that people who are ideologically self-supremacist are in positions of power over the people they list as enemies, deserving of death etc. in their private lives? Yes, I realise that white men have a lot of power, but does this really justify exposing all men to massive injustice? Is it really fair to rob people of their right to express when their…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 01:36 PM
4

What the fuck is going on with the advice in that thread? I can't believe how many people are telling him to admit to the crime to her. The dude is fucked if he listens to anything said.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 01:16 PM
-4

If an enormous media campaign that spans an entire month, raises tens of millions of pounds, has huge celebrity and social engagement and is expected to be repeated every year indefinitely is a drop in the barrel to you, I have no idea what you think would be a reasonable amount of attention. You can tell me to leave all you want, it just makes me want to stick around even more. :)
/r/MensRights19/12/12 12:42 PM
-2

If you don't care about the lack of public concern about men's health then just GTFO. You don't belong here cunt. We literally just had an entire month dedicated to prostate male cancer awareness. Were you in a comatose state for the month of November? I'll catch you up, just in case. There was a social campaign, referred to as 'Movember' where men were encouraged to grow moustaches as an aesthetic display of solidarity and to raise awareness for cancers that affect men. Even though it was about…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 12:35 PM
-3

I'm sorry if my pointing out facts undermines your unjustified whining. Perhaps you should try finding something justified to whine over.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 12:05 PM
-7

We literally just had an entire month dedicated to prostate cancer awareness.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 11:59 AM
-1

Just as predicted, you fled once you realised you were guilty of transphobia, homophobia, racism and sexism. What a champion of civil rights you are. :)
/r/MensRights19/12/12 11:58 AM
0

But she didn't make any of those claims. Right, which is why I said: I was lampooning the stereotypical activist And not: I was lampooning Cameron Russell she's openly admitting she is at privilege. Do you really think that that isn't obvious from watching the video?
/r/MensRights19/12/12 11:18 AM
0

I was lampooning the stereotypical activist that feels no-one but white men can benefit from privilege and that anyone else who feels they are being helped is actually being harmed.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 11:10 AM
1

I was being sarcastic.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 11:04 AM
2

Remove the laugh track and you have a poignant speech about the plight of male rape victims.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:53 AM
-3

Please don't be stripping women of agency in instigating the process. It's being insinuated that somehow a woman, by herself, can carry out a false rape accusation to conviction. This is patently untrue. False rape accusations are heinously immoral things, but their damage is exponentially increased by a weak court system, mainly run by men who seemingly hate men. It may be women pulling the trigger, but it's society that's giving them the gun filled with bullets and kicking us into the firing l…
/r/MensRights19/12/12 10:37 AM
7

Male teachers are certainly up against it, you have my sympathy. Don't let some moron troll get to you.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 02:29 AM
5

You found it extremely insulting because they were trying to insult you. People who are being serious don't say things like; I probably wouldn't have a problem with you watching a baby but if the child is old enough for you to penetrate I would have a problem with that.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 02:24 AM
-6

All a man, woman, child or well-trained monkey needs to ruin your life is a small bottle of petrol and a cigarette lighter. Why would it just be the woman ruining your life, anyway? Wouldn't the court system, mainly comprised of men, also be largely responsible for this? And the jury? And the solicitors? A woman can't convict you for anything by herself.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 02:20 AM
5

EVERY SINGLE WOMAN HAS THE ABILITY TO RUIN YOUR LIFE. Every single person has the ability to ruin your life. It is by no means exclusive to women.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 11:55 PM
0

What is insane about illegalising images of child abuse...?
/r/MensRights18/12/12 11:46 PM
16

If you want to see the really fucked up bit, scroll down to previous incidences.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:29 PM
11

Yes, my ideal way to die is immediately following a manic episode where I slaughter innocent children, following years of depression and mental illness, leaving everyone who ever knew me to think of me as nothing more than a psychopathic murderer. Fucking hell. Where is the compassion in the world? Children have been fucking perforated and killed and all people can think about is how to use this to incite hatred.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:22 PM
1

Read the AgentOrange files if you don't believe me. If you don't think that men can be discriminated against, then you are being wilfully ignorant and a bigot. I should note that this wouldn't exactly be a novel conclusion, but this would probably be the most comprehensive display of SRS moronics I've encountered yet.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 07:28 PM
2

Did they make any distinction between what genders would get arrested? If not, no.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 07:06 PM
0

And correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that non-white, non-heterosexual, trans* men are discriminated against due to sexism? I'm saying that these female supremacists will not make the distinctions you inconsistent hypocrites do in their discrimination against men and will discriminate against trans, non-white and non-straight men just as much as they do straight white men. Once again, either you admit that white men will be the victim of sexism, or you admit that you're a bigot. I know …
/r/MensRights18/12/12 07:04 PM
1

Yes, I don't mean that straight men will pretend to be gay to exploit straight women-- though, now that you've said it, I am sure that this happens, too-- I mean that immacho (a word I've just made up) men will be accused of being gay and will roll with it for fear of alienation.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 06:57 PM
0

Uh, thanks for supporting me, I guess. I hope for your childrens sake that you don't ever find yourself doing this...
/r/MensRights18/12/12 06:45 PM
1

I wasn't trying to poke holes in your post. Just confused. My 'good effort' line does seem a little catty, having re-read it. I meant it in an elbow-to-the-ribs, "you cheeky thing" kind of way. Apologies for not making that clearer. I wonder if we'll ever see a day when straight men live as gay men out of denial of who they are? I'd be surprised if we're not seeing it already amongst men in predominately female social circles. "Gay best friend" phenomenon etc.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 06:43 PM
1

How am I conflating those two issues? There are people who are openly anti-men in positions of power. Are you saying that trans-men aren't men like the rest of us? That they would somehow be immune to discrimination just because they were born with vaginas? Or that one of these bigots would choose not to discriminate against a black man? I love the way you desperately try to fight the cognitive dissonance you're getting over the fact that non-white, non-heterosexual, non-transgender people are g…
/r/MensRights18/12/12 06:39 PM
1

Gay men can choose to straight-act and live unhappy, heterosexual lives if they so choose. Being in a homosexual relationship, just like a heterosexual relationship, is a choice. Good effort, though, you nearly had me.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 06:28 PM
-1

Given that the scat community isn't gender-specific and extends pretty much only to a sexual proclivity rather than a defined lifestyle choice with a sizable civil rights movement behind it, including a large number of men who could be recruited to the cause... yes, it would be better to go with "eat shit."
/r/MensRights18/12/12 06:20 PM
0

...and what about the non-white men? Or the transgender men? We just cast them to the wolves because 'Hey white men have power'? That sounds pretty intensely bigoted. Don't you mouthbreathers hate bigotry?
/r/MensRights18/12/12 06:06 PM
1

In the UK, 'eating' someone means to apply oral sex. Maybe I'm being culturally-tunnel-visioned or over-sensitive, but it made me wince and I thought I'd speak out.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 06:05 PM
4

Your post seems to insinuate otherwise. It might seem small, but as MRAs, we should really strive not to associate male homosexuality with bad things.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 06:00 PM
7

Some of us like having dicks in our mouths, thanks.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 05:58 PM
2

Nick Denton is a piece of shit who outs his fellow homosexuals and slutshames women. Fuck him and fuck everything about his company.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 05:56 PM
0

You know that not all men are white, right? And that there are some people who were born with female genitalia but identify as male? These people will be affected, too. I have no idea why discrimination against "white cis men" would be acceptable, irrespective of that, though.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 05:54 PM
0

That there are a significant number of people who hold positions of authority and power whilst concealing an enormous prejudice that will invariably result in discrimination.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 05:45 PM
0

I like how loudly you spoke out about AgentOrange dropping doxx, then Would you have taken issue if a feminist had posted the names and occupation of members of an extremist anti-women group? Or an anti-gay group? Anti-racial minority? If you answered no to any of these, congrats, you're a hypocrite. If you answered yes, then you must take no exception to people in positions of authority holding extremist, bigoted views which will invariably affect their performance and professionalism, potentia…
/r/MensRights18/12/12 05:09 PM
0

You're right. I better go consult my online hivemind so I can taste the salty ropes of cum-truth all over my uncirclejerked face.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:58 PM
0

Enough to go through my posting history and downvote everything you see, lol. Stay classy, mouthbreather.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:54 PM
0

A whole bunch of misogynist bullshit? I've spoken out about Paul Elam and his ilk in the past, but they're undeniably popular here. Doesn't mean we're all fans.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:53 PM
0

No, this isn't normal teenager stupidity, this is the sort of stupidity that can only be learned and displayed by adults. You're disparaging 14-year-olds by comparing them to this cretin.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:47 PM
0

the daily mail Spoken like a true moron. The Daily Mail pretty much is a hate publication; against women.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:45 PM
1

And doxxing "violent feminists" is so much better, amirite? ...did an SRS mouthbreather seriously just grant clemency to a slutshamer? You guys seriously are fucking bonkers. Just to answer your question, though; yes, holding extremists responsible for their extremist views, especially when they're in positions of authority as many were, is much better than outing an unwilling, innocent gay man and defaming and shaming an innocent woman. What the fuck is going on the world where I have to explai…
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:37 PM
6

good man LOL GOOD JOKE
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:17 PM
4

Nick Denton is a piece of shit who outs his fellow homosexuals and slutshames women. Fuck him and fuck everything about his company.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:12 PM
7

Right? These misogynist children need to check their privilege, man up and shut up complaining. Don't they know what whilst they're failing school in record numbers, getting less places in higher education and being the primary victims of poverty and homelessness, there are women who earn less money than men who work harder jobs in better companies?!
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:06 PM
7

I was blindsided with the bottle and KO'd before I even knew I was in a fight and even if I hadn't been, I was hugely outnumbered, both by girls and the men who tried to stab me when I dared try and resist. I'm reasonably confident that if I had put up a fight, I'd have been killed. 'preciate the sentiment, though.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 03:42 PM
10

Well, obviously there must be a suddenly-developed problem with young men. It can't be society, it must be the men. We need to get this man a research grant so he can do the physiological research required to investigate what this sudden new problem with men is.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 03:22 PM
4

This subreddit generally disagrees with the concept of alimony. Who said it didn't? What I said was: I'm absolutely certain that the majority of people would encourage the father to sue for alimony because that's what lots of other women would do. One doesn't have to agree with something to use it vindictively. [citation needed] It's an opinion, hence the qualification of "I'm absolutely certain." If it was a statement of fact, it would read, "It's absolutely certain," or something similar. Good…
/r/MensRights18/12/12 02:22 PM
2

You're wrong http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/search?q=alimony&restrict_sr=on I see a lot of griping about women and a lot of griping about alimony. Nothing to suggest I'm wrong.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 02:06 PM
6

I think you're failing to understand that SarcastiCock obviously has a better understanding of your family dynamics. This might confuse you, given that he has only a cursory knowledge of your family whilst you have been a member of your family your entire life, but trust me. He knows.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 01:13 PM
2

Of all the political agendas being advanced, the idea that mental health should be taken more seriously is valid, I absolutely agree. so I don't think that is an example of someone trying to co-opt the tragedy. Might've been poor wordsmithing on my part, but I meant that Long's behaviour was vile. The message that the mental health of boys is being overlooked needs a better spokesperson than her. I have a feeling that any emerging figures will be labelled as bigots and comprehensively bombarded …
/r/MensRights18/12/12 01:10 PM
5

I disagree, I'm absolutely certain that the majority of people would encourage the father to sue for alimony because that's what lots of other women would do.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 01:06 PM
5

AskReddit, Divorce or at a push, Relationship Advice might be more help. Good luck and I hope you get some helpful advice.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:55 PM
-4

Poor woman, victim of the patriarchy that tells her being beautiful gives her privilege. How little does she know that she's actually just being mega-raped by male privilege.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:51 PM
4

This isn't the best place to ask for this sort of advice- people here will leap all over your mother and defend your father to the death. Try a more neutral subreddit.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:48 PM
1

Better educated is not an argument. Another red herring. No, my arguments are here and here, both of which remain unaddressed by yourself. I have provided a link to multiple studies. No, you haven't. You've said 'they exist' and given an extremely vague sign post. This is not sufficient. I can't believe how frequently this needs explanation. Provide a specific study and an author, with the specific part you are citing in your next post or I will presume that no such study exists and you are lyin…
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:55 AM
1

Mrref is full of academic information. Mensrightslinks is full of academic information. The book I linked to is full of academic information. If it's so full, then why can't you link me to the study that corroborates your claim? This really isn't a new, unreasonable or uncommon practice. Your citation is unverifiable. No, it isn't. All you'd need to do is check the book- made easy by the fact I've listed the title and authors, not just gesticulated at a bookshop and said "IN THERE!" - And you'd …
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:36 AM
12

Why? Were you one of them? :P
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:33 AM
22

It really is fucking vile how many bloggers have seized upon this tragedy to co-opt and self-include.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:25 AM
1

This is not us writing essays, this is us trying to educate each other. No, this is you spouting nonsense and hoping that it is academically supported, which it apparently isn't as you're proving incapable of proving it. I can't give you a degree I wouldn't need you to, either? but you can use this forum to learn new information or the errors in your information. How am I meant to learn new information if you're not presenting it? When someone asks you how long it takes to cook a steak, do you j…
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:16 AM
5

It really is barmy- he actually worked two jobs, a fairly uncommon thing in the UK, because he was accused of being underemployed after he couldn't afford rent on a two bedroom house he was court-ordered to have if he wanted access to the child. Despite working 70hr+ weeks, for minimum wage, with no days off, he was expected to provide, every month, the equivalent of several months wages to his ex, meaning she lived like a Queen in a lovely warm country, miles away from her child's father. Even …
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:12 AM
1

It's not my responsibility to corroborate your claims; the burden of proof is carried by the one making the assertion, hence why I provided a reference for my assertion. Just saying it exists is not sufficient. Generally, you need at least an author name and a publication. A web link is preferable but not essential, academically.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:02 AM
1

There is no audience genius, it's you learning and me learning. (Or whatever it is you are doing). What has an audience got to do with your apparent unwillingness to validate your own argument?
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:56 AM
9

I'm no artist, but I've given it a go. It's more of a concept than an actual submission, but I think it works. edit: Don't buy me gold if I win. Donate the money to Real Fathers for Justice.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:48 AM
2

I don't know, it seems to me that you're the one smearing, here. I've had plenty of reasonable debates with feminists. I knew before I even clicked this thread that it wasn't actually asking for feminist sources, it was an invitation to throw a few bones in the direction of feminism. Disappointing.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:35 AM
1

You realise that they'd have to cite the non-"public relations" versions in debate if they wanted to use them, right?
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:30 AM
5

You know who you'd be better off asking? Feminists.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:25 AM
9

A former colleague of mine's ex literally kidnapped their child and moved abroad without telling him. Despite consequently failing to turn up to any of their court-ordered custody exchanges for over three months, he was ordered to continue paying child maintenance, without the amount being altered for the lower cost-of-living abroad.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:24 AM
7

If she wants to report you, she will, irrespective of what happened in the 'build-up.' There's very little point trying to pre-empt a false rape accusation; by their very nature they are lies and thus don't need any basis in reality. Speak to the girl directly. Ask if she enjoyed herself and take her out for a movie. I'm not parroting that Spearhead bullshit, spending an evening with her non-sexually will allay your fears entirely.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:21 AM
39

I got a bit sick of people holding back sniggers when I tell them about when I was bottled, stamped, had two teeth broken, ripped the flesh from both knees, sexually assaulted and narrowly avoided being stabbed by a group that was mostly female.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:15 AM
1

It's not my responsibility to corroborate your claims; the burden of proof is carried by the one making the assertion, hence why I provided a reference for my assertion.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:12 AM
2

People don't it when you point out something that undermines a potential argument in their favour. For whatever reason, I seem to have something of a reputation here that attracts negativity.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:11 AM
7

I hope he enjoys his brief moments of freedom before they're invariably snatched away again.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:53 AM
8

A whole bunch of emotional argument, coupled with the same tired statistics we've all seen a billion times. Gender-activism blogs really are the lowest rung on the rhetorical ladder.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:49 AM
8

No liberal website would embarrass itself by being liberal towards a topic. A masterclass in logic.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:43 AM
0

That's because you're assuming I was referring to people who've been gunned down by young men like Adam Lanza. I wasn't. So, despite the fact that your post is contemperaneous to a school shooting, specifically mentions "young men who've shot up schools and malls and theaters" and doesn't once mention suicide, I'm supposed to deduce that you might be talking about a totally separate issue? That isn't how communication and rhetoric works, my man.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:37 AM
-2

Arguably 100 years ago violence was more common. This statement has no intellectual value whatsoever.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:26 AM
-1

I don't know how you missed this part, but if you hadn't, you might not have come to the conclusion about me that you seem to have. I didn't miss it, it just didn't really have any influence on my criticism of your post. I'm very much of the position that the mental instability exhibited by the young men who've conducted shooting sprees lately is not the fault of feminism. You've phrased your post in an incredibly obtuse way, then, when you say things like this: I have no doubt in mind that our …
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:23 AM
1

Not to an academic standard. Of the 15-20 I researched, the only fatherless case was Jeff Weise, whose life was remarkably fucked up, far beyond just an absentee father.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:17 AM
4

Cho, Klebold, Harris and Goh all came from nuclear families. Lanza's parents didn't separate until 2009. Most other school-shooters were juveniles and so details are hard to get, but we can't just assume they were raised in single-parent families. There isn't even any correlation between school-shooters and absent fathers, let alone causation. Your hunch is wrong.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 12:09 AM
-3

America is failing young men, has been for some time. Fairly tepid start. I'm inclined to ask how long "some time" is. they're probably proud of it. Sound more sore. I have no doubt in mind that our feminized culture has caused lives to be lost. And the reasoning for this, is...? Also, I just encountered this statement by yourself in another thread. For someone who is "very weary of all the finger-pointing that goes on after a major shooting incident like this," you sure seem eager to point your…
/r/MensRights17/12/12 10:57 PM
4

Ask them?
/r/MensRights17/12/12 10:43 PM
-1

I suppose you weren't saying to be hateful, sorry about that, but you did suggest that being civil was a mistake. Again, not quite. I suggested that it was a mistake to waste civility on someone who doesn't reciprocate, not that being civil is a mistake in and of itself.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 08:51 PM
0

Who said anything about being hateful? If I sense someone isn't in a position to have a reasonable debate, whether from incompetence or 'just because,' I don't bother engaging them.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 08:29 PM
2

This assumes there is any connection between spree killers. I'm not the one making assumptions. The initial post read: So many of these school shooters seem to come from single-parent families. This is conjecture, plain and simple. Four of the five most famous and numerous school-shooters from the last 20 years were from nuclear families and it is nigh-impossible to get any details about juvenile school shooters, who make up most of the rest of the incidences. Out of all the research I've done, …
/r/MensRights17/12/12 08:27 PM
3

Neither Cho, Klebold, Harris or Goh were from single-parent homes. Most other school shootings seem to feature juveniles for whom details are scarce in media reports, but there is no reason to believe that they were from single-parent homes either. I refuse to let empty-headed conjecture go unchallenged.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 07:53 PM
7

Get a lawyer. We are in no position to advise you on a topic like this and any attempt to do so will expose you to the fucking of a lifetime once you enter legal proceedings.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 07:36 PM
3

So many of these shooters seem to wear T-shirts, too. What other irrelevant factors can we shoehorn in here?
/r/MensRights17/12/12 05:54 PM
2

And for the record: I have no problem with feminists. Nor do I, but believe me when I say we're the minority here. Even mentioning feminism without qualifying it with some sort of insulting epithet is enough to spark the hate-brigade.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 05:41 PM
3

You made the mistake of being civil with someone who clearly isn't civilized. I think a distinction can be made between feminists and 'men who feel they ought to be feminists to impress women.' He sounds like the latter.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 05:24 PM
-11

You'll soon learn that most of the users on r/mensrights are more interested in anti-feminism than pro-masculism. You're going to receive a whole bunch of vitriol, downvotes and condescension, so be ready for that.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 05:18 PM
4

It always surprises me to see adults using the "But they're doing it toooooooo" argument. It doesn't work when seven year olds use it, it's just embarrassing when adults try.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 04:17 PM
-12

Whilst this is obviously a despicable and heinously immoral way to behave, let's not fall into the trap of using this as a club to beat women. We make life harder for ourselves when we take things like this as personal grievances, rather than glaring social issues.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 04:01 PM
-5

What a convincing and cogent argument you've constructed.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 03:52 PM
7

Why is it society approaches these situations with an attitude of, 'who or what can we blame this on?' And not, 'what factors do these incidences share and how can we prevent this happening again?'
/r/MensRights17/12/12 01:21 PM
1

"if they can't walk a straight line, they are too drunk". This is a decent line of thinking. In an ideal world, there would be some sort of universal sobriety test. I don't know enough about biology to weigh in, logistically, but I absolutely concur that a clear, universally-agreed sobriety delineater would be a reasonable solution. See but who decides that someone who is sober enough to make a food order is sober enough to have sex. Ideally, we'd use common sense and honesty. I accept that soci…
/r/MensRights17/12/12 01:16 PM
0

Given that autism affects men predominately, I don't think r/mensrights is an appropriate place to insult those with autism.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 12:55 PM
-1

How, praytell, would I substantiate an opinion? Link you to a double-blind trial where I confirm that my opinion is indeed, my opinion? Regale you with rhetoric of how most of the people I've encountered on MR forums are bigots?
/r/MensRights17/12/12 12:51 PM
-1

But not every couple whose romantic connection ends or goes through an extended period of hibernation while they are still coparenting becomes "dysfunctional." Yes, but some do, which you didn't acknowledge in your post. You're presenting a false dichotomy here. Explain. Kids don't give two shits whether or not their parents are in love in the romantic sense. Utter nonsense. I would've loved for my parents to have shared a kiss, even once, as a kid. I can't find any studies on the topic of wheth…
/r/MensRights17/12/12 12:49 PM
-4

We had eighteen acts of legislation pushed through in the UK and I am aware of all of them, though I daresay I won't be bothering to learn about the Supply and Appropriation (?) Act.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 12:32 PM
1

The current definition of rape in Canada isn't clear about to when consent is invalid due to alcohol, and is over broad in several other ways. Because it isn't clear in real life when consent is invalid due to alcohol, either. This is why treating things on a case-by-case basis is so important. If they legislated that two drinks was the limit for consent, what drinks would they be? Pints of beer? Cocktails? Shots? Two shots in quick succession will get a person more intoxicated than two beers sp…
/r/MensRights17/12/12 12:23 PM
20

Apart from you, you adorable little stalker, you. <3
/r/MensRights17/12/12 11:44 AM
-2

Lol, a sockpuppet account that receives upvotes within 15 seconds of posting? NOTHING SUSPICIOUS GOING ON HERE PLEASE MOVE ALONG.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 11:43 AM
-3

boohoohoo someone disagrees with me on the internet :'( FTFY.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 11:40 AM
-18

By erring on the side of caution and exercising a little judgement before acting. Britain and Ireland don't have the same swathes of legislative quagmire that America does and even if they did, there are some laws people have a social obligation to be aware of, including at what age someone can consent to sex.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 11:38 AM
0

Front page of this subreddit, I should make clear. If you'd like to see who wrote the other, check out the current top ten.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 11:28 AM
-3

We don't need three topics all announcing this release, especially when the link is still in the top 10 on the front page.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 11:20 AM
-17

I always wonder what goes through people's head when they parrot this phrase. I can only speak for myself, but I thought; "I wonder when people will learn that ignorance of the law isn't an excuse."
/r/MensRights17/12/12 11:18 AM
-19

It's sad, but ignorance of the law isn't an excuse. Ireland certainly has issues with sex education, but I can't believe he never would've heard of the age of consent.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 11:04 AM
0

For one the current system is what is so problematic, so changing something cannot be continuing it. You're not suggesting change, though. Whilst you have phrased it in a way that seems radical, what you are actually proposing is already the status quo. Second, there don't seem to be problems with having a clear, sensible definition for what constitutes murder and any other crimes, yet somehow I am supposed to believe that having rape as clearly defined as any other crime is a bad thing? Killing…
/r/MensRights17/12/12 10:58 AM
4

The one where we're angry and bitter at those pesky women and their rights.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 10:28 AM
0

(which you should be, if you want children) Why? morally opposed to breaking up a marriage while there are kids in the house, even if the romantic relationship between the parents takes a nosedive. Staying together 'for the kids' is a surefire way to raise kids in an awful environment. The link I had to the study that supports this now 404s, but here is a media report which says pretty much the same thing. Speaking personally, I wish my parents hadn't stuck together for my siblings and I. Their …
/r/MensRights17/12/12 10:18 AM
32

Okay Rambo, I think we can lose the military cryptic talk. You investigated a webforum, it's hardly infiltrating the KGB.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 10:11 AM
8

Whilst it's admirable someone actually did the research, is this really a surprising outcome? A pretty sizable portion of radfems are already pretty outspoken of their hatred... edit: After reading 8 or 9 of the threads, this is pretty much standard radfem interaction. Has anyone got any 'highlights'?
/r/MensRights17/12/12 09:40 AM
-3

Haven't you heard? 'Man up.' Who needs things like justice in the court system and an end to forced genital mutilation when you have platitudes like that?
/r/MensRights17/12/12 09:37 AM
-1

What is the best men's rights website/blog, in your opinion? Good effort, though.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 09:32 AM
1

So we decide what is rape or isn't based upon a subjective judgment that varies from situation to situation? Not cool. You'd rather we just arbitrarily declare people rapists without having any understanding of the nuances of their situation? You would seriously rather have judges treat all cases identically, irrespective of the varying circumstances? You realise that one of the biggest gripes the MRM has is that rape cases aren't given reasonable investigation, but you want to continue with thi…
/r/MensRights17/12/12 09:29 AM
-1

Why would I spend my time doing this?
/r/MensRights17/12/12 01:55 AM
-1

The linked article is mostly factual. The false accusation is from the 40 minute old sock puppet account that you made to post. I made a new account so that I could post a moronic smear against a man I have no quarrel with, only to then post from my 'real' account in hopes of achieving... what...?
/r/MensRights17/12/12 01:46 AM
-1

It, uh, really shows.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 01:28 AM
1

Are you seriously unfamiliar with the concept of referring to a group, collectively? Shall I save your post for the next time you mention feminism?
/r/MensRights17/12/12 01:25 AM
-1

How? You said that you should both get to choose the counsellor, yet prior to that you said: Get a new counsellor. Insist on a male. That is not choosing a counsellor together. Why should he be entitled to insist on a male, yet the woman has to get her own private counsellor? Why can't he 'suck up' having a female counsellor and get his own private male one? When we both agree that this person can be our councilor, then that's who we go to. So why the insistence that they be male?
/r/MensRights17/12/12 01:10 AM
6

Wow. I thought the MRM hated false accusations, yet here you are wildly accusing someone of being a paedophile with nothing more than a prejudiced piece of hate-smearing.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 01:05 AM
-1

Seems completely fair to me. We both had to agree on the councellor. If we are both in the relationship, the we both get to choose the relationship councellor. You realise that this directly contradicts what you said earlier, right?
/r/MensRights17/12/12 12:56 AM
2

Come on, you can do better than that. I can, but unfortunately you can't, so I'll leave things here. You've embarrassed yourself enough, off you pop.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 12:45 AM
2

Oh, please... I'm sorry if you're now regretting showing yourself to be a homophobic, mouth-breathing, bigoted moron. You made the decision to write the blog and post it here and now you've made yourself look even more ridiculous. Tragic.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 12:30 AM
3

Gee, i thought you were actually being reasonable. I'm sorry that you find calm discourse so unreasonable. Perhaps if I call you a prick, a sack of shit, an intellectually-void monkey, you'll find it a bit more reasonable as per your writing style. I didn't co-opt shit, Of course you didn't. You just drew direct links between two totally different social movements in order to bolster your own weak argument. Slut shaming and Uncle Toming aren't collective. Next week, on Ridiculous Statements Only…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 11:58 PM
0

Many feminists defend the SCUM Manifesto And how are feminists generally viewed, in this subreddit? The only reason this may be picked up in a way that affirms the beliefs of our detractors It's not the detractors that I'm especially worried about, I'm worried about potential allies deciding to ignore feminist rhetoric only to come here and see that that rhetoric is justified.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 11:11 PM
1

Since you are not the one that brought the term "rape hysteria" into this discussion, you don't get to define it. And by the same token, neither do you, making your point once, twice, three times a failure. I've given you plenty of opportunities to make an argument (or, indeed, to substantiate the toilet-plunger abortion you dumped before me) and you've failed to do that. You've displayed a total incompetence for debate, discourse and rhetoric and I wish to waste no more time or energy teaching …
/r/MensRights16/12/12 10:44 PM
1

Not only do I not see how that is relevant Shocker. It's relevant because you're claiming that its the MRM's duty to calm rape hysteria, claiming that it affects men predominately because the first page of a Google search for false rape accusations doesn't have any links where females are the victim. Even if we discount your incompetence at supporting this claim, you'd still only have an argument that false rape accusations affect men predominately, not that rape culture or hysteria does. Google…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 10:29 PM
1

I'm not the person you were debating with, I just found Eryemil's squirming and dodging hilarious.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 10:15 PM
0

If you can't find a single news article of a woman as victim of false-rape accusation then that certainly means that your model requires some adjustments. Except, as I've already pointed out, rape hysteria and culture is about more than the act of rape and false rape accusations. Once again, I'm not asserting anything here, simply questioning your (currently unsubstantiated and thus invalid) assertions. Simply saying that it's not up to par is not enough; if it is such poor evidence then you sho…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:52 PM
1

Nope, it's not my responsibility to verify your claims. The burden of proof is carried by the one making the assertion. Just a sidenote, too, rape hysteria involves more than just false rape accusations. A Google search is not proof of anything. I've noticed you've had this issue in another thread and I doubt I'll have better luck explaining this to you than the other gentleman did. Look up how to write an academic essay, including referencing, then try again.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:39 PM
3

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:36 PM
1

Google Nope, it's not my responsibility to verify your claims. The burden of proof is carried by the one making the assertion. Just a sidenote, too, rape hysteria involves more than just false rape accusations. The burden of proof Contextual reading comprehension doesn't seem your strong suit, so I'll just point out that I was clearly making fun of you and your angry self, hence my direct quoting of you, spelling mistakes and all. edited
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:31 PM
1

The facts. The ones that totally rebutt your argument. You know, the facts.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:23 PM
0

Because the victims of it are overwhelmingly male? [Citation needed.] Also, "the victims of rape are overwhelming female." [sic]
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:10 PM
0

What factors? "Before you ask what they are; this is a hypothetical situation, the events and factors would be apparent in a real life situation." - PartTimeBadman We don't consider people who manipulate people into giving them money rapists We don't call coffee tables 'poppersquirts,' either, what's your point? Someone who manipulates someone into giving them money is a con-artist, and con-artists are generally viewed as bad people. To negate consent because of manipulation goes against all pri…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 07:33 PM
1

Stop drinking the Kool-Aid, man.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 06:49 PM
1

Irrelevant. Seriously? The fact that the majority of governments, worldwide, are comprised mainly of men, is irrelevant to the idea that men have power in society? I can't think of anything more relevant to who holds the power than who is in power. I feel like I should quote myself; I have a feeling that no amount of rhetoric could dissuade you from such a skewed sense of reality, so I won't waste any trying.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 06:24 PM
1

"Men have all the power." Nice strawman. Right, even though women are the majority of voters. What sex makes up the majority of politicians in power? If that's the case, you must avoid an awful lot of comedy. Oooh, sick burn.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 05:56 PM
1

For fuck's sake shut the fuck up.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 05:48 PM
1

And feminists don't? Not on the scale that men do. You must hate comedy shows. I don't go to comedy shows for political discourse, nor political platforms for comedy.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 05:46 PM
1

For fuck's sake shut the fuck up. No. :)
/r/MensRights16/12/12 05:43 PM
1

However, there is not a concerted effort on their part to vilify women and to disadvantage them in respect to the other sex. There doesn't need to be because they already have the power. The vilification of men is to make the power we hold seem illegitimate so that it might be redistributed. So you agree with me. Your problem is not with this piece of satire, it's with a lot of the other content. This is no different to the "other content." It is just another example of it.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 05:43 PM
1

Yes. The examples you gave are isolated cases. Blimey. I have a feeling that no amount of rhetoric could dissuade you from such a skewed sense of reality, so I won't waste any trying. This isn't the topic. You're derailing. The topic here is a very simple piece of satire. Actually, it's called elaboration, the process of adding detail and depth to a point. You said that there'd be plenty of time to people to try to fuck it up, I pointed out they wouldn't need to as the MRM is wasting the silver-…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 05:01 PM
1

Because there will invariably be MRAs who are anti-women, and we need to make sure that they don't get into positions of power like the radfems have. ...are you seriously suggesting that there isn't a fairly large number of anti-women men who are in positions of authority? Are there any radfems with the platform of, say, Rush Limbaugh? Or Todd Akin? Or any other of the many men who have been excoriated for being anti-woman in a position of authority? There will be more than enough time to have p…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 04:25 PM
-3

I would also be curios to see an example of what you consider hysterical dampening of rape hysteria. Just use reddits search feature, limit it to r/mensrights and then click the comments of any topic that mentions rape. You will find lots of handwringing and rape apologia. Here is one of the first results, for your convenience. Okay, but what differentiates between the two cases. Events and factors that are specific to the two cases. Before you ask what they are; this is a hypothetical situation…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 04:10 PM
0

The average means nothing to the individual, though, my overarching point being that there is absolutely no necessity for these things to be compared. Some people can get kicked in the crotch and laugh about it, some people get a light graze and need to lie down, some people menstruate razor blades, some people don't even realise they're leaking. There is no universal consensus on this and no sense in trying to compare the two.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 03:31 PM
1

Why do you so want to include people who are that gullible in the MRM? Why wouldn't you want people to be as sympathetic to men's rights as they are to women's? I want the general populace to take the MRM seriously, but you can't call them gullible for believing anti-MRM diatribe when MRAs make themselves so intensely unlikable. The MRM isn't some sort of special club, there are no entry requirements, stop being so elitist.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 03:26 PM
0

Did you miss the part where I said that I have friends who suffer from period pains? Surprisingly to some, there are more people than you in the world.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 03:17 PM
7

I have no idea what your first point is about I was criticising your decision to publish the hatred and then associate it with the MRM. You are perfectly entitled to hate people, but when you make that hatred public and link it to a social endeavour, you open yourself up to such criticism. The MRM already has a stereotype for being hateful and nasty without you validating that stereotype. As for your question Ah. I didn't think you'd be so blatant in your co-opting of black struggles, given how …
/r/MensRights16/12/12 01:52 PM
-4

It seems to me like you probably buy into the rape hysteria, and don't understand what you are talking about. Quite the opposite. I'm aware we're developing a society that 'cries rape.' My point is that no-one asked the MRM to perform this task you seem to think we're performing and the MRM's methods of "dampening rape hysteria" are often hysterical themselves. People here try to defend men's right to due process and stop the standard idea that seems to exist nowadays that women don't lie about …
/r/MensRights16/12/12 01:46 PM
9

I long for the day when it is acceptable for people to hate the vile and contemptible without being criticized for doing so. Well, long no more for that day is here, because I was actually criticizing how you chose to publish that bile and associate it with the MRM, further validating the stereotype that we are angry and hateful. not for scum who try to make all black people feel bad for the doings of people like the Washington shooters. Co-opting aside, I have no idea what you're talking about …
/r/MensRights16/12/12 01:27 PM
0

(I'm not talking about how people view the MRM.) My mistake, though I'm now unsure of the relevance of feminist gullibility to the (often correct) stereotype that MRAs are misogynists. If you're saying that they believe we're misogynists because they are told by their leaders, then I would highlight how their leaders are absolutely telling the truth and cite this entire subreddit as evidence of that. Satire is hysterical, frothy-mouthed and embittered, now? No, this subreddit and the majority of…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 01:20 PM
-4

...no, the MRM is labelled as a group of rape apologists because of the high number of rape apologists. Quite why it would fall on the MRM to "dampen rape hysteria" is beyond me, but whatever the case, this "dampening" is often hateful, often seeking to justify why a rape wasn't a rape (she got drunk, she didn't struggle yadda yadda) and perpetuated by men who also happen to post misogynistic or hateful things that don't mention rape at all.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 01:06 PM
65

But either way he is a worthless sack of maggot-ridden shit and I fervently hope that his morbid obesity catches up to him in the form of a slow and painful cancer. This, incidentally, is one of the reasons why the world is doomed. I long for the day where the men's rights movement can try to make a point without hysterical hatred.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 01:00 PM
0

Do you understand the difference between satire and jokes? Satire is a subgenre of comedy. The link does nothing of the sort. The video might not. The title suggesting that we kill all rape victims, in a forum with a reputation for misogynistic grappling with rape, might confirm people's beliefs that we're misogynists who grapple with rape morally. If someone is stupid enough not to understand the difference between satire and a joke, then we don't want or need that someone on our side. Baffling…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 12:57 PM
18

I'll be sure to tell all the women I sleep with that their sexual fulfillment is irrelevant- that's me being honest AND providing conversation. What a man I am.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 12:34 PM
7

...how is that fair, in a two-way relationship? Why can't he be the one to "get his own personal male counsellor?"
/r/MensRights16/12/12 12:32 PM
2

Is it really funny, or helpful to the cause, to make jokes about murdering rape victims? We are already stereotyped as misogynists and rape apologists, why confirm it?
/r/MensRights16/12/12 11:55 AM
-5

I don't think a group of men, famed for rape apologetics and obviously biased towards men, are the people to do that.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 11:52 AM
-2

Also, why are you assuming that OP agrees your ideas on rape in the first place? I'm not? Often times in discussion, people will volunteer additional information that was not previously mentioned or referenced.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 11:51 AM
0

You're going to 'go out on a limb' and say that being kicked in the balls is infinitely worse? An incomprehendible level of suffering, far beyond the scope of human comprehension, that's your 'out on a limb' choice? I've been kicked in the groin and I have female friends who suffer terribly from period pains. From what some of them describe, a kick in the balls sounds much more enjoyable. Equally, I have a male friend who had a testicle rupture during such an assault. There is no standard for ho…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 10:08 AM
-4

Next week, on Boring Shit That Never Happened...
/r/MensRights16/12/12 10:01 AM
1

What an effective and eloquent argument you've concocted.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:59 AM
3

I'm not trolling. Please, explain to me how having a topic that jokes about killing rape victims who think that murder is worse can possibly portray the MRM or MRAs in a positive light.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:53 AM
-20

There aren't any MR forums, websites etc. that isn't mostly occupied by embittered bigots, but r/mensrights tends to have the most rational and cogent users. r/mensrights has a nice mix of different content and if you ignore all the rape comparisons, rape marginalizations, rape apologia, rape definition questionings and pretty much every topic that tries to 'soften' rape, you have a pretty decent forum.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:51 AM
3

How do we not look like a group of rape apologists with shit like this being posted?
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:43 AM
5

Please don't post pictures of your children, especially when you're considering reopening a custody battle. my next phone call may be to the insurance company to see if my new insurance covers mental health. Something about this makes me wince. There must be some sort of superstition against publically questioning your child's mental health for the crime of being unfocused. Good luck, in any case.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:42 AM
8

Fear, shame, mental or physical distress, religion, lack of knowledge, societal and social pressure...
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:34 AM
1

So what happens when it's only women encouraged to pursue these things? Do you seriously believe that this is happening? but rather that we should encourage both genders to get into all fields. So, you've acknowledged that women weren't pushed towards the science industry, you've acknowledged that it's male-dominated, you've acknowledged that we should be encouraging all genders to pursue their interests, and yet the idea of a childrens TV show that aims to get girls into science offends you? Wh…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:30 AM
3

Ask a legal professional. We are not in any sort of position to aid on this topic.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 02:04 AM
1

Amanda Todd was a teenager who was bullied at school, then targeted, abused and blackmailed over a number of months. She was repeatedly encouraged to commit suicide both offline and online. These guys masturbated to a guy in a mask in an obscure video that almost no-one will see. It's comparisons like these that make the general populace hate us. Please stop making them.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 11:00 PM
3

I looked at your link and it just lists a bunch of PBS programs. I don't see how it supports your point. I was showing you how many programs PBS has to offer, including many the stereotypical young girl wouldn't be interested in. Either way, I don't appreciate the logic that "If someone discriminates there, then it's okay here." Except, it's not discriminative, because they do cater to boys, too. Scroll through that list and you will see many shows that a young girl would have no interest in wha…
/r/MensRights15/12/12 10:30 PM
6

Harding's piece was to incite angry clicks from MRAs. By responding, you're feeding the trolls.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 09:23 PM
12

So, a person in a position of authority exploits a situation and lies to a child so that they can stick their hand in their underwear, away from friends and adults, whilst saying how much they love children... yet she walks free. Fuck me, what a society we live in.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 09:22 PM
2

They're not. They're using gender-specific programming to attract female attention to a traditionally male topic. A boy could watch if he wanted to, and as I'm sure many do.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 08:52 PM
19

I agree that men and women should be as close to equal as possible.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 03:36 PM
1

If you had turned down your "I'm offended" klaxon, you might've noticed that my post was an analysis of how society treats male and female sexuality and not an espousal of belief. Fuck off to r/SRS if you think signposting out-of-context posts is a valid way of starting meaningful discussion.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 03:27 PM
9

There are plenty of programs that PBS offers that a girl would have absolutely no interest in. You can't cater for everyone without occasionally excluding someone.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 03:16 PM
1

When will it be cool to joke about murder-suicides?
/r/MensRights15/12/12 03:12 PM
2

I was posting how society treats male and female sexuality, not my actual beliefs.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 03:09 PM
2

It's not cool to tell people not to murder their families? Noted.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 03:08 PM
2

So, as men tend to abuse women physically, women tend to abuse men emotionally. [Citation needed.] Do we campaign for more men to look into pre-nups before marriage? Pre-nuptial agreements often fail in courts. And that anyone who says you shouldn’t need one is potentially abusive? Ah, hysterics, exactly what the MRM needs. Do we start campaigning more for prostate cancer health and awareness and end the demonization of the prostate exam? Not a bad idea, but we did just have 'Movember' which was…
/r/MensRights15/12/12 11:50 AM
-1

Maybe it's because, historically, sexism was mainly practised against one group of people; women and propagated by one group of people; men. Racism has majorly affected every race throughout history, both victimisation and propagation.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 11:26 AM
-2

The 'objective' behind the MRM is to tackle inequalities that men face, but the motive of the majority of MRAs I've encountered is to shake fists at feminism. It is an unfortunate truth that most of our members don't want to bring men forward, they want to drag women back.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 11:21 AM
68

Those misogynists. Womyn are beautiful, sexual creatures and if you don't want to have sex with them, you're misogynist scum.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 11:17 AM
3

We can pay for men to pleasure themselves but we can't pay for birth control? Where's the fairness in that? I think that's really the crux of the issue. A woman using birth control is an expression of her rights as a powerful womyn. A man using a sexual aid like Viagra is just trying to pleasure himself. The intimacy, affection and comfort of a loving sexual experience is an integral part of femininity, but just a disgusting display of misogyny and perversion by men.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 09:30 AM
-10

If you're going to commit suicide anyway, don't kill your family first. Shit never looks good in the news afterwards.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 09:25 AM
26

What a fucking moron. When will people like this stop getting into positions of authority?
/r/MensRights14/12/12 09:26 AM
1

Trigger warning you misandrist/rapist.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 05:59 PM
2

Just fishing for angry clicks and comments. Don't give her either.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 05:56 PM
5

Because of the patriarchy. Women get looked after, men do the looking after. If a man can't look after himself, he's left to the wolves.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 05:52 PM
2

I could pull the 'can't discriminate against yourself' trope out, but I'll settle for the simple fact that there will not be a big overlap between those that identify as a feminist and those that identify as an MRA on this petition.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 01:50 AM
2

The motive you're trying to impute is an interesting one, but I don't buy that that was the motive here and even if it were, I don't think this attracts any positive attention to the cause at all. How can we say that we're not an anti-women group when we are hanging our hats around this?
/r/MensRights13/12/12 01:31 AM
0

I'm speculating, much like we all are. Ahhh, not so easy when you put things in context, eh?
/r/MensRights13/12/12 01:25 AM
20

When did teachers get castrated in this way? Why is it girls reporting sexual offences on male teachers, not male students on female teachers? These are questions that must be asked.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 11:43 PM
-1

Wouldn't you rather no-one gets drafted than everyone gets drafted? Having the women and children on a sinking ship won't stop you from drowning.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 11:20 PM
-1

I'm speculating, much like we all are. I'm not sure where you get that she "remembers the entire night," as far as I can see the only details that she knows for certain are: She drank alcohol. She wore shorts. She flirted. She was left in a parking garage staircase. That does not sound like a "whole night" to me, does it to you? I feel I should elaborate on what drinking means in a social context, too. You don't start the night drunk, you start the night sober and gradually become intoxicated by…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 11:18 PM
-2

Some things must be stated unambiguously.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 10:56 PM
-9

This is why the men's rights movement is a failure. This is why MRAs are viewed as misogynists. Rather than starting a petitition that would improve men's rights, you would rather punish those pesky women.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 10:46 PM
-1

Both people are drunk they flirt (flirting is mentioned in the girls poster so don't say I invented it) then they have sex. First line in and you've fucked it up already. You've already acknowledged that this isn't my original example, which makes it a strawman. I know you're going to get antsy and say that I'm dodging the question; I'm not, I'm simply not going to entertain your strawman argument. (BTW I never implied that "people are raped by dangerous situations") You said, and I'm paraphrasi…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 10:43 PM
0

How have I changed the situation? Here is the original situation: Or, third option; she drank too much alcohol and he had sex with her semi-conscious body, thinking that because she didn't explicitly refuse, she must consent. He views the incident as him seducing a woman, she views it as him taking advantage of her drunken state. Now, let's check the situation you invented: You have a Woman, who is drunk, and a man who is drunk. They flirt, then they start making out and having sex, the next day…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 09:33 PM
2

Now, how about we alter the black rights movement to the Negro Integration Community Effort (or NICE) the women's rights movement to the Feminist Union Network or (FUN) the gay rights movement to Gay Alliance for Moving Equality Socially or (GAMES) and then FUN, NICE, GAMES and the AltMRAs can all go fuck eachother in a pile of steamy, cooperative, egalitarian fun. I actually agree with the bullet-point version of this, without all the insinuation that men should just be sycophantic underlings t…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 09:24 PM
-1

There's a problem there. There really isn't. The problem is in your head. So lets analyze. Lets. They flirt, then they start making out and having sex, the next day the woman realizes that they had sex, she thinks, I was too drunk to give consent, so I was raped. Two lines in and already you've changed the situation entirely, making this entire analysis a strawman and thus totally worthless to the topic at hand. It is relevant, that's why I'm advising people to be aware and not put themselves in…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 09:10 PM
-2

No, it doesn't.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 09:08 PM
-3

So what's the correct position to take as to not be labelled a rape enabler or apologist? The 'correct position' is the one where you don't senselessly reapportion blame for no reason other than your own bigotry. People aren't raped by dangerous situations, they're raped by people. So what if the guy didn't realize how drunk she is because he's drunk himself, and actually believes they're having consensual sex. The next day she says you raped me. What then? The man is a rapist but doesn't realis…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 08:25 PM
-5

Why don't you post these as one topic and stop cluttering up the subreddit?
/r/MensRights12/12/12 08:16 PM
-4

But saying that to the slut walkers will get you branded a rape apologist. Probably because it's something a rape apologist would say.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 07:50 PM
-2

Or, third option; she drank too much alcohol and he had sex with her semi-conscious body, thinking that because she didn't explicitly refuse, she must consent. He views the incident as him seducing a woman, she views it as him taking advantage of her drunken state.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 07:34 PM
1

Peyote: Not even once.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 07:18 PM
2

Because despite having almost no information (and contrary to the information you have been given) on the topic, you've fabricated a narrative in which the woman, rather than being the victim of rape, is a cheating harlot. I can't imagine why anyone would be so keen to absolve the man and indict the woman without being prejudiced.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 07:14 PM
2

Clearly.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 06:38 PM
1

A man flirts with a girl, plies her with alcohol and then has sex with her semi-conscious body, presuming that "she didn't say no" and therefore consented.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 06:37 PM
-4

My speculation bigoted conjecture: FTFY.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 06:33 PM
-1

By your own argument, why should we assume that Josh Brent is capable of moving Brown? He is a professional athlete of approximately the same size. He also proved that he was capable by performing the rescue, albeit too late. I don't know that Brent is bigger than Brown Google. Do we know how long after the car flipped and caught fire that McWilliams arrived? I didn't notice that in the article. This would only further incriminate Brent. You're absolving her of responsibility since she wasn't pa…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 06:17 PM
0

Not sure how the survey was performed, I found it weird too. But since I've seen 4 of them in various papers and sites, I chose to trust them, if just a little bit. "Papers and sites" usually list their methods of how they obtain evidence... but let me just save you some trouble; it's a bullshit statistic with no basis in reality. If between three and seven out of ten men would rape if they could get away with it, you would've been raped ennumerable times already in your life. Rape would be as c…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 05:52 PM
-1

I believe that anyone who has the power or ability to take action should do so. What makes you think that she had the power or ability to do so? It's incredibly difficult to move an unresponsive person who is lighter than you, let alone one who is bigger than you and strapped into a car that is on fire. The fact is, we don't know that she could've done anything, even if she tried, but it's unlikely she would've been able to as Brown is larger than her, strapped into a flaming car that is flipped…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 05:45 PM
1

everything from 30 to nearly 70 percent of all men are willing to commit rape if they won't be caught. How could anyone work this statistic out, outside of plain old bullshitting? Asking men, "Would you rape someone if you could get away with it?" the only reason men choose relationships and marriage over just whoring around is more sex, ...what? So, in order to get more sex, we'd obligate ourselves to a single person and socially-and-monetarily castrate ourselves, rather than just... sleeping w…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 05:26 PM
2

Seriously? So since there's a man there, the woman has no responsibility to save someone's life? It's not a case of "since there's a man there." Since it was his friends, his car, his fault and he is a professional athlete, the onus is on him to do any rescuing and heavy-lifting. How could a middle-aged woman even go about moving a 250lb man from a car that is both flipped and on fire? And why would the responsibility fall to her, a random passerby and not the 250lb professional athlete who caus…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 05:17 PM
-1

What, praytell, should the woman have done? Dove into the upside-down, flaming car to rescue the 250lb man with her bare hands? It was a middle-aged woman coming across a car crash, with another 250lb+ professional athlete on-scene, and she gets chewed out for not risking her life? Fuck me, this place is pathetic when it wants to be.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 04:56 PM
14

I can guarantee she'll get off with some sympathetic words from the judge and a coy shifting of blame to the man.
/r/MensRights06/12/12 08:34 AM
11

Oh dear, must we do this? Can we not just accept rape is a terrible crime without having to constantly compare it to other bad things?
/r/MensRights06/12/12 08:29 AM
0

Are you actually defending Michael Kimmel ? "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle Sure , he's allowed to have an opinion Right, and no-one forced you to hear his, did they? Your opinion on its value aside, he is much more educated than the average bear on the topic at hand. Go ahead and look him up on Wikipedia. Have you written that many peer-reviewed articles?
/r/MensRights05/12/12 04:37 PM
-1

No, there is nothing wrong with men and masculinity. Debatable. I'd say the inclination towards sexuality and violence- sometimes, combining the two- borne from our practically reptilian brains is an issue. No, men don't need to change. Why not? Are men faring especially well, outside of the business world? Would this subreddit be necessary if there wasn't some innate desire for change? No, you don't get to define what it is to be a man. Because? There is no divinely-appointed arbiter for mascul…
/r/MensRights05/12/12 01:46 PM
1

I have had in-depth discussions with my female friends about our porn habits, including some friends who were decidedly anti-porn. Some people are too sensitive about their sexuality.
/r/MensRights05/12/12 01:28 PM
5

If a man was reading an erotic novel on the bus, no-one would bat an eye. If a woman was reading Gaping Holes Monthly on the bus, people would challenge her. A pornographic magazine is not the same as a 250 page book.
/r/MensRights05/12/12 01:26 PM
2

LOL, did you just compare MRAs to black people and homosexuals? Yup. Some black people and homosexuals are also MRAs. Some black people are homosexuals. Funny old world, right? You weren't born an MRA through genetics. You chose to associate yourself with the MRM. I have no idea what the relevance of this is. Are all women born feminists? Were the Black Panthers actually born from panthers? The MRM is an ideology, a party of sorts, and therefore subject to criticism. Yes, criticism. Not blind an…
/r/MensRights04/12/12 11:54 AM
1

Whilst I agree with most of your point, I don't think experiencing life in a subjective way can really be described as a 'feminine tendency.' I don't think there's a person alive, man, woman or otherwise who can say they have an objective outlook on life.
/r/MensRights03/12/12 04:20 PM
12

They've confused 'hate speech' with 'speech that I hate,' tragically.
/r/MensRights03/12/12 01:33 PM
6

Look at this shitlord implying that only men can be doctors or poets. How can all men be so stupid and sexist? Look at how he reinforces the patriarchy by declaring what is and isn't a parody or out of "cont"ext. Nice job sneaking in a bastardization of 'cunt' you shitlord. By the way, my gender-variant, bigotry approved underwear is full of my urine bohoohoohooohoooooo :'(
/r/MensRights03/12/12 01:02 PM
14

That would have a much more intellectually-stimulating statement. Yes, it would have, because rather than being a pissy, passive-aggressive, interminably whining ignoramus, you'd be making a clear, morally provocative statement that could lead to interesting debate and discussion. No matter how hateful the statement would be, at least you'd be contributing to the discussion, not hoping for backrubs and tissues for your piss-soaked groin.
/r/MensRights03/12/12 12:49 PM
13

Let's extrapolae this logic; "Some MRAs are misogynists, therefore this community of MRAs must be responsible for misogyny on YouTuibe." "Some radfems are violent criminals (as evidenced by this video) therefore r/SRS must be responsible for the riots in London." Yes, some MRAs are misogynists, exactly like how some black people are racists, some gay people are heterophobic and some females are misandrists. These are facts. However, you can't just take the actions of individuals and apply them t…
/r/MensRights03/12/12 12:44 PM
0

And did you seriously compare rape apologia to farming? I think he did. Better go piss your pants and cry ineffectively for a few hours.
/r/MensRights03/12/12 12:33 PM
18

Yeah, after all, YouTube is our private domain and not one of the five most viewed websites in the world, right? Go be intellectually-void elsewhere.
/r/MensRights03/12/12 12:32 PM
2

Anglo-masculinity English masculinity...?
/r/MensRights03/12/12 02:20 AM
1

So... not all branches, then?
/r/MensRights02/12/12 01:35 PM
3

Female privilege is shoving a police officer and coming away unscathed.
/r/MensRights02/12/12 01:34 PM
1

Curious how many of these "I need feminism because..." are a response to female henpecking, rather than male chauvinism.
/r/MensRights02/12/12 11:59 AM
10

I wonder how many other men feel this way? Or how many men feel this way but don't speak out for fear of social reprisal? Even after claiming to be against circumcision, the female doctor still tells the poor guy to "man-up." Imagine if I told a rape victim that? There would be outrage.
/r/MensRights30/11/12 01:57 PM
6

No, I'm pretty sure the parent has a very strong obligation to find out if using a pair of unsterilised kitchen scissors to mutilate their infants genitals has any risks.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 06:55 PM
1

No, see, they were pretending to be women, therefore they're misogynists for crossdressing without being transgender (check their cis privilege?) and the rape was actually a rape on all women as an example of the patriarchy. If they didn't want to get raped, they shouldn't have dressed as women.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 04:20 PM
1

Yes, that is by definition what a 'serial' killer is, consisting of a series. I'm sure there are a significant number of people who have murdered more than one but have avoided detection by diversity. Cough.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 04:01 PM
7

Who needs to be told that severing a significant portion a flesh from an infants genitals might have risks?
/r/MensRights29/11/12 03:56 PM
1

I'm afraid that's not really how the legal system works. Once you have a couple of case examples, the legal system can pretty much absolve itself by citing those case examples as a precedent for its behaviour. It's total BS, but it's the way things work.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 09:09 AM
-4

It's worth noting that this tactic has come about from male lawyers plying their female clients in divorce cases. For every money-grubbing, controlling woman, there is a snivelling, spineless lawyer giving her legal armaments. It's all well-and-good to shake our fist at those spiteful women but it's lawyers who have facilitated and fostered this.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 08:59 AM
4

What a shame. If she had told the court of her plans, they probably would've given her 200% of her husband's salary and then sentenced the man for not having it.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 08:48 AM
-2

On the above post alone, I disagree. If you have more evidence to choose from, fair enough, I'm just calling it as I see it.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 01:26 PM
1

Yup. It's a sad state of affairs, but it's a cause I believe in and won't let the tyranny of the majority get me down.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 12:38 PM
1

I didn't want to spell it out for you as to not insult your intelligence but it seems I will have to. What, praytell, is forcing you to do so? Here is bartonar's post: Actually, no, what you mean is; "Here is bartonar's post with lots of insertions by myself:" Here is bartonar's post: Despite that, it'll be used as 'evidence' that in an antiseptic environment with trained, skilled medical personnel there's risk of death from blood loss. I'll break it down much more clearly and concisely than you…
/r/MensRights27/11/12 12:37 PM
1

Just a note, it needs to be a lower case x in /mode NickName +x
/r/MensRights27/11/12 12:00 PM
1

On the above post alone, I disagree. If you have more evidence to choose from, fair enough, I'm just calling it as I see it.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 11:48 AM
4

I think you're reaching a fair bit there. Intact means undamaged, free of injury. An 'non-intact man' connotes a man that has been harmed, damaged or injured in some way and that is how a significant amount of circumcised men feel.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 09:49 AM
1

That's not what he was saying; he was highlighting how ludicrous the general attitude to MGM is, that even when we know it's potentially fatal, we accept it as a necessary risk in a court of law. The jury will buy it, too, for fear of offending.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 09:44 AM
14

You're wasting your time. No matter what, they are the most oppressed, they have undergone more hardships than we can ever imagine, we don't know suffering the way they do. It's pathetic, I know, but it's the way they view the world.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 09:22 AM
1

what are you, a bunch of fucking chimpanzees? You could be forgiven for thinking so. The men's rights movement seems far more interested in spiting women than empowering men and it is a real shame.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 09:19 AM
0

Fuck me, why am I now being petitioned to legislate capital punishment? What the fuck is going on in this thread?
/r/MensRights27/11/12 01:03 AM
3

She used his name, his school, his email address He contacted her first. He supplied those details to her. There is no recognised obligation to privacy here, outside of a moral one. called him a rapist Nope. It's very coyly written. It asks leading questions, as one would of a hostile witness, and very blatantly leads you to that conclusion but it does not make that conclusion itself. It is not a statement of fact, it is a piece of rhetoric. I wish as much as you do that we could do something to…
/r/MensRights27/11/12 12:10 AM
1

And still a total waste of time and money as no Western court system would ever find in this guys favour. Even discounting prejudice in the courts, defamation cases are notoriously hard to win as free speech guarantees so much.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:52 PM
5

...if your armpit hair raises when you're angry, I am never challenging your dominance in the pack.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:42 PM
0

Yes, it has been a long day, perhaps time I put the mouse down for the night. 'preciate the debate, until next time!
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:27 PM
2

Hairs along the back of an animal that rise when it is angry or alarmed.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:11 PM
0

I honestly can't answer. I believe wholeheartedly in the goodness of humanity. No matter how unlikely it is, it is an ideological goal, not a realistic target. Saying that we should instead strive for violence only in self-defence is, in practice, no different and no more realistic than no-one hitting eachother. If no-one ever hit eachother, there'd be no need for self-defence, so it is practically oxymoronic to say that we should strive for violence in self-defence. I really can't believe a fli…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:09 PM
2

Judges and prosecutors don't go to the parts of town where they might be held accountable for their misdeeds.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:55 PM
8

I have no problem with people making unreasonable threats to get themselves out of legitimately difficult situations, it's when people follow through on unreasonable threats to put other people into difficult situations that gets my hackles up.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:51 PM
1

No, it isn't.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:49 PM
0

But that's never going to happen. But people only being violent in self-defence is?! no violence ever, which presumably could include when you are being attacked, restrained, or otherwise violated. If no-one was ever violent, how could any of these situations arise?! Am I being trolled here? Have several dogs or smaller mammals learned to type and coordinate debate efforts on obscure webforums?
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:47 PM
2

And achieve nothing besides wasting all your money on a lawyer.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:42 PM
3

You made the mistake of being civil with someone who isn't civilised. I'm not sure what reaction you were expecting, but as a neutral party, your emails come off as very reasonable whilst she comes off as a paint-huffing rabies victim. I'd do your best to forget about it and move on.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:42 PM
8

I can pretty much guarantee you now that she'll get off with either no prison-time or a pathetic token sentencing.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:34 PM
0

If no-one was ever violent to anyone, no-one would ever need defending, would they? This doesn't require a lot of brainpower and I don't know how multiple people are struggling with the concept.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:29 PM
2

Re-reading my post, it does seem a little... snappy. My apologies, good sir.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 08:14 PM
16

I've had both. They're both shit and we'd do better not to compare them.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 06:05 PM
-2

We definitely promote our own merits, I'm too busy (read: lazy) to do it myself, but I'm fairly confident that if you were to break down the post demographics here, you would find more 'anti-female' posts than you would 'pro-male' ones. Obviously, conjecture is not an argument so I'm not expecting you to assign any credibility to this musing. I'm of the opinion that equality can only be grasped, equally, which is why the sheer volume of potshotting that goes on between the MRM and the various fe…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 06:00 PM
0

If you can find a single successful social movement that operated on revoking the merits of others rather than promoting its own merits, then I will cede the point but until that time I am steadfast in my position. I, too, appreciate the debate. Rational discourse always seems to give way to frothy-mouthed bile in most subreddits.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 03:03 PM
3

Nailed it. Now, to force it into the MRM vernacular...
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:59 PM
-1

Basically what I am saying is that to achieve a society of non-violence, all violence has to have a social stigma, woman on man violence included. I totally agree with this, but my overarching point is that the MRM should not hang it's hat on the hook of 'women have too many rights' but instead, 'men need more rights.' Every post that focuses on descalating feminism is a waste of time.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:23 PM
1

It shows a man forcing sex on a woman who initially resists but then enjoys it. If that isn't glorifying rape, I'm not sure what is.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:21 PM
-1

I'm confused myself every time I read this subreddit. Don't give women special privileges... except when they post something positive here in which case give them all the special privileges they want.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:10 PM
-6

Please see my other posts where I detailed why this attitude is the exact reason the MRM is a persistent failure.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:06 PM
0

It's a good thing I don't believe that violence is never the answer then, eh?
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:05 PM
1

He asked for a movie that glorifies men raping females, I provided one. Don't sip from the bottle if you don't like the flavour. Shrug.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:04 PM
3

It does, but I fear people will leap to discredit it for containing the word 'slave.'
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:03 PM
-1

Incorrect, i would only peg them back until they are in-line with the rights afforded to men No you are incorrect because my point is to advance male rights, not to hold back women's, You're becoming increasingly inconsistent, here. Except according to you men should be 100% pacifistic in response to female violence Please quote where I specifically stated that one gender shouldn't retaliate against the other. There's only been a few posts between us, you should have no trouble finding it.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 01:02 PM
-1

Incorrect, i would only peg them back until they are in-line with the rights afforded to men. So... not incorrect, then? Nope Not a rebuttal. how do you explain this quote from yourself Easy. I'd rather violence doesn't exist at all, but if someone feels compelled to act in a violent way I think retribution should be swift and effective. It seems to view male on male violence as acceptable and you are white-knighting because you don't like the idea of women being hit. I don't like the idea of an…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 12:56 PM
28

This is not an appropriate platform to seek advice. As much as everyone here would love to help you, none of us are qualified to deal with this. You need to speak to your father, if he is around and failing that, a counsellor at your school. edit: But also, holy shit that sounds like a terrible situation to be in. You have my sympathy.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 12:49 PM
-3

Because i recognise the reality of the situation, not even in 100 years can we achieve a society of complete non-violence Another reason the MRM is doomed to failure. Pessimism is not justification here, I'm afraid. nd that occasionally women have to lose out in order for equality, we can't always have everyone win. If you're specifically aiming to 'peg back' women's rights whilst doing nothing to bolster men's rights, you are a misogynist. Your actions are motivated by spite towards women, not …
/r/MensRights26/11/12 12:46 PM
-2

How is anyone supposed to take us seriously as a political or social movement when our members advocate violence over pacifism? People will read your statement and (rightfully) think you're more interested in hitting women than you are stopping men from being hit. Your statement is just so revealing about the mentality of the average MRA; it's not about lifting men up, it's about bringing women down. It's not about empowering men, it's about punishing women. It's not an independent social moveme…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 12:40 PM
-1

Personally i believe it is easier to increase the acceptability of striking women, then to make it unacceptable to strike men. This is the exact reason why MRAs are the men's rights movements worst enemy.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 12:27 PM
0

You realise that Wichelle's suggestion is no more achievable, right? Achievability has very little to do with ideology.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 12:18 PM
14

Father's "rights?" Are we living in the same society? We need to stop using this phrase as fathers have no rights whatsoever in our society. 'Father's temporary-and-easily-withdrawn parental luxury' seems much more apt to me.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 12:17 PM
-12

Protip: No-one would know you're a woman if you didn't mention it. Lose the passive-aggressive 'lost sheep in Wolftown' routine, don't be an idiot and you'll be fine here.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 12:09 PM
0

How about no one hits anyone unless it's in self defence or in defence of another person. ...how is that better to "don't hit eachother at all?"
/r/MensRights26/11/12 12:00 PM
0

I mean, audit and monitor the spending of any money provided to them that's been allocated to the care of the children in the care. Meaning child support and any government entitlements. You realise that makes absolutely zero sense, right? If I had $100, needed $100 of food and I was given another $100 but told I could only spend it on food, guess what I'd do? Spend that $100 on food and spend my own $100 on frivolous shit, safely out of the eye of your creepy, oppressive and authoritarian regim…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:48 AM
12

Or, we could just not hit eachother at all and we wouldn't need any of this.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:07 AM
2

...and...?
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:05 AM
2

It's actually a pretty common reaction to having your tongue damaged. After a certain point, instincts kick in and you will flail wildly to try and free yourself.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:50 AM
-4

It's a bit bizarre that you'd openly make this request, but there are a couple. Probably the most famous example is Straw Dogs which features a scene where a male character forces himself on a female character who eventually starts enjoying it. Let's see how r/mensrights can spin this one!
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:46 AM
12

You mean a Disney movie, aimed at children, with a female protagonist, based entirely around role-reversal, might have reversed gender roles? And that pertains not only to the king, but to every single man or boy in that movie. Nonsense. What about the three sons? The other clan-leaders? Give this to an asexual alien come to earth, and they will conclude based on this movie, that men are the laughing-stock and pets of women. Jesus, let's hope no asexual aliens deign to land and watch only one mo…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:42 AM
4

Why is a woman commenting on men's issues anyway? They don't understand because they don't know oppression gang-rape patriarchal misogyny.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 09:28 PM
6

The virginity is strong in this one.
/r/seduction16/11/12 09:16 AM
0

Why should he be given an appeal? The case was pretty much air-tight with very little controversy over the verdict.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 03:34 PM
1

Gasp. I haven't ever seen someone complain about that before. You're the most original thing since sliced bread.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 11:33 PM
6

sexual assault Something tells me that the victim is not a willing participant in the act. Good job trying to shoehorn in an unnecessary and bitter side-comment, though.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 09:19 AM
36

It says that half of sexual assaults are committed by men who are drinking. If statements of fact upset you, you're probably best off avoiding reading things.
/r/MensRights18/08/12 12:06 AM
1

I read the thread. You're in the wrong.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 08:12 PM
3

I damn well expect every single one of the 36,000 subscribers to donate. This is the single biggest opportunity the MRM has got in the 21st Century and it is time to step up.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 10:51 PM
2

Doesn't it seem like sound advice to avoid calling your passengers derogatory names?
/r/MensRights30/05/12 10:06 PM
3

Utterly, utterly sickening.
/r/MensRights30/05/12 09:18 PM
1

Hahahahahahahahaha.
/r/MensRights30/05/12 04:11 PM
3

I'm happy to give you the benefit of the doubt and believe you meant no harm, but saying things like such things are NOT oppression, they are liberating. Is deeply, deeply offensive to those of us who have been oppressed for nothing more than the way they speak, act or feel. It is perfectly okay for men to be like you- macho, butch, however you want to describe it- but the issue is that society still denigrates those men who aren't that way. Unless everyone takes a stand against this, nothing wi…
/r/MensRights30/05/12 02:48 PM
5

to say that such things are NOT oppression, they are liberating. Well, you're not being oppressed by them, so you're in no position to make that sort of judgement. Do you think that young, gay males feel better about hating sports and hunting because you haven't even been called a 'faggot'? The entire idea that gender is a social construct and that we are basicly all the same until culture shapes us into men or women is feminist hogwash imho That is exactly the opposite of the point of that post…
/r/MensRights30/05/12 02:30 PM
5

I would speak to your doctor about this. Getting medical advice from strangers is a risky affair.
/r/MensRights30/05/12 02:13 PM
14

Congratulations? What are you hoping to get out of this? A hearty slap on the back for being you?
/r/MensRights30/05/12 02:12 PM
1

I think the main issue with that line of thought is the way it is presented. In most of the cases I've seen, the sentiment is expressed with no accompanying sympathy or compassion; a cold, inhuman statement. I think there is nothing wrong with suggesting that women should take care to avoid situations in which they are vulnerable, so long as it is that; a suggestion. Not advice-after-the-fact. Too often it is presented as; "If she had been more careful, she wouldn't have been raped." This helps …
/r/MensRights30/05/12 12:15 AM
7

Just re: this- I think it's polite for whoever did the inviting to do the paying, irrespective of gender.
/r/MensRights29/05/12 11:09 PM
3

No, I'm afraid I was being sarcastic. If something as boldly moronic as that arises in this subreddit and it has positive votes, you should question it as sarcasm. :P
/r/MensRights28/05/12 06:29 PM
3

whoosh
/r/MensRights28/05/12 05:26 PM
-4

I think he should be allowed one 'free' rape. He was convicted for it, after all. /s
/r/MensRights28/05/12 12:08 PM
1

Whilst I think the idea that one gender sits more offensively than the other is utterly bonkers, I would totally go for a law that meant everyone had to sit a certain way on public transport. It annoys me to no end when I see someone with their feet on the seat (it seems to be more women than men, they're expressing their matriarchy power over us!!!1) or sitting with their bag on the seat next to them when there are people standing.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 12:06 PM
1

The Bible is a lot like safety instructions from the 50s; seemed like sound advice at the time, but in practice everyone is dying from Aspestos poisoning.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 10:51 AM
3

You think you're enlightened, but really you're just as constrained by society's gender roles as everyone else. All the pretension of a modern man with none of the integrity. Sickening.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 10:20 AM
2

Occasionally I'll actively encourage a girl to think that I'm gay. It's amazing how quickly people change if they think there's nothing that can be gained from your attraction towards them.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 10:18 AM
1

This is why I am hesitant to engage someone who uses such tactics. If you're willing to demonstrate better practice in the future, then by all means, I will strive to engage you appropriately.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 12:45 AM
1

If I did that, then you wouldnt have any way to discredit me. I will quote the post I see when I initially go to my letterbox, despite seeing it change every time I hit refresh. You are discrediting yourself by asking me to provide an answer to one post and then overtly changing that post without making it clear such a change has taken place. We have "rightsbot," a program designed to capture and preserve text-topics in their original state because in the past, people would post messages and the…
/r/MensRights28/05/12 12:26 AM
1

Here's an idea; don't hit 'save' until you think your posts are sufficiently "bolstered." Thank you for admitting my genius. I am very flattered by your honesty but I politely decline. If you really insist that you must get to caress me, respond with: "If I did that, then you wouldnt have any way to discredit me."
/r/MensRights28/05/12 12:16 AM
1

Ahhh, and so you return to posthumously editing your posts without acknowledgement. As I've said before, that is cowardly, manipulative and means I cannot even attempt to engage you on any intellectual level because you will only move the goalposts to suit your agenda. If you think I am a genius who can do no wrong and you thoroughly ache for the day you can lovingly caress my loins, respond with "Irrevelant argument, my edits only go to bolster my argument, and you complain as a way to discredi…
/r/MensRights28/05/12 12:08 AM
6

Thanks!
/r/MensRights28/05/12 12:04 AM
22

whoosh
/r/MensRights28/05/12 12:00 AM
6

Why do they need to be prominent? Why aren't you demanding Redcoriff provide evidence of the feminists who he's citing? There is at least one poster on this board, whose username escapes me- and I apologise for that- that honestly feels that suffrage for women was a mistake. I'm not going to identify one of my real life acquaintances to please you, either. I would not be satisfied with this answer and I don't expect you to be, but it's the only one you're going to get.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:57 PM
7

It really does bear (bare?) thinking about.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:50 PM
59

I can't help but think you're being sarcastic. Aren't you aware that women seldom commit crimes? Men are scientifically always violent criminals and if you disagree you're a bigot. End of.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:49 PM
1

If we're using the definition society generally agrees upon, the dictionary definition of feminist- someone who advocates equal rights for women- then yes, I would be considered a feminist. I'm sure you have your own warped, distorted and biased view of what a feminist is, but I simply won't define myself by your standards. :)
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:48 PM
9

I don't feel 'dirty' because I am a man. My body hair, natural fragrance and rough-and-tumble personality makes me feel like a beast in only good ways. Have an upvote because this is an interesting topic.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:22 PM
0

Don't eat shellfish.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 10:45 PM
1

Abortion is biologically restricted to a certain gender; either gender can have sex (consentual or otherwise) with either gender. If you really think that men perpetrate sex against women in "99% of cases" then you are the sexist, not me.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 09:29 PM
0

I was quite careful to keep my posts gender-free, so I'd appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth irrespective of that.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:58 PM
9

Well- and I mean this sincerely- good job for spinning the metaphor back, that was quite clever rhetorically, but I'm afraid I simply disagree. Biscuits?
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:39 PM
0

Yes, I did raise an implausible scenario, hence; "so did I." I raised an implausible scenario in response to another implausible scenario; that society should/would "stop moving towards being a bunch of fucking pussies."
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:38 PM
95

Hopefully he'll win the civil suit and skin them for all they're worth. Maybe someone should look into contacting the man- perhaps even funding his civil suit should it be necessary.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:36 PM
0

He proposed something implausible and nigh-impossible to implement, so did I.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:32 PM
10

You're still using one bad apple to disregard an entire orchard. If something is a common theme amongst a subset, disregarding it as nonsense is a foolish thing to do.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:30 PM
6

Just goes to show you, you lie down with dogs and you will get fleas. I make an ardent point of avoiding anyone whose parentage is so senselessly wealthy because they always, always prove to be poisonous. Assuming that the young man didn't assault and/or rape her, then he has had his educational life ruined out of spite and malice, a prissy daddy's-little-girl using her wealth to make her life easier at the expense of another human. I can only hope she pays the price for it, but let's face it, n…
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:26 PM
0

Well, go start r/uglypeoplesrights and post it there? You don't have the right to try and seduce someone, you have a consequential privilege granted by freedom of expression. Until there's a law passed that makes it illegal for men to attempt seduction, this is not a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:12 PM
10

I have met men's rights activists, both online and offline, who think that women are the inferior sex and should not be allowed to vote. Does that mean I should tar all MRAs with the same brush?
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:11 PM
15

This is not typical feminist rhetoric by any stretch. Don't use an extremist example to disregard the entirety of something, that is poor form and makes us look bad.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 07:56 PM
16

I'm fairly certain this blog is satirical, having read more than one article.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 07:50 PM
7

What can I say? I just love rape.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 07:40 PM
12

Psychotic delusion.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 07:20 PM
4

This is not a men's rights issue. Women are entitled to be fed up of people trying to seduce them.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 06:43 PM
0

How is my approach implausible? Make a law so if there's a false accusation of rape the accuser is punished for it. Two things. One, you made no mention of this approach in the post I responded to, you simply stated that "it would be far better if we did away with the stupid idea" hence my response that it's implausible. Two, there are laws against murder, does murder still exist? Yes. I agree that falsely accusing someone should have serious consequences, but it would by no means stop it happen…
/r/MensRights27/05/12 06:23 PM
-3

It would be far better if no-one ever raped anyone. If we're proposing implausible and nigh-impossible solutions to tangible problems, then that is my solution. However, since theoretical fixes mean nothing in non-theoretical problems, my solution is the obvious one. Outside of this one sentence, I'm not even going to address your second paragraph because it always leads in the same bullshit circles; I say "if you're drunk, you can't consent" then you say "that's people shirking their responsibi…
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:47 PM
-7

I'd rather people stop raping eachother, then no-one could possibly be falsely accused.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:33 PM
0

You can be accused of murder, genocide, sex with a minor, petty theft, blasphemy, whatever, at any time and any place. If people are going to be accused of heinous crimes anyway, surely it stands to reason that you should take the necessary steps to avoid being convicted for it? I'd rather be accused and acquitted of rape than accused and convicted.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:22 PM
-1

It shouldn't be a problem, and yet it is. Where you assign the failure- failure to obtain consent, or failure to withdraw consent- is irrelevant. I would sooner everyone demand consent or refuse sex and no-one get raped than everyone use their judgement and some people get raped.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:12 PM
-3

I find it difficult to believe that someone could prove beyond reasonable doubt that you raped them despite having no opportunity to do so and specifically refusing an opportunity to do so.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:08 PM
-3

Ehhhhhh, I'm iffy to commit to saying consent should ever be presumed because it opens the door to technicalities and dilution.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:05 PM
2

Irrespective of what you like, we live in a culture where people have sex- the consent is debatable- and then are prosecuted for it. It stands to reason that the easiest way to avoid being accused of rape is to avoid situations where someone can construct that you've raped them.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 04:59 PM
0

Why? We are an enlightened society who decidedly agree that dancing is a tribalistic behaviour we indulge in for enjoyment. Whilst it has come to be sexualised, that is not an inherent acknowledgement that we are tribalised and sexualised people.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 04:56 PM
17

Unfortunately, it's considered hilarious to think that a man would refuse sex. Role-reversal in sexual harassment is practically always for comedic purposes. Men certainly can't ever be credible victims of sexual assault in the media- after all, THEY DROPED THE SOAP LOL!!!11 or LOL I SHURE WUDNT TURN DOWN SEX WITH JENFER ANISTON!!11 LOL!!!1 WHAT A PUSSY.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 04:38 PM
3

Personally, I think we should err on the side of caution and avoid sleeping with women who might later accuse us of rape. If a woman is drunk, don't sleep with her- even if she clearly consents. I wouldn't allow my friend to drive his car if he had had even a single drink, so I won't allow a person access to my genitals with the same proviso.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 04:28 PM
1

The fact 28 people upvoted it and one person thought to submitted it is bad enough.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 02:44 PM
1

Gotta bake the cookies to get rid of the kookies, as my fictitious grandmother used to say!
/r/MensRights27/05/12 01:04 PM
1

It is, and it is incredibly disappointing. We are giving up being the intellectual superiors to pettily attack irrelevant people.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 12:54 PM
1

If we're talking academia, you are uneducated. I don't expect anyone to have a degree to be educated on the men's rights movement, however, you are totally uneducated on it. Why should I spend my valuable time educating someone who has already disavowed the movement? "Closed eyes see nothing."
/r/MensRights27/05/12 12:39 PM
1

Well, actually, if you re-read the comment trail, you'll see that I already beat you by getting you to admit that you were wrong to use the word "trivial." After that, you deflected my criticism as "Oh now you're getting angry" which is a wanky form of a debate if there ever was one.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 12:36 PM
1

Well, two things. 1.) You're 18. You have not got a college education by any standard. 2.) You're uneducated on men's rights issues.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 12:34 PM
1

Now who is getting angry? ;) Look me up when you've finished puberty and we'll have a real debate, not a prissy, uneducated teenager throwing their toys out of the pram because they don't like what someone is saying.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 12:26 PM
1

Well, now you've failed to address my question, so I'll ask it again; what makes you think you're in any position to advise anyone on anything- let alone men's rights issues that you are entirely uneducated on- when you aren't in a position of authority?
/r/MensRights27/05/12 12:14 PM
1

If I look like a dick for refusing advice from someone in a far (orders of magnitude) less qualified person than myself, then I'll happily look a dick forever. Obama doesn't let Justin Bieber advise him, so why should I let you advise me?
/r/MensRights27/05/12 12:02 PM
1

Again, I'll take my political advice from someone old enough to rent a car, not an uneducated, inexperienced teenager.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:54 AM
2

You're uneducated on the men's rights movement, as evidenced by your willingness to call the intentional mutilation of children "trivial."
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:44 AM
2

I'm being awfully rude because you've offended myself and others here by denigrating our cause with baseless, uneducated rhetoric. You have waded into a subject you aren't knowledgeable about as though you are knowledgeable and are now suffering for it.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:35 AM
2

I don't buy that you meant there were "bigger issues" because you specifically used the word trivial. The sentiments are not interchangeable. Fact is, you're uneducated on the men's rights movement, inexperienced at life and if you're willing to abandon your faith and beliefs so easily, we don't want you. Nothing of value has been lost by your absence, so don't feel any obligation to return.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:26 AM
3

You have suffered from it whether you acknowledge it or not. There is no end of information regarding the loss of sexual sensitivity etc. caused by forced mutilation. Irrespective of how you feel about it, you have absolutely no right to describe it as "trivial" or as a non-issue and it is heinously insulting to all the victims of this barbarism that you would do so.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:17 AM
4

You're the one being insulting by telling all mutilation victims their suffering is "trivial." If you are insulted by someone pointing out that you're 18 and thus still adolescent, that's your own problem. The difference between my feeling passionate and your dispassion towards circumcision is that I'm not making topics telling people not to bother with it, that it isn't an issue.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:09 AM
8

An issue that affects the rights of men is not a men's rights issue? Sorry, but I think I'll take my political advice from someone who has finished puberty.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:00 AM
14

So, the intentional and widespread mutilation of children is "trivial." Good to know. Clearly you're not the kind of person that the movement requires, so off you pop and good luck with your future endeavours.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 10:51 AM
18

Must we really do this? Are we really the masculine version of SRS? I thought we were better than this. Everyone who upvoted this should feel ashamed.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 10:47 AM
1

"If the shoe fits, wear it." If you're accused of holding a viewpoint, embrace it. You're directly advocating I preach feminism by saying "If the shoe fits, wear it."
/r/MensRights27/05/12 12:26 AM
3

If that's how you feel, feel free not to return to r/mensrights. We don't need mouth-breathing idiots like you, we need rational, intelligent folks.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 12:20 AM
7

Because it's unnecessarily discriminating against pregnant women who aren't five months pregnant? What if you're four months, two weeks pregnant? Or eight weeks, but it's a difficult pregnancy? It just seems a bizarre line-in-the-sand to want drawn.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 09:33 PM
1

Seems an unnecessary alteration.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 09:18 PM
29

Nope. Pregnant women are indisputably less able-bodied than their non-pregnant counterparts. I don't really approve of the cutesy aesthesis they've tried to use and would rather it said "Pregnant women."
/r/MensRights26/05/12 07:43 PM
1

You realise that you're advocating that I spout feminist propaganda now, right? The full saying is "If the shoe fits, wear it." Some 'AntiFeminist' you are, Mr. Propagator-of-feminism.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 07:37 PM
0

Yes, she did. I will have fun insulting her (lack of) intelligence, thank you. :)
/r/MensRights26/05/12 07:29 PM
1

Hahaha, we're back to this?
/r/MensRights26/05/12 07:28 PM
1

So the issue is that men don't spout untrue bullshit? Well, I have an easy remedy for you, then: spout untrue bullshit. Men are in no way deprived of the right to claim that they can multi-task and women can't, but men choose not to.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 07:20 PM
1

Your sarcasm was wrong. Prosecutors are for criminal courts, this money was awarded for a civil suit.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 07:08 PM
5

Please don't trivialise our cause with aesthetic bullshit.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 07:05 PM
2

If the laws hadn't have been so weak in the first place, they might not have been there. The current laws encourage more men being wrongly accused- and with increasing frequency. I'd rather 100 men stand wrongly accused today than 200 men tomorrow.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 07:01 PM
1

I'm saying the punishment for false-accusation should be far more severe- I'd have it so false accusation had a mandatory prison sentence of the length of the crime accused, plus five years, plus being put on a register that robbed you of trust permanently; no credit (loans, mortgages et al.) ever again, no jobs that involved handling objects of major value, no jobs where trust was of any importance.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 06:50 PM
0

I doubt it. Judging by the other evidence of her intelligence, she spotted one or two errors and used the umbrella to avoid looking foolish for missing one.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 06:32 PM
2

Using that logic, why don't we start paying false-accusers to come forward? If we give each of them £1,000,000, then they'll be certain to come forward! Preventing crime is far more sensical than repairing it, proposing that the perpetrators of crime should be granted clemency for admitting it is a bullshit way of looking at things.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 06:31 PM
5

Yeah, I eventually caved and watched it- ensuring that she didn't get another view on her video- and if I've learned anything, it's that I'll never called her "interesting" or express any sort of interest in hearing what she thinks about anything ever again.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 02:55 PM
1

There's an expression we have in England for just such a situation. "Suck out, you mugs." I'm sorry you lost your friend, but hey, nothing of real value was lost, eh? We'll be your better friends to make up for it.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 01:55 PM
1

Anyone we want to convince would not be convinced by someone who resorts to threats of violence.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 01:38 PM
1

Curious how many of them are called Nathan. Maybe they're sore over their awful names.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 01:36 PM
9

In what way does this encourage false-accusers telling the truth? It encourages liars to indict people with heinous offences for personal gain. We shouldn't be looking for ways to make things easy for these criminals, we should be setting such an incredible deterrent that no-one wants to commit the crime in the first place.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 01:33 PM
1

My favourite part is where she used the [sic] denoter as an umbrella because she isn't well-versed enough to find all the linguistic flaws in his letter. Honestly, why anyone pays any attention to this heinous moron is beyond me.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 01:28 PM
3

I laugh in the face of physical threats. I am by no means a tough person- quite the opposite in fact- but if someone is resorting to silencing you physically, it means they can't defeat you intellectually. A Pyrrhic victory is still a victory when it comes to intellectual debate.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 12:57 PM
1

Oh, it's a video? Gross. I don't want hear voice infecting my otherwise pristine ears.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 12:54 PM
1

Does anyone have a link to where she complained about this coffee incident? I've never been able to find it.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 12:30 PM
2

How is this a men's rights issue? You sound incredibly sore about a non-issue.
/r/MensRights25/05/12 10:10 PM
4

You aren't arguing based on facts now, you're arguing on anecdotal experience.
/r/MensRights25/05/12 10:08 PM
3

Thus the horrifying failure of the Sex & City? Someone clearly missed the part in Sex and the City where 3/4 of the lead characters end up married whilst the other one flits from sexual relationship to sexual relationship.
/r/MensRights25/05/12 10:05 PM
1

Another proud member of the PartTimeBadfanclub. <3
/r/MensRights08/05/12 10:02 AM
1

Not entirely, no, but I can't see any black people preferring life in those times.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 08:12 PM
1

Read Malcolm X if you want an insight into how being a black person was in the 50s. Everything I've ever read about black people in that time period was awful, segregation to the extreme.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 08:11 PM
1

Thank you for your concern- I know he doesn't represent the MRM or the posters here. What concerns me is that I've only learned that through posting here for a few months. Any newcomers or potential sympathizers to the cause might see his extreme nature and disassociate themselves- although I'm sure people are equally critical of me!
/r/MensRights07/05/12 07:56 PM
-1

It's poor form to make 'back-up requests' regardless of how you do it, really. You shouldn't need the help of others to defend your own viewpoint.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 10:10 AM
-1

There is a small number of users who have developed something of a vendetta against me and will downvote anything I post without any thought or consideration. C'est la vie.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 10:08 AM
2

No-one, because I'm lucky enough to live in a country where circumcision is viewed as uncommon. Plenty of other, less fortunate men have had parents who have forced the barbaric practice on them, which is simply horrific.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 10:05 AM
0

"Good night" sweetie. <3
/r/MensRights07/05/12 12:39 AM
1

I've told you my reasons, sweetie-pie. Didn't you say "Good night" earlier? That's generally a sign-off line you use when you want to stop talking. Gosh, more dishonesty. :)
/r/MensRights07/05/12 12:36 AM
0

Go ahead and look in any text-only topic in this subreddit, scroll until you find 'rightsbot' and clicky "Why?" That is why I have no interest in debating you. I have seen you edit, delete and manipulate your posts on several occasions, which, as the users of this subreddit will agree, is a dishonest and manipulative thing to do and a totally unacceptable way to behave. Even if that wasn't the case, you've clearly made up your mind anyway, so why would I waste my precious time on you when there …
/r/MensRights07/05/12 12:34 AM
0

Well, I don't have to tell the good users of this subreddit how thoroughly dishonest it is to pose a question or a topic and then edit it without acknowledging the edit clearly, so thank you for doing me the favour of ending any potential for debate before I had to point that out as my reason for declining. :)
/r/MensRights07/05/12 12:28 AM
1

You've edited and changed this post at least twice now. Please decide what you are going to say and then say it.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 12:21 AM
0

Ah, I remember the British Airways controversy surrounding this- I am British- but I assumed it was an isolated incident that American's certainly wouldn't have heard about. My apologies. Beyond fucked up.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 11:19 PM
1

I have never heard of that. I'd be happy to read any proof you have of such a policy existing- from an unbiased source, of course.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 11:13 PM
2

I respect your viewpoint, but I think those issues are more easily overcome by individuals than being denied the right to your kids, or your foreskin. You can have a decent career without a university education, but you can't ever re-grow your foreskin or re-spend time with your kids.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 11:04 PM
55

Vasectomies are not infallible. Get a pre-natal paternity test. Edit: I would also urge everyone to take this topic with a pinch of salt. It seems a little bit fishy.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 10:54 PM
3

Circumcision and fairness and justice in the family law system should be the two biggest focuses of the men's rights movement right now, as these are two of the biggest issues affecting men in society. Prejudice in the media is obviously a big issue but we will struggle to have a tangible change on that.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 10:47 PM
2

Well, I apologise for wading in without considering cultural differences.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 10:30 PM
3

Maybe it's an American thing, then. I regularly play football with some of the kids on my road, used to work in a toyshop, volunteered in a school etc. and have never encountered anything like that. Not to say it doesn't happen- before obviously it does- but I'm thinking it's a lot more prevalent Stateside.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 09:59 PM
-2

The biggest mistake that was ever made in regards to rape culture was subtitling it with "Men support rape culture." This one mis-step has meant that men can stick their fingers in their ears, shut their eyes real tight and scream "They're ridiculous for saying that!" If the anti-rape-culture folks had said "Men are unaware of rape culture" then I think the debate would be vastly different. edit: from AntiFeministMediavia /r/MensRights/ sent 58 seconds ago show parent So you also believe in 'rap…
/r/MensRights06/05/12 09:31 PM
-1

No, you've got that wrong. In those days, the majority of black men driving cars would've been harassed by police on a very frequent basis. Men these days are not harassed on a very frequent basis by the police- or the public- merely for being near kids.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 09:16 PM
-5

If the criticism is so petty, why are you this offended by it? Your paper-thin-skin and desperate need to be victimised is doing more to hinder the movement than a criticism of defacing public property is.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 09:12 PM
-1

Well, I'm sorry you're so easily offended by someone saying that defacing public property is bad. Maybe Gaia-Online would be more suited to your overly-sensitive disposition?
/r/MensRights06/05/12 09:03 PM
4

If a feminist did it, I would also say that it was defacing public property. Your victimisation complex is rather all-encompassing, isn't it?
/r/MensRights06/05/12 08:55 PM
-4

In this context? Because someone defaced that train by leaving a sticker on it.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 08:48 PM
1

Sounds like you've got the right attitude, then. Feel free to PM me with your next attempt and I'll give you some in-depth feedback.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 08:38 PM
-1

I agree with the action if not the sentiment. Defacing public property like that irritates me greatly.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 08:33 PM
0

The poster was referring to the former police tendency to presume that any black man driving a car must've stolen it. It was pretty much the norm back in the 40s/50s. Obviously black people don't have to worry about it (so much) these days.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 08:14 PM
1

Kudos for taking it on the chin. Did you proof-read this before submitting it? Because I'm sure you could iron out 60-70% of the errors just by looking at it with fresh eyes.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 08:08 PM
4

We're not in a debate yet, so there's no score being kept.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 07:58 PM
2

Way too short, sloppily written, does not target a specific point or make compelling arguments towards that point. Buy a book on grammar for journalists- here is my favourite one- and brush up on your debate skills, then try again. Proof-read thoroughly. Don't sign off with 'out.' Make sure all your sentences are cogent. Don't say "First of all" and then only list one point. I'm sorry, but this really wasn't very good.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 07:49 PM
3

I'd love for one of those spineless, cowardly morons to get upset by me. It would make my day.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 07:38 PM
3

Don't bother arguing with them. You could present the most cogent, rational, fair, intelligent and reasonable argument in the world and you'll only be met with bile and unintelligence from those mouthbreathing dimwits.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 07:28 PM
2

You're getting distracted by what was a throw-away example of how women are also vilified by an uncaring society.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 07:04 PM
2

I disagree about gold diggers being seen as villainous, I've not heard anyone refer to them in a positive light. My point was that this is not a male-exclusive issue. Men being accused of awful things seems to be the 'in-thing' at the moment, but the general lack of love towards others has been present in society for years now.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 06:57 PM
-5

Are you sure? You could follow my posting hist-- oh wait, you just did. <3
/r/MensRights06/05/12 06:54 PM
4

This is slightly- probably only by a slim margin- by the fact it doesn't include any statistics for homes where the fathers are present but abusive. I'd be surprised if any such statistics exist, but for this to be taken without a pinch of salt, it needs framing and comparison. I'd also be interested to see how motherless homes compare. Certainly, homes with both parents fare better.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 06:54 PM
-1

You essentially just said you are also of the lowest wit. I'll give you the opportunity to try again- the trick is to say that I am the silly one, not yourself.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 06:50 PM
-3

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, friend. :)
/r/MensRights06/05/12 06:42 PM
27

I thought this would be a discussion about rap music and was thoroughly disappointed to find it was just another lame discussion about rape, where both sides have no intention of altering their opinions and are just re-hashing the same tired lines that have been re-hashed four billion times already.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 06:40 PM
-1

That's why you linked to your post in the thread directly, rather than just summarising things or quoting yourself, right? You're fooling no-one.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 06:35 PM
-1

Yes, you could, but I'm not making topics asking if women are the new black man driving, am I? :P
/r/MensRights06/05/12 06:25 PM
-3

You asked us to weigh in on an issue that you're directly involved in. Fight your own battles.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 06:24 PM
-5

This is r/mensrights, not r/ineedbackup.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 05:57 PM
1

The best way to respond to hostility is with love. Nothing gets angry people more worked up than being ineffectual. I appreciate what you're saying but it's just shenanigans, really.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 05:46 PM
0

Not every mental patient is in "distress", you know. This woman clearly was. I'd have thought someone who suffers from the illness would be somewhat sympathetic to another sufferer being taunted and insulted online, clearly I was wrong. Maybe you'd be so kind as to post a video of yourself so we can make fun of you, too?
/r/MensRights06/05/12 05:27 PM
3

Oh, AntiFeministMedia has taken to tracking my post history and calling me a woman/feminist over and over again. It's just more fun for me to treat him like an infant than as an adult.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 04:51 PM
4

I don't think I understand your question 100%, but I mean rare as in, few men are blatantly accused of wrongdoing simply for being near a child. Of course, the last few topics on this subject have proved that it does happen, but my point is that that gives a warped impression because no-one posts about when it doesn't happen.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 04:50 PM
0

You were quite specific that it was teaching men to be evil, what with the title and only using examples of men and saying "This instills a quasi-instinctual 'woman-good / men-bad' reaction"
/r/MensRights06/05/12 04:48 PM
7

No, I don't think so. Whilst I'm sure there are certainly some men who are accused of terrible things whilst around children, it's still a relatively rare thing. No-one ever posts about how they were walking to the shop with their kid and nothing happened.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 03:27 PM
9

A lot of people here happen to be right-wing/conservative. It's not a bad thing to have people from all sides of the political spectrum represented here, even if the left/liberal side can get a little buried sometimes. What isn't really good is people using 'liberal' or 'conservative' as a negative epithet.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 02:10 PM
14

I wouldn't say it's teaching that only men are evil- if you see an attractive woman with an older man, you're taught to think "gold digger." We live in a society where compassion has to yield to suspicion and distrust. It's not right.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 01:56 PM
4

Nope, she's mentally ill.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 01:13 PM
-2

Well, I'm sure you'd be delighted were it a woman mocking a man in blatant mental distress... cough.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:59 PM
-9

Until next time, Cutie-pie. <3
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:23 PM
-10

Who's a cutie? You are! <3
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:17 PM
-8

You're such a cutie, you know that? Ooh, I just want to squeeze your cheeks something rotten!
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:07 PM
6

I'm concerned about the rates of theft amongst young people, therefore we should cut off all babies hands so they can't steal things. Pathetic, disgusting and thoroughly offensive. Schafer should be publically shamed for this.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 11:28 AM
6

It should be plainly obvious to anyone that she is having some sort of breakdown. To point and laugh is just cruel.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 11:26 AM
-7

Twelve hours later and you're still going? That is adorable.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 11:20 AM
13

It's the Daily Mail, of course it's horse manure. I really wish people would stop reading the Mail because it is written with a very clear agenda and designed to provoke. You are just doing exactly what the Editors want you to do- getting all worked up and distributing the stories- more pageviews equals more money equals they will do it more because they know it works.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 09:53 AM
1

It certainly undermines the credibility of the person spewing it when they're not able to debate without getting hysterical.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 09:45 AM
1

I have no idea, OThomson brought it up.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 09:44 AM
1

Who said anything about her being innocent? "Going overboard" implies he was too vigorous in defending himself- IE, headbutting her- my point is that he had stopped defending himself and started brutally battering her as soon as she hit the ground. I am detailing my viewpoint with as much clarity as possible because I want to condemn his actions as thoroughly as I can.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 09:44 AM
3

We seem to agree on quite a few things. I can't wait for people to start accuse us of being the same person. :)
/r/MensRights06/05/12 01:08 AM
1

A question since I don't know you well; do you have any problem with a woman who is drunk that initiates sex with a guy (and then regrets it the next day, she may have a boyfriend or whatever)? It depends. If she is clearly so drunk that she couldn't possibly know what she was doing, then I think the onus is on the man to turn her down. If she is still 'in control' but does it anyway then she has no-one to blame but herself. I am not qualified enough to try and address the grey area inbetween- m…
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:59 AM
2

How is this a men's rights issue?
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:37 AM
0

2.) When you're talking about a situation that can and does involve rape, you should be very careful not to say sex is "essentially positive," is my point. 3.) Because size is a huge deal when you get physical with someone. Headbutting someone to the ground- even if slightly OTT IMO- after they attack you is defendable, but punching them repeatedly, in the face, whilst they're lying on the floor and unable to protect themselves? Barbaric, malicious and should be utterly condemned. 4.) As long as…
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:35 AM
3

It was something like "They're saying the woman is stupid because it's her body and her responsibility not to get pregnant" or some other hateful BS. Edit: And yeah, I can't really see how a man can be smart for getting a woman preggo... unless they have kids, I suppose? Not sure why that would be a negative, though.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:19 AM
0

[–]AntiFeministMedia 1 point 43 seconds ago Im sure it is flattering, a female trolling a mens rights forum must be so desperate for male attention even negative attention is welcome. If anyone missed it. :)
/r/MensRights05/05/12 11:50 PM
-2

Keep trying. I'm nearly there.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 11:49 PM
3

Haha, sure it is, friend. Certainly not just your ego not letting someone else have the last word, I'm sure. :)
/r/MensRights05/05/12 11:46 PM
0

Your attention is flattering. Keep trying. :)
/r/MensRights05/05/12 11:41 PM
-2

You said it is "essentially a positive act." How can it "essentially" be a positive act when there is clearly a point where it isn't? "Often a positive act," sure, "usually a positive act", perhaps, but "essentially" is a poor choice of words. Yeah, and she wasn't convicted. The judge said it was the drunk man's responsibility. And I agree with him. I think when you repeatedly ask someone to do something and they do it, you have no-one to blame but yourself.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 11:21 PM
-1

As long as this subreddit continues to identify as anything other than a place to promote the rights of men, it will not be taken seriously. Having things like: As a result, we have been earning scorn from bigoted feminists and white knights since 2008. Only shows that we are sore and that those "bigoted feminists and white knights" really do have an effect.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 11:01 PM
-2

I made no effort to interpret your text negatively. I read it, paused, re-read it and shuddered a little. I'm perfectly happy to accept that it's poor wordsmanship rather than anything untoward, but I think you should admit the same. So then you probably shouldn't burn someone's penis either when they clearly wouldn't want it sober. Well, duh?
/r/MensRights05/05/12 10:56 PM
1

NO BISCUITS FOR YOU, YOU ARE FUCKING WRONG YOU MOTHERFUCKER. >:( Kidding. Can you imagine if I suddenly busted that out?
/r/MensRights05/05/12 10:51 PM
-1

Haha, this one made me smile. Otherwise, keep trying.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 10:42 PM
1

Before I got to the end of your post, I was already formulating how to say "We are going in circles." I'm glad to see you agree. Biscuits?
/r/MensRights05/05/12 10:41 PM
-1

You can't see how what you wrote was disturbing because you wrote it. Self-evaluation is difficult. For sex, inebriation sets up a huge gray area for what is essentially a positive act, At some point in inebriation, it becomes rape and that is not a positive act. By saying that it is "essentially a positive act" you are intoning that it is a positive act regardless of how drunk the victim might be. What else except consensual sex could I seriously have been referring to when I said it's positive…
/r/MensRights05/05/12 10:39 PM
-2

I'm gonna go ahead and only reply to this one, this being the first one in my letterbox. Keep trying. :)
/r/MensRights05/05/12 10:22 PM
-2

1.) That is absolutely different. He pestered her into burning himself, an action through which she could not possibly come to any physical or emotional harm. If he had pestered her for sex, that could lead to her physical or emotional harm. 2.) ...what? He said sex is "essentially a positive act." How is that saying "sex is positive or negative." 3.) He wasn't defending himself if he "went overboard." Defending yourself is protecting yourself from harm and danger. Knocking someone to the ground…
/r/MensRights05/05/12 10:21 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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