TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

PhysicsPhil Archive

View 1 post and 120 comments by PhysicsPhil on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

PhysicsPhil/r/MensRights05/05/11 06:19 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-1

I wouldn't say feminist brainwashing so much as indoctrination, possibly unintentional. Just as people who rely on religious support groups are likely to become converts, because they hear a lot about it when they are most vulnerable and in need of support, so too GLBT people who need support are likely to hear feminist dogma in their support networks. This is especially likely for transsexuals, as they are probably going to need more support. This becomes self-perpetuating, too. Once you have m…
/r/MensRights01/08/11 12:28 PM
1

Not necessarily, it can just be religious nutbaggery. If you read FSTDT occasionally, you'll soon get used to the idea that there is no depth of stupidity beyond the True Believer.
/r/MensRights01/08/11 11:34 AM
2

aren't interested in fluffy, giant hats While the hat to which you refer is quite possibly the stupidest headgear I've seen worn seriously, I did find on one occasion earlier this year (at a festival) that the combination of a lounge suit with a toy top hat (I think it was originally a St. Patrick's Day one with the shamrock torn off, it had been lying around and I picked it up more or less on impulse) was very effective at getting female attention. Unfortunately, it worked best on those who app…
/r/MensRights22/07/11 05:03 AM
1

The thing that really puzzles me about this is that the PUA idea of social proof doesn't seem to entirely cover it, since the increased attractiveness occurs even with women who don't know about the relationship, and I don't change my mode of dress or behaviour in any way I'm consciously aware of when I'm in a relationship. Another funny (well, not so much at the time) aspect is that it seems to work to a lesser extent even if I'm not actually in a relationship yet, but, for example, have just m…
/r/MensRights22/07/11 03:09 AM
2

She's going to have trouble with the First Amendment, too. I suspect she'll try to get an unenforceable law passed, then blame its uselessness on "activist judges".
/r/MensRights09/07/11 05:28 AM
3

The 30% rule would only apply if a company has less than 30% women in its board. I.e. it only applies if there is ongoing discrimination which has not been removed by existing mechanisms. No, the reason for the disparity may not be discrimination, it may be something else. Inequality of outcome does not prove inequality of opportunity, in and of itself. restriction on people's property rights oh, you're a libertarian Not entirely. I support reasonable restrictions for the good of society, but th…
/r/MensRights08/07/11 06:24 AM
2

Well, he unbanned me: You have been unbanned. It appeared you were part of the troll mob at MR.. but sometimes appearances can be deceiving... sometimes. Not sure why he banned me, or what I said to get unbanned, but oh well.
/r/MensRights08/07/11 04:54 AM
3

Now prove that the imbalance is caused by sexism now and not 40+ years ago when today's top directors were beginning their careers, or some other cause entirely. I do not need to. If you claim that we need a discriminatory law to overcome allegedly discriminatory practices, you need to show that the discrimination is ongoing and cannot be removed by using existing mechanisms. Remember that you are introducing a new restriction on people's property rights, so the burden of proof is on you to show…
/r/MensRights08/07/11 04:50 AM
2

That's interesting, as only 1 in 6 have been sexually assaulted in their lifetimes…
/r/MensRights08/07/11 04:07 AM
2

And me, with the same message. I have no idea what I posted to get banned, I suspect it was something over here.
/r/MensRights08/07/11 03:52 AM
3

Also you are being intellectually dishonest by saying "regardles of qualifications." No one is saying that women should be hired regardless of their qualifications. What if less than 30% of the top however many candidates are women? 2) You ask that question as if in and of itself a gender disparity in the board of directors is an inherently bad situation. Why do you claim that this is the case? because systemic sexism is bad Now prove that the imbalance is caused by sexism now and not 40+ years …
/r/MensRights08/07/11 03:31 AM
1

They appear to have fixed that oversight now. All there is is an epic [deleted] chain. I almost expected to find a mod post at the end saying "Did you really expect to find something here?"
/r/MensRights08/07/11 12:11 AM
1

I was actually thinking of Australia, which has a fairly good economy (the GFC had quite a small impact), a relatively generous welfare system (albeit with certain flaws), and a far more pro-worker IR system than most (if not all) of the US. However, I was also speaking partly hypothetically, as I have argued on many other occasions that the minimum wage should be raised to a level which is sufficient to support one adult plus the target number of children per adult without welfare payments, wit…
/r/MensRights08/07/11 12:07 AM
1

The problem isn't men in government - after all, most of the rest of the developed world doesn't have this problem, the problem is the religious nutcases in government. Remember that the popular support for these ideas is essentially religious, based on the argument that life begins at conception, and, over here, seems to be more actively supported by women than men. Almost everywhere in the developed world where there is support for strict government restrictions on abortion has a large religio…
/r/MensRights07/07/11 10:38 PM
1

Because it takes up to 45 years for the effects of previous inequalities to disappear from the workforce as people retire. Let us pretend that 30 years ago, only men got into high-paying career streams. That would mean that now those men are in their 50s, having reached the best-paying part of the workforce, and are thus still showing that bias. Even if 100% of all the entry-level positions which lead to those high-paying jobs had been held by women for a decade, that probably wouldn't outweigh …
/r/MensRights07/07/11 10:38 PM
1

Would you say that the financial manipulation augment still applied in a country where the welfare/workers' rights laws were more generous, such that essentially anyone who is fit to raise a child is receiving an income sufficient to raise 2 or 3 children at an acceptable standard of living?
/r/MensRights07/07/11 10:31 PM
2

I suspect Al-Jazeera English's main point here is to argue that yet another element of modern western life is bad and should be restricted by law (and that even people from that background think so) to encourage moderate western muslims to support some (at first, anyway) of the puritanical restrictions the extremists want, and to get them to think they have a valid point about this so they might about other things too.
/r/MensRights05/07/11 01:38 AM
2

Consent to sex is consent to the consequences of sex. In the UK, consent can be conditional on an action to take place after sex, so a man could potentially consent to sex on the condition that the woman pays a sufficient sum to cover all the costs he has if she gives birth to his child. This would be made more complex by the way child support is based on the wealth of the parents rather than the needs of the child, but it could probably be done.
/r/MensRights04/07/11 11:56 PM
3

IMO, the critical determining factor regarding what is an MR issue is whether it harms women equally. If it does, it is probably a worthy cause and one which, as individuals, we should support, but it isn't an MR issue. That means that, in the context of LGBT rights, something which is good for gays and lesbians is probably not an MR issue, whereas something which affects just gays would be. Likewise, something which harmed, say, just black men would be both an MR issue and a antiracism issue.
/r/MensRights01/07/11 01:08 PM
2

Indeed. If you take a category of people who have been blocked from holding any job where they could get useful experience in technology, business administration or senior management, and force companies to use them for those roles anyway, problems are pretty much inevitable. It would take longer to get equal outcomes, but a slow and steady approach focusing on education and removing artificial barriers is going to work a lot better for society as a whole.
/r/MensRights01/07/11 12:41 PM
1

Of course that is the ideal, but you have to think about how to achieve that, and, more difficultly, how to get the necessary laws passed.
/r/MensRights30/06/11 02:47 AM
1

You would also run into problems where the age of consent is lower than the age of majority, so a person can have sex but not incur a debt. That said, the law could either allow a girl's parents to sign with her (not much chance of that) or simply over-ride the rules regarding age of majority for contracts in that specific case.
/r/MensRights30/06/11 02:45 AM
1

I think labels like reverse- or positive- are more useful when the discrimination is based on a multi-valued category (race, for example), rather than a binary one: that is, where , say, a black person is treated better than the norm, but no other race is (in that context), as opposed to being treated worse. I still think the label is a poor choice, but something of that sort would work.
/r/MensRights29/06/11 01:44 PM
1

The strait man's friends discover that he wasn't as straight as they thought.
/r/MensRights29/06/11 12:49 PM
1

Several australian states. Edited GP to correct.
/r/MensRights29/06/11 10:26 AM
1

I think here [EDIT: several australian states] they don't have strict liability if the defendant legitimately believed that the person was of age (for example, drinking in a bar would usually enough, or smoking openly, or had fake ID).
/r/MensRights29/06/11 08:22 AM
2

Under UK law, a person's consent to sex can be conditional on an action to be done by the other person afterwards - this was established in a case a few months back where a man was convicted of rape for not paying prostitute[1]. A clever legal draftsman could probably come up with some set of terms which would obligate the woman to cover all the man's costs (by, say, some sort of loan) in the event that she gives birth. effectively making the man into a prostitute who happens to get paid exactly…
/r/MensRights20/06/11 02:58 PM
1

In some countries the law is against something like "appearing to depict a person under the age of 18 in a sexual manner", which outlaws both adults who look underage (because that makes enforcement easier - otherwise you need to find someone to prove that at least one model was underage at the time (good luck)) and drawings (probably just because no-one thought of it or cared enough to fix the wording because, well, who cares about the dirty paedos). IIRC freedom of speech is enough to protect …
/r/MensRights20/06/11 12:37 PM
2

I think part of the reason is that every time there is a circumcision thread, you get at least a few "Why can't we just forget about circumcision?" posts, which is a question which has been answered so many times that it begins to look a lot like trolling. That sucks for the genuinely new people, but I for one believe that a good few of those asking are just trolls.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 07:31 AM
1

Good point. I hadn't thought about the handling costs.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 06:22 AM
2

Aww, no explosion into a puff of (il)logic. :(
/r/MensRights13/06/11 06:21 AM
1

So's reddit, although a couple of sub-reddits seem to be surprisingly full of Aussies, but that might just be a combination of high traffic and timezones.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 06:15 AM
2

No, she was undergoing the specialist training course for riot police. She was given the option of not doing the course (TFA is unclear if it was opt-in or -out), in which case she would not be eligible for duty in a riot. Running in full gear seems to be a fairly common part of that job, so it would be perfectly reasonable. The issue seems to have actually been that they mocked her for her failure, rather than that they had the test.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 05:56 AM
2

Maybe I'm just paranoid, but anti-spiking fears might be quite lucrative for the alcohol industry. Bottled drinks tend to be more expensive than tap beers and base spirits, and are presumably more profitable.
/r/MensRights13/06/11 04:14 AM
3

Unless, of course, it wasn't a rule before kloo posted it, in which case he should be removed for mod abuse :)
/r/MensRights13/06/11 04:07 AM
3

No (non-consensual) use of force is something I'm perfectly in agreement with, but when both people are equally drunk (or near enough equally drunk) and they are willing at the time, it should treated just like a purely-statutory rape case where both involved are minors: either both sides are screwed for life, or they both go free.
/r/MensRights12/06/11 07:18 AM
1

That would only apply if she was bound by that choice, which she isn't.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 02:35 PM
2

I think that sort of analogy works better if you use jewellery rather than a television: dressing up to show off one's wealth or appearance is fun (and would be more fun if I had more of either to show off :( ), but then you're a damn fool if you start doing things which make you an easier victim. Conversely, if one has reason to go into the ghetto or wants to go pub-crawling or the like, one should take other reactions to reduce the risk of bad things happening. Lastly, while people do get rape…
/r/MensRights11/06/11 04:13 AM
1

Even if the moderates did manage to get rid of the extremists and stop providing cover for them, there is a difference of view, in general. Those who are egalitarian-feminists tend to argue for equality of outcome, whereas mainstream MRAs tend to argue for equality of opportunity.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 02:28 AM
2

It has been cleaned up now, and is mostly positive.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 02:10 AM
2

It could just be that women would make the place less attractive tho their clientele with brining in enough additional revenue to counteract what is lost by driving away their old customers, or at least, that they think it will.
/r/MensRights10/06/11 02:25 PM
1

He said "should", not "are". If you disagree with his statement, you have to argue that it is bad in some way, not that it is illegal. Remember that legality does not define morality, even in a democracy - consider prohibition in the USA. Private consumption of alcohol didn't become immoral and then moral again, but the law changed.
/r/MensRights10/06/11 02:19 PM
2

That is a slightly weird thing to do (I assume it made more sense to him at the time), but it is fairly dafe unless it was in a hot climate. Here the rule are that milk can be left out (after a delivery, say) for a total of 3 hours when the ambient temperature is below some figure, reducing down to a much shorter time in the hottest conditions (i.e 40C +). Indeed, in the UK it is still common for milk to be delivered door-to-door, which involves leaving the milk on the doorstep (because of cours…
/r/MensRights09/06/11 12:14 PM
2

That's not true anymore: everyone who was a British (as opposed to Imperial) Subject is now a UK Citizen, and so is the monarch.
/r/MensRights08/06/11 12:16 PM
1

It's a rage comic, they're supposed to have grammar errors and so on. It's all part of what makes them such a desirable part of reddit, along with the use of a picture to display something which usually has nothing interesting other than the text.
/r/MensRights05/06/11 08:13 AM
1

ISTM that it would be more reasonable to delay the sentence rather than reduce it (obviously a real life sentence would be reduced, but the UK doesn't usually sentence people to actual life) when there is no-one else to take custody of the children.
/r/MensRights05/06/11 07:59 AM
1

To be fair, they probably actually just want men to buy women's lit, and if they were in the business of selling men's lit, or black lit, or whatever, they'd say that everyone else should read that too.
/r/MensRights05/06/11 07:42 AM
0

Given how many people there are in the world, it wouldn't be all that unlikely that they exist. However, what difference does it make if they are satanic, christian, non-aligned, atheist, or worshippers of Cthulu? All that matters is what they are doing.
/r/MensRights05/06/11 02:54 AM
1

The way the laws work here are that until the committal hearing, the accused's name is sealed in sexual cases (although that only prevents publication, not telling someone about it in person), and the accuser's name is IIRC sealed until then, and then may be sealed if the person is underage or certain other conditions apply. The public is still allowed to observe the trial, and to report on it as normal, provided the names are left out of the report. EDIT: I think the accused can give up the pro…
/r/MensRights28/05/11 09:06 AM
1

What beats me is WTF some of those unions have to do with any form of IP law: The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers The International Brotherhood of Teamsters The Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers, and Grain Millers International Union Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO The International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers, andHelpers, AFL-CIO International Association of Fire Fighters (maybe they misunderstood "burning copie…
/r/MensRights28/05/11 07:46 AM
1

Thanks for your explanation, I think I understand your position a lot better. single leadership/collaboration; I think that you are underestimating the value of collaboration in current society. We see that most large entities are actually managed by someone who is first among equals, and who depends significantly on his equals for their areas of expertise. For example, we see that in the CxO level of companies, in Westminster-type cabinets, and other similar structures. At the same time, single…
/r/MensRights28/05/11 07:07 AM
1

Consent in contract law works differently from consent in sexual law (or medical consent, for that matter). Whether that is reasonable is another matter, but that is the current situation.
/r/MensRights27/05/11 03:11 AM
1

That depends on the local legal system, in some places the state prosecutor can only press charges where there is a compelling public interest or where the crime is against the state, otherwise the victim has to ask the prosecutor to do it. I'm not sure where WhineWhine is from, she may live somewhere with that sort of arrangement.
/r/MensRights27/05/11 02:57 AM
1

From your link: The new foreskin is only shaft skin that has been grown sufficiently long to double over the glans and allow it to soften and regain some sensitivity. It has none of the unique sensory enervation that gives the owner of a natural foreskin such pleasure. It isn't a reversal, it is a bodge which repairs part of the damage without replacing the destroyed structures of the rigged band, the frenulum, and so on. If a complete repair could be made, and would be paid for by the people wh…
/r/MensRights27/05/11 01:05 AM
1

If everyone just leaves it the way they finish with it, with a sufficiently large household you would expect to find it in the desired position in proportion to the gender balance (that is, if it were a 50/50 split, it would be up about half the time, if it were 80/20 m/f it would be up 80% of the time, with the correction applied for men defecating). OTOH, in a 2-person household, you would expect to find it in the wrong position almost every time, which again is fair and reasonable.
/r/MensRights26/05/11 11:54 AM
2

Why not make partnership at a law firm more family-friendly? Because partnership is a reward for being sufficiently skilled and dedicated to bring in a lot of money to the firm, and an enticement to continue to do so for them. Working shorter, more flexible hours (which is usually what "family-friendly" comes down to) will bring in less money for the firm. If you find a way to achieve as much in an 8-hour day as the rest are achieving in 12+ hours and a lot of time in evenings and weekends, then…
/r/MensRights25/05/11 01:12 PM
1

Maybe it would help if you listed the specific traits which are regarded as masculine (and thus more valuable) and feminine (and thus less valuable). ISTM that in different fields (not just the public/private sphere, which is rather too broad) would value different traits differently, and in at least some cases that value will be because it is actually useful. For example, considered risk-taking is useful in business because a well-chosen gamble can pay off and make a large profit, which, after …
/r/MensRights25/05/11 10:56 AM
2

Sports cars and serious off-road vehicles.
/r/MensRights16/05/11 12:56 PM
1

In places where consent to sex can be conditional[1], you might be able to consent to sex only on the condition that the woman does not give birth to any child conceived as a result of that encounter. You'd probably need to get it in writing, and have a very good lawyer, but it might work. [1] IIRC this is the case in the UK: ISTR a case a while back about a man who slept with a prostitute and left without paying who was convicted of rape because she consented on the condition that he pay her. (…
/r/MensRights30/04/11 11:28 AM
1

The catch with that is that the person is not only abused, but also an abuser in the same action. What I was told in school is that here, if the people are about the same age, then if one parent wants charges pressed, they are reminded that their own child would also be a criminal, but that otherwise the state usually has no interest in the case.
/r/MensRights29/04/11 02:49 AM
1

Probably won't be approved: I've heard it said that the reason comments are so stupid on AdelaideNow is that the staff have to understand them before they are approved. Unfortunately, I forget who I'm stealing that from.
/r/MensRights28/04/11 11:15 AM
4

You forget that this is a political audience: they laugh if someone on their own side makes any condescending, vaguely humorous, or even slightly insulting comment about an opponent: if the comment is worse, they just laugh a little louder unless it gets the joker into serious trouble (which takes some doing). IOW, the laugh isn't because it was funny but because it was negative.
/r/MensRights28/04/11 10:41 AM
2

As someone else said, just because it is sex-specific doesn't make it sexist[1]. It wouldn't have been any better if she'd been male and he'd called him "laddie" or "son" or something of that sort. [1] obvious proof being that the difference between an actress and an actor is usually important, especially when casting. :)
/r/MensRights28/04/11 10:36 AM
1

Also, women in masculine clothing (say, trousers and a shirt) are still wearing female clothing designed in a style which is traditionally masculine, or are wearing masculine clothes but in a feminine way (tying a knot in a shirt to make it more flattering, that sort of thing), or are wearing sensible work clothes. The last doesn't apply to men in women's clothing. The second is hard to do for clothes but can be done for accessories, but seems to be more socially acceptable for some things (scar…
/r/MensRights14/04/11 04:47 AM
2

Yes, he is, that's why he is being forced to pay child support.
/r/MensRights14/04/11 03:08 AM
1

He does have a bit of a point: if these things become commonly used, rapists would know to check first. Depending not he particular form of the device, the check itself might be as bad or worse than the rape (using a stick, perhaps?), and if the device can be easily removed (as an anal one would have to be), it won't do much to stop rape if the rapist knows it is there. However, they would work for now.
/r/MensRights13/04/11 12:36 PM
1

In any jurisdictions where the mother can hand over the child to the state without any penalty, could the father do the same thing if he could get gold of the baby for long enough?
/r/MensRights29/03/11 12:38 PM
1

Unfortunately, I think every X-equality movement ends up with a few X-supremacists. It provides a nice hiding place and helps give them legitimacy. Even worse, trolls do as much harm as people who really hold those opinions. I advocate that all feminists are opponents, but not all women are feminists. That sounds pretty reasonable.
/r/MensRights20/03/11 05:01 AM
1

There are some idiots, usually downvoted to hell and gone here but you see them on GMPM comment threads and so on (although some could well be trolls or agents provocateur). You also see some comments at around +1 - +3 who argue that all women are the enemy and must be kept down.
/r/MensRights20/03/11 03:15 AM
1

The feminist movement didn't get really crazy until after things like votes for women were widespread, which, while radical at the time, were clearly about equality. Once the MRM can get people to agree that equality is necessary, then the loonies like cuckoldedcock pretends to be can have their fun and get treated as nutty fringe elements like the all-hetero-sex-is-rape, only-woment-should-be-politicians crowd like at AROOO, who are so far beyond even people like Maracotte that they don't matte…
/r/MensRights20/03/11 02:01 AM
1

And it is not that unusual for things to be funny and harmful: society tolerates Funniest Home Videos and the like which are often harmful to one or two people because people like watching other people made to look like an idiot, even if it hurts them in the process (or appears to). I think that's why "dumb blonde" jokes become acceptable when you make them about Paris Hilton, or when you change the target to a group which it is more acceptable to mock (changing a anti-Jew money-grubbing joke to…
/r/MensRights19/03/11 09:01 AM
1

Since the moderate MRAs just want equality, whereas the crazies want male supremacy, I suppose the civil-rights equivalent would be the Nation of Islam or the Black Panthers.
/r/MensRights19/03/11 09:00 AM
0

No, this is what a troll looks like. cuckoldedwife is almost certainly a sockpuppet, and that account is a fairly crazy feminist. In fact, I think he's gotten confused about which account he is using in this thread.
/r/MensRights19/03/11 08:30 AM
0

And how many of those 20 are named cuckolded*?
/r/MensRights19/03/11 08:26 AM
-1

I'm all for winning by whatever means work, but I don't think using crazies to shift the centre will work until the moderates can gain social acceptability.
/r/MensRights19/03/11 08:24 AM
1

I was almost tempted to upvote this, but the idea of giving cuckolded* even a tiny bit of karma stopped me.
/r/MensRights19/03/11 06:32 AM
1

Well, there are cases where you just have to wonder why they possibly could have thought that what they were doing was a good idea, just like someone who walks drunk down dark alleyways while wearing ostentatious signs of wealth can expect to get mugged if he does it often. Yes, these crime should be punished, and yes it should be safe to be an idiot like that, but such safety is impossible to achieve in a free society, so people should have a little common sense. EDIT: I don't mean that they ar…
/r/MensRights16/03/11 10:16 AM
2

Maybe she was an atheist or pagan, that has been used as grounds for a father to get no custody or even visitation in the deep south before (although it was, IIRC, overturned on First amendment grounds).
/r/MensRights14/03/11 11:04 AM
1

Yes, you're right. The cops were wrong to threaten him that way. Cops do that all the time - lodge empty threats (and that's all it was). They also lie and deceive people regularly, in the course of their official duties. In an interrogation, cops are allowed to lie to the person they interrogate; if the one interrogated lies, he commits a crime in doing so. Where I am, public urination is a sex offence, even if no-one actually sees any exposed genitalia: a fellow student I knew slightly back th…
/r/MensRights14/03/11 10:04 AM
7

these laws are also not related to just Islam, what would you call some of the instances in India amongst Hindus or in Asia, or even in Israel amongst certain Jewish sects? Any jurisdiction which restricts peoples civil rights based on their assigned religion[1] cannot be considered a progressive nation. I think we can say that most of Europe (except for parts of the east), the USA, the former British Dominions other than perhaps South Africa, and Russia proper (as opposed to, say the Moscow-ins…
/r/MensRights14/03/11 07:01 AM
1

I suspect a mans dress would end up something more like either a alb or some form of eastern robe.
/r/MensRights08/03/11 01:52 AM
1

One solution would be to define an amount of money which is deemed appropriate to raise a child, including clothes, food, extra house space, and so on, and set child support payments to be half of that amount for each parent, into a trust fund which has each parent as a trustee, and a requirement that the money only be spent on the child's costs (possibly with restrictions on how the money is distributed too, so it can't be blown by one parent on treats, for example). If we then make sure that t…
/r/MensRights03/03/11 11:00 PM
4

The justification is that some prostitutes are forced into it, and so none should be arrested so that those who are unwilling prostitutes feel safe to talk to the police.
/r/MensRights03/03/11 11:08 AM
4

People joke about all kinds of suffering they are enduring. Not everyone, of course, but a significant number do.
/r/MensRights18/02/11 01:17 AM
2

Yes. It comes from many programming languages, since it is far quicker to type != than ≠, especially on old TTY keyboards.
/r/MensRights18/02/11 01:11 AM
1

Gays and lesbians might be better off than men in the family court system, simply because there is far less opportunity for the well-known pro-female bias to appear. That doesn't mean that a more radical shake-u of family law isn't a good idea to make it better reflect the reality of modern relationships, of course, but that's another question.
/r/MensRights17/02/11 11:08 PM
1

In my department there are slightly more openly (and obviously[1]) bisexual men than gay men. That suggests that, at least around here, the relationship would be less likely to be fraud than simply an ordinary case of cheating. Of course, in a culture where sexuality is considered more prescriptively, it is more likely that he might be lying about his sexuality. IOW, don't dump ohm for being gay without finding out if he really is first (but by all means dump him for lying and cheating if you li…
/r/MensRights17/02/11 11:02 PM
1

It really would make sense to record who the actual father is, for the purposes of medical history checks and so on, and to allow fathers to sign the birth certificate stating that they know they are not the biological father but wish to accept responsibility anyway.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 01:51 PM
1

And frankly, the people who get their babies circumcised for cosmetic reasons, ("...feels that an uncircumcised penis looks like a 'weenie in a blanket'") should be forcibly circumcised themselves. That would only work if they hadn't been already, and I expect most men who think cut penises look better than intact ones are were cut themselves.
/r/MensRights15/02/11 10:28 PM
1

These experiences could be explained in terms of the strategies that seddit loves to over-intelectualise: asking like that is unusual (and probably more so back then than nowadays), it shows self-confidence (because you think you can get her to say yes without getting her drunk first), and makes one seem casual about her (and therefore not desperate for a random hook-up), and, with the right girl, proves that you know the game and are therefore at least marginally intelligent. It would also prob…
/r/MensRights15/02/11 10:00 PM
2

For matters which would be criminal offences, ISTM that the school should simply tell the police that they had received a report that such and such occurred, and leave the appropriate bodies to investigate. Internal disciplinary measures should only be used for purely internal matters (such as cheating). A university usually doesn't have the resources to properly investigate a case like that, and even if it did, it wouldn't really be an appropriate use of funds, especially since even if it is su…
/r/MensRights14/02/11 06:09 AM
1

In some ways, it would make sense for all accused criminals to be anonymous until they are convicted, with the identities being protected by the same rules as they use to protect innocent relatives of criminals.
/r/MensRights14/02/11 05:42 AM
2

if someone is actually being abused, it should be their right to choose whether or not to press charges. That's fair and good in the general case, but there are situations, like women who have been brought up in strict anti-women religious sects (some of the crazier branches of the LDS and Islam, for example), where they have been indoctrinated from birth that they should submit to their men and keep it secret. Society has an obvious interest in rescuing the victims of that kind of life. That ca…
/r/MensRights14/02/11 05:29 AM
1

If you were circumcised as a child, you don't have a frenulum. In the normal techniques used for babies, that is the case, but if it is done on a slightly older child the forskin can be lifted and removed without removing all of the frenulum. That is how i still have almost and inch of frenulum. Of course, I think he still made a mistake, since the head is of course the glans. EDIT: yes, he just misworded it, he didn't make that mistake again later.
/r/MensRights01/02/11 03:13 AM
0

It is possible to take a moral stand to protect others even when one is neither capable of being harmed nor has been harmed by whatever it is one is trying to protect others from. However, she has said that sex with intact men is more pleasurable.
/r/MensRights01/02/11 03:10 AM
2

emo faggots Now there's a good way to convince people that this is a rational, well written post which contributes productively to the discussion and deserves uprooting. ANY comment stating an opposing viewpoint is IMMEDIATELY downvoted. If a post is well written (or at least doesn't start by calling the writers opponents "emo faggots") and is free from patent nonsense, it won't be likely to be downvoted. However, by the end of a long page, if there are posts which keep repeating points which ha…
/r/MensRights01/02/11 12:05 AM
1

It looks cool, but unless it was carefully fitted, that would be incredibly uncomfortable. Of course, it would have to be used naked, or clothing would ruin the shape.
/r/MensRights31/01/11 10:36 PM
1

the point isn't that i'm an apathetic person, its that i have undergone this procedure and it has affected my life zero I'm glad that you are lucky enough to be unaffected by it, but it has affected me, and plenty of other redditors, which is part of the reason for the hiveminds anti-circumcisionopinion. circumcised people live happy fulfilled lives, Yes, true, but for many their lives could have been better if their parents and doctors hadn't been so misguided, ignorant, or plain cruel (I know …
/r/MensRights31/01/11 10:09 PM
2

I was circumcised as a when I was quite young (3 or so) because was diagnosed with phimosis. I do remember some discomfort when urinating before I was cut, but I don't know if the phimosis was caused by an attempt to retract my foreskin too early. I certainly don't recall any attempt to use steroid creams or anything else as an alternative treatment, but I was too young to be certain. Unfortunately, the medical records I have copies of don't go back that far, and I now live in a different countr…
/r/MensRights31/01/11 01:03 PM
2

Using porn is a reasonable idea a first glance, and given the small sample size (another post mentioned a similar-sounding study using only 33 subjects), I suspect whoever oversaw the project was probably a pretty vanilla unisexual person who might not have had second thoughts and realised what seems obvious to us.
/r/MensRights31/01/11 12:42 PM
1

I think the wisest thing to do in a situation like that would be to wrap all your assets up in trusts before the relationship starts, as far as possible, so that it isn't available for alimony, child support, or anything like that.
/r/MensRights31/01/11 06:16 AM
1

I forget the study (there were some popsci articles about it was on /r/LGBT a month or so back) but it was a study of erectile response to porn and showed that most bisexual men only responded to one or the other. Unfortunately I didn't find the original paper, so I don't know what porn was used. That might be a problem, because I for one find that a much smaller proportion of gay porn is arousing to me than of straight porn, mostly because a smaller proportion of it is of body types I find attr…
/r/MensRights31/01/11 05:39 AM
3

I think it is that most cut men don't want to believe that it is a bad thing. I know I used to insist that it was a good thing, and look for quotes to prove it. I would even refuse to read articles which I was told would have no arguments for circumcision. I only started to wonder if I was being an idiot when i realised how much healthier uncut penises looked (after I got over some religious issues WRT looking at pictures of penises). The only thing that stops me raging about it is that there is…
/r/MensRights31/01/11 04:08 AM
1

If the grandparents had been in contact (even if they rarely meet) without he child before the separation (or widowing, as in one case in the story), then they should still, in general, have access afterwards. If they were estranged, but their child died, IMO the grandparents should, in general, be given an opportunity to meet with the grandchild, but whether to grant court-ordered access should probably depend on the child's wishes (depending in its age) and the nature of the estrangement.
/r/MensRights31/01/11 03:18 AM
1

I'd tell him that I had heard something in confidence which would make it very unwise for him to not wear a condom when he's with her, but that he wasn't to tell her that I'd told him that. Then I haven't broken the promise not to tell anyone, the my wife wouldn't be compromised (unless she was the only person who crazy wife had told, I suppose), and he isn't likely to get screwed for child support.
/r/MensRights31/01/11 02:24 AM
1

good point, if it had been a non-minor one, they would probably have mentioned which one.
/r/MensRights27/01/11 10:06 PM
1

She was a public schoolgirl, which means she was probably rich or at least knew important people. I'm not saying that helped her in particular, but I've found looking rich has helped me with the police from time to time (drinking in dry zones and so on, nothing major), and I would be surprised if it didn't at least help a little.
/r/MensRights27/01/11 07:41 AM
1

I'd say that anyone who maliciously falsely accuses someone of a crime, the accuser should be punished to whatever the maximum sentence which could be imposed on the accused.
/r/MensRights27/01/11 02:54 AM
1

Wouldn't a homeless person be entitled to government-funded treatment for a life-threatening disease, even under the US system?
/r/MensRights25/01/11 04:46 AM
1

And you lose breaks because things come up which have to be dealt with when the students are free, or because students come up and ask for help, or all the other things that take up time and which can't be avoided.
/r/MensRights25/01/11 04:43 AM
1

The reasons I don't want to be a teacher (apart from other ambitions) is that I don't want a poorly paid job with long hours, lousy promotion prospects and the hassle of dealing with parents, obnoxious pupils and the education system, and poor social status. A job paying the same as a moderately senior teacher (a head of subject or year) would be about what the Ps get degrees crowd can get in my department at uni, as new graduates, and they would only be working office hours.
/r/MensRights25/01/11 04:40 AM
2

"If dining with others, stand whenever a lady enters the room." Modern gentleman? Are these dating tips from the medieval period? This does seem to still be conventional at formal and high-status events. OTOH, it would be out of place in a casual setting.
/r/MensRights20/01/11 01:59 PM
3

pay for date That bit, I think is the only sexist part. The other sexually-different parts are pretty sensible. Offering a lady one's arm is pretty helpful if she is in heels or a gown, and walking on the road-side is pretty sensible since mens clothes are generally cheaper and more easily cleaned than women's clothes of equivalent standard.
/r/MensRights20/01/11 07:10 AM
1

TFA says there is no time limit.
/r/MensRights19/01/11 11:23 PM
2

Then why have it all? Shouldn't mommy be working too? Sorry, I forgot a part of the logic (I'd posted this a little while ago in a discussion on wage law, so I thought I'd already posted it here): While each parent should be paying 50% of the cost of raising a child, I was working on the assumption of an average of 1 child per parent (or 2 per mother, if you prefer to look at it that way), which is a bit less than the current average in the developed world (most developed countries are at around…
/r/MensRights18/01/11 03:38 PM
2

1) agreed, and custody orders should be reasonable WRT working hours (for parents with orating shifts, for example). 3 & 7) The government should work out a baseline cost of raising a child though to the end of tertiary education, or until the child would be eligible for sufficient government benefits to study without being financially dependant on his parents). This would include clothing, transport to school, and other essentials, as well as whatever is considered to be an acceptable level of …
/r/MensRights18/01/11 02:39 PM
1

Last thing, instead of making someone pay for causing someone grief from a false rape accusation, why not completely wipe it off their record, to the point that it never shows up in checks etc. Apart from what AnnArchist says, which can be dealt with by sealing the names of the accused in criminal cases until there is a conviction, there is the victim's lost earnings, the wasted police time, and so on. IMO someone who deliberately makes a false crime report should be severely punished just for t…
/r/MensRights18/01/11 01:35 PM
1

I assume the GP is trying to mean men who aren't mentally trans-women (even if they haven't realised it yet).
/r/MensRights18/01/11 12:57 PM
1

Refusing $30 million because it doesn't include alimony or child support? Does this mean she'd consider herself destitute with the amount of money that she's being offered and that their children would be impoverished by only getting this amount? It must be a luxury for her to know that no matter how this is settled that she's set for life. ISTM that child support should be some fixed amount which is considered the cost of raising a child through to the end of university (or, perhaps, to the end…
/r/MensRights07/01/11 01:13 AM
1

I think one way to deal with malicious false accusations would be to treat them as defamation, with the accuser fully responsible for the costs of restoring the victim's reputation (including ads in newspapers and the like) and paying whatever counselling costs and so on which the victim needs. In addition, false accusations should be punished with whatever the victim would have got if the accusations had been believed.
/r/MensRights19/12/10 05:55 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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