TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

PositiveBear Archive

View 1 post and 135 comments by PositiveBear on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

Wait. This is actually a thing.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 04:45 AM
–

Well see, to the crazies out there, it's "innocent until proven guilty or male, therefore guilty". Because god forbid a woman could be wrong about something! Wait a second, something doesn't seem right...
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:29 PM
–

Then she would've claimed he verbally abused her
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:28 PM
1

That link you provided is wonderful. I'm saving that one :D Like I said, they should be taught all of the facts, including whatever benefits and dangers that arise from it.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 05:59 PM
2

Of course, as do I. It's a god damned waste, considering everything else that's breaking down in that continent.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 05:51 PM
–

Absolutely. That's what should be fought against. Misinformation is one of the main tools they use to trick people into doing it.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 03:10 PM
–

I might be wrong here but I don't think the MRM is focused so much on banning circumcision in its entirety as it is focused on not forcing it upon children when they're incredibly young. An adult male should have every right to know what they're getting into and any potential benefits or disadvantages that arise from this act.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 05:11 AM
3

A correlation may in fact show the actual cause. But a correlation alone does not indicate a cause in and of itself. E.G. There are a statistically higher number of minorities in prison for crime. The -correlation- is that more minorities commit crime. Yet to say that being non-white makes you commit a crime (without any other evidence) is wrong. See what I'm going for? Sorry if I'm not clear, articulating things isn't a strong suit.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 05:16 PM
5

Fundamentally, it's performing an act of genital mutilation upon a child without their consent in an act that carries many health risks. (risks) Which, in any other case, is wrong. That is why so many MRAs think it's wrong to do it to small children. Speaking personally, my parents were catholic so of course it happened but I'm not really happy nor sad about it. If someone in their adulthood wants to have it done? Sure! Go for it. No risk to anyone else but yourself and as a consenting adult, yo…
/r/MensRights04/06/12 01:42 AM
2

He was accused of drowning. Not convicted. Learn the difference between the two please.
/r/MensRights22/04/12 12:13 AM
1

I feel like mis-clicking or checking the wrong racial box on a job application isn't going to be something that gets you into the court room. But if I'm wrong about that, then by all means don't try to do it. It's certainly not worth the trouble that it could cause if they will take the situation that seriously.
/r/MensRights16/04/12 03:07 PM
2

I guess I've never had a problem with it. I'm only 20 though and most of the jobs I apply for are pretty standard, college-student positions so maybe the professional world is different. Yet I think the key phrase is "optional" here; hell, if you really wanted to check, why not try putting "black male" or "hispanic male" or something like that and then if they ask you about it, just say it was a misclick. See if that actually changes your chances at getting the job. I'd love to hear if it does :…
/r/MensRights16/04/12 03:50 AM
1

As I said prior; I agree with you. But this is not the place for an attack on religion; it's a place to help someone try to see their child. If you want to talk about religion and why it's evil, go to r/atheism. If you want to help the OP get visitation rights for his child, feel free to comment logically and respectably.
/r/MensRights16/04/12 03:45 AM
3

I do agree with you because I am a militant atheist. But this phrase has no place on r/MR. It's not related to the topic and is a blatant, unprovoked assault on religion and the idea of a church. It's irrelevant and as such, downvoted.
/r/MensRights16/04/12 03:43 AM
6

The best I've ever had was some chick a year ago was yelling at me for calling her an idiot. The reason I called her an idiot is because she was going on about Obama being a "socialist muslim ni**er" and I wish I was joking. It slowly escalated until I called her a stupid cunt; she hits me and my immediate response is to put a straight into her solar plexus. She drops and I walk the fuck out of the door and drive away. Maybe I was out of line for my language but she struck first and I'm sticking…
/r/MensRights15/04/12 03:42 AM
2

I actually sort of have to agree with Kanuk, at least in principle. I feel more like one should say something -about- the topic, instead of a thinly veiled (in my eyes) attempt at "I think this sucks, who here wants to affirm it?" But I agree with you in that you -can- easily understand what he means. Yet to say that everyone can is a blanket statement and not necessarily true.
/r/MensRights09/04/12 07:55 PM
2

What she is failing to get is that freedom is speech means that the assholes get to win sometimes. It's a fundamental issue that arises with said freedom; the only solution is to ignore it or play back against it. To argue that you don't "deserve" to deal with it can be levied by any number of groups but the core problem is the same; free speech means you have to put up with fucking morons (case in point: the guy in the car or the author herself)
/r/MensRights09/04/12 07:53 PM
2

Let me fix that then :D Violent* psychopaths.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 10:43 PM
1

I'm with you :D except I wouldn't limit it to violent psychopaths. But hey, might as well start somewhere; it's not like there's any shortage of them :D EDIT: Violent* psychopaths
/r/MensRights08/04/12 09:39 PM
1

...oh. Duh. Well thanks again for letting me know :D
/r/MensRights05/04/12 03:48 PM
1

It was a combination of pseudo-sarcasm and actual feeling. If she had been sixteen, seventeen or eighteen when she did this, I would actually support the death penalty for her -but- she wasn't and thus I'm not pushing for that. Also, I'm curious; who is FR666? Never heard of them; I assume they're a member of SRS? Thank you for being reasonable though :D
/r/MensRights05/04/12 03:32 PM
2

Thanks for being reasonable about it :D
/r/MensRights05/04/12 03:16 AM
2

Not a problem :D I'm gonna edit out the sexist joke. Thanks for letting me know it's not funny :D
/r/MensRights05/04/12 02:57 AM
2

Check the edited version I posted in reply below. In case you didn't: Crazy* women logic.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 02:48 AM
0

Ok tough guy. I'm not going to say she should be killed; in my eyes, I'd drop her but I'm not the law. You're more of an MRA than I will be? Hahaha. Good joke. Enjoy being wrong! :D
/r/MensRights05/04/12 02:13 AM
1

Absolutely we should punish people for false rape claims done maliciously. I don't have a lust for blood; I have a lust to see her get punished for letting an innocent man sit in prison for a decade and only releasing him because it "bothered her" and would release a weight inside of her. Fine, you'll say this deters the problem of people underreporting rape. I disagree; I say that a woman should have good god damn evidence of it to put it forth. If she goes out and goes to a party and ends up s…
/r/MensRights05/04/12 02:12 AM
0

Oh also, she kept the secret for ten years. So even if she was eleven, she held it for a decade. You'd accept that? Fuck you and fuck off back to SRS where you belong.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 02:09 AM
1

She didn't commit murder. Although I do support the death penalty for certain crimes (shit like this qualifies) even if she was a little girl. I committed a felony B&E at age 13. I should be held liable for that (and I was). She made a fucking stupid choice and she deserves the consequences.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 02:07 AM
1

I'm not sure; that was just my answer to the question. I sincerely hope they have a longer statute though. She deserves it.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 02:05 AM
3

Sorry. Crazy* woman logic. The reason it's common is that it's true -_- For these particular women.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 01:47 AM
3

Hey, I'm all for the revenge thing. This happened to me or my friends, (at least I think) I'd be the one clamoring for revenge. The problem is that the line between justified vengeance and psychosis is a very thin one for some people. Some guy who views himself as "justice" or whatever could use that information to find out where she lives or where her friends live and that could end very badly. Also, it's off-topic but it -is- a reddit policy not to post personal information. But I do appreciat…
/r/MensRights04/04/12 11:57 PM
7

You gotta remember to talk about how, if you don't make it, it's the fault of men for setting up a system against women. In tryouts meant for women. But hey, feminism and logic are like oil and water.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 10:53 PM
3

Not cutting. Not a snowballs chance in hell. Medical data for the pain-based trauma alone is enough reason for me but even if it wasn't that, it's not my place to make that call.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 07:33 PM
2

I'm excited until the US passes a law banning it because it's "sexist" or else the VAWA declares it to be a 'weapon to deny evidence of rape' or some stupid bullshit like that.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 07:26 PM
1

Do you know what's the worst part about this? She didn't do it b/c it was wrong. She did it because it would free up a weight inside of her. In the article, and I quote: "I just want him to be out and freed," Cassandra said in her interview with the police. Then, she said, "I will be free on the inside." Fuck this bitch.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 07:20 PM
4

You beat me to the point.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 07:17 PM
1

Under USC Title 18 Sec. 3282 it is 5 years from the date of perjury. This title is more general and the 5 year limit applies to all non capital criminal offenses. So after 5 years, she had nothing to fear of Perjury. Charge her with any crimes possible, including wasting of police resources, filing a false report, if she was in the statute I would happily apply perjury and anything else that someone who knows the legal system better than I do could come up with.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 07:15 PM
0

And she held onto that lie for 10 years. You are liable for your actions, no matter the age. Especially having had a decade to consider it and she decided that her lie and the image/life of a man was more important than freeing an innocent man from prison. Fuck everything about that.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 07:12 PM
-7

You're my new favorite person :D
/r/MensRights04/04/12 07:03 PM
5

I actually -want- to agree with you but it's the better decision overall. Like Ignatius said, if you make a mistake while releasing someones' name or information, it can have much harsher consequences than you would plan for. Although, I will go on record as saying that he has (in my eyes) every right to hunt her down and enact revenge. But that's my personal opinion and not a common stance in the MRM.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 07:03 PM
13

No see, that's "sexist" because women had to put up with immature men at some point in their lives so they should be allowed to be immature now because....just because. Wait a second; sorry, I think there's something -fucking- crazy on my screen. Oh, nope, just crazy women logic. EDIT: Fixed sexist joke
/r/MensRights04/04/12 07:00 PM
12

Hahaha that's adorable. "Did the crazy bitch use logic?" Nope. If she did, she wouldn't be the crazy bitch she is!
/r/MensRights04/04/12 06:59 PM
9

IIRC, any damage to a vehicle over a thousand dollar is a felony (in the state of Michigan) and can be treated as a criminal felony offense. So as you said, pursue criminal charges :D
/r/MensRights04/04/12 06:54 PM
0

:D kickass. I'll let that concern me when I start getting laid :/
/r/MensRights04/04/12 03:53 AM
0

o_O Really? Thanks for letting me know then :D I knew it was something like 20-25 ejaculations can still be "live" afterwards but had no idea it lasted that long. Or could reverse.
/r/MensRights03/04/12 06:18 PM
1

Wow. Thanks! :D Now excuse me while I go get my vasectomy
/r/MensRights03/04/12 03:08 AM
2

Ok I'm sorry for being so...rash, I guess would be the word. But anyone who would use that sort of logic, to say "mine does, therefor his should" would easily qualify for that. But again, I'm sorry for making such a claim.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 02:56 PM
2

Um...yes and no, I guess. I'm not a lawyer but I don't know how a court would rule on attempted theft of semen. I do know that they would happily accept a domestic abuse and assault charge, the courts being what they were. That's more what I was going for. Striking her is a big black line to step over (legally) hence why I view it as a mistake. Then again, I'm a fat single nerd. So. What do I know :P
/r/MensRights02/04/12 04:25 AM
2

Pretty much, actually. Although I don't believe I ended up hitting the 'report' button. My mistake. I will say your comment read, to me, a very hostile tone and was highly dismissive in nature. So in effect, I will apologize for my conduct. I acted improperly. For future reference, however, I will recommend that you elaborate on your post besides simply stating something, so someone similar to myself doesn't inadvertently misread your comment. Also, reading back into your comment, being deaf is …
/r/MensRights02/04/12 01:30 AM
5

Ad hominem. No, I get my enjoyment from life out of weight lifting and tournament play of various things. Not sure where you got the "making people believe what I am doing is real life" part. I don't tolerate ignorance and stupidity in my own world. Women shouldn't bow down to men in all aspects of life. Men and women should be treated equally. If the woman wants to have the man in charge of the relationship and he is ok with that, that's their thing. If vice versa, great, that's their thing. I'…
/r/MensRights02/04/12 01:24 AM
3

Logic does not need sources. Logic is logic. But if you insist, the strawman. It's a little hard to point out a spelling error in real life. But I am one of the people who will tell someone to shut the hell up if they insist on speaking like an idiot. But I am just an elitist asshole, so what do I know? Correction: this is your first throwaway (maybe) on r/mensrights. There is a distinct difference. If no one else will stand in the way of ignorance and poor logic, I will.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 01:10 AM
3

Poor choice of words on my part. Logical faults and ignorance in my eyes constitute harassment, as people lose brain cells reading stupidity. Just my two cents worth, of course.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 01:05 AM
8

I feel like the best advice has already been given but that's not my call to make. Good luck with whatever happens.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 01:02 AM
3

I'll start off by pointing that spelling errors in your original post automatically remove credibility, at least as far as I am concerned. Straw men are also not accepted in the court of logic and reason. I am not a moderator. As far as I am concerned on a personal note, using logic, citing sources and not acting the fool are all good places to start. I'm sure there are other people who are happy to help you, including r/MR FAQ section.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 01:01 AM
2

Ignorance and strawmen are, respectively, unacceptable and logical faults. Mutilating of your child for the reason of "being like you" in unacceptable and poor logic, That is all.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 12:59 AM
3

You hit it right on, as far as I am concerned. We imbue our children, in some ways, with our own cultural traits. That's a biological fact, not something we can really control. Religiously, absolutely not. We should let our children decide on their own whether or not they want to have a particular faith and if they do, they are free to do so as adults. Linguistically...I don't actually understand how you can't. You can't very well raise a child in a spanish speaking household and not have them l…
/r/MensRights02/04/12 12:52 AM
2

Post downvoted and reported for reason of harassment and logical fault. Please use respect and logic on our forums; until then, return to SRS. Thank you for cooperating.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 12:49 AM
2

Before I go on, please use the "search" function in the top right corner of r/MR and search for "circumcision". This topic has been covered time and time again, both in posts and in the side bar. Now for the discussion. Your husband is an idiot; no offense to you, I'm sure he is a nice man and a caring husband and all of that but if his logic is "to look the same", he has no business feeding himself, let alone raising a child. His logic, based on his comments, boils down to "circumcised penises …
/r/MensRights02/04/12 12:48 AM
1

Post downvoted and reported for reason of being incompetent as well as ignorance. Please use logic and respect on our forums; until then, return to SRS please. Thank you for cooperating.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 12:37 AM
11

I'm with you on this; this feels funny to me. Just want that on record.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 12:37 AM
12

I don't think you're a bad person; you just made a mistake. Destroy this account too, by the way. Have zero record of it on your computer if possible. This could, some how, be considered "evidence" if it went that far.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 12:36 AM
4

The best advice has already been said but I'm going to parrot it. 1: Do -not- admit to assault in text or to police. Deny any claim possible, even if they do arrest you. If the police come, invoke your 4th, 5th and 6th amendment rights and only speak to the lawyer. 2: Record and save all texts; if you can take full screen shots, do it. If you cannot, instead use a camera to get a full picture of the messages to back up your text saves. 3: Ignore her. Speak to your friends that you say you can tr…
/r/MensRights02/04/12 12:34 AM
3

Post downvoted and reported for reason of being incompetent as well as ignorance. Please use logic and respect on our forums; until then, return to SRS please. Thank you for cooperating.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 12:26 AM
1

Just as I am not a mod :D r/MR supports claims with evidence. Unsupported claims carry little weight. Case in point: Men are generally taller, smarter and more moral than women Taller, sure. Please define "smart". Book smart? Common sense smart? Multiple definitions here. More moral? Citation please. Outside of that, these claims have zero weight.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 08:37 PM
1

Please attach sources to any claims like this. Post has been reported and downvoted for reason of lack of citation, as well as ad hominem.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 07:41 PM
4

The term you're looking for, OP, is called "egalitarianism". Feminism is focused on the problems women face. The MRM is focused on the problems men face. The people focusing on both are called egalitarians.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 07:18 PM
1

I think that means she has a B.S in feminism. See what I did there? :D
/r/MensRights30/03/12 01:38 AM
4

That's how it -should- go. The problem is that the media acts as if any man is a rapist if accused as in the Duke University case At least in the USA, we're taught that women are some sort of special individual who would never lie or do this and that men are somehow bound to harass women and abuse them (speaking from personal experience). Hence why I have so little faith in the system.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 01:37 AM
7

The problem with this is that all it takes is for her to start crying and the judge and jury will immediately look at the man as if he's the scum of the earth. I don't necessarily agree with what he chose but I'm just playing devil's advocate here.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 07:26 PM
1

I actually have no idea about whether or not fathers ask for it. It seems like that 92% statistic would be for when both parents ask for it but that's conjecture. Let me go look for a stat for you :D Here we go. "An estimated 50% of fathers who seek custody in a disputed divorce are given it Now, maybe there are other criteria at stake. This does say "estimated", so we have to take that with a grain of salt. Also this website is bemoaning the fact that now women are getting the same treatment so…
/r/MensRights29/03/12 03:40 AM
5

It's my inner brit
/r/MensRights29/03/12 03:11 AM
6

I think (this is my perspective, not that of r/MR as a whole or anything) that it's less laws are biased against men and more that the legal -system- is. Let's take a look at some laws. Child Custody The law states that "In cases of divorce, the court of jurisdiction for the divorce proceedings also determines child custody arrangements. Under the common statutory provision, if the spouses have children together while married, the parents have joint guardianship over that child and the parental …
/r/MensRights29/03/12 12:35 AM
9

No see, if you do that, she'll claim it was rape because "he made me overcome my natural unwillingness". Don't ask me how it makes sense, I'm a logician, not a feminist :D
/r/MensRights29/03/12 12:20 AM
16

Over on SRSd, That was as far as I needed to read before I knew this was going to be hilarious to read :D
/r/MensRights29/03/12 12:19 AM
4

Of course. But that feels like egalitarianism to me. Since feminism, by definition, is focused on the -feminine- side of things. Of course, I'm just curious :D Not trying to be insulting.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 10:21 PM
4

Absolutely; the feminist side of the argument simply disregards the male side of things. What's more, the movement as a whole looks at the 40% of men who are domestic violence victims, put their fingers in their ears and go "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU". Just as female on male domestic violence is considered acceptable courtesy of modern sitcoms and even cartoons as a child. We're taught that we have to take it. For the record, I just like playing devils' advocate because it's too easy (imo) to …
/r/MensRights28/03/12 09:32 PM
1

<3<3<3<3 Edit: Heartception
/r/MensRights28/03/12 09:28 PM
1

Happy cake day btw :D Good use of logic in your post ^ Makes me happy to see a rational, reasonable human being using their talents to make a point.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 09:21 PM
1

You can't and won't change her mind. Ignore her rambling and try to keep the topic as far away from the idea as possible.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 09:21 PM
3

Being a political outcast is only common if you're conservative. Anything SRS related, on the other hand, just hates logic. Welcome to the logic club :D
/r/MensRights28/03/12 09:15 PM
5

Well my point was that they claim to be a feminist who supports mens rights as well. So wouldn't that be a case of misusing the word feminist and actually being an egalitarian? But what you said is 100% correct; feminism is about creating equal rights between the genders by focusing on only one of them. So I'm with you on that :D
/r/MensRights28/03/12 06:54 PM
10

I'm going to try to address this from both sides of the line. On the feminist side, one would say that many feminists -do- care about these things and that they try to push for full equality. Similarly, some women -have- been sent to prison for having sex with underage males. From the MRM side, while individual feminists may care and push for this, the feminist movement as a whole does not. They don't appear to push for any of this, it's always going off about how "men make more than women" with…
/r/MensRights28/03/12 06:16 PM
24

Not trying to be insulting, so don't take it that way but wouldn't that make you an egalitarian, not a feminist?
/r/MensRights28/03/12 06:06 PM
2

This is actually very true; I guess I was going more for that idea that women (seem) to judge women for how they dress and look much more so than men do.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 02:41 PM
1

Honestly, as sad as this sounds, don't get married. Pre-nuptial agreements can be thrown out of court (source ) Yes that source is not the -best- information but the end result is the same: pre-nuptials are not a safe tool. Really though, that advice is going to be at the core of what you hear. Marriage gives you a pretty negligible tax break and opens you up to all manner of problems. Live with the girl you love if you so desire but marriage is just a hassle.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 06:51 AM
2

Post downvoted and reported for the following reason: Lack of genuine thought behind the post. Please use logic when posting on r/MR and until then, your posts will be treated accordingly.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 06:45 AM
2

One thing I am proud of, as a guy, is a general sense of being able to handle myself. That and accepting that some people will not like me for who I am and those people are not worth my time. The lack of peer pressure from other men is really nice as well :D As is the notion that other (straight) men will not judge me for how I dress (within reason) and are fairly open to other people, as long as they're not total pricks.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 06:43 AM
3

Post downvoted and reported for the following reason: Lack of genuine thought behind the post. Please use logic when posting on r/MR and until then, your posts will be treated accordingly.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 06:40 AM
3

I agree with this idea but I think there's a better way. In the r/MR, we need to stop responding to obvious troll posts or just stupid crap. I use a template I'll share here for you guys in the event of a stupid post that's trying to make us look bad. Downvoted and reported for (insert cause). Please take some time to research the topic at hand before asking r/MensRights about it. If you have legitimate questions, we will be happy to try and help. There should be less of us calling people dumbas…
/r/MensRights28/03/12 06:38 AM
7

Well since our wonderful friend decided to delete his post, it's hard to actually cite a source. Also, nice job using proper grammar :D Although your point breaks down to "fuck off you're a little kid" which I'm not. But hey, not my problem :D
/r/MensRights26/03/12 03:18 PM
1

Pretty much :D Although sadly no one will ever take -our- side, courtesy of the indoctrination they receive through the media about how women are always being help down by the patriarchy. Wait, no, more positivity! Um....if the author doesn't respond, it just means our friend who made this post was too smart for the high-school dropout who made the original article! :D
/r/MensRights26/03/12 03:17 PM
17

I have to admire the amount of thought you put into it. Very well written :D Nice job. Let us know if he responds.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 04:49 AM
20

Hypocrisy and ad hominum. Come back with a rational argument or go back to SRS where you belong.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 04:48 AM
13

Ad hominum and logical fallacy. Come back with an actual argument or go back to SRS where you belong.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 04:48 AM
3

From the same article: It will not have gone unnoticed that men are more violent than women. Men perpetrate about 90 percent of the world's homicides and start all of the wars. So I actually did read the article. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, I took something different from it. Although I do appreciate you being calm and reasonable when calling me out on it. So thanks for that :D
/r/MensRights26/03/12 12:13 AM
2

Yeah because, ya know, all those queens who committed acts of violence against their opponent countries were actually doing it because of...men...somehow. Yeah, makes total sense! That article is just more idiotic claims with zero evidence to support them.
/r/MensRights25/03/12 10:57 PM
-1

Yeah that's right. Arm the feminists so when they're too damn stupid to figure out how it works, they can cry about it being a patriarchy conspiracy to stop them from committing violence.
/r/MensRights25/03/12 10:55 PM
2

Don't spew ignorance on our forum and expect respect.
/r/MensRights25/03/12 05:24 AM
1

Your caps lock is broken.
/r/MensRights25/03/12 05:24 AM
2

This...this sounds terrible. And now they feel really awkward. :( Good comparison though :D
/r/MensRights25/03/12 05:23 AM
2

Dear everyone who -actually- is an MRA on here. Just ignore this guy. Report the post for trolling and ignore it. No amount of logic will convince them that they're going to win. We're just feeding them by employing actual arguments against them.
/r/MensRights25/03/12 05:22 AM
1

Going on any large groups' forum and accusing them of doing something they're pretty clearly not (at least as far as the mainstream is) is a good way to incite anger. Just like going to a Black Panther rally and accusing them of promoting "nigger on white violence" would incite anger. You ignorant fuck. The fact of the matter is that, as you said, it's still "just a piece of skin". And the foreskin -does- have a purpose. It's a large cluster of nerves that enhances sexual pleasure for both peopl…
/r/MensRights25/03/12 05:21 AM
9

-Most- people here (namely Demonspawn and knucker3) have already made their points which are the same as my own, but I'll answer anyway. Yes there are abusive men. Just like there exist abusive women. It's more of a media bias against men, just like those ads about (verbal abuse being the same as physical abuse)[http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/0/1/0/6/6/1/abuse-47646761262.jpeg] All of which show men as the abusers. Long story short, if the roles were reversed, the ferminists would be …
/r/MensRights25/03/12 03:50 AM
2

Post reported for being biased and attempting to incite anger but I'll answer. Let's take a comparison for a second. Your eyelid is a piece of skin. Would you like it to be cut off? No. You wouldn't. Would you like that we psychologically (damage)[http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/] you as an infant? No. Of course not. So why should we go ahead and let people do that in the name of a backwards religious belief? What's more, the reason so many Mens Rights advocates are so angry about it is that t…
/r/MensRights25/03/12 03:46 AM
2

<3<3
/r/MensRights24/03/12 03:58 AM
3

Touche. I wish I knew how to add an accent :/
/r/MensRights23/03/12 10:15 PM
2

Affirmative action is like most political acts. It's a good idea. It's horribly ineffective in practice. In effect, it's saying "we have to fight sexism by being sexist the opposite direction!"
/r/MensRights23/03/12 08:51 PM
4

Fuck everything about this.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 08:17 PM
2

But until he mentioned that he was the guy she treated like shit, she showed no remorse. Who's to say that, if he hadn't pointed it out, she would've felt any guilt for it? I have no idea if she felt guilty or if she simply said an obvious cop-out to make herself look less like the bad guy. "You scared me to death"? Really, lady? A wealthy neighborhood in daylight and you got "scared to death" by a guy in a brand new car? I'm calling bullshit on that, no questions asked but that's besides the po…
/r/MensRights17/03/12 04:57 AM
1

Thank you for being a reasonable person; that's quite nice to see, even if you do not agree with me, I appreciate you being levelheaded about this issue. However, I reject that argument that she was merely taught it because there are fundamental things that we as human beings should do, regardless of what we are taught. Let's take racism as an example. Imagine that we grew up in the rural south. All our lives, we were taught that blacks were the devil and they will kill you on sight. So every ti…
/r/MensRights17/03/12 04:32 AM
2

That was someone elses' comment on this thread, sorry. OP said his wife suggested that; my mistake for misreading. I was trying to suggest that him reciprocating the feelings she showed him will let her know that her actions have consequences and they're not good ones.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 08:23 PM
3

I'm more with the OP here but Nep, if we do that, isn't that essentially going to say to these people "treat us like shit, we'll take it"? It seems like getting on our knees and apologizing to the girl for something we didn't do is going to reinforce this notion that they're -always- right. I thought that's what the MRM was trying to get rid of.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 08:15 PM
1

I can't tell if this is in the same sarcastic tone mine was in.... If it was, have a cookie! :D If not....well, I have no response :P Except that the examples that came to mind for me were all of those European queens who started and triggered massive bloodshed.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 05:51 AM
1

Your facebook needs some pruning, I think
/r/MensRights16/03/12 01:58 AM
1

I'm actually in the exact same situation, so hello! :D The best answer I can give you is the emotional attraction and the benefits that offers you. Only sleep with girls you're actively dating; don't go near alcohol if you're looking for sex. If you're really worried, get a sound recorder for any potential sexual interaction. It'll help if you ask "are you sure you want to have sex?" and if she says yes, that's evidence in your favor.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 01:54 AM
1

So the basic stance of your point is that reactionary conservatives = illogical? Wow. Who'd have thought? :P
/r/MensRights16/03/12 12:34 AM
2

Yeah, I know, it was stupid. Thanks for the education though;it's nice to know there's people willing to do the research that I wasn't smart enough to do. I will say that with all the emphasis one hears from doctors about the topic, it's a little hard to take a step back from that huge number but like I said, thanks. I found a couple of good things I wanted to share on the topic though. 1: Breast cancer received almost 2x the federal funding of prostate cancer, as well as being covered over twic…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 07:32 PM
1

The case against kids is purely one wherein you don't get to see the kids or your visitation/custody rights are obviously biased. Then again, I really don't like kids; I can't look at this from a perspective outside of that. That's not even me trying to cop out of this debate, I just can't look at it any way. I'll concede the point to you in cases of fairly evenly split custody and everything. The point about the Casey Anthony case is that the media can and does blow things out the water, as you…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 07:16 PM
1

...where the fuck did this come from? O_o I only read that statistic about a month ago. Stupid me for not citing my sources. Sorry everyone! I didn't know that was as close as it is!
/r/MensRights15/03/12 06:54 PM
1

The feminist argument will be "well only MEN cause wars, women never do". Ergo, men should pay for the stupid choices that all the men in government make. (Of course, they totally ignore the women in congress who support war and the possibility of a female president going to war) I'm not saying I agree with that statement; it's pretty stupid and only true in a purely historical sense where men were kings (except for all the queens in history who have decided to go attack other countries).
/r/MensRights15/03/12 06:51 PM
2

For the record, we are looking at this from two totally different sides. I'm single, twenty and have no want for kids -or- a relationship in the near future, plus I don't like kids, so I'm going to struggle to look at it from your side. Now that we have -that- out of the way, let's begin. Sure, if the child is yours biologically, then you probably should pay for it. Except for the cases where the mother then moves in with another guy and is romantically involved with him; why, then, should I pay…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 06:46 PM
1

Of course! I'm not gonna hate on you :D Just trying to let ya know that text can be screwy to read; hence why I always throw in emoticons! :D :D :D Positivity!
/r/MensRights15/03/12 06:32 PM
1

I'm with you on the child custody thing but at least at the moment, I don't want kids. I can't take a stance on this really but the whole point of the MRM is that there is a clear discrepancy between male and female custody being given. If the rates were equal or even near-equal (like 60-40) I'd be ok with that issue. But it's not; it's somewhere closer to 80-90% of the time, women get custody. Duke Lacrosse team had members falsely accused of rape and they suffered greatly before the girl resci…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 06:24 PM
5

The problem with having kids is that if she wants to seperate, you're bound to pay for those kids. No matter what. Even if they don't want to live with her, the state will say "go with Mommy" and they're screwed. Then you're stuck with twenty years of bills for kids that, if she hires a lawyer who's a big enough dick, will ensure you see your kids once a year. For a weekend. With regards to the sex issue: Yes, it is a fairly small percentage of women who do these things; I've only run into one c…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 06:21 PM
2

I'm actually with you on this. Your initial tone -did- come across as a little bit more hostile, like "why do you assholes give a shit?" but your tone has become a lot more casual and civil, so kudos to you. I'll try to answer as many questions as possible if you have them.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 06:15 PM
6

Prenups have been thrown aside time and time again by the courts because the woman fucks up and loses her money, so her ex-husband is then told to pay for her mistakes. The MRM is focused on fixing a lot of the legal issues that arise from the civilized world, not harassing women (or men) who disagree. Let's start with a few of the basics. 1: Men have a much higher chance of being told they have to pay alimony, no matter what happens with regards to their spouse's monetary situation or the mans'…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 06:14 PM
1

Discussing gay marriage: “This is an issue just like 9-11… We didn’t decide we wanted to fight the war on terrorism because we wanted to. It was brought to us. And if not now, when? When the supreme courts in all the other states have succumbed to the Massachusetts version of the law?” Speaking to the Allentown Morning Call, February 2004 That's the direct quote from his speech :/
/r/MensRights15/03/12 02:47 PM
7

Ok good, you're a reasonable individual. That makes me happy to see. I can honestly say I've never seen anyone on /r/MR try to trivialize genital mutilation but if you've seen it, I'll take your word for it and my response is: fuck those people. That's an ignorant, biased and bigoted viewpoint that's pretty unacceptable by any rational standard. The gist of the MRM's point on this is as follows (and maybe other people can put it better): Yes, Female mutilation is pretty effing horrible and needs…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 05:57 AM
3

Of course it's not. However, being pressured to do that "to support women", specifically breast cancer which occurs in 1 in 10 women as opposed to prostate cancer hitting about half the male population? That's absolutely feminism promoting their own problems.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 05:49 AM
0

...that's seriously dumber than comparing "gay rights" to "9/11"? O_o Wow, your standards are so different from my own. High-five for being unique! :D
/r/MensRights15/03/12 05:47 AM
3

I'm actually w/ this guy; I'd prefer to see a source of this. Not that I'm doubting but it's nice to be able to say "oh ok this happened in this way"
/r/MensRights15/03/12 05:46 AM
5

Which is all well and pretty fucking shitty. We should absolutely try to end that horrific practice. It doesn't change the fact that it occurs in males in exponentially greater numbers, in "civilized" cultures with the approval of the state and the church. At least female genital mutilation is pretty universally called "terrible" by any reasonable person. With regards to the female G-Spot, you're not going to level that one because it's not a controllable aspect of the mutilation itself. If the …
/r/MensRights15/03/12 05:44 AM
3

I'm still awaiting the "how" except for the overall purpose. Also, male genital mutilation = occurs across the civilized -and- uncivilized world, with the blessings of government and churches. It's also mostly done when men have no idea what the -fuck- is going on, so they have no choice in the matter. This, of course, isn't to state women have a choice in the matter; far from it. But this is often done in those shithole backwater countries when a woman is in her childhood or teen years. It's on…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 03:36 AM
4

Both are involuntary; both are painful and both are a pretty damn bad thing. Sure it's a little worse when it comes to women since it removes a major source of pleasure but remember: male foreskin contains a -huge- amount of nerve endings related to sexual pleasure. Circumcised men lose something that uncircumcised men would never give away.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 02:55 AM
1

Bull fucking shit "that's not reverse discrimination". 3 dictates that the exams are done over and over until a particular amount of the winners was female. The "quota" system of #1 is just as discriminatory as any other affirmative action policy. The "tie breaker" scenario is sexism at it's fucking finest. No, fuck this idea and fuck everyone who thinks it's a good idea.
/r/MensRights13/03/12 01:57 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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