ProblemKaese Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
2	I love having male privilege! That's worded like 97% of combat kills have a male killer, 80% of suicides have a man convincing the victim of their decision etc.	/r/MensRights	27/01/20 12:37 AM
1	This headline calling someone who committed suicide due to mental health issues “mentally fragile” Am I understanding something wrong when I think that "mentally fragile" and having "mental health issues" has the exact same meaning except for mental health issues possibly also including lighter cases? If there is a difference, is it just that the association is different for native speakers? (and this is no argument for the headline, I have read about that case from another article that clearly states complementary information that contradicts the implied message of this headline)	/r/MensRights	29/11/19 01:01 AM
1	Crypto is sexist. It's true that heterogeneous groups work more effectively.	/r/MensRights	08/08/19 03:29 PM
5	A woman gets drunk with her date and decides to drive a speedboat. She's speeding and she crashes, and sadly dies. As a result her date gets convicted of murder. Why do women have 0 sense of responsibility for their actions? and what if he died too? would they then say "he obviously did a double suicide" because he didn't stop her from being reckless? Edit: Now I read the article and he wasn't accused of 'murder' but of 'gross negligence'. So also according to court all he did was not take care of her even though he should.	/r/MensRights	25/01/19 02:20 PM
2	Thought you guys might like what I had to say I actually find this kind of downvotes sad because each imaginary -1 is a symbol for a person who doesn't like facts that are against their own worldview.	/r/MensRights	21/01/19 12:58 PM
-1	Boys will be boys yes thanks you	/r/MensRights	16/01/19 12:35 PM
5	Toxic Feminity is... they're definitely not putting ALL men in the same category, but by only saying that some men are fine they are implying that most of them are not. And also, they are differentiating when they shouldn't be. What they called men out on was something you can call out women just as good, which means that they have a biased view on gender, so in other words they are simply sexist.	/r/MensRights	16/01/19 12:51 AM
-29	Boys will be boys "X will be X" is a statement often used as an excuse for X having a certain trait that it can't take the responsibility for because this trait is part of X's nature. Given the example that men or boys are able to rape, legitimizing any action they may take also excuses and therefore encourages this behaviour. I'm mostly certain that this argument at least follows some sort of logic, and you can defend against it by saying that the original statement is not meant to excuse any behaviour of boys b…	/r/MensRights	16/01/19 12:31 AM
1	People in this thread were talking about how men's rights subreddits are nothing but woman hate. Saying "they did it too" isn't a valid defense. And there's so much to criticise about this first comment! For example, you could complain about them referring to men's rights as a "community of men" implying only men wanting equal rights and therefore OP being sexist against women or most of the high voted posts on this subreddit being about helping victims, which is the exact opposite of shitting on anyone except maybe the people responsible for the cases. One example of a very obviously nonva…	/r/MensRights	13/01/19 04:37 AM
2	Feminist doctor shames men who feel psychologically damaged by male genital mutilation. Claims these men are "mansplaining" and have a "fragile male ego". damn men should stop having an opinion really fast	/r/MensRights	06/01/19 07:26 PM
-3	The Patriarchy sure looks oppressive towards women that sounds gay af	/r/MensRights	05/01/19 11:56 AM
3	Misandry has been extremely normalised these days. gradeAunderA talked about this too, yes	/r/MensRights	05/01/19 11:55 AM
3	The Patriarchy sure looks oppressive towards women All of these stats can be explained by men having a tendency to make different choices, even though I don't think all of them are caused by that, for example laws around custody give women an advantage over men regardless of what the men chose to do.	/r/MensRights	05/01/19 01:37 AM
5	Misandry has been extremely normalised these days. that's why the word woman is sexist. They should change the word to wopeople. *but of course changing disappointment into disappointpeoplet would be absurd.	/r/MensRights	05/01/19 01:22 AM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" I'm not saying it's okay that blacks are being killed because it's from their own kind, I just said that it's not whites who are oppressing them. And as you said, it has nothing to do with "oppression".	/r/MensRights	01/01/19 06:49 PM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" But i don't think this is cherry picking as the conclusion was right, they just don't understand numbers well enough to support it.	/r/MensRights	01/01/19 04:08 AM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" the article claimed that women are more likely to be killed by people close to them rather than anyone else. To get the chance of getting killed by someone close to you under the assumption that you are a woman, you just need to divide the percentage of homicides being on women by close people by the percentage of homicides being on women. Since you already have the percentage of homicides being on women, you only need the percentage of homicides having female victims and being performed by peop…	/r/MensRights	31/12/18 12:23 AM
2	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" yeah im sorry I was really tired yesterday and that 2nd part I wrote was actual bullshit. You do need more information than what the article gives you to come to the conclusion the article draws. What that first part was supposed to mean is that to get the percentage of homicides being on a female victim and by a partner or family member, you need the percentage of homicides on females being done by a partner or family member instead of the percentage of homicides done by a partner or family mem…	/r/MensRights	30/12/18 08:39 PM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" you can't just multyply 28 by 64 and leave out the %. I didn't expect you to not know this but % means that you divide it by 100. So 28% by 64% equals 0.28 * 0.64 which is 0.18, so 18%. To your question what I'm multiplying: I labled the 28.9% as the percentage of murders being committed by a partner or family member and the BBC statistics already are labled, which means that you should also know that the 64% is the percentage of these murders having a female victim.	/r/MensRights	30/12/18 08:24 PM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" why would you say that when dealing with the percentages like raw numbers would lead to a result 1280%, which isn't what Hovis got. Still, calculating 64% of 20% is worthless because it completely ignores the meanings of the numbers. The number you are trying to use here is the percentage of murders being committed by acquaintances, which I had to look up at another source. male female by acquaintance 10.4% 18.5% 28.9% by stranger 69.6% 1.5% 71.1% 80% 20% 100%	/r/MensRights	29/12/18 03:21 AM
0	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" the 64% is not the percentage of women being killed by partners but killed partners being women, so multiplying that with the 20% won't get you the percentage of homicides being on females and by their partners. Instead, that tells you that worldwide, in most of the homicide cases, the victims are male, while in the household, most of the victims are female, leading up to the comparison made in the title of the article of the household being a more common place for females to be killed. Edit: I …	/r/MensRights	29/12/18 03:12 AM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" this is a global statistic so it may not say very much about life in cities because in comparison to war etc. there are very few homicides in cities.	/r/MensRights	29/12/18 03:05 AM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" 28.9%	/r/MensRights	29/12/18 03:02 AM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" You do realise that 80 is not more than 96, right? This discussion is only about bad arguments, so unless you are talking to someone with a different opinion than yours, just bringing up different arguments for your position instead of defending the ones attacked is useless. Your logic is the same as claiming whites are still oppressing blacks just because they die of murder more often but ignoring that most of the blacks dying by murder are killed by their own race.	/r/MensRights	29/12/18 02:52 AM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" me differenciating between these numbers already implies that one isn't the same as the other. I don't understand what you mean when you say that some statistics don't "belong together", but it's clear that the information needed to draw a conclusion is not included in the article which draws this exact conclusion. The question is why they leave out the percentage of homicides being caused by an acquaintance of the victim and the actual number supporting the claim.	/r/MensRights	29/12/18 02:39 AM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" I meant 18.5% of homicide victims are women killed by their partners, already did the calculations for you. I did not fill in your X, as your calculation does not make sense in the given context. A little table for better understanding: male female by acquaintance 10.4% 18.5% 28.9% by stranger 69.6% 1.5% 71.1% 80% 20% 100% So you get the number of homicides on females by acquaintances by applying the 64% to the 28.9%. The number the article is about, even though not mentioned in the article itse…	/r/MensRights	29/12/18 02:28 AM
7	9 Female Empowerment Quotes with Genders Reveresed came here to say that	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 06:53 PM
2	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" no, it's 64% of the total number of people killed by acquaintances, which is 28.9% of all homicides. 64% of 28.9% is 18.5% and that divided by 20% is 92%, so 92% of homicides on women are done by people close to them.	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 04:09 PM
0	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" Statistically, this is true, even though it works for men too. First of all, it's harder to identify a murderer if he wasn't associated with the victim, which means that even if there were exactly as many murders by close people as by strangers, of most murders that were solved, which would mean that you know whether the killer was a stranger or not, the murderer would be an acquaintance. Besides that, when you don't know somebody, you tend to have fewer motivation to kill them.	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 04:02 PM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" If we can't stop men from being killed, we'll just have to go the other direction.	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 03:56 PM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" It's 18.5%, according to the 64% of homicides by close ones on women and 28.9% of homicides in general by close ones.	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 03:55 PM
2	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" they are sad for their husbands being brutally murdered	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 03:49 PM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" It doesn't say 64% of women that are homicide victims are killed by someone close to them but from murders of someone close to one, 64% are on women. If you apply these 64% to the percentage of murders performed by people close to the victim and compare that to the number of women killed by anyone, which is 20%, you get as a result that 92.4% of women who are killed by someone else are killed by a person close to them. Since 92.4% are actually more than 64%, you can't say making people mistake t…	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 03:48 PM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" because that's not what this article is about. It's about where women get killed the most, and this indirectly (you also need the percentage of murders being performed by partners/family members, basic statistic knowledge which the writers of the article don't seem to have and a calculator) shows 92% of murders against females are done by family members or partners. Instead, you could complain about why they didn't show the 92% of females getting killed in this occasion rather than the 64% of pe…	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 03:31 PM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" thats probably because the percentage of men being the killer is 96% while the percentage of men being the victim is only 80% which means that most incidents are men on men but only one fifth of opposite gender homicides are women killing men.	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 03:21 PM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" My pedagogy teacher keeps saying that boys tend to be less responsible by nature, giving girls an advantage in school. That suggests that the gender bias may be solved in this regard if the schools changed their systems, but it also may mean that it's the mens own fault for being homeless. At least, "It's their nature" may be true, but still is a bad excuse for being irresponsible. By the way, I don't know how true that premise is, but it explains the statistics very well.	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 01:42 PM
2	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" Yes, they were. According to this source, 94% of perpetrators were male. That means that there are more male killers than male victims, so actually you can only conclude that men are more likely to get involved in a crime, and if they are, they are less likely to be the one getting killed.	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 01:33 PM
0	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" According to this source, a total of 28.9% of murders were committed by partner or family. If you multiply that percentage by the 64% from the BBC statistic, you get 18.5%. If you divide that by the 20% from the statistic, you get 92.3%. That is the probability of a woman being killed by a partner or family member rather than by anyone else. If you ask me, 92.3% is even higher than 85%.	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 01:29 PM
1	BBC shows 80% homicide victims are male. Tries to spin it around by giving it the title "Women are much more likely to be killed by someone close to them" Ever took a look at who actually kills them in the global statistics? It's 94% men, which is more than the 80% of victims being male from the article. So in general, men get involved in homicide with a higher probability, may it be as the victim or as the one responsible, and when women get involved in one, they have a higher probability of being the one getting killed. So the BBC source about all homicides doesn't give you any valuable information if you don't have context, and with the context…	/r/MensRights	28/12/18 01:20 PM
16	Female YouTuber with millions of dollars complaining about not getting paid enough even though her videos are either not interesting or ad hominem attacks towards men, White people, or Americans. subscribe to a black person	/r/MensRights	10/12/18 03:15 PM
2	Beleive women poster on my campus restricting a discussion means encouraging blind obedience tho	/r/MensRights	08/12/18 12:42 AM
1	Beleive women poster on my campus yes i did read it so you dont have to repeat what you said already. But it's possible to make a reply without physically removing the former message, since it removes something from the discussion aswell, especially for people who did not get the chance to read the OP and who might make the same claims towards your answer again, just to have listed all points. Beyond that, cutting down the sheet may not have the meaning of silencing anybody, but can easily be interpreted as such and is therefore…	/r/MensRights	08/12/18 12:33 AM
4	Beleive women poster on my campus silencing an argument does not counter it, but keeps up the image of the opposition of feminism being against the concept.	/r/MensRights	08/12/18 12:15 AM
3	Beleive women poster on my campus r/menkampf	/r/MensRights	08/12/18 12:12 AM
58	Pay gap hysteria- the results are in! apparently not.	/r/MensRights	30/11/18 06:44 PM
1	Pay gap hysteria- the results are in! haha as if women's choices existed	/r/MensRights	30/11/18 06:41 PM
9	Viewers are left outraged as Sir Cliff Richard tells Loose Women he'd rather 10 guilty people go free than one innocent person suffer after he was wrongly accused of historical sex offences not all heroes wear capes	/r/MensRights	28/11/18 04:36 PM
1	Women telling us about our penises.. fucking "men's health" here is a wikipedia link with various sources that say that the rate is around 75%.	/r/MensRights	25/06/18 09:31 AM
0	Privilege is invisible to those who have it These things aren't tied to race or gender. Of course they are not "tied" but, just as TheMythof_Feminism said, we are talking about tendencies. No one is talking about not publicly acknowledging wealth privilege. people usually mean what they say and if trump does not acknowledge his wealth privilege, this is an argument against the point TheMythof_Feminism tried to make when saying Do you think rich people don't know they're rich? Nope. The draft and Violence Against Women Act would be example…	/r/MensRights	22/06/18 04:59 PM
3	Privilege is invisible to those who have it Why do you use subjective evaluations as arguments when you already know they have zero value edit: just saying that everything i said is nonsense is about as constructive as throwing arbitrary insults at each other	/r/MensRights	21/06/18 04:40 PM
3	Privilege is invisible to those who have it Originally "lol" was shorthand for "laughing out loud", but people started connecting it to stupid/funny situations because that was when the term originally was used. Now, "lol" does not have the same meaning as what it's an acronym for. It describes the situation and not necessarily that you are laughing about it. This is what you call evolution of language. here is a source that gives examples of poor language defining the normal language of the future. The "correct way" is subjective, the of…	/r/MensRights	21/06/18 04:25 PM
2	Privilege is invisible to those who have it so you give reasons for why it is not society but our species as a whole prefering to protect women and then complain about me saying that men protecting women is a cliche? When you are formulating a response, dont prove the point you are trying to disprove. For example, in my previous comment I did not contradict myself. Also, even if people don't use the word privilege in the way it is officially defined, you can say that its actual usage in modern society defines its meaning. For example, peo…	/r/MensRights	21/06/18 03:28 PM
2	Privilege is invisible to those who have it reading is overrated, guessing what people say is a fun way to support your position	/r/MensRights	21/06/18 03:12 PM
-3	Privilege is invisible to those who have it when people say that someone is privileged, they mean that their starting conditions were above average. They would never complain about someone for example saving the world and getting a huge reward for it. An example of someone who does not acknowledge his privileges despite clearly having them is the famous quote by Trump about only starting with a few million dollars. He does know that he's rich but he talks about it as if he had the same chances as anyone else. I don't really know the laws …	/r/MensRights	20/06/18 09:53 PM