TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Proof_Option1386 Archive

View 1 post and 245 comments by Proof_Option1386 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)
15

ProgressProof_Option1386/r/MensRights25/07/24 08:25 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

What on earth did you put in your edited comment that was so bad that the mod removed it?
/r/MensRights10/10/24 04:29 AM
-1

I don't mind your existence - I mind your willingness to lie. I would welcome a debate with someone with a different point of view who didn't use bullshit as their first and only rhetorical tool :)
/r/MensRights10/10/24 04:20 AM
-2

There are a lot of reasons that college enrollment by men is declining. It's definitely a problem in a lot of ways. However given how useless most college degrees are, and the amount of debt those useless degree holders are saddled with, I'm not convinced that lowered male college enrollment is, in and of itself, a unilaterally bad thing. Congrats on saying something that wasn't completely vitriolic shit, by the way. Maybe there's hope for you. Baby steps!!!
/r/MensRights10/10/24 04:12 AM
1

You didn't quote me saying what I thought of what he actually said, nor did I tell you what I actually thought of what he said, princess. When you do nothing more than misrepresent yourself and others, it serves as a pretty explicit acknowledgement that you think your perspective is shit, too. Otherwise you wouldn't have to lie so much ;). Try having an actual opinion sometime, and try not lying. I think you'll find it satisfying.
/r/MensRights10/10/24 04:00 AM
1

No princess. My words are to explain the point that you deliberately lied about what he actually said. And that the lie you made up clearly deviates from his actual words. Which again, you lied about. That you lied about them isn't in contention: You claimed he said [blatantly!]: men “who won’t vote for Kamala” should be lined up and SH0T! What he actually said was: "There are going to be some males in our society that will refuse to vote for a potential female president because they don't think…
/r/MensRights10/10/24 03:46 AM
1

Lol - so first you lie about what he said, then you lie about what I said? Stop lying, son.
/r/MensRights10/10/24 02:49 AM
0

no, he said "a potential female president," not "this woman for president". Stop pretending you don't grasp the difference. It's abundantly clear that he's referring to men who are so misogynistic that they would never vote for any woman for president, and not assuming that any man not voting for Harris is automatically in that group. You can tell this by the words he actually used and their meanings. You deliberately lied in order to make his statement seem more inflammatory than it was, and no…
/r/MensRights10/10/24 02:28 AM
-1

Sure, but isn't there a similarly wide gulf between a nude beach and a brothel? I mean, I don't know how many nude beaches you've been to, but even in my limited experience, they are very different animals. Again, I just think he's dramatically overstating a more reasonable reaction - "I'm not comfortable with that" or "Why didn't you check in with me to see how I'd feel about that" or "I don't want this to become part of our lifestyles" or even "Taking your clothes off and swimming in front of …
/r/MensRights10/10/24 02:00 AM
-6

Yeah, but surely there's a massive middle ground between a blase "That's nice, dear - how was the water?" and "I feel betrayed. It makes me sick to my stomach to think she did this to me."
/r/MensRights10/10/24 01:44 AM
-18

I think you should stick to apples to apples, not apples to oranges. But I see your point. I guess what I'm wondering is, when you say women are free to do what they want without criticism or reproach, whose criticism and reproach is at stake here and why would it be more than just an eyerolling annoyance? Like, when you consider the women in your life and their actions - do you personally feel like you have to withhold judgement or keep quiet because you aren't allowed to criticize or reproach …
/r/MensRights10/10/24 01:34 AM
-2

Princess - come on....maybe you went to some shit college and maybe you didn't, but you know as well as I do that you are in no position whatsoever to call out *anyone* for having a "rotten donkey brain" much less someone like me. as far as your other points go, they are not only utterly irrelevant to what we are discussing, but laughably inconsistent. By your own logic, you are in zero position whatsoever to label his wife as the "bad person". Because you aren't in the relationship and you aren…
/r/MensRights10/10/24 01:24 AM
0

it's a pretty clear difference, but if you don't think so, why make the effort to lie about what was said in the first place?
/r/MensRights10/10/24 01:14 AM
-3

My pleasure, big guy. I know it's hard to not lie and I was really glad to give you the push you so clearly needed.
/r/MensRights10/10/24 01:03 AM
-3

He didn't make a genocidal threat. I know that word is super popular right now, especially with histrionic twits, but that doesn't excuse your misuse. He didn't dehumanize men. He should be censored at the least and potentially fired for what he said because he was in front of a class and acting as a representative of the university. This is another example of you getting histrionic in service to your conclusion - but your histrionics don't support your conclusion, they pointlessly distract from…
/r/MensRights10/10/24 12:58 AM
-4

Why the deliberate misquote - and what's wrong with all of you reacting to the headline without bother to take the five seconds necessary to watch the clip? What the guy actually said, and I quote, was: "There are going to be some males in our society that will refuse to vote for a potential female president because they don't think females are smart enough to be president. We can line all those guys up and shoot em. They clearly don't understand the way the world works." That's markedly differe…
/r/MensRights10/10/24 12:47 AM
-4

a) I know this is confusing, but none of us are actually talking to the man in this article. b) Again, more confusing, but we are all expressing opinions about the article and about each other's opinions. And we all have the right to do that. No matter how insanely ridiculous and moronic the opinion someone like you spouts, you have every right to do it. And I have every right to point out how monumentally stupid you are, and you have every right to react to me pointing that out. That's how that…
/r/MensRights10/10/24 12:41 AM
-2

No you actually don't... because you hold zero authority over how they feel...how someone states they feels is subjective so there is zero objective measure to rate whether or not it is an over reaction Sweetie - that's utterly retarded. You don't need authority over someone to have an opinion, as you've literally just demonstrated. Does this word vomit actually pass through your brains on the way out? And I realize this might be difficult for someone like you to understand, but normal people do…
/r/MensRights10/10/24 12:35 AM
-11

Keep in mind, a lot of the people on this thread probably not only have limited experience with women, but also with actual relationships. So of course their point of view is incredibly small and pointed.
/r/MensRights09/10/24 10:19 PM
-3

Of course I get to decide what is or isn't an overreaction to someone stating how they emotionally feel. So do you, and you are exercising that right, just as I am. Stop making stupid arguments in service to a lousy perspective. And of course I'm tone policing because that's the only issue in this article and this post! That's literally what we are arguing about, and bitching at me for tone policing while you criticize the tone of the article is so stupid it doesn't even rise to the level of hyp…
/r/MensRights09/10/24 10:18 PM
29

Why is the equivalent here him going to a strip club instead of him going to a nude beach? Regardless, if her reaction to him going to a strip club was "I feel betrayed. It makes me sick to my stomach to think he did this to me" (as his was), then she would be similarly retarded. It's a fucking strip club - he didn't bang your sister.
/r/MensRights09/10/24 10:13 PM
0

Lol - when feelings are dismissed out of hand, especially in service to an anti-male ideology or narrative that's a problem. That doesn't magically mean that every feeling held by a male, no matter how ridiculous and hysterical has to be fully embraced and validated. This guy said: "I was fuming to think she would undress in front of strangers. I feel betrayed. It makes me sick to my stomach to think she did this to me" It's clearly a hysterical overreaction. He can have whatever feelings he wan…
/r/MensRights09/10/24 10:07 PM
-6

Lol - when feelings are dismissed out of hand, especially in service to an anti-male ideology or narrative that's a problem. That doesn't magically mean that every feeling held by a male has to be fully embraced and validated. This guy said: "I was fuming to think she would undress in front of strangers. I feel betrayed. It makes me sick to my stomach to think she did this to me" It's clearly a hysterical overreaction. He can have whatever feelings he wants, and people can piss all over the stup…
/r/MensRights09/10/24 10:02 PM
-17

I’m not being disingenuous, I just don’t think that the culture is where you think it is. Folks like Dear Abbey and her commenters show their independence and purity by being as gender neutral as possible. If the genders were reversed and some lady was being this histrionic they were definitely offer her the same chill pill.
/r/MensRights09/10/24 08:46 PM
-23

The husband didn’t say he was uncomfortable or distressed or unhappy. He said he was “betrayed” and “sick to his stomach”. Presumably a strong word like “ownership” was used because of his hysterical overreaction to a very minor breach of decorum in front of complete strangers. His reaction would only make sense if his wife flashed her cooter to his coworkers and friends while winking in implicit promise. This reminds me of the woman who said she had been “sexually assaulted” by Chris Noth becau…
/r/MensRights09/10/24 07:43 PM
-40

Don’t you think there’s a difference between going to a nude beach with a bunch of fat naked people and their fat naked kids and fat naked grandparents and going to a nude beach filled with hot people looking to fuck? I don’t think the advice to find out more before reacting is so out of bounds here… Regardless of whether you agree or disagree, how is this a men’s rights issue? Are you asserting that, had the genders been reversed, the advice in the article would have been different?
/r/MensRights09/10/24 07:08 PM
7

What your professor should have said was that in the situation you described, that would indeed be rape. He should have acknowledged that society is dismissive of these situations. He then should have made the argument that sexual violence and rape is currently far far far more prevalent coming from men than coming from women, but that as men's willingness to report incidence increased, that differential might well go down. He could have then argued that normally, when people bring up rape and s…
/r/MensRights08/10/24 09:29 PM
1

Apparently you don't even care enough to read the article and see that this happened in 2019, that people were outraged and that the girls were punished.. If you *actually* cared, you would have known that. But you don't care, you are just slotting it into your aggrievement narrative. Don't do that.
/r/MensRights07/10/24 03:22 PM
1

It is on the news and the internet…you literally provided a link to an online news article…
/r/MensRights07/10/24 04:35 AM
1

I like the idea that EC votes would be apportioned proportionally to the popular vote in the state. That way, for example, conservative voters in CA and liberal voters in Texas would still meaningfully impact the election. And then republicans would have reason to care about CA (and not threaten to withhold disaster relief the way Trump did). And conversely, democrats would have reason to campaign in Texas.
/r/MensRights05/10/24 03:52 PM
0

Post WWII us had the world by the balls. By the time the Cold War ended, the US had squandered most of its advantage on pointless military bloat. We bankrupted Russia, but man did it cost us. We were caught, like everyone else, quite flat footed for globalization. Just because the US wasn’t building factories in China doesn’t mean that manufacturing wasn’t occurring. It was, and in spades. Cheap Chinese goods have been flooding the global markets since I was in short pants. And cheap Chinese goo…
/r/MensRights02/10/24 07:31 PM
0

Except he didnt. It took another 4 times what he started to bail it out. Which makes me question: is your dick just too small to accept that you are wrong, or is it because you’re ability to handle cognitive dissonance is just so lacking that you are unwilling to give credit to a democrat or to democrats in general?
/r/MensRights02/10/24 07:27 PM
-1

It's not just the Democrats, it's the Republicans, and it's the world. The world has moved towards globalization. It is a fact. The US had one of two options with that: Sit by and do nothing while foreign goods got cheaper and cheaper and domestic goods became more and more expensive until not only would no one outside of the country be willing to buy US goods, but no one would purchase them domestically, either. So either these companies move and US jobs are lost, or these companies go bankrupt…
/r/MensRights02/10/24 04:30 PM
1

When someone gives you information you don't like, it's always a good idea to google the information. Unfortunately, your ignorance is paired with too much arrogance to do that. Bush began the auto bailout, and notably did so despite the bailout bill proposed by Democrats being killed by Senate Republicans because they didn't think it cut wages enough. Bush then unilaterally extended 17.1 billion in bailout money (which he took from TARP). Obama was already the president-elect at that time, and …
/r/MensRights02/10/24 03:27 PM
11

Why are you attributing the attitudes of the people in the article to the article itself? I thought the article was pretty explicit about documenting misandrist attitudes amongst a privileged few, not subscribing to them…
/r/MensRights02/10/24 05:28 AM
-1

lol. It was worth asking given how histrionic you are. I'm glad that's not the case, princess.
/r/MensRights01/10/24 10:55 PM
0

Are you implying that I've used threatening language and have been light on facts?
/r/MensRights01/10/24 10:39 PM
0

A Reddit post is a nice starting point to spark a discussion or to help instigate a perspective. If it’s your end point, then it just strongly implies that you are just grasping at any straw that happens to fit your narrative and you aren’t really interested in doing any work, research wise or intellectually, to come up with a well thought out argument or perspective. Just because a dipshit says something you don’t like doesn’t mean you get to automagically assume they are the benchmark for soci…
/r/MensRights01/10/24 10:03 PM
1

That’s moronic. You don’t spend tens of billions helping people “as a coincidence”. You’re just being dismissive of facts that contradict a lazy and stupid narrative.
/r/MensRights01/10/24 10:01 PM
-6

Sentencing gap is something to focus on. It’d be interesting see the evolution of those numbers since 2012. Though even there, I’m not really interested in what happens in Africa or South Africa. They are shit shows. I’m interested in what happens here in the us, and to a lesser extent, Western Europe. If this is something that interests you, why is your support a Reddit post?
/r/MensRights01/10/24 07:53 PM

Daily? Stop with the hysterical bullshit. If you think travesties of justice are occurring on college campuses, then get off your lazy ass and make that argument and provide specifics and make your case. Instead, you are engaging in lazy hyperbole. I’m not an expert on the subject by any means, but the internets seem to imply that there have been 502 cases brought up under title ix, of which 197 have been resolved. Even if we assume that all 502 cases represent horrible travesties of justice and…
/r/MensRights01/10/24 07:35 PM
-10

Your claim was that the Left has done nothing for men. And what I've said isn't something that "may" be true, but is true. Your claim is refuted. There are certainly assholes on the Left, and some of those assholes are lazy with their rhetoric and damning towards men. Those assholes aren't the ones running the House and the Senate. They aren't the ones seeking the Presidency. They aren't part of the cabinets and they aren't setting policy. Should you be annoyed when some plump green-haired, pimp…
/r/MensRights01/10/24 06:50 PM
-27

Come on. That's so clearly a reductive and whiny load of shit. The "Left" panders to men less than it did before, but still does. I think "men" have every right to resent the amount of pandering to women, especially at their expense, but pretending that that is the entire picture is just a retarded tantrum. The "Left" has been the ones keeping the lights on for the last 20 years, ever since the Tea Party destroyed the Right as a governing body. The Right in this country serve only to obstruct, t…
/r/MensRights01/10/24 06:16 PM
1

Um...both people in the video were being obnoxious and looking to get a rise out of people. Looks like the people didn't want to get involved in their ridiculous bullshit. I would be surprised if anyone except the disabled, the elderly, or the burdened expect anyone to open a door for them, irrespective of gender. I think a large % of the population feels an obligation to hold a door open for people immediately following them, also irrespective of gender.
/r/MensRights28/09/24 02:25 AM
1

You have no useful skills. You have no useful experience. You are clearly a lawsuit waiting to happen. You've only applied "to like 30 places". You lack basic reading comprehension and you clearly have a gigantic and completely unearned chip on your shoulder. *That's* why you aren't getting hired, especially for HR. Take some basic accountability, son, and grow the fuck up, stop the pity party, and stop pretending that the world is the problem when it's incredibly obvious that *you* are the prob…
/r/MensRights27/09/24 05:17 AM
0

There are several options here: There is systemic bias against you because you are a straight white male going into HR; You haven’t put much effort getting or preparing for interviews and therefore haven’t had much success; The people you deem inferior to you based on a the narrow set of qualifications you are looking at are actually better than you in ways that you aren’t considering; You interview badly and the people interviewing you can see that you are aggrieved, hypersensitive, and have a …
/r/MensRights26/09/24 07:55 PM
-1

Don’t forget you also have “years” of experience at 24 and applied to 30 jobs! Plus, the recruiters also give you info about who got the job including their gender, sexuality, and qualifications. Because that’s a thing that happens! Stop making stupid shit up.
/r/MensRights26/09/24 01:59 PM
14

From your description it sounds like you are just too manly. Maybe you should trying mincing or using expressive hand gestures in the interviews so that they’ll think you are a homo and give you the job. If you don’t think you can pull that off, just tell them that you’re “vers” when they ask about interests. Mention your big thick penis - not like they can ask for proof. The reason you are having trouble is because HR people are completely fucking useless. Therefore, companies that are worried …
/r/MensRights26/09/24 02:45 AM
0

https://www.reddit.com/r/BSA/comments/1cngw3i/bsa_membership_graph_1911_2023/ That's what happens to organizations when membership drops (and drops steeply) over long periods - they start looking for new sources of membership...
/r/MensRights12/09/24 04:47 PM
-2

So "fuck off with my rhetoric" that "the wife's vagina was treated like a clown car" because "people had many children"? And "fuck off with my rhetoric" about the high mortality of children because "very few of them survived to reproductive adulthood" I mean, retarded *and* illiterate? That's quite a combination. I know this is complicated for someone like you, but if you are going to piss all over someone's premise, don't support it, and don't piss all over their reasoning by simply restating i…
/r/MensRights09/09/24 03:11 AM
-2

I mean, in traditional households like that, the wife’s vagina was treated like a clown car, and you didn’t have any modern conveniences. These people threw out litters, farmed, kept animals, slaughtered them, cooked, cleaned, and spread their legs on command. For the vast majority of people, it wasn’t a picnic as a woman, either. And keep in mind that what was driving “traditional” gender roles was the shockingly high mortality rate during childbirth and of the high mortality of childred couple…
/r/MensRights06/09/24 08:31 PM
-11

There are definitely people out there that subscribe to one-sided gender roles and responsibilities, and you’ll find those people on both ends of the spectrum. I do not believe they represent the mainstream, which is your belief.
/r/MensRights06/09/24 08:27 PM
2

I would probably want to add to these in a way that centers being a man, for example, to know that your worth as a man is not dependent on having a woman or elevating women above you.
/r/MensRights06/09/24 04:36 PM
1

Meh - I don't buy that at all. Men and women are different, but are *far* *far* *far* more alike than they are different. For most of the shit that's labeled as either "women's" or "men's" work, I think you would need a pretty good excuse to get out of having at least a basic level of competency. I expect a man to know how to sew on a button or change a diaper or do the laundry. I expect a woman to know how to change a tire or mow the lawn or flip a breaker. "But I'm a man/woman" shouldn't be a …
/r/MensRights04/09/24 04:16 AM
5

I don’t think that in the slightest. You misread my comment.
/r/MensRights02/09/24 08:39 PM
25

It seems like the article expresses that you have to say the “no” in a positive way and pair it with an expression of love. I would worry that the “no” as expressed in the article is so washed out that it instead implies a flexibility rather than a boundary. Still, I think pairing it with love is a nice idea. I feel like this is a more effective version of the approach in the article: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m6WsyWRXY18
/r/MensRights02/09/24 08:25 PM
11

These articles are frustrating because they never break down the results. For example, I’d be interested to know if the results bias was dependent or impacted by the gender of the teacher
/r/MensRights02/09/24 07:24 PM
2

Sure it can. But people like patting themselves on the back for their slacktivism/virtue signaling, and that's incredibly irritating and really gets in the way of the message. There's a good middle ground between sanctimony/picking fights and keeping your head down.
/r/MensRights01/09/24 10:50 PM
2

Really? I find all the commenter dialogue to be useless fluff. regardless of the gender of the commenter.
/r/MensRights01/09/24 07:41 PM
1

Really? I find all the commenter dialogue to be useless fluff. regardless of the gender of the commenter.
/r/MensRights01/09/24 07:40 PM
1

There is nothing you can do. But aren't the male commenters almost as annoying?
/r/MensRights01/09/24 07:14 PM
1

I’m not going to try to wade through that regurgitated screed to try to figure out what points you might be making or repeating. Take a deep breath and actually write a response rather than try to overwhelm me with word-vomit.
/r/MensRights27/08/24 04:03 PM
1

lol…influential how? I mean, Jesus. I’m just not seeing any of the noise those people making translating into real policy. I see a lot of lip service paid, but I see men, in terms of elected and appointed positions, in terms of money spent, in terms of real dollars, doing just fine. I do see men, as a class, participating less in colleges and universities, but I think of that as the canary in the coal mine. The collegiate system is entering a death spiral, one that is long overdue. In the afterm…
/r/MensRights27/08/24 03:41 PM
1

I think you choose to pretend that the most extreme examples of any group you choose to oppose represent the mean of that group. And I think you do it deliberately because you are disingenuous. If I had to point to the biggest areas of “degeneracy” in our society, the ones that are most fundamental and have the largest effects they would be issues like gun massacres, the complete breakdown of the Republican Party’s interest in actual governance at the national level since the Tea Party, the domi…
/r/MensRights27/08/24 07:49 AM
4

Apparently, quite a lot more than you. And I dated quite a bit before I came out, son. Also, are you actually homophobic or just trying to offend? I’m not offended, it was just weird to bring up porn and assume I’m perverted.. And if you’d like to pretend I’m mocking your romantic life arbitrarily to make yourself feel better, then go ahead. Of course you are the one whining to the internet about it…
/r/MensRights27/08/24 07:36 AM
2

Again, some mean girls on Reddit don’t magically define feminism any more than some twits on Reddit define men. Feminism isn’t a monolith. You are just pretending that it is because you are reductive and lazy. If laziness, entitlement, outrage baiting, and attempts at cancellation in the face of real or perceived insult were limited to people calling themselves “feminists”, maybe I’d be inclined to take this bullshit of yours more seriously. But they aren’t limited to “feminists” - it’s widespre…
/r/MensRights27/08/24 07:28 AM
-13

I’m gay. lol. But dating women isn’t rocket science, you just have to be attractive, and in your case, good at hiding what a stupid and angry twit you are. lol. Of course feminism has been positive for relationships between men and women. You just think otherwise because you think that you are the only one in the relationship who should be able to have goals outside the relationship and standards within it. Your attitude is narcissistic, lazy, and entitled.
/r/MensRights27/08/24 07:22 AM
-6

What enforced female hegemony? “Mean girls on social media get too much attention” isn’t a hegemony. Unfairness and double standards bother me too - greatly- but that doesn’t magically equal an “enforced female hegemony”. That’s just you engaging in victimization porn fantasies - which is, predictably, the same shit you complain about in women. Which makes all thus anti-feminism just petty bitching because you are pisdy that someone else is getting more attention than you…
/r/MensRights27/08/24 07:04 AM
-19

The net result of feminism has been dramatically increased workplace participation by women which has been a huge economic driver for the country. It’s also resulted in women being able to vote, and if you are suggesting that’s a bad thing, then that’s pretty telling. Some women are unhappy cunts. That’s irrespective of feminism. They are just more able to express it and aren’t required to suck it up and live miserable lives any more. I’m sorry you are unappealing to women, but you blaming that …
/r/MensRights27/08/24 06:58 AM
-28

Birth rates in every country are negatively correlated with women’s average educational attainment and workplace participation. And birth rates of natives in western nations have been falling for decades. Laying this at the feet of “feminism” is both petty and mean spirited. If you are so interested in having children and traditional gender roles, then date stupid ugly chicks, pay for everything, and stop whining. A dominant theme in this sub is what a load of shit it is that women blame everyth…
/r/MensRights27/08/24 06:18 AM
-2

That’s their business. The Palestinians could have turned Gaza into whatever they wanted it to be. What they have chosen and continue to choose is to take the billions of dollars they get every year and to spend it on rockets and ammunitions and terrorist tunnels. When you cynically choose to blame Jews for the bad and violent and self defeating choices the Palestinians insist on making, that’s antisemitism. Stop being a bigot.
/r/MensRights26/08/24 09:05 PM
-3

“If I say ‘Israeli’ instead of ‘Jew’, no one will be able to guess that I really mean ‘kike’” I’ve broken your code. It wasn’t that hard. Attributing blame to Israel in a war that Palestinians started and have refused to end is antisemitic. Blaming Israel for Palestinian terrorism is antisemitic. Refusing to acknowledge Palestinian terrorism or excusing it is antisemitic. Putting blame squarely upon Jews and only holding Jews accountable is antisemitic. You are antisemitic. You refusal to acknow…
/r/MensRights26/08/24 07:37 PM
-2

"How dare you call out my antisemitism! You calling me out for being an antisemitic bigot is the problem. Me being an antisemitic bigot is just fine!" Funny how much you people like dead jews, and how much hate you have for live ones. But in your mind, it's the jews' fault...
/r/MensRights26/08/24 06:39 PM
-8

There is no genocide. There's a war, one which the Palestinians started with a brutal massacre. Civilians die in wars, and the Palestinian's cynical decisions to build schools and hospitals over military bases ensures that civilian deaths will be maximized. Despite this, the Israelis show incredible restraint and precision in their targeting and have done an admirable job of minimizing civilian casualties. Civilians die in wars. That's why countries generally don't start them. Starting a war by …
/r/MensRights26/08/24 06:15 PM
-10

Bullshit.
/r/MensRights26/08/24 06:11 PM
1

Lot of hypotheticals to try to justify why this is in a kens rights sub…
/r/MensRights25/08/24 02:05 PM
1

Ultimately, I would suggest not bringing up feminism at all in the context. If the goal is to form groups for men to support other men, it shouldn't matter whether or not the members do or do not also support women. That should be outside the scope of the group, and trying to gatekeep based on attitudes towards women would be a distraction. If a guy is hurting and needs support, but also believes that there shouldn't be pay gaps, does it really matter if his understanding of pay gaps is on point…
/r/MensRights21/08/24 09:24 PM
1

The internet mocks fat chicks constantly.
/r/MensRights20/08/24 04:00 AM
0

Newsflash: Retard posts reactive post to gain attention. While she is a retard, I do kinda get it a little bit. She wants a girls-only club. I can empathize. I resent greatly the presence of women in crowded gay bars who are taking up valuable space, uselessly. Especially when they get all grabby or get insulted when you don't want to touch their tits. Unlike the woman who made this post, I smile, politely cup their breasts, and keep my uninclusive thoughts to myself.
/r/MensRights20/08/24 12:47 AM
4

"When her book was first announced, some assumed it would be a scorched-earth tell-all. Instead, Mulaney is all but absent. Tendler explicitly refers to her marriage only a handful of times—for instance, when she mentions her reliance on her husband’s income or relocating to Los Angeles for his job. Otherwise, she writes around him." And it should be noted that she *does* have significant mental issues, as detailed in the article. It is, in point of fact, the main focus of the book. "Tendler’s b…
/r/MensRights19/08/24 06:47 PM
-5

Um...if you actually look at the misandry wikipedia page, you'll find that graphic is captioned "Entrepreneurs on Etsy sold embroidery parodying the concept of misandry.\22])" You'll also find that it's in a subsection of the misandry wiki entry describing the relationship between feminism and misandry. I'm not sure how you arrived at this presentation, but it's not what showed up in the google search for me, and it's certainly not representative of what's in the actual wikipedia entry. Given ho…
/r/MensRights19/08/24 05:45 PM
4

There's definitely a lot of looney toons bullshit on both the feminisms subs and the Men's Right Sub. I find there are some important differences though. I think there's more diversity of thought on this sub, which certainly has potential for more interesting exchanges and less dogmatism. Of course there's dogmatism here too, but it's less dominant. I think what drives that on the feminism subs are the mods, who are quite narrow in their thinking and hostile to anything that doesn't fit a partic…
/r/MensRights17/08/24 10:55 PM
-23

There is no how exactly. These people are histrionic nutjobs.
/r/MensRights16/08/24 02:55 PM
25

The only way this could be justified is if the woman would also have not made him financially responsible for the child had she chosen to carry the pregnancy to term.
/r/MensRights16/08/24 04:00 AM
2

And just because the author didn’t intend for the story to be read as an equal indictment of the narrator doesn’t mean that such a reading isn’t just as valid.
/r/MensRights14/08/24 05:25 AM
2

I don't get it. First of all, the idea that you can post things publicly, but can then be aggrieved by unpleasant responses is completely moronic to begin with. Disagreeing with a response, fine. Not liking a response, fine. Criticizing that you shouldn't have gotten those responses in the first place and are being shamed? That's ridiculous. Second of all, in making such a sweeping and negative statement in the first place, he was not only inviting sweeping responses, but was actively inviting t…
/r/MensRights14/08/24 01:11 AM
3

Irony: I'll come back one day GenZ: Why? Adapted from the The Three Amigos, released in 1986
/r/MensRights12/08/24 08:45 PM
12

A few years ago, a short story called "Cat Person" was published in the New Yorker and went viral. It was a fantastic story - a stream of consciousness piece written from the perspective of a young female college student working at a movie theater. She becomes friendly with an older male patron, and they strike up a largely virtual relationship, which eventually culminates in an awkward date and lousy sex. She then ghosts him, after which he insults her. It was beautifully written, and very capt…
/r/MensRights12/08/24 06:34 PM
10

What's biting in the movie is that it's completely true. What's ironic is that *he* completely lacked reason and accountability, and was desperately attracted to a woman who epitomized both.
/r/MensRights12/08/24 06:25 PM
1

What's biting in the movie is that it's completely true. What's ironic is that *he* completely lacked reason and accountability, and was desperately attracted to a woman who epitomized both.
/r/MensRights12/08/24 06:24 PM
1

What's biting in the movie is that it's completely true. What's ironic is that *he* completely lacked reason and accountability, and was desperately attracted to a woman who epitomized both.
/r/MensRights12/08/24 06:22 PM
-19

A 26 year old man made a decision that he now regrets at 32. Rather than be accountable for it, he blames his ex wife. I agree with the other commenter that this story sounds made up, but it’s also ridiculous. It was his decision. If he didn’t want to do it he shouldn’t have done it. That his ex wife wanted it doesn’t change that it was his decision. Sounds like it was a stupid one, and that’s a bummer. The moral here isn’t “women are evil and poor men are persecuted.” The moral is, make sure yo…
/r/MensRights12/08/24 04:34 PM
-1

While this doesn't directly address your topic, it is a little adjacent: It's weird that women have so much trouble giving birth. Other mammals don't. The proximal issue is the relatively enormous size of a fetus' head. But one would think that there would have been plenty of time for women to evolve wider hips to accommodate the head. Turns out the problem is walking upright. Larger hips would create a bigger chance of the fetus falling out, and it turns out from an evolutionary perspective, th…
/r/MensRights11/08/24 05:53 PM
5

No. It isn't possible. I'm so sorry. Every group of men friends will have at least one homo, and that one homo will constantly be after your pristine little tukus. They simply won't rest until they ensare you in the pink triangle and force you to go vegan and listen to Rush while insidiously making you aware of how sexy Alex Lifeson grew over the years. There's just no way to avoid it. The only thing you can do is to prepare by getting your rectum used to a variety of progressively large decorat…
/r/MensRights11/08/24 04:16 AM
0

Your experience in this arena makes sense to me, but look - opinions on reddit are like assholes. Everyone's got one, and everyone thinks theirs doesn't stink. We want to think that we are part of a reasonable and representative cross section of society, but we aren't. We aren't even a representative cross section of whatever our subreddit is supposed to speak to. We are the people angry/annoyed/bored...etc. enough to come onto an anonymous website and post our thoughts. The internet in general …
/r/MensRights10/08/24 07:03 AM
0

That you might be the common denominator in your past relationships is certainly worth exploring - maybe you do have some issues you need to work on* - or maybe it's not an issue of your personal failings, but rather a problem or repeatedly choosing bad women to engage with. Given that you've mentioned the problems with your mother, it's likely that you choose - even subconsciously - women that have some commonalities with her, hoping on some level that success in those relationships will make u…
/r/MensRights10/08/24 05:27 AM
1

Well, it's hard to argue when you bring out the big guns with those all caps. And of course I must be saying that women wearing hijabs should be killed. Great point. And look - you are vitriolic and insulting on the vast majority of your comments. And you do you! But you can't act like a hysterical asshole 90% of the time and then clutch your pearls when you feel that *you* are being insulted. Take it down several notches, princess - those nails of yours are super long.
/r/MensRights07/08/24 05:45 PM
2

OK, well, there are certainly people who agree with you. However, most people *do* believe in gender norms, and different dress and grooming codes are in line with those codes and exist based on the notion that violation of those codes would be disruptive and a distraction in the workplace. Certainly there has been a lot of societal movement around what is considered disruptive and what isn't, but it's a process, and more conservative workplaces - especially workplaces with more conservative cli…
/r/MensRights07/08/24 05:30 PM
4

This post would seem to suggest that you reject gender norms - is that actually so?
/r/MensRights07/08/24 05:20 PM
0

I just assumed you had a thick dick that made up for the stuff you have going on topside… ¯_(ツ)_/¯
/r/MensRights07/08/24 03:14 AM
2

If a prenup is a turn off for a woman, that should be a turn off for you… Alternatively, if it offends you so much, then quit your job and live off her earnings. Plenty of men do…
/r/MensRights07/08/24 12:42 AM
-1

Common sense tells us that if you don’t want to share your assets in the event of divorce, don’t get married or get a prenup. lol. And as we know, prenups work just fine. lol.
/r/MensRights07/08/24 12:31 AM
6

I agree that the laws should change and be updated with the times. Marriage isn't what it used to be. Women's earning power isn't what it used to be. But this problem of outdated laws is hardly limited to divorces. Patent laws are r-word. IP are r-word. Libel laws are r-word. Tort laws are r-word...and the list goes on. If Joe is smart enough to earn a 1 million dollar a year salary, then he should have been smart enough to pay a lawyer to draft a reasonable pre-nup. It's hard to get too worked …
/r/MensRights06/08/24 11:30 PM
1

I think the most appropriate response to this controversy on a men's rights sub is "not our problem"...
/r/MensRights06/08/24 03:35 AM
2

I'm less interested in what people are willing to apologize for and renounce and more about how people actually live. I think if you focus more on how people actually live their lives and less about how they feel about hypotheticals, you'll find things aren't quite as bad as you think.
/r/MensRights06/08/24 03:29 AM
2

The main subject matter of this sub is men’s rights. Sometimes bitching about feminism and feminists serves that, but oftentimes it’s a mean spirited distraction.
/r/MensRights04/08/24 05:34 PM
3

Given how much and how widely we are encouraged to label our affinities and interests and beliefs as our identity, this applies to just about anyone and everyone, I think. When OP and many of the commenters limit this insight into just feminists, it’s a tell of their bias. And it’s fine to have bias, as long as it’s recognized and acknowledged
/r/MensRights04/08/24 01:43 PM
1

The term is irritating and cutesy. The song was surprisingly great, and a fun video.
/r/MensRights03/08/24 06:29 PM
1

There are definitely a fair number of people her for that reason, but I think there's actually a wider diversity of opinion here than you'd expect, and I haven't seen the kind of intolerant dogmatism on the part of the mods that you find in the feminism subreddits. I think that counts for quite a lot. I think there's value in being able to engage freely even if that means you face a lot of pushback.
/r/MensRights28/07/24 09:55 PM
1

Don’t rope Jews into this shit, chief.
/r/MensRights28/07/24 06:13 AM
2

Interesting bit of context: the wicked stepmother" trope didn't actually originally exist in those stories. They were always about the wicked mother. The Victorians were the ones that introduced the concept of the saintly mother. They also didn't like talking about sex. So the wicked mother was made into the wicked stepmother (and the dead, saintly mother), and the sex part was taken out. So, to give an example, in Snow White, a wandering prince came across the comatose snow white, on display in…
/r/MensRights26/07/24 05:19 AM
0

Wearing as much makeup as Trump does and whining constantly doesn’t seem manly to me. The limp wrists aren’t a selling point either. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
/r/MensRights26/07/24 01:29 AM
1

Read my first paragraph and do your best to actually process what it says. SMH And for that matter, read the damn article before throwing your hissy fit. There’s nothing even remotely anti male in there.
/r/MensRights26/07/24 01:26 AM
1

I'd explain the Children's Story hour hosted by drag queens by saying that Mrs. Doubtfire is a beloved movie. I don't know why you'd think they'd be "explicit" unless you are saying that fat guys wearing ridiculous wigs and massive amounts of makeup is explicit in and of itself. I don't think it is. If you think it is, don't send your kid to Drag Queen Story Hour. I also remain confused as to why the people who scream so loudly that no one should be allowed to tell them how to raise their kids a…
/r/MensRights24/07/24 03:03 PM
6

Thank you, shavemydicwhole. Let’s all try to be a little more like shavemydicwhole.
/r/MensRights23/07/24 08:20 PM
28

I completely agree with the second picture. However, I think it would be a mistake to discount the empathy present in the comment in the first picture. She has empathy, she just has some sticking points that you and I don't agree with. But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater! The man v. bear bullshit, so clearly refuted in the second picture is a distraction. The meat in this comment is "Being a woman is not a disability and this infantilising of women is what we are trying to get away f…
/r/MensRights23/07/24 06:19 PM
1

It's a mixed bag to be sure, but so what? It's a quarter loaf, maybe a half loaf. The point is, there's some bread involved. It doesn't have to be the whole loaf to be helpful.
/r/MensRights23/07/24 06:09 PM
2

Most voters are retarded and cling to simple, idiotic slogans. It works so well for republicans, and democrats have to either follow suit or lose. It would be nice if political candidates were viewed soberly and evaluated based on their experience and merits more than their “likability” (or, in the case of Trump, his unlikeability)
/r/MensRights22/07/24 04:19 PM
2

This is so ridiculous. Vice presidential candidates are traditionally chosen because of their demographic appeal. Hell, it’s a huge factor for presidential candidates as well. I know this is going to shock you, but JD Vance wasn’t only chosen because he’s an aprincipled bootlicker. He was also chosen because he’s a white guy from a swing state that Trump hopes to win. So enough with this pretense that only Democrats play identity politics, or that they are only in play when someone black is on t…
/r/MensRights22/07/24 04:14 PM
1

No sweetie - they literally overturned it.
/r/MensRights22/07/24 04:09 PM
-1

She is not “infamous” for insider trading. It has been pointed out that, like literally every single fucking member of the house and the senate, she has engaged in trading that is illegal for people not in congress. Only moron partisans try to single her out as either remarkable or corrupt for this.
/r/MensRights22/07/24 02:12 AM
-2

The election was always going to centrally hinge on the Republicans doing away with Roe v Wade and its tattered guarantee of abortion access. And the republicans were always going to try to shift that narrative into a diatribe against “woke”. Hillary Clinton isn’t running and won’t be on the ticket, period. I think you are trying to jam this into a narrative it just doesn’t fit.
/r/MensRights22/07/24 02:10 AM
27

I don't believe in the oppression olympics thing we have going on in our culture. I *do* believe that having a certain degree of empathy for what other people might be dealing with is a good thing. Right now, there's a cultural focus on the struggles of trans people, and a cultural dismissal of the struggles of men. I think it can only be seen as a good thing for men when trans men talk about the struggles they are facing as men.
/r/MensRights19/07/24 04:26 PM
13

Show your emotions anyways. You don't need to ask permission.
/r/MensRights14/07/24 05:08 PM
4

unfuckable men - for any reason.
/r/MensRights14/07/24 04:36 AM
7

When I was 18, I went on a trip to Czechoslovakia with my parents. We were tagging along on a hunting trip with my aunt and uncle and their friends. Everyone on the trip was German except us. I don't know whether or not that's significant. It was a small inn, and our group had rented out the whole thing. One night, one couple got into an argument - even though they were in their room, you could hear the man screaming at her and hitting things in the room. After about half an hour, my father and …
/r/MensRights12/07/24 05:36 PM
3

You misread my comment.
/r/MensRights10/07/24 07:24 PM
5

If you think someone is behaving obnoxiously to you and it isn’t justified, you totally can, but it also helps to have a little empathy that what might be driving it has nothing to do with you and isn’t your fault. So instead of taking it personally, you just move on. And also, that you don’t have to subject yourself to that kind of bullshit in the first place. Also, it irks me that there’s no space in the public mind for a follow up cartoon where the guy builds up an equally cunty chip against …
/r/MensRights10/07/24 06:52 PM
1

I would offer up the following thoughts: That double standard, both in public perception *and* public reaction is bullshit and depressing - however, I think it's also changing. I'd be curious to see if there would be different results if such a trial happened now. This is largely because people gauge a lot of their internal social reactions by the social reactions of the people around them - i.e. when something distressing happens, people are inclined to look around them and react based on the r…
/r/MensRights10/07/24 05:25 PM
-18

If pretending that, along with all the other things you pretend about yourself, is soothing to you princess, then by all means go for it :) Or you could simply not throw a tantrum when you are corrected. Which, judging from your comment history, is something you lionize yourself for in your personal life. Instead of going apeshit, just do a better job of not being sloppily wrong in the first place. It isn't difficult.
/r/MensRights09/07/24 05:13 PM
-23

Is that how it works? You fuck up and say something clearly wrong, but when you are corrected, it's the other guy's fault. How convenient. Instead of projecting your inadequacy onto me, you could simply take the correction and move on. Grow up.
/r/MensRights09/07/24 04:39 PM
-22

This means that the smartest man is smarter than the smartest woman. It also means that the dumbest man is dumber than the dumbest women That's not what it means. It means that you will have more male geniuses than women geniuses, not that the male geniuses will be smarter. A genius is off the scale. Their intelligence can't be meaningfully measured with our current tools, and therefore it's useless to use those tools to try to compare them. The same applies at the bottom of the scale.
/r/MensRights09/07/24 04:09 PM
13

Chivalry comes with a lot of privileges for the woman, and these privileges were balanced by the incredible limitations women had to endure during the time of chivalry. In the modern world, we have (and rightly so), decided as a society that those limitations are wrong - that women aren't objects to be desired and owned by men, but are equal to men and should be viewed and treated as such. Unfortunately, people tend towards entitlement, and women are just as susceptible. So they desire the posit…
/r/MensRights09/07/24 02:13 AM
3

Depends on how the pressuring is done - if by "pressure" we mean a general societal agreement and expectation that cunnilingus should be a menu staple at most restaurants to the point where the restaurant would seem lacking if *wasn't* on the menu and give a diner pause, then sure, definitely. If we mean that the diner should then feel entitled to point out that they can get this particular menu item at most other restaurants, and that maybe chef should consider offering it, perhaps as a "specia…
/r/MensRights08/07/24 08:42 PM
49

Jesus. I would argue that the real problem here isn’t what a vindictive piece of shit she was, it’s that the internet not only stokes meta social engagement and hatred, but monetizes it. And organizations (and everyone else) are only slowly learning that attention from randos isn’t significant and isn’t worth paying attention to.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 02:27 AM
1

I mean, that's how it is for everyone these days. Forty years ago, both men and women settled - for different reasons, but they settled and often found happiness in what they had. Nowadays, both men and women don't want to settle. They want their needs met, and they focus on what they think they deserve rather than what they think they have. It's a sea change in mindset. And I'm not arguing a value judgment on that, just pointing out that they have standards and you have standards and getting in…
/r/MensRights07/07/24 10:27 PM
3

Really hope cities run with this sooner rather than later. I have zero issues funding services for the homeless. I have huge issues with them camping out in subways and on the streets. Homeless advocates say "it's their neighborhood too". It isn't. I'm the one paying massive amounts of money to live here. The advocates will claim "they aren't hurting anyone" and "they are just trying to live". And it's like...sure...but dudes blowing each other in the steam room at the gym aren't hurting anyone …
/r/MensRights05/07/24 05:27 PM
-7

I mean the biological part is that estrogen acts as a blood thinner, making women less susceptible to heart attacks. I guess guys could start taking estrogen…
/r/MensRights04/07/24 06:53 AM
8

I was very leary of any estrogen centric drugs, like clomid.
/r/MensRights30/06/24 05:48 AM
5

Definitely agree with you on getting tested, in terms of shutdown though, I think that depends on your dosing. Low dosing won’t shut down your body’s natural production, and your doctor will monitor things to see how you are doing. The key is small adjustments and small doses. If you decide to go on testosterone it’s a long term solution to a long term problem. Maintenance doses as you age are great. Zonking yourself into oblivion for a few years of glory is to be avoided.
/r/MensRights30/06/24 05:46 AM
8

Are there any competing responses from the He-Man Research Group?
/r/MensRights28/06/24 10:38 PM
1

Depends on who is saying it - in this kind of situation, I would say that it helps me ask more targeted questions or come up with hopefully more grounded hypotheses
/r/MensRights28/06/24 04:26 PM
37

From the article: “ It’s too soon to make any final judgments, and many of these data points about young men and their interest in the far right aren’t substantial enough to be more than suggestive. But just because we don’t have the gold standard of randomized, controlled trials that scholars like to have before saying anything definitively, it doesn’t mean there’s nothing to be learned about the topic.” Admittedly, I didn’t read most of the interview because I found the interviewee to be irrit…
/r/MensRights27/06/24 10:25 PM
2

I know. That red dress is just awful. The cut is bad. The color is bad, and her hair and makeup aren't helping.
/r/MensRights27/06/24 12:14 AM
37

Why not accept the win? She agrees with your basic proposition, that sexual assaults against men aren't taken seriously - and she didn't make it conditional on you accepting *her* basic proposition, that assaults against women are treated humorously as well.
/r/MensRights14/06/24 07:25 PM
3

From what I've read, the bell curve for women on any given trait (such as IQ) tends to be higher, meaning fewer women at the extremes, more women towards the center. Compared to the women's curve, the male curves tend to be *slightly* flatter, meaning more men at the extremes. This would occur for IQ as well. These are slight differences in the curves though, not massive ones. Overall, men and women are still far, far, far more alike than they are different, especially on average. It's at the ex…
/r/MensRights14/06/24 02:45 PM
3

Keep in mind, this isn't a study, it's an infographic based on multiple studies. The wording is quite vague and suggestive. It is not precise and clear. However, if you go to the one of the cited articles, Here We get the following, more clear information: The research, which involved imaging the brains of nearly 1,000 adolescents, found that male brains had more connections within hemispheres, whereas female brains were more connected between hemispheres. The results, which apply to the populat…
/r/MensRights14/06/24 02:42 PM
30

An interesting infographic from Northwestern: This is the link However, it should be noted that this summary doesn't give any information that would allow us to put words like "tend to" in context. So when the finding is reported that "In studies examining connections within the brain, it has been found that women tend to have stronger connections side to side, which could lead to better intuitive thinking, analyzing, and drawing of conclusions. Men, on the other hand, tend to have stronger conn…
/r/MensRights14/06/24 02:58 AM
3

Thank you! Abortion Access Contraception Access Abortion and contraception cost Sexual Harassment in the Workplace and Sexual Assault Stereotyping Having to pretend Eat.Pray.Love isn't fatuous crap Movies with witless twits as female characters
/r/MensRights13/06/24 10:58 PM
-1

That surprises me. The liberals I know and respect are very very much in favor of that.
/r/MensRights12/06/24 02:24 AM
0

hear hear
/r/MensRights12/06/24 02:12 AM
-5

Biden has been and continues to be a champion of the working class. Most notably, he saved the auto industry - an industry mostly staffed by men. You may find ways to take pot shots at Biden for his support of women and claim that they are at the expense of men, but he's done more for actual men than Trump ever has or will. Trump literally doesn't give a shit. He might haphazardly virtue signal by doing things he thinks will infuriate the left, but in terms of actual action to help large numbers…
/r/MensRights12/06/24 02:11 AM
0

One difference I've noticed, and I'm not gonna hypothesize as to cause, because there could be any number of factors, is that disagreement is far more tolerated and far more productive on this sub than it is on the feminist focused subs. Ultimately, I've found it a much broader tent. It reminds me of an interaction I had the other day: I needed some lunch, and went into a Korean grocery that had a tiny lunch counter. While I was waiting for my food, about 20 construction workers filed in and als…
/r/MensRights09/06/24 01:44 AM
2

Good point :)
/r/MensRights08/06/24 11:53 PM
1

See, I just disagree with you on this. I don't think that females have a higher tendency than males. I see it as across the board douchebaggery - I think at any moment in time, US society gives some flavors of douchebaggery a pass while demonizing others. Right now, women are getting the pass and men are getting demonized. That hasn't always been the case. It won't be the case forever. Like, be irritated by it, Call it out when you see it. But have some damned perspective (and empathy) as well -…
/r/MensRights08/06/24 11:00 PM
2

Sure is. People suck. :)
/r/MensRights08/06/24 10:56 PM
107

There are two ways to interpret this: Your female friends have a double standard because they are women; Your female friends only give a shit when it impacts them because they are people and people are narcissistic assholes; You seem to be focused on 1, and I'm sure that's possible, but I think 2 is probably the deciding factor here.
/r/MensRights08/06/24 06:59 PM
7

I don't think you need to "respect all women" any more than you need to respect all men. I think it's important that you, to the best of your ability, divorce a person's gender from the mental process you go through in order to determine whether or not you respect them. And unfortunately, you need to do that regardless of whether other people are doing it too. Having character is tough. If it was easy, everyone would have it. Your ex sounds like a completely hypocritical douchebag. Stop hanging …
/r/MensRights03/06/24 05:20 AM
5

Meh - I'd take a different message from this, because there are ample examples of this kind of verbal bullshit from men in government too. The message I'd take is that how nice that women are just as obnoxious as men, not that they are *more* obnoxious than men. I will say it is nice to see MTG, who is a disgusting POS, put in her place for once. It's also worth noting, because the clip leaves a lot out: The verbal altercation began when MTG interrupted a guy during his time with one of her pate…
/r/MensRights02/06/24 07:14 PM
1

Oh my god - why the hell would you say or even think something like that? And the moment you say crap like that and indulge yourself in crap like that, you give cover to misandrist statements. Grow up.
/r/MensRights31/05/24 01:43 PM
-4

Because it’s utterly irrelevant and these intactivist nut jobs are just shoehorning it in because when you’re a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
/r/MensRights29/05/24 07:14 PM
-11

To my knowledge, none. And if you look at my comment history, you'll see that I've made that argument at length in the last 24 hours. I don't see her as "earning" that money in any way. That doesn't mean she "stole" it in any way - unless your contention is that she played a 27 year three child long con, and even then, I'd go back to the pre-nup. This was their agreement.
/r/MensRights29/05/24 06:32 PM
-15

OK sweetie. Good luck in Fantasyland. I'm sorry something bad happened to you in the cereal aisle.
/r/MensRights29/05/24 06:10 PM
-14

I'm sorry guys - some trash study you found published in "wackjob U" doesn't magically counter settled science just because you've got a bee in your bonnet on the issue. If your penis isn't working properly, it's not because of circumcision and it's not because of Melinda Gates. Sorry.
/r/MensRights29/05/24 05:55 PM
-15

You are entirely correct about Kellogg. But Kellogg didn't invent circumcision. And no one is circumcising people in Africa or anyone else because of Kellogg. And trust me - circumcised people jerk off just as often as non-circumcised people. And honey - do you really think it's a strategic move for you in *any* interaction to get the other people involved focused on relative intelligence levels? It's a bad idea. As far as the "research" you cited, sorry, but I'm gonna go with the NIH on this on…
/r/MensRights29/05/24 05:52 PM
1

Melinda Gates didn't accuse Bill Gates of domestic violence or child molestation. And their divorce settlement was governed by the pre-nup they had both negotiated before they got married, not by a family court. So I'm not sure how the arguments you are making support your conclusion that she's a thief...
/r/MensRights29/05/24 05:39 PM
-3

For the last 30 years, I've seen Republicans tout themselves as the "Party of Personal Accountability", while at the same time making it abundantly clear that they were in actuality the "Party of Other People's Personal Accountability." That hypocrisy always bothered me immensely and still does. Of course, as I think many would be very quick to point out, and to your point, it really isn't just Republicans. We'd be better off if everyone just owned their shit, but finger pointing is just where t…
/r/MensRights29/05/24 05:26 PM
-5

My "morality" in this case was that Bill Gates negotiated and signed a pre-nup that gave Melinda Gates a certain amount of money in the event of a divorce. She negotiated and signed it too. Who in the hell are you to assert that their agreements aren't "moral" and represent "stealing." From where do you generate this supposed moral authority? "Stealing" is a legal term. It's very definition involves legality. Something that is "legalized stealing" isn't stealing. Are you one of those special peo…
/r/MensRights29/05/24 05:19 PM
-33

Um...."she" was helping those boys and men. They aren't circumcizing men and boys in Africa to try to impact their sexuality, but to help control the spread of AIDs, which is absolutely rampant in Africa. I'm not sure how you could be so ignorant of such a basic and well known fact. Meanwhile, the *only* reason they genitally mutilate women is to destroy their ability to feel sexual pleasure in the expectation that any woman capable of sexual pleasure is going to cheat on her husband. Also, stop…
/r/MensRights29/05/24 05:15 PM
-28

That's not how that works.
/r/MensRights29/05/24 05:08 PM
-33

She didn't steal any of that money. If Bill Gates didn't want to lose any of his money in a divorce, he shouldn't have entered into a contract that entitled her to that money in the event of a divorce. I doubt Bill Gates is unhappy with the divorce settlement or feels that she "stole" his money. As far as her choice of causes go, I'm not sure how you can justify going after people for their pet causes. Are we supposed to piss all over someone who donates time and money to pet rescues because hom…
/r/MensRights29/05/24 04:15 PM
6

Nope, but get it anyways.
/r/MensRights28/05/24 04:43 AM
2

Everyone has hpv…had you googled it you’d know you can’t get tested for it. You only know you have it if you have an outbreak. Get vaccinated, and get your kids vaccinated, regardless of gender…
/r/MensRights28/05/24 04:42 AM
-27

I’m not just counting current workplaces. As I thought should have been obvious, the world has existed longer than the last ten minutes….
/r/MensRights26/05/24 05:02 AM
-48

That sucks, and I'm sorry you have to go through that. But let me clarify: I'm sorry that you have to hold yourself to a standard of behavior that you feel your coworkers do not, not that you are having to hold yourself to a standard of behavior. Where I have less sympathy is that christ - who hasn't felt that way? I felt that way as a gay man in the office; black people felt that way; woman have felt that way; unfuckable people have felt that way. So on the one hand, the double standard is comp…
/r/MensRights26/05/24 02:41 AM
10

It's a wonderful little scene, but let's not forget that it's also completely ironic: The character saying this has severe OCD and is a slave to repetitive behaviors, which lack all reason. He's also a gigantic asshole to everyone around him on a constant basis and is never held accountable. His love interest in the film epitomizes both reason and accountability. With regards to OP, sure - but come on - men are just as fake, just as hypocritical, and just as irresponsible. These aren't qualities…
/r/MensRights22/05/24 06:20 PM
2

Sure, but the woman in this story, and by extension many women, is certainly entitled to be bitter about all the things her ex should have done - just like many men are entitled to be bitter in the same way.
/r/MensRights19/05/24 06:13 PM
1

yes...10% less self-reported pleasure on an abstract scale is somehow worse than having your penis amputated. Got it. You aren't being hysterical at all. You realize it's ginned up crap like this that makes you people, and by extension anyone complaining about misandry, look completely and absolutely ridiculous? No. Of course you don't. But let me assure you, bud - the big factor holding you back from having more and more pleasurable sex isn't in any way, shape, or form your circumcized penis, a…
/r/MensRights17/05/24 11:19 PM
5

You should insist on a staff member to accompany you on your visits into the rest rooms, and that the restroom you are checking be shut down for the duration of your visit. It's a legal liability issue - not just for you, but for the school, and for your company. I believe that people will get on board. Also, you sound hot.
/r/MensRights17/05/24 08:54 PM
1

I apologize, but I'm not sure exactly what you are asking - could you be more specific? I'd also love you to expand on the second paragraph
/r/MensRights17/05/24 04:20 PM
-5

The "blatant misandry that goes pretty much unchecked" that has been ramping up since the early '00's alongside the rise of social media. That's pretty damned recent. You are going stack that as "just as impactful" against the blatant misogyny that went on pretty much unchecked from 1775 to 2000? And which for most of that time was enshrined into law? How can that not seem ridiculous to you? And again, I get that there is this ridiculous notion that online = media coverage = reality. That's clea…
/r/MensRights16/05/24 09:39 PM
-11

I haven't made the argument that male circumcision is ok. I have made the argument that equating cutting off some skin on the head of a man's penis is the same as removing a woman's clitoris is ridiculous and showcases a profound ignorance of female anatomy. Also, you responded to me in the wrong thread. SMH. Either way, the main thing holding you back from relations with women might just be a profound ignorance of basic anatomic realities rather than societal misandry.
/r/MensRights16/05/24 08:47 PM
1

Wow. That's not how that works.
/r/MensRights16/05/24 08:39 PM
-7

Female circumcision cuts off the clitoris. The biologic equivalent would be cutting off the head of a man's penis. And this is just one of the ridiculous contentions you've made in this post. I get the emotional place you are coming from, but you need to think this stuff through more carefully before trying to translate your raw emotions into thoughts. You are confusing the "rights" that men are entitled to through the law, which haven't changed and haven't been curtailed, with the regard men's …
/r/MensRights16/05/24 08:25 PM
-10

This sub, much like /Feminism and /Feminisms is, in my view, largely emotional in nature. People come here to vent. They come because they are angry, and they come because they feel aggrieved. I am against misogyny. I think many others who frequent this sub are against misogyny. I think the vast majority of people on this sub are primarily concerned with misandry. I think many people on this sub, in my opinion mistakenly, think misandry is as impactful in our society as misogyny. I think that's …
/r/MensRights16/05/24 07:57 PM
7

Good luck. I'm sorry you have to go through this.
/r/MensRights16/05/24 04:32 AM
63

It's not irony! In order to get surgery, and to have it covered, Trans people have to be diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria, a mental illness whose treatment is gender reassignment surgery. The key here is that their problem is covered as a medical condition. What you need to find is a doctor who will guide you through not only a mental illness diagnosis, but who can also make it clear to your insurance company that it's cheaper for them to cover your medical condition than to risk a lawsuit. One a…
/r/MensRights16/05/24 03:21 AM
12

The person the video is about seems like an exceptionally irritating and annoying and immature and self-involved twit. I'm not surprised they lost their position. There was no grooming. People need to stop throwing the word "grooming" around. It's a specific clinical term with a specific clinical meaning. You aren't using the word because "grooming" is happening, but as a lazily snide way of trying to imply child molestation.
/r/MensRights15/05/24 05:56 PM
6

I noticed some of them looked like the same people commenting on both; I noticed most of the commenters on both were women; I noticed that most of the commenters didn't seem like people who I would go to for their opinions; Which is how I'd describe most comments sections....
/r/MensRights15/05/24 04:50 PM
1

Yeah - jesus. That's an incredibly harsh sentiment to express once, much less constantly. And christ - working hard to better your financial situation is the kind of accountability that the folks in this sub claim they are looking for! By rights, you should be upvoted to a massive degree just for representing a positive counternarrative.
/r/MensRights14/05/24 09:22 PM
3

I mean, yeah, totally, but men do the same thing by trying to marry or date the hottest woman possible, who will be entitled and narcissistic instead of the dumpy girl who will treat him like a king. There's a push-pull in dating between what will actually work out best for you in the relationship, and what you think will impress your friends and family and society. The two are rarely in lockstep, and this problem persists across gender.
/r/MensRights14/05/24 08:51 PM
1

It wasn't an assertion I came up with out of the aether in my brain. I googled it. Got several links with relevant information and read it.
/r/MensRights14/05/24 01:27 AM
1

"With social clubs, if they are small enough and mission-centric enough, they can be single sex" That's what I stated. Not sure why you'd say that is "not true at all" when you then go on to say it *is* true. Women only spaces are subject to constant legal challenges, and those challenges have been overwhelmingly successful. I think you should read my comment again and then take some time and google.
/r/MensRights13/05/24 03:43 PM
-11

Lol - did it ever occur to you folks that the reason the Boy Scouts opened it's doors to girls was because it needed more members? It's an increasingly crowded landscape for extracurriculars for kids, and the Boy Scouts wasn't faring well. Opening up to girls is an attempt to service a business goal - and the Girl Scouts were *pissed* about it, because they've been having the same issues.
/r/MensRights11/05/24 05:49 PM
-2

I looked up the "women only workplaces" thing, and it was a "shared workspace" company largely backed by WeWork called "Wing". While certainly it was celebrated with numerous fawning articles, it was also subjected to numerous litigations and threats of litigations. It was founded in 2016, and had to drop it's "women only" by 2019. They went under in 2022. With social clubs, if they are small enough and mission-centric enough, they can be single sex. Past a certain size, and they'll be forced to…
/r/MensRights11/05/24 05:35 PM
3

I don't think you should feel that way at all - while I disagree with you, men's rights impact women just like women's rights impact men. It is very much your business to post on this thread.
/r/MensRights11/05/24 01:31 AM
2

Unfortunately, although Republicans like to *pretend* they are the party of small government, they are always delighted to vote for more government just as long as it happens to support their social agenda.
/r/MensRights10/05/24 10:58 PM
7

Oh, and for example, in the news today: "U.S. Sen. Katie Britt of Alabama introduced a bill today that would require child support throughout pregnancy and create a clearinghouse of adoption and anti-abortion pregnancy crisis centers to combat decreasing birth rates." I.e. the bill would create a federal database of pregnant women so that the government would know if someone got an abortion. Katie Britt isn't a man. Katie Britt wasn't elected by men. This bullshit is certainly toxic, but it's no…
/r/MensRights10/05/24 10:47 PM
25

There are more women than men. Women vote at higher rates than men. Women are therefore choosing to elect men and to elect people that appoint men - including men who decide that women cannot make their own healthcare decisions. As far as fortune 500 companies go, yes, but the Corporate world compensates by pandering incredibly hard to women, particularly women of color. You can blame men for men's choices, but it seems particularly disingenuous to blame men for *women's* choices by claiming we …
/r/MensRights10/05/24 10:36 PM
4

In some ways we do, in some ways we don't. People want to give definitive and overarching answers to a question that doesn't have definitive and overarching answers. I would say no. I would say no because we live in a society in which women have a slight majority in voting and therefore have the ability to have the definitive word on many if not most of the issues that concern them. That government fucks them on an issue like abortion isn't because government is Patriarchal, but because so many …
/r/MensRights10/05/24 10:25 PM
1

It's nice that you "want" the most skilled people in this profession working for you. But what makes you think you'd automatically be able to get them? This whole train of argument is just so damned reductive and naive, and yet it's the dominant paradigm in these conversations.
/r/MensRights09/05/24 05:02 PM
1

Here are the business goals of DEI: To lower turnover costs and broaden the talent pool as much as possible: in an environment where leaving your job is a strong strategy to achieve promotions and pay increases, talent is always a flight risk. By trying to pre-emptively make corporate cultures more open to women and minorities, organizations are attempting to lessen that flight risk by showing that opportunities exist in house, and by making the culture's more palatable. Marketing to an every mo…
/r/MensRights09/05/24 05:00 PM
1

The statistics are what the statistics are, and they are clear, albeit very full of holes. Obviously there are no statistics kept on unreported crimes. That being said, if there was this huge unreported mass of men who had been subject to unconsented to sexual activity, one would have expected a massive swell of #metoo's coming from men during the massive swell of #metoo's that came from women. There's was no such swell, massive or otherwise - and there still hasn't been! To me, that's quite tel…
/r/MensRights09/05/24 12:35 AM
-1

If you were willing to sacrifice any standards you might have, you wouldn't have trouble getting it either though...
/r/MensRights08/05/24 09:14 PM
-1

Except according to you, that’s not just how it is. lol. Women seem to be having a lot of trouble getting sex, too
/r/MensRights08/05/24 08:50 PM
1

Very true. And I don’t think that pissing matches are useful. However I do think that a sense of the larger picture is a good idea. The problem I have with pissing matches is that the folks engaged in them tend to use them as part of an attempt to piss on b because a is more significant. And what I’m saying is that it’s ok to be focused on b, even if a really is more significant in some objective sense.
/r/MensRights08/05/24 08:49 PM
-7

Also, here's the thing, because I'm *livid* and disgusted at the way society right now dismisses men's concerns and problems while pandering to women. But that being said, it's important to acknowledge that this is in no way happening in a vacuum. If you are a woman, the likelihood of you being raped or assaulted or sexually harassed by a man is at least an order of magnitude (and possibly two) higher than your likelihood of being raped or assaulted or sexually harassed or falsely accused by a w…
/r/MensRights08/05/24 06:03 PM
1

An innocent interaction with a woman can land you in jail with no due process based on what she claimed you said or did. False sexual allegations can land you in jail as well. Literally ANY sort of interaction with a woman can land you in big trouble. She just has to point a finger at you, and you're done. All these things are true, but so what? What you are missing in your calculus is *likelihood*. We've all read horror stories about false accusations and men's lives being ruined. They are abho…
/r/MensRights08/05/24 05:51 PM
-10

Why should women be saddled with the responsibility of being the gatekeepers of sex just because they are women? I agree with you that things are dysfunctional now, but things weren't so hot in your theoretical past, either. Men and women are going to have to figure out a solution to the problem of mating that doesn't overly burden or overly privilege anyone by the mere virtue of their gender.
/r/MensRights08/05/24 02:44 PM
6

Pre-nups are good for men. Pre-nups are good for women. Pre-nups are good for everyone, and I think everyone should have one before getting married. They will not solve all problems, but they can solve a lot of them, and at least provide some sort of starting point for discussing the problems they cannot solve. At the very least, the crafting and signing of a pre-nup, when done thoughtfully and intentionally helps put the prospective spouses on the same page on some pretty big issues. This doesn…
/r/MensRights07/05/24 05:06 AM
3

I'm sorry to hear that you were used so callously. That sucks. If it's any consolation, and it should be, not only are there many men who have had the same experience as you, there are many women, too. There are tons of users out there, and tons of people who allow themselves to be used. Men don't have the monopoly on either narcissism or codependence, and neither do women. It's very tempting to drink the kool-aid on the popular narratives on a topic - but I don't think the popular narratives ar…
/r/MensRights05/05/24 09:05 PM
1

This is a hard thing to do in practice, but the stupid things women say and do shouldn't impact whether or not you take their grievances seriously. If you think women have a point with some or all of their grievances, you have to acknowledge them independent of the other bullshit. People you think are shitty have problems, too - something I think more women should acknowledge. It's like when people on the internet say that they are going to vote some way out of spite because someone on the inter…
/r/MensRights05/05/24 01:58 AM
2

A lot of municipalities keep very incomplete statistics. There are also laws in place regarding the kinds of statistics that different municipalities can and cannot keep. A complaint is made. It is either a true complaint, or a false complaint. The complaint is either pursued or not pursued. The pursued case either results in a conviction or plea bargain, or it is unsuccessful. As well, there are SA's for which no complaints are made. For the most part, the statistics that are kept are for pursu…
/r/MensRights04/05/24 02:48 AM
0

Pretty sure you don’t see how that doesn’t follow from my comment. Oh well.
/r/MensRights25/04/24 12:48 PM
2

Except, it seems like he was overexplaining things always, but only to his female colleagues. Come on. According to the only facts we have available to us, the guy was just awful to his female colleagues. Surely even a group that is centered around women being shitty to men can acknowledge that men being shitty to women is also common?
/r/MensRights25/04/24 04:14 AM
1

Nothing in the article suggests that a judge or the judge used the term Mansplaining - either you have access to information no one else does, or you didn't bother reading the article...
/r/MensRights25/04/24 04:09 AM
-6

I'm sorry if basic facts are interfering with your narrative and causing distress. I'll take solace in the internet being the *only* place a person like you is ever able to be condescending to to someone like me ;)
/r/MensRights25/04/24 03:45 AM
-24

"Single most incompetent" based on what possible standard other than you simply not liking her? She's the vice president. Pence did nothing. Biden, unusually Did. Gore did nothing. Bush I did nothing. Cheney did a lot because Bush II was clueless.
/r/MensRights25/04/24 03:19 AM
-12

I'll be voting for Biden - Biden has done more for men, both directly and indirectly than any Republican in the last 50 years. Biden has been a strong and steadfast supporter of Unions and the Auto Industry, that advocacy largely impacting men. He spearheaded and passed the largest infrastructure bill in decades, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs for men. Biden's policies and promotions benefit men greatly. Biden also supports abortion access - and fewer unwanted children mean fewer men for…
/r/MensRights25/04/24 03:17 AM
3

There are no credible sources, just made up claptrap.
/r/MensRights24/04/24 11:01 PM
1

That hit-piece article never alleged that Huberman spread herpes. Please don't make things up. And as far as him being a serial cheater, he may in fact be a serial cheater! Given that his dating practices are utterly irrelevant to his work in the public sphere, I'm not sure how this would be relevant for me to give a single crap about as a consumer. And if it *was* central to his work in the public sphere, I think I'd need a little more than just a sleazy and uncorroborated hit piece before I ca…
/r/MensRights23/04/24 11:24 PM
4

Toxic women are more than happy to go after attractive men too, they just have to be emboldened to do so. Look at the recent hit piece on Huberman! I do think it's a mistake to ascribe the actions of a toxic and controversy-driven media to political feminism as a whole. I think political feminism is mostly concerned with abortion access, and is conflicted on that, too.
/r/MensRights21/04/24 11:41 PM
9

I'm pretty sure that the "bullshit being drunk law" *does* apply to both the guy and the girl - basically, such a law favors the first person to report the assault, regardless of their gender.
/r/MensRights20/04/24 03:53 AM
2

They are working - they just have an easy job that is overcompensated*. There are plenty of men who have easy jobs that are overcompensated. There are plenty of women who aren't "cam whores" who are overcompensated. As far as your stream being filled with cam whores...your stream is derived from an algorithm that quickly adjusts to your viewing habits. It's showing you lots of cam whores because apparently, you have a fixation on cam whores. Instead of bitterness, focus on self-discipline. No on…
/r/MensRights15/04/24 11:14 PM
4

I'm assuming this is satire?
/r/MensRights15/04/24 05:22 PM
6

Pandering and bashing aside, it does seem pretty fragile. Surely you can suck it the fuck up and control yourself during the birth of your child? I don't think we need to pretend that most folks aren't getting epidurals, that it's the "most absurd pain ever" or that it's a "miracle and women deserve the world" in order to think the guy in this case needs to put on his big boy pants and man up and show some solidarity.
/r/MensRights14/04/24 03:31 AM
34

Online, the same way we "help" women who are frustrated and angry: By taking their concerns seriously, by being sympathetic and allowing them to center their problems without dismissing them, and by finding ways to be supportive, and by being constructive rather than expressing shadenfreude. Your question is disingenuous.
/r/MensRights13/04/24 08:38 PM
-11

Sounds like you are choosing to be miserable ;)
/r/MensRights13/04/24 02:16 AM
-33

Women routinely treat men like crap, especially when it comes to being approached by men - which I'd have much more empathy for if there wasn't also this expectation that men have to do the approaching. There's a really simple solution for a lot of these guys - and it sounds glib, but it'll also solve the majority of their problems: start banging other men. Think about it. As an added bonus - a lot of you straight men who are unhappy with how you are treated by women would be considered quite a …
/r/MensRights12/04/24 11:40 PM
4

There are plenty of strong women out there. I see them at my gym every day, and a good many of them are stronger than me. And even if they *weren't* stronger than me, there's a hell of a lot of them strong enough to throw a punch and injure someone, even someone stronger than they are. So on it's face, your question is ridiculous and poorly stated. However, let's restate the question correctly: "Is punching someone weaker than you justified," and the answer still remains "it depends on the situa…
/r/MensRights10/04/24 12:30 AM
0

If you really want to win at being male, consider homosexuality. It's fucking delightful. And it's rather nice that any affiliations with women in your social life are because you genuinely like them and value their presence in your life rather than being resigned to dealing with them out of necessity.
/r/MensRights09/04/24 10:13 PM
0

I mean, men encourage toxic femininity traits, too. Toxic masculinity and toxic femininity represent a gendered hierarchy structure that doesn't function very well any more, but which large numbers of people can't quit for one reason or another, to one extent or another.
/r/MensRights06/04/24 03:57 AM
1

I would define toxic masculinity as primarily being the belief that men are inherently superior to women and that one's masculinity is tied to and conditional upon that superiority. I would also suggest that toxic masculinity involves denigrating traits in men that are considered "feminine," and believing that the existence of those traits invalidates masculinity. I think an over-reliance and indulgence in physical aggression and the threat of physical aggression is a hallmark of toxic masculini…
/r/MensRights06/04/24 03:23 AM
-1

The physiological reason is testosterone - in addition to its biological effects on muscle and bone..etc, it also has a biochemical impact on the brain, increasing aggression and lowering inhibition. On average, men are only slightly more aggressive and slightly less inhibited than women. However, at the high end of the bell curve, you have very high aggression and very low inhibition individuals, and these are the ones committing the vast majorities of the violent crime. The mistake people make…
/r/MensRights04/04/24 06:45 AM
2

You are mis-stating the arguments I just made as well as basic facts...lol. I'm gonna bow out of further interaction. I'm sorry, but it's pointless to argue with you when you choose to operate in bad faith. I've made my points and they stand. As you are well aware, by the way, Biden is widely seen as instrumental in Thomas' nomination as he refused to call several corroborating witnesses to Anita Hill's testimony.
/r/MensRights18/03/24 03:24 AM
0

I would find that very intriguing, and would happily be wrong. Regardless, in general, white men not only vote republican basically 60-40 compared to white women, 55-45, but are less fickle as well. Democrats are tacking hard towards women in part to follow the culture, which is slanted towards consumers, and therefore women, and in part because the Republican success to outlaw abortion has allowed for a lot of potential vote swinging. There isn't a similar issue aligning men as a segment. If th…
/r/MensRights18/03/24 02:59 AM
-4

The men in this sub do, overwhelmingly. I'd put money on it.
/r/MensRights18/03/24 02:42 AM
-29

The federal budget in 2022 was $6.13 trillion. The amount you are referencing is $12 Billion. 1 Trillion is 1000 Billion. so 12 Billion is .001957 of the budget, or .1957% of the budget. This is an utterly negligible amount, even if you made the wild and insanely unsupported assumption that there aren't similar earmarks in the budget that can be almost wholly benefit men. So be irritated if you want, but have some perspective and control your ginned up outrage. This isn't a "silent killer," it's…
/r/MensRights17/03/24 05:09 PM
-2

Very nicely argued and summarized. Took me all of 30 seconds to read. I guess I had time for your "dissertation"
/r/MensRights16/03/24 12:56 PM
1

Yikes.
/r/MensRights15/03/24 11:21 PM
-1

It's nice that you've googled this, and that is indeed correct information. Did you really not continue reading? At that time, the parties were largely regionally based, with the Democrats being overwhelmingly in the South and the Republicans being overwhelmingly in the North. The 1964 Civil Rights Act and subsequent Southern Democrat defection punctuated the beginning of a radical shift in the parties from regionally based to ideologically based. There's a reason why Republicans do everything p…
/r/MensRights15/03/24 05:36 PM
0

If you are still socially liberal, then how has this reshaped your political identity? Are you indicating that you'll still consider yourself socially liberal in terms of gay rights, minorities, decriminalizing weed...etc. but will vote for Republican candidates who are against all of those socially liberal positions?
/r/MensRights14/03/24 06:39 PM
3

Let's inject a little history: As you are well aware, after the Democrats put into place the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Southern Democrats, switched to the Republican Party en masse. That's not "talk", that's fact. When you have to lie about facts to make your point, it's a tell that you are well aware that your argument isn't very good.
/r/MensRights14/03/24 06:37 PM
0

Where did you hear that male biology is more complicated? It isn't - and that's not my opinion, it's a scientific fact. Biologically speaking, women obviously have a lot more going on vis a vis reproduction. They also have a lot more genetic material than men given that they have two full X chromosomes, while men only have 1 X and a rapidly (evolutionarily speaking) shrinking Y. There are only about 27 functioning genes on the Y chromosome, only 10 of which don't have analogues on the X chromoso…
/r/MensRights11/03/24 09:22 PM
1

Just keep in mind that this is really not an uncommon way for folks to feel. I'm not trying to justify it or dismiss the way you feel about it, but just know that there's plenty of aggrievement to pass around, but too little empathy. Do your best to avoid basing your self-image on how other people who don't know you and don't care about you see you.
/r/MensRights09/03/24 01:08 AM
2

One way of viewing this is that because the cultural zeitgeist is so corporate driven, it's not really focused on "women", it's focused on *customers* and chasing profits. So these corporations are trying to sell products to a customer base they feel is either overwhelming female and responsive to being pandered to, or overwhelmingly buying into a worldview in which women are entitled to being pandered to. The long and short of it is that men who aren't "focused on women as if women were a speci…
/r/MensRights07/03/24 12:51 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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