TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Purp Archive

View 0 posts and 327 comments by Purp 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)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-1

Lol you're calling me names.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 08:12 PM
-2

I compared those things in one way, the right to criticize the problem. Not the ways you describe.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 07:55 PM
-3

lol k so deep
/r/MensRights20/10/15 07:44 PM
-6

I didn't say they were "correlative", I said they were similar in one way, the only way relevant to the only thing we were discussing.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 07:34 PM
-3

No of course not. She can and should address problems as a whole, even if they don't effect her directly right now. Like my previous example, you should address the problem of discrimination in child custody cases even if you have custody of your own children. How can that not be just completely obvious to you, it's amazing.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 07:16 PM
-2

You can be rich and still complain about problems that don't effect you..... Its simple logic.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 06:34 PM
-12

Lol my "imposed" argument. I can't fathom why anyone who is worth roughly $5 million should complain about wage gaps. because wage gaps could still be a thing even though a rich lady exists? How imposed...
/r/MensRights20/10/15 06:18 PM
-1

complaining about how you made only 5 millions for working less hours than the rest. Right, which I why I never said or implied anything about that. We're discussing "should complain about wage gaps" generally; that's why I quoted it in my original post. I never made any comment about her comments on her own pay.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 06:01 PM
-13

Which is a different argument than "three famous actresses made a lot of money: gender-pay gap = myth", the only argument and logic I was discussing.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 05:48 PM
-5

You stated that there was a "proven" long history of a gender pay gap ie one based on gender but not choices Which is much less specific than "a handful of men earning a lot", a different argument, you misrepresented my argument with an easier to attack one, straw man. You don't seem to understand that. a few rich guys does not a gender pay gap make which is why I never said or implied anything like that blatant and desperate straw man. But sure, about your irrelevant unrelated point, I won't co…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 05:34 PM
-5

to say that she's underpaid when she makes so much more than everyone else I never said or implied anything about her saying she was underpaid. "I have no problem with Jennifer Lawrence talking about inequality in pay" is the opposite of "I don't think it's in good taste to have a net worth of $5 million and be talking about wage inequalities". Being an overpaid woman does not prove "women aren't generally underpaid".
/r/MensRights20/10/15 04:41 PM
-10

The question isn't how much money do the Matildas make versus Real Madrid. I agree (it's not entirely the question), but it's clear these women provide a revenue stream that could pay a team minimum wage, according to Ronda.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 04:23 PM
-12

And a handful of men earning a lot does prove one, does it? Nope, which is why I never said or implied anything like that blatant and desperate straw man. Thanks for making it clear you don't understand.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 04:11 PM
-6

Warren Buffet doesn't say that he's underpaid. Please provide proof if he's saying he's not getting paid as much as his colleagues. I never said or implied anything about him saying he was underpaid. The only incredibly obvious point I was making was that you can speak out against problems that don't directly effect you. It's incredible you couldn't grasp that.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:59 PM
-31

There you have it, one three famous actresses made a lot of money: gender-pay gap = myth So a handful of people making money disproves the pay gap across all professions, ages, and other demographics? Dwyane Wade won custody of his kids, I guess all this talk here about "custody discrimination" must be total nonsense! I mean, one celebrity did it once...how could it be a problem?!!?!?!? He's certainly forfeited the right to criticize the problem, right? Reaching for straws makes your argument lo…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:49 PM
-7

60k tickets sold, $21000 salary, $100 million in revenue overall stats: http://www.businessinsider.com.au/australias-best-female-soccer-players-are-paid-just-21000-a-year-2015-9 You can look up minimum wage yourself. It's not as simple as This one makes this and that one makes that and they aren't even. That's exactly how simple Ronda made it.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:38 PM
-8

You're comparing "discriminating" tastes in entertainment to systemic discrimination by gender?! I'm surprised you take gender issues so lightly in a sub dedicated to them.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:32 PM
-44

There you have it, one famous actress made a lot of money: gender-pay gap = myth
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:31 PM
-6

I don't think it's in good taste to have a net worth of $5 and be talking about wage inequalities "I don't think it's a good idea to have custody of your children, and be talking about custody inequalities" Because being rich doesn't suddenly mean you stop giving a shit about people who aren't? Warren Buffet shouldn't speak about philanthropy because he's rich? I personally think actors in general are ridiculously overpaid. There's a lot of people out there doing a lot of good in the world that …
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:28 PM
-30

Nope, she says they "earn less" and "complain" because they're dumb. Not that doing that makes them dumb. Not sure why complaining about an established problem makes them dumb exactly.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:25 PM
-26

women earn less and complain about it because they're dumb "Women are dumb"? I thought we didn't like gender stereotypes and generalizations. "If men complain about custody discrimination, it's because they're dumb. I work harder and prove my worth as a father"
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:15 PM
-15

Of course, I can't fathom why anyone who is worth roughly $5 million should complain about wage gaps. Because being rich doesn't suddenly mean you stop giving a shit about people who aren't? Because one rich woman doesn't disprove a long history of historical gender pay gap?
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:14 PM
-6

One example proves the rule, across all countries, age groups and professions?!
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:12 PM
-20

Cute soundbite but she didn't really address the question in a way that was meaningful to context, the women's soccer dispute. They aren't even paid 2/3 minimum wage and have already sold 60k+ tickets to the games (that they're now boycotting). So they're bringing in a ton of money, according to Ronda that means they are paid a lot right? Oops.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 03:12 PM
3

Identity politics is for eight-year-olds. For sure. Political arguments that focus upon the interest and perspectives of groups with which people identify have no place on /r/MensRights.
/r/MensRights09/09/15 08:18 PM
1

not in the south...
/r/MensRights13/08/15 04:09 PM
1

muh feels
/r/MensRights12/08/15 07:56 PM
0

You can scroll up to read earlier comments
/r/MensRights12/08/15 05:17 PM
1

trolled Ah yes the old "person who disagrees with me = troll" gambit. Thanks your sexual prowess is obviously second to none. Next time I want relationship advice from a divorced guy I'll hit you up. Keep drinking liqueurs made for women that you then have to chase because they're still too strong, in your backyard. I'll just stick to bourbon in bars. Sorry for whatever happened to you, but you gotta get over the anger man.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 05:07 PM
0

There comment thread here, which you were not involved in but hopped in looking for attention anyway, has a few of my opinions. What's your favorite recipe for a frappucino cocktail? :)
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:57 PM
-1

Again man, sorry for whatever she did to you. Focus on the mistakes and grow from it. Wash away the bitterness with some more chocolate liqueur :)
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:50 PM
-1

Aww youre so mad you're like the little kid standing on the outside of the circle saying antagonistic things in the hopes we'll pay you attention. Here you go, little guy.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:42 PM
0

Maybe go for a walk man
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:39 PM
1

Cool, the same insults again
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:39 PM
0

Idgi. I can usually tell after a couple dates, I think. You do you.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:38 PM
1

You're so mad you replied twice? Whoa. Totally worth it bruh.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:36 PM
1

So you just repeat yourself? Cool story. Thanks for not addressing anything I said.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:34 PM
-1

I know a lot of girls on tinder. They put up with more shit than we do, or at least as much. Don't take my word for it: /r/tinder. I don't think "it's only like that cuz bitches be triflin" is fair.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:32 PM
1

Read some other replies on this sub, they are quick to overgeneralize. In that context this one might be too. Thanks for the childish insults, really adds a lot.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:31 PM
0

I'm guessing you're pretty young, 18-19. Old enough to think it's cool to be drunk, young enough to not be able to handle the taste of real alcohol (thus chocolate vodka! Lol) or go to a bar ( fire pit) or buy your own alcohol (stole moms favorite vodka). I've been there. Once you realize the world really isn't against you it gets better.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:28 PM
-1

Huh, I think that some women and some men are both only looking for non serious relationships. You think it's just some women though. Interesting.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:24 PM
-1

... From women? So it is the women's fault, and men just innocently react to it?
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:20 PM
1

Again, I wish you peace so you aren't so desperate to impress people you don't know. If you keep chasing these things it leads no where. Gotta respect yourself first, cheesy but true. Also chocolate liquor, lol. Chased with an appletini?
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:16 PM
0

No, I was just making fun of you. I make fun of lots of things that don't make me angry.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:14 PM
0

What? Everyone believes youre mad man, you don't need to beat a dead horse. Again we all make mistakes, you just gotta learn from them.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:09 PM
-1

Are you replying to the right comment?
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:08 PM
0

Without clicking, I assume that a screen grab of a girl saying she wants to hook up? Are you so insecure you have to impress strangers in the internet? Again man, sorry for what she did, but it gets better. If you just focus on staying mad it won't do a bit of good.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:05 PM
-1

Yep, petty. No need for quotes. You forgot childish and tired, too. You'll have to forgive me from guessing from the infantile replies here that you aren't really capable of having a thoughtful discussion.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:57 PM
0

So beta bro I would neg these girls so hard amirite
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:54 PM
0

OK, then if these quotes are gospel, what about all the quotes from men that say they really don't care? I guess that's entirely the fault of women who just never bothered to create a personality?
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:53 PM
0

Cringe, doubling down on the pretty insults. Thanks for not answering the questions or criticisms, I think that says enough.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:49 PM
-1

It's a direct quote that only one woman said.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:48 PM
-1

whoosh Thanks for not answering the questions or criticisms, I think that says enough. You'll have to forgive me from guessing from the infantile replies here that you aren't really capable of having a thoughtful discussion.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:44 PM
1

He quoted one woman, then said sorry "ladies". He's trying to generalize... That's the point
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:43 PM
-1

Tinder is probably the best dating site to meet truly good women
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:40 PM
0

Sooo beta amirite??!?! Lol I even called the tired, petty childish insult you were going to use! I'm starting to guess you might be a parody account or something. Is that supposed to be another example where you "post substance"?! Lol. Thanks for continuing to prove that you have nothing to say but childish insults. Try /r/MensLib Think that men sometimes get a raw deal, but don't want to associate with outright misogynists? Whoa, that's actually what I was looking for, thanks! Do you speak for …
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:25 PM
0

They do get DUIs, but...they get punished less harshly Do you have any source for this statement?
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:23 PM
1

Hah, I made an edit to the last post, but I'll repeat a quote from a post you made and deleted earlier: Tinder is probably the best dating site to meet truly good women...I’ve met the best women on Tinder. your response was /r/TheBluePill Sooo beta amirite??!?!
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:12 PM
0

Stalking you? I clicked one link and viewed the results. It's a feature built-in to the website. I didn't hire a private investigator. Oof, wow, you're on a sub called "/r/WomenHate" too?! This is getting creepy. Thanks for never responding with any substance or actual rebuttal, just tired personal insults, the way a child would do. It makes it more clear for everyone else how little you actually have to say. Edit: Holy shit you're the founder of that subreddit! Almost all submissions are yours,…
/r/MensRights12/08/15 03:04 PM
3

:: glances at post history :: I'm divorced now Oof, yep. Called it (hadn't even seen it when I guessed before). Again man, sorry to hear it but it doesn't excuse reinforcing sexual sterotypes and thought-terminating cliches. That's what's we're here to undo! It's what we criticize the other side for.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 02:55 PM
-4

Seriously, is this /r/theredpill? I'm sorry she broke your heart man but there's plenty of fish in the sea.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 02:42 PM
–

There's no reason for attractive men to settle down, as women just keep putting out and hoping for a relationship. Sorry ladies, he has zero reason to commit to you. Lol wat? They are supposed to save it for marriage or something? Having sex with a girl means there's no way you can be interested in having a relationship with her?! Are you really that shallow?
/r/MensRights12/08/15 02:08 PM
–

Holy shit, what kind of women have you been dating? Not to brag, but I've managed to find attractive women with a personality! I even value spending time with them! Imagine that. Must be cuz I'm so beta huh? This unthinking dogma feels like /r/theredpill.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 02:07 PM
2

Also a violation of the protection against unusual punishment in the eighth amendment
/r/MensRights09/08/15 02:21 AM
1

Not really, but it does raise the question
/r/MensRights17/07/15 03:14 PM
9

before I discovered Libertarianism and Anarchism in my defence Atlas Shrugged is summer reading this year huh?
/r/MensRights04/07/15 07:55 PM
-1

I've never heard of horror movies so I think you're right
/r/MensRights05/05/15 01:13 AM
0

Another double-reply? So mad.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 06:27 PM
1

mutant separatist dystopia
/r/MensRights28/09/14 06:21 PM
1

Feminist? Ok kid. Shouldn't you be working on that book report for tomorrow?
/r/MensRights28/09/14 06:18 PM
1

Ugh, such a cringey sentence. Highschooler confirmed.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 06:11 PM
1

I just miss this place before it's Eternal September. These ridiculous comments only give more fuel to our critics. And who can blame them? The irony is that it hurts the very cause we're fighting for.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 06:09 PM
1

Was that another reply because of how much you "don't" care?
/r/MensRights28/09/14 06:04 PM
1

lol you're so mad you replied twice to the same comment? I'm imagining you on the other end like "omg I just thought of another sick burn!"
/r/MensRights28/09/14 06:03 PM
1

The kind of trite rhetoric getting thrown around speaks for itself, I don't really have to prove how much group-think rules this sub.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 06:02 PM
0

You're obviously still in high school and probably don't have a sister, so it may be hard for you to understand what it's like to hear about experiences like sexual harassment from women you care about. You keep going back and changing your posts...you added "let me guess, you're a feminist." Wow! The world isn't that black and white kid. Although I applaud the incredible bravery it takes to bash a supposed feminist on this sub.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 06:00 PM
-1

feelings.jpg
/r/MensRights28/09/14 05:55 PM
1

Oh look you labeled it bigotry! Discussion over.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 05:54 PM
1

Your lack of anything to say speaks for itself. I accept your apology. Edit: oh you added another rehashed rant. Eh I'm bored.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 05:52 PM
0

Right but in contrast to your ridiculous false dichotomy of there only being "mature" and "complete stiff", the OP was saying this sub could be more mature than that. Obviously, he's new here.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 05:51 PM
1

I don't see a lot of dissenting opinions getting any traction. This one mostly because it's piggybacking the main comment, and it's still one of the lowest-rated. And this one that's so low you have to click "load more comments". I've been in this sub since there were only about 1,000 people and trust me, it used to be capable of nuanced discussion. But when the second-highest rated comment is "THIS IS LITERALLY SEPERATE DRINKING FOUNTAINS FOR BLACKS" it's clear that ship has sailed.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 05:44 PM
-1

This sub is a bit more mature than that. At least OP learned that wasn't true.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 05:37 PM
2

talk to any woman that's used taxis frequently and she'll tell you the same thing Horseshit OMG such an unfounded assumption on my part! I can't believe I didn't realize you meant "of course that happens and I'm not denying it" when you said "horseshit"! Me fail english.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 05:34 PM
-2

Ah the old "I keep replying because of how much I don't care" gambit
/r/MensRights28/09/14 05:31 PM
2

Presuppostions? It's a widely reported problem. the world's a wild place. all sorts of things happen. Trite platitude. So...we should just let them happen? unseemly comments from cab drivers are one of the more easily addressed inconveniences. Er...doesn't the solution being discussed here address it? And how "easy" has that been?
/r/MensRights28/09/14 05:00 PM
-2

Thanks for disproving that this is a circlejerk by getting hurt feelings about it being called a circlejerk
/r/MensRights28/09/14 04:57 PM
5

Because you can file a complaint that means it never happens? Flawless logic!
/r/MensRights28/09/14 04:50 PM
-5

If you don't understand the false equivalence in equating the systematic disenfranchisement of blacks in historical context with this, I'm not sure how I can explain it to you. At least you abandoned the ridiculous idea that I was cherry-picking.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 04:49 PM
-3

If I'm cherry picking then it's quite a ripe orchard. Those were 5 of the ten highest rated top-level comments...but yeah, cherry-picking.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 03:46 PM
-2

That's is exactly what racist local governments have done in the past (and arguably still do) as a means of persecuting minorities. and theres a wonder why this gender pay gap is when business women create endeavours like this That is absolutely disgusting I'm coming out with my new service: 'No Blacks in my Van'. What next? Cab driven by white people Such harsh self-criticism!
/r/MensRights28/09/14 03:10 PM
-6

Dear god thank you, talk to any woman that's used taxis frequently and she'll tell you the same thing. This subreddit is ridiculous...the second highest comment compares this service to black and white water fountains. So much false equivalence.
/r/MensRights28/09/14 02:20 PM
-13

/r/MensRightsCirclejerk
/r/MensRights28/09/14 02:14 PM
1

Apparently you don't. Not only is this a waste of effort, it creates something our critics can (legitimately) point at and say "see, all they do is create issues where there are none".
/r/MensRights06/08/14 09:05 PM
-1

Because there's no way they were both being violent!
/r/MensRights06/08/14 06:32 PM
-2

You're conflating so many issues, it's so difficult to find an adult in here to discuss this maturely with. So if I call the cops and say someone just robbed my house, they should handcuff me and the criminal?!
/r/MensRights06/08/14 04:19 PM
-3

I'm sorry you treat equal rights so trivially. If you think a guy who got the cops called on him being briefly handcuffed and then released shortly after is as big an issue as systemic prison rape, or harsher sentencing for men, you don't understand much.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 03:56 PM
-1

Maybe they did? Maybe the male was argumentative? Maybe she was less threatening than the male? Again, all the cops knew was a female reported domestic abuse. If you respond to a call of violence, you're duty is to prevent more of it. Would you rather the cops just assumed "eh it's probably just some feminazi" every time a woman called the cops? Is there a "moderate" version of this subreddit that's capable of more than one perspective other than our own? This post is completely without context,…
/r/MensRights06/08/14 03:52 PM
-11

So when the cops arrive, how are they suppose to know who's the good guy? We don't have any context (you've provided none), perhaps he was argumentative, perhaps they both hit each other, etc. Just because someone is bleeding doesn't mean they're entirely innocent. All the officers knew was that a woman called to report domestic violence. Going on that info, if the officers perceived a threat, they restrained him for their safety, determined the details, and released him. Seems pretty standard. …
/r/MensRights06/08/14 02:07 PM
0

So he wasn't arrested, just handcuffed? Pretty standard for officers to handcuff people for their own safety.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 01:48 PM
3

I thought this comment was a parody of how terrible this sub has become
/r/MensRights06/07/14 05:10 AM
3

It's not a direct quote, and would you really be surprised to see someone say that on here? For every comment here that adds to discussion, there are three more the regurgitate trite platitudes about "pussy passes" etc.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 01:35 PM
1

How is this not the top comment? The reactions to this obviously fake sign show how far up it's own ass this sub has become. With so many real issues to discuss I can't believe this shit makes the front page.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 02:29 PM
1

No, because this is obviously fake.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 02:27 PM
1

Asking where they're from is the best one. It's also one of the ways to know this is obviously fake.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 02:27 PM
3

Why the need to say specifically women? Because it's obviously fake?
/r/MensRights18/05/14 02:27 PM
0

Seriously this is how theses people think. The pranksters that made this incredibly obviously fake sign?
/r/MensRights18/05/14 02:26 PM
0

Ugh "troll" is not a catch-all word meaning "someone I disagree with". I'm not "trolling" by pointing out that something that's obviously fake is fake. You can't address my criticisms so you try to label me as a "troll" to dismiss them.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 02:22 PM
-2

Wow you are a fucking idiot. The sheer number of people raging in this thread about such an obviously fake thing shows how ridiculous this sub has become.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 04:44 AM
3

shitty rage comics are making the front page, ugh this subreddit is but a shadow of it's former self
/r/MensRights28/03/14 12:33 PM
2

BUT, MY RAGE!
/r/MensRights14/03/14 02:03 PM
1

And you are thinking in naive children's metaphors instead of the real world. He took a plea deal because his lawyers advised him, and because it's how 90% of modern-day cases are resolved. You just don't understand plea deals.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 03:02 PM
1

It's certainly not about being honorable, that's not how plea bargins work.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 01:46 PM
-5

trite platitudes
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:58 PM
-8

/r/cringe How did this circlejerky bullshit get so many upvotes? This is what's wrong with this subreddit. We face real issues, but seem to favor trite platitudes over real discussion.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:44 PM
0

He did the honorable thing and tried to conceal evidence - and is punished? Disgusting.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:41 PM
-9

wow, automatic censorship?
/r/MensRights27/01/14 03:55 PM
1

What? Non sequitur
/r/MensRights27/01/14 02:06 PM
0

It does. Also, men can't get pregnant. To what you added: Pretty sure men have the same right to terminate their pregnancies that women do. The only catch is that they can't get pregnant.
/r/MensRights26/01/14 06:03 PM
1

What? Men can't get pregnant...
/r/MensRights26/01/14 04:43 PM
-1

blatant false equivalence /r/TumblrInAction
/r/MensRights26/01/14 04:23 AM
0

Then maybe stop looking to fucking Memebase for intellectual discussion? And while you're at it stop reposting the shit here....
/r/MensRights11/12/13 11:25 PM
1

/r/TumblrInAction
/r/MensRights08/12/13 09:10 PM
0

Shitty straw man cartoons are hitting the front page?! Jesus what happened here...
/r/MensRights11/11/13 10:18 PM
0

There are different repercussions between having a child and going to war. I'm surprised you're unaware. The government hasn't mandated that women "volunteer" for rape Sigh, now I can't even tell if you're being serious.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 08:39 PM
0

Agreed, it's part of the class war. I mean, what other reason could there possibly be for not wanting your army to be made of old men?!
/r/MensRights08/11/13 04:55 PM
-1

though it's certainly more difficult. Right, as I said, it simply isn't as useful to require women to be infantry.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 04:53 PM
0

Your last sentence almost sounds like you're making fun of someone that would actually believe that.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 04:51 PM
-5

Are we not mature enough to acknowledge that there's a real disparity between the strength of the average man vs an average woman? Any species with a long gestation period, such as ours, has one sex to do the birthing and one sex with big teeth and muscles to protect it. I think women should have the right to be infantry, but the average man would simply be better suited to the task...do you have any idea how much gear they carry? It simply isn't as useful to require women to be infantry. Now we…
/r/MensRights08/11/13 03:32 PM
1

Please, share more of the trite tweetings of your teenage sister
/r/MensRights13/10/13 11:30 PM
-1

false
/r/MensRights15/09/13 06:26 PM
-1

so brave
/r/MensRights15/09/13 06:25 PM
-3

Ew, it's these creepy comments that scare me away from this sub. A feminist advocates for the equality of women...what if I told you you can do that and also advocate for the equality of men at the same time--crazy right?!
/r/MensRights14/09/13 02:08 PM
2

Ok...time to switch this sub to text-only, or make a new version that's text-only; like all other once-great reddits that slowly become overrun with shitty memes from Tumblr.
/r/MensRights14/09/13 02:06 PM
1

not so sure... Riverton girls' basketball coach accused of rape Female sex ed teacher accused of raping boy Jennifer Vigil, Teacher, Charged With Raping Male Student In New Mexico Classroom
/r/MensRights30/08/13 04:48 PM
7

Right, but we're talking about your title specifically, which was purposefully worded in a misleading way.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 02:55 PM
3

No you didn't, you wanted an attention-grabbing headline. You're perpetuating the problem, not drawing attention to it.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 02:28 PM
-2

WOMEN...AMIRITE?!?!
/r/MensRights22/07/13 08:13 PM
-1

no one cares
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:36 AM
3

DAE STEM?
/r/MensRights17/07/13 01:14 PM
–

THEY DO IT TOO
/r/MensRights16/07/13 01:40 AM
5

Really? We're posting our objections to whimsical bumper stickers? Should I post the "If you can read this, the bitch fell off" biker t-shirt to /r/feminism?
/r/MensRights16/07/13 01:33 AM
2

ugh what is with this shit content? it's 4chan copypasta that's years old
/r/MensRights30/06/13 06:16 PM
1

Trying to find facts about the verdict that aren't speculation: http://www.theprovince.com/news/Vancouver+shock+after+being+found+guilty+human+trafficking/8584321/story.html "The jury believed a number of allegations about Mr. Orr but not the allegations against Ms. Huen" The eight-women, three-men jury began their deliberations Monday after one of the 12 jurors was excused
/r/MensRights30/06/13 04:08 PM
2

Is that really that hard to understand though, even if, say, the wife were a husband? Having someone you know killed is worse (emotionally) than someone you don't, it's even worse for someone you're very close to or related to. Having a good, innocent person killed feels worse than an killing one that is innately evil, especially one that's your enemy who is trying to kill you.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 04:30 PM
3

so brave
/r/MensRights31/05/13 03:19 PM
2

Assuming every one of these facts is true (which we have no reason to believe), what does it have to do with the glass ceiling? Because women make money, that means every barrier to career advancement has been removed? You can make a lot of money and still have your career stifled. Not to mention, "glass ceiling" now refers to men in minorities, as well, not just women. Pretty sure the OP has no clue what "glass ceiling" means.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 03:18 PM
1

How dare you denigrate the name of girlpowermarketing.com. They cited the whole site!
/r/MensRights31/05/13 03:15 PM
1

Great, but until we have some reason to believe it, we won't.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 03:14 PM
1

By "literally" do you mean "figuratively"?
/r/MensRights17/05/13 05:55 AM
-1

Where did I say it was murder? Oh right, I didn't...I simply said that perhaps the punishment for drugging unsuspecting women with abortion-inducing drugs should be slightly differently than the punishment for a woman electing to abort her own fetus. So sorry to piss on your straw man, it seems like you spent a lot of time on it.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 05:46 AM
1

except this assault resulted in the termination of the fetus. Why'd you leave that part out? Punching a pregnant woman in the stomach is different than punching a not pregnant one. ...and how many clinical abortions start with an unwanted assault? Zero you say? Interesting difference...
/r/MensRights17/05/13 05:32 AM
1

The only parts of a woman or mans body is the parts you were born with. You mean like...eggs? Oops. I also heard tell of something called the "umbilical cord" being part of the woman, but I guess that was just a myth.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 01:28 AM
1

I sure wouldn't want people to go around slipping abortion pills into random pregnant women's drinks and only get a slap on the wrist. Why do you hate men?
/r/MensRights17/05/13 12:55 AM
-2

The fetus is part of the woman's body. To kill the fetus the assailant had to assault her, that's the difference...are you fucking stupid? if a woman kills her own fetus So you think abortion should be illegal? You think drugging unsuspecting women with abortion-inducing drugs should be legal?
/r/MensRights17/05/13 12:30 AM
3

Holy shit, you use intentionally killing someone's fetus without their permission as a soapbox to spew some bullshit about men's rights? You sick bastard. You do us all a disservice.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 12:28 AM
1

a few seconds ago SO MODEST
/r/MensRights03/05/13 08:27 PM
1

No memes or rage comics. This trite bullshit belongs in /r/AdviceAnimals
/r/MensRights03/05/13 08:26 PM
0

Sigh, you've gone into disingenuous-backpedaling-to-win-an-argument mode, not worth it anymore. I guess "MEN LIKE DEM BEWBS, AMIRITE FELLAS?!" was just too deep for me.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 03:32 PM
1

Almost as if it's controversial because of it's relation to objectification. Or that "MEN LIKE BOOBS HUEHUEHUE" isn't the end of the discussion...nah, I guess it was too deep for me (and the countless others who had the same interpretation). I like how you distilled the whole argument into a bumper sticker catchphrase, though. Discussion is hard.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:33 PM
3

Still waiting on the part where I said "totally the same thing". My position was that you're oversimplifying. Not to mention, countless others (1 2 3 4) in this thread drew a connection to objectification, as it was obviously a subject you were commenting on. To deny that is disingenuous on your part. I guess they were all being pedants too, who totally misunderstand the deep, philosophical underpinnings of your clever MEN LIKE BOOBS poster...
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:51 AM
0

Pedantic? You replaced my position with a more easily defeated one, then attacked it. That's the definition. It's precisely this type of thinking that makes slogans like this a necessity. No, it makes them trite.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:16 AM
3

Which somehow equates to "liking boobs and objectification are totally the same thing"?! Of course not...hence, a straw man.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:03 AM
0

No, hyperbole is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:57 AM
-3

whoosh on you for not knowing there's no whoosh
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:43 AM
-2

wat? it was hyperbole...
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:40 AM
3

Because liking boobs and objectification are totally the same thing! Luckily I never said or implied that...nice straw man though.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:40 AM
-6

the comments are just a shouting section of how feminism is evil Amen. We should have a /r/mensrights for, say, discussion, and leave this one to the "women r bad, ok?" circlejerk it has become.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 12:57 AM
3

Sexual attraction and objectification in western culture is a complex multi-faceted issue...eh fuck it I'll just upvote this shitty poster
/r/MensRights27/04/13 12:56 AM
1

Sure, people "like" them, but breast fetishism isn't universal.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 12:48 AM
1

No, I used it to provoke critical thinking in the face of unthinking dogma.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 02:46 PM
1

No, I used it to provoke critical thinking in the face of unthinking dogma. That's the opposite. You might want to look it up...
/r/MensRights26/04/13 04:39 AM
1

I'm trying to find some part of your post that isn't one...
/r/MensRights25/04/13 04:07 PM
2

What the hell is up with this subreddit lately? Here's an article by a feminist that goes against some of the negative stereotypes we harbor toward feminists, and you use it as a soapbox to reinforce those sterotypes and spew thought-terminating cliches? feminists seem to hate us So brave! if feminists would actually let men construct an infrastructure ...because we men never reinforce gender sterotypes that prevent men from freely expressing themselves? Ok, we get it, all feminists are evil mis…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 03:59 PM
2

Ok point, but what is this horrible poster design? At a glance I thought this was some religious wacko shit you see on the subway. Wiping my ass with it would be an insult to my ass.
/r/MensRights15/04/13 04:31 AM
0

Just make a text post instead of posting this shitty poster design cancer
/r/MensRights12/04/13 03:15 PM
11

Neon green on hot pink--are you punishing us for reading it?
/r/MensRights08/04/13 03:25 AM
-2

get banned from /r/relationships for good measure
/r/MensRights07/04/13 12:23 AM
2

[citation needed] that ALL feminists think ALL guys should be "the archetypal hyper-masculine dude"
/r/MensRights28/03/13 05:39 PM
2

she can have an abortion Abortions, what? Yeah, abortions, like the ones mentioned in the original post? Or when you said "she can have an abortion"? Maybe you missed that... Do you actually have any idea what this topic is about? I'm guessing it's Reproductive Rights, as the title states; which is the only thing I've been discussing. Nice attempt at dodging, though.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 01:55 AM
2

Oh, it wasn't in the paragraph, but most states' safe-haven laws apply to men and women equally, so that's not an unfair advantage... What can the man do? Men don't get pregnant, so it's unfair we can't have abortions? Makes sense.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 07:00 PM
1

I think "legal" part of "legal abandonment" is the relevant part you missed. I missed it...because it wasn't there, it was never mentioned. "a woman can waive all parental responsibilities and rights unlike a man" is meaninglessly vague, just like the OP; and untrue. Child endangerment and neglect laws still apply to mothers.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 04:48 PM
1

Who knows what was meant by it; it was meaninglessly vague. most states any mother can walk into any police station, fire station, or hospital and just hand a child to anyone at the front desk and walk away In most of the states with safe-haven laws, either parent can surrender the infant. I believe there's only 3 or 4 states that limit this right to the mother.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 07:31 PM
1

a mother may abandon he child with no questions asked What the fuck? This is a meaningless, untrue sweeping generalization. From a recent story: A 24-year-old Pennsylvania woman abandoned her 8-month-old daughter in the woods...The baby is currently in the custody of Child and Youth Services, according to...[the mother] is charged with endangering the welfare of children and recklessly endangering. ...and you had to make this a JPG?! Jesus what has happened to this sub...
/r/MensRights14/03/13 06:53 PM
2

i love lamingtons
/r/MensRights09/03/13 02:01 AM
7

Notre Dame
/r/MensRights04/02/13 03:02 AM
1

this metaphor is kind of incomplete "kind of incomplete" is a nice way of saying "purposefully misleading". This subreddit is getting kind of creepy, we don't need disingenuous cartoons to speak for us.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 03:36 PM
2

unverified anecdotes from 4chan?! wtf happened to this subreddit...
/r/MensRights05/01/13 09:59 PM
-8

Thank god it's a poorly drawn half-a-megabyte JPG. I'm always disappointed when people use words to express words.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 10:07 PM
7

We're posting screencaps of 4chan now?! RIP /r/MensRights
/r/MensRights30/12/12 06:11 PM
7

fake/cancer
/r/MensRights26/12/12 09:20 PM
4

What in the ever-loving fuck? Godwin's law? What has happened to this subreddit...
/r/MensRights22/12/12 02:51 AM
2

/r/forwardsfromgrandma
/r/MensRights22/12/12 01:47 AM
2

I thought that at first too, but another way to take it is that giving people more guns would lead to more shootings, the way giving people penises would lead to more rapes.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 01:41 AM
5

Not only does it not help us, it hurts us. For every critic that says MR is just a bunch of unthinking misogynists, posts like these only prove them correct.
/r/MensRights09/12/12 10:43 PM
12

source is cited as "Internet discussion forum"...seems legit
/r/MensRights09/12/12 07:07 PM
1

If the story is partially or entirely manufactured however, the discussion is pointless. We have plenty of real-world issues to discuss, we don't need to water it down with "a woman stepped on my toe, women suck, amirite guise?!"-posts.
/r/MensRights30/11/12 03:07 PM
3

...because this is just some unsourced anecdote.
/r/MensRights30/11/12 02:29 PM
1

the truth is it just makes a better emotional appeal to talk about the women suffering in developing countries No, of course not. We can advocate for equal rights while still recognizing an the unequal plight women find themselves in in many countries. Notably, Saudi Arabia has no law requiring men to wear clothing that covers their head and faces. It's not "Oppression Olympics" to acknowledge such situations.
/r/MensRights20/11/12 05:22 PM
6

but...but...the pity party!
/r/MensRights21/10/12 11:04 PM
-1

No, the exact opposite of implying all would be implying none. Something that tends to do something, has a tendency to do something. It does so frequently, regularly, etc.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 10:28 PM
-7

Some people != "[all] feminists", the implication of the OP
/r/MensRights19/10/12 07:28 PM
20

Feminists tend to be violent [citation needed]
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:31 PM
6

These sweeping generalizations and "here's a multi-facted argument boiled down to an oversimplified quip and a stick figure"-style don't help anything. This is what the other side does.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 02:29 PM
-1

You should have to get yourself banned from /r/srs and /r/againstmensrights before you're allowed to post to /r/mra, it's like a badge of honor.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 05:29 PM
12

"the last thing anyone thinks about is sex during a pelvic exam because [none of them are hot]" isn't really helping...
/r/MensRights09/10/12 03:16 PM
-2

Can we start a /r/MRA_Circlejerk sub for these types of posts?
/r/MensRights03/10/12 03:35 PM
0

men get what they want by producing something of value...women are less likely to be productive wat
/r/MensRights24/09/12 01:08 AM
30

You notably changed the definitive article "the" to "a" when taking the quote out of context. I think the more likely explanation is you knew exactly what was meant but tried to make it appear like something else for karma whoring purposes.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 04:25 PM
3

wasn't so much that business owners chose to discriminate so much as it is that they were required to by law There were laws that forced Woolworth's to exclude blacks? News to me. Boynton v. Virginia was in 1960, but the Freedom Rides started in 1961. Why didn't anyone tell those silly blacks it was already legal for them to ride the bus, and the free market would sort things out for them?
/r/MensRights10/05/12 03:21 PM
9

I prefer Blu Cantrell - Hit 'Em Up Style
/r/MensRights17/04/12 07:20 PM
-3

becuz opression!
/r/MensRights22/03/12 09:22 PM
-7

Rage novels making the front page...this is how /r/atheism died
/r/MensRights26/02/12 12:54 AM
6

Wow, this subreddit is citing unsubstantiated stories from 4chan now?! Guys, there's enough real discrimination out there, these circlejerks just make us look bad.
/r/MensRights09/02/12 05:57 PM
-4

i've seen a comic somewhere in which a judge agrees to lower his sentence if the accused agrees to surgically alter himself to a young attractive female. Oh, anecdotes and a comic...nevermind those are great reasons. Here's a comic that implies men can't cook; so by your logic, men can't cook, right? I mean, "obviously artists noticed the trend". Maybe she was referring to the concept of nonconsensual/harmful sex Ya think?!!
/r/MensRights25/01/12 08:47 PM
1

He'd be sentenced to jail for 30 years, like this woman was?
/r/MensRights25/01/12 08:22 PM
-2

If she was attractive her sentence would have been lighter. Do you have any reason to believe that? Or just not enough here to whine about, that you had to invent something? I laughed at loud at the part about 13 year old males being unaware of sex Nothing like that was in the article, but what would your argument be, if it were? That 13-year-olds are capable of consenting to sex?
/r/MensRights25/01/12 08:01 PM
2

So what? We're discussing the negative aspects of legal prostitution, or arguments against it. The perception of legalization as endorsement, money laundering, and human trafficking are all arguments against prostitution (whether you agree with them or not) which are much more logical than "women are so empowered by illegal prostitution" (the ridiculous argument laid out by the OP, who presumably has never heard of pimps before). The idea that women are in control of prostitution's status itself…
/r/MensRights20/01/12 07:20 PM
1

That or legal prostitution invites it's own problems, namely human trafficking and money laundering....nah it must just be that "women want to be able to get as much as they can".
/r/MensRights20/01/12 03:20 PM
1

Not just a few hours of inconvenience. Their reputations have been smeared through the community. Good point. It was more than inconvenience. Who needs that kind of crap in their life, all for trying to do the right thing. Why support a society that is that vindictive? Right, it seems unfair to be "punished" for a good deed. What's the alternative, though? If they had been the criminals, and the police simply said "eh, they said they weren't criminals, good enough", that would possibly have enda…
/r/MensRights19/12/11 07:30 PM
-1

My evidence, as I've stated many, many times, was the facts of the story we were presented with. You still have not provided any evidence. You lost, you're mad, I get it. You've gone from bad arguments to simple name-calling, granted I understand you're feeling very defensive at this point. I know what the logical fallacies are but they are mostly used as a sleazy way of avoiding giving actual answers, by constantly trying to turn it into a competition. No they aren't, they are how we tell logic…
/r/MensRights19/12/11 07:09 PM
-1

I am sincere in my encouragement of you to read up on what constitutes a logical argument. I understand you can't openly admit to knowing the weakness of your arguments, but because you abandoned each one, one-by-one as they were dismantled, I can tell you are intelligent enough to realize why they were flawed. You hurt our cause by mouthing off emotionally; there are plenty of real cases of gender bias that there's no need to create one where there isn't; and it creates a Boy Who Cried Wolf sce…
/r/MensRights19/12/11 06:35 PM
-1

Yes, giving up would be your wisest option at this point. Thanks for conceding.
/r/MensRights19/12/11 06:22 PM
-1

You seem too eager to rely on the fallacies. Ironically, this is literally what you're doing. Again, I don't think you understand what constitutes a logical argument. You say I have no evidence. I say you have no evidence. You say I have to provide evidence but that you don't. The burden of proof is yours, you're arguing that there was bias here. If there's no evidence to support that, there's no reason to believe it. Do you have anything at all except the claim that you don't have to prove anyt…
/r/MensRights19/12/11 06:12 PM
-1

There's no evidence that they weren't. There's no evidence that the boys weren't aliens from outer space. By you logic, this unequivocally proves they were aliens. (Again, wikipedia is your friend here: Argument from ignorance) ... and no, I'm not repeating a post just because you lack reading comprehension. I just asked you to link to it. Seems more likely you just never had any evidence. If childish name-calling makes you feel better about that, go for it.
/r/MensRights19/12/11 06:00 PM
-1

You made the claim that gender wasn't an issue here. I made the claim that there is no evidence that indicates they were treated differently because of their gender, it was a refutation of the earlier, implied claim by the OP that they were. You attempted to refute my claim, and provided no evidence. So I ask again, sincerely, where do we have any evidence that gender affected the outcome of this case? You said you already provided it, right? Just link me to that post.
/r/MensRights19/12/11 05:49 PM
-1

I gave evidence, you simply rejected it. You did? I must have overlooked it...please state again where do we have any evidence at all that the boys' gender affected the outcome of this case? (BTW, "I think men are discriminated against sometimes" != evidence in this case) You haven't given any evidence there wasn't bias. The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. Your argument is the same as "We can't disprove God, therefore God exists". (You're a bit new to debating I assume? You m…
/r/MensRights19/12/11 05:39 PM
-1

So you don't have any evidence of bias in this case. I didn't think so. Without a similar case involving females, there's nothing to compare it to. Of course... that's because a case involving females wouldn't have ended up this way in the first place. Lol, you do realize your second sentence contradicts the first, don't you?
/r/MensRights19/12/11 05:26 PM
0

Yeah it's totally ludicrous to even imply that males are treated differently under the law WTF? I never said anything about that, this is a blatant straw man on your part. Where do we have any evidence at all that the boys' gender affected the outcome of this case?
/r/MensRights19/12/11 05:16 PM
-5

I agree, it's better to avoid potentially saving the life of another than to risk having to answer a few questions.
/r/MensRights19/12/11 05:06 PM
-1

Why is this on /mensrights? Two males were arrested, so presumably it was because they were male?! Had nothing to do with them matching the description of the suspects? And why are we posting articles from the Daily fucking Mail?!
/r/MensRights19/12/11 04:56 PM
-1

Thus, the two cops would presumably say "our description says two young girls stole a car, here we have two young girls that found a stolen car, we should detain and interrogate them." I asked what "fix" would you propose that would have changed the outcome of this case? Where do we have any evidence at all that the boys' gender affected the outcome of this case?
/r/MensRights19/12/11 04:45 PM
0

In this case, what evidence do we have of any male-hostile system? Stop asking for them to accept the risk - and start fixing the system. This is just a dogmatic cliche that has nothing to do with the case at hand. Your hurt the entire MR movement when you force things like this. With so many real examples of bias, it helps our cause to be reasonable in cases like this. What "fix" would you propose that would have changed the outcome of this case?
/r/MensRights19/12/11 04:29 PM
-3

What if they were adult men who had kids? Then they wouldn't have matched the police description? What if they did actually get charged with something? Considering they didn't commit a crime, that would be wrong. Luckily the police determined they didn't commit a crime, by detaining and interviewing them. What if they lost their jobs over the charges? What if they couldn't feed their own kids because of this chain of events? That would be bad...but why stop there? Why not say something like "wha…
/r/MensRights19/12/11 03:58 PM
-3

because the end result was the protection of a young girl and the recovery of a stolen car, at the price of a few hours inconvenience?
/r/MensRights19/12/11 03:25 PM
1

here you go, I read the article for you: Police arrested a man and a youth at the scene as they matched a description given to police.
/r/MensRights19/12/11 02:51 PM
1

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/mcdonald-beatdown-cashier-freed-11-days-grand-jury-testimony-article-1.986141
/r/MensRights04/12/11 05:12 PM
2

You wouldn't...perhaps I misspoke. This is an example where these things didn't happen.
/r/MensRights04/12/11 04:55 AM
6

The irony being that this subreddit is presumably in the name of "equal rights"...
/r/MensRights06/11/11 10:23 PM
5

No, "hetero[sexual] white men" includes transgender men.
/r/MensRights06/11/11 08:18 PM
9

It's a word for which we have no other equivalent, that in itself makes it valuable. It's useful in contexts where "typical" is not specific enough, such as articles discussing trans- issues. I believe it originated in a scholarly article, I could be wrong though. It's useful in not perpetuating a heteronormative culture. What does being male have to do with its usefulness to you?
/r/MensRights06/11/11 08:07 PM
10

What word did we already have that means the same thing? There isn't one. Then it is not, be definition, superfluous! If you must grasp at straws... normal? The default? The implication is that others are abnormal; when in reality their gender and sex were determined by the same process as you and I. I know you don't care and just think that's too "PC", but it has real implications, and it's just incorrect. Your choice of idioms is, oddly enough appropriate; you certainly are grasping at straws,…
/r/MensRights06/11/11 07:45 PM
10

It's not just the political correctness, it's the specificity of the term that makes it useful.
/r/MensRights06/11/11 07:33 PM
4

If I'm a man and I am a guy who's attracted to women That's cissexual... PS - I mean the word in the sense of proportions of the population rather than in a judgemental sense, before people have knee-jerk responses and think I'm some sort of homophobe. That's the problem, it implies others are abnormal. "Typical" is the word used in psychology to contrast with people with disorders, and is a bit less judgmental. But "normal" and "typical" are not specific enough, and do not mean the same thing a…
/r/MensRights06/11/11 07:13 PM
10

Thanks for just repeating the OP without adding anything, but you mind expanding on why you feel that way? What word did we already have that means the same thing?
/r/MensRights06/11/11 06:50 PM
5

I'm sorry you're unfamiliar with it, but it's not superfluous. What word did we already have that means the same thing?
/r/MensRights06/11/11 05:20 PM
16

This article appears on CBS, ABC, Reuters, CNN, Forbes, even the Daily Mail. How does that not qualify as mainstream? Not to mention, she hasn't been convicted of any crime. Just imagine if someone posted an article on here where a man was accused, but not convicted of rape; and the OP was calling for the man's trial by media. With so many legitimate examples of anti-male bias available, you hurt our cause when you try so hard to be offended by things that aren't offensive.
/r/MensRights29/10/11 08:42 PM
3

men's rights = domestic violence?
/r/MensRights28/10/11 03:32 PM
-2

zomg what a controversial position to take on /r/mensrights. that really took balls; oh sorry didn't mean to offend you, i meant courage.
/r/MensRights05/10/11 06:26 PM
1

Good point.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 07:12 PM
-1

At least it's a modern reference, but technically Pakistan fired the first shot.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 05:21 PM
-4

This particular incident shows that women, too, will launch a counterattack across the world if a colony gets invaded because neither side was able to compromise. Ok, but that's not a rebuttal to "women don't start wars"
/r/MensRights04/10/11 05:06 PM
-12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm Thanks for not having answers to any of my other points though.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 04:51 PM
-12

I notice you didn't mention Margaret Thatcher. Just because she was already covered in this thread. Thanks for not having answers to any of my other points though.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 04:41 PM
–

What war did Cleopatra start? Boudica led a rebellion against occupying forces. What war did Elizabeth I start? For Meir, if you're talking about Yom Kippur War, wasn't she heavily criticized for not starting that? Edit for the downvoters: I always forget how dissenting opinion is treated in this subreddit. I know anything that isn't a circlejerk makes you uncomfortable, but at least try and refute some of my points.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 04:26 PM
-8

So the US started WW2?
/r/MensRights04/10/11 04:14 PM
-7

great, but that's not a rebuttal to "women don't start wars"
/r/MensRights04/10/11 04:02 PM
2

I like how this subreddit champions equal rights by reinforcing gender stereotypes
/r/MensRights27/09/11 04:25 PM
1

disagree with what?
/r/MensRights27/09/11 03:47 PM
2

Yes yes, I've seen the video. I forgot about lyrics to the song where they say: Smack my bitch up / but in a way which subverts traditional gender roles in an unexpected twist
/r/MensRights27/09/11 01:41 PM
1

Huh I always thought it was a reference to the Kool Keith line Edit: It is, according to the article you posted. the song actually meant "...doing anything intensely..." lol ok...even though it had never before or since meant that, and that the lyric it was referencing was literally about smacking bitches...
/r/MensRights26/09/11 08:47 PM
1

It invited counterpoints, that's a call for discussion. In fact, it led to a string of comments...for all the hatred of "manginas" on this board you guys sure are sensitive.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 08:34 PM
3

So you aren't refuting any of my other examples? You're just reaching for any counterpoint you can find? How is that constructive?! This is where this subreddit starts to become an /r/atheism-like echo chamber. This is far beyond my point (sexism occurs often in music) but I'll bite. There's no shortage of misogynistic composers, Ives comes to mind. In the professional world, patriarchy is a very real problem. Ask the next female conductor you see.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 05:58 PM
-7

Really? You've never heard a misogynistic rock n roll song? Or Prodigy's "Smack my bitch up" doesn't count as misogynistic electronic music? Blues...ever heard of this obscure guy named Robert Johnson? Edit: wow downvotes? If you're going to downvote, at least explain how there's never been a misogynistic rock and roll song, or why Smack My Bitch Up isn't misogynistic.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 04:30 PM
-7

QUICK! which genre of music were you thinking of when you wrote "misogynistic music". all of them? then see if you can figure out why that genre is known for its misogyny. Not "because they say misogynist things" but why those artists say these things. because women are terrible or something? what are you reaching for?
/r/MensRights26/09/11 04:05 PM
-16

Luckily no misogynistic music exists, or it would make this subreddit feel like a humorless parody of itself. Edit: I forgot how this subreddit treats dissenting opinions/calls for discussion. What I meant to say is that no misogynistic music exists.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 02:39 PM
2

Is there a subreddit similar to this with some, um, intelligent discourse?
/r/MensRights19/09/11 08:33 PM
–

Finally, we can retaliate against a man having his life ruined by an unconfirmed accusation, by ruining these women's lives based on an unconfirmed accusation.
/r/MensRights08/09/11 08:41 PM
0

Maybe they calculate prices based on risk...nahhh probably just sexism.
/r/MensRights27/07/11 08:23 PM
1

Yeah, I didn't think it was a word either, but MW says the etymology goes back to 1531, so idk
/r/MensRights12/07/11 01:52 AM
2

ok...
/r/MensRights11/07/11 05:37 PM
6

34 is quite inumerous, don't you think? Maybe my sarcasm meter is broken, but if there is a countable number of things, those things are literally not inumerous, they are instead highly numerable.
/r/MensRights11/07/11 04:07 PM
2

Never pet a cat with any less than 3 witnesses present
/r/MensRights11/07/11 04:04 PM
11

Excuse me. Miss. I would like to talk to you. But before any conversation, may I please have your original ID for age and background checks? Before getting any closer I will need a blood sample for sobriety and drug tests! no way to break the ice on a first date like asking for a blood sample
/r/MensRights11/07/11 02:50 PM
2

Yes, whenever possible involve yourself in the matters of people you don't know about things that don't concern you, because you want to.
/r/MensRights04/05/11 12:35 PM
1

I see no reason that chest hair and leg hair are so different that any comparison between them is so illogical that it's not even worth addressing. Because we were discussing an assumed double standard regarding women exposing their chests vs men exposing their chests. My argument was that the male and female chest both display secondary sex characteristics. If you'll remember, this started with a poster's claim that there is "no equivalent" to a woman displaying the secondary sex characteristic…
/r/MensRights15/03/11 03:51 PM
0

Er, no. The implication was that the comparison was so illogical and answer so obvious that it need not be stated explicitly. It assumed the power of "inference" on part of the reader, and obviously you're the type that needs everything spelled out for you, so I apologize for that.
/r/MensRights15/03/11 03:03 PM
1

good point, because breasts are genitals
/r/MensRights15/03/11 02:50 PM
1

Who said anything about organs? Chest hair is a secondary sex characteristic, as I said. Source: 9th grade biology class.
/r/MensRights15/03/11 02:39 PM
0

Huh? We were discussing women displaying their chest in puiblic vs men displaying their chest in public. So Gareth321 said, "Hey what about legs?" Thus: Is thicker leg hair analogous to breasts simply because it's a secondary sexual characteristic? the answer is no. If you wanted apples to apples, lets compare womens exposing their legs in public to men exposing their legs in public. But the comparison is illogical. I never dodged anything, I answered it head on. Don't be mad you're wrong. I ass…
/r/MensRights15/03/11 02:28 PM
1

Obvious troll? No, just a pedant I'm afraid.
/r/MensRights15/03/11 05:20 AM
0

Leg hair generally doesn't appear on the chest, but instead, the legs.
/r/MensRights15/03/11 04:28 AM
1

We all know it's shit, that's not the point.
/r/MensRights15/03/11 03:10 AM
0

Jezebel-bashing on /mr? That's a risky stance, sure you can afford the karma hit?
/r/MensRights15/03/11 02:53 AM
0

Hair, broadness and denser muscle & bone structure are all secondary sex characteristics displayed on the male chest. If you don't think it's analogous to breasts, just read the comments section of the next post on Jezebel that features a topless Jon Hamm.
/r/MensRights15/03/11 12:19 AM
0

If i wore a low cut top, it would show a flat piece of skin with hair on it. Thanks for agreeing with me that in both cases, male or female, secondary sex characteristics are being displayed, and are equivalent in this way.
/r/MensRights14/03/11 11:30 PM
-2

Er, how about in this context? It is appropriate for the man in the office to walk around shirtless? If not, you're point is disingenuous. Also, the woman in the comic is never shirtless, so I'm not sure why that's relevant at all. The woman is displaying a socially-acceptable amount of the secondary sex characteristics on her chest. A man wearing a deep-v t-shirt or somewhat-unbuttoned dress shirt would be doing the same thing.
/r/MensRights14/03/11 06:31 PM
-2

Really? Men don't have any secondary sex characteristics on their chests? News to me.
/r/MensRights14/03/11 05:31 PM
0

lol true
/r/MensRights14/03/11 05:09 PM
-2

Outrageous, right? Men can't even expose themselves in public anymore. Fucking misandrist nanny state.
/r/MensRights14/03/11 04:55 PM
4

Really? And if a woman doesn't have any boobs, how does she create them by going to the gym regularly? Surgery? That's easier than working out?
/r/MensRights14/03/11 04:29 PM
-4

Genitals =/= breasts. The equivalent would be the man exposing the same part of his chest.
/r/MensRights14/03/11 04:15 PM
9

Credit to the scene in Episodes the author of the comic ripped off
/r/MensRights14/03/11 04:03 PM
0

No, actually you'd call them an "ephebophile". Source: your immediately previous sentence where you said what the correct term was.
/r/MensRights11/03/11 06:57 PM
0

His argument was basically "consider both sides, and pick your battles", much too reasonable for /mr/
/r/MensRights08/03/11 10:14 PM
-3

Right, because he totally said that
/r/MensRights08/03/11 10:03 PM
1

you've explicitly upped the age of the alleged victim to being legal No, in one of the cases the victim is still very much illegal. The deck is stacked against your argument because it's terrible. I merely claimed that you can't assume lack of harm from lack of coercion No, but you can't assume harm, either. In this case, the judge did neither.
/r/MensRights08/03/11 08:44 PM
1

Ok, a hypothetical. In the US, age of consent is 18, in the uk, 16. If a 16 y/o has sex with 30 y/o in the UK there's no harm, but in the US they would be harmed, correct?
/r/MensRights08/03/11 08:06 PM
0

inflammatory comments, on the internet?! the lengths women will go to defend female pedophiles Pedophiles? The boy was 15...what does this have to do with pedophilia?
/r/MensRights08/03/11 07:56 PM
2

Well, he was less than a year away from being a legally consenting adult (in the uk). Show me any indication that he has been harmed. Some children are more mature than others, that's why cases like these are best decided on a case-by-case basis; and in this case no coercion was found.
/r/MensRights08/03/11 07:41 PM
-2

So you'd rather see her go to jail in the name of fair treatment? I'd prefer the version where a victimless crime results in no victims. Besides, what's the point of having a judge if the law is to be enforced blindly? This situation would be different if the teacher (not his teacher, btw, but anyway) said "I'll give you an A if you have sex with me". But there was no evidence of coercion, and the law was put in place to prevent and punish coercion.
/r/MensRights08/03/11 04:56 PM
2

Well that makes one of us. I certainly was, as were most of my peers, some of us even had sex before we were 18 WITHOUT being coerced...imagine that! I'm sure you'd say we were raped, when did /mr get so PC? I thought this subreddit was about challenging the draconian/puritan laws. Maybe 15 year-olds aren't the most mature, but that's a far cry from criminal activity.
/r/MensRights08/03/11 04:46 PM
0

Because they are both cases of consensual sex (at least, this case).
/r/MensRights08/03/11 04:35 PM
-6

A kid? Really? At 15 you weren't interested in sex?
/r/MensRights08/03/11 04:06 PM
-5

Whenever a man is prosecuted for prositution doesn't /mr stand up and say "it was a victimless crime! how can consensual sex be bad!!!" then here: The experience was short-lived and required no coercion. He touched you first. He was not seduced or corrupted by the experience. Lynch her!
/r/MensRights08/03/11 02:58 PM
1

because it's a black market there's a lot of human trafficking, violence and coercion != consensual
/r/MensRights04/03/11 08:30 PM
0

Why can't they just leave people alone to do what they want as long as it is consensual? Wow...you don't really know anything about prostitution, do you? At least, when it's illegal. It's not like opening a lemonade stand, because it's a black market there's a lot of human trafficking, violence and coercion associated with it. If you want to argue for women's rights, argue for legalizing prostitution, not condemning those who want to stop exploitation.
/r/MensRights26/02/11 05:29 PM
24

and sexism
/r/MensRights22/01/11 03:17 PM
1

Maybe if he didn't want to have a kid, he shouldn't have had unprotected sex with a fertile female over and over again.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 04:03 PM
1

Sorry I missed the part of the article where she was a rapist, is there a page 3 or something?
/r/MensRights01/12/10 03:36 PM
2

she dumped you, huh?
/r/MensRights01/12/10 03:16 PM
0

HAHA BILL LIKEY SEX
/r/MensRights26/11/10 11:50 PM
-22

male vs female pedophilia stats.jpg
/r/MensRights18/11/10 03:26 PM
0

what's the sentence There was no sentence, maybe next time try reading an article before you submit it
/r/MensRights05/11/10 12:06 AM
-2

She seduced 16-year-old boys?! The monster!
/r/MensRights21/10/10 01:51 PM
-6

Now, these motherfuckers smoked your goddam cousin in front of you, nigga! Blew his head off in front of your face, and you ain't gonna do shit? You acting like a little bitch right now...
/r/MensRights16/10/10 09:16 PM
10

maybe it was a joke...nah must just be the female conspiracy at work
/r/MensRights16/10/10 07:34 PM
0

Buy a wig?
/r/MensRights23/09/10 03:25 PM
3

That may be good advice
/r/MensRights22/09/10 03:37 PM
6

Make sure you ask advice from somewhere other than /mr/. Everyone here will tell you to get divorced immediately. That may be good advice, but they say that to everything, so get a second opinion.
/r/MensRights22/09/10 01:43 PM
-1

No, we still can't assume sexual harassment until someone, well, sexually harasses. Besides being irrelevant, it's not even a fair comparison, the ratio of professional female sports (and female sports coverage) to male sports (and coverage) is far from 1:1, as is the number of male to female sports reporters, or male to female sport players worthy of being interviewed.
/r/MensRights15/09/10 08:26 PM
-1

We can't assume they never would, but because they are professionals, until one does sexual harass someone perhaps we shouldn't assume they are fixated with the men's "packages", let alone all female reporters are.
/r/MensRights15/09/10 08:15 PM
3

No, he implies that women must be more preoccupied with the players' "packages" than doing they're job. You know, because they're women. This, in response to being "asked about an allegation that some members of the New York Jets had harassed a female reporter". Hmm, seems unlikely, doesn't it? This is not an issue for /mr. Oh, and men are allowed in wnba locker rooms.
/r/MensRights15/09/10 02:08 PM
4

isn't this a problem inherent to current laws and not to marriage itself?
/r/MensRights13/09/10 04:20 PM
-4

these "social constructs that benefit women are evil" kind of posts always seem redundant on /mr.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 04:17 PM
-4

It seems a sad, empty life. Time will tell, so far it says ruined.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 04:16 PM
–

wow.../r/mr ruined your life.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 02:42 PM
1

Are you talking about Will Smith?
/r/MensRights02/09/10 12:11 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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