TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Quarkster Archive

View 10 posts and 1,233 comments by Quarkster on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,233 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
8

No, I meant the part about women being challenged in such a fashion
/r/MensRights11/08/13 04:17 AM
9

I question how often this really happens.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 02:22 AM
3

Do you have an example of this?
/r/MensRights10/08/13 10:37 PM
7

No, I'm talking about coverage of this sort of thing occurring in the US
/r/MensRights10/08/13 10:05 PM
4

She tried to kill him in 2010 by driving them both into a wall and then taking him on a death ride on two blown tires. One of the things I've struggled with, is how he was in so deep that he not only forgave her, but constructed excuses in order to stay. "It's ok that you tried to kill me, I know you've had a lousy homelife." I'm pretty sure that professional help is the way to go here. Said professional could help you with what you can do personally. I give a lot of advice on reddit but this on…
/r/MensRights10/08/13 09:26 PM
2

All the property of the husband that he currently owns and his ancestral property (inherited or inheritable) will be divided between the husband and the wife. Can someone clear up what this means? Does she get the inheritable property immediately or upon the man's acquisition of it? What if he remarries? What's the basis of the wife's claim to a third party's property?
/r/MensRights10/08/13 08:32 PM
15

Is the lack of this sort of coverage in the US due to media blackout, lack of MRA presence, or difference in how easy it is to prevent groups on campus?
/r/MensRights10/08/13 08:21 PM
1

You're right. I'm having trouble thinking of a good way to reword it though.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 07:02 PM
1

Oh wait a minute, that's from among sexual violence victims. I thought it was saying nearly 100% of women had been raped. While number of perpetrations in the same victim-perpetrator pair is an excellent point, the reports of multiple perpetrators are lifetime figures and the odds of having more than one in the sampling window is quite small.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 06:46 PM
5

Did he try for an expungement of his arrest record?
/r/MensRights10/08/13 06:30 PM
1

Why are the numbers so high for that study? What questions were asked and what answers led to a rape classification?
/r/MensRights10/08/13 06:25 PM
5

As men we also have different career options (not better or worse, just different). For example, pro sports. But women also clean up in modeling and such, so it's a wash, just different opportunities though. If a woman is athletic and wants to make a career out of sports and entertainment, her options are massively limited. But what would you do about that other than recognize it? You can't make people watch women's basketball. And I don't know what you mean by entertainment, because there are t…
/r/MensRights10/08/13 04:55 PM
19

the hiv (aids) test will take longer because it takes about 3 months to show up to begin with. To clarify, you need to wait 3 moths before the blood draw, and even then it's recommended that you get checked again after 6 months.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 04:47 PM
1

Feminism is an ideology regarding gender relations. Feminist organizations are heavily involved in women's rights activism. Not everything feminists do is women's rights activism and not all women's rights activism is done by feminists.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 04:25 PM
16

Men cannot contract the desiese, NOPE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_papillomavirus#Cancer I'm vaccinated
/r/MensRights10/08/13 06:37 AM
1

he was looking at things in a purple pill way Could you explain what that means?
/r/MensRights10/08/13 06:05 AM
9

To call WRM and feminism the same thing is pretty insulting.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 05:56 AM
13

I am a feminist, I am an MRA Usually they mean they're both an MRA and a WRA.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 05:51 AM
11

Nope. Sorry. What might help is having her not put your name on the birth certificate and getting a paternity test. Talk to a lawyer about whether there's anything else you can do, but you can't contract out of child support if she changes her mind later.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 04:57 AM
28

I get told all the time I have no reason to support the movement because I'm not affected. Is this true? You're already affected by education policies that fuck you over, and if you want to avoid getting affected by the other issues then they have to get fixed now rather than later.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 04:40 AM
2

I was under the impression that no one runs on the MR platform
/r/MensRights10/08/13 03:08 AM
2

He deserved due process no matter what he did
/r/MensRights10/08/13 03:01 AM
52

women are simply not interested in higher positions of labour I'm sure you meant fewer women are interested, before SRS shows up
/r/MensRights10/08/13 01:51 AM
1

Yes and your welcome to say that he making an assumption and I agree he is but hes not making an unfounded assumption. Should it be documented that this assumption is being used in his conclusion? I would say yes, but that is not the same thing as saying hes wrong. I don't think you understand how science works. You tell people what your assumptions are, people don't guess at them. Every assumption is bullshit if it isn't justified. No justification was provided. It is unethical and fraudulent t…
/r/MensRights09/08/13 11:03 PM
1

the fact that female rapists are still human there will be at least some over lap That's an incredibly weak supposition to base something like this on. Weak enough that you should absolutely be pointing out that you're using the parity assumption. Saying his conclusion is wrong is incorrect, that data does lead to those conclusions. No. The data plus a huge assumption leads to that conclusion. You always have to lay out any assumptions that you're making when interepreting data. Personally I thi…
/r/MensRights09/08/13 10:45 PM
2

It certainly could be a wording issue, but it's important that the wording is correct and there are some important people saying that it's actually correct.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 10:11 PM
1

http://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1k1phm/a_note_on_interpreting_statistics/
/r/MensRights09/08/13 08:05 PM
1

I'm a regular here in good standing. Check out my history. I'm banned from againstmensrights. Unless I've somehow missed it, nowhere have you explained why having the same number of victims implies the same number of perpetrators on the nation-wide level, other than by making the irrelevant but true point that the perpetrators aren't traveling across the country. One of the big issues is that I and many of our experts seem to be in agreement in this very thread that there are probably more femal…
/r/MensRights09/08/13 04:43 PM
1

Well it's a good thing that's not even close to what I was talking about then.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 04:06 PM
1

I've looked through the whole thread. Would you please link it to me?
/r/MensRights09/08/13 04:05 PM
4

Bullshit. Cops asking to search can totally have that effect on people. I can tell you from first hand experience.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 08:52 AM
1

I went to college with some guys who went to all-boys schools. Freshmen year was a huge social faceplant and most never really caught up.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 08:21 AM
0

Does anyone happen to know her stance on this? Personally I think the lack of socialization with the opposite sex could be comparably as harmful as gender bias in coed schools.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 02:42 AM
1

You never explained how the number of incidents can be used to determine the number of offenders. Please do so.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 09:40 PM
13

I'd argue that MGTOW is as much a response to feminism as the MRM is.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 06:24 AM
4

Yeah. I've been dirnking.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 06:02 AM
2

I'm not saying it's not a movement. I'm saying it's a very different kind of movement.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 05:56 AM
6

I'll bet you $10 that same-sex couples are more likely to have both partners working.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 04:57 AM
6

Hey. Let's meet actions that fit our objections without sarcasm.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 04:54 AM
40

MGTOW isn't a movement the way the MRM is. It's a bunch of men making personal life decisions. What anyone else thinks of that is totally irrelevant.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 04:49 AM
2

This is really more a question about why np linking exists at all I guess
/r/MensRights06/08/13 02:53 AM
9

How would this stop anyone?
/r/MensRights05/08/13 11:39 PM
0

What criticism? All you do is keep harping on the fact that the surveyed victims almost certainly don't share abusers, which is irrelevant and probably hides female perpetrators. Please explain how having the same number of rapes by each gender implies anything about how many rapists of each gender there are.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 11:29 PM
3

Everyone says it so it must be true
/r/MensRights05/08/13 02:28 PM
0

Have you read anything I said? Talk to some colleagues about this or something
/r/MensRights05/08/13 01:41 PM
1

I'm not assuming anything about facts, which is precisely why I've been so careful not to use men and women in my hypothetical examples which demonstrate the flaws in your reasoning. They are scenarios which would fit the data but in which your parity claim would be way off base. You're damned right that I don't have the numbers. I don't have them because they aren't there, which is why the conclusion can't be drawn. Women commit 40% of rapes before certain reporting errors and after correcting …
/r/MensRights05/08/13 06:07 AM
1

No I'm not and you're ignoring all of my reasoning. Let's suppose that candy A comes in 1 million flavors and candy B comes in 10 million flavors. If you pick 500 of each at random then in both cases you're probably getting all different flavors.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 05:42 AM
3

Most assumptions are unreasonable
/r/MensRights05/08/13 05:31 AM
3

Your reasoning is all plausible, but the study used by the infographic doesn't include data on number of victims per perpetrator. We can only present this as a suspicion. Our claims must be ironclad.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 05:29 AM
5

Please talk to a statistician. Don't embarrass us. This study only counted victims, not perpetrators. What happens if the number of perpetrators differs is you find victims from a larger fraction of the rapists of the gender with fewer rapists that commit more rapes, whichever gender that might be. I am here with my math and science background skeptically examining claims because I want us to have strong claims.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 05:12 AM
1

They don't have to have the same rapist! If there are the same number of each type of victim you'll find similar numbers of victims of each type regardless of how many perpetrators there are. Let's say rapists of Gender A individually commit 10 times as many rapes as rapists of Gender B, but Gender B has 10 times as many rapists. Then there are an equal number of victims who were raped by each gender. Given this scenario, what data would you expect?
/r/MensRights05/08/13 03:44 AM
1

it's clear to me that for some obscure reason you think there are less female rapists than male rapists. Then what the fuck was this? Actually if I had to guess I'd guess that there are more female rapists because women get turned down less frequently. And this? Exactly. Therefore female rapists will supposedly rape less frequently. Meaning there would have to be more of them to have the same number of victims. But we don't know. Are you even paying attention? This isn't about my opinions. It's …
/r/MensRights05/08/13 02:21 AM
1

Exactly the point I was making initially. All we learned is that a lot of rapes are committed by women. That seems like a pretty huge revelation in and of itself.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 02:14 AM
1

Yep. All the more reason not to jump to conclusions.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 02:11 AM
1

Exactly. Therefore female rapists will supposedly rape less frequently. Meaning there would have to be more of them to have the same number of victims. But we don't know.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 01:59 AM
1

You're viewing rape as something predatory that people are setting out to do. This is rarely the case, at least among men (men are far better studied). Far more common is someone getting turned down and not taking no for an answer or victimizing someone who has lost faculty. Since women are less frequently turned down, my guess would be that female rapists commit fewer rapes. I wouldn't slap that on an infographic though. It's a matter in need of study.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 01:57 AM
1

Actually if I had to guess I'd guess that there are more female rapists because women get turned down less frequently.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 01:53 AM
1

That isn't even close to how bayesian inference works. You might try make an Occam's razor argument, but the differences between the sexes both biologically and socially are big enough to give that some serious trouble.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 01:45 AM
1

and have to rely in guesswork and make reasonable asumptions. So frame it as guesswork and assumptions instead of the actual results of the study. Fuck. Have some academic integrity. You're advocating exactly the thing that we so revile in feminist politics.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 01:25 AM
1

I don't know of one. I seriously doubt that good data on it exists. Why does it matter though? Isn't the scale of the problem be based on the number of victims rather than the number of perpetrators?
/r/MensRights05/08/13 12:56 AM
11

Just because they're more likely to be overweight doesn't mean they're less likely to be underweight. Even then, you should really be looking at statistics on malnutrition and starvation in order to draw that conclusion. One possible explanation is that boys are more physically active in developed countries.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 12:52 AM
0

If you want to make an infographic about that then you should use a study that collected information from which that conclusion should be drawn.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 12:46 AM
0

That was not the point of the study. Is the proportion of rapes committed by women not a good enough statistic? Either way we're blowing this wide open. I don't think we should sacrifice integrity in order to come up with a more sensational title.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 12:40 AM
2

Yes, I would, because the study only counted victims, not perpetrators. Honestly? If I had to guess I'd say that male rapists commit more rapes per rapist (thus depressing the number of rapists). I would make this guess based on social dynamics. But it would be a guess.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 12:29 AM
0

Why do we need an assumption?
/r/MensRights05/08/13 12:23 AM
1

You shouldn't. You should recognize that there is insufficient data to draw such a conclusion one way or the other.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 11:46 PM
4

Let's say rapists of Gender A individually commit 10 times as many rapes as rapists of Gender B, but Gender B has 10 times as many rapists. Then there are an equal number of victims who were raped by each gender. Then, barring reporting differences, your survey is going to find as many victims who were raped by gender A as by gender B. I have great respect for you but you need to be more careful with your analysis of statistics.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 10:07 PM
1

The problem with assuming a discrepency in the average number of victims for male and female rapists is that given the methods and scope of the study, it's a stretch to assume that a significant portion of the respondants were all victimized by the same perpetrator(s.) Because this was a nationwide survey, it's not just problematic to assume that victims from the study had the same perpetrator. It's ridiculous. I have to disagree with you here. We don't know which gender tends to be individually…
/r/MensRights04/08/13 09:23 PM
1

~11% is the lowest meaningful recent figure from the Rumney review And let's not forget how prevalent this stuff is.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 02:48 AM
3

It's not entirely anti-male. It supports the feminism approvedTM men's issues.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 02:44 AM
1

True, I hadn't even thought of that
/r/MensRights03/08/13 04:53 PM
0

Marxism creates a class war against the haves and have-nots. Now, this isn't necessarily a bad thing I'm going to have to disagree there. Wars are generally not the best way to approach things.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 07:35 AM
1

I'm just asking questions.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 07:17 AM
1

(men and women - half of the world's migrant workers are women, half are men See, there you go. Why aren't these Tajikistani women going off and being migrant workers?
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:36 AM
1

Culture-centrism/religion/racism leading to a desire to raise the children in Tajikstan was one thing that came to mind. I don't know though. I'm just asking questions.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:09 AM
0

Oh. I was expecting it to be one of those 30 second summaries. I'll have to watch it later.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:07 AM
1

And does that accurately describe what's going on here or are there other factors at work?
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:03 AM
0

Please. Calling it an article is a stretch. It doesn't go into detail on anything.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:01 AM
1

And why aren't the families leaving? This isn't the 1800s when a trip across the ocean was a huge financial drain.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 05:54 AM
1

Sounds like you understand perfectly.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 05:46 AM
1

But what about the women? I don't know. The article doesn't really go into detail on what's going on with them. I'm also not clear on why only men are leaving.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 05:39 AM
2

And it looks like Mississippi has pretty reasonable statutory rape laws, which was my only remaining concern. http://www.tobywelch.com/defense-attorney-FAQs/criminal-defense-FAQs.php?faq=27&faq_id=27
/r/MensRights03/08/13 03:32 AM
1

Do you have an article on this?
/r/MensRights03/08/13 03:21 AM
1

Really? Now there's a shitstorm waiting to happen.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 03:15 AM
1

Just have to work out a way for it to cover a legal claim to paternity in the cases where the mother doesn't want the father involved. That's a really tricky thing to approach, but I don't see how this proposal would make the current situation any worse. Thus it could be implemented separately.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 03:11 AM
2

In my mind they're both the same. Inequalities based on life choices, not sexism or anything else. Yep. That's why it's so frequently brought up in response to wage gap claims. If one, then the other.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 02:32 AM
3

In several states this would make abortion almost effectively illegal for her. I'm not finding any states with a cutoff at less than 20 weeks. To clarify, I found a source saying that Oklahoma has the earliest cutoff at 20 weeks, but I'm not sure I trust it. I've found cutoffs for a few other southern states, and none of them are below 20 weeks.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 02:28 AM
1

We should definitely include a provision allowing a man to chain himself in earlier so that the woman doesn't get ditched at childbirth. There could be a subprovision releasing him from responsibility in the event that the child isn't his.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 02:18 AM
1

4-2i I support women's rights (human rights in general, actually), but not feminism. Intentions and motivations within feminism vary from good intentions and ignorance, to resentment and cult mentality, to recognition of the issues MRAs bring up but not trying very hard to do anything to take radicals out of power, to money and a monopolist ideology.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 02:16 AM
1

I think you misunderstood what I meant by attached
/r/MensRights03/08/13 01:34 AM
34

Only on reddit. Among older feminists there's a pretty big divide. Actually even on reddit this is a big part of the whole /feminism vs. /feminisms thing
/r/MensRights03/08/13 12:02 AM
8

I don't find that surprising at all. That's what a person attached to a religion looks like.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 11:54 PM
6

Did it look anything like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVmRui1oFF0
/r/MensRights02/08/13 11:41 PM
5

Here's the setup: Men’s rights activists often insist that men are victimized by sex crimes and abuse just as much as women are, if not more. The part about abuse is true. To make the claim for sex crimes you have to include the prison population, which the CDC does not do. The part about most violence against men not coming from intimate partners is heavily counterbalanced by the fact that men are far more likely to be victims of violent crime in general. Then they use some stats on domestic vi…
/r/MensRights02/08/13 10:19 PM
3

I'd also like to point out that there was no control group in which I guy named Mike adds Mr. to his resume and we see how that affects things. I would imagine that it looks more professional.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 10:07 PM
8

SPLC does straw man us a bit, even if they never say 'hate group' http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/myths-of-the-manosphere-lying-about-women
/r/MensRights02/08/13 10:03 PM
2

4-2i I support women's rights (human rights in general, actually), but not feminism. Intentions and motivations within feminism vary from good intentions and ignorance, to resentment and cult mentality, to recognition of the issues MRAs bring up but not trying very hard to do anything to take radicals out of power, to money and a monopolist ideology.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 07:40 PM
18

Yes, it's just non-malicious in that case
/r/MensRights02/08/13 07:11 AM
0

Well someone clearly hasn't reviewed my post history. There's already CCTV all over the place and it will be labelled. This is nothing new. And what the fuck does surveillance have to do with the ghettos of Nazi Germany?
/r/MensRights02/08/13 06:40 AM
0

Please explain to me what could possibly be wrong with this other than spending.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 06:35 AM
0

Did you read the article? These are well lit areas with surveillance and occasional police walk-bys. No one has to go there.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 06:32 AM
1

Cr Doyle said that men would not be banned from the zones, but the areas would be subject to real-time surveillance by the police and council officers via cameras. So what's the problem? The fact that they're selling this as a protective measure for women is indicative of the systemic issues we're familiar with, but I can find no problem with the proposal itself. Well I don't know how effective it will be. Could be a waste of money. It's not discriminatory though.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 05:34 AM
2

The dictionary
/r/MensRights02/08/13 04:11 AM
3

Well I'm not criticizing their response in this case, but it's pretty sad that this is what it takes.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 04:08 AM
3

Yep. All they need is video evidence, a story that suggests that evidence would be present where there is none, and for her to be violently drunk.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 04:03 AM
3

That's in response to criticisms of her prior videos then.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 03:39 AM
1

Works for me
/r/MensRights02/08/13 03:34 AM
4

I think their comments section is broken
/r/MensRights02/08/13 03:33 AM
3

Lol, no. Look at how many of these female characters are protagonists. If the they ever receive help from a man at any point in the plot then they're 'damsels in distress.'
/r/MensRights02/08/13 01:55 AM
1

You don't save anywhere near that much money in taxes. That portion of your income just isn't taxed.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 09:15 PM
1

Give 5000$, save 4500-5000$ in taxes This doesn't happen
/r/MensRights01/08/13 08:29 PM
17

And socially, in my opinion, sexism inflicts more damage to women than to blacks You don't say?
/r/MensRights01/08/13 08:19 PM
1

Really? No one is wearing a seatbelt
/r/MensRights01/08/13 08:13 PM
2

I'll see if I can find it again
/r/MensRights01/08/13 07:06 PM
1

I didn't say it was a reasonable position
/r/MensRights01/08/13 06:43 PM
1

What is a 'Y Wave Feminist'?
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:55 PM
1

Don't forget that we're all fat virgins with neckbeards
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:54 PM
5

He seems to think I will be paying child support based on my 185,000 salary and that it would look like I was being intentionally underemployed to avoid the larger child support burdens. From what I've heard this is probably the case, but considering the quagmire that is child support in some states you might have a hard time getting a straight answer. I'm always blown away by the reasoning here though. Does anyone really think that someone is going to intentionally get paid less in order to pay…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:48 PM
8

The Hayden rider gets tacked onto the ERA by the National Organization for Women every time it's up for consideration (although this was not the case the first time it was added). There's a lot of division within feminist organizations over this issue, with many people believing that women still need special protections due to non-legislated bias against women.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:37 PM
1

Considering how many people believe in a god that is horribly offended by the idea of eating pigs but not by the idea of eating cows, do you really not think that someone could believe that without hating said coal miner as long as he doesn't directly challenge her belief system?
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:30 PM
7

Fair enough, and if people recognized that then I wouldn't have a problem with it. The trouble is that so many people see feminism as the 'one true path' to gender equality. This view is espoused by many feminist figures on the internet and is frequently used as an argument against the MRM. The claim is that feminism is about gender equality for all, and that MRAs should be working on men's problems (but only the approved ones of course) through feminism rather than through a 'hate movement'. An…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:24 PM
6

Progress on mens' rights is often labelled "human rights". And is advanced by non-feminist organizations when women aren't the primary beneficiaries. I believe that feminism was initially focussed on equality, albeit in a narrow area, but the word corrupted quickly I think its early leaders were, but I think the closest thing to bestowing additional responsibility that feminism has done is to give women the option to be earners and contributors. This has ultimately produced a world where expecta…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:05 PM
0

You might just hate rich white men
/r/MensRights01/08/13 04:54 PM
1

It's an improvement in regards to differing views being allowed, but they're pretty strict about all posts being about women.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 04:53 PM
3

He's right about the movement, just not about all of the individuals within it. Unfortunately there was always enough backlash against any 'negative' consequences for women that none of these egalitarian individuals were able to achieve much. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/16iqlc/im_actually_offended_and_ashamed_that_youre/c7wgn02 Feminism has done much that is good, but has never really been about equality.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 04:42 PM
1

It's not that old, but a healthy pregnant 25 year old doesn't need to sit down
/r/MensRights01/08/13 04:36 PM
1

In this case maybe, but that's a big maybe. You need to show a preponderance of evidence suggesting that she was not just wrong, but intentionally and maliciously wrong.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 07:10 AM
7

For posterity
/r/MensRights01/08/13 06:44 AM
5

We had someone a few months ago who seemed to actually move to China. I don't remember any child support or alimony details.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 06:06 AM
1

There would still have to be evidence. Do you realize how easy it is for there to be zero evidence that your accusation is intentionally false?
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:54 AM
1

The first amendment doesn't apply to twitter. It prevents government censorship.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:48 AM
1

There's a biological basis for it. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20032-transsexual-differences-caught-on-brain-scan.html#.UfnsZeH0Fok
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:05 AM
1

We'll never what really happened with this. If it actually happened as presented, I don't know. I wouldn't really raise a boy or girl differently until they approach puberty anyway. I definitely don't think hormone treatments should be happening though. If the kid was brainwashed into this, which is entirely possible and perhaps even likely, then it's very wrong. I say it's perhaps likely because I'm under the impression that while developmental differences start quite early, children aren't rea…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:03 AM
2

That's not even how the first amendment works
/r/MensRights01/08/13 04:34 AM
6

Talk to people on reddit. Remain calm and present evidence.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 04:12 AM
5

All of the big feminist organizations are gynocentric. None of them do much of anything to address men's issues, and many of them make the issues worse.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 03:15 AM
2

The only bigotry here is saying that because women suffer somewhere else that men either shouldnt have an opinion or should just deal with it. This is unacceptable. This is exactly the point I was making.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 09:42 PM
4

That's really not the point though. It's very difficult to show that she intentionally made a false allegation, tons of damage has already been done without a conviction and the police usually won't even investigate whether an allegation was intentionally false or not.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 09:13 PM
2

I was peeling back the victim mindset from the reasoning to reveal the bigotry beneath
/r/MensRights31/07/13 09:05 PM
3

I started getting screamed at about the “little girls in Africa” FGM isn't as bad as executing all female babies at birth. See? It's okay because there's something worse. and how “its not the same with little boys they don’t even remember it” Infants who experience FGM are going to remember it to the same extent.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:50 PM
6

I especially love it when the pregnant woman is 25 and is expecting a 50 year old man to give up his seat.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:38 PM
2

Any men actually, but yes, lesbians too
/r/MensRights31/07/13 04:28 PM
1

Not everyone lives in a state that hands out carry permits. The solution there is more training. Most of the basic knife defense covered in beginner's martial arts classes will not work against a skilled user, and many martial arts schools don't have the knowledge base for advanced training in knife defense.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 09:21 AM
2

Another reason to go with an actual martial arts class. The focus is on discipline rather than empowerment.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 09:17 AM
2

They should say that in the rules then.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:29 AM
3

From their rules: Relevance: Please submit content that is relevant to our experiences as women, for women, or about women. I think being raped by a woman qualifies as about women.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:25 AM
1

It's just a bot that files self posts so there's evidence of what you said originally. This is done because certain people used to like to come here, say something that would illicit some response and then edit the original text so that the responses look horrible.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:24 AM
7

Well naturally I'm not fit to watch someone's children and am emotionally dead.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 06:44 AM
2

i dont think they set out to treat him inhumanely And I don't think it's intended that anyone gets raped in prison. The trouble is that fuck all gets done about it. It shouldn't be possible for a man to be in a jail cell for four days without anyone knowing about it. He should be able to get help. Because men are represented so disproportionately in the prison population, prison issues are men's issues. There's also the issue that female prisoners are often treated better, but that's not really …
/r/MensRights31/07/13 06:14 AM
4

Really you can't win. I've seen the same girl called a slut and prude, in both cases by people who were very aware of her sexual history. It's not much different for guys.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 06:05 AM
2

Sounds like a cocky bastard who won't fare well against a determined attacker who know what he's doing. Pepper spray resistance is a real thing, but I have yet to hear of anyone who was resistant to a collapsible baton, knife or electricity.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 06:00 AM
7

four counts of bestiality and one of trying to use a child to create child pornography. How exactly did bestiality beat out child pornography for the headline?
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:40 AM
1

Yep, as long as you keep it somewhere from which you can draw it easily and quickly.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:36 AM
3

I guess you could interpret it that way, but that's definitely not how I read it.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:30 AM
4

The anonymity is a two-way street and definitely influences behavior in that regard as well. For instance, it's pretty rare for someone to say "kill yourself" in an argument in real life.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:29 AM
2

Justice wasn't done. No one was held accountable. besides that what more do yo guys want? Humane treatment of prisoners, who happen to be mostly men.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:27 AM
6

The only real criticism to make here is that it needlessly leaves men out of the message.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:15 AM
5

This was a holding cell. He was cuffed to a bench. He couldn't even use a toilet. I know he couldn't use a toilet because he would drink from that if he thought he was going to die.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:14 AM
3

$10 says that from inside the women's cells he would have been able to ask for help.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:05 AM
7

Forget drug legality, I'd have the same reaction if this guy was a serial killer. You can't do this sort of thing to people.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 04:55 AM
1

I don't care how sexist it is, these self defense courses are nearly worthless aside from possibly providing good advice about avoiding street crime. You'd be way better off with a real martial arts class. None of this car key bullshit.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 04:51 AM
5

It absolutely is. 4 days without water should be lethal. When they say he drank his urine to stay alive, they mean he would have died if he hadn't done it.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 04:43 AM
1

I don't think we know enough to draw that conclusion. For instance, there's no indication that he still wants to be with her. Some people are really into the whole forgiveness thing, and his use of the word godly makes me lean in this direction.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 02:39 AM
2

You should do a more in-depth post about your experience in the history of the movement.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 02:24 AM
2

What abuse?
/r/MensRights31/07/13 02:20 AM
1

Is your day job being a bot who calls people losers? Apparently that's all you do.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 01:01 AM
1

What issues are those?
/r/MensRights31/07/13 12:55 AM
2

Why are you so intent on attacking me as a person? Isn't your position strong enough to support itself? Do you have nothing better to do? Probably not, considering your divorce.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 12:48 AM
2

I do have ADD. I've also considered proposing marriage.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 12:25 AM
1

you will never have one On what basis do you claim that I will never have a prenuptial agreement? Sunset provisions are mandatory parts of prenuptial agreements in many jurisdictions. They aren't a personal issue at all. Once the agreement expires either party can prevent any sort of agreement from being reinstated.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 12:14 AM
1

and never will. Okay. You've made some tall claims here, but this is preposterous.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 12:02 AM
1

So that's a "no opinion" on sunset provisions then?
/r/MensRights31/07/13 12:00 AM
1

Well perhaps not about the pregnancy big, but the rest stands. http://www.walzermelcher.com/evaluating_enforceability.pdf See uncoscionability and inadequate disclosure. Edit: Please tell when when, and if, you've ever dealt with and executed a prenuptial agreement. Your own personal prenup hardly makes you an expert, especially given how law varies across states. And I would really like to hear a decent justification for sunset provisions.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 11:46 PM
2

No I don't see. The idea of unconscionability is often applied in ways that I'm unhappy with, and businesstimemod is absolutely right about duress. And then sometimes there are sunset provisions, which throw out your prenup for you in the event of childbirth or the passage of time. I certainly consider that to be a miscarriage of justice.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 11:25 PM
7

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenuptial_agreement#United_States 4.) the agreement cannot be unconscionable; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionable "It's not fair", as determined by the judge, is a reason for dismissal. This is often a point of contention. And let's not forget sunset provisions
/r/MensRights30/07/13 11:18 PM
3

We don't deal much with anecdotes because they're easy to dismiss as freak occurrences, and dismissal is the primary weapon used against men's issues. It simply doesn't get the desired results. Anecdotes are shared though. If you do some searching you can find them.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 10:25 PM
2

I love how nobody mentions that almost all big deal atheist figures are well established scientists who do layman's outreach, like Dawkins and Tyson. Few women go into science. Fewer devote their entire lives to it like these figureheads do.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 02:05 AM
2

Well I don't know what the actual research says, but that's certainly not what the headline suggests
/r/MensRights30/07/13 12:26 AM
2

Did they control for parental intelligence? IQ is very heritable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ
/r/MensRights29/07/13 11:37 PM
2

This is completely false.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 03:57 PM
10

It's illegal to do this for abortion.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 03:54 PM
7

Well why didn't you start with that article then?
/r/MensRights28/07/13 07:57 PM
3

I'm a person who knows the law and understands self defense. Forcing a confrontation is dangerous, and attacking someone is illegal.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 07:33 PM
5

Did we read the same article? It says the police were trying to handle it. What did you want them to do exactly?
/r/MensRights28/07/13 06:32 PM
2

It still wouldn't be okay and that's not how it's applied
/r/MensRights28/07/13 06:11 PM
2

I disagree. When people think it's okay to assault someone based on a gender predicated suspicion, it becomes a men's issue in addition to endangering the person committing the assault.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 06:03 PM
6

Following is not a crime and is a damned easy thing to be mistaken about. Assault and battery is a crime. If you think someone is following you, double back to confirm, then step into a place that has people.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 05:48 PM
2

Good thing he was a cop and there was video evidence.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 05:09 AM
0

Who needs help?
/r/MensRights28/07/13 12:20 AM
1

Why is this here?
/r/MensRights27/07/13 11:28 PM
2

a) none of that says anything about research funding b) source?
/r/MensRights27/07/13 08:48 PM
1

Who? There's no link.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 08:45 PM
3

I don't know. I've heard people say breast cancer is more treatable, but I've never seen any actual evidence that the difference results from anything other than funding.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 08:36 PM
6

there is a ton of support for those with Breast Cancer, but virtually NONE for testicular cancer. There are tons of programs in the hospital for those with breast cancer, little fancy pink ribbons and "save the ta-tas" t-shirts and bullshit like that. Testicular Cancer? There is pretty much nothing. Seriously, I know, I have been there. There's a huge difference between research funding and giving a shit
/r/MensRights27/07/13 08:26 PM
2

http://www.reddit.com/r/thatHappened/comments/1j1xe2/he_impressed_a_hottie_by_insulting_her_and_then/cbaxdy2 http://www.reddit.com/user/louis_xiv42 You don't find it highly coincidental that all but one of your comments here in the past 72 hours has been some sort of attack on me after you informed me that you would be stalking me?
/r/MensRights27/07/13 07:21 PM
2

Is there a reason you're stalking me?
/r/MensRights27/07/13 07:13 PM
2

See, that's a very important detail
/r/MensRights27/07/13 02:45 PM
1

Take your sockpuppetry somewhere else
/r/MensRights27/07/13 02:36 PM
20

Right. That's why there's no emotional support.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 01:57 PM
2

Per year?
/r/MensRights27/07/13 01:56 PM
5

If you want to make fun of educational standards then go for it. Don't target the students.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 05:40 AM
1

I was a public school student and I now study mathematical and computational physics. I also used the word panopticon yesterday. Plenty of private school students can't write for shit when they graduate college.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 05:32 AM
29

Don't forget prostate cancer
/r/MensRights27/07/13 05:22 AM
2

Well at least post it as a comment link so we can discuss it
/r/MensRights27/07/13 05:21 AM
3

I've been all raged out for a long time now
/r/MensRights27/07/13 05:16 AM
4

It can bring you to tears sometimes
/r/MensRights27/07/13 05:10 AM
20

Based on the geographic restrictions, I'd bet it's illegal only where they accept men
/r/MensRights27/07/13 04:51 AM
10

Of course. Even terrorists have chivallry.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 04:34 AM
1

Forgetting issues of how rape is defined and handled by law enforcement, what's your point? Rapists are a small criminal minority regardless of gender composition.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 02:12 AM
2

I didn't say anything of the sort. I'm sure men commit more rapes than women by reasonable definition, but nothing you do with a vagina counts as rape. For a woman to be charged with rape she needs to stick an object inside someone else in a state that counts that as rape. And of course only women were interviewed in the study.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 02:09 AM
1

That question assumes that men don't get raped by women
/r/MensRights27/07/13 02:06 AM
2

Well there are an awful lot of white people (72% in fact) in the US and forced envelopment doesn't count as rape. So there you go.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 01:55 AM
0

Well if that's sufficient to make him a troll then I guess I just don't care. He wasn't sock puppeting, false flagging, mocking, trapping, or doing anything else worth getting upset over.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 01:08 AM
0

Someone askes a question while disagreeing with you and you response by being a giant douche and telling them to shut up. And calling someone a troll isn't a silencing tactic?
/r/MensRights27/07/13 12:55 AM
13

the U.S. marriage rate has dropped to 31.1, or 31 marriages for every 1,000 married women. I think they're missing some units or something.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 09:22 PM
1

I don't think you meant to reply to me
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:32 PM
2

Arguably, but my point is that even if you disagree with that there are truly gender neutral terms that can be used.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:27 PM
2

Young accounts are given no tolerance. Off-Topic posts will be removed The details of your finances are not a men's rights issue. You gave us a budget breakdown. /r/legal has already advice you to file a chapter 7. What do you want?
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:25 PM
1

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1j42n9/financial_woes_what_do_i_do/
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:12 PM
3

No, you came here with financial issues and suicidal tendencies. /r/SuicideWatch We're not qualified to help with financial issues stemming from a divorce. Giving unqualified legal advice is dangerous.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:11 PM
35

different physical minimum requirements for female and male trainees. Well there's your problem
/r/MensRights26/07/13 07:51 PM
8

Sounds good to me. I've never been a traditionalist. As long as no one says anything was my fault.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 07:46 PM
6

It's gotten attached every time it's been introduced in the past 55 years and the version currently up for ratification includes it. I would support its passage without the rider.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 07:44 PM
2

Right. Everyone who doesn't already know what's happening is a troll. Shut up and sit down. If he's a troll he's grossly incompetent.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 07:25 PM
-1

Except for the whole gang wars thing they used to be into... But yeah, no complaints now
/r/MensRights26/07/13 06:47 PM
11

You're not going to get banned for this. Not even close. In fact, have a high five. Opposing views are welcome, if not agreed with. EDIT: As you can see from the reply I got, you're not completely wrong about this subreddit. I do think you'll find it's very different from the feminist subreddits though.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 06:45 PM
12

Won't work Hayden rider
/r/MensRights26/07/13 05:12 PM
43

Actually cops don't have to protect anyone. This is well established legal precedent.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:36 PM
22

Before anyone says "waiters would be just as sexist" Waitstaff
/r/MensRights26/07/13 03:05 PM
-1

Key word: young There was a huge HIV outbreak in the gay population in the 70s
/r/MensRights26/07/13 02:00 PM
54

I kicked the hornet's nest, so to speak, when I left a comment on something. I'll admit, I was very harsh and not in a good place when I wrote it. Don't you dare blame yourself for the vitriolic filth that spewed forth on you. You deserve better.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 06:00 AM
10

They do, but tests aren't 100% accurate, especially for HIV I'm not sure that HIV is significantly more prevalent among young gay men though.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 03:24 AM
4

lack of reporting For murder?
/r/MensRights26/07/13 01:12 AM
2

It even points out how women frequently aren't punished very much.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 12:42 AM
4

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/are-lesbians-more-accepted-gay-men-0
/r/MensRights26/07/13 12:35 AM
2

It can be more than one kind of issue at the same time. The focus of much of the discrimination is that they're gay men. The issue of black men being searched more often than black women would be sex discrimination, and a men's right's issue. Gay men are treated worse than lesbians
/r/MensRights26/07/13 12:22 AM
3

If they were straight, would they face the same discrimination? If the answer to this question is yes, it is a Men's Right's issue. If the answer is no, it isn't. They wouldn't be facing it if they were women but were still gay. Men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 12:14 AM
4

Warren Farrell Karen Straughan Helen Smith Christina Hoff Sommers
/r/MensRights26/07/13 12:09 AM
2

Yeah! Fuck investigations!
/r/MensRights25/07/13 01:29 AM
3

Exactly the conclusion I was leaning towards.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 11:44 PM
14

Don't they rotate who's on their money somewhat frequently?
/r/MensRights24/07/13 11:06 PM
-1

It would be very poor wording, but it's the most logical explanation I can think of for what he said.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 09:55 PM
0

He might mean recording sex for use as evidence. Illegal filming charges will be way better than rape charges.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 09:51 PM
2

You're trying to make a display board explaining knowledge possessed by this demographic or are you trying to fill in weaknesses in this knowledge base?
/r/MensRights24/07/13 04:00 PM
5

Do you guys support gay rights? Yeah, but it's not a focus of the movement. Gay rights has a much better foothold in society than men's rights. It's the same reason that we're not focusing on women's rights. Men are apparently the only group that doesn't deserve a voice.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 05:55 AM
2

http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pcbi.1003092 That's the actual paper. (With no paywall!!!) Our model requires neither the initial assumption of a decline in older female fertility nor the effects of inclusive fitness through which older, non-reproducing women assist in the reproductive efforts of younger women. This is really stupid. They ignored obvious factors and included age-selectiveness, which isn't established for most of human evolutionary history. Male…
/r/MensRights23/07/13 04:46 PM
1

Certainly better. But what of the morality of contraceptive sabotage in such a world?
/r/MensRights23/07/13 03:52 AM
3

Certainly, but what about in a fair world where said man couldn't be forced to pay child support?
/r/MensRights23/07/13 03:49 AM
13

No. Rape is sex without consent. Women can do that, by force or coercion, just like men can. Rape is the female equivalent of rape. Similarly, either gender can sabotage birth control. There you run into an interesting question about whether it's worse when a man does it. I'd argue that it isn't worse because of reproductive rights in our legal system, but in a system with fair reproductive rights it might be worse.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 03:42 AM
21

No. It also shouldn't be considered rape if someone pokes holes in a condom. It's not the same sort of thing. It should absolutely be a crime though.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 03:34 AM
0

Oh, did you see my comments?
/r/MensRights23/07/13 03:32 AM
1

Of course, said mothers decided to have those children. The law is also more lenient with women in general.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 04:16 AM
3

I think there might be some options in between those two.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 12:21 AM
7

The false abuse allegations is definitely still an issue, and quite possibly so is financial ruin.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 09:18 PM
6

There are some obvious examples (Saudi Arabia), but in most cases I don't know enough about these cultures to make such a judgement, and it's nearly impossible to find unbiased deeply knowledgeable sources on the matter. Here is a great example of the sort of thing you might not realize about foreign cultures. In many of these places everyone needs more rights. There's also the issue of how the turn-around is handled. India is a great example of just how fast well-meaning attempts can turn south…
/r/MensRights21/07/13 08:58 PM
14

That's a stupid opinion. Plenty of men are morons and plenty of women are very smart. Does this coincide with r/mensrights? No.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 08:51 PM
2

Did you look at the article? That kid does not need to be breastfed every day. Also, breast pumps.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 01:44 AM
2

MRA here downvoting you.
/r/MensRights20/07/13 10:21 PM
3

Evidently, to some, wearing makeup and heels and participating in relationships with men equates to fraternizing with the enemy. What do you care? Why are you dealing with them? Why are these people not disavowed?
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:56 PM
14

Hence why the general public thinks things are worse than they are. Hence why only the bullshit studies get attention. Hence most of what NOW does in terms of getting laws passed. What does anyone do to keep these people you complain about in check?
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:40 PM
14

the quiet majority of feminists Therein lies the problem. Only radicals are doing anything.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:30 PM
2

This is correct.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:55 PM
1

No. I heard the one thing, posited how it could result in the idea that he was sexist, and admitted that I don't actually know. I don't care whether he was sexist.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 06:11 PM
1

Well if it's true and you only look at how he treated women then you could easily jump to the sexist conclusion. I don't know if he was sexist and I'm not sure I care either way.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:56 PM
4

From what I've heard he though everyone was beneath him, including women.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:46 PM
2

Source? And is this outside childbirth? Childbirth pumps you up with shit tons of hormones. People on lots of acid have been known to take gunshots to the chest without going into shock. Women in childbirth should be compared to men in combat situations at a bare minimum.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:07 PM
1

http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2012/01/women-or-men-who-has-a-higher-pain-tolerance/
/r/MensRights18/07/13 04:20 PM
20

If you were an author doing an AMA, wouldn't you mention your book?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:51 PM
24

Why do many women feel entitled to marriage? Statistics show many men opting out, and the media response is about how many women won't be able to get married now.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:50 PM
40

women reported feeling unsafe in taxis, mainly because of inappropriate behaviour by drivers. Therefore we have to make sure men can't use the 'safe' taxis? What the fuck is that?
/r/MensRights17/07/13 11:56 PM
5

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15491274
/r/MensRights17/07/13 03:22 AM
1

I disagree with your concern. People should talk more about marriage. I think there would be fewer divorces that way.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 11:35 PM
3

Why?
/r/MensRights16/07/13 11:23 PM
3

Better idea: marriage contracts There's no reason that all of this can't be handled with contract law.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 11:22 PM
6

Because adultery isn't a crime. That's why we shouldn't put adulterers in the sex offender registry.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 11:21 PM
1

Can we get the reproductive rights portion adjusted? That really isn't it at all.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 10:54 PM
3

Define "feminist" All or nearly all of the stuff getting discussed here was done by NOW.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 09:04 PM
2

False http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaginismus This has no bearing on whether it was rape, which it was
/r/MensRights11/07/13 02:34 AM
3

You missed the first time she said stop
/r/MensRights11/07/13 02:32 AM
21

She said stop and you didn't stop. That's rape.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 01:50 AM
1

Are you implying that republicans would fix this?
/r/MensRights11/07/13 01:48 AM
1

I'm rebutting your post title.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 12:27 AM
2

The original verdict was a miscarriage of justice, but in Canada (and many other countries including the US) there is constitutional protection against Double Jeopardy
/r/MensRights11/07/13 12:21 AM
1

I would do it
/r/MensRights10/07/13 07:54 PM
1

I think the real key to deciding what should be done with this is to distinguish between bearing a child to term and parenthood. The woman is the only one dealing with the dangers and tortures of pregnancy. To force someone to carry a child to term would be wrong. As a society, we have already decided that simply because a woman carries a child to term does not mean that she has to accept parental rights and responsibilities. See Safe Haven laws. However, men currently get no such say in the mat…
/r/MensRights07/07/13 05:15 PM
27

In other news, shit smells bad It's unclear if the movement has any power beyond "disgruntled douchebags talking shit about women (in general) on the Internet". Seriously. Anyone who reads that sentence and doesn't laugh at what the website is claiming to be needs to rethink their lives. Even if it was true, this is not a rational assessment of anything.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 04:27 AM
2

What compromise? That would imply we were giving up something.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 02:21 AM
4

He's a witch! Burn him!
/r/MensRights07/07/13 02:12 AM
0

Isn't that what history is for?
/r/MensRights07/07/13 02:06 AM
0

Why?
/r/MensRights07/07/13 01:55 AM
20

Incidentally, this is one of the many arguments against the death penalty too
/r/MensRights07/07/13 12:55 AM
0

You might also tell Askmen and sex I think I'm going to wait on that injection though.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 12:53 AM
18

Point out that people can be released from prison when it turns out they were innocent.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 12:44 AM
14

So call them unamerican
/r/MensRights07/07/13 12:34 AM
35

8th amendment argument over
/r/MensRights07/07/13 12:26 AM
1

These numbers are worthless when no significant effort is made to investigate such matters.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 11:34 PM
3

If the man wants the woman to have the child and she doesn't, how would you feel about him signing a contract or taking some other measure to ensure that he would be the one to take care of the baby? Even if he was the only one? If you're asking if I would be okay with this as an option agreed to by both the man and the woman, then yes.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 11:33 PM
7

In addition to what has already been said, we can see the same problems starting up in developing nations that are on the rise. If we get this stuff sorted out, they'll have a better example to follow. Example: India's rape situation. It's a huge problem and it needs to be dealt with, but the actions being taken seriously harm men while doing little to stop the actual problem.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 05:41 PM
5

Depends on the shorts. The big issue for them was air circulation.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 03:16 PM
6

I still really want to know if any of them are still wearing skirts because they turned about to be better than shorts.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 03:12 PM
6

One certainly could, but if we did it, we'd be brigading This one isn't worth it
/r/MensRights06/07/13 01:56 PM
6

A fucking third ammendment violation? Didn't expect to see that one.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 06:02 AM
2

Sure
/r/MensRights06/07/13 06:00 AM
2

Congratulations, you're okay with the most radical widespread opinion in the MRM. Feel free to stick around and learn something.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 05:14 AM
2

Be sure to tell us the cited reason for your ban.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 04:45 AM
1

The only paternal responsibility abdication you'll find advocated for around here would require the man to do it early in the pregnancy.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 04:40 AM
3

You must hate Safe Haven laws
/r/MensRights06/07/13 04:25 AM
2

Yep. Welcome to truth town. Men commit more violence. That doesn't mean women have a monopoly on victimhood.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 04:13 AM
2

Source? I've been subject to mistreatment by girls, some into my 20s
/r/MensRights06/07/13 04:08 AM
3

Source?
/r/MensRights06/07/13 04:05 AM
3

MGTOWs are men who have decided not to enter traditional relationships. What does that have to do with abuse?
/r/MensRights06/07/13 02:55 AM
1

You could phrase it as a way to get more rape victims who don't want to deal with the police to get help. It would probably be a good idea even outside of this context.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 02:46 AM
6

What if both parents make allegations?
/r/MensRights06/07/13 02:18 AM
1

Absolutely. I wonder if you could declare rape in a medical context without starting an investigation.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 02:13 AM
1

I don't approve of doing any of this, just discussing.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 02:08 AM
1

Police lineup, she says "I don't recognize any of these people"
/r/MensRights06/07/13 01:57 AM
1

How does SRS still exist?
/r/MensRights05/07/13 11:03 PM
1

Well yeah, but they can't say that.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 10:39 PM
0

Few stay at home Dads? Why aren't men pulling their weight?
/r/MensRights05/07/13 10:36 PM
5

I'm not sure of the details, but I know it doesn't entail preventing physical abuse in the first place.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 10:25 PM
3

Yeah, the censorship is pretty much the only issue. The approved opinions aren't so bad.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 09:55 PM
6

THEY'RE NOT FEMINIST ENOUGH. BLAME MRAs.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 09:31 PM
5

You can get banned for offending people. If they don't like your message, they have people intentionally misunderstand you and get offended so that you can be banned. In this case, the trick wasn't necessary.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 08:45 PM
2

Science found that men are more altruistic when it comes to actually taking action rather than just saying "I feel bad for you".
/r/MensRights05/07/13 08:29 PM
1

I don't know what you've seen and heard. No judgement.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 07:54 PM
5

Yes. I don't know how much, but people will make false accusations for this reason. My biggest hope is that they say "I don't know who did it"
/r/MensRights05/07/13 07:50 PM
23

He's on suicide watch because the other inmates beat the shit out of him. Oh, that's a nice solution to prison violence.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 07:33 PM
24

Most reported rapes where the perpetrator is unknown are fictional. That's not what your title says.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 07:28 PM
3

If you're not concerned for the husband (a question you should ask yourself), you should approach this from a child abuse standpoint rather than a domestic abuse standpoint.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 07:24 PM
5

https://www.nationalparentsorganization.org/ Lots of resources there and they would love to hear your story.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 07:15 PM
2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_%28mythology%29 That's why
/r/MensRights05/07/13 07:05 PM
2

Well sure, there's plenty to complain about in the details.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:28 PM
1

You're saying that you should continue supporting the kid after you give it away. No one is going to go for that.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:17 PM
2

No. Various protections are lost along the way from infancy to adulthood. It would be weirder for all of them to disappear at once.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:08 PM
1

Can someone explain the cognitive dissonance in society that says teenagers are unable to make informed decisions and be responsible for themselves while at the same time allowing them to decide their entire future based on choices they make in school at this time? You have a right to protection from the predations of society, but private educational institutions and businesses have every right to use whatever factors they deem fit to judge your potential and capability.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:56 PM
1

Okay. If you think you're going to get rid of the basis of adoption, good luck with that.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:50 PM
1

Only person decided to have the baby in that scenario, and it wasn't the father.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:41 PM
1

Corrupt DV laws, biased courts, and involuntary servitude are also how our society "works." It doesn't make it right. I'm talking about the expressed purpose of laws, not the practice. Our society has decided that we should all help each other out. Lets say you end up paying massive amounts of child support for a child you never wanted, took responsible measures against having, but had anyway. If it is unfair for you to be burdened with paying for the child, then why on earth is it acceptable to…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:31 PM
1

I don't see much of a difference between forcing men to pay for children they didn't want individually or collectively. A significant portion, possibly a majority, of tax money is spent on alleviating undue burden from the less fortunate by spreading it around. It's how our society works. In so doing it allows a much greater guarantee of personal autonomy.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 04:50 PM
1

If we let the mother stick society with the bill we're still allowing her to shift the burden of her choices onto others who had nothing to do with her costly decision, but collectively instead of individually like with child support. Yep. And this is already something that we as a society have decided to do. But only for women.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 04:26 PM
0

I've been trying to refind the video of the guy who was putting up MRM posters in Vancouver or Toronto when he was assaulted and received death threats from a man on the street. There was also a recording of his call to the police after he had figured out who the guy was and you can hear the police blowing off their job in the background.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 03:31 PM
1

Rewrite a few laws and undo it.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 03:20 PM
1

We have enough trouble placing non-infants for adoption as it is. Forget any other arguments, this wouldn't work.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 03:18 PM
1

Yep. Several such politically incorrect studies on gender psychology have burrowed their way into the common arguments of this subreddit. Ask for sources on such claims and you'll be surprised about how often you shall receive them.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 03:16 PM
0

It was a legal, culturally accepted and regulated practice in some cultures at certain times in history. it has a direct impact on the validity of the feminist theory that men oppress women via patriarchy. Excuse me for a moment while I refute this It might be argued as evidence that men oppressed women. These were cultures in which slavery was regularly practiced for both genders, and male slaves were treated worse. Patriarchy "theory" is not a theory as it makes no testable predictions.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 03:13 PM
3

I've seen a lot of figures. Part of it could be different rates in different countries as well as differing definitions of abuse. The rates are similar.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 04:09 AM
3

Someone will reply with something stupid every time you do anything. It doesn't mean the message isn't spreading. We're not trying to turn radfems, we're trying to enlighten the public.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 03:26 AM
3

I have no idea what that refers to
/r/MensRights05/07/13 02:54 AM
7

Does a state not consist of people?
/r/MensRights05/07/13 02:29 AM
3

That's mostly Sweden, and to a lesser extent Norway. Denmark is right out.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 01:34 AM
5

http://www.pitt.edu/~vester/QJE2001.pdf
/r/MensRights05/07/13 01:31 AM
8

I'm not really sure. If anything, it cements the idea of penetration as a different class of violation from other sexual violence.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 01:28 AM
10

Talk to a divorce lawyer without telling her and be sure to bring up the threats. A child is far better off growing up in two households than in one household with parents who hate each other.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 01:13 AM
6

Pretty sure slavery is ownership of a person by another person
/r/MensRights05/07/13 12:54 AM
5

I take it Scotland has no true Scotsmen in it?
/r/MensRights04/07/13 11:50 PM
32

Yes, and this applies to many men's rights issues, such as health care, prison rape, and the like. The problem isn't that women don't have it bad enough.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 11:05 PM
3

Okay. That was not clear from the text.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 11:02 PM
11

http://www.policymic.com/articles/27139/new-york-rape-is-rape-bill-leads-the-way-in-ending-sexual-violence Still doesn't include forced envelopment
/r/MensRights04/07/13 10:55 PM
7

After interrogating the list of names and removing the members of the public (who shouldn't be in the list - obviously the beancounters at the HSE cannot sort their tables out) What are they getting at here?
/r/MensRights04/07/13 10:52 PM
25

The fact that feminism has deep roots in liberal politics doesn't mean that liberal politics is inherently feminist.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 10:50 PM
2

If wife selling is legal in a culture, that means she is the property of the husband. These were culturally accepted practices in some cases, as was mentioned in the wikipedia article. Though I really don't know why this is a point of contention. It's not as though this has any bearing on modern men's rights.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 10:46 PM
1

Did I say that was the case?
/r/MensRights04/07/13 10:26 PM
1

Well that can't be legislated. I say fix the tractable problems first. Equal legal treatment will go a long way toward equal social treatment.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 06:10 PM
1

How is it hard? Women have no obligation to parenthood but men do. Whether it's an accident or not is irrelevant. I only brought up the intentional case to highlight that this would result in fewer unwanted children because far fewer women would do this in order to get child support money or in order to 'catch' a guy. If he initially agrees but decides to back out later, that's a different story, and I would be in favor of child support.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 06:06 PM
1

Yeah well no one is in charge, so that makes this sort of thing a little tough. I'd agree with all of the points you're making.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:53 PM
3

You'd be right in that it's not that simple, but wives were in some cases subject to the same sort of slavery that other slaves were subject to. This may not have been particularly common or widespread, but let's not get ourselves called historical revisionists.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:14 PM
6

Exactly. And again, I have no idea why we're still hung up on the past. Is slavery relevant to modern black issues?
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:31 PM
7

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife_selling This was frequently done to protect the wife when her husband could no longer support her, but in certain cultures she could have no say in the matter. Of course, plenty of men were enslaved too.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:03 PM
3

An excellent point.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:56 PM
1

They did in some places in the past, and arguably in certain distant portions of the world today.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:52 PM
1

Except to a limited extent in societies with a weak rule of law where armed attackers were a very real and regular threat, there is no reason why physical strength should make it ‘natural’ that one portion of society should have greater legal rights and cultural freedoms over another. When that strength gives you the capability to push a plow it leads to a natural division of labor, which in turn leads to different societal roles. I won't argue what should have happened, but I don't think you're…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:32 PM
5

I'm not sure I agree. In certain cultures women used to be treated as chattel, and I'd say that there we see significant oppression of women as compared to men. In Europe and North America during the 1800s (as well as lots of other places and times), I'd say you're absolutely right. Of course, none of this is particularly relevant to the modern situation and oppression isn't a contest.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:30 PM
4

Why would you ask about abortion in particular? It's not an issue that divides the two groups.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:26 PM
1

Well if you're not married, the woman can just leave the father line on the birth certificate blank and put the kid up for adoption. The father can then claim the child as his own if he jumps the legal hurdles fast enough and gets a DNA test, but I believe that still leaves the woman free of any obligation. Even within a marriage, a woman can just drop the baby off at a Safe Haven within the first three days following birth. So, you may ask, how would we prevent men from using such an ability ag…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:21 PM
1

I don't think so.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:08 PM
1

"Women can put children up for adoption, what about men?" I call it opting out of parenthood, which is exactly what putting a kid up for adoption is.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:53 AM
1

she's subject to the same "incentives" such as having her driver's license revoked or being thrown in jail for contempt of court. Debtor's prisons are illegal Once women bear an equal obligation under the law, you can expect them to take a greater interest in the unfairness of those laws. And at what point is a woman going to have a man get pregnant and make her support a baby she never wanted to have? Though I find it no more defensible to expect "him" to pay for it when he is a random taxpayer…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:52 AM
1

I don't know why this gets equated with abortion. What it should be equated with is putting a kid up for adoption.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:26 AM
8

You cannot include a no alimony clause. Prenups only address pre-marital assets.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:02 AM
2

No, "this behavior" meaning having a baby that you can't support, in this case referring to a woman having a baby alone because the man never wanted one in the first place and then expecting him to pay for it.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:08 AM
1

But if this behavior is against the will of the man, that's okay?
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:50 AM
1

I'd make is to make the parents who put their child up for adoption obligated to pay child support until such time as that child was adopted. This is frequently never, hence the foster system. This also wouldn't work with Safe Haven laws.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:28 AM
1

So you're against parents putting children up for adoption?
/r/MensRights04/07/13 01:45 AM
2

Fine. Authoritarian. Happy?
/r/MensRights04/07/13 01:08 AM
5

Oh right, thought policing. If my facts and logic hurt someone's feelings I can get banned.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 01:08 AM
3

Its an exaggeration, but only certain people are even allowed to respond.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:58 AM
2

Actually that organization combined with censorship is exactly what I was going for.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:56 AM
12

Of course you get warnings. You're towing the party line.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:38 AM
1

There's also the question of whether they have to use some external definition of gender.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:32 AM
3

I'm talking about the subreddit, not feminism the movement
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:28 AM
1

This is already illegal in several ways That's why it's irrelevant to the routine infant circumcision debate.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:25 AM
-2

I agree circumcision should be illegal without informed consent or medical need, but it isn't and this case has nothing to do with it.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:12 AM
1

National Parents Organization may be able to help you find a lawyer. You need a custody or visitation agreement or order before you can do anything else, and for that you should at least consult with a lawyer.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:11 AM
1

I was assuming they were infants. I still need way more information.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:01 AM
5

It is discriminatory and I'm not sure anyone is in the wrong.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:00 AM
21

Hey look, a warning. Another difference!
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:29 PM
6

What about in feminism itself? (The subreddit)
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:20 PM
9

Well of course the rules are up to the mods. The question is whether the rules they choose are fascist.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 11:10 PM
17

AlexReynard got banned, and the given rule violation was the top level comment one. He didn't make any top level comments. How do you justify that? Also, how do you justify the rule?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 10:52 PM
2

Read again some unfounded cases of rape may be false or fabricated No effort is made to find false accusations and put them in this category. And let us not forget that for a great many cases, there would be no way for the police to determine if an accusation is false or not, no matter how much they were to investigate.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:32 PM
4

8% is an FBI statistic. I forget where the 2% sometimes seen comes from. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#FBI_statistics This statistic is almost meaningless, as many of the jurisdictions from which the FBI collects data on crime use different definitions of, or criteria for, "unfounded." That is, a report of rape might be classified as unfounded (rather than as forcible rape) if the alleged victim did not try to fight off the suspect, if the alleged perpetrator did not use …
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:20 PM
2

This just happened, so they don't know if this was done with parental consent. More charges may follow.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:12 PM
1

Even supposing we were soulless misogynists, why would we do something that would strengthen the veil of victimization?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:34 PM
0

Eh. It also wasn't particularly on-topic. I'm guessing it was one of the regulars.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:46 PM
4

What I'm getting from this discussion is "no statistics can be trusted but look at these statistics." If you won't accept the % false and % unreported numbers then it all comes down to anecdotal evidence. Oh, now I can't criticize research methodology and question the conclusions that were drawn, or ask for a real study. Any other rules I should know about? And men won't get unaccused if a liar is prosecuted. Actually they very well might be, and currently women know they won't get in serious tr…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:36 PM
6

not really interested in complaining about circumcision Why not?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:22 PM
4

This is nothing new. That subreddit isn't taken seriously, and does not represent the majority feminist view. This isn't a NAFALT, most feminists merely think we're wrong rather than rapists.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:20 PM
2

Yep, that's what I was looking for.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:09 PM
4

Philadelphia policy does not equate to statistically more likely. "Obviously lying" is a different scenario than being unable to distinguish between cases 1 and 2. Well that's not the followup question you asked. What answer did you expect to get? Hypothetically if the false accusation rate is 8% and 20% of rapes are reported to the police, out of 100 accusations, 8 men were falsely accused and 400 women didn't report their rape. (Statistics taken from the wiki article above) Victims who don't c…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:00 PM
2

Still ignores the rights of the man. If he didn't consent to parenthood, he shouldn't have to support a child. When a woman doesn't want to be a mother, she can drop the child off at a safe haven or go through the normal process of putting the child up for adoption. She is then free of obligation. The man has no such option. If a man doesn't want to be a parent, he should be able to opt out while the woman can still get an abortion, thereby losing all obligations and parental rights, just as the…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 06:41 PM
10

Does anyone have the link that showed this stuff was common based on a survey in the UK? I've needed it a few times recently and I can't find it. It was posted here a while ago.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 06:35 PM
1

This daycare is aside from child support. If she has full custody, you don't have to pay anything beyond the court ordered amount. However, with joint custody both parents are expected to provide for the children when the children are in their care (hence the reduced payments). How they want to split up shared costs like daycare and medical bills is between them. Thus, he shouldn't pay for anything beyond child support when he's not getting his court-mandated custody.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 06:30 PM
5

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1hk9c0/philadelphia_policy_almost_never_arrest_false/
/r/MensRights03/07/13 06:07 PM
-1

In principle she shouldn't be able to if she denies you custody, but there could be legal loopholes.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:31 PM
0

What kind of advice or help are you asking for then? We can't give legal advice.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:21 PM
3

case #2 happens far more often. This has never been established. You'll see plenty of claims that it has been established, but case 1 and case 2 are extremely hard to distinguish and the police will usually refuse to investigate allegations of false accusation.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:04 PM
3

Get a child custody lawyer. The National Parents Organization may be able to help you get in touch with a good one. Talk to this lawyer before calling the police. Talking to a lawyer does not necessarily mean filing suit (which could save you money, if that's a concern). Just having a lawyer can be enough to intimidate someone out of wrongful action. Regardless, a lawyer can advise you on the best course of action.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:45 PM
2

I think they should have equal opportunity (though outcome should be on individual merit) I think that opportunities in the United States are as equal as they have ever been and that women have about the same amount of opportunity as men, not that this is really a concept that you can measure in this fashion given the asymmetries of the problems faced by each gender.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:09 PM
2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercion Coercion /koʊˈɜrʃən/ is the practice of forcing another party to act in an involuntary manner (whether through action or inaction) by use of threats or intimidation or some other form of pressure or force, and describes a set of various different similar types of forceful actions that violate the free will of an individual to induce a desired response. Please don't equate my pointing out that this is not coercion with a defense of what happened.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:06 PM
2

No. This is withholding information. Coercion would be making someone do something they wouldn't do otherwise via some threat.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 03:38 PM
2

This is a sub for the discussion of issues affecting men's rights. It is a reaction to feminist dominated gender politics which villainizes men and erases their issues through monopolization, censorship, lies, and emotional appeals. This is not a traditionalist movement and it advocates gender equality. You'd be right to be skeptical of some of what I've just said, but ask further and you'll be presented with hard evidence.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 03:19 PM
18

'Set to be banned' is misleading. A small anti-porn group has gotten one congressman to do something. The military needs porn. This win't happen.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 03:02 PM
1

I don't think we have enough information to determine to what extent performance differences are biologically determined compared to the possible effects described by ExpendableOne.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:49 PM
4

Males also have a particular advantage in upper body strength, which in tennis means faster returns.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:45 PM
3

Upvotes for reason and internal skepticism. You're right, and if this does not correspond to increased abuse then it is troubling indeed.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:43 PM
3

Still a hell of a lot more transparent than a lot of studies.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:20 PM
1

True enough, but the legal access proves the right.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:57 PM
31

Odds are they were moved to the spam filter by mods
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:39 PM
15

Bingo. Discussions lose members for them and gain members for us. That should tell us something.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:29 PM
4

It would be a horrific travesty.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:10 PM
2

When you make someone do something
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:10 PM
0

Actually the entire US and Canada have access to abortion without restriction for reason. I don't know about elsewhere.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:09 PM
0

Well first off that's already not how it works, and secondly the idea that rape babies are more okay to abort promotes false rape accusations.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:20 AM
1

You need to present a reasoned argument for this that weighs the rights of all involved, including the rapist, and includes consideration of accusations of rape in order to gain custody. This matter will not be settled by assertions.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:19 AM
3

Therefore, consenting to sex is consenting to parenthood. By that terrible logic, abortion should only be allowed in cases of medical necessity and rape.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:11 AM
2

Yeah, but who gets the baby if the father wants it? Most of these cases don't have child victims.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:09 AM
3

Sex isn't consent to parenthood. This is fairly well established.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:06 AM
2

Yes. I don't know what the right thing to do is in this case. It's a very difficult question.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:04 AM
2

What the fuck is wrong with you? No one should ever have to live through a false accusation. We can't prevent it, but we can avoid encouraging it. And I already said that no child support is an obvious go ahead, so why are you bringing finances in again?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:49 AM
6

I know. I've been here for a while. If rape victims can take custody, there will be false reporting for that reason. That's the sort of consequence I'm talking about.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:38 AM
0

Yes. This does not include a right to marriage, but does require that marriages be equal.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:35 AM
27

He certainly shouldn't pay child support. To your other questions, I don't know. We would need to think carefully about it, including implications and possible abuses.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:28 AM
1

Burdened? I don't know. Legislated? Yes. Modern politicians? Not sure when these laws were written.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:19 AM
1

Yeah, but instead they legislated based on what I just said
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:12 AM
7

No, it's because of traditionalist views about men and new views about female independence combined into the hulking monstrosity known as family court.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 03:53 AM
2

That wasn't my question
/r/MensRights03/07/13 03:18 AM
1

EDIT Nevermind, I can't read.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:56 AM
1

It is being reviewed, but this can't reverse the decision.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:27 AM
1

No, there's no double jeopardy in Canada either.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:27 AM
3

Men get a day to decide? What decision is this?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:25 AM
6

What does that mean?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:26 AM
2

That's not what coercion is
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:53 AM
17

The general consensus is that this a hypocrisy on the part of feminists, not that their view on abortion is wrong. Most of us are pro-choice for the mother and the father.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:50 AM
13

Then you're not pro-choice
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:45 AM
5

Go to a hospital immediately and have a tox screen done. Then see if you can find a domestic abuse shelter that will take you in until you figure out where to go from here.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:27 AM
0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade The State has the right to intervene prior to fetal viability only to protect the health of the mother If this ultrasound provides some information that protects the health of the mother, I'm not sure it's a bad law. In this case I would require more convincing at the very least. Abortions should be safe. If the ultrasound does not protect the health of the mother, the ACLU will be all over this and there will be nothing we can really do.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 11:43 PM
2

BSA doesn't approve of atheists or gays either, and we had quite a few of those (myself included) make Eagle in my troop. Ignoring dumb shit from central command is half of what the BSA is outside the bible belt.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 10:40 PM
23

Removal of the clitoral hood is pretty much exactly analogous to circumcision. Routine circumcision was popularized to discourage masturbation. The parallels abound.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 06:42 PM
13

Even if everything goes right: http://intactnews.org/node/138/1319461990/acquisition-erectile-dysfunction-circumcision Don't let anyone tell you that circumcision is significantly different from mild female genital mutilation.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 06:29 PM
2

Identifying unfairness faced by men disproportionately to women and efforts to hide this unfairness or tarnish men unfairly. Educate others about this. I sort of figured it out on my own, but I didn't realize how big it was until about six months ago. I paid attention. The fact that my mother is in the legal field helped in that I know a lot about legal rights and thus notice such violations. I was also raised to believe that men and women should be treated the same, but observed that this was n…
/r/MensRights02/07/13 06:19 PM
5

I like your semicolon
/r/MensRights02/07/13 06:02 PM
1

No. People have differing financial situations and this would be unenforceable.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 05:53 PM
0

What state is this in?
/r/MensRights02/07/13 05:45 PM
21

That's the Venture program, which is decades old. This is nothing new. Source: I'm an Eagle Scout. Personally I think separating boy scouts and girl scouts is kind of dumb, but they're private clubs, and I don't think we have any right to tell them what to do.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 05:45 PM
1

Alternative explanations: STI UTI Phimosis, a rare condition that is easily treated at the time that it becomes an issue A minor foreskin related infection, likely from poor hygiene, that he ignored until it got bad. People need to see doctors. Because of the bullshit in the united states regarding circumcision, that's an easy explanation to jump to in order to explain observed phenomenon, and an easy explanation to jump to for a man trying to hide something similar. Anecdotes should not be a ba…
/r/MensRights02/07/13 04:41 PM
5

No, she has been lied to. The US is bullshit. What she's doing is refusing to look deeper and listen to reason.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 04:32 PM
3

That kid looks more like 6
/r/MensRights02/07/13 02:11 PM
1

Planned Parenthood v Casey The Supreme Court determined that abortion is legal until the fetus is viable.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 01:36 PM
6

That's what the article says, though that begs the question of why she had gasoline.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 04:03 AM
2

This law would go against previous supreme court rulings. I don't know why it's being taken seriously.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 04:02 AM
2

Why don't you think it's real? No good fiction I've ever read has "So" as a byline
/r/MensRights02/07/13 03:47 AM
10

I seek to avoid becoming that which I oppose.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 03:45 AM
3

It is vitally important that you immediately establish that this was done without your consent. The university might be able to help you have it taken down.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 03:16 AM
19

Why did she have a bottle of gasoline and matches? I hope premeditation is considered in sentencing.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 03:13 AM
3

Tell your faculty advisor immediately.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 03:07 AM
4

The claim being made here by others is that treating others differently based on gender isn't sexual harassment because the action, verbal or otherwise, is not sexual in nature. I don't know if they're right, and I'm not sure that it matters.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 02:39 AM
2

Everyone always compares it to Rome, but Roman women couldn't serve in the military or do the same work a man can. History only repeats itself when you look at it with confirmation bias. I'm not saying this will end well, I'm saying it will be different.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 02:15 AM
2

It certainly is bad for society as we know it. But what else could it be? The powerful (such as newspaper publishers) are mostly older and living in the past, rather than seeing what could be.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 02:10 AM
2

As would we all, though I wonder how much of your husband's experience results from interacting mostly with men.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 02:06 AM
2

We should take every book with a grain of salt, because people are wrong sometimes.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 02:04 AM
2

If this isn't true, what harm has been done?
/r/MensRights02/07/13 01:35 AM
10

Supporting children doesn't count?
/r/MensRights02/07/13 01:29 AM
7

Also, safe haven laws
/r/MensRights02/07/13 01:19 AM
27

No. See Roe vs. Wade
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:54 AM
27

in the United States From the title of the original post. Lack of access to abortion elsewhere is a travesty, but not the focus of the current discussion
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:43 AM
7

The "men's rights" movement is a backlash against changing gender roles and norms which threaten traditional masculinity. This is about as true as holocaust denial.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:41 AM
23

No, thanks to legal abortion (as it should be) that's fairly rare.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 12:38 AM
2

Why shadowban and not regular ban?
/r/MensRights01/07/13 11:51 PM
0

If they were totally objective in their hiring, they'd just look at the qualifications on your resume and make the phone call asking you to start on Monday. Utter bullshit. You can assess working knowledge of the field in an interview without the person being able to use google, and see if they're coherent in addition to asking questions that they didn't already answer on their resume.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 11:37 PM
25

Probably because almost no one becomes a mother against their will and men face tons of custody bullshit
/r/MensRights01/07/13 11:31 PM
3

I thought they were saying, "she works hard too, make her feel you appreciate how hard she works" That's exactly what they were saying. He had just finished talking about he appreciates her, and the response is "You'd better appreciate her!" Unlike in many cases, I have no idea if something similar would happen in a genderswapped scenario, but this is really stupid and disrespectful.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 10:57 PM
2

I see no reason they couldn't be on the same questionnaire. Part 10b of what?
/r/MensRights01/07/13 10:54 PM
8

Like taking a job that keeps away from home for the entire work week in order to provide for his family? The assumption that she must be neglected was very disturbing.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 10:24 PM
6

If you ask any questions that you are using to look at gender roles or sexism, make sure you ask the question separately for men and women so you can distinguish feelings and opinions about men vs. women from feelings and opinions about people in general. Not doing this is a huge source of bullshit in surveys.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 10:23 PM
1

could this really be the reason of so many feminist resenting men? It's a small piece of it.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 10:21 PM
7

The type of people who are going to make false rape claims, are not the type being brought to a medical center for a rape kit like that. If you go to the police and say you just got raped, they'll have you go there. We should not demonize this women for what she said, because odds are she's seen the worst cases... Agreed ...and is highly unlikely to have seen one that was not actually rape. Source?
/r/MensRights01/07/13 09:59 PM
10

They could have a weight requirement rather than a gender requirement. That would be non-discriminatory as it would select for the trait they claim to be selecting for. I doubt they're being honest about their intentions though.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 09:43 PM
14

Ehh. She may not mean that the way you're interpreting it. If the only stuff that goes into her report is an account of injuries, semen and whatever other forensic evidence there might be, then in principle it wouldn't matter how she feels about it. However, this is very bad practice when it comes to cognitive bias. She is clearly not distancing herself emotionally from her work, which is of paramount importance in forensics.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 09:42 PM
2

Another interpretation would be that when a woman says she was abused but then kills for one of those reasons, the lie is often believed. And let's not forget proxy violence.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 04:07 PM
2

Homicide isn't a crime. Murder and manslaughter are crimes, but not every homicide falls into one of those categories.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 04:06 PM
21

"Yeah, but what do you do for her? Do you appreciate her?" What does it fucking look like he's doing with that post?
/r/MensRights01/07/13 04:03 PM
1

And men weren't allowed in the one with the changing station?
/r/MensRights01/07/13 03:38 PM
-1

Hope for the future. Sometimes we forget that most of the traditional media is controlled by the elderly.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 06:25 PM
57

So women can use the men's room if there's a line. Men can't do the same thing because they're sexual predators. This is especially stupid because they're single occupancy bathrooms (I assume, since it's a train). They should all be unisex.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 05:50 PM
1

If they rejected discriminatory proposals, they would save more money.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 04:43 PM
1

But when the application is discriminatory, that's a big problem, and it's not a hard problem to foresee.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 04:37 PM
1

But why would they let the drug companies dictate the nature of the subsidies?
/r/MensRights30/06/13 04:19 PM
1

Overall profit is not equal to price. Which is exactly why they still want to sell more at a lower price. If people buy at a subsidized price in Australia and sell it somewhere else, the pharmaceutical company still makes the same amount of money but the government pays subsidies on drugs that aren't being used in Australia. The government suffers.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:52 PM
5

When they respond "No", what happens next?
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:51 AM
2

Try again, I'm not having problems.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:28 AM
3

Now I'm not here to question the notion that men frequently receive uneven treatment when it comes to things like child custody and sexual abuse, but my understanding of the issue is that these discrepancies are caused mostly by preconceptions of manhood and the imposition of gender roles ('men can't be raped', 'women are better carers than men'), than any actual written law. Essentially, human biases and widespread misconceptions about these issues that need to be stamped out. There are allusio…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 02:24 AM
1

especially if the child looks well taken care of and happy. See, there's the problem. Children can be little shits sometimes.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 01:24 AM
3

They think its cute when they know its his child. This does not mean that they aren't more likely to suspect him of wrongdoing if he's a stranger.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 10:52 PM
2

Was there any evidence other than the testimony of the accuser? Preovolos presented a handful of photographs that showed Sarmiento posing in front of cakes on at least two of her birthdays, according to time stamps on the photos, as well as other occasions. In one photo, Sarmiento is seen posing on front of a cake that appeared to have her name written on it, but Sarmiento insisted the cake was not for her. Instead, Sarmiento said the cake bearing her name was actually for one of the children's …
/r/MensRights29/06/13 09:22 PM
1

Right, but 300 was the total number of men, not the number of men with ED. If the effect was small in both populations (regardless of proportionality) then you would need a very large sample size.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 07:26 PM
5

I would distinguish between corporal punishment and hitting your kid back, particularly as he starts to approach you in size.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 07:06 PM
3

she broke just as many laws as the couple This certainly isn't relevant. Was there any evidence other than the testimony of the accuser?
/r/MensRights29/06/13 07:02 PM
31

Yes. I've been fed the same amount as a girl half my size on a backpacking trip. Yes, I did have to carry more, in fact my load was considerably more than proportional. I've not had access to scholarships for women, and there were no equivalent scholarships for men. "Ladies Night" Being treated as dangerous. Pat downs at concerts - it seems that women are always exempt, though sometimes their purses are searched. Numerous women's events at college with no equivalent men's events (even though the…
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:55 PM
2

It depends on how prevalent ED was found to be. If it was 2 uncircumcised guys and 9 circumcised guys found to have ED, then it would be nowhere near enough. This article gives more detail, including links to the actual studies. Unfortunately I can't get through the paywall to the first article to take a more detailed look at the methods. However, to establish statistical significance indicating increased chance of ED (I'm simplifying it as a binary condition) in circumcised men with 95% confide…
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:34 PM
1

That's an unusual enough condition that I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt until an expert tells me otherwise. I do wonder at how much needs to be removed though.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:04 PM
1

Nor does it need to be identified ahead of time. People often let it go way to long, but this issue is primarily caused by ignorance due to the prevalence of circumcision as a preventative measure, particularly among the older population (doctors tend to be older, and medical literature takes a little while to catch up, particularly for non-specialists). Even when it does go too long, I'm not aware of any irreversible damage outside of freak occurrences, though I'm not an expert on the matter.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:02 PM
1

every time we vote a made up story to the top And how do we avoid that without witch-hunting? People make throwaways to post here because people will vilify them for it. Not all of them are trolls.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:00 PM
1

That's to get a 5% error in a split sample, where all subjects fall into one category or the other.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 05:46 PM
2

Well clearly that prevents actual discussion from happening. And clearly constant witchhunting wouldn't do any damage.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 09:03 AM
1

300 is a pretty big sample size, and no one gets funding for this stuff. The figure 4.5 probably has some fairly large error bars, but it's a statistically significant finding. I may have misremembered a bit regarding the viagra, but it's really not the point here.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 09:01 AM
2

No, not really. Nobody whose mind might get changed cares.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 08:59 AM
5

I don't know what forums you've been looking at, so I really don't have anything to say in that regard. Which brings up an interesting point; feminism isn't some unified movement or unilateral ideological hierarchy. There are multiple different types of feminists, multiple different takes on what feminism is. There is no unified Global Feminist Hierarchy campaigning to destroy the rights of men. True, but almost all of agree that women are oppressed and need additional protections and that men d…
/r/MensRights29/06/13 08:58 AM
2

Supposing that's true, who give a fuck?
/r/MensRights29/06/13 08:48 AM
1

http://news.menshealth.com/is-your-circumcision-making-you-soft/2011/11/02/
/r/MensRights29/06/13 08:47 AM
4

"Actually, when I have sex it feels great, and I can reach an orgasm with no problem" Circumcized men are about four times as likely to use viagra. Again, without trying both you can't know from personal experience.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 08:33 AM
3

What the fuck? What harm is he causing?
/r/MensRights29/06/13 08:31 AM
7

Of course not. They're told it's not a big deal and they can't know any better. This isn't the sort of thing you can just guess.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 08:28 AM
9

I'm circumcized. I'm with them. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 08:23 AM
12

You'll get way better pain killers than a baby would. Babies are super sensitive to that sort of thing.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 08:14 AM
7

Tell you friends
/r/MensRights29/06/13 07:54 AM
10

He pushed her in so he would have time to finish his phone call to the police without being assaulted. She got wet. A man behaving that way could have been beaten to a pulp and everyone would say he deserved it. I don't know what the deal with the police is.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 07:18 AM
2

http://www.drmomma.org/2009/08/penn-teller-circumcision-documentary.html I'm not budging on this. No one is circumcising my child unless it is a medical emergency. There are often other options that aren't used for no good reason, depending on what's wrong.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:07 AM
6

So.... What was all of that about?
/r/MensRights29/06/13 04:42 AM
1

Did you mean to include a link?
/r/MensRights29/06/13 04:29 AM
11

We have been thwarted and I am now a feminist.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 04:28 AM
3

Irony: He was probably trying to provide for his family out of societal obligation when he stepped on the land mine.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 04:26 AM
14

I actually noticed without knowing that anyone else had. What I didn't realize until I came here was that feminist lobbying had pushed through much of what I was concerned about and that all of the statistics I had heard were wrong. How could I have realized? It wasn't in my area of interest and I can't fact check everything (though my training in experimental bias sure helped win me over quickly once I knew to look). I had never heard any credible dissent. No reason to be suspicious. This is wh…
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:52 AM
1

Yes, but it also generally causes overall profit to increase due to efficiencies of scale. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:47 AM
0

Subsidies reduce the amount of money they make - because governments are in effect buying in bulk and thus negotiating the price down. Nope. If it was going to drive the price down they would opt out.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:33 AM
4

You won't find all that many fathers on reddit (not that this should keep you from trying). Most of the men here are 24 or under. In a hilarious twist of fate, Symantec's shit list has a great many father's websites on it that might also be good places to find people.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:18 AM
1

At a price factor of 50, they could probably deliver it by sounding rocket and still make a profit.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:15 AM
0

So you're saying they don't want sales because it exposes them to litigation?
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:12 AM
1

What does that have to do with subsidies?
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:04 AM
1

A troll so competent that he makes meaningful contribution? That begs a few questions.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 11:50 PM
2

I agree. It doesn't get discussed much here because it's one of the few things that we generally agree with feminists about.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 09:49 PM
0

He makes good points sometimes. I don't think he's a troll. Just very angry.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 09:48 PM
3

A subsidy is when the government reduces the market price by making up the difference with tax money. If anything it lets the company make more money by charging more and still having people buy it.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 09:41 PM
14

simply complies with the requirements of the National Health Act that the government can only subsidise a medicine in line with a drug company's request. Why the fuck is that a law?
/r/MensRights28/06/13 09:25 PM
6

Exactly. If the laws were written properly it wouldn't matter if you were a man, woman, transgender, heterosexual, homosexual, asexual, or whatever else I haven't though of. Really, in a fair world why would the government need to know how you identified or what genitals you have?
/r/MensRights28/06/13 08:47 PM
6

Male disposability and the idea that women are oppressed. It's causing pretty much every other problem, but I don't know what to do about that so I focus on law and calling out flawed research methodology.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 08:43 PM
3

There might be tampons in a purse. Someone could get offended. EDIT: Whoever downvoted missed the dark sarcasm.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 08:41 PM
-1

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/1h6lqj/if_the_father_wants_to_keep_an_unborn_child_but/carww8j
/r/MensRights28/06/13 04:22 PM
3

Are you advocating universal (as opposed to relative) morality?
/r/MensRights28/06/13 03:39 PM
1

Consider hypergamy collectively and in a practical application and you'll see what I mean. Are you seriously leaving this as an exercize to the reader? Can't you just tell me what happened or link me to an article or something?
/r/MensRights28/06/13 03:04 PM
1

I know. That doesn't mean finding a balance will be easy.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 02:58 PM
2

No it isn't. Hypergamy doesn't have a fundamental policing component.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:52 AM
1

Can you explain this sexual policing?
/r/MensRights28/06/13 04:38 AM
5

Yes. She's perfectly within her rights (by the same amendment) to say that men don't have a right approach her and talk to her. However, she's wrong.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:57 PM
2

The first one.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:44 PM
13

Now get back to work! Is that a job offer?
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:37 PM
2

There are obvious factors, but then there's questions like how to balance different classroom activities. Boys and girls aren't necessarily going to thrive under the same conditions. There are plenty of examples of this that get discussed on the subreddit fairly frequently, and that's where it gets tricky.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:36 PM
9

I didn't say they have an equal opportunity. I said that's what needs to happen. And yes, it's a difficult question.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:26 PM
17

Let me stop you there. The goal should always be equal opportunity, not equal outcome. Sometimes it's hard to distinguish the two, but it's an important distinction. That said, special extra support for women doesn't sound to me like equal opportunity.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:18 PM
16

What gives guys the right to come up and talk to me? Isn't there an ammendment about that?
/r/MensRights27/06/13 10:18 PM
1

Libtard No, I'm a technoprogressive libertarian. I merely don't have fantastical notions about how everything used to be used to be made of smiles and unicorn farts. but GMO foods shown to have incredibly harmful effects There are some environmental concerns. If you're talking about issues from eating them, you're wrong. I defy you to present one example. Keep in mind that pest resistant crops have less poison sprayed on them. ADHD drugs have been linked to all manner of truly nasty 'side effect…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 10:01 PM
1

http://www.medicalprogresstoday.com/spotlight/spotlight_indarchive.php?id=1039
/r/MensRights27/06/13 04:20 AM
1

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/08/26/rape-shield-laws-and-false-convictions/
/r/MensRights26/06/13 09:39 PM
1

That's specific to NY. See other states as well. There's also the issue of hiding the identity of the accuser from the public record.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 08:20 PM
1

the men's side This isn't a real thing. There are plenty of female gender traditionalists. I was pointing out that the rape shield laws OP wants an apology for protects male victims as well. Why should a male rape victim have his past sexual history (when completely irrelevant to the case) paraded out to a jury knowing how that can unfairly harm the victim? The big one there is past false rape accusations, which are prevented from being admitted as evidence by rape shield laws. Or what if the ac…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 07:54 PM
1

Republican men being against women registering even now How would we address that? It's clearly not what we're going for. Everyone ideas that it's the result of traditionalist female privilege (or positive sexism, as it's sometimes called). Or that rape shield laws protect male victims too First, no they don't. Women can't rape under most jurisdictions. Second, even if they did it wouldn't affect anything we say about sexual assault crimes. So you have no rebuttal for any of his points?
/r/MensRights26/06/13 07:36 PM
15

No. It's a crime opportunity. You aren't going to abuse drugs by accident.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 07:29 PM
21

lure of drugs That is not a workplace hazard.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 06:44 PM
2

Split custody or welfare
/r/MensRights26/06/13 06:35 PM
6

Basically, I have a friend who is so in the dark about reality, she legitimately thinks that feminism is justified and that men have it good. That's a pretty normal level of in the dark, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 06:23 PM
7

Please forgive us and help us to create a better world. I'd love to, but this isn't really a letter from feminism. It's a letter from a feminist. I'd love to accept such an apology and engage in discussion with any feminists who feel that way.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:53 PM
0

Right. Everyone is sitting here arguing over what the fuck grammatically incorrect means when it's pretty fucking obvious what point I was making and no one is disputing that.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 11:59 PM
0

Quite the opposite. Whether or not it's really grammatically incorrect is irrelevant. You can't go around publishing the suggested alternatives and be taken seriously as a firm.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 11:47 PM
0

Why?
/r/MensRights25/06/13 11:44 PM
0

Depends on what you mean by grammatical validity
/r/MensRights25/06/13 11:00 PM
0

It makes it a death sentence to publish
/r/MensRights25/06/13 10:54 PM
-1

It's generally avoided in formal writing.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 10:43 PM
3

(if not more so considering they get people who want to change the world by getting everyone to agree with them) If not? As though it weren't a certainty?
/r/MensRights25/06/13 07:51 PM
-6

You're using extremely archaic grammar. Yes, like the great majority of published writing.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 07:13 PM
1

Also, see this link http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-censorship/feministing-erases-female-sexual-predators/
/r/MensRights25/06/13 07:03 PM
1

So it starts off with what I must assume is this Subreddits primary complaint. The prevalence and ease of a reporting a fake rape. There is no primary complaint. Now, getting jailed for a false accusation of rape sounds like a terrible fate, but it does not sound like a particularly common fate. After all it is nearly impossible for a woman to get a man convicted of an entirely legitimate rape. Of course, merely being accused can completely ruin your life, and there's essentially nothing to keep…
/r/MensRights25/06/13 06:56 PM
3

Using him as a gender neutral pronoun is also quite commonplace.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 06:32 PM
25

CPS won't do anything without a court order. The fuck? Have they already investigated? Have someone else report it.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 04:30 PM
3

Hey. Some women have very manly hands.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 04:28 PM
3

That's actually grammatically incorrect. You've changed object plurality midsentence.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 04:26 PM
58

Whenever I see my daughter now, she immediately tells me, "Daddy, I don't want to go back to Mommy's house. I want to go night night at daddy's house." She literally has anxiety attacks over it. Child protective services. Call them.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 04:25 PM
18

Eh. This one is pretty easy to chalk up as a natural consequence of not having a gender non-specific pronoun.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 04:22 PM
1

At the end he says who he's impersonating
/r/MensRights25/06/13 04:21 PM
1

"Sex workers are often vulnerable victims of traffickers and pimps, yet they often remain the prime targets in prostitution investigations, while the Johns [patrons] who fuel the exploitation are treated as mere witnesses," Solution: Fuck everyone equally. Slow clap At least the prositutes might be able to give up the pimps
/r/MensRights25/06/13 04:08 PM
2

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/09/obama-chained-cpi-budget_n_3045653.html Look at that, they can push through Huffington Post articles. http://books.google.com/books?id=It0XSBZz2wEC&pg=PA375&lpg=PA375&dq=national+organization+for+women+%22annual+budget%22&source=bl&ots=rX42DXc3v_&sig=In69nZ7XExC9upvE7S5czRWjU9A&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FLPJUa22Ca_I4AOB84CwAw&ved=0CGsQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=national%20organization%20for%20women%20%22annual%20budget%22&f=false
/r/MensRights25/06/13 03:10 PM
5

Male, you would naturally expect any bias to be on the side of men. So name one law that's biased in favor of men. Here's our list of laws biased against men: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRightsMeta/comments/tnwn8/faq_suggestion_antimale_legislation_roundup/ Of course, there are no such laws in the modern western world. If there were, someone would have an example out of the thousands of times this request has been made.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 03:07 PM
32

Most of the stuff they say about rape on an individual basis is true, if not comprehensive. Absolutely right about bodily autonomy, though I think they're really missing the point by not extending it to penises. Body image issues are a problem. Other stuff
/r/MensRights25/06/13 04:20 AM
-1

Oh wow, they included some corporations. Clearly google is oppressing us.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 03:35 AM
1

I'm fairly certain Google doesn't compile its own dictionary. EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Dictionary Yep, Oxford American College Dictionary
/r/MensRights25/06/13 03:30 AM
2

Wikipedia has more articles than the abridged dictionaries have entries by a large margin, and updates decades faster.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 03:25 AM
2

Right, but it takes frequent use to make into the abridged dictionary.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 03:20 AM
2

Misogyny has been in common use for a long time. Misandry hasn't. This is how dictionaries work.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 03:09 AM
2

you're pretty much implying the whole movement is the cause. I disagree
/r/MensRights24/06/13 11:50 PM
3

The raw hatred I've seen in this post so far doesn't really help. It's true many feminists are swift to demonize us, I was just highlighting the spectrum in the feminism movement. The difference being that many feminists say we hate women, when really we just hate bullshit. Also, this is the internet. People are angry. Generalizing that soon in a post supposed to show the variations is quite counterproductive. They said "feminists think X is bad". My response is "I've seen many feminists do X". …
/r/MensRights24/06/13 11:42 PM
13

The woman who knew CPR but didn't perform it isn't being sued.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 10:18 PM
9

You can't blame him for the defibrilator, and I doubt emergency response was part of the receptionist's job description.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 10:14 PM
6

Certainly a nice message, but some lack of comprehension or denialism is present most IRL feminists can perfectly be considered allies This would probably true if it wasn't for all of the misinformation out there. As it stands, most of think we're a hate group and/or don't recognize mens' issues as pressing. Feminism is about changing the gender roles, sexual norms, and sexist practices that limit you and punish you when whenever you deviate from them. And the experiences listed above (and more)…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 07:11 PM
1

Most people don't want to approve even in ignorance. Many have prejudice against men which they transpose onto trans women (ie hypersexual and violent, unsuited to being with kids, predatory), yet wouldn't express their prejudice in such an open way against cis (non-trans) men...except for pedophilia 'protection' (airlines, babysitters, daycares, playgrounds). I think a large part of this is the fact that misandry is so ingrained in society that they don't really feel a need to make a point of i…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 06:51 PM
1

I'm going to level with you. I don't understand any of this at all. I have no idea what a gender is that's separate from genitals, DNA and sexual orientation and coherence to gender stereotypes. I don't need to know. I believe people when they tell me this stuff is going on, and I'm not judging anyone for how they behave as long as it doesn't impinge on the freedoms of others, or for what they may do to their bodies. I see dismissal of transgendered persons (usually by the older generations) as …
/r/MensRights24/06/13 05:42 PM
2

I don't think the genitals I have/were born with are anyone's business except my romantic and possibly sex partners. Agreed. It's still something that gets talked about, even when not referring to anyone in particular. And all I'm saying about language is look at OP. He doesn't know how to talk about this. Look at how many sentences it takes you to explain this to me. This is because the language used to describe all of this is way more complicated than it needs to be, largely because we're tryi…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 05:23 PM
4

All I was saying is that "male transgendered" doesn't imply "male-identified, like a cross-dresser, drag queen and the likes, and not at all identified as female whatsoever" I'm not really sure what to do about all of this, though I think segregated bathrooms are kind of dumb and I don't see why the government needs to decide or know what your gender is. I also think we need to adjust our language to make it simpler to distinguish gender identity from what genitals you have/were born with.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 05:08 PM
7

Even then it's unclear
/r/MensRights24/06/13 04:58 PM
2

They were spamming other things, too. Which other things? When you say they, were they the same accounts?
/r/MensRights24/06/13 02:57 PM
2

Were the posts being made with new accounts, or old accounts that we hadn't seen before? Would it be possible to selectively restrict access to new accounts?
/r/MensRights24/06/13 02:56 PM
6

4chan is hardly a united group.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 02:55 PM
5

Yes, that happens a lot in many different studies. It's called "confirmation bias". You'll find it in every single study on the mythological wage gap. Hey now, there are good studies on the wage gap. It's just that no one cites them.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 02:49 PM
17

If they're terrified people might think them less men for manning up and taking the helping hand that's offered, they're part of the problem. Ask him if rape victims who don't come forward are part of the problem
/r/MensRights24/06/13 07:38 AM
22

Beeman, 53, has been the subject of campus probes for allegedly inflating crime statistics on federal grant applications and misappropriating money for personal uses. I want to hear more about such investigations.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 03:51 AM
3

It's sort of big with libertarians, but none of that is really relevant.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 03:19 AM
1

I looked. I'd like some information about other countries and income levels. And larger sample size.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 10:44 PM
7

And a lot of the posters here would have much sought advice/perspective from the Father's side of this... We've got lots we can tell you about what his perspective might have been, but every case is different. It sounds like you want to go in with an open mind and consideration for unfairness he might have faced. That's all I would really recommend. Good luck. EDIT: I would also advise coming back and asking specific questions after talking to him.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 10:18 PM
2

I'm addressing him. If I didn't attach it to your response the context would be lost.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 09:24 PM
3

Please post results here if you do so
/r/MensRights23/06/13 09:08 PM
3

Gay men?
/r/MensRights23/06/13 08:06 PM
15

First rule of feminism: Don't talk about women Second rule: If you ignore women, you're sexist
/r/MensRights23/06/13 08:05 PM
1

I feel that Men's Rights has effectively and clearly identified that there's a bias that exists. It even, at times, can look like an intention to harm. Right, but it hasn't received enough publicity or gained enough acceptance. In light of this, I feel like there's a void when it comes to the right positive role model for men. If men can't trust Feminism, how do we help keep them tuned into, as you said yourself, the good things that feminists are trying to do? By calling out bullshit in the mov…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 08:02 PM
7

Yeah, I figured it out before responding.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:55 PM
15

(10) Most women fail to appreciate fully all that men do for them. How the fuck would I know? Also, if I think women do some of this stuff but so do men, that would be misanthropy, not misogyny. They don't check for that though.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:54 PM
35

Write whatever you like, just make sure you spell my name correctly. For a minute there I thought you were saying you're Wil Wheaton.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:39 PM
2

TIL I know absolutely nothing about Minnesota's political leanings.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:22 PM
1

I said it isn't a theme. There are many, and the closest one to that would probably be "the feminist movement suppresses truth in order to achieve goals based on a false presumption regarding the social balance between men and women" This isn't to say that the feminist movement is trying to do some good things (though many of us may disagree on implementation), but rather that many of its goals are misguided and based on its own tendency to bias research to fit with the presumptions upon which i…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:17 PM
8

Can we get the author to come here and talk?
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:14 PM
2

And I think Men need to remember to extend this to women... What offends us is a modern angry woman who blames men for her unhappiness. To turn around and then blame women for our unhappiness creates a deadlock. There are plenty of angry young people here who like to project, but that really isn't a theme of the movement.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:08 PM
5

Cancer is a lot easier to attack than suicide.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 04:29 AM
1

I have to side with the jewish guy on this one. She can piss in someone else's mouth. Also, I presume there are regular toilets as well. Clearly not everyone at the club wants to shit on someone's face.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 04:21 AM
19

Angela Mollard should take her nose out of men's lives and stick it up her ass.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 04:19 AM
16

The fact that it's about $1500 and only super early adopters have one yet is definitely a factor here. Also, the guy in the picture has tons of hair.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 04:17 AM
1

I can't find it on wikipedia, so I'm not sure it exists.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 01:18 AM
3

Okay. This isn't an area of particular interest for me, so I'm really not qualified to do more than quote wikipedia.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 01:11 AM
1

I don't consider myself an MRA. I consider myself a person concerned about defending the rights and liberties of all people, with a special interest in men (because of the serious lack of attention paid to men.) That's pretty much everyone here. It qualifies you by my definition.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 12:52 AM
1

Absolutely, as long as the court allows physical abilities as qualifications for a labor intensive job.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 12:50 AM
1

When a woman is hired over a man. Pretty standard discrimination suit.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 12:32 AM
0

We could try prosecuting when more-qualified female applicants are passed over for female applicants, just as can be done in reverse.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 12:23 AM
2

No, but there are other ways besides quotas. We could start by attacking the idea that men are pedophiles.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 12:09 AM
3

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-teenage-mind/201305/overdiagnosis-adhd Most of the criteria in the DSM are subjective. There's a reason people get second opinions.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 12:07 AM
2

There is absolutely bias against men in these roles, and that is bad. I just don't think a quota system is the way to fix that.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 12:07 AM
0

Absolutely
/r/MensRights23/06/13 12:03 AM
3

So what's all of this hubub about overdiagnosis of ADD then?
/r/MensRights22/06/13 10:33 PM
0

This is a tabloid article. They probably would have had pics if she had been a male stripper too.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 10:20 PM
0

She's charged with a class B felony. The absolute minimum sentence for a class B felony is 3.5 years in NY. It can be as high as 25. Her attorney fees will be pretty high as well if she doesn't waive her right to an attorney. AND THEY GAVE YOUR BAIL MONEY BACK.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 10:13 PM
0

I think the fact that she got caught by accidentally dropping all of it in front of police who until that point were not suspicious may have been a contributing factor in the article being written.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 10:09 PM
4

Yeah. Expert consensus. You know, like the method by which the DSM-IV was written. Also, I'm not appealing to authority right now. An appeal to authority would be "Dr. X says it should done this way, therefore it must be true"
/r/MensRights22/06/13 09:59 PM
3

Expert consensus, as I said. You have the most qualified people get together and figure out how often field diagnoses are wrong. It's the same way you investigate misdiagnosis for any illness.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 09:47 PM
6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matriarchy According to Rohrlich, "many scholars are convinced that Crete was a matriarchy, ruled by a queen-priestess"[46] and the "Cretan civilization" was "matriarchal" before "1500 B.C.," when it was overrun and colonized.[47] Also according to Rohrlich, "in the early Sumerian city-states 'matriarchy seems to have left something more than a trace.'"[48] "There is plenty of evidence of ancient societies where women held greater power than in many societies today. …
/r/MensRights22/06/13 09:45 PM
6

No, it requires independent review by a group of experts on depression looking at the rate at which depression diagnoses are wrong in a sample of the population.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 09:37 PM
2

http://www.mytexasdefenselawyer.com/texas-criminal-laws-penalties/drug-possession-marijuana/ You're telling me that your bond was more than the maximum fine for the misdemeanor you committed? Considering that you get the bail money back, are you sure it wasn't attorney's fees and the fine that you were paying off? Do you realize that this woman is going to prison for at least three years?
/r/MensRights22/06/13 09:35 PM
7

You don't need to figure that out to point out that your study didn't take it into account. You're allowed to make such simplifying assumptions, but they must be explicitly stated or your study is fraudulent.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 09:25 PM
2

You do realize that you get the bail money back, right? Also, what state was this in?
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:50 PM
6

http://www.thelastofus.com/ EDIT: What the fuck why is this downvoted? She's the girl in the game.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:45 PM
8

Also, there are definitely women who are into that stuff. The things you learn in college.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:44 PM
5

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_analysis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propagation_of_uncertainty Try taking a methods of science class, like a took several years of.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:38 PM
1

I'm sure not all of them are that preposterous.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:36 PM
1

You should see the stripper drug dealer bail post for more of this shit. Apparently it's "let's hate women in the dumbest way possible day"
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:36 PM
1

Assuming the guy in question wasn't from a ridiculously rich family, that's where the injustice was. Not here. Bail is supposed to be set so it's possible for you to pay it. That's what bail is for. You're acting like bail is the punishment for the crime.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:31 PM
7

No. It's important that unknowns be recognized even if they cannot be eliminated. Go learn some scientific method.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:29 PM
2

Mirror universe. As in a universe in which the beliefs about genders are reversed. my experience of many white feminist educated middle class women (and I have known many) is that their main psychological problems revolve around frustration about not getting their way. Right. So clearly that's everyone then. It couldn't be the case that better people than that don't like to spend time around you. Also, we're talking about feminists now? I thought we were talking about women.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:27 PM
3

Because rich white women can't have body image problems or other negative experiences? Are you some sort of mirror universe feminist? This is exactly the sort of shit that needs to be dispelled.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:20 PM
1

In new york, it's quite possible that she opted for an ankle bracelet tracking device as a condition of bail, which, if the judges allowed it, would entail a substantial reduction of bail. Considering that she's charged with a class B felony, and for what looks like a comparatively small amount of heroin at that, $1000 bail for someone who doesn't have much money would not be at all unreasonable.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:12 PM
1

Fuck off. No one is white knighting here. I'm trying to keep stupid behavior out of the movement. There's no excuse for going on about shit that she isn't known to have done. Anyway, it looks like she's charged with a class B felony http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article220.htm#p220.16 She's probably looking at a few years in prison, given that she didn't have a ton on her. http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article70.htm#p70.00 And let's not forget that an ankle bracelet tracking device can be ordere…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 08:06 PM
1

Right. Clothes == crime
/r/MensRights22/06/13 07:42 PM
1

What's dumb is that you don't know that she did that. Strippers aren't all the same person.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 07:36 PM
1

Yeah, I clicked the link. That's where you said a lot of dumb shit about pickpocketing and flirting with police. My point about the amount was that there's no evidence that she's more than a small-time dealer.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 07:31 PM
15

Look up the area's non-emergency police contact number and ask them. If they don't cooperate, talk to a lawyer.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 07:28 PM
2

Wow, you said a lot of dumb shit. She was definitely selling though. You don't put a personal stash in 47 individual bags.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 07:27 PM
1

Those bags of heroin might be a gram each, less if they're cut. Also, bail is set based on the ability of the defendant to pay it. It's a measure intended to keep them from disappearing before trial.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 07:23 PM
2

Yeah. Pedestalization doesn't guarantee self esteem though.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 07:06 PM
1

It's quite possible that the couple only had enough money to bail one of them out and chose her.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:42 PM
0

The privileged, white, upper-class women that are drinking too much pinot grigio are not wanting for 'esteem'. Yep, right there.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:28 PM
12

Child support laws in cases where the guy never wanted the kid in the first place. Alimony.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:20 PM
5

That doesn't mean they don't have psychological issues.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:10 PM
8

Women are twice as likely to be diagnosed with depression and anxiety as men FTFY How willing people are to seek treatment differs considerably by gender and incorrect diagnosis rates easily could as well.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:10 PM
5

That would make sense. The further explanation is definitely required though. These issues can't be condensed to tag lines.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 05:56 PM
21

Quotas in general are a bad idea. They rely on an assumption that a particular fraction of qualified applicants will be a specific gender in order to result in fair hiring practices, but such fractions are rarely achieved.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 05:45 PM
7

Are women capable of doing these jobs actually applying for these jobs? EDIT: I'm asking for data. I'm well aware of the issues.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 04:14 PM
1

Try directly asking some of our more involved colleagues, such as /u/GirlWritesWhat and /u/TyphonBlue
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:52 PM
5

people were comvinced that he must have done something to deserve it I'm sure they did, and it's bullshit. There was never any allegation that he so much as touched her, and we should call people out on that sort of thing.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:50 PM
32

We really need to push through some legislation enforcing a male employee quota in nursing and child care so everyone will see how stupid this.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:47 PM
9

Consent certainly doesn't have to be verbal (if she's ripping my pants off and rubbing up on my dick, it's pretty well implied) Consent is continual? I'm not even sure what this is supposed to mean. If it's not retracted, isn't it continuing? Consent certainly doesn't have to be enthusiastic. When my ex would have sex with me after I had a rough day even though she was really tired, that wasn't rape. I would do the same for her. It was mutual support. Consent is honest and lack of consent is rap…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:45 PM
2

What was it called?
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:33 PM
2

What was it called?
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:33 PM
1

That may be how it works sometimes, but I wouldn't assume it was hazing in this case.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:30 PM
5

Men's rights has a dogma of perpetual victimization where feminists are responsible for men's problems, and they perceive any attempt to dispute that as an attack. Not exactly. First off, we don't say there's a matriarchy. Second there's the fact that it's not dogma because the feminist lobby is a visible entity that has done a lot of things we don't like very much. Our stance is based on reason (which is not to say that it's immune to criticism). We don't blame all of our problems on feminism, …
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:29 PM
3

Well the definition you present and the way it's generally meant do differ a bit.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:37 AM
1

Well I'm not surprised. Measuring ovaries would be much more difficult.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:35 AM
7

I agree, but I think you would also agree that 'patriarchy' is a needlessly gendered term that is prone to causing this sort of confrontation.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:31 AM
1

I thought we were talking about testicles for no apparent reason. Also I thought I was fat.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:29 AM
1

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x9279662 Blam, somewhat above average testicle size
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:26 AM
0

So you're fatter than I am.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:23 AM
5

It pains me to see you fight with typhon. What's your goal here? You know as well as I that MRM recognizes the issues you're referring to as patriarchy without using the gendered term.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:22 AM
0

I'm 6'1", 180 lbs and according to my calipers, my right testicle (the smaller one) is 1.15 inches on the small axis by 2.5 inches on the large axis. Also, I have a decent tan.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:18 AM
6

hazing incidents happen all the time Is that what they're calling rape now? EDIT: Note, this was in quotes, so presumably does not represent the views of the author.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 05:51 AM
2

In my experience these comments generally crop up at the point that the discussion gets to rape in general, and especially when it starts getting framed specifically as a womens' issue, not in response to "my friend was raped". I'd agree that in such a situation it's not appropriate to interject directly in such a situation. the thing is feminism isn't asking you to wait around Oh yes it is. Every day we get people walking into here and posting on reddit and tumblr about how feminism is going to…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 04:52 AM
4

when a group of women come together to discuss the transgressions enacted against them, they do not have to address the transgressions against men. Why should they? Granted. They don't have to and I'm not mad at them for not doing it. I'm not even the one who steps in. Why shouldn't someone be allowed to extend the conversation a little bit though? It's a public forum. they are still trying to achieve the same rights as males. And there's the fundamental assumption which you're not allowed to qu…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 04:28 AM
12

Feminism already has its podium. Right down they're doing their best to keep us from getting ours (not all of them, but we're not getting much support from the others). This is done by quoting studies that are known to be flawed and conveniently forgetting to mention results that don't fit the central female victimization dogma of feminism. We can't get our podium without disputing the misinformation and pointing out what's being done to keep us from being heard. The goal is to make a world wher…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 04:11 AM
4

Well you're looking at it wrong. It's not a fundamentally gendered issue. By framing it unnecessarily as a "women as victims, men as perpetrators" issue, they are the ones dismissing actual victims. And if we're not allowed to step in, how do you recommend we get an audience for the fact that men make up a very large portion of the victims, yet are all but ignored?
/r/MensRights22/06/13 04:07 AM
4

First off, no I'm not. I'll be told to man up, and that my problems aren't as bad (because it's a contest, but only when women are more victimized). Of course, I think everyone should be a bit less sensitive. It's the gender disparity that bothers me. How does pointing out that these problems are general human rights issues and that men are being ignored detract from our cause to make it so that men aren't ignored?
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:52 AM
3

Why should I care? I'm not allowed to be offended at her sexist joke.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:41 AM
1

What? Okay, we need more details. Is she verbally abusive towards you?
/r/MensRights22/06/13 03:04 AM
5

First, she's not your friend. Stop doing shit for her and don't put up with her making fun of you.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 02:49 AM
11

A fair question. The issue is that the feminist movement actively and intentionally draws attention away from men's issues, and tries to make general human rights issues into women's issues for no good reason. It suppresses studies that don't fit with their dogma of female victimhood monopoly and continues to cite studies which have been known to be flawed and grossly misleading for decades, and which demonize men. If we were in a position where mens' issues were really being heard on the same s…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 02:47 AM
6

http://24.media.tumblr.com/c8e3a44b853bcefadee17018ec081988/tumblr_mgoqrlB1yl1r0cc78o1_1280.jpg Wow. This one really nails. Not intentionally of course, but spot on.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 02:33 AM
49

Because feminists say we hate women, and they have a bigger audience. Feminists do this because we're peeling back the curtain and pointing out that women aren't all that disadvantaged any longer (in developed first world countries). Feminism has a dogma of perpetual victimization where men are responsible for women's problems, and they perceive any attempt to dispute that as an attack. Some of them probably believe that no one who doesn't hate women could dispute their dogma, but many are certa…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 01:31 AM
7

I can't find a record of a conviction for this man. The arrest was in 2009. How ironic if he got involved because a media circus ruined his life when he was innocent.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 01:10 AM
2

Looks like most of it is over his saying that abortion is usually wrong.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 11:23 PM
1

Perhaps you should link to the updated version then.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 11:17 PM
2

The litmus test you should be applying is: "would a reasonable adult elect to have this surgery performed on themselves?" I'd say that a necessary but perhaps not sufficient condition.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 11:11 PM
2

I was born with a cleft lip. Adult reconstruction is far more difficult and painful and will not achieve the same results. It really needs to be done as a small child to be done correctly. It also makes everything better, as opposed to foreskin removal which reduces sexual function. You're not wrong to ask the question though. The line needs to be drawn somewhere. I'd be glad to engage in a more in depth discussion of these sorts of procedures in another thread.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 11:10 PM
8

I want to send you a present.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 10:34 PM
10

Can I have your address too?
/r/MensRights21/06/13 10:05 PM
11

Yep. Welcome to the club. The sort of shit you just encountered happens all of the time. Many of the studies that are cited are totally biased or misinterpreted.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 09:29 PM
2

Ummm.... It's June right now. Not July.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 09:21 PM
21

Sure. And unlike feminism, let's mention what country this is happening in when it's relevant.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 07:46 PM
2

Is this an intentional parody of what SRS thinks MRM is?
/r/MensRights21/06/13 07:28 PM
3

Yes, your post. You make an inflammatory claim about men being the superior gender (simply untrue), then make same incomprehensible claim about nature's discretion. Then something about appeasing feminism. It was also the only post by that user. It looks just like a false flag operation, and if it isn't then I suggest you take your male supremacy agenda elsewhere.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 06:48 PM
1

Ahh. I remember that. I reported it.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 06:39 PM
1

Don't forget about this http://www.reddit.com/r/MRSelfPostCopies/
/r/MensRights21/06/13 05:56 PM
2

Cite specific examples where you think he has overreached. I'm not sorting through there without a good start from you.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 05:43 PM
2

Why don't you make a case against him for us?
/r/MensRights21/06/13 05:19 PM
2

I've seen it. I don't abuse people in or out of a relationship regardless of gender and I'm not going to. I don't need some tool with a microphone taped to his head to tell me how to watch out for my friends and family. One of the biggest problems in DV is that it's so frequently treated as a one way street when it quite frequently isn't. You're posting this here because you don't understand what we're about.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 02:55 PM
48

I really don't get how anyone thinks reviews left by exes are going to be a good source of information.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 02:51 PM
2

Please consider this blog post. http://stevemoxon.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/who-gets-it-wrong-on-domestic-violence.html Of course, feminists are just going to ignore these stats and keep calling DV a women's issue.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 02:45 PM
6

If they would actually act like it, that would be great.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 02:38 PM
2

Beat me to it
/r/MensRights21/06/13 02:37 PM
0

It doesn't even have to be partner violence. I qualify as a victim because someone once slammed a locker door on my hand in middle school. I then hit him in the head with a binder, so he's a victim too.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 02:36 PM
3

The big difference is we like to use science. Those first two certainly might be true, on average. There are studies about those matters. I don't if there's any real consensus on it, but I also don't really care. Third bullet point might be true if you restrict objectification to physical fitness and sex characteristics. If you throw income and 'power' into the mix, the tables tip quite a bit. For the fourth point, comparing the two is pretty silly. I suspect that the idea comes from the mother …
/r/MensRights21/06/13 02:33 PM
3

The authorities would discourage people from saying you can avoid being mugged by wearing purple socks If that would work, I'd sure as hell do it.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 02:28 PM
1

My mom used to be an ADA. Prosecutors going forward with cases where they shouldn't is hardly limited to rape cases.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 02:19 PM
4

They haven't done a study that takes into account the fact that false accusations are rarely investigated or that there would be no way to recognize many false accusations. Figuring this out would be incredibly difficult. What's unacceptable is to just scrape up the few cases that were already found to be false accusations and say that this is representative of the total rate of occurrence.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 11:54 PM
4

"I knew this was a truthful report, and I couldn’t prove it. I’m now going to reopen it using these strategies." I'd be very interested to know how this could yield more evidence in an old case. And of course there's the 2-8% statistic that's essentially made up. Someone has to do a decent study of that at some point.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 09:23 PM
2

We don't know the details of why this happened. Both the defense attorney and prosecutor participate in jury selection. We don't know what strategy either was using to thin candidates.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 09:02 PM
1

If you're going to talk to a lawyer he or she will know far better than I would.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 08:52 PM
1

Yes. The same people usually handle ass coverage before and after marriage.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 08:43 PM
8

IT IS NOT THE FAULT OF AN ENTIRE GENDER We know. No one says that. Take a look at what some of the people here say about white knights. We're blaming the fact that no one will listen to our issues on people of both genders who tell us that feminism is going to address those problems later and until then we should sit down and shut up. There is also some disagreement on specifics. it was mainly men who created it (Patriarchy) It was people of both genders that created society as it was and is. It…
/r/MensRights20/06/13 08:41 PM
1

Should I get married symbolically and avoid signing any government papers saying I am married etc? As in, I will just have a religous wedding ceremony, but avoid government papers. Depending on where you are you could still get nailed with common law marriage. You would also miss out on all sorts of legal and tax benefits from marriage. An alternative would be a prenuptial agreement. I highly recommend talking to a divorce lawyer about all of this.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 08:30 PM
9

The police don't even look for false allegations. The evidence has to found by the defense or by accident.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 08:13 PM
15

from the perspective of a prosecutor, if it's just the woman's word against the man's, you kind of have to go forward with the prosecution, no? Absolutely not. In the US at least, it is the duty of the prosecutor (along with the judge, DA and maybe some other people) to throw out a case that has insufficient evidence or for which the evidence suggests the defendant is innocent.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 08:11 PM
10

No. Reasoned dissent is encouraged here.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 08:08 PM
13

Considering the observed false conviction rate, I'd say there are insufficient safeguards, and most of the known false convictions have been the result of DNA evidence exoneration. In cases with no DNA evidence or in which the defendant claims that the sex was consensual, such exoneration can't occur. I'd also point out that it takes extraordinary circumstances such as this for a claim that a rape accusation is false to be taken seriously, because of all the pressure about not questioning victim…
/r/MensRights20/06/13 07:44 PM
3

Most of the issues crop up when you're older. If nothing else, you're not going to enjoy sex as much as you would otherwise. The fervor is because people act like it's a huge crime to do such things to girls, but men get told it's not a big deal and they should suck it up.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 04:59 PM
4

I'm assuming you've not been circumcised, because I can honestly say it's never been something that's been bad Wrong, and I'm not speaking from personal experience. How the hell would I know whether it would be better? That's why studies were done. I've never had sexual reduction ruin a relationship You're in high school. It doesn't happen to everyone, and it generally isn't going to happen when you're young. I've never had the short pain of a circumcision have a lasting effect How would you eve…
/r/MensRights20/06/13 04:44 PM
5

So the problem is that since babies can't express consent, and that it has little to no medical purpose it should be stopped because it causes pain to babies and cuts up their genitals sans consent? Pretty much. it's never seemed particularly evil, nor have I ever thought about it as such a crime against male babies Why would you? You've been told all your life that it's supposed to happen. It isn't intended as a crime against male babies (of course, neither is female genital mutilation in Islam…
/r/MensRights20/06/13 04:26 PM
11

Well first off, there's the whole rights issue. It's almost never done for medical reasons and infants can't consent to that sort of procedure. http://news.menshealth.com/is-your-circumcision-making-you-soft/2011/11/02/ http://www.noharmm.org/IDcirc.htm Erogenous zone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ridged_band#Function http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_effects_of_circumcision#Adverse_effects Aside from occasional botched circumcisions which can have really bad consequences, circumcision removes…
/r/MensRights20/06/13 03:56 PM
14

Given the amount of female bias, this might actually be helpful.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 10:21 PM
1

I'd say it's the publicity of the trial that the issue
/r/MensRights19/06/13 08:16 PM
1

Does anyone know what they allegedly did?
/r/MensRights19/06/13 08:07 PM
1

You didn't get the memo about women being the master race?
/r/MensRights19/06/13 07:50 PM
10

"Title IX, step aside"
/r/MensRights19/06/13 06:55 PM
1

I feel no rage. Only sadness.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 05:47 PM
5

Do you realize that a huge amount of the sort of bullshit you're talking about is sockpuppetry by people who don't want MRM taken seriously?
/r/MensRights19/06/13 04:03 PM
8

Coddling of female offenders is hardly the primary concern. We're talking about concerns such as bodily autonomy, reproductive rights, and preposterous standards for alimony, in addition to a government that spends way more on women's health issues than men's health issues, definitions of rape that preclude female offenders, marginalization of male rape victims, laws and policies that assume the man is the primary aggressor in domestic violence cases, a court system that favors the mother in chi…
/r/MensRights19/06/13 03:35 PM
6

The flawed concept that misandry can only exist if men as a group are oppressed and women as a group are privileged I've never heard anyone say that. I've never heard anyone deny that misogyny still exists in the western world. The idea that women are privileged comes from a simple examination of the legal system.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 03:12 PM
3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confrontation_Clause It says the accused is supposed to know who is accusing him, not the public. This is not a 6th amendment violation. That said, the way we deal with publication of crime in general really needs consideration.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:48 PM
1

He's talking about reversible sterilization, so I'm guessing IUDs and that new male injection thing.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:43 PM
1

Why? This never happens.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:39 PM
1

You shouldn't believe it based on the details given. You should be suspicious and get more details.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:38 PM
6

Regardless of what issues women are facing, most of the issues faced by men are being caused by feminist ideas or feminism is interfering with attempts to address them. That's the antipode.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 06:59 AM
4

When "I need MRM because part of my penis was cut off for no good reason and scholarships favor women" isn't deemed whining.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 05:49 AM
7

No famous female economists Requires choosing a definition of famous that excludes women. The most famous economists are long dead. Bored of being told to man up Better not ask feminists about child support then in 45% of homicides against women, the main suspect is a partner or ex-partner http://www.uiowa.edu/~030116/158/articles/dershowitz3.htm Less than 1% of property worldwide is owned by women This shit again? This has been thoroughly refuted. Men don't feel obliged to use hot wax on their …
/r/MensRights19/06/13 05:44 AM
1

The one relevant article on male rape was deep in some sociology collection, and the poor guy had to wait 20 years to break his silence, and was largely marginalized and told by police to "man up" following the incident. Regardless of what the police said and how offensive it might have been, it's extremely unlikely that there's anything they could have done about it twenty years after the fact. In many places that's past the statute of limitations. Best of luck in your endeavors.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:45 AM
2

Actually the wife or a proxy for the wife is usually the first suspect, even if punishments aren't equal. Hence my post above.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:33 AM
6

That says they'll be able to compete for the position, which I approve of. I do not approve of guaranteeing that women will be admitted. Much of the modern military has too much focus on PT, given the technological and logistic nature of modern warfare. Infantry combat units and special operations forces are a bit exception to that, and women need to be held to the same standards for the safety of everyone involved.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 01:35 AM
5

It's the reaction to accusations that differs.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 01:30 AM
3

All? Even Seal Team 6?
/r/MensRights19/06/13 12:19 AM
3

When I answered 'Strongly Agree' to 'Men should be able to fix most things around the house' and 'Men should be able to take care of their car' or whatever the exact wording were, I would have given the same answer if you replaced 'Men' with 'Women'. People should be able to tend to their property.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 12:18 AM
3

They both ... post studies in which correlation and causation may be confused. You'll see me calling out such studies here from time to time. No amount of degendering of movements is going to make people understand statistical analysis. My point is any of those ways if we made a significant effort to stop gender biasing our children maybe we would have less one gender dominated professions and sexism against any genders. I see some efforts along these lines from both sides, and I agree that we s…
/r/MensRights18/06/13 11:42 PM
1

If Ritalin is beneficial, he told me, then long-term school performance – as measured by indicators such as graduation rates and math scores – should improve. This stuff has been decreasing in general. Pretty hard to control an experiment. In fact, it found that boys who had taken Ritalin were more likely to drop out of school, and girls were more likely to be unhappy and depressed. Gee, it's almost as though kids who have trouble in school are more likely to be given Ritalin. Correlation =/= ca…
/r/MensRights18/06/13 11:30 PM
3

They also instruct officers to look for who is the most visibly distressed (normally the woman) as an indicator of who to arrest. Yep, even when they're violently distressed.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 11:20 PM
2

Huh. Not what I was expecting. How was the information collected and analyzed?
/r/MensRights18/06/13 11:16 PM
16

This is so preposterous that I suspect that some very important details have been left out. EDIT: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1042676/Businessman-uses-Aston-Martin-decapitate-horrific-suicide-revenge-ex-wife.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/2974083.stm http://digitaljournal.com/article/212640 The fact that he was bound is pretty weird, but depending on how it was done his hands might have been pretty usable.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 11:11 PM
4

I have yet to see a proposal here (other than a few which were heavily criticized and shot down) which was not egalitarian in nature.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 11:09 PM
1

Considering that those chemicals are a hell of a lot safer than the ones from the 70s, it sounds like an improvement, though not a perfect world by any means.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 11:57 PM
2

I'd say gender segregation counts as a service.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 12:41 PM
1

He has to sign away all rights before the baby is born. He does not get his name on the birth certificate. The child’s father will be registered as “unknown”. If someone else—say his ex’s new husband—wishes to adopt and coparent the child, he cannot interfere. This is an extra-bad idea. Include separate entries for biological and legal father. This could be medically important. He should be able to provide witnesses to testify that he hadn’t seen her in at least six months prior to the birth. No…
/r/MensRights14/06/13 08:25 PM
13

Tell them that the University decided that the security and privacy of girls is more important than that of boys. When they ask why, tell them to ask the management.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 03:49 AM
6

Step back, talk to some people to whom you're close about the issues, remember that we see the worst the most.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 08:48 PM
2

Go for it
/r/MensRights13/06/13 08:46 PM
1

Yeah, because: a) No one want to think they're associated with a hate movement and b) Feminism isn't strictly a hate movement. It does good things to, such as DV shelters and rape counselling, even if the way men are handled and some of the details about how they think society works are wrong. We're the group based on rationality (well, the de facto leadership is, anyway), but this sort of "You're either with us or against us" talk sure does a good job of hiding it.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 06:17 PM
2

I agree. That doesn't mean that feminist lurkers are part of some conspiracy to make us complacent.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 05:39 PM
-7

Bullshit. Lots of them end up contributing to discussion without trying to push an agenda. And even if they did, you've forgotten Hanlon's Razor.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 05:34 PM
-8

POLARIZE! Calm down and let them make decisions. This kind of talk looks extremist, and for a cause like ours that's not as well known it reinforces many of the bad things that are said about us. There is a middle ground, regardless of whether we think it goes far enough, and having people occupy it is way better than what you're trying for.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 05:30 PM
1

I know that, but is there a large sector of the trans community that views this as a problem with feminism and not just a couple of assholes?
/r/MensRights13/06/13 05:27 PM
3

What about all of the feminist lurkers who pop up saying they thought they would hate us but come out on our side? Given the extent to which we rally against feminism and the generality with which we speak against it, it's not surprising that many think we oppose more of its views and actions than we actually do.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 04:58 PM
2

Congratulations to all of you who have acted with so much courage to face down the anti-feminist trans, ... Is there an strong anti-feminist position in the trans community?
/r/MensRights13/06/13 04:56 PM
3

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Experts-pick-holes-in-Jiah-suicide-abetment-case/articleshow/20565710.cms Looks like this should end as well as it can considering that he has already been arrested. I really have to wonder how arrest warrants get issued in India.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 04:53 PM
2

If abortion is a reproductive right then not paying for a child you never wanted and never accepted responsibility for is a parental right.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 04:51 PM
3

That would be parental rights. A reproductive rights issue would be women sabotaging birth control.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 02:43 PM
7

What are the charges?
/r/MensRights13/06/13 02:40 PM
2

Besides its anti-life activities, Emily’s List is committed to affirmative action, meaning discrimination against men in employment and promotion until an equal number of women are employed at all levels. Can someone explain this sentence? I don't see what one has to do with the other.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 02:05 PM
3

So how exactly do you continue fighting for equality once feminism has been beat? I think your use of the word defeat is misleading. The general goal is to end up in a society where men's issues and women's issues are handled fairly. The general trend here is to oppose feminism for its dismissal of men's issues, assumption that women are oppressed and men are advantaged, and misrepresentation of facts to enforce these ideas. What most of us would like to see happen is for the feminist movement (…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 06:37 PM
3

First, I don't think anyone here will argue that sexism against women doesn't exist, or that there don't exist men who genuinely resent women with a burning passion. There might be some arguments about prevalence and what constitutes sexism, but that's hardly unique to us. You'll find many excellent rebuttals of the pay gap here. In summary, women tend to make choices such as delaying or interrupting their career to have kids and taking fewer high-paying technical jobs which account for this. Bo…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 05:35 PM
11

Yes, I did
/r/MensRights12/06/13 04:58 PM
57

I dislike what type of behavior is being called feminist When prominent feminist activist organizations like NOW push for this shit, what do you think is going to happen? Academic feminism acts on the assumption that we live in a society that favors women over men men over women. Even the words feminism and patriarchy are designed to be polarizing and to help with claims of victimhood. The women who are claiming that label and then acting like fools should be ignored or called something else. Th…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:44 PM
4

Don't forget the anecdote in the description of the video on youtube: For those of you arguing for equal rights among men and women...a former police captain was caught having sexual intercourse with his 17 year old daughter. He was only charged with incest and nothing else. He plead guilty and his sentencing is in March 2013. He faces probation. This case is taking place in the same exact courtroom as this video. Which of course completely ignores the fact that the daughter had reached the age …
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:21 PM
1

There's too much bullshit for anyone to cover all of it. Why shouldn't there be specialization in advocacy?
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:08 PM
1

I feel like my problem with your premise is that it seemed forced to me, such as by law by the state; I am beginning to think that assumption was incorrect though. Am I? Yes. The government doesn't have to step in everything.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 04:35 AM
1

Had to google that one. Really? I can think of plenty of arguments against this, but this isn't one of them. This is only a way to deal with kids during working hours, and their own parents would be involved in the process. It hardly seems like a situation conducive to abuse and neglect, especially considering that the alternative is actual daycare or just being home alone. What this is advocating is extra parents.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:29 AM
1

Well obviously this is all hypothetical :p But in this instance, the two stay at homes would not do as well monetarily as the rest of the people who work harder. You would have to somehow subsidize this - and at that point, why not just hire a nanny or babysitter? I should probably admit at this point that I'm a bit of a communalist (very different from communist). They potentially could be paid by the families who contribute less parenting, and might do some work from home as well. This could b…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:25 AM
1

Why is it that discussions about false rape accusations by MRA is frowned upon on reddit when it's clearly a men's issue? The fact that it's a men's issue is a large part of it. Not sure if I understand the reasoning behind your phrasing.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:15 AM
1

why the 'need' for Pharmaceuticals skyrocketed in the last 10 years A large part of this is newer drugs with greatly reduced side-effects, making their use worthwhile for milder issues. why a miniscule fraction of people in 1900 were diagnosed 'mentally ill' compared to today's estimated...what is it now, 1 in 3 people are 'mentally ill? Problems weren't recognized. I'd much rather live in a society where problems are overdiagnosed than one that just doesn't know how to help people. Or maybe eve…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:11 AM
1

That's hardly the only way it could work. It was merely an example. People could also simply work different hours, or there could be one or two stay-at homes in the parent group who get weekends off from parental duty. Also, by your logic people wouldn't get vacation days.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:05 AM
2

Be really careful throwing around the term attachment parenting. It gets applied to some really messed up stuff.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:03 AM
6

I think my opinions pretty much line up with the majority of feminists today. If you're including 'street feminists', I have to disagree, though it's quite arguable that the big difference here is that you've seen the facts. Evidence: negligible feminist outcry against vilification of MRM
/r/MensRights11/06/13 09:31 PM
8

There's a pretty big difference between disagreeing and getting called a rape apologist for no reason, or being told that my opinions don't matter because I'm a man.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 09:26 PM
5

Bullshit. There are plenty of people who support MRM and call themselves feminists that are widely loved by the movement. Feminists claim to want to deal with men's issues too (usually with the "we'll get to it later" caveat), but even that expands it beyond the definition you gave here: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1g59c4/mens_rights_and_feminism/caguqsn Anyway, I have you tagged as a friend of the movement, and you will stay that way regardless of what you call your self. Person…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 09:20 PM
8

We make a distinction between feminism and women's rights advocacy. Feminism is the ideology which asserts that women are systematically oppressed by a 'patriarchy' that favors men. Academic feminism commits a lot of academic fraud and manipulates statistics to support the conclusions it wants. (I was skeptical of this claim when I first heard it here, but ask about that in particular and you'll get some pretty convincing arguments) Feminism is supposedly about equality, but completely ignores m…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 08:30 PM
2

The difference is that guilt is a positive finding, whereas innocence is a presumption.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 02:15 PM
2

I am quite firmly in the camp that feminism is nefarious. That sort of sentence is going to turn a lot of people off. Partially because it's sensationalistic, and partially because it really isn't accurate. Most of what we don't like in feminism results from ignorance and well-meaning dogma.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 04:44 AM
2

If you're the calm and reasonable one, you don't even need to be right for undecided people to decide they like you better.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 04:32 AM
3

I highly recommend calling it an examination of feminism and legitimately considering it from both sides if you don't just want a bunch of disgruntled redditors reading it.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 04:16 AM
3

Well ManKind is one that's mentioned in the article
/r/MensRights11/06/13 02:49 AM
1

I don't believe passengers are allowed in the driver's compartment
/r/MensRights11/06/13 12:43 AM
6

The distinction between not guilty and innocent is long-standing in the legal system. Criminal courts don't find defendants innocent, they presume them to be innocent unless it is found otherwise. I'm not sure whether the judge was trying to make some sort of point of saying this, or if the article is simply focusing on something that happens in every case.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 12:28 AM
6

Lets start with a source showing that this is really a thing.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 11:06 PM
11

Idea: put together a list of domestic abuse charities that take abuse against men seriously
/r/MensRights10/06/13 11:04 PM
5

I really want to keep an eye on this. I'm wondering if any of them will decide that the shorts still aren't as good as skirts and keep going.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 11:02 PM
5

First, get in touch with a lawyer before the cops show up, and get your side of the story established and notarized. I talked to a friend about her the next day and he told me I had made a huge mistake, she has apparently gone out with guys like that before, and then cried rape and gotten them in loads of trouble. Second, it sounds like there might be some character witnesses.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 08:04 PM
3

The sentence in question, about which the discussion is occurring. Given the direness of our present circumstances-- the inherent barbarism of the social, economic, political, religious, academic and cultural corrals into which we are captured and contained-- it is fair to claim that it is impossible for anyone to adequately consent to sexual activity in the present.
/r/MensRights08/06/13 05:11 PM
1

Couldn't you roll it up some?
/r/MensRights08/06/13 03:29 PM
7

Idea: Skirt with zippers on the front and back that can be connected differently to turn it into shorts
/r/MensRights08/06/13 03:17 PM
-5

Why would someone use this instead of a tampon?
/r/MensRights08/06/13 02:40 PM
1

That's really not the point, but I'll take details
/r/MensRights08/06/13 02:34 PM
1

That's exactly the counterexample I was thinking of when I decided to ask for a source. Why not instead place prison reform activists?
/r/MensRights08/06/13 02:31 PM
2

It's a well known phenomenon that when females are involved comfort and security is considered seriously and implemented. Source?
/r/MensRights08/06/13 02:29 PM
5

So this is a non-profit tampon?
/r/MensRights08/06/13 01:41 PM
1

What are you appealing?
/r/MensRights08/06/13 06:06 AM
1

Yeah... that's pretty dumb
/r/MensRights08/06/13 04:43 AM
9

So? Dads raising children are also on the rise. This will be happening to every profession soon.
/r/MensRights08/06/13 04:24 AM
2

Can someone give a quick summary of the good men project?
/r/MensRights08/06/13 03:41 AM
3

I saw this more as an add pointing out existing marginalization, rather than reinforcing it. It isn't really trying to do anything about either, but would I expect that from a car company?
/r/MensRights08/06/13 02:40 AM
5

This is an ultra-orthodox minority group. Ignorance is the biggest hurdle.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 11:49 PM
-2

I know. I just wish he would try harder.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 08:41 PM
10

Government operative? Sounds a bit paranoid. The government would come up with something better than this nonsense: those who felt women should be able to vote and those who felt women shouldn't be able to vote were both equally wrong.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 08:19 PM
0

Yes. I just wouldn't expect someone who could do something about it to be an amateur rapper.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 07:42 PM
3

Frankly, I'm surprised too. Not my idea of a 4chan hacktivist. The case he got involved in has nothing to do with it.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 06:27 PM
1

That's pretty fucked up in several ways
/r/MensRights07/06/13 06:14 AM
2

Link to case?
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:58 AM
6

Not a voice for radio
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:53 AM
2

Does anyone know what 'Red Herring Alert' is supposed to mean?
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:45 AM
8

Serious question, not a criticism Why is everyone acting like this is a new development? Censorship has been the feminist standard for a long time. Clearly many of the people saying this now realize that it's not new. So why?
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:34 AM
3

Charts can show lots of things. Even feels.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:03 AM
3

Did you have charts? Always use charts.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 04:59 AM
3

So I read it, but I'm still not sure what you want money for.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 04:06 AM
-7

Sure, keep bitching. We all see the bullshit arguments that get thrown around. That's no excuse to make similar ones.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 03:29 AM
-4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation#Classification Wikipedia disagrees on the prevalence. Of course, it's not a contest.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 03:21 AM
9

I wish I had some money for you guys. I wish there was some other way to help.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:35 AM
9

20 years ago yesterday if you didn't do it you were a self centered misogynist FTFY
/r/MensRights06/06/13 11:52 PM
9

Are blowjobs how women suck the privilege out of us?
/r/MensRights06/06/13 10:41 PM
1

Exactly. See how good that makes MRAs look?
/r/MensRights06/06/13 09:09 PM
3

Oh, I'm not saying it doesn't happen, I'm just saying that feminism is the reason that it pops up when it's typed into google.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 08:14 PM
4

I actually googled "single moms are losers" It's mostly feminists claiming that others say that.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 08:09 PM
1

I don't have an account
/r/MensRights06/06/13 08:03 PM
8

Type that stuff into google for yourself. I got EXTREMELY different results. I don't know if that picture is doctored, but doctoring it would be incredibly easy.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 07:59 PM
1

But a study is shaky ground if it doesn't have enough context and raw information of its methods. It surely is, and that in and of itself is a great criticism of a study.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 07:57 PM
1

Comments about studies aren't studies. It's the reasoning for dismissing studies that's problematic. If they're doing something wrong, call them out on the specific issue.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 07:37 PM
-2

I don't disagree. There is certainly fair discrimination. However, the presence of fair discrimination doesn't preclude the presence of unfair discrimination. I am trying to make a point here. I see a lot of dismissal of feminist claims on this subreddit based solely on the fact that it doesn't fit with our ideology. Now when it's just someone writing something, whatever. I also see it with actual studies though, and that's a problem. One of the biggest issues with feminism is the extent to whic…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 06:34 PM
-2

Geez. I'm happy about your kids, just pointing out that the claims were baseless to begin with.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:59 PM
-5

All the posts about the men's center and the media support in Toronto aren't positive?
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:50 PM
1

Every group deserves advocacy. I'm not convinced that bias against women is gone. Make specific criticisms.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:45 PM
1

Preaching to the choir.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:23 PM
1

Well I'm not sure to what extent these factors were corrected for.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:10 PM
1

Whether there might be certain unfair discrimination against mothers.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 03:44 PM
7

I'd like to point out that this is a tertiary source that cites some older secondary sources. Some of the secondary sources are drawing on primary publications from as long ago as the 70s. The anecdotes tell us essentially nothing. It does nothing to address the possibility of performance issues from these mothers, and it still doesn't correct for important career choices. That being said, some of this bears looking in to. This is way too much for me to make any sort of evaluation right now. The…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 02:33 PM
13

Research includes analysis of carefully collected data, not simple assertion and observation.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:16 PM
-2

This is silly to even consider discussing here. The economy would be crippled instantly.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 02:22 AM
0

I have yet to see such a threat that could be traced back to an active member of the movement. To be clear, I'm not saying it hasn't happened.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:49 AM
1

That would be an add-on
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:29 AM
1

I don't believe I said it was a lie. It's just meant to be funny.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 09:44 PM
1

No, the disclosure is the penalty.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 09:04 PM
2

I'm sure it's also true. If you really hate men that much, how much time are you going to spend with them?
/r/MensRights05/06/13 08:59 PM
1

That's really not how civil law works. If you want to void the contract and accept the penalty (in this case, disclosure), you can do that.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 08:33 PM
1

And you know this from your examination of the contract? If it was written that way, someone fucked up big time.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 07:36 PM
7

How much Mandarin do you speak?
/r/MensRights05/06/13 07:28 PM
6

Do you have a work permit? They're probably going to kick you out.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 07:17 PM
2

Take you sock puppetry elsewhere
/r/MensRights05/06/13 06:56 PM
-1

Troll post
/r/MensRights05/06/13 06:49 PM
1

And now the story is leaked.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 06:10 PM
4

Fine, just charge them with facilitating a crime instead of prostitution.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 06:05 PM
1

I know a few girls that I would invite to my bachelor party if I were to have one now. Exclusionary stuff sucks, but some stuff is going to tend more one way or the other by nature.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 05:42 PM
2

So?
/r/MensRights05/06/13 03:57 PM
1

Similarly, we shouldn't be blaming it on the alcohol consumption of the perpetrator.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 03:55 PM
1

Why do you want me to care about this?
/r/MensRights05/06/13 03:04 PM
8

Just in case anyone is wondering, I watched the video. The judge ordered Facebook to produce the information. which means it was a subpoena. Facebook is refusing to comply with a subpoena.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 05:09 AM
2

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1foswk/how_would_you_describe_your_political_views_in/cacc8l9 Also, affirmative action
/r/MensRights05/06/13 04:10 AM
6

Because men have privilege. Especially prisoners.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:25 AM
5

Nothing is ever so simple. Aside from the fact that most men were enslaved to the feudal system or rotting in debtor's prisons or conscripted into armies for most of history, much has changed. This is a movement about the present, not the past, and we recognize that different countries need to be handled differently. We want equal rights for everyone. Why is it that men are the only group not allowed to ask for their rights? Any time the shackles are thrown off, someone is going to get hurt in t…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:23 AM
3

We're asking for equal rights for men. For instance: Abolition of selective service/conscription Protection of bodily autonomy (stop circumcising children) The ability to decide whether or not you want to support a child Not being assumed guilty on domestic violence calls Maintaining an presumption of innocence and recognizing false accusations in sexual assault cases Equal treatment in child custody cases Equal sentencing in general criminal cases Prison reform
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:15 AM
0

Right. Everything has to be as gendered as possible.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:09 AM
3

Is preferential legal treatment not a protection?
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:08 AM
2

Now hang on. Lots of lies are told about us. Naturally someone is going to question the party line at some point and try to get the word from the horse's mouth. We may hear lots of those lied repeated in the questions, but that's no reason to go chasing people off.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:06 AM
3

Of course. Because articles about people are just silly.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:02 AM
6

Your understanding of the MRM is entirely flawed. My stance is egalitarian. While I think feminism has some good goals, I think its assumption that men hold a fundamentally more advantaged position in modern society is incorrect, and that in many cases the more vocal ends of it sacrifice male rights to achieve their goals. Why focus on men's rights then? Because others already have women's rights covered. I've never seen anyone produce a single modern law in the United States that favors men. On…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 12:59 AM
3

Yeah, I've heard of it and I'm sure it happens. I do love how they leave women doing it out of the article though.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 12:48 AM
5

Technoprogressive extropian left-libertarian (libertarianism isn't fundamentally right or left leaning, though most lean right. I lean left.) My views on individual liberties could be called conservative in some sense, as I want them protected with reduced regard for security. I'm about as anti-tradionalist as it gets though.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 12:43 AM
1

The low crime rate and great prison system definitely contribute to some differences.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:57 PM
3

Of course, in this new era of ours, the name of the game is creation, not destruction. Eh. Carefully targeted destruction anyway. It's more cost-efficient.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:46 PM
1

Some of that might be from living in Scandinavia. I get the impression that there's a fairly large difference in cultural biases there.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:43 PM
5

I never call myself an MRA off the internet. No one knows what it means. I'd argue that this is also true of feminism, but no one has heard of the MRM outside of the Toronto area. Some people seem to just blow me off when I insist upon equal treatment in situations where women are being given an unfair advantage. Others recognize this as just. I'm too young for parental rights to really be coming up in conversations. Same for circumcision. I do criticize the prison system fairly often. Most peop…
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:30 PM
1

I don't... the agreed upon penalty has occurred... if anything he should get a partial refund.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:15 PM
1

Then why doesn't WBB want us to like MGTOWs?
/r/MensRights04/06/13 07:53 PM
2

And why don't you want us to like MGTOWs?
/r/MensRights04/06/13 07:32 PM
1

No, the fraction of a particular cancer caused by HPV is the ratio of HPV related cases out of total cases for that cancer. The risk rate for HPV causing that kind of cancer is the number of cases of that cancer caused by HPV out of the number of cases of HPV. You can then further adjust for the risk of contracting and retaining HPV. As an extreme example, if the only case in the world of cancer Q was caused by HPV, the risk of HPV causing cancer Q would still be incredibly low.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 07:30 PM
13

If we can't handle criticism, why are you allowed to post here but we're not allowed to post there?
/r/MensRights04/06/13 07:18 PM
4

Can we drop the acronyms? At least for first use in a post? I've been here a while and I still don't know what half of these acronyms are.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 07:12 PM
4

The fraction of a kind of cancer isn't the important factor. The number and severity of cases is the issue. It does look like gay and bisexual men are a high risk group. Why aren't men in the UK receiving the vaccine? The limited resources argument is over. There's enough to go around.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 07:09 PM
8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_papillomavirus#Cancer The numbers there put women at higher risk. Are they wrong? It also looks like men have a higher clearance rate.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 06:24 PM
1

Okay. Why not both?
/r/MensRights04/06/13 05:51 PM
4

I'm a man in the United States who is immunized against HPV. As I understand the situation, women are at considerably greater risk from HPV, and so the first batches were earmarked for women while production ramped up. Now (again, to my knowledge), it's equally available to everyone. I don't have a problem with that. What's the situation in the UK? EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardasil#Use_in_males
/r/MensRights04/06/13 05:08 PM
1

Maybe it's many/most of the feminist crusaders on the internet, bet there are other people out there.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 05:02 PM
1

If we just say "I find these posters offensive", no one will listen. I agree that we shouldn't have to sugarcoat it, but do you have a better idea?
/r/MensRights04/06/13 04:58 PM
3

Well if you're buying together it wouldn't really matter.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 03:59 PM
3

Do you know if this was actual corporate policy?
/r/MensRights04/06/13 03:39 PM
4

Yep. All they do is offend and demonize people.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 02:31 PM
1

Actually Medieval Europe's child mortality rates were unusually high for any historical period and location due to the huge number of zoonotic diseases and terrible hygiene. Also, lower fertility and a smaller fertility window due to diet and other factors meant that women weren't pregnant as often as you might think.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 01:12 PM
1

Certainly, but we should be calling the claims baseless when that's what they are, rather than false.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 12:38 PM
1

I do talk, online and in life. But I'm scared. I'm not in a stable place in my life yet, and I can't afford to make enemies. Without anonymity, I need to be sure that those to whom I talk won't turn against me. Maybe in 10 or 15 years when I have a wife and tenure, things could change.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 12:37 PM
2

The trouble is that it's impossible to distinguish baiters from the mentally ill
/r/MensRights03/06/13 11:09 PM
2

I think it's an evolutionary biology paper that happens to be about humans. I don't think there's any social or political motivation.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 10:41 PM
2

Agreed, nothing here is fake. Also, it's too bad that /r/feminsim deleted you cross-post
/r/MensRights03/06/13 10:32 PM
1

Please explain to me how we would use this information to decide what to do about gender issues or to justify any actions taken.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 10:30 PM
3

It persisted for reasons not discussed
/r/MensRights03/06/13 10:18 PM
2

No. I absolutely think this is how it got how it was at the dawn of agriculture. However, there has been way too much development since then for it to be relevant to modern society.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 10:15 PM
1

unless you wish to dismiss the theorisations because they do not fit into your world view why would it matter if it doesn't address anything that has happened since the palaeolithic? What is the point of mentioning that? Because it makes it irrelevant to discussions of modern gender issues.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 10:08 PM
1

I'm confused by what tessie999 could possibly be talking about if there are no degrees of sexual assault.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 09:48 PM
1

Then I am even more confused
/r/MensRights03/06/13 09:39 PM
7

Well I've just skimmed it. I'll go back and read in depth but it looks like that's an incredibly simplistic and inflammatory summary that you have there. I don't work in this field and am therefore unqualified to speak as to the validity of this work, but this is certainly physical anthropology. It's an attempt to explain the observed development of sexual dimorphism in the genus Homo. It's not attempt to discuss gender roles from a social standpoint, and it doesn't address anything that has hap…
/r/MensRights03/06/13 09:11 PM
2

Surely you mean first degree? Or is it the other way around in the UK?
/r/MensRights03/06/13 04:16 PM
3

Well no, sexual assault is too broad a term for that.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 03:59 PM
7

Petitions, which is a form of complaining. Complaint and voting are the framework of democracy. There's no one to vote for who says they'll do this, so we're left with complaining.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 03:52 PM
15

Include envelopment alongside penetration, as well as rape with objects (by either gender)
/r/MensRights03/06/13 03:44 PM
6

What are these crypto-totalitarian sensibilities you're talking about?
/r/MensRights03/06/13 03:41 PM
1

Read my other comments
/r/MensRights03/06/13 03:17 PM
1

Indeed
/r/MensRights03/06/13 02:23 PM
1

The biggest issue I have is that there's no statistical interpretation.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 01:14 PM
1

Sole custody =/= divorce, and this has been getting better
/r/MensRights03/06/13 10:18 AM
2

Pharmaceuticals were never this necessary before. I take it no one in your family has schizophrenia.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 01:35 AM
2

Pharmaceuticals alone have done wonders for mental health, even disregarding other advancements. And you don't know the first thing about me, and the internet has given me access to many of the most wonderful things in my life that I do completely offline. I don't know what happened to make you so sad, but maybe if you weren't so busy being a victim you could do or say something useful.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 01:18 AM
2

Is it worse than having parents who hate each other?
/r/MensRights03/06/13 01:15 AM
3

I can't hear you over the sound of my longevity, psychological health and access to mankind's collective knowledge. Also, why is increased divorce rate a bad thing?
/r/MensRights02/06/13 11:15 PM
30

Welcome to the club Don't believe everything you read here, some people get carried away. Think for your self. We pretty much just censor false flag sock puppets and people inciting violence (frequently one and the same). Be sure to check out the sidebar in detail. You're going to want to learn the meanings of the terms apex fallacy and male disposability. I think that's the basic tour. Welcome again.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 11:14 PM
6

Yep. Also LGBTQ, minorities, the disabled
/r/MensRights02/06/13 10:34 PM
1

Yeah. Most people out there are 'feminist by default.' They don't adhere to the ideology that most of us object to. They just support equal rights and believe that feminism does that.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 10:20 PM
0

To paraphrase many women I've talked to: "I don't know, it makes sense. I just never really thought about it." EDIT: I do love downvotes for sharing personal experience when asked to do so.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 09:50 PM
16

I think the best time so far to be just about anything is now. Things have been getting better for a long time, even if the progression hasn't been even.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 09:48 PM
2

Can someone do a breakdown on these people? Pretty sure Twitter Youth Feminist Army is going to be some bullshit, but not sure about the others.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 09:29 PM
10

Their position is that women on campus are scared? I bet they are, given what's being said about MRAs.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 07:02 PM
1

I'm not arguing that. Just saying we shouldn't go knee jerking and there could be some grains of truth to be found if we had more extensive data analysis.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 04:44 PM
1

True enough, but you hardly need to use relative probabilities for statistics to get misinterpreted.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 03:42 PM
1

I'm talking about a relative shift in the probability, not a majority of male initiators.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 02:19 PM
2

anything is an option Not with the biased legal system breathing down their neck it isn't. Could you imagine the reverse of this, a single father wanting to come to a mother-daughter/son outing/meeting? He'd be laughed at, told he's being insensitive and possibly even be looked in to for possibly being a pedophile. I wouldn't argue otherwise. Pointing this out isn't going to get anything done though.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 03:40 AM
2

Yeah, that would also work. I've been operating under the assumption that this wan't an option.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 03:28 AM
1

Well it's certainly a breath of fresh air compared to the usual demonization.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 03:00 AM
5

she thought women should be payed a salary for being a housewife Who was going to pay this salary?
/r/MensRights01/06/13 10:08 PM
5

Yeah, well mostly it gets me downvotes. We may not have censorship here, but there are a lot of people who aren't a whole lot better than feminists when it comes to ideology.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 09:04 PM
3

I'm not saying her request was reasonable, I'm saying it's stupid to let one person destroy an event.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 09:01 PM
1

Why, because I know Bayes' Theorem?
/r/MensRights01/06/13 08:18 PM
1

And once she does that you have grounds to remove her.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 07:35 PM
-2

I would also say it would be preferable to just let a man into the mother/son event rather than cancelling. It just seems dumb to let someone like that ruin everything.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 07:34 PM
-13

Regardless, seems preferable to cancelling.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:29 PM
5

Love the trigger warning: Contains violence against women. By villains. In video games that feature more violence against men.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:20 PM
-32

Why didn't they just include her? EDIT: This has got to be some of the dumbest downvoting ever. If men's stuff has to be cancelled every time a woman insists she should be included, it will never happen. The options are to have it anyway and continue barring women, or include women. Clearly the first option wasn't going to happen in this case for some reason.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:18 PM
9

A real doctor would be a good option. If you're in school then the health center can probably do it. The unlabelled urine containers are also pretty disturbing. Are you sure there wasn't a serial number or something? I would point out that testicular examinations are supposed to be a bit rough, but I certainly wouldn't be satisfied with "It doesn't feel malignant." Definitely, definitely, definitely have your personal physician check that out. Was all of the information for female health about p…
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:10 PM
5

I think there might eventually come a day when people could change gender essentially on a whim, and hermaphroditism could become a socially acceptable option. There might also come a day when no one makes children in a uterus. A world as you've described seems incredibly unlikely though. I'd be interested to know where you're trying to go with this question.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:59 PM
9

Well hang on, do we have a study on the conditional probabilities? It's entirely possible that the man is more likely to initiate the divorce under these circumstances.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:31 PM
2

Seems like a bit of a stretch. There's nothing here indicating that lack of exposure causes reduced sensitivity. The opposite could easily be true. Further study required (including replication of these results).
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:20 PM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:17 PM
4

I'm more concerned about the social repercussions that come from this. Lawyers can help with that using threats about defamation lawsuits and such. Get one.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 06:22 AM
3

Does it really matter? She suddenly expects marriage. Something is wrong here.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 06:13 AM
0

Yep, and I only had to do it once.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 10:23 PM
1

Right. Punish the teachers for children misbehaving. That makes sense.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 10:23 PM
2

Alternatively we could just let kids go to the bathroom and then deal with academic issues as they come up.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 10:13 PM
1

Urinate on the floor.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 09:44 PM
1

The person in question would have a poor grasp of how feminism affects men's rights, or on reality in general. The trick is that an MRA is anyone who advocates for men's rights, regardless of ideology. I'm a women's rights activist, but not a feminist.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 07:42 PM
1

I really wish they had broken some of this down by gender.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 07:27 PM
2

I think there is. It would be misguided, but belief in the patriarchy certainly doesn't preclude concern or advocacy for men's rights.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 06:44 PM
6

For all the bullshit PETA puts out, not leaving your pet in a hot car during the summer is something I should hope we could all get behind.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 06:17 PM
9

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/jun/14/circumcision-ban-row-san-francisco http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2011/06/24/banning-circumcision-in-san-francisco/ http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/2013/05/16/president-of-nebraska-bar-misrepresents-shared-parenting-bill-bars-opposition-to-it/ http://www.amptoons.com/blog/2008/12/04/domestic-violence-shelter-targeted-by-anti-feminists-some-of-the-vile-language-and-verbal-abuse-we-took-on-the-phone-was-horrific/
/r/MensRights31/05/13 06:02 PM
1

it's a logically correct statement ... that is destined to be interpreted the wrong way by people who do the convicting and investigating.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 03:13 PM
5

to both genders
/r/MensRights31/05/13 03:07 PM
3

That's true. However, this isn't SRS and I don't know how else to draw upon the resources here. If I really wanted to do a downvote army I'd have hidden my intentions with other accounts and bitly links to prevent link notifications.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 09:16 AM
1

Attention everyone! Do not downvote!
/r/MensRights28/05/13 09:12 AM
3

I know lots of people here are more knowledgeable on this subject than I am. Anyone who can provide helpful input would be welcome.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 09:03 AM
15

Why is this argument even necessary? How about "I don't owe you a baby, goodbye"?
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:12 AM
1

I know, I just don't see what that has to do with the event in question.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 12:41 PM
-1

You're telling me she would have gotten in trouble if she was a man? Not likely.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 11:24 AM
1

Depends on the mission.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 01:46 AM
4

Fight on an oil rig and Norwegian special forces will win every time They're all just differently specialized.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 12:42 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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