Reizu Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
2	well its official boys now have less worth than animals , to avoid hurting animals a research facility is using donated foreskins instead ( i dont know how a baby can donate part of its body but eh .. ) You still don't get it. It's called men's rights, but we fight for gender equality(at least legally) for males. That includes boys, but men tend to be the focus. Circumcision is cruel because not only is it mutilation, but the same act upon baby girls is illegal. That's sexism by allowing boys to be mutilated on basis of their gender and a reason for men's rights to be involved, if mutilation of only male children wasn't enough. They aren't mutilated specifically because their children, but beca…	/r/MensRights	21/12/11 11:41 PM
3	well its official boys now have less worth than animals , to avoid hurting animals a research facility is using donated foreskins instead ( i dont know how a baby can donate part of its body but eh .. ) Maybe you don't understand. It's called Men's Rights, but it means male rights. So we are fighting for the rights of all men, or boys, or other male people.	/r/MensRights	21/12/11 10:26 PM
2	New FBI definition of rape leaves gender unspecified, but still speaks in terms of penetration “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” to “Penetration or Envelopment, no matter how slight, of the vagina, penis or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration/envelopment by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” How does this include masturbation? Unless you have a different definition of envelopment?	/r/MensRights	21/10/11 12:45 AM
3	New FBI definition of rape leaves gender unspecified, but still speaks in terms of penetration I agree with you, but you are no more right than they are. You are assuming that it is a general case of penetration when the victim does not give consent, but the definition leads one to believe it implies being penetrated, which would, if applied in this context, say F on M rape is impossible. And why not just say penetrated or enveloped? That wouldn't be too much work.	/r/MensRights	21/10/11 12:18 AM
8	"The Turkish Football Federation (TFF) decided it had a testosterone problem." ALL MEN banned from some Turkish soccer games! The issue wasn't that men were the main violent people in this act, the issue was they banned ALL the men for something only a subset of men did. They specifically banned based on gender, and that's fucked up. I think men are the majority, at least by a little, who come to these games, so of course they will be the majority of hooligans. Imagine if they banned all the white people from the game that many people participated in, but the majority were white. That would be stupid. The same if they …	/r/MensRights	25/09/11 04:21 PM
1	Masculism - The key issues How is stereotyping not statistics? Steroetypes comes from some sort of statistics. Black people eat chicken and watermelon- statistically true, but still stereotyping. Men love sports, same. Women like shopping, same. All stereotypes, all based(in some way) on statistics. It can be both. Now, I'm not saying that statistics aren't a useful measure, but it's pretty stupid to only stereotype certain groups-it should be all or none, and I'm leaning towards none. Otherwise insurance companies should…	/r/MensRights	23/09/11 06:04 AM
1	Masculism - The key issues What definition of merit has to do with a group that you are born into? Define merit then. I want to see this mystical definition of yours which is different from thinking that all people of a certain group do something, because a majority of them do, or at least some(stereotyping).	/r/MensRights	23/09/11 05:58 AM
1	Masculism - The key issues You said merit, which is individually achieved. Otherwise, you are stereotyping or generalizing. If I, a man, do not have accidents-why should I pay twice as much because I share a common trait with others which I cannot choose? Otherwise you could charge more for any kind of trait. And we all know this leads to stereotyping further. That's why many things cannot be generalized when calculating insurance, such as race, ethnicity, nationality(i think) etc. Why is your sex somehow different than t…	/r/MensRights	23/09/11 12:49 AM
5	Masculism - The key issues You just gave an example which show the exact opposite of what you're argument was. merit-based discrimination When being a male is not something earned or merited. While: An objective teacher discriminates on student performance to give out grades. Which is based on the efforts of the child, not just children or male children or female children.	/r/MensRights	22/09/11 03:22 PM
4	"I wouldn't agree with you, but you are very well entitled to actively object and protest to what goes on in /r/mensrights." Before you read: note that some of these do contain misogyny, but also have truth to them Legitimate concern #1 Sadly, feminists actively fight to prevent changes on this subject for men, dismissing our concerns as invalid or "you should have worn a condom". So I doubt we will be on the same side of a picket line. Feminism is the cause of many men's rights problems 2 Most modern feminists want equal rights only when it benefits them. I don't see them jumping to sign up for the selective service,…	/r/MensRights	06/09/11 08:28 PM
3	"I wouldn't agree with you, but you are very well entitled to actively object and protest to what goes on in /r/mensrights." Oh and another thing: Much of what is on that very long list is actually true and makes sense. Some misogyny, some bigotry, some anti-feminism, and some truth.	/r/MensRights	06/09/11 08:12 PM
2	"I wouldn't agree with you, but you are very well entitled to actively object and protest to what goes on in /r/mensrights." Well, then I see two explanations because most of the comments that are linked on r/AMR are heavily downvoted: 1) People downvote what they see as bigotry, which is a downvote brigade 2) MR isn't as sexist as you think and downvotes certain comments. It doesn't matter what the numbers are, instead you just cenosr any diessenting opinion, while on r/MR, you can still see their post, whether or not people disagree with it.	/r/MensRights	06/09/11 08:10 PM
4	"I wouldn't agree with you, but you are very well entitled to actively object and protest to what goes on in /r/mensrights." What strawman? I was specifically talking about a situation in which a drunk man and woman wanted to have sex. Whether or not who initiated it shouldn't really matter. How can it be rape if both people are drunk ,and nobody was forced? The lack of consent doesn't really make sense for someone who can't take advantage of someone because they also lack consent. And why is it the woman is the only one who can be inebriated beyond consent? Because that was a question I asked, and iirc I asked long b…	/r/MensRights	06/09/11 08:02 PM
3	"I wouldn't agree with you, but you are very well entitled to actively object and protest to what goes on in /r/mensrights." So creating a subreddit, one that directly and primarily links to r/MR and comments you don't like, whether it be for misogyny, bigotry, or sometimes just anti-feminism, is not starting a subreddit war? I mean, yeah most of the stuff on r/AMR is correct in attacking the bigotry, but you would have to be pretty ignorant not to acknowledge that specifically attacking a subreddit in name and policy isn't starting a subreddit war.	/r/MensRights	06/09/11 07:12 PM
4	"I wouldn't agree with you, but you are very well entitled to actively object and protest to what goes on in /r/mensrights." You keep making excuses for why someone was banned, but none of them are even close to satisfactory. They can ban me without reason, and simply because I agree with some MRA issues. But if r/mensrights crossposts somewhere, they are horrible and misogynists and bigots. You can link posts to r/mr whenever you want and there is no problem, but when MRAs call attention to something, they are just outright horrible. You call all MR xposts invasions, even when it could simply be calling attention to …	/r/MensRights	06/09/11 07:05 PM
6	"I wouldn't agree with you, but you are very well entitled to actively object and protest to what goes on in /r/mensrights." And another thing: treating all feminists as trolls You are treating all MRAs as trolls, or at least misogynists simply because of what others do. persistent and vicious downvote campaigns (like what you've done to Nebula42) You made a subreddit to downvote people here, you an't tell me that people won't countertroll you and you consider that harassment.	/r/MensRights	06/09/11 06:47 PM
8	"I wouldn't agree with you, but you are very well entitled to actively object and protest to what goes on in /r/mensrights." 1) You say 'you've done' to [insert redditor's name here], but not only is not that not me, that's not much of the subscribers of this subreddit. 2) My comments were deleted, so I don't know how you would see them, but they were something along the lines of: if a man and woman are both drunk and have sex, either they were both raped, or neither. One commentor said that it's the man's fault because of the patriarchy giving them more power and I disagreed. That's the gist of what I was arguing abo…	/r/MensRights	06/09/11 06:46 PM
8	"I wouldn't agree with you, but you are very well entitled to actively object and protest to what goes on in /r/mensrights." Wait, something you say is harassment, but they disagree-> which is grounds for banning? That sounds less like exposing bigotry and more like censorship of dissenting opinions. I was also banned from there, for arguing a point about drunken sex iirc. It was disagreeing with one of the members in a respectful way, not persisting harassment, but asking for clarification..and I was banned and my posts were deleted to censor me. What is harassment according to you? Is it disagreement with your membe…	/r/MensRights	06/09/11 06:13 PM
6	"I wouldn't agree with you, but you are very well entitled to actively object and protest to what goes on in /r/mensrights." You still haven't explained why you feel the need to ban anyone who does a much as disagrees with you. You're attacking anyone who agrees with any MRA issues, simply because MRAs usually hate feminists. It's not like r/mensrights bans you for posting, but more importantly, even if they did, why stoop to that level? How does acting like the people you despise make your point more valid?	/r/MensRights	06/09/11 05:20 PM
5	What I mean when I talk about "crazy feminists" (from now on I'm going to refer to it as crazy lines of thinking) So what if they both feel like they were raped because they wouldn't have had sex without being impaired by alcohol?	/r/MensRights	05/09/11 03:45 AM
3	What I mean when I talk about "crazy feminists" (from now on I'm going to refer to it as crazy lines of thinking) Wait, so it depends on feelings now? so if both intended to have sex, they are both rapists, if both feel hurt they are both rapists? How can feeling a certain way change the crime? That's like saying sex with a passed out person is ok if they didn't feel hurt when they awoke.	/r/MensRights	05/09/11 03:27 AM
9	What I mean when I talk about "crazy feminists" (from now on I'm going to refer to it as crazy lines of thinking) Also, can both be too drunk to consent yet still have sex? Then who is the rapist?	/r/MensRights	05/09/11 03:22 AM
3	MISANDRY - "Testosterone to blame for banking crash, say Tory MPs" True, but it is definitely meant as an attack on those who are commonly known to have lots of testosterone: men.	/r/MensRights	04/09/11 06:22 PM
6	Ask MR: My lesbian friend is having a women's only wedding ceremony (all guests are female). Should this annoy me? Pretty sure OP's wife is hetero and a ciswoman, so that means it's only the man part of it's that's an issue.	/r/MensRights	27/08/11 12:22 AM
8	Extremely immature and hateful response to the WSJ article by Jezebel titled "Women Threatening to ruin all college fun". Have to read it to believe it She did sort of say that by saying: Then again, I actually enjoy men. That is definitely an insinuation that submissive men aren't real men. Which is something that people shouldn't think. We should tell her that it's wrong to think of men like that. Stereotypes aren't ok for anyone.	/r/MensRights	23/08/11 09:31 PM
5	I made one little post to /r/againstmensrights and they got scared Reizu here. I'm obviously not RsonW, I mean, they have been here for more than 3 years and I got about 4 months total. I kept asking questions because people avoided answering me directly or said things I don't understand. Like some people seemed to be suggesting that the man is always at fault for drunken sex, which is obviously wrong. Other people were trying to change my words to make it look like I was trying to say a guy taking advantage of a drunken woman wasn't rape, rather than the scena…	/r/MensRights	21/08/11 01:57 AM
10	Behold: The Black Male Privilege Checklist. The female privilege wasn't that they were allowed to say it, it was because any man who said something similar about women would be fired, not just criticized.	/r/MensRights	15/08/11 03:55 AM
15	Behold: The Black Male Privilege Checklist. What the fuck does that mean? No seriously, that's offensive to me as a man and as a black person. I don't even know what you were trying to convey.	/r/MensRights	15/08/11 03:42 AM
10	Behold: The Black Male Privilege Checklist. Black male here. 1-14: Mostly Bullshit or irrelevant. 15: Porn and money shots-How is that black male privilege? 16-19: More bullshit. 20: Women do this also, not male privilege..so obviously not nlack male privilege. 21: A lie. Polygamy is not legal in the united states, and is not common by any measure. 22: Wrong for me. And how is it a privilege? Women are allowed to like older men..so who cares? 23: I'll admit, it's true, but the opposite has detriments, the less partners you have, the worse…	/r/MensRights	14/08/11 07:05 PM