TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Revoran Archive

View 7 posts and 3,958 comments by Revoran 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 3,958 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

[Asking male victims of DV:] Were you at fault, in any way in causing her violence? Wow. Just wow. Last updated 2011 At least it's 8 years old, but still, disgusting.
/r/MensRights25/10/19 02:39 AM
19

This is more of a MGTOW thing.
/r/MensRights29/10/18 04:48 AM
-2

OMFG this is such a minor issue. Whenever shit from this sub hits my front page it's always just "look at this sexist post from a random nobody on social media" What about male suicides, workplace deaths, male homelessness, domestic violence against men and boys, rape of men and boys, conscription, MGM?
/r/MensRights29/10/18 04:40 AM
1

Shame on you, Ada Derana, for your feminist media ethics /u/JohnPerera what evidence do you have that this was motivated by feminism? Could your provide more cultural/local context?
/r/MensRights24/10/18 07:21 AM
-3

Oh fuck off. It takes bigger balls to forgive than to hold a grudge. Also it's hardly on us to judge him for how he personally feels.
/r/MensRights19/10/18 12:12 AM
6

It wouldn't be legal in any of the US because she's his teacher, and she also provided alcohol to a minor. Fair enough that it's a false equivalence, though I still feel 4 months for what she did is a joke.
/r/MensRights17/10/18 01:51 AM
1

you could apply same logic for 12 yo olds, by passing mexican borders. Just FYI it depends on the state in Mexico. But some of the northern border states are 12, yeah.
/r/MensRights17/10/18 12:54 AM
13

Don't build up men, tear down women In general I agree that this sub has a big problem with that. But in this case, no you're wrong, what the fuck? You're damn right I will tear down a woman teacher who fucks her minor student. I mean what's your argument here? That she isn't a literal pedophile who fucked a pre-teen, so therefore it's not that bad? Wow what a high fucking bar you've set there. She's a criminal who abused her position of authority to take sexual advantage of a minor and provided…
/r/MensRights17/10/18 12:49 AM
3

Most of their lack of rights had nothing to do with that. It used to be that only rich(or land owning) white men could vote. Then it became just white men. Then just white people. Are you American? In the US it went like this: Male land-owners over 21 can vote. In some cases women land-owners can vote. Americans are British subjects, but have no representation in the national Parliament. The US becomes independent. At this stage, many states don't even bother holding public elections for Preside…
/r/MensRights06/10/18 12:10 PM
1

Let's say there is, I dunno, a million feminists in the world. And let's say 10% of them are misandrist crazies. And let's say 10% of those post on social media. That's 10,000 misandrist posts. Enough to fill this entire subreddit, every day, for the next 5 years. And looking at the sub, you would then think every feminist was like that. There's always going to be more stupid feminists on twitter/tumblr/facebook. I don't give a shit. I don't want to hear from misandrist nobodies on twitter. Mayb…
/r/MensRights06/10/18 11:48 AM
1

One that I've heard: "muslims need to take a stand against terrorism" But yeah, I know what you mean.
/r/MensRights27/09/18 05:13 AM
5

On the one hand I want to deter false accusations, on the other hand I don't want to deter the liars from coming forward and admitting their lies to get innocent men out of prison.
/r/MensRights24/09/18 01:26 AM
1

Lmao this is why she is a banker and not a biologist or reproductive scientist. What a load of hooey.
/r/MensRights05/09/18 02:37 AM
4

No she's completely wrong, biologically speaking. There's no reason she can't conceive a child. Her only choice is between having enough time to care for the child she conceives, or working full time.
/r/MensRights05/09/18 02:36 AM
1

Why is this relevant to Men's Rights? Is this person a prominent feminist, MRA or other activist? A journalist? Celebrity? Politician? Does it have millions of likes? There's literally no context here other than some fuckwit posted something stupid and harmful on twitter. This shit happens every day. For all we know Stan, you posted this then reposted here for karma. I'm not saying you did, just pointing out that there is no context. I don't want this sub to become "shit that a stupid person sai…
/r/MensRights30/08/18 04:18 AM
1

Sorry, I'm using jail and prison interchangably. Here in Australia that's generally the case - for instance the Goulburn Gaol is actually a high security Prison. I understand that jail generally means local jails in the US.
/r/MensRights26/08/18 01:27 PM
-2

I mean what's worse, sending an innocent person to jail, or raping someone. Depends on how long they were in jail for, maybe?
/r/MensRights26/08/18 10:08 AM
2

They could've said: Teacher who sexually assaulted a boy, avoids jail and keeps license. They chose to say: performed oral sex on boy
/r/MensRights13/08/18 01:39 PM
2

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/96s49s/to_not_let_the_kids_father_see_their_kids/ - the other thread https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/search?q=judge+judy&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all - it's been posted a lot
/r/MensRights13/08/18 01:32 PM
8

I love this but it's been posted so much. I mean there's two posts of it on the front page right now.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 09:36 AM
10

Yeah it doesn't make sense in the modern world. In ancient history, it may have been more hygienic for those who survived the procedure. But I bet a large amount of babies died due to pre-modern circumcisions. It would have been done in unhygienic conditions, with no anesthetic or blood clotting meds, and no trained doctors. I mean the traditional Jewish method of circumcision involves a man sucking the blood from the circumcised baby penis (yes really) and this has resulted in multiple infant d…
/r/MensRights22/07/18 03:39 PM
10

The Jews started it along with the ancient Egyptians and some ancient Arabs. But the Jews did not control Mohammed, and the Jews do not control muslims today. I mean, of all the circumcised men in the world, only a tiny amount are Jews. Most are muslims, Americans and South Koreans. Also Jews are not the ones who made circumcision popular in the US or SK - that is down to Americans.
/r/MensRights22/07/18 01:20 PM
12

About 1/3rd of the world's men are circumcised. It's mostly in the USA, South Korea, Israel and muslim-majority countries. Rates of circumcision are very low in Europe, Latin America, China and India.
/r/MensRights22/07/18 01:18 PM
5

Just FYI there's also other forms of MGM out there which are still practiced: castration (reported in India) and penile subincision (reported in remote parts of Australia, South America, Africa).
/r/MensRights22/07/18 01:17 PM
72

One of the arguments that pro-circumcision people use, is that circumcision is correlated with significantly lower rates of penile cancer (penile cancer is caused by HPV). If a HPV vaccine was freely available to boys, this argument loses it's weight.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 03:31 PM
3

Yeah the whole thing is very muddy and no one can seem to agree. Most Brazilians consider themselves Latino. But most Brazilians speak Portuguese.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 07:15 AM
4

Even then, there are exceptions. Jamaica is in the Carribean. They speak English (or Patois*, which is very similar to English), and are not hispanic or latino. Puerto Rico is in the Carribean. It is a territory of the USA and it's people are American citizens. Most PRans speak Spanish, only 20% speak English well. They are considered both hispanic and latino. Belize is in Central America and they mostly speak English with a minority of spanish speakers. They keep debating whether they are latin…
/r/MensRights16/07/18 07:03 AM
2

Hispanic = people who speak spanish as their native language Latino = people from Latin America Latin America = Every country in the Americas except for Canada, the USA, Jamaica. Native Spanish-speakers from Spain = hispanics but not latinos. They speak spanish but they are from Europe. Basques from Spain = basque people live in northern Spain and southern France. They speak a separate language (basque) which is very different to Spanish and French. However many speak Spanish or French as a seco…
/r/MensRights16/07/18 06:47 AM
7

Sorry to burst your bubble /u/Mandarni but it's actually: The USA Every muslim-majority country (in fact the vast majority of circumcised men in the world are muslims) Israel (jews and muslims, duh) South Korea (introduced by America during the occupation) India (there is 170 million muslims in India, comprising 14% of the population) Some parts of non-muslim Africa (pushed by the WHO) In addition, there are other forms of MGM (male genital mutilation) practiced around the world. Penile subincis…
/r/MensRights13/07/18 03:56 PM
4

Not even men. Infant boys in the case of most circumcisions.
/r/MensRights13/07/18 03:53 PM
9

Imagine if you got naked with a woman and said something like "I prefer bigger tits". Sorry you that woman was such a selfish asshole to you.
/r/MensRights13/07/18 11:00 AM
8

"but muh religion" is not a valid reason to circumcise either. The only valid reason is to correct a serious medical issue/abnormality.
/r/MensRights13/07/18 10:59 AM
7

New Australian law It's a New South Wales state law, not a national law. Though the article itself clarifies this, but I know some people only read the headline. I don't really have a problem with a campaign to educate people on getting clear consent. Especially in the case of casual sex in the alley behind a nightclub. It's good if everybody knows where everybody else is standing. But where I feel affirmative consent laws are a problem is in committed relationships where people often don't give…
/r/MensRights08/07/18 03:50 AM
22

Actually moost circumcised men in the world are in muslim-majority countries. There are also some non-muslim-majority countries where it is popular such as the USA, South Korea, Dem. Rep. Congo, Ethiopia, Angola and of course Israel. But yes MGM (specifically: male circumcision) was popularised in the west by John Harvey Kellogg and a few quack doctors. The same group also supported FGM (specifically: burning the clitoris with acid). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_circumcision#/medi…
/r/MensRights07/07/18 03:10 PM
8

They have had threads on circumcision over there.
/r/MensRights07/07/18 03:09 PM
3

1940: Hundreds of thousands of British men fought and died defending the UK from the world's most powerful army. 2018: Some sheltered guy on the internet calls immigrants "invaders" and questions the masculinity of those who disagree with his political views. Lmfao.
/r/MensRights03/07/18 03:31 PM
3

7 countries that are not in a war Depends on whether those countries were able and willing to help them, or not. There's definitely a lot of cases where people should have stopped sooner and claimed asylum long before getting to the UK. soyboy So I'm not a "real man" unless I agree with your political opinion. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights03/07/18 02:27 PM
4

Fuck off with your anti-immigration bullshit. Especially because it's often misandrist, targeted against men and boys.
/r/MensRights03/07/18 12:13 PM
-8

Imagine if only all Jews or blacks were required to register. Would “It’s unlikely that you’ll be drafted” matter at all? Of course not. You seem to think I am in favour of selective service or something. I'm not, and I agree with your assessment here. Did you even get to my second paragraph? we don’t need military personnel unless the US homeland is attacked How can you justify forcing your people to fight in foreign wars? And while the US might need military personnel to station in some countr…
/r/MensRights03/07/18 06:27 AM
1

You mean if it was a man.
/r/MensRights03/07/18 06:09 AM
3

Explain to her that men can erections but that doesn't mean it's consensual. Morning wood for instance, is not consent to sex. Female rape victims sometimes have orgasms, but it's still rape.
/r/MensRights03/07/18 06:05 AM
0

I suppose that’s why the verbiage was used. Plenty of media outlets use the word "rape" even if there is no crime called "rape" in that jurisdiction (many areas have a serious sexual assault type crime that isn't called rape). The issue here is just pure sexism.
/r/MensRights03/07/18 06:03 AM
1

What do they expect? That a murderer will just admit it lol?
/r/MensRights03/07/18 04:39 AM
51

It's unlikely America would conscript people again. These days wars are done with drones and elite soldiers - they do not rely on sheer manpower anymore. And of course no one will invade the US, because they have nuclear weapons. But it's still shitty that men are forced to sign up, or they face all these penalties and can't vote. In fact they can technically go to jail for not signing up (but this is rare).
/r/MensRights03/07/18 04:35 AM
2

No it isn't. There is strong evidence that both society and genetics play a strong role in gender differences. There are some big differences in gender roles and attitudes in different cultures and times. Like half the stuff on this subreddit is complaining about shitty, illogical sexist views in western society against men, which often doesn't apply to other cultures. There are also some big similarities across many cultures. There's also observed physical differences (obviously in sex organs e…
/r/MensRights03/07/18 04:24 AM
11

Conscription is only arguably ethical if the country is being invaded. In reality the UK has nuclear weapons, so there will be no major invasion of the UK. No country with nuclear weapons has ever been majorly invaded.
/r/MensRights03/07/18 03:56 AM
237

Ineligibility for opportunities that may be important to his future. Inability to get financial aid for school. Inability to be federally employed. Inability to be employed by the local government. Unable to get security clearance as a contractor. Unable to get U.S. citizen if you're an immigrant. You're forgetting the big one: Not allowed to fucking vote. They take away your right to vote unless you agree to sign up to die. Meanwhile women automatically get the right to vote with no restriction…
/r/MensRights03/07/18 03:51 AM
59

We're also talking about a small subsection of rich people. Plenty of rich people have no trouble shacking up. These women should definitely be asking themselves why they specifically can't find a partner.
/r/MensRights02/07/18 03:03 PM
2

In 2014 they got $882 million from the tax payer. They are an immensely profitable company but cooked the books so they could claim enormous tax deductions they didn't deserve. It's not enough that they avoid paying tax they owe, they also have to take money out of tax payers' pockets. Disgusting. But really, they get influence and favours and power over both the Coalition and Labor, which is far more valuable than money.
/r/MensRights29/06/18 09:22 AM
1

I'd appreciate you not calling for one of the greatest public institutions to be hocked off for a quick buck. They've been doing it for years. Former head of channel 10 runs the joint. It's beyond saving, burn it. That's the LNP strategy. Sabotage it and starve it of funding, then claim "look see publicly owned xyz doesn't work, it needs to be privatised".
/r/MensRights29/06/18 07:32 AM
1

I mean I call women dickheads as well. And men and women cunts.
/r/MensRights29/06/18 06:12 AM
1

Milo is a dickhead. But I suppose he's no worse than some of those in parliament so yeah why not let him speak. mangina Are we really still saying that? Fuck off with that sexist bullshit. Having a vagina doesn't make you weak. And politically disagreeing with you doesn't make someone less of a man.
/r/MensRights29/06/18 05:22 AM
3

That's worth noting in a general discussion, but it's not relevant to this particular case which happened in Montana.
/r/MensRights29/06/18 05:20 AM
3

Fuck off. The ABC is a national treasure. If they're sexist and racist, then newscorp and 2gb and the like are basically hate groups. If they're spouting misandry (which they didn't in this article) then they need to be reformed not axed.
/r/MensRights29/06/18 02:58 AM
1

If the ABC is sexist and racist, then I shudder at newscorp.
/r/MensRights29/06/18 02:57 AM
-1

They weren't harrassing him or his wife they just parked there for a while. He also lodged an 18c complaint for racial hate speech against him, after he criticised 18c for infringing on free speech. The guy is a fucking hypocrite.
/r/MensRights29/06/18 02:53 AM
-5

Nah I'm talking about something that happened a while back: he defended a company who put cheeky messages and paintings on their vans. Then when comedians parked their own van outside his house, with a cheeky message directed at him, he had a cry on twitter about it.
/r/MensRights28/06/18 02:04 PM
-5

They're both fuckwits if you ask me. SHY with the "men's violence against women, men can stop rape" misandrist crap and Leyonhjelm... jeez where do I start. Stands up for our civil rights and free speech ... right until people direct bile at him and then he starts clutching his pearls. At least he supported gay marriage I guess. As a lefty with libertarian sympathies, I'm disappointed in both of them. Babies sitting in parliament.
/r/MensRights28/06/18 01:36 PM
11

Most Australians (whether left or right or up or down) don't know who Weinstein is.
/r/MensRights28/06/18 01:29 PM
4

I completely agree that it’s beyond insulting for women to have any place in judging a man’s penis - what is attractive, sexually satisfying etc. Women are entitled to have their own preferences. But it's a real dick movie (pun not intended) to pressure someone to get it done just for you. In fact it's more than a dick move it's a huge red flag of an abusive controlling partner. And of course mutilating your child's genitals because you want them to be attractive to future partners (as happens w…
/r/MensRights25/06/18 08:48 AM
5

If you read the article, it's not really that pro-circumcision.
/r/MensRights25/06/18 08:46 AM
1

Should clarify that I'm not against detaining asylum seekers to stop them disappearing into the country while their applications are processed. Just they should ideally be detained with their families and for as short a time as possible. Also full disclosure: I am from Australia and currently we: Turn back any unauthorised boats (typically full of asylum seekers) headed here. View any such people as illegal immigrants. Any such people are detained indefinitely without charge or trial in a privat…
/r/MensRights25/06/18 05:52 AM
1

If someone is deep into the country they obviously either made a mistake or, much more likely, are just plain old illegal immigrants (they're just seeking asylum to prolong things so they don't get deported immediately). But if they surrender at or close to the border, well, yeah. A lot of them could also seek asylum in Mexico. That rules out everyone from South America. You mean South-Central? But yeah. Definitely in some cases they could have (and should have) sought asylum in Mexico. Unfortun…
/r/MensRights25/06/18 05:37 AM
4

If your country considers asylum seekers (ie: not illegal immigrants who enter and try to evade capture, but people who surrender and try to claim asylum) to be criminals, then the problem is with your country. Legitimate refugees (asylum seekers are not all legitimate refugees - they need to be processed) are not always going to be able to get visas and travel through standard means, due to the nature of being a refugee (fleeing your country often on short notice, because your government is una…
/r/MensRights25/06/18 04:28 AM
2

I think as a society we need to tread a fine line between making overweight people feel like shit (which doesn't help them lose weight), versus making them feel it's totally normal and healthy (which it isn't at all, it's literally killing us).
/r/MensRights23/06/18 06:06 AM
11

I feel like, if the man signs consent to have his sperm harvested if he dies, then fine (though in that case I don't know why you wouldn't just harvest the sperm while you are alive). However it really needs to be written consent. Like organ donation. Except less critical (nobody needs sperm to save their life).
/r/MensRights22/06/18 01:26 PM
4

The market can be biased because at the end of the day businesspeople are not completely rational actors - they have biases and preconceptions just like everyone else. The market also plays a role in shaping people's desires. But I think in this particular case, you're right they wouldn't keep those shirts up if they didn't sell.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 12:39 PM
43

I doubt they mean it that way, but notice how it doesn't say "large" or "fat" or "overweight". It's clearly to make each gender, in their own way, feel better about being overweight.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 12:37 PM
1

Nobody can lie or argue like a woman. Rubbish. Men can be great liars and arguers. See: politics. Having a good father in your life is important, more important and meaningful than a mother. They're both equally important. I'm sorry for what happened to you, all the same.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 06:05 AM
2

Polygraphs are unscientific, unreliable rubbish. That's not a comment on this specific case, just a comment on the reliability of polygraphs in general.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 06:02 AM
6

Why not? Firstly it's too much trouble, when the real problem is people who upload it and spread it around. Second it opens up the possibility of someone sending you the link and you open it and then whoops you're suddenly a criminal. I guess you could make a comparison to child porn, where people who possess it do get in a lot of trouble. But creepshots are obviously not in the same league of harmful as cp. Its not about the person taking the video as much as it is about the person spreading it…
/r/MensRights19/06/18 04:20 AM
13

You couldn't help that, though. That's not your fault. Nip slips happen, shit happens, and we all have desires and get aroused by other people's bodies. An upskirt or creep shot would be if you saw the nipple and then decided "oh shit better get this on my phone so it's now immortalized forever and can be shared". "celeb wardrobe malfunction" I don't think we should prosecute people who view the videos, but I won't shed a single tear if paparazzi assholes go to jail for getting shots of Rhianna …
/r/MensRights19/06/18 04:03 AM
13

I mean at some point it has to be OK to take photos and video of people in public. I draw the line at intentionally getting shots of their undies when the person clearly didn't intend to show their undies. But I get if your line is somewhere else.
/r/MensRights19/06/18 03:55 AM
10

I'd say both should be illegal. But fair point it's quite specific.
/r/MensRights19/06/18 03:48 AM
20

Why? Do you have an expectation of privacy in public? If somebody has to go out of their way to intentionally get a photo of your undies for the purposes of getting off, then that's pretty clearly sexual harassment. Like, it's explicitly a sexual thing. The intention behind it is sexual, and the undies are sexual (there's a reason people wear undies - to cover up their genitals). And it's certainly non-consensual. And I'd bet most people would feel offended and violated at it. If you are intenti…
/r/MensRights19/06/18 03:43 AM
18

Upskirt photos should be a crime, but I feel like it should already be covered under other laws? Is there seriously not already a law against intentionally taking photos of people that shows their underwear, without that person's permission?
/r/MensRights19/06/18 03:34 AM
3

The news part of buzzfeed aren't the same people that do the top 10 list clickbait etc. And I mean, OP's article is from The Sun, which is a newscorp tabloid, and a particularly shitty one at that.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 03:26 PM
8

This is much more a men's rights issue than some of the shit that gets posted in this sub. Would you rather it be yet another outrage-bait screencap of some stupid radfems misandrist tweet?
/r/MensRights08/06/18 05:20 PM
73

I think it's important to both recognise that men are 75% of suicide victims whilst also recognising that it still affects both men and women.
/r/MensRights08/06/18 05:18 PM
1

It's kind of the opposite. Both of them made some valid points, then g_squidman directly addressed the other person's points and argued against them, but the other person literally refused to even consider what g_squidman was saying. The author comprehensively lists the evidence for media bias, and then simply hand-waved it all away, saying simply, there is no such thing. I'd be interested to read that book. There are certainly media out there which are right-biased and some which are left-biase…
/r/MensRights05/06/18 06:00 AM
2

That's not cherry picking - it's the opposite of cherry picking. They copy-pasted every single paragraph which wasn't a direct quote, to argue the point that the author's POV was neutral. Cherry picking would be if they only posted a couple of the neutral non-quote paragraphs while the other non-quote paragraphs had a clear biased POV.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 05:57 AM
0

So what you are saying is that we should cling tightly to the facts you hold dear and ignore the facts that don't support your narrative? No, that's not what they said at all... That person pointed out a specific way in which OP's headline was misleading. That is all that post said. You're inferring something which was not said or even implied. Now, the rest of your post I think is pretty valid criticism of that poster and of the article.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 05:55 AM
1

If it's true then it's true. That being said, I don't think kids are equipped to handle that sort of talk either emotionally or intellectually. If the mother truly is a bitch then hopefully the kid will work it out on their own as they grow up.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 09:25 AM
0

Her and her future husband can work out their own dynamic, and they can work out whether the term "breadwinner" hurts his feelings or not. Also in the unlikely case that you are the real Nick Clegg, then you majorly fucked up by supporting the Conservatives.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 09:23 AM
1

I was about to say Trump is rich, famous and (sadly) influential. But then I thought, that applies to both of them.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 09:16 AM
6

What a gay old time we are having here in this thread :) Mmmm, now I want a gaytime.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 01:54 AM
2

Sorry mate, words have meanings. You can use them incorrectly if you like, but that doesn't change reality. Kiddy rapers are kiddy rapers. I agree that all child molestors (many of whom are paedophiles) are terrible but again, that means a different thing to paedophile.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 09:36 AM
2

Edit for foreigners: Superannuation is a savings account you can't access until you retire, similar to a 401k. Sydney Morning Herald is an Aussie newspaper, generally considered centre-left. Women over 50 are the fastest growing group of the homeless. Going to need a citation on that one. Even if it's true though, the vast majority of homeless in Australia are still men. And even if it's true, what do you want to do about it? Aged pensioners already get waaaay more money than jobseekers and stud…
/r/MensRights31/05/18 12:11 AM
1

I'm OK with this, but only if they are convicted in court of deliberately making a false report (as in the article). It shouldn't apply to cases where they make an accusation but there isn't enough evidence to convict. Because those are in the grey area where we don't know who is telling the truth. It also shouldn't apply to people who make a mistake and pick the wrong person from a lineup. Also as /u/DadJokesAndMore said it should apply to both genders.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 12:04 AM
1

Thanks for the info. That's pretty much what I expected - still illegal but much lower sentences (plus they probably go more lenient on the women in court as well). But yeah still awful and sexist.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 11:59 PM
7

I agree completely.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 11:53 PM
2

Not even an ephebophile necessarily, since not every piece-of-shit child rapist is a chronophile (though of course many are).
/r/MensRights30/05/18 11:49 PM
2

How does people laughing at child abuse ... make feminists win?
/r/MensRights30/05/18 11:46 PM
2

Can you give some examples of that in the west? (AUS, NZ, US, CAN, EU) ? Some of them might have lower punishments for women, but I don't know of any country where it's actually legal for women to rape men. Even if it's not technically called rape in the lawbooks (and it certainly should be, but that's a different discussion), there's usually some offence it would come under.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 11:45 PM
44

Pedophile isn't the appropriate term for someone who rapes a 13 year old. Paedophiles are people attracted to pre-pubscent kids (ie: <12). So if you are raping 7 year olds, then you are much more likely to be a pedophile than someone who rapes a 13 year old. Obviously both are awful, but pedophile has a specific definition. I believe there is a double standard in the media when it comes to male and female sex criminals, but we need to compare similar crimes.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 11:40 PM
1

Relevant username. Thanks for the clarification, however I think this is more a technicality since you're not really giving the parent much choice. It's take the child with them, or lose the child potentially for years.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 08:44 AM
17

This should have 20 times the upvotes it currently has. This is part of the problem with this sub (and reddit in general tbh). Outrage-inducing tweets get massively upvoted but real stories about real issues don't get as much attention. Thanks for posting this OP.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 12:31 AM
7

I'm pretty sure that they (as in the US government and also my country's government) already deport legal citizens if: a) they are dependent minors of the parent being deported, and b) they have citizenship of the country they are being sent to That being said, they can't stop those kids from coming back once they turn 18.
/r/MensRights28/05/18 11:46 PM
1

? Is that person who tweeted trans?
/r/MensRights28/05/18 11:42 PM
5

He and his lawyer claim he was deliberately framed. His conviction was overturned based on the detective (who is now disgraced and has people combing through his cases for malpractice) using tainted evidence. Apparently the whole trial lasted only one day including choosing the jury, and the prosecution had one witness and no other evidence tying him to the scene.
/r/MensRights17/05/18 02:30 PM
1

So like, a decent wage for every year of lost income.. But what about compensation money for the years of his life taken away?
/r/MensRights17/05/18 02:18 PM
32

That link doesn't work.
/r/MensRights17/05/18 02:07 AM
11

Technically not paedophiles, but child molestors. But yeah this is fucked up. judge says they would be ‘too isolated That's the fucking point.
/r/MensRights17/05/18 02:06 AM
2

I would agree with that wording.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 03:26 PM
1

Integration/lack-thereof, maybe? In India for instance, they speak like 7 major languages and many minor ones. But many of the people of xyz ethncity don't leave their part of the country. It's not like America where in any small city you can find 20 different ethnicities. Plus I guess there is also a difference in having a few large ethnic groups in a country, versus multiple smaller ones. Here in Australia we have about 75% of the population are either anglo-celtic Australians born here, or ar…
/r/MensRights16/05/18 03:17 PM
4

Asian countries are not even close to ethnically/culturally homogenous. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and North Korea are quite homogenous af (though they certainly have minorities). China has over 120 million minorities. More if you count the different types of han in the south who speak their own dialects. Yes that's only 10% but 120 million is still 120 million. There are whole regions of China where the most spoken language is not Chinese, and for Chinese itself: different dialects of it are of…
/r/MensRights16/05/18 02:53 PM
2

Wow, I feel bad for English, Portuguese and Arabic-speaking Africans! They must be terribly racist. Hundreds of millions of Africans speak Arabic, English and Portuguese as their native language, just FYI. But I agree with your overall point that this is stupid.
/r/MensRights16/05/18 02:45 PM
13

"You're doing better than me! Stop working so hard so I can catch up 3: " Wouldn't it be nice if we could all work less hard?
/r/MensRights13/05/18 02:47 PM
3

When I was skinny af I could do it. Wasn't comfortable for long periods but it could be done. But if you're fat or have muscly legs, or you're one of the small minority who have very large junk, then I can see how it's just not gonna happen for you.
/r/MensRights06/05/18 06:47 AM
7

Manspreading and "sexist aircon" are on the level of complaining about men leaving the toilet seat up. Total non-issues.
/r/MensRights06/05/18 06:43 AM
3

The topic of "man spreading" as a common feminist gripe is proof that women generally don't have any real problems in this world. No, that doesn't follow at all. By that logic, if a man complains about something stupid then it's proof that men have no problems in the world. Which we know isn't the case. It might be a sign that that particular person has no real problems, though. Or that they're just an idiot who can't see real problems when they happen and focuses on stupid bullshit instead, per…
/r/MensRights06/05/18 06:42 AM
11

Also: why does it matter whether they are men or women? Do women and men journos get killed for different reasons... ? Because I'm pretty sure that when journos get killed it's generally for the same reasons regardless of gender (they went to a conflict zone, or they spoke against the government/crime syndicate).
/r/MensRights06/05/18 04:36 AM
-3

Considering the UN represents all countries, it makes sense that they would have some feminist stuff going on. Not every country is a western nation where women and men have, on paper, equal rights. Isn't r/mensrights always saying that feminists need to focus more on actual oppressed women in the third world?
/r/MensRights06/05/18 04:32 AM
5

So what percent of journalists overall are women?
/r/MensRights06/05/18 04:30 AM
7

A 40-60 election is a landslide in favour of the 60.
/r/MensRights05/05/18 01:36 AM
1

I get that it's opinion. I doubt they would publish a similar opinion about women, black people, hispanic people or a similar protected group. It's pretty clear that publishing an opinion like this (especially with that tweet) about men is just controversial enough to get clicks, but not controversial enough to ruin their reputation entirely. The quote is from Freud, you would need some background in Freudian psychology to understand it. I don't have that so I'll keep quiet. I do as I'm a psych …
/r/MensRights04/05/18 12:29 AM
1

My bad.
/r/MensRights04/05/18 12:10 AM
1

Sorry, the tweet.
/r/MensRights03/05/18 06:14 AM
1

OP's headline It's the NYT headline/tweet. They wrote that, OP just took a screenshot. If they write an ultra-sexist, hate-speech, click bait headline, then that's on them. But still thanks for providing those links - you're doing good work.
/r/MensRights03/05/18 06:12 AM
1

If NYT posts an extremely sexist, misandrist headline tweet to get clicks, that's on them.
/r/MensRights03/05/18 06:09 AM
1

I mean the tweet itself is clickbait by the NYT. The article isn't exactly pro men's rights though. It makes some good points about toxic expectations on men, and needing to discuss masculinity but also says that male sexuality is inherently brutal.
/r/MensRights03/05/18 06:08 AM
3

I suggest you do. The author is pretty clear that she he thinks male sexuality is inherently brutal. Though she he also makes good points about society needing to discuss masculinity.
/r/MensRights03/05/18 06:03 AM
1

Except they would never publish a tweet like this about women, black people, hispanic people, jewish people, muslims etc (and good, because fuck sexists, racists, antisemites, islamophobes and the like). It's "safe" for them to publish this about men, they know it will cause just enough outrage to get clicks, but not enough to ruin their entire reputation nationally. Granted, the article itself isn't as bad as the clickbaity blatantly misandrist tweet.
/r/MensRights03/05/18 05:57 AM
2

Australia doesn't have public sex offender registries.
/r/MensRights01/05/18 01:51 AM
6

Juries have done a lot of good as well as a lot of bad. They were incorporated specifically to solve the problem of judges and laws+lawmakers being disconnected from the lives of the people, and also because it's harder to bribe a entire jury than one magistrate.
/r/MensRights01/05/18 01:48 AM
1

Thauvette v Malvon This is the oldest link on the first page of a Google search for "Thauvette vs Malvon": https://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5163 - it's just some guy talking about the case on a forum, though. And yeah I did a double-take when I saw the crazy alt-right racist shit in this thread. Like what the fuck.
/r/MensRights29/04/18 02:18 PM
1

Thanks. Also, paging /u/CounterfeitMemes
/r/MensRights29/04/18 12:24 PM
3

As far as the "child support" comment goes, that's just semantics. Call it child benefit payments from the federal government, or whatever. Oh I see what you mean. My bad. the federal government has been awarding refugee status to illegal immigrants who accept work or visiting visas to the United States and who promptly walk into Canada and claim refugee status but not through the legal framework that currently exists. It is a very big problem in Canada right now. This makes more sense, thanks.
/r/MensRights29/04/18 10:10 AM
-2

Thanks for the context. Though I'm not sure that makes it better.
/r/MensRights29/04/18 09:18 AM
-3

Do you have a link, because that doesn't sound right. Unless they are asylum seekers, perhaps? But that's not the same as being an illegal immigrant. And in any case child support is coming from the (supposed father) not the Canadian/provincial government?
/r/MensRights29/04/18 09:18 AM
10

Your comment is a perfect example of Poe's law. I mean what the fuck, man. Aliens, communists and turning everyone brown? If you really believe that then please go and see a psychiatrist.
/r/MensRights29/04/18 06:02 AM
1

It's usually not specific to high school or college (though it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case somewhere). Usually it's if an adult with authority has sex with a minor under their care, then that's illegal, even if the student is over the age of consent. But with college, most of the time students are over 18 anyway. In the UK, the age of sexual consent is 16 but the age of adulthood is 18. In some US states (CA, FL) the age of sexual consent is 18 anyway, so the point is moot. In fact…
/r/MensRights29/04/18 05:04 AM
1

No, it's completely legal to have sex with your professor if you are both adults (over 18). But most areas have an age of sexual consent (separate to age of adulthood) below 18. It's only a few US states (notably California and Florida) that have age of sexual consent at 18. This is IMO silly, since older teens are going to have sex regardless of the law ... but that's another discussion. So in the UK, the age of sexual consent is 16. Normally at 16 you can legally have sex with people (includin…
/r/MensRights29/04/18 04:56 AM
2

I think statutory rape would be the better term. It's distinct from straightforward rape, but doesn't make light of the issue (IMO "romp" kind of implies it was a fun light thing and not a serious abuse of power).
/r/MensRights29/04/18 04:49 AM
18

AAAAAWAAAYYY YEAAAAAH YEAH YEAH YEAH
/r/MensRights29/04/18 04:36 AM
5

I could adopt out. Well that depends on the jurisdiction. In some areas, if the father is your husband (or was married to you at the time of birth), then he gets a say in whether to adopt. Of course if you never tell the guy he's a father, then yeah.
/r/MensRights13/04/18 02:43 AM
13

Ah, I didn't see that. For some reason I read the post wrong. My bad.
/r/MensRights05/04/18 05:37 AM
3

The last thing I would accuse feminists (as a whole) of, is being unconcerned about rape. If anything they have the opposite problem, sometimes.
/r/MensRights05/04/18 05:15 AM
6

I mean if someone hates men (or women for that matter), then they are definitely part of the problem.
/r/MensRights28/03/18 10:56 PM
2

Hopefully not. It was a shitty joke but that's as far as it should go. Getting prosecuted over it is ridic. Especially when there is legit violence-inciting hate speech out there.
/r/MensRights22/03/18 02:51 PM
3

If you're gonna rage, rage at the right thing.
/r/MensRights22/03/18 10:25 AM
8

Using a weapon would be an aggravating factor, no?
/r/MensRights22/03/18 05:17 AM
-1

Read the article again - she wasn't exonerated. I agree that guy should never have been convicted over a racist joke in poor taste though. It's not like it was neonazi propaganda or anything. He was a fuckwit but it's not worth wasting time and money prosecuting people for jokes when there's people posting shit like "kill the muslims" on Reddit. He gets to appeal, so hopefully it goes well for him. Edit: READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE morons. She wasn't exonerated. Or do none of you know the meaning o…
/r/MensRights22/03/18 05:15 AM
6

And I mean, who cares? Even if she didn't disfigure his face, she still cut his head open. She could've killed him. It would've been so easily to slip down and cut his jugular.
/r/MensRights22/03/18 05:08 AM
24

She could've fucking killed him. And she gets a 12-month suspended sentence? What a joke. Meanwhile people are going to jail for selling cannabis.
/r/MensRights22/03/18 05:06 AM
2

I don't know any men who shot themselves, but I knew a woman. She fit the typical MO for men who shoot themselves - boyfriend had just broken up with her, she lived alone on a farm, she was drunk at the time etc.
/r/MensRights21/03/18 02:42 AM
4

Adultery is not illegal in most countries. Nor should it be. It's illegal (along with pre-marital sex) in many muslim-majority countries, as well as Taiwan and the Philippines. Some US states technically have adultery as a criminal offense on the books, but in reality this cannot be (and is not) enforced because it was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
/r/MensRights16/03/18 03:04 PM
3

I don't really see how this is related to feminism. And it's only tangentially related to men's rights in that it is an example of somebody (and by somebody I mean a nobody) making a misandrist post on social media.
/r/MensRights16/03/18 02:31 PM
1

Statistics say that you're full of shit. Post them, then. I'll be waiting. And you're literally contradicting yourself [by] saying that single parents are disadvantaged... but that it somehow doesn't relate to the validity of family structure. You may have a point here.
/r/MensRights11/03/18 01:30 PM
1

There's nothing wrong with being accurate in our statements and specific in our use of language. If you think that's "PC" then I don't know what to say to you. But fuck it, I'll just block you for white-knighting. Lmao. But of course, I'm the one creating a safe space with my PC "language". Right... Good riddance, snowflake.
/r/MensRights11/03/18 01:24 PM
2

There's two sexes (and a bunch of intersex conditions which fall outside the two norms). Gender is a much harder to define concept - what really makes someone a man/woman/other? But the fact that it's hard to define should at least allow for lively debate on the topic, rather than shutting people down for debating shit in a college class. I mean come on.
/r/MensRights10/03/18 02:22 PM
51

It's not the single mothers. It's the lack of the father. Mothers aren't just naturally shitty parents or anything.
/r/MensRights10/03/18 08:10 AM
3

More like Rudhir Papanashi.
/r/MensRights09/03/18 04:13 PM
16

The kind of shit people of color went through and are still going through in some parts of the world doesn’t compare to having to sit on the back of the bus. People of colour literally had to sit at the back of the bus. Like men are being made to on this bus. If they can afford to replace all those seats to segregate men (who are apparently all evil rapists and gropers), can they not afford security cameras on the buses? Also who is going to enforce these seating rules? The police? Couldn't the …
/r/MensRights09/03/18 04:06 PM
9

Being old isn't a disability but I'd give up my seat for an otherwise healthy elderly person.
/r/MensRights09/03/18 04:03 PM
41

Just sit down and if any asshole gives you dirty looks, then give them dirty looks right back. And if they question you, say you had hip surgery. It's just a fact that not all disabilities/issues are outwardly visible like being old/pregnant is.
/r/MensRights09/03/18 04:02 PM
14

RT is indeed controlled by the Kremlin. But how would Putin benefit from this article? What reason would RT have to fabricate this particular information?
/r/MensRights07/03/18 04:01 AM
51

Assuming your experience is representative (which is a big assumption), if I had to guess why that might be: Because women have been told by society for decades now not to put up with being abused (which is totally good and I support that message). While men have been told for decades now that they're not really victims or if they are it's not as serious.
/r/MensRights06/03/18 03:00 AM
1

enviable Unavoidable.
/r/MensRights06/02/18 10:18 PM
3

If you put a hash before text it looks like this: IPutAHashBeforeThis
/r/MensRights06/02/18 10:18 PM
3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_force_feeding
/r/MensRights05/02/18 02:28 PM
3

While I'm sure the mail doesn't like feminists, this isn't really an angle against feminism. It's just pro-men's issues. Which is exactly the sort of content this subreddit needs instead of being obsessed with feminism.
/r/MensRights04/02/18 01:31 PM
2

They probably recognize that their traditional "immigrants, minorities and lefties are evil" crowd is going to get old and die soon, so they're trying to re-target. That would be my guess.
/r/MensRights04/02/18 01:30 PM
1

That just seems pointless. November is cold for North America and Europe. A lot of women don't shave in cold weather anyway. No one is going to see your legs if you are just wearing jeans.
/r/MensRights04/02/18 01:27 PM
2

All while letting Islam for example get a free pass on oppression because they're not white males. I hear people complain about this a lot but I almost never see it from feminists or anyone on the left.
/r/MensRights29/01/18 01:52 AM
1

Are y'all saying that men have so few problems that tearing down women's issues is all that's left? Why would you assume that? The OP is about feminism, not men's rights, as you said. Which probably means it doesn't belong here. But yeah it doesn't mention men's rights.
/r/MensRights29/01/18 01:51 AM
5

For the record you don't need a doctorate to diagnose mental disorders, you just need to be accredited (full undergrad+hons+year of supervised work).
/r/MensRights23/01/18 04:55 AM
1

While there is less homeless women overall, it should be noted that someone in a shelter is still homeless. Also people couch-surfing because they have nowhere to stay are homeless. Rough-sleepers like this poor man are a minority of the homeless population.
/r/MensRights23/01/18 04:53 AM
18

I feel like that makes it even worse. It's conceivable that some woman out there might be so extremely stupid and ignorant that she thinks men can control erections when they sleep. But if it's a guy then he should know better simply due to personal experience.
/r/MensRights20/01/18 02:17 AM
2

No worries. And yeah I agree it's bullshit that they don't call it rape.
/r/MensRights20/01/18 02:08 AM
3

It can mean a person of either gender. You see it a lot in old writing. Nowadays it's mostly only seen in laws. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/he-or-she-versus-they
/r/MensRights20/01/18 12:44 AM
2

Nah, look at sub-section 4. If the act by A causes: B to penetrate to vagina/anus of another person, or Causes B to penentrate another person's mouth with their penis And B doesn't consent or A does not resonably believe B consents Then A is liable upon conviction upon indictment for life imprisonment So if a woman forces a man to penetrate her, she is liable to imprisonment for life. I could be wrong here, but it seems pretty clear.
/r/MensRights20/01/18 12:36 AM
6

To be fair to the UK, the female version carries the same sentence. But yeah it's dumb that only the male one is called "rape".
/r/MensRights19/01/18 02:31 PM
-1

Let me explain how this law plays out Is that actually how this law is going to work? Because it seems like both you and the guy above are basing your information on 2 bullet points in a fake news article.
/r/MensRights04/01/18 09:56 AM
0

Lol, what? I don't think that's how this law works at all. It's certainly not how the US Equal Pay Act works, which predates this law by several decades. Nor is it how the anti-discrimination acts in Australia work.
/r/MensRights04/01/18 09:48 AM
7

Men and women are both capable of believing two mutually exclusive things, or wanting two mutually exclusive things.
/r/MensRights04/01/18 09:45 AM
7

Can you give some examples of them being paid to advocate for communism? I don't think I've ever seen them advocate communism, let alone get paid for it? Left wing, sure, progressive, OK, very pro-feminism, sometimes anti-male, yep. But I don't think I've seen them advocate for communism.
/r/MensRights04/01/18 04:25 AM
1

It's not really on the same level as nigger. But it is a male-shaming insult, like calling someone "small dick" or "neckbeard".
/r/MensRights23/12/17 10:14 AM
7

I don't see anything wrong with the word 'Cuck'. It's just a slang term for somebody with Far Left opinions, It's short for cuckold, which means a man whose wife/girlfriend is unfaithful. As an insult, it implies the guy is weak-willed, naieve, not very manly, allows himself to be taken advantage of. Basically, cuck is in the same category of man-shaming insults as "manlet", "neckbeard" "a real man would do xyz" "tiny dick" "manchild" etc.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 10:06 AM
37

Affirmative consent is the law for college campus policies in California. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB967 Who must seek whose consent? Technically both people have to seek the other's consent. However this law doesn't do anything to deal with sexist perceptions which lead to men getting locked up disproportionately often. So in reality it's going to be men falling afoul of this most often, due to inherent misandry in society. Also the law itsel…
/r/MensRights16/12/17 12:00 AM
1

The comment was mildly inappropriate, but not worth a social media shitstorm.
/r/MensRights13/12/17 04:23 AM
2

Yeah but they're electing to do it as a way of getting out of jail early. That poses a number of issues: There's a very fine line between "hey you have this option to get out of prison early" versus "let us cut off your balls or else we will keep you locked up indefinitely". You're still releasing convicted rapists/sex offenders early. What about female sex offenders? Is it actually the castration itself which is effective, or is it that people who are seriously reformed are more likely to choos…
/r/MensRights13/12/17 01:40 AM
1

Definitely.
/r/MensRights12/12/17 09:46 AM
1

An average of 8030 US veterans committed suicide every year between 1999-2010. In 2010, ~15,500 US females committed suicide (5 per 100k). I could calculate the 2000-2010 average but I'm lazy. We can't know what percent of the females commit suicide each year due to being raped. But even if it's 50% (7750) that's still less than the total number of veteran suicides. That being said, some of the veteran suicide victims would be women. Veterans in general are much more likely to commit suicide tha…
/r/MensRights12/12/17 09:36 AM
45

How would you feel if your female coworker put up a sign saying "attention male coworkers, please stay away as I don't want to get raped" ? Also /u/Tedesche has a point that even if you agree with the sign... it's a good way to get yourself fired.
/r/MensRights12/12/17 03:50 AM
10

I guess there's the option of chemical castration (drug treatment to suppress sex hormones) for repeat sex offenders with mental disorders like paedophilia etc. From what I understand chemical castration is reversible... but it also has some long term side effects and I guess you are running the risk that someone goes off their meds and reoffends. :/
/r/MensRights12/12/17 03:48 AM
12

Rape and child rape are awful, but I don't think we should be pushing the most severe kind of MGM as a way of avoiding indefinite prison.
/r/MensRights12/12/17 12:57 AM
7

Not sure what you mean by backstab. Laci had and still has a lot of views that many on this sub would disagree with. Personally I still like a lot of her content even if I disagree with some (certainly not all) of her views.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 02:31 PM
3

Not to mention it is totally and completely legal to photograph, men, women, and children anywhere in public. This actually depends on your jurisdiction/country. Though since OP said little league I guess he is probably in the US.
/r/MensRights30/10/17 12:58 AM
9

No matter what your position on abortion is, I think we can all agree you have be fucked up to actually want one.
/r/MensRights29/10/17 07:37 AM
24

I agree with the sentiment but man, surely you can come up with a better insult than that? It's not like there's a shortage of material to work with - the woman admitted to molesting her little sister.
/r/MensRights29/10/17 07:34 AM
4

Ugh. Fuck that twitter feminist, and fuck Trump Jr. Edit: Apparently the originator was a tumblr user called The Frogman, who put it at the end of a post accusing MRAs of causing the Isla Vista killings.
/r/MensRights20/10/17 04:31 AM
0

Thankfully penile cancer is quite rare, and almost never found in young men. Though this vaccine also helps to prevent throat cancers.
/r/MensRights15/10/17 07:03 AM
3

Even before the WHO, male circumcision was common in North Africa and the Horn due to the introduction of Islam. Also it's been common in Egypt since ancient times. Even before European colonization, it was practiced by some groups in the Congo, as well as the Kikuyu and Maasai in East Africa. Also it was practiced by some Australian Aboriginals. Additionally, other forms of MGM are practiced elsewhere such as castration (South Asian slaves, Czech sex offenders) and penile subincision (some Aust…
/r/MensRights13/10/17 05:34 AM
5

If the mental gymnastics for that position were acted out physically, those people would form a human centipede.
/r/MensRights13/10/17 05:21 AM
7

Being under the influence of drugs does not lessen your responsibility in any way. She chose to take drugs, then she chose to stab him. That being said, I do agree that when someone is only offending because of drug/mental problems, the proper solution is rehab and treatment not jail. But I guarantee you if a poor black man with drug and mental issues stabbed someone, he would rot in jail.
/r/MensRights13/10/17 04:36 AM
24

I don't think feminists have ever argued that they are systematically treated unfairly in courts Feminists in the UK and USA have called to close women's prisons and divert almost all female offenders out of jail. 2016 the guardian again 2015 the telegraph 2014 the washington post the conversation huffpo uk 2011 the bbc the independent 2007 the standard 2006 the guardian Hillary during the 2016 campaign highlighted in a CNN op ed that the amount of women in US prisons has increased drastically (…
/r/MensRights13/10/17 04:34 AM
218

the boob assaulter was fully in control of his actions and knew exactly what he was doing. the stabber, not as much. which is why she was ordered to get help instead of to serve jail time. No. She chose to take drugs. Then she chose to stab him. Being intoxicated is not an excuse for stabbing someone. It does not lessen your responsibility at all. I agree with you that rehab and treament is a better option for people who have drug/mental issues. Jail keeps the public safe in the short term, but …
/r/MensRights13/10/17 04:23 AM
6

if a company fires for being wrongfully accused Then you should be able to sue them for wrongful termination. Though I think in much of the US you can be fired for almost any reason which is terrible.
/r/MensRights23/09/17 07:50 AM
1

A mental hospital can be harsher than a prison Is that really the case in the US? Remember it's not he 40's anymore - we don't just chain mentally ill people up all day anymore, or lobotomize them anymore. Also the US has some pretty horrid prisons for a rich western country. Not sure about juvenile female prisons specifically, though.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 08:36 AM
3

Yep sure, this ad being disproportionately male can't just be general bias against men or ignoring female perps. No, no, it has to be part of the shadowy political-correctness conspiracy to protect muslim child molestors! Fucking come on man.
/r/MensRights17/09/17 11:38 AM
1

I would bet the majority of muslim migrants in Germany can read and write German to some degree. Do you have data indicating otherwise? Refugees would be another matter, as they didn't really have time to spend years learning German before fleeing their home country. In some cases people are not even literate in their first language (I know literacy in Syria has dropped drastically since the war, for instance). I would also bet that literacy rates are higher for those who have lived longer in Ge…
/r/MensRights17/09/17 11:35 AM
7

Wow. This post should be on /r/badtheology and /r/badhistory. It's ridiculous you have as many upvotes as you do for such an ignorant post. Christianity had the protestant and humanist reformation and look what a great modern world that created. Um, the Protestant reformation led to the 30 years war, which was the most destructive conflict until WW1 (and the most destructive religious war in European history), leaving 8 million people dead and millions more homeless, refugees or subject to famin…
/r/MensRights15/09/17 02:10 AM
3

Who said that? Do you have a link?
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:56 AM
8

Oh, so you like taking extreme examples of idiots, and applying to the entire left/right wing? I can do that too, mate: The right: Islam isn't a race. Also we will now violently harass and abuse Sikhs because they are brown skinned and wear turbans, so they must be muslim. The left: Um, that's racist.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 01:52 AM
8

the phrase men's rights put into scare quotes Wow, fuck you Vice. Could they have been any more contemptuous and dismissive? You would never see them put the phrase women's rights into scare quotes, as it would indicate skepticism that women's rights were a real thing. Now, to be fair to them, many people here do not acknowledge any systemic oppression of women in the west. But it's certainly not more common than anything else on the subreddit.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 03:42 AM
8

Not to mention it is incredibly insulting to actual victims of castration. Castration was common in Europe and Asia for thousands of years. The last Catholic castrato died in 1922. Castration was used as a punishment for gay men in the west in the first half of the 20th century. It is still used today as a punishment for male sex offenders in the Czech Republic, and is inflicted on boy sex slaves in South Asia.
/r/MensRights10/09/17 07:24 AM
11

I don't remember him coming out openly supporting Trump. Maybe I missed it. He just happened to release dirt on Hillary (her irresponsibly talking about stuff in emails). You're right a lot of leftists then decided he was an evil nazi Trumplican Russian tool. Though to be fair, there were already some leftists (mostly feminists) who already considered him a dirtbag because he was accused of rape (which obviously means he's guilty despite no evidence). Overall my view of him is fairly positive de…
/r/MensRights09/09/17 02:42 AM
4

This was a high school, so they weren't children but they were still minors and of course this was illegal and unnaceptable.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 12:35 AM
4

And they get alienated and excommunicated from the movement for it They excommunicate each other. Different groups of feminists sometimes don't even consider x y and z to be real feminists, and this is often mutual.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 02:55 PM
21

Nice I also like how the blurb isn't "men/women are evil, everybody is a proto rapist" but rather "try to be a decent human being"
/r/MensRights04/09/17 02:52 PM
1

So not just misandrist but racist as well, nice... Oh and apparently the "lol prison rape is hilarious" shit is extended to women now by old mate red commenting on Facebook. Props for gender equality I guess... but those jokes are still in fucking poor taste.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 01:53 PM
1

Fair enough.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 02:02 AM
2

Well, gamer_zzzz said so and then OP replied without denying it basically saying "so?" Where did the photo come from anyway? I assumed since OP posted it that he took it at his local woolies.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 01:26 AM
2

I was also being serious. Which of those alternatives do you think is best?
/r/MensRights03/09/17 05:26 PM
1

OK would you prefer [square bracets] or "quotation marks" (I could also do dual apostrophes ' ') next time?
/r/MensRights03/09/17 04:27 PM
3

Who really gives a fuck issues: You might have to take piss in a restaurant restroom that's also accessible to women and disabled patrons. That's what you wrote. I was paraphrasing.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 04:22 PM
16

For a restaurant with limited bathroom space it makes perfect sense to have this style. No, it makes perfect sense to have two unisex bathrooms. Your argument here is that functionality/practicality comes before silly feelings of being squeamish around the opposite gender. OK then, commit to your argument and say that both bathrooms should be be unisex. You wouldn't even need to make any changes to the facilities, since men can use stalls just the same as women. By having one unisex and the othe…
/r/MensRights03/09/17 01:16 PM
4

Who cares who you have to use the bathroom with Apparently non-disabled women care, since they have a bathroom all to themselves... If anything, both bathrooms should be unisex. Is this a massive deal? Not really. After all men use the bathroom less often than women and take less long when they do. And like you said, I don't really care who uses the bathroom with me. But it's still annoying and a big double-standard.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 01:12 PM
2

If things are different on mother's day then I will be annoyed along with you. But your pic makes it seem like they were all like this (or at least lacks crucial context). You probably should have mentioned this was just one cake out of many "happy father's day" cakes. There's a big difference between making up a few cakes to cater to people who want something different, and having them all be like that.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 12:55 PM
1

So turns out all the cakes around this one had "happy father's day" written on them according to /u/gamer_zzzz below. In which case this becomes much less of a big deal.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 12:50 PM
0

I've got no problem with being inclusive. These days nuclear families are few and far between, you've got orphaned kids, single parents doing the job of two parents, kids being raised by other caregivers, transgender parents etc. (Plus Mum's Day and Dad's Day have become a bit of an excuse for businesses to peddle their bullshit). ... Except that I highly highly doubt this would fly on Mother's Day. I would be happy to be proven wrong though. Edit: Apparently all the cakes around this one had "f…
/r/MensRights03/09/17 11:46 AM
2

I imagine it would be hard for a paraplegic to enter the sewers and fight evil clowns... I'm sure a gay, black, amputee would also make a compelling protagonist... but that doesn't make the actual protagonist of It bad just because he isn't those things.
/r/MensRights28/08/17 08:19 PM
2

Britain is friends with plenty of countries that treat women badly. They're even friends with some countries where FGM is legal and sometimes practised. Not saying there isn't a massive double standard here, just that geopolitics usually comes before human rights concerns.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 05:54 AM
1

The studies posted later in the article might very well be valid and worthy of a serious look. But the writer (this Taylor Larson woman) is incredibly biased. First she accuses progressives of pushing an agenda, and then she spends the the rest of the article talking about Trump and the mainstream media anti-male pro-gay propaganda conspiracy... basically pushing her own political agenda. It's hard to believe she is writing in good faith.
/r/MensRights21/08/17 06:54 PM
0

Being intelligent is not the same thing as being knowledgeable. Foreskin medical facts are not exactly common knowledge. But I would say he should've known better than to operate unqualified with scissors in the bathroom.
/r/MensRights21/08/17 03:57 PM
10

Standing up for what is right sometimes requires defending the most deplorable people, because it is against such people that deplorable actions and words are seen as just.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 03:07 PM
3

I don't quite see how it's fair to force people (men) to fight and die if your country itself is not being invaded.
/r/MensRights12/08/17 06:20 PM
2

I didn't mean to say they were rright about AVFM or RoK (I haven't even checked out the latter group, so can't speak). What happened is: The guy above me said if a group was listed as a hate group by SPLC, it actually elevated his opinion of the group. It also made him want to give them a fair chance. I pointed out that WBBC are listed as a hate group by SPLC (the unstated question being: "Do you have an elevated opinion of WBBC just because SPLC denounced them?"). He then went on to somewhat de…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:38 AM
1

That's a good way to get men to not buy from your shitty cafe, even in a suburb as hipster Brunswick. Priority seating They are assuming guys are even going to want to eat there in the first place?
/r/MensRights09/08/17 02:12 AM
2

Absolutely. Though it's worth noting that this is probably partly due to the fact that most women and men are straight (which I would expect to carry over to prison guards in the absence of contrary information), while almost all most juvenile innmates are boys (which is in itself another huge issue).
/r/MensRights09/08/17 12:58 AM
1

Reminder that this subreddit,'AVFM, and Return of Kings are all called hate groups by them. Yes, but then so is Westboro Baptist Church.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 12:29 AM
1

So I feel like this started out with feminists paying way more attention to manspreading than was necessary (ie: a simple gender-neutral sign on transport saying "please don't take up more space than necessary" maybe with a picture of someone with their bag on the seat). Now it's gotten to the point where we spend more time mocking them about manspreading than they spend complaining about it.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 11:12 PM
1

I mean if you have super fat legs then the rest of your body is probably pretty big as well, and you probably just take up a lot of space regardless of your leg position.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 11:10 PM
1

So you're telling me I may actually want to skip leg day?
/r/MensRights27/07/17 11:07 PM
1

Well, he did have a lot more likes than she did. Not that two examples really say much.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 02:24 PM
3

Is English not their first language?
/r/MensRights25/07/17 02:28 AM
2

The only link I can find between them is that the founder of The Daily Wire previously worked at Breitbart for a year. So... nothing really. And yeah, the comment is consistent with the USA Today review I guess. Technically they said "some" which could refer to other people complaining online, but it sounds like weasel words to me.
/r/MensRights25/07/17 01:54 AM
6

He's not saying Conan is a hypocrite. It's that Conan's joke here exposes the double-standards of people outraged at the New Hampshire state rep.
/r/MensRights21/07/17 06:34 AM
7

Holy crap I had no idea that subreddit had gotten so bad. Like you said, I respect people's right to choose their own lifestyle, because relationships are hard and have a high fail rate and the legal system is biased against men. But I wish they could do it without being so, well, misogynist (and I don't use that term lightly). Not to mention the upvoted racism in that first thread. Fuckk.
/r/MensRights05/07/17 05:05 PM
3

WHY ARE WE SHOUTING?!
/r/MensRights02/07/17 02:31 AM
2

Taking half a bottle of aspirin isn't going to kill you, and doesn't even really warrant a hospital visit on its own. Depends on how much is in the bottle. Too much aspirin will absolutely kill you via fluid buildup in the brain. Many over the counter drugs are deadly in overdose. For instance if you take too much paracetamol/acetaminophen (tylenol), you will die a horrible slow death via liver failure. It's just not as reliable as shooting yourself in the head or jumping off a 20-story building…
/r/MensRights01/07/17 05:48 AM
2

Aren't men something like 4 times more likely to succeed at suicide attempts? I thought this was common knowledge? To know how likely they are to succeed at suicide attempts, we'd have to know how many times each group attempted suicide. The stat we do have is that in the USA, UK, Australia etc men are 3-4 times as likely to commit suicide as women. In India it's actually much more even, but men are still 1.26 times more likely to commit suicide.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 05:45 AM
1

communism (feminism) Watch out for those red(head)s under the bed! Seriously though, communism and feminism are not the same. There are plenty of communist/socialist/marxist feminists though. You do have a point about women silently accepting the advantages they have in society. But the same can be said of men. It's just human nature to not look a gift horse in the mouth. Plus the whole privilege is invisible to those who have it thing.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 12:53 PM
7

Do you also support parents giving tattoos to babies? What about cutting babies toes off? After all, you can live a full life with 9 toes - you'll never know the difference and you won't remember the operation! Clearly parents should have the right to cut their baby's toes off.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 12:36 PM
4

There's no false equivalence. In fact some kinds of FGM are less bad than MGM.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 12:35 PM
2

How long is the stick up your arse?
/r/MensRights29/06/17 12:34 PM
1

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply you said that, I was just reaffirming what I saw as my main focus in the thread.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 02:44 AM
1

It doesn't matter whether you accept it - it's the truth. Shit happens, kids disobey their parents and wander off. The main point is that you can't go around accusing people of being child molestors for no reason.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 10:07 AM
2

They can, though. If someone makes a false rape allegation (ie: criminal proceedings) against a man, he can sue them once the criminal proceedings are over. If someone falsely sues a man for rape (ie: civil court) then he can counter sue. Also if there's sufficient evidence that a person deliberately made a false allegation, the police/prosecutor can choose to charge and prosecute them in criminal court. Obviously this varies a lot by jurisdiction but this is how it works, more or less, in a lot…
/r/MensRights28/06/17 09:56 AM
1

Not this stupid manhood101 shit again. That's what I get for not turning annotations off.
/r/MensRights23/06/17 04:40 AM
12

According to Kentucky law: 510.070 Sodomy in the first degree. (1) A person is guilty of sodomy in the first degree when: (a) He engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another person by forcible compulsion; or (b) He engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another person who is incapable of consent because he: 1. Is physically helpless; or 2. Is less than twelve (12) years old. (2) Sodomy in the first degree is a Class B felony unless the victim is under twelve (12) years old or receives …
/r/MensRights21/06/17 04:31 AM
7

Can I start a shelter for only children and men without getting hate from SJWs? Probably not.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 07:38 AM
48

Yes, there's a lack of shelters and support for male victims. But this specific poster is talking about sexual assault against females (grabbing pussies) and making a jab at Trump. So naturally the profits would go to a women's shelter? The poster is indicative of the larger problem, but it's not specifically shitting on men or saying they can't have shelters.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 07:33 AM
10

You're disgusting. Stop apologizing for rape.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 09:32 AM
12

18 You clearly didn't read the fucking article. This guy was 14 when he became a father. Meaning he could have been as young as 13 when the woman (then 20) had sex with him. We're not talking about a couple of love-struck 16 year olds experimenting with sex here and wearing a condom. We're talking about a 20 year old sex offender taking advantage of a young teen and getting pregnant. And situations like this are EXACTLY WHY we have age of consent laws. Because 14 year olds usually aren't capable…
/r/MensRights19/06/17 05:46 AM
23

I think you mean "an adult" since we're not talking about rape of musical chords.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 05:44 AM
2

Are we surprised at this, coming from one of the most misandrist sites on the web?
/r/MensRights19/06/17 02:44 AM
20

Can we not sink to the level of tumblr SJWs by taking photos of random people's legs on the train?
/r/MensRights18/06/17 01:13 AM
10

The very term "benevolent sexism" is a product of gynocentrism. The phrase puts the focus on how the act affects women, rather than how it affects men (ie: men allowing women on lifeboats before them causes men to die, but it's called "benevolent" when in reality it shows deadly malevolence towards men.)
/r/MensRights17/06/17 01:11 AM
1

How did you get that from the OP?
/r/MensRights16/06/17 02:48 PM
9

It's a combination news/entertainment/discussion show. Sometimes OK but generally fairly shit. A lot of people watch Sunrise but it doesn't have the journalistic cred of something like 7 Nightly News or ABC News.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 02:32 PM
1

I mean, both are offensive and bigoted statements. It's just that one is more acceptable to say.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 09:31 AM
1

If only it worked that way in real life.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 10:34 AM
2

Except then people just won't be able to afford to go to college at all, or they will take out private loans at stupid interest rates...
/r/MensRights03/06/17 07:37 AM
10

What they need is government price controls on university tuition (increasing each year with inflation ofc), to stop the upward pressure created by government student loans. But knowing the USA, it would be lambasted as evil socialism so I doubt it'll happen until their tertiary education system reaches breaking point. And to think my government wants to move towards a more unregulated American style university system. Ugh. What an absolute disaster.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 02:28 AM
8

It's always disgusting when people use tragedies like this to push bigotry, but it happens every time. There's always a crowd saying it's the patriarchy or all muslims are evil etc etc.
/r/MensRights24/05/17 10:24 AM
1

I think I read his comment wrong. It's my bad.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 03:46 PM
2

I'm saying I mentioned law enforcement already in my comment. But you're not wrong - there would be anarchy overnight.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 11:24 AM
10

Law enforcement.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 10:16 AM
21

It wouldn't completely recover within weeks. It would cause a massive global depression lasting years if not decades and many industries (teaching, nursing) would pretty much collapse and not recover for a generation or longer. If men stopped working though, society itself would collapse overnight. All vital services (electricity, healthcare, sewerage/clean water, waste removal, all telecommunications, law enforcement, military) would cease to function, there would be a world wide famine and mil…
/r/MensRights20/05/17 09:05 AM
1

There would actually less rapists than victims, even, since some rapists rape multiple victims.
/r/MensRights18/05/17 02:37 AM
4

Police can ask you questions normally like anyone can. This is not the same as being detained. Police can arrest you if they have a good reason think you've broken the law. You are not free to leave, and can be forced into custody. Attempting to leave at this point is resisting arrest, a serious crime. Some places (eg: the USA) also draw a distinction between detaining and arresting. When detained in the USA you are not free to leave, but the police also can't force you into custody as if you we…
/r/MensRights18/05/17 02:33 AM
9

I think this is much more likely to be stupidity about "making the space inclusive" rather than a conspiracy to falsely accuse guys. Never put down to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity (and sexism in this case).
/r/MensRights18/05/17 01:22 AM
22

Even if the ladies' bathroom is under maintenance that really changes nothing. As someone else said "BUT I MIGHT SEE A PENIS IF I LOOK HARD!" is not an argument. Guys don't like looking at dicks either. Even gay guys generally don't enjoy soft peeing dicks.
/r/MensRights18/05/17 01:20 AM
15

"Transgender people should be able to use any bathroom they'd like!!!!!" I actually agree with this. There's so few trans people that really this should be a nonissue. I don't think I've ever run into a trans person in a bathroom in my whole entire life. Just let them use whichever bathroom they like. ... But it has diddly squat to do with urinals. If you don't like urinals, use a stall.
/r/MensRights18/05/17 01:18 AM
7

Egalitarianism doesn't preclude having different facilities for people whose bodies are actually different. No egalitarian would go into a gynaecologist and say "lol you have to stop doing all female reproductive treatments, today only this practice is gender nonspecific"
/r/MensRights18/05/17 01:16 AM
2

... That wasn't what I was saying at all. In fact I was saying the opposite of that.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 11:35 AM
3

And they aren't allowed to say "well this MIGHT not be a problem Actually they are. They have near-complete discretion over which calls to respond to and in what order. They also have discretion over which laws to enforce and which crimes to investigate. This is because police forces have limited resources and simply cannot do everything. Unfortunately this discretion is often used in a discriminatory fashion, or cops just go for the lowest hanging fruit (drug users, prostitution, sting operatio…
/r/MensRights15/05/17 10:10 AM
1

True, but there isn't really a good reason to carry a gun around in the city/town unless you just bought it or you're taking it in for repairs etc (even then I would expect you to carry it in a case). Or unless you're currently at work as a security guard/law enforcement. If you're stopping for supplies on your way to go hunting... surely the gun would be locked in your car out of sight. Also, people walking around in public can't tell if your weapon is loaded or if the safety's on etc.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 09:58 AM
0

the stigma will follow him for life. His criminal record/sex offender listing will be expunged (as opposed to all the falsely accused people who serve their time in full and have to live with that rape record and sex offender listing). Though it's kinda shitty he only got a partial pardon based on her recanting her accusation, and that he had to fight in court for a declaration of innocence. The social stigma of the rape conviction will still follow him, though he's also lucky because this was a…
/r/MensRights15/05/17 09:35 AM
40

Apparently there was zero evidence against him, and he plead innocent.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 09:29 AM
46

My guess is she probably had strict religious parents or something. That's not an excuse, just a reason. She also would've been 18 when she made the false accusation (came forward about it at 22, and she's now 27). So old enough to know better but also young and stupid. Note: he would've been 22-26 while in jail... she's taken some of the best years of his life.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 09:26 AM
156

The $90,000 restitution is part of her criminal sentence. If I'm not mistaken he can now go and separately sue her in civil court for damages (54 months lost income, emotional trauma etc) if she has more money. Could be wrong though. The bigger problem is this, though: Despite a lack of evidence in the trial, the judge took Coast's word over Montgomery's and sentenced the innocent man. So there was zero evidence (the huffpo article could be leaving something out or exaggerating, but since he was…
/r/MensRights15/05/17 09:20 AM
2

In my experience public parades of passionate people (say that three times fast) are not the best places for rational debate. Weird fantasy though.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 11:15 PM
1

The girls were 14-15 Source? Video you posted says middle school. I was under the impression that was 11-13. 14 at most. If people are downvoting me because they seriously think these girls should be forever sex offenders, they're fucking delusional. The girls should face some punishment but a permanent criminal record or worse: sex offender listing for something like this done at even 13 is utterly insane. I know the USA has a hardon for criminalizing kids (esp boys) but come on.
/r/MensRights10/05/17 06:56 PM
1

I'll take that as a "no I don't have a source and I made it up" then.
/r/MensRights10/05/17 06:50 PM
-3

Edit: Upvotes for racism and downvotes for me. Stay classy /r/mensrights. Do you have a source on 11-13 year old muslim asian kids in the UK gang-raping a girl and showing it to the entire school, and getting away with it? (And yes I know by asian you mean south asian or west asian.) Or were you just being racist and islamophobic for literally no reason? If that's the case, kindly bugger off back to T_D thanks mate. :) Edit: Wow, you actually are a T_D poster. How unsurprising. Edit 2: Actually …
/r/MensRights10/05/17 10:51 AM
2

I don't think the girls should be forever listed as sex offenders, nor should they have a criminal record following them around forever because they made a bad decision and assaulted someone as tweens. People deserve a second chance at 11-13. That being said, 11-13 is old enough to be criminally responsible, and they should've known better. How should we deal with this? Maybe some sort of deal where if they're good for a year they don't get a conviction recorded against them? You're right that i…
/r/MensRights10/05/17 10:48 AM
3

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/24/us/7-year-old-philadelphia-girl-abducted-monday-breaks-free.html
/r/MensRights10/05/17 10:40 AM
10

European countries heading in the right direction here.
/r/MensRights01/05/17 02:47 AM
1

Cutting cultures will just leave earth as well.
/r/MensRights01/05/17 02:46 AM
3

Maybe a little younger with parental consent - like 16. Think tatoos, plastic surgery etc.
/r/MensRights30/04/17 03:51 PM
4

Child abusers. Denying a child access to their parents is child abuse.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 10:35 AM
1

It's almost like people should learn not to make frivolous/malicious false accusations of serious crimes, and schools should learn not to hang students based on unproven accusations and leave enforcing the law to actual law enforcement organizations. I do feel for people get assaulted but have no way to prove it, though. That must be awful.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 07:43 AM
1

Are we surprised? This is Jessica Valenti, she is one of the most hypocritical, attention-seeking, man-hating, professional-victim feminists out there. She's one of the worst examples of a popular feminist. Even lots of feminists want nothing to do with her.
/r/MensRights25/04/17 11:08 AM
5

Well, hardcore traditionalists have both misandrist and misogynist views.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 03:05 AM
4

There was actually a mum recently who was anti-MGM, and the dad was fighting her in court to get it done to their 4-year-old son, and he won. Very sad.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 02:24 AM
2

For you and I, yes. But we already agree with him that circumcision of children is wrong unless strictly medically necessary (a tiny minority of cases). For the people viewing the debate or the person he is arguing against - maybe not so much.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 01:46 AM
5

We dont care which is more damaging. Agreed. But it's worth mentioning there are many forms of FGM - some are more damaging than male circumcision while others are less damaging. But all forms of FGM are illegal - even a tiny pinprick on a girl's labia. Meanwhile as you said there are people advocating for circumcision and cosmetic circumcisions are covered by health insurance (and in my country, I'm fairly sure it's covered by our socialized healthcare as well).
/r/MensRights13/04/17 01:43 AM
6

??? It just says a lot about people in the west in general (fuck, it says a lot about people in general that they are more interested in what happens closer to home). If horrible shit like this was given the importance it deserves, we wouldn't hear nearly as much about goings in the west, and the news would be dominated by stories like this from other countries.
/r/MensRights12/04/17 02:50 AM
26

I doubt any such "services" were guaranteed in the contract, as that would be just as fucked up as this gold-digger walking away with $500million of someone else's money.
/r/MensRights12/04/17 02:24 AM
1

Most Jewish and Muslim parents have their little boys' penises surgically altered. It's strictly required by Orthodox Jews and reccomended in many muslim sects. Circumcision is mentioned in Jewish holy texts as a symbol of God's pact with the Jews as his chosen people. It's also reccomended in the Sunnah and some Hadiths, but not the Qur'an. The poster I replied to was /u/JewandScholar Most Christians don't do it, but it's popular in the USA, Canada and the Philippines.
/r/MensRights10/04/17 06:20 AM
13

That's a common misconception. There is actually many types of FGM. Some of them are much less harmful than male circumcision (such as type Ia), while others are more harmful (such as Type III). But all types of FGM are illegal, even if they're much less harmful than male circumcision. I'm glad I was circumcised Good for you. But regardless: If adults want to get circumcised (for religion, for looks, whatever) that's their choice. However, it's NOT OK to force it on children who can't consent. W…
/r/MensRights10/04/17 04:57 AM
5

Feminists study icebergs?
/r/MensRights02/04/17 09:24 AM
81

I mean, I've also read articles from women talking about how male contraception would be bad because it takes control away from women. I feel like idiots are just idiots regardless of genitalia.
/r/MensRights02/04/17 09:24 AM
1

Human comes from Latin humanus, "of mankind", ultimately from the Proto.-Indo-European word for earth. At no point has there been an "only males" connotation to it. Yeah that's why that section was stuck-through with the explanation added. Thanks for the further clarification. wer and man both were and have always been separate words, one wasn't dropped from the other. But even still, in the Indo-European languages, man has always ment male human. It seems like you're correct that they have been…
/r/MensRights02/04/17 04:54 AM
0

What part of what I said is factually incorrect bollocks?
/r/MensRights02/04/17 04:28 AM
2

What I'm saying is that any English professor reading an English paper should understand that the word 'mankind' is inclusive of all humans, and not a sexist gendered term designed to exclude women. It's not like 'fireman' which refers to men only (which is why we say firefighter to be inclusive).
/r/MensRights01/04/17 12:01 AM
7

Ah shit, my bad. What's the actual etymology? Edit: Apparently from Latin via Old French.
/r/MensRights31/03/17 01:51 PM
5

I can't imagine taking a literature class Yeah, I can't imagine you taking one either. Women are crap at writing proper poetry or literature. TIL that My Country, Harry Potter, Frankenstein, Pride and Prejudice, Jane Eyre, Emma, Wuthering Heights, Little Women, the Tale of Peter Rabbit and the Gruffalo are all crap. GTFO.
/r/MensRights31/03/17 12:05 PM
-3

I mean, in fairness, most of the really important and pivotal works of literature in history were written by men. Especially the further back you go when women were denied education/weren't taken seriously. So what is he really teaching? Sounds a standard literature class minus a few important works authored by women.
/r/MensRights31/03/17 11:50 AM
6

Biologists usually say "evolution of humans" or they use scientific words with specific meanings like "anatomically modern humans" "behaviourally modern humans" "homo sapiens" etc. This is to avoid confusion. But no one is going to be confused by the use of "mankind" in an English paper. This is just moronic.
/r/MensRights31/03/17 11:44 AM
472

'Mankind' is gender neutral. Fucking morons. For starters, it comes from the Old English 'man' meaning humans/people and 'cynde', which had a similar meaning to modern words like 'species' or 'race' (hence "the human race"). The word 'human' did not exist back then. It is a combination of 'hue' and 'man' meaning colour/appearance of a person. So 'human' came from 'man', not the other way around (and so by their logic, it is just as sexist as 'mankind'). from Latin. In Old English, male people we…
/r/MensRights31/03/17 11:11 AM
1

Breitbart is often full of shit. Do we have a less biased source?
/r/MensRights30/03/17 03:02 AM
7

Medicaid / insurance should cover infant circumcision only when it is strictly medically necessary to corrrect a serious problem present in the child's penis.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 03:00 AM
2

Point 1) is also broken since pay discrimination is illegal, at least for wage jobs.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 01:44 AM
1

But this statement is much more true than Obama's because she limits it to women working full time. Which is what the original 77% stat was for. Though personally I would put this one at half-n-half because it's still misleading.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 01:42 AM
-2

Feminists generally do not support and encourage ultra-conservative Islam, Islamic terrorist groups, backwards tribes in rural areas of the middle east, or the government of Saudi Arabia (ie: the people who actually do stoning). Let's keep the criticism of feminism to stuff they actually do. There's plenty of material there. Edit: Downvoted for inconvenient truths, I guess. Oh well.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 02:35 AM
54

there's no serious academic debate over the wage gap Correct. The academic consensus is that it is largely caused by women's own choices (choosing lower paying careers, choosing to work less, and choosing not to negotiate for raises and higher salaries) not by sexist discrimination from employers. The 77% figure is merely pop-sociology.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 05:02 AM
28

Eh, this is just more bullshit. Look at the title. How dare those men tell us anything - dirty mansplainers. Granted in this case what they said (biological sex is a construct) is stupid and factually wrong.
/r/MensRights25/03/17 03:52 PM
1

Fuck you Cosmo I will continue to make my wife cum several times a session and I'll fucking enjoy it.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 10:42 AM
1

So knowledge and power gaps do matter, then?
/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:41 PM
1

You're right clearly we should legalize fucking 10 year olds since knowledge and power gaps between adults and minors don't matter at all.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:38 PM
2

True.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:03 PM
9

I would say socialism is more popular among feminists than diehard support of capitalism. There's a big crossover between socialists, marxists etc and feminists. Note when I say socialism I mean proper socialism, not social democracy (which is often conflated with socialism by right wingers who don't know better).
/r/MensRights23/03/17 10:23 PM
1

We as a society have deemed individuals under the age of 16 This happened in Michigan in the US, where the age of consent is 16. The Federal age of consent is 18. But that is rarely enforced. As for other US states: Age of consent 16 = 31 states (133 million people). Age of consent 17 = 8 states (79 million people): Age of consent 18 = 12 states (98 million people): DC, Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands and American Samoa are 16. Personally I disagree with 17 and 18 as I think they are unreal…
/r/MensRights23/03/17 01:55 PM
3

Firstly, 14 is below the age of consent in the US. (Personally I also think 17-18 is too high. But whatever.) Secondly, she was 38. That's a 24 year age gap. It's not like this is some normal teen relationship where they were 14 and 16, or even 14 and 19. There's a pretty clear knowledge and power gap. She could have given him an STI, or gotten pregnant (and in the US he would legally be on the hook for child support at 14). Thankfully she wasn't his teacher or other authority figure, so there's…
/r/MensRights23/03/17 01:31 PM
1

Thirty eight. She was 38 and he was 14.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 01:27 PM
2

still too young to be having kids You realise a 14 year old can get a woman pregnant? His sperm are 100% ready to go. This stupid woman could have gotten pregnant, and the boy would legally be on the hook for child support (that is the law in the USA). It's happened before (14 year old impregnates his 20 year old statutory rapist, is put on the hook for child support): https://www.businessinsider.com.au/male-statutory-rape-victim-nick-olivas-must-pay-child-support-2014-9 but probably already mas…
/r/MensRights23/03/17 01:20 PM
1

She could give him a sexually transmitted disease. She could get pregnant and he will be stuck with child support / being a father at 14. He could be mentally traumatised.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 01:18 PM
1

I agree but just FYI the brain doesn't ever stop changing for your whole life. And the frontal lobe (logic/reason, impulse control) isn't considered fully developed until you're in your mid 20's.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 01:16 PM
11

IKR? Was surprised and pleased to see a prominent feminist (120k followers) tearing NYPost to shreds in the replies. Some quotes from her: "no way you're suggesting her husband is a cuck to her sexual violation of a kid. This isn't porn fantasy this is rape." "<pic> here is a better portrayal of this rapist...in court being held accountable. Why post selfies?" "this woman raped a boy 8-15 times and you post glamour selfies & call her husband a cuck like he was an accomplice to adult kink??" "if …
/r/MensRights23/03/17 01:12 PM
8

OK, so, what the psychologist is saying: Some things described as microaggression may be actually racist / sexist - he doesn't deny that subtle slights and insults against minorities exist However, the line between regular racism/sexism/bigotry/serious abuse, and microaggressions, is fuzzy and often defined by feels not reals Sometimes things may not actually be racist or sexist and the person is just prone to being offended Due to this fuzzy, non-empirical basis, colleges probably shouldn't be …
/r/MensRights20/03/17 12:48 AM
4

That's a big problem in the USA, from what I gather.
/r/MensRights17/03/17 02:40 PM
49

Lies. Women want custody for one reason... male wealth being redistributed to them by the guns of government... Or maybe they want custody for the same fucking reasons as fathers do: They love their kids and don't want to be separated. They don't trust their ex with parenting (valid or not). Sure, some women are gold-diggers just in it for child support. And some are just in it to spite their ex. But most fall into one of the above categories. Quit your woman-hating libertarian bullshit. and if …
/r/MensRights17/03/17 01:32 PM
2

Yeah I getcha. Edited my post.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 03:51 PM
13

Homelessness is a real issue. Men are the majority of homeless and over 2/3rds of those sleeping on the streets. Meanwhile male specific shelters are vastly outnumbered in many areas by those for women or "women and their children". Of course yeah it's not directly related to women marching against Trump's sexist comments.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 03:04 PM
12

I like this novelty account.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 03:02 PM
9

I'm not sure why you all think homelessness is a male issue. Oh, I don't know, maybe it's because: Men are 56% of homeless people. Men are 67.6% of those sleeping rough (ie: living on the streets). Go to a shelter Yes, men refusing help may be part of the problem. But female-only/women-and-children shelters also drastically outnumber male-only ones. There is simply a lot less male-specific help available. But I suppose it's not worth trying to convince someone who is so racist and sexist they ma…
/r/MensRights14/03/17 03:00 PM
10

Tell that to the Texas regulations. They say this kid can only fight biological females since he is a biological female. That being said, even with hormone treatment can any biological female hope to hold their own against fit biological males in wrestling? Seems unlikely.
/r/MensRights25/02/17 03:18 PM
9

Yes, because anyone who dislikes Trump must be a shill. No one ever really dislikes him, they just say they do because they're being paid by the liberal media Soros conspiracy.
/r/MensRights17/02/17 07:17 AM
2

There was a study involving consenting adult men in sub-Saharan Africa (where HIV is pandemic) which showed that it reduced the chance of transmitting HIV. However that's a far cry from circumcising non-consenting infant boys, or from circumcising people outside of Africa/in less HIV-prevalent areas. But anyway that's one of the reasons the UN promotes male circumcision.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 07:27 AM
5

Benny Mardones "Into the Night": She's just 16 years old, leave her alone, they say Winger "17": She's only 17... Daddy says she’s too young / But she’s old enough for me These are, by definition, not encouraging paedophilia. In fact it's normal for adults to be attracted to older teens. 16/17-year-olds can arguably give informed consent to sex. Many places set the legal age of consent at 16/17. However these kinds of relationships can be unhealthy or have a power imbalance. For instance Benny M…
/r/MensRights14/02/17 12:56 AM
1

A normal photo is not the same as porn. Though that's a fair point - maybe parents should not be able to exploit children in that way for commercial gain.
/r/MensRights12/02/17 05:31 AM
10

As disgusting as this crap is, I really don't see why it should be illegal since no one is being harmed by them (unlike actual cp where children are harmed in the making of it and have their right to privacy violated every time it is viewed). But I agree that if FB removes loli hentai they should remove this, and are hypocrites for not doing so.
/r/MensRights11/02/17 10:55 PM
3

All the female vets I've known were tough people who often put down animals (you pretty much don't have an option this is a big part of the job) or reached up a cow's/horse's (vagina, typically, for artificial insemination). Though, I lived in a rural area. But I still support this. If we have affirmative action for women in STEM, there should be affirmative action for men who want to be nurses/vets/teachers/psychologists etc.
/r/MensRights11/02/17 10:26 PM
2

I totally get your point, but in this particular case the baby was 7 weeks old. Mothers should be expected to breastfeed, unless there's a good reason not to. Assuming this guy isn't a single dad, he was probably using expressed breast milk.
/r/MensRights11/02/17 10:49 AM
20

Some of them are admitting to very serious crimes. They need to be doxxed and reported to the police. The prohibition against personal information and doxxing is to prevent witch hunts and threats/harassment/slander. But some of the people in this post admitted to violent crimes and are potentially still a danger to their partners, children or others. That being said, it would be best if OP did the doxxing/police reporting himself rather than releasing the information publicly, to prevent nutter…
/r/MensRights05/02/17 01:18 AM
1

No, because that isn't the definition of sexism. The definition of sexism is prejudice, discrimination, hatred and mistrust based on sex/gender.
/r/MensRights05/02/17 01:08 AM
3

I mean I'm hardly surprised. The sub is literally "againstmensrights". They might as well call it "againstjewrights" or "againstblackrights". They are a bunch of anti-male bigots. The sub is literally full of sexist assholes. Though with a name like that, you would think they would have a moment of clarity and think are we the baddies?.
/r/MensRights02/02/17 01:57 PM
5

Yes but according to like 1 minute of Googling I did, there's also the Employment Equity Act which requires employers to undertake affirmative action to help women, aboriginal people, disabled people and non-white minorities.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 02:12 AM
13

The Canadian Human Rights Act prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sex/gender. However the Employment Equity Act requires employers to undertake affirmative action to help women, aboriginal people, disabled people and non-white minorities.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 02:10 AM
1

No, he responded to me.
/r/MensRights28/01/17 07:08 AM
1

Perhaps the best solution is to not have them, then. Politicians love them though because it catches everyone and is basically unavoidable even for rich people with accountants on retainer.
/r/MensRights28/01/17 12:54 AM
1

Sales taxes unfairly impact the poor, who spend most of their money on goods and rent. If you're going to have one, essential items need to be excepted.
/r/MensRights28/01/17 12:11 AM
1

What do you mean "you girls"? I'm not a girl. And no, here's what Trump said: I’ve gotta use some Tic Tacs, just in case I start kissing her [referring to Adrianne Zucker who was in the room]. You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything… Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything. Sounds like Trump is assuming a lot. He doesn't even wait. He just ki…
/r/MensRights28/01/17 12:06 AM
1

... That has nothing to do with the issue at hand. This thread is about when it's OK to grab someone's genitals.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 11:57 PM
-2

What the fuck are you blathering on about? We are talking about in what situation it's OK to grab someone's genitals and whether it can be reasonably assumed they let you or whether it's sexual assault.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 02:27 PM
1

Just because he thinks people "let" him doesn't mean they actually wanted it. It really depends on the context. If he was naked in bed with a woman for sex and he grabs her pussy, that's fine. If he grabs some woman's pussy in a business meeting or at a function and she chooses not to report it, that's still sexual assault. And he might think she "let him". Some assaulters and rapists are not fully aware that what they are doing is wrong. Not all rape is of the "grab a woman at knife-point in th…
/r/MensRights27/01/17 01:52 PM
1

A woman or child Or a man, even. But yes, agreed.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 01:50 PM
-4

If a rich/powerful/famous person walks over and grabs your dick in some non-sexual setting, and then later you're not sure whether to report it ... is that OK? The person probably thought you just let him/her do it because they are famous, powerful etc. But really, that's still sexual assault.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 01:49 PM
0

Are we sure that isn't because this disparity has become common knowledge and companies are trying to rectify it by favouring women/screwing men in hiring?
/r/MensRights27/01/17 01:47 PM
1

Excessive sexualization or objectification of women. Women's bodies are sexually objectified more openly and often. Agreed there. It does happen to men too (particularly in regards their height, but also in other ways like musclyness and occasionally penis size), but it's more open and common with women's bodies which are plastered up in every ad campaign etc. Men are objectified for their earning potential and usefulness. If objectification turns women into sex machines, it turns men into food …
/r/MensRights27/01/17 01:43 PM
-1

What are you talking about? I never accused him of grabbing women. I said he talks about women like they are objects. That being said, I think it's likely he did what he was talking about and you are clutching at straws. But whatever, guilty or innocent he's still a nasty dude.
/r/MGTOW24/01/17 10:53 AM
0

You think that's bad? One of the organizers was a woman who spent 27 years in jail for spending 12 days torturing a man to death. That being said, I can sympathise with women who protest against Trump. The dude talks about women like they are objects to grab the pussy and kiss. It's disgusting.
/r/MGTOW24/01/17 05:54 AM
-1

It's actually hilarious that you think an article in the Brussels "journal" qualifies as evidence for anything. Next you'll be linking me to Breitbart of HuffPo columns.
/r/MensRights24/01/17 02:38 AM
1

Yes. Bullshit. You take one tangentially related statistic from one country (which doesn't mention feminists or feminism) and use it to apply to all women or all feminists, and then make unfounded assumptions about underlying psychological motives with no evidence to support it? GTFO.
/r/MensRights24/01/17 02:18 AM
-2

The candidates would spend all of their time in New York and California where the population is the largest. Lol no they wouldn't. People who argue that are ignoring the facts of where Americans live. The US is not like Canada where 33% of the population lives in the top 4 cities, or Australia where 50% of the population lives in the top 3 cities. To reach 33% of the US population, a candidate would need to visit 15 cities including Detroit, Houston, Dallas, Miami, Phoenix, Washington, Philly, A…
/r/MensRights24/01/17 01:54 AM
-3

Trump didn't win fair and square. He took advantage of the US's unfair rules to become President. I despise Hillary but she got 3 million more votes than him. That is a fact. If the system was actually fair, she would have won. Just like if the system was fair, Gore would have won in 2000 since he got over 500,000 more votes. I agree that Demonspawn is just making bullshit presumptions about what women subconsciously feel about Islam.
/r/MensRights24/01/17 01:25 AM
1

Feminism is not a movement for their stated goals. Instead, feminism is a test to see which men are strong enough to stand up to women's demands. Because Feminism is a test rather than a movement, it is reacting viscerally to Islam which will not give into women's demands. It is what the women in feminism want: strong men that will tell a woman "no" when her demands are unreasonable. That is absolute bullshit and you know it. Go back to /r/theredpill Feminism does attack Islam, especially non-in…
/r/MensRights24/01/17 01:15 AM
1

Or maybe women should just be able to wear whatever they want, whether it be hijabs or a bikini? There's a world of difference between being forced to wear hijab against your will by a patriarchal islamic government, and being a woman (muslim or otherwise) who wants to wear a hijab. Now if these feminists were forcing women at the march to wear hijabs, then sure OK that's wrong and hypocritical.
/r/MensRights24/01/17 01:10 AM
95

This wasn't just murder, this was premeditated murder preceded by days of brutal torture. And they have no motive other than being offered money - the victim had done nothing to them. How the fuck is she out of jail? She should die in fucking jail. Fuck.
/r/MensRights24/01/17 12:27 AM
4

I get the joke, but it's called whitewashing because of this not because of race.
/r/MensRights24/01/17 12:16 AM
5

Thanks for the support, but speaking as a male MRA I can sympathize with women who marched against Trump. Sure, some of them are crazy man-hating feminists. But the guy talks about women like they are objects to kiss and grab on a whim. He's gross. He reckons TIME magazine's "person of the year" award should be changed back to "man of the year". Dude needs to keel over and die already. Also this poster is still bullshit. No child support? What about men who are left with the kid and the mum runs…
/r/MensRights23/01/17 09:59 AM
1

I mean it's virtually impossible for a man to commit paternity fraud unless he deliberately swaps babies at a hospital. Women always know whether their kids are biologically theirs or not.
/r/MensRights23/01/17 09:55 AM
2

That's sexual assault. Paternity fraud is when the kid isn't your biological child but someone (usually the mother) tricks you into thinking it is. A woman always knows whether a kid is biologically her child or not, so it's virtually impossible for women to be victims of this kind of fraud. I mean there might be a one-in-a-billion case of someone deliberately swapping babies at a hospital. But that's it.
/r/MensRights23/01/17 09:50 AM
1

You should have seen /r/zelda for a couple of days after this trailer came out.
/r/MensRights23/01/17 09:47 AM
0

We should take everything the Daily Fail says with a truckload of salt, since they've shown multiple times that they have no journalistic integrity. But that doesn't stop them from being right occasionally.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 03:01 AM
1

Republicans do that just as much. It's called politics, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights20/01/17 02:12 PM
3

The best statistics are based on information that's verifiable, or at least has a source. Even when they are based on anecdotes or personal accounts, it's typically done with proper sampling techniques etc.
/r/MensRights18/01/17 12:47 AM
2

Ah, my bad then.
/r/MensRights17/01/17 04:35 AM
3

De-segregating prisons is a terrible idea. For starters there's a massive risk of rape. Currently you're looking at prison rape coming from gay/bi guys and straight guys on a power trip. Or from guards/staff. If you mix genders, you're massively increasing the population at risk of rape (many more small weak people mixed in with stronger people) and massively increasing the pool of potential rapists by including a bunch of rapey straight guys who otherwise had no targets in with women. Obviously…
/r/MensRights17/01/17 01:56 AM
18

Can't be just a fucked up bad person. Nope, she was mentally ill She can be both. My mother had severe post natal depression and never dumped me in a bin. The least she could have done is drop it off somewhere it would be cared for.
/r/MensRights17/01/17 01:54 AM
7

Accusing all white guys of being Trump supporters is exactly the kind of thing that turns people into Trump supporters. FFS.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 01:00 AM
2

That sort of logic is too common yeah. But regardless, RationalWiki is super biased.
/r/MensRights12/01/17 01:50 AM
11

What's the big deal? Yeah, it's targeted towards women. It would be better if it said something like "we will help you no matter your gender". But poster doesn't portray men as animals. It doesn't mention men or women at all. Date rape happens. Acknowledging that fact does not mean you are demonizing men. The bar just needs a reminder that sexual violence affects men too. If a man goes to this bar and orders an 'angel shot' and the bartenders laugh at him - that's the time to get outraged. Hell,…
/r/MensRights10/01/17 07:56 AM
2

That's fine, but it isn't what happened here - the bartender sold a drink to some guy who was apparently not that drunk and then the guy gave the drink to the girl on her way out of the bar.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 01:56 AM
6

I could understand if they went after the bartender for serving drinks to someone who was sloshed. He has a responsibility to sell alcohol responsibly. But: That's not what happened - it was another patron buying her a drink. Even then, it's totally unrelated to her drink driving, which is 100% on her and no one else.
/r/MensRights08/01/17 04:10 PM
1

It's not perjury to lie in a kangaroo court that has no legal power (just the power to ruin your reputation and education). She should be charged with filing a false police report, though, yeah.
/r/MensRights07/01/17 04:46 AM
8

This is actually one of the better posters I've seen from feminists because it cites one of the real reasons for the gap in avg full time earnings: women choose to work different jobs to men. Now of course one of the reasons for those choices is sexism/gender roles in society, but normally they just pretend that it's evil men deliberately underpaying them out of pure misogyny. That happens of course, but it's illegal and extremely rare. Edit: on -> one
/r/MensRights06/01/17 04:07 PM
1

What? Newspapers are dominated by the right wing. Daily/Sunday Telegraph, Courier Mail, Herald Sun and The Australian are all right wing. Only The Age and SMH are center-left. Most of the full-on lefty media is on TV/internet instead of papers.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 12:57 AM
2

Just to clarify, The Australian isn't our official national newspaper or anything like that. It's just a popular newspaper which can be found in most parts of the country.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 01:34 PM
3

Must have been all the X-rays in the first strip.
/r/MensRights02/01/17 07:49 PM
12

I despise Trump but by turning him into a cartoon comic book supervillian they only make themselves look more ridiculous.
/r/MensRights02/01/17 07:49 PM
-3

I can't come up with any counter-argument at all to that guy's well-thought out post, so I'm just going to call him a retard
/r/MensRights20/12/16 09:15 AM
0

If you up cuckold porn these days, it's mostly black men screwing "white wives". It's a weird and obscure fetish but it's definitely a thing and definitely has a racial component.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 09:13 AM
-15

If you look up cuckold porn (or even the cuckold subreddit here), it's mostly black men screwing "white wives". It's a weird fetish yes, but definitely a thing and there's definitely a racial component.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 09:10 AM
1

In this case it may actually have been accurate for once. But I agree with you, it's a dumb insult thrown around primarily by alt right idiots, 4channers and edgelords.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 09:08 AM
0

"From Tammy Hughes", and here I though it was the patriarchy telling men not to cry. Some feminists demonize men as the oppressors, but in actual feminist patriarchy theory it's perfectly possible for women to hold sexist patriarchal views. It's not a literal patriarchy they are talking about as in a group of men. It's this nebulous concept of sexist views which women can also hold. Of course patriarchy theory falls down in other ways, but yeah.
/r/MensRights13/12/16 11:30 AM
1

Damn, you're right. Although it's rarely ever going to matter since this only applies to primary and secondary schools, and almost everyone has left secondary school by the time they turn 18. I suspect there's a reason they specifically didn't include tertiary education here. But fair enough.
/r/MensRights10/12/16 12:12 AM
1

Both cases here involved sex between an adult and a minor. In both cases, the younger party had sex voluntarily. In both cases, the younger party was not able to give actual valid consent either due to the 5 year age gap between 14 and 19, or due to the power imbalance between a teacher and minor student. The age of consent for sex between a teacher and student is 18, which is why she was charged. Don't accuse me of making shit up when it's you that is desperately trying to rationalize the sexis…
/r/MensRights09/12/16 04:13 PM
2

That's up for debate. A 14 year old can have sex voluntarily, but whether they can give informed consent to sex is another matter entirely.
/r/MensRights09/12/16 08:30 AM
1

Spain was 13 before which is just far too young. The move to 16 was a good thing. That's not relevant to minors having sex with teachers, which is still statutory rape in many areas if you're under 18.
/r/MensRights09/12/16 08:25 AM
1

In the USA, since 2005, it's been illegal to execute someone for a crime they committed whilst they were under 18. Of course they should be executing anyone at all, but yeah.
/r/MensRights09/12/16 08:23 AM
1

"Inappropriate relationship" is actually the right term to this case No. The correct term in both cases is statutory rape. the age of consent is Texas is 17 No it isn't, if you are having sex with your teacher. Your comment is a perfect example of the sexist double standard that this post is trying to shine a light on.
/r/MensRights09/12/16 08:20 AM
2

Some more studies regarding men being sentenced more harshly for the same crimes: http://fcx.sagepub.com/content/7/2/146.short http://cjp.sagepub.com/content/25/2/242.full.pdf+html Also, feminists often like to cite a study done in Middlesex county, Massachusetts which says that when men actually tried to get sole custody of their children, they got it more often than women. However that study was done over 30 years ago, draws on even older data, and only applies to Massacheusetts law. It can't …
/r/MensRights08/12/16 07:13 PM
1

Definitely agree.
/r/MensRights04/12/16 10:10 PM
9

In fairness, a lot of the reason for this is not that women are inherently lazy or unintelligent, it's because historically most of the "doing" was manual labour which women simply aren't as good at. Plus someone has to raise the children, so women were busy doing that. Plus, you can't risk valuable uteruses in dangerous, strenous labour (other than, you know, labour labour).
/r/MensRights04/12/16 01:39 PM
2

Affirmative action may be unfair and sexist but it's hardly communist.
/r/MensRights04/12/16 05:19 AM
0

The comments here are ridiculous. Feminists are blamed for literally everything, even when nothing in the article mentions feminism of women's rights or a bogus statistic or any feminist person. I'm all for blaming feminists when a feminist actually does/says something bad.
/r/MensRights04/12/16 05:15 AM
2

Feminists can be stupid but they are not the boogeyman. They are not they illuminati. They are not behind every bad sexist thing ever.
/r/MensRights04/12/16 04:55 AM
1

You realise there is more options than a) chauvanistic feminist, b) sexually repressed social conservative, or c) egalitarian ?
/r/MensRights04/12/16 12:37 AM
10

Nothing in the article suggested these girls or their teachers were feminists. Was there a sexist double-standard at play? Yes. The "female sexuality is non-threatening and can't hurt men/boys" stereotype. Which feminists haven't done a lot to dispel. But I think that's the furthest extent to which we can blame feminism without more info.
/r/MensRights03/12/16 12:15 PM
10

How many of the men skewing this are fly-in-fly-out workers who don't actually live in WA, though?
/r/MensRights02/12/16 09:37 AM
1

I'd be inclined to agree. But then I'm not a famous hollywood actor/actress and don't know any, while she is and does.
/r/MensRights02/12/16 09:35 AM
3

I hear you. Despite being horrible, Cersei is also sympathetic in many ways. I also feel sorry for Robert Baratheon though. As far as he knew the Mad King and Rhaegar kidnapped his betrothed, whom he loved. Unbeknownst to him she didn't love him back. The Mad King was also a terrible ruler by this stage, and the people of westeros were suffering. However the war was shortened due to Tywin switching sides. Robert's beloved died, and he was essentially forced into a marriage with Tywin's daughter …
/r/MensRights02/12/16 07:06 AM
5

This is why we have close-in-age exceptions to statutory rape laws in many jurisdictions (should be all), and why similar exceptions should exist for sexting (but usually don't).
/r/MensRights01/12/16 07:11 AM
2

China would love to incarcerate as many people as the US does, they just don't have the resources to do so. Also they execute far more people every year than the US - in the thousands. Though the US is still one of the top executors.
/r/MensRights01/12/16 07:10 AM
5

Homophobia was all about policing men's sexuality, because men weren't supposed to have sex, except when it could be regulated by a woman, in marriage. Agreed. However it should be noted that similar regulations were placed on women/girls, who were shamed for having sex with males outside of marriage in an effort to control their sexuality and ensure that men's children were their own etc. But lesbians didn't cop as much shit as gays because it was seen as non-threatening (dicks are scary and me…
/r/MensRights30/11/16 04:55 PM
53

Do you mean she walked as in she was convicted but didn't get jail time? Like, she got a pussy pass? Or you mean she walked as in she was acquitted / found not guilty (in which case that's not the same thing as a convicted male rapist)? Edit: According to /u/Mike377774774 the post was about a female nurse who allegedly raped a patient and eventually lost her job. But she was never arrested or charged, and even kept her nursing license.
/r/MensRights23/11/16 03:10 PM
3

the 1/3 statistic Ah yes, the fact that 1/3 victims of domestic violence are male. That's the statistic they talked about. ...right guys?
/r/MensRights23/11/16 03:06 PM
1

That's all baseless speculation and outrage-bait. Why don't we wait and see what actually happens?
/r/MensRights21/11/16 10:06 AM
6

Domestic violence order and apprehended violence order. Designed to get domestic abusers and assaulter to leave people alone, but sometimes misused by false accusers.
/r/MensRights17/11/16 12:08 PM
1

I know from personal experience that I don't have the right to refuse to date a woman. You can refuse to date any lady you like. The justice system goes easy on women sometimes, which can sometimes include crazy women who react badly to being rejected, but there's nothing specific about men not being able to refuse women. You're right about the Queensland rape law though. Those I regard as unconscionable. This I'd put in the silly basket. Let's have a look at the result of Australia not having m…
/r/MensRights17/11/16 07:45 AM
2

That doesn't even make sense. If a woman takes off her bikini bottom, she is wilfully exposing her genitals. No ifs or buts (well maybe one butt).
/r/MensRights17/11/16 07:41 AM
1

Actually they're about the same. Canada is perhaps a few percentage points more but the difference is minimal.
/r/MensRights13/11/16 12:44 AM
-3

Canada's majority population makes up 80% of the total population. Only if you count French-speaking Quebecois as part of the majority in Canada (people who speak a different language, have a different culture and often threaten to break away and form a separate country). So that is to say, you shouldn't count them. If you're gonna count them as part of Canada's majority, you might as well count Spanish-speaking hispanic white people as part of the US majority.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 10:11 AM
1

I don't like Lena Dunham the dirty liar anymore than you guys, but this is getting pretty far removed from actual men's rights issues.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 09:19 AM
3

I wonder if the child rapist mother will get custody of the child.
/r/PussyPass08/11/16 11:36 AM
4

I'm not prepared to spend much time talking about pinpricks of the labia. Who would be? The World Health Organization, for one. Also numerous governments across the world which have specifically outlawed the practice, resulting in prosecutions against the offenders (in that case doctors had to examine the children and were not able to rule out Type IV or Type I, which combined with testimony from the children and the statements of the accused, resulted in a conviction). FGM has a well understood…
/r/MensRights08/10/16 07:12 AM
3

clitoroplexy Clearly, clitoridectomy is more harmful than male circumcision. But it is only one form of FGM. There are many forms of FGM which are objectively less harmful than MGM, yet they are still illegal because we reason that females' right to bodily integrity is more important than a parent's right practice their religion, or to have cosmetic surgery performed on their children. Boys do not have the same protection, simply because they are boys and because circumcision is a tradition in a…
/r/MensRights08/10/16 07:03 AM
5

It's hilariously stupid because an SJW might post in a place like /r/kotakuinaction (to argue against the majority), then get banned from somewhere like SRS where their views would actually be more welcome.
/r/MensRights08/10/16 04:39 AM
8

2) The slut-shaming of Carol and Tommy. Because as we all know, slut shaming didn't exist in 80's American high schools. Honestly I think it's more sexist against women to try and whitewash history and pretend misogyny didn't exist in the past. Because it fucking did. This reminds me of the Polygon review where the author criticized The Witcher 3 for having violence against women and misogynist characters, and for not having enough non-white characters. TW3 is based heavily on medieval Poland, a…
/r/MensRights03/10/16 03:24 AM
1

Links to other subreddits must use NP format ("np" in place of "www"). Not that it really stops much brigading.
/r/MensRights01/10/16 08:20 AM
23

Funny but not really mensrights related.
/r/MensRights30/09/16 05:00 AM
1

Granted, they have to make ladies of themselves. That feel when I walk into a store with an unkempt beard, body odour, wearing a muddy tank top, ripped jean shorts and thongs, and they call me "sir".
/r/MensRights26/09/16 02:50 PM
2

/r/bigdickproblems /r/fitness/ /r/introvert/ /r/socialskills /r/seduction
/r/MensRights24/09/16 07:26 AM
1

Yup. Probably should have just said it.
/r/MensRights21/09/16 11:53 AM
3

They would, but they probably shouldn't. Especially if the 14 year old looks really mature - passable for 18.
/r/MensRights21/09/16 08:46 AM
1

There is absolutely nothing in there about radicals. It says that refugees are vetted by the FBI, NCC, DHS. Do you think those agencies are knowingly letting in dangerous radicals? So far nothing you mentioned is listed as being a disqualification of entry. Not specifically no. The infographic mentions "connections to known bad actors". Meaning terrorist organizations, hostile foreign governments etc.
/r/MensRights21/09/16 07:28 AM
1

OK well in that case you're missing the point that the base logic behind it is fallacious whether we are talking about 10% or 0.1%, men, women, muslims etc. Yes I'm fine with letting in tens of thousands* of refugees. That is, asylum seekers who have been vetted and determined to be refugees. Of course, we can't stop there - you also have to have social programs to help people integrate etc. I also support strong border controls, since you can't detain and check people's story without border con…
/r/MensRights21/09/16 07:14 AM
1

There's definitely a double standard there.
/r/MensRights21/09/16 06:40 AM
1

Are you really implying all muslim immigrants are violent extremists? Or that it's not possible to screen immigrants for radicalism?
/r/MensRights21/09/16 06:39 AM
1

Pew polls aren't the most reliable in the world, but even if we take them at face value we can see that extremism and opinions vary greatly from region to region. Sharia also means different things to different Muslims, it's not something that's set in stone across the board. Muslims definitely do tend to be more conservative than westerners though, and homophobia and sexism are problems we absolutely have to contend with even outside of radicalism. I'd say the US doesn't do so badly with Muslim…
/r/MensRights21/09/16 06:36 AM
3

No, I don't agree with your view on refugees. But /r/mensrights isn't the place for partisan arguments. My point was simply that the poison M&M's argument is irrational regardless of what broad group you're trying to justify discrimination against, whether it be men, or women, or muslims or asylum seekers. I can't imagine what kind of mental gymnastics are required to believe that this fallacious argument is only OK when it's being used to support your particular viewpoint. Edit: Here's Christin…
/r/MensRights21/09/16 06:20 AM
0

The argument makes no sense, regardless of what policy/ideology it's being used to support. It's the logic of bigots, as Christina Hoff Sommers said.
/r/MensRights21/09/16 06:03 AM
2

I don't have a problem with fit people fighting and unfit people doing support work. It's just biology that men are stronger and larger on average, but there will always be a lot of weaker men better suited for support work. Somebody has to drive the trucks, fix the planes etc. For every combat soldier there's what, 3 support personnel? More? Of course it would be nicer if there was no conscription to start with. Getting conscripted to fight in some foreign war of aggression is bullshit.
/r/MensRights21/09/16 05:16 AM
4

Government's ability to distinguish bad from good Skittles is pretty much non-existent. Some asylum seekers clearly fall into the "dangerous assholes" or "clearly just economic migrants" categories. Some clearly fall into the "wow this person is obviously a real refugee and needs help" category. Many people fall in the middle. But putting effort into vetting asylum seekers is way, waaay better than having no vetting system and just letting everyone in or keeping everyone out.
/r/MensRights21/09/16 12:13 AM
3

Ah, well that's arguably sexual harrassment, depending on the context she was sending the nudes in. But certainly charging a teen with CP charges for giving out nudes of them-self is retarded.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 04:50 PM
9

If a man inflicts abuse on another man, that doesn't make the latter any less of a victim. I remember hearing an argument like this from someone once. Person: Men are not oppressed. Me: I wouldn't say oppressed, but men have gendered problems. Men make up 90% of homicide victims. Person: But most of them are murdered by other men. Me: So? I guess what they're trying to get at is that women are not systematically abusing men in that case. And they're right (though the reason men are homicide vict…
/r/MensRights16/09/16 12:46 PM
3

Why do you feel good? Because we feel sexy. Who would be finding you sexy? Well, uh... men I guess. So you're doing it for men. ...Shit. Of course there are other reasons. Social pressure to look nice, emulating others in your social circle, emulating the 'ideal woman' etc. Or a desire to seem more powerful by being taller. And just because someone wants to feel sexy doesn't mean they want to have sex with everyone who finds them attractive/at all. But in many cases it comes back in whole or in …
/r/MensRights16/09/16 12:10 PM
1

That may be one reason, but it can't be the whole reason because homosexuality of various forms was normalized in certain societies.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 12:07 PM
3

Romans 1:26-27 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. Most scholars believe this refers to female homosexuality. But even here, the focus seems to be on how bad male homosexuality is and ho…
/r/MensRights16/09/16 11:54 AM
5

See here: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/530ld5/why_is_it_more_acceptable_for_women_to_explore/d7p37cx I'm not a lawyer, but I'm 99% sure this is the case. Still a joke, though.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 11:44 AM
5

A recent French woman was able to successfully sue her husband for lack of sex during their marriage. This is because France still has at fault divorce. If you and your spouse jointly file for divorce, then it's all fine and you can both go your separate ways. But if you want a divorce and your spouse isn't cooperating, then you are forced to file for an at fault divorce. You now have to prove that the other person did something wrong to cause the breakup, after which the court will grant your d…
/r/MensRights16/09/16 11:37 AM
2

It also helps protect against penile cancer and genital warts. And it stop men from spreading HPV to women where it causes cervical cancer. Preventing penile cancer is one of the arguments people use to try and justify circumcision of non-consenting boy children. It was never a good argument (because penile cancer is rare and only found in older men) but with the advent of the HPV vaccine it really falls down.
/r/MensRights14/09/16 09:00 AM
18

This is a huge red flag. You are at risk of domestic violence. This sort of violent, threatening talk is in itself abuse. Sure, sometimes people say shit like this and never act on it, but can you take that chance? If she is bigger and stronger than you, she might be able to seriously hurt you in a fight. Also in some places if you two get into a fight, you could get arrested as the aggressor because you are a male. The fact that she was amused as she said it is also a big no no. If I ever got a…
/r/MensRights14/09/16 08:31 AM
0

By saying: These sort of advances sometimes come from troubled kids who are not well adjusted. I did not mean to imply: No 13-14 year old boy would pursue sex with an older person unless they were not well adjusted. I can see how my language may not have been clear, so I'll make it simpler: Some T are S Not all S are T. Not all T are S. Where T is troubled kids, and S is kids who pursue sex with adults.
/r/MensRights14/09/16 05:59 AM
11

It was probably the woman's barrister trying to play the woman card. We shouldn't be angry at the barrister who is just doing their job using every possible tactic to defend their client. Rather, we should be angry that we live in a society where the barrister thought there was a chance that bullshit might work.
/r/MensRights13/09/16 12:14 AM
10

I think what Badger is trying to say is that it's possible it was the boy pushing for the sex. These sort of advances sometimes come from troubled kids who are not well adjusted. This can and does also happen when genders are reversed. If that's the case, it means she probably wasn't grooming him prior to the relationship, which is what the judge said. However the appropriate response when this happens is to tell the kid no and educate them about consent and healthy relationships. Instead this w…
/r/MensRights13/09/16 12:05 AM
3

Mate, do you have to be such a homophobic cunt? There's literally gay MRAs commenting in this thread.
/r/MensRights12/09/16 06:02 PM
4

Cuba has a good healthcare system compared to other Carribbean countries, and compared to other poor underdeveloped countries. But it's not really good compared to developed countries, and far from the "best in the world". The main thing is that it's universal and single-payer, and it's available to virtually all Cubans. The quality of care is also decent as is the availability of drugs. That's in contrast to America where tens of thousands of people have died due to lack of health insurance cov…
/r/MensRights12/09/16 05:55 PM
2

Depends on the feminist. There's a big variety.
/r/MensRights11/09/16 11:47 AM
1

Goddamnit. I really wanted to like her because she was funny. Now it turns out she's a lying asshole.
/r/MensRights08/09/16 05:13 AM
1

In Lawrence v Texas, all sodomy laws across the US were ruled unconstitutional. They cannot be legally enforced. But yeah, the US isn't the whole world.
/r/MensRights07/09/16 01:58 PM
1

This is He-Man Now admittedly, the people who created He-Man did the same thing to He-Man's female equivalent, She-Ra. http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/4/49448/1451361-shera_wallpaper_shera.jpg
/r/MensRights07/09/16 06:15 AM
1

Er, how do you know the dude was a SJW?
/r/MensRights04/09/16 02:07 AM
7

All I can think is Mr. Meeseeks.
/r/MensRights03/09/16 06:30 AM
1

So by that argument, we should make abortion illegal and force women to carry children to term ... because they chose to have sex? I don't think that's a very good argument - punishing people because they chose to have sex. Or do you just think that you should be able to abandon your child with zero repercussions? Women can do this. They can give a child up for adoption (in many cases without the knowledge or consent of the father). Are you saying this should not be allowed?
/r/MensRights31/08/16 05:10 AM
6

Hopefully not, because men consenting to abortions is unjustifiable regardless of which camp you're in. If the fetus has a right to life (pro life) then it's not OK to abort it unless the mother's life is in danger, and even then the man shouldn't get a say in her life-saving medical decisions. If the fetus has no right to life (pro choice) then it's the woman's choice because it's her body.
/r/MensRights31/08/16 05:01 AM
21

This comment is pretty much ripe for being taken completely out of context on some Tumblr blog to show how the evil MRAs are all pro-life abortion clinic protestors or whatever.
/r/MensRights31/08/16 01:10 AM
1

he constant message throughout Western culture that they 'want equality', which in their minds means 'men suck, throw rocks at them'. For a lot of feminists and women, they think this way yeah. Since men these days are constantly told that being 'domineering' and 'confident' are being abusive and assholes I mean, to me, the word domineering has negative connotations but confidence does not. It's no secret that women are attracted to confidence (hell, so are men). 'domineering' and 'confident' ar…
/r/MensRights29/08/16 06:35 PM
0

Not every post is bait to make the MRM look bad. Jeez. You can see the previous submission for this here, where the title makes clear OP's views on the subject: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5057zc/while_discussing_the_plot_of_gillian_flynns_gone/ Not sure why this was submitted twice, perhaps the original was hidden due to the title? IDK. And frankly, there is the odd bit of (anti-female) sexism in comment threads here. Most of the really bad stuff gets heavily downvoted, but sti…
/r/MensRights29/08/16 06:28 PM
2

I would say free tests which are standard practice but the prospective father can opt out if he wishes. I don't like the idea of forcing men to give up their and their kid's DNA.
/r/MensRights29/08/16 04:45 PM
3

This doesn't illustrate that rape doesn't suck, it illustrates that people sometimes make bad jokes.
/r/MensRights29/08/16 04:22 PM
7

The inability of the judicial system to put a stop to these abuses even a half-decade later. For colleges, the threat of losing federal funding will always be greater than the threat of having to compensate a few wronged students. This won't stop until someone successfully sues the government themselves for forcing colleges into this.
/r/MensRights29/08/16 03:17 PM
9

and if your husband was a wife-beating drunk asshole, there was no recourse. Bullshit, if your husband beat you, you could get every other man in your vicinity to beat him. Quite often that simply was not the case. now, tell me what a man could do if his wife beat him? Zip. Zilch. Nada.
/r/MensRights28/08/16 11:58 PM
10

Not even sewing up crotches and cutting of clits. Those are the extreme forms of FGM. Just making a small nick on a baby girl's genitals with the tip of the scalpel is illegal and will get you jail time. But apparently male circumcision which is much more severe than that is totally fine.
/r/MensRights28/08/16 02:46 AM
1

No, what's shitty is people being racist or sexist or otherwise bigoted (especially based on spurious information like that woman who made the comments about male carers). You don't get to be an asshole and then be free from criticism.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 04:16 PM
1

Fair point that it's misleading. I guess it depends on the exact nature of the work and where it occurs.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 03:52 PM
0

I thought it would have been obvious that I pulled those numbers out to illustrate my point. They're not actual statistics I drew from real crime data. The reality here is that with the very small risk of being victimised by say, a black person or a man; versus the extremely small risk of being victimised by a white person or a woman; there's just no way to justify discriminatory treatment (which must then in turn be called out as unacceptable bigotry). This reasoning is so bad that I wonder if …
/r/MensRights27/08/16 03:41 PM
0

You don't need to be ashamed of being French just because some other people, who happen to be French, did something bad/stupid. <insert male, female, white, black, muslim, christian, atheist etc in place of French>
/r/MensRights27/08/16 02:26 PM
2

I think one of the local bans was written like that (not sure which city) but in effect this is targeted only at muslims. Funny part is the lady in that picture wasn't even in a burkini. Just a brown-skinned woman in a sleeveless shirt, a cardigan, swim tights and a scarf.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 02:25 PM
3

Dude don't be ridiculous. Most feminists, most leftists, most critics of the anti-immigration movement ... fuck, most people do not support terrorism and make up such bullshit.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 02:22 PM
3

If you see a strange man in a dark alley, then you're taking a lot more into account than just the person's gender such as the time of day, the location, the lighting level, whether you know the person etc.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 12:23 PM
1

I know that. You disagree? With what part?
/r/MensRights27/08/16 05:37 AM
2

It's a good thing seatbelts aren't people who can suffer from racism and sexism, then.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 05:04 AM
7

It's not even about the ratio, it's about the incidence of male child molestor carers, which I imagine would be very low. For instance it's true that black people are more likely to commit murder than white people. But the incidence of murderers is so low to start with that it makes no sense to avoid broad groups of people because they might murder you (thus doing so is racism or misandry). Another way to put it is 0.01 versus 0.001 - The former number is 10x bigger than the latter, but both num…
/r/MensRights27/08/16 04:42 AM
11

You can make decent statistical inferrences with a sample size as small as 30 (assuming IRS). The more the better, though. I still doubt that stats back her up.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 04:38 AM
3

Thankyou, I was wondering what the hell this was about. What a misandrist cunt.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 04:37 AM
9

Overall, you're not wrong. But there's just no need to bring this up except maybe when talking about workplace accidents / men's health. Everyone knows men are generally stronger than women. If women are doing lettuce packaging then whatever, good for them. By the way, I personally know women who did cherry and pumpkin picking, as well as harvest work (tractor and truck driving) and cotton sorting.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 04:35 AM
47

And they've elected to not be a safe space and to not restrict free speech. Good for them. Of course any university (private or public) that restricts free speech heavily loses a lot of it's credibility.
/r/MensRights26/08/16 06:35 AM
138

Private clubs and (naturally) support groups can be safe spaces. University classes/lectures and public spaces are not safe spaces and cannot be without restricting freedom of speech.
/r/MensRights26/08/16 05:47 AM
1

It's rape yeah. But it would have been even worse if she was physically forcing him against his will. So a distinction needs to be made. So you could have something like sex with a child under 16, and then forced sex with a child under 18.
/r/MensRights24/08/16 04:16 PM
3

Well it depends on your country. It varies between about 70-80% in the west.
/r/MensRights24/08/16 06:41 AM
-1

Seriously? "Cuck" got 7 upvotes? Jesus Christ. I don't agree with his post either but have some fucking class.
/r/MensRights22/08/16 06:09 PM
1

Absolutely.
/r/MensRights22/08/16 03:49 PM
-5

Women have gendered issues that disproportionately affect them. Just not 77 times as much...
/r/MensRights22/08/16 11:35 AM
6

Check out the poster on the left - stop traffickers controlling you (traditionally seen as a female issue). Looks like they're legit.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 04:34 AM
2

TBH I'm in favour of just making all bathrooms unisex. I don't really care if the loud diarrhoea sounds coming from the next stall are made by a male or female butt - it's still stinky and awkward either way.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 06:07 AM
1

Why not just add a unisex bathroom? Also good for trans people. Many places even have a unisex disabled bathroom these days.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 06:05 AM
2

The shirt was definitely inappropriate. The reaction of online feminist bullies, however, was disgusting and inexscusable.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 04:58 AM
2

Man made isn't a gendered term for fuck's sake... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_(word)
/r/MensRights19/08/16 08:04 AM
1

If an investigation has not started yet, then you're not tampering evidence just deleting your own files which is generally your right. Some kinds of records legally must be kept for 7 years, however. Broadly, this lawyer is just doing his/her job and giving good advice. We should all hope that our lawyers do their jobs well and give us all good advice. Even those in the wrong deserve good legal advice.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 01:59 AM
13

The intended audience here is not men in general, but the community of misandrists and anti-white racists on Tumblr and those who might have read their hateful garbage.
/r/MensRights16/08/16 10:05 AM
4

It sounds racist and sexist because it is racist and sexist.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 11:21 AM
-5

This is just surface-level identity politics. It's spawned by an insidious desire to turn society in on itself and decimate white majority populations; Lmao what. Look I'm all for applying 18C equally to protect white people as well as minorities (or even better, ammending 18C to take out the bit where it's illegal to "cause offense", since nobody has the "right to not be offended" ... that's ridiculous). And you have a couple of decent points (moral relativism is bullshit, "white male" being us…
/r/MensRights15/08/16 10:44 AM
5

Not only does Gawker harrass people and post their private sex tapes online, they're hipocrites about it. They were raising a big stink about the fappening (tons of female celebrities' private sex tapes and pics leaked by hackers) but apparently it's OK when it happens to a male celeb.
/r/MensRights14/08/16 08:14 AM
2

You got downvoted but you may be right given that still 9h later no one has posted a source for the claim.
/r/MensRights14/08/16 02:02 AM
14

Do you have any source for feminist organizations training judges on how to handle DV, divorce and rape cases?
/r/MensRights13/08/16 06:00 PM
69

Julie Bindel wants that. The Guardian is giving this misandrist shit of a woman a voice, which is almost as bad.
/r/MensRights13/08/16 05:58 PM
3

It's the non-consensual and or 'not medically necessary' part that makes it mutilation. If a doctor cuts off my arm to save my life, that's a medical procedure. If I cut off a child's arm because I think it looks cool or because God told me to, then that's mutilation.
/r/MensRights13/08/16 04:08 PM
3

If this is supposed to be satire, then it's pretty shit satire.
/r/MensRights13/08/16 09:18 AM
3

Um, this is hardly surprising. Of course sexual comments and jokes are more common than sexual assault and stalking.
/r/MensRights13/08/16 08:53 AM
8

No doubt White Ribbon and similar organizations will have a whinge, but it's good to see male victims are getting some support. Coincides with stories like this: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/domestic-violence-not-just-a-female-problem-more-than-10000-males-across-nsw-affected/news-story/c623f4a389bcbafd9c87147f156f9712 (I don't like Murdoch media, but beggars can't be choosers when it comes to reporting on male issues). On a separate note, minor victims (of both genders) also need s…
/r/MensRights12/08/16 11:23 AM
4

Exactly. This happened because the victim was a man and the perp (at time of being tried) was a woman.
/r/MensRights12/08/16 04:19 AM
3

If only I could deport everyone I disagree with. We would be left a proud nation, population: 1.
/r/MensRights11/08/16 04:55 PM
2

Yeah fair point.
/r/MensRights11/08/16 03:36 PM
2

OP's title specifically compares this with how (some) women react to objectification. It's trying to point out a double-standard. I don't think he was trying to criticize objectification overall.
/r/MensRights11/08/16 03:25 PM
1

People have choices, but those choices are influenced by the environment around them. So in this case the choice isn't really "Do I want this or not?" it's "Do I want this, and if not... am I prepared to make a scene on TV and make my team look bad". I wouldn't say this is sexual assault... just that it's very inappropriate in the same way it's inappropriate if you hit on a waitress (whose job is to be nice to you, and who in some countries is reliant on your tips to make a living) or when your …
/r/MensRights11/08/16 08:34 AM
1

Relevant username for /u/explain_the_funny
/r/MensRights11/08/16 08:30 AM
1

Aren't gyms and swimming pools sometimes open to the public and sometimes have women-only or men-only hours? Admittedly swimming pools are generally government run not privately owned like the gold course.
/r/MensRights10/08/16 03:09 AM
3

If we are going to ban completely unhelpful, divisive, misogynist posts like the one OP made, then we need to be upfront about it. Personally I'm for free speech even if it means allowing morons like OP to say stupid, offensive things. But either way it needs to be made clear what the policy is.
/r/MensRights09/08/16 12:18 PM
9

Read the end of the paragraph: Information and support is also available to men who have experienced family and domestic violence Though given their attitude, I wouldn't expect much real support for victims. They might just assume you're a perp.
/r/MensRights09/08/16 05:40 AM
2

You don't need to have an example for it to be valid. In fact having an example without statistics is worse than the reverse, because one example doesn't say anything about the broader situation other than the instance is non-zero. The article was still sloppy journalism, of course, but do we really expect any sort of quality from the Mail? They are a garbage rag.
/r/MensRights08/08/16 11:53 AM
5

5 years old committing crime Pick one.
/r/MensRights08/08/16 11:51 AM
309

They have a basic understanding they just don't give a shit because the kind of women who read Cosmo would never pick up on how terrible it is and will therefore continue to buy in spite (or rather due to) the terrible quality.
/r/MensRights07/08/16 04:09 PM
19

That's disgusting. The cops should be aware that a lot of abuse is mutual, sure. That possibly should be considered when they get called out to a domestic situation. But arresting you due to your gender and asking what you did to "deserve it" is just fucking atrocious.
/r/MensRights04/08/16 11:28 PM
16

OK a few things: Get a lawyer. The police are allowed to lie to you about most things. The police and public prosecutors are not trying to help, they are trying to build a case against you. Anything you say to them will be twisted to make you look like an abuser. Do NOT talk to police without your lawyer present (other than giving your name and address). Do not consent to come down to the station. This is serious. If you are convicted of domestic violence, you could get a criminal record or even…
/r/MensRights03/08/16 05:56 AM
-4

Harvard Dean wasn't wrong, and shouldn't have gotten canned, but he was also perpetuating the issue by saying that. That is to say, there is probably some biological factor to why women and men choose certain careers, but we hardly need to make a big song and dance about it since we can't change biology. However at the same time some of it is social, and we can change the social aspect of it, and having authority figures talk about the biological difference hurts this part of the issue. But yes …
/r/MensRights01/08/16 04:44 AM
2

The death penalty is wrong on principle, but she should go to jail for life.
/r/MensRights31/07/16 03:18 AM
5

Portion size is actually an interesting issue re: obesity. When eating out, portions are often quite large to satisfy big people, and when a smaller person eats the same portion they're putting on weight. At the family dinner table things tend to be a bit better due to the cook dishing out an appropriate portion for each family member, but how much people eat is still heavily influenced by things like plate size (which will generally be the same set of plates in a house) since people have a desi…
/r/MensRights31/07/16 03:10 AM
6

TBF that sounds like a great time. I fucking love me some ice cream. Just... not ... every day.
/r/MensRights31/07/16 03:05 AM
1

The Guardian has run stories on male suicide before, in spite of their heavy feminist bias. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/oct/31/social-media-campaign-male-suicide https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/16/scotlands-drive-to-reduce-male-suicides https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/09/highest-australian-suicide-rate-in-13-years-driven-by-men-aged-40-to-44
/r/MensRights30/07/16 02:28 AM
7

This is a tough issue. Legally speaking, the men would not have been doing anything wrong by hiring prostitutes: Prostitution -both buying and selling- and brothels are legal and regulated in New Zealand (rest of the world please take note, particularly the US with it's stupid full ban*, or the "nordic model" which criminalizes men). However these guys were disabled enough that they were basically permanently semi-institutionalised. This raises the question of whether people (whether prostitutes…
/r/MensRights28/07/16 11:53 AM
10

Yeah, those westernized countries like Thailand, Ukraine and Tajikistan! Jesus not everything is 100% due to feminists. Sure it could be argued that toxic feminism has contributed to male suicide rates (or at the very least that they conveniently ignore the issue) and there might be some correlation between western feminist countries and male suicide, but feminism is not the boogeyman ffs.
/r/MensRights26/07/16 11:30 AM
40

This issue isn't unique to Canada. My country (Australia) has the same problem. As does the US. And the UK. And France, Spain, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, China, Russia, Brazil, Argentina, Kazakhstan... In fact male suicides outnumber female suicides in almost every country in the world: rich and poor, large population and small, whether they are "pro-feminist" or oppress women.
/r/MensRights26/07/16 10:03 AM
3

I realise this is just a revenge fantasy on your part, but really that would be lose-lose for Musk. Either he gets arrested for murder/attempted murder, or news gets out that his "unreliable" self-driving cars kill/maimed his wife/ex.
/r/MensRights26/07/16 02:48 AM
11

Transpeople are only a tiny percentage of the population. It seems extremely unlikely that this is a natural case of transgenderism. But even if it is, 11 is far too young to be going on hormone therapy and prepping for surgery. 14ish at the very youngest. Genital reassignment surgery on a 11 year old is child abuse on par with FGM. Agreed that the articles are both super biased (both this one and the mail one it's based on), so we can't be sure about what's going on here.
/r/MensRights25/07/16 06:28 AM
28

Games and movies which force the diversity aspect tend to suck, yeah, because the actual art and quality of the movie falls to wayside in favour of pushing an agenda. It's perfectly possible to have a movie with women and minorities (or even about them) which doesn't suck.
/r/MensRights25/07/16 05:16 AM
5

White Ribbon, like any other charity, is entitled to choose what their mission is. That doesn't mean we can't criticize them for their bullshit. Agree apart from that.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 04:21 PM
1

True. Or, those might have genuinely liked it.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 08:16 AM
-6

Seems like some people genuinely enjoyed the film. Pity feminist outlets have manufactured a controversy by screaming about misogyny. Film won't do well regardless of quality if these empty cinemas are any indication.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 11:27 PM
8

It's not really about whether the lady cheated, it's about whether the kid is biologically yours. That's why I included the (admittedly very rare) situation about a baby getting swapped (in which case the mum is raising a kid which isn't biologically hers). There's other situations that don't involve infidelity - like if the woman was raped, or if the couple weren't together when the kid was conceived. We're not the ethical police But you are beholden to an ethical code and have to navigate comp…
/r/MensRights18/07/16 05:35 AM
22

It's a threat to the child's health due to the risk of heritable conditions from the biological father. The child's legal parents (including fathers) are entitled to be informed about the child's health. It's also unethical in a more general sense. At any rate, this is why paternity testing should be mandatory at birth (opt-out). Then you wouldn't have to worry about confidentiality issues, and it would be the father's fault for opting out. we never say anything Are you saying you'd let a woman …
/r/MensRights18/07/16 05:08 AM
16

All of them should be. Everyone deserves to know whether the children they are raising are their biological children. That includes rare cases of women whose babies were accidentally swapped at the hospital.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 04:51 AM
10

Most of the time these things technically apply to men too, but in reality no one ever intended for a man to use it (as demonstrated by the title). It's like a law that technically applies to everyone but in reality it's enforced mostly against poor people, minorities, men etc.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 04:29 AM
4

In fairness, lesbians aren't there to be cute for guys.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 08:14 AM
1

denied equal justice under the law... This happens in Islamic countries too. In fact it's even worse because it's often enshrined in law. Look at apostasy laws in Iran - top punishment for men is execution, top punishment for women is prison.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 05:52 AM
1

It's important to note that Sharia isn't something that is set in stone across the board. Different Muslims have different views on what Sharia is and whether it should be the law of the land, just like different Christians have views on what it means to be a good Christian. The stuff you mentioned absolutely does happen in some places, but it's not the same in all Muslim countries / communities. Now that being said, I'd definitely rather be a man in the west than a woman in Saudi Arabia.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 05:50 AM
1

It may eventually be banned, but yes Jews and Muslims will make quite a fuss I imagine.
/r/MensRights15/07/16 11:54 AM
3

300 million dollars to maintain her lifestyle This is what is wrong with the world. What an entitled piece of shit.
/r/MensRights14/07/16 09:10 AM
3

It wouldn't surprise me if that was the case, but I guess there's no point speculating.
/r/MensRights13/07/16 04:18 PM
51

It might also pick up mentions of "slut shaming" which I imagine would be higher among female twitter users.
/r/MensRights08/07/16 05:29 PM
1

One time I got a weird look from a dude when taking her into the bathroom, but it was probably surprise. Another time when she was a baby at the park I got a scowl from a woman. But really that's about the extent of it. I feel some areas and social groups are far worse about this than others, maybe?
/r/MensRights30/06/16 05:00 PM
4

Raised by a single mother and lacks positive male role models? Had an abusive father and lacks positive male role models? Father was distant and didn't do that kind of stuff with him? Is just a complete moron?
/r/MensRights30/06/16 04:57 PM
2

The downside risk is actually tiny, though. But yeah the sexist reporting is the issue. In a just world neither gender would get reported for helping out a kid briefly.
/r/MensRights30/06/16 04:49 PM
4

Conscription is pointless since the advent of nuclear warfare Lol what? Since WW2, the US has been involved in 24 conflicts/wars, none of which involved the use of nukes. 6 of them happened during conscription.
/r/MensRights16/06/16 06:19 AM
1

There's a difference between scenes of people fighting and a closeup of a face.
/r/MensRights16/06/16 03:33 AM
2

Nothing ever disappears these days anyway... https://www.redditery.com/user/200lbRockLobster/submitted
/r/MensRights15/06/16 05:26 AM
1

Agreed. So why are you commenting, again?
/r/MensRights14/06/16 05:46 AM
11

Agreed, muslims the world over are much more conservative than Christians (at least, outside of Africa anyway) and other religions. Albeit I would like to point out that you should take statistics like this with a grain of salt: for instance if you asked how many British people thought rapists should be killed you'd probably get a disturbingly high percentage. That being said, "rape" and "being gay" are not equivalent, and yes there is a huge issue with a.) conservativism and b.) radicalism/viol…
/r/MensRights13/06/16 05:10 PM
4

In one breath she criticises muslim-hate and then goes on to man-hate. Hilarious. "But you don't understand, my bigotry is OK!"
/r/MensRights13/06/16 05:06 PM
7

Even those are more usually depicted with the skin still on...
/r/MensRights08/06/16 04:51 AM
1

Here's the actual questions they used and the differences athletes/non-athletes. For obvious reasons I can't post the entire study, sorry. http://imgur.com/IM1SdW9
/r/MensRights06/06/16 10:54 AM
1

I've had a brief look at this study: (Disclaimer: I'm not a statistician or fully qualified social scientist, I'm only a second year psych student.) I can't see any obvious problems with sample size or the statistical analyses they used (if there's any statisticians here, feel free to correct me). They weren't trying to infer what percent of the population are athletes(or petrol engineers), they were trying to find out whether any given college athlete was significantly more/less likely to use "…
/r/MensRights06/06/16 10:14 AM
1

How can you verify am online survey? You can't verify in-person surveys, either, most of the time. Unless you're asking stuff like "are you male?" or "are you black?" - Surveys rely on honesty. A certain percent of people will lie on a survey, but we assume that generally on balance the rate of liars is roughly the same for most surveys. But there's been a lot of research on the reliability (whether they can produce the same results when repeated) and validity (whether they produce accurate resu…
/r/MensRights06/06/16 10:06 AM
1

Ah, fair point. Although it was for putting her foot on a seat.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 04:22 AM
1

We both know that's not going to happen.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 04:42 PM
2

Fair point.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 10:07 AM
1

Ah I see. My bad.
/r/MensRights31/05/16 11:31 PM
9

That's a fair comment. GoT does have an excessive amount of boobs on screen, and clearly it's not all for sexposition - it's to get viewers too. Of course, they did just have their first dick fondling on screen and I'm yet to see a vagina get fondled on the show.
/r/MensRights31/05/16 04:18 PM
2

They were only married for one year, they are both very successful, she's really not entitled to anything You and I know this, but the law often disagrees. If he did abuse her, then I hope he is brought to justice. But as far as I know she hasn't even made a police complaint.
/r/MensRights31/05/16 04:15 PM
1

And yet she was getting disapproving stares from others in the club.
/r/MensRights30/05/16 03:00 AM
11

Yes. /u/Kapa666 was clearly using the holocaust as a metaphor for how men are treated in family courts. Still in bad taste, though (also: not a good comparison).
/r/MensRights29/05/16 04:45 PM
28

Wait a second, what happened to his daughter? Did he have to give her to the mother to get custody of his son? Was she an adult who doesn't want to have contact with him since the divorce?
/r/MensRights29/05/16 04:43 PM
0

Nothing wrong with people having lots of consensual, casual sex. It is however, a bit rude to start performing sex acts in public. Not to mention illegal. She should saved the boob groping for the bedroom. I also found it a bit annoying that she's so insecure about her sexuality that she needs to write an article defending her decision to dance and have sex. But whatever.
/r/MensRights29/05/16 03:21 PM
102

Note that this is only a thing in about 15 US states. The rest of the USA, EU countries, Australia, Canada and NZ do not imprison people for failure to pay child support. Still a horrible injustice though. Edit: So it seems I was wrong about Canada (in some cases), and there is a US Federal Act which allows jailing parents for failure to pay, although how consistently this is enforced I don't know.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 03:08 PM
1

I know that males overall are under-represented but this is a very specific and interesting claim. Could you link to a source? I assume we're talking about US colleges here since the OP is about that.
/r/MensRights27/05/16 06:01 AM
1

I think that's a pretty big assumption to make, Sasha.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 11:27 AM
3

Why would people necessarily make a connection between having sex and then sometimes showing signs of pregnancy 2 months later? Man, people had some weird ass views on gender and reproduction in ancient times. Even up to the 1600's, Europeans thought that men and women were two varieties of the same gender, and that penises and vaginas were simply inverted versions of each other. That being said, virtually all cultures we know of (including "primitive" cultures) have recognized some link between…
/r/MensRights21/05/16 09:08 AM
5

Eh, I interpreted it as "Like Melisandre, Madonna decieves people about her age using magic (plastic surgery), isn't this comparison funny!" So maybe shaming. Either way, the feminist editor was also shaming people. And invading their privacy as well.
/r/MensRights20/05/16 06:51 AM
-3

Who has proposed this "new family unit" and in what context? Can you show that the view has wide acceptance among feminists?
/r/MensRights18/05/16 05:03 PM
5

Makes it seem like they're less vulnerable than everyone else. The way I read it, the judge was acknowledging the stereotype / paradigm that exists, and then contradicting it.
/r/MensRights18/05/16 11:04 AM
3

The response is to set the record straight, and let the audience decide for themselves who to believe. Let's say you live in a smallish town of around 20,000 or so. The local newspaper publishes a libellous article about you which is read by 1000 people. Your options for setting the record straight are to tell your 50 or so friends and family personally what the truth is. Some people may be able to go online and publish something themselves on a blog or facebook. But not everyone is internet lit…
/r/MensRights17/05/16 11:35 PM
1

Edit: Nevermind, I misread your post, my bad.
/r/MensRights17/05/16 04:27 AM
3

Where do you live? From what I can tell, this varies greatly from area to area. Everywhere has some gender bias but only certain places seem to go so far that people give dads the stinkeye. Where I live, I take my young daughter to the park and push her on the swing with no trouble.
/r/MensRights17/05/16 04:24 AM
2

Damn, she's really let herself go.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 05:58 AM
2

This really comes down to pessimism vs optimism.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 04:28 PM
6

Hey now, no need to make fun of people for their kinks. What other people do in the bedroom is none of our business. Also the stereotype of fat feminists (or if you listen to radfems: fat MRAs) is getting pretty tired. Many of the worst radfems like Sarkeesian are quite thin. Other than that, I agree with you wholeheartedly.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 04:04 PM
7

We all know that's bullshit of course. But a more realistic concern is we need to not discourage false accusers from admitting their crimes so that innocent people can be released from jail/exhornorated. That is, would she have come forward and admitted her lies if the penalty was severe jail time rather than a fine and potentially getting sued? Also, admittedly penalties should take into account whether someone admitted wrongdoing versus was found out - that's an important difference. Though a …
/r/MensRights07/05/16 03:53 PM
15

The fact that men die in the background is kind of the point, though. It's symptomatic of the empathy gap between men and women. 1 woman dies and it's portrayed as a tragedy, 100 faceless men die and no one cares. You could argue that for some shows, it's just true to life. For instance it's normal for a show set in WWI trenches to have a lot of men dying. But that's just a case of art imitating/portraying the empathy gap we have in real life.
/r/MensRights03/05/16 06:59 PM
4

It certainly wouldn't surprise me, but yes a source would be nice.
/r/MensRights03/05/16 06:56 PM
3

Forced work on pain of imprisonment = slavery. Chattel slavery is not the only form of slavery.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 12:29 PM
2

Conscription is slavery. It's forced labour of free individuals who have committed no crime. Hell, it could even be argued that forced labour of convicted criminals is slavery. Particularly noteworthy because this is extremely dangerous labour. Chattel slavery is not the only form of slavery.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 12:26 PM
2

Pretty much. Same for men too (since the majority of men are not even close to being fit for combat duty). Isn't there like 3 support roles for every combat role? Someone has to drive the trucks, wash the clothes, repair the gear, pack the stuff, cook the food, care for the injured etc.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 11:27 AM
4

I'm banking on the fact that once women are forced to register, all of a sudden it becomes a "massive issue" and feminists will be up in arms. Similarly, now that women are being forced to pay their ex-hubby's alimony, all of a sudden it's become a huge issue and we need to reform the law. Go figure.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 11:26 AM
2

Both of the lead candidates have a cult of fanatical followers.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 05:50 AM
15

... The show explores the lives of criminals and what lead them to commit crime, and how they are on the inside. Those characters are women because the show is set in a women's prison. That's like complaining that a show set in the army during WW2 focuses on male characters.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 10:29 AM
3

Granted, poverty doesn't mean the same thing in the west as in developing countries, since even homeless people have access to clean drinking water and free healthcare. Still, though. So many men on the bottom rungs of society.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 04:00 AM
1

Numerous investigations have found small amounts of male DNA in female brains and vice versa, due to various causes. But that doesn't necessarily effect your overall gender.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 04:37 AM
2

Gender is made up of both biological factors and social constructs. It's a very complex concept, it's certainly not black and white.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 04:37 AM
3

If modern life has taught us anything, it is that there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all model of being a man. Why should ordinary men feel ashamed to aspire to be supermen survivalists? Exactly. And being a survivalist entertainer is about as useful in modern life as being a crossdresser entertainer...
/r/MensRights26/04/16 11:27 PM
2

Oh for Christ's sake. There's no conspiracy. Muslims are not "taking over". This sub is about men's issues not your bigotry. Keep that shit out of here.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 11:25 PM
2

The implication is that these "manly" skills are no longer required, that they are retrograde and useless. They might not have much use the decadent, modern urban society. But I guarantee you, come any catastrophic event, men who possess these skills will be in high demand. These men will take over. I think that's going a little far... What I took away from it is more that while Gryll's specific skills are not (usually) needed in modern life, his qualities such as resourcefulness, stoicism and d…
/r/MensRights26/04/16 11:24 PM
1

Just finished writing a post explaining how you could get these results from a survey and then I read your post. Suffice to say I agree. It's amazing how ignorant some people are.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 04:51 PM
1

Quick context: This appears to be a discussion paper that references other findings, not a study/survey itself. The full paper is not available yet but you can download the summary and highlights here: http://www.broadbandcommission.org/publications/Pages/bb-and-gender-2015.aspx Now, about this terrible blog: How did they know the exact figure of 46.7% had not reported victimization when it was not reported? How did the UN know it was just 35% of women who reported abuse How does the UN know the…
/r/MensRights26/04/16 04:41 PM
1

Came here to say this. Very weird title reflecting a weird article.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 04:17 PM
1

I mean, I despise Germaine Greer as much as the next normal person, but I wouldn't pull a firealarm if she was spouting her transphobic, pedophile-apologist bullshit.
/r/MensRights25/04/16 06:29 PM
1

Fem-splain Can we not sink to their level please?
/r/MensRights25/04/16 06:27 PM
1

Uh huh, sure buddy ;) I bet you work reeeal hard with empathy like that.
/r/MensRights23/04/16 10:44 PM
2

Sorry, we can't all leech off Daddy's trust fund like little parasites :)
/r/MensRights23/04/16 04:31 PM
1

Yeah it's really terrible. The law in question applies to all forms of "spreading" (ie "bagspreading", putting your feet on the seats, laying across seats) whether the person is male or female. That being said, I don't think a law against taking up too much space is necessary.
/r/MensRights23/04/16 04:30 PM
6

It's got nice white plastic and smooth lines, but it's essentially a torture restraint rack. Disgusting.
/r/MensRights20/04/16 05:42 PM
4

Interesting, but ultimately a speculative social/psychological theory with no way to really falsify it. Edit: ly
/r/MensRights19/04/16 03:05 PM
23

$10,000/month? More like $2500/month, for no longer than 2 years, only if the marriage lasted longer than a year, only if the partner didn't work/study during the marriage, and only if the payer has enough income.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 03:03 PM
0

I'm not seeing the problem with female space nazi officers (Phasma) and female pilots. I guess it could be argued that maybe women wouldn't make good Stormtroopers but none have their gender revealed anyway. If they had planned them to be men, would that be evidence of "patriarchy" ruining Star Wars? I'm just not seeing the issue here. So what they wanted to include some more women in the cast.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 02:43 PM
1

You and the other guys make fair points. I'm definitely not trying to excuse lack of depth, just saying it's not necessarily due to feminism as it was there before (at least in the prequels anyway).
/r/MensRights19/04/16 11:43 AM
3

Force Awakens didn't shove any political opinions down anyone's throat. It wasn't censored or propagandized. It contained no mentions of feminism, no mentions of men, women, gender, sexism, patriarchy, oppression etc. The closest it came to referencing gender was two tiny moments in the film: Finn asks Rey if she is OK and she looks at him and says "yeah", implying that it was a dumb question. Rey rejects the offer of a blaster from Han, stating that she knows how to take care of herself. Han sa…
/r/MensRights19/04/16 06:31 AM
5

Fair enough, but that isn't the result of a feminist conspiracy. It's been a problem in Star Wars since A New Hope. Luke, a farm boy with no piloting experience, managed to take down the Death Star. They took it even further in the Prequels with Anakin winning the podrace and taking down the Trade Federation control ship at the age of 10. Star Wars has always been about the "chosen one", incredible coincidences, fate, and people who are inexplicably naturally gifted and good at everything they t…
/r/MensRights19/04/16 04:53 AM
4

Scram back to r/twochromosomes, troll. Ah yes because everyone who disagrees with you must be a secret feminist agent. I've been subscribed to /r/mensrights for longer than you've been a Redditor. But please tell me more about how everyone who disagrees with you is a secret feminist troll. It's not healthy to be this paranoid mate. Everything isn't a feminist/muslim conspiracy. http://imgur.com/3cORLBo
/r/MensRights19/04/16 04:50 AM
3

I prefer movies that adhere to reality and the Laws of Physics. Is a Star Wars fan Right... I'm sick of morons like you who see feminist conspiracies everywhere. You give the MRM a bad name. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 04:34 AM
7

I prefer fantasy where interesting characters exist in an interesting world full of cool magic/tech and overcome obstacles (bad people included). I don't give a shit about the protagonist's gender as long as it fits the world and they are written well. It's pretty pathetic that you feel so threatened by a female protagonist in a movie. You're a real big strong man, mate. Lmao.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 04:19 AM
6

the journal "Violence Against Women" Well now, I'm sure there's no bias there...
/r/MensRights19/04/16 04:16 AM
3

Nah, she's a real person.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 04:15 AM
1

Did you even see Force Awakens? The movie is fine. So what if it has a female protagonist? I expect Rogue One will be fine as well. Star Wars is going to be OK. Relax.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 04:04 AM
3

The only distinction here is that she was in a position of authority over the guy. You can't give meaningful consent, as a minor, to a person who is in a position of authority over you like your parent, your teacher, a police officer, medical professional or your prison guard, etc. So I think we are in agreement here. held financially liable for lost wages of this lady. If an employer doesn't want to employ this lady due to her sex offence conviction, that's their prerogative, and not the mother…
/r/MensRights19/04/16 03:14 AM
5

Paragraph breaks are your friend. Likewise, a strict legal definition of Sex Offender means "a person, male or female, who has been convicted of a crime involving a sexual act where the federal, state or local laws require them to be placed on the Sexual Offender Registry." She admitted to and was convicted of a sex offence. She's a sex offender. That's all there is to it. Plenty of countries don't have sex offender registries and still use the term sex offender. This is like calling someone a r…
/r/MensRights19/04/16 01:52 AM
0

"One of them is shitty therefore it's OK to treat them all shittily." This is the logic of bigotry, mate.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 01:40 AM
2

The murder statistic is legit. Almost all homicides are committed by men. It's still bullshit though because it's being used to justify sexism against men when really only a tiny, tiny minority of men are murderers.
/r/MensRights17/04/16 03:57 PM
0

So challenge it by posting your own message next to it, rather than by ripping it down and lending credence to the radfem's incoherent babbling about "toxic masculinity".
/r/MensRights17/04/16 03:55 PM
1

God it's so damn embarassing to have people like that as part of the movement. Accusing everyone of "conspiring with feminists" We already have morons parodying us on SNL, we don't need people living up to the stereotype.
/r/MensRights17/04/16 03:45 PM
1

Sorry OP made a dick (pun fully intended) of himself and by extension the MRM. I actually had to refute an earlier thread in here which called the study psuedoscience (which is absolutely ridiculous). We can't throw a tantrum when some data appears that doesn't necessarily support our worldview (that being said, even if circumcision was shown to be slightly beneficial, I would still be against infant circumcision on informed consent grounds).
/r/MensRights17/04/16 03:42 PM
1

Morons. If the idea behind this is that thugs will target women, then it makes no sense for them to give rides to transwomen who present as male. Muggers and rapists aren't going to stop and ask if you are cisgender before mugging you. "Hi Mr - do you identify as a man or a woman?" "I'm a man..." "Oh shit, better leave him alone guys - let's go find one who identifies as a woman."
/r/MensRights17/04/16 02:02 PM
7

Great article (and from the courier mail, no less). Only bit I disagree with is this: addresses the growing issue of violence and public safety. Violent crime overall has significantly dropped in the last decade. It's only sexual assault that has has risen. And that may be in part due to greater awareness of what constitutes assault and greater support for victims, rather than due to an actual increase.
/r/MensRights17/04/16 01:47 PM
2

I think there might be a misunderstanding here. In Australia and New Zealand, "hotel" usually refers to a pub (bar/tavern/saloon). Historically, many pubs had accommodation on the upper floor, but nowadays most people stay in motels/inns/hostels instead. This particular establishment looks to be converted into a "gastro pub" (which is closer to a restaurant, and has more emphasis on food quality). It would be a bit weird to go into a pub or restaurant to get changed.
/r/MensRights16/04/16 02:48 PM
6

You don't have freedom of expression on somebody else's property. His hotel, his rules. If you want freedom of expression walk around in the street, or stay at home.
/r/MensRights16/04/16 01:45 PM
4

What if this instinct is kicking in because they women they're admitting currently actually ARE worse than the men. Would the guys still act like retards if their female squad buddy was every bit as capable as they were?
/r/MensRights16/04/16 12:26 PM
2

Is it still up?
/r/MensRights16/04/16 11:47 AM
2

People are always harping on the misogyny of America's enemies. Wouldn't knowing that they're fighting against women/mixed gender forces make such groups fight harder and surrender less easily? It's not quite that simple... I can't see standard infantry surviving this experiment as a viable, large-scale fighting force. Seems like more evidence that we're headed into an eternal drone strike feedback loop. Agreed. I don't see how this can work unless women are subjected to the same standards as me…
/r/MensRights16/04/16 10:29 AM
27

They don't say they're only banning men. They say they're banning lyrca shorts and then give an example of where it caused issues (some guys with big dicks walked into the hotel in tight pants). In fact the chairwoman of the cycling association is complaining about the ban. If they are in fact enforcing this only against men, then I hope they get sued.
/r/MensRights16/04/16 10:23 AM
3

I agree, but this meme is getting old. Also this has nothing to with chivalry.
/r/MensRights16/04/16 10:18 AM
124

The difference in abuse between the sexes online isn’t in the amount Data shows men get more hate Umm... It would seem that even social science suffers from shitty science journalism. As if the field didn't have enough trouble with objectivity as it is. One moment women getting harassed (supposedly more than men) is a huge problem. Then when some data comes out indicating that men actually get harassed more, all of a sudden it doesn't matter who gets harassed more? Yeah gender-based harassment i…
/r/MensRights15/04/16 02:36 PM
5

psuedoscience OP this study isn't psuedoscience. Please learn the definition of the word before throwing it around. If you have a specific criticism of the study I'd love to hear it (for instance it's my understanding they tested the outside of the foreskin rather than the inside, which I think is a serious error). This study tested whether the sensation of the glans (penis head) was reduced by removing the foreskin. They appear to have found that it wasn't reduced. What the study doesn't test i…
/r/MensRights15/04/16 11:59 AM
1

And yet Curves, which restricts its membership to women, is completely fine. Does Curves exclude male-to-female trans people, though?
/r/MensRights15/04/16 10:46 AM
1

Are they referring to genetic women, perhaps? If not, you've got a point. In any case I feel like either it's OK to discriminate based on gender or it isn't. If there are women's only gyms and women's only taxis, why not a men's only barber? The law needs to be applied equally, and it needs to account for transgender people (in the sense that if we allow businesses to discriminate, then transpeople need to be classified as one gender or the other for business purposes).
/r/MensRights15/04/16 10:45 AM
1

Often, there simply isn't enough evidence to convict a person of rape. This might be due to the nature of the rape (rape tends to happen in private, with few witnesses), or it might be that the police charged the wrong person, or the accuser mistakenly identified the wrong person in a lineup, or perhaps the accused might get off on a technicality due to a mistake by prosecutors. Rape accusers should only be charged with false reporting if there's reason to believe they intentionally made a false…
/r/MensRights15/04/16 03:07 AM
3

Yes but getting attacked in the street is very unlikely as it is, so really there's no need for special parking spots. Plus there's no evidence that these spots will do anything to keep people safe.
/r/MensRights14/04/16 01:31 PM
3

officers should be required to report suspicious activity to their department immediately. Maybe, but if so it should only apply to serious crimes (violence, child abuse etc). And I'd argue the same should go for regular citizens (at least in the case of child abuse). There's so many laws on the books that reporting every single instance of someone possible breaking one is not feasible. Even when an officer is on-duty, they aren't legally required to enforce every single law.
/r/MensRights14/04/16 10:51 AM
6

I sympathise with this woman. It must suck to feel unsafe in the car park. But giving one class of people special protection just because they feel unsafe is not the answer. Men are actually more likely to suffer street violence so if anyone should be getting special parking spots it should be men. But really it's a dumb idea because it's sexist/unfair and street assaults are rare anyway (even for men). The answer here would be to put in cameras and lights.
/r/MensRights14/04/16 09:53 AM
1

It doesn't matter how they're paid. An off-duty cop has the same rights and responsibilities as any other citizen. The distinction between off-duty and on-duty is a very important one. You see, an on-duty cop has lots of extra rights above what a normal citizen has. Police can detain and arrest people, perform searches, carry firearms etc. Resisting arrest by a police officer is a crime in most places. Assaulting a police officer is typically a worse crime than regular assault. In most places, p…
/r/MensRights14/04/16 08:38 AM
4

I wouldn't vote for Trump in a million years but that Bernie supporter was such a sexist, racist moron.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 01:38 PM
8

To be guilty by association you need to be associated.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 11:51 AM
2

But we don't forbid information that is relevant to this subreddit, no matter its source. Gawker?
/r/MensRights12/04/16 02:13 AM
3

Waiting for a 14 year old kid to get mugged because an asshole Uber driver refused to pick him up.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 02:34 AM
-1

In some areas that may be true (it's certainly not true in my country). But in any case, they shouldn't be able to.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 02:32 AM
2

In the US, the legal standard is usually that the religious belief is bona fide (that is, genuine/real). The state could easily argue that the Church of Female Taxi Drivers didn't have any actual true believers and it was just an excuse to make money/whatever.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 02:30 AM
12

Some SJWs might get mad if Britain changes this to be gender-neutral, but it wasn't SJWs who drew up this law and voted it in. This is largely the result of old-fashioned MPs, not the SJW boogeyman.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 12:39 AM
1

Perhaps you should have said "controlling for confounding variables" rather than "create control groups", because they mean different things. At any rate, without the study text we don't know what variables they did and didn't account for.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 11:18 AM
12

RemindMe! 6 Days "Is it still up?"
/r/MensRights10/04/16 11:01 AM
0

You can't make an actual control group, though, with a study design like this. A control group is needed when you're testing the effect of one thing on another (when you're trying to show causation). Ie you have subjects separated into the group that gets no treatment/standard treatment and the group that gets treated with the actual thing you're interested in seeing the effect of. But to do that you have to have control over the sampling of the subjects and all the conditions, which isn't the c…
/r/MensRights08/04/16 05:07 PM
0

So I am not so willing to let the authors and paymasters off the hook here, since they should be aware that the current landscape does not allow for research to balance out through diversity of opinion and neutrality of funding. These are fair points. While there's nothing inherently wrong with doing a study on this issue, I'd bet there's a lot more sociology/criminology studies focusing on issues like this than on say, the gender sentencing gap. The fact that the scientific method should prevai…
/r/MensRights08/04/16 04:09 PM
-1

deciding not to create adequate control groups This would be observational study, not an experimental one. A control group would make no sense in that case. Edit: That is, you can't create a control group when all you're doing is looking at data about who was convicted for what and how long their sentence was. You might have meant that they didn't adjust for other relevant factors in the data (for example: perhaps the men who killed strangers were more likely to have prior convictions, and the r…
/r/MensRights08/04/16 04:00 PM
1

It's not the study's job to talk extensively about things outside of it's scope. Research reports are supposed to be very focused and not go on tangents. The issue is that people will then use this study out of wider context to support their bullshit ideology without taking into account other studies or the limitations of the study. Not to mention it's possible for both there to be an "intimacy discount" and a gender sentencing gap. They aren't mutually exclusive and the existence of one doesn't…
/r/MensRights08/04/16 11:34 AM
3

We are allowed, we do it, it's just that we don't do it with everyone that is the whole point. As I said, What I'm saying is that even if men allow themselves to be vulnerable (and they don't always), everyone else is not interested in hearing our story. It's called the gender empathy gap. People don't feel sorry for men the way they do for women. But even putting that aside, if men are just more prone to only confiding in a few close people ... what happens when we don't have anyone close enoug…
/r/MensRights08/04/16 11:21 AM
2

TBH both you and the guy in the .gif make good points. The fact that men are not allowed to be vulnerable or feminine is a real issue and it's part of the suicide issue. Another issue is that we expect men to be these providers and don't support them, as you said. And they're both interlinked. It's all part of how the ideal man is percieved by society. A self sufficient breadwinner who supports everyone else and doesn't have problems (or at least deals with them internally only).
/r/MensRights08/04/16 11:11 AM
1

Implying that I'm conceited isn't a counterargument. Try again mate.
/r/MensRights06/04/16 01:02 AM
1

The word is doublespeak, and it refers to when language purposefully obscures or reverses the meaning of words. Which is not at all relevant to my post. If you're too simple to understand that there are multiple layers to this (the incident itself, and the media reaction) then there's no hope for you.
/r/MensRights06/04/16 12:45 AM
6

What the fuck This was pretty much my reaction as well, although EvilPundit is right about your title. What a shitty, scatterbrained article. I got the vague sense (from the sections that were actually legible and not just an unbroken stream of consciousness) that this woman was somehow white washing the incident? Ew.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 01:10 PM
2

Having sex with a 17 year old person shouldn't be illegal (unless you're their parent or an authority figure with power over them). But you and I both already agree on that, I thought? Were you just using the example for the benefit of others?
/r/MensRights05/04/16 01:06 PM
1

It is in one sense, but not directly. On a direct level, this is just a kid bullying another kid. The race/gender issue is the media reaction and society's double standards, which is separate.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 01:01 PM
0

Child death was common in ancient societies, so they probably didn't think it too unusual that a child would die after a circumcision. The advantage of circumcision if you almost never bathe (as in an ancient desert society) is clear. Thankfully in modern society we have soap and running water, as well as cures and preventative methods for all the other things that circumcision supposedly prevents.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 12:58 PM
-5

This incident itself wasn't a race issue. It wasn't really a gender issue either. It was a bullying issue. Kids can be real assholes, and it's not surprising that the girl's brother helped her. The double standard in the media are the race/gender issue, though. Because you're correct that if you flipped the races or the genders (or both) this would have been all over the media.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 11:00 AM
6

The overly muscled character in the picture is a fantasy Dwarf. He's shorter than the other characters in Dragon's Crown, and has a grossly over-proportioned torso and arms. Dragon's Crown is often trotted out by feminists as an example of objectified/sexualized female characters (I mean, just look at the Sorceress in OP's picture...). What they fail to realize is that the male characters are all overly stylized as well, and argument that it's a power fantasy doesn't hold up since no man actuall…
/r/MensRights04/04/16 05:39 AM
4

So, the official reason is that she broke a contract by working a second job. The real reason is probably the pedo stuff. I doubt the misandry factored in.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 05:39 AM
1

Re: Age of consent laws. The line has to be drawn somewhere, though. Because clearly some people are too young and clearly others are old enough. If you draw the line at say, 15 or 16 and then add some close-in-age exceptions, that generally covers the vast majority of situations. Of course in this case it was a 3 year old. And a 3 year old shouldn't be held criminally liable for anything they do (and in fact they aren't since they're under the age of criminal responsibility). Thankfully it seem…
/r/MensRights04/04/16 04:04 AM
5

Agreed the double standard sucks. It takes months for this woman to get fired for supporting a guy who allegedly had hundreds of CP pics. But some scientist wears a racy shirt and it's a huge shitstorm. But at least she got fired, right? I think that "men who like kids" had a different meaning than what most people seem to be thinking... Maybe, given she shudder supports CP elsewhere. But it also comes before "men who like kid things" and she specifically mentions bronies.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 02:24 AM
0

I agree with you generally, What if they were all 17 year olds who willingly snapped those pictures of themselves for guys? Like usual camwhores do? Possible, but seems unlikely. The alleged CP was discovered by some kids who broke into this guy's garage and stole his CDs - surely they wouldn't have come forward unless there was some seriously questionable pics in there? Plus camwhores are basically sex workers and it's illegal for minors to do sex work.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 02:20 AM
14

Some of those tweets are reasonable, OP. For instance when she says that: A guy convicted of having sex with a 17 year old is not a child predator. Well yeah - a 17 year old is not a child. Consensual sex with a 17 year old is not child rape. It's normal for adults to be physically attracted to a physically mature teen (ie 16, 17, 18 years old). Of course it should still be illegal for an authority figure (teacher etc) to have sex with a minor under their care, even when it would otherwise be le…
/r/MensRights04/04/16 01:51 AM
25

Women are objectified men are idealized Yes because us men all want to be 4 foot tall impossibly-muscled naked guys who, in real life, would be horribly disabled due to their disproportionate arms and legs.
/r/MensRights03/04/16 11:08 PM
-10

If Donald Trump really does end up making all these morons leave for Canada I might actually visit there, it might end up making a dramatic improvement in our societies. It'll be counterbalanced by having Trump as the President who gives voice to all most racist, xenophobic, jingoistic elements of society. So you'll be trading one kind of idiot for another.
/r/MensRights03/04/16 02:27 PM
3

So Gov. Scott vetoed the last attempt at alimony reform? So even if the speaker and house leader send the bill off to him, he could just veto it on a whim (or if special interest groups lobby him)? TBH the veto power is pretty undemocratic, it really shouldn't be a thing. Sure, sometimes it's useful when vetoing a crazy bill that somehow got passed by the legislature, but just as often they're vetoing good bills that should become law. And in any case it's wrong on principle that one individual …
/r/MensRights02/04/16 01:37 AM
0

This is pretty close to sexualizing minors/child porn which is understandably banned on this sub (given that it's illegal and morally wrong). It's a fine line to tread. :/
/r/MensRights02/04/16 12:57 AM
3

A better example would be a TV station which pays the star of a popular prime-time show more than an actor on a late night show which caters to a niche audience.
/r/MensRights01/04/16 11:38 AM
1

Yes because of course we all know that the majority is always right and tribal mentality doesn't exist.
/r/MensRights01/04/16 01:23 AM
1

It's one thing when stupid people accept that they don't know what they're talking about and leave the thinking to others. But when someone is so stupid that they're not even aware of just how stupid they are, that's when real problems start. That's what's happened here. You're not even aware of how ridiculous you sound.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 11:17 PM
1

Sigh. You're such an idiot.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 10:25 PM
-1

"High" is a nebulous term that has no clearly defined border with "not high". Granted, I don't know your daily dose, all I know for sure is that you're under the influence of oxy. You don't even know what my daily dosage is. Sure, and you don't even know what the daily dose of some hypothetical person is.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 02:36 PM
-1

If your percs are working to relieve your pain, then you're high. You may not be as over the moon as someone who took double your daily dose, but still. I'm not addicted. See how you feel if you stop taking your daily dose of opioids.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 02:19 PM
-1

I guess you've never known someone who takes prescription medication daily. You can be dependent on say, benzodiazepines without being in a permanent blackout. You can take oxycodone every day without sleeping all the time (in fact that's one of the reasons oxycodone is used over morphine and such, although one can build resistance to traditional opioids anyway).
/r/MensRights31/03/16 01:56 PM
-4

Even being a drug addict doesn't necessarily make you an unfit parent, if you're functional. Plenty of people are addicted to their prescription opioid painkillers or benzodiazepines, for instance. Although there's definitely a correlation there between addiction and bad/negligent parenting. So I would go so far as to say dysfunctional addicts should have their children removed. That being said, of course in an ideal situation people wouldn't be addicted to drugs, using them around kids or havin…
/r/MensRights31/03/16 01:23 PM
1

It's OK to discriminate if there's a good reason. But there's no good reason here. HIV/hepatitis don't discriminate and neither should the needle exchange program.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 11:07 AM
1

Using drugs doesn't automatically make you a bad parent. Yes that's often the case, but it's not a given. If people are neglecting or endangering their kids, then yes absolutely take the kids away. have drugs and needles in the flat... My diabetic mother had drugs and needles in our flat. Most people have drugs in their house. It's possible to store things safely out of reach of kids. And it goes without saying that I'm not defending this sexist program which allows men to suffer and die. Men an…
/r/MensRights31/03/16 11:06 AM
-3

Like... um... FUCK YEAH the should lose their kids. They are essentially saying: "This program helps mothers hide their addiction so they can continue to neglect their children." A drug user is not necessarily neglecting or endangering their children, though there's certainly a correlation.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 11:00 AM
6

People are going to contract incurable terminal illnesses because of these fucks. Wow.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 10:59 AM
35

HIV and hepatitis don't discriminate, so neither should these people. They're going to let men suffer and die because they're sexist fucks. Wow.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 10:58 AM
-1

It's called Poe's law. Also: Are you seriously following me around this subreddit to criticize my posts? That's pretty pathetic.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 10:54 AM
1

Wow. Even given that most of the innmates are boys (and most women, including abusive prison guards, are straight) that's still nuts. Absolutely disgusting. If this was girls the country would be in arms.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 04:32 AM
0

At least their website links to two help lines specifically for male victims: https://www.disrespectnobody.co.uk/need-help/ Pity the ad reinforces the false stereotype that DV is all male-on-female.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 03:54 AM
0

Oh yes, in the same way that an apple is an orange or a bird is a mouse.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 02:07 AM
0

I never mentioned censorship.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 02:05 AM
1

As I explained, it's not that I'm right and everyone else is wrong, it's that we all agree but people are misreading my comments. For some reason people seem to think I am justifying this woman's behaviour and are downvoting reflexively.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 01:13 AM
10

Disgusting. Entitled bitches stealing millions from these guys. Don't get me wrong, I'm OK with limited-term alimony, capped at a low amount. If someone is left high and dry by a divorce, they should get some alimony to help them become financially independent again. But these million-dollar divorce settlements are just wrong when the women in these cases did nothing to earn that money.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 01:03 AM
-2

Substitute "women" with "men" this basically sounds like something a radfem would say. Shitty abusive people are shit. I really hope this was staged, for the guy's sake :/ Hope he's OK.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:45 AM
1

I'm merely sad for the state of the world, that cretins like you exist.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:37 AM
1

There's no point to argue, it's simple reality. He touched her as a result of her actions, so that means it doesn't matter who touched who, because of who the source was. Yes. We agree on this. I agree with you. This is literally what I was saying, you fucking cretin. I'm embarassed for the entire human race that you're such a fuckwit.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:30 AM
1

Are you incapable of reading? I said I would, because the guy in the video was justified in doing what he did.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:28 AM
1

Please! Don't hurt me sir! Lol. Though I'd probably react exactly how the guy in the video reacted, since he was totally justified. ... Which I mentioned in my post. ... And you didn't understand, because you're a complete fucking moron.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:25 AM
1

False analogy.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:24 AM
1

Here's some semantics for you, fuckwit: You don't know the definition of semantics. All I did was point out that she did in fact touch him first. That's not semantics it's observing reality.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:23 AM
0

There's no semantics in my argument, I was simply pointing out the indisputable fact that she did physically touch him first. If people choose to ignore reality, or are so mentally deficient they can't understand my post, that's not my fault.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:21 AM
0

She put her arm in front of them. Maybe if you actually watched the video you'd know, lol.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:15 AM
-1

Please don't send me your profile pics mate, I'm straight.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 05:08 PM
-1

Watch the god damn video. 0:17 - She puts her right arm in front of him. He begins to walk forwards and with his right hand reaches out for her arm, which is blocking his way. 0:18 - We see his right hand on her arm. Christ, how much easier do I have to make it for you.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 05:07 PM
-3

They're not all wrong, strictly speaking, they're just misreading my comment like a bunch of morons and then downvoting reflexively. I merely pointed out that the guy touched her first, however he was justified in doing so because she was blocking him with her arm.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 04:19 PM
0

Watch the god damn video. 0:17 - She puts her right arm in front of him. He begins to walk forwards and with his right hand reaches out for her arm, which is blocking his way. 0:18 - We see his right hand on her arm. Christ, how much easier do I have to make it for you.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 04:06 PM
-2

Notice the part where I say that she provoked him and he was justified. Ergo it's her fault.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 03:55 PM
-4

Will I get a prize?
/r/MensRights30/03/16 03:25 PM
-5

Sweet nectar of the Gods.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 03:24 PM
1

Nice work finding this, even if it is old. I'll go out on a limb here. If Kaufman's numbers hold up it's quite possible that there are multiple times as many female teachers sexually abusing students as there are male. According to the US DOJ it works that way in youth prisons. Why should schools be any different in that regard? Well, in fairness the majority of teachers are female as they mention in your source. That being said, perhaps women are also watched less/less suspected than men which …
/r/MensRights30/03/16 03:18 PM
-2

You're grasping at straws and arguing semantics. All I was pointing out was that she literally didn't touch him first in the video. She didn't physically touch him first. She did not cause her body to come into contact with his first. That's what I was saying. Comprendo? We are in total agreement that she was in the wrong, and he was justified in pushing her away.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 03:04 PM
0

Her blocking him isn't actually touching, but yes she is in the wrong here, so we're essentially in agreement. But I'm used to reading ignorant drivel from you, dungone, so I shouldn't be surprised when you are incapable of comprehending a simple post I made and realizing that we in fact agree on this.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 02:54 PM
6

Pretty much. The woman is a moron and definitely in the wrong here.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 12:35 PM
-3

No, I was being perfectly logical and stating facts that are shown in the video. What happened is that she blocked him, then he pushed her arm away, then she grabbed his shoulders and started whining. Ie: he touched first, though she provoked it. He was in the right, she was in the wrong. Before commenting, you should watch the video and read the comments. That way you'll avoid saying stupid things.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 12:34 PM
-31

You are literally incapable of comprehending what you read. Why are you spending time on an internet forum?
/r/MensRights30/03/16 12:31 PM
-28

I'm not saying that he started it or that he is at fault. What he did was justified. I was just pointing out simple facts. God people are fucking morons.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 12:30 PM
0

Maybe you should actually watch the video before commenting. The guy touches her first. However, he was justified in doing so because she physically blocked his way. End of story.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 12:17 PM
-34

Why you are you posting this crap? We all agree she was in the wrong. From my very first comment, I said that she provoked him and he was justified. My point was simply that in actual fact, he touched her first. | I'm not sure how I could be any clearer. I'm not sure you even read my comment, honestly.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 12:12 PM
-1

Yes. We are in agreement.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 11:18 AM
7

My point is that she wasn't being untruthful. It's just the she omitted the context (which was that he was perfectly justified in doing what he did). I wasn't defending her disgraceful conduct, just pointing out facts.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 10:44 AM
-13

If a fact is inconvenient or doesn't fit someone's personal narrative, they tend to downvote. Edit: Thanks for proving my point for me, guys :)
/r/MensRights30/03/16 10:42 AM
5

Every man has the right to know whether he has biological children, and who they are. In addition, every woman has the right to know who the biological father of her children is. Lastly, every person has the right to know who their biological parents are. If some families break up due to a child's true paternity being revealed, it is unfortunate. However the right of people to be informed about their biological children (or lack thereof) is more important. This is why paternity testing should be…
/r/MensRights30/03/16 10:41 AM
-24

No worries mate. It's just a people thing, not necessarily unique to either group.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 06:29 AM
-117

Well yeah that's what happened - she put her arm in front of him (without touching him), then when we see her arm next, his hand is on it (ie him pushing her out of his way). He touched her first, but it was justified.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 06:26 AM
-220

He actually touched her first, though she provoked him. She tried to use her arm to block him from leaving, then he grabbed her arm and pushed it away, then she grabbed his shoulders etc. Edit: Downvoted for pointing out indisputable facts. It's all there in the video people. She blocked him (without touching him), then he (justifiably) pusher her away because she blocked him. You're all fucking idiots.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 06:18 AM
1

The problem with raising the limit past 16 is that 16-17 and 16-18 year old relationships are quite common and not particularly harmful to the younger individual. The same can't be said for a relationship between 14 and 23, especially when the older is also the younger's teacher and is in a position of authority and care over the minor. I guess you could perhaps change the nature of consent laws to be an age range around the individual's age but that's another discussion.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 05:14 AM
2

So (Godwin forgive me) when the Nazis were forcing Jews out of their homes into concentration camps, that wasn't really genocide or immoral because it was German law and the majority of the public accepted it? I mean you're basically arguing for cultural relativism here, and we all know that's bullshit.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 05:10 AM
2

It really doesn't matter what the law or public opinion says. Both of those can be wrong, as they are in this case. This was rape. A 14 year old cannot give meaningful consent to sex with their adult teacher.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 04:55 AM
2

A human being in spain who is 14 can consent. No, the age of consent in Spain is now 16. They changed it last year. The age of consent was previously 12 in 1995 and then 13 in 1999. Clearly that's far too young. Thankfully they saw sense and updated their fucked up laws to something more ethical. :)
/r/MensRights30/03/16 04:51 AM
3

A business is already putting it's information out there in public for everyone - that's what businesses do. Doxing only applies to private individuals.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 10:36 PM
10

the frequency/pace at which it keeps occuring. aside from the very occasional jail sentence....judges keep letting these women go with probation, and/or fines. Look I've no doubt that it happens, and that sometimes women get off lightly, but... Do we have any actual data regarding how prevalent female-on-male teach-student sexual abuse is? Do we have any actual data on what the average sentence is for such crimes? What the media reports is not necessarily representative of reality. The media is …
/r/MensRights29/03/16 02:31 AM
4

An unsupervised (within reason) sleepover with girls and boys 12-13 years old? That wouldn't have happened with my parents knowledge when I was that old. Eh, then do you hold them responsible if the kids get up to some same-sex action? Admittedly, the chances of that are lower, but I'm sure it's happened.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 11:02 PM
18

The UK is a country which not only has a state religion (Anglican Church), but the Anglican leaders get to vote in the government and pass laws for everyone else in the country. It's fucking medieval. The weirdest part here is they are forcing him to be raised muslim. At any rate, this is why we need separation of church and state. This is why we need the men's rights movement. I feel like this could be challenged under EU human rights laws, though.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 04:08 AM
3

They drive a lot more, but are they more likely to be in a car? Women can be passengers.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 03:44 AM
8

That's a fair point. I suspect it's likely due to speeding, drink-driving, rev-head culture, inherent male risk-taking behaviour, and that men are more likely to be drivers (esp occupational drivers). However, most fatal crashes do not occur in underground car parks.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 03:37 AM
1

That's very naive. People get away with serious crimes all the time due to not enough evidence. Yes, not all rape reports to police are true, but to say that most are false is ridiculous. Studies usually say between 10-40% are false.
/r/MensRights26/03/16 10:07 AM
0

Most cases of sexual assault are false. That is why so few charges finish as convictions. This is a very simplistic and incorrect view. You're confusing legal innocence with factual innocence. Everyone should have the legal presumption of innocence, yes. I would even say that accused people should not have their names released publicly until they are convicted. But in reality, we know that sometimes factually guilty people get away with committing crimes, and sometimes factually innocent people …
/r/MensRights25/03/16 12:41 AM
1

I'm a straight white male, so according to the nutjob extreme SJWs, I'd be 'splaining no matter what.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 08:03 AM
-3

OK, so imagine if people kept trying to set you up with men because they thought it was impossible to be attracted to women. So yeah, annoying.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 07:19 AM
3

Or. Or. Or... We could not charge kids (of either gender) with crimes based on stupid kid shit like this. I mean honestly this warrants temporary suspension from school at the most. WTF is the world coming to.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 12:07 AM
-5

/r/conspiracy is leaking...
/r/MensRights23/03/16 12:05 AM
-35

Asexual people have to deal with the annoying perception they don't exist, and constant unwanted sexual advances (since every advance is unwanted). It also sucks if you want to please your partner but just don't get anything out of sex. Most people want partners that are attracted to them and enjoy sex with them. That being said, you're right that they don't face any legal inequality.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 11:02 PM
2

feminst military Is that even a thing? I find it hard to imagine your average academic feminist or tumblr blogger joining the military.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 09:50 AM
10

If you're within the privacy of your own home or a place where you can reasonably expect to not be seen, especially if you're having sex or doing a shit or something private, then you should have a legal expectation of privacy, thus making it illegal for someone to film you without your knowlege and then spread the footage around. Now if you're in the street or a public area, then sure people should be able to film you all they like.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 07:21 AM
2

The US has not undergone hyperinflation.
/r/MensRights20/03/16 02:34 AM
1

As the biological father, you have full legal rights to your child. If only that were true. In many areas he has zero rights to child even after paternity has been established. It really depends on the jurisdiction/s.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 01:09 AM
3

If you're going outside the west, there's plenty of legal rights that men have and women don't. I assumed the post referred to the west.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 10:04 AM
46

he should have the right to require her to and if necessary force her to have an abortion If we hold his right to bodily autonomy sacrosanct, then we must also give her that same right. Which means not forcing people to undergo medical procedures against their will. You can certainly make an argument for men being able to absolve themselves of responsibility before the child is born, but you can't make an argument for forced abortions. That would be heinous.
/r/MensRights14/03/16 08:11 AM
1

woosh
/r/MensRights03/03/16 09:39 AM
3

It's sad when anyone of either gender commits suicide. Also sad when people ignore male victims and don't recognize the true gendered nature of suicide.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 09:34 AM
3

Most people, including myself, agree with the stated aims of feminism (gender equality). But thats not all there is to feminism. It's not that simple. For instance I don't believe in patriarchy theory.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 08:33 AM
4

Ugh. Those lawmakers are so evil. Course it's hardly the worst human rights abuse in China. But still.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 08:29 AM
3

Not really. This is /r/mensrights not /r/antifeminist or /r/whenfeministsdostupidthings There's a lot of antifeminists here, and that's fine, but it's not what the sub is supposed to be about. Keep the antifeminist talk relevant to men's rights, thanks. Ie if a feminist organization/prominent individual does something harmful to men's rights or says something misandrist.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 09:49 AM
22

I have a 5 year old girl. Being a parent is not that hard of a job. It's not the easiest in the world, sure, but it is FAR from being the hardest. Probably the most demanding thing is that you are essentially on call all the time. You can't come home and forget about work like in a regular job, because you work from home and your kid is always there. Albeit this is mitigated as they get older and more independent. But as a result of always being on call, you have to give up career progression/ed…
/r/MensRights28/02/16 08:02 AM
1

You expect consistency from SJWs?
/r/MensRights28/02/16 02:47 AM
1

I feel like the Lord of the Rings is much more one cohesive plot whereas Harry Potter is much more episodic (albeit with a long story arc across all the movies as well). That's not surprising, I guess, given LOTR was written as a single book (it was the publishers who split it into 3 parts) and Harry Potter was written as 7 books.
/r/MensRights27/02/16 10:40 AM
5

Hack a Hair-drier was the name.
/r/MensRights27/02/16 05:52 AM
1

At least we can all agree that there's a double standard there (men don't get support whilst women are "coddled"). Even if we disagree on what to do about it.
/r/MensRights26/02/16 10:09 AM
1

Good catch.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 02:44 PM
3

I thought the idea was that no one should be expelled unless they'd been proven guilty in a court of law, or it had been otherwise proven that they had violated the uni's code of conduct? Most accusations of rape are unable to be conclusively proven false/true.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 02:44 PM
5

I don't know what the /r/feminism moderators are teaching their kids but this certainly doesn't bode well. I know I'm teaching my daughter to value kindness, integrity, fairness and perseverance.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 10:53 AM
5

If someone has been convicted of a false accusation in a court of law, then sure expel them. Otherwise you're just guilty of violating due process but in the other direction.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 08:01 AM
3

Of course, there's no such thing as reverse racism or reverse sexism. What they're really saying is they won't act on sexism against men, racism against white people or hate-speech against non-trans people. That being said, I can't imagine there would be much sexism, racism or hate-speech of any kind on a coding website? Like is there really a need for any sort of policy here?
/r/MensRights25/02/16 07:41 AM
7

Thanks for proving Milo's point for him. Jesus Christ how pathetic.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 03:26 AM
9

The Dail is the lower house of the Irish parliament. If you mean how does being a woman constitute a merit then I have no idea. I guess you could argue she brings a unique perspective being a woman but there's already 25 other women in the Dail so while they're certainly very underrepresented it's not like they're not present. And surely she should be talking about her policies not her genitals?
/r/MensRights25/02/16 03:22 AM
6

Throwing people in jail for victimless crimes like drug use is never a good thing no matter how you spin it. If women started getting murdered at the same rate men do, that would be a bad thing too. The fact that the rate at which women are entering jail is increasing faster than the rate at which men are entering jail is a legitimate issue that needs to be looked at. It's just that here they are telling us that the the incarceration rate of women is higher than for men... which is totally false…
/r/MensRights25/02/16 12:49 AM
6

So America has to choose between a misandrist corporate sell-out and a racist conspiracy theorist / science denier. Well, still I guess you can vote for other candidates in the primaries and hope they get the nomination.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 01:31 PM
1

Sex-negative feminists are the weirdest fucking group. I wish they would just fuck off with their extremist rhetoric that hurts sex workers and their customers.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 11:05 AM
-3

Like 50 million Americans (males 18-40ish) have to worry about being sent to war if the draft is reinstated.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 01:37 AM
-3

That's an interesting idea, but here's the thing: Let's say that you and I promise to be together forever and then you give up your career or education to be with me. Because after all we've promised to be together forever, right? If we're going to be together forever (and we may very well be, as 50% of marriages last) then you've got nothing to worry about. But then something goes wrong and we break up after 5 years. We're one of the 50% who didn't last. You've now got five wasted years. Surely…
/r/MensRights23/02/16 03:09 AM
2

I'm against Islamophobia too, but you need to stop making everything about people hating muslims. Not everything is about prejudice against muslims.
/r/MensRights22/02/16 02:37 PM
2

Gender inequality is one cause of domestic violence, but it is not the only cause nor is it the primary cause. Overall a good article. My only gripe is that it claims to talk about the issue of domestic violence in general, but has a laser focus on only one kind of violence (male on female). It completely ignores male victims (who make up 33% of domestic violence victims in Australia) and same-sex violence.
/r/MensRights22/02/16 02:35 PM
7

I'm not defending radfems (the kind who saw femininity as demeaning) It's wasn't the housewife role itself that was oppressive and demeaning, it was the inability to get hired in other jobs and the glass ceiling that existed in the ones they could get hired in. That was the oppressive part. It wasn't wearing a dress and an apron, it was the fact that you couldn't wear a suit. However it's not the 1970's anymore and today women can get hired into almost any job, with many companies actually givin…
/r/MensRights22/02/16 11:07 AM
4

Pretty much this. It's probably bad parenting yes, but it's not some kind of sick experiment nor is it child abuse. It's within the range of weird stuff that parents teach their kids/weird ways that parents raise their kids.
/r/MensRights22/02/16 07:36 AM
1

Princeso implies gender ambiguity in Spanish.
/r/MensRights22/02/16 07:35 AM
2

It's not child abuse but I would say it's bad parenting if he is showing a preference for one thing and they're forcing something else on him (ie: notice how they make him wear the hair clips when he doesn't want them).
/r/MensRights22/02/16 07:34 AM
1

According to that article, the amount identifying as gay/bisexual varied between 1.2% and 6.8%. Where does it say 2%? Not to mention the 2011 Williams Institute report, aggregating sources from several different countries, said that 8.2% had engaged in same-sex sex, and 11% said they experienced some same-sex sexual attraction (these figures include people who identify as heterosexual - ie: "that one time in college" or "just that one time in the army"). I honestly don't think you read your own …
/r/MensRights22/02/16 07:31 AM
1

ether it is biological to be male or it is taught. Or it can be both. No one is stopping him from expressing himself. The comment never got deleted. It just got downvoted for rudeness or whatever dumb reason people downvote things for. Also I don't want to be that guy but the grammar in your post is atrocious. Is English not your first language?
/r/MensRights22/02/16 07:23 AM
2

One of those old laws that never gets enforced, but is still technically on the books.
/r/MensRights22/02/16 04:17 AM
3

Haha misandry and domestic violence are so funny... That being said, there are worse cases of misandry to address than internet joke pictures. The main thing that annoys me here is not the joke itself but the fact that a man could NEVER get away with posting this about a woman's vagina. It would be decried as disgusting misogynist garbage.
/r/MensRights22/02/16 04:16 AM
22

Or they didn't like him spamming...
/r/MensRights22/02/16 12:42 AM
9

Maybe if she tried to win sole custody on that basis, then she would be spiteful and prejudiced yeah. Joint custody should be the default, unless one/both parents are unfit/unwilling. I wouldn't say kids need a father per se, but studies show that having two loving parents is the best environment for them.
/r/MensRights22/02/16 12:39 AM
1

I get it. We shouldn't allow the crazies outside the movement to dictate what our movement is like. Well in that case, I'm putting my vote in that we don't say this kind of shit because it's totally unhelpful.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 12:45 AM
7

That's a bit of a broad statement. It varies from country to country. Some of them are absolute monarchies where the clergy have a lot of influence on laws / judiciary (Saudi Arabia), others are actual democracies but with theocratic elements (Iran), still others are secular democracies albeit most of the country is one religion (Turkey, Israel, Kurdistan), others are actual theocracies (IS). Some were ruled by secular dictators until recently (Iraq, Syria).
/r/MensRights21/02/16 12:40 AM
10

I understand your frustration at such a horrible person, but there's no need to be a keyboard warrior who threatens violence. That is everything that critics of the MRM say you are.
/r/MensRights20/02/16 02:11 PM
3

Yes, but there's also bad things about early feminism (early on the tender years doctrine, and later extremist morons like Germaine Greer and Andrea Dworkin) and good things about today's feminism (the best and most sex-positive, egalitarian ones aren't all that bad, and there are still gendered issues women face).
/r/MensRights19/02/16 12:09 PM
2

...No. That's stupid.
/r/MensRights19/02/16 03:16 AM
5

Pretty much this. It's more complicated than "feminism was always evil and all feminists were always terrible, forever" or "feminism was always a bright light fighting the good fight".
/r/MensRights19/02/16 02:05 AM
3

white people today weren't the white people of 25 years past One person isn't another person, yeah.
/r/MensRights19/02/16 12:50 AM
2

Presenting an issue that affects both genders (and is in fact primarily a racial issue) as a primarily women's issue. Gotta love hijacking a serious tragedy to further your political agenda.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 11:48 AM
-3

That's just a racist stereotype. I'm sure some Romani people have stolen kids but so have people from other ethnicities. Even then what happened to the couples in Ireland was racial profiling and it was wrong.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 11:29 AM
2

I've had like one instance where some nosy women were giving me dirty looks at the park. For the most part, it doesn't happen to me. Must be different in your area. I'm really sorry you had to deal with such horrible bigoted people.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 04:41 AM
1

I would have been like "Uh. Oh. My bad. Sorry. ... But still you need to get over it, it's just hair."
/r/MensRights18/02/16 04:37 AM
7

That's disgusting and extremely racist on multiple levels. I mean I could maybe understand if there had been children reported missing recently and those kids fitted the description but even then...
/r/MensRights18/02/16 04:34 AM
2

What has this got to do with men's rights? We all know Hillary is an avowed feminist (and not the good kind), a corporate sellout and a general moron. The fact she's said yet another stupid thing to pander to a certain demographic isn't news.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 02:32 AM
3

Why are you saying socialist like it's a bad thing?
/r/MensRights18/02/16 02:29 AM
4

Though to be fair, Anakin was the same. He was like the male version of a Mary Sue.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 02:22 AM
1

Which is more dangerous, someone throwing a sharp, relatively heavy object at you, or someone that punches you? Obviously it's the person with the weapon/object. I totally get your point. However note that the example they gave was the guy shooting her in the leg with a shotgun. That would clearly be up in the "most dangerous" category. Dealing with offenders is a good idea I just wish they didn't try to reinforce the "man bad, women good" stereotype which doesn't fit most IPV situations.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 02:12 PM
4

Fair point. They'll probably still accuse you of censoring them, but it will hold less stock.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 06:23 AM
2

Well, put your own poster over the top.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 04:30 AM
3

The reason blackface is offensive is not because of the black face. It's not the fact you're painting your skin to look like African people. Or else the movie "White Chicks" would be racist against white people because it shows two black men dressing as white people. At any rate, merely dressing that way isn't racist. It's the history of how it was used to reinforce racist stereotypes and continue a system where black people were oppressed - that's the racist part. So when people wear blackface …
/r/MensRights17/02/16 12:39 AM
1

I assume you're referring to the man-on-man lovin' and advancement of the arts/sciences, rather than the child rape, sexism and slavery.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 12:35 AM
1

Don't be such a cunt.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 10:29 PM
22

Alternate headline: Self-obsessed women upset that gay men don't put them on a pedestal.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 09:21 PM
6

This isn't something you can disagree on, it's not up for debate. Sorry.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 01:05 AM
12

Women aren't beating up men, that's 99.9999% men Males are 33-50% of domestic violence victims and it's mostly women who are being violent towards them. And a huge amount of IPV is reciprocal. Women absolutely are beating up men, at least in a domestic setting. Men are 98% of CEOS, 94% of CFOs, COOs, etc. and still own all the mainline businesses This is the same argument feminists use to justify hiring/promoting women over men. The truth is that it doesn't matter at all that the world is contro…
/r/MensRights15/02/16 05:09 AM
5

Australians are all entitled to unemployment benefits (about $240/week, albeit our cost of living is also higher than the US) if they can't get a job. If you're mentally ill to the point where you can't work then you can get disability pension which I believe is slightly higher than unemployment benefits. If you're a single parent you get more - like $350/week or so. As part of unemployment benefits you may be required to do community service for minimal pay, or undertake a certain number of hou…
/r/MensRights14/02/16 07:39 AM
6

Agreed in principle, although increasing the population is probably not good for society in the long term. 310 million is more than enough as it is.
/r/MensRights14/02/16 12:26 AM
5

Hey now, don't dump this stupid woman on Mexico, they have enough problems.
/r/MensRights14/02/16 12:22 AM
4

25 years is like a third of a lifetime.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 06:27 AM
2

I read the speech moron. She mentions him falling in and out of consciousness several times, including during PIV sex. At any point she could (and should) have stopped it, but she chose not to. According to what she wrote, she raped the guy. Yeah, she doesn't deserve jail for what happened, but let's be realistic here she did the wrong thing (also, so did he, albeit he didn't rape anyone but he acted like a wasted moron).
/r/MensRights08/02/16 10:17 PM
2

Her real crime was raping that wasted semi-conscious guy in college. Her stealing jokes is trivial and has basically no relevancy to men's rights.
/r/MensRights08/02/16 10:06 PM
2

Yes, sex with a drunk person is not (automatically) rape. But in this case the guy wasn't conscious. That's rape. As for her stealing jokes? Who cares, it has nothing to do with men's rights.
/r/MensRights08/02/16 10:00 PM
-1

When was the last time conscription was used in the US? Was it used for a war to protect US territory from attack, or was it used to invade a foreign country on the other side of the world?
/r/MensRights04/02/16 05:24 AM
-1

I'll tell you where they don't come from: launching aggressive wars against small countries full of brown people on the other side of the world.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 04:22 AM
1

Ah, another one of the Supreme Court's incorrect decisions. Sad to see.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 02:42 PM
1

This makes like no fucking sense for Denmark, which is not under threat of being attacked by anyone... Then again neither is America I guess.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 12:39 PM
1

Disgusting comments by him. Don't really see what this has to do with men's rights, though.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 11:10 AM
3

Bristol Palin is 26. That's a perfectly healthy age to have a child, provided you are financially capable of caring for it. Albeit she had her first kid at like, 16 or something.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 07:06 AM
2

If you die on the first suicide attempt, you can't have any more attempts. So it's normal that there would be a disparity here.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 05:35 AM
4

It's illegal to drive while under the influence because you might hurt other people. Similarly, if you commit murder or rape or any other crime while under the influence, you are still responsible. However consenting to sex doesn't hurt anyone. That being said, the idea that anyone under the influence can't consent to sex is just ludicrous. Clearly if someone is conscious, aware of what's happening and able to communicate, then they can consent to sex.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 04:15 AM
7

If there is a total war against China, it will be over in 30 minutes.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 01:42 AM
1

So, show me where she smiled. Or grabbed him. Show me some kind of consent, besides "taking it." Despite what crazy fringe feminists say, having bad sex does not mean you were raped. Consent need not be enthusiastic. She doesn't need to smile, grab him etc. What's important here is that she continued to have sex with the guy knowing he was basically unconscious. If anyone was raped, it's him. C'mon, sell me on sex being totally different than violence. Is that a serious statement? I'm flabbergas…
/r/MensRights29/01/16 03:42 PM
4

Disgustingly biased.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 12:48 PM
0

I understand. Once you shove your hands into someone's pants and push them on the bed, they've already consented unless they call the cops. Is this some sort of argument for a "yes means yes" standard of consent? At any rate, what you are talking about (whether the guy did anything wrong) is a totally separate issue. Given what we know from her account, he was a drunk jackass but not a rapist or assaulter because she was consenting. She was perfectly sober and could have told him to leave at any…
/r/MensRights29/01/16 11:55 AM
0

While he had sex with her. That's not the way sex works. It's not something a man does to a woman, it's something that two (or more) people do together. She was a consenting party, he was not. She could have stopped it, but she chose not to. It's pretty simple mate. Stop drinking. I rarely ever drink, but frankly it's beside the point. If you're unresponsive and unconscious you can't consent.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 11:29 AM
1

Yeah I actually just added that and then saw your comment.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 11:12 AM
7

Intoxicated people are able to consent. Having sex with a drunk person is not automatically rape. Anyone who tells you that drunk sex is automatically rape is a moron. If drunk sex is rape then I am both a rape victim and a rapist, in fact I've done both at the same time! But the guy that Amy Schumer raped wasn't just drunk or high, he was actually passed out. She admitted the guy was falling in an out of consciousness while she had sex with him. That's rape, even if his stupid ass initiated it.…
/r/MensRights29/01/16 10:59 AM
2

/r/mensrants
/r/MensRights23/01/16 06:20 AM
2

Most UK hospitals won't routinely offer it to parents (some private hospitals do if I remember rightly), but parents are able to request it if they wish. So Jews, Muslims and others are probably going to get their children mutilated for religious/cultural reasons without even realizing why it's wrong.
/r/MensRights22/01/16 07:01 AM
1

It's less of an issue when they are appointed. When they are elected they have to worry more about what the public thinks because they have to garner votes.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 11:17 PM
2

Well yeah. Postpartum depression is different to regular depression, but with both the person is still aware of their actions and is not suffering from any hallucinations or delusions.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 06:09 AM
5

Post partum depression is real, but it does not excuse murder. This woman is a serial killer and she needs to be in jail.
/r/MensRights21/01/16 03:47 AM
3

Either the father was unsuitable, or he didn't want custody, or he wanted custody but the biased family court system screwed him over. Clearly Lacey would have been better off with pretty much anyone else.
/r/MensRights20/01/16 02:46 PM
5

Assuming the second note was intended to come from Lacey and the double suicide was planned by Dymes, then this is a case of murder-suicide where the suicide attempt failed. The other possibility is Lacey sees that her mum is always taking pills and emulates this with drugs that were left out. Then Dymes realizes what Lacey's done and attempts suicide rather than calling an ambulance. In this case Dymes is guilty of criminal negligence/recklessness and manslaughter, but not murder. In this case …
/r/MensRights20/01/16 02:31 PM
3

and the recommendation of the Logan County’s Prosecutor’s Office Ie: A public prosecutor recommended that the judge not sentence her to jail for attempted murder. Disgusting and no way would this have been the same if the genders were reversed.
/r/MensRights20/01/16 02:19 PM
2

Premeditation should absolutely matter, but this woman should still be in jail because she assaulted the guy using a weapon.
/r/MensRights20/01/16 08:13 AM
4

Acid attacks are typically premediated as revenge against someone who has done something the community deems unacceptable. It's done to publicly shame the victim, because they will always have scars and be permanently disfigured. And as /u/intensely_human said, there's only one reason you would be carrying acid around. So yeah they're pretty much always planned and premeditated.
/r/MensRights20/01/16 08:12 AM
2

Men make up the vast majority of those killed by police, and are treated worse than women at every level of the legal system?
/r/MensRights19/01/16 09:06 AM
1

Good point.
/r/MensRights19/01/16 01:47 AM
4

It's true that on average women earn less than men. This is mostly due to the fact that: Women choose lower paying jobs than men. Nurses and teaches rather than doctors and plumbers. Women work less hours than men, on average. Women have less work experience on avg because they choose to spend years raising kids instead of working*. Sometimes a woman might be paid less than a man for the same job. This tends to happen in corporate jobs where people negotiate a private salary contract with their …
/r/MensRights18/01/16 03:17 PM
3

Looking at the pictures of the event they are cool with themselves. Evidently only so long as they are surrounded by other like-minded women. I'm sorry you are getting downvoted by assholes who use the downvote button as an "I disagree" button, btw.
/r/MensRights17/01/16 02:46 PM
1

Do you think that a nude child in public is child porn? Let's say a child running under the sprinkler in a front yard or a child getting changed at the beach. What about a woman breastfeeding in public? What about nude art, displayed in a public place? I don't think those things are sexual or pornographic. Or: What about a muscly topless man? What about a woman wearing makeup and a sexy dress? Those things are pretty sexy but they're not porn. ...Plus I don't know about you, but I don't find the…
/r/MensRights17/01/16 02:45 PM
8

The event is spoiled either way, either by pervs or through their own self-defeating rules. The only way to do this, IMO, is to walk around topless like it ain't no thang, and then shame anyone who gives them trouble. Rosa Parks didn't give a shit how people reacted when she refused to move to the back of the bus, these women shouldn't give a shit either - they should be proud of their bodies without needing a "safe space".
/r/MensRights17/01/16 02:09 PM
1

It's not porn as long as they're not doing anything sexual.
/r/MensRights17/01/16 02:04 PM
9

I get that they don't want guys perving on them. But it still defeats the entire point of the picnic. "I'm going to go nude to prove that nudity isn't special or sexual - but gosh don't look at me lol." I actually agree that women should be allowed to go topless, but this is a dumb way to go about making the argument for legal exposed nipples.
/r/MensRights17/01/16 01:58 PM
1

If they are threatening to immediately seriously injure or kill you (or another person), then you can seriously injure or kill them. That's pretty much the same in all states. Once your life is in danger from an attacker, there's no proportionate response because a threat to your life is as serious as it can get. Running away simply isn't always an option so they don't expect everyone to run away all the time. For instance you might be old or sick or disabled or really tired or you might be shor…
/r/MensRights17/01/16 06:36 AM
1

Australian here. If someone comes at you or someone near you with a knife, you have the right to kill them to stop them attacking. Even if the DPP (equivalent to your DAs) brought you up on murder charges (unlikely), you would almost certainly get acquitted on self defense. Now, if they've become incapacitated and you continue to attack them, that's when you will probably get into trouble. That being said we have less violent crime than America to begin with, although perhaps a higher proportion…
/r/MensRights17/01/16 05:37 AM
2

You aim for wherever you can get them. Just like if someone is running at you with a knife, and you have a gun, you shoot them in the body because if you try to hit their arm/leg and miss, you'll get stabbed. THAT BEING SAID, if you are going to get into a knife fight, the smarter option is to run away if possible. Because even if you "win" you will probably get stabbed and might still die.
/r/MensRights17/01/16 05:30 AM
3

That's self defense. If someone is trying to stab you, you have the right to seriously wound or even kill them. Basically as soon as they try to injure or kill you with a weapon, they forfeit their right to life.
/r/MensRights17/01/16 05:27 AM
3

Fucking hell, that sucks. I assume that the authorities either turned a blind eye or reporting it to them would have gotten you attacked by other inmates?
/r/MensRights17/01/16 05:24 AM
6

To compete with the big dogs, you're going to need either an original idea so that you're not competing with them directly, or an astronomical amount of money.
/r/MensRights14/01/16 12:06 PM
5

NOTE: He was 'fined' (docked pay) by the Melbourne Renegades, the cricket club he works for. When he signed on with them, he would have agreed to let them dock his pay arbitrarily. The government/law enforcement/courts were not involved. But generally I agree that the reaction to this was way overblown with people calling it "harrassment" (lmfao). But when a different female reporter does far worse ... crickets. Not a sound from feminists or the media.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 01:26 PM
5

YouTube is an American company subject to US law. But I'm not an international copyright lawyer I guess, so I won't presume to know the exact specifics of how this might work across borders.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 01:10 PM
-3

Wait is this some sort of criticism of statistics as a field? Because if so please let me know, I don't have time for anti-intellectual garbage. At any rate, I haven't engaged in any sort of shenanigans - only stated facts. In actual fact the ratios are being used to justify discrimination on the basis of gender. And in that respect I agree with you that it's wrong. But they didn't engage in any sort of shenanigans, they didn't give inaccurate statistics or mislead anyone. All they are guilty of…
/r/MensRights11/01/16 12:15 PM
3

This has actually happened before, although it's pretty rare. Hypothetically yes, you are still responsible for child support even if your sperm was stolen, and even if you were raped. You have to remember that in most western countries, men have absolutely zero reproductive rights. In some jurisdictions you can even be put in jail for not paying child support. In addition, in some places men can be forced to pay child support to children which are not theirs.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 10:29 AM
-1

You do know the meaning of fold, right? It means multiply. They said it's a "10-fold increase for women", that means the number of women who entered prisons in 2014 is 10 times the number of women who entered prison in 1974. Meanwhile the number of men entering prison has increased 4-fold (by 4 times) in the same period. Who knew 2534 is MORE than 12460. As I said above, they aren't saying that there are more women entering prison than men. They're saying that the rate at which women are enterin…
/r/MensRights11/01/16 08:10 AM
3

It already is illegal to deny visitation. It's just the courts rarely enforce it.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 06:53 AM
1

People will still base decisions on getting laid. It's in our nature to try and attract mates, even if there's no promise of immediately getting some (or in the other case, if your base need to cum is otherwise satisfied).
/r/MensRights10/01/16 06:43 AM
3

This is a good analysis of on reason why people who are now in their 20's, 30's and early 40's are having less kids. But as Daphne said, the article is talking about people who are in their late 40's, 50's and 60's.
/r/MensRights08/01/16 07:36 AM
1

Buzzfeed presents: How to be a really mean person. (But lol it's K cause you're doing it to men, you go girl). That being said, this isn't exactly a big deal.
/r/MensRights08/01/16 07:30 AM
38

Women are akin to children [when it suits the agenda], they are fully capable adults [when it suits the agenda].
/r/MensRights03/01/16 12:28 AM
18

I was circumcised at 4 and it was terrifying. I remember physically fighting the surgeon who was trying to put me under general anesthetic. It was also horribly painful for months afterwards. I got used to sleeping with my knees bent to stop the sheets from touching my genitals. I also didn't heal properly and now have a skin bridge (luckily it doesn't cause me pain, it could have been much worse). Now, I was circumcised because my foreskin blocked the urethra, meaning I sprayed pee everywhere. …
/r/MensRights27/12/15 03:36 AM
7

It's good she said it's OK, because as a male I need permission from random female journalist to feel emotions.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:24 AM
5

Yeah both sexes being forced to pay alimony is equality. But justice would be banning long-term alimony and capping alimony at a livable wage amount. Sort of like how both sexes being forced to register for selective service is equality, but justice would be abolishing selective service requirements altogether.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 11:58 AM
3

SJWism is not a psychosis nor a mental disorder of any kind. It's just a shitty ideology based on a misguided sense of justice, confirmation bias and outright bigotry. You don't have to be mentally ill to hold to a shitty ideology or lack critical thinking skills and the ability to use basic logic.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 10:52 AM
2

I was under the impression that they did care about % which is why they did things like hit you with a horrible charge they know they can't you on, in order to intimidate you into pleading guilty to a lesser charge - then they have their conviction.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 10:46 AM
2

Do you think most people have the intelligence to understand that? Or will they misinterpret it as you being a misogynist? Then again, some parts of society already call us misogynist so what have we got to lose?
/r/MensRights23/12/15 03:24 AM
3

There's nothing wrong with having a female lead character if it fits the universe and she's well-written. (It makes perfect sense in Star Wars where largely people don't care about gender). It's only an issue if it ruins the movie by obviously pushing an ideology on the viewers.
/r/MensRights21/12/15 01:19 PM
4

Well statistically speaking most violence against men is committed by men. More broadly, most violence (period) is committed by men, and most victims of violence (period) are men. But I feel like phrasing it the way you did is not that helpful because the last thing you want to do is make people feel alienated or encourage the kind of self-hate that radical feminists do in men.
/r/MensRights20/12/15 05:44 AM
3

The article you linked is about a female teacher who allegedly raped her underage students. I think you may have linked the wrong one by mistake. The fact this has upvotes is proof people don't even read the damn article.
/r/MensRights20/12/15 05:21 AM
2

Yeah my bad. When I said I agree with him generally I meant I generally agree with his post, not that I generally agree about giving up seats and giving up lives.
/r/MensRights19/12/15 04:06 AM
10

You probably shouldn't comment without reading the OP.
/r/MensRights19/12/15 03:18 AM
7

I've seen more instances of men taking bullets for women to save them than I've seen women give up their seats for elderly or disabled men. I've seen the opposite: many more instances of women giving up their seat for elderly and disabled men and than men taking bullets for women. I agree with you generally, though.
/r/MensRights19/12/15 02:44 AM
8

This is a good but I can't help but feel if she had been attractive and white the sentence would have been less.
/r/MensRights19/12/15 02:24 AM
13

out of her league Or maybe they just smell the crazy and run in the opposite direction.
/r/MensRights18/12/15 06:29 AM
1

Well I mean, it would be an improvement, but both are deplorable.
/r/MensRights17/12/15 10:58 AM
1

This is all beside the point. In this situation it's a teacher and a minor student. The teacher has a responsibility to take care of the minor student which she is breaching. The teacher also has power and authority over the minor student which pretty much invalidates any possible consent the student gives. Even if the age of consent is 16 (and I fully agree that 18 is extremely backwards, unrealistic and way too high to set the age of consent), it should still be illegal for a teacher to have s…
/r/MensRights17/12/15 06:54 AM
1

Where I live the age of consent is 16, but it's still illegal for an adult to have sex with a minor under their care. That includes teachers, parents/guardians, coaches, religious leaders, police, prison guards etc. That being said, as I said above, we're not 100% sure what she is actually accused of here.
/r/MensRights17/12/15 06:52 AM
1

Except that this isn't just any sex, it's sex between a teacher and a minor student under her care. Yeah, sure, a 16 should be able to have sex with older people. No problem. But a teacher/parent/religious leader/coach has responsibility towards the minors under his/her care. In addition, that person has a lot of power and authority over the minors under their care which means it's not freely given consent.
/r/MensRights17/12/15 06:50 AM
1

Statutory rape isn't called rape, it's called statutory rape. There's a reason we use the word statutory - it means "by law". As in rape by law, but not necessarily by fact. a 24 year old Yeah a 17 year old and a 24 year old shouldn't generally be illegal. Except she's not just any 24-year-old, she's his teacher. She has a duty of care and responsibility towards him which she breached by fucking him. She also has a great deal of power and authority over him, which can potentially use to get him …
/r/MensRights17/12/15 06:47 AM
1

I understood that you were being sarcastic lol. Hence my use of the word satirical. What I didn't get was that your post didn't seem to have a consistent point.
/r/MensRights17/12/15 03:01 AM
-49

Your comment doesn't make any sense. If you were trying to be satirical, you need to be consistent. You can't switch tone halfway through. The only way the tone switch makes sense if it was meant to indicate "oh sorry I went against the prevailing (wrong) viewpoint by suggesting that women should be banned from teaching for being rapey, here i'll toe the line" then that would imply you actually do want women banned from teaching which can't be true because surely no one could be that fucking cra…
/r/MensRights16/12/15 03:18 PM
143

We don't actually know what she's accused of doing. "Corruption or solicitation of a minor" isn't very clear. I think in this case the article is fine since they're not saying she "had a relationship" or they "had sex" (which is what I generally have an issue with), it's saying she's been charged with a sex crime - which is exactly what has happened.
/r/MensRights16/12/15 03:15 PM
5

Yes but it's still based on sex: 5/6 of the most hated groups are male. 4/6 of the most loved groups are female. And race: Loved groups: Chinese, Jewish. Hated groups: Black Caribbean, Pakistani, Polish.
/r/MensRights16/12/15 07:45 AM
1

wont*
/r/MensRights15/12/15 10:07 AM
4

Sorry I'm not sure I understand your point?
/r/MensRights15/12/15 09:49 AM
11

I don't think this is "the reason" games lack female characters. It's because games have been marketed primarily to males. And even before games, heroic fiction has always had mostly male protagonists. That's gender roles at work - men are expected to be the heroes. It's not like game designers create their games specifically to avoid feminist outcry, if anything, the chilling effect from feminist nutsos is minimal. However it's certainly a valid point that this is a double standard. If Galbrush…
/r/MensRights15/12/15 08:27 AM
12

Donnie fighting the good fight there.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 02:21 AM
2

By treating someone differently until either guilt or innocence is proven, you're already not treating that person as innocent anymore. By this definition, there is no such as a presumption of innocence for anyone ever. You realise that presumptively innocent people get arrested and even sometimes jailed and post bail all prior to ever standing trial, right? I agree it's fucked up but it's not the same as a presumption of guilt. It's the same reason people who have been charged with murder (inno…
/r/MensRights13/12/15 02:59 PM
1

Well, cancer or heart disease, probably.
/r/MensRights13/12/15 02:11 PM
1

The problem is that they were her students. She was in fact their teacher, and that makes it illegal because regardless of age she still has power over them It should be illegal but it should only be a minor offence (no pun intended, because they were all consenting adults). She should lose her job and be banned from teaching. But 5 years jail and a criminal record? No way that's fucked up.
/r/MensRights13/12/15 02:09 PM
3

The fact that they even fucked this up and broke their own tax law by insisting the payment go to her shows that there is an anti-male bias at work here.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 06:38 PM
2

Because of course, everyone who is accused or rape is guilty. So that figure should clearly be 100% right? Morons. Though I certainly agree that shark culling is retarded.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 04:47 PM
2

Well, y'know, excepting all the jews who aren't white.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 04:45 PM
0

In this situation, a woman is raped and then she comes to report it to the UAE authorities. They can't find the alleged rapist, but they jail her because by reporting her rape she's admitted to having extra-marital sex.
/r/MensRights09/12/15 08:11 AM
8

Typically harassment has to be: Intended to cause distress, or Repeated after the receiver indicates they don't want it You wouldn't call it harassment to ask someone out once, for instance. It's only if they say to leave them alone and you keep asking them out. But it's just ridiculous to threaten to involve the authorities when it's a bunch of primary (elementary) school kids.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 01:50 AM
2

That wouldn't help the situation. You'd be victimizing a bunch of dumb kids for being dumb kids. Realistically, the school should have: Given the boy a slap on the wrist and told him to stop writing unwanted love notes. Punished the bullying/teasing kids. Detention or picking up rubbish or something. Not threatened to take the matter to the cops because it's just some playground drama WTF IS WRONG WITH THAT PRINCIPAL.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 01:44 AM
2

In other news, South Korea has the 2nd highest suicide rate in the world, with over 2/3rds of victims being men. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate
/r/MensRights08/12/15 01:27 AM
-4

Jewboy's conclusion seemed to be (although apparently that's not what he meant - see below) that if the CDC study had 1.8 million women getting raped, but the Crime Bureau only had 180k rapes reported to the authorities, that it must mean the remaining 1.62 million didn't actually happen. But we know for a fact that not all rapes get reported to the cops (and for that matter, some of the rapes that do get reported never actually happened). And as I said, some of the rapes that are self-reported …
/r/MensRights07/12/15 01:58 PM
10

Well, the statistics aren't fabricated (as in made up out of thin air). It's real data that's been deliberately framed in such a way as to be misleading. For instance X amount of women reported having sex while under the influence of alcohol. That's real data, but the CDC have called it "rape", when any sane person knows that having sex after a few drinks is not automatically rape. Second: /u/jewboyfresh was insinuating that there are no rapes that go unreported, which is clearly wrong. Even if …
/r/MensRights07/12/15 06:58 AM
19

Well looks like the justice system forgot to include the other 90% shrug Uh, no. The obvious conclusion here is that 9/10 rapes were not reported to police. Of course this is complicated by the fact that not all of those 1.8 million "rapes" in the CDC sexual abuse survey (or the 1/5 women in the Campus Sexual Assault Survey) may actually be rapes. It depends on the wording of the questions (which might make more or less people respond positively, or might make males or females respond in differe…
/r/MensRights07/12/15 04:52 AM
3

Gynosycophant A much better way of saying white knight. Well done. I don't think it'll pick up, though, because white knight carries much more emotional weight.
/r/MensRights01/12/15 09:34 AM
1

Some of these photos refer to people (women) being wasted. I think it's not out of line to make sure your friend is OK if they are shitfaced and being hit on by someone. But the way they presented it here in these posters is laughable. As you said it sounds like they're just anti-sex lol.
/r/MensRights01/12/15 09:32 AM
3

Where was I arguing for mandatory minimum sentences? He was arguing against mandatory sentences, and then you criticised him for making that argument. Forgive me for assuming that you were pro mandatory minimum sentences. The only bit I think that was really inappropriate was saying these guys were otherwise decent citizens which I think crosses the line into trying to minimize what they've done. They're assaulter and murderers. Men deserve protection from this kind of violence Men already have …
/r/MensRights01/12/15 01:16 AM
3

it's the same sentiment everywhere You can't prove that with a Google search. Do you have any actual statistics on sentencing?
/r/MensRights01/12/15 01:00 AM
6

Firstly: Way to editorialize the title OP. Please don't try to spin your bullshit, just post the article title or a sentence from the article. Or at least some unbiased description of the article. Secondly: I actually agree with him because judges should have the ability to discern between an attack with malicious intent and one without. The most important part of a judge's job is choosing a sentence after the jury delivers a guilty verdict. Having strict mandatory minimums defeats the point of …
/r/MensRights01/12/15 12:57 AM
4

Well maybe you should go and find a critic of the law and tell them, I dunno. Well that's kinda what he's doing here...
/r/MensRights01/12/15 12:44 AM
61

Note she didn't say "I believe rape victims", she said "I believe women". So it seems as though she either believes only women can be rape victims, is deliberately framing rape as a female-only issue or is only prepared to accept the word of women. Either way, sexist. At any rate yes, it's silly to react that way to a mere accusation. In an ideal world, people wouldn't get fired from their jobs over accusations without any supporting evidence :/ That isn't to say that Stoya is necessarily lying …
/r/MensRights30/11/15 02:57 PM
2

This is what no one ever talks about. You've got some feminists calling for the head of anyone who is even accused of rape. And you've got other people decrying the outright false accusations: where no rape ever happened. But what no one ever talks about the times when a rape really happened but they convict the wrong person, and so the real rapist is walking around probably raping more people.
/r/MensRights30/11/15 01:39 AM
0

I just don't understand why I have to divulge my personal life details to my employer to get leave. That's what annual leave, long-service leave and paid sick days are for. You shouldn't get parental leave unless you're have to care for a dying parent/spouse? I think that's a reasonable request. People should get a certain amount of paid leave every few years in case one of their family members is seriously ill. Course it depends where you live, I guess. Most of the US allows employers to fire y…
/r/MensRights30/11/15 01:21 AM
3

OMFG what a total non-issue. There's FGM, sex trafficking, domestic violence and slut shaming but instead they complain about sexist heating? Jeez.
/r/MensRights29/11/15 02:20 PM
1

Maybe they're including all unwanted sexual touching over a lifetime?
/r/MensRights29/11/15 08:52 AM
2

Fair point.
/r/MensRights29/11/15 08:25 AM
9

Those are American and German websites, though.
/r/MensRights29/11/15 06:22 AM
2

sexist heating What's that?
/r/MensRights29/11/15 02:46 AM
16

If you think that unborn humans have a right to life, that doesn't necessarily make you a misogynist. If you're anti-abortion because you want to like, punish women for having sex, then yeah that's misogynist.
/r/MensRights28/11/15 05:02 AM
22

Now imagine elmer fudd raping lola bunny. Oh wait, suddenly it's not funny any more... George Carlin also said that pro-life is categorically anti-woman.
/r/MensRights28/11/15 03:44 AM
0

It doesn't.
/r/MensRights28/11/15 01:09 AM
5

It's already campus policy on all university campuses in California and New York (campus policy mandated by state law). You could be expelled from university for hugging your partner without first asking them verbally if that's OK.
/r/MensRights27/11/15 01:17 PM
4

You won't see those excuses trotted out for a man who rapes a 10 year old girl, you shouldn't see it for a woman with a boy either. You see bullshit when the sexes are reversed (male perp female victim), as well. http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/11/29/cleveland_texas_rape_case_defense_attorney_calls_pre_teen_victim_a_spider.html The bullshit has a slightly different odour though. See, instead of trying to make our the male rapist as being a poor, vulnerable, pitiable person (that doesn'…
/r/MensRights27/11/15 12:17 PM
-6

There's definitely sub-sections of our culture that condone or trivialize rape and sexual assault. I don't think that makes our culture a "rape culture" overall, though. I mean just look at the movies which make fun of guys who get anally raped in prison. Or look at the people who blame drunk women for getting raped. These idiots are definitely around, although I haven't read any statistics on just how common these kinds of views are.
/r/MensRights27/11/15 12:12 PM
3

I don't disagree that man on man, woman on man and woman on woman DV is often taken much less seriously than man on woman DV.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 01:54 PM
2

Violence is NOT a gender issue You just said there weren't any battered women/they were very rare. So violence is a gendered issue ... or it's not? and it's being portrayed as one. It matters. I agree that the way White Ribbon pretends violence is all male on female - that's wrong, yeah. Why do I think it's wrong? Because the best statistical data we have says it's wrong. The best data we have says that men are a significant amount of victims and women are a significant amount of perps, and that…
/r/MensRights25/11/15 11:33 AM
3

First, I'm sorry your ex was such an abusive, lying piece of shit. That really sucks. Yeah, I've met a woman who was the victim of non-reciprocal violence at the hands of a man. But that doesn't mean anything. Maybe she was the only one in the world. Maybe she was one of many. I don't know for sure because you can't trust anecdotal reports. People's stories are interesting, but we can't make big conclusions from them. Imagine if 80% of taxi drivers in the country are Jewish and I just never meet…
/r/MensRights25/11/15 11:15 AM
5

Here is my anecdotal evidence, from which I conclude that men rarely ever hit women I'm just going to ignore the statistics linked above by /u/iainmf Waaahhh the social sciences are not scientific Are you fuckin' kidding me?
/r/MensRights25/11/15 10:55 AM
1

Being married or even just living with the mother can often make you liable for child support. But again in many jurisdictions you can challenge this on the basis that you're not the biological father of the kid. For instance in my state (non US): http://www.legalaid.nsw.gov.au/publications/factsheets-and-resources/taking-action-to-question-paternity
/r/MensRights25/11/15 06:23 AM
2

There's tons of examples in the US. The issue is that there's often a time limit on when you can challenge the child support decision on the basis of you not being the father, and also the legalities are often very complex. For instance in California I think the limit is 6 months after being notified of your obligation, and often people don't get notified because they just moved or they're in jail or out of the state/country, or they're uneducated/mentally incompetent, or they're too poor to aff…
/r/MensRights25/11/15 05:38 AM
2

If you happen to be a man who's wife cheated and produced a baby with another man the genes don't matter. You still have to pay for it. Depends on your jurisdiction and the circumstances.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 12:43 AM
7

IKR. Thank goodness no man has ever had to pay for a child that isn't his...
/r/MensRights25/11/15 12:42 AM
4

Girls and boys need both masculine and feminine influences in their lives, and the ideal situation for raising kids is with two loving parents.
/r/MensRights24/11/15 01:11 AM
1

No, we should wait until she's convicted of a crime. She's not gong to be convicted of a crime, because what she did isn't a crime. There's lots of bad things that aren't crimes, such as cheating on your partner. In this case, what she did is perfectly legal (according to the father's lawyer). The worst thing that happens to her is she has to sit through civil court hearings and gets stern words from the judge. Let me ask you this: if someone came to you saying that their partner had left them, …
/r/MensRights24/11/15 01:02 AM
3

Well, the most important factor is having two loving, involved parents.
/r/MensRights22/11/15 01:25 PM
13

You're the one jumping to conclusions by saying he could have abused her when you have no evidence for that. Yeah maybe she was abusive. Maybe they're both repitilian aliens from the planet Zenon. The only information we have is that the mother legally gave the daughter up for adoption, against the wishes of the father (who wanted to raise her). If we get more information, then we can reassess.
/r/MensRights22/11/15 01:18 PM
48

What's prejudiced is you making spurious suggestions the man might have been abusive, when we have literally nothing to suggest that. Because of course when a woman does something wrong, it's really a man's fault.
/r/MensRights22/11/15 01:17 PM
18

Removing the article would be like pretending it never happened. Better to leave it there with an apology.
/r/MensRights22/11/15 01:01 AM
1

Just imagine if OP had left his ID at home. Jeez. This is doubly stupid because your ID doesn't prove you are the parent. Driver's licenses don't list your kid's names on them. Plus you're not gonna carry around the kid's birth certificate to match with your ID.
/r/MensRights21/11/15 10:07 AM
11

The media already doesn't interview MRAs. Most people don't know the MRM even exists. Of those who do, many believe that all MRAs are universally abusive, misogynist, conservative white men. This is partially due to lies from radical feminists, and partially due to the minority of abusive misogynists who are very vocal on social media.
/r/MensRights19/11/15 10:18 AM
2

Academia can be a haven for radical feminists (including the man-haters at York), although it differs from school to school. That doesn't necessarily mean all self-described feminists are that extreme.
/r/MensRights19/11/15 06:18 AM
0

I never thought I'd find myself singing the praises of a Breitbart article, but they are absolutely on point here. I guess broken clocks are right twice a day.
/r/MensRights19/11/15 06:08 AM
2

It is Korean.
/r/MensRights18/11/15 01:08 PM
1

Second he describes that if he leaves he will have to pay money for the raising of these extramarital conceived children. This may or may not be true. It depends on the laws in his state/country. In some places, a man can be forced to pay child support even if children are not his own. But in other places, he can escape this by having a paternity test to prove the children are not his. Your friend needs to talk to a lawyer. They are dirt poor and seek economic uplifting, but this seems so sick i…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 01:05 PM
4

at least 50% of rape accusations are fraud I think you mean false. Fraud is when you deliberately deceive someone in order to get an unfair or illegal benefit, especially for monetary gain. at least 50% No, this is (probably) wrong. We have no way to know the true rate of false rape accusations. Figures as low as 1% and as high as 90% have been recorded in various studies, with most reporting somewhere between 2% and 47%. But even the best studies still have serious limitations and methodologica…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 05:56 AM
11

Bad title. Shitty article. The boy hasn't been charged with anything. The police are not involved. Article doesn't mention any punishment from the school, except that they threatened to file charges if he writes another note (though this in itself is unreasonable, the matter should be dealt with without involving law enforcement). Dr Valerie McClain, a Tampa-based psychology, said that passing a love note did not constitute sexual harassment, and the boy probably thought he was being sweet and i…
/r/MensRights17/11/15 03:22 PM
3

Do it anyway. This is important, it goes beyond petty internet squabbles with feminists. (I can't post it, they already banned me for posting in this sub).
/r/MensRights17/11/15 11:09 AM
0

So he's gonna raise the kid in a family where mummy constantly bitches at daddy? He's gotta stay in an unhappy relationship for the next 16 years? Better to end it now while the kid is too young to remember the breakup.
/r/MensRights17/11/15 09:44 AM
-4

Ftfy Jesus fuck Wait so you believe that hell is real. You care enough about this percieved blasphemy that you take the time to write a comment and "correct" the person. But then you casually take the Lord's name in vain?
/r/MensRights17/11/15 01:46 AM
2

Ok this is going to sound weird to you guys. I think 9 months jail is too long, considering she confessed to lying and in this case the man was never jailed nor convicted. Something like weekend jail for 9 months, banned from drinking alcohol and probation for a few years. WAIT A SECOND. HOLD UP. PUT OUT THE TORCHES. I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE THINKING GUYS. "This sexist piece of shit, doesn't he even care about the guy whose life was almost ruined?" Don't get me wrong, we should punish false accusers. …
/r/MensRights17/11/15 01:34 AM
2

We don't ask for it because we learned long ago the help is not there. That's a bit of a chicken or egg scenario. But either way, it's a massive problem.
/r/MensRights16/11/15 09:06 AM
28

And then we wonder why 75%-80% of suicides are men. Yes, it's partly men are conditioned to be more decisive and to use more "manly" (read: reliable) methods of suicide such as a bullet to the head or jumping off a cliff as opposed to a drug overdose. But it's also because they have far less social support than women do.
/r/MensRights15/11/15 06:59 PM
1

The ad is tasteless and crass. Fat jokes appeal to the lowest common denominator, like a fart joke. I hope the woman understood what kind of ad she was appearing in. But yeah, most people don't find obesity to be sexually attractive. And it's irresponsible to pretend obesity is OK, because obesity is extremely unhealthy and a massive issue in our society. If the genders were reversed, would it even make the news Probably not because women's body image is taken much more seriously than men's. TL;…
/r/MensRights15/11/15 05:02 AM
1

I assume it was statistically significant or it wouldn't have been reported.
/r/MensRights13/11/15 07:13 PM
10

Men who insist on paying for the first date are "trying to buy sex," misogynist pigs who think women can't pay for their own meal, men who won't are "cheap."
/r/MensRights13/11/15 07:11 PM
16

Catch 22s / Double-binds: If the man won't make the first move, he's a wuss and a loser. If he does and the woman doesn't like him, he's a sexually aggressive creep. If a man defends himself against a violent woman, he's a wife beating scumbag. If he doesn't, he's a wuss and should be mocked. Double standards: If a girl's clitoral hood is removed, that's female genital mutilation - a horrible barbaric crime. If a boy's foreskin is removed, it's normal and acceptable and within the parent's right…
/r/MensRights13/11/15 07:06 PM
8

She forced other people to have sex with each other. That's equally as bad as rape but it's not really rape in the way we normally use the word.
/r/MensRights13/11/15 06:39 PM
1

Brain size as a percentage of body weight is weakly correlated with intelligence among mammals, last I heard.
/r/MensRights13/11/15 05:58 PM
-5

Objectively speaking, the strictest most conservative definition of a feminist is someone who: identifies as a feminist and, advocates for the rights of women and girls You don't have to believe in patriarchy theory to be a feminist, and indeed patriarchy theory wasn't even well known amongst the public until just recently. Hell, it's still often misinterpreted to mean a literal patriarchy.
/r/MensRights13/11/15 03:48 AM
-3

First of all, just to be clear: when academic feminists talk about patriarchy theory, they're talking about an idea in sociology and philosophy that we live in a society where masculinity is valued above femininity. They're not talking about a literal patriarchy where society is ruled by a group of males (every society in history), though they sometimes talk about this latter issue as well. Second, while believing in patriarchy theory means you're a feminist, there are also feminists who don't b…
/r/MensRights13/11/15 03:27 AM
2

To answer, usually name withholding is a media bias. Often yes, although it's also possible in some places for a judge to give an order suppressing the publication of the person's name. This is usually done in the case of minors or if the judge thinks the publication of the name would prevent a fair trial from taking place.
/r/MensRights12/11/15 02:55 PM
74

Ozzie = Ozzy Osbourne. Aussie = Australian. Kiwi = New Zealander.
/r/MensRights12/11/15 02:54 PM
1

For all you know the guy grew up poor as shit. Don't be so presumptive. That's like hearing someone is a man or white and assuming they're privileged.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 01:06 PM
2

[Some women are crazy, therefore it's OK to distrust women] This is basically the same as the misandrist poisoned M&Ms argument. The one that uses poisoned M&Ms as a metaphor for violent men. "If someone gave you a bowl of M&Ms and 10% were poison, would you take one?" "Some men are violent, therefore it's OK to distrust men." "Some black people are thieves, therefore it's OK to distrust blacks." "Some women are crazy, therefore it's OK to distrust women." Trouble is, people aren't candy. People…
/r/MensRights11/11/15 01:02 PM
1

I hate to be the first to break the news to you, but for the most part, just consider women to be insane. Yea, yea, yea, "you can't say 'all' bla bla bla" so let's skip that stupidity and get down to what should be the RULES for a man's life in 2015: Just assume every woman you meet is insane. Even if she isn't State Hospital crazy, at LEAST one day or week a month she is. Only problem is you don't know if it's that time of the month. This is basically the same as the "poisoned M&Ms" argument wh…
/r/MensRights11/11/15 12:58 PM
3

How many MORE men are victims of female partner violence? In Australia, 33% of domestic violence victims are male, with the vast majority of those being victimized by females. http://www.oneinthree.com.au/ It's also true that women make up the majority of those killed by their partners in Australia. ...Of course that is completely and totally unrelated to the article topic...
/r/MensRights10/11/15 08:36 AM
3

Where I live, you have to be separated for a year (not living together and not having sex, also demonstrate separate finances etc) before applying for a divorce. If you want to do it sooner, you have to do marriage counselling. I think that's a pretty fair requirement. I fully agree that child support and alimony need to be massively reformed. Alimony should be short-term only and capped at a low amount (alimony is not there to fund people's high-roller lifestyle). Jail sentences for failure to …
/r/MensRights09/11/15 03:39 PM
6

Are you some kind of fanatical Catholic who doesn't believe in divorce? Actually scratch that, because even the Catholic Church say that an unhappy couple in an unhealthy marriage shouldn't live together (albeit not divorce).
/r/MensRights09/11/15 03:28 PM
9

Divorce has existed for thousands of years, probably as long as marriage has. We have written records of it going back to ancient Athens at least. Two people who have tried but simply cannot work it out... should not stay together. Ideally kids should be Kids raised by two loving parents. But kids raised in an unhappy, turbulent marriage can be just as bad off as those raised by single parents.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 03:26 PM
2

You're replying to OP. I think you meant to reply to me. You're right that ending it is the right thing to do but she did it the wrobg way. That was my whole point. Read my post again, I think you missed the second paragraph.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 02:24 PM
1

You can't expect people to stay married when they aren't happy and don't love the other person. "Staying together for the kids" is a stupid idea and often ends up worse for the kids anyway if the parents don't get along. But if she took you and your siblings off him and raised you in that sort of environment I can understand how that would really suck and be damaging. Thanks for sharing, sorry that happened to you. :/
/r/MensRights09/11/15 12:54 PM
2

Where I live bike helmets are mandatory for everyone. Albeit we're one of the only countries where this is the case.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 05:21 AM
1

Uh, he hasn't "destroyed" anyone's argument. His argument has lots of flaws. With the exception of a few cultures that consist of people who are still essentially neanderthals in terms of their mental development Which cultures is he talking about? And why/in what manner are those cultures different to his? Now, if they are different and that has an impact on morals about rape, wouldn't that suggest there is a cultural/social component to rape... which is part of what he is arguing against? This…
/r/MensRights08/11/15 05:24 PM
2

Asked how this poster was an issue of men's rights, because no rights were being violated.
/r/MensRights08/11/15 09:50 AM
1

Nah. The text is center-aligned.
/r/MensRights08/11/15 04:29 AM
8

You realise this sub is for positive things too?
/r/MensRights08/11/15 04:21 AM
1

If I informally call someone a child rapist, do I really need to clarify that I'm accusing them of "sexual intercourse with a child under 10" as per the NSW crime act 1900? As long as everyone understands what I mean and I'm not actually in a court, does it matter? I don't really see the problem with the common usage of the word assault here.
/r/MensRights08/11/15 03:03 AM
1

You don't have to cause any lasting harm for it be assault. I could come up and pinch you, and it wouldn't cause any real harm but it would be assault. As for the water gun incident, it's really hard to say without being there. If it was just a stray squirt then that's hardly worth worrying about and she's obviously just trying to get him into trouble. If it was a sustained thing where he continuously did it while she was screaming at him to stop, and she got pretty soaked, then that should be i…
/r/MensRights07/11/15 08:25 PM
4

I guess you're from the US? In other english speaking countries, the word "assault" is generally used to mean physically attacking someone, not just verbally threatening them. Also: media aren't required to report the exact legal name of the crime he was convicted of, especially shitty media outlets like the daily mail which has basically no journalistic standards.
/r/MensRights07/11/15 04:49 PM
5

You can call MensLine on 1300 78 99 78, and you can even go online at https://www.mensline.org.au/ and request a callback. They offer 24/7 phone counselling services, but requesting a callback is probably the best option since you might have to wait otherwise. MensLine Australia should not be confused with mensline, which is part of Queensland's DV Connect service. It seems to be focused more towards counselling male abusers, rather than male victims. Also if you're a victim of domestic violence…
/r/MensRights06/11/15 10:14 AM
1

Fair enough. In this case you've got what she said on record: two conflicting statements one of which must be false. So you know for sure that she's broken the law. That isn't true for most cases, of course, but the charge here is legit from what you described. Sorry if I came off as overly aggressive. I'm not a lawyer or even an American, just someone concerned about injustices. Personally, I think her false report is more serious than her DWI, but that's not the law in Texas; false report is a…
/r/MensRights05/11/15 03:36 PM
5

I recommended that we also file false report charges against her Yes. She made a false report and you have a signed statement from her which proves it. even if only to use as leverage for a jail-time plea to the DWI. WHAT THE FUCK? If you truly care about justice, stop using frivolous charges to intimidate defendants into pleading guilty to a lesser charge. All you do is waste the court's time, and the defendant may in fact be innocent of all charges anyway. If you don't think you can get a conv…
/r/MensRights05/11/15 12:18 PM
1

Maybe it's because of feminists, maybe it's not. We don't know either way, so we shouldn't jump to conclusions. We wait until we have sufficient evidence before concluding anything. That's like, the whole point of statistics.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 02:07 PM
13

the word patriarchy is code for masculinity Well duh. Patriarchy theory holds that masculinity is valued more highly than femininity by society, and this means that those with masculine traits (especially men) are privileged, and this is the root of many of society's ills, and the reason women are oppressed. Academic feminists of the second and third waves have made no attempt to cover this up, as it's the central idea in their philosophy of gender. This is why many feminists talk about things l…
/r/MensRights02/11/15 01:52 PM
5

You didn't use any logic. You didn't make any sort of argument based on reason or evidence. All you did was throw a baseless accusation out there, and now you're avoiding discussion and derailing the conversation. You might as well have called him a nazi. What you are doing is intellectually dishonest, and you should feel bad.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 01:28 PM
2

Attacks with corrosive liquids are different they're not intended to kill the person. They're intended to disfigure and publicly shame the person. The idea is that they will live forever with a face that says "I did something bad". If you use a gun/knife, you might kill the person which defeats the purpose of publicly shaming them. Also, people can cover up a knife or bullet wound and no one will ever know they were attacked. So I don't think you can really compare attempted murder to acid attac…
/r/MensRights02/11/15 01:18 PM
1

Well, in my country it's actually illegal to discriminate on the basis of sexuality, even if it's a gay bar. You have to apply for a special exception (such as a domestic violence shelter that only serves women) and they're generally not given to profit-earning businesses like a bar or a bakery or a barber. So as a straight guy I can walk into a gay bar and they can't legally kick me out based on my sexuality (but realistically if they wanted me gone they'd make up another reason, because that's…
/r/MensRights02/11/15 01:13 PM
1

You seem to be confused. The bakers weren't forcing anyone to convert or to take part in their religion. Rather, they were refusing to take part in the gay couple's religious activity (since they had a priest officiating, you argued the wedding was religious). And that's fine. You have the right to practice your religion, but I don't have to help you practice it. Freedom of religion is a negative right, not a positive right. The issue with the bakery discriminating is much more practical than th…
/r/MensRights02/11/15 12:52 PM
1

Just FYI I think this is a bad argument. Your religious rights don't extend to forcing someone else to help you practice your religion. If someone else refuses to take part in your religious practices, that's not a violation of your freedom of religion.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 10:42 AM
1

So really this is about religious differences, then, and service was refused based on the different beliefs of that Christian sect? So they should also refuse service to Hindu or Buddhist couples wanting a wedding cake?
/r/MensRights02/11/15 10:40 AM
1

Except that marriage as a social rite/institution has existed for tens of thousands of years - far longer than monotheism. Marriage is far older than Abraham (if he even existed).
/r/MensRights02/11/15 10:37 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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