TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Ricwulf Archive

View 3 posts and 679 comments by Ricwulf on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

two month old dead post that's been removed calls others pathetic k.
/r/MensRights16/11/25 06:34 PM
1

That wasn't the point. The point was that if you are completely unaware of a topic, learning about said topic through a secondary source and one that is incredibly biased does not lead to you to even knowing whether it is or isn't a good summary. Let me give you an example. I could talk to you about something like Weather Underground and how they were a feminist movement from the 70s that fought against anti-abortion rhetoric, stood against the Vietnam War and Capitalism, while also engaging in …
/r/MensRights14/09/25 04:35 AM
0

Wow, compelling. Definitely not in denial, despite literal official sources explicitly stating that he'd engraved his bulled casings with phrases like 'Hey Fascist! Catch!' and Bella Ciao, an antifa folk song. That's not the language the killer would use if he was a groyper. Even CNN is debunking this crap for fucks sake.
/r/MensRights14/09/25 02:38 AM
0

Weather Underground was a leftist domestic terrorist organisation that engaged in literal bombings. Even when you tried to pull up the worst of the Right with grave dancing of their own, the left was engaging in whole-sale murder. But sure, it's the right that's bad. Maybe they’re hoping that maybe this unfortunate accident will finally wake up everyone to the horrors that we all face with gun violence. That school children’s deaths will finally be taken serious now that a bullet has literally s…
/r/MensRights14/09/25 12:36 AM
0

It's cute that you need to bring up what happened forty years ago to justify admittedly being pieces of shit. You want me to disavow that shit? Done. I disavow it. Wow, that was so easy to do. Notice the lack of excuses I made? Notice how I'm admitting that they were wrong to do that and not being a partisan, blindly defending one side? Or should I resort to whataboutism myself and bring up movements like WeatherUnderground? Or is that Different™? And as J6, yeah, I am annoyed that a woman was s…
/r/MensRights13/09/25 10:40 PM
5

Did you know that by men having their foreskin, that enables more potential growth of dangerous bacteria? There is a VERY VERY simple test that can prove you wrong instantly. Are you ready for this? Is the rate of genital infection higher or lower when you compare rates between nations like America and Canada? They have roughly inverse rates of circumcion (~80% in America, ~30% Canada). So are you missing something? Yeah. Common sense. America and Canada have near identical cultures and health s…
/r/MensRights13/09/25 11:34 AM
0

I'm experiencing a lot of schadenfreude that the killer is MAGA in all but name. He was literally a leftist. He called Kirk a fascist, his own family have shared that he was a leftist, he's a leftist. You're ignorant.
/r/MensRights13/09/25 11:29 AM
2

As someone not familiar with Kirk before the assassination, apart from being able to recognise his face and name, I think the program presented a good summary for the uninitiated. Putting aside that it's really really not a good summary, how would you know? If you have no idea of Kirk, how would you know if this is a good and accurate summary? You are, by definition, ignorant. And that in-and-of-itself isn't a bad thing, we're all ignorant about topics we're unexposed to, but to then speak as if…
/r/MensRights13/09/25 11:25 AM
1

Difference is how the Hoffman's were killed and the circumstances. Their death is a lot more murky considering that the murderer personally knew them. It's even murkier when the murderer was a registered Republican, but was also close to Democrat Tim Walz and the Hoffman's had just voted in favour of Republican legislature. Now, we can make arguments from every angle, from political motive in both directions based on the perpetrator, but also from a potential personal angle as well. So you want …
/r/MensRights13/09/25 11:19 AM
1

I am interested in other equity solutions. Yes, it's clear that you're fine with discrimination when it benefits you, you just spin it with a MensLib coating and call it a day. Equity inherently requires treating people differently based on their immutable traits. It's mutually exclusive from equality.
/r/MensRights24/05/23 10:22 AM
10

Do you know what precedent means? Do you know the situations that this has already literally happened? Even then, she could wait a couple years and then sue for child support, literally citing the case that set the fucking precedent. What a great start to adult life. She rapes him as a kid, and then just when he can start to earn money to try to make something of himself, she comes along to mooch off his hard work for her abuses. Will it happen for sure? Who fucking knows, maybe it will, maybe i…
/r/MensRights21/05/23 07:07 AM
7

Oh boy, yet another case of treating boys and men like they're broken girls and women.
/r/MensRights21/05/23 06:57 AM
0

It did. He was talking to a chick who believed that men are paid more. That sadly doesn't make them a feminist. The pay gap myth is pushed quite a lot in the mainstream with little to no critical thinking about it, presented as gospel. Not everyone is as invested as the activists despite taking activists at their word, especially when they get segments on news channels to spread their bullshit. Do try it with them, and see if you can change even 1 feminist stance on pay gap. I can bet that it wo…
/r/MensRights20/05/23 08:22 AM
1

We're talking about feminists. No, the context didn't give that impression, it was talking about an average person. Frankly, I wouldn't even bother discussing with a Feminist these topics, not unless there's the potential of onlookers to convince instead. Nearly every self-described Feminist I've ever spoken to has been beyond reaching in any meaningful way, so I'll play to the audience instead, and if there's no audience, there's no point beating my head against that wall. Normally, no one like…
/r/MensRights20/05/23 06:41 AM
1

And in my experience, I've found that to be the least motivating method to encourage people to change their minds on topics, especially for the casual that holds little ideological purpose of the view. Don't get me wrong, the point of challenging the topic is for a greater discussion that can lead to further explanations, like the difference between the asserted wage gap and the reality of the earnings gap, along with the difference between equality and equity. But starting out with "you're wron…
/r/MensRights20/05/23 05:56 AM
1

Nah, telling people the answer rarely get them to admit they're wrong. Just challenge them with basic logic: If women are paid less than men, why not overwhelmingly staff your business with women to bring down labour costs? Why hire men at all? Questions that they cannot answer rationally are more successful at convincing people I have found.
/r/MensRights20/05/23 03:40 AM
3

The gap is still real though, women are making less money then men. That's not a wage gap, that's an overall earnings gap. Equal opportunity (equality) is not the same as equal outcomes (equity), and in fact the latter actively requires discrimination to achieve those equal outcomes. Tell me, are you interested in other equity solutions? Maybe women should catch up to men in workplace injuries and deaths, right? What about homelessness? Suicide? That's the funny thing about equity. You lot all w…
/r/MensRights20/05/23 03:37 AM
3

there's nothing you can do Statistical trends say otherwise, along with the rest of the developed world.
/r/MensRights29/01/23 11:11 AM
5

medical benefits Nope. You're wrong. If this was true, statistics would clearly be present between nations/regions like America and the Middle East when compared to pretty much the rest of the world. The reality is that genital health isn't better in America compared to Canada despite practically inverted rates of circumcision. Circumcision having health benefits is completely and utterly a myth. And before you or some other advocate comes along, there is medically needed circumcision arising fr…
/r/MensRights29/01/23 11:08 AM
2

All you do is play defense for the name while being well aware of the core values. You are not representative of Feminism,and faux ignorance is not an excuse. You're a shield that Feminists use to avoid proper criticism. You're more concerned with protecting the name of Feminism than actually standing against the leaders that are vile. And that's assuming you're not just some trolling asshole.
/r/MensRights26/01/23 06:31 PM
4

No, it's not opinion. Feminism at its core is vile. You can ignore it, but it's still there. I have yet to see Feminist leaders/academics/policy-makers that aren't some of the worst people out there pushing the most vitriolic shit out there without being widely hated by most Feminists (see Christina Hoff Sommers). The alternatives are always people who are ex-Feminists, like Cassie Jaye or Erin Pizzey because they get exposed to the true nature of the Feminist movement and find it fucking awful.…
/r/MensRights26/01/23 09:58 AM
3

Well, when all Feminism tends to get their roots from "researchers" like Mary P Koss or advocates like Solanis, yeah I'm more than happy to paint with a broad brush. A degree of separation doesn't change that either. The "good" feminists don't get a pass just because they got their ideology from Feminist X when that Feminist gets their ideology from the worst out there. And that doesn't even tackle the foundational Conflict Theory that runs to the core of Feminist Ideology. Appealing to the igno…
/r/MensRights26/01/23 03:55 AM
1

Nah, you'd take the situation at face value and never suggest a woman deserved being stabbed with zero evidence of her being abusive. You literally jumped to him being abusive in this case despite zero evidence of such because you knee-jerked into her defence. Deny it all you want, you might even believe what you say, but chances are you wouldn't, because it wouldn't even register as a possibility without further prompting.
/r/MensRights09/06/22 11:46 AM
3

Good feminists are little more that pr for the feminists that have any sort of power. But hey, you go ahead and find me those Good Feminists that are running feminist organisations or heading up academia. Until then, words are cheap.
/r/MensRights09/06/22 04:36 AM
3

If you see a case like this, and immediate think "well, what if he did something to deserve it?", you probably need help. Because we all know you wouldn't suggest such a thing if a man did this to his girlfriend, and don't pretend you would.
/r/MensRights09/06/22 04:33 AM
2

Feminism isn't a definition, it's a socio-political movement, complete with its own ideology and theories. For example, you cannot be a feminist as disagree with core tenets like Patriarchy Theory, it would be akin to a Christian not believing in Christ.
/r/MensRights07/01/22 09:01 PM
9

Counterpoint: if they're going off reported crimes? Then they're probably not wrong considering the high rate that male victims don't report because the system doesn't take it seriously when it's a male victim.
/r/MensRights25/11/21 03:49 AM
1

San Fran is the Progressive Liberal policy city. Often filled with hypocritical policy and overflowing with the type of liberal that hates these cops but consistently and routinely vote for the exact same policies over and over again. Everyone bitches about Florida, but it doesn't have nearly the problems San Fran has had in recent years regarding drug abuse, shitting in the street, and rampant homelessness. It's the culmination of these policies and you're now seeing these areas in their early …
/r/PussyPassDenied31/01/21 10:36 AM
1

Where's the evidence for Depp? And who gives a fuck about the shitty movies. I don't. I care about the abuse. I wasn't gonna see that shitty capeshit anyway. Abuse is the issue, not the movies. People are just trying to get some level of consequence for Amber by attacking her career, just like countless other have been.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/11/20 11:35 PM
1

Just to be clear, you've defending people like this in the past, right? Weinstein wasn't a problem, yeah? Or is abuse a one-way street for whether it's okay or not to give a fuck?
/r/PussyPassDenied27/11/20 08:32 PM
6

Yup. It's absolutely fucked. I remember a case of a man who tried to defend his property with a bow and arrow while using target arrows (which for those that don't know, are relatively not that dangerous due to their design that just "plugs" the hole they make). Still charged and prosecuted.
/r/PussyPassDenied26/11/20 09:38 AM
20

While Australia is absolutely fucked, to be entirely fair, the video title says this is in Victoria, which implies Melbourne. And for those that aren't aware, Victoria is to Australia what San Fran is to America. But yeah, Australia is fucked. Not even allowed to legally defend your property from criminals, and yourself is still a legal nightmare after the fact.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/11/20 10:45 PM
12

I love how she goes back for more, expecting something to have changed. 100% deserved it.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/11/20 10:42 PM
11

Shockingly, people disagree with you. So who's right, you the individual, or the majority of the subreddit?
/r/PussyPassDenied18/11/20 11:04 AM
1

I didn't even know you were trans. How the fuck was I meant to know that you were trans? I was referring to the original post, and about how YOU wanted to be in the same situation this kid was put through. Talk about seeing hatred where there is none.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/11/20 08:04 AM
1

Then turnabout is fine, quit whining.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/11/20 11:02 PM
1

You're so right, small dick insults is much higher class. /s
/r/PussyPassDenied12/11/20 10:46 PM
1

Makeup, filter, and the lighting too.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/11/20 10:45 PM
0

Nobody. But I'm not the one that wants to be put in a situation where I want to mutilate myself. That's on you.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/11/20 09:45 PM
0

And yet, you have a mindset like an infant that doesn't want to read 3 paragraphs. First step to undoing that "regression" you mentioned would be to actually give a shit instead of wallowing in that self pity you got going. Though I do like that "kid" you threw in there. Really shows an attempt at shitflinging because I hit a nerve at that terminal immaturity.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/11/20 01:44 AM
0

Someone who isn't totally brain-dead. It's 3 paragraphs. Grow up.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/11/20 07:26 AM
57

It's always amusing to see elites showing their true colours, about how everyone else should have less, but not them. Shame the Lyft drivers didn't chat and leave her there.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/11/20 02:32 AM
1

I never denied this guy's suffering. Nah, you denied it by pretending like this was a desirable situation while deluding yourself that you were respectful with that hollow "damn that sucks". But you can't tell me I automatically would have suffered ill effects if a perverted woman had her way with me at that age. Not everyone is a victim. No, I very much can. Just because you think you were mature, doesn't mean you in fact were. You weren't that different from your peers and just because your te…
/r/PussyPassDenied11/11/20 02:10 AM
1

I dunno, I wasn't the one who was all "Man, I'm sooooo jealous of a child who was gonna turn to self mutilation to escape their rapist". I think you might be the one who isn't getting it.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/20 11:28 PM
3

It's even more so when BLM started from an incedent where a guy tried to get an officers gun.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/20 09:49 PM
1

Really? A "no u"? But please, do tell me more internet tough guy. Please tell me how you didn't just make an argument about the strong take from the weak like some ms-13 animal.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/20 09:47 PM
5

It actually doesn't matter who the partner is. The process happens regardless.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/20 09:45 PM
6

Eh, he's being overly spiritual about it, but there is research that shows the chemical releases during sex are designed to create emotional bonds. It's a part of the whole intimacy deal. That said, sex isn't the only way bond's can be formed.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/20 09:37 PM
1

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say, I don't think this was a pussy pass denied, solely because she came back for thirds. She knew he wasn't afraid to hit her, she just thought she was tougher than she actually is.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/20 09:31 PM
2

Sounds like what a rapist would say.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/20 09:26 PM
2

I was thinking it was more like what a rapist themselves would say. After all, they're just "weeding out" the weak, right?
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/20 09:25 PM
1

Yeah! I mean, who wouldn't want their innocence taken by a predator, right?
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/20 09:22 PM
1

I'd argue it's probably a weighted thing, rather than a black and white scale of "oppressed vs not oppressed"
/r/MensRights26/10/20 10:27 PM
27

Irrelevant. Assault (and crime in general) is not measured in potential damage. Her mindset was to injure him, and he had every right to end that with whatever means necessary.
/r/PussyPassDenied23/10/20 07:25 AM
38

No, it wasn't. Recap. She assaults him. He gets in a good hard hit that causes her to pause. She goes back for more. Him, knowing that one punch isn't going to end it, and that she's fully aware he's gonna hit, goes to continue until she does stop. It ain't overkill. It's knowing that one punch isn't enough to stop some crazy bitch. This idea of "honour" in a fight by unnecessarily taking blows is utterly stupid.
/r/PussyPassDenied23/10/20 07:21 AM
18

Nah, she didn't relent, so why the fuck should he? He got a good hit on her that first time, and she kept coming. Why should it be a constant back and forth of him getting good hits and her constantly coming back? She wanted to play, so let's play.
/r/PussyPassDenied23/10/20 07:17 AM
29

"No no, I'm totally one of you guys, I just [proceeds to demonstrate that they're not one of "us"]"
/r/PussyPassDenied23/10/20 07:15 AM
3

Such as? Care to show us these horrible comments towards a paedophile that make us "sick in the head"? I'd say it's due to a lack of respect of the rapist, but would you be asking for that kind of civility were the offender a man? Because I kinda doubt you'd ask for that about Epstein, for example.
/r/MensRights24/08/20 09:50 PM
1

That's nothing though. I could have a website for sculptures made of dogs ear wax, doesn't make it popular or worthy of any status, just that someone is spending money on that crap.
/r/MensRights20/08/20 11:17 PM
2

Now do black people. /s
/r/MensRights20/08/20 11:11 PM
2

True Feminism absolutely hates men. You need only look at Feminist Academia (as in, research and theories done and portrayed through the lens of Feminist Theory) to see its true nature. From Patriarchy Theory being a rip-off of Nazi Rhetoric (Raplace man with Jew and women with German people, and presto, you have Hitler) to a literal alteration of Mein fucking Kampf being accepted into a peer reviewed journal in the modern era. Who better to represent Feminism than the researchers that all other…
/r/MensRights15/08/20 12:30 AM
2

They literally believe that men are incapable of being raped, that the term doesn't apply to men. Even a brief glance at their profile shows their blatant prejudice and sexism.
/r/MensRights14/08/20 11:42 PM
3

The fact they took these out of modern cars are the real oppression.
/r/MensRights14/08/20 11:31 PM
0

Disagree. Abortion shouldn't be allowed to begin with, and men should father their children (as should women be a mother to their children). Then again, I'm also against casual sex culture and think sex should be a major milestone, not some marker along the timeline.
/r/MensRights10/08/20 08:00 AM
2

Well that's kinda my point. And really, it's because you can't be a borderline white (or any race) supremacist. By its very nature, racial supremacy is a binary choice. There are no shades of grey. Either you believe a race is superior, or you don't. There is no "just a little supremacy". Now if he made the claim in regards to racial nationalism, then it might have been a valid point, because that can be measured in degrees (does a person want a full-blown ethno state, or do they want racially b…
/r/MensRights09/08/20 10:37 PM
6

As fun as it is to riff on this stuff, I legitimately want to know what makes Tucker here a "borderline white supremacist". I know he isn't, but what is the criteria being used to classify a person as such? I want them to truly try and rationalise their statements.
/r/MensRights09/08/20 09:04 AM
8

How so? What makes him "borderline white supremacist"? Such a description must have criteria.
/r/MensRights09/08/20 06:25 AM
2

Rousey's situation is a bit more nuanced than that black and white take. Personally, I think she was in the wrong but so was the boyfriend. Without seeing that actual altercation (because there is an allegation that he blocked her from leaving, meaning that force can be allowed), it can be hard to make a definitive statement. But beyond aaaaaalllllllllllllllll that, there is one simple truth: you can agree with a person on one thing while disagreeing on another. We don't need to succumb to the c…
/r/MensRights08/08/20 09:59 PM
3

I hope you hold that same standard for race, lest you be an open hypocrite.
/r/MensRights03/06/20 04:21 AM
1

You do know that it's a choice to be a Feminist, which supposts Feminism, a movement with a very ugly and horrible history of bigotry and hatred, right? Saying that "Feminism just wants equality" is about as ignorant, stupid, and brain-dead as saying that "The KKK just wants safety". It's sorta true, you just have to ignore everything that they do.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/05/20 02:34 AM
3

Yes. What do you think the point of the whole "Epstein didn't kill himself" meme was? It was to not forget that the elites in general (not just Hollywood) are fucking awful and that these things are openly known, like Weinstein. Who the fuck do you think is defending the abusers in Hollywood?
/r/PussyPassDenied30/05/20 02:21 AM
1

Maybe if you read it, you'd understand why you're an idiot.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/20 05:23 PM
1

Imagine thinking beating someone when they're knocked over, and then continuing after the fight is over is somehow not excessive. When you end a fight, going back in for more crosses over from winning the fight and into straight up assault. And just to make it clear, let me give you a rundown. In the video you linked, he should have stopped at ~21 seconds into the video. That's when she falls down and isn't capable of swinging back, let alone defending herself. But it gets worse, because he fini…
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/20 08:51 AM
1

Are you kidding? I actually thought that was overkill because he kept going after she was down. You've gotta be a troll. Nobody looks at a single hit ending a fight and multiple hits AFTER a fight is over, and goes "yeah, the one where he keeps beating the shit out of her is clearly a better situation". Pull your head out of your ass.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/20 04:34 AM
0

So then the question is this, what should he have done? Maybe held back some and hit her multiple times? Maybe he should have just stood there and take it? He's a man, yeah? She's just a frail little girl, right? Deprogram yourself. If this was a dude getting knocked out on something like holdmybeer or instant_regret, you wouldn't even blink twice, instead of looking to concern troll. Nobody bats an eye when men get knocked the fuck out for assault, especially when it's against someone they can'…
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/20 04:08 AM
0

How was it excessive? It was a single kick that ended the fight. He didn't hit her again. He didn't go back for seconds. He ended the fight and stopped there. He took control, and you don't like it because she lost. Deprogram yourself.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/20 12:56 AM
1

And you had the gall to call anyone else a virgin fatass? And then out yourself like that?
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/20 12:53 AM
1

She ain't being stupid in the name of equality. You can see how stupid she is by the way she has absolutely no guard at all, indicating that she didn't expect any retaliation. She's being stupid because she thinks she can get away with it thanks to her gender.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/03/20 12:51 AM
1

So, accelerationism?
/r/MensRights10/02/20 05:30 AM
2

Definition of feminism 1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes 2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests Irrelevant. Just like you or I would be proud of our country of origin, especially in the States. You don't control your nation of origin either do you? No, I also think that's largely dumb. You can be proud of values, but at that point you're proud of values, not a nation. For example, I'm not American, yet I highly value freedom, free…
/r/MensRights27/09/19 01:16 AM
3

Okay sure, my point was essentially there is no real feminism. I guess that was my ego saying my feminism. Which doesnt include pompousness, recklessness, overreach, or misconduct. And ultimately, you're wrong. Feminism has baggage. You cannot deny that. It has a history. It has an ideology. Saying you're a Feminist and then going against that ideology (say, Patriarchy Theory), will ultimately brand you by the majority of Feminists (especially those with sway) as "Not A Real Feminist™". You're r…
/r/MensRights26/09/19 09:47 PM
3

And I'm saying the definition is wrong, and using the term "feminist" has a LOT of baggage. The fact that you're refusing to even acknowledge that there is baggage involved is why Feminism in any wave is a problem. By using the label, you throw support behind the movement as a whole, ESPECIALLY within academia where things like the Patriarchy Theory is used as a basis for their research. And neo's wording isn't any better. Giving off some kind platitude over how the term simply shouldn't need to…
/r/MensRights26/09/19 09:35 PM
4

If you put down your disdain for the word feminism for a moment Too bad it isn't just a word. It's a movement, with a LOT of baggage that goes back for decades. Also, it's always good when people like you talk about "real" Feminism. Tell me, which Feminist scholar would you like to point to as a "real" Feminist? Which leader that holds sway (and no, not some ex-celebrity) would you like to refer to as a "real" Feminist? And lastly, can you show that those "real" Feminists don't end up getting th…
/r/MensRights26/09/19 01:17 PM
6

It's pretty clear that she meant Feminism as in the original "dictionary" meaning, not this last wave crap. So which wave are you referring to here? Because we're somewhere between third or fourth if I remember correctly. Are you bandying behind people like Solanis and Dworkin, or more like the White Feather Movement? Or maybe you're simply going to put support behind the oldest of Feminist ideology, Patriarchy Theory? Which can be in its most simplest form be condensed down to "Jewish Bankers M…
/r/MensRights26/09/19 01:13 PM
8

Femenism is pro-women right They really aren't even that, which is why support for Feminism among women is so low. Supporting both men and women rights is not a contradiction. Correct, and I 100% agree. But Feminism does not equal women's rights, in the same way that PETA does not equal animal justice. Feminism is a movement, and with it comes baggage. If I were to disagree with the notion of Patriarchy Theory, that would isolate me from most Feminists, especially within academic circles. The id…
/r/MensRights26/09/19 01:05 PM
2

Feminism's entire foundations is based upon the "radical" tenets though. Pretty much all Feminist researchers are/were radicals, not to mention their theories are all based around those thesis ideas. To ignore the roots of such a movement by reducing it away would be like saying that NatSoc has some interesting ideas if you don't focus on everything else to do with them. Feminism, by virtue of being a movement, has a history and baggage. Supporting that movement means accepting that baggage.
/r/MensRights26/09/19 01:01 PM
5

You should answer because you should make it clear what you believe. And more character attacks because you cannot defend mutilation beyond "we did it before, we can do it now". Furthermore, you're being judged directly on your barbaric actions, not because you're a Jew. Stop playing the victim card. Tell you what, why don't you answer this. No specifics, just a yes or no question, and I'll leave it at that? That sound fair? Does religious freedom give a person the right to infringe upon the hum…
/r/MensRights16/09/19 02:27 AM
5

You refuse to answer because you know it shows you to be the hypocrite you are. Either religious freedom allows human rights infringement, or it doesn't. Clearly you know it doesn't, and you're a monster. Also, I'm happily a Christian. I absolutely understand something bigger than myself. Thanks for further making assumptions about me to try and attack my character, rather than any actual points I'm making. So, in total, we have hypocrisy, ad hominem/character assassinations, appeal to tradition…
/r/MensRights16/09/19 01:34 AM
3

We believe the Torah we have today was handed from G-d to the Jewish people at Mt. Sinai. In the Torah, we are commended to perform the Bris at day 8 of an boy's life. Why do we do it? Simply we were commanded by G-d. I can't think of a more authoritative source. And is there any other religion that would justify abusing another individual? Again, do you support honour killings under religious doctrine? If you do not, you are a hypocrite. Oh, and no, I don't mean support as that is something you…
/r/MensRights15/09/19 11:24 PM
4

Does not matter, you called me a monster, thus de-humanizing me. This is the first thing an antisemite does. And a monster harms innocents. In this case, infant children who have no choice in the matter. Based on what YOU said, you would feel the same way about anyone who is wears traditional Jewish clothes. Not at all. That's an irrational victim complex assertion by you. You wearing clothes effects nobody but yourself. This is something you simply cannot grasp, can you? The issue is that you a…
/r/MensRights15/09/19 10:40 PM
5

And there comes the labels, based upon the assertion that my motivation is due to some idea that I'm anti-jewish, rather than the motivation of respecting human rights, of which do not cancel out the rights of other human beings (meaning your right to practice religion does not give you the right to cause harm via infringing upon bodily autonomy). Tell me, why does your tradition justify child mutilation? And if tradition is enough to justify it, are both child and arranged marriages also justif…
/r/MensRights15/09/19 10:04 AM
3

Don't act all surprised that you got called a monster because you defended your barbarism with "but we've been doing it for so long, we should continue with our barbarism". You know you're a monster, but now that you've been backed into a corner, you'll feign offence and tap out of the conversation. I'd say have a good day yourself, but I honestly can't to someone who would defend mutilation the way you did. At least the hygiene argument means well despite the ignorance. Yours is just blind crue…
/r/MensRights15/09/19 05:50 AM
4

Appeal to tradition isn't an argument. Just because you've been mutilating children for centuries doesn't mean it should be continued. You're a fucking monster in my book, and if you're going to pretend that it's because of your religion, then you're a delusional fool looking to use your religion as a shield for barbarism. With all due respect, which is none, go fuck yourself.
/r/MensRights13/09/19 10:09 PM
6

Being against child mutilation is apparently Jew Hate. Sure, that makes sense. While we're at it, being anti-fgm is Muslim Hate, eating beef is Hindu Hate, and working on Sunday is Christian Hate. Or maybe that's all a load of shit, and your religion isn't an excuse for barbarism.
/r/MensRights13/09/19 09:55 AM
7

And where is that condoned by the village at large, to stay with your comparison. Also, please explain how I'm employing whataboutism, because I truly don't see it.
/r/MensRights11/07/19 10:53 AM
9

When you have to point to historical events to justify whataboutism, your point might not be as strong as you think. Tell me, can you find a significant number of anti-sex people today, within the western/developed world, that would condone that, let alone participate? Because the issue isn't about the past. It's done, and the vast, vast majority of people, including the sex negative, view that shit as wrong. Meanwhile, we have this issue going on right now. Quit pointing to the past as if it's …
/r/MensRights10/07/19 11:07 PM
3

Because they still think it needs to be said? Because they think that, regardless of what might be the general consensus around here that they are still right? And while I don't agree with what they said, or the idea of stating "I might get downvoted", I can still respect saying what they think is right even when faced with opposition.
/r/MensRights11/04/19 06:40 AM
1

For the same reason the boilermaking industry is, last I saw the statistic, 99% male. Women don't apply. If you have an application rate of 1 woman to every 20 men, then having a 50/50 workforce is inherently discriminatory, often by passing up men in preference to women. The alternative is to pressure women into fields they have no interest in to inflate those application numbers. Also, in nations that incentivised other fields to become more gender equal (engineering encouraging women, nursing…
/r/MensRights10/04/19 06:00 AM
1

Sounds to me like you've never spoken to a victim in your life, and because you've had a sheltered experience can't fathom the idea that men can be unwilling. Then you have the gall to moan about how much attention this gets in a subreddit dedicated to focusing on issues that men face, which is about as sensible as whinging that there are too many questions on askreddit. A big issue men face is the lack of attention male victims in general receive. Rape is by far the worst category of this, but …
/r/MensRights10/04/19 05:44 AM
1

There's a world of difference between a believer and a blind ideologue. You're the latter.
/r/MensRights19/03/19 05:03 PM
1

And that makes you irresponsible, naive, shallow, and near dangerous with your type of thinking. It completely disregards the well-being of others as a whole for focus on a single issue. It's not healthy either. I think I'm done here, because you're beyond stubborn and just rolled over into downright stupid wilful naivety.
/r/MensRights18/03/19 07:05 AM
1

And yours is severely misplaced if you're so blinded by a single issue that you would ignore everything else around it. You're the definition of a useful idiot. You're the one that is easily manipulated, and then doesn't even care that they've been used to achieve utterly terrible plans. You're making the argument that the ends justify the means. And that's utterly horrifying that you can sit there and tell me blind ignorance is okay. You seriously need to pull your head out of the sand.
/r/MensRights17/03/19 10:43 AM
1

Exactly. You're so blinded that all other collateral damage doesn't matter to you. You could vote in a literal dictator, but hey, at least you got rid of routine infant circumcision. It's. Not. Worth. That. And your shallow approach to these topics are a brilliant example of someone who should not be voting, because it's downright irresponsible behaviour to ignore such dangerous ideas.
/r/MensRights17/03/19 01:44 AM
1

And that's the problem. I could just as easily tell you of a person who was for better state education, pro-worker rights, and anti-banks, but that wouldn't change the fact that said candidate was Hitler. If you only care for a single policy, you're a fucking moron. I'm not saying that his stance on circumcision should be outright ignored, but it needs to be weighed compared to everything else. And flat out, everything that comes with Yang makes that one policy not worth it. It sucks. It's not f…
/r/MensRights16/03/19 10:41 AM
66

Yeah it sucks. Believe the victim means believe all women. That's how it started Well, if you remember back, #metoo originally started as #yesallwomen. The only difference was that #metoo had the foresight to avoid the bigger PR failures of #yesallwomen despite trying to send the same message (which did slightly backfire when a bunch of men came forward with their abuse, which received backlash).
/r/MensRights15/03/19 10:19 PM
1

No, it isn't. The ends do not justify the means. In this case, that means would be electing Yang, who has utterly terrible policies. This is the rhetoric that puts dictators in power before they're known to be dictators. And no, I'm not saying that Yang is a dictator, but you would never know because you simply don't care. You're so shallow that it's honestly scary, and it further reinforces the idea that you're paid off to promote Yang by trying to get people to ignore his other policies.
/r/MensRights15/03/19 10:15 PM
1

Thanks for the definition. Removal of any organ is mutilation. It's a disfigurement. Just because you're used to that state doesn't change the fact. I do consider ear piercing mutilation. Amazingly, we don't perform that as a routine practice on infants. And I am still against that when it does happen on infants, regardless of how rare that might be. Hygiene? You do realise that there is no discernible different in genital health between Western nations? And really, cleaning isn't hard. If you c…
/r/MensRights15/03/19 10:29 AM
1

It is by definition of the word 'mutilation'. If you're going to complain because that's not comfortable with your sensibilities, that's up to you. There is no subjective matter on what constitutes mutilation. I don't care if you want to apply it selectively, you said Western Civilisation, and now you want to back out of that because it doesn't support your defense of barbarism. And lastly, it was started within America to try and discourage men from masturbation, popularised by Dr Kellogg. He a…
/r/MensRights15/03/19 07:23 AM
1

My point was that you're being short-sighted to achieve a goal no matter the cost. And I don't think you're a troll. I specifically said shill because it means something specific. You claiming not to be one doesn't necessarily fill me with trust either, because it would be your answer either way.
/r/MensRights15/03/19 07:11 AM
0

should the minority of things dictate the policy of the majority? Honestly, I don't think so. Oh, so you don't agree with circumcision then? Because the vast majority of the world, hell, even just of the developed nations, don't circumcise on a routine basis. In fact, as far as I'm aware, the US is the only developed nation that does in fact perform routine circumcision. What about those stigma's that are inherit now in Western Civilization. Only really within the US, and it's rather barbaric. I…
/r/MensRights15/03/19 04:50 AM
1

How about this? Why not try to compare some research? Seeing how you're majoring in the medical field you'll have the resources, so try looking up the male genital infection rates between nations that regularly circumcise and nations that don't. A good place to start is the USA vs the rest of the developed world, which will be able to account for medical differences for the most part. You'll find no discernible differences in the rates of genital infection in men between nations. And the reason …
/r/MensRights15/03/19 04:43 AM
1

Then you're still an idiot. If all it takes is a single issue to get you to swing your vote, then by that logic you could justify voting for the second coming of Hitler, so long as he was against circumcision. It's great that you're passionate about stopping the tragedy that is routine infant mutilation, but being blind to what's going on around a situation and voting in utterly terrible policies just because a single other policy is good is not smart. And it wouldn't matter who it is. If they'v…
/r/MensRights15/03/19 04:37 AM
1

Yeah. Having one good policy, or even a few, doesn't outweigh all the bad policies. Every politician has a variety of policies, and you generally won't find a politician that you won't disagree with on at least one or two topics, and the inverse is true as well. Yang might be sensible here, but that doesn't account for his other policies that many would disagree on. People really need to wise up and stop with those kinds of posts that encourage voting over single issues, instead of looking for c…
/r/MensRights15/03/19 04:26 AM
7

And abortion is a hot topic issue that has two different concerns being discussed. On one side, the discussion is about the right to bodily autonomy. On the other, it's the right to life. To cut it so simple as "it's just about the women" is a very narrow way to put it that allows the conversation to be steered towards certain discussions, instead of looking at the whole issue. And I want to be clear here, despite being pro-life myself (a position I came to reluctantly), I'm not looking for that…
/r/MensRights25/02/19 09:34 AM
15

Not to mention that men lack bodily autonomy in nearly every nation through the simple but harmful practice of routine infant circumcision. This is hardly a questioned practice, let alone forbidden.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 09:24 AM
2

Yeah, you sound like someone who puts the law first, instead of actually listening to the discussion. I think it's clear you don't care about actually discussing what rape is, and instead appealing to the law as your guide for what is good and bad, instead of actually understanding what is good and bad. I'm sure the legal system will really remember this blind loyalty.
/r/MensRights13/02/19 12:43 AM
1

Oh look, further appeals to authority. I like how you're trying so hard to appeal to legality, instead of engaging in proper discussion. Legality does not equal morality, nor does its rigidity allow for proper analysis of every situation, as this subreddit would already know considering the court bias that already exists which has lead to numerous failures by the legal system to do it's duty of justice. But hey, you go ahead and continue to appeal to others instead of using your own reasoning to…
/r/MensRights12/02/19 11:20 PM
1

Well that there is a nice appeal to authority and all that, but it doesn't really make an argument any more or less valid. I stand by my point that it's sexual abuse, but not inherently rape (though it can be). Being coerced into giving consent is still giving consent. An obvious exception to that is if you are forced to do so with a threat (both implicit and explicit). But if you are convinced through argument to agree to have sex, that is not rape. Sleazy, immoral, abusive, absolutely. But not…
/r/MensRights12/02/19 11:11 PM
1

And I disagree with both of those notions. Was that supposed to be some kind of "Gotcha!"? Using a sexist, hate movement's definition that is used to make women into perpetual victims? It's time to grow up and have your own standards instead of just trying to throw everything back at Feminism. They don't have to set the bar, and nor should they (that's how we get shit like the Duluth Model). And the first step to ending that is to stop contextualising everything around that horrible movement.
/r/MensRights12/02/19 10:50 PM
1

Being nagged or pressured into sex when you don't want it. That would be called coercion into sex, which many would argue is a grey area. For example, I would call it abusive and immoral, but maybe not so far as rape as a blanket statement, instead having to examine it on a case by case basis.
/r/MensRights12/02/19 10:26 PM
2

Getting hard is not always about arousal And even if it WAS that doesn't mean it isn't rape, in the same way as saying that a male on female rapist can't use the excuse "but she was wet". A guy could be at peak arousal and it would still be rape, because the only fact of the matter is that it needs to be unwilling. If consent isn't given in some way (verbally or non-verbally), then it's rape.
/r/MensRights12/02/19 10:21 PM
1

I don't have a grand master plan to solve career exhaustion. I'm just expressing my perspective which is that quality time spent between children and fathers should be a major life priority, regardless of class or profession. I agree. However, I think you're backpedaling from what you've defended. To quote them: That works for manual labor, yes, but an office jockey? No excuse. There is a clear double standard. Exhaustion is fine if you're doing physical labour, but not if you're in an office. T…
/r/MensRights09/02/19 10:05 PM
3

Because it's a stupid opinion that devalues the idea that office work is work, when the only difference is mental and physical work loads. Stress, which is generally more common in office jobs, is just as draining as physical work. And besides that, being a bread-winner and providing for a family doesn't change depending on their job. They're entitled to rest. I'm glad they've got a position that's relatively cushy and allows them to enjoy their time with their family. I think that's fantastic, …
/r/MensRights08/02/19 02:55 AM
2

And what context was ignored? The fact that he was slipping in and out of consciousness, or the fact that she was laughing during this speech? I'd also say that a person getting on a stage, admitting to having sex with a man who was unable to consent, and then getting applause for said speech, is a bit of a reveal of how society views male victims. I'd say that's a pretty important topic relevant to the MRM. And oh, I'm sorry, I thought we were using collectivist logic. It seems like you can abs…
/r/MensRights07/02/19 09:30 AM
1

Well yeah. Who would like a boring comedienne who steals her material from others in the industry and makes the same tier jokes as a 9th grader, but from a female perspective? She's a manufactured celebrity, and everyone can smell it. I don't know a single person who likes her. I don't know a single person who would like that kind of humour. And nobody likes a thief.
/r/MensRights07/02/19 06:22 AM
1

I can see how others would disagree with me, but it's free speech to me. You're operating under the notion that it wasn't a real event. Amy hasn't denied it, and this has been spoken about for years now. In fact, I found an article from 2014 on it. Furthermore, it wasn't a comedy bit. It was a speech. Excerpt from article: Comedian Amy Schumer recently gave a speech at the Ms. Foundation for Women’s Gloria Awards and Gala, an event dedicated to saluting “women of vision.” This was found with a q…
/r/MensRights07/02/19 06:18 AM
3

"Rape is fine because I don't like differing opinions" It's amazing how sociopathic a person can be, all because you disagree with others beliefs.
/r/MensRights07/02/19 05:59 AM
2

"Sexual assault is fine to ignore because I'm a horny twat." - You. Low standards aside, this is about as dumb a comment as the people who have started calling Dahmer hot because of the recent Netflix special. You've missed the entire point of the discussion just to share how shallow you are.
/r/MensRights07/02/19 05:58 AM
1

Apparently calling out a singular woman for being a rapist is the same as hating all women. Hey Arj, would condemning Bill Cozby for his actions mean that you hate not only men, but also black people? Is that really the standard you want to set, where you let pieces of shit continue to be pieces of shit on the basis that they have certain circumstances of birth, like being a woman?
/r/MensRights07/02/19 05:50 AM
9

Sure.I don't know about that theory I only know feminism and feminists on a personal basis. As far as leaders and organizations, I don't know, I have no contact with them. Interesting. So you don't know the movement and the ideology, yet you'll back them as per your comments here? Let me ask you a question: If I called myself a Nationalist Socialist, but was legitimately ignorant of core tenets, would that be a valid excuse, or should maybe I educate myself in that scenario? I do know that we ca…
/r/MensRights06/02/19 05:23 AM
40

It's honestly not even a long chain of events. Feminism leads to Patriarchy Theory (which is a core tenet of Feminism) leads to man hating. How does it lead to man-hating? In the same way that blaming the Jews for all of Germany's problems lead to Jew hating. You can't have an ideology that states "X demographic holds too much power and is the cause of all of Y groups problems" without it leading to hatred. This is basic cause and effect.
/r/MensRights06/02/19 02:20 AM
9

Can I ask you a question and get a simple response? Is Patriarchy Theory a core tenet of Feminism that goes back decades into the movement? If not, do you think any Feminist leader or organisation would agree with you that Patriarchy Theory is not a part of Feminism?
/r/MensRights06/02/19 02:19 AM
12

He worded it fine. The whole point is to confront people with their bias. To show them that they are okay with the daily, routine, legal mutilation of one, but are outraged at the already illegal and abnormal mutilation of another. I don't care if they get uncomfortable by that. I don't care if they knee-jerk and downvote. Because I've never seen a person convinced by pointing it out calmly. I've only ever seen change when people are actually confronted with their own hypocrisies.
/r/MensRights06/02/19 02:15 AM
42

I've always retorted with the clitoral hood at that point. It's analogous to an insane degree, and I've yet to see someone who doesn't squeal "it's different" with absolutely nothing to back their statement up. And even then, that same lolgic could be used to justify cutting off ears. After all, how many kids properly wash behind their ears? It's just cleaner to lop it off I guess.
/r/MensRights06/02/19 02:13 AM
3

I don't disagree. So how do we fix this problem, without vilifying men? How do we break that cycle? And it is a cycle. You've identified a problem, but can you create a solution? And then there's the ethics question of "is consent to sex also consent to parenthood?". If the answer is yes, does that also apply to women? If not, why? This isn't a simple thing. It's rather complex, and consistency of position and reasoning isn't easy. And oddly enough, the one community that has pushed for a soluti…
/r/MensRights31/01/19 02:39 AM
1

Said the troll with an obsession over KiA.
/r/MensRights23/01/19 04:58 PM
2

So you'd be fine and would encourage an ad that targeted women and said they're responsible for women who murder children? Are you fucking insane, or should we also hold Jews accountable for over-representation within the banking sector of Germany? Bloody hell, collectivism is one hell of a drug.
/r/MensRights21/01/19 10:26 AM
2

When are you going to apply that standard to literally any other demographic? Women are the number 1 demographic that abuses children by a large margin. Are all women responsible for holding them accountable? Or how about black people? Despite being a minority, they commit a disproportionate amount of crimes. Should all black people be responsible for those select black people who break the law? If not, then which is it? Do we expect people to be responsible for others based on arbitrary, immuta…
/r/MensRights21/01/19 08:29 AM
6

Ah yes, the modern Kafka trap. "If you argue against this ad, you're clearly one of the bad men". Beautiful. Perfect form. Expertly avoids ever having to actually engage at all.
/r/MensRights21/01/19 08:26 AM
5

Why has this become so divisive? Because it's based upon the idea that the majority are responsible for the actions of the minority. Everyone knows toxic masculinity is a real thing. No it isn't. I'm sure we've all experienced situations where someone could have stepped up and called someone out on their shitty behavior. Cool. What demographic do you want to apply that to next? Should black people be held accountable for the failings of the minority of black people who are criminals? What about …
/r/MensRights21/01/19 08:22 AM
2

Thank you for the polite questions and statements yourself. You aren't wrong for your thoughts by the way. It's a very very real possibility that I'm jaded. And your optimism isn't a bad thing. Take other opinions on board, and I'm only one.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 02:22 AM
2

compromise No thanks. What is a compromise in ending shit like the Duluth Model? A smaller version of it? What's the compromise on male suicide issues? Less suicide, but still largely ignored? Compromise isn't an option. Especially when a large group out there is Feminism, that directly wants these discussions to take place in the scope of their conspiracy which is "Patriarchy Theory" (directly analogous to the Illuminati in a social setting as opposed to an economic setting), which it will prom…
/r/MensRights20/07/17 12:58 AM
2

Because of standards. Lowering yourself to that level will also lead to a lowering of everything else, because you're too busy trying to be popular with an idiot, over trying to explain what it is you're trying to achieve and stay on goal.
/r/MensRights19/07/17 11:24 PM
1

Try not to get triggered there snowflake. Funny considering that you're the one who's acting on emotion and gut responses. my higher moral standards That's clearly laughable. fans of kid touching Considering that Milo himself was a victim of that, I'd take a guess that he has a very messy history with the topic. That doesn't excuse it, but there's more than meets the eye. But hey, go with that gut feeling. confederate pride Another gut feeling that doesn't look at the why they are supportive of …
/r/MensRights14/07/17 11:41 AM
1

Find a MSM outlet covering this study. Not that they are any more trustworthy, but apparently you need to be fed it by them, which won't be happening because this goes against their narratives that they have crafted. But sure, rely on a genetic fallacy.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 10:21 AM
1

So we should be pandering to the lowest common denominators? Lowering ourselves to those who run on how they feel about Milo, rather than the reality of the survey done?
/r/MensRights14/07/17 10:19 AM
4

Good thing Milo didn't do the study.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 10:17 AM
1

Do you have anything else besides a genetic fallacy?
/r/MensRights14/07/17 10:16 AM
1

I dunno about you, but I don't rely on a Genetic Fallacy, where you'll discredit something because of where it came from, rather than it's actual accuracy. But please, show me a more MSM site (which is just as trustworthy these days) that is reporting on this stuff?
/r/MensRights14/07/17 10:15 AM
1

Wifey isn't derogatory either. As for being equivalent, how is wifey and hubby not a cute phrase for wife and husband? And nobody is saying that that this is some massive gender inequality, simply that it's a double standard. You're relying on an appeal to relative privation, that because there is worse cases out there, that this is somehow not a double standard.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 08:25 PM
3

Go to an optometrist. If you can't see the double standard, there are many other things you won't be able to see. But please, explain how one of two equivalent words is derogatory while the other isn't, and therefore a double standard. Once you can do that, then you get to be snarky.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 03:44 AM
4

/>pointing out a double standard is "joining the victimhood" lol Nobody here is offended or feels victimised over this shit. It's just pointing out a double standard.
/r/MensRights12/07/17 07:58 PM
2

And yes this sub is a hive mind, I have been on it long enough to see that is very true Said the user leaving because others didn't agree with them. I however think it is important to deal with the increasing attempts of women Cool, I support you personally doing that, but the MRM is for men and their issues specifically. In this case, it is about getting male specific suicide support, because the vast majority of suicide support material out there is geared towards women. But you don't want to …
/r/MensRights12/07/17 04:54 AM
3

The MRM has ALWAYS stated that it focuses on issues for men. We are not actually an egalitarian movement, though most people within are egalitarian. The reason? Because we have always believed that a movement which is better equipped should deal with the issue, rather than spreading ourselves too thin with the little resources we have. As for a familiar movement, Feminists are the ones who ex-communicate for disagreeing. You're running away because people disagreed with you. You're welcome to st…
/r/MensRights11/07/17 08:13 PM
2

Said the one minimising the issues of men. It's laughable that caring about a men's issue is now the same as the Feminist shit that goes on. But sure, if people disagreeing with you and explaining how you're wrong is enough to push you away from supporting men's issues, I guess that just displays how invested you were to begin with. Because when people don't agree with you 100%, it's time to cut them out. Sounds like a familiar group.
/r/MensRights11/07/17 07:48 PM
3

No he didn't. Ad hominem is only when an insult is used in place of an argument. He insulted you while accompanying an argument. Just because you and /u/g_squidman don't understand the difference between 4 dead and 4 not dead isn't his fault. The fact that you don't understand that there are many people who make many attempts, sometimes 5+, and how that can severely impact the numbers isn't his fault. The fact that he spelt out how men are dying at 4 times the rate of women with next to none of …
/r/MensRights11/07/17 11:36 AM
7

Ask them if they have ever actually spoken to an MRA, or if they have looked at the actual talking points directly from an MRA website (and not something like RoK). This challenges their personal knowledge in regards to primary information. It will either show them as something of a sheep to others that simply lap up information from MSM, or that they didn't even bother to learn what it was that they were opposing. In regards to the "points" presented, ask about why rape should be treated differ…
/r/MensRights31/05/17 02:13 AM
16

While Karen does point that out, it isn't really an argument or point that gets the message across. Because they legitimately don't understand the issue, that both groups say the other isn't Feminist. They don't get that they are, for all intents and purposes, friendly PR for those that actually have institutional power and influence, and use said power and influence to harm men. While the fallacy is correct, it means nothing to them. This is an explanation.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 11:44 AM
1

Your analogy isn't bad actually, because Lego play isn't a zero-sum game. You don't outright ban the boys from using the Lego, you limit it. Even then, I don't necessarily agree with it, but it's at least reasonable, and can be said of all the toys to ensure fairness. If you limit the usage of the toys to ensure everyone gets roughly an equal time using them, then the problem is, largely, solved. So while the analogy isn't the best, it isn't really wrong either.
/r/MensRights19/04/17 01:01 AM
1

This is not equality, this is equity. And this is the end goal of Feminism and other SocJus movements. The aim is never equality, it's always been equity (or equality of outcome). That's what's so wrong about these movements, they don't want to be fair, they want to give people benefits based on traits due to circumstance of birth.
/r/MensRights19/04/17 12:55 AM
1

Yeah, I was talking about America unfortunately. But even those that you suggested are illegal in multiple European countries. There is no legal form of protection that they are allowed to carry. And it really sucks, because the government is protecting the safety of criminals over the safety of their own citizens. I'm all to familiar with living under a nanny state, and it truly sucks because you have to rely on the state for protection rather than have the means to protect yourself and others.
/r/MensRights05/04/17 02:50 AM
1

In order for that to work you have to take them off guard, since it's America and thankfully they can actually use this I would have them learn how to fire a taser or pepper spray. That's likely to be a effective even on a really big guy. Pepper spray maybe, but not a taser. A taser is less likely on bigger guys, and in many cases will just make people angry. Tasers are incredibly unreliable. You want to cut down on assault? Start legally concealed carrying. The more people who do it, the more i…
/r/MensRights05/04/17 12:52 AM
40

I think the bodily autonomy of men is a men's right issue. Am I wrong on this one? The top comment points out that this is a huge double standard, and that if the roles were reversed it would be in the media as a very different story.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 12:13 PM
4

That's actually one of the worst scales there could possibly be, solely for that massive gap between 20-80%. Whoever made that map should be fired due to it being pretty much useless. And the source link is more trouble than it's worth, because it's just a link dump of various studies that involve the topic of male circumcision. Actually finding which study involves the statistics used for this map could take a person well over an hour (assuming it is actually in there). Sourcing content for inf…
/r/MensRights16/03/17 07:30 AM
6

For a slight bit of positive thinking then, consider that America and a few countries in the Middle East are the only places where this is really commonplace. In the rest of the world, this isn't a common trend, especially in other first world countries. And also consider that more people are becoming aware that routine infant circumcision is a bad practice. So yeah, this map is a little depressing, but it's getting better. One step at a time.
/r/MensRights16/03/17 07:18 AM
7

But the vast majority who hold any power believe that, or similar things. Hell, NOW (largest Feminist organisation in the world) actively opposes equal custody laws by default. Feminists do nothing to change the Duluth Model which was implemented by Feminist lobbying (which if you look deeper shows a fucking evil mindset, but that will just lengthen this post). I agree that many mainstream Feminists are somewhat reasonable. But ultimately, that means jack shit. Because at the end of the day, the…
/r/MensRights01/03/17 11:15 PM
3

While I get your point, and don't agree overall, I will say that shit like Buzzfeed is the mainstream. And even when you actually examine Feminism at its core, you will see that it is built upon the hatred of men (hence the relation to the MRM). But that's another topic for another thread. In regards to this thread, I agree because I have never heard of this site before. ShortList Magazine? Literally fucking who? I have never heard of them before, and Twitter giving them a verified tick means no…
/r/MensRights01/03/17 04:02 AM
1

So if I manipulate someone, you don't think that's abusive? Or is it that you don't think that manipulation is a form of control? Because it really is. It's kinda in the name. It might not be a 100% control, but it's certainly guiding a person down a certain path. I think this is the issue. Because manipulation is abusive. And there are multiple forms of manipulation. Through lies, to tricks, to blackmail. All are forms of manipulation, and all are abusive. As for turning it around, you kinda di…
/r/MensRights26/02/17 09:57 AM
2

Nah, don't you get it, hesoshy saw someone assert it elsewhere, so it MUST be true. I mean, MRA's just want to beat woman, amirite? /s
/r/MensRights25/02/17 05:53 AM
1

You're right. The solution is simple. However, actually doing it is incredibly hard. The reason abuse is such a hard thing to deal with is because it comes from somebody they love. I don't know if you have an S/O, but if you do, could you cut them out of your life tomorrow? Completely and totally, with ease? Because that's what it's like. You KNOW that they're abusive, and yet you still love them, because love isn't an easy thing to control (because you don't actually control it). I get that it …
/r/MensRights25/02/17 05:52 AM
2

Well of course. Is it any surprise that someone sprouting shit like that would be emotionally unstable? It's pretty much expected.
/r/MensRights25/02/17 05:49 AM
1

I'm going to assume that it's either a troll, or they're acting touch to over compensate. Because they have no idea what being in an abusive relationship is like. Because they truly think it's easy to fight back, and have no idea the harm that can come from being hurt from someone you love. Betrayal can hurt like a bitch, and while I personally haven't felt it, I have seen those who have felt it. It's not easy. It's incredibly hard.
/r/MensRights25/02/17 05:47 AM
5

And you avoided the situation entirely. The point is to imagine. If it's okay for you, a woman, to kick a guy for cheating, would it be okay for a guy to kick a woman for cheating on him? It's a simple yes or no answer.
/r/MensRights25/02/17 05:45 AM
1

First of all, they can't control their boyfriends. The boyfriends are responsible for their own behavior, period. Do you have any idea what manipulation is? This means things like blackmailing, threatening with false accusations, and lying to get what they want. That is what is meant by "control". But I like how you managed to turn the problem around and blame the man for this. Because when a man hits a woman, it must be her fault, right? Or is it also different then as well? Why this isn't comm…
/r/MensRights25/02/17 05:43 AM
8

I don't think the sub is being "taken over." These comments are usually from those who are long time left-wingers who are annoyed that there is more diversity in opinions and people. In fact, I want OP to a largely accepted post or comment (meaning at least 100+ upvotes) that would be a part of this "alt-right" take-over. I mean, if mensrights is being taken over as they claim, this should be easy, right? It comes from the idea that "my personal politics are the only correct way, and any other w…
/r/MensRights23/02/17 05:08 AM
1

Like Meyright said, nobody is advocating that women be forced to have abortions, at least not in the MRM. However, a popular solution is for men to have the option of a financial abortion. This means that all financial obligations that might arise from having a child (child support for example) are null and void. In connection with this, the father loses any and all rights towards the child. It's not about reducing rights, it's about expanding them.
/r/MensRights23/01/17 10:13 PM
2

I dunno, I'd say it's just pointing out the hypocrisy.
/r/MensRights14/01/17 12:12 AM
3

It seems liberal meninists are the same as liberal feminists, just more whiny about even more laughable issues. Where do I even start with that sentence. I guess first would be that meninist/meninism is a made up thing. It's a satire of Feminism. Second, if you think this is a huge focus, it isn't. All this is show is the hypocrisy out there. There is no-one getting angry over it, not even whiny. It's mostly just a "yeah, that's stupid and hypocritical". But yeah, take one post on a subreddit to…
/r/MensRights14/01/17 12:11 AM
6

I have a theory that this comes from the idea that none of their relationships have been healthy, usually from their end by injecting Feminist ideology into every vein of their life. "Emotional labour" is usually used to describe the normal emotional responses that come with being in a relationship, and it goes in both directions. These Feminists have such an ego that they don't even consider the idea of the male partner having "emotional labour" caused by themselves. Emotional Labour is nothing…
/r/MensRights11/01/17 04:45 AM
1

Show me where Feminism at its core is good. People like to say "Feminism is many groups", yet they all ignore how it always has core tenets, that at its basis, it shares ideas. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but the most popular ideas would be those that get shared the most and have the most power within the movement as a whole, right? So why then is the movement lead by horrific groups that advocate against equality? Why is NOW, the largest Feminist group there is, actively advocating against me…
/r/MensRights04/01/17 01:16 PM
2

So men suffer and the status quo continues. How lovely. Question, what's the point of being here if you don't want anything to change? Something has to change, and quite frankly, I'm all for more personal responsibility over the choices a person makes.
/r/MensRights02/01/17 06:21 AM
2

Why will it? You're assuming that the woman deserves funding for getting pregnant. She made a conscious decision to go through with the birth, that makes it her responsibility. Sorry if that seems harsh, but choices have consequences. It isn't up to society to take care of that, especially not the government.
/r/MensRights02/01/17 04:38 AM
2

And so we shouldn't try and change that? There shouldn't be a legal obligation to pay for a decision that someone else made, regardless of gender. It's fucked up that a man can be jailed for failing to pay the financial burdens of another individual, even if he literally can't pay because he doesn't have the money. Sorry, but I refuse to accept and defend the status quo of men being shafted.
/r/MensRights01/01/17 11:15 PM
2

All men know you should wear a condom if you don't want to be on the hook for child support. And condoms break. What then? Suck it up buttercup? A man doesn't have the equivalent to an abortion because a man doesn't have to deal with pregnancy or childbirth. Financially he can. Maybe then some women will also think a little more before going through with childbirth because suddenly it's a decision that impacts them solely, rather than being able to place burden on another. You don't think it's a…
/r/MensRights01/01/17 11:14 PM
5

How so? How is talking about the inequality of men being expected to finance the choice of a woman in anyway being a whiny shit who hates women because they're an idiot who doesn't understand social interaction? Pointing out an inequality isn't even close to incels. But please, keep up with those associations. It's totally legit, just like RoK, PUA and RedPillers are totally MRAs, amirite? /s
/r/MensRights01/01/17 10:18 PM
5

If consent to sex is consent to parenthood, then abortion should also be revoked for equality. I'm for the expansion of rights, not the reduction. Both need to have the option to not be obligated to parenthood. That means men getting a "financial abortion" option, which removes all financial obligations as well as any legal rights to the child.
/r/MensRights01/01/17 10:15 PM
1

Look at their name. They're just a troll who's being edgy. Or rather, image linked.
/r/MensRights01/01/17 10:13 PM
5

Missing the point. Your argument boils down to "consent to sex is consent to parenthood". If we apply that to women equally, that means that we have to outlaw abortions. The issue is that a woman has a choice to abort or keep a child, and if the latter is chosen, the man has to finance that decision, even if he doesn't want to in the majority of situations. In the interest of expanding rights, not reducing them, it should be that men are not expected to pay for the decisions of the woman. The wo…
/r/MensRights01/01/17 10:10 PM
1

Because it's obvious. However, right after a female celebrity has passed away after having a heart attack isn't a bad time to have a PSA about how heart attack conditions are different between the sexes. Honestly, I'm one of the first people to leap at Feminists and SJWs gendering shit. This isn't one of those cases. This is nothing more than awareness, and I'm a little disappointed because it seems that people are trying to find something wrong with this, when there really isn't.
/r/MensRights30/12/16 09:20 PM
1

To be honest, I think in relation to the article, it's a little irrelevant. Important, don't get me wrong. But on the topic of heart disease and identifying the symptoms, I think that focusing on how it can be different between the two sexes is important. I know that this comment, and a few others are out of concern that men get the care that they need, but women do too. This is one of the few cases I have ever seen around here that I would say "derailing" is a legitimate criticism. Let's not ge…
/r/MensRights28/12/16 08:41 PM
72

Exactly this. Was coming here to comment that, but I'm glad someone already has. This is one of those few things that completely sounds like Feminist BS, but it's completely legit. Men and women have different issues when it comes to heart disease.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 05:05 AM
2

DiCaprio was in "What's eating Gilbert Grape?". He played Arnie Grape, the brother of Gilbert (played by Johnny Depp).
/r/MensRights21/12/16 11:04 AM
1

Feeling safe can be an objective measure No it can't. You can't objectively measure a feeling. It's subjective. You can objectively measure safety, but not a feeling of safety (at least, not beyond "how much", which in this case is largely useless). Your hypothetical is ridiculous. By what leap of judgement do you assume that the correct response to that situation is to pander to her racism I'm sorry, were we not trying to pander to people's feelings, which can include feelings spawned from raci…
/r/MensRights20/12/16 12:08 AM
1

Society should strive to make individuals feel safer. And if that means snuffing out the elements of society that provide unease in the first place, so be it. I'm not talking an illusion of safety here But that's the problem! What are you meant to do when it is already reasonably safe, and the fear is irrational? Do you pander to those people, at what might very well cause discrimination to another group? Let's continue with the "black people scare me" shit. If I were scared of black people and …
/r/MensRights19/12/16 10:30 PM
1

How do you quantify "feeling safe" into an objective measure, when it is ultimately an incredibly subjective measure? Here's a hypothetical. A white woman is walking down a street. Walking the other direction is a black man. She crosses the street because she feels unsafe because he's black. What should we do to pander to her delicate sensibilities of irrational fear? Should we just blindly give into her racism to make her feel safe? At no point will this work. There will always be prejudiced pe…
/r/MensRights19/12/16 10:20 PM
1

This sub has gone downhill. AKA: You've changed! YOU USED TO BE COOL, MAN! Now you won't just blindly follow whatever I say as gospel!
/r/PussyPassDenied15/12/16 05:00 AM
2

these women make up four of the top five (EDIT: music artists). And don't forget that 1D has a target audience of women. The only people that make them as successful as they are, are women as a group. Probably internalised misogyny for not buying Madonna's music.
/r/MensRights11/12/16 12:05 PM
2

Ask yourself this: Who is the main audience for music? As a demographic, who is "pandered" too more, men or women? In my opinion, going through the top 5, it seems to be overwhelmingly aimed towards women (that isn't to say men can't or don't enjoy that music, but a target demographic is a target demographic). Now, it's pretty obvious that America and the majority of the world is a capitalist system, right? Logic would dictate then that the music industry would be trying to maximise income. Why …
/r/MensRights11/12/16 12:03 PM
0

Just going to go ahead and point out that it's a show about a couple of white women with scenes about beating up/stabbing a black man over a rape accusation with no trial. In other recent news, schools have decided to ban Huckleberry Finn and To Kill A Mockingbird for "racist language". [Source] If anyone is doubting that the left is overwhelmingly regressive as fuck, look no further. (And if your left, and your not regressive, great. But the vast majority of the left that has any power at the m…
/r/MensRights10/12/16 11:48 PM
7

What about religious reasons? Nope. We don't excuse harmful barbarity solely on the basis of religion. It's that simple. I was Circumcised as a new born and its an important part of religious identity for me. Question: Would it not have more impact if it was your choice? I mean, you've been set down a religious path by someone else (in this case, I'm assuming parents), and that's fine. But wouldn't it have more of an impact if you chose it? Someone else chose that for you. And if you are happy, …
/r/MensRights07/12/16 11:11 PM
2

in case when someone needs it for medical reasons. Don't get me wrong, I do support those who choose this option (and it's that choice which is key), but for most things, there are non-invasive options out there which are often viable. I think it's important to also raise awareness that it isn't the only solution, even when it is a choice.
/r/MensRights07/12/16 11:07 PM
5

That's..... not even close. Cis is the counterpart of transgender. By comparison, cis is to transgender, what straight is to homosexuality. Cis refers to gender aligning with your sex (gender being your mental configuration, and sex being your physical configuration). Sexuality, like straight, gay, or bi, refer to what attractions a person typically has.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 11:42 PM
1

You've gotten a bunch of joke answers, but if you want what was the intended purpose, then I can give you that. People took offence to the word "normal" in this context. By their reasoning, being trans was therefore not-normal, and therefore shameful (which is BS, but anyway). Overall, it's a way for them to say that being trans is a normal thing (it isn't, it's abnormal, but it's completely okay. Words have meaning). So the use of the world cis was made to replace normal.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 11:39 PM
1

Yup, nihilistic trash. Here's a question, if nothing matters, why do you bother continuing to live? Serious question, and it isn't that I want you to die, because that would suck, but if nothing matters because we're all so pathetically insignificant, then why bother at all? Why do anything? All you're trying to do is bring your depressing world view and enforce it on others. Which is no surprise, because you dislike when others have a feeling of purpose.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 08:49 PM
1

Still thinks that humanity hasn't progressed further than the stone age. We're not animals, and we have progressed past our primal instincts. If not, rape wouldn't be seen as the abhorrent thing it is. But hey, you keep up that big boy alpha act. You're sure to get a woman to like you, especially with that whole nihilistic schtick you got going. Chicks really dig the whole "nothing matters" vibe. You're pathetic. God forbid some people try to have a good life. Meanwhile, you're here projecting y…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 12:33 PM
3

Sorry. Just came out of an argument that was pretty much SocJus wankery. I kinda assumed that you were doing the same. Again, sorry.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 12:13 PM
3

Yeah actually, I am. Considering that men are nearly equal in number of victims (not including the prison statistics, which would make men the majority), I'm pretty certain. Then there are all the cases which are dismissed as being rape, such as the various "relationships" between teacher and student, that we both know would never be allowed to happen were it a male student. Don't try and feed me bullshit when I've already looked into it.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 11:48 AM
3

I mean like, if you really can't analyze the facts and see that institutionalized racism exist I don't see the point in explaining it too you. Because you can't. You use anecdotal evidence and leap to conclusions because you work backwards. You start with the conclusion and make the evidence fit, rather than actually trying to be balanced about it. Separate but equal, I'm sure. No, equal by holding them to the same standards as everyone else. I'm not a part of the group that's advocating for seg…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 07:59 AM
4

So black people being discimrinted against in America is a conspiracy theory. Got it. No. The theory that they are today at an institutional level is a conspiracy theory. But here's a question for you: Why only black people? Asians, Latinos, and other "coloreds" sorry, "PoC" have managed to improve their situation from their historical troubles. And yet black people must still be targeted today? That is of course wildly ignoring the rampant violence in inner city gangs of course. And the drug tr…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 06:19 AM
7

I could use a bunch of big words that you probably won't understand like "institutionalized racism" Oh, so a conspiracy theory with little to no hard evidence beyond conjecture and more theories? Has there been a time in this countries history where black MEN WEREN'T indiscriminately targeted to fill up prisons? I dunno, why do they commit more murders per person than any other demographic in the US? That isn't just petty crimes that they're arrested over, that's the big ones. But please, do tel…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 04:50 AM
5

Yes. We should stop teaching men not to rape. We should be teaching everyone not to rape. That's both men AND women. The issue is that it is being targeted solely at men despite women perpetrating rape just as much.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 03:50 AM
5

And yes, boys commit the act of rape significantly more than women do, so we target them more. I mean, statistics prove that's false, but even if we ignore that, I'm sure we should be really focusing on the black community, right? After all, black people commit more crime per person than any other demographic. So, is it okay to target black people, or are you going to shove your sexist bullshit up your ass?
/r/MensRights06/12/16 03:48 AM
1

I dunno. Maybe to deny you the last word that you're so desperately trying to get. Maybe I'm just bored. Maybe it's because you still refused to answer a single question I asked and deflected every time, because then you might have to do a little self-reflection.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 02:05 AM
1

TL;DR is that you're a coward because you refuse to accept other life choices as valid. But hey, you're a "progressive". Your whole life belief is to control others actions.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 12:34 AM
1

You're pathetic. You're a spineless coward, who's too chicken shit to try being anything else except what society tell him he should be. God forbid you think for yourself. You be a good dumb brute. You slave away, give your hard-earned money to play the role given to you, never try to better yourself, just be a good "real man". And what's worse, is that I would be 100% fine with you being that person. What makes you a coward and a lowlife is how you're trying to spread your bad life choices to o…
/r/MensRights05/12/16 01:47 AM
1

Ah yes, the "real man". I was waiting for that. Tell me then, what is a "real woman" then, and is that not a shitty sexist attitude to have? Are they meant to be good little housewives, making sure the home is clean when their real man comes home so they can pleasure him when he requires it? Or are you a hypocrite and only hold men to this archaic gender role of chivalry, but don't think women should be in their archaic gender role of housewife? Also, why should men be required to "step up"? Why…
/r/MensRights04/12/16 11:49 PM
1

And what responsibilities are they? What responsibilities did they agree to and how did they get those responsibilities? Here's a hypothetical: Let's say a man and a woman have sex resulting in the woman getting pregnant. She wants to keep the child, while the man doesn't. Does he have a responsibility to care for that child based on her choice? If not, then why are you contradicting your previous points. If yes, should a woman be forced to go through pregnancy if a man wants to keep a child. I …
/r/MensRights04/12/16 09:45 PM
1

And so fucking what? That isn't abuse. You're devaluing the term to try and fit your agenda. And besides, is sex a contract to agree to fatherhood? If so, can we extend that to women and take away the right to abortions? How about protection laws for mothers who leave their children on adoption home doorsteps? When you go down that path, you have to analyze if it's equally applied to women. And look, I'd love to see more fathers stick around, but what you're suggesting is wanting their own life …
/r/MensRights04/12/16 05:50 PM
1

Are you kidding me? And what, women are naturally better parents? Nice sexism there. Furthermore, I've read statistics that say women are the majority who perpetuate child abuse. But don't let that ruin the narrative. Please continue with the BS.
/r/MensRights04/12/16 04:46 PM
1

Looks like they came from here. One person was the OP of this post. I don't mind looking at the stupidity, but that's all it should be. Reddit is strict about brigading (at least for subs it doesn't like because they go against the narrative). Probably should have used an archive OP. Here's one for you.
/r/MensRights04/12/16 08:48 AM
4

There's that dichotomy again. Nobody says men are oppressed. However, they do point out the disadvantages that men do unfairly face. That doesn't make it oppression. That's just things we would like to see improved. Talking about how 80% of all suicide victims is men and wanting to lower that suicide rate isn't crying about being oppressed. That's seeing an issue and trying to fix it.
/r/MensRights03/12/16 11:46 PM
2

No, it isn't. Neglect isn't inherently abuse, because sometimes it's out of their control. Abuse is abuse. It's damaging to the child, either psychologically or physically. But hey, I guess women abusing kids is no biggie, because the mother has it worse. Question: are men allowed to hit a woman because they had a bad day? If not, why can a woman abuse a child if she has a shit situation?
/r/MensRights03/12/16 11:42 PM
8

If that's what you got from the sub, you must have comprehension difficulties. Never have I seen anyone make an argument that would be construed as "it's soo hard being man, it's like we're oppressed". You've got this idea of a dichotomy where if we don't think everything is perfect, we must think everything is horrible. We don't. All that goes on in this sub is outlining the issues that men face, as well as the hypocrisy that is pervasive within society. Shit like this post is a good example. I…
/r/MensRights03/12/16 07:37 PM
10

I can tell you outright what it was. It was The Tender Years Doctrine. Guess what it was before then? Men got default custody of children (reasoning being that men made more money, and it wasn't uncommon to have a nanny, which the father could afford to pay for. The Tender Years Doctrine changed that. But instead of it being equal, custody went to women by default, citing it was "in the best interest of the child" (which is bullshit considering how many single parent children end up with severe …
/r/MensRights03/12/16 07:32 PM
9

I'm pretty sure that I've read studies that say women perpetrate the majority of child abuse. I could be wrong, but I do remember reading that. Men might be more severe, but it's more common for a woman to be abusive rather than a man being abusive towards a child.
/r/MensRights03/12/16 07:26 PM
1

There's also the theory that it held back the right to vote, as other western countries achieved women's suffrage before the Suffragette Movement became a thing in America. Then there is the terrorism acts they committed, like bombings. Feminism, at its core, is a horrible movement, built on hatred. It's core, fundamental belief is Patriarchy Theory. The logical conclusion of such a theory is hatred. When you blame men for all your problems, how can you not hate such a group? Feminism is shit, r…
/r/MensRights02/12/16 07:05 PM
2

If you can prove that men within the same company as you are being paid more for the same job, you can take it to court. It's already illegal to discriminate in pay. Now I admit I think you're spreading bullshit, but what is the solution if you are telling the truth? Do you want to make it double illegal? What is the end goal if it is already illegal?
/r/MensRights02/12/16 06:59 PM
1

And what discrimination would that be? Because why don't we compare a couple races. Why don't we compare black people to latinos, or asians? All three races have faced hardship and discrimination, and yet blacks are the only ones that are still "suffering". Maybe because it comes from within their own communities. Meanwhile, you have Asians that, as a demographic, are more successful than white people. So here's a question, is Asian pride a bad thing? How about if we were in Armenia, would white…
/r/MensRights28/11/16 10:07 PM
1

Oh look, something that wasn't being spoken about. This was specifically about racial pride. Not pride in general (then again, I'm not really for the whole gay pride, because that leads to stereotypes. But that's a whole different topic). Fighting for men's rights is not comparable, as there are objective points who show that men are also discriminated. And to those that believe in white rights, they believe that they are objectively discriminated against. Because that isn't actually an objectiv…
/r/MensRights28/11/16 09:11 PM
1

Oh, what a load of horse shit. That's the same logic used to dismiss men's rights. White rights, I can see where you're coming from. But pride? No. If being proud of black is okay, it's equally okay to be proud to be white. (Again, racial pride is stupid, but what ever floats your boat). I mean, let's dissect that racial pride for a second. What do whites have to be proud about? But then, what do black people, and let's be honest, AMERICAN black people have to be proud about? All racial pride is…
/r/MensRights28/11/16 01:02 PM
1

I don't think that it's touching on white pride being good, so much as the hypocrisy. I think all racial pride is stupid. But there's a clear hypocrisy that one is allowed and the other condemned. Calling out hypocrisy isn't support of the other. That's a false dichotomy.
/r/MensRights28/11/16 11:01 AM
2

>Complains about how "cuntsplaining" makes us look bad. >Uses "cuck" unironically Pot, meet Kettle.
/r/MensRights27/11/16 09:24 AM
4

I see where you're coming from, but it's no more "doxxing" than reading any other article. As such, there is still a double standard between the post about Brock, and the one about Shaper.
/r/MensRights23/11/16 10:39 PM
39

Still would have been nice to have a link provided. Like I will now do for everyone else. http://imgur.com/a/ppfZA
/r/MensRights23/11/16 08:54 PM
2

But what does it have to do with Men's Rights? Rights, not so much. Inequality though? Yes. Funding for gender specific funding is female dominated, at a rate of around 10 to 1 last I heard. This is despite men and women suffering around about the same in regards to gender specific health issues. But even so, who is saying anything about societal changes? You're the one who brought that into the mix. Instead, awareness allows for a serious discussion to be taken place in places higher than fucki…
/r/MensRights20/11/16 08:12 AM
3

Because trying to raise awareness of the male suicide epidemic (~80% of suicide victims are men) is such a pansy thing, amirite? Fuck off. How dare people want to have one of the largest websites out there to push a message to help raise awareness for a serious issue. Unless you think men offing themselves so much is no big deal?
/r/MensRights20/11/16 05:41 AM
0

I mean I'm just saying a lot of the reason men's rights isn't taking seriously is because people often bring it up in retaliation to women's rights focus. I dunno, I'd say it's a great exercise in showing how society at large is very much gynocentric. Hell, a good example is how the selective service was largely ignored as a non-issue, often dismissed as "you'll never get drafted". That is, until earlier this year and discussion took place about extending such responsibilities to women. At which…
/r/MensRights20/11/16 05:35 AM
2

trp subreddit is a reference to the Matrix.... And when you hear The Red Pill you think trp subreddit. MensRights is a social movement, trp is not. Only if you are aware of both groups. Most people are not in fact aware of TRP. Hell, most people are not aware of the MRM. If this film is their first interaction with the MRM, the name is irrelevant for the most part. It's only people like you who are too worried about a name rather than the content. Defend the content, because the name is irreleva…
/r/MensRights05/11/16 06:42 AM
2

I'm also not a fan of associating trp with men's rights The name of the film is not in reference to the subreddit TheRedPill, it's most likely in reference to the Matrix, about waking up from the propaganda. I think it's an unfortunate choice that unintentionally links the two together, but only if you are actually aware of the two groups. However, anyone who makes that association in all seriousness after seeing the film is probably not that bright to begin with.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 02:21 AM
8

See, that makes sense, except it's Australia. You can legally discriminate in hiring and I believe paying, so long as you say that it's for the goal of "equality". I'm not even joking.
/r/MensRights02/11/16 10:24 AM
6

No real scotsman gets thrown around because YOU don't get to decide who is and isn't a Feminist. There is no membership card, there are no required credentials. These people are operating under the label of Feminism. For your same logic, to them YOU are the false Feminist. You're not the real one to them. So who do I trust, the ones that get backed and actually have some institutional power, or the nobody trying to revise the history of their movement? Edit: I like how there has been no response…
/r/MensRights31/10/16 04:21 AM
4

in the same way you make tumblr SJW's your feminism representatives. Well I know I don't. For me, it's shit like what they're pulling in regards to the Red Pill film by Cassie Jaye, the campaigning on campuses trying to shut down freedom of speech, oh, and their historical record of horrible shit like the Duluth Model, Tender Years doctrine, and ignoring statistics that show many "feminist issues" are pretty much gender neutral. But sure, let's go ahead and ignore the bad stuff. They're not the …
/r/MensRights31/10/16 04:04 AM
3

You're getting downvoted because you're talking about a statistical anomaly. The vast majority of cases end up disadvantaging the man. It's possible that it could happen to you. But it's unlikely. Hell, you could even win some form of payment because that's how fucked the system is against men.
/r/MensRights30/10/16 01:46 AM
5

You're about to get downvoted to hell because you are simply mis-informed. Could also be because they're spreading mis-information too. Just because they're ignorant doesn't mean that it's a-okay to spread that ignorance.
/r/MensRights30/10/16 01:43 AM
2

I think this is why you are experiencing what you are experiencing with mods - no matter what we do, people bitch at us. So that's why there is so much provable censorship in the default subs? It totally isn't a biased cancer that has caused it to purge comments that display wrong think? It's just a bad interaction I've had with completely justifiable comment graveyards? I'd be happy to stick up for you. But there has to be some clarity. Keeping secrets and handwaving away concerns is not going …
/r/MensRights09/10/16 12:50 AM
2

But so many people here are engaged in oppression olympics that they are looking for any reason that they can decry "censorship!" I've seen reddit get shittier and shittier over the past few years. I've seen multiple subs get infested with cancerous mods that get power trips going. Concern that it isn't here is NOT me trying to be oppressed. Far from it. I'm just curious, and when there is accusations of censorship, you handwave shit away, it doesn't make me, a user, feel too re-assured. Now, yo…
/r/MensRights08/10/16 09:56 PM
2

I don't want to come off as being annoying or conspiracy, but if you were in my position, would you honestly believe that? It really looks like you've just hand-waved me away, when me, and others, are concerned that maybe this sub could be getting censored. I don't want to believe this sub has mods that have gotten a little power hungry, because I really like it here. Try to see it from the user side that right after accusations of censorship, such a non-answer with no explanation does look bad.…
/r/MensRights08/10/16 08:56 AM
1

That seems fair, though I asked on that comment, and I'll ask here, how do you know it's a spam bot? I don't really know how to figure that one out.
/r/MensRights07/10/16 12:02 PM
1

That's fair, though how do you know it's a spam bot? Looking at their account is fairly blank (the ~3000 Karma would be from the submission yesterday)
/r/MensRights07/10/16 12:01 PM
1

Well that's pretty shit. Took a while, but I guess even /r/mensrights might have succumb to the cancer.
/r/MensRights07/10/16 07:45 AM
3

I mean. It was a repost for starters (in fact, I remember posting it myself a year ago with the exact same title and exact same imgur image link), though that isn't really against the rules. Secondly, it could be possible that the poster, /u/Adeleines deleted the post. Everyone is jumping that it must be a conspiracy that the mods or admins have deleted it, yet it could very well have been the OP. Maybe they can respond to this post now that someone has actually messaged them and ask them what h…
/r/MensRights07/10/16 12:51 AM
10

It is not "mutilation" to remove excess skin when it is done for hygienic reasons. So what, you think every single male is born with a defect like that? Further, if it is that needed for "hygienic reasons" then how do the rest of the first world, like England, Europe, Asia, Australia, England, New Zealand etc survive, considering that it is in the extreme minority to do such a procedure in those regions? Your argument is shit. It's a bullshit cosmetic surgery that has nothing based in logical re…
/r/MensRights06/10/16 07:57 AM
1

Well, it's been going for a while now and it's somewhat popular, so I doubt they'll get shut down.
/r/MensRights05/10/16 07:56 PM
2

Gonna tag /u/ChadLadiesMan so they can see too. the person writing the post, logicd, wasn't the one who got raped. logicd was a user who was quite inflammatory, but was pretty much unbeatable in his arguments. He has since been banned by the staff, despite him not actually breaking any rules. As for who this is, I remember seeing it when it surfaced, and it was either a case where they were drugged, or they knew they couldn't resist without getting accused of domestic abuse/being a rapist. It wa…
/r/MensRights04/10/16 10:44 PM
6

Most other Cringe subreddits are very restrictive about their content. For example, the main one, r/cringe doesn't allow any content of anyone under 18. cringepics is all just facebook posts and messages of sleazy guys. They're biased as hell, and if you show something sleazy of a woman, your post will probably end up deleted. CringeAnarchy are a bit better, in that they make fun of anyone and everyone. Bronies? Yup. Vapers? Yup. SJWs? Yup. Anti-SJWs? Yup. They actually focus on cringe, rather t…
/r/MensRights04/10/16 10:39 PM
1

And what is the purpose of saying something mean? It's to insult you. The entire purpose of saying something mean is to try and get a reaction. You are advocating for the target to basically go "Good job, you've done what you intended, and I'm actually an incredibly easy target". For some reason, you don't seem to get that the internet is not actually real life. You can walk away from it. You have the tools to block people. You have the tools to take a break. If you let it get to you because som…
/r/MensRights01/10/16 02:54 PM
2

Good point that I forgot. Thanks for adding that.
/r/MensRights01/10/16 01:36 PM
1

Speaking out against it is better than ignoring it. It isn't though. The vast majority of this harassment is purely to get a reaction. Why give these assholes exactly what they want? By reacting, you've made yourself a target. Also, treating the internet like real life is a little stupid. You don't like it, walk the fuck away. That isn't quite the option in real life, but online is a different environment. You have the tools to walk away, or block them. the things people have said about her are …
/r/MensRights01/10/16 03:32 AM
2

Exactly, here in America it's uncommon to not have it done And that justifies it? Right off the bat you've started with a bandwagon fallacy. I never said health concern. I said hygienic. I've overheard groups of girls on at least 2 occasions saying they smell. Would you not say that being unhygienic would be a health concern? You're grasping at straws. Also, do you think it would be as acceptable to do that about women? Maybe in regards to giving oral, but them smelling isn't really ground to os…
/r/MensRights01/10/16 12:45 AM
1

And it happened MUCH worse to Leslie Jones than a lot of people. And how do you know that? You're going off her word, when she looked at it without the standard PR buffer to use the victim narrative to her advantage. Do you think that people like Richard Dawkins, another person in the public eye, doesn't get harassed online? I'd argue that he does more due to him being very controversial to many people. So here's the question then: Why is it sexism against Leslie and the other cast members, but …
/r/MensRights01/10/16 12:27 AM
1

Just for the record, I didn't chose the normal ear piercing, because it's reversible. It can heal over. I still find it a violation of bodily autonomy, and therefore wrong, but if it's on a scale, this is far down the list of things I would care about.
/r/MensRights01/10/16 12:22 AM
1

Well, at least you're consistent. Most others aren't.
/r/MensRights30/09/16 03:19 PM
9

Does intent really matter? I mean, the intent of slaves wasn't to be cruel to them. In fact, many owners (wrongly) saw it as giving them a better life than they had in Africa, in return for working. The intent was irrelevant, because it was still oppressive. Even so, the origin of circumcision was intended as a form of dissuasion of masturbation. It was done to prevent as much pleasure from "such a sinful act". It's intent therefore was to reduce feeling. Is that not cruel? Now it has devolved i…
/r/MensRights30/09/16 03:18 PM
1

I wouldn't frame it as oppression If baby girls were routinely mutilated (as in surgery that is irreversible) in regards to their genitals for what is a cosmetic surgery, would you not call that oppressive? So what is the difference when it happens to boys?
/r/MensRights30/09/16 03:08 PM
5

Additionally, I've heard annecdotal stories from women that they greatly prefer circumcised men and that there can be a significant hygienic impact. It's a highly American thing. Outside of America, it's rarely ever done. Secondly, it has virtually no hygienic impact. Here's question for you: If circumcision is only really popular in America, then where is this health concern outside of America in places like England, Europe, Australia, China, Japan, or any other country that is in the first wor…
/r/MensRights30/09/16 03:06 PM
6

The sexism and threats that the actors (specifically Leslie Jones) have received far outweighs the "sexism" of creating a female remake. You're acting like the threats they received is unique to them. Everyone in the public eye gets them. They just discovered a nice little victim market to be able to use it to their advantage and get some sympathy. Their "harassment" was no different from any other famous person. The only difference is that these idiots decided to look instead of let their PR pe…
/r/MensRights30/09/16 02:52 PM
3

To be fair, it is different, though it doesn't help the Feminists. Being a Muslim or a Refugee is a choice. Being a man is not. It's really that simple.
/r/MensRights22/09/16 01:12 PM
2

First two waves of Feminism were for equality I disagree. When a core tenant of Feminism has always been Patriarchy Theory, it's very clear that man-hatred is a logical conclusion of what would result from such a theory. So what is Patriarchy Theory? In the most basic way of all, it basically says that there is a patriarchy, that it was constructed by men, and that men uphold said system. This patriarchy also oppresses women and keeps them down. So right off the get-go, Feminism as an ideology a…
/r/MensRights19/09/16 09:17 AM
3

I can't wait for all the sexism this will actually cause. Think about it like this. I have 10 people on my board of directors, with only 10 actual candidates that are properly qualified to be there. Everyone else is legitimately subpar. Only one of those 10 is a woman. Okay, so I get 3 underqualified women on these boards. How are those 3 women, and possibly the one who was legitimately qualified, going to be treated? They're going to be ignored. Everyone will regard them as the "mandated divers…
/r/MensRights11/09/16 08:34 AM
3

Simple answer to the stupid headline. Because women aren't choosing that line of work. And a quick correction: Who dies the most as a result of war? Who's injured more? Who sees death right in front of their eyes more? This is about as retarded as Hillary saying that women were the primary victims of war.
/r/MensRights08/09/16 09:07 AM
3

I'm not really reading into it. I'm just baffled that you thought it was worth commenting about (especially if I wasn't meant to read into it).
/r/MensRights05/09/16 12:14 PM
1

I can't believe she posted this video To be fair, it seems that she posted it within a group of friends (or a private group) who then shared it around themselves, with one person giving it to Lauren Southern who made it go viral. Neilson has since went on Facebook and responded to the overall public response... by calling it "gamergate style anti feminist bunch of nonsense". Here's a post by SirYouAreBeingMocked over on Tumblr that shows her response, along with the original video from Lauren So…
/r/MensRights05/09/16 12:12 PM
3

I've sat here for a solid 3 minutes trying to figure out that leap. Gonna have to elaborate on how you get "creepy" from pointing out that there's a contradiction in the sign York U put up.
/r/MensRights05/09/16 12:02 PM
1

Be careful! You'll cut someone with that edge.
/r/MensRights05/09/16 11:59 AM
3

You're missing the point though. It isn't "gender neutral" if it only allows women. Whether or not you want to use said bathroom is kinda irrelevant, it's the contradiction that's the issue.
/r/MensRights05/09/16 11:55 AM
8

NOBODY IS ACTUALLY SAYING THAT ABORTIONS SHOULD BE BANNED! What part of that do you not understand? It is point out that if we were to reduce the rights of women to what is currently afforded to men, that it would result in the banning of abortion. It is not saying that abortion should be banned, but rather that would be the result if we are reducing rights. To use your example, it wouldn't be "I believe that abortion should be banned", but rather use it in a back and forth (and it's important t…
/r/MensRights31/08/16 09:18 AM
1

Some countries including Sweden are proposing "male abortion" laws which allow a man to abort all responsibility within the first 18 weeks (same window women have to terminate the pregnancy). Interesting. Because there will be an interesting problem I believe. In situations of one night stands, cheating, or breaking up close to when conception happened, there is the very easy possibility for a woman to not tell the father that she is pregnant. Would she be required to declare to the father of he…
/r/MensRights31/08/16 07:19 AM
5

You really don't understand here? It's trying to point out how unfair it actually is. Nobody is actually suggesting that it's the solution we want, but rather that is what it would be like if women were also subjected to the same standards that men are subjected to. It's a method to try and get more people to empathise with the situation. In this case, banning abortions would be unfair, so why are men not given at the very least a similar alternative to being forced by the state to raise a child…
/r/MensRights31/08/16 07:13 AM
1

If you think this is how 4chan would respond, you should maybe actually go check 4chan out. Because that isn't how they react. This is more like the Anti-SJW section of Tumblr, and this was just a barebones reply stating nothing but facts. Also, if you think there would be a huge difference between Canada and the USA, then you'd be wrong. It might not be as bad in some areas (it could also be worse), but chances are they will be pretty similar, with men still getting the shitty end of the deal. …
/r/MensRights29/08/16 10:18 AM
1

Kevin's College Tips
/r/MensRights29/08/16 10:13 AM
3

Except you're assuming that people in the centre are fence sitting, when that isn't necessarily the case. A person can hold a variety of values from both ends of the spectrum and end up being in the middle due to the balance.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 05:59 AM
21

It's misleading though. It makes it seem like they're talking about farmers. It would be like someone saying they work in the tech industry, but their job is literally just sales at a store. It's misleading about what work is actually being done by them. Pointing it out is actually a pretty valid thing in my opinion. Their job is not unique to the agriculture industry.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 05:55 AM
2

If you are old enough to punch them you cant be raped, stop being a weak fag. Enjoy prison. Because that is exactly what will happen.
/r/MensRights26/08/16 12:55 AM
2

They abandoned the idea because it might effect a group of people who are less than 1% of the population. Rather than give a lounge that would effect ~50% of the people there, they chose to abandon the idea for the mere possibility that it might cause discomfort to some people within a group that makes up less than 1%. See how 50% is disproportional to less than 1%? Also, the point was that it was shut down not because of the discrimination of men, but rather because the solution (an additional …
/r/MensRights22/08/16 10:40 AM
2

I can say the sky is green. Doesn't mean that's the case. When any person has to prove innocence, that is guilty until proven innocent. By it's very nature, to prove innocence would imply that one is guilty by default.
/r/MensRights09/08/16 03:00 PM
1

I did read. Let me quote your previous comment. I asked you the same question you asked in your post. Bolded for emphasis.
/r/MensRights04/08/16 09:26 PM
1

What question did I ask? I didn't ask a damn question in this chain. But let's go back to the comment before this one. So you're saying that anyone that uses the word 'feminism' or can be construed as 'feminism' must absorb and be a part of their worst examples? Thing is, it isn't just anyone identifying as Feminists. This is core Feminism. This isn't just three examples of a bad Feminist. This is three examples of Feminist organizations that have huge influence and have resulted in effecting la…
/r/MensRights04/08/16 12:55 AM
1

I gave you examples and you've just handwaved them away. Next time, don't ask if you don't actually care.
/r/MensRights03/08/16 09:13 PM
2

So you are flat out denying that the world largest Feminist organisation is Feminist? Have you even considered that maybe, just maybe, you are the one who has gotten Feminism wrong? Seriously, this is the largest Feminist organisation there is, and yet some arsehole on the internet thinks that they're the "real" authority to speak on what Feminism is. You're being wilfully ignorant because you don't want to accept the reality that Feminism is a pile of shit.
/r/MensRights03/08/16 01:52 PM
1

So here's a question then: Is the Duluth Model a Feminist pushed idea? And if so, how was that "for equality", when it has actively suppressed equality? Another: Is the National Organisation of Women a Feminist organisation like their website states? If so, how can their active stance against equal child custody by default for divorce possibly be considered equality? How can I define Feminism with equality, when nearly everything I have seen from Feminism has resulted in inequality? You can deny…
/r/MensRights03/08/16 12:57 PM
1

Yup. That's exactly what I meant. You're totally not playing stupid. Not at all. /s
/r/MensRights03/08/16 05:31 AM
1

You miss my point. It doesn't matter what you define it as. It's actions speak far louder than that.
/r/MensRights03/08/16 05:03 AM
1

I'll give you three examples, most in the history of Feminism and therefore what Feminism has been built on. First up, I'll point to the White Feather Society, something which is a relevant talking point with Feminism's recent opposition to the Selective Service. Recently, it was announced that any woman who turns 18 after (I think) 2017 will be required to sign up for the Selective Service, just like men have required. Feminist's are now opposing this. However, if we go back to the first wave o…
/r/MensRights03/08/16 12:43 AM
2

It's foundation is the ideology. For fucks sake, if you actually look at what it's built on, who is seen as the leaders of Feminism, both now and historically, and you will see a wide variety of people who are horrible people who have said and written horrible things in the name of Feminism. You can deny its foundation and fall back on the definition all you want. The definition is wrong. I can define the sky is green all I want. It's still blue.
/r/MensRights03/08/16 12:20 AM
2

And yet, when you look at academic Feminist papers, you see that a lot of these people are not betraying what Feminism is about. Look, Feminism is not just a stance. It's an actual ideology, and with it comes baggage. There is a long history of bigotry, hatred, and downright bad actions that have come from the movement. The definition means jack shit. The Nazi's just wanted a safe country for the German people. But we both know that there is so much more to the Nazi's than their definition. Same…
/r/MensRights02/08/16 12:50 PM
5

Doesn't matter what anyone thinks. Feminism has shown through their ideological writings, along with the actions of its proponents, that it's a hateful movement that causes more harm than good.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 11:35 AM
3

This all comes down to the dictionary definition. Equality for women is a simple definition for feminism. People can bleat on about a definition for Feminism all they want. I'll still judge everything they do by their actions. And so far, there's a huge pile that shows Feminism doesn't give two shits about equality.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 11:33 AM
4

Don't really see what this has to do with Men's Rights. Even tangentially, this game, as far as I know, has nothing to do with Feminism either. The closest is the tie to the film. But for those interested, according to SteamSpy, on Steam alone, there are only ~1300 copies, give or take by 900. At most, there are a little over 2000 copies out there. At the minimum, there's 400. And that includes any reviewer copies. This was a failure due to three main things. The first was that it just wasn't a …
/r/MensRights02/08/16 06:49 AM
3

Many fans of Ghostbusters actually thought the one from 2009 to be pretty decent from what I heard.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 06:40 AM
1

I wanna start this reply with a healthy fuck you. I thought we were having a nice debate, but you decided to go into insults. The closest I got to an insult was calling you a liar. But let's go over this then: racial and gender diversity are good business decisions that will increase a businesses profitability. So why are companies not diverse? If this is beneficial, then companies should be diverse because it would be in their best interest. But then why is there a lack of diversity? Maybe we s…
/r/MensRights01/08/16 01:12 AM
1

How does racial and gender diversity lead to more innovation? Diversity of opinion and mindset does (or at least gives more ideas, regardless of if they're good or bad). But there is nothing inherent within racial or gender diversity which guarantees better results. You've made an assertion, but nothing to actually back it up. Considering that your first post was contradictory, I have a feeling that you're pulling this idea out of your arse to justify diversity is good in a business sense (when …
/r/MensRights31/07/16 09:09 PM
5

Unchecked, capitalism will do whatever it wants in the name of money. Followed by Your companies will be more diverse and make better decisions. Which makes no sense. If diversity will result in better decisions (something which is speculation when referring to diversity of traits (as opposed to diversity of mental attitudes)), then capitalism would actively seek out diversity on it's own. You can't say that capitalism only focuses on money (a product of being a successful company making good de…
/r/MensRights31/07/16 06:55 AM
2

Nah, because it still counts page visits (just not for the ads), so their results in stuff like Google still register for search results.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 02:15 AM
1

This image is really depressing. It perfectly shows how little people care for men at all.
/r/MensRights14/07/16 09:12 AM
4

MensRights, where women get downvoted for stating fact. Because we knew you were a women? Lose the ego. We don't care if you're a woman or a man. You were downvoted because people disagreed with your stance. Not because of your biology.
/r/MensRights12/07/16 11:24 PM
1

We talk about the agency of women being ignored in favor of society-wide excuses for behavior(sexual assault, domestic violence) all the time on /r/mensrights. Why do we have to stoop that shit on here? Because the system doesn't allow him the agency he needs to get to a better place. He divorces her, and he loses half of his stuff (or more), risks having to pay her in the future with alimony (and failure to do so risks jail time), and overall has a higher chance of things getting much worse tha…
/r/MensRights03/07/16 10:24 AM
1

Why is this an archive.is link? This website isn't sympathetically covering them... I've seen OP before, they just archive everything, which isn't a bad idea in general. I believe it's so that they original article doesn't get edited or taken down, or because OP doesn't support them for other reasons.
/r/MensRights22/06/16 08:52 AM
1

Funny how all these sites were dead quite about "voting for a woman" when it was Palin.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 12:38 AM
6

A lot of them also include cases of misfires. All that is required for a "mass shooting", as defined by the FBI is that 4 or more people are shot (not killed, but shot). This list can also include defensive gun uses in scenarios where a gun was fired to disable (or kill) multiple assailants. That way the list is titled makes it seem a lot worse than what is actually included.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 12:35 AM
2

40%? The common statistic that I've always seen is that men receive 63% longer sentences.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 07:19 AM
4

It's almost as if that's the exact thing a minipulative person would say when confronted! To be fair, that is a kafka trap. You've made the argument that if someone were to defend themselves for the accusation of being an abuser, to the point that they feel attacked, then they must be guilty. I'm not saying that the screenshotted OP doesn't come off as an abuser (because they do come off as an abuser), but that your argument/reasoning isn't that solid.
/r/MensRights05/06/16 09:11 AM
5

Interruption occurs at ~1:20:00.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 01:41 PM
9

To anyone wondering, Milo starts at ~1:03:00. The interruption occurs at ~1:20:00. Here's a link starting at 1:19:00 for a little context.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 01:40 PM
464

I don't know how it went on for this long without police being notified. Two reasons. Because sexual manipulation of boys is seen as a joke, and women are seen as incapable of being predatory by the general public, so nobody thought to even notify the police at all.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 01:26 PM
3

That's because of what /u/Revoran pointed out has now passed. Yes, the gratuitous amounts of tits on screen was to get viewers in. But after season 2, you can see that the amount goes down season after season. Because they didn't need to draw you (or others) in, it already had you hooked with the story, and those hooked will use the story to get others in as well. It was a very cheeky marketing technique to get people in with the "scandalous" attitude of gratuitous nudity, but it isn't needed an…
/r/MensRights31/05/16 10:55 PM
3

They're not just butthurt, but they aren't even original.
/r/MensRights24/05/16 11:38 PM
3

So what, the fact that men get a 63% harsher sentence in courts for the same crimes, accounting for things like prior crimes too, and being (if I remember correctly) twice as likely to receive a sentence than women, that can stand. But the idea that this same bias might actually be present elsewhere in law is beyond your grasp and must be conspiratorial?
/r/MensRights24/05/16 06:13 AM
5

/r/cringeanarchy The other one is filled with feminist mods who wouldn't let this post get by.
/r/MensRights23/05/16 05:15 AM
1

Accusation of brigading MensRights Funny how they have a history of posting in MenRights for well over a month (I only checked that far back). Funny, how when I go to check your past month (or rather, 29 days considering that is how old your account is), I get back 26 posts over that time within MensRights. Meanwhile, /u/colourful_opinion has well over 100 posts in that time within MensRights. If you're going to accuse of brigading, might want to actually make sure that they aren't a regular her…
/r/MensRights21/05/16 01:59 PM
1

Gone now.
/r/MensRights21/05/16 12:13 PM
10

Unless you are actually going to disprove the statistics, all you're basically saying is "I can't believe that statistic, so it shouldn't be trusted". Appeal to incredulity is not an argument.
/r/MensRights09/05/16 03:25 AM
13

Multiple studies have shown that the majority of domestic violence incidents are reciprocal, meaning that both parties are guilty of causing harm to the other person (and not simply for defence). If I remember correctly, it was something like 58% are reciprocal scenarios. There are also multiple studies that say domestic violence effect men and women at nearly the same rates. However, of the cases that are one way, there have been studies that say 70% of the time, it's a woman hitting a man. Wit…
/r/MensRights09/05/16 02:16 AM
5

Here's a link detailing over 200 studies on domestic violence. If you look at many of those statistics, they are not that far from what the image/study OP posted is saying, and that domestic violence is perpetrated against men and women at near equal rates. http://web.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm But I'm sure your gut feeling that this is "bogus" is spot on, and not just an appeal to incredulity I'm sure you'll be able to go through that study OP linked and disprove it (just like those that a…
/r/MensRights09/05/16 02:01 AM
2

She made a follow-up video about how that video went viral, especially in places like Facebook, and she ended up getting a bunch of messages talking about how "I thought I was the only one who thought like this". The follow-up video was basically one big shout-out to a bunch of other good resources on YouTube that do these callout videos, so that those who were new to her channel could find more resources. Here's a link to that video if you're interested.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 02:53 AM
16

"The 15 year old girl was manipulated into thinking that she wanted sex, to the point that she still says she wanted it today". -an article if the genders were reversed.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 05:39 AM
1

Look's to me more like you got trolled OP. Then again, might just be Poe's Law.
/r/MensRights01/05/16 05:31 AM
3

You have no idea what that kind of relationship is like. You think that it's easy to walk away, but these kinds of relationships are extremely nuanced. It's a case where you love the person who treats you like shit. You don't want to be treated like shit, you know you should leave, but you don't. Because you love them. It's not meant to be rational. And even the strongest of person can fall into these types of relationships. A victim to this isn't stupid. They're manipulated into thinking that t…
/r/MensRights27/04/16 02:10 AM
1

I see where you are coming from, but it really depends on how it is done. If it's done in a controlling way, or to demean the person into submission, I don't know what else you would call it. It's manipulative, and if a man were to be manipulative like that to a woman, it would absolutely be deemed domestic abuse. So why is it any different when it's done to men?
/r/MensRights27/04/16 02:05 AM
2

OneMV is one of the best people for presenting an argument, and will occasionally go and callout people who make outrageous claims that "MRAs do X" by asking for proof, only to be met with silence every time. OneMV is a pretty cool guy.
/r/MensRights22/04/16 12:48 PM
1

Well... That's weird. Because I have another person who is in Adelaide and they've hit the paywall (despite this news site being based there). So I dunno then.
/r/MensRights21/04/16 11:19 AM
2

Dunno why you got downvoted when it seems you're correct. I'm in NSW and it's fine for me. Seems like those outside of Australia get a paywall.
/r/MensRights21/04/16 07:31 AM
0

How does that change what I said? You're still more worried that a conservative said it that, than what was being said. Furthermore, want to back up those assertions there buddy? I know collegefix is right-wing, but I'm curious if you actually have anything to back up their supposed sexism and racism. EDIT: would you look at that, sitting at a nice zero. Does someone not want to back up their claims?
/r/MensRights20/04/16 05:36 AM
1

Are you going to actually debunk anything said, or just leave it at the ad-hom, as if attacking what they are rather than what is said is a valid point? I mean, what makes this any different from a Feminist dismissing a point because it "came from an MRA" than what you are doing here, because it "came from a conservative news source"?
/r/MensRights20/04/16 02:22 AM
3

No, you'd fail like those before you, because of how they will go on about how there are intersex people, and how nobody is truly a pure XY or XX. I wish I was joking, but I'm not. This is where the whole slew of bullshit about the non-binary gender stuff comes from. Because as much as the SocJus Authoritarians love to say how they are breaking the gender binaries, they're only re-enforcing them by using this stupid method of putting everyone into boxes. Because rather than say what makes a man …
/r/MensRights19/04/16 03:27 AM
1

Pretty much. I don't have sources on me, and it's late, and I'm too lazy to fetch them, not lazy enough to comment. Anyway, to deconstruct the "wage gap", you have to actually look at where it comes from. So the one that is parroted around that women make 77 cents for a man's dollar for the same work, or a similar variation of that. So how did this number come about? Well, they took the yearly wages of every full-time working man, and found the average of that. Then they did the same thing will …
/r/MensRights14/04/16 01:56 PM
2

True. Good point, and worth mentioning.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 12:16 AM
2

Hm, the draft seems like it could be another example. It doesn't make sense that only men have to get drafted. Did feminism play a part in this? No, this was actually at the time a logical choice that went on to the point where it no longer makes sense. It originates from back to the days where a village would number in ~100-200 people. The idea was that if you sent off all your men and only 2 returned, the village would be able to repopulate, but the inverse wouldn't be possible. However, such …
/r/MensRights10/04/16 08:08 AM
2

To be fair, there are quite a few people on their report team. One person might have gotten one report, and another got the second report. This is why mass reporting is more likely to be successful because more people will see it, and eventually you might come across a person who agrees. It's definitely a PC nightmare there, but it also depends when talking about individual cases, because different people handle them.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 03:39 AM
7

You're implying that the group on FB was a MR group. MR and Anti-Feminists have a big overlap, but they aren't the same group.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 03:34 AM
3

Also, pointing out that a variety of issues that currently disadvantage men were caused by Feminists in some capacity. Like you said, custody laws are one. They were originally done in a way that the father would get the child by default (Something I believe to be a poor system as well). Due to Feminists, this got changed, not by having equal custody, but by making the mother the default instead. Another example is the laws and procedures surrounding Domestic Violence. The Duleth Model is used b…
/r/MensRights10/04/16 03:32 AM
26

Not to mention that as a woman, you will have a greater chance of actually getting the job.
/r/MensRights03/04/16 09:59 PM
20

Well the key word in the top half is "might". There is no guarantee, but under the guise of being what they deem to be ethical, they shouldn't perform an abortion after 20 weeks (though before is fine), as it might cause pain. This same standard of ethics however is not applied to baby boys and routine infant circumcision. I don't think it's anti-abortion, but rather anti-double standards, asking more for consistency in reasoning.
/r/MensRights02/04/16 10:17 PM
31

It's in reference to Carl the Cuck. For more info, here is a link to the page on him and AIDS Skrillex on KYM.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/03/16 11:45 AM
1

It's a bi-product of both the system and type of content. Imgur is a simple site that is used for images. Its commenting system is limited to 140 characters. This means that Imgur attracts people that want simple interactions and the system actually prevents any decent discussion.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 12:22 PM
1

Because this won't backfire if a case like Cologne happens again. Because nothing says safe like a box with limited exits holding a bunch of women.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 04:01 AM
4

You know what is funny about this to me? Is the complete waste this is. From the look of the image, I'd be willing to put money that this is for a shopping centre. Considering that women spend the majority of money, that would also make them the majority of people in shopping centres to spend said money. They've just given exclusive spots to a group that was already a majority at said location, assuming that this is for a shopping centre. Well played Germany. Not completely retarded at all. /s
/r/MensRights28/03/16 03:58 AM
10

The only one being any sort of dick is you. Nobody brought up censorship in a legal sense. And even then, you only brought it up to move the goalposts once you got called out. You're acting no different from the twats that use "sexism is power plus privilege" to say men can't experience sexism. It's a definition that doesn't apply to what is actually being spoken about.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 07:01 AM
1

In fairness, South Carolina has a high concentration of black people there. Chances are, it's just a result of demographics where there aren't very many white students to begin with.
/r/MensRights10/03/16 11:37 AM
1

the hypocrisy on this sub. How so? I have yet to have seen any part of this sub actively telling men how to behave (with exception to threads asking for advice). If you have an example of the hypocrisy, I'd love to take a look.
/r/MensRights10/03/16 11:34 AM
2

I think 4chan is fairly accurate with how this will turn out.
/r/MensRights06/03/16 10:56 PM
10

To be fair, it depends on what the statistics are counting and how you are perceiving it. When people say domestic violence, 9 times out of 10 they think of two people in a relationship with one person harming the other. However, domestic violence can involve other situations like two siblings or parent and child. So depending on whether they count instances like two siblings (unlikely) or parent and child (very possible), that could pad out the numbers. At the end of the day though, it doesn't …
/r/MensRights02/03/16 10:36 PM
1

That's a fair point. Besides, both of us admit that it is based on what we have seen. Both of us have most likely missed things that the other may have noticed, so you're right about needing a third party to look into it that doesn't have a bias on the topic, which would be a pretty hard feat to find a group to accomplish. I'm willing to accept and agree that either one of us could be entirely wrong (and it's probably me), as the views we stated are based on our perception. I mean, I know I have…
/r/MensRights29/02/16 02:18 AM
2

I never claimed that the Right doesn't lie. The world isn't black and white. I was saying that the Left has lied more often and been a lot more sneaky about it.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 01:48 AM
2

Whilst I don't like defending the Right that much, from what I understand they never had anything like The JournoList. The Right can be pretty scummy and I don't argue that at times they try to revise history. But the Left has a history of sneaky shit to influence the public.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 01:35 AM
0

It's horseshoe theory in action. The further away from the politcal sides you get, the closer they actually are.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 01:32 AM
2

Once your kid starts sleeping through the night (usually after 6 months) you will get a decent amount of sleep. I feel so bad for my parents. Growing up, I had acid reflux as a regular thing until I was like 3. My brother who is three years younger than me had it until he was 4 iirc. My parents had to deal with kids screaming in pain in the middle of the night for about 5 years. And that was just when it was constant. There was still the occasional case of it, but nothing too frequent. Whenever …
/r/MensRights28/02/16 10:11 AM
1

What do you think the first reaction to a man saying he was raped by a woman be? It wouldn't be "are you okay?" or "What did you do to bring this on yourself?". I'm thinking more along the lines of "How did it happen?". (That is if they even believe a man can be raped) Which is how it should be. A police officer should, as harsh as it is, be as neutral as possible to the case. It sucks. It's horrible. But that is how it is. Because their job is to determine what happened. That includes if it eve…
/r/MensRights21/02/16 12:16 AM
1

They would make great marines They would make great fodder. While I don't support fodder, that is all the vast majority of them would achieve.
/r/MensRights14/02/16 11:34 AM
2

No. An adult male was called "wer", while an adult female was called "wif". Mann was used to refer to any person, however, it was also used in some contexts to refer to adult males only.
/r/MensRights12/02/16 08:52 PM
7

Sure. I don't disagree with that. Especially when you look into the etymology of the english language and how it formed.
/r/MensRights12/02/16 06:41 AM
12

How is that like a Feminist? Calling out the stupid double standard where apparently she is allowed to be a condescending and patronizing idiot but him doing the same is worthy of it's own title and held to a worse standard? If holding men and women to the same standards is what you think is Feminism, you're mistaken. On top of that, mansplaining is a Feminist term. The only one who is sounding anything like a Feminist is you.
/r/MensRights12/02/16 01:06 AM
97

Yet, she uses words like "mansplaining" in public. To add onto that point, they are constantly complaining about the gendering of words. Saying that words like "Businessman" should be "Businessperson" and "Police Man" (in the generic context) should be "Police Officer". But a negative gendered word against men? Let's not only use them, but actually make them. The fucking hypocrisy that is rampant throughout the entirety of Feminism is astounding.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 10:47 PM
1

I don't quite think that the comparison is the best. Would be better if the guy was ripped and buff with the women checking him out. It's a much clearer double standard where we must ignore a woman's body, even if she wears clothes that are designed to flaunt said body, but not for guys. If a guy were to walk around topless and show off his washboard abs, women would be staring like crazy. Personally, I'm of the opinion of stare away. Find others attractive. Just remain respectful in your intera…
/r/MensRights11/02/16 08:30 AM
2

Sure, but I highly doubt people would choose "Not applicable" and "depression". It makes no sense for a person to answer "Do you have a mental disorder?" with "No mental disorder and depression". So to take the "not applicable" results as false/questionable as well seems a little silly. Now THIS is a rookie mistake. A person will only answer "not applicable" if none of them are applicable most likely, and so they will only cast one vote. A person who has (or has had), say anxiety and depression,…
/r/MensRights05/02/16 09:09 AM
2

it's more than likely not over 50% of the people on the Subreddit actually have a mental disorder Because that's a rookie mistake to make. You would only possibly believe that it's over 50% of the people who responded to the survey. Also, I'd like to point out that people can choose more than 1 so having under 50% of the votes be "not applicable" does not mean over 50% voted that they have a disorder Sure, but I highly doubt people would choose "Not applicable" and "depression". It makes no sens…
/r/MensRights05/02/16 06:33 AM
2

Sure, but how many did that? I mean, you're discarding data solely because it doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions (even though I do agree that it is just internet survey data, which isn't the most accurate). I agree that there were probably some who skimmed it, or ignored the professional part because of the whole self-diagnoses movement that has sprung up over the past few years. But saying that the data is outright false or too unreliable is silly. If we are going to disregard the answers g…
/r/MensRights05/02/16 05:51 AM
1

If we're going to be assuming that people are answering dishonestly, then this whole survey is useless. Also, I did admit that I was sure some people ignored the "professional" part. But when the question asks for if they were professionally diagnosed, you have to respond in good faith that people were honest with their answers. If you can't do that, then you can't trust any survey, as you will never really know if they're lying.
/r/MensRights05/02/16 01:09 AM
4

If you look at the actual title of the question in the survey itself, it says Do you have any professionally diagnosed (past and/or present) mental health issues (select all that are applicable)? Meaning that no, it isn't self-diagnosed. I'm sure there are some who ignored that "professional" part, but the question does specify if they were diagnosed by a professional.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 10:28 PM
1

Okay, so middle school isn't a US wide thing, and high school starts at grade 9. Just as a small side note, that seems kinda odd. The whole reason we have a system that goes K-6 then 7-12 is that it splits it in half. Seems odd to have 9 years of education in one place and less than half in the other. Then again, it might have been done on the idea of physical maturity, as most teenagers start to go through puberty around then. But back on point, seeing how this happened in 7th grade, it's reaso…
/r/MensRights04/02/16 01:34 AM
0

It's an iffy thing. If the MRM does show up, it could be labelled as "See! The MRM does support RoK!!!" unless we were actively trying to prevent the group there. The problem with that however is that would make us no better than when Feminists pull this sort of shit to get MRM events shut down. It's a tough call on if we should even do anything more than condemn it online while still trying to reduce their visibility by not giving them undeserved attention. Because at the end of the day, that i…
/r/MensRights03/02/16 10:14 PM
1

Interesting. I don't disbelieve that, and I'm sure that it has happened more than just that once, but it is still anecdotal. But I would be interesting to seeing just how often that happens, and in what situations this occurs. I'm not too familiar with the US system for school, but here in Australia, primary school (Kindergarten-Year 6) is much different to high school (Year 7-Year 12). In primary school, you (usually) only have one teacher a year (occasionally if you are put in a double year cl…
/r/MensRights03/02/16 10:09 PM
5

I can guarantee this will fail. Edutainment has always been sought after, and it fails a lot of the time because it can't tailor its teaching. It isn't a teacher, edutainment can't adapt to the child. Edutainment had been tried for decades, from books like Horrible Histories, to TV like Bill Nye The Science Guy. And while yes, both of them worked well in engaging the students, that doesn't mean that they did better or that they were being taught better as a result. On top of that, trying to use …
/r/MensRights03/02/16 11:14 AM
1

Except that technically would be brigading. You're trying to get people from here to go to another subreddit that they normally wouldn't go to, in the hopes that they will change the vibe in the thread. I think they should be corrected too, but this is still asking for a brigade.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 10:10 PM
1

Except that can still be argued against within the Feminist viewpoint. "Male Feminists are actively using their privilege to help out women fight the oppression that they have faced for centuries. While they use their privilege to help women achieve equality (rather than be complicit with the current inequalities or fight to maintain them), they instead promote women's voices, rather than speak over them. Inversely, female MRAs are being used by the men as figureheads with no actual agency for t…
/r/MensRights02/02/16 01:07 AM
4

Nope. Sorry, but the same thing can be said of female MRAs. Both sides think they're on the right side. You can make the argument that the MRM is the right side (which I will probably agree with), but that doesn't change that both sides have their justifications, and as such, "Uncle Tom" is a term that is applicable for them to use from their perspective. Sorry, but it's a stupid point that is attacking a person for what they have between their legs, and not their arguments.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 10:39 PM
9

This is what we need more of. These kinds of PSAs that do have a hint of humour to them, but still sending a serious message. Seeing this kind of awareness spread around gives me great joy.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 10:24 PM
2

A lot of what you have typed out is anecdotal. But let's take a look at some things that stood out. Much of the US..... have tried to make their rape laws as gender-neutral as possible. Yeah, like excluding forced to penetrate as a form of rape..... oh wait. No. That doesn't make it gender neutral. Man-hating certainly does exist and is tolerated within feminism, but most of the "man hating" that outsiders claim is bullshit, it is just hatred of particular behaviours. The vast majority of femini…
/r/MensRights30/01/16 05:50 AM
3

But that still didn't answer my question. You made the claim of "Even if this isn't fake it doesn't change the fact that men who have been raped are normally treated kindly when they comment politely on feminist forums". Now, that might very well be true, especially how I do believe that individually, most Feminists are good people. But as a movement, they're shit. The exclude men from rape laws. They implement systems that target men for their natural biological differences (Duleth Model for DV…
/r/MensRights29/01/16 09:50 PM
3

Honestly, I seriously think it depends. If the person who said "Kill yourself" was saying it within an atmosphere where normally that would just be shit talk or banter, then yes, I think the law is would be stupid to apply to such a situation. However, if we are talking about people saying "Kill Yourself" in a serious manner, and the person targeted does kill themselves because of what was said, then yeah, it's kind of applicable. I think context of the situation is important.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 09:40 PM
13

Serious question then: Why isn't there discussion within Feminist circles about how when Mary P Koss did her infamous rape study, she classed male rape perpetrated by a woman as "Other Sexual Assault"? Don't get me wrong, I do realise that the silence there is a little different. One is opposition (Those in OP's post), and the other is apathy, where they simply don't care because it doesn't effect them.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 12:40 PM
20

Actually, that is a crime in America too if the person actually does kill themselves, especially if there is evidence that point to them actually being a part of the cause.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 12:37 PM
1

what the majority of people who self identify with the movement believe Honest question then: from what I gather, you actually do believe in equality, and that really is great. You're one of the few self-identified feminists out there who actual do. However, you claim that you are among that majority of what people believe. Now, I can agree that the majority of people who identify as Feminists are often with the best of intentions, and truly do want equality. But what happens when that majority …
/r/MensRights29/01/16 12:21 PM
2

And now I miss Logicd.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 06:58 AM
3

Name for me 5 feminist leaders that have a larger or equal following of feminist followers to people like Anita Sarkeesian, Andrea Dworkin, Lena Dunham, Amy Schumer or Jessica Valenti, who at the very least is vocally supportive of Men's Rights, and calls out the "bad" feminists. Because these are the leaders of the feminist movement. They are the ones that are the face of it. They are the ones with the millions of followers. They are the ones that spread misinformation like the wage gap and rap…
/r/MensRights29/01/16 06:56 AM
1

Nice implication there. Never did I say that. What I will say, is that millennials are trying to reinvent the wheel, just like every other generation before them. They're bitching about how shit life is thanks to those dastardly Baby Boomers, forgetting how every other generation did the exact same thing: bitch about the hand they were dealt. In 50-70 years time, I assure you that that generation will be blaming millennials for their situation as well. As with every generation, they always think…
/r/MensRights26/01/16 09:08 PM
1

I love how quick people jump to blame boomers for all of the worlds problems.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 03:30 AM
2

No way to give a man a womb Wasn't there recently a breakthrough that would allow a male to be able to carry and give birth to a baby? I mean, it has to be medically implanted, but if I am remembering correctly, that is still an amazing breakthrough.
/r/MensRights23/01/16 08:39 AM
1

Oh trust me, I know. I've interacted with those types before. It isn't pleasant having to deal with someone who sees oppression everywhere they go.
/r/MensRights22/01/16 08:45 PM
4

That's a self-contradictory claim. By saying that it has to be an institutional power is ignoring that their schemes and scholarships are part of the institution. It's a flimsy argument at all levels, but that is the flimsiest of all.
/r/MensRights22/01/16 12:41 PM
3

I completely support having a scholarship for men, but I think it's wrong to exclude black and Native American men. When looking at who is the most disadvantaged when it comes to trying to attain entry into higher education, it's poor white males who are the worst off. Source: https://www.ucas.com/corporate/news-and-key-documents/news/ucas-data-reveals-numbers-men-and-women-placed-over-150-higher On top of that, Milo left in a loophole that he is aware of, where the person only need to identify …
/r/MensRights22/01/16 01:31 AM
31

exclusively to white men He actually said that it is available to anyone who identifies as a white man. Literally, you can be a black woman, but as long as you identify as a white man on the form, you're eligible. This is one of the best things ever, because if anyone says it is racist or sexist, he has two massive weapons against that argument. First is that is this grant is racist/sexist, then so are all the other grants who are for minority/women classes. If however they say that it is someho…
/r/MensRights22/01/16 01:29 AM
8

So you think that a child could have the power to enact this on their mother if they desired? I have a feeling the mother would be punished, but it would be a pittance compared to what punishment a father would receive. But hey, pointing out the bias against men in the courts and the lack of punishment for ruining a life that women routinely get is totally unrelated to Men's Rights. Taking a quick glance at where you post tells me exactly how much you care (or understand for that matter) about t…
/r/MensRights19/01/16 10:39 AM
0

Did I disagree? All I said is that the insult isn't any better than when they do it. I thought we were meant to be better than Feminist, not the same with a different colour flag.
/r/MensRights16/01/16 02:58 AM
0

Nice justification. Works exactly the same from a feminist perspective. To them, Feminism is a righteous cause. To us, the MRM is a righteous cause. So whose perspective is more correct? And don't get me wrong, I can perfectly see where you are coming from, but it can be used near identically from a Feminist perspective.
/r/MensRights15/01/16 11:41 PM
0

Really, this insult is no different than when feminists will claim that female MRAs are in it to get some dick. Let's not lower ourselves to that standard.
/r/MensRights15/01/16 01:18 PM
4

Here are some of the tweets. Now tell me, if those were aimed at women how that wouldn't be called out as emotional abuse? Because it absolutely is.
/r/MensRights08/01/16 02:46 AM
3

I have had a grand total of 0 mandatory lessons/psa classes on the topics of stealing, murder, arson and vandalism. I have had 4 on rape. The earliest was when I was 15 (EDIT: I should make it clear that at 15 I and everyone around me knew that rape was one of the worst crimes out there. It wasn't like this was the thing to teach me that rape was bad, that was already drilled into me). It tried to link porn with raping. The class was 3 hours long. The girls were allowed to go back to class after…
/r/MensRights08/01/16 02:43 AM
1

Like I said, they are far from being a group I would whole-heartedly support (I do support trying to help women victims, but despise the whole narrative pushing). However, this is a more recent ad. Assuming that such ads continue to appear, this could be a step in the right direction for them. Still a ways to go, but better than, well, everything you pointed out. I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt in this instance, but I am still sceptical as well, with the main thought in the back of …
/r/MensRights02/01/16 01:02 PM
3

and plays no part in supporting men. I'm not really trying to defend them (they aren't the best, that's for sure), but I will say credit where credit is due. Doesn't this campaign kinda state that t your statement I quoted not quite true? Or is this a police campaign who also support White Ribbon? If it's the former, there is still a long way to go, but at least it is improving if that is the case.
/r/MensRights31/12/15 02:58 PM
0

What a stupid response. There is a world of difference between claims being made, and having something instituted into law that would be regressive to society. And don't get me wrong, if it was all talk, I would agree with you. But this topic is a little more nuanced than what that image would assume it to be.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 11:56 PM
6

Or men are realising that marriage just isn't worth risking half (or more) of their assets. Not to mention marriage has also been devalued a lot over the years, and people don't see the point like they used to.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 02:53 AM
5

I think we need a safe space because of air-con and the word "too".... wait, that was feminists, that's right.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 02:47 AM
2

Either that, or a lot of teenage boys have an exam fetish, as that is one of the most common "awkward boner" scenarios I've heard of.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 02:44 AM
3

Once a husband begins to be vulnerable toward his wife, she doesn't want him anymore. She may not even understand why and will then make it about something else Just spitballing here, but could that be down to a gender roles idea that men don't show emotion, so when a man does, a woman doesn't know how to react to it in regards to a relationship? By comparison, women having that freedom to show such emotions, men in a way expect it and come to learn how to handle it, at least in comparison. I'm …
/r/MensRights28/12/15 01:00 AM
5

Since half of the issues that the MRM fights for were caused and defended by feminists. Stuff like the Duleth Model, unfair child custody rights, the massive gap between male and female health funding, etc.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 12:50 AM
3

Name 3 large-following feminists (with a following that is primarily feminist, so people like Christina Hoff Sommers are out, as they are often labelled anti-feminist by mainstream feminists) that don't spew some form of hate towards men. I'm talking followings the size of Jessica Valenti, Anita Sarkeesian, Lena Dunham. Then, if you do manage that task, where do these "good feminists" get their statistics from? Chances are that they get them from the bad ones, with the biases from people like Ma…
/r/MensRights28/12/15 12:45 AM
8

Is it worth the trouble? No. Quite bluntly the last thing these people want are objectivity. I will concede that they were decent when they started, but things change. RationalWiki is full of misinformation and narrative. You will most likely have a very hard time on RW if not getting banned very quickly for "bad faith".
/r/MensRights27/12/15 11:47 AM
5

The (minute) "benefits" from female circumcision (the removal of the clitoral hood) are pretty much the same as those found with male circumcision. So you hold a lovely double standard. Also, let me make it clear, I do not advocate for female circumcision. Both male and female circumcision are abhorrent, and teaching proper basic cleaning techniques that take less than 5 seconds far outweighs mutilating a child without their consent.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 11:15 PM
4

So if you will do this to your sons, will you seek out the same treatment for your daughters? Removal of the clitoral hood is directly analogous to removal of the foreskin on a male, with roughly the same amount of benefits. Or are you going to scream "it's different!" despite it being pretty much the same?
/r/MensRights26/12/15 09:39 PM
5

This is actually a fairly divided issue. It really does depend on what sub, topic and time of day/week to see which viewpoint comes out as the prevalent one. I've seen plenty of people argue that false rape claims should always be kept in mind. I've also seen it be denied. It really depends on who is in the comments at that time.
/r/MensRights21/12/15 10:34 AM
5

I laughed. It's dark humour. I've laughed at rape jokes where women are the butt of the joke. I'll do it when men are the butt of the joke. And god damn yes, those were puns. I thought we were better than this? Better than being hypersensitive where we couldn't even take a joke.
/r/MensRights21/12/15 10:28 AM
1

Looks at where the author is located. Melbourne based. I'd say I was surprised, but then I'd be lying.
/r/MensRights20/12/15 09:57 PM
7

There's one easy rebuttal to "not a real feminist!". Simply ask them to name a good feminist that has a following that trumps Anita Sarkeesian, Valerie Solanis, Lena Dunham, Andrea Dworkin, Jessica Valenti, etc. Chances are they won't, and if they do, chances are they are uneducated on how much of a shit person this "good" feminist is. But even if they find a "good feminist", who isn't a shit person, ask them where this good feminist gets her statistics from, and I can bet you anything that it w…
/r/MensRights20/12/15 11:22 AM
5

pretty sure this group of links and commentary has been blatantly stolen (or maybe reused by the original author) as I am quite certain I have seen it all before, and most of it in the exact same order with the exact same comments. That isn't uncommon. I mean, do you really want to have to type all of those out again for each idiot? Most people who post this stuff will keep a draft somewhere to do a quick copy+paste. It's just to save time. it reminds me of that super long tumblr post that some …
/r/MensRights20/12/15 11:17 AM
2

when studies show men and women are about equally as likely to experience it? See, I've seen differently (from a PEW study, I think, can't remember). It said that overall, men are harassed more and more in all types of online harassment except sexual harassment, which women do receive more of. There was another study that came to the conclusion that women are more susceptible to the effects of harassment, where they gave insults and harassment to both men and women, and women reacted worse to th…
/r/MensRights17/12/15 08:56 PM
1

Don't get me wrong, I do know this shit (admittedly only basics), but we're talking about feminists here. Do you really think they know? After all, women are the primary victims of war.
/r/MensRights17/12/15 07:18 PM
5

"men likely would vastly outnumber the few women who qualify for combat." Oh, so this isn't like the Fire Brigade which you had to lower the standards for women to equal out the numbers? You're not going to advocate this now? Somehow, trying to save someone's life is fine for someone unfit for the job, but when it is directly a women's life on the line, that's too far.
/r/MensRights17/12/15 04:15 AM
9

Clicks increase their search result relevance.
/r/MensRights16/12/15 03:21 AM
1

Yep, no argument from me there.
/r/MensRights15/12/15 11:16 PM
1

Female suffering is never played for laughs. You know what, I'm going to suggest an exception to that. Female protagonist/good-side suffering is never played for laughs. Villain women however? Sometimes. It's rare, but occasionally it happens, although there is usually something that has been done prior to try and dehumanize the character before that point to try and remove empathy or distance being able to relate to the character.
/r/MensRights15/12/15 09:59 PM
2

Good work Donnie. It ain't always easy to go against the group.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 08:03 AM
11

Do you know why is is "more harsh"? Because of the fucking options. Seriously, women have pretty much all clothes available to them, so long as it fits in a decent way. They have t-shirts, trousers, shorts, singlet tops, enclosed shoes. Those are pretty much what men can choose from, and the restrictions on those clothes are pretty much the same between men and women. But then you add in all the other clothes that women can wear, and you do have to have more restrictions that pertain to those cl…
/r/MensRights13/12/15 05:53 AM
2

A woman says Can we not? Why should we be playing their identity politics game? Why should the content not stand on it's own?
/r/MensRights11/12/15 04:24 AM
3

Being a woman means you need to be a Feminist. Ask her if that is the same for men and being an MRA/"meninist" (yeah, I know it's satire, but we're talking to a Feminist here)/masculinist. When she says that men are above women and don't need a movement, ask her what legal rights a man has that a woman doesn't have. Watch as she performs gold medal winning mental gymnastics.
/r/MensRights09/12/15 11:49 PM
1

Hey, you don't know this person's fetish. If they want to be raped and then eaten by a shark, so be it. Stop kink-shaming you patriarchal shitlord. /s if it wasn't obvious
/r/MensRights09/12/15 11:38 PM
1

Except this is reaching at best. Apart from a few wackos out there, no one would complain about an ad that said men only. The only issue here is the wording. It should have said women only, instead of no men.
/r/MensRights09/12/15 12:19 PM
8

Pretty much this. While I do like a lot of his points, he shouldn't be classed as MRA or anything like that. He is anti-feminist. That doesn't make him pro-MR, and from what I have seen, he is pretty indifferent about the movement.
/r/MensRights07/12/15 09:41 PM
1

The problem is that many will do what they are already doing. Condemning it as "nobody should be drafted" but do very little about it. They will make noise about it and prevent this change, but I highly doubt any of them will continue to fight to get everyone released from this system.
/r/MensRights07/12/15 09:01 PM
5

Why shouldn't /r/mensrights[1] be judged to the same standard they hold feminism to Name me 5 Men's Rights Activists that are of prominent size (following) that you would consider extremist. I'll start you off with the famous one of Paul Elam, who has said some crazy things. In the mean time, I'll just name off Lena Dunham, Andrea Dworkin, Anita Sarkessian, Jessica Valenti, and Valerie Solanis. See, the big difference between the MRM and Feminism is that the crazies are the ones running Feminism…
/r/MensRights06/12/15 11:56 AM
3

Leering directly at someone can be considered rude, but that is it. Sure, it makes whoever is being leered at feel uncomfortable, but that isn't harassment, especially when it is unintentional, as many people do just "stare out into space" and that direction might have someone there. Also, how much does someone want to bet that this would never be held up if a woman was doing it to a hot guy?
/r/MensRights04/12/15 10:27 PM
10

Fucking hell, she really is like if an SJW or Feminist ran for president, Nah, she's just pandering to that crowd. If she get's in, I'd imagine it would be far worse for every crowd.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 06:46 AM
1

Women didnt go on the roof, how sexist Excuse me while I go get even the tame things that Femen have done.
/r/MensRights30/11/15 08:20 AM
2

I think that the quote is what sold me on it. I'm not advocating this sort of thing, but I understand why, and support their cause, just unsure of the method.
/r/MensRights30/11/15 12:04 AM
5

I'm curious as to what MensRights thinks of this. They were also quoted to be saying how it is easier for them to climb on top of Buckingham Palace, than to gain access to see their own children.
/r/MensRights29/11/15 08:44 PM
5

and now someone removed it completely Good. The topic [of MRAs) is completely irrelevant to his page, why should it be there in any capacity? I can understand the blog, I guess, but who approved of it and who didn't is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights29/11/15 10:08 AM
10

Batty's son was killed by his father, who at the time was mentally ill and living in his car. Curiously, Batty doesn't mention either of these things. Not to mention her entire message is to try and stop violence against women. Her son was the one that was killed, but it's really the women that need help, not both. It isn't even women and children, it's just women. It infuriates me how someone can experience a situation where a male is the victim and then frame their entire campaign to solely he…
/r/MensRights27/11/15 10:24 AM
23

I have absolutely no respect for Rosie Batty. She is one of the people that make talking about domestic violence against men so hard. Just read these two parts of the article. Ms Batty became an advocate after her son, Luke, was bashed to death by his father at a Tyabb cricket ground. Okay, so she became an advocate after her son was killed via domestic violence from the boys father. Fair enough, I can get behind that. But after describing domestic violence as domestic terrorism (which makes no …
/r/MensRights27/11/15 10:15 AM
4

as nobody can be "forced into" parenthood any more then anybody else can Except they can. A potential father has no legal say in abortion (rightfully so), and while he can walk away from physically parenting a child, the woman can (and most likely will) get child support, meaning that he is still a parent financially. Women have freedom over whether they are a parent or not, even having the legal right to leave a child anonymously on a doorstep to relinquish ownership in all fashion. Men have no…
/r/MensRights23/11/15 02:49 AM
1

But I don't doubt the sincerity at all. I'd be more in doubt if they did take it down, like a child trying to hide something they broke, hoping that no-one really notices. I didn't think you were pro-censorship, just that keeping it up is far better than removing it.
/r/MensRights22/11/15 08:46 AM
2

Depends on the length of the apology, but really, that's all that's needed.
/r/MensRights22/11/15 06:13 AM
14

Notice it’s still available to read though. As it should be. I don't think that articles should ever be deleted, even in cases where something like a dox is present (it should be redacted from the article, but the rest still available). If there is a public apology, and that is on the original article, then I have no problems.
/r/MensRights21/11/15 11:35 PM
6

The man still. I mean, when you have a well known female comedian go into great detail about how she fucked a guy that was so drunk he not only had trouble keeping it up, but was also passing in and out of conciousness throughout sex and not get a massive backlash against her, you know that this sort of shit-show applies to a man having sex with a woman. Of course, using common fucking sense, unless someone became aggressive under the influence of alcohol and "loses control", it wasn't a rape at…
/r/MensRights15/11/15 05:59 AM
6

Care to elaborate? I tried to find what rule was broken, and I couldn't see it. Unless it was "bad faith", which is a bullshit rule that idiot subs use to justify blocking out a dissenter. Because they don't agree with you, they must be there on bad faith.
/r/MensRights15/11/15 05:49 AM
5

The tradition might be old, but we're talk about the charity organisation. OP was clearly talking about the charity organisation. Either read the whole post or don't comment.
/r/MensRights13/11/15 08:34 PM
1

Well I think that term is too broad. It makes things like coping a feel (also wrong) be classed as rape. It would be molestation, not rape. Slight difference, but it matters. It would be better to restrict it to any form of unconsenting intercourse, be it oral, anal, vaginal or masturbatory (jacking someone else off, or using any part of their body to jack off against their will, though in my personal opinion, I wouldn't class the masturbatory one as severe as the others, but that is just my opi…
/r/MensRights12/11/15 09:54 AM
0

Most of MRM agrees that some early feminism was essential. Honestly curious, not trying to stir up shit (though it probably will), but what parts are there that were essential? I'll take an educated guess here and say that the most common answer to this would be voting rights, but even then, most men didn't have voting rights that much earlier. Voting rights were tied to class and wealth, most often through the form of property ownership (which would explain why men voted more often, as they wer…
/r/MensRights11/11/15 12:21 PM
1

I don't like looking at things from one particular ideological angle at the expense of others. I'm sorry, but at the expense of who exactly?
/r/MensRights11/11/15 12:07 PM
12

That is a crime if done in the court of law. It's called perjury. It can also be a crime to lie to police, as it would be an obstruction of justice.
/r/MensRights03/11/15 12:06 AM
6

Oh, absolutely. I completely disagree with the move by the mods, and if it were a topic they cared about, they would absolutely stick around to do their job. So it does have a slight level of ideology, but I highly doubt it is malicious, just... lazy.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 11:20 AM
13

Or laziness. I believe that there is cancer in a lot of the default sub mod positions, but I'm also sure that half the time it also comes down to laziness. This is a question that is bound to draw in some controversial discussions, ones that will require moderating. Rather than actually do their "job" (it is a volunteer thing don't forget), they'll just delete it to make their life easier. Not for a political or ideological reason, but more likely a laziness issue.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 08:29 AM
4

It doesn't? But it is still a very interesting resource, and there are definitely some "why is that like that" questions that should be asked from this data. Specifically for relating to Men's Rights would be the Special Education category (Are boys being over-diagnosed/treated as if men and women are identical when there is a very real possibility that there are other factors?), the Higher Education category (Why do men not only enroll at quite a lower rate than women, but also graduate less th…
/r/MensRights21/10/15 06:04 AM
1

And yet, I still don't believe that CHS was big enough that this was "a CHS debunking" (implying that it was somewhat inspired by her), and not just a simple case of common sense taking over with a comedian doing their thing of putting the humour in there.
/r/MensRights18/10/15 12:07 PM
1

True, but that specific idea I haven't seen her make before that video. I could be completely wrong, but I'm pretty certain the CHS wasn't big enough in 2009 to have an influence on this comedian. It's possible, but unlikely.
/r/MensRights18/10/15 11:59 AM
1

This was well before the CHS video. That comedy show (Ed Byrne Different Class (which is a really good watch if I may say so)) was done in 2009. So while CHS quite possibly held these views before the video, she didn't make a video about it until after this one.
/r/MensRights18/10/15 10:58 AM
1

Sure, but that doesn't stop the media and people Or the campus kangaroo courts that have been happening either.
/r/MensRights18/10/15 09:55 AM
1

No. If they do a shit job, they do a shit job. As such, I will call them out on said shit job. Like I said, if they want to do a serious article like this, they have to take it seriously. That means taking off the underwear from the head, stop being retarded, and actually do something that would mean something on a resume. Stop excusing bad behaviour because they've always been bad. By that logic, we can't criticise Feminism because Feminism has always been bad.
/r/MensRights15/10/15 10:40 PM
1

Of course they're not a legitimate news source. For fucks sake, excusing shitty behaviour when they are trying to write something serious isn't okay. You seem to be under this idea that just because the site is mostly comedy, that excuses them being lazy over any of their information. You seem to be unable to separate that while the site as a whole is a comedy site that an individual article can't be serious. If Cracked wants to write said serious article, they have to be serious about their wor…
/r/MensRights15/10/15 10:27 PM
1

It's an entertainment website Implying that makes a difference. The purpose of this article was serious. It wasn't meant to be entertaining. It was serious. They don't get that excuse for shitty work on something they are trying to be serious about.
/r/MensRights15/10/15 08:05 PM
14

I don't know where you're from, but in America at least, the very religious are often of the right. Now, I do agree that it isn't necessarily "the right" which is teaching abstinence, it is the religious ones, also known as "The Religious Right" which will heavily push this. Chances are, if the hard right in your country isn't heavily religious, your country in general isn't very religious, and I'm inclined to believe that you're somewhere in Australia or possibly Europe.
/r/MensRights15/10/15 12:15 PM
1

If they want to write a serious article, guess what you have to do? Serious work. You can't write an article that is meant to be informative and to try and change minds, and then not do the work that goes with that. That's sloppy, it shows no care, and frankly, insulting. Rather than wait and put the effort in, they run the article without enough information. Don't get me wrong, the intent is great, but the execution is worth criticising. I honestly think that waiting for some actual interaction…
/r/MensRights15/10/15 06:18 AM
1

Cracked is an entertainment website, not a serious journalism website And yet they want to play with the big boys and write a serious article to change minds and perceptions. They don't get to have their cake and eat it too without getting called out on it.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 11:19 PM
2

And to be triple fair, they might not have wanted to come forward because this is Cracked.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 11:15 PM
1

Most military reports of rape are men. Bolded. So, if the most reports are men, why are there apparently none for them to find? This is poorly done and should have been properly researched. I'm not going to kiss the arse of a shitbait website like Cracked because they did a half-arsed article that talks more about women than men because they didn't do the bare minimum research.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 10:12 PM
1

most military reports of rape are from men. This is from a post in this very thread from /u/TacticusThrowaway Cracked wants to write an article on a serious issue with the intent of changing minds and perceptions? Maybe they should do some research before running a story.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 09:13 PM
7

I don't know. I think it would have been better to sit on the idea that run the story. Sit on it until you can get the numbers to talk about this stuff. Better yet, have a better title. But hey, Cracked is known for being a click bait piece of garbage these days.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 08:13 PM
2

Basically, i can commit sins worthy of recognition Nah, I'm talking about Original Sin. This is the concept that you are born with Sin already in you, that you are already guilty from birth and no matter how good you have lived your life, you still need to repent. If I remember correctly, it's taking burden from your ancestors sins.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 07:26 AM
0

So in discussions that would only be relevant to a very select few? Most people aren't ignorant, even most racists aren't, they just don't care.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 06:14 AM
1

Except the benefits is what is the privilege, not the ignorance of being aware of said benefits. However, my complaint is, even in this legitimate meaning, what is the point? So I'm aware that I receive X because I'm Y. What does that change? If I try to speak up, I'm speaking over those that are oppressed and being oppressive or a Y saviour (EG White Saviour is the most common version of this). The only point for bringing up privilege (without a reasonable solution offered) in any argument woul…
/r/MensRights14/10/15 06:01 AM
4

The original meaning was as an explanation for why, say, white people might not understand the risks that black people face when it comes with interacting with the police, because every interaction that they have had has been perfectly polite. Except that's wrong. The privilege would be that the white person doesn't have the risks that a black person would. What you described would be ignorance. A privilege would involve some sort of benefit. There isn't really a benefit from not understanding s…
/r/MensRights14/10/15 05:04 AM
46

Implying privilege is anything but Feminisms version of Original Sin. I can't tell any different between these two concepts. For example "Pray for forgiveness of the sins you were born with" "Check your privilege". Neither actually change anything of the situation, and they are both ways to keep people in line. Talking about privilege in relation to unchangeable concepts (like sex or race) is a pointless endeavour as it will produce no results.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 03:54 AM
4

Many hate it equally because they conflate the two as the same thing. Feminists also have a track record of assigning "MRA" to anyone they don't like, even though they don't identify with the the label.
/r/MensRights13/10/15 08:45 PM
3

I think the post was more about saying "don't be surprised if there are some more downvoted content coming up, this is why."
/r/MensRights12/10/15 09:57 AM
6

They've doxxed before. But even so, it's pointing the clear hypocrisy among Reddit admins, even if only this is only meta related to MR in nature. Imagine if we were petty enough to do something like this but only with the feminist subs, shit like SRS, SRD, Feminism, TwoX, etc. How long do you really think this sub would last if we tried to pull this shit off?
/r/MensRights12/10/15 08:53 AM
5

I think you meant /u/spez
/r/MensRights12/10/15 08:50 AM
7

The best way is to refute or clarify every one of their points with sources. Like how women are 71% of non-reciprocal domestic violence, showing that many men don't hit back and they will suffer in silence. Also shows that there are women out there who know that they can get away with this because they are women. The point isn't to take away from women either, they are just as much a victim as men can be. The point is to include men, not exclude women. That is what they don't understand due to t…
/r/MensRights11/10/15 11:43 AM
1

Google aren't much better for a heads up. If you want to stick with the Firefox style, I suggest Waterfox, a clone (as the name might suggest) that prioritises security and such. Seeing how it has no ties to Mozilla is a good move too.
/r/MensRights11/10/15 04:00 AM
8

Oh fuck off. By your logic, mothers are child killers. 27.3 percent of child deaths resulting from abuse were perpetrated by the mother, compared to only 14.8 percent of fathers. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/resource/child-maltreatment-2009 But we both know that such a fucked up label won't help anyone. Further, women rape men at roughly the same rate if you count "forced to penetrate" as rape. You want to treat men as guilty first? Go the fuck ahead. I'll treat them as innocent until prov…
/r/MensRights11/10/15 03:54 AM
3

Oh for fucks sake, can people please stop trying to treat boys like they are dysfunctional girls?
/r/MensRights11/10/15 03:46 AM
3

Yeah, that's why they banned Milo Yiannopoulos too. Honestly, neither of them should have been banned. This was a debate on "Does Feminism have a problem with free speech?", and the next minute they ban one of the worst faces for feminism out there and the next day one of the best debaters against feminism out there. This has very obviously answered the question that the title of the debate had, and that was a yes. Thankfully the Streisand Effect has taken hold a little and brought attention to …
/r/MensRights10/10/15 01:54 AM
1

So you are against free speech and freedom of thought? I vehemently oppose Feminism, but it should be taken down via challenging their ideas, not by force through some government to outlaw it. EDIT: Oi! /u/PierceHarlan . You're not going to say anything? Just edit out the bad stuff? Good job, you intellectually weak individual. At least have the courage to admit that you were wrong when confronted with it. EDIT 2: Well, either a mod deleted it, or Pierce did. That's just pathetic if it's the lat…
/r/MensRights06/10/15 10:13 PM
6

You're damn right, there are plenty out there. But they are pretty far from a majority and will be quickly shouted down if they get any actual power that leads to anything. They're just (for the moment) a vocal minority. One that I wish mainstream feminism would actually call out, but that would require actual work and self-reflection.
/r/MensRights04/10/15 10:20 AM
60

No, because that is where their power comes from. Everyone wants to help a victim. Nobody cares about a person that can help themselves. Godwin's Law, but still. This is identical to the Nazi's. They believed that they were being oppressed by the Jews, that the Jews had this massive amount of power over them, despite how they were able to wipe out so many of them. Feminists are similar in that they really believe that men oppress them, despite how much power the voice of a single woman has compa…
/r/MensRights04/10/15 06:41 AM
0

Why the fuck are you ok with making prison rape jokes? As someone who is pro-MR, I am perfectly fine with those jokes. Because I know it's humour, I know that it isn't serious, and I will never stand for censorship of anything, especially humour. Just because it's censoring something you disagree with doesn't make it right. To paraphrase the words of South Park: When it comes to humour, it's all or nothing.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 12:08 AM
2

So a person of authority using their position to influence a child for sex is fine? I get that the kid might not be scarred by it, but that doesn't make it okay. If grooming a child for sex is wrong (where the child is okay with having said sex), so is this. There is very little difference, it's both a case of a person of authority taking advantage of someone they have direct influence over.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 12:01 AM
2

Considering that he only has a bachelors of science, that doesn't surprise me in the slightest.
/r/MensRights28/09/15 10:19 PM
1

Ooh, it does. Not perfect, but still far above average for a Tumblr gif.
/r/MensRights28/09/15 09:06 PM
36

Sorry Americans, I know how much you love him, but Bill Nye ain't that great. He's a presenter first, scientist second. He might very well know science and loves it, but he's a presenter first, and as such knows what is popular and how to remain relevant. Sorry for the shitty tumblr style gif, but here is Bill Nye giving a speech somewhere (I don't really care that much, but what he said is important). Now, anyone who knows anything about science should be able to easily call him out on this one…
/r/MensRights28/09/15 01:19 PM
2

Lazernerd linked to their site, and that is it. If anyone prefers Youtube, here is the link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4wmW8fKrwk
/r/MensRights26/09/15 09:56 PM
7

Or in other words, be as sexist as you want, just make sure to say "Gender Inequality" as your reasoning.
/r/MensRights26/09/15 12:50 PM
17

Ironic, considering that Vice had a video about a group of warrior women, and were then disappointed when those warrior women weren't misandrists but rather had a deep respect for men who they saw as equal. They knew that many men were bad people, but that there were many who were their equal too. The Vice "reporter" couldn't grasp that idea, and felt really let down that it wasn't how she imagined it would be.
/r/MensRights26/09/15 12:11 PM
1

Nope. Strongly disagree. And I will never advocate for the policing of anyone's language, especially in humour. I find some rape jokes to be very funny, more-so if they are gender-neutral, but I will still chuckle at at others. Most popular rape joke are gender neutral as it is (I can give plenty of examples, but I'm not sure if it would be allowed here). Just because you're allowed to say whatever you want doesn't mean you're allowed to say whatever you want and still be considered a decent per…
/r/MensRights25/09/15 02:34 AM
1

That sucks.
/r/MensRights21/09/15 08:49 AM
5

PS A link to Daily Life gives the hate filled gender bigots the oxygen of publicity. Yup. We should really be pushing people to use archive.is for these sites.
/r/MensRights21/09/15 05:41 AM
1

That sounds reasonable. It's better than any jail time or fine, especially for a 19 year old. Also gives back to the local community.
/r/MensRights21/09/15 03:55 AM
2

14 apparently. I don't know of anywhere, but even so, he shouldn't have to uproot his whole life at 19 for something like this. It's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights21/09/15 02:44 AM
5

Do you want to try to explain that reasoning, or should I just skip to calling you a moron?
/r/MensRights21/09/15 02:02 AM
3

If a woman lies about having an abortion and they don't see each other again (imagine a hookup situation), but comes back a year later demanding child support, should he just cough up because he wasn't thorough enough? The guy should have had a punishment, something of a slap on the wrist for being careless (I know that some people here don't think he should get anything). But now he still served prison time, has greatly reduced access to computer activities and will most likely suffer most of h…
/r/MensRights20/09/15 09:41 PM
83

It's how they have to report it. Because he was according to the law a sex offender, it is how it should be labelled. I agree, it's bullshit and sucks, but they aren't saying he was one, so much as he was registered as one.
/r/MensRights20/09/15 11:42 AM
15

I'd much rather take that small step forward than not step at all.
/r/MensRights20/09/15 10:30 AM
18

Thanks to /u/McDouggal over at SRSSucks, whom I found this from.
/r/MensRights20/09/15 09:34 AM
2

You whiny little child. I say that with the full knowledge that it is an ad hominem and likely to put you on the defensive and indignantly close your mind against everything else I will say. But I also say it because it's what you are. Not really an ad hominem. It isn't being used as a way to try and dismantle my argument, it's just an insult. And maybe, just maybe, when it comes to sex abuse, we have the one domain where women have an edge over men. Where they get lighter treatment than men It'…
/r/MensRights19/09/15 05:49 AM
4

You mean that it uses similar scenarios to try to minimize the variables? Cherry picking is using a specific point that only happens in one specific area, and yet all around it is contrary. An example of this would be using the video game series GTA to say "All video games are about drugs, murder, and violence", while ignoring the plethora of games that don't focus on any of those topics at all. So unless you can show me evidence that disproves this example, this ain't cherry picking. If you can…
/r/MensRights19/09/15 03:21 AM
5

How is this cherry picking? This is in the same city and year. And can you produce a counter-example?
/r/MensRights19/09/15 02:20 AM
32

Wouldn't it be more of a false dichotomy?
/r/MensRights18/09/15 11:57 PM
7

Semi-joking aside though, Sh0e is awesome, and most definitely falls under the description of charming and delightful. People who interchange cute and adorable really don't understand that there is a difference.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 10:49 AM
5

Asking/telling women to smile is a well-recognized behavior that clearly implies that the woman is there for the visual satisfaction of the man. You've already been shown to be wrong, but let's have a quick look at this. You claim that it is for the benefit of the man. But I can easily justify this away by saying that the man's happiness is only dependant on a woman's happiness, just another way that women are deemed to be more important. A woman's happiness is more important than a man's happin…
/r/MensRights14/09/15 09:17 AM
5

Actually it's Firedash. I'm a pyrofox.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/09/15 10:44 PM
3

It has nothing to do with the court system What do you mean? Obviously the courts are flawed as fuck, didn't you see how they oppressed her by not listening and believing! Those shitlords!
/r/PussyPassDenied11/09/15 10:42 PM
12

There are more than 50 percent woman voters than men so this rhetoric is really all she needs. If you think that even 10% of those women would fall for this shit, you're highly mistaken.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 06:39 AM
2

Pretty much, but SRS doesn't hold the same power as wikipedia. Though I wouldn't be surprised if there was a decent overlap between the two.
/r/MensRights10/09/15 07:39 AM
13

Wikipedia is precisely the problem. There is an inner circle that never gets banned for anything. And if they do, they're usually back within a month. One admit bans them, and then their buddy admin unbans them. This inner circle is directly the problem. They're feminist orientated, and this is a problem,because it isn't neutral. It's ideologically biased.
/r/MensRights10/09/15 01:21 AM
1

Possibly. It seems like this is one of the few issues that some feminists care about (Laci Green for example). There are plenty that oppose it, and think that it's a non-issue. Some even insist they will be doing it to their child because they don't want him to have "an icky dick". It's one of the few issues that I can actually say there is a considerable amount of feminists that do agree on this issue. I don't think it is the majority, but plenty of the reasonable ones.
/r/MensRights09/09/15 11:17 PM
3

Point still stands that you would rather mutilate a child rather than teach them proper hygiene. You would rather severely reduce their sexual pleasure capabilities over teaching simple washing. I'm going to make an assumption here and say that you believe in evolution. Do you seriously believe that the body evolved and kept such a design flaw that many people seem to think it is? Or if you believe that God created man, do you really believe that he would create such a flaw? We are meant to be i…
/r/MensRights09/09/15 11:13 PM
4

And yet nowhere is the word feminist or Feminism used in this image/sign. Don't assign labels to people that don't use them. If they're feminists, great. But we don't know, so don't attribute something to Feminism when there is no proof it is them.
/r/MensRights09/09/15 01:42 PM
12

So, you would rather mutilate a child... than teach proper hygiene? Let's cut off our toes too, so we don't have to wash between them, do you know how rampant Athete's foot is?! Oh, better let's also lop off the most of the ear, it's always a pain to clean in there. /s Serious question time. Would you advocate for snipping the clitoral hood off of a vagina? It is directly analogous to that of the foreskin on a penis. So why not? It would be easier to clean after all.
/r/MensRights09/09/15 10:35 AM
22

Oh, nice. From the same speech that can be boiled down into "Men have problems too, but hey, men should be helping women, go sign this pledge". It was nice to acknowledge the problems, but nothing, and I really mean nothing, is being done about it. Further more, what is your opinion then on the Duleth Model. You know, the domestic violence model that uses criteria such as size and strength to determine who is the aggressor. Oh, and that also states how DV is perpetrated but patriarchal reasons f…
/r/MensRights09/09/15 10:28 AM
1

I'll give it a shot this weekend. See how well received it is.
/r/MensRights08/09/15 09:08 AM
10

It's because it's Mr Cappadocia. He's a part of the Anti-SJW crowd, and there are plenty in that crowd that are worth following, as their posts are often very well written and resourced. Edit: If people are interested, I'd be willing to do a weekly post (if possible) to post something similar as this here from Cap or any other of the good Anti-SJW guys out there who post really good information. Seeing how I follow them, it wouldn't be too hard.
/r/MensRights07/09/15 11:47 PM
2

I wouldn't. She thinks because women were oppressed in the past, that women who aren't feminists now are ungrateful, as if they are in their debt.
/r/MensRights07/09/15 01:07 PM
9

On a small scale, individual level, I can fully support that. A kid thanking his/her single mother for being there as both a mother and father is great. But a company that would promote a mother on Father's Day? Not cool. I don't see them doing that for the single dads on Mother's Day.
/r/MensRights05/09/15 09:57 PM
4

/r/nottheonion
/r/MensRights03/09/15 07:24 AM
5

I'll concede that. But it should be noted that "MRA-ish" doesn't mean neutral. That was more my point.
/r/MensRights02/09/15 01:53 AM
1

How is the clothing choices of women in north america relevant to the clothing choices of a fictional character in a fictional universe? It gets worse. R. Mika is a wrestler, right? That is her history according to the game. So it's hilarious how this person has pushed their western ideas on another culture. https://www.google.com.au/search?q=japanese+women+wrestling&biw=1366&bih=653&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAmoVChMI5ODZt4HXxwIVRSOUCh1x5gB- Take a look at the japanese female wrestl…
/r/MensRights01/09/15 11:45 PM
0

All that it proves is that you were a dick. If I went to a sub like say, blackladies or something, and said "Hey Black women... FUCK YOU." then got downvotes, it would be because I was a dick, not proving any point. So good job.
/r/MensRights01/09/15 11:40 PM
9

Interestingly it's a pretty MRAish channel. Nope. It's pretty neutral. At times taking a stance that I would say is in line with Feminists. Others leaning towards MRA, but most of all, he leans towards science, all while blatantly stating his biases ("I don't like to admit it but..." for example). It's just neutral. And that is why I like it.
/r/MensRights01/09/15 11:34 PM
5

I don't see a 15 year old willingly receiving oral sex from an adult as rape. I do. For similar reasons that I find incest wrong. Because there is almost always someone who has authority over the other person. Would it be wrong for an adult to groom a child for sex? The child doesn't see anything wrong with it and thinks it's normal. Equally so, the 15 year old thinks it's normal for the 40+ year old cheerleader to have sex with him. If their ages were closer (her being around 21) then maybe (bu…
/r/MensRights31/08/15 09:48 AM
2

If it were a high school gym teacher fucking the 17 year-old head cheerleader, would you say the same thing? Honest question.
/r/MensRights31/08/15 09:42 AM
1

Sure, in that scenario. But the chances of Sanders creating a fully functioning socialist society in 8 years (assuming he gets re-elected which I would doubt), is slim to none. So while yes, that would be a solution, and one that is "fair" (I don't believe socialism to be in any way fair. Why should an uneducated janitor get paid the same as the guy who worked for 20 years to get to CEO?), I don't believe that it would be achievable within his term.
/r/MensRights29/08/15 11:25 AM
1

>"We are going to have pay equity for women" >"pay equity for women" >"equity" Well, isn't that an interesting word. It's pretty much the word for equal outcome. Meaning it doesn't matter what circumstances the person is under, if they need more to be equal, they get it. I'm not a fan of this. Especially in this case. This would mean paying women more per hour to close the earnings gap , not the wage gap. I honestly believe that Sanders here knows that women don't earn less, but is going to be u…
/r/MensRights29/08/15 03:37 AM
4

If you are 16+ and you get it with your own consent, why not? Absolutely. I fully support individual rights. The only thing I heavily oppose is routine infant circumcision. That ain't right.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 10:56 AM
4

I agree with you, but even these arguments aren't even that good. I mean, if they are valid, then we should also being doing female circumcision (removal of the clitoral hood, which is directly analogous to the foreskin), as many of the arguments are valid for both cases. For some reason, I feel like there will be a bigger resistance against that idea though. But yeah, I see no real issues with your points.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 10:19 AM
5

Solved with vaccines. I get what you're saying, and you aren't trying to be pro (you seem to be neutral), but I can't see any justification to cutting off a part of a child that will effect them later in life, unless it is known for sure that it is necessary.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 09:58 AM
5

No dude is mad that their dick doesn't like a pig in a blanket And that is where you're wrong, because there are men out there who are upset that they are circumcised. There are tens of thousands that are botched or cut too tight and make sex uncomfortable to the point of painful. But hey, no girl would want that, so lol, who the fuck cares. Get the fuck out of here you unsympathetic fuck. Just because you don't care about your prick, doesn't mean others don't care about theirs.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 09:55 AM
3

For anyone curious, the number of neonatal circumcision-related deaths in the US is estimated at around 117 deaths annually. That might not seem like a lot, but it is considering that circumcision is little more than a cosmetic surgery and completely unnecessary (there is no proven reasonable benefits to circumcision).
/r/MensRights26/08/15 08:32 AM
10

So you're argument is who the fuck cares, it's a baby. And what girl would want to touch it? Man, aren't you a shallow uncaring fuck. Also shows how American you are. You don't even recognise how America is the only developed country that has widespread routine infant circumcision.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 08:17 AM
7

Not all modern feminists though But the vast majority of the prominent ones. I can name off a plethora of horrible, bigoted feminists that are seen as leaders within their movement, and yet the feminists like the one in the picture and CHS get pushed to the side. People love to chime in and say "Not all feminists..."^^<sup>[1]</sup> but it doesn't matter. It's the leaders, the ones that actually influence change, that are the problem. [1] And before anyone wants to bring up "what's different bet…
/r/MensRights26/08/15 07:32 AM
3

There is absolutely nothing wrong with circumcision, although it does decrease sexual sensitivity and if done poorly can cause sex to be quite uncomfortable. What is wrong is the mutilation of the genitals without consent. Routine infant circumcision is wrong. The child has no choice in the matter. Would you be okay with giving an infant that can't talk yet a tattoo and/or piercing? It should be an adults decision, and they can only make that decision about themselves. The only exception is when…
/r/MensRights26/08/15 07:27 AM
2

WebMD says Thanks for playing.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 07:21 AM
1

ps i dont believe this female should be more harshly punished, i believe men should be less harshly punished You know, I'm actually going to disagree. Not for this case here maybe, considering how old it is. But for most cases. Look at most peoples reactions to when a male child molester gets something like 4 years. Most people will scream that it isn't long enough, that he should be put away for life for being such a monster. However, there are people within this very thread who have said, and …
/r/MensRights21/08/15 01:50 PM
4

That this would be internalised misogyny? I doubt it (But I'm sure some idiot will prove me wrong). That there is such a thing as internalised misogyny? Oh yeah. It's the most sexist idea feminism has come up with. Basically a woman is only exercising her freedom of choice if she aligns with Feminism, otherwise it's the patriarchy brainwashing her and instilling misogyny into her essence. I wish that I had the creative talent to make this shit up.
/r/MensRights20/08/15 06:50 AM
0

Well, there I went spilling my spaghetti all over the place. I stand by my statement that it happens too often, but this is not one of those I guess.
/r/MensRights19/08/15 12:57 PM
3

Poe's law struck you. When there are people who legitimately think that (someone in the comments did post about how she was white too) it's harder to tell that some people are being sarcastic.
/r/MensRights19/08/15 11:12 AM
2

How many times does this kind of shit have to fucking happen!? For fucks sake. If a mother has [purposefully] murdered one child, she should be stripped of her custody of any other children. They have shown that they are not capable of raising a child, so why should they keep another? This is just sick, and I hope that the judge has/had trouble sleeping over this.
/r/MensRights19/08/15 11:02 AM
2

There is actually something similar that just happened in Australia (it's on KiA at the moment), and while the law says you can't discriminate based on gender, you can if it is for the purpose of equality (Eg, saying women only in a male dominated field). Personally, that's bullshit, but whatever.
/r/MensRights10/08/15 09:22 PM
1

Thank you. I wasn't bothered to look it all up. It's to teach a negative link to bad behaviour, like how you soon learn not to touch the heater because it burns. Similar thing, you learn not to be a brat because it leads to a stinging spank. People really need to learn the difference between what a spank is and what qualifies abuse. The two are very different, both in intent and outcome.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 12:21 PM
2

First wave feminism got women the right to vote and everyone on /r/mensrights agrees with this Only that they should have said rights. Many women opposed the Suffragettes, because it would have required them to sign up for the draft. That changed, and women still don't have to sign up for the Selective Service, which is for all intents and purposes the same thing. Second wave feminism made it easier for women to initiate divorce and leave abusive relationships. It also allowed women to abuse sai…
/r/MensRights08/08/15 08:46 AM
2

So since forever, considering that many women opposed the suffragettes, as it would require them to sign up for the draft.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 02:48 AM
2

I have to agree for the most part. There was evidence presented, but no sources (as is the way with a live debate). Did Milo come out on top? I think so, but it wasn't a schooling.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 02:02 AM
1

Doesn't change that there are actual people who believe this crap.
/r/MensRights31/07/15 01:09 PM
2

They actually constructed a strawman into their comic. It's pretty degrading to the whole thing in my opinion. It's clearly not about getting women into comics at all. Otherwise they'd have made a character that was easy to relate with, not some dogmatic feminist bullshit, that needed to beat up a misogynist to prove some point. She was a weak character in my opinion. Because opinions like the strawman got to her.
/r/MensRights26/07/15 02:16 PM
3

150k is an extremely good showing for a first issue. Agreed. However, that drop between issues is the most important thing. Especially when this series was being praised everywhere in online media. And yet, it still had such a drastic drop. So, even though there is a drop in the overall market, this should have been doing somewhat decent with all of the press it was receiving. What those numbers you posted don't cover is that in month eight (the last FemThor issue) it sold 115,000 copies. Which,…
/r/MensRights26/07/15 08:10 AM
3

Nope. Not an alien from Asgard. It was Jane Foster.
/r/MensRights26/07/15 07:57 AM
13

TL;DR - Female Thor ended up exactly like most fans thought it would, a stunt to boost sales that was dropped after eight issues because that's as long as it was sustainable. Even then, it failed at drumming up sales as well. Here's a link. The problem was a few things. First off, it made no sense. Why was she taking Thor's (the son of Odin one) name? Thor isn't a title, it's a name. Very different from taking something like Wolverine (which they have also done, with X-23 becoming the new Wolver…
/r/MensRights26/07/15 05:24 AM
4

dipshits like this are the face of their movement. They aren't just the face, they're the leaders. Jessica Valenti, Germaine Greer, Andrea Dworkin, Valerie Solanis, Anita Sarkeesian, Jezebel "We proudly have beaten our boyfriends", Lena Dunham, Mary P "1 in 4" Koss. The list is a little too long to say that the feminists who actually get power are not the good feminists, and that for those feminists to get where they are, they need some level of support first. And then you look at feminists who …
/r/MensRights19/07/15 01:41 AM
5

There is a legitimate fetish that is basically this, but that is all it is: A fetish. This sounds like someone with said fetish who wants to try to normalise it. They don't want to be too blatant about it however, so occasionally they go out, but his wife still does it more. Much more.
/r/MensRights18/07/15 09:55 AM
2

It has nothing to do with waiting in line. Seriously, I have nothing against unisex bathrooms, but to give women another? That is special treatment. Is this a non-issue? Sort of. I wouldn't put it high on the list of problems, but it does show that men's things, even a bathroom, no longer belongs to them.
/r/MensRights16/07/15 07:15 AM
9

All hail the glorious Patriarchal Empire!
/r/MensRights16/07/15 07:12 AM
3

I agree with this. Either everything is off limits, or none of it is off-limits. The latter is much more preferable.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 01:04 PM
4

It's possible, though it is harder due to it being a white house petition, meaning American signatures are the only valid ones if I'm correct. There are plenty of anti-SJW people out there, but a large chunk of them are outside of America in my opinion (myself included). Getting enough signatures would be tough, but not impossible.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 01:03 PM
3

Good point. Maybe I am just getting a little too cynical, and someone just needs to tell me I'm being an idiot.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 10:33 AM
1

See, even when they help men, they are still doing it to help a woman. Don't get me wrong, it's good that they are trying to help at least, but it is still because it benefits a woman.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 09:35 AM
6

Someone has to be responsible. Nope. But let's play along. What if she was the one that initiated the sex? Is he still guilty? What if the amount of drinking left them both blackout drunk? Neither can then be in control at all really. Who is the "responsible" party then? And this is always my favourite. Two lesbians go out for drinks and they have a one night stand with the other. Both are angry and claim that the other raped them. Who was really the rapist? Someone has to be responsible, as you…
/r/MensRights13/07/15 09:29 AM
3

You know, I would be more inclined to believe you if it wasn't for the current FBI definition of rape explicitly excluding male rape victims that were forced to have sex with a woman. Oh, and who was it that pushed for that law change? I will admit, credit where credit is due. It's better than what it was, as it does now include a male raping another male as legally rape. But a drugged man that has sex with woman where she initiated it still isn't seen as rape. Yeah. I'll take it that Feminism i…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 02:10 PM
67

Of course. Mentioning that the outrage was over Victoria's firing would break the narrative. Pao has gotten rid of more women in the tech industry than brought in.
/r/MensRights11/07/15 03:41 AM
5

At it isn't just that it's little girls doing it. I feel like using children in that way and raising them with no restraints is pretty disgusting. I simply can't blame the kids either, but those parents are horrible. They're no different from the WBC who use children to do their bidding.
/r/MensRights10/07/15 11:23 PM
3

The ideology of the person running Reddit DOES. It could be argued that it doesn't, but only on the provision that they are capable of putting their ideology to one side and not let it influence their decisions. Very rarely are there people capable of doing that. I know I would have a hard time doing that.
/r/MensRights10/07/15 11:21 PM
3

does anyone else think this website should really be run by a male? Who the fuck cares? I want the person best qualified. That person, will be someone who has Reddit's best interest at heart. That means the users, not expanding its money making capabilities.
/r/MensRights10/07/15 11:20 PM
7

Just a heads up, archive.today is also a great way too.
/r/MensRights05/07/15 02:13 AM
7

Gee, when hundreds of subs go dark all over the place, it sends a message to users and admins. At one point, 27 of the top 100 subreddits went dark. That sends an incredible message. Even if MensRights isn't in that top 100, it still shows those who only come here that something is going on. It was entirely about sending a message, and that message was sent loud and clear.
/r/MensRights04/07/15 12:12 AM
6

Geez, I'd hate to see what they class as misandry if this shit is allowed to happen.
/r/MensRights01/07/15 02:09 AM
2

I didn't mean in terms of what you can get away with, but the system where the rich are treated easier than those who have less is still present, even when their money isn't used. It is much more extreme in poorer countries that the countries that I listed, where you're dead right, you can get away with murder there, but it still stands that in pretty much every other country, the upper class is still treated more lenient than others. TL;DR I wasn't trying to say that it is as bad in the first w…
/r/MensRights27/06/15 12:06 AM
8

It would be similar everywhere else in the world too. Maybe not to that same extent in countries like America, England, Australia etc. But any country that has a clear class divide, this would be pretty normal there. Of all the privileges that get spoken about, class is the only one that SJWs ignore, and class is the only one that is definitively a privilege at a near 100% rate.
/r/MensRights26/06/15 02:08 PM
3

Probably because it was extremely off-the-cuff and too short. If it was made to actually promote discussion instead of a small comment, then sure. I don't support the deletion, but I'm certainly not against it. Try making an actual post with some talk to it, instead of a glorified comment.
/r/MensRights24/06/15 09:21 PM
4

Yeah, it's still up in KiA. I don't know what OP is talking about there.
/r/MensRights24/06/15 08:32 PM
3

I felt awful that it affected her mental health as much as it did towards the end of the experience, though. I guess that's because she isn't transgender, and going from one to the other (even just as an experiment) can be extremely detrimental to your sense of self if you aren't. That was my guess as well. Also, to follow this up, have you met/had a discussion with other transgender people, either MtF or FtM, about the topic of discrimination between the genders? What were their views on it if …
/r/MensRights24/06/15 03:17 AM
4

Don't know if you're still answering, but what is your opinion on Norah Vincent's conclusion of her experiment and do they line up with your opinions? Here is a link to her story. https://youtu.be/Ip7kP_dd6LU
/r/MensRights23/06/15 10:16 PM
3

>19 hour account. I have a slight feeling that they're a troll.
/r/MensRights19/06/15 01:47 PM
6

Also, most people these days are using ad block. However, archiving reduces their number of hits, lowering their relevancy in Google searches.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 06:24 AM
-1

From what I have heard (multiple people of different ideologies). It is irrelevant to what I listen from her, so I didn't bother looking it up.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 05:04 AM
15

Here's the thing though: I have zero fucks about if she is a climate change denier or not. A person does not need a 100% track records. Look at Bill Nye. He is the smartest idiot I've heard of. Look at that image. Read how fucking faulty that logic is. But he is still right on a variety of other things. There is no connection between feminism and climate change, so even if Lauren Southern is a denier of climate change, her views on Feminism are still okay. The only reason someone brings this up …
/r/MensRights15/06/15 04:28 AM
3

True, but famous people are the exception more often than not.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 03:48 AM
5

A man would of been punched in the face and the media would said he deserved it, even if the guy was smaller. Don't be stupid. The media wouldn't have said that he deserved it. There would be no story at all. All stories that I have seen where it is a male victim it was a male attacker, and they have to bring in the victim's mother or girlfriend,talking about how tragic it is. It's a fucking joke how strong the narrative is here in Australia.
/r/MensRights14/06/15 09:42 PM
3

I Don't Even Know What To Believe Anymore.
/r/MensRights13/06/15 10:03 PM
3

It's Always Fucking 'and' That Never Gets Capitalized!
/r/MensRights13/06/15 01:08 PM
1

Fair enough. And nah, I'm good.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 01:08 PM
1

Well, while it is a lesser known publication, you could link the one from this post here, as it is only a day old. In the comments put the one from last week in there as well for further sources.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 07:07 AM
0

I have a question. Do you think that statutory rape is less important? Because I sure as hell don't. The whole reason that the statutory rape law is a thing is because of the abuse that can be caused otherwise. An adult is an authority figure. Children are taught at a young age to trust those of authorities, teachers especially so. So suddenly they have a situation where they can influence their feelings and can manipulate them. The reason a child cannot consent isn't necessarily because they ar…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 07:00 AM
1

But let's be honest, there is absolutely no way this is going to fuck those little boys up the way being raped will fuck up a little girl. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ikd0ZYQoDko&ab_channel=VenerableB Yeah, whatever will make you sleep at night. At least the girls will get sympathy from most people. Those boys will rarely get anything. Even now you are denying that this is rape because it happened to a boy, denying what they went through.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 06:50 AM
1

You mean bragging about it like this guy would? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ikd0ZYQoDko&ab_channel=VenerableB
/r/MensRights11/06/15 06:47 AM
9

It sucks too. Because there is a legitimate issue that she is tackling, but then she purposefully ignores a whole demographic that needs serious help who have nothing at the moment.
/r/MensRights08/06/15 04:21 AM
8

My god. Pure propaganda. It's all men's fault for each point. Because Patriarchy.
/r/MensRights08/06/15 04:10 AM
1

I agree. The closest this comes to a men's right issue, is pointing out the bias in the media, that women get passes when they shouldn't. It's reaching though, so hey.
/r/MensRights07/06/15 10:15 PM
1

It'll be hard for anyone to admit Sarah Palin has a valid point. I don't like Palin. She has a point. It was not difficult. There are plenty of moderates and neutrals who will listen to someone's arguments and separate the person when it isn't relevant (basically, any stance they have previously made that relates to that current point). As far as I know, Palin hasn't been a hypocrite on this issue, so who she is, is irrelevant to me. For fucks sake, people just love identity politics.
/r/MensRights07/06/15 10:10 PM
6

Completely irrelevant. A correct statement is correct no matter who says it. Is 2+2=4 suddenly worth ignoring if Saddam Hussein was the one to say it? No. It is still correct. This is no different than how feminists treat MRA's. They look at the person saying something and then allow their bias to take hold. Palin is not a great person, I agree. But she does have a loud voice. She can spread a message, and moderates out there will listen.
/r/MensRights07/06/15 04:23 AM
9

Does that change her being right here? You were literally dismissing her not due to what she was saying, but for what she has done in the past. I agree that she isn't the best, but it is completely irrelevant to the discussion.
/r/MensRights07/06/15 03:59 AM
7

I care because she actually has a voice. If she is the person who will actually get the general public to actually take a look at the fucked up situation that has occurred in the treatment of these two cases, then great. Palin might not be the best person, but who cares. Why attack the person? All that is doing is creating more pointless identity politics.
/r/MensRights07/06/15 03:14 AM
4

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/02/statutory-rape-victim-child-support/14953965/ Not an issue? I think it is an issue. And sure, the child might not find it an issue/be traumatized. But hey, lets not punish an adult who took sexual advantage of a child. Because if the child says they liked it, then what is the big deal, right? And note: I'm explicitly saying child. Male or female has no real bearing on the issue. The perpetrator of the abuse is still wrong. The victim is still …
/r/MensRights04/06/15 07:40 AM
1

Well the difference is that while both are an ideology, only one is an actual movement. What actual goal of religion is there? It's much more about how to live your life. Feminism on the other hand does have goals, even if they are twisted to fit each person differently to mean "what I want". I do understand your comparison, but it is kind of a false comparison to a certain extent.
/r/MensRights30/05/15 01:57 PM
2

And that is the thing that really gets me. Does this, in any way, justify killing the child? No. There are plenty of other options, including giving the child away. I mean, you still don't need the fathers permission to do that.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 10:52 PM
21

I think that their PR game has worked quite well in delaying what should have happened at least 5 years ago. It's the "Not a Real Feminist" and "Not all Feminists are like that!". What we have, are idiots who defend those who are abusing the system under the name of Feminism to defend them. They don't call them out, they just throw a cover on it, trying to downplay them. Not realising that those making the changes, the radicals? They are the ones with the most power, and every time it is said "n…
/r/MensRights29/05/15 10:49 PM
3

Most of the stats do not include men fullstop. If the FBI definition of rape can't include a male as a victim unless the perpetrator is male, then suddenly you have a massive amount of missing statistics. These stupid definitions of rape need to end. None of the "penetration" crap. Just keep it fucking simple. Was sex consensual? No: it was rape. Yes: it wasn't rape. The definitions of consent, and when one is able or not able to give consent may then be defined (EG how drunk a person is).
/r/MensRights27/05/15 11:25 AM
3

TumblrAtRest might give it a shot, though seeing how it is a sub meant to find sanity on Tumblr, it is doubtful. TumblrInAction won't go for it, they don't do self posts at all, so this would most likely be out of the question. You could try spreading this on and around the anti-SJW community on Tumblr itself, spread it around in the SJWs own backyard.
/r/MensRights25/05/15 09:25 AM
2

I agree, however, we both know that this is a one way joke. There is no way she would even consider joking if it were a woman who was mutilated. And that is the only issue I have with such jokes. Of you are going to make them, then don't hold double standards about them. I'm a firm believer of "all or nothing" when it comes to humour, but I will still criticise someone for holding double standards.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 11:51 AM
4

From what I remember, and I'm not looking it up because I really don't care about here enough, she is something like 1/8 or 1/16 of another race, and that makes her PoC enough to try and claim it. It's a load of horseshit, and that is pure exploitation of ones heritage. She knows that she is being a hateful piece of shit, she just doesn't care and will use anything she can to try and excuse herself.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 12:17 PM
4

If you believe these nitwits represent feminism then you're as nitwitted as they are. Except they literally are representing it. How many times do people like Sarkeesian, Laci Green, Lena Dunham, Andrea Dworkin need to be presented for what they are before they start to realise that feminism is represented by these people. And until people start to see the more moderate feminists start to actually call these people out over just saying "not a real feminist", the sooner feminism will be better re…
/r/MensRights14/05/15 08:36 AM
2

That is the double standard. A rape of a woman? How terrible, this is the worse of society! A rape of a man? Bahaha, how hilarious! It isn't funny, it's a double standard that is the product of feminism pushing the idea that women are victims.
/r/MensRights09/05/15 02:32 AM
3

The problem is, it is those in the Psuedo-Feminism parts that actually get things done. They're the ones held up as role models. I personally am anti-feminist, though I do want it to return to the intended goals. Only problem is, at this point it may be too late. A Woman's Right Movement would be a much better idea, as the mirror to the MRM where the two groups work together.
/r/MensRights09/05/15 02:28 AM
7

I skimmed it too, looking for this, and couldn't find it. This title seems to be very sensational. The closest I could come to this conclusion would be the quote "Whether you voted for me, or Helen, or Philip, or Simon, I promise to represent you all, and work tirelessly for you all." where she seems to leave out Mike's name. It's putting words into others mouths, and it feels wrong.
/r/MensRights09/05/15 02:22 AM
2

When you figure that out, tell us how to fix the GamerGate article as well.
/r/MensRights06/05/15 09:20 PM
1

Well, I decided to do my counting. Primary school, there were 3 male teachers to the ~21 female teachers (I don't know the actual number, as it was years ago and I don't want to spend half and hour trying to remember if I got them all). As for highschool, every department had at least 1 male teacher, with a total of 15 males to 17 female teachers (though I think I'm forgetting 2 or 3 teachers, do hey). It's interesting how different the schools are, and I doubt that it is anything that is motiva…
/r/MensRights03/05/15 10:09 AM
12

At my primary school, there was a grand total of 3 male teachers, and 1 left half way through my time there. Highschool was better, but it was a private school, and that might have had something to do with it.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 08:17 AM
1

To play devil's advocate, I have seen (But can't find a god damned trace of any story on it) about girls doing this to men as well, I believe it was a murderer and it was because he was "too good looking to be a bad person", or something along those lines. Of course, I think it is still crazy for either case, and that it is pretty hard to believe what I present without some sort of backup to help prove it, so I guess take it with a grain of salt.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 07:34 AM
2

I have a question. If we were to allow everything as art, even those that are malicious like this, which accuses a person of rape, does this person have no line? Would they be fine with a person creating "art" that is child porn? I wouldn't be. Art ends when people are hurt to achieve its message.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 11:34 AM
1

There are a few diamonds in the rough in TEDx, but for the most part, it is pretty shitty.
/r/MensRights23/04/15 09:24 AM
2

I love this infographic. More often than not, infographics tend to focus on one group. This one here removes that pissing contest that happens and shows that everyone has problems. Thank You OP for making this.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 02:35 PM
6

So, this brings up a very valid point, one which I hadn't thought of for ages. Feminism builds men up to be some kind of all powerful invincible being that can't have problems, or that those they do have don't pale in comparison to what women face. What does this tell women? It tells them that there is a life out there that is perfect, that won't have problem. That is so unbelievably misleading of what the real world is like, and it's a little sad that people really think like that. It's also ve…
/r/MensRights18/04/15 01:31 AM
-13

Well, to play devils advocate, the messages that have been revealed don't actually say he was framed for anything. They spell out that they planned on fucking with him to get some form of revenge. It's a muddled case, and while I doubt that the guy is guilty with these messages happening, it doesn't clear him either. There are still 10 other women who came forward. It's a very messy case, and until more news comes to light, there isn't a definitive answer to what happened.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 06:16 AM
2

By that logic, which I agree is screwy as fuck, the Nazi's weren't bad. (Or as /pol/ puts it "Hitler did nothing wrong") The Nazi party got into power by fixing many of the problems that Germany had at the time. Hitler saved that country. Of course he went on to murder many many people, but that should be ignored. They saved a whole country. Don't you get that?! It's this screwy logic that just doesn't work.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 10:28 PM
13

"All conservatives are liars, left-wing is the only truth" How about you read it, follow the sources, and what do you know, you've done your own fact checking to make sure you're not being lead astray. That's what moderate thought is called. Looking at all the facts and coming to your own decision based on those facts.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 11:37 AM
3

Yup. It really does suck. The guy who really pushed for it in America was Dr Kellog (same guy who did the cereal, yeah). The idea was a religious one, that it would stop people from masturbating. He also advocated for female circumcision (the clitoral hood, which is equivalent in terms of anatomy), but it never caught on.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 11:37 PM
4

"The foreskin contains branches of the dorsal nerve and between 10,000 and 20,000" For comparison, the clitoris has an estimated 8,000.. So yeah, it does take a lot from a guy.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 11:23 PM
2

Here are two pages that I get from a tumblr I follow that is filled with sources. Here and here. There are plenty of reasons against male circumcision. As for less painful, what the fuck are you on about. Does this look like something that would be used on something less painful? Because it looks like it would be pretty fucking painful to me, especially considering that they can't use anesthetic on the child as it is too dangerous. And how about how circumcision can cause permanent trauma to are…
/r/MensRights28/03/15 11:16 PM
13

Sarkeesian is not just asking for more "dynamic female characters". Nobody would have a problem with such a request. The problem isn't even that though. Look at Dying Light, which did have a strong female character. She was weak for a certain part of the game, and yet she regained that strength. Prior to being captured, she saved the player. Sarkeesian said that because she lost her strength, it was worse. Character progression isn't allowed. A woman must be infallible, otherwise it is just flau…
/r/MensRights27/03/15 12:27 PM
2

Of course not. But I've never met one that wasn't angry about something. I can say the same thing about men. Everyone has something that makes them angry. Of course, they are only the vocal ones that you notice. There are plenty in the shadows who don't speak up.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 07:35 PM
2

Either a moderate leaning towards Feminism, a lurker in here, or someone from r/all, if I had to guess.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 07:00 PM
9

Are you trying to tell me that those who are sending the threats are not the result of those leaders? These leaders have made it abundantly clear to plenty of those who follow, and that is that the enemy is not a person. Attacking the enemy (not refuting or debating) is justified to them. They are either a disgusting male, or a woman with internalised misogyny who is just trying to get some attention from those disgusting males. It becomes clear that the leaders absolutely are the problem. I wan…
/r/MensRights26/03/15 09:15 AM
14

So what happens when it is the extremists that are leading the group? The majority might not be like that, and might ignore it, but looking at those who are advocating and have the following to back them? Yeah, that is representative of the movement. I agree that there are plenty of good feminists out there. I'd like to believe that it is the majority that are just silent. Doesn't change that there is a serious problem with those who are held up as leaders and idols within the group, and then CH…
/r/MensRights26/03/15 08:41 AM
26

Difference would be who is leading who. Feminists have people like Andrea Dworkin, Sarkeesian, and Lena Dunham who are looked up to, while within their own group, feminists like Christina Hoff Summers are looked down upon by the majority of modern feminists. I haven't seen anything resembling that in the MRM, though I will say that I am not full into everything, and just peruse every now and then, so if it does happen, that would be why I don't know about it.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 08:29 AM
1

I don't know what it was like 5 hours ago when you posted that, but at the moment, going through the top comments it seems pretty decent, and those comments are 12 hours old as of writing this. The top 5 comments there seem fine, and are agreeing with how that OP tried to call the person out. I'd much rather see a potential abuser called out, realises what they are doing, and reforms themselves, than be instantly called out, shunned, and not really know why. Keeping a friendship, if possible, is…
/r/MensRights22/03/15 11:29 AM
4

I'm not commenting on their other work, but when they are acting out what is a satire, over the top is kind of the point.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 02:48 AM
5

Well, the fact that Meninism is a satire, that would kind of be the point.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 12:57 AM
15

I always love seeing the bottom comments. Someone tried to claim that industrial jobs are now filled with women. As someone who works in an industrial complex around many factories, I had a good laugh.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 12:51 AM
20

"Something something misandry something something is really just misogyny something something Patriarchy." The mental gymnastics of some of these people is just... well, if there was an Olympic event for it, it would be close and interesting.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:58 PM
1

Aristotle is the person who said that.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 04:36 AM
2

I feel like if these were actual quoted events, this would be so much better.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 08:44 PM
2

Not All Feminists Are Like That.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 12:15 AM
0

Look. I guess this is something that I won't agree on. I don't have to either. Having differences in opinions are good. I guess this is just going to have to be a simple agree to disagree situation. Sorry.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 09:54 PM
0

No, it hasn't been. All that has been stated to me has been that it is a rape accusation, and that he will have his life ruined. I'm saying that I don't see how this is an accusation.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 09:22 AM
1

Oh, right. I knew I had seen it, total mindblank.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 02:28 AM
1

KOBS?
/r/MensRights21/02/15 02:04 AM
1

I've had this thought rattle around in my head for a while. My opinion is that both should. A certain percentage of their wages goes towards money for raising the child. School fees, food, clothing, possibly rent (it's debatable), medical relating to the child. The percentage would be the same for both parents, to keep it as fair as possible. Neither parent would be allowed access to the money for reasons that are personal. As for what percentage, I wouldn't know. I don't know how much would be …
/r/MensRights21/02/15 12:00 AM
11

He was just doing his job: Acting. Apparently he is a gamer, enjoys CoD from what I have heard.
/r/MensRights20/02/15 11:49 PM
0

Tell me, in what way is being pegged as resembling this woman's rapist, accusing him of rape? Go on. This is mental gymnastics. You know, that thing people mock SJWs for doing. Is this shitty? YES, oh my god YES. Should the guy be treated like this? NO. I agree that this is terrible treatment for the guy. I just don't see it as a rape accusation.
/r/MensRights20/02/15 09:51 PM
-1

He hasn't been accused of rape. Seriously, I get that being accused is serious shit, and holds a lot of power, but this isn't an accusation.
/r/MensRights20/02/15 11:36 AM
-7

Except he's not. He has been labelled as someone who resembles another person who committed rape.
/r/MensRights19/02/15 07:12 PM
-25

I wouldn't go that far. I mean, it is pretty screwed up, and the guy should sue. I mean, he is paying for a service, which is an education, which they are purposefully disturbing by restricting his access to parts of the campus. Is his life fucked up as a result? Not Really. Is it a very shitty situation? Absolutely. If true, because it seems vague on most points.
/r/MensRights19/02/15 11:31 AM
2

I'm not disagreeing with you, that's for sure. I was just giving an opinion on maybe why.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 08:39 PM
5

The sub is pretty lenient on the whole banning as far as I know, due to really embracing free speech. Overall, as long as they get downvoted, most people with half a brain cell can figure out that people don't agree with him.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 08:08 PM
20

>checks top comment >sees it is calling out the double standard with more than 1000 likes >good More people are becoming aware of the bullshit that goes on.
/r/MensRights12/02/15 08:50 PM
0

Serious question: Are we Anita Sarkeesian now? Are we going to take perceived slights and make it an issue? Normally, I agree with most of this sub. However, this is one of those things I don't agree on. I won't go against it, but it doesn't seem like it is something that would relate all that much to something that is a right.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 11:12 PM
2

Okay, I'm prepared for the downvotes here, because I'm going to go against the circlejerk. Guys, I think it was a hyperbole/joke. Even so, in a healthy relationship, that isn't bad advice, so long as it is mutual. If it isn't mutual, then that is not good. I think this is a case of people taking something a little too literal.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 09:03 PM
5

ArbCom did nothing, because Ryulong still runs the page. He was in communication with another editor who was instructed on what to do, along with other articles he has his grip on. And then there is other people who are getting bans lifted early, like Bernstein, who was banned for fighting. On hard fact information, STEM topics, Wikipedia is pretty good. Anything that is even remotely controversial, you have no chance. Fuck, for a while there, the GamerGate article was better on the SJWs very ow…
/r/MensRights10/02/15 08:51 PM
2

I know all about McInjosh. As someone invested in GG, we know all about his insanity.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:56 AM
4

Oh, I know, but she is the success story of a teleseminar... Remember. But no, I really do dislike McInjosh so much more than Sarkeesian. I can't really blame Sarkeesian, she is making a quick buck.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:55 AM
5

So, I'm assuming that this will mean that women will always be given preferential choice when hiring. This is an assumption, and can't be proven yet, but if that is the case, then that is wrong on every level.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 08:25 PM
111

As much as I dislike FemFreq, you got to give her credit, she knows how to scam, and damn does she do it well.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 08:17 PM
5

I'm almost certain that I read a statistic somewhere that claimed in situations where a parent murders a child, it is a mother 70% of the time. So I dare her to pull that line, and then explain why there are more instances of women killing their children than men.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 08:34 PM
1

Now, let's get something clear: What about when you do the same thing with the word "feminist" here? Well, it is a false equivalence. Feminism is a choice, an ideology. Gender, sexuality, race are not choices. That is why this is applicable to them, and not here. They mock and insult that which is not a choice.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 12:19 PM
1

I get that, this is one if those figureheads doing the instructing though.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 02:08 PM
4

My point is more that McIntosh is using her to get money. McIntosh is co-opting Sarkeesian, who is in turn co-optiing feminism. I had a feeling this wouldn't be a popular view here, she is still far from innocent, but I personally dislike McIntosh so much more because of how he uses a woman to tell other women how to think, to get rich.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 01:30 PM
29

My favourite part was how she touched on male on male violence in gay relationships, totally ignoring that the highest rate of DV is in lesbian relationships.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 10:16 AM
3

In case you didn't get it, Anita Sarkeesian is the face of the group FemFreq. Jonathan McIntosh, is the writer for it. He is the one that tells her what to say, he is the one behind the curtains. She is a mouthpiece for him to profit from.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 06:38 AM
-7

As much as it I dislike Anita, honestly, I've come to blame her a lot less. Jonathan McIntosh on the other hand, now that is a manipulator using a cause to further his career. Anita is a mouthpiece. If she were even remotely more than that, she would do debates, and she doesn't.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 05:35 AM
1

I mentioned the study that said domestic violence is not some massive gap but more closer to a 50/50 divide of the sex of the victim, and I'm basing it from that. I'm tired at the moment, but if you'd like, I can try to find you the studies tomorrow.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 01:15 PM
2

What that stat tells me is that there is a sever under-reporting of Female on Male DV. Studies have shown that it is pretty close in the ratio of male to female abusers, with actually lesbian relationships being the worst occurrence rate. So it isn't that for every 4 Male on Female DV, there is only 1 Female on Male DV, but more for every 4 reported, only 1 of the other is reported.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 11:46 AM
5

That is the number that they received. It is still a problem with Male on Female domestic violence that not enough people report it, and it is the same the other way around in regards to Female on Male violence, only moreso. Studies indicate that it is roughly a 50/50 split between the genders when it comes to who is the abuser, or abused. So, whilst 1 in 5 doesn't match up with what studies say, I'd bet that this would be fairly accurate in how many they got.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 11:42 AM
1

I think it is also the part of "accepting the blows", as in many males won't do anything about them and just "suck it up" because they don't know what else to do. They fear they will be ridiculed, and in some cases that will happen, and they won't hit back because they are not a violent person at all, let alone for self defence even. It's a valid point, and one that I think stems from the lack of support male victims receive, which is next to none not including close family and friends, which is…
/r/MensRights19/01/15 11:39 AM
1

Of course people can just agree on their own and not involve the court as well. Absolutely, though I think that it should be put through the legal system as to avoid any conflicts or later issues ("THEY REFUSED TO PAY UP!!!").
/r/MensRights30/12/14 08:23 AM
1

Those comments at the bottom. They're beautiful.
/r/MensRights30/12/14 07:58 AM
3

Staying on to the title with the whole Child Support idea, I don't think that it is an inherently bad idea, but I think it does need to be changed. Instead of a set monetary value that the court or some other system decides, it should be a percentage of income based on how much the person earns. BOTH parties should be contributing in this percentage into a separate account, where the funds are exclusively used to help raise the child. Food, education costs for the child (Example: Not university …
/r/MensRights30/12/14 07:53 AM
1

What is the difference? Someone said something they don't like, and now they are trying to get the person fired. They are absolutely silencing him for his opinion. "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection." - Neal Boortz Note: whilst this is not government censorship, it is censorship done via another group putting pressure on someone/group. In this case, a petition consisting of (mainly) feminists putting pressure onto AFR.
/r/MensRights11/12/14 05:45 AM
1

Fair enough. I think it deserves to be a bit serious though.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 11:43 AM
2

I'm just thinking that the mod missed a huge opportunity to title this "Concerning concern trolls"
/r/MensRights09/12/14 05:58 AM
6

With the recent changes to the new re-release, you could go first person. This includes when getting a prostitute in the game. After done, due to the free-will nature of the game, you can then murder said prostitute for your money back. From what I read, their main issue was that you could do this in first person, which made it feel more real. It's a load of shit, because if it were the case, games in general would make me violent. I am not. If games (specifically first person games) influenced …
/r/MensRights03/12/14 08:38 PM
21

The Galbrush Paradox This is the problem with female characters.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 08:25 PM
0

As a PC gamer, I don't buy from stores for the most part. Occasionally I will, but only from actual games stores. Otherwise, all you'll get at Target is the same few games, CoD/Battlefield, The Sims, Angry Birds. Maybe a few hidden object games too. The console section isn't that much better either, though it is better I guess.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 08:22 PM
1

I don't think so, unless they have done so multiple times. I mean, if someone is accused of rape but is found innocent, does that instantly make it a false rape claim? Yes, I am against false claims, but this could actually have a negative impact where people become more reluctant to come forward with a claim. Edit: I have been downvoted. But I have a question: What distinguishes a false rape claim, and a legitimate rape claim where the rapist is found innocent? I absolutely agree that false rap…
/r/MensRights12/10/14 08:38 PM
0

Adblock, boom solved. Also, I'm on a mobile, and there are no ads on that page in mobile form.
/r/MensRights22/07/14 10:45 PM
7

I feel like it was also trying to dismiss the FemalesAgainstFeminist movement by calling them privileged. That's a huge assumption and stereotyping in action. It then tried to blame men/"the patriarchy" as if they indoctrinated these women to think this way. Yeah, it was trying to ask for proper arguments rather than name calling, but their points were just as insulting.
/r/MensRights22/07/14 10:34 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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