TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Ripowal1 Archive

View 1 posts and 427 comments by Ripowal1 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

That's a pretty good deflection, but you're not OP and you haven't explained how a text "proves" consent.
/r/MensRights11/03/14 09:50 AM
4

A woman was paid three times what a man was paid for doing a worse job. Except that their "job" was to see which gender could get closest to the record performance for their gender. In which case, the woman was paid three times what the man was paid for doing a better job - getting closer to her gender's record than the man did.
/r/MensRights10/03/14 06:07 PM
2

Yes there are more, very good! And yet notice that there are still many more men of color than white men. Not that any MRA can recognize racism through their zealotry...
/r/MensRights08/03/14 11:36 PM
1

With one study from a biased researcher? Pft, it'll take more than that to prove that "the entire core of feminism is based on false accusations". Stop making false accusations.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 11:31 PM
1

This isn't "/AMRdiscussesracism", go have fun there. Yes, as I said, I should have know you wouldn't care about racism. My bad. I take the judgement of "Dr. Denis Keyes, William Edwards, Esq., & Robert Perske" over yourself. As such, I dismiss your claim, and stand by the original list. Ah, I see. So you're just going to ignore that one of the 3 requirements for being classified as a mentally retarded adult is having an IQ under 70 points? Ok, whatever floats your boat, brah.
/r/MensRights07/03/14 07:38 PM
-2

What relevance does that have to the question? Ah, right, I should have known you wouldn't care that your example of discrimination against men is also an example of discrimination against people of color. Stop being racist, you bigoted fuck. llol Take it up with the list makers. Again, just pointing out that you made an incorrect statement. You're the one who brought that source into it, just accept that it's wrong.
/r/MensRights07/03/14 07:32 PM
1

Forty three examples then. I mean, you said something incorrect, so I corrected you. Also, only 14 examples were white. Hmm... Tsk tsk. None of the listed cases were after the 2002 court decision that made a distinction. Every person listed is "mentally retarded". What about "low 70s" in 84, "probably" retarded in 89, "70" and "71-76" in 90, "72" in 92, "low borderline" retarded in 95 and in 96, "70" and "74" in 99? There's 10 examples that don't actually meet the standard for mental retardation…
/r/MensRights07/03/14 07:25 PM
2

No, Wanda is not male. Also, many of those cases were decided that the person was either merely borderline or not mentally retarded. (I'm not saying I think that's right, but you do have to prove mental retardation in court to receive leniency for it.)
/r/MensRights07/03/14 07:03 PM
5

14 and black and in the 40s.
/r/MensRights07/03/14 05:43 PM
1

I am rather curious about why you think a text should prove consent. How do you prove that the supposed text-er didn't change their mind between the text and the sex? How do you prove that it was actually the person who owned the phone who texted the supposed "consent"?
/r/MensRights07/03/14 02:26 PM
1

You're right, feminists haven't done that.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 09:49 PM
1

making mass false accusations is at the core of your movement. Nope, sorry, you haven't proven it. Stop making false accusations.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 05:37 PM
1

The only people there are criminals WHO?! Who on that list is an actual criminal? Register Her doesn't do that. Lol, nvm, it seems you have a penchant for denying the truth. You are really a despicable crowd of habitual liars and false accusers. Hey, don't falsely accuse us of being false accusers! You have to prove it first. ;)
/r/MensRights06/03/14 05:28 PM
1

You still aren't proving these false accusations of harassment or targeting. I can't prove these false accusations, because they're not false. No one has been harassed or hurt. Criticized yes So, doxxing people is now only criticism? Inundating them with threats so that they fear to leave their homes is only criticism? Making false rape accusations against someone is only criticism? Starting campaigns to threaten and intimidate people is only criticism? Pressuring and digitially attacking a comp…
/r/MensRights06/03/14 05:16 PM
2

So... for example, when Perris wrote an article about Big Red and then she got doxxed and harrased, that was 4chan? When Nolan doxxed the wrong Ohio University student, that was 4chan? When Elam doxxed the wrong Georgetwon alum, that was 4chan? When a longtime member of /r/mensrights was highly upvoted and gilding for telling people to make false rape accusations against certain female staff at Oxy and linked to their personal information, that was 4chan? When AVFM put up register-her.com, that …
/r/MensRights05/03/14 04:30 PM
0

So you're actually flat-out denying that MRAs have targeted and harassed women? EDIT: Sorry, I made the more thorough response earlier but it wasn't going through, so I posted this bit of brevity.
/r/MensRights05/03/14 02:58 AM
2

Lol, I didn't realize that merely holding an opinion you disagree with elevated me to a leaderhood position. It's so strange, to have so much power just for daring to comment with questions and facts.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 08:28 PM
2

So... there wasn't a concerted effort to dox and harass Big Red? No one doxxed the wrong Ohio University student (falsely accusing her of being a false rape accuser, ironically) identified from grainy cell phone footage, leading to an inundation of harassment that led to her not leaving her house out of fear? And then, of course, the same MRAs certainly didn't post the personal information of the female Dean of Students for the crime of saying that the girl they doxxed was not the girl in the vi…
/r/MensRights04/03/14 08:24 PM
-2

How clearly, exactly? Are you suggesting that prominent members of the MRM have not harassed women nor called upon swaths of MRAs to harass them?
/r/MensRights04/03/14 05:16 PM
1

Such human rights.
/r/MensRights03/03/14 06:11 PM
3

"I take internet arguments way too seriously. I cite hundreds of pages of data and expect people to read through them all in order to support their arguments." "I asked someone to cite their sources and they provided them. Unfortunately I apparently don't know how to read abstracts or use the ctrl+f function to find the percentages they presented to me." Here, I'll help you by using ctrl+f myself: NIJ 14.8%: in Exhibit 1 on page 4 DOJ 10%: in Exhibit 7 on page 25 (I understand why you wouldn't w…
/r/MensRights01/03/14 06:17 PM
3

Looking through four different studies to confirm my suspicions isn't worth an internet argument. "Reading is so hard. I know your sources will support your side and not mine, so it's better for me to ignore them." Once again, I'm not arguing legal precedents, I'm arguing morally. Oh, I see now - you disagree with legal and scientific data because it doesn't adhere to your definition of rape. Well, that explains why your view isn't consistent with facts. Jesus christ you don't understand my posi…
/r/MensRights01/03/14 05:39 PM
2

I can't find the original study, but I did find the sample size was a paltry 388. I'll check this off as "unknown". How convenient for you - and look, you even ignore the other national studies supporting her results! Good for you, you're on your way. They're in a grey area between the two. "Crime but not rape" is in a grey area. Again, how convenient for you. The entire point of rape being bad is it causes irreparable trauma Nope. Can you point me to any place where the statute says that rape i…
/r/MensRights01/03/14 05:22 PM
3

Oh, right, I forgot - if I don't agree with you I'm a troll.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 05:10 PM
0

Oh really? Cite em. "Researchers Martin Schwartz and Molly Leggett tested the disputed question empirically back in 1999.4 They surveyed students with Koss’ survey, but substituted this question for Koss’ original alcohol and drugs question: Have you engaged in sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to but were so intoxicated under the influence of alcohol or drugs that you could not stop it or object? If Koss’ question 8 created a significant “false yes” problem [as Sommers claims], then many …
/r/MensRights01/03/14 05:36 AM
0

I wasn't trying to refute anything, I'm just pointing out that actually, yes, there have been numerous scandals recently about universities under-reporting the amount of sexual assault reports they receive. It's not some silly conspiracy feminists think is going on, it actually happens. To dismiss the fact that universities do intentionally under-report the number of sexual assault reports they receive to improve their reputation and appearance of safety is just not honest. That's like relying o…
/r/MensRights01/03/14 02:37 AM
1

Welp, you've convinced me. Oh, wait.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 02:08 AM
0

Actually, I believe there have been recent scandals at numerous schools for failing to accurately report the numbers of sexual assaults reported to them in order to make themselves look better.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 10:33 PM
1

Exactly. Ideological high-five!
/r/MensRights28/02/14 03:36 PM
3

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/cm2012.pdf#page=76 Nearly two-fifths Child Maltreatment 2012(36.6%) of victims were maltreated by their mother acting alone. One-fifth (18.7%) of victims were maltreated by their father acting alone. One-fifth (19.4%) of victims were maltreated by both parents. Twelve percent (12.0%) of victims were maltreated by a perpetrator who was not the child’s parent. The largest categories in the nonparent group were male relatives Let's remember, though, tha…
/r/MensRights27/02/14 11:44 PM
1

Weren't you just talking about how we can't trust the CDC to honestly defend their own data because bias? Are you really suggesting it's not a known phenomenon that governments try to represent themselves as better than they are and cover up the bad?
/r/MensRights23/02/14 08:06 PM
-1

I think you misplaced your mirror. Using statistics correctly =/= raging jackass.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 07:21 PM
0

It's not a fallacy when the blog and the writer of the blog clearly don't understand what conclusions you can actually draw from victimization data. Also, fallacy fallacy, brah. Can you limbo that low?
/r/MensRights21/02/14 07:17 PM
0

Actually, this so-called "refutation" was itself refuted here on Toysolder's blog. A link to a blog. That's how you know someone's refuted a scientific research entity.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 06:57 PM
3

Sorry, you're right - that was vague language in a convoluted sentence. My math there was supposed to be giving the most generous statistical benefit of the doubt to the way the data was being presented in the infographic, but I should have also said explicitly that you can't draw conclusions about the rapist population from the victim population.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 06:42 PM
-1

EDIT: I was notified that I forgot to explain that it's statistically impossible to make a conclusion about perpetrators from a victimization survey. So, to clarify, all of this math here is conjecture based on the generous assumption that you can determine a perpetrator population from the CDC data, which still proves the infographic wrong. Ah, yes, the noted statistician Toysoldiers. Let's just ignore that even TS' analysis of the data (women commit 43% of the rape against men) directly contra…
/r/MensRights21/02/14 05:25 PM
8

I'm not sure how well this will be received here, but the CDC refuted the incorrect use of statistics in this infographic (and the original article) over 5 months ago: "Thank you for your inquiry regarding the NISVS data and for providing the background information pertaining to your question. It appears that the math used to derive an estimated percentage of female rapists that you found at the various websites you forwarded to us is flawed. First, we will summarize the assertion and what we pe…
/r/MensRights21/02/14 03:23 PM
-2

No, you're not wrong. The CDC long ago clarified how the data used for this infographic was being manipulated to the point where the conclusion wasn't statistically sound. But everyone loves that it seems to support their point, so they either a) ignored the CDC or b) said the CDC was lying about basic statistical methods.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 02:10 PM
-1

they probably would have done the same if he'd called their friend a "loser" right? We honestly have no idea, and that's all I'm trying to get at here. Considering how crazy their response to an insult was, I wouldn't be surprised if they did react the same way if "loser" were the insult. There's a difference in responding to someone's actions and responding to their social group (which is the basis of a hate crime). Punching a black guy who punched you isn't a hate crime, but punching a black g…
/r/MensRights19/02/14 05:58 PM
2

Did they attack him because he was "the kind of person" to insult their friend, or did they attack him because he insulted their friend?
/r/MensRights19/02/14 05:39 PM
2

An ideology is a system of ideas, like a worldview - it's comprehensive. You're saying that "this person on facebook fits my definition of gay, so I'll call him gay" is an ideology? I literally cannot comprehend a) how that qualifies as an ideology or b) how that "ideology" converts assault to a hate crime. If you punched someone for calling you a fat fuck or something, is that a hate crime if that person's ideology is that you fit their definition of a fat fuck? So I guess the one question I ho…
/r/MensRights19/02/14 07:38 AM
4

Which is...?
/r/MensRights19/02/14 07:12 AM
7

Agreed - if anything the teens seem homophobic for perceiving "gay" to be such a horrible insult that a person should be painfully mutilated for saying it.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 06:07 AM
4

The whole adoptions system needs revamping. Many agencies take advantage of pregnant women who are nervous about their future and turn their pregnancy into profit, trying to convince women that adoption is the best/only way and raking it in from the sale of a child.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 03:07 PM
-1

I didn't. I made a reference to Mary Koss's hypocrisy. Really? Where? Maybe I'm just blind/stupid/both, but I don't see any mention of hypocrisy until deep in the comments when you realized that dissing the use of non-self-report measures wasn't getting you anywhere. That's where the hypocrisy comes in. Based on some men's "self reports" she dismisses all male victims; and based on her own beliefs she dismisses women's self-reports. Yes, I've agreed several times that her not counting MTP as rap…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 09:54 PM
-2

It's not that Mary Koss is relying on behavioural measures that's the problem, Ripowal. Then. Why. Did. You. Say. This. At. All?: By asking women “have you ever been physically forced to have sex or have had sex under the influence of drugs or alcohol" and disregarding if they said that they hadn't been raped. If you’re a woman and you don’t think you’re raped, you don’t get to decide that, Mary Koss does. There's absolutely no mention of hypocrisy in there - just apparent outrage that Koss (and…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 09:43 PM
0

So once again you refuse to actually respond to your own glaring hypocrisy. I honestly don't know why I expected better from you. How many times have I said in this discussion that MTP should be classified as rape? Two or three? How many times do I have to say before you stop breezing past it and beating me over the head with opinions of Koss' that I've never supported? I'm taking umbrage with your claim that when feminists don't rely on self-report data they're "deciding" whether or not a woman…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 09:35 PM
-3

No, I'm saying that you're pretending you logically flounced me when all that happened is that your dutiful supporters have come out in force to pat you on the back for talking in circles. Why don't you respond to this: Why don't you answer for this?: Jack is equally likely to experience physically forced sex as Jill in the last twelve months. However the CDC found that only 20% of the victims who reported being physically forced into sex in their lifetime were male. Why is this? When witnessing…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 09:27 PM
-3

Lol, spanked? Your white knight MRAs finally showed up and downvoted everyone who disagrees with you. Having your own personal army while you dance around avoiding the point and stuffing words in people's mouths isn't "spanking", dear, it's delusion. Why don't you link to your magnet or puzzle piece video now, to show off how truly full of yourself you are?
/r/MensRights13/02/14 09:19 PM
-1

I personally do not think it's misleading to ask "Have you experienced [definition of rape]?" and then report "1/4 people say they have experienced rape," because that's what the definition means. It takes out the guesswork of wondering what a respondent actually meant when they said they had experienced rape. Personally I think it's more honest and less misleading than letting every respondent interpret "rape" in their own deeply personal way.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 08:40 PM
0

Then I'm genuinely confused about why you said this: If you’re a woman and you don’t think you’re raped, you don’t get to decide that, Mary Koss does. at all. Were you just looking for a snarky jab you didn't actually agree with?
/r/MensRights13/02/14 08:16 PM
2

Finally, I am saying that either classify men being "physically forced to have sex" as having been raped or simply report on the research without the rhetorical flourishes. But you've ignored almost the entirety of my comment, so I'm not feeling charitable toward your contribution to this "debate". I'll ask again, with a slightly different example now to suit your exact wording: If a survey of men found that 1/4 men had been "physically forced to have sex" but only 1/16 men said they had been "r…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 08:10 PM
-1

That's exactly why there's huge academic value in clearly defining an experience to inquire about instead of depending on the respondent to "know" what you mean by rape. If you're interested, I just made a wall of text here that expound upon the necessity of operational definitions.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 08:02 PM
1

Ok, so you would also say that it's bad if a crime victimization survey "decides" that someone who experienced burglary, in fact, experienced burglary, regardless of what the burglary victim thinks, by asking a question like, "Has anyone ever entered your home without your consent with intent to commit a crime (like theft) once inside?" Because, according to you, asking if anyone has experienced the definition of a crime is bad while asking if anyone has experienced the name of a crime is fine, …
/r/MensRights13/02/14 07:55 PM
-1

Ok, so you've gotten off-topic again. Let's try to keep this simple. You said "If you’re a woman and you don’t think you’re raped, you don’t get to decide that, Mary Koss does." Are you implying that this is a bad thing? Try to answer my point just this once, please.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 07:19 PM
-3

The fact that MTP is not considered rape is, indeed, horrible. However, that doesn't mean that crime victimization surveys are big brutes telling women that they've been raped when they've experienced acts consistent with rape. Savvy?
/r/MensRights13/02/14 07:05 PM
-3

Hm, more avoiding the point. Surprise.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 07:03 PM
-5

Ok. I mean, I'm not surprised that you would refuse to admit to intellectual dishonesty about the very nature of crime victimization surveys, but at least I tried. Also, nice bait in your edit. Considering your loose understanding of what the words you use actually mean, I'm not sure I can have a good faith debate with you. EDIT: Seriously, stop editing seconds after you comment - try thinking about everything you want to say BEFORE you hit save. If you’re a woman and you don’t think you’re rape…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 06:57 PM
2

That's true. However, you also lamented that women who had experienced actions consistent with rape were having their experience "decided" for them, despite their experience factually being rape, and this was the focus of my comment. You've neatly avoided the issue at hand. Do you rescind that claim?
/r/MensRights13/02/14 06:52 PM
2

I mean, there are lots of crimes with definitions that people don't know about, or may not think about. That's how pretty much every crime victims survey goes - you ask people if they've experienced the specific parameters of the crime, not just the name of the crime. You could ask someone "Have you ever been robbed?" and they think, Yeah, someone stole my tv when I was out of town once! and answer, "Yes, I have been robbed," when actually what they experienced was burglary. It's easier and more…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 06:48 PM
2

Why is inheritance specifically a benefit for women?
/r/MensRights12/02/14 09:17 PM
1

http://www.gettyimages.com/ After you search for a keyword, you can sort the number of results per race, gender, age, etc.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 04:21 PM
6

I'm noticing a pattern of not-understanding-what-words-mean from you.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 11:18 PM
4

Found them. Even in the same Getty database.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 10:41 PM
5

Victims, actually. Unless sad men with black eyes and blooded lips are aggressors. You could always look at the database yourself. There's an even more disproportionate number of men under "victim" than under "battered".
/r/MensRights10/02/14 10:37 PM
1

What a brilliant rebuttal.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 08:53 PM
6

Interestingly enough, there are already more men than women in the getty database when you search "battered", and near-equal numbers for "sex offender".
/r/MensRights10/02/14 08:52 PM
2

Yeah, preventing someone from having sex is just like giving someone a hard kick to the genitals!
/r/MensRights10/02/14 06:49 PM
4

Not only "lesser beings", but "even lesser beings". But I'm sure that's "legit".
/r/MensRights09/02/14 11:58 PM
5

It's true - for the longest time medical research was done on men and presumed to be generalizable to everyone, but further research found that women have different symptoms indicating a heart attack that no one knew about because men were the standard. These campaigns are trying to remedy misinformation.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 12:29 AM
3

Oh, I totally agree with that. It's just that's not normally what (I see) people say here. Even in this thread you have people "explaining" this wage gap by attributing it to women's choices, but they don't turn that scrutiny back on themselves. I don't think I've ever seen the top comment on a link about men making up more workplace deaths say "it's also a fact that men are more likely to choose dangerous jobs, and that men are favored for many more dangerous jobs due to their biological advant…
/r/MensRights06/02/14 04:05 AM
0

It's just annoying how this article seems to pin the issue that sexism must be the reason women aren't also taking these jobs that pay a lot. Now, I'm just curious about the way you're setting this up, because I see a lot of MRAs saying that sexism is the reason that men are taking dangerous jobs instead of safe ones. Could that not be due to men and women being different as well? I don't get why women dominating lower-paying jobs is seen as their choice, but men dominating dangerous jobs is see…
/r/MensRights06/02/14 01:12 AM
1

Well, all of your comment addressed to me used words like "you" and "you're", so I don't know why your asking me about someone else. And regardless, it's still incredibly close-minded to think that someone can only make a judgment on the quality of a link if they've had the ability to find and post quality links before. Even kids who don't know how to drive yet can see someone swerving through multiple lanes of traffic and say "Hm, that person's a shitty driver." Even people who don't have the f…
/r/MensRights01/02/14 07:04 PM
1

I mean, reproductive rights and autonomy are kind of important, so I posted a link to a website where you can get free condoms. Even though it's not much, it's still better than "look at this one crazy radfem who doesn't let men comment on her blog that almost no one knows about! This is definitely a huge men's rights issue!"
/r/MensRights01/02/14 05:33 PM
-1

Overall that's a pretty lousy argument. You don't have to have access to prime content to be posted to know shitty content when you see it - on any sub.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 01:33 AM
2

Results from the study showed that students possessing good math skills and only moderate verbal skills were more likely to pursue a career in STEM than students who were good at math and also had high verbal skills, because of the first group’s narrower range of available job choices. Of the high school seniors surveyed with high math and high verbal skills, 37 percent were male and 63 percent were female. When an individual is good at math and also has high verbal abilities, he or she is open …
/r/MensRights31/01/14 05:18 PM
1

Oh, so it's only a false accusation if the police pick you up kidnap you. Unofficial false accusations are the sort of accusations feminists throw around all time Funny, I don't remember any feminists sending over 400 unofficial false rape reports to Occidental College...
/r/MensRights29/01/14 05:04 PM
1

So you're adding the qualifier that if it doesn't end in jail time it's not a "real" false accusation?
/r/MensRights29/01/14 03:32 PM
1

Ah, I see - there's no scenario in your mind where a false accusation doesn't end in cell time.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 03:17 PM
1

So what you actually believe is that a false rape accusation is so bad that you have to add kidnapping and multiple rapes to make rape as bad.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 03:12 PM
3

...And being raped can't? If anything, by your calculation, it would seem that being raped is worse, because both can result in PTSD, but being raped has a guarantee of experiencing rape, while being falsely accused has a chance of rape. Both have a chance of murder. Mostly I'd say it varies by situations and individuals, but if we're playing the odds then being raped has that absolute factor of having been raped.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 05:58 AM
4

And yet feminists are supposedly stupid or sensitive for not liking those, while this joke is "allowed" to be taken seriously. Why? It seems that you should either a) point out that doing A is stupid, then not do it yourself or b) not say that A is stupid, then do it yourself. You shouldn't have it both ways.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:19 PM
1

Keywords here being "in the school". There's been so much media coverage and hype about school shootings that I'm pretty sure this case would be getting no coverage if this poor boy had attempted suicide at home, so I'm not surprised that they're drawing on the school + danger aspect. Also, as another commenter mentioned, the whole incident is probably still being investigated, so AP would still be limited in what knowledge of the scenario they have. That's the nature of the news. Several years …
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:24 PM
3

This is hardly accurate. Remember when every major news network reporting on the Steubenville trial lamented the sentencing of two boys convicted of rape and how their promising football/academic careers would be cut short, while completely ignoring the girl who was raped? I may be confused, but did they do that because they thought those boys were actually "she"s, and mistakenly gave a fuck?
/r/MensRights28/01/14 08:41 PM
7

Agreed, this strikes me as the kind of over-sensitive tripe that feminists are mocked for, yet it goes right to the front page.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 07:01 PM
2

But conspiracy!
/r/MensRights28/01/14 05:47 PM
5

Does your brother have a protective order against his ex? Because this woman had a protective order against the man who made this facebook post forbidding him from doing anything to her that would cause her "to suffer physical and/or mental abuse, harassment, annoyance, or bodily injury." If you disagree with the protective order that's another story, but unless your brother has one against his ex the situations aren't comparable.
/r/MensRights27/01/14 04:17 AM
4

thought-provoking question lol
/r/MensRights25/01/14 09:37 PM
4

Exactly. Everyone gets to revoke consent, and you don't get to assume. Making out =/= consent to heavy petting. Seeing a movie =/= consent to making out. Foreplay =/= consent to intercourse. It's sad that this presentation of a rape victim as hysterical and not-raped has any upvotes - and had no downvotes when I commented.
/r/MensRights24/01/14 08:16 PM
13

Are you suggesting that once a person removes their pants they've given irrevocable consent? Because if someone undresses, then says they don't want to have sex anymore, and you still have sex with them... that is rape.
/r/MensRights24/01/14 03:59 PM
0

You godwinned all over yourself, there. I'm going to stop responding to you now, because you seem very angry and a little pathetic, and I pity you. (I'm sure that somehow that means I hate men.)
/r/MensRights18/01/14 01:57 AM
1

True. They go to the Tender Years doctrine 2.0 that we are all familiar with today. What's your point? Yeah, because it's not like several studies have shown that in cases where men actually ask for custody they get it over 70% of the time. But I'm sure that those pesky facts are inconvenient, aren't they? Oh, and shove your shaming language up your ass, you man hating harpy. Lol, hate harder. And polish up on your shaming language. <3
/r/MensRights18/01/14 12:38 AM
1

Oh, so you're willfully ignorant. That explains it. Also, stop following me around a month late. It's creepy (not to creep-shame you, of course./s)
/r/MensRights18/01/14 12:30 AM
1

So, all a woman has to do is create conflict, and she gets her way? No, all either parent has to do is be in conflict over the custody arrangement the other wants and then perfectly shared custody isn't the default arrangement they go to. Do you... do you have reading comprehension skills? Or do do you have such a strong persecution complex that anything that doesn't go exactly the way you think it should is just women getting their way? Christ.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 12:27 AM
1

I don't know if I should give up on trans issues entirely and just not care. If you could actually just stop caring (especially because of a few people you don't like), then it doesn't sound like you care at all. What would you think of someone who said, "Ugh, I'm arguing with this group of hostile MRAs and they're really frustrating, and I'm ignorant about a lot of mens issues. But they make it hard to like them, so maybe I should stop caring about men's issues."? Is your belief in human rights…
/r/MensRights10/01/14 09:08 PM
2

No problem - I err on the side of knowledge. I used to think "to take something for granted" was actually "to take something for granite."
/r/MensRights10/01/14 01:28 AM
1

Sorry, for future referecne it's "deep-seated".
/r/MensRights10/01/14 01:04 AM
7

Surely you know the difference between being confident and saying "fuck you, slut, dumbass, scum!". Especially in a sub specifically for the OPs to just let go on a rant to get something off their chest.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 09:13 PM
5

Sorry I don't think as poorly of men as you do. :\
/r/MensRights09/01/14 09:07 PM
2

No, he can't risk talking like that at his job or elsewhere because he'll just be shamed being a normal, crude male! /s
/r/MensRights09/01/14 09:05 PM
2

I knew he was redpill when he said men should be "allowed" to verbally abuse women because that's what women really want. Blegh.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 09:04 PM
7

I think the real misandry is thinking that being abusive, rude, swearing, and calling people names is "male behavior".
/r/MensRights09/01/14 09:00 PM
6

...You're a Poe, right? There's no way...
/r/MensRights09/01/14 08:30 PM
26

Yes, you definitely weren't banned for being abrasive and name-calling the OP and that's not what the sub is for. But sure.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 07:17 PM
1

Are you kidding me? No, I'm not. The original query was how many men or women would choose to be the other gender. You brought up that there are more people getting MTF srs than FTM srs. There are 3 problems with this: The cost differences between the two surgeries make that statistic not an accurate representation of how many FTM or MTF transgender people actually want to have srs. Not every transgender person even wants to have srs, meaning that even if that statistic was accurate to people wh…
/r/MensRights07/01/14 07:35 AM
1

Then why would you even bring up sexual reassignment rates, as if they were relevant to a discussion of whether or not people would choose to be the other gender? people do choose whether or not to have the surgery. They weigh the cost vs benefits analysis. That not only includes the cost, but also the perceived gains. Yes, of course they choose whether or not to have the surgery (if they even want it, another factor). But you have to admit that the difference between: "Hm, can I afford to take …
/r/MensRights07/01/14 06:10 AM
0

Wow, that turned from a discussion of people actually being able to afford surgery to a nice condescending finish. Well done, I definitely agree with you now that we can learn a lot from how many people have sexual reassignment surgery. Transgender people don't "choose" to be transgender based on how cushy they think being a man or a woman is, so perhaps it's best not to make dumb assertions in the first place.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 03:39 AM
0

But it's still not even an accurate measure of how many would choose to get the surgery. If one option is drastically more expensive than the other, that option is going to have more people "choosing" it.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 03:06 AM
0

Yes, but I'm just saying that using rates of sexual reassignment surgery isn't a valid measure of whether there are more FTM or MTF transgender people.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 08:15 PM
-1

Yes, according to that sub questionnaire you're only 85% white and 89% men. Who could possibly think its all white men?
/r/MensRights06/01/14 04:39 PM
0

If considering the significant cost difference between constructing/attaching a functional penis vs. making a hole, maybe the difference in FTM and MTF sexual reassignment surgery isn't that meaningful...
/r/MensRights06/01/14 12:26 AM
1

They're criticizing TMZ for making a rape joke. This is... such a stretch.
/r/MensRights03/01/14 12:19 AM
1

Please be a Poe, please be a Poe, please be a Poe...
/r/MensRights30/12/13 05:43 AM
9

But... the woman was raped... by a serial rapist. What "shit" was there to see through?
/r/MensRights30/12/13 03:48 AM
2

Show me an 'abusive husband' and I'll show you a unicorn. Wow, so abusive husbands just don't even exist? What about the whole "gender parity of domestic violence" bit? Or is that only trotted out when you want women to look bad?
/r/MensRights29/12/13 05:39 PM
1

Unfortunately anyone can be trans-exclusionary. :\ But thanks for sharing! I x-posted your story to /r/RealMRA, where we're trying to aggregate some good content without bad content or comments.
/r/MensRights20/12/13 09:48 PM
3

To visit the sub claiming to have some sort of key to completely understanding and authoritatively describing both sexes simply because one has had one's own, personal, anecdotal experience is arrogant and self-serving. And yet this was exactly the lens that was taken a week ago when the post about a lesbian who lived as a man for 18 months said that "this is how it is and women have privilege", and got over 1000 upvotes and everyone praising it as a nail in the coffin against male privilege. I …
/r/MensRights20/12/13 03:24 PM
1

Yes, what a coincidence that after commenting against me on a recent thread you mysteriously showed up on only my comment in a much older post. Assault is still assault.
/r/MensRights20/12/13 06:22 AM
1

Stop stalking me. Don't you have anything better to do? And yes, soldiers can still sexually assault people. Your happiness at the moment doesn't undo kissing someone without their consent.
/r/MensRights20/12/13 06:10 AM
1

Because every feminist is radical amirite?
/r/MensRights20/12/13 04:35 AM
0

Furthermore I find many of oneiorsgrip's findings to be what she chooses to believe rather than that of a majority of women. We shouldn't be seeing her interpretation of her experience as something to be considered to be a universal experience - especially one untainted by the MRM.
/r/MensRights20/12/13 03:54 AM
0

It's the combination of condescendingly asserting that she knows more about the experience of being trans than a silly feminst trans woman does and denying that her anecdotes are valid by using her own anecdotes and ironically claiming that she only sees part of the picture, despite having lived as both genders. It has nothing to do with being from a different position. It's the being from a different position and claiming to know better about the other position thing. Something like, "Hey, you'…
/r/MensRights20/12/13 02:50 AM
0

And all the top comments are variations of "that's not actually what happened, dear, you just think that because you're a feminist. Let cis me tell you what happened." And the lesbian post was at over 1000, for comparison of "well".
/r/MensRights20/12/13 02:00 AM
10

It's quite admirable that despite having only lived as a woman you're able to tell this trans woman who has lived as a man and a woman what she really experienced, since clearly she's the one who's only seen part of the picture.
/r/MensRights20/12/13 01:56 AM
-4

There was very popular post recently about a lesbian who disguised herself as a man for 18 months that was used to sell the concept of "female privilege" that everyone here just gobbled up. Unfortunately, you're suggesting that male privilege exists, which isn't going to float well here. I admire you for being willing to put out a detailed dissenting opinion to MRAs, and I'm sorry for all the people who are just flat-out denying the validity your experience because it doesn't suit them.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 10:30 PM
-1

I did suggest how it's helpful. I then asked you why you think it's not helpful. You're awfully defensive for someone who hasn't cited a single source in their entire argument, while insisting that they're correct. I swear, if you say "I don't have to prove I'm right" one more time, you're not getting the satisfaction of a reply. I've met all of your goalposts after moving them time and time again and you're not satisfied and keep moving them, do me a favor and give once piece of evidence that s…
/r/MensRights19/12/13 05:09 AM
0

Unlike you, I'll actually support my claim: http://laist.com/2013/12/18/mens_rights_group_submits_phony_rap.php Facing discipline when one has not committed a crime is an injustice to the individual whether it's a slap on the wrist or jail time. Being reminded of university policy is such an injustice. In what way do you think creating a means of reporting wherein a rapist would face no consequences helps victims? Because every rape victim want their attacker to be jailed. It's well-known that e…
/r/MensRights19/12/13 04:42 AM
0

Riiiiight, it's just a big coincidence that they got an influx of hundreds of false reports right after this subreddit posted a link to it and some of the most prominent commenters endorsed filing false rape accusations against female faculty and students, and provided a list of individuals to accuse (which was gilded), and said that they had already done so themselves. You're doggedly pursuing the topic of votes because you know it's the one small piece of evidence against the sub that can't be…
/r/MensRights19/12/13 04:22 AM
1

"Late Monday, the 16th we started seeing a stream of what we would call suspicious reports that were being submitted" to Occidental's Google-based assault reporting form, said Jim Tranquada, director of communications for the Los Angeles college, which has faced scrutiny in recent months for underreporting sex assaults involving its students. That's about the same time that commenters on Reddit's r/MensRights subreddit began discussing plans to spam the college's reporting system with phony accu…
/r/MensRights19/12/13 03:45 AM
0

And you accuse me of moving the goalposts. Yes. I said I received downvotes, comments and PMs, and you've re-focused on discussing only the downvotes (which neither of us can prove either way) to the exclusion of all else. Nice try though.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 06:27 PM
1

You're making an accusation. It's your responsibility to prove that accusation. You haven't done that. Therefore, the accusation is frivolous. You can't prove your accusation that the downvotes came from AMR and SRS, or that this sub was manipulated into supporting false rape accusations. Therefore, your accusation is frivolous. MRAs downvoting you for being an AMR troll isn't evidence that MRAs support anything you're arguing against. It's simply evidence that some MRAs are fed up with you, per…
/r/MensRights18/12/13 06:06 PM
0

Can you demonstrate with undeniable certainty that the downvotes you received came from MRAs? Can you demonstrate with undeniable certainty that the downvotes I received were not from MRAs? If not, then you can't discount the theory that, whether you like it or not, a lot of MRAs support making false rape accusations when it suits them. Can you demonstrate with undeniable certainty that downvotes you receive in this sub aren't handed out simply because everyone has you tagged as an AMR troll? Wh…
/r/MensRights18/12/13 05:44 PM
1

I commented in critique of making false rape accusations against female university faculty and students, and was inundated with downvotes, comments and PMs from MRAs defending the practice and deriding rape victims who don't go to the police. Unless you don't hold MRAs responsible for the opinions they profess, then I don't know how I "manipulated" them. Did I force them to say these things? How dastardly of me!
/r/MensRights18/12/13 05:26 PM
0

And that couldn't have anything to do with the incriminating comments being deleted and unable to continue to be upvoted. /s
/r/MensRights18/12/13 05:11 PM
0

Because NAMRAALT, right? Whenever someone here does something bad it's secretly SRS' fault.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 03:13 PM
3

Well yeah, I meant the form itself, since everyone here got so worked up about how it was a tool to oppress men.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 03:08 PM
4

I would like it if it was possible to file sexual assault reports against females the same way.... But yea, that would be in low taste. It is. The form is completely gender neutral. No one's being targeted, except Occidental's reputation as being very hostile to rape victims.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 08:20 AM
18

I deserved it for disagreeing with the vigilante hivemind. Also I'm a feminist, so that wouldn't help the reputation anyway. :\
/r/MensRights18/12/13 08:09 AM
1

First, you're presuming a lower performance proved No, I proposed a what-if scenario. there is already evidence that false accusations are a bigger problem than feminist advocates have admitted So how many college-aged boys are falsely accused of rape by girls? I could just say that this statement is meaningless because your evidence is behind a paywall, etc etc. you're assuming they "may or may not occur." False accusations have already occurred under the existing (new) standards I know. But ar…
/r/MensRights17/12/13 11:55 PM
0

having little or no change in academic performance for the students would not reduce the benefit of the choice. But what if their performance actually decreases, as some studies have found? Is it worth it to do a disservice to every boy in the class/school in order to avoid false accusations against a few boys that may or may not occur? (This isn't rhetorical, I'm wondering what you think.) Also, It's interesting, though, that girls can't do as well in front of boys as they do on their own What …
/r/MensRights17/12/13 10:55 PM
1

I don't know if you've actually read the form, but the accused face no consequences either. So a false accuser really has no reason to do so through this avenue.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 03:06 PM
1

Right back at you.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 09:04 AM
2

Brilliant rebuttal. I've seen the error of my ways and am now drinking from the goblet of Elam.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:58 AM
-9

So because we don't and can't know you're going to operate under the assumption that this resource will be inundated with false reports from the proliferate masses of false rape accusers? Also, this is a survey for gathering data and determining trends. No one is being charged here.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:55 AM
-12

Surely you understand there's a difference between filling out a completely anonymous online form and having to speak to another person about your experience, right? Surely you know there's a difference. Because you seem to have ignored the part where I said "the additional shame that comes from telling a person and knowing they're judging you" in favor of beating up a strawman. I have made no claim that there are no other methods for male victims to report. I've suggested that for a lot of men …
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:53 AM
-13

Nice try, but we both know that's not what I said.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:48 AM
-13

Ah, yes, because the world is just teeming with false rape accusers, who vastly outnumber the actual rape victims who could use this resource.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:47 AM
-15

Nice try but we both know that's not what I said. Quote: "Real rapes are supposed to be taken to the police."
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:46 AM
1

The title is misleading; any gender of student can make an accusation against any gender of student. Male students aren't targeted. How do you know this is what the students and advocates "want"?
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:44 AM
0

I'm not sure if the effect would extend from lower education, but just about all the current research on gender-segregated schools and classrooms from elementary to high school suggests that girls perform much better in a gender-segregated environment while boys' performance stays the same or observes a slight decline. So that may not actually be the best route to take.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:43 AM
-15

Ok... so the part where this online survey is completely anonymous actually doesn't allow the victim to report their attack without the additional shame that comes from telling a person and knowing they're judging you? Please explain.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:33 AM
-15

But why is their aim to shut down a service for victims of sexual assault? It comes off as extremely petty.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:32 AM
-17

Ok, what are the other shame-free resources that male rape victims have to report their female attackers at Occidental College?
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:27 AM
-37

So if a rape victim doesn't want to face the police for a variety of reasons... their rape wasn't real? If, for example, a young man is too embarrassed and traumatized that he was raped by a young woman to report it to the police, who he fears will belittle his experience, then too bad?
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:23 AM
-21

So instead of allowing victimized men perhaps their only resource to report their attackers, you'll misuse it to harass innocent women. Sounds legit.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 08:21 AM
-29

I'm confused about how this will help victims of rape, particularly male victims who arguably face much more shame and pressure for reporting their rapist and would benefit enormously from an anonymous tool. Why would you want to shut down what could be their best resource, when all that happens is the perpetrator (if they're even named) will be alerted to the the report and reminded of sexual misconduct policy? You're making it harder for victims to report rape without legal consequences for th…
/r/MensRights17/12/13 07:10 AM
0

Yup, offering proof that a sailor grabbed her and kissed her without her consent in an uncomfortable pose is certainly not proof. Saying that sexual assault is sexual assault regardless of what the victim calls it is certainly bigotry. /s Do you have a non-ad hominem argument to offer? Or is bigotry what you keep up your sleeve for when you don't have any evidence for your claim? Regardless, I'm done with this conversation (unless you actually provide evidence for any of your assertions). And un…
/r/MensRights17/12/13 03:49 AM
0

So you surrender because you don't have the source to back up your claim? I accept your concession to your own hypocrisy and context manufacturing.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 03:39 AM
1

was generally considered acceptable. So were a lot of bad things. Are you going to say that owning black people wasn't racist because at the time is was "acceptable"? the woman had never said that she considered it assault. So again, you're asserting that in order for a crime to have taken place, the victim must consider it a crime? So when a little boy has sex with an adult woman he's not a victim of rape, because he doesn't consider it rape? stop defining what is appropriate behavior for peopl…
/r/MensRights17/12/13 03:32 AM
1

Can you please supply the quote where she said that she did not mind through the whole act? Because, to me, the quote where she says she had no choice, was grabbed, and didn't like the pose indicates that she... didn't consent. Also, I notice you artfully dodged my question about if sexual assault and battery only occur when the victim minds, and not simply when those acts are performed.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 02:19 AM
1

You seem to be ignoring the quote where she said she didn't make a choice to be kissed and was grabbed on the street and forced into it. That doesn't indicate consent at all. Are you really suggesting that it wasn't sexual assault just because she said she decided not to mind later, due to the circumstances? If someone punches you and you decide later that it's not a big deal because of the circumstances, does that mean that battery did not occur?
/r/MensRights17/12/13 02:08 AM
1

You seem to do a lot of assuming. For example, you're assuming that the woman in this photo consented to the kiss, when, by her own account: "It wasn't my choice to be kissed... [in 1945]. The guy just came over and grabbed! [in 1980 for the reenactment of the kiss] I told him I didn't want to redo that pose!" What feminists have done, however, is yank the original encounter out of this context and project their own feelings onto it That actually seems to be what you're doing. You want this kiss…
/r/MensRights17/12/13 01:46 AM
-1

Well personally I've never seen anyone claim that consent can be revoked after sex. I've seen the claim that people can be not consenting during sex but not verbalize due to fear/shame/etc, which actually makes sense. So personally I wouldn't think that consent can be given or revoked (meaningfully) afterward. Additionally: "It wasn't my choice to be kissed... The guy just came over and grabbed! I told him I didn't want to redo that pose!" suggests that, at the very least initially, she did not …
/r/MensRights17/12/13 01:23 AM
0

Well, if we accept consent can be revoked at any time, I would say it can also be given. Ok, so you're saying you agree with the claim that consensual sex can be declared rape by revoking consent after sex is already complete? Just want to be clear on that. Because this nurse was saying essentially that that she "consented" after the kiss was over, because she realized the soldier was celebrating the end of the war. If that means that he didn't sexually assault her, then that opens a big can of …
/r/MensRights17/12/13 01:03 AM
0

"But I didn't know that then. It wasn't my choice to be kissed... [in 1945]. The guy just came over and grabbed! [in 1980 for the reenactment of the kiss] I told him I didn't want to redo that pose!" Hm. Sounds very consensual. Could it be that she just didn't want to slap a sailor on V-day? Or (I'm curious) are you suggesting that consent can be given for an act after the fact?
/r/MensRights16/12/13 11:03 PM
0

So, the vibe I'm getting here is that as long as you don't wish that the person is dead and you've been drafted into a war it's fine to sexually assault that person. The context around it has been wildly distorted by feminists in order to fit their ideological agenda. Thankfully, hardly anyone takes it seriously and it does more to discredit the feminist cause every time it gets brought up. Please explain this distorted context. These two were strangers, the sailor grabbed the nurse, essentially…
/r/MensRights16/12/13 07:26 PM
0

And still viewed as acceptable, romantic and iconic today regardless of the time period it occurred in. FTFY
/r/MensRights16/12/13 07:26 PM
-1

The photographers were there to catch pictures of the sailors returning home. You may notice she's in a feminine pose because she's essentially in a headlock with her waist grabbed tightly, the way he turned her into that position. Notice that her hands are balled into tight fists and aren't around his arm, back, neck or head as you would likely expect from someone fully consenting to and expecting a kiss. Also notice the little flab of neck under her chin, which may suggest that either he's kis…
/r/MensRights16/12/13 07:16 PM
2

Male sailor sexually assaults a nurse, hailed as an American icon and the most romantic moment ever captured on camera
/r/MensRights16/12/13 09:59 AM
3

And that his lips touch the back of her neck - that's probably a factor.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 08:45 AM
6

Yeah, conservatives would never try to deny people voting rights or marriage rights or anything like that. /s
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:25 PM
1

Ok, well, you can believe that if you want, but I'm not subscribed here and I'm not an MRA.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:20 PM
2

Perhaps this could have been avoided had he married a reasonable woman who understood that sex is necessary for men to lead a physically and mentally healthy life. I think you missed the equality mark and shot straight into male hypoagency. Does the professor not have accountability for his actions in your eyes?
/r/MensRights15/12/13 01:31 PM
1

Ah, I understand that you're a false flag now. Well, whatever.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 10:36 AM
1

I'm a feminist, and you're embarrassing me. You talk like a baby having an astoundingly bad tantrum. You are the kind of feminist that MRAs point at and crow "This is Feminism, isn't it terrible?" and make it worse for everyone else. Your first comment was accurate and sensible. Unfortunately you immediately devolved into dribble afterward.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:34 AM
3

Oh my god stop, you're embarrassing me.
/r/MensRights14/12/13 01:26 AM
1

A lot of people only want to see the pain that affects themselves.
/r/MensRights13/12/13 02:46 PM
5

I only brought it up because he said that this was the only sub that would care. I offered evidence that other people do care, and would care if this were posted elsewhere. Now, go through the rest of your day not being so presumptuous. Trust me, it feels much better.
/r/MensRights13/12/13 04:19 AM
4

Ah, I guess that explains why you thought that men pursued custody at a greater rate. I didn't know you came from mensrights. So. ...Your move?
/r/MensRights13/12/13 02:57 AM
1

Blacks are shown to get harsher sentences for the same crimes. One surgery is shown to be more expensive than the other. That's a proven effect. Aren't there records for sex change surgeries though? Where are the numbers for those? Yes, there are. And that's where you see the effect that the cost difference between the surgeries can affect their popularity. There is no evidence for that position though. There is evidence that the sources we currently use for statistics are skewing the data, thou…
/r/MensRights13/12/13 01:21 AM
0

You coming up with some half-assed explanation isn't enough to disprove the reports of there being three times more male to female transgenders than the other way around. If you think that people not seeking psychological help and not being able to afford reassignment surgery is half-assed, then I don't know what to tell you. Those are the sources of transgender statistics, and they're skewed by nature. Do you also think that black men are just more criminal than everyone else just because they'…
/r/MensRights13/12/13 12:18 AM
4

You're confusing feminism with femininity. All I said was that I'm a feminist. And I know a lot of other feminists (and females) who feel the same way - the idea that men can't be raped comes from very antiquated and traditional views of sex and gender, and has no place in the modern world.
/r/MensRights12/12/13 11:09 PM
-1

I'm curious too - someone here told me the other day that some public schools don't allow any kids to have access to their inhalers because more boys than girls have asthma. No source was forthcoming.
/r/MensRights12/12/13 09:36 PM
15

Unfortunately a lot of children are taught that when another child is mean to you, it means they secretly like you. Some people don't unlearn that as they grow up.
/r/MensRights12/12/13 09:28 PM
32

As a feminist, I care about your rape story. Anyone can be raped, and I'm sorry that it happened to you, and for the blowback you've received from society.
/r/MensRights12/12/13 09:26 PM
1

Sorry, just reading that makes me feel dirty. Your feelings should always be respected, no matter how many times you've had sex with anyone in the past. You expect to have sex in marriage, but it's not a contract where your payout is sex. No it's not comparable to being violently assaulted by a stranger, but spouses are absolutely capable of rape. Yech.
/r/MensRights12/12/13 09:20 PM
2

I know that upvotes correspond with popularity, as that was the whole point of my comment. It reflects poorly on your evidence when your good evidence is so much less popular than the hip but lousy evidence. People are going to see more of the bad evidence and see that everyone loves it.
/r/MensRights12/12/13 08:32 PM
1

I'm confused - does she think that "I promise to uphold my half of the 'bargain' that is our supposed love and have sex whenever you want me to" is a part of marriage vows or legally defensible? Does she at least also think that wives can't rape their husbands, or is that only a "wifely duty"?
/r/MensRights12/12/13 07:28 PM
0

It seems like you've blown past the majority of my comment spent explaining why the current available statistics skew the ratio of FTM and MTF transgendered people, and are still operating on the assumption that there are more men wanting to be women. I can't really have a discussion about this with you when your premise is false. You also seem to have misread my explanation of the effect of greater social acceptance of people transitioning from woman to man. It would indeed be bullshit if I had…
/r/MensRights12/12/13 09:04 AM
1

Aw gee, thanks! My first millibitcoin.
/r/MensRights12/12/13 08:56 AM
1

I wasn't talking about people's acceptance as trans, I was talking about the notable change in the way other people reacted to their behaviors and not their physique. Also, in these example of the trans men receiving praise, do you think that they're not passing well? This it why your comment seemed irrelevant. It's saying that anecdotes work both ways. That was the point of my comment - if you're going to accept this anecdote with fervor, why not the anecdotes that go against what you think is …
/r/MensRights12/12/13 08:49 AM
0

That is privilege. Things like that are evidence of privilege. One lesbian ciswoman saying that she - shockingly - prefers living as her assigned gender is not evidence. I think the most popular post I saw here about the unwarranted battery in Argentina got maybe 100 upvotes or so - whereas this rather measly tale currently has over 1000. It casts a bad light on the quality of your evidence. P.S. I also can't say I'm surprised that in a country where women don't have legal access to abortion - i…
/r/MensRights12/12/13 08:46 AM
-1

The number of MTF and FTM transgender people isn't really relevant to this topic, because a transgender person may be transgender because they feel like they're in the wrong body, not because they think it would be neat to be the other gender. However, I can still talk about the statistics if you'd like. We can't actually know for sure, due to a lot of factors. Some APA statistics suggest that the incidence of transgender-ism is about 1 in 10,000 for biological men and 1 in 30,000 for biological…
/r/MensRights12/12/13 12:22 AM
1

I never suggested there was?
/r/MensRights12/12/13 12:00 AM
0

...This isn't really relevant to my comment at all?
/r/MensRights12/12/13 12:00 AM
-2

The point I'm trying to make is that a lot of people here going crazy like this proves that women have more privilege than men, despite the fact that it's one case, and a fringe one at that.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 11:59 PM
2

You seem to be either missing or ignoring the part where they specifically talk about their experiences with the way they're treated, not generally how happy they feel now that they feel comfortable in their skin. They talk about things like not changing their behaviors, but suddenly behaviors that used to get them called "pushy" and "bossy" were now getting them accolades like "assertive" and "leader".
/r/MensRights11/12/13 09:29 PM
2

Exactly. Everyone has challenges, and even if they didn't it's foolish to treat this one instance as a proof that women have more privilege.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 08:19 PM
9

I know that's a great soundbite, but this one example is not the be-all-end-all of gender privilege, and I would caution people from running away with it. One woman saying that she would prefer to be a woman does not mean that women have more privilege. There are also (better-documented) cases of transgender men much preferring the treatment they get as men than they got as women - should their perspectives not be considered as well? http://gas.sagepub.com/content/20/4/465.abstract http://bigthi…
/r/MensRights11/12/13 06:25 PM
2

Speaking about feminists wanting to take over everything certainly seems like an issue. ;)
/r/MensRights11/12/13 02:21 AM
1

Now now, this sub is a safe space where men are allowed to speak about issues that they want - it's not for you to police what's related and what's not.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 02:13 AM
2

I'm curious about the atmosphere in this post where you and others say that the UN statistics are wrong without any sources, yet deride the UN for not citing a source. ~~~~ "The property part is obviously wrong" "These countries produce something like 50% of the world's GDP" "Let's assume that women in these countries earned just 50% of what men earn" "Naturally women earn a big chunk of all earnings in developing countries as well." "Women own after all a large part of all property and other as…
/r/MensRights11/12/13 02:11 AM
6

Hell, a frequent reason women go into stripping and related professions is in order to fund their college education, not avoid it.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 01:56 AM
-1

Maybe it hasn't been as well-established as you'd hoped?
/r/MensRights10/12/13 04:23 AM
-5

Weird how your mind just went straight to that argument... Maybe because I hear it so much. How weird...
/r/MensRights09/12/13 08:47 PM
0

I'm going to try guess what you meant based on your vague, incomplete and unrelated sentences. Despite the fact that asthma is more common in young boys than younger girls, by the time they hit their teens (this boy was a teen) the numbers even out and eventually more girls than boys have it. I hope you're not trying to suggest this is some kind of conspiracy of feminazis trying to kill boys by not letting any student have access to their inhaler.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 08:36 PM
-6

I'm not the one who said it's not related, I just attempted to explain the thoughts behind trying to keep this Men's Rights sub a place for men's rights, not a "safe space" for men to talk about other things. Why are you so immediately on the offensive?
/r/MensRights09/12/13 07:16 PM
0

I mean, there are places for that. Like r/news. This sub is advertised as - and people come here for - men's rights-related issues and discussion.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 07:07 PM
12

Is it not possible that they're talking about researching an extension to the program? People do actually do research and analyses on how best to improve and extend the reach and impact of help programs. Also, next year is less than a month away.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 07:02 PM
20

Are girls allowed to keep their inhalers with them? EDIT: The answer is no. All students were equally screwed.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 06:41 PM
4

But men only think about sex, so the best way to make an impact is boobies!/s
/r/MensRights09/12/13 04:04 AM
1

Personally I've only ever seen people complain about this "if a woman has one drink" or "if there's a single drop of alcohol in her" bit here, I've never heard such a proposition from a feminist. Where have you heard this claim?
/r/MensRights08/12/13 07:01 PM
-1

She's also mentally ill, so...
/r/MensRights08/12/13 03:41 AM
1

Oooh, a capital T. So honored to be ad hominem-ed this way!
/r/MensRights07/12/13 09:41 PM
0

As for the quotation...well, he wasn't wrong, now was he? And that's all I needed to hear. Toodles, nancy-boy!
/r/MensRights07/12/13 06:56 PM
0

You don't have to be an MRA to hate Feminists. You might want to remember that. But he very clearly shared some of your major beliefs. Unless your want to try a No True Scotsma, he fits: "[T]he feminists always have a talent for enraging me. They want to retain the advantages of being women (e.g. cheaper insurance, extended maternity leave preceded by a preventive leave) while trying to grab those of the men. … They are so opportunistic that they neglect to profit from the knowledge accumulated …
/r/MensRights07/12/13 05:20 PM
3

This is some really rough evolutionary psychology here. I really just hope you realize that this can only be speculation and there's no way to actually prove this is how people evolved. Especially when you look at different culture across the world and find that the only consistent sought-after qualities are things like humor and empathy.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 06:32 PM
0

I know this, I'm a brony. I'm just laying out the scenario. Entertain me for a bit: So you're saying that the creepy bronies who give bronies a bad name aren't the majority, but they're the ones that make up the majority of media representation and attention because they stand out the most, so people falsely judge all bonies to be bad and view "brony" as a negative label because of that? Hm, who else dos this sound like...?
/r/MensRights06/12/13 06:20 PM
1

Brony here, I know.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 06:14 PM
8

Have you tried Gravity Falls?
/r/MensRights06/12/13 06:41 AM
9

I'm pretty sure there were adult females watching at the same time adult males were. A lot of them still go with the with brony moniker.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 06:41 AM
-8

Well, you see... reasons.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 06:38 AM
1

My understanding is that NOW opposes defaulting to shared custody when the parents are in conflict over custody because of the risk of parental alienation and other detrimental effects - they do not propose that mothers should get sole custody by default in any/all cases.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 05:07 AM
-3

Many people within a large ideological group will do a variety of seemingly counter-intuitive things.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 09:22 PM
1

Perhaps you should work on not being so condescending. Bye!
/r/MensRights05/12/13 09:21 PM
1

Hm, funny, I'm reading all the same words as before yet there's still no evidence, though you disagree with the statements of these academics, that they actually support or accept Solonas or SCUM. Strange.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 09:19 PM
-1

If it's part of the required reading list, clearly it wasn't some "passing commentary", given that books ain't cheap. True, but I have been required in the past to purchase books for classes for the sole purpose of eviscerating them, so I remain skeptical. Have you read through them all? There's quite a few. I'm confused, there are no results returned for "solonas" "valerie" or "scum". How are you reading support of Solonas into these quotes?
/r/MensRights05/12/13 09:16 PM
0

But the end result didn't actually fix the problem, it just flipped the genders of it. But you presented it as "the reason custody is so lop-sided in the first place", which is just not the case. Sorry, but if you care more about some vague possibility of a negative image ... than you know, actually helping people... well that's just fucked up. Yes, but it's hardly unique or shocking. It's just not really relevant next to "feminist excludes made to penetrate from definition of rape. It's generic…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 09:11 PM
1

My wife has them from her time in university I'm curious about how long ago this occurred. Rarely are they referred to in glowing, positive terms though. The same goes for SCUM, unless to commend it for being satire. we have entire lists of flat out misandric statements made by lettered, tenured college professors. But not supporting Solonas. Hm, how surprising that this list of quotes is irrelevant to your claim that Solonas is widely respected by mainstream feminists and academia.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 09:01 PM
7

The only potentially contentious points in this list that I can see are that: 1) The feminist who proposed the basis for the Tender Years Doctrine did so through passionate campaigning because in her time a divorce meant that children went straight into custody of their father, and she was denied any contact with her children after she divorced her husband for adultery - custody was already lopsided, she didn't make it so. She helped pass acts that made it possible for mothers to have custody an…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 08:41 PM
0

people like you dismiss all the legitimate problems they bring up ...Riiiiiiight. Because "people like me" actually want infants to have their genitals mutilated, and want male victims of rape and domestic abuse to feel too emasculated to come forward, and want men to complete lethal suicide behavior more often. It's certainly not the illegitimate issues that we have a problem with. Nosirree.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 08:14 PM
0

Then why are you an MRA? You must know it's bad for you.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:54 PM
1

Feminists want to eat your babies!
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:47 PM
0

Not every piece of knowledge can be found behind a link in English. Did I ask for a link in English? Oh, I didn't? Then why not just link your sources already? Oh, and cut the condescension, it's not becoming. It's not my job to do your research for you.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:22 PM
16

And we had a competition with the creator of minecraft to see who could raise more money for charity via the Humble Bundle V, and he matched the huge donation! Unfortunately good deeds don't make as captivating news stories. :(
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:18 PM
-3

Especially the ones who have the really dedicated porn roleplays and masturbate to the little kids' ponies. Unfortunately they're the most noticeable, and the other bronies don't deride them vocally enough to make up for the creep factor, making it harder to want to tell people you like the show for fear of their generalizing assumptions. Like a lot of things in life, actually.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:17 PM
1

I gave you several sources. No, you said "These sources aren't of any use to you, so let me just tell you what they said." Links?
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:02 PM
3

the OP is using the actual definition. Not the made-up definitions you tend to use Oxford Dictionary Misogyny: noun dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women: she felt she was struggling against thinly disguised misogyny Merriam Webster Misogyny: a hatred of women Hatred: 1. A very strong feeling of dislike 2. prejudiced hostility or animosity Cambridge Dictionary Misogyny: feelings of hating women, or the belief that men are much better than women Macquarie Dictionary Misog…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:00 PM
3

Noooo, not my internet points!
/r/MensRights05/12/13 06:53 PM
2

Not in the actual Oxford Dictionary. Misandry: noun dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against men (i.e., the male sex): her brand of feminism is just poorly disguised misandry Misogyny: noun dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women: she felt she was struggling against thinly disguised misogyny
/r/MensRights05/12/13 06:49 PM
-1

Marc Lepine is cited in gender studies courses? No, because he didn't write a satire and he actually killed people in the name of anti-feminism - but he did "inspire" another MRA to action. Also, I'd love if you could source me one college that has SCUM in its coursework, even if they do teach it as a satire from a woman who hated feminism. His works (does he even have any works?) are referred to in academic settings and discussed in classrooms the world over? Mao's writings are also referred to…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 06:14 PM
0

Yeah, I have sources. If I had not, I'd be lying and that's not my style, whatever you're implying. Ok, so you apparently have sources, but you just won't provide them. Much better. For heaven's sake, don't they understand that thy are celebrating the killing of human beings!!!! I'm happy to imagine that this is the same reaction people had a long time ago to Jonathan Swift. "Don't they understand that they are celebrating the eating of poor babies!!!" Criticism towards the feminist interpretati…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 06:10 PM
-3

So just to make sure I have this right - you don't actually have any source to support your claim. Just assumptions. Also, there's a difference (if it even happened, since you have no source) between writing positively about an actually violent person and a satirist. Do you also condemn Jonathan Swift and his supporters?
/r/MensRights05/12/13 01:50 PM
1

I'm confused - this comment seems to have almost nothing to do with mine?
/r/MensRights05/12/13 01:45 PM
7

AVFM hasn't so much as mentioned Vasalgel for over a year, as far as I can tell, and CAFE hasn't touched on it at all. Why should NOW?
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:47 AM
-3

What's your source for this nebulous claim that there are so many Solonas fans - nay - idolizers in Finland and Sweden? If that's the game, then Marc Lepine is an MRA accepted by the mainstream MRM because a man in Norway admired his "work" so much that he decided his best option was to take out his hatred for feminists on police officers. Which, to be blunt, seems a little more dire than boys sitting on benches. How many women--or pro feminist men--have hit, stabbed or shot a man or a boy becau…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:33 AM
10

Hear, hear! I also propose we deny the word "homophobia" as representative of hatred of homosexual people, because it clearly means to be afraid of same things, as per the greek roots. Down with the modernists!
/r/MensRights05/12/13 06:54 AM
-1

Still satire, and poorly received. From page 67 of The Scum Manifesto, “Why produce even females? Why should there be future generations? What is their purpose? When aging and death are eliminated, why continue to reproduce? Why should we care what happens when we’re dead? Why should we care that there is no younger generation to succeed us? Eventually the natural course of events, of social evolution, will lead to total female control of the world and, subsequently, to the cessation of the prod…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 06:50 AM
-5

...So you're shifting the goalposts? I guess that's really all you can do at this point, since your source doesn't support your original claim.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 05:53 AM
0

equating Marc Lepine with MRAs and the MRM (which Lepine predated by about...oh...20 years or so, but why let facts get in the way of a good smear? Men's Rights as you know it has existed since for the better part of four decades, and in other forms since 1856. How old do you think Lepine was, exactly, when he shouted "I hate feminists!" and massacred female engineering students? Really, with foaming radfems like Ripowal1, it's best to back away slowly and don't make sudden moves. Haha, mis-char…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 05:22 AM
-4

So... all these quotes of academics not being crude and rude are evidence of the pervasiveness of feminists being as crude and rude toward men as the OP is toward women? Nothing there even approaches the OP, or my gender-reversed version.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 05:19 AM
-4

Yeah, if only feminists said something comparable like, "If men expressed emotion half as well as they rape, they wouldn't commit suicide so much." But no one actually says that about men, do they? Or do you know something we don't?
/r/MensRights05/12/13 03:30 AM
1

NAMRAALT
/r/MensRights05/12/13 03:18 AM
2

So does this mean that MRAs will stop pretending that every woman who does something anti-man is a feminist? Will they stop pretending that Valerie Solonas was a figurehead of mainstream feminism and that the SCUM Manifesto wasn't a satire dismissed by the feminist community at large? Because that would be nice. Also, you can't discount all sources because you dislike a few: http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/man-who-ran-marc-lepine-website-denied-bail-1.480808 http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/200…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 02:21 AM
0

There's no innuendo to talking about how men like large breasts when advertising for larger breasts. The product is absolutely relevant, making the original comparison to breast enhancements disingenuous. And clearly, advertising that relies on innuendos of sexualising women are published all the time, so OP's claim really feels like manufactured outrage.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 12:25 AM
1

You and I don't agree on the appropriate level of retaliatory violence that a person should be able to engage in, once they are violently attacked by someone else, I don't suspect we are going to agree on that point. You're right. I am a decent human being and think that there is such a thing as unnecessary force, such as killing someone if they spit on you. You, however, think that if someone shows any violence towards you (including spitting and spray-painting) this gives you free reign to res…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 12:07 AM
3

Can you imagine and ad like that for breast enhancements or something? No, because this is about hair. It has nothing to do with primary or secondary sex organs. You're drawing a false equivalence.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 11:45 PM
1

I truly wonder how you'd feel if the group of pacifists were feminists that were being harassed and assaulted by a group of unprovoked individuals. My first thought certainly wouldn't be "They should be slowly burned alive!" I think that they are deserving of the consequences of their shitty behavior. As do I. Death by flamethrower, however, is not an appropriate consequence. the attacker began the confrontation and the victim has the right to end it, by whatever means necessary. DAE unnecessary…
/r/MensRights04/12/13 11:40 PM
-3

Extremist MRA arrested for death threats against police; & terrorising a woman; & defacing artwork; & vandalising property; & theft of intellectual property; & public nuisance; & terrify women in their homes by descending in groups to harass them; & bring grenades into courthouses; & beating their fathers; & killing their children, arson and criminal mischief, aggravated assault; & gunning down 76 people; & death threats against women in the tradition of Marc Lépine; & killed eight people in a h…
/r/MensRights04/12/13 11:36 PM
9

I'm sure this will benefit all the male victims of rape. ...Somehow.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 11:26 PM
1

Don't hold your breath.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 11:20 PM
1

But you aren't sitting there being attacked, you're watching a video of other people being attacked. And regardless, "They spat on and/or spray-painted me so I burned them alive," shouldn't sound reasonable to anyone.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 11:17 PM
0

Now this is a strawman: Saying that I can dislike those pro-life men without wanting to/enjoying seeing them attacked is not a strawman. It's a direct answer to your question that implies I enjoy seeing men attacked. I also like how you accuse me of shifting the goal posts while doing it yourself by trying to change the subject away from these feminists. Pointing out that MRAs also say shitty things =/= shifting the goalposts. Shifting the goalposts occurred when I said GWW has bemoaned the priv…
/r/MensRights04/12/13 10:50 PM
1

So if you use a flamethrower to slowly burn alive someone who hasn't used violence against you... hm...
/r/MensRights04/12/13 10:39 PM
-5

Wah, someone disagrees with me, trolling. Surprise.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 10:30 PM
-29

You fool! You should know better than to not absolutely hate feminists more than anyone in MRA territory!
/r/MensRights03/12/13 10:30 PM
-8

Still not ready to condemn them like I asked? Still not ready to admit that what made you angry was an offhand comment on the internet rather than a mass assault on peaceful individuals? Still not ready to accept that you are in essence defending those people? What a drama queen. I've condemned them elsewhere, why are you getting so worked up about a lack of a comment on the internet? Did you like seeing those men attacked by any chance? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. What a fucking strawman. Do I like seein…
/r/MensRights03/12/13 10:08 PM
-5

isn't that the women are privileged so much as that men and women have distinct advantages and disadvantages in those areas Except the part where she repeatedly says that the women are privileged and the men are oppressed/enslaved. But sure.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 09:56 PM
-5

kindly show me a video where mras claim women who have been the victim of acid attacks are privileged. Don't shift the goalposts. I said that GWW has said that women in countries where women and girls have been the victim of acid attacks for seeking education are privileged. Should I link you to that video/transcript, or would you like some time to put more words in my mouth first?
/r/MensRights03/12/13 09:55 PM
-12

so worked up ...So worked up? I think the people getting worked up are the MRAs who somehow think they're effective activists when they hop on my comment history and downvote me. don't seem to care when a group of people are getting pepper sprayed and assaulted while attempting to keep their place of worship from being vandalised. You did see that I said I don't support the actions of these feminists here, didn't you? Can you imagine the reaction that a line of women quietly standing and praying…
/r/MensRights03/12/13 09:48 PM
-11

Oh, do you not like it when people make blanket statements about you? How totally-not-hypocritical.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 08:47 PM
-15

Oh, wait, I remember you - you're the one who constantly posts videos of women getting punched to great accolades. Disengaged.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 08:47 PM
-14

I don't condone the harassment by these feminists, but don't pretend you're a shining beacon of humanity for supporting using flamethrowers on people. If this protest had been toned down to not include harassment, I personally don't care how "peacefully" you promote denying anyone's bodily autonomy. But anything to distract from the shitty beliefs held by MRAs, right?
/r/MensRights03/12/13 08:43 PM
-10

A hate group is an organized group or movement that advocates and practices hatred, hostility, or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation or other designated sector of society, or those who are unlike members of the group. So maybe advocating using a flamethrower on people you dislike is actually kind of hateful after all Huh.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 08:35 PM
-21

Oh, sorry, I guess it was presumptuous to assume you (and the people who upvoted you) hate the people you want to use flamethrowers on. Silly me. That's actually very supportive of human rights. You've done the movement proud. I guess I can't expect much from the people who also upvote "violent animalistic dumb cunts." as if it contributes to discussion.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 08:24 PM
0

You're assuming that penis=cunt, whereas I think most people would say a better approximation is penis=vagina, cunt=dick. Comparing the proper name for genitalia to crude slang isn't really intellectually honest.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 07:46 PM
-35

Ah, textbook hate group. EDIT: Man, you guys really cling to your echo chamber, don't you? Also, storming through my comment history and sending me angry PMs doesn't make you better activists.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 07:41 PM
2

There wouldn't have been any legal protection there, either, if she went through craigslist like this fool.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 07:23 AM
1

I want to believe you're a false flag trying to make MRAs look bad, but I've been here too long to believe that.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 07:47 PM
0

Like committing a much worse crime that will get you more prison time. Also one which will probably make it look like you're covering up a rape that actually happened.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 11:26 PM
-1

So much human rights.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 03:06 PM
1

Also, y'know, what would stop someone from texting a passed-out person "Do you want to have sex with me?", and then grabbing the passed-out person's phone and texting back "Absolutely!"? (The answer is nothing.)
/r/MensRights30/11/13 03:03 PM
2

Indeed, look at the survey results and they confirm your feeling.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 08:32 PM
2

For the first two, maybe because they saw this?
/r/MensRights29/11/13 08:30 PM
-1

You sound less like a member of a human rights movement and more like a crotchety old devil complaining about kids being disrespectful to their betters. A group of teenagers were, unsurprisingly, rude, and this is apparently a men's rights issue to people? I'm lost. If a woman responded this way to a group of boys you'd call her hormonal or oversensitive. I can't see anything to be lauded here.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 07:09 PM
3

...Isn't that a No True Scotsman?
/r/MensRights26/11/13 09:10 PM
3

How about a man who murders a baby and "got away with it" because he was "depressed" and didn't want to have to "worry about other things"? Or a man who rapes and murders a 5-year-old and "got away with it" because he was "mentally ill" at the time? Also, "acquitted" =/= "getting away with it". For example, in the case of the raped and murdered 5-year-old, the man was acquitted but still sentenced to time in a prison psychiatric hospital.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 12:55 PM
0

Do you know who supports children who are up for adoption? (Hint: it's the government.) Also, what's worse for the child: being on government support for 9 months (like 70% of people who get on it) with their mother, or being given up for adoption and experience a traumatic family shift and be on government support until they're adopted? Also, that system has huge potential to be abused. "Hey, Marie, have sex with me or I'll fire you, and then you'll have to adopt out your toddler son."
/r/MensRights22/11/13 06:12 PM
0

And if she feels she can raise it, but then loses her job?
/r/MensRights22/11/13 06:06 PM
0

No, as a man, you don't have the option to abort the child. You absolutely do not have sovereignty over someone else's body.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 05:58 PM
0

So if that's not what you want, you're options are a) pay for you own child or b) let children starve.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 05:54 PM
0

Shouldn't this be ideal, if you want to be able to legally abandon any children you don't want?
/r/MensRights22/11/13 05:48 PM
7

I thought the gist of the comment was taking issue with "rape despite working as a prostitute," which seems to be implying that prostitutes can't be raped, not that you should be allowed to kill people.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 11:37 PM
1

Yes, I certainly assumed a lot about how the community would perceive my comment. And you know what they say about when you assume...
/r/MensRights21/11/13 03:27 AM
1

Yeah. I'm really part of the camp that wants to get rid of selective service/drafting altogether rather than make more people do it.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 11:34 PM
0

So then... women shouldn't be drafted, because on average there's almost no chance for them to qualify, so they'll just get more people killed by holding them back and getting into messy relationships. Or do we still want women to be signed up for the draft for some reason? I'm confused about which way we're leaning today.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 10:41 PM
1

Well then clearly dads are bad parents all the time, otherwise why would they win fewer custody cases? It must be because women are simply better parents than men, so telling Julie she parents like a man is an insult to her.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 04:20 PM
1

Girls throw baseballs well all the time, so attributing poor play to a female-only phenomenon is indeed a sexist insult directed at all women. Such a dumb argument!
/r/MensRights20/11/13 02:14 PM
-2

Oh no, not insults! I'm... I'm melting!
/r/MensRights20/11/13 02:12 PM
-1

Girl, in this context, is used as a synonym for poorly. You would say "You throw poorly!", or you can substitute "like a girl." The "girl" is the part that's important for the insult. It directly equates being a girl with poor performance.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 02:18 AM
1

I understand what an analogy is, yours isnt valid because its wrong. Sure, sure, whatever. I mean, sure, your situation was a gender-based insult, and mine was a gender-based insult, but sure, mine is wrong because reasons. I provided you with a valid one No, you had some vague attraction-swapping scenario with no actual gender-based insult at all. I ignored it because it wasn't analogy, it was just you saying "what if men weren't attracted to young and healthy women?" If mine is wrong because m…
/r/MensRights20/11/13 02:11 AM
2

immediately your version fails because there is no link to attraction for men looking at women making sure they can hold babies properly. And women can't tell how well a man throws by looking at him. What's the problem? And regardless, not being based on sight does not disqualify an analogy - it's called an "analogy" for a reason. Women are however attracted to men who are strong, athletic and mentally assertive and confident. Conversely are not attracted to the men who are physically weak, who …
/r/MensRights20/11/13 01:30 AM
3

I can, I just disagree because, frankly, it's asinine. Here, have a hypothetical: Julie almost drops her baby, but catches is at the last second. Her friend Susan laughs and says, "Damn, Julie - you parent like a man!" You shouldn't have a problem with this, because Susan isn't insulting men everywhere and implying that they make bad parents, she's just insulting Julie because men aren't attracted to masculine women who can't parent.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 01:03 AM
-5

You can't see how using "girl" as a synonym for "poorly" isn't insulting to girls? I mean, it's glaringly obvious.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 11:45 PM
0

Lol, what a drama queen.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 01:36 PM
5

"First, the category of 'false accusations' does not distinguish between accusers who lie and those who are honestly mistaken. Nor does it indicate that a rape did not occur, merely that the specific accused is innocent."
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:15 AM
0

His sperm, his responsibility.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:06 AM
1

the reason you may not have been well received initially is that people here really get touchy when the conversation starts on who has it worse. But they didn't get touchy when I talked about "who had it worse", they got touchy and hair-trigger downvoted when I said "rigid gender roles are bad for everyone". Literally this is what I said. You said "Why are more dads not stay-at-home fathers" and I said "because rigid gender roles are bad for everyone," and the horde descended. And the go-through…
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:02 AM
0

Ok, I'm still having trouble seeing what you're arguing about. That's because we agree that gender roles are bad for everybody. Unfortunately, if it comes from a feminist, it seems most MRAs descend in a horde, while praising an MRA for saying the exact same thing. can you understand the frustration that the article paints it as only being bad for women? Yes. I never argued with your frustration. However, my point was that you're acting as if the scenarios are equivalent, whereas I posited that …
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:29 PM
0

people lie as you are well aware But all they have to do is check! Or do men have zero ability to act with volition?
/r/MensRights18/11/13 11:25 PM
0

If the solution is so simple, why does anything need to change? You don't need legislation for paternal surrender - all you need is for men to "insist" on wearing condoms! It's even better this way, because they wear it themselves! There, problem solved. No need for financial abortions. Men will insist on condom usage because there's no out for half-assed measures like there is in your world construction.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 10:42 PM
1

That's a better source, but it's still a pop psych article and, regardless, doesn't suggest a general loathing from women toward stay-at-home dads. This article pretty much outlines the stigma that stay at home dads have to deal with. The article makes a point that much of the stigma SAHDs face are the same things SAHMs have been complaining about for a while. it is from the perspective of males who were laid off and are now stay at home dads There are 3 dads in the article - 1 who stays at home…
/r/MensRights18/11/13 09:14 PM
1

So... the study just details the shifting demographics of parenthood. I couldn't find any support for a claim that women "loathe" stay-at-home dads and consider them less "sexy" until I found another link in the blog you used as a source, which led to an Indian newspaper of questionable merit (historically showing numerous biases) stating "many women feel that house husbands lose their attractiveness and cannot be considered sexy." with absolutely no source. So the study you linked to is legitim…
/r/MensRights18/11/13 03:03 PM
-3

Obviously if the man has assumed the role of a father it is a different story. Obviously? I think you'd better try to explain how a child is the responsibility of the mother because biology, yet a man suddenly gets equal consideration if he wants it. Either it's both of their responsibility, or one or the other. None of this wishy-washy "well if he doesn't want it then the mother is totes responsible for her actions, but if he does want it then he's magically now an equal to the biologically tie…
/r/MensRights18/11/13 01:56 AM
-1

Women have the majority of the control over whether they get pregnant, so they should bear the majority of the responsibility for caring for a child that they cause to be brought into the world. I'm glad to know you think that mothers should be favored in child custody hearings over fathers, since the child is clearly mostly theirs. There really shouldn't be a debate about this at all: children should go with mothers because they're mothers have the majority of responsibility for them. /s Your b…
/r/MensRights18/11/13 01:31 AM
-1

Because the woman... will insist on their use now Yeah, because men never lie about condom usage. If a woman "insists" on condom usage everything is magically solved! I'm glad you solved this problem - how did I not realize it was these evil fucking sluts all along?
/r/MensRights18/11/13 01:23 AM
2

But you don't just force women to accept the consequences of their actions, you punish the child, too, unless you, you know, support the child with government funds. Which come from the taxpayers. So you're actually forcing millions of responsible taxpayers to subsidize your abandoning your child. If a guy can just "opt out" of raising a child with zero personal consequences, why would he bother to buy or use condoms? He now has zero responsibility for any pregnancy he causes. Knock up a pro-lif…
/r/MensRights17/11/13 10:00 PM
2

The most common one I see is something along the lines of: "How can MRAs constantly complain about the effects on boys living in single-mom households, yet advocate the right to abandon any child they don't want enough?"
/r/MensRights17/11/13 02:53 PM
5

careful as fuck I see what you did there.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 05:45 AM
1

That you found a single active petition hardly means much. Hm, kinda sounds like you want more petitions in order to actually "mean something".
/r/MensRights17/11/13 05:41 AM
3

Then why are you bitching about there not being enough "bullshit" petitions?
/r/MensRights17/11/13 05:12 AM
3

...So why not, you know, do some activism and make some petitions?
/r/MensRights17/11/13 03:23 AM
3

I don't search by topic, I search by cause: circumcision. Sorry, Im on my phone and it's hard to check.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 11:18 PM
5

There were two anti-MGM petitions on change.org a week or so ago. Where are you getting your info? EDIT: Here, one of them's closed now, but the other is still open and has over 1500 sigs: http://www.change.org/petitions/united-states-congress-ban-the-circumcision-of-all-males-under-the-age-of-18-years-old Also, I noticed that change.org doesn't have "allowed topics", they're sorted by popularity. If people aren't submitting men's rights-related petitions it's not going to be listed as one of th…
/r/MensRights16/11/13 11:10 PM
1

I'm sure you're heckling the other commenters for wanting to be stay-at-home dads, right? Or are their complaints of gender roles valid to you? You've probably also talked down to the guy complaining that women don't think stay-at-home dads are sexy, of course.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 09:50 PM
1

Oh my fucking god, how many people can't read where I said I misread cypher's comment and apologized?! You're pretty goddamn smug for someone who can't follow a conversation.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 09:48 PM
1

Wow, lol, you sure do have a lot of hate balled up in there. Try to keep your words in your own mouth, if you can manage. I mean, Jesus fuck, I'm liberal - I want more people to get help and support. I'm surprised at this hypocrisy from you, though: complaining about how liberals are "redistributing wealth" by giving more people affordable health insurance one day and then wanting more people supported by welfare the next. You say that calling single moms and kids fucking parasites is an "inconv…
/r/MensRights16/11/13 12:47 PM
1

but he won't divorce her for it. You're right, he probably just won't propose int he first place.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 07:00 AM
0

If, and this is a guess, your point was that moms could be executives if they wanted, I beg to disagree. I want nothing more than to be an executive. I'm not standing on the rooftops screaming it, but most people who know me are familiar with that. However, I can't have that unless I meet a man who is willing to stay home and take care of the kids and the cleaning and the cooking (and is willing to let me do it). So whoever you want to blame, for whatever reason, my gender role has locked me int…
/r/MensRights16/11/13 06:50 AM
0

Oh you also use racial slurs, why am I not surprised. This is exactly how it went down. Fuck, what is it with this thread and thinking that anything in quotation marks can only be a direct quote and couldn't possibly be paraphrasing or an example. I never claimed to "quote" anyone. I thought trolling you would get my point across but apparently you're thick. "Wah, my sarcasm was shitty and now I want to blame you." (Again, because apparently you're a dense one, I'm not actually suggesting this a…
/r/MensRights16/11/13 05:38 AM
1

Saying "I've seen a lot of people say such and such, since you asked" is not that same as saying "Well I haven't seen it, so therefore it don't real, so therefore irrelevant."
/r/MensRights16/11/13 01:37 AM
-1

If you followed down one more comment you could've seen that I misread which part of my comment cypher responded to and saved yourself this whole little novella.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 01:28 AM
0

Um... that's not logical, but what did I really expect?
/r/MensRights15/11/13 10:12 PM
2

Um, people? I don't jot down the names and link to every person who makes shitty comments on articles or reddit. Sorry.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 08:04 PM
-1

There's respect for single fathers (something single mothers aren't often afforded) I'm sorry, I misread which part of my comment you responded to. But there's the already referenced: "So what is is you do?" And those annoying feminists who think that if a woman genuinely wants to take care of her home and children she's setting everyone back.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 07:51 PM
-4

1) I was talking about stay-at-home moms respecting other stay-at-home moms, not stay at home dads. 2) Can you link the study? Surely it's valid and reliable. 3) Who were the surveyed women? I'd guess that stay-at-home moms are more likely to be subscribed to traditional gender roles, and therefore would be less likely to be attracted to someone who broke traditional gender roles. 4) Were the participants asked about stay-at-home dad in general, or were they asked about their own partners? It's …
/r/MensRights15/11/13 07:40 PM
-2

Most women work fewer hours, in more flexible jobs, that carry less risk and allow them to spend more time with family. That's a fact. I never said they didn't. It can be done. That's a fact. I never said it couldn't. Counterpoint anecdote: My uncle is a stay-at-home dad. It can be done. So why are men complaining about not being "able" to stay at home when it's clearly possible? /s I haven't really seen tons of hate for stay-at-home moms. "How could she be so stupid to have sex with a guy who'd…
/r/MensRights15/11/13 07:35 PM
1

that sorta doesn't matter when it comes to distrubtion of CP? Gosh, I could've sworn I included the phrase "sort of" in my comment, almost as if I were drawing a comparison and not saying they were the same thing. Oh, wait, I did? Hm, look at that. a legal situation and gender discrimination in the enforcement of that law? Yeah, how crazy for them to prosecute the boys who distributed the girls' nude photos to two schools-worth of boys without their consent and not the girls who took pictures of…
/r/MensRights15/11/13 07:29 PM
-10

*affecting But people are socialized to value and respect careers and/or lifestyles that have high prestige and earning power. I don't have statistics, but my supposition is that there are more more people who want high-paying jobs than there are people who want to take care of children and clean all day (this a simple scenario that's not accounting for "Oh, I wish I could make a lot of money taking care of children and cleaning all day"). I also think that people who want access to good jobs ar…
/r/MensRights15/11/13 05:39 PM
-3

Why aren't there more stay-at-home dads? Maybe because everyone is affected by rigid gender roles?
/r/MensRights15/11/13 04:58 PM
0

To underaged children. Y'know, sort of how it's not pedophilia to date a 13-year old if you're also 13?
/r/MensRights15/11/13 04:56 PM
1

as if someone actually said that I "love" how you assume that quotation marks are only used when quoting someone directly. If you're gonna pick at grammar, go complain to typhon about how she called 4chan 4-chan and 4 chan in the same breath, twice, and still couldn't get the name right. no one even implied it Hm. What's this? Did 4-chan white knight Anita? I mean, come on. Was that the best 4 chan could do? (this line is repeated twice in the short summary, so I can only assume they really mean…
/r/MensRights15/11/13 09:27 AM
1

True, assumptions aren't agreements - but in that case, neither is the hypothetical assumption that it's ok to share the girls' photos. Even if somehow there was an assumption that the photos could be shared, they didn't actually give consent. It's a real shitty move: "What? You didn't tell me not to invite 500 clumsy assholes to your house, this is on you." I merely included the assumption in snapchat because I think it makes it a little worse; it wasn't a neutral situation, they assumed there …
/r/MensRights15/11/13 08:54 AM
9

It's ridiculous to charge children with child pornography charges for viewing children their own age. To them it's simply pornography.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 08:35 AM
1

Yes, that is a better analogy. The robbery was really only good for the "that was stupid, but the perpetrator is still wrong," but I tried to stretch more mileage out of it. The one thing I would add to your analogy is that somehow it's communicated that you don't want them to bring anyone over to your house. The way people understand snapchat operates is that after a few seconds the photo is gone forever. This means the girls were operating on the assumption that no one else could even possibly…
/r/MensRights15/11/13 08:31 AM
3

I think it's asinine to charge children looking at children their own age with child pornography charges - to them it's just pornography. However, sometimes people try to use the spirit of the law to punish perpetrators (those sharing non-consenting peoples' photos) and not the victims (people whose photos are being shared with the public without their consent), even though technically both could be charged with child pornography charges. They make do with not having a law against sharing privat…
/r/MensRights15/11/13 07:48 AM
7

So you'd rather start the boys off on hypoagency early instead? "Because no teenage boy can help but send nude photos of girls that were taken in confidence to the rest of the student body, no they are about as responsible as fish getting caught on a fisherman's line." Is it smart to share nude photos with someone you thought you could trust in this day and age? No. Is it immoral? No. Is it immoral to distribute nude photos of someone beyond what they consented to? Yes. (Hint: it's stupid to lea…
/r/MensRights15/11/13 06:34 AM
4

I get it - the joke is that you changed the definition of "white knight" from "a mangina who hopes to get laid by kowtowing to harpies" to "a person who does not hate a woman enough for my tastes". Haha, it's... funny?
/r/MensRights14/11/13 11:42 PM
2

Implying that if there are no cards about rape there are no cards making fun of women. Implying that men aren't raped, because a card about rape is considered making fun of women.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:27 PM
2

At least that makes sense. Thanks.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 03:04 AM
2

Children need Fathers as much as mothers. and I am tired of seeing kids that are clearly fucked up cause they don't have a Dad run very contrary to the popular support for financial abortion for fathers. How do you reconcile them? (This isn't an attack, just a curiosity.)
/r/MensRights12/11/13 10:49 PM
10

So... being a submissive gay man makes you less of a man?
/r/MensRights07/11/13 10:07 PM
2

The entire basis of his comment about statutory rape was dependent on the fact that this boy was tried as an adult, which is false - I'd say it's relevant more than pedantic whining. The title is a blatant lie, but you'd rather piss and moan about how this is a men's rights issue somehow rather than be honest. Revealing.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 10:35 PM
2

But he wasn't tried as an adult. He can only be held until he's 23 because he wasn't tried as an adult, and he was sentenced to juvenile detention until he's 20. He did not get 40 years to life. This title isn't just misleading, it's completely false, and the fact that's it's being mindlessly upvoted is depressing.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 08:33 PM
3

Where are these women making "jerk off" jokes by the hundreds?
/r/MensRights05/11/13 07:36 PM
15

You must know that words have connotations. Can you imagine the MRA reaction if a feminist said "please refrain from making statements like "all men are rapists and pedophiles" regardless of how true it might be"? Instant misandry, and probably one of the top posts on the sub. It's simply not true at all, and you were conceding "well, it may be true, but don't say it."
/r/MensRights05/11/13 07:19 PM
-13

Shh, don't point out facts, no one cares about men! All those people outraged about this must be confused.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 05:36 PM
8

regardless of how true it might be ...Right...
/r/MensRights05/11/13 05:34 PM
1

Naw, he punched the 16 year old, then the woman got in his face, and then the fight continued outside. Again, that's just what the person who actually uploaded the video said was happening.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 03:53 PM
-1

He wasn't an employee or blocking the door - the crowd was trying to prevent him from leaving because he punched a 16 year old in the face and they called the police. At least, that's how the original uploader prefaced the video.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 05:17 AM
1

That is indeed true.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 06:49 AM
5

I've only seen athletes do this - personally I've never seen it extend to day-to-day interaction.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 01:16 AM
1

Woops
/r/MensRights03/11/13 09:57 PM
2

I don't understand how anything but the Pure Romance and Female Orgasm events are female-centered. The Pure Romance party is the only female-only event, and the rest are about... sex and sexuality. Outfits made out of condoms, talk about how booze affects sexual behavior, be an LGBT ally, learn about safe sex, a drag show, and identify inappropriate sexual behavior don't seem to be all about women.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 06:48 AM
2

She also wrote the first algorithm to be processed by a machine, so she's kind of recognized as the first computer programmer. But yeah, those darn feminists.
/r/MensRights02/11/13 11:58 PM
36

TIL Ada Lovelace and Rosalind Franklin didn't exist, apparently.
/r/MensRights02/11/13 05:22 PM
2

Hey, don't creep-shame.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 11:30 PM
1

*seen as
/r/MensRights31/10/13 11:19 PM
0

That's a better comparison.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 07:12 PM
1

Fair, but not mentioned in the linked article. And still, one room in an apparently quite spacious haunted house just doesn't scream "focusing on men" to me. It would be like calling a gay haunted house too focused on women if there was a "fashion-advising room" for the stereotype of gay men giving women fashion advice.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 06:45 PM
4

I really don't see how one sign about tripping over penises in a haunted house full of references to historical and political female figures and lesbianism is "focus[ing] an awful lot on men". Did you just launch straight into the comments after a quick glance at the misleading title?
/r/MensRights31/10/13 06:30 PM
1

So MRAs are working on Nicholas Alahverdian.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 01:41 AM
0

Agreed, this read more as "study rediscovers human nature" than a problem with women or feminism.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 04:53 PM
3

You're right, the bouncers should probably wait for a nice docket of evidence supporting the claim that a woman may be about to get raped before they try to do anything. /s Managing trouble in a bar is their job.
/r/MensRights21/10/13 04:29 PM
6

Naturally this is why we should keep men out of teaching and nursing roles - they just aren't wired to be nurturing and will never have the same expertise women do. /s
/r/MensRights18/10/13 04:55 AM
3

Well obviously the mom is at fault, but the boy shouldn't have made himself more vulnerable prey by making his mother angry. I mean, come on, kids, stop giving your abusive parents a reason to hit you - take some responsibility! /s
/r/MensRights17/10/13 03:42 PM
14

Matthew took her home and left her semi-conscious on her front lawn in freezing temperatures. That was a dick move, for sure. Can we not refer to leaving a small, thin, unconscious and intoxicated 14-year-old outside to freeze at 22 degrees as just "a dick move"? Intoxicated people are more susceptible to shock and hypothermia, she could have died.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 06:33 AM
2

It's ok, she's a female. /s
/r/MensRights17/10/13 05:14 AM
4

This article was written as a parody in response to a Slate article called College Women: Stop Getting Drunk.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 11:33 PM
1

So you're saying that if this governor hadn't had a family, he would have passed this bill? Because he passed it to favor his family?
/r/MensRights14/10/13 10:20 PM
1

Uh...huh... Sure.
/r/MensRights14/10/13 08:23 PM
1

No, not nepotism. Nepotism is giving a government contract to your brother-in-law, or appointing your niece Attorney General. It's showing favoritism to your relatives regardless of merit, not attributing your ability to empathize to your family experience. Saying "as a father, husband and grandfather," is not nepotism. You can have a problem with it all you want, but it is simply not nepotism.
/r/MensRights14/10/13 08:15 PM
6

Not until 2016.
/r/MensRights13/10/13 09:27 AM
-8

It's about being able to carry your wounded buddy out of a fight. Women are still banned from ground combat. Where are they going to find a wounded buddy to carry? Why should they be held to the same standards when they're not allowed to do the same work?
/r/MensRights13/10/13 07:36 AM
1

So having empathy is now nepotism. I didn't realize that simply being a relative means that you granted your relatives favoritism in your politics. /s
/r/MensRights11/10/13 10:54 PM
1

So... the governor vetoed it because his relatives told him to?
/r/MensRights11/10/13 10:04 PM
1

Double jeopardy has absolutely nothing to do with the example I gave. Double jeopardy prohibits retrying a defendant for the same/similar charges after a conviction/acquittal/mistrials (depending on who moves for it). Regardless, the technicalities of the marijuana distributor example are irrelevant. If you want to know why the governor thought this bill would be unconstitutional for retroactively changing alimony payments, why don't you ask him, or his office? All I can do is tell my understand…
/r/MensRights11/10/13 09:51 PM
2

"[The bill] tampers with settled economic expectations of many Floridians who have experienced divorce." So basically because it would have altered contracts and agreements that had already been settled. Imagine if a bill increased the mandatory prison sentence for marijuana distribution, and people who had already been sentenced to and were expecting 5 years in prison would retroactively be set to serve 15 years. So, the system can be changed, but previous contracts should be grandfathered in.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 06:19 PM
2

I think it would be worse for alimony reform if it was found that a governor signed in an unconstitutional law about it - there could be backlash and extra protective measures put on current laws. God forbid a governor not introduce an unconstitutional law.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 05:11 PM
4

Yes, it was considered potentially unconstitutional for its retroactive nature, and that's why he vetoed it.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 04:42 PM
10

A woman needs to pay for her choices just like a man would her husband's choice to abandon his family and disappear for 27 years. FTFY
/r/MensRights09/10/13 11:53 PM
23

Also, the social security money was legitimately spent on taking care of their kids. I don't know why she's the villain for not "paying back" money she got because her ex-husband was declared legally dead after 8 years. And the ex-wife isn't "fighting" anything, the vanisher missed the 3-year legal deadline for having legal death revoked. Combining those time frames, he had 11 years to come back and get his SSN. Does it make common sense? No, but that's the legal time limit. I fail to see how th…
/r/MensRights09/10/13 10:56 PM
2

I'm not surprised that feminist news sources are covering this more accurately than major news outlets. Well, except for Doug Barry, but... Doug Barry. Yech.
/r/MensRights09/10/13 04:43 AM
4

Heads up (pardon the pun), the ironically banana-flavored ones are the worst.
/r/MensRights09/10/13 01:46 AM
4

A guy I knew once said that he would only have sex with virgins because "why would you want to stick your dick in a used trash can?" We aren't friends anymore.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 06:13 PM
0

You replied to someone saying that a boss could be a woman, you then replied saying that harassment isnt always heterosexual, which would mean a lesbian woman is sexually harassing another woman Yes. Because it said the coworker was in a skirt and referred to the legs as "her" legs, meaning the coworker was a woman. However, the boss's gender wasn't defined, which means it could be either a man harassing a woman or a woman harassing a woman. Acknowledging that THIS SCENARIO EXISTS does not IMPLY…
/r/MensRights08/10/13 06:01 PM
0

...I didn't say that? Hm, in fact, I said previously that if it were a guy staggering drunkenly out of a bar with a sober girl, that could also be sexual assault. I don't know where you're pulling these straw men from. The online scenario clearly says that the boss told a coworker "that her legs look great in that skirt." Ergo, coworker is not a man. Ergo, I'm not ignoring male victims by saying that in this scenario the harassment could be homosexual.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 03:43 PM
0

True. Harassment isn't always heterosexual.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 10:56 PM
-1

It's still wrong on so many levels. Yes, but the OP's claim is incorrect. It assumes that any adult who spends extra time with a kid must be a pedophile. It assumes that a coach spending extra time on and off the field with one particular athlete may be having/grooming inappropriate relations, which is a possibility. Then there's the one about "your drunk friend". What if your drunk male friend leaves the bar with a girl? Then what is it? Sexual assault. Or, according to the majority (53%) on th…
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:54 PM
2

Actually, "The coach spends more time with a player - on and off the field" doesn't gender the perpetrator or the victim.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 07:40 PM
1

Or that time that mensrights brigaded itself because typhon didn't think a criticism of the strength of her data was getting downvoted enough, and set up a new thread just to direct people to downvote her critic. That was... fun.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 07:27 PM
2

You may also want to sign this petition as well, which already has more attention and signatures.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 01:59 AM
3

Are you kidding? I can't get enough of people conflating homosexuality with pedophilia and blaming liberalism for the rape of infants! /s
/r/MensRights07/10/13 01:44 AM
-13

Of course, this belief of your extends to men as well, right? It's a free country, if more men want to work as coal miners than as teachers, it's their choice.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 11:50 PM
2

http://mankindproject.org/men-helping-men http://mensupportingmen.org.au/ http://www.mensline.org.au/Home.html http://menscenter.org/counseling-services/mens-support-groups/nurturing-dads-support-group/
/r/MensRights06/10/13 11:40 PM
-8

for the record, I would not support anything that label itself "Men supporting Men" either How could anyone know that? When she asked why you weren't willing to show any support (an annoying sales tactic, admittedly), you "told her that it would not benefit [you] since [you are] not a woman, and it is not made for [you]", which actually suggests that you would donate to a Men supporting Men group. I don't think either you or her are blameless here.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 11:29 PM
1

That makes much more sense than the pseudo-psych other people are trying to use to justify her disproportionate hate to the point where fans said that the actress who plays Skyler should die because Skyler's a bitch. However, since they're really dedicated to blaming her, I don't think this good explanation applies to them.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 07:35 PM
2

I've already addressed that elsewhere: 1) he admits in the end that he wasn't doing it for his family and that was a lie to make himself feel better 2) he had to protect his family from problems he caused 3) of course it alleviates some severity, but Skyler's transgressions were also committed for the good of the children, so objectively Walt is still worse (murder and drug empire vs. cooking the books and adultery)
/r/MensRights06/10/13 07:25 PM
0

You don't have a critique of my argument, so you claim that I haven't watched the show. You're arguing against me rather than my claim. This is what an ad hominem is. Cogent enough for you? No one on reddit has ever rephrased someone else's statement, clearly I'm drunk, and clearly you can't pull anything besides ad hominems out of your ass. If your next comment contains an ad hominem, I will consider it your concession in this debate and revel in the easy victory. Also, downvoting every respons…
/r/MensRights06/10/13 02:09 PM
-1

"You've looked at the situation beyond the shallow perspective Walter presents as his wife holding him back? Pft, haven't watched the show." Got any more nonsensical ad hominems to throw in there, or do you want to try being cogent?
/r/MensRights06/10/13 01:59 PM
-1

You realize that the person who creates the characters has a greater understanding of the machinations of the show and its characters than the average viewer begging for Skyler to die because she's annoying, right? See, we can all be condescending! (As if you wouldn't point to it as evidence if Gilligan said "Yeah, Skyler's a bitch and Walter's a victim of circumstance."?)
/r/MensRights06/10/13 01:22 PM
-1

...I never said that you said that? Stop putting words in my mouth or GTFO. I said you're rationalizing why she's hated more, not that you said she's hated more. Check out that victim complex.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 12:34 PM
-2

Agreed. As I said, it's just disappointing that people will so readily shit on the wife for being the killjoy to the murderous meth lord.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 12:17 PM
-1

she's viewed as "bitch" because she's not supportive of walt, but she keeps choosing the "MONEY!" Because you're rationalizing why Skyler is more hated, despite the much for paltry examples you have to offer. Walt cooks meth, sells it, kills people, kidnaps his children, sexually assaults his wife, robs trains, etc. Skyler had sex with a man who wasn't a murdering drug lord who made her feel appreciated, she uses her accounting skills to keep Walt's illicit earnings from destroying her children'…
/r/MensRights06/10/13 12:15 PM
-2

Yes, but Vince Gilligan even said that the whole point of the show is that Walt is objectively bad, and becomes harder and harder to sympathize with. Skyler is trying to cope with being married to a drug lord whom she can't even even keep out of her house or away from her kids. Also that Walt only has to protect his family from problems he created. I mean, I agree that that's most of what's happening here, it's just disappointing that people are so blindly accepting of the show as told from a mu…
/r/MensRights06/10/13 12:06 PM
-4

That's definitely a factor. However, I believe the effect still holds true because she is excoriated for/despite being accurate in her judgment of Walt. She also seems to be part of a trend of disproportionately hating on the wives of TV criminals. Carmela Soprano, Betty Draper, Skyler White - none of them innocent by any means, but receive much more criticism despite being no worse than their husbands.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 11:48 AM
-5

Every character is flawed but Skyler is disproportionately hated. That's my point. I'm not picking sides - I dislike both of them, but objectively Walt is much more heinous. You seem to disagree, so I'm defending Skyler. I'd be arguing just as much if you said Skyler was an absolute saint and Walt was being persecuted beyond that which the scope of his crimes warranted. Support your side or GTFO.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 11:43 AM
2

All right. That makes more sense, but "hate" still seems like a strong feeling to have toward a woman whose suspicions of her meth-cooking husband turn out to be completely founded.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 11:37 AM
-1

Convenient that you ignore the perspective of the man who actually created the characters and the show. You can try to nit-pick, but Walt is way worse than Skyler and isn't nearly as hated.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 11:23 AM
1

Her skills as an accountant save the family from poverty. When Walt is dying of cancer, she stays strong for the children. She tries to keep the family together, protect the children, and persuade Walt to leave the meth business. She breaks bad, too, eventually, but is much more excoriated than Walt despite the fact that she doesn't murder, or put dead little boys in barrels of acid, or cook or sell hard drugs. And she's still trying to protect her children from the repercussions of Walt's actio…
/r/MensRights06/10/13 11:17 AM
1

She likes money but isn't supportive of her drug-lord, murdering husband? What a bitch. Here's what Vince Gilligan - the creator of Breaking Bad - said about people hating Skyler, and I'll leave it at that: We’ve been at events and had all our actors up onstage, and people ask Anna Gunn, “Why is your character such a bitch?” And with the risk of painting with too broad a brush, I think the people who have these issues with the wives being too bitchy on Breaking Bad are misogynists, plain and sim…
/r/MensRights06/10/13 11:06 AM
-2

I'm pretty sure the Skyler White syndrome was to denote the fact that, even though her judgment of Walt (as, you know, a drug lord) is absolutely correct, a vast swath of viewers see her as the bitch. The female character judges the male character's actions/behavior in a totally on target way, and yet the audience hates her. Note: You can disagree with the idea that Skyler receives disproportionate hate, but the fact remains that in duscussion and in the news The Skyler White Effect is about the…
/r/MensRights06/10/13 10:48 AM
0

And I've had several MRAs on this very sub tell me some variation of man up/your balls haven't dropped/your mom has your balls in her purse. Would like me to claim that this is representative of the MRM, or can we all be rational?
/r/MensRights02/10/13 11:51 PM
2

Urban Dictionary? And I thought using the Daily Mail was pathetic.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 11:41 PM
4

we can make very educated guesses But they're still guesses. I'm just saying, you shouldn't go around claiming things as fact when you don't actually know. Isn't this the same sub that gets riled up when the "alleged" is left off of the term "rapist" (and even "victim")? You don't get to call the kettle black, pot. Maybe I'm just a very cynical person, but it seems like the "best" time to attack someone would be when there's another group in the forefront that everyone will readily blame. It's u…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 11:34 PM
11

It's only Fox news article [12] that says her dog died, Erin Pizzey's article [13] and her AMA both say her dog was shot, and her AMA says the dog lived. So no, since it's Fox I'm not really surprised. It still doesn't account for the idea her dog was poisoned that Alzael brought up, and none of the sources make the claim that feminists were the ones who killed/shot/poisoned it. Let's all play telephone!
/r/MensRights02/10/13 08:56 PM
18

If you're going to accuse people of things, let me give you some facts about the whole dog dealio and break down your claim: 1) Erin Pizzey does not know who attacked her dog 1.5) Erin Pizzey also worked with people with violent tendencies, another viable pool of potential attackers 2) Erin Pizzey's dog was shot, not poisoned 3) Erin Pizzey's dog did not die Just FYI, so you can be more accurate in your future laundry-listing of the wrongdoings of feminists. Source: Erin Pizzey's AMA
/r/MensRights02/10/13 07:52 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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