~ archived since 2018 ~
~ archived since 2018 ~
| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...I'm not saying you should be silenced, I have no idea where you get that from. I'm saying you're fucking nuts if you enjoy the casual misogyny bandied about here, and I'm not going to listen to you anymore. | /r/MensRights | 26/04/12 12:44 AM |
| 1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...If you're actually a woman who enjoys posting in r/mensrights, then you're truly insane. | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 11:54 PM |
| 1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...Because the world population rate is actually falling/there needs to be more people on this planet. In developed nations with birth rates that are below the replacement level, whose population isn't augmented enough by immigration, such programs do exist. That's absurd. It should be done on a case by case basis, not on assumption that women should get preferential treatment just because women are (might be) more impacted (as you haven't provided a citation, but I've trusted what you said). It is… | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 11:37 PM |
| 1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...NOW Foundation Opposes Phony Parental Alienation Disorder - Regardless of whether you think PAD is a real thing or not, this page would leave you thinking that women never say horrible untrue things about their exes to their kids (with or without the intention of alienating them) and that only abusive dads/partners would bring up these nasty lies in custody hearings. Note the effort to discredit fathers' rights groups (like Glenn Sacks's Fathers & Families) as "populated" with "batterers, child … | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 10:31 PM |
| 1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...There is no need for most modern societies to subsidize it in such a manner. A falling population rate is a perfectly valid reason to do so. That still says nothing about the significance of the situation in the first place. I have a feeling that this is turning to the direction of an appeal to emotion. It's significance is very prominent in family courts. That, along with many other factors are why such courts show preferential treatment to women. | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 10:06 PM |
| 0 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...What do you mean by "the problem"? As far as I can tell your paranoid delusions haven't manifested themselves in reality. | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 09:49 PM |
| 1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...Poisoning the water; nobody suggested that. It means that society should not subsidize the choice, not that it should punish the choice. Having children is a biological imperative and pretty necessary for the continuation of the human race. Society very much should subsidize it, and many countries do. Base rate neglect. Even if women end up in this situation more often, that doesn't mean that the situation is common. The idea that it's common isn't my argument, my argument is that it is overwhel… | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 09:39 PM |
| 0 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...Sure they do. Since you assert that claim without any evidence I'm just going to dismiss it without any evidence. | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 09:23 PM |
| -1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...No, this is a prime example of how your biases distort your view of feminism. Feminism is the belief that men and women should have equal rights, including equal responsibilities in marriage and child-rearing. When you start hearing crazy bullshit like "women should be able to make any choice they want in a marriage and force their husband to support them," that's radical feminism. And that kind of thing may fly over in SRS, but it doesn't in the real world, and very few women feel that way. | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 08:38 PM |
| -1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...There are many studies on gender income discrepancy, some use full time weekly pay, some use lifetime earnings. | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 08:27 PM |
| -1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out......Which, in our modern world with birth control and abortion, is a choice. So you're advocating the voluntary cessation of human reproduction. Good call. Citation? Because the NOW Foundation's pages on custody would lead me to believe that family courts are biased towards women because men have been stereotyped as violent abusers who, when they lobby for more custody, are just trying to weasel out of child support. Your biases are your own problem, unless you want to provide citations for that.… | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 08:14 PM |
| -1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...And why is that? Because women choose to stop working - surprise, when women choose to stop working, their earnings drop. Duh Can men choose to stop working? Nope, they must abide by whatever the woman decides; if she wants to stop work and raise kids, he has no choice in the matter. No, you can't stop working when you're a father, you need to provide for your children. And fathers have a choice in the matter if they're married, if not they're required to support their children. Unless you're ad… | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 08:02 PM |
| -1 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...Yes, women make less money, mostly due to motherhood. Which is why family courts are biased toward women, and Peter-Principle is wrong to bring up family court as an excuse to believe he's discriminated against. | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 07:48 PM |
| 0 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...Family court is incredibly biased in favour of women and against men. From that article: "Other studies show consistently that the first child significantly reduces a woman's earnings and that the second child cuts them even further." Can you understand why the courts are biased? The 77 cent figure is a complete lie, you don't even know what you are saying. The 77 cent figure come almost entirely from time and costs associated with child birth (which, if you'll remember, is also why family court… | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 07:38 PM |
| -2 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...And by that you mean you're sources are clearly biased and/or insane? | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 07:03 PM |
| -3 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...The same ones that apply to men, only women are being paid 77 cents on the dollar to pay those debts. You think women don't have to pay alimony? | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 05:45 PM |
| -5 | Frida Ghitis blurts it out...No, both are not wrong. If your gender is treated as a second-class citizen then you need to organize and fight back. Men have never had this problem, only a few things that go against them now. That's why men's rights advocates are mocked and derided, not because they don't have legitimate points, but because raising hell about them is seen as petty overkill | /r/MensRights | 25/04/12 05:23 PM |
| 0 | seriously though, sexual assault is hilarious. (when the victim is a boy.)You don't know what assault is. There's a reason nobody calls statutory rape assault, because it isn't. | /r/MensRights | 18/03/12 01:53 AM |
| 1 | seriously though, sexual assault is hilarious. (when the victim is a boy.)And you base that on what? It looks like a consensual relationship that the parents got wind of. If anything it's statutory rape. People in r/mensrights are agreeing because they aren't all completely insane. | /r/MensRights | 17/03/12 02:52 AM |
| -1 | seriously though, sexual assault is hilarious. (when the victim is a boy.)No, people would call her a slut and she would get to go on Maury. And the guy would go to jail, just like this woman has. | /r/MensRights | 16/03/12 04:11 PM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter