TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Sanguifer Archive

View 0 posts and 494 comments by Sanguifer on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Battery is about to die, so I'll try to be brief: Bollocks. Statutory crimes exist not to set a rule by which we can begin to judge actions, it's a rule by which the judment ends. It took place? One party is guilty, one party is innocent, no questions asked. Asking questions is literally arguments from the mouths of child abusers, after all. You are conveniently grouping children and teenagers again. And You are using probabilities to argue individual cases. Psychological harms are a possibility…
/r/MensRights24/02/16 10:59 PM
1

I'll walk with You through Your scenario. However, keep in mind that we are actually considering the possibility of a sociopathic or psycopathic teenager. I mean, surely You wouldn't argue those don't exist? Parents tell teen where she is allowed to go and what she is allowed to do. She laughs in their face. They ground her. She goes for the door regardless. What now? Physical restraint? She'll call child protection services. Take away her phone? Boy, CPS will REALLY love THAT one. Especially wh…
/r/MensRights24/02/16 10:39 PM
1

Easiest way would be to get video evidence. Catch the coercion on tape. Might explain the delay between first alleged rape and the charges. Suppose the coercion involved blackmail of the sort of "do it or I'll reveal XY about You to Your spouse/the authorities". XY could be a number of things - drug abuse, infidelity etc. Then You got the dillema: If I go to the authorities and make an accusation, what I was trying to hide will definitely blow up in my face. Hell, I can even imagine the first se…
/r/MensRights24/02/16 10:25 PM
2

Just out of curiosity... how exactly do You imagine that going down? Let's assume for the sake of the thought experiment that she's not lying: How do You "use the telephone" and credibly report a rape by coercion... by someone 32 years younger? Is there a scenario not featuring physical force that You'd not find to be "obviously total bullshit"? Seeing how we know next to nothing about this particular case at this point of time?
/r/MensRights24/02/16 10:14 PM
-1

Legalistic fallacy on a men's rights board? Hey, stop arguing against infant circumcision, after all it is totally legal and in fact not a crime. Also women can't rape, lol, haven't You read the law? And if two drunk people have sex, the man is the rapist. Statutory rapist. Also, don't let me catch You manspreading in NY, that can get You arrested. Want me to continue or will You aknowledge that "it's the law!" is a bullshit argument?
/r/MensRights24/02/16 09:55 PM
-1

What they want, is not what is good for them, nor moral for the adult to do. Now get your fucked up desire to fuck kids off this fucking subreddit. Plot twist: mwobuddy is underage and wants to fuck adults. Shit, didn't think of that, did ya? I don't get You guys. Seriously. You wouldn't accept the same argument from feminists, would You? "You just want women to get back to the kitchen You fucked up misogynist!" "Legal parental surrender? You just want to be able to dodge responsibility, You dea…
/r/MensRights24/02/16 09:50 PM
36

"Fuck me or I tell the cops You deal crack." Doesnt take a lot of imagination to come up with a possible scenario.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 09:27 PM
1

Wait, wait. So... that guy kept touching You and trying to kiss You and threatening Your friend, then You grabbed his buddy and told him to restrain his friend... ...and that's where his buddy said "screw You bitch, if he wanna rape You I'll help!" and Your friend joined in saying "hell, I'll even hold her down for ya bois, with that skirt she's literally begging for it, amirite?"... did that happen? No, of course not. That'd be a rape culture. What happened is a guy got drunk and was pushy and …
/r/MensRights23/02/16 10:23 PM
2

This. Before You listen to Your heart telling You "but...but those are nazis, man! We shouldn't help nazis!", remember that's exactly what well-intentioned progressives think about men's rights groups. "but... those are misogynists!" "But... they're wrong about that, and I'm right about nazis!" - yes. And that, too, is what well-intentioned progressives think. This is why adhering to universal principles as well as we can is important - else You give someone the power to arbitrate who is worthy …
/r/MensRights23/02/16 10:04 PM
1

And how do You filter the spin from the truth? Is there a google app for that?
/r/MensRights09/01/16 02:39 PM
4

This is exactly what "Rape Hysteria" is. In all of the shrieking about this rape gang of thousands of men, it seems lost that there where only TWO rapes. Two accusations of rape. I'm not saying either way, but until proven, it's still an allegation. This whole affair is ... troubling. The rumor mill goes from "1000 people on the Dom Plaza, ~100 reports of theft, robbery, sexual assault and 2 rapes" to "1000 men conspiring to rape and assault". I mean... what? I'd really like to know what actuall…
/r/MensRights09/01/16 01:07 PM
1

I believe I may have missed it. Try making it again. No, I can't name the police officers, though that shouldn't be too difficult to find out. As far as I am aware, this falls under the freedom of information act. The victim is fucking DEAD. The victim of what? His own suicide, or the as of yet unproven police brutality? THAT is the point. As of now, the only proof we have is that Ian is dead in what looks to have been suicide. We don't know whether he was the victim of anything as of now.
/r/MensRights01/01/16 04:28 AM
1

Yes we do. We need evidence of police misconduct. 'Innocent until proven guilty' is a principle that applies to police officers, too. Look, I'm not saying either way here, okay? I'm saying we don't know enough to make even an educated guess as to what happened. Could have been police brutality. Could also have been a drug-fueled psychotic episode. Could have been anything. We don't know. But I thought "Believe the victim!" is what the OTHER side does.
/r/MensRights01/01/16 02:40 AM
-1

If, hypothetically, I put a gun to Your head and tell You to rape Your daughter or I pull the trigger and then do it myself - are You as much at fault as I am? Not saying that this is what happened here, I don't have the details of the case. It might not be #pussypass, that's all.
/r/MensRights22/12/15 06:45 PM
-1

Don't worry, You'll get used to it. Feels>Realz. Everywhere.
/r/MensRights21/12/15 05:08 PM
1

these aren't the kinds of people we want to fight for I disagree with this sentiment. I advocate for the rights of men - that includes left and right, religious and atheists, criminal and innocent... hell, even feminist. I do agree that this isn't a particularly important issue. Unless immigration is unlimited, there will always be discrimination. This is a case of pragmaticism, not bias. Similar to the HPV vaccine thing.
/r/MensRights20/12/15 11:53 PM
2

When the New York Times editorial board issued its powerful condemnation of America’s gun culture, they went beyond mere outrage in response to the recent murder sprees in San Bernardino, California, and Colorado Springs, Colorado.(...) The common denominator is white masculinity and the particular ways that it is connected to American gun culture and the color line. San Bernardino...white masculinity. The shooters: Syed Farook and his WIFE Tashfeen Malik.... WHITE MASCULINITY. I'm all out of ev…
/r/MensRights20/12/15 05:40 AM
2

He does that a lot. I'm baffled by the number of downvotes - seems to me people around here still vote with their gut more often than not. Demonspawn might not be the most compassionate or friendly person, but it's damn rare for him to be flat out wrong about something. I find that very admirable, even if I often disagree with him on the interpretation of data or conclusions drawn.
/r/MensRights20/12/15 05:34 AM
1

Well... credit where it's due: That really is a pretty good one.
/r/MensRights20/12/15 05:03 AM
4

I'm not too sure on that yet. The nordic countries do seem to have a problem with their immigrants. And that's despite an effort to sweep it under the rug, 'cause none of them want to give the impression of being racist - understandably so. I remain skeptical, but I'm open to the idea that there actually could be a real problem in that area.
/r/MensRights20/12/15 04:28 AM
6

Men are encouraged to wear a white feather ribbon and commit to a pledge, huh? Glad to see we're back to the classics.
/r/MensRights07/12/15 12:11 AM
3

"2 in 1" sounds like some really hardcore rape, though.
/r/MensRights07/12/15 12:08 AM
1

Regarding the marital rape laws: The one thing that comes close to that is a tongue-in-cheek argument I sometimes hear - if marriage does not include consent, then what the hell is it for? You mean I can be legally forced to work and provide for my spouse, while she can withhold consent to sex for as long as she likes and simultanously can demand that I don't try my luck with someone else, 'cause if I do she'll divorce me and I'll have to pay alimony? Put it like that, and it's a rather fair que…
/r/MensRights06/12/15 11:46 PM
1

Must...resist...the...urge...to...godwin.... 'sides, think they did better on the other side of the iron curtain? In soviet russia, criticizing the party would land You in a lunatic asylum, on the - surprisingly reasonable, albeit sinister - grounds that anyone daring to do so had to be either suicidal or insane. They called it sluggish schizophrenia - paranoid delusions of fighting for truth and justice. Shit, in Poland, there was a wave of denounciations made against alleged former communist a…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 10:56 PM
2

We realize it. We're just tired of it. MRAs campaigning against ridiculous alimony laws? Misogynist losers! Women start to complain, too? Goodness, we need a reform here! Why wasn't anything being done all those years? Leave it to the women to get shit done! See You lazy MRAs, that's real activism, be glad for allies, why so hostile? If You are nice enough we might maybe take a look at Your other grievances in a few years. Fucking brutes, sheesh. The bitterness is somewhat justified, yea?
/r/MensRights18/11/15 10:27 PM
3

I know, right? Every time a law is written to discriminate in favour of women, the backlash is ridiculous and it's destroyed! That's why selective service is a thing of the past and both FGM and circumcision are illegal. AMIRITE?
/r/MensRights18/11/15 10:20 PM
5

On FTB? ??? Ladies and gentlemen, I do believe we might be witnessing a breaking point.
/r/MensRights18/11/15 10:05 PM
1

Does say something about the status quo when people can say the equivalent of "Oh, I'm a comic book writer, I do the script and the pictures. But I'm not an artist! I just do the art. And the writing. And I guess You could say I'm a writer. But not an artist, a comic book writer who does his own art! Stop assigning labels to me!". Is that a semantic argument, deiberate dishonesty, or active doublethink? The answer is probably 'yes'... Using the descriptive term for the movement feels like it's a…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 09:54 PM
1

Wat. What does all that have to do with what I said? The christians who wage war while simultanously professing to follow the bible are bad christians, because their deeds directly contradict their scripture. The muslims who wage war on nonbelievers, on the other hand, act in accordance with their scripture. Judged by my own moral code, both groups are acting in an immoral way. It's just that one of them is murderous AND hypocritical, the other just murderous.
/r/MensRights18/11/15 01:13 AM
11

Everything is better when explained by Karen. Short version: Duluth model of aggression is a feminist-inspired domestic violence model that defines men into primary aggressors and women into primary victims from the get-go. The Duluth model shape many police policies in DV responses - got a DV call, arrive on scene, check who has sustained more injuries, who looks more fearful or upset, who is bigger/stronger/more aggressive/more capable of doing damage, after applying all the preconceptions and…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 01:02 AM
1

Then why are self-described Christians carpet-bombing their enemies? Two groups of people following two different moral codes. Group A professes to follow a moral code that includes "do not kill other people". Group B professes to follow a moral code that includes "do kill other people if they refuse to convert to Your belief system". Judged by the moral code those groups profess to follow respectively, person from group A who kills someone is acting against his self-professed moral code, person…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 12:39 AM
2

Shutting the gates on one while allowing others in would be rather hypocritical, would it not? Also, presumption of innocence is an international human right under the UNs universal declaration. I question Your 'fact' there. Allowing in people from Group B will only raise the rapre rate in Group A's country if the people who immigrate actually happen to be rapists. Which You never know in advance, unless they have criminal convictions on record - especially when they enter a new environment and …
/r/MensRights18/11/15 12:13 AM
1

Another interesting point about Milo is that identifies as a homosexual man which makes the sincerity behind his criticisms of feminism and social justice have a more valid taste. Identity politics are fucking everywhere. He might be white, cis and male, but at least he's not spit straight.
/r/MensRights17/11/15 11:27 PM
5

...right. Don't let me catch You complaining about erosion of due process or anything in that regard. I see when it comes to certain kind of men, guilty until proven innocent is just fine with You. Newsflash, mate: If You have 2 populations, one experiencing per capita rape rate of 2%, and another a rate of 10% - that doesn't mean that an individual belonging to group A "rapes at a lower rate". A man from group A is not 2% rapist, and a man from group B is not 5 times as much rapist than the oth…
/r/MensRights17/11/15 11:06 PM
0

Political correctness is more important than public safety (Unfettered muslim immigration despite numerous attacks) Right, let's deny entry to one group because a subset of that group does evil shit sometimes. By that logic, deny immigration to all men, because some of them might rape, amirite?
/r/MensRights17/11/15 10:45 PM
2

What exactly is the problem with it?
/r/MensRights16/11/15 05:58 PM
1

It might not be hypocrisy. It could be a vicious cycle. Group A says: You guys need to open up! Guys open up, get smacked by Group B. I say this because I know the odd self-identified feminist who might as well be an MRA on quite a few topics, particularly bodily integrity, presumption of innocence and similar items. I have no reason to suspect hypocrisy from them. Problem is, they're not prominent. While they are being relatively egalitarian, the institutions still shriek about their 1 in 5.
/r/MensRights16/11/15 01:05 PM
2

You can hope, but it's rather unlikely. The more mainstream the MRM gets, the more signs You see. It starts with the having-Your-cake-and-eating-it-too - look for the MRAs who will on the one hand argue sexual dimorphism when it comes to earnings gap and gender roles, then turn around and, say, dismiss the notion that one gender may be better suited for childcare, or actually require more spending in the healthcare department. Watch them attribute the earnings gap to women's choices, then condem…
/r/MensRights16/11/15 12:53 PM
2

I would comment on the video directly, but unfortunately, I was blocked by Dean a while ago. Now I see why. Dean, You can balk at people telling You that You act just like Feminists all You like, and block them all day: You ARE acting just like feminists. "Anti-theism is hate and bigotry. Anti-feminism is just fine." Riiight.
/r/MensRights16/11/15 12:25 PM
6

I'm "that guy" around here, it seems, so I'll go ahead: Technically, it might not fit the legal definition of domestic violence. But even if that's the case, it still sure as fuck is assault and most definitely wrong by any moral standard.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 10:47 AM
-1

From the article, last paragraph: "Even adjusting for the greater rate of new cancer cases affecting women (1:32 to 1), and the fact that female cancers are deadlier than male cancers by a ratio of about 2:35 to 1, there still seems to be a significant gender gap in favor of women for federal spending on cancer research and prevention." Also from the article: "they [NHL] will spend $4,446,000,000 in 2009 for female-specific cancers (breast cancer, cervical cancer, ovarian cancer, and “women’s he…
/r/MensRights03/11/15 12:05 AM
2

I wouldn't be surprised if true. I mean, it's not like the MRM isn't being painted as full of violent vindictive stalking doxing hateful misogynist neckbeards who are afraid of strong and empowered women so they would naturally take every opportunity to rape one. Painted by media like the one in the link. The fucking audacity: "We've been telling people they should be afraid of men's rights advocates, and see? THEY ARE NOW! We were sooo totally right pleasedon'tlookupself-fulfillingprophecyinadi…
/r/MensRights02/11/15 11:47 PM
4

Not gonna tone-police You, but I want to express a different view, and I'm pinning it under here as contrast. I think it's fine to have "concern trolls". For one, You never know who is a concern troll and who is genuinely concerned - I like to give people the benefit of the doubt. For another, it helps to get Your beliefs questioned every now and again. An echo chamber is no good in the long run, and even concern trolls can bring up a valid point every now and again. Case in point with the OP - …
/r/MensRights02/11/15 11:29 PM
1

Hardly. The female gamers I know don't want their games to be meddled with. And the casual gamers just don't care either way.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 10:37 PM
2

Depending on what You consider to count as developer... Bayonetta was designed by Mari Shimazaki. The most famous female in gaming industry is probably Amy Hennig - that'd be Legacy of Kain, Jak&Daxter and Uncharted, director and writer. There's also Jade Raymond, Assassin's Creed I & II, executive producer. IIRC they're even working together ATM. Historically, there's Roberta Williams, co-founder of Sierra and pioneer in text and point&click adventure genre - notably King's Quest and Phantasmag…
/r/MensRights02/11/15 10:35 PM
1

And how many women? No, serious question. Maybe it's just a common thing to be considering for all people. Maybe it's something like 42% men vs 36% women? If it's, say, 42% vs 12%, though - that'd be noteworthy.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 10:12 PM
1

Thanks for the links.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 09:39 PM
0

No, they are not coming up with more movies, they are merely remaking an old one. Nihil novum sub sole. Besides, You really shouldn't look to feminists and sjws as role models. Let them bitch about 'appropriating cultures' and be outraged over nothing. Why emulate them?
/r/MensRights02/11/15 12:16 AM
4

Real-life example of wage gap due to personal choices in action, so not entirely unrelated, I guess.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 11:55 PM
1

I've heard it claimed that the sentencing disparity could at least partially be explained by a disparity in previous conduct and criminal records at the time of sentencing. Care to comment? I haven't seen any convincing evidence for or against that notion yet myself, but seeing how the wage gap can be mostly explained without sexist discrimination, I wonder whether it could be true for this particular gap, too.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 11:49 PM
2

I googled it. From a clean browser, though. Surprise, the results are different. I get Urban Dictionary and Matrix references, though the subreddit is there, too. Also, I'd probably google "red pill film" or "red pill documentary". No TRP reddit there. It might surprise You, but the "common person" won't be interested in gender politics anyways, and especially not interested enough to consider watching such a thrilling and exciting blockbuster... it's a fucking documentary, not a commercial.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 11:42 PM
4

Or maybe she fears for her safety and the topic makes her feel uncomfortable. This game is fun!
/r/MensRights01/11/15 11:23 PM
1

There's also no reason why it couldn't just stay in the title. No chances of the good name of the MRM to be tarnished. What doesn't exist can't be torn down. Let's worry about estabilishing a good name first, which is hopefully what this documentary will help promote. Feminists gonna spin, like they always do, regardeless of the title.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 11:21 PM
3

You mean a documentary about the MRM taking screentime to adress misconceptions about the MRM is a bad thing? Interesting.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 11:15 PM
1

Got a source on that? Quick google searches didn't reveal anything like that for me.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 11:12 PM
2

It's a good thing to bring up to rub into the faces of people who still spout the bullshit about the wage gap, to be sure. Allow me to be "that guy" and put up the probably unnecessary disclaimer that Clinton most probably paid them exactly as much as they actually earned. It's median annual salaries, after all. In 2005, they were actually higher for the female staff, though insignificantly so.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 11:02 AM
3

Why waste women's time? It's clear they specifically need a man for the job. If they were looking for counselors for, say, troubled girls of ages 12-18, chances are they'd be looking for someone who knows what it's like to have their first period, or have to consider abortion at 16. That someone most probably won't be a man, for obvious reasons. Not saying men can't show empathy for an abstract phenomenon, but You wanna explain that to a girl who has been raped and is now pregnant with the rapis…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 08:53 AM
4

Is it affirmative action tokenism when I look for males for my male contraception research? This is a counceling job. For young people with problems. It's a safe bet to assume that some of their problems stem from not having a positive male role model. It is also a safe bet to assume that a fraction of them would respond better to a male counselor than a female one (just like a fraction of them will respond better to a female one than a male one). In cases like this one, gender or race might act…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 08:47 AM
1

Why fight over it? Well, let's see. Elam 2014: I am the sole proprietor of A Voice for Men. It is my intellectual as well as personal property. Every dollar donated goes right into my pocket. I spend that money on this website and on activist efforts at my own discretion, considering the opinions of the AVFM management team that volunteers to help run this place.(...)The way I look at it is that the donations are given freely by people who get a really great website (that they could just get for…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 08:42 AM
1

I guess thought that will be the epitaph of the MRM though -- died here, because a couple of holier-than-thou MRM blowhards couldn't stand even the possibility -- or really completely implausible scenario -- that someone might make a living doing it. The irony. Have You read this article? Specifically this bit: Those changes are now made easier by the fact that people like Milo Y., Sargon, members of #gamergate, sites like Brietbart and a growing collection of others who have suddenly found reli…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 08:35 AM
1

Feel free to be critical. I don't mind criticism. Neither should Elam. Remember, this is the guy who periodically tells MRAs to gtfo if they don't like the way he's doing things.Well, we don't like the way he's doing things. So we're just following his wishes when we don't support AVFM. But of course we couldn't come to that conclusion alone. It's all the feminists brainwashing us! Booooo!
/r/MensRights20/10/15 08:26 AM
2

Just to clarify here - are You actually arguing against having a democracy here? Because that's what having a democracy entails. All adults having a vote, even those who do not carry their weight in a quantifiable way. To be sure, if a woman is working, she is also paying taxes. If a woman is NOT working, chances are she is a homemaker, meaning she is still contributing to the cohesion of society and should have a say in how the society is governed. Women have about 55% of the vote in total, yes…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 08:15 AM
2

Demonspawn? Well, I don't agree with him, but frankly, he does make some interesting points. Interesting as in: Worth thinking about. It's always good to be made to question one's own convictions. And if I'm understanding his arguments correctly, they're actually logically sound. I don't agree with the conclusions and with some interpretation of the data, but the premises sound plausible. Even if my knee is twitching while I say it. Thing is, Demonspawn is not advocating against women; he's advo…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 07:54 AM
1

It doesn't. Government wants to outlaw circumcision. Religious people object. Government strikes down the proposed legislation because allowing something for religious reasons only is not compatible with a secular state.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 07:17 AM
1

All babies are gentile. Judaism is a religion, not a race. And at least in germany, yes, 'gentile' babies and 'jewish' babies alike are still being mutilated because of the protests of the Central Council of Jews in Germany. This is an actual, tangible, quotable unironic jewish lobby. With a website. Okay, the muslims had protested, too, but given the climate of fear of being labled as antisemitic in germany, I think it's not unreasonable to assume their voice was of secondary importance to the …
/r/MensRights19/10/15 09:21 PM
2

The enemy of my enemy. You get misogynists in MGTOW and You get antisemites among intactivists. You probably get the odd male supremacist among the MRA, too. Besides, do You presume to know the motivations of the upvoters? It's an upvote. You can upvote something just because it's funny, or shocking. If I saw that comment, I'd have upvoted it myself, wanna know why? Because as it happens, in my country of Germany, "because the jews think it's cool" actually is the reason circumcision remains leg…
/r/MensRights19/10/15 08:15 PM
3

Sargon still "not an MRA", eh? ;)
/r/MensRights19/10/15 07:53 PM
2

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't honey badgers and "Honey Badger Brigade"? Therefore, when the OP says Marcotte targets the Honey Badgers, I understood it to be "Marcotte targets HBB". AFAIK, Janet Bloomfield is not member of the Brigade... so now I'm confused. Multi-way. Marcotte is full of shit, as usual, so I deem the honeybadgers/HBB linguistic confusion more interesting.
/r/MensRights19/10/15 07:51 PM
2

It's remarkably rare, at least among the prominent MRAs. Random semi-anonymous comments on reddit or elsewhere are hardly indicative or worth taking seriously. I can recall only very few examples. One is August Lovenskiolds from AVFM earnestly proposing to entrap and falsely accuse women of rape in order to prove a point about the stupidity of "affirmative consent" laws. I assumed it was satire until I saw him stating in the comments that he was being earnest. And that was 1 year ago. (Source, g…
/r/MensRights19/10/15 07:24 PM
1

...broad antisemitic generalizations? Is circumcision of boys a tenet of jewish faith, or is it not? Last I checked, there was something about a covenant with god. I'm sorry, but saying that followers of the jewish religion think that circumcsision is perfectly fine is a "broad atisemitic generalization" only in the same way that saying feminists believe in Patriarchy theory is a "vile misogynistic attack".
/r/MensRights19/10/15 06:37 PM
-1

J'accuse! Yeah, no. Try again. My dislike for Paul Elam has nothing to do with what dishonest feminists are saying. It's based entirely on my personal dealings with him and my own observations. The recent "holier-than-thou" "we-supported-men's-rights-before-it-was-cool" article only served to convince me that AVFM is a sinking ship. At the same time, I fully aknowledge and appretiate the work they have done. Still doesn't mean I'll be running to the bank to save them.
/r/MensRights19/10/15 06:25 PM
7

Okay, so... say a squad member reports me for calling her a stuck-up bitch. I say I never said that. Now what? Oh, right. Listen and believe...
/r/MensRights19/10/15 06:06 PM
1

(...)Nonetheless, the concept of alimony is inherently flawed, because it allows one spouse to basically cut all ties of support, while forcing the other to continue that support indefinitely. And love and care is not exactly paid work, is it? Frankly, I'm not even sure what You're arguing right now. So You value a homemaker, but not enough to support a contract that would allow one to be a homemaker without taking a huge risk? Alimony is not inherently flawed, because nowhere does it say that a…
/r/MensRights19/10/15 07:09 AM
1

Nice try, but no. I basically AM the homemaker in my home. I suppose it is in my nature to devalue my own contribution, yeah. Or more accurately, I know that this shit is not nearly as tough as having a full-time job. Not since we have the machines to help out. I don't devalue it - but I don't overvalue it, either. Never said it would be cheaper or of equal value, I said it would be perfectly conceivable to nevertheless pay one and still have more than enough money for Yourself. Working full tim…
/r/MensRights16/10/15 08:13 PM
0

And You think I don't know that because...? We were talking about the origins of alimony. You say it never made any sense. If so, we're suddenly talking about a marriage with NO alimony. In that kind of marriage, You are not worse off continuing Your life just like it was except suddenly You have double or more disposable income. You can spend half of Your new income on a house help and eat out every day and still have just as much or even more money than before. Not a good thing to forget Your …
/r/MensRights15/10/15 09:35 AM
7

Article from 2012. Bit late, no?
/r/MensRights14/10/15 03:52 PM
3

I know that You can't help whom You fall in love with, but seriously man, consider how fucked up that is. If she "play" hits You when You argue (and fankly, that does NOT sound like "play" to me at all), just imagine what she might do in a really serious argument... You know Your situation better than we do, but this really doesn't look healthy to an outsider. Either way, I wish You nothing but good luck in life.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 02:18 PM
1

Just like the data shows a "wage gap". Different problem, same cause.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 01:53 PM
0

You mean he has 20 years of work experience and a salary that used to be sufficient for two people or more. That's worse off than starting at minimum wage in Wall-Mart? You know, what with the woman being unemployable even if she does have any education worth having, after 20 years of homemaking... I can live pretty comfortably on 1000€/month. If I had double or triple that, I could hire a maid to do my cleaning and go out for dinner more often than not and would STILL have more money than I hav…
/r/MensRights14/10/15 01:51 PM
1

I was without a job for the better part of a year. I went to my local agency, asked them to help me find a job. They said I'm not entitled to that unless I receive benefits. So I filed for benefits. They told me I'm not entitled to that because I live with my girlfriend who can provide for me financially (although noone can legally force her to). So I asked them what I should do now - they told me to move out, get my own flat, then file again when I'm not cohabitating. I said I only wanted them …
/r/MensRights14/10/15 01:40 PM
3

It's scary, but I'm optimistic as well. Unlike with men, people actually care about their internets.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 01:30 PM
7

Ah, but obviously You neglect to say that the ones who don't get murdered only live because their patriarchal overlords want to keep them alive to have something to rape when nothing good is on the telly. We're onto You, You cherry-picker, You.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 11:48 AM
2

In addition to that, trying to write a female lead as a man will open You up to accusations of mansplaining femininity, not doing the female perspective justice and shit like that. Why bother? A good story shouldn't depend on the gender of the protagonist, and there are but a few topics that are exclusive to one gender or the other.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 11:21 AM
1

Depending where You live. But I'd argue cohabitation is never more dangerous than marriage, because cohabitation does not require You to go through legal procedures to end it. Your partner may choose to take You to court, but You can at least conceivably end the relationship without involving the government.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 09:06 AM
1

That's like saying "Hey, if You don't want to interact with women, just be gay!" - a worthless proposition, You'll just be miserable. I could fawn over how awesome it is to suck a cock, and it totally might be for me - I'm still rather unlikely to convince a heterosexual man. The loss of a generation is no big loss, sure. But that will also mean that MGTOW can't grow, since the people who are likely to adopt the lifestyle are also less likely to reproduce. Gynocentricism is an evolutionary stabl…
/r/MensRights14/10/15 08:44 AM
2

Cohabitation isn't enslavement. Marriage IS. It's a legally binding contract that enables the state to force You to work in order to support Your spouse on the pain of incarceration. I'm sure few people who get married see it like that, but that doesn't change the fact that it IS like that. Both women AND men need to be made aware of the realities of marriage.
/r/MensRights12/10/15 09:34 PM
2

Feminists are anything but liberal. Some of the core values of liberalism that are common to pretty much every strand of it are individualism, universality and egalitarianism - and feminists are overwhelmingly supremacist collectivists who ooze special pleading with every step.
/r/MensRights12/10/15 09:23 PM
4

Yeah sure. Go try and adopt a kid as a single man, see how well it goes. What makes You think they'll let single men use these? All single men who don't want to marry are pedophiles, don'tcha know?
/r/MensRights12/10/15 09:07 PM
4

It's a manifestation of female AND male nature. Don't forget that even if we assume women keep demanding, the men keep giving.
/r/MensRights12/10/15 08:55 PM
3

That's fine for You, maybe. It's not fine for quite a lot of men. And not only those who have little choice in the matter (Yeah, don't interact with kids when You're a teacher of 20 years, don't interact with women when You're a hairdresser or a plumber or a car mechanic and they're Your customers) - most men are biologically wired to want to have kids. People who are able to MGTOW without missing anything in their lives are extremely fortunate - and also evolutionary dead-ends, what with not pa…
/r/MensRights12/10/15 06:58 PM
0

What about the bodily autonomy of the fetus?
/r/MensRights12/10/15 06:54 PM
2

No. You'll get slandered. It's maybe possible to open one without getting sued, but it's a gamble.
/r/MensRights11/10/15 11:52 AM
1

Personally I'm not, either, but since that kinda makes me an evolutionary dead-end, I'm willing to bet most men will feel differently. It's awesome if someone can go MGTOW, but it's not a good solution for everyone. Definitely a lot of things men can learn from MGTOW without completely subscribing to it, though.
/r/MensRights11/10/15 11:47 AM
0

Wait wait wait, since when did abortion become a "fundamental right"?? Don't get me wrong, I'm as pro-choice as one could get, but since when is terminating a life a "fundamental right"? It should be a granted privilege, not a fundamental right.
/r/MensRights11/10/15 11:41 AM
1

18 trillion over 10 years. The US debt has been growing exponentially since about 1980. Back then, gross debt was at about 3 trillion. 2000, it was 7 trillion, making it 4 trillion in 20 years. In 2010 it was at about 14 trillion, that's 7 trillion in 10 years - double the debt in half the time. Today, it's about 18 trillion - 4 trillion in 5 years, so probably will increase to 10 trillion in 10 years at least by 2020, probably more. A projected 18 trilion increase until 2025 is actually entirel…
/r/MensRights11/10/15 11:36 AM
1

Its the opposite to a club, you basically just get to go out and do what you want in life free from social expectation of raising a family, being a good member of a community and all that. It's a bit of a bummer if having a wife, raising a family and being a good member of Your community IS what You want in life ;)
/r/MensRights11/10/15 10:43 AM
1

This works as long as You are not too far gone to find motivation to get busy. Down that road, madness lies.
/r/MensRights10/10/15 10:23 PM
1

You mean You do everything Your boss does except for this one extremely important thing and You end up getting less pay? Gee, I wonder why.
/r/MensRights09/10/15 01:31 AM
2

For a long time, men have been needed for protection. The status we gave them was a no-brainer and a small price to pay for being able to hide out at home so they would go out and risk their lives in times of trouble. Don't wanna pick a fight here, just had a thought while reading this: Frankly, I don't even see it as a 'price'. I mean, it is if we view it as a model for a society, but on an individual level, I'm pretty sure it was an organic thing. When other people sacrifice something for the …
/r/MensRights26/09/15 08:40 AM
2

Unfortunately, the moment You make these kinds of arguments, You're a pedophile apologetic. Because think of the children!!! Ironically, the law on age of consent is full of inconsistencies like those. By far my favourite is the particularity of marriage. In Arizona, for example, the age of consent is 18 (disclaimer, with some additional leeway for people within a certain age range, but that's immaterial here). However, You can get married at 16 or 17 with parental consent, or even below 16 with…
/r/MensRights21/09/15 07:30 PM
4

Well, I might have theoretically entertained the idea if not for the fact that it was 2 different judges, and the 2nd judge was female.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 04:44 PM
2

Won't help if You get falsely accused. It's ridiculous that teacher is becoming a high-risk profession for men o.O
/r/MensRights18/09/15 04:34 PM
2

I'm sorry, I see how I didn't word that very well. I'm trying to say that if one accepts arguments from biology in discussions about gender - citing sexual dimorphism in discussions about, say, military or firefighting standards - one also has to remember that very same sexual dimorphism when talking about cases where it doesn't benefit men. I suppose it's "sexist" in the strictest definition of the word - differential treatment due to gender - but certainly not in the colloquial sense of the wo…
/r/MensRights18/09/15 04:17 PM
0

In the same manner though, if You tell me to punch You in the face and I punch You hard enough to knock a tooth or two out, You may very well complain - even in court - that You didn't consent to me knocking Your teeth out, just to a punch - but don't be surprised if the Judge facepalms and doesn't agree that it was aggrevated assault. Some people will tell You with a straight face that the trauma of rape is more severe than losing a limb. I personally don't agree, but that's just haggling over …
/r/MensRights18/09/15 04:01 PM
1

Yes, that was indeed my point.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 03:35 PM
1

I see. I'll remind You next time a guy gets thrown into jail for failing to get ongoing, enthusiastic and verbal consent to every step of a sexual encounter. Oooor You could stop being faceatious. This is two idiots engaging in dangerous activities which went horribly wrong. This is usually called an accident, or... recklessly causing grievious harm at worst. What did she plead guilty to? Let's see... oh yeah, recklessly causing serious harm.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 10:32 AM
5

So it can be rape even if there was consent? Got it! Would it kill You guys to be consistent about a standard just once?
/r/MensRights18/09/15 07:40 AM
2

Hashtag notallMRAs But yeah, it can be very frustrating at times. Throwaway comments to the tune of "men good row row fight the powah!" can net You dozens of upvotes within the hour, critical analysis of a problem or questioning the sources will get You accusations of white-knighting, manginism, internalised misandry and whatnot. Frankly it's rather sad to see MRAs becoming feminists 2.0 =/
/r/MensRights18/09/15 07:32 AM
2

As always, reverse genders... would the "cost-benefit" argument hold water if this was something that effected men and to a lesser extent women or would women be demanding equal access? As always, remember what You actually want. Reverse the genders and there would be outrage, probably, yes - but would it be a justifiable outrage? The "cost-benefit" argument doesn't hold water in the court of public opinion, but the majority of the public is either stupid or ignorant on the specific issue, and n…
/r/MensRights18/09/15 07:26 AM
2

The money saved on ineffective HPV vaccination could be used as funding for developing a male contraceptive pill. Or for prostate cancer research. There's Your benefit.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 07:11 AM
1

I'm always (perhaps naively) surprised how many people here want to have their cake and eat it, too. Sexual dimorphism where it suits the narrative, evil sexist discrimination where it doesn't.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 07:08 AM
2

It's fun to entertain the 'gotcha!' moment, but frankly it's nitpicky as hell. It's like nitpicking the phrase 'Nothing is certain but death and taxes', because hurr durr You can be unemployed and not pay taxes hurr durr. Sure, a more airtight argument from Obi-Wan would have been "Only a Sith deals only in absolutes", but that doesn't make an elegant phrase in a script.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 06:45 AM
13

Because he apparently admitted to agreeing to the act. So technically, at this point it's not sexual assault, it's BDSM gone wrong. Fucked up either way, but none of our business what people consent to.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 06:23 AM
7

And people wonder how fasle rape allegation lynch mobs happen. Well, they happen just like this: Some idiot with a bias craves outrage, and to hell with facts. Fair trials and hearings are for pussies, hearsay is where it's at in 2015. The OP just did to that woman what the rabid mob did to the Duke players and the UVA fraternity. Well done.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 06:16 AM
2

Why would they...? Most politicians don't care about solving issues. In fact, they like issues. 'cause as long as there are issues, there is reason for elections. They'll milk the gynocentric train until the camel's back breaks, then they'll milk that for a while until some semblance of normality is restored, and then they'll find another issue to milk. Yes, I am aware that not all politicians are like that, but unfortunately those who are tend to do well for themselves. As usual with people who…
/r/MensRights17/08/15 05:59 PM
0

That's just retarded. No alimony is hardly fair to anyone. And I'm saying that in the knowledge that Men receive alimony, too. It's rare, but it happens. It's well documented that the family unit where the parents specialize is the family unit that is the most successful. It's not surprising - someone has to take care of the kids and the household. If both parents try to juggle career, kids, and chores, they'll half-ass everything. If both parents prioritize career, they'll end up spending a lot…
/r/MensRights17/08/15 05:55 PM
2

It's worse than that - often the term "men run the world" is being quite unfairly misapplied. What do people who say that mean by this? Well, ask them. They will almost immediately start talking about... politicians, judges, police chiefs, generals and CEOs. Notice something about that list? Pretty much all of them are public servants. All of them are accountable to either the government, the public at large, or - in the last instance - to shareholders. They hold power, yes, but they are not all…
/r/MensRights08/08/15 06:47 PM
6

Maybe the books she published up til now just aren't exactly selling very well? If JK Rowling sent a manuscript around tomorrow, even if it happened to be total shit, some publishers would publish it anyways. The name would sell enough copies to cover the expenses and make some profit, so why not? Not saying that this is the case, but it's a possible explaination other than sexism. As an aside, if sexism actually IS the cause, at least it's the easiest thing in the world to exploit.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 12:33 PM
21

Bullshit one way doesn't magically become less bullshit the other way. Circumcision doesn't raise the risk of contracting HIV, telling people that it reduces the risk does. People gonna be "why should I spend money on condoms, I got circumcised, everyone is telling me that protects me from aids amirite?".
/r/MensRights08/08/15 12:20 PM
4

Heterosexual relationships are natural and necessary for the human race to expand and exist. Homosexual relationships are not (Sorry but that's the facts) Wrong on one count at least. Even if they are not strictly necessary to the continued survival of the human race, they're still just as natural as heterosexual relationships. There is nothing unnatural about homosexuality, You can find it in quite a lot of non-human mammals. You're still right on Your condemnation of the usage of "heteronormat…
/r/MensRights08/08/15 12:14 PM
5

I am willing to bet that much of the "harassment" the SJW side has gotten indeed was due to third party trolls as well. Not all of it (same as not all harassment GGers are getting is from 3rd party trolls), but probably a lot. I mean, it's such an easy and rewarding target.
/r/MensRights05/08/15 07:57 PM
-10

I'm willing to bet that one was 3rd party trolls. I mean, come on.
/r/MensRights05/08/15 06:43 PM
4

The one that pisses me off the most is probably circumcision. The one I want to see fixed most is probably reproductive rights. Legal parental surrender & reliable unilateral male contraception would fix SO many things from the bottom up...
/r/MensRights05/08/15 03:12 AM
2

Consider the Parsemus Foundation, better known as "the guys behind Vasalgel". Effective, unilateral, affordable male contraception would solve a LOT of problems from the bottom up. It might not give You the warm glow of "I donate to charity", but I think it might be the best place to direct donation money if You want to actually solve some issues.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 07:45 PM
1

... no, that's because that is so bloody obvious it isn't even worth spelling out. It's the quintessence of political activism. It goes without saying.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 07:41 PM
3

Changing the law is not a solution for bad laws? That's news to me. We're trying to make the MRM into a relevant voting group. On the one hand by raising awareness of the issues, on the other hand by deconstructing feminism, since they're often in direct opposition to the MRM and hold more political influence. As for male contraception, donating to Vasalgel research is an option availble for any MRA. Hell, if there were clinical trials in my country, I'd probably volunteer as guinea pig.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 04:59 PM
3

Idiocy aside, I'm actually curious now whether there is any truth to it. I mean the bit about women's metabolism as compared to men's, not the patriarchy bullshit.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 12:01 AM
1

Read through most of that. Still not convinced. This demonstrates a corelation, not causation. Care to comment on the fact that Saudi Arabia's government spending is almost as high as that of UK in spite of not having women's suffrage? It's kinda hard to find numbers that aren't hidden behind a paywall, so I can't compare the historical increase, but comparing for the time between 2008 and 2015, the two graphs for SA and UK look remarkably similar: http://s12.postimg.org/xa741hmlp/Untitled.png (…
/r/MensRights03/08/15 11:54 PM
4

Legal changes. Banning male genital mutilation, enabling legal parental surrender for men, default shared custody of children upon divorce, removing primary aggressor policies from the law. Oh, also developing reliable, unilateral male contraception. A few off the top of my head. Edit: Especially the latter has the potential to solve a LOT of issues from the bottom up - paternity fraud, for example. As it happens, most of that is not exactly easy to achieve, or even within the power of the avera…
/r/MensRights03/08/15 11:22 PM
0

Pedantry. Men typically show no in-group preference and some out-group preference. We can argue about whether it's strong or not - perhaps I'm misremembering, but IIRC it was nearly 75% out-group preference for women, which looks pretty strong to me -, but putting it in contrast to their lack of in-group preference would still mean that men, in general, will vote for people who pander to gynocentric thinking. I do not think it would make any practical difference in the long run. I am also not co…
/r/MensRights03/08/15 11:17 PM
3

The men's rights movement is not a movement. Okay. I think we'll have to fundamentally disagree on definitions here. Including what this subreddit is for. Which is weird, because right in the sidebar, we see: "The Men's Rights subreddit is a place for those who wish to discuss men's rights and the ways said rights are infringed upon.". You don't want an inclusive discussion? Well, there's a name for a place that practices the opposite approach. I believe it's "echo chamber". However, men's right…
/r/MensRights03/08/15 11:04 PM
0

I am going to have to repeat myself: Men have a strong out-group preference for women. When only men vote, they vote in favor of women. When men and women vote, they vote in favor of women. Even if one would disallow women's suffrage, not much would change in practice.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 10:57 PM
3

Probably because they're not interested in truth or honesty at all. They can always point out that this is an archive and that they made an apology. Meanwhile, the page will still show up in google when looking up "MRA hate group?" or similar items. SPLC is kinda a caricature of themselves, though, and AFAIK noone actually takes them seriously anymore, though.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 10:53 PM
4

That is only a problem if You concentrate on perpetrators only. Many of us are actually more concerned with (the lack of) support for male victims.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 10:48 PM
1

It could also be Patriarchy...atriarchy...triarchy...triarchy. Aaaanywaaaaaays.... okay, I'm done with the shitposting. Not gonna make it a habit, promise.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 10:46 PM
1

But MRM is a movement, so concern does matter, and all concern is not necessarily trolling. Ace678 said the mods here are weak because they allow concern trolling.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 07:19 PM
3

It's Your toxic masculinity, of course. Shitlord.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 07:17 PM
2

Going with that, there was never any winning, since men as a group have a relatively strong out-group preference towards women's concerns anyways. So it doesn't matter whether men or women have more voting power. That is all assuming voting counts for much in the first place - often times, it doesn't. And I wouldn't be so quick to assume it wouldn't happen. The Zeitgeist moves on and sweeps up all of us, sooner or later. Lots of things have happened that were "just not going to happen".
/r/MensRights03/08/15 07:16 PM
4

3 year old item. They actually made a follow-up statement partially retracting that. Basically, they lied and they know it.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 05:46 PM
2

Because there are exactly 0 women who are concerned with men's rights and equality. Oh wait.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 05:42 PM
3

There is a word for this bullshit - concern trolling. How do You distinguish concern trolling from actual concern? Do tell. See, 'cause I'm being accused of that one often, and it strikes me as a bit unfair that there is no defense for it. Disagreement on something =|= trolling.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 05:41 PM
2

Comments disabled. I am disappoint right from the get-go.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 05:18 PM
9

But it's other men who do it, darling. See, that makes it all right then, cause that means women are still free to fear all men, the sex-crazed rapeculture-y bastards! /s
/r/MensRights03/08/15 05:16 PM
1

Not only that, there could be no winner. The guy wins, he's a shithead who beats up women. The gal wins? Well it was obviously set up for PR reasons!
/r/MensRights03/08/15 08:57 AM
2

I wasn't making a statement about ER, just about the (imo) false dichotomy of "misogynist vs madman".
/r/MensRights03/08/15 08:33 AM
3

Why is it a "vs" in any case? In my book, having generalized hatred or contempt for half of the human population pretty much qualifies as being insane.
/r/MensRights02/08/15 11:24 PM
3

Don't You know that 30 dead people a year in a country of 300 000 000 with notoriously easy access to guns is an EPIDEMIC? Wait, let me translate that into DVI speak: "A person dies in a mass shooting every other week! We should do something about it!!!!"
/r/MensRights02/08/15 11:17 PM
3

Actually, they probably are. It's just that our life expectency has doubled thanks to scientific advances. Lifelong monogamy would be way easier and way more common if lives were shorter ;)
/r/MensRights02/08/15 06:14 PM
0

Depends. I am fine, for example, with significantly more money going into breast cancer research than prostate cancer research. This is because like with the gender pay gap, I don't just take numbers at face value, but try to look for explainations first. The long and short of it is that breast cancer is more likely to kill young women, whereas prostate cancer is more likely to kill old men (who have an increased risk of getting pretty much every disease due to old age). From both a pragmatical …
/r/MensRights02/08/15 06:08 PM
0

That's the cost that comes with the perks of having things like, oh, subsidized healthcare, maintained roads, unemployment benefits, law enforcement and so on. I'm fine with that. Incidentally, I pay pretty much exactly as much in taxes as my partner. Less, actually, since I earn less money. And frankly, I don't think Your representation is correct. Women as a group conspire to take away money from men? Well, maybe in Your country. In mine, the majority of people - both men and women - don't eve…
/r/MensRights02/08/15 10:33 AM
1

Justicar is one harsh mofo. I don't think I could ever live up to his insanely high standards. I do respect him a lot, though.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 11:20 PM
6

Well? We DO live in a gynocentric society. Biology more or less dictates that. And "their agenda"? MGTOW have an agenda? That's a new one for me. I wouldn't know about MGTOW mirroring anything, I don't talk to other MGTOW. I don't feel the need to, I do my own thing. No, not everyone is doing that. I know quite a few people, for example, who quite literally got married and had kids because "well, You're supposed to, right?". My partner tells me men, after she tells them she doesn't want to have …
/r/MensRights01/08/15 11:17 PM
5

Then the mgtow subreddit sidebar is full of shit. At its core, MGTOW is like atheist - it doesn't say anything about one's political views. You're just a man going his own way. The whole label is quintessentially broad. After all, how hypocritical would it be to say "You can't go Your own way Your way, You need to do it our way"?
/r/MensRights01/08/15 10:39 PM
1

It's good that You question You own (possible) biases. There's no golden rule. As long as You are aware of facts and risks, everything else is - hah - Your body, Your choice.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 10:34 PM
7

That's a weird way to view that. Are mgtows republicans or libertarians? Wat? Are MRAs left or right? Are atheists left or right-handed? Are gamers liberals or traditionalists? No causal relation at all.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 10:31 PM
6

I don't see enough evidence to assume feminism has anything to do with it. There are more than enough anti-porn people out there who aren't feminists - many religious fundamentalists, for example. (in b4 "sooo... since feminism is a religion...")
/r/MensRights01/08/15 10:26 PM
2

Not really. Frankly, I haven't witnessed either thing, at least not that I can remember. But I'm not the best person to ask. I have experienced very little of the issues men face in any case. Not circumcised, not married, my partner doesn't want to marry OR have children, and I left universtity on my own terms (finished school with 0.1 point short of perfect average, dropped out of university with 1.4 average). Not wealthy enough to be target for gold-digging, not active enough in society to be …
/r/MensRights01/08/15 10:22 PM
5

gnore those feminist concerns that are legitimate. Those being? Serious question. I've been looking for legitimate feminist concerns for a while now. Anything one could actually work towards changing, if You would. "Gender roles" and "people can be sexist pricks sometimes" are arguably here to stay.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 10:04 PM
2

Well, I do think this subreddit could use a sticky on top, outlining what MRAs want to have changed. I'd advise to divide it into hard issues (the ones that can hardly be argued against: Right to bodily integrity, reproductive rights, the sexism of the draft. It's extremely hard to argue against those three in any way) and soft issues (everything else that we can actually potentially argue about). That being said... I am sure You have come across the phenomenon known as "both men and women still…
/r/MensRights01/08/15 10:00 PM
1

What are You talking about? "Man" is a derogatory name nowadays ;)
/r/MensRights01/08/15 09:25 AM
1

Umm... circumcision didn't do that. Sorry. That's malnutrition and lack of proper medical care. Yes, the botched circumcision definitely didn't help, but come ON. This is such a stretch.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 01:56 AM
4

Jeez. I wish I could talk to those people, individually, personally. It takes a bit of explaining to demonstrate why MRAs have to actively oppose feminists. "They don't want to change things, they just bash feminists!" Okay. How? How do we change things? And what things would we change? We could tackle the issue of male genital mutilation! Well, we do, actually. And often enough, when we talk about it, we get... feminists who say "MGM is not an issue, haven't You heard of FGM? It's way worse! We…
/r/MensRights01/08/15 01:50 AM
1

Officially, I think it was for "derailing". However, it's interesting to note that the ban followed a vehement disagreement I had with... Paul Elam. Go figure. Granted, I kinda brought it on myself. Maybe I shouldn't have said "If that's Your true colors, ban away." Turns out they were his true colors ;)
/r/MensRights01/08/15 01:32 AM
2

Actually, it IS exasperating that men's rights activism is a thing. To paraphrase Dr. Randomercam, I'm not proud to be an MRA - I wish I didn't have to. It really is exasperating that we need people to campaign for the rights of young boys to not have their genitals mutilated.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 01:18 AM
1

Jesus, what is it with psychiatrists telling people to kill themselves? I was hoping my experiences there were not representative.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 12:42 AM
1

I gotta break a lance for Elam here. To clarify, I do not like the guy, at all. And another disclaimer - I'm banned from the comments on AVFM. So really, I don't have a reason to defend him other than his merits. And there is merit in what he has been doing. Yes, his writing seems to hurt more than help. But his inflamatory style has brought a lot of attention to Men's Rights. Sure, we can all sit back now and claim we would have gotten it anyways - but no way to know that, and I personally know…
/r/MensRights01/08/15 12:34 AM
2

Do they also come in the Derpy variety or are us fans of tertriary characters screwed again? ;)
/r/MensRights01/08/15 12:27 AM
35

So... You want them to give tampons to men, too? Or what is the concern here?
/r/MensRights31/07/15 12:42 PM
7

At least in this case, that's one thing male sex workers should be glad about. From what I've gathered, those people are often trafficking fetishists, practically adopting the stance that all prostitution is trafficking. They are often doing a lot more harm than good. With friends like these...
/r/MensRights31/07/15 11:39 AM
1

Yeah, that was my bad. I misunderstood his meaning there. My mistake.
/r/MensRights31/07/15 12:09 AM
1

Obviously not bleeding obvious enough, seeing how I understood it otherwise. One could say, the way I understood You wrong. But I do apologize for having misunderstood You there.
/r/MensRights31/07/15 12:08 AM
1

+1. It's alarmingly easy to talk children into making claims of sexual assault. You can practically talk them into it by asking them the same question over and over again, slightly modified every time. Often children will just break down and try to find the "right" answer once they realize their first answer doesn't satisfy You. Especially if they can't just go away or ask someone else for the questioning to stop. I'm not saying this happened here, I'm just saying it's a thing.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 09:40 PM
2

Well, with that kind of understanding of economics, they won't be in the top three for long. They might transition into a good PR firm though, I guess.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 08:54 PM
-2

Edit2: Disregard that, I suck cocks. Totally misunderstood that post. Sure — as long as you ignore the way the majority of men around the world suffer MGM! Sure, as long as You blatantly lie. According to the WHO, around 1/3 of men worldwide is circumcised. That's by no account a majority. Edit: Because some people around here are just as eager to get offended as certain people elsewhere, I do not support or condone genital mutilation, regardless of gender, unless done as an adult (and even then…
/r/MensRights30/07/15 08:50 PM
3

facepalm Bloody hipster racists.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 03:54 PM
1

Even if MR doesn't get in there, the whole idea is fundamentally opposable.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 03:04 PM
1

How they can take a study seriously that sets up a control, then does not evaluate the results of the control is beyond me.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 03:02 PM
14

I kinda did. I'll never give a feminist the benefit of the doubt again. Promise.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:12 AM
1

That's interesting. I do wonder if that has anything to do with the small population of NZ.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 12:11 AM
1

Personally, I think the solution is legalization and regulation. The problem with legalization and regulation is it does little to actually offer protection for women who take up the trade due to dire financial need. With legalization and regulation come beaurocracy and taxation. Meaning more costs and less net profit. Prostitution is often a tempting (and sometimes the only) alternative precisely because it's profitable. If I have the choice between doing shitty work for $15/hour, taxed, or doi…
/r/MensRights29/07/15 11:23 PM
22

Mine was about giving a feminist the benefit of the doubt. Gosh, I'm such a shitlord.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 11:11 PM
4

This is a human rights movement, not a religion - or a popularity contest. We don't have a pope. We just have issues to adress.
/r/MensRights27/07/15 05:07 PM
4

I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she thought she's being progressive and just didn't realized what she actually wrote there. This could have been deliberate, yeah - but it could also just be a mind so affected by the zeitgeist that it didn't realize that in an article that called for treating men more humanely, she actively dehumanized men. Left a lengthy comment on there, let's see how it goes.
/r/MensRights26/07/15 11:38 AM
1

For instance in the first column for full-time workers. They averaged 59,450 men and averaged 47,076 women. So of course men are going to make more on average,even if they both get paid the same individually. Nitpicking, but that's not how hit works. One calculates the average by adding up the sum total and dividing it by the number of entries. It's irrelevant for the average that there are more men working than women. Example: 5 men earning 90, 100, 120, 150, 170. That's 630 total, divided by t…
/r/MensRights25/07/15 09:53 PM
2

There is a bit of an unfortunate vocabulary thing going on. There's this term "swallowing the red pill" - a reference to the Matrix movie, where the protagonist is told that the world what it seems to be, then is being offered two pills - the blue pill would allow him to go back to believing what he always believed about the world, and the red pill would help him see reality as it truly is. In that sense, most MRAs have "swallowed the red pill" because they recognized that men don't actually hav…
/r/MensRights25/07/15 09:32 PM
1

Gragas disagrees. Gragas will fuck Your shit up. Gragas will come a'rollin' out of the jungle and smash Your face in with his glorious bellyflop. Gragas is love. Gragas is life. ...Sorry, i just HAD to ;)
/r/MensRights25/07/15 09:09 PM
4

That's because it wasn't a quote. Do You see qotation marks? It's a paraphrase.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 01:32 PM
6

No, of course she didn't. This is just very convincing CGI.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 09:34 AM
6

Video evidence is un-shitty enough a source for You, mate?
/r/MensRights24/07/15 09:34 AM
1

Child pornography charges were dropped. I do not know for sure, but seeing as there were 10k+ text messages with the 'victim' involved, I would assume that the child pornography charges were for sexting. As such, it's a good thing they were dropped. I think it's a shame that laws designed to protect children from exploitation get abused to get frivolous charges for harmless, consensual behavior. Before anyone gets on my case: Yes, I understand that in this case, it's statutory rape, but there ar…
/r/MensRights24/07/15 09:30 AM
1

Thank You. Guess my memory was just being a bitch again.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 09:11 AM
6

Dude, no offense, but You are acting like one just now. "People disagree with me! I'm getting downvoted! I'm a victim of the shitlords!" Get over it. Unpopular opinions are called that for a reason. Either You care about the truth of a statement and don't care about upvotes or downvotes, or You care about Your score. You can't have both. Anywhere, not just here. Know what they call a place where You don't get downvoted for comments people disagree with? An echo chamber.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 09:07 AM
2

To the top with You. Fuck this clickbait shit. From the article: Mr Corcoran said that when criminal investigations had taken over the case, Detective Senior Constable Alexander had asked him whether he believed the woman's claims. He said he found that question alarming and something he'd never been asked before. I actually sorta agree with him. It shouldn't be relevant what a police officer personally believes. What matters is evidence.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 08:48 AM
3

Is that a recent addition? I honestly don't remember reading that when I first arrived here. Not that I disagree, just curious whether my memory is that bad.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 08:38 AM
1

I read the entirety of it. I'm a rather talkative sort, but I really don't know what to say right now.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 04:38 PM
2

Someone is trying to make a lot of money off of bigots. Insert "I'm not even mad; that's amazing!" meme here.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 03:49 PM
2

I didn't mean to imply that germany is particularly bad when it comes to circumcision, but I can see how it could be seen as such. However, when it comes to legal change, it's been an uphill battle - the combination of "circumcision is not a big deal" and fear of being labled as antisemite is hard to overcome.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 10:48 AM
1

Socially, yeah, and thank goodness for that. But politically, the accusation of racism in general and antisemitism in particular still holds a lot of power.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 10:44 AM
11

Germany is a minefield for Intactivists. Any effort to stop this barbaric practice will be swiftly met with accusations of antisemitism, and antisemitism is the #1 sin here. The scars left by the Third Reich run deep.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 12:46 AM
-1

The Men’s Rights Movement (MRM), comprised of women and men called Men’s Rights Activists (MRAs), is a social and political movement which seeks to combat inequalities and injustices in societies across the world, but particularly in the West, that impact men and boys. Indian MRAs, You don't exist. Japanese economists who are concerned with grass eaters and want to tackle the underlying causes - eh, that's some oriental crap, who cares. Intactivism? Surely such a thing is limited to the west and…
/r/MensRights23/07/15 12:31 AM
2

You misunderstood me. GamerGate has achieved a lot in the past year, and it did so without much leadership. GG's victories were carried on the back of individuals who got fed up with some shit and started to dig for facts, tweet, selectively boycott and write e-mails to sponsors. Sure, we had some very notable GGers who did a shitton of work and acted as community beacons, but that wouldn't be worth much without the average gamer doing his part. And I don't know if You remember, but we've seen o…
/r/MensRights21/07/15 05:31 PM
34

former operations analyst and statistician here, doesn't surprise me in the slightest, but it does show that the establishment he works for is useless It is. Bundesministerium für Familie und Forschung. Those are the guys who pay for a pilot study on violence against men (2004 I believe? Could have been 2006), and when the results are in and - surprise, surprise - they show similar outcomes to those of the study on violence against women, what's their response? Hint: It wasn't "That's interestin…
/r/MensRights21/07/15 03:12 PM
3

For all the people who think grass roots consumer activism carries no weight, may I point You towards #GamerGate? You never know what might spark the next one. This guy at least is doing something. Good for him.
/r/MensRights21/07/15 02:58 PM
1

Brilliant. So we're aspiring to be just as moronic as feminists now? No thanks.
/r/MensRights19/07/15 10:25 PM
-3

I know it's an unpopular opinion around here, but I don't think there's anything wrong with that sentiment. Quick! Picture a nobel-winning scientific genius! Ok, was that a male or a female? What happened to "Men are usually the statistical outliers, that's why the smartest people on earth tend to be male"? Well, same goes for the biggest idiots. So if You guys take offense that someone sees "dumb and stupid" and associates with "male", then You actually should agree with feminists that associat…
/r/MensRights18/07/15 09:11 PM
2

She might just know it's the better horse to bet on.
/r/MensRights16/07/15 09:01 PM
1

Not true at all. At my workplace (predominantly female staff), my also female boss enforces knee-length (at least) trousers and full shirts (no spaghetti tops or tank tops). In the summer, we get temperatures of up to 40 degrees indoors thanks to glass roofs, too. So far, not a lot of outrage. It's exactly what it's claimed to be - a practical solution. Also, not like places like that aren't known to enforce dress codes for employees. Note I am not defending the women who grope men in any way. T…
/r/MensRights16/07/15 06:30 PM
3

Is there some sort of difference between "The Red Pill" and "swallowing the red pill"? 'cause most MGTOWs I know have swallowed the latter.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 12:58 PM
1

Or, You know... not? Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but my current partner has had a former friend sorta stalk her for a few months. Nothing life-threatening, but not a nice situation all around. She could have gone to the cops (more than enough evidence to get a restraining order at least), but she chose not to for various reasons. We hear so much about trigger-happy accusers and whatnot that it's easy to forget how most normal, sane people actually prefer to solve their issues on their own a…
/r/MensRights11/07/15 10:16 PM
1

Just a quick one in: You're not. Don't worry. Some of us sometimes forget that holding feminists up to their ridiculous standards is a means to show how ridiculous those standards are in the first place. That doesn't mean we should actually act the way they (well, some of them) act. Responsible adults know that there is a lot of moral grey area around sex and consent. And just because something can be a crime under certain circumstances doesn't mean it HAS to be one, every time. I mean, if my be…
/r/MensRights11/07/15 10:11 PM
2

We kinda do. Gynocentrism (+ optional Male Disposability). Gynocentrism is pretty solid.
/r/MensRights11/07/15 09:31 PM
1

And by definition, Feminism is about equality! Guess we're all feminists now!
/r/MensRights18/06/15 03:38 PM
1

That's the protection. It's not much of a protection if no grievence has taken place, is it? What does it protect from? Falling in love and consensual sex? My beef with the laws as they are is that they define people into being guilty of one of the most severe crimes we have, regardless of circumstance. If there were no age of consent laws, it would be legal for adults to have sex with anyone, all the way down to babies... [snipped for brevity] I'd settle for that, it'd be infinitely better than…
/r/MensRights18/06/15 02:49 PM
1

I'm not sure if I understand what the difference in practice would be. Before I misinterpret that, could You expand a bit?
/r/MensRights18/06/15 02:21 PM
70

Technically, You don't have to cut into the testicles in order to inject a drop of gel into the vas deferens. The injection point is likely to be just below the scrotum, since that minimizes the risk of accidentally damaging vital organs. And it's an injection, not surgery. I know, people are not likely to see much of a difference between knife+genitalia=cringe and needle+genitalia=cringe. But I still disagree with Your assessment. Yes, those types of contraceptives are unpopular with females, b…
/r/MensRights18/06/15 02:12 PM
2

Which is exactly why we need to get rid of them. Why would anyone defend absurd laws? Oh, because "think of the children", that's why. This mantra is almost as effective as "think of the women" when it comes to pushing through absurd and ridiculous laws.
/r/MensRights18/06/15 02:03 PM
1

We need to get rid of statutory rape laws. What good are they doing? Seriously now. What does statutory rape law cover that normal rape law doesn't? Nothing, except for presuming guilt. If we get rid of statutory rape laws, and an underage victim of rape comes forward, I'm pretty sure the judge won't go "Well, I'm not gonna listen to You 'cause You could have consented in theory". Think 'listen and believe' is bad? Well, statutory rape is worse than that. It's not even "always believe the victim…
/r/MensRights18/06/15 02:01 PM
1

The law is not there to protect. No law will protect You from getting raped. The law is there for redress of grievances and prevention of further offenses. As such, the first thing a court should be doing is to examine whether a grievance has occoured. Age of consent laws and mandatory prosecution laws skip that part. They define people into victimhood and don't give them a voice. Remember the guy who had sex with a minor who lied to him about her age? He got convicted even though both her and h…
/r/MensRights18/06/15 01:29 PM
1

Actually, I don't, since I was adressing a more general comment. I explicitly stated that I have no idea whether consent was present or not in this particular case - it is irrelevant to me agreeing that just because a sexual relationship is not mundane it doesn't mean it should be considered rape.
/r/MensRights17/06/15 07:54 PM
0

No it doesn't. As You have correctly identified, understanding is key here. Not age. Power certainly doesn't, either. Power lets You coerce and blackmail, but those are very different beasts. You CAN walk away. An exception would be things like schools, prisons or family - settings where You actually can't just walk away or You'll be hauled right back by the authorities. But this applies to other subject matter as well - like, say, cruel and unusual punishment or physical or emotional abuse. Thi…
/r/MensRights17/06/15 07:51 PM
1

Do elaborate.
/r/MensRights17/06/15 02:59 PM
-1

I agree with the OP in Your picture. This is the wrong way to go. If the sex was consensual - and I do not know if it was in this instance -, it's not a rape case. If it was not consensual, then it is rape, regardless of whom it happened to. Gender has nothing to do with rape. Age has nothing to do with rape. Wealth or power have nothing to do with rape. The only thing that matters is whether consent was freely given. If the sex was consensual, it can still be a lot of things - coercion, decepti…
/r/MensRights17/06/15 10:30 AM
10

Disclaimer and inb4: I am not defending the actions of this woman at all. She totally, absolutely had it coming. That being said: Not weird at all. The guy just demonstrated why everyone was laughing when she was buzzing around him doing little damage. Hell, even he himself was laughing until she got serious. If You watch the video again, at about 1:35, she uses excessive force (we hear a loud smack, that had to seriously hurt) - and the crowd goes all "Whoah whoah!" - and then he immediately re…
/r/MensRights17/06/15 10:08 AM
1

And it's just as standard to think other people are NOT like us, specifically that other people are worse than us. See Dunning-Krüger-Effect, or withing the MRM - the "One Good Man" phenomenon.
/r/MensRights17/06/15 08:44 AM
1

No it doesn't. I think men often circumcise their sons for no good reason at all. Doesn't mean I could see myself do it. Ever. All it says is that 20% aknowledge that it happens at all.
/r/MensRights17/06/15 08:43 AM
-3

Frankly, I don't see that as a big deal. "Why don't men get to have maternity leave?" is akin to saying "Why don't men get to have abortions?". Sexual dimorphism. It doesn't cease to exist if it doesn't fit the agenda. Of course, with the purpose of maternity leave extended to encompass not only the time needed to bear the child and recover from birth, but also to raise the child - the latter can go to either parent. But longer maternity leave for women is hard to argue against. It's biology.
/r/MensRights17/06/15 08:12 AM
3

I vehemently disagree. Right now, I do roughly 80 to 90 % of the housework, seeing as I'm only working part-time. I don't see why my partner should work full-time and then be expected to do the dishes, cooking or laundry after work. I'll keep doing that, thank You very much.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 11:23 PM
1

Not only that, mate. Left and right, traditionalists and MGTOW, religious and atheists. United vs the even more crazy. It's like gamergate, except less popular and more important.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 11:02 PM
5

Have You considered politics? Maybe You could look into Justice For Men And Boys, since You're from the UK...
/r/MensRights16/06/15 10:21 PM
1

(cont. from before) Feminists would argue that the preferential treatment that they are given in schools and jobs is precisely there to balance out the discrimination that already exists and the competitive edge that men get from lacking those obstacles in childhood and onward. How do you respond to a claim like that? There are a dozen responses to that, and I'll make a few of them. First of all, You can't end discrimination by discriminating more. It just doesn't work. When You give a certain g…
/r/MensRights15/06/15 01:39 PM
1

...I just spent over an hour typing a response, then lost it due to pc crash. Goddamn it. Okay, take two. I hope at least that goes to show that I am taking this seriously. I think that the problem is that feminism sees MRAs as outsiders at best and opponents at worst instead of mutual colleagues aimed at the same goal but with different opinions on how to get there. Whereas I think that is not a problem, it's the truth. We do not aim at the same goal. Feminists like to claim that they want equa…
/r/MensRights15/06/15 01:39 PM
1

I am going to assume You act in good faith, and answer accordingly. Sorry for the length, and I apologize up front if my tone becomes strident at some point. Those sound like noble goals. Has the men's right movement succeeded in ending any of those things in any location? Not to my knowledge, but not for the lack of trying, mind You. Take the example of Germany - making Circumcision illegal was voted down because that would be oppressive to the Jewish community - avoiding religious offense is m…
/r/MensRights15/06/15 11:15 AM
4

Do You have any source that actually lists the questions the participants were asked to determine the number of assaults? I followed the link in the article and I only found questions about the participant's opinions on efficiency of rape prevention programs, authorities dealing with reports and similar stuff, but I haven't seen what questions were asked and what definitions were used for the actual questions about sexual assault. Maybe I just missed it.
/r/MensRights14/06/15 04:21 PM
1

I'm not saying that we should enter feminism and criticize their views from within. Ehm, excuse me: But how will they ever be open to addressing this hole in their logic? I don't think that they would ever be willing to listen to an outsider of their philosophy unless they feel like it is safe to do so. Again, how do we solve this problem by letting their beliefs go unopposed within their own movement? You're not saying we should criticize their views from within, You're just saying it doesn't h…
/r/MensRights14/06/15 01:31 PM
1

So then why bother with either movement? Because contrary to what it may appear like, this is not the prove-feminists-wrong movement, even though it's often necessary to do so on the way. It's the men's rights movement. We're actually more interested in things like ending male genital mutilation and giving men reproductive rights, or stopping governments from passing laws that legally discriminate against men. I understand this. But they aren't listening. As long as you are an outsider, they can…
/r/MensRights14/06/15 12:29 PM
8

Jesus christ. If I was a less scrupulous man, I'd be organizing crime in India right now. How short-sighted can one be?
/r/MensRights13/06/15 08:46 PM
10

Dunno how much of it is wishful thinking, but I noticed this too. I actually said out loud to my partner during the video: "Now he knows exactly how we feel". You can just see it in his expression, this "Holy shit, I'm surrounded by morons, how do I argue with that?" kind of realization. He has two options now - ignore and carry on, or re-evaluate his worldview. And good luck to him, I gather many of us know exactly just how hard it is to do that.
/r/MensRights13/06/15 07:50 PM
1

If both sides join and have their arguments put to scrutiny, would not the better ideas win out? I do not see what is counterproductive with that. When one side says "1+1=2" and the other says "1+1=PATRIARCHY YOU FILTHY MISOGYNIST", arguing is indeed rather contraproductive. I am fully aware that feminists are likely to represent the MRM in a similar fashion... and there You go. That's the impasse we reached. Feminist arguments have repeatedly been put to scrutiny - Patriarchy is unfalsifiable (…
/r/MensRights13/06/15 07:46 PM
1

You know what? Go try it. Go oppose feminists within their own movement. For example on r/feminism. See You in 30 minutes when You're banned. I agree that feminists have overstepped their bounds in several areas, but I also think that women still have a long way to go in other aspects of society, and for that feminism still has a purpose. Like where, precisely?
/r/MensRights13/06/15 07:35 PM
28

Wow. Are we gonna see Cenk apologize to GWW next or what? O.o
/r/MensRights13/06/15 02:15 PM
3

Not cool, but to be honest I don't mind male-only OR female-only (or even black-only or muslim-only or whatever-only) spaces, as long as they're, You know - optional. If someone wants to found a boys club (or girls club, or gay club, or whatever club) and doesn't welcome Xs or Ys - well, let the open market of ideas take care of it. I wouldn't want to subscribe there myself, even though I am sympathetic to some of the MGTOW philosophy.
/r/MensRights13/06/15 02:14 PM
2

But... why would You support feminism? I mean, seriously. I am an MRA because I advocate for the rights of men. In a similar fashion, I would call myself a WRA - I do advocate for the rights of women (specifically - because anyone can just make that general claim - abortion and sex workers). There's just nothing else I can call myself, it's the descriptive noun for what I do. But I wouldn't call myself, say, "manospherist", if that was a thing. I wouldn't want to be lumped in with Return of King…
/r/MensRights13/06/15 09:33 AM
1

"Survivors UK gets its funding slashed in 2015! Yet the MRM doesn't care - here, let me link to their articles and campaigns from 2014 and 2013 to prove it!" Yes, the MRM is incompetent as fuck, they can't even see into the future. Meanwhile, J4M&B actually blogged about this. Valid point about AVFM, though, I don't remember reading about that one there. Anyone knows whether that's an oversight or a deliberate choice?
/r/MensRights13/06/15 09:00 AM
1

I'm not missing it. The crux of the issue is that marriage still requires the assent of the child in question. That is the absurdity of it. What is assent? Well, assent is like consent, except it cannot be called consent because the law defines it differently so it has to be called something else. So, in other words: -"I wanna fuck that guy". -"Nope, You can't. Not even if Your parents would allow it." -"Okay. Um... can I marry him and then fuck him?" -"Sure, as long as Your parents are okay wit…
/r/MensRights12/06/15 03:03 PM
5

Love the headline. "Man receives sex act while blacked out". For fuck's sake. If he got anally penetrated with a cactus they'd probably call it "Man involved in kinky sex while blacked out". What does it take for them to call it rape?
/r/MensRights11/06/15 04:06 PM
7

I personally like the way Dr. Randomercam put it (paraphrased): "Men have all the rights, You say? Splendid, gimme Your dick mate! SLAM Oh what, You wanted that foreskin? You think You had a right to it? Well that was a bloody stupid idea, wasn't it?"
/r/MensRights11/06/15 04:00 PM
1

Are You daft or just acting that way? Once they DO get married, they CAN give consent. They don't need parental consent every time they fuck their wives or husbands. And in any case, it's obvious that their own consent must be taken into account too, else they could be married to someone against their will if their parents say so. So yes, they can and do consent to 'adult things'.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 03:56 PM
1

Except for all the cases where they can, like when they get married first. This is not even a case of de facto =|= de jure, this is a case where even the law has all manners of exceptions built in.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 11:05 AM
1

No. I am saying that stupid, unfair, bad laws quite evidently exist, so dismissing something on the ground of "that's the law" is fallacious.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 10:47 PM
2

Amen to that.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 07:47 PM
1

Well, there's certainly no benefit for You from discussing things with me, that's for sure. Seeing as Your whole argument can be summed up by "But it's the law!", I don't know what You are looking for on a men's rights subreddit. Circumcision is fine because it's legal. Getting raped, then milked for child support is fine, 'cause it's the law. Conscription is A-okay, cause it's the law. VAWA and Title IX are all fine, 'cause it's the bloody law.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 07:40 PM
3

And when You get raped by a woman and she gets pregnant, You get to pay child support for 18 to 25 years depending on where You live. That's how the law works. So all the outrage here about such cases is moot. Good to know where You stand on that.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 07:26 PM
-4

No, of course You don't think this is a case of that. Well, have fun being offended at standard language. Maybe You can join the feminists on that one, I hear they're all about sniffing out inappropriate linguistic relics.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 07:23 PM
0

Oh, right. Let me just excercise my patriarchal power and arrange a meeting. No, wait. I'm a polish immigrant living in germany. I don't even get to vote. But thanks anyways.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 06:33 PM
2

Ah. Okay then. Thanks for clarifying.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 06:02 PM
2

That makes no sense. Why is forgiving infidelity a weakness now? I mean, You are entitled to Your opinions, of course. But how is that different from saying, say, "I won't vote for that guy because his wife is fat and no self-respecting guy would stay with a fat chick"?
/r/MensRights04/06/15 05:53 PM
0

Hillary Clinton might be a repulsive human being, but what do her private affairs have to do with anything? There are people out there who don't exactly value fidelity very highly, You know.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 05:41 PM
1

You have implied that in some sense what is going on in these scenarios is not a crime or at the very least shouldn't be treated as such. No. I have implied that in many cases, what is happening is a crime that is different from rape, and therefore should not be treated the same as rape. The point is that adults cannot have consensual sex with minors By law. Except for all the cases where they can. That is the crux of the problem. Go fuck a 16 year old in Alabama - perfectly legal. Now travel to…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 05:37 PM
1

This is not a court. It's a discussion boards, and I don't know any better place to discuss unfair or illegitimate laws than a Men's Rights boards.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 04:53 PM
-3

Oh, I can see why. It's because this side has its fair share of people who are just eager to find offense everywhere. Yes, words have diffferent meanings in different contexts. And in the context of suicide, the phrase "silly thing" is an euphemism. It downplays the severity of the signified, yes. But it's not trivializing, it's coping. I assume if someone says to me he doesn't want to live anymore and I retort with "omg, don't say such things!", You'd interpret that as me silencing them and den…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 04:48 PM
7

And also look at all the posts where I'm for them. Wow, such feminist. Amaze. Here, I backed my shit. But actually do tell, where have I argued against men's rights? Cause I don't take to that kind of accusation kindly, sir or madam.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 04:36 PM
-18

sigh No. That is not how language works. See, I'm no expert on the english language. However, I do speak three languages fluently, and I don't think it's a coincidence that there's an almost exact equivalent of that euphemism in both german and polish. I have also been in the position where the phrase "Please don't do anything silly" was being directed at me, from family members. I assure You they did not think it was trivial.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 03:25 PM
6

Yes. The causality being that females do the sexual selecting in almost all sexually dimorphic species. This is a biological prerogative. Cultural factors merely enhance it.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 03:20 PM
3

I see You can make baseless accusations. Well done.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 03:09 PM
25

Obviously, Obama would charge $3506,49.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 03:06 PM
25

Don't overthink it. It's easier because teenage boys want sex and have a harder time getting it than teenage girls.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 03:00 PM
1

So when they pass the laws that make drunk sex rape (but only for the man, of course), will You be standing here saying "It's a matter of the law being that a drunk woman is not legally capable of consenting"? Yes, society has drawn the line where it has. And like with many of its previously drawn lines, it's been drawn in the wrong place for the wrong reasons.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:59 PM
3

I hate that argument too, but... well, it works. It's what ultimately stopped me. I'm not sure if I'm glad it worked, but things are gradually getting better, so I hope one day I might actually be happy that I didn't. I think it works so well because egoistical people don't tend to be suicidal.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:52 PM
-25

No, it's a colloquialism. Ever heard of the phrase "I hope he doesn't do anything silly"? This is not people minimizing suicide, on the contrary - it's being taken so seriously noone wants to actually say it out loud.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:48 PM
10

Or, You know, it could be just a lesbian couple that is understandably upset that the school has failed to get on with the times? People are people. Not everyone has a sinister agenda to DESTROY THE MENS! Save Your outrage for those who actually do, there are enough to go around.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:44 PM
2

I am not glossing over that, I am simply giving teenagers more credit than most people appear to be. What do You mean, victims who can't give consent? So when I had sex with my girlfriend when I was 15, I was actually raping her? And she was raping me? Teenagers are perfectly capable of giving very enthusiastic consent, and everybody knows it. The problem is not with the ability to give consent, it's with the lack of effective ability to avoid coercion, seeing as You can't just avoid a teacher's…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:39 PM
1

This is contrary to my perceptions, so I can't really say. I do not doubt that there are a lot of teenage girls who quite enthusiastically consent to sex with older men, but I'd argue that the reverse is more often the case simply because of the aforementioned sexual dynamics. But I freely admit that I might be wrong on that. In either case, if a teenage girl considers herself 'lucky' to have scored with an older guy, I'd argue the same way - it's not rape. It might be misuse of trust or maybe e…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:24 PM
-3

Where have I said that the adults shouldn't know better? Your comparison is invalid. Aside from the fact that people actually DO argue like that for, say, parental kidnapping - someone who lures children into his van with candy can be safely assumed to have malicious intent. Someone having consensual sex with a teenager cannot necessarily be assumed to have malicious intent. After all, teenagers are perfectly capable of having consensual sex with each other. The higher sex drive in teenage boys …
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:16 PM
24

Because they can. Remember, sexual power dynamics don't magically go away just because the people involved are legal minors. Look, I'm not saying every teenage boy begs to be statutory raped. I AM saying that those teenagers probably jerk off multiple times a day and watch more porn than anything else. Yeah yeah, generalization, yadda yadda. It's a cliché 'cause it's true in most cases. Most teenage boys DO want to get laid. No, they don't want to get raped, but yes, they do want sex. It's a phy…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 12:37 PM
1

Not just the cosmetic industry. There's also stem cell research. Extracting cells from an aborted fetus is immoral and unethical so we can't do it, but from a few thousand mutilated baby penises? No problem with that! I have mixed feelings about that one, because while I cathegorically oppose infant genital mutilation, I also think stem cell research is incredibly important. I'd still sooner see the practice ended, but as long as people do it anyways, might as well get some good out of it. And y…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 05:11 AM
1

What has MRA done for women? We view women as our intelectual and moral equals. We don't deny female agency, which is why we hold them to account just as we do with men. Traditionalism doesn't, and Feminism definitely does not, either. And when we do that, You 'feel less than welcome'. You are welcome. But Your views and statements will be scrutinized just as much as anyone else's. This is what real respect looks like.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 05:05 AM
1

I don't see why feminism is a movement for inequality. I certainly don't advocate for men to have less rights, I just want women to have more. ...I'll try to be charitable here. Your statement:a) You don't see how feminism is a movement for inequality. b) You don't want men to have less rights. c) You want women to have more rights. Equality: X = Y Now, there are multiple ways to imbalance that equasion. You could do X-1 < Y. Or You could do X < Y+1. So, honest question: In Your country, what ar…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 04:57 AM
1

Not necessarily. Assuming that male contraception would only be availble in western natrions (doubtful, since it's been researched in india for a while now, but for the sake of argument...) Male pill introduced to the west -> birth rates falling -> demand for workers rising + ressources and space freeing up -> immigration rises -> population stabilizes -> children of immigrants grow up with male pill availble -> birth rates falling -> etc etc etc. Unless of course we get invaded by china or some…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 04:11 AM
1

Kingpink2, why are You asking us? I would love to know about some actual women's rights issues. But as far as I am aware, there is exactly one right that men have in the west which women don't have, and that's being topless in public. Not much of a cause. What else is there? Well, I have one more thing... sex worker rights. And even that is partially a men's issue, too, thanks to the ridiculous swedish model gaining popularity (criminalizing the purchase of sex only) as well as the fact that mor…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 03:21 AM
2

Oh, definitely. It's like with Prohibition - "end demand" doesn't work, it just pushes things underground. I'm amazed at the hubris, really - as if some petty law could eradicate the Oldest Profession In The World. It will do no such thing - it will only make honest men and women suffer while ruthless individuals who don't care about the law will do just fine. Better, probably, since they'll have less competition and will be able to control the supply.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 01:43 AM
7

Tomorrow on Buzzfeed: 'Misogynistic MRAs fantasize about raping feminists!'
/r/MensRights04/06/15 01:19 AM
1

Remember the sort of people MRAs regularly deal with. Common sense can no longer be assumed ;)
/r/MensRights04/06/15 01:17 AM
1

And then You get accused of violating her privacy by making a sex tape. Can't win.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 01:07 AM
1

Not only that... It's Evolution, Baby! Think about it. If this goes on, who's gonna procreate? Well, since dating has become so much of a risk - that would be the biggest risk-takers. And who's second in line? The men who refuse to aknowledge the reality of the situation because they think women can't do anything wrong. So which behaviours get to live on? Risk-taking and gynocentrism. Wash rinse repeat. Though this be madness, yet there is method in't.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 01:06 AM
2

France might pass that shit soon. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3109799/Men-pay-sex-fined-1-200-new-rules-brought-France.html#readerCommentsCommand-message-field I consider myself a women's rights advocate as well as a men's rights advocate. As such, I'm very much for the rights of sex workers - one of the few legit women's rights issues that I am aware of. Ironically, quite a lot of anti sex work lobbying is being done by... feminists... I think it's ludicrous AND appaling that the Fr…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 12:58 AM
1

I know it feels like it's the same thing, but it's really not. Intoxication is not a valid legal defense for a number of reasons - not least because it would be trivial to commit a crime in cold blood and get drunk afterwards as insurance. However, in this case, it's not the perpetrator who uses intoxication as defense, it's the 'victim' who is intoxicated. The victim did not commit a crime while intoxicated, it's not a defense, so the comparison is invalid. This is not 'getting away' with somet…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 12:42 AM
1

Possibly because of the lack of the self-defense disclaimer?
/r/MensRights04/06/15 12:13 AM
0

Dude, not cool. There are enough women out there who don't support this shit, and enough male idiots who do. It's a dark place, don't go there.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 12:12 AM
6

Gay marriage is pretty much the only marriage I'd support, actually. Less chance of one party getting screwed due to bias in case of divorce.
/r/MensRights03/06/15 11:20 PM
1

Those are mostly semi-phobic reactions. They don't have to be rational. It's like being afraid of spiders while living in central europe.
/r/MensRights27/05/15 07:12 PM
0

I'm at a loss of words. I'll try to be gentle about this. Sure. Let's put that to the test. So You accuse me of rape? Great. Let's have a trial. Jazzeki v. Sanguifer, let's do this. I'm pretty sure I can positively prove I have not raped You. I'll then countersue for defamation and take You apart for every penny You have. Okay? Great. Back to Grace Dunham: What would the lawsuit be titled? Lena Dunham v.... whom? Not Grace - she doesn't want to sue. So who is the offended party? You? Or the Stat…
/r/MensRights24/05/15 07:11 PM
-1

I know what the point was. I'm making my own point. That point being: Whenever one argues sexual dimorphism, one has to take the rough with the smooth. Even if all men's issues were to be fixed, I'd still expect a significantly higher suicide rate for males. Edit: An inconvenient thought for many, judging by the amount of downvotes. Tough luck, it's still true.
/r/MensRights24/05/15 06:25 PM
0

I'm amazed, too. So You are saying we should ignore what people say and consider themselves to be, and just march on with our agenda? Well, I suppose You don't have much of a problem with Mary Koss's "research", then? I mean the one that is root of the "1 in 4" bullshit? The one which counted people who themselves said they didn't think they were raped or assaulted under "assault" anyways? You didn't think this one through, eh, buddy?
/r/MensRights24/05/15 06:21 PM
1

Re-classify her as a victim where she clearly doesn't see herself as such.
/r/MensRights24/05/15 06:17 PM
1

I approve of that phrase. Perfect for identification of idiots.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:53 PM
0

Sounds a lot like what people around here did to Grace Dunham. Oh snap! Edit: If the brave downvoters would like to enlighten me as to how this is different, I am ALL ears.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:29 PM
-12

Frankly, not really... What would You expect? Parity? In a sexually dimorphic species? When a guy risks everything in a business, that business fails, and he finds himself on the street with 100k Euro debt and no job... suicide begins to look not only like a good option, but even a rational one. Things like that one alone should account for a higher rate. This is another manifestation of "Statistical outliers likely to be men". At least in part.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:27 PM
-2

None of us is in any position to offer forgiveness anyways. Or did she diddle You, personally? Or one of Your kin? If Grace Dunham is fine with it, that's their business, and should be end of story. She had every opportunity to file a lawsuit. Seeing how Lena Dunham basically confessed outright, this would have been an easy case. As such, not only did she have opportunity, she arguably even had financial incentive. But she didn't. So maybe we should all just fuck off and mind our business.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:21 PM
2

Well... I don't bear much sympathy for Lena Dunham, I think she's a horrible person. That being said, Grace Dunham is an adult now, and if she wanted to press charges, she could easily do so. I don't see why anyone should stamp her with the 'victim' stamp just because it fits one's own agenda. One should always try to estabilish whether a grievance has occured in the first place. Else we'd just punish people for our own satisfaction, which is pretty fucked up IMO. And yes, I'm also saying the sa…
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:13 PM
2

You really should invest some time into learning about Your body, mate. Prostate orgasms are the stuff of legends. It's not called the 'male g-spot' for nothing. Though I admit it does feel kinda gay at first ;P
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:03 PM
2

Because even the old dictionary definition of "misogyny" was "hatred or contempt of women". And, surprise surprise, words change meanings over time. Or... do we defer to the dictionary now? I guess we're all feminists then? I mean, according to the dictionary definition... yeah, okay, everyone got the joke. My point being: That won't cut it. I think it's more effective to ram home the point that we say the things we say because we respect women just like we respect men - and therefore hold them …
/r/MensRights21/05/15 05:13 PM
1

Spoiler alert, of course.... In the books, Sansa never actually goes for winterfell. By the end of A Dance with Dragons, she's still at the Eyrie, IIRC. Bolton's bastard is actually set up to marry Jeyne Poole, who pretends to be Arya Stark, not Sansa. Petyr Baelish has plans for Sansa to marry the heir to the Eyrie and later reclaim Winterfell from there. More spoilers(!): I deeply suspect the changes to the series are simply due to financial considerations, as well as for the convenience of th…
/r/MensRights20/05/15 03:19 PM
8

Do as I say, not as I do.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 02:58 PM
1

Oh, I see. Sorry, didn't recognize the sarcasm. Carry on.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 07:33 PM
1

What if it were 26? Well, that would mean people who do specialize will soon out-perform You. A family where one person is working for 52 hours a week and the other stays at home will be doing better - the children will be looked after 24/7, the housework will be done, someone will be always there to let the plumber in, or pick up the mail, or do the paperwork with bills or departments or whatnot. A family like that will also tend to be happier. I know, I can hardly imagine it myself, but that's…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 07:32 PM
2

Care to elaborate? That's a bit of a broad statement. In what way are we far worse? I'm genuinely curious.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 12:20 AM
1

For all intents and purposes, I just assume every stranger is a scumbag, regardless of gender. I'm always happy to be proven wrong. But I'm glad You bring this up. I'd still argue the fear of rape is disproportionate to the risk of getting raped, but it's important to remember that often times, this is just a clash of two successful evolutionary strategies: "Mistrust strangers" and "Ingroup preference(women)/outgroup preference (men)". For both men and women, this often translates to simply "Mis…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 12:17 AM
1

In a thread where the OP talks about the dangers of taking fiction seriously? I think You broke my irony meter.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 12:05 AM
1

IIRC, voices like that have been heard for the past half century or so. The rationale being that it's so rare for a jury to convict a woman of anything - regardless of evidence - that the whole process becomes basically a waste of public funds. Sorry for my lack of a source, take it as a tasty factoid - with a grain of salt or two.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 11:58 PM
2

No. In the situation we're in, all the risk is on the husband's side. And as I've stated numerous times, that's just as wrong. You seriously ask how it is unfair to demand from one party to risk their future and financial security, but not from the other? Add to it the fact that men gain sexual capital as they age, while women lose it. It's that sexual dimorphism thing again - it's not only an argument when it's convenient, it's all or nothing. Balance between work and family is a nice idea, but…
/r/MensRights17/05/15 11:45 PM
2

This is fundamentally unfair to the parent - regardless of gender - who agrees to sacrifice his career opportunities in order to raise the child or children. SOMEONE has to. No alimony = no marriage; it doesn't fix the problem, it merely reverses it. This time around, it will be mostly women who'd be damn stupid to do it. Trust is all fine and good, but You need some sort of insurance.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 01:37 PM
2

Noone would be having children anymore. Or at least properly raising them. Would You agree to spending 10 years raising a child, only for Your wife to dump You with an 10-year hole in Your resumee and no security for it? Right now, marriage is a sham for men, and that's bad. With no alimony at all, it would quickly become a sham for women, and that'd be equally bad. This troublesome sexual dimorphism of ours will prevent us from ever getting a perfect balance, but it'd be nice to have at least a…
/r/MensRights16/05/15 11:41 PM
3

You see this in pretty much every kind of competition - even when we set physical prowess aside, look at chess, poker, esports. But I'll even, for the sake of argument, give You that it's more complex. Hell, I'll go all the way - it's all "bio-social, sociological, arbitrarily perpetuated, etc...". Given that, does that change the fact that right now, most of the most qualified people in a given field are going to be men? And if You want to change that - assuming it's not biological and that it …
/r/MensRights16/05/15 11:25 PM
1

So it's the idea that rape is everywhere and completely normal. No no no no NO NO. If it was the idea that rape is normal, it would say "normal". It says "normalized". Those words are different for a reason. Normalized means it's NOT normal, but is being treated as such. In a similar way, we live in a "child molestation culture". As in, the actual rate of child rape is extremely low when expressed per capita (and usually occurs within close familial circles around the child), but people still do…
/r/MensRights16/05/15 10:41 PM
7

My fave is: "Do You believe in individuality and personal freedom? Congratulations, You're a satanist!" Edit: I didn't come up with this one. Credit where it's due - to Sage Gerard a.k.a. Victor Zen
/r/MensRights13/05/15 07:09 PM
2

This is exactly why You don't want to feed the pedophilia hysteria. Pedophiles are rare. Pedophiles who are also rapists are even more rare. About half of them are women, of course - but when You feed the hysteria, who gets wrongly accused and pilloried? Protip: It's not gonna be a woman. "Stranger danger" is the Think-of-the-children version of rape culture.
/r/MensRights12/05/15 01:03 PM
1

Funny that, I heard the exact opposite - i.e, You're likely to retain some residue urine when You sit down. Seems more likely too me. Swedish stunts aside, though - for normal, everyday home toilet use, sitting down to pee is entirely reasonable. The aforementioned benefit of catching the urine spray aside, You also prevent random stream splits or pressure changes. Also sneezing. I mean, sitting down doesn't prevent sneezing, but at least You don't have to worry if You do have to sneeze while Yo…
/r/MensRights10/05/15 11:32 PM
1

I cleaned both, but the students were reasonably civilized. Not many horror stories from me. But then again, those were dorm bathrooms, small dorms, so no public restroom mentality - the people using the restrooms would presumably like to use them again the same day or next day. I'd never claim that women are angels when it comes to hygiene, just a simple observation that stand-up peeing does result in the area around the bowl getting dirty and smelly more quickly, so it's not an entirely unreas…
/r/MensRights10/05/15 11:23 PM
1

The "how men pee" is not a recent attack; it's an attack as old as the toilet, and it is a legitimate criticism if You're the one having to clean said toilet. I've experienced the difference first-hand living in various student housings. The ones where people were nagged into sitting while peeing were decidedly easier to clean. No matter how good Your aim is and eve if the stream never randomly splits or sprays, You always get a urine fog spraying around, and it does accumulate over time. Some c…
/r/MensRights09/05/15 01:25 PM
12

Well good luck with AVFM. It's not exactly free speech zone over there anymore, either. What with mods not understanding sarcasm even when it's denoted with /sarc and other mods banning for 'holding the work of AVFM in contempt', or as I would call it - criticism. Good luck indeed.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 04:43 PM
2

He's right on many things, but remarks like pathologically selfish psychology of women (Origin of Feminism part 1, ~9:30) are severe self-inflicted blows to his credibility. I mean, even if I was to agree that women are selfish by default (that is, more selfish than Your average self-interested animal), the whole phrase reeks of contempt - and is gibberish to boot. "Pathologically selfish psychology of women"? Okay, so that implies - what? That all women are selfish, presumably more selfish than…
/r/MensRights07/05/15 04:22 PM
3

(after all, who gives a crap whether John Smith is good at League of Legends?) $2.5k per month from Riot if You're participating in the LCS. In addition to that, all the prize money, money from streams, sponsors, Youtube, patreon etc. You can get. With the gaming industry overtaking the film industry, people will start giving a crap real soon ;) Not saying that Your points are wrong, though. Most players don't really aim to go professional, even if they're otherwise highly competitive.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 04:12 PM
9

Currently the university defines stalking as “a course of conduct directed at a specific person that is unwelcome and would cause a reasonable person to feel fear,” Did these people forget what 'definition' means? Defining: The act of making definite, i.e. precisely distinguishable. This ... thing up there defines nothing.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 12:08 PM
3

I vaguely remember reading up on that somewhere else, too. It's called the holographic principle, and it's some part or other of string theory. Been proposed as a solution to the black hole information paradox IIRC. Might have read about it in a Hawking book now that I think about it... This stuff is so mind-boggling that I don't even pretend to understand it, and it's very likely to be a simplification in any case.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 12:03 PM
12

I honestly feel physical ache in my heart when men speak against the MRM. Don't start, mate. Reverse genders and You have a very stereotypical feminist statement. Don't go down that road. We're not the Way, the Truth and the Life. We should be glad for criticism. Not all of it is uninformed or bigoted.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 11:55 AM
3

This article: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/simone-de-beauvoir-a-nazi-a-pedophile-and-a-misogynist/ Disclosure, I admit I hold a bit of a grudge ever since I've been banned for pointing out Paul Elam's hypocrisy on the topic. Especially since I have in the past applauded and defended AVFM for not doing that sort of thing. Guess I was wrong.
/r/MensRights06/05/15 09:38 AM
1

"Suspect the wife/husband" is standard procedure, but Sandberg is a human being and 'innocent until proven guilty' applies to her just as much as to anyone. Besides, even if she was the scum of the earth - which I wouldn't know or want to presume - it would have been far easier to just file a divorce with the standard accusations and get a bit less with WAY less risk involved. Especially since 'he's worth a lot of money... I'm not saying, but I am implying' is bound to be thrown around, as You s…
/r/MensRights06/05/15 07:29 AM
20

And people still wonder why I advise them to be careful with allegations of pedophilia, or using allegations of pedophilia as an argument. Yes, I'm still looking at You, AVFM. This is the reality. This is whom a moral panic about pedophiles will affect, 95% of the time: Men. Fuck it, I'll even go one step further: Even if that guy actually is a pedophile, he hasn't actually raped anyone. Presumption of guilt is not only wrong when it applies to men in general, it is also wrong when it applies to…
/r/MensRights06/05/15 07:19 AM
12

Men and women are different, and face different issues, but only by supporting each other can we work towards equality. May I ask You an honest question, honestquestion95? What exactly are the issues women face, currently, in Your country of residence? As a feminist, You ought to know. I consider myself an advocate for the rights of men. You could wake me up in the middle of the night and I will have a couple of men's issues that are pretty much undisputable, along with a couple more we could ar…
/r/MensRights05/05/15 10:33 PM
-3

Only thing remotely connecting those (and very remotely at that) is the subtitle: "Shocking security video demonstrates exactly why you should never play with fire at a petrol station, or refuse a smoke to a desperate woman." Reverse genders, assault on men by women not being taken seriously, etc etc. -> Men's Rights. It's a stretch.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 01:28 PM
0

Ideals aside, it's not unreasonable. When You hire a booth babe or a stripper, You discriminate based on looks. When You push an attacker away and he falls down the stairs, You violate his right to life (worst case scenario). You'll likely say 'duh!' - exactly. It's trivial to find cases where what You quoted is true. Of course, there's a difference, but the challenge is in explaining the difference. The premise is not wrong.
/r/MensRights01/05/15 09:02 PM
-1

I dunno why You're getting the downvotes. While I disagree that the 2% gap should be artificially corrected, from a political perspective, this totally makes sense. Aknowledge a 2% gap and You blow up all the "77 cents a dollar" nonsense AND You get good PR at the same time, with a minimal cost. This is very in line with most high-profile MRAs, too. I mean, few people will argue women don't face discrimination at all - even if it was true, that claim leaves oneself wide open, since You only need…
/r/MensRights01/05/15 09:19 AM
1

Well, thing is... we do recognize that men and women have different interests and goals, different power and status symbols etc, so I wouldn't be inherently dismissive about the idea that women might be uncomfortable with things that don't make men uncomfortable in an exact genderflip. But even allowing that, it's not really an argument for anything, it's an observation at best. 'cause Bayonetta alone proves that female gamers are - duh - not a homogenous group, they're people with different tas…
/r/MensRights01/05/15 09:08 AM
2

Final Fantasy is not really a series as such - there is usually very little connection between the parts. Direct sequels are denoted by something like Final Fantasy X-2 or XIII-2/3. Otherwise, there are only easter eggs and vague hints to connect particular parts with each other, at best. So no worries there. I'm more concerned about the... quality of what they try to do here. FFXIII was a disaster when it came to writing and plot. Like, really, REALLY bad. The series wasn't going in a good dire…
/r/MensRights01/05/15 08:05 AM
4

Dr Randomercam once made an interesting point: Maybe we all are supposed to be human doings. That is, after all, what makes us great. Anyone can be a being - that's just existing. It takes effort to do, to achieve. I wouldn't want that part to necessarily change. I'd much rather we started to value women for what they do, too. Or not value them if they don't do anything.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 05:12 PM
1

Yes, I am. Have You... actually read the OP? Is there a comparable ideology and movement in history?
/r/MensRights29/04/15 07:28 PM
1

Actually, You listed the criteria You use in a comment in a different thread. I assume You mean this and this? Taking Your definition, the catholic church still fits like a glove. Advocates lesser rights in law for the target group Jews. Propagates discrimination against the target group Christ-killer Jews. Teaches that the target group is inherently inferior and immoral Immoral christ-killer Jews. Teaches that the target group is a threat Well, they did kill Christ. They're Anti-Christ, if You …
/r/MensRights29/04/15 07:03 PM
1

Then please do explain how feminism is a hate movement. Go ahead. Bet You I can find equivalence in catholic history for anything You can come up with.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 09:50 AM
2

Try catholicism. I'd say christianity, but that's too vague. Yes, I know, it's a can of worms. But if feminism qualifies as a hate movement, then so do most religions. At the very least historically.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 08:37 AM
5

“Here’s a guy who thumbed his nose at a court order for 14 years,” Mr. Momjian said. “There should be some kind of sanctions for doing that.” "Pay up!" "I don't have any money!" "You disrespectin' me? Break his legs!" Yeeeah...
/r/MensRights27/04/15 07:21 AM
1

And it would have been just as wrong.
/r/MensRights23/04/15 12:16 PM
1

An absolutely comparable situation. In both cases, the line drawn is completely arbitrary. In both cases, it's statutory rape - the rape happens per definition, even if neither party seeks redress or feels victimized. In both cases, one party is assumed to be unable to give consent, and that is the entire basis for prosecution. How is it incomparable? Oh right, because You're not comfortable around one topic, but comfortable around the other. Of course.
/r/MensRights23/04/15 11:56 AM
-5

Nice dodge. Good thing so many men rot in jail for having consensual sex while drunk. It's illegal for a reason, and they should be punished for it. Right with You on that. /s
/r/MensRights22/04/15 12:26 PM
2

Please tell me exactly what men were forced into doing. Early Irish Law: The leader of the kin-group was known either as ágae fine (pillar of the family) or cenn fine (head [literally] of the family). He apparently was a senior member selected from the kin-group based on various qualifications. One of his main duties was to take responsibility for members of the kin-group, acting as a surety for some of the actions of members, making sure debts are paid (including for murder). If the member coul…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 12:24 PM
-3

Any decent person will let You off that hook when You show him Your ID. Just like most cops won't pull You over for going 3 MPH over the speed limit, and many conductors won't fine You if Your monthly ticket has just expired yesterday. You, like many people, forget that the law is intended to serve and protect people, not to find arbitrary ways to fuck up their lives. Or do You actually believe that in those 96 hours, the kid in question would magically develop the mental aptitude to fully conse…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 11:44 AM
-1

I'm with Gottlob on this one, and frankly I don't understand the downvoting. While I generally agree that women are valued more than men in society - see Boko Haram coverage - in this particular case, I can't imagine that the response would have been any different if it was 120 men and 20 women. A lot of people died because the company felt it was more important for the employees not to take unaothorized breaks (which is why they locked doors that could have otherwise been used to escape the fir…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 11:15 AM
6

I don't want people to express their enthusiasm via jazz hands. I think if they really, really like what I am saying, they should show it with jizz pants. Now THAT would be enthusiastic, honest feedback.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 10:51 AM
2

Not only that, also in stem cell research. See, it's illegal to use the cells from, say, an aborted fetus. But it's perfectly fine to take a severed foreskin. Even though You could make the very same arguments for and against both of the practices - as in: They're wasted otherwise, people do those things anyways vs. this fuels a demand, makes doctors encourage the termination of a human life / the mutilation of a newborn's penis for reasons not related to health, etc. I admit this makes me extre…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 10:45 AM
10

I read a thriller a while ago by Karin Slaughter (can't recommend, it was barely decent enough to pass time on a 4-hour train ride), I don't know the english title, german was "Vergiss Mein Nicht" - frankly, I only remember it because it was odd ("Vergissmeinnicht" is a flower name that literally means "Do not forget me", but is usually written without spaces). It was about a child trafficking ring, and the "twist" was that a large portion of the people running the ring were women - some of them…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 10:29 AM
2

You'll probably be hard-pressed for a quote, but it's basically the whole premise of "The Second Sex", except that it's the men doing it. As in: "Men define women as the Other - an incomplete man, mutilated, inessential. Men act, women are acted upon. Men create and invent, women wait for men to save them and guard them". I.E, women being pre-destined to victimhood. Nowadays, it seems feminists are doing what Simone was accusing men of doing. Edit: I would like to note that I read that dreadful …
/r/MensRights22/04/15 10:11 AM
2

Could it possibly, maybe, somehow be that one side is acutally right, though? Are people protesting racists just as bad as the people they protest against? And I'm not even sure anymore that this is a false equivalency. Between #killallmen, SCUM manifesto, radfems, the duluth model, toxic masculinity, 'teach men not to rape', rape culture, 'men systematically oppress women' even though noone can come up with a solid example for that (yes, I'm gonna harp on about it) etc etc... sounds more and mo…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 09:56 AM
5

No, of course not. The point is, we don't want quotas for anything. Not the good things, and not the bad things. The real issue that is being adressed - lazily, and repeatedly, I admit - is that the sentiment of "we need more female CEOs" is culturally acceptable, for no good reason. The sentiment "we need more female prisoners!" is not. And yes, this IS a real issue - the issue being legislation is being enforced to push women into the favourable positions - not people in general, women in part…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 09:30 AM
1

In principle, one would first have to accurately define Feminism. Aside from that, let me demonstrate a flaw in Your reasoning: Do You believe in individual self-determination? Congratulations, You're a Satanist! Do You believe that people who are willing to work should be able to find it, and that everyone deserves not to be hungry? Well, You're a Nazi. Whether You self-identify as such or not. See the problem? Funnily enough, the MRM actually circumvents this by having the noun form of the ver…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 09:15 AM
2

He or she already did: I do not know the main issues of women and men although if they are diametric, there is a larger problem at stake. "I do not know what the issues are, but women's issues are surely more severe." And then they wonder why we don't get along with feminists...
/r/MensRights22/04/15 09:05 AM
3

I do not know the main issues of women and men I'm sorry, WHAT? What kind of feminist are You? "I don't know what issues women face but I'm a feminist"? Worse yet, You do not know yet You claim that "women are more opressed (generally speaking)"? You don't know, but women have it worse, therefore You're a feminist. But You don't really know. Are You for real? Don't You see a problem with Your thinking here? Honest question, how do You rationalize that one? You could wake me up in the middle of t…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 08:57 AM
1

Well, I imagine about as many as those who suddenly become (the uninformed kind of) feminists because they have a daughter. You want what You see as the best for Your kid. Well, usually at least.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 08:21 AM
-1

Some asshole in the comments is right. First of all, the "kid" was 4 days short of turning 17, which is the legal age of consent in Louisiana, making every argument from the law extremely petty at best. Second, the teachers got busted because the "kid" was bragging about it, so we can be rather certain at least he thought he was lucky. But sure, don't listen to the people actually involved, just assume victimhood. Just like a certain political group likes to do. Ahem. Third, god help me if I eve…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 07:51 AM
0

For fuck's sake, just get rid of this "statutory rape" bullshit already. It makes my blood boil. Statutory rape: The sex was consensual, the "victim" doesn't feel victimized or seek redress, but the statute is offended and demands justice!!! Ridiculous. Especially since the guy was 4 days short of being legal. FOUR. DAYS. Respess’ lawyer, Jeffrey Smith, said that if the tryst had taken place four days later, when the teen turned 17, there would have been no case, the station reported.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 07:44 AM
3

Every reasonable person would agree that the same crime with the same record should attract the same punishment, regardless of race, gender, etc. Then why isn't it being done? Men are more likely to commit certain types of crimes. But men are also more likely to be charged with, convicted of, and receive harsher sentences for crimes - both in general, and when comparing the same type of crime between male and female offenders.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 07:27 AM
1

Yeah, funny how noone wants to campaign for THAT part of equality ;)
/r/MensRights22/04/15 07:22 AM
0

Well, and I hope You weren't. I hope it was meant as a joke, 'cause otherwise... I'm absolutely serious. Even if You speak of the arithmetic mean when You say 'average', chances are a few hundred thousand men will have a penis of that exact size. Not to mention that even then, it's still likely to be wrong: Take 10 men, 4 with 10 cm penis length and 6 with 15 cm penis length. Calculate the mean - 13 cm. Ta-daa! More than half of them have a 'bigger than average' penis. In short - mathematically,…
/r/MensRights22/04/15 07:21 AM
0

What if I told You it's because treating cancer always impacts one's quality of life due to the nature of the treatment, regardless of the type of cancer.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 11:25 AM
2

Noble attitude, utter math failure though. If 1.75 billion men have a below average sized penis, and presumably the other 1.75 billion men have an above average sized penis, where are the men who have an average sized penis?
/r/MensRights21/04/15 10:31 AM
4

Poe's law is the only law.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 10:28 AM
2

It's a stunt. I'm not sure what good it is supposed to do. I mean, Anita does such a good job at discrediting herself, more proof is hardly required. Maybe I just don't see it, but this really looks like swagger to me. Hell, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't take that bait even if I was 100% convinced of whatever point I was making. Why walk into an obvious trap? That's aside from my opinion that Sarkeesian would get intellectually destroyed in a debate with pretty much anyone worth their salt... ... a…
/r/MensRights21/04/15 10:14 AM
1

That's because birth month is a single factor. Exceptional mastery of a skill isn't as straightforward as that. Sure, with enough hard work and dedication, everyone can get reasonably good, maybe even great. But when that point is reached, there are other factors, some of them out of a person's control - wealth, health, time, talent, genetic predisposition, chance, upbringing, education... Think of it in terms of rolling dice to determine points. I know, it's rather abstract, but bear with me. I…
/r/MensRights21/04/15 09:53 AM
1

There are a few other papers that produce similar results, but I don't have them on hand atm. It's important to note that the vast, vast, vast majority of men and women will be within the middle. It doesn't mean that men, on average, are necessarily smarter. It means the smartest people are likely to be men - but same goes for the biggest idiots. Some people like to forget, ignore, or otherwise drop that latter part ;) Edit: also, You're welcome!
/r/MensRights21/04/15 12:00 AM
1

Exhibit A. From the abstract: Males have only a marginal advantage in mean levels of g (less than 7% of a standard deviation) from the ASVAB and AFQT, but substantially greater variance. Among the top 2% AFQT scores, there were almost twice as many males as females. These differences could provide a partial basis for sex differences in intellectual eminence.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 11:37 PM
1

Not sure how You could tell. Looking at isolated data points (can't find a bigger study with a quick search), the numbers look different to me - depending on country, between 10:1 and 30:1. Looking at the current list of chess grandmasters, we have a 43:1 Male/Female ratio. Seeing how those are the outermost statistical outliers, and how one would expect the larger overall group to have disproportionately more outliers, that's not too far off from the expected value. The rest could indeed possib…
/r/MensRights20/04/15 11:30 PM
3

And in a society where everyone owns slaves and noone sees anything wrong with it, that is a very special thing to do indeed. Edit: Ninja editing? Okay. The answer is still 'yes'. Because, see, that's what 'special' means: different from what is normal or usual. Better luck next time, though.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 10:52 PM
2

This is just another self-aggrandizing woman acting like she did something special. She is - and did - no such thing, because none of this should have existed in the first place. Tough shit, 'cause all of this DOES exist and most people DON'T do what she did, so yeah, she actually did something special.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 10:40 PM
2

Camille Paglia. You're just being silly now, You know?
/r/MensRights19/04/15 06:12 PM
10

Looking for accuracy on the Urban Dictionary is like hitting Encyclopedia Dramatica for Your paper research. And frankly, in this case, they did quite a good job - because that's pretty much what the term "MRA" is (wrongfully, ofc) associated with. Remember, a dictionary doesn't judge, it merely reports on the common use of a phrase.
/r/MensRights18/04/15 03:42 PM
0

I don't care. Two wrongs do not make a right. I'm rolling my eyes just as hard when feminists complain about MISOGANAAAAY in bloody song lyrics.
/r/MensRights18/04/15 03:30 PM
-6

Responsibility for what, writing some (presumably) bad rap? For fuck's sake, it wasn't a manifesto. It was a dumb song written by dumb teens. I'd say chances are pretty good that it wasn't meant to be taken seriously by anyone. God forbid someone writes or performs something offensive, we can't have that, can we?
/r/MensRights17/04/15 02:20 PM
2

Can I join? ...please? ;)
/r/MensRights15/04/15 09:32 AM
1

There is a lot of "I'm not an MRA but..." going on, that's true. Since I've been an atheist for long enough to witness the "new wave" of atheism (and yes, I know, that's not really that long), I kinda recognize the pattern. Back in 2000ish, there were a lot of "I'm not an atheist but..."s. Basically people who don't believe in god but won't call themselves atheists for various reasons. I see similar things here. "Oh, I advocate for the rights of men, but I'm not a Men's Rights Advocate!"... TBH,…
/r/MensRights15/04/15 09:27 AM
1

Frankly, I do subscribe to the idea that there are fates worse than death - thinking about some statements from male rape & torture survivors in the Kongo I read a while ago, heartbreaking renditions of how every day is just pain, no money for surgeries or medicine, no hope of recovery, would rather be dead... But I do not think this is applicable in this particular scenario.
/r/MensRights15/04/15 09:13 AM
27

Eh. Shaky evidence at best. You could just as well conclude that when the wife is stressed, she's giving his husband hell for every little thing he does or doesn't do, and when the husband is stressed, he goes into his mancave or for a drink with a buddy or just doesn't bother to burden his wife with his shit (or doesn't want her to become stressed because then she will start giving him hell for every little thing he does or doesn't do). This is an interesting observation, but it says nothing ab…
/r/MensRights15/04/15 08:46 AM
3

Unfortunately, this is actually one of the reasons that murder is legally considered to be a worse crime than rape. On a societal level, rape has always been viewed as at least as bad as - if not worse than - a murder. But legally, You can't have harsher penalties for rape than for murder, because that would presumably make rapists murder their victims afterwards - 0% chance of the victim going to the police, and the sentence is more lenient if You ever get caught. Of course, this only counts fo…
/r/MensRights15/04/15 08:37 AM
6

I'd argue further: Sometimes, a double standard is the only standard. Or rather, what looks like a double standard is actually two separate standards. Many MRAs or roughly affiliated people (Karen Straughan, Dr.Randomercam, TL;DR) argue from biology (sexual dimorphism, evolutionary psychology etc) when it comes to gender issues. Not everyone agrees with them, but those who do essentially have to concede that if we talk about a sexual dimorphic species, there are not necessarily double standards,…
/r/MensRights15/04/15 08:26 AM
0

And none of those laws are tied to mandatory prosecution laws. Well, we're getting there with intoxication, I guess. But I digress. Diminished capacity is the key phrase. When it comes to age of consent laws, there is no talk of diminished capacity. It's no capacity, at all, ever, and charges will be pressed by the state even against Your (or Your parent's) explicit wishes. Age of consent laws draw an arbitrary, absolute line... ...and then bend that line anyways. Like in, say, Mississippi, wher…
/r/MensRights15/04/15 08:04 AM
-2

That is not true. At least not necessarily so. Laws may be written for a majority of a certain set of circumstances, but those cases are usually outliers themselves. Like MRAs never tire to say (and rightfully so) - You don't need to teach people not to rape, the majority already knows it's wrong. This also applies to cases of child rape. You argue that those ruled minors far more often lack the capacity for "meaningful consent" than they possess it. Do they? I seriously don't know. But I actual…
/r/MensRights14/04/15 07:46 PM
0

I'd agree, but for this: The laws criminalise consensual sex. They just do. You say the rule of thumb "stick to Your age group when experimenting with sex" applies to most teenagers - true, but then again, most teenagers do that anyways. You say the legal system doesn't have time to sift through every detail of every person involved in something like this - I'm sorry, but we are talking here about cases that are outliers in the first place. The legal system needs to have time to examine the indi…
/r/MensRights14/04/15 07:31 PM
2

I'm skeptical about that. I've seen this with the Atheism+ fiasco. The fact that this is just getting into a "no You!" contest - and we all know how well shit sticks to MRAs and how easily it bounces off of feminists, so we can only lose that one - aside, this invites the entirely wrong type of people into the group. People who don't care about Men's Rights - they just don't like feminists. And this, in turn, wouldn't even be that bad. But consider this: This is the sort of people who will have …
/r/MensRights14/04/15 07:17 PM
1

A question to You: If the author instead found out that De Beauvoir was a member of the White Rose, a semi-egalitarian, and a model citizen with no record of sexual misconduct at all - would that somehow make her ideas about feminism valid? If not, why does it matter if she's the opposite? Criticize the ideas, not the people behind them. I understood the article perfectly well. No, You do not get all that from just reading "The Second Sex". I read that piece of shit, and 95% of it is drivel. But…
/r/MensRights14/04/15 04:22 PM
1

You would do well to keep that in mind, lest You miss some feminist's sarcasm and hyperbole and accidentally take it at face value, then post it as a quote proving how vile feminists are... Oh wait, You just did that. A few posts above. Damn.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 03:45 PM
1

Go read the article, maybe You will follow then. Here, let me demonstrate what You just did: before we called this date rape... we called it exciting. Warren Farrell says rape is exciting!!!! And the answer is, of course, no, I am not going to stop. You see, I find you, as a feminist, to be a loathsome, vile piece of human garbage. I find you so pernicious and repugnant that the idea of fucking your shit up gives me an erection. Paul Elam finds violence against feminists sexually arousing!!!! Ge…
/r/MensRights14/04/15 03:43 PM
1

f-f-f-f-facepalm From the same article: The climate of sanctimony about student vulnerability has grown impenetrable. No one dares question it lest you’re labeled antifeminist, or worse, a sex criminal. The article is called Sexual Paranoia Strikes. She's on our side with this. Congratulations, You managed to quote-mine someone who actually agrees with You.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 03:09 PM
5

Haha. I'd like to know if maybe the male economists applied blind application methods? The thing feminists should actually lobby for if they want more equality? Applications without name, sex, marital status, age or photograph, that is. Just the qualifications and the motivational letter. Sure, not applicable to everything (jobs, apprenticeships etc. might care about photograph, age, or even sex - see booth babes), but for universities, it shouldn't matter one bit, and it would prevent bias in e…
/r/MensRights14/04/15 02:46 PM
1

"My number one concern is the dignity and freedom of women. And the dignity and freedom of women will not be achieved by overprotection of women. It will be achieved by women taking personal responsibility for themselves and deciding what they want." -Camille Paglia ...what? They're not all talking shit, and not exclusively so. Just a reminder.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 02:34 PM
8

GREEN ‏if a survivor of violence tells you something is violent, you >listen AND BELIEVE. You shitlord. Funnily enough, by their broad definitions of violence, You have been violently assaulted. He/She just said that Your opinion and arguments don't matter because You didn't experience victimisation - something that is out of Your hand (almost) entirely. Your words are worth less than theirs. So he/she dehumanised You. Quick, make a patreon account!
/r/MensRights14/04/15 02:24 PM
3

I did the maths for australia a few weeks ago, and it's similar there, althouth the difference in hours worked does not quite account for all of the %wage gap. Just for most of it. Taking that one factor into consideration alone, the "wage gap" shrinks to about 5%. That's before accounting for experience, specializations, qualifications etc etc etc.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 02:08 PM
-3

And all three matter not one bit. I repeat what I already said on AVFM before they banned me for it: Don't do this shit. What does this have to do with anything? De Beauvoir was a Nazi - and so were quite a lot of people in that time. So what? To make an analogy - Jefferson was a racist slaveholder, let us burn the Declaration of Independence? De Beauvoir was a paedophile - and again, nothing follows from it. She wasn't a paedophile because of her feminism. She was a feminist and a paedophile. A…
/r/MensRights14/04/15 01:49 PM
-2

Is there any good basis for that belief, though? Or is it just a knee-jerk reaction, just like the entirety of "violence against women" on the feminist side? Remember, You said it Yourself - adults having sex with minors. Not adults raping minors. Abolishing age of consent laws would not suddenly make rape legal.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 01:32 PM
3

Up until she started with the "teach boys rape is not even an option" idiocy, I was almost convinced this was a parody. I mean, look at those sketches: One portrays the two normal guys just backing off nervously, then with panic, when she suggests they are or should be rapists. The second one actually brings up a valid point of critique on "shrödingers rapist" - does "shrödingers rapist" apply to police officers? Firemen? Surgeons? Doctors? Nurses? Hotel staff? Basically, all the men everyone en…
/r/MensRights10/04/15 12:58 PM
1

Well, that would still be illegal under the current laws, though. I mean silly as in: The arrangement actually worked in everyone's favour. Women get the discounts, men get to meet more women, bars get more money from the men. Yes, I know, a rather shitty deal for the men, but one many men gladly take over just going to a random, more egalitarian pub. They're adults, they can make that choice.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 11:09 AM
0

That... seems silly, tbh. But I guess that's just SJWisms coming around to bite women in the arse - again.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 07:28 PM
2

It's not necessary, but in today's climate, it's probably prudent. After all, it would at least prevent all the accusations of being ignored or misrepresented because penis. Remember, it's not really about representation. I mean, UoT's student body was 55% female / 45% male in 2002. That's the most recent statistic I could find; it wouldn't surprise me if it was more women now. And yet, they still have a designated officer for WOMEN.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 04:14 PM
4

Examples of goods, facilities and services include, shops, financial services such as banking, leisure facilities such as pubs and clubs, entertainment and transport. Wait... You don't have ladies' night in the UK? o.O
/r/MensRights09/04/15 03:58 PM
8

Apparently, yes. See the assaulted police staff.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 03:55 PM
1

philosoraptor is it still /s if You have to /s it, though?
/r/MensRights09/04/15 03:40 PM
1

Might. That's the thing. Corelation =/= causation, at least not necessarily. It's not unusual for people that age to suddenly get worse grades. And, frankly, this MIGHT have something to do with the fact that he just went through a court ordeal - one he didn't necessarily want to go through in the first place. And the person he was sexually and possibly romantically involved with was jailed and had to register as a sex offender. And their relationship probably broke down, seeing how it went publ…
/r/MensRights08/04/15 08:11 AM
2

Okay, what? First of all, quote me where I say "not damaged". I don't know if he's been "damaged" or not, and neither do You. From that article, it wasn't even him who was pressing charges. I quote: Erica Ann Ginnetti, 35, was arrested in January in Lower Moreland after police were tipped off when the victim showed photos and videos of the woman to his classmates. For all You or anyone else knows, all this started without his knowledge and against his wishes. I don't know either, but that's exac…
/r/MensRights07/04/15 12:31 PM
0

Mhm. Right. Except the guy was SEVENTEEN. "Kids don't have the ability to make the kinds of judgements" my ass. Old enough to drive, old enough to work, but not old enough to refuse sex? But old enough to brag about it in class and show photos and videos around? In which world? Now, don't get me wrong - it's still an improper thing to do for the teacher - simply because of the possibility of indirect coercion due to her position of authority. And yes, were the genders reversed, we all know what …
/r/MensRights07/04/15 09:26 AM
2

Volker Pispers (political cabaret) once said about the whole lot, paraphrased: "The academic coffee ground readers put their heads together with the crystal ball owners, and one hour later we get the Index of Business Climate... down to a fraction after the decimal mark!"
/r/MensRights06/04/15 03:59 PM
3

Comments disabled. Of course. Yawn. On a side note, I understand the impulse to say "I'm not like them!". I mean, I too have always had this image of men as violent as I grew up, and I too thought to myself - I'm different. And so was my brother. And so was my best friend. And my not so best friend. And a few guys I knew. And most of my male teachers. Took me a while to realize that, no, I wasn't different, I just had a skewed perception of maleness.
/r/MensRights06/04/15 03:51 PM
2

Touche. I didn't think this through, it seems.
/r/MensRights06/04/15 03:45 PM
1

I admit I found that video a bit over the top as well. I found the tone distasteful. But it's the tone. Btw, the whole 'piglet' bit might have been a reference to the popular 'pigs are more equal' phrase, plus the pink hair... I still don't find it particularly funny, but there You go. Considering this was before #gamergate erupted, IIRC, his anger and predictions were surprisingly spot-on, though. Even if I didn't like his tone.
/r/MensRights06/04/15 03:42 PM
0

Not necessarily. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt here. It seems they were trying to distinguish between false accusation with malicious intent, and unfounded accusation - which, technically, would still count as "false", but rather due to lack of evidence instead of because of evidence of malicious intent and/or lying. We're always going to get that sort of thing in a crime that more often than not boils down to he-said-she-said, unfortunately. Of course, they kinda put themsel…
/r/MensRights06/04/15 03:30 PM
9

Not wrong, just hypocritical. Seeing as Valenti chants the "don't question victims" mantra, if Rolling Stone did practice due dilligence, guess who would be the first to lament how the press doesn't believe rape survivors and is overly sceptical and how that's totally victim blaming and rape culture...
/r/MensRights06/04/15 03:07 PM
1

Well, one can only hope. Careful, a bit of a derail here, apologies in advance, but You seem to be interested, so... Yeah, gynocentrism is basically the tendency of a species to concentrate most of their efforts to ensure the survival of females. The reason I am not very optimistic about it is because it at least appears to be that the desire to protect women (yes, and children, granted) is rooted very deeply. I was trying to point out that effective survival strategies are both being passed dow…
/r/MensRights03/04/15 10:08 PM
3

When someone starts to forbid people from eating meat, call me. Until then, it is entirely comparable. You are not obliged to follow someone else's recommendation on diet if You do not agree with it.
/r/MensRights03/04/15 09:01 PM
1

Don't go that way, mate. Jokes are jokes. Being offended at someone's sense of humour only makes You a twat, even if Your motives are sincerely good.
/r/MensRights03/04/15 08:57 PM
2

They are largely cultural, but I wouldn't deny there's an element of biology / evolution to it as well. Culture is a product of biology. I don't know why so many people try to separate these things. We didn't have thousands of years of evolution, then suddenly decided nomadic tribalism and hunting/gathering is sooo last year, this agriculture thing is totally in right now. People lived in nomadic cultures because settling was not an option. As soon as it became an option, the people who played t…
/r/MensRights03/04/15 08:55 PM
3

Phahaha, no. Not when it's about choice. What's next, men eating at McDonalds is an MRA issue because they ruin their health, the poor darlings? Just... no.
/r/MensRights03/04/15 08:16 PM
4

I don't see how it's an MRA issue, or any kind of issue, really. Let people eat and not eat what they want. And let them feel bad about it if they're retarded.
/r/MensRights03/04/15 07:57 PM
3

Card games about castrating men is protected by freedom of expression as much as shooting hookers in grand theft auto is. Hear hear. Have all of my upvotes.
/r/MensRights03/04/15 02:01 PM
3

Isn't that part of the point to be made? When You can't stop someone who is clearly doing something wrong out of fear of the consequences... what do we call people whose actions are beyond public criticism? Used to be the aristocracy...
/r/MensRights03/04/15 12:47 PM
2

Would be a fair analysis if not for the fact that in 2nd case, two guys were able to tell the guy who dropped the wallet exactly what happened after he came back looking for it. Though I admit as far as a 'social experiment' goes, this really doesn't prove much anything.
/r/MensRights03/04/15 12:39 PM
2

I don't know what to say, man. I'm sorry for what happened to You. I'd love to tell You that everything is gonna be alright, and that it's not as bad as people make it out to be, but I can't tell You that. I wouldn't know, anyways. Try Your best and hope for the best. It might work out, it might not be too bad. Hell, maybe You'll even find You enjoy being a father, who knows. Parenthood does weird stuff to the brain - if it was all bad, noone would ever do it. You'll manage somehow. Remember You…
/r/MensRights02/04/15 03:20 PM
1

What? Sorry, I am paying attention, and I'm taking it as seriously as You are. Your words: And there's no benefit to being stronger other than you're always the one that has to take out the trash in case you haven't noticed. Using Your superior ability to do physical work for the benefit of others is as much a choice as having a child.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 02:36 PM
3

They can go fuck themselves for all I care, then. I am not falsely accusing other people and making them miserable "for the greater good". That's exactly the mindset of "It doesn't matter if Jackie lied", or "Yes I made up my rape but it was to highlight a deeper problem." Just no.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 10:39 AM
1

Figuratively speaking. Everything's a trade nowadays ;)
/r/MensRights31/03/15 09:50 AM
1

Of course that is my point. And no, it is not irrelevant. The law is illegitimate and stupid, it should not be used to harm innocent people just to further an agenda. I am always amazed when fucking MRAs argue in favor of false rape allegations. Get a fucking grip, people. The world is full of people who don't agree with feminists and don't agree with the laws as they are, or simply aren't aware that the law is as retarded as it is - and plenty of those people are women. Whom You would be willin…
/r/MensRights31/03/15 09:48 AM
1

Perhaps we are talking about different things, then. I thought I said that in the modern world, most of those costs have been lessened by both cultural changes and, more importantly, technological advancement. Being stronger aint much of a benefit now (though I still think I'd notice if I suddenly had 30% less grip strength, for example), but it would have been even as far as 500 years ago (which is nothing in evolutionary terms). And being taken less seriously wasn't supposed to be the benefit,…
/r/MensRights31/03/15 09:16 AM
1

Not really. There are biological costs involved, for one. The "compassion power", as You put it, is tied to greater neoteny in females. But that does mean they don't enjoy the benefit of increased upper body strength and better muscle mass. And it does come at the cost of being taken less seriously due to said neoteny. Compassion usually comes with some amount of (mostly non-malicious) condescending. Then there's the whole biological burden of childbirth. And the burden of sexual selection. We t…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 05:32 PM
7

We have vastly different definitions of victim blaming, then.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 03:48 PM
6

And that's the problem, ain't it? Language again. Blaming has two meanings. One is accusatory. One is explainatory. The trouble is that we get accused of victim-blaming (accusatory) when we're merely correctly attributing partial responsibility to an ill that has befallen someone. We only blame victims of rape insofar as we would blame smokers with lung cancer, or blame victims of burglary who don't lock doors, or blame victims of arson who don't care to install fire alarms. None of these people…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 03:32 PM
2

I don't see a problem. I mean, I don't think this comic accurately represents any part of the MRM, but other than that, I mean. It's actually a bit of a satyrical trope. Compare to this - same concept, different topic. Now, like I said, I don't agree that the cartoon accurately represents reality, but then again, what do You expect from the opposing side?
/r/MensRights30/03/15 03:00 PM
5

Droning on? I suppose. If by that You mean repeating a truth. Or would You actually argue that people should not take a degree of responsibility for what happen to them? That's the point - in response to arguments against blaming women, we point out we're not blaming women. Then we make a point how victim questioning is not the same as victim blaming, for example, or that skepticism towards unverifiable claims is not unwarranted. And we get accused of victim blaming. So we point out we're not bl…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 02:53 PM
5

The rational wiki is a joke, anyways. I particularly like this bit: Rape culture fosters the misconception that incidents of false or politically motivated rape accusations are commonplace, in order to create a cloud of doubt on all potential rapes. Emphasis mine. Oh, I wasn't aware this "Rape Culture" is an entity with a will and a goal. And this from people who laugh at Intelligent Design. To be perfectly fair, though, they do include this bit: Because of the overall sexism in rape culture, me…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 02:43 PM
1

I don't, actually. I worked in gastronomy for a while, it can be a surprisingly tough job. But sorry abour that, my Irony Glands don't always work on the internet ;)
/r/MensRights30/03/15 01:02 PM
1

That could have been true, just as being a billionaire could have come with too many disadvantages that people would just give away their money to avoid those disadvantages, but as a matter of fact, it isn't true. Only if we're taking a snapshot. Everyone would agree being rich is an advantage. However, not everyone agrees that becoming rich is worth the trouble. Would I like to be rich? Sure. Would I care to work 80 hour weeks for 20 years in order to become rich? Not really. Sure, the rich guy…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 05:43 AM
1

Would that count? Or if not... how about pretty much the entirety of the reactions to Elliot Rodger? Since this is Men's Rights subreddit, You are likely to hear of the stories where men are NOT the violent offenders. What do You expect, that we go out of our way to find sources about male perpetrators of violence? To what end? We're rather egalitarian people, for the most part. We aknowledge that women are human beings. We aknowledge that men are human beings. We also aknowledge that human bein…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 05:33 AM
1

I'll redirect You to my post here. I should probably make a more comprehensive one, or maybe even a video about it, one day. Now, I wouldn't necessarily go so far as to say men in Iran are worse off than women, but sure looks like men don't have it as good and women don't have it as bad as we are often led to believe. Really, the fact that it's way easier to make that kind of judgement about the first world is a testament to how egalitarian our societies try to be. But those societies aren't try…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 05:08 AM
-1

Well, that metaphor would be valid if "woman-driver" was a somewhat coined term. Maybe if it was more catchy, it would have caught on. As such, it's not like "women-drivers", because noone uses that term. It's clunky. It's forced. And it has the added problem of describing, You know, an actual woman. Whereas "mansplaining" is not "a man explaining something", it's "explaining in a manner typical to men". Anyone can do that, since the actual gender is not relevant. But if someone came up with a c…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 04:31 AM
0

I also know a lot of women who really should grow a pair. And quite a few guys who act like they're on their period. What's Your point?
/r/MensRights30/03/15 03:58 AM
-1

Well, sure. But complaining about how a term is "sexist" just because it is gendered is very akin to feminists frothing at the mouth whenever someone dares say "Fireman" or "Mankind" or something similar. I'd be even willing to consider that the term "mansplaining" wasn't coined entirely out of spite, but due to a genuine observation, i.e. this type of authoritarian, slightly condescending and/or patronizing kind of explaining tends to be more common in men than in women. I do not know whether t…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 03:56 AM
2

I don't think it is. Sex work is legit work, and if I had the choice between slaving away at mcdonalds for minimum wage and cut on sleep and leisure time in order to study, or do a bit of escorting or an hour or two of webcamming before going to sleep, I might be tempted to do the latter - provided I have the looks and charm as well as the mindset - some people just don't have what it takes to be in that line of work, just the way it is. I mean, think about it. Work 50 hours a month and just bar…
/r/MensRights29/03/15 11:43 PM
-4

Unfortunately, that's not how language works. I don't get to decide what a word means, and neither do You. When someone says a factually wrong thing, i.e. "The lasso doesn't work if he's mansplaining", I'll point that out. But nice to know that You don't care about what's factually correct. And this is golden: Edit: You're a bigot for using the word. That's the end of it for me and a whole lot of other men. So fucking drop it. You people have demanded that we stop using all kinds of words for fa…
/r/MensRights29/03/15 11:25 PM
-2

Because two wrongs make a right...? I am not a fan of proclaiming one side wrong, then turning around and doing the exact same thing.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:48 PM
3

To be completely fair, it's okay to have ministers for minorities. As it is understood that in a democracy, the majority does actually already hold a lot of power, and it is prudent to take measures to prevent a tyranny of the majority. The moment it always goes horribly wrong is when well-intentioned sexists proclaim "women" to be a minority.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:43 PM
6

Kind of reminds me of the whole "pink/blue" feminist crusade. A brief history of color-coding boys and girls: Red, an aggressive color, is culturally seen as male. Pink, a "lesser" red, is used for boys, "lesser" men. Feminist throw a fit, girls are powerful too, women start buying pink things for their daughters. Time passes Feminists throw a fit that pink is seen as a girly color. There's no winning move, it seems.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:39 PM
2

[Warning: A bit of a sidetracking here, sorry] That's a huge problem with a lot of these things. Same thing happened to 'rape culture' - most people keep using that phrase thinking it means something entirely different to what it originally was supposed to mean. Then, due to the nature of language, it started to mean something else. And now MRAs sometimes end up criticizing the use of rape culture (1), but adressing the properties of rape culture (2). Huge mess ensues, noone really at fault at t…
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:32 PM
-5

Mansplaining is not about being untrue. It's about being condescending. My brother is a textbook "mansplainer". He doesn't even do it on purpose, he just has this very irritating, very grating way to explain things. His explainations are usually pretty impatient, unintentionally condescending, often precluded with a sigh or rolling his eyes, and often include exaggerated simplifications or explaining things that You already understand and didn't ask to get explained. I don't hold it against him,…
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:18 PM
2

Dunno where You are living, but You could try to do both. Assuming You are single, You could possibly get by on a part-time wage. Part-time leaves You still with plenty of time to write and do research. Not sure if You would have the motivation or strength to do it - unqualifeid part-time work can be just as draining as a high-paid position - but You'd theoretically have the time, and having work experience build up - even if it's just part-time - and basic bills covered is always a good thing. …
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:09 PM
0

No, I am not. There is no definition of "private consequence" or "public consequence". There is nothing to look up there. There was no talk about the private or public sector. I'm willing to accept it as miscommunication, but I won't be talked into not understanding something that wasn't said in the first place. I wouldn't smile in any case. I find both sentiments repulsive. But I also wouldn't demand that they be held publicly accountable for a private action. Which is what this would result in…
/r/MensRights29/03/15 09:53 PM
0

Glad to hear it. So You support me not hiring MRAs then? Or firing them when I find out one of my employees is one? Just be honest with me on this one. If that's the case, I'll just respectfully disagree. That aside, is that why going to the press with a story is refered to "going public" about something? Seriously, I think You're being facetious. By Your logic, communist Russia had "freedom of speech", because You could say whatever You wanted - You'd just end up in a gulag, or a mental hospita…
/r/MensRights29/03/15 08:30 PM
6

This came to light when a one-month-old baby died after a home circumcision went wrong. Callis Osaghae was brought to Waterford Regional Hospital last August after a botched circumcision with a razor blade. This is ridiculous. So we don't say: "What the fuck are You doing, are You crazy!?", instead we say: "Here, fool, let me show You how to mutilate genitals properly. Noob."?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 08:22 PM
9

Not even counter-productive. Straight-out inhumane. The OP advocates for punishing innocent PEOPLE just to further an agenda. We can't say "Feminists are fascist sexist ideologues - LET'S BE JUST LIKE THEM!" That's just disgustingly immoral.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 08:10 PM
4

Yes it is. Not uniformely and perhaps not even overwhelmingly, but often enough.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 08:07 PM
3

But explaining why girls and women still don’t have the same rights as boys and men is hard to comprehend, since I don’t fully understand it myself. I think I can just about identify the problem.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 07:50 PM
0

Private consequences. Those would be very public consequences. Wouldn't You rage if feminists made petitions to, I dunno, exmatriculate Sage Gerard? Private consequences and all that? I actually applaud the indemendent upon some reflection. Them publishing an article like that only confirms what has been emerging as a pleasant pattern: The public will not stand for such outrageously sexist and racist sentiments. But we wouldn't know if those sentiments were banned from being expressed.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 07:39 PM
1

So You can't have racist opinions now? And also not sexist opinions? And also not opinions deemed by others as racist and/or sexist? Good luck ever getting into media as an MRA, then. Edit: No, I don't think MRAs are racist or sexist. I'm saying other people will claim they are, and will demand our pieces not published on the same grounds. You can holler "But WE are right and THEY are wrong!!!" all You like, that's irrelevant when setting up the framework of public discourse.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 07:33 PM
-2

It's rare, but it happens. I know, nitpicking, but this kind of thing is also not exactly in every second issue... To be quite frank, I actually chuckled a bit at the mansplaining bit. Come on guys, don't be such Sarkeesians. Overanalazing every little bit of female-on-male violence. What should we call it? Something catchy like the "Woman in Refrigerator". How about the "Manhandled Mansplainer" trope? Come now. We have bigger fish to fry, why bother with little red herrings?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 07:15 PM
10

ICH BADE IN FRAUENTRÄNEN!! Probably a swastika in there somewhere as well. I mean, just stands to reason.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 06:49 PM
2

I'm still not convinced this is not a hoax =/ I mean, seriously...
/r/MensRights27/03/15 12:36 PM
1

actually, come to think of it, i've never seen anyone except feminists even use the word "derailing" except when talking about actual, physical trains. i recognize the word came from 4chan and other forums to discuss the form of trolling we all understand as intentionally posting off-topic material and images in a thread. Yeah, no. Our side is doing it too.. Sorry, it's true. Granted, feminists almost make an art form out of it, but fair's fair, they do have more experience under their belt.
/r/MensRights27/03/15 12:31 PM
1

do you want us to believe that with the exception of Turkey and Israel most of the Arab/Persian world women are not second class citizens? They may be. They may not be. How would You tell? Ever been 'there', wherever 'there' may be? And if not, what are You relying on to judge? Media coverage? From the Rolling Stone, mayhaps? Ever heard of Mahr or Mahriyeh and/or Nafaqa? Here, it makes a good read. And here's my layman analysis of it, just because I feel like it. It's long! Also disclaimer: I do…
/r/MensRights27/03/15 12:52 AM
7

Dear god, please no. That's the first brick in creating an echo chamber.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 10:08 PM
0

This obviously encourages the mugging of women and therefore is rightfully banned. Shame on us misogynists for making a fuss. Sheesh. Privilege, people.
/r/MensRights24/03/15 11:51 AM
6

The angle is in the title: "No civilised system of justice should have to depend on such flimsy evidence." Hear, hear. In this case, it was a woman convicted solely on the testimony of a detective with a history of misconduct. In an other case, it is a man convicted solely on the testimony of an alleged victim with a history of lying or manipulative behavior. Both cases should be unacceptable. First is a perversion of judicial law, though, while the second is in the process of being enshrined in…
/r/MensRights24/03/15 11:45 AM
1

Country of residence? Might have something for Australia on my hands. Generally, best to look into official, state-provided statistics. They're more difficult to discredit or disregard, and It's rare that they outright lie, they mostly merely deliberately misrepresent in abstracts. Comparing total wages vs total hours worked usually makes the gap shrink to within a statistical error margin. You could start there. For further factors, consider specialization (some studies pile jobs within the sam…
/r/MensRights23/03/15 11:11 PM
2

I don't want to compete with this sub or 2x, I just want to create some place where we can all work together, like normal people. Well, as one of these obviously not normal people, I'll tell You right now - good luck with that, it won't happen. The very first time You encounter a problem where numbers are vague and emotions run high, but only one side can be objectively right - there's Your divide. Wage gap. How do You "work together" on this one? MRAs say it doesn't exist, or it exists only to …
/r/MensRights23/03/15 02:51 PM
1

This is the place. Now, would You maybe care to name an area where women do not have rights equal to those of men? Because I have yet to see one. I really do. In the first world, that is. Equal rights, mind You. Not equal outcomes. Now, do excuse me if I don't quite wait for Your response before I go on - I will adress it if You can come up with something, no worries - but that's kind of the crux of the issue. I'm an egalitarian humanist. And when I look at the state of human rights in the west …
/r/MensRights23/03/15 02:42 PM
2

Best of luck then, You'll need it ;)
/r/MensRights20/03/15 06:43 PM
3

If we meet halfway we are at the same place, thus equal. How do You meet halfway when it comes to the "wage gap"? One side claims it doesn't exist, the other says it does. There is no half way here. It either exists, or it doesn't.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 06:34 PM
5

Sorry to see You go. One final thought, though: Yes, many in the MRM are quite focused on bashing feminism, but there's a reason for that. See, when there is public discourse going on, it's really, really hard to do anything when one side says "1+1=2", and the other side says "1+1=PATRIARCHY YOU FILTHY MISOGYNIST". Especially if, for some bizarre reason, it's the latter that gets to call all the shots. Deconstructing feminism in order to disempower it is a legit excercise. Plus, as someone alrea…
/r/MensRights20/03/15 06:05 PM
1

I'm not going to do the research for You (sorry!), but from what I've gathered, Poland is still rather anti-feminist. That could have changed in the recent years, though. And frankly, it's not really a good country to live in (sorry, ol' motherland, but it's true...). Besides, it's in the iron grip of a different religion - the catholic church is calling the shots more often than not. Not sure if that's preferable to feminism for You. The atheist movement in poland is growing, though, so that's …
/r/MensRights20/03/15 05:56 PM
0

Made a comment, let's see if it makes it through moderation. For the record: "As for numbers, they vary. With all forms of domestic abuse, we cannot accurately estimate what is not reported. There well may be scores of men ashamed to go to police. But the numbers on reported domestic violence depict a stark picture: in the most recent statistical publication, Victoria Police put the number of male domestic violence victims at 15 per cent. Most – not all – of the research undertaken by the Austra…
/r/MensRights20/03/15 05:28 PM
10

I was kinda forced to answer all questions that refered to patriarchy with "not at all" or similar, because I disagree with the premise, i.e: Something can't be attributed to patriarchy if this whole concept of patriarchy has not been proven to be valid.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 10:06 AM
2

If You want an interesting read about the whole "human trafficking" topic, I recommend Maggie's Blog - as an example, but feel free to browse through the blog, I'm sure You'll stumble about an eye opener or five. TLDR - when feminists say they are fighting against "human trafficking", they often mean "female prostitution". Not necessarily involuntary prostitution, either. It's like when they say they oppose domestic violence - it's best to ask some questions before assuming to know what they act…
/r/MensRights18/03/15 03:00 PM
7

Eschew all contact with women. No, wait. That's misogynistic. Well, at least not sexist, though. Or is it? Daaamn. Btw, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some truth to it. I mean, have You ever seen a misandrist feminist who is forced to talk to a man about his rape? The forced smile paired with cold eyes? The problem, as ever, is that this article pretends that this is gendered. Stop the presses! Facial expressions tell us something about the attitudes of human beings! Boy, I wouldn't have t…
/r/MensRights17/03/15 04:50 PM
1

Fine then. Neither are women. So what was Your point, again? However, since we're talking about representation.. know who's a minortiy when it comes to political representation? Why, MRAs. Hmmm. Politicians listen to groups that have money and political power. Fighting with feminists is not the way to get politicians' assistance in passing new laws. It's a fool's game to think that politicians will just stop listening to a powerful group when MRA's have no money or political power to offer in re…
/r/MensRights17/03/15 02:12 PM
1

Three times have we told You that legislators and judges are public servants. They do not wilfully create laws, they create them according to their perception of the will of the people. This perception can often be skewed by personal bias and lobbyist effort, but it's still how representative democracies are intended to work. This is not a personal attack. If You will just ignore the things we say and repeat the questions which we already (quite exhaustingly) answered, why are You here?
/r/MensRights17/03/15 12:13 PM
1

Out of my whole block of text, THAT is what You decide to talk about? Fair enough, but I hope You know how that will look like to everyone else here. MRA's need to suck it up and admit that a lot of what they are fighting against is in fact laws and court decisions made by other men. The U.S. Supreme Court has never once been dominated by women. Neither has the U.S. Senate, U.S. Legislature, and to the best of my knowledge any State government or court. This is a marked difference between a mino…
/r/MensRights17/03/15 12:08 PM
4

You're not a Men's Rights Advocate... You merely advocate for the rights of men (in this case, the right not to be viewed as inherently violent and dangerous)? Well, good luck down that path ;) Edit: Good job on that blog post, though. Snark aside, I tip my hat to You.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 10:07 AM
1

Oh, I see. "I don't care about mistakes I might have made because [narrative]." You may choose to act like that. I, however, will not.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 09:54 AM
1

I even quoted You where You DID say that women are by definition minorities, and now You say You didn't say that. Which one is it? MRAs have absolutely no problem at all with attacking gynocentric thinking in men. But, surprise surprise, You don't see that because... You focus on women. Do You maybe perhaps spot the problem here? Another thing You do here, and I'm sorry, but it says a lot about Your attitude: It is men who have been making and enforcing unjust laws. >This is just reality, at lea…
/r/MensRights17/03/15 09:52 AM
1

And they arguably also need them more because of the children. What is Your point again? Look mate, before we play this game for a few more hours, I'll tell You straight: I am not interested in finding a reason to care more about the homeless men than the homeless women, or vice-versa. I think it's surprising that the data I've found for michigan is so much at odds with the usual figures (that being between 60% and 80% of the homeless being male). And that would actually make part of the stateme…
/r/MensRights16/03/15 06:35 PM
1

No, I think You are right. That's the beauty of this movement, it basically owns its shit. Most of the time at least, and for the moment. I've said it elsewere, but in MRM circles, I read something disagreeable maybe once every month or two - In other circles, I read something disagreeable once or twice a week. That's one hell of a good record in my books. And at least half the time (from my experiences), the MRM community is there and ready to self-police when someone says something stupid or b…
/r/MensRights16/03/15 05:53 PM
-2

Yes. So? The overall number is still almost 50/50. Assuming the source I provided has numbers that are remotely accurate, the number of homeless men and women is remarkably equal, and I don't really see how the fact that 66% of homeless singles are men and 75% of homeless family adults are women is relevant either way. Homeless is homeless.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 02:09 PM
3

Well, go to Youtube and search for "TLDR this MGTOW doesn't understand humans", You'll find at least one example. There are misogynist MGTOWs, and there probably are misogynist MRAs. We don't lose any points by recognizing that. But just like self-identifying feminists who claim that feminism is only about equality, they are just not representative of the movement as a whole. I for one don't even much care whether someone is misogynist or misandrist or whatever. I just repeat: Circumcision, repr…
/r/MensRights16/03/15 10:32 AM
6

I went to look for michigan statistics by sex. Found this: http://www.housingresourcesinc.org/sites/default/files/public/2010_michigans_annual_homeless_report.pdf Page 13, 51/49 male/female overall ratio in homeless adults. Homeless children (and as far as I can tell, that includes people in their late teens) aren't differentiated by sex. I admit I'm surprised, I expected the ratio to be more skewed towards males. At least according to this source, and with women dominating the male-female ratio…
/r/MensRights16/03/15 10:06 AM
15

Damn, man. You practically spelled it out by prefacing it with "I have a modest proposal:". Education isn't what it used to be. (And now I feel old. And conservative as fuck.)
/r/MensRights16/03/15 01:45 AM
2

Sorry to break it to You, but that's not misandry, mate. That's just people being assholes. Misandry is a very heavy word. It means hatred and contempt for men based on their gender. The women who replied with callousness might well have harboured hatred or contempt for YOU, but that's still far from misandry. Just like people disliking the antics of Anita Sarkeesian is not misogyny. Would You say You not replying to the women who were open to something but weren't that physically attractive - Y…
/r/MensRights16/03/15 01:39 AM
2

I'm as sex positive as it gets. But preferably with someone whom I know and trust, not some random dude or gal in a hotel elevator in a strange city at 4 a.m., quite possibly drunk or at least tipsy (I'll just assume, people leaving bars at 4 a.m. usually are). If that makes me a puritan, then so be it.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 12:56 AM
5

Women are only 52 percent of U.S. voters As opposed to men, who of course are 78 percent of U.S. voters, amirite? [/sarcasm] They are by definition minorities More than 50 percent is now by definition a minority. Black is white. Sorry, but You say things like that, and then wonder why MRAs are angry? I don't know about other MRAs, but I personally get a bit angry when someone tries to tell me with a straight face that 1+1=3.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 12:49 AM
4

I also haven't really noticed a lot of bias, and I was in a 80% female university faculty (linguistics...) before I dropped out (personal reasons). The only thing I remember thinking of as ridiculous is that in an 80% female environment, we still had a designated women's representative. Then again, I was a good student with top-notch grades, so I guess that might distort my perception a bit. But hey, I also haven't served prison time (yet?), still doesn't mean there are no issues with bias in se…
/r/MensRights16/03/15 12:25 AM
1

Ehh.. to be quite honest, I always had some sympathy for ol' Watson. Initially, that is. Before she started to milk the victim cow. I mean, if that happened to me, I'd probably feel creeped out as well. And if I happened to mention that in a video and the whole thing just snowballed out of control... Granted, the way she handled it drained my sympathy pretty quickly. But I can understand how someone would be creeped out by the whole situation, and I don't think it has a lot to do with the sex of…
/r/MensRights15/03/15 10:56 PM
4

I don't blame anyone for jumping to conclusions - not much anyways - since this looks so much like the false accusation scandals of the past, but still, this. I understand the reactionary instinct, but it does noone any good to counter their "accusation = guilty" mentality with an "accusation = innocent" mentality. One thing, however, that is outrageous even without knowing all the facts, is the nature of the charges. Apparently, some of the reported sexual acts were consensual. The accused are …
/r/MensRights14/03/15 10:13 AM
3

I read through the declaration. There are a quite a few things to comment about, but this one is particularly scary. From the political declaration: "[...] 11. Recognize the importance of the full engagement of men and boys for the achievement of gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls, and commit to taking measures to fully engage men and boys in efforts to achieve the full, effective and accelerated implementation of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action " Conscription…
/r/MensRights13/03/15 07:53 PM
1

It would be helpful if You could supply us with the definition of Rape Culture You will be basing the debate on. There are at least two to my knowledge - a colloquial one and an academic one - and it doesn't help at all that everyone is mixing those two up all over the place. If You are debating about the academic definition of Rape Culture -i.e, the normalization of rape - I think it would be most prudent to point out that nothing follows of it. To put it another way: If the argument is that ra…
/r/MensRights13/03/15 07:16 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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