TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Slyndrr Archive

View 0 posts and 173 comments by Slyndrr 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

Keep telling yourself that, I bet it makes you feel all righteous.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/06/15 05:19 PM
-2

Mm, sure. Keep justifying sending gifs of girls getting beaten up (usually by someone overreacting to a non-threat they could have dealt with way better) to the front page within hours. I'm sure it's reasonable. Ad hominem, by the way? Really. Ad sub-inem maybe, get over yourself.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/06/15 04:57 PM
-9

Sub just loves seeing a girl get beaten up. The "justice porn" behind it is a thin veil.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/06/15 04:11 PM
1

Sure. Let's find that out for individuals after the social stigmas and unfair laws are gone.
/r/MensRights27/03/15 01:48 PM
1

To pull some statistics from this article: one fourth of discrimination suits since 2006 because of parenthood comes from men, despite men taking a smaller than that amount of leave. Here is another article on the same topic. It's about a newer research report and it is very unambiguous. And I think it's great that the Swedish government gave men the option. The question is, how many of them really want it, and why. More than dare take it, and because they are human and want to be with their kid…
/r/MensRights27/03/15 01:33 PM
1

The Swedish minister for equality, JämO and their research/staff. You can find an artice here. It's in Swedish, but hopefully you can get something from google translate. As for historical and cultural backgrounds, you have to take into consideration that most of the western countries have had a very strict gender role assignment for thousands of years. This isn't something that just goes away overnight even considering that women have been joining the workforce in droves for the past 50 years. …
/r/MensRights27/03/15 12:46 PM
1

This comment and the similar comments were upvoted when this post hit /r/all, that's how I found it. Now that it's again out of mainstream view, the downvotes are trickling in. Calling feminism a "hate movement" is just absurd. Yes there are individuals who are hateful, scornful assholes and still call themselves feminists. They are far from mainstream. Take a look at the feminist subreddits and compare the headlines with this one. Try to sort out what is hateful and what is not. Take a look in …
/r/MensRights27/03/15 11:53 AM
0

This is the exact same thing that happens to women. There is no gender discrimination here. This is just the way it is, if you want a career. You can't just disappear for a year. There IS a difference, a measurable difference. The men lose MORE than the women taking the same amount of time, due to doing something unexpected and breaking social norms. Of course it is. If it's true, it prevents the wasting of taxpayer money on something which will never work. It does work and doesn't waste taxpaye…
/r/MensRights27/03/15 11:41 AM
3

... People following social norms? The dads in Sweden face many difficulties with this. They lose more than the women on taking this time home with the kids, mainly because of these social norms. Their work places simply doesn't trust them as much after doing a thing like this and their opportunities are cut. Saying "it's just nature" isn't constructive at all. That only makes it harder for the men who admit to themselves that they want a more solid connection with their families and who are wil…
/r/MensRights27/03/15 08:32 AM
-3

What exactly does this have to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights27/03/15 08:22 AM
1

When even mainstream reddit (well known for being fairly anti-feminist) thinks you're being too harsh on feminism, maybe it's time to re-think things? Maybe the reason it doesn't feel "safe" is because it's actually becoming hatred? Look at this post. It has absolutely nothing to do with what should be the agenda for a men's rights group. Do you think getting branded as a hate movement helps getting MRA into universities and general gender discussions? If you want to bring something to those aca…
/r/MensRights27/03/15 07:25 AM
-3

Dude.. When even mainstream reddit think you're being too harsh on feminism, maybe it's time to re-think things? Maybe the reason it doesn't feel "safe" is because it's actually becoming hatred? Look at this post. It has absolutely nothing to do with what should be the agenda for a men's rights group. Do you think getting branded as a hate movement will help getting MRA into universities and general gender discussions?
/r/MensRights27/03/15 07:15 AM
-4

You don't want men to carry all the burden of guilt for all bad stuff happening in society. Well guess what. Feminists don't want to carry all the burden of guilt for all bad stuff happening to men. If you don't like people who try to place all the guilt on men, then don't do exactly the same to women or feminists. That just makes you just as bad as the individuals who want to put all the blame on men. Looking at this subreddit, this is exactly what is going on here. Almost all posts clearly poi…
/r/MensRights26/03/15 05:43 PM
-6

Sure, let's put all the guilt on another group instead. That'll fix things!
/r/MensRights26/03/15 05:29 PM
0

Continue the discussion somewhere else. It surely needs to be held, as a feminist I do admit very willingly that there are many topics that feminism can't or won't deal with for men or boys although there clearly are overlaps.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 03:34 PM
14

Yeah, I just took a look at the other headlines.. wtf. This is just a feminism bashing circlejerk. Too bad, the topic should deserve better than that.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 01:57 PM
69

Saw this from /r/all and wondered what the hell this has to do with men's rights.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 01:40 PM
3

We don't get banned here, but we get our inboxes full of hate and get downvoted to oblivion. Which is just as good a tactic to keep discussion one-sided.
/r/MensRights30/06/14 03:43 PM
0

Men can't be victims because just by having a penis you're part of the patriarchy, or you're part of rape culture and need to be told not to rape or you'll just lose control. I strongly disagree with this. Most, most feminists will agree that "patriarchy" is a set of stereotypes and ideas perpetuated by both men and women. One of those ideas is that men can't control their sexuality and will be tempted to rape persons because of what they are wearing. Another patriarchial thought is that men can…
/r/MensRights05/06/14 08:10 AM
1

Twox and some private ones.
/r/MensRights05/06/14 06:57 AM
0

Isn't MRA the same, though? Could you honestly vouch for every man and woman in this sub, and every MRA philosopher you read? I very much doubt that. That's not now philosophical or political movements work. And it's in the end a good thing, if there was a complete hegemony the movements would never evolve. We shouldn't be so afraid for diversity and change. It's quite often a good thing. Feminism has evolved in waves, once enough change has happened everyone simply shrugs and says "fine, next w…
/r/MensRights04/06/14 11:00 PM
2

Funny that, I'm banned from there. To be fair, I didn't read the sidebar and didn't follow the rules and probably deserved it.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 10:50 PM
-1

Did you actually read the link from http://www.attorneys.com ? It answers that question. "According to some estimates, only about 10 percent to 15 percent of divorced or single fathers have sole custody of their children. The remaining fathers have either joint custody or no custody of their children. Why do women win custody in such high numbers? There are many reasons. First, it's important to remember that statistics don't tell the whole story. They fail to take into account the fact that: Co…
/r/MensRights04/06/14 10:18 PM
-5

/r/feminism isn't something I subscribe to. It's run by one of "yours" actually, the owner of the sub is MRA and not a feminist. The moderation has gone in waves from being completely anti-feminist and now just seems to be random. I honestly don't know what's up with that sub anymore, but I am damn sure that it doesn't match up to what I or many other feminists stand for. As for feeling welcome here - whenever I mention that I am a feminist I get downvoted like crazy. This is not a very acceptin…
/r/MensRights04/06/14 10:08 PM
0

You are right that men are very rarely seen as the victims, but when a man does sue for custody rights he has a very good chance of winning if he is a stay at home dad with an abusive spouse and actually fights for his rights. This site gives some information and this article has some good information on what a father should think of before court. The biggest problem men face isn't actually biased courtrooms. They do exist, I know, I hate this bias too from a very feminist standpoint - I believe…
/r/MensRights04/06/14 09:50 PM
5

Thank you, edited.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 09:40 PM
-9

Hi, feminist here. One big problem men have right now is that the MRA movement is easily distracted by trolls like OP. Men who live in abusive relationships suffer horribly. OP is using your outrage to have some fun and to further drive a wedge between you and feminists who actually wish to help with men's issues. There are no European countries where woman-on-man-violence is legal and no countries where an abusive spouse would get custody rights if a case was brought up. OP claims to be a femin…
/r/MensRights04/06/14 09:30 PM
6

He is very good at trolling, not very good at logic. Here's another good quote from this "feminist": No, those women are very capable. We are hardly able to organize single conference. They are milking public funds for decades.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 09:20 PM
4

No really, which country is this? There is no European country where an abuser would win custody and woman-on-man violence is legal. If someone has been telling you this, you need to find correct information so that you can get away from your situation. Considering that you have been lying about being a feminist to rile people up and clearly just love farting about (and this is likely why you were banned from /r/feminism), you are very likely also lying about your marital situation. Successful t…
/r/MensRights04/06/14 09:09 PM
9

Are you? Let me quote you: "I would return the favor. Feminist is most likely just fine with male rapes in prison and underage rape. Boom! You are rape apologist and pedophile supporter." You sound like a troll to me.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 08:59 PM
1

And I also wrote repeatedly that I suspected that you were using it as a rhetoric and that I thought this was careless and disrespectful. You're right, it helps nothing to be careless and disrespectful. It turns people away from your cause. Like me, getting the hell out of this sub again having learned nothing I didn't already know.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 07:29 PM
0

I don't agree that an unwilling father should be forced into fatherhood, and where this can happen the laws need to change. I say that as a feminist, just as I don't want a woman to be forced into motherhood by banned abortions. I also acknowledge that forcing a woman to go through pregnancy and birth and motherhood and child support payments is a much worse situation than forcing a man into fatherhood and child support payments. It shouldn't be compared. You went too far. It is not about rhetor…
/r/MensRights04/06/14 06:57 PM
1

No. It isn't. Your argument would be easier to swallow, and I would completely agree, if it were "a dad should be able to denounce fatherhood during the pregnancy or within X weeks of being told of his fatherhood". Bringing abortion rights into the matter is ridiculous.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 06:42 PM
2

the exact same argument with reversed genders Thing is, it isn't. A man wouldn't have to complete a nine month pregnancy followed by a birth. This includes hormonal changes, possible fears (parasite inside), extreme body changes, and at the end of these nine months of possible torture, medical examinations, work impairment, you have to give birth. Giving birth causes permanent change to the genitals, possibly permanently damaging them, causing things like poop pouches in the vagina, tearing, ana…
/r/MensRights04/06/14 05:59 PM
2

any man who made a woman pregnant should be able to refuse her an abortion This. I get that you are using it as a rhetorical statement (or at least I really hope so), but it is very insensitive to the women who get forced to carry to term against their will, or feel forced to do clandestine abortions, and not very considerate of the actual facts involved.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 05:32 PM
1

How on earth is this upvoted? Does anyone in this sub know what pregnancy and birth is and how traumatizing that can be to a body, especially for a woman who does not want to be pregnant? No, it's not to be used as a rhetorical argument. Ever. It's reality in a lot of places, even in the US.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 05:21 PM
-2

To many women redpill would be a hate sub. Would you be so dismissive if 10% had been going to an openly racist sub? 10% is a huge deal.
/r/MensRights03/06/14 09:22 PM
-1

If you want to end a discussion, just end it. Don't beg me to end it for you and give you the last word, this isn't kindergarten. Yes, men do violence against other men too. Nobody is denying this. The problem is with masculinity, patriarchy. It hurts everyone. It's not some biological prerogative, just like femininity has been shown not to be. It's a coat to take on and off. To sew, patch, examine. Of course you don't condone rape. Most rapists don't even condone rape. Many, may rapists deny to…
/r/MensRights02/06/14 06:51 PM
-1

Not as sorry as the women abused and murdered because of men who think they own them and just want to "protect" them, who think they deserve the women, earned her cunt.. I can assure you of that.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 05:51 PM
-1

Protecting women from harm was extremely important throughout the evolution of our species and in turn resulted in the formation of gender roles and the discrepancies between male strength and female strength. Men were expected (and possibly felt through instinct) to use their lives as shields to protect women from harm. Women were expected to protect themselves and remain in safe conditions. This resulted in what women today would describe as oppression. To any outside observer the difference i…
/r/MensRights02/06/14 05:24 PM
-1

Downvoted? Have you read this post and the comments on it? http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2712lo/patriarchy_theory_and_biology_the_unjust/ That's what the likes of Elliot would believe. Upvoted. Celebrated.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 04:01 PM
1

Why not? Because it's not as virulent as the male toxicity. It isn't violent, the damaging sides of femininity turn inwards, just like young women generally turn to self harm instead of street violence and thuggery. Deconstruction of masculinity has to be done for gender equality to be reached. Deconstruction of femininity is already well on the way, and so is deconstruction of masculinity, mainly thanks to feminism. Why do the MRA movement generally struggle against that? Surely twisting and tu…
/r/MensRights02/06/14 03:39 PM
1

For god's sake man, study. Yes, there are concepts of toxic femininity, albeit not usually named that specific name. Feminists have spent half a century deconstructing femininity. There has been waves of it. Burning bras, girl power, lipstick feminism, gender theory, anti-housewife movements, returning to accepting housewives-movements, "ban bossy". It's been done to shreds and it is still being done and discussed. If you ask me personally, the toxic aspects of femininity is being demure, passiv…
/r/MensRights02/06/14 03:27 PM
-1

Am I doing that? Claiming men are the enemy? No. I and for the matter 99% of the feminist discussions I read and partake in paint culture as the enemy, admitting both men and women perpetuating it. So why do you accuse me of doing it? This whole forum is a witch hunt on feminists and women. Why? I am being cried out against and am hearing plenty about oppression here. Clean up in front of your own door before whining more at feminists. I do want a civilized discussion. I come here hoping to have…
/r/MensRights02/06/14 02:59 PM
1

I have the anecdotes. Do you? Are you making up stories in your head, stories you've only read on the internet? I have given you plenty of proof about what rape statistics look like. You've only given me personal doubt in return. You need to actually present conflicting data, otherwise your critique is useless. /r/feminism is run by a male mod who is a MRA and not a feminist. Complaining about that sub is ironic, at best. Toxic masculinity is not an attack on all masculinity. Really, what is wro…
/r/MensRights02/06/14 02:15 PM
1

Violence, dude. Violence. Things to be protected from. You can't protect a woman much against cancer and heart disease unfortunately, it doesn't matter how manly you may be. You can't protect women from old age either. Violence against women is done by men. The danger women feel in their daily lives comes from men.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 12:56 PM
1

How many men do you know who have been raped? Who raped them? The surveys and lived experiences of women show rapes against women to be 15-20%. 7% of rape victims to be male. Find me the male victims if you believe them to exist in greater quantities, the burden of evidence is on you. Keep in mind that I am not the person ordering these surveys. Feminists are not the ones ordering these surveys. It is not some giant conspiracy out to cover up male rape victims. Did you read the article I linked …
/r/MensRights02/06/14 12:46 PM
-5

This entire sub seems based on fighting feminism. What is so scary about questioning the gender normative and the power distributions? Wouldn't it be better to try to change the world instead of clinging on to old ideas and denying problems in society? Where are the MRA'ers fighting for paternity leave and the right to show any emotions besides anger? Where are the MRAs fighting male stereotypes, the patriarch, the fighter, the machine? Who is the enemy here? Feminism has the enemy clear. It is …
/r/MensRights02/06/14 12:34 PM
-7

All masculinity is not toxic masculinity, just like all femininity is not toxic femininity. There are good sides, there are bad sides. The bad sides and the expected stereotypes need to go. We should be allowed to embrace both femininity and masculinity. 28.8% of all U.S. non farm firms are women-owned The gender pay gap IS a thing but a more complex thing than a percentage Despite the legal, social, and economic gains that women in the United States have made in recent decades, a statistically …
/r/MensRights02/06/14 12:23 PM
1

It is. What else? Other women? Tigers? Do show the statistics, you haven't. Lesbians are not all women, and of course a lesbian is more likely to suffer domestic violence by a woman than by a man. She is not living with men! Rape is insanely common, all over the world. In the US 15-20% of women are raped at least once during their lifetime. One in five, one in six women. Women are more likely to be victims than men both when it comes to domestic violence and rape. In the cases where women abuse,…
/r/MensRights02/06/14 11:48 AM
-7

You dare to say that women are not disposable after reading that article about Pakistan, where men murdering women is normal? Where half the population sees it as a necessity to do so? What a rapist consider to be rape and what a raped person considers to be rape are not always the same, no. Should you go by what the rapist feels about it, or the victim? Your defence of these matters and your refusal to see the suffering this kind of genderbased domination in power and politics and worth makes m…
/r/MensRights02/06/14 11:35 AM
1

Got anything to back that up? Do you honestly want statistics on tiger attacks in the modern world, or are you being a bit of a cunt now? Men don't provide any security to women that they can't provide for themselves with a career and an own economy. Instead, the men in the woman's' life are a potential threat. Women on women violence is very rare. Men on women violence is common. Domestic violence is also common. Men raping women is common. Can you give me any solid evidence of men providing an…
/r/MensRights02/06/14 11:19 AM
1

The danger to women isn't from tigers. It's from men who want to fuck and own us. Owning ourselves makes it possible for us to choose the men who are not violent to us and makes it possible for us to escape when violence happens or is imminent. It is self-evident that in order to escape the biggest danger to women (men) the obvious solution is to live independently from them.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 10:45 AM
1

As someone who was a victim of domestic abuse and whose only saving throw was her own career and economy, it really is very obvious to me that the safest, securest life for a woman is an independent life. I'm not sure how logic would have to twist for that not to be the case.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 10:15 AM
-2

Aggressive, much? Living up to the MRA stereotype I see. Please note the original post and the assumptions I am concerned about. It is much more likely that you had a skewered perception of the birth rates of the women in your neighborhood than that it was a statistical anomaly.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 09:57 AM
-1

It is tempting to see all family mothers as "all women" but also incorrect to do so. You notice these women more, they look like standard to you. Yet, even if you look at a very high birthrate country like Pakistan or Palestine, the average child to woman ratio is still no higher than three-four. Not all women end up as mothers of large families.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 07:56 AM
-13

Women are the primary victims of violence, even in war. Many countries are nightmares where violence against women is legal, even outside of war. The whole idea of women and children first is a myth. In war, disasters and every day life, women are the main targets of violence. Women are sold and treated like property in many places of the world. And no. Men in the US are not the main targets of sexual violence. 1/6 men have not been raped in their lifetimes.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 07:37 AM
-13

Despicable to mention the world wide status of things where no "I'm talking about the US" is defined? Why? Why is it so despicable to mention that yes, world-wide, women have it much much worse than men? In the US, specifically and in certain regions of the US especially? Sure, men do kill themselves (again, toxic masculinity) and go homeless (mainly a reflection of very poor mental health care). Subhuman? No, certainly not. Men are still valued higher than women. The chance of a fetus being mal…
/r/MensRights02/06/14 07:05 AM
-10

In the US, maybe. Not world-wide.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 06:55 AM
-79

Women are more likely to be poor than men. Men going to prison in droves isn't because of women, or because they are seen as less worth, but because of a toxic masculinity..
/r/MensRights01/06/14 10:46 PM
-13

"Walk home at night without fear" could be one of many responses. Note. I don't agree with her. I don't think genders should be abolished. But the idea that we are equal already is a falsehood.
/r/MensRights01/06/14 10:30 PM
-9

Sources? Because you certainly seem to have a very vague grasp on what childbirth does to the female body. Having child after child since puberty would mean the death of most women in their mid 20's if not earlier. Pregnancy is a great danger, women are not breeding machines and we have been using contraceptives since before recorded history for this reason. A child is only as valuable as the parents still alive to raise it and care for it. There are women that manage to get 5-7 children. They a…
/r/MensRights01/06/14 09:22 PM
-1

“Women and children first” has been debunked as a myth. It is said, but not followed. Women and children are more likely to die than men in most situations, war included. Much less likely to be soldiers, but instead much more likely to be the victims of soldiers or other men in a society governed by martial law. The most patriarchial societies today are bloody nightmares and extremely far from safe for women. Even a modern woman here in the west is at her safest when she has her own career and e…
/r/MensRights01/06/14 09:12 PM
0

Not sure why this is being downvoted. It has indeed been the case for the majority of human history, as evident by the very closedly matched physiology of men and women. It is very possible that the slight difference comes from competition between men rather than resource management/gathering. A woman sitting at the hearth any longer than the few months she'd need right before and right after the birth of the child would be a burden for any tribe. She would have no reason to sit there for years …
/r/MensRights01/06/14 08:39 PM
2

If you do the other things right (grooming, health, attire) your friends may be more likely to accept than you think.
/r/seduction02/04/14 03:52 PM
1

Sorry. In feminist circles it is taken as a very known fact.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 10:43 AM
1

It is not some biological set in stone fact. It is a cultural stigma, the same one that keeps shouting at us that women are carers and men are providers. Some harsh poking by earmarking parts of it helps make up for it. It changes culture. There is a new view of fatherhood in Sweden, active fathers, engaged fathers. Fathers strolling about with toddlers outside in large numbers.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 10:18 PM
2

Oh grow up. I'm talking about a specific situation with a girl and a man.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 10:06 PM
1

Yes, you can. You can be in a passive aggressive situation and feel very vulnerable and endangered. It is very possible that the man in the situation isn't even realising this. That does not change that he is acting very inappropriately and making the girl feel harassed.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 05:29 PM
3

And if you read what op thought about it, this is precisely why she was hesitating.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 05:16 PM
2

One time thing on someone far away, in mixed company? HR may have a word with her if you insist. Repeated, when you are alone with her, on men walking by, making you feel uncomfortable and vulnerable? Go at it. It's harassment.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 04:45 PM
1

It is still highly inappropriate and sexist behaviour. Imagine you yourself being dressed as a hipster, sitting next to a bigger, stronger fellow who kept dropping threatening remarks to any other man with hipster attire passing by. Would you be comfortable? Would you assume no such remarks would be thrown in your direction once you turned your back to him?
/r/MensRights29/11/13 03:07 PM
3

Coming from this culture I would have another possible explanation as to why these boys would react in a contrarian manner. Girls often speak up during these seminars and will react positively to it, making anti-bullying seminars a girly thing. The boys who are immersed in a culture where anything girly is bad, lumps the anti-bullying in with the bad stuff and increases the bullying behaviour to prove themselves to be boys rather than girls. The school possibly realised this and infused the enti…
/r/MensRights29/11/13 02:43 PM
2

I have nothing in English, but here is an article in Swedish that you can google translate. The school looked at previous research about how students respond to changes and teachings about bullying, and managed to work around it.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 02:00 PM
2

This is a very good example of a law change that works for everyone. Feminists elsewhere do work for change in schools etc that can help men. Recent experiment in Swedish school with zero-tolerance for bullying and "boys will be boys" mentalities raised the boy's grades by a wide margin while at the same time creating a safer environment for everyone, as another example. While laws against discrimination or violence do help, these kind of structural changes are arguably a better solution althoug…
/r/MensRights29/11/13 01:44 PM
1

Nobody is forced. However the mother can't take that part so if nobody takes it it's lost.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 01:04 PM
1

Being the same brand of feminist, I'd say no, it's good.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 12:09 PM
0

Yep. This stigma can be removed by earmarking part of the leave for the father.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 11:59 AM
2

‘I would absolutely call myself a feminist, without hesitating. And it makes me sad when you hear people don’t want to call themselves a feminist, whether they’re a bloke or a teenage girl, because they think the word has negative connotations. 'Feminism is about equality between men and women and is something that will improve our society. We should be encouraging people to be happy to declare themselves as feminists. We need to be very clear about claiming that word as something positive. 'It’…
/r/MensRights29/11/13 11:49 AM
1

I know the definition, thank you. This is a case of it. Calling the girl by another name on purpose is meant to destabilise and disorient her. Shaming her for calling it out and asking about it is done to further destabilise and disorient her. To purposfully create jeallousy and then shame the person for expressing the jeallousy is definitely a gaslighting technique.
/r/TheRedPill14/11/13 01:58 PM
1

When you shame someone for reacting to your set up situation then yes, that is gaslighting. The sole purpose is to "gain the upper hand", to damage the partner.
/r/TheRedPill14/11/13 07:13 AM
0

If you go around gaslighting girls and treating them like this, then yes many people react similarily to being abused. It's not the way to have a successfull relationship. If you want a happy, stable girl then don't go into mindtricks or manipulation. If you want an unstable nervous wreck then please do.
/r/TheRedPill13/11/13 06:17 AM
1

The majority of women are not feminists. Woman does not equal feminist, nor having feministic ideals. Very often you will find women who advocate patriarchial values and would shoot down any suggestion for laws that would promote equality. Very often those same women would be in powerful positions. The most common arguments are that feministic proposals would be absurd, like the recent "bechdel test label" (seriously, what harm can it do? We're already labelling other products in a gazillion dif…
/r/MensRights07/11/13 10:42 PM
1

Because of the historical ties and the obvious connections with the stereotypes and mechanisms still problematic today. It's not a matter of mangling any language, it does make sense although it is not a black and white issue today.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 10:31 PM
1

Because it stems from a patriarchial way of looking at gender, where the patriarch is the strong provider for the submissive, childproducing woman. It's not the best word no, but it does have it's reasons. The society we had going back a couple of decades and then stretching on into unknown infinities was most definitely tangiably patriarchial. Our culture is still heavily influenced by that kind of thinking, although we are fighting against it through feminism and women's rights primarily and t…
/r/MensRights07/11/13 05:48 PM
-1

The vast majority of those people are not feminists, I can assure you of that. Lawmakers, judges, lawyers and politicians are most often men and most often not feminists. More likely to perpetuate the patriarchial mechanisms I mentioned earlier, except for in some lip service cases that often get hi-jacked by movements other than the original feminist beacause they suit highly conservative, christian (in the case of sex negative or transphobic radfems) politicians and voting bases.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 05:36 PM
-1

Would your observations interfer with my definition of patriarchy, even if you only accept it as my own rather than a universal definition?
/r/MensRights07/11/13 05:25 PM
-1

It all depends on how you view social sciences and statistics as tools I suppose. If you believe both to be non-scientific then there is little anyone can do to convince you otherwise.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 04:38 PM
0

There are many definitions of patriarchy. This is one most modern day feminists such as myself would agree with. We can clearly see that we don't live in a patrilinear country where only men are allowed to rule. We can see the tendencies towards male leaders, stereotypes re-inforcing these other problems I mentioned, patriarchial mechanisms working to undermine equality with the ghost of the family patriarch and subservient women and kids haunting us. It's not some great conspiracy, it is our cu…
/r/MensRights07/11/13 04:21 PM
1

Not necessarily benefiting. It puts different expectations on men and women, stereotypically demanding strong, emotionally numb and sexually potent/aggressive male leaders and weak, emotional, submissive and passive women who trade out their sexuality as some form of currency for protection and care or just plain money. Some people see the male role as benefitial, some people see the women's role as benefitial instead, but it all depends on what kind of person you are. Most people would agree th…
/r/MensRights07/11/13 03:55 PM
1

A little bit of both, but I daresay that if a woman is drowning because nobody expected her to learn to swim it is more a matter of the latter.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:59 PM
1

What it also shows is that being put on a piedestal is a bad thing. We already know it's a bad thing because it removes the subject's ability to autonomy, this study shows it is also a bad thing because it significantly lowers the subject's survivability in extreme situations. In the end, relying on someone to save you, or teaching someone that they should be saved and should not break social rules and prepare to be autonomous is bad and not a privilege.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 06:54 AM
1

The original study is a comparison between Titanic and the myth and what has actually happened since. Trying to use the Titanic to show stats in "what happened after the allegedly culturally defining Titanic" is dishonest, at best. Using clothing and swimming abilities when we're talking about a mythical stereotype where the big strong man would make way to save, rescue, at peril of his own life, getting the ladies and kids into the life boats is also irrelevant. Oh but she had a corset? Fuck it…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 06:14 AM
0

A blog "refuting" university studies in the economics field? Oh my. When will men's rights turn academic?
/r/MensRights16/08/13 04:29 AM
1

Feminist here. This is indeed what feminists believe. We want to remove the whole enforced thing where women are seen as carers and men are seen as providers and get equality when it comes to the pressure on both genders. Paternal leave, paternal responsibility when taking sick leave with the kids etc, these are all things to strive for because it a) gets kids a better connection with both parents and b) gives both genders equal opportunities to build a career. Removing these gender stereotypes …
/r/MensRights26/06/13 08:25 AM
29

In order to donate an egg you go through IVF stimulation and minor surgery. In order to donate millions of sperm you jerk off into a cup.
/r/TheRedPill04/06/13 10:52 AM
0

They've apparently done it. It's actually quite common in urban areas for gangs to mark territory in some way. I've honestly never seen a feminist marked zone before, mainly it's male gangs who behave like that. However. They have marked it quite clearly, and going in and breaking the rather obvious policies for the area is without a doubt seen as an attack, which is my initial statement. If you want a gender war without constructive discussion, this is what you'd do. You attack. But seriously, …
/r/MensRights01/09/12 08:31 PM
0

"They have claimed this as a safe space I guess." With this. Come on. They really are.
/r/MensRights01/09/12 08:08 PM
0

Posters, apparently.. Rethorics, talk, gossip.. Students talk.
/r/MensRights01/09/12 07:45 PM
0

Got the impression it's one gang of students against some other gangs of students. Yes. Activist/organised feminists are probably aware if there's a men's rights organization nearby which will target them.
/r/MensRights01/09/12 07:34 PM
-1

Assuming that women who accuse men of rape "wanted the sex", "changed her mind afterwards", "wanted to harm the man" and "invited it" is generally ok on this subreddit? So why would you defend the minors when a priest alludes to kids often doing the above mentioned things? Stop with the misogyny. Take this as lesson to treat all rape victims with respect and caution. And yes. Women do get convicted for raping minors. In the case of the 15 year old boy (2004 OK CIV APP 97; 104 P.3d 1132 (2004).),…
/r/MensRights01/09/12 05:55 PM
0

If you go in with the attitude that you're posting in a "lion's den" and generally act as if this'd be some sort of guerilla warfare, what makes you think you'll get a positive response?
/r/MensRights01/09/12 05:40 PM
-1

Yes, how about you actually click the link now that I'm posting it for the second time? "The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed this technical report." Page 3. The entire document is published by The American College of Pediatrics. There is also a rather ridiculously long reference list at the bottom. Skimming the titles should also give you a clue if reading the entire document (which is hesitantly pro, not CIRCUMCISE ALL THE MALES!).
/r/MensRights28/08/12 05:47 PM
-1

I do find the idea of brushing off the American Academies of Pediatrics, Gynecologists and Obstetricians as practitians of pseudo-science because they don't fit your narrow view of the topic as slightly amusing.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 05:34 PM
-3

Science mostly disagrees with you about that as well
/r/MensRights28/08/12 05:14 PM
-1

Beware of blanket statements
/r/MensRights28/08/12 05:04 PM
-2

And "medical problems" from being circumcised are even smaller. I don't see the point of your argument.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 04:09 PM
0

You made it sound like you was on about people who are still concious, if someone is concious and they say "I know I will die but I don't want you to amputate my leg" they should be forced to have it amputated? Yes. Without a doubt. You can learn to walk with a prosthetic or handle a wheelchair, but death is final. I would consider the doctor who neglected to give treatment due to what could be deranged pain-induced ramblings to be a murderer. Recently in the UK Tony Nicklinson was refused the r…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 03:24 PM
1

Checking up on FGM victims is very commonplace, what you are suggesting is being done. You can find information on health disadvantages and trauma with a simple google search. Go ahead. Look at the pretty pictures.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 03:13 PM
0

I'm curious - what makes you think an emergency amputation would not be life saving? You think doctors just love to chop off limbs for no good reason? And yes. I believe I have stated this repeatedly now, keeping someone alive and well with science and medical aid > personal patient beliefs/feelings/morals.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 03:02 PM
0

I also believe in emergency amputations when medically necessary despite of patient pleading, procedures done on comatose patients and medical aid to alzheimer victims or psychologically incapable patients. So shoot me.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 02:50 PM
-1

Because science and medical reasons > beliefs, individual choice when the choice can't be made, and personal morals
/r/MensRights28/08/12 02:39 PM
0

I'd consider that possibility if there were any even moderately reliable scientific studies on the benefits of FGM. But there aren't any. Quite the opposite.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 02:26 PM
-2

There isn't, so your imaginary scenario does not exist. FGM and circumcision are very real things. Not hypothetical situations.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 02:16 PM
-2

Yes. It does. It covers all FGM and female circumcision in a blanket statement, because it is actually quite possible to do that. Female vulvas and vaginas are self cleaning thanks to the labias and hair, pH and natural discharge and disturbing the balance by removing labias, hair or washing with pH-changing soaps or even douching can/will cause infections. Removing the hood of the clitoris will not cause sperm or other fluids to stay for a shorter amount of time on the skin because of this self…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 01:28 PM
-2

Female circumcision has no medical benefits and is illegal under the Female Genital Mutilation Act (2003). There is no evidence anywhere to be found about FGM having any medical benefits. There is for male circumcision.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 01:13 PM
-5

There is no medical benefit.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 12:57 PM
-6

.. No trauma? Bringing a 1-2 year old kid to the dentist more than 10 times (the teeth don't come out all at once) to go through dental surgery? Seriously? Have you ever even seen a kid OR been to the dentist? This is a utterly ridiculous comparison.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 11:29 AM
-7

What a very strange little strawman. Teeth removal (I assume you mean the milk teeth) would lead to other medical complications. First of all, it wouldn't be possible to do on infants, so the trauma would remain in the person's memory. Second of all, it'd mean more trauma in regards to feeding and eating, which can be a big enough issue as it is in young kids. Third of all, removing all of the teeth would not guarantee lack of dental issues nor do most dental issues lead to all or any teeth havi…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 10:40 AM
-7

No but the truth if it is that delaying the procedure for all of the religiously enclined circumcisions would create a lot more trauma and medical issues than letting the procedure be done on infants.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 10:14 AM
-5

I'm not saying everyone should be circumcised. I'm happy the way it is now, with freedom for the parents to decide. Currently I would decide in favor of, because of medical benefits and religious freedom. Not just the medical ones you listed in your link but also because of possible future penile problems with the foreskin which would be avoided. This is solely based on benefits outweighing the possible complications (which appear to be botched procedures and psychological issues rather than med…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 09:51 AM
-9

You choose to alleviate a medical condition? No, you really don't. We err on the side of what's medically defensible. According to most research, circumcision is.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 09:34 AM
-3

The (reasonable) medical reasons for doing it apply for women too. No. The penis is not self-cleaning, the vagina is. The vagina without it's little folds and hairs is more unprotected and disturbed and more prone to infections. Read up on basic sexual biology before blanket statements.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 09:08 AM
-11

And some men are upset about not being circumcised as an infant and having to go through it at an adult age due to medical problems. I can guarantee that's a trauma you won't forget.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 08:55 AM
1

That's the most sensitive part of most penises. Circumcised or not.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 08:45 AM
1

I think the most important fact to remember is that 54% and sometimes even higher (depending where in the world you are) of rapes and sexual assaults never get reported just because of the victim shaming going on. People will be people. People will be framing and getting other people in trouble, there is no getting away from that. It's not a woman thing, it's not a rape thing, it's a human thing. Trying to pin it on victims only furthers the culture of blaming the rape victim which has been and …
/r/MensRights25/08/12 07:50 AM
1

Try posting about how not most female rape victims lie to frame the male and see how far that gets you in mensrights. Then decide weather the subreddit is misogynic or not.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 12:22 PM
1

You're creating a strawman. In the countries where these laws already exist (ie UK, Sweden for example) that's the level of intoxication that needs to be proven through witnesses or security cameras. One glass of wine doesn't count for anything.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 11:09 PM
1

No. That's exactly what it comes down to in countries (ie Sweden and UK that I know of) where these kinds of laws already exist. Assuming anything else would be valid.. well that'd be slightly conspiratory.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 10:53 PM
1

A slurred "y..eah" while the woman is unable to walk unsupported... is something you as a human being should consider dodgy regardless. She's obviously not at her senses and quite incapable of judging her situation or possibly understanding what you're asking of her.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 10:32 PM
1

If the woman is unable to walk unsupported, unable to make an informed decision.. That's also something you, as an adult, should be able to judge for yourself. Having sex with people that heavily under the influence is controversial regardless of weather they expressively want it or not.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 10:21 PM
1

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, I made that clear in my initial statement. I'm saying it's not a female thing, it's a human thing to try and frame or punish others through use of the law. In the case of rape victims it's just being blown out of proportion into an urban myth where rape victims are often regarded with suspicion regardless of facts actually gotten in specific cases, and that is very damaging to the cause and attracting misogynic elements to MRA.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 03:26 PM
1

That is a bit too far from the truth of it though. Looking at judgements from the Swedish side of things, it's a mixture of witnesses (mostly when it comes to proving levels of toxication for example), physical evidence both on persons and surroundings and credible/cohesive statements. Men will be let go if the picture doesn't add up right. A simple statement will not be sufficient. Also do keep in mind that evidence, situations and witnesses can be tampered with, in all cases of crime.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 02:10 PM
-3

The idea of the woman retroactively removing consent from the picture is actually a bit of an urban myth and a very damaging one for the cause, letting misogynists in and calm discussion out. Yes, it happens. No, it doesn't happen more often than in other crimes and it certainly isn't happening enough to discredit rape victims as a whole. Setting people up, framing them for something they didn't do, getting others into general trouble ranging from stolen pencils to death row is a human problem, …
/r/MensRights23/08/12 12:33 PM
2

If you don't know for sure weather a woman is consenting sex or not, the simple solution is to just ask her or to abstain. It's not exactly rocket science.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 11:18 AM
1

Comparing similarities and drawing conclusions on anything biological between species, ranging from behaviour to physiological traits, is way too common and a big mistake to make. It's tempting for our puzzle solving instincts to do so but about as gainful as astrology or ouija boards.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 11:07 AM
2

So both then. Goodie. :) Go go uni.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 10:02 PM
2

Amen, girlfriend. ;)
/r/MensRights22/08/12 08:54 PM
2

Wait. Does that still mean that a man who is still in a relationship would not be able to take leave? Because in that case, still got a long way to go.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 08:44 PM
1

Actually I pulled that quote right from the website, quite unedited.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 08:21 PM
0

Most Jewish boys are circumcised without any pain relief, just like those in the picture. Just because their parents happen to be wealthy enough to buy lots of pretty blue blankets to hide all the blood does not change the nature of the act. Wealthy jews now too ey? I'm amazed you kept quiet about that kind of shit until now.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 07:44 PM
0

What makes you think I don't cringe? I cringe when I see any kind of operation. What's mostly cringeworthy about that image is the lack of hygiene and proper care for the little ones. However, it's not the kind of treatment a baby would get in my country, nor by the practices I'd advocate. Thus it's fairly irrelevant to my side of the argument. The FGM pictures I could post would still be relevant because FGM is forbidden by law here and unscrupelous bastards ship their little girls abroad for t…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:12 PM
0

Smegma is smegma. It is composed of the same substances and serves the same purpose across all species and across all sexes. Did you see the image I linked you of an unwashed vagina? How does that look any different from an unwashed penis? No. What you showed me was an infected vagina. Big difference. Women don't get smegma, we have discharge. Different bacterial flora, different kind of mucus, different pH from the male smegma. I give up this conversation. You're biased and obviously quite irat…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 05:34 PM
1

Horses don't generally walk about in subways or wear pants for that matter. Comparing us to other species is not helpful. Yes, the vulva takes part of the job of keeping the pH, moisture and bacterial flora just right. That's why shaving it can lead to yeast infections. It is indeed a question of human rights and of religious freedom. Considering the delicate balance, taking everything, including possible benefits into consideration is necessary. No need to get rightous and upset. Keep it ration…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 04:28 PM
1

Not where I come from, mainly because selling your own sex isn't illegal here. Selling someone else's or buying it is. Are men stupid, or do they willingly give drinks away realizing they're still just taking a chance with amiability and not actually paying for a prostitute?
/r/MensRights22/08/12 03:26 PM
0

Actually you're legally wrong there. And morally questionable. Men just can't do anything wrong, can they? ;)
/r/MensRights22/08/12 03:16 PM
1

In fact I do If smegma builds up in the foreskin, it can start to smell, stop you easily pulling your foreskin back and become a breeding ground for bacteria. This can cause redness and swelling of the head of your penis, called balanitis. And here for the vaginas The vagina is designed to keep itself clean with the help of natural secretions (discharge). When it comes to sexual practices, opinion pieces are acceptable yes. I can't imagine anyone getting grants to do visual research on sexual ab…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 03:05 PM
1

No, it's not limited to sexism topics. It's an argumentation technique which actually also can be used by women. Urban dictionare gives three good explanations.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 02:52 PM
0

If you do not stop with the insults and generalizations of me I shall end this conversation immediately. Any arguments containing such will be ignored. Removing all the of labial folds and the clitoral hood would improve genital hygiene for females quite a bit. It's a poor argument. Most definitely not. Vaginal hygene depend on these little folds. Vaginas are self-maintaining when it comes to hygiene and should optimally only ever be washed with water (and even that is largely unnecessary) for t…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 01:15 PM
-3

.. And how dare you imply that the few cases concerning the woman simply regretting the sex has anything to do with the multitude of cases concerning having sex with someone who is drunk out of their mind and unable to defend themselves or tricked into a situation where they believed contraception was being/would be used when it in fact was not?
/r/MensRights22/08/12 12:58 PM
0

Well the main issue is an emotional response. A mutilated female sexual organ makes me want to throw up, a circumcised penis encourages other feelings alltogether. [Didn't your father teach you that answering a question with another question is rude?] (http://www.unicef.org/publications/files/FGM-C_final_10_October.pdf) The justification lies in what I've been saying all this time. There is no proof of health hazards when it comes to circumcision, medical investigations do point the other way mo…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 12:22 PM
0

Mmmyeah. Best to not challenge openly but to listen, sit in, pay attention, play by the rules, and then focus on men's rights issues in your actual work. Learn the language and the culture to avoid such incidents. Thankfully not all lecturers are like the one you mentioned though!
/r/MensRights22/08/12 12:11 PM
-1

Words have power. Using loaded words will diminish your arguments and get your opponent angry. It's far from a red herring, it's clumsy argumentation. You have yet to show me how circumcision, which is what we're discussing here, compares to ANY cases of FGM. All cases of I, II and III type FGM (which are by far the most common ones, type IV is where all uncommon forms are lumped together, from cauterization to piercing and pricking) are detrimental to female sexual experience. Actually, what co…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 11:05 AM
0

Actually, no. There are plenty of secular, uncircumcised jews. No rejection, disgust or ostracism on them. Maybe a frown from the grandmother and pokes about getting it done already but that's it. Even if a jew in the western world would be cast out from his family for not being circumcised, he'd have an entire society around him welcoming him as just another citizen. The girls in these countries would not. The Copts are a tiny, persecuted group of christians in Egypt. Hardly trendsetting.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 10:54 AM
0

What I would really recommend is to go to the universities and take courses in gender theory. Hell knows they need some more equality in there, and that's the best way to get the agenda out in a socially acceptable way. Proper research instead of internet activism. I know it sounds as if you'd be getting in bed with the enemy, but after taking some courses I actually can't complain. The good thing about universities is that they tend to have a more level headed approach, and gender theory in par…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 10:44 AM
-1

So boys are dogs? Funny, you seem so indignant about it while ignoring all that I wrote about how painful Jewish and Muslim circumcision is. I'm complaining about YOU using a word commonly used on animals to describe FGM. Which about says it all, really. How you interpret that as me saying boys are dogs is... Really beyond belief. There is nothing healthy about FGM. There has been studies showing that circumcision can be healthy. I'm getting it from my jewish friends in a western country where c…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 10:33 AM
-4

"Trimming" of the labia? It's not a fucking dog you're talking about. These are the three most common cases of FGM. "Trimming" the labia is done in this way: "The inner and outer labia are cut away, with or without excision of the clitoris.[34] The girl's legs are then tied together from hip to ankle for up to 40 days to allow the wound to heal. The immobility causes the labial tissue to bond, forming a wall of flesh and skin across the entire vulva, apart from a hole the size of a matchstick fo…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 10:19 AM
-3

Because those women live in a very oppressed society where their daughters are likely to be stoned for any sexual deviance. Male jews do not.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 10:08 AM
-4

Are you trying to imply that the suffering of babies does not matter simply because they will not remember it. Do you really want me to take that line of reasoning to it's logical conclusion? No, what I'm saying is that they were the babies, they are obviously not traumatized by it and encourage the practice for many different reasons, some medical, some social, some for sexual reasons and some for religious reasons. I am naturally against the suffering of babies. A baby arguably also suffers wh…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 09:08 AM
-5

Judaism goes beyond religion. It's quite possible to be non-religious and still jewish and happy with the circumcision. They were the babies, don't forget that. They are the ones living with the consequences and by FAR don't see it as something negative, quite the opposite.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 08:46 AM
2

No, the problem with the specific term of "mansplaining" is that men think they do when they in reality are wrong.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 08:44 AM
-6

One organization doeth not consensus make. Circumcision is not seen as a problem for jews, it's seen as a positive thing.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 07:37 AM
2

Yeah, provider and defender of the family, not father and carer. Focusing on the father bit is always good. :) Well, I think mainly because singles/child free couples aren't quite as much in need of support. Having a child is a big expense, and companies will want to look amiable to those who carry that burden.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:57 AM
-4

Why not, you know, listen to the male jews who are actually circumsized? Why don't their voice count? Who are we to judge what's best for them?
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:55 AM
1

"One of the most unique, important things about SPARK is that we’re a movement by girls, for girls and girls’ allies (including boys and grownups)" Both boys and grownups are allowed to participate. To compare it to an exclusive men's golf club which has no other meaning besides letting rich and powerful men socialize and bond outside of business meetings is quite scewered.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:46 AM
19

That's an odd statement. Traditionally men's roles are all kinds of things (breadwinner, defender) besides father. It warms my heart to see a company actually reach out specifically to fathers. Fatherhood is so far below motherhood in media attention and general value, it's very damaging.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:40 AM
1

The woman isn't bloody mind controlling him into offering drinks. He goes and buys one of his own free will. Thus the entire scewered situation is his fault. Regardless of her actions, he starts treating her like a whore and is the one carrying the blame.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:34 AM
1

No. It's not a group of people, most of the time. The patriarchy is a big and diffuse way of saying "the stuff feminists want to change". It can be that board of directors who refuse to let a woman in because well, she just never was invited to the golf sessions and we can't really have a nice whisky or strip with her in the gang and she's a bit of a harpy anyways isn't she? It's also the collection of values that box people into our respective roles. "Women shall wear pink, men shall wear blue"…
/r/MensRights21/08/12 10:54 PM
1

No. The man offers the drink of his own free will. It is on him, not on the woman who chooses to accept or deny it. The woman can not be blamed for his actions.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 10:44 PM
1

Two other things one also has to remember; if you go to a prison you'll hear very unlikely sob stories about unjustice from most of the inmates and certain people tend to get a little bit likely to exaggerate when discussing a political issue.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 10:35 PM
1

I'd like to see some scientific evidence of the "serial monogamy" statement. Since we actually know jack shit about anything social pre recorded history.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 10:20 PM
2

Never did you stop to consider that it's the men who offer drinks? Not the women who are at fault for accepting/denying? It's the men doing the offering. If the men feel that their offering is a burden then they can stop and offer some intelligent conversation instead. I sure as hell prefer the latter and usually scoff and dismiss the former.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 10:16 PM
7

Lemme just correct something here. We don't see those who compliment us directly as "weak". It's kind of creepy and scary actually. Or just plain boring and uninspired. For me it's a matter of personal space. Immediately entering into my space and commenting on my physical appearance is a privacy invasion. My looks are important to me, but my body is not something I'd let anyone comment on or touch immediately, and not the best thing about me (or so I'd tell myself). Find another way in, make it…
/r/seduction02/08/12 11:38 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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