TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SteelCrossx Archive

View 17 posts and 1,785 comments by SteelCrossx 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)
121

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights29/03/13 02:21 AM
31

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights03/09/12 02:01 AM
16

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights22/08/12 12:18 AM
14

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights05/09/12 01:42 PM
12

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights13/06/13 08:33 PM
12

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights07/01/13 04:25 PM
11

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights20/10/12 03:08 PM
9

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:50 PM
8

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights12/12/12 04:57 PM
7

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights09/01/13 02:59 PM
7

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights04/08/12 09:16 PM
6

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights10/08/12 01:44 AM
5

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights31/08/12 02:04 PM
5

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights09/11/12 10:13 PM
3

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights12/07/13 10:24 PM
1

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights25/09/12 02:01 PM
0

SteelCrossx/r/MensRights29/09/12 08:32 PM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,785 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
7

I like the social acceptance being circumcised has provided me. I don't like that someone removed half the skin from my penis on my behalf before I could understand any of the involved concepts.
/r/MensRights22/05/19 05:04 PM
4

I’m a cis-hetero white north american male in his 30’s so my opinions are welcome here too, right? I always took the point of rejecting feminism as it currently is to be rooted in the idea that this quoted sentence should become incomprehensible. You belonging to any particular group does not mean your opinions are unwelcome. Your opinions are received and evaluated based on merit. I'm sure that if you made some sort of coherent, sourced argument for your first paragraph then you would get subst…
/r/MensRights12/02/19 12:08 PM
1

Read the case. I did. Justice Scalia said both "Colorado law has not created a personal entitlement to enforcement of restraining orders. It does not appear that state law truly made such enforcement mandatory" and also "Even if the statute could be said to make enforcement “mandatory,” that would not necessarily mean that respondent has an entitlement to enforcement." But, you know, this is Rehnquist and bootlicking was a treasured pasttime of his. Cops simultaneously should have the power to d…
/r/MensRights02/08/18 01:10 AM
1

People can speculate about all sorts of things, but the court of appeals did not reach that decision. The court in no way endorsed the police conduct in the case you did link as "non-criminal." Police routinely commit unprosecuted crimes all the time. The officers were not found liable for anything resulting from their actions or inaction. I wouldn't call that an endorsement by the courts, and I don't think anyone would endorse lazy policing, but it certainly implies the behavior was not crimina…
/r/MensRights02/08/18 01:00 AM
1

the court held that cops who were mandated by law to perform an action and purposefully failed to do so in the most ridiculous ways could not be held liable when their failure led to someone being murdered I'm returning to this comment just to clarify, since I didn't know which case you were referencing, that Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales ruled the officers were not mandated to arrest by law as your comment asserts. In my jurisdiction a violation of certain restraining orders is explicitly not…
/r/MensRights31/07/18 10:50 PM
1

it's for any relationship where you put someone else's well-being in your care, e.g., a cop who arrests someone has a higher duty to defend them from a pinprick than a cop has to a person he sees on the street who is being attacked by a person who he is legally mandated to arrest Police Officer/Inmate is another example, I agree. I used two primary examples (Parent/Child, Doctor/Patient) because basically everyone is involved in those two relationships at various points in their life. in the cas…
/r/MensRights31/07/18 10:39 PM
3

The ruling itself stated "the duty to provide public services is owed to the public at large, and, absent a special relationship between the police and an individual, no specific legal duty exists". A special relationship, in legal jargon, means one person is responsible for the welfare of a specific other person. It is usually reserved for a parent/child or doctor/patient relationship. I'm not sure what case you're referencing which involved a murder or what law required an action that wasn't p…
/r/MensRights30/07/18 04:52 PM
20

Protect and serve was initially LAPD's motto. Police do have an obligation to the public at large. The case law you're indirectly referencing determined that police officers are not each individual's own personal security. That would be an impossible standard.
/r/MensRights30/07/18 02:23 PM
3

And then I can reciprocate by buying him breakfast in the morning, or letting him fuck me in the ass or whatever. I stopped reading right there for a number of reasons.
/r/MensRights24/04/18 01:55 AM
5

I studied philosophy in college. The bulk of the students were men, for whatever reason we may speculate about. If the majority of the student body is women then fields that appeal to men are going to have to adjust to the demographics of they'll get cut. My university tried to cut the philosophy department entirely for the majority of the time I was there.
/r/MensRights15/03/18 03:38 PM
2

Simple, you must have actual crime to deal with. When there's not enough crime you gotta start fishing. I've never heard anyone within my departments refer to "fishing" or "digging" as anything other than attempting to recognize obscured criminal activity.
/r/MensRights26/01/18 01:54 AM
2

I am a police officer, have been in three different jurisdictions, and I don't feel I've ever been encouraged to focus solely or primarily on securing a conviction rather than objectively investigating.
/r/MensRights25/01/18 08:56 PM
8

I do have the internet. I am also obligated to review legal rulings, certain news stories, and my state's ethics bulletins. I am open to both the idea that I am more informed and also the idea that I am biased. Instead of confirming my own bias by blindly looking for, and likely unsuccessfully finding, whatever you may be referencing, I decided to just ask. I don't mean to put you out but I do want to improve and not just confirm my own world view.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 08:17 AM
2

Cops are notoriously not doing their jobs lately... I'd be interested if you could clarify and source this claim.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 07:41 AM
8

People are saying we're in the middle of a police brutality epidemic and that's measured in fractions of a percent. Context is important but it does speak to what is and what is not valued.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 06:20 PM
194

My mother was stunned when she found out my disabled brother was being abused by his wife, suggested a shelter, and learned there was only one for men in all of the US at the time.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 06:18 PM
38

It's very easy to admit text messages into evidence in my state, Oregon. You should listen to your attorney. They have the facts, knowledge of local law, and experience with the court which will hear your case.
/r/MensRights21/10/17 11:51 AM
1

She calls the technique "very well worn" but her source only identifies the use of the Progressive Stack Technique in the Occupy movement. The only proponent listed admits that it might seem like an unfair practice on the individual level. Since we are graded as individuals in school, it seems like a clearly inappropriate technique to break out in a classroom environment.
/r/MensRights21/10/17 06:10 AM
2

It's someone's perception of a man sleeping while working a male dominated profession.
/r/MensRights27/05/17 04:18 PM
7

They want autistic men dead more because we're "creepy". This is actually very much my experience as a police officer. Most of the time, when I get "creepy" calls, I'm about to meet someone with an addiction, disability, mental health diagnosis, racial minority, et c. It's code for "socially unacceptable" and most often through no fault of their own.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 08:23 AM
1

I did not FORCE you into anything. YOU claimed The Duluth Model is not universally true. I countered with the fact, FACT, that there are states in the US still utilizing it. It has not been completely abolished or altered in any way, shape or form. Again, "it has been completely abolished" is very different from the claim I am making. Someone said it is universal. I am saying it is not universal. "Not universal" is very different from "does not exist." It's important to the conversation because …
/r/MensRights31/12/16 07:38 PM
1

Doesn't matter. The fact a technique like this made it past the drawing boards and codified into police procedeur, that it's still utilized in some states is grounds for concern. My position is "this is not universally true." You've forced me into the other extreme because one person was talking in extremes. I reject that.
/r/MensRights30/12/16 06:03 PM
1

Im glad some handle it appropriately. Here in Texas 'injury' is defined as 'felt pain' which can be easily faked. Oregon requires "substantial pain." Just saying something hurt doesn't squeeze that juice because criminal cases require independent physical evidence.
/r/MensRights30/12/16 02:48 PM
2

Then have your girlfriend lie to the police and see who they believe. I've had plenty of women lie to me about domestic assault. We're not required to arrest unless there is physical injury. That can't really be faked. In my cases, women have been more likely to cause injury, and so go to jail, because they are less restrained with their violence. I don't think acknowledging that some jurisdictions handle domestic violence well is a threat to the idea that some don't and need reform.
/r/MensRights30/12/16 07:51 AM
1

The legal term is "predominant aggressor" and its codified into most police handbooks In my jurisdiction it's called the "primary aggressor" and that isn't code for "man." We have to consider a number of factors, none of them are sex.
/r/MensRights30/12/16 07:09 AM
1

I'm about to sleep but I'll absolutely read it later. I'm curious to know how that model favors women other than considering who inflicts the most severe injury as one of many factors.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 06:23 PM
2

Yes.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 04:40 PM
-1

I outright do not believe you. For good reason. Oregon definitions do not reference sex or gender. The premise of the Duluth Model, per Wikipedia, is "domestic violence is the result of patriarchal ideology in which men are encouraged and expected to control their partners." I'm not sure what criticism you have of policy to offer a specific take.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 03:10 PM
0

something something Duluth Model, and something something Implicit Bias. Yes, some jurisdictions use inappropriate definitions or procedures and some people exhibit bias but that's different from claiming that arresting the man is standard practice.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 02:57 PM
-2

Duluth model. Get educated. ALL jurisdictions have explicit bias in their domestic assault laws. My jurisdiction doesn't adhere to that model. We still identify primary aggressor but that doesn't necessitate a sex bias. I arrest women for domestic assault all the time. There are biased officers, for sure, and some jurisdictions with inappropriate definitions or procedures but that's not to say it's standard policy to arrest the man in a male/female relationship.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 02:56 PM
-21

It's odd to see a group stereotyped in a subreddit about the unfairness that stems from stereotyping a group. Most jurisdictions do not have any explicit bias in their domestic assault laws.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 01:11 PM
4

I get the claim, I'm just saying the disagreement is in the definition of "greatest."
/r/MensRights27/12/16 07:10 PM
7

I think Bruce was amazing but he's surrounded by a lot of mysticism and wasn't a competitive athlete. Jet Li was winning an athletic national sport at 5 and not in a limited league, if I remember correctly.
/r/MensRights27/12/16 06:42 PM
17

This really depends on what you mean by "greatest." If you mean most achievements considering their time, place, and conditions then yes. If you mean "performs the best" then no. I had an ongoing debate with a friend while I was overseas passing the time about the best athlete in history. I said Jet Li because he was dominating a sport that required a high degree of general athleticism. My buddy said Lance Armstrong because he overcame cancer. My challenge was that, if we're considering obstacle…
/r/MensRights27/12/16 06:08 PM
1

I played around with it when I lived in Illinois. I'd keep my hair short, cover all my tattoos, and shave before every run. While running I waved at every person and dog I passed. Almost everyone waved back except women in their teens through thirties and dogs. I kept count on every run. It made me feel pretty bad and it's sad to know they were uncomfortable too.
/r/MensRights26/12/16 04:00 PM
16

I came out of the military modestly fit and have since taken up weightlifting. I'm not particularly tall and I'm certainly not The Rock but I do find that some people, most notably smaller women around my age, cross the street to avoid me or get visibly uncomfortable. I have a similar experience in uniform as a police officer. My belief is that being a large man, police officer, or soldier are all reminders that violence exists. I think it's that subtle reminder of violence that causes the avers…
/r/MensRights26/12/16 01:50 PM
2

My subway closes when I come on work at 10 PM. That's a solution for some people but many men work in areas and on shifts where even fast food isn't very available. There aren't many convenience store options.
/r/MensRights14/11/16 12:37 PM
1

Sure. I didn't say it varied from the dictionary as a criticism. I just can't look it up myself so I have to ask.
/r/MensRights11/11/16 06:10 PM
9

With that in mind, what definition of the word "consent" do you think is accurate? It's certainly be used differently than the dictionary definition now.
/r/MensRights11/11/16 04:33 PM
2

I read the OK Cupid article, since it's the site I used, and I was really surprised by the writer's conclusion which asserts that choosing between a flood of messages is just as difficult as carefully crafting an interesting, creative, unique first message.
/r/MensRights15/09/16 08:30 AM
1

Yeah, I agree that cis can be and is used in a negative way, but there is nothing inherently wrong with the root of the word. I agree. That's why I've been so focused on context. Context is what will make it offensive or not, in my opinion. I agree. A lot of other slurs have roots that mean negative things or have long histories of being used as slurs, but "cis" is still new, the public perception of the meaning of the word has time to change, hopefully not for the worse. I agree. The only thing…
/r/MensRights12/09/16 07:15 PM
1

I think a lot of the time things that would be positive towards cis men the writer may not feel that adding the label is necessary, because in most contexts it's just assumed due to being much more common. That's one way to experience the lack of positive or empowering references to cis men, for sure, and maybe not a wrong one. Another way to experience the way articles talk about cis men would be that, in conversations about sex and gender, cis men are contemptible. Here's a random article, the…
/r/MensRights12/09/16 06:51 PM
1

I'm not defending anybody who is rude to someone because of the way they were born. The word at the moment, from what I've seen, is largely recognized to distinguish that somebody's gender matches their biological sex. If it is becoming largely seen as a slur then there needs to another word to serve that purpose that doesn't have the same negative connotations. Sure. I'm not saying you're advocating the use of a slur. I'm saying more specifically, to clarify the comment that started this conver…
/r/MensRights12/09/16 06:05 PM
1

Here's my point. There's nothing wrong with being cisgender or the word itself. The issue lies with the people who, for some reason, have a bias against cis men. Isn't that the same with almost every insult oriented at a class of people? Most of the words used to indicate race / sex / gender / orientation weren't developed to be intrinsically insulting but developed that meaning through use. Even without a word to indicate that somebody's gender matches their biological sex(which is really only …
/r/MensRights12/09/16 04:35 PM
3

That's because that's not the type of stuff that gets upvotes, especially not on Reddit where most of the votes on articles are from first reactions to the title. I would honestly be surprised to see any article which refers to "cis men" in a particularly positive way or in a way focused on "empowerment."
/r/MensRights12/09/16 11:38 AM
5

I was definitely surprised by the inconsistency you point out. If the sports aren't the same then what justifies equal pay?
/r/MensRights29/05/16 01:08 PM
1

No one deserves our way of incarcerating them. Our prison system is sick. OK, that's different. What do you think is inhumane about it or what would you rather see?
/r/MensRights06/05/16 12:14 PM
2

This is assumption everyone makes of the accused/guilty, that they deserve it. NO ONE deserves it, it's horrendous and there is ample proof that the money can be better spent. No one deserves incarceration or do you mean something else?
/r/MensRights05/05/16 10:56 PM
1

Schlafly argued that "the ERA would lead to women being drafted by the military and to public unisex bathrooms." That was some incredible foresight. Regardless of stance, that does seem to be where things are headed.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 04:40 PM
3

Pain and injury are not synonymous.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 06:28 PM
-2

Scarily enough, police (in America at least) are not required to protect citizens. Yet officials are holding a normal citizen responsible? If you have a special relationship like parent or doctor. Inappropriately applied here, though.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 06:26 PM
9

Minorities accused of rape have a much harder time than white guys. In court, for sure. In certain circles, maybe not so.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 04:29 PM
1

"Men like to act as if commanding women’s attention is their birthright, their natural due, and they are rarely contradicted," she writes, as if men don't ask other men questions. "It’s a radical act to refuse them that attention. It’s even more radical to propose that if they want it so fucking much, they can buy it." This is not my experience. Neither ignoring me nor paying attention to me in exchange for compensation feel radical. That feels like status quo.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 12:12 PM
9

"The two men had outstanding warrants for other Broken Windows charges, namely, being in a park after closing and public urination..."
/r/MensRights28/05/15 09:45 PM
0

Happened to me. I don't mind organizing, dealing with phones, and helping customers. I applied to several secretary positions after working a few years data entry with phone duties. I felt I was very qualified and was finishing up a degree. I never even got called back.
/r/MensRights25/09/14 05:52 PM
1

I know my jurisdiction is putting more emphasis on differentiating between unfounded (no objective evidence it occurred) and false (a provable deception) when it comes to rape cases. It is something law enforcement is starting to put more attention toward and I suspect we'll find we have more accurate studies before long, presuming someone wants to do the leg work.
/r/MensRights21/09/14 02:22 PM
6

He was asked for his own greatest achievement. If something's hard for you, it's hard. No need to force standardization. I don't ever want kids myself, I can't imagine how hard it would be for me to not only be a father but to be hugely successful then in prison. I could imagine that being a focal point of a lot of my own personal effort if that was the case.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 12:41 AM
3

Rick Remender is the Robin Thicke of Comics. How oddly appropriate.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 11:09 PM
4

In case you don't want to read the whole article: These days, clicking through a slideshow of the world's hottest female soccer players makes you look like a bit of a creep. But admiring the abdominals of male footballers? That just means you have a pulse. . All of this obsession over thighs and abs can create the illusion that women and gay men aren't actually keeping their eye on the ball, and help fuel the stereotype that they don't constitute "authentic" sports fans. . And if straight men ar…
/r/MensRights26/06/14 09:43 PM
7

We can hope so, that's hilarious.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 03:25 AM
2

This is actually something I'm fairly familiar with. Living without any assistance is called "living rough," which I know you know but I want to hit other readers as well. When homeless people are given things, like cash or food, from a random passerby it extends how long they can live rough before they have to go to a shelter. Shelters (and other appropriate charities) are equipped with people who can get a diagnosis as to the cause of the homelessness and develop a plan of action. I've worked …
/r/MensRights10/06/14 05:29 AM
2

I don't know it you read the part that explains that the sub-groups dislike each other. That's an interesting way to compose the article, honestly. Grouping things is something we as people do to aid our own understanding of the world. An article could have just as easily grouped all ideologies focusing on sex and gender. It could have then quoted only from the red pill sites (as this article did). "5 Uncomfortable Truths Behind Feminism" Feminists hate women. <Links to TRP stuff.> These groups …
/r/MensRights03/06/14 05:57 PM
9

This sub having a diverse population would be a critically damaging counter-point to critics. That's why it has to be presented with dishonest intent.
/r/MensRights03/06/14 05:50 PM
1

People using that tag aren't necessarily women.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 05:59 AM
3

Do you realize how urgent that is ? I'm definitely aware. Unfortunately I'm not local and he's not willing to move out of state due to custody concerns. Unfortunately people aren't always logical and people who are being abused even less so. That's why it's frustrating the services that have the capability to deal with the particular needs of his situation won't help. Even more frustrating, they would if he was elderly or a woman.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 03:29 AM
3

Well if he dies the kids will end up being raised by that cunt. That's what I keep telling him. Can't you document the abuse? Video? Ask kids to testify? I've photographed the bruises, offered to act as a witness to police when she has stolen his pain medication. The hospital has seen the starvation, has records of his various blood draws that show a lack of medication in his system. Evidence isn't the problem, getting someone to charge her, get him out of the house, or on any other way actively…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 11:09 PM
2

Also, modest.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 09:03 PM
5

He is. He's mobile and the kids respect his condition. They do what he says and are capable of dressing themselves, helping him clean up, and appreciating the entertainment he's capable of providing. He walks them out to the school bus, sleeps a few more hours (the pain prevents him from a steady schedule), then maintains the house.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 04:17 PM
9

My mother is in her mid sixties and she's actually becoming a fairly emphatic supporter of the need for men's services. It's likely due to the fact that my physically disabled brother is being abused by his wife. He's gone from nearly 200 lbs to just a bit over 130. The doctors have said his body is beginning to shut down from starvation. Several social workers have said he's being abused but there simply aren't resources for him. We've called his local police department, the DA, and the state's…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 07:53 AM
1

You say not all Muslims are monsters? Imagine a bowl of M&Ms. 10% of them are poisoned. Go ahead. Eat a handful. Not all M&Ms are poison. Interesting what changing one word so it refers to a different group can do.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 06:28 PM
2

I agree with this in theory but, of the tweets linked, only one doesn't explicitly mention men. It does imply men, however. Comparing one's own group to another group, then refusing to let that group have an input on what their experience actually is like, is a great way to set up a fictional group that has every benefit desirable and no undesirable hindrances.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 06:19 PM
0

"Pretty goddamn high" isn't a really specific indicator. What would be reasonable? No excessive violence at all would be ideal, and is a great goal, but isn't really reasonable. Considering that officers are required to deal with aggressive and violent people, to say that officers are no more likely to commit assault than the average person is actually quite something. The average person can and should walk away from most situations that may turn violent.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 01:36 AM
1

This is honestly mind boggling to me. I worked in a jail for three years and it's incomprehensible that something like this could have happened there. Diabetics in my facility were tested by medical staff twice a day. Every inmate in segregation had to get up and come get their meal three times a day (once on each shift) to ensure they were healthy, coherent, and mobile. No toilets were ever left clogged, no one was ever left in their own feces, and we had medical staff on site all day every day…
/r/MensRights23/05/14 07:17 PM
1

They do, in fact, commit more violent crimes than the general population Your source does not say that. I also caution against letting CATO interpret their raw numbers for you. They have a fairly clear agenda. and over twice as many sexual assaults, per capita. This is absolutely true. Police officers are on par with priests and teachers with the sexual assault rate. It seems that sexual predators gravitate toward positions that allow them the ability to abuse and we absolutely need to find a wa…
/r/MensRights23/05/14 06:42 PM
1

The only statistics I'm familiar with are by The CATO Institute. It's worth being wary, as they seem to have an agenda, but the raw numbers are workable. They're gathered from media reports of misconduct, so it's almost assured they're under reporting, but that's all we have. According to my link, there is a .835% chance of a police officer being involved in a reported case of misconduct per year. The .835% number means that fewer officers are accused of misconduct in any given year than the US …
/r/MensRights23/05/14 06:37 PM
52

Men's Rights is a joke. We live in a vastly male dominated culture, we got the long end of that short stick. It's moronic to push for 'men's rights' until truly repressed groups are given more equality. Hi! Thanks for contributing. I'm very interested in what you have to say, personally. What benchmarks do you advocate we use to determine which groups are repressed and when those groups are equal?
/r/MensRights20/05/14 10:31 PM
1

The main question I have is when a crime is committed against a person or group, who is it that decides whether or not the victim is a member of a hated group? Well I'd say that's our disconnect. Can't and shouldn't punish a person for membership in a group. If the individual themselves commits a crime motivated by hate (which they practically have to outright admit) then that should be considered an aggravating factor and, in determining likelihood of continued wrongdoings, looking at the recid…
/r/MensRights14/05/14 10:43 PM
3

If a known neo-nazi beats up a black man and it is his first criminal offense. Would it be okay to sentence him to a longer sentence because other neo-nazis before him had continued to commit more crimes? Is that truly justice for that individual? I'm afraid this just isn't specific enough for me to really say. To try to really catch your point, is it OK to sentence someone more harshly because they're statistically, not individually, more likely to offend again? Sometimes. Generally something b…
/r/MensRights14/05/14 04:42 AM
3

I disagree with hate crime. A murder is a murder no matter the intent. I would like to know what extent that you agree with that. Not being confrontational just want to know. My personal opinion is that motivation should only be taken into account in determining how dangerous or likely to commit more crimes an individual may be. Hate crime legislation is useful in that a person who hates a group is more likely to continue indulging in violence than someone who attacked his wife's lover, for exam…
/r/MensRights14/05/14 03:30 AM
4

Hmmm, so it's not just the act, but the intent behind it? As in, sure, you're being murdered intentionally, but it's not because the killer wants you dead just that you're in the way. From a purely legal perspective (with which I disagree to some extent) yes. Hate crimes are punished more harshly and some of the aggravating conditions necessary to seek the death penalty require a certain intent. That being said, one of those aggravating conditions is being a hit man, killing for a purely practic…
/r/MensRights14/05/14 02:25 AM
16

Abortion laws exist not so women can decide willy nilly if they want to be mothers or not, but because bodily autonomy and the right to have control over your own organs trumps the rights of both the foetus and the father. This is a kind of rhetoric that I feel detracts from the actual conversation. Abortion can very much about motherhood (depending on the person maiing the decision) as much as more esoteric arguments like rights and autonomy. Men have interest in parenthood and autonomy in very…
/r/MensRights08/05/14 08:03 PM
1

If we're going to be dreams, I prefer to think of Azathoth as the dreamer, which is just as possible yet unlikely, I suppose. A lot of Eastern religions and philosophies take that sort of approach to reality.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 01:22 AM
3

In fact, I've seen many different definitive answers work. It's answers like "I'm already busy that night" that don't always work because some people actually mean just that without subtext.
/r/MensRights05/05/14 11:41 PM
3

But still, it is telling that 5-10 rapes are much more disturbing to our society than all the death. Absolutely agreed. I think concrete numbers help show what a comparatively small 'issue' is being addressed.
/r/MensRights04/05/14 12:23 AM
3

I'd suggest someone go through and simply chronicle the rate at which something we currently consider criminal happens and to whom. I'd much rather actually see the distribution.
/r/MensRights03/05/14 10:17 PM
1

Did the article specify this the study was limited to salary positions? If so, I didn't catch that. I'll look again. Thank you for the correction.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 06:39 PM
1

More directly, once one of those employees surpasses 40 hours in one week it is legally required they be paid more.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 07:03 AM
2

I know it's sexist. There you have it. The opening line. So my question is, why does it seem to be that women are given more leniency in being sexist, even brazenly so. I can't recall having ever read an article where a man simply states "this is sexist" and it's fine.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 05:11 PM
4

It made me wonder if the reason we don't see as many women in lead roles as men is in part because a significant portion of the female audience may find the men in supporting roles insufferable.
/r/MensRights26/04/14 04:39 PM
1

This may partially explain why veterans are so common among the homeless.
/r/MensRights25/04/14 06:40 PM
4

Am I the only one who saw this as an exercise to show that a rapist can look like an any everyday person? A mirror does not show me an everyday person, it shows me a person inextricably linked to the idea of who I am.
/r/MensRights25/04/14 03:31 AM
1

Why not do it in a woman's bathroom with the man voicing the victim? I'd like to see the results of that.
/r/MensRights25/04/14 03:14 AM
4

I wonder how many of the guys that didn't rush in stepped out and called 911. I wonder what the statistical distribution was, we just see two and two. It's certainly callous to tell someone willing to risk their own safety after just hearing a woman in trouble that they could be a rapist.
/r/MensRights24/04/14 05:57 PM
0

Shouldn't she have drawn then with huge penises? That's the claim of how women are objectified in drawn media. They're drawn with huge breasts to be attractive to men. She's saying a small penis is unattractive. She's doing the opposite.
/r/MensRights23/04/14 07:28 PM
2

Exactly what I want to think about right before sex, AIDS and rape. They're going to scare the desire for sex right out of decent folks.
/r/MensRights23/04/14 07:21 PM
1

Last I read, a child with two mothers did the best of all households. I didn't read the study proper, just a news article mentioning it so take that for what it's worth.
/r/MensRights23/04/14 03:19 AM
2

Schrödinger's violent man.
/r/MensRights23/04/14 01:29 AM
3

Men are involved in violence prevention work. Policing is around 90% male. This is something I am simply unable to understand from this author's perspective, crime has been steadily declining since the 50s. Whatever the cause for that decline, it's impossible to coherently say men aren't involved but also that men control all positions of power. To change society (via crime reduction) is to express power. Either men are doing it or men don't have all the power.
/r/MensRights23/04/14 01:27 AM
4

I would be willing to participate in this and I'll gladly say so openly. My brother is disabled, doesn't have access to a men's shelter or DV shelter, and is being starved to death by his abusive wife. Would that be the kind of experience/anecdote/story you're looking for?
/r/MensRights21/04/14 08:23 PM
6

I've had a little exposure to the publishing of adult articles and books. I'd say this condition isn't as pronounced but still consistent and becomes very ideological. I personally believe indie publishing and ebooks will resolve the problem of literary gatekeepers.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 06:31 PM
3

A great sentiment obscured by an unnecessarily confrontational article. I'd love to have shared that with feminist friends that have a high contrast view of their critics but I don't think, in this form, it would help.
/r/MensRights18/04/14 08:22 PM
4

What I found most frustrating was how often the article insisted on complimenting her. It makes her complaint ring hollow.
/r/MensRights13/04/14 05:09 AM
47

...for no other reason that the fact that he is "some old guy". The title editorialized this but I think it's inaccurate enough to be a problem. The author wasn't escorted out because he's an older man, that's just how he was described, he was escorted out because those that complained believed he disagreed with their premise. That is a much worse thing. If someone is targeting a demographic, others can speak out for them. When someone is targeting dissent, it becomes much more difficult to chal…
/r/MensRights11/04/14 11:58 PM
2

That group specifies they're celebrating the women eating, the exact opposite stated intent of the group showing pictures of men taking up too much room. It's an interesting contrast.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 01:25 AM
11

Of all the adopted people I know, none are angry at their parents for abandoning them. Certainly not as an adult, at least. They love their adoptive family and understand their biological parents were put in bad circumstances.
/r/MensRights05/04/14 12:05 AM
3

I resent that. My penis has a face and is a fucking outlaw wanted in five states and Georgia. Georgia the country.
/r/MensRights04/04/14 10:27 PM
4

It seems a little heavy-handed, and seems to put girls in a spot where they have to adjust because of other people's behavior. Couldn't that be said about all clothing? If I'm most comfortable nude, wearing clothes at all would be something I'd do out of consideration of others and the societal standards they accept.
/r/MensRights04/04/14 04:54 PM
2

"Bro" specifically is used as an insult here, I'd suspect.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 05:32 AM
1

These pieces of shit do that all of the time. No these, no brigade. I've been reading here for quite a while and contributing a modest but regular amount. I've recently noticed the focus on the police amping up and have been trying to offer different perspectives. I think the MRM has some great people and some great points. Right now the movement exists primarily in this sub, as I see it. It's sad that Reddit as a site seems to hate cops and that this sub isn't an exception. I believe it detract…
/r/MensRights26/03/14 12:06 PM
3

They talked to him for three hours and, when that avenue was exhausted, they tried to employ a taser (to no effect) then the canine, which is the safest of the less-than-lethal options.
/r/MensRights26/03/14 07:35 AM
-1

Your argument only says that the officers were inconvenienced. Woopdifuckingdoo. That's not an honest reading of my point and I'm sorry for it. I really don't mean to antagonize you and I do believe you're reacting naturally to a bad event. I just don't believe indiscriminately blaming the police or unreasonably blaming these officers helps anyone, ultimately. At the end of the day it isn't deemed worth it to use more resources when a situating becomes delicate due to mental illness/retardation.…
/r/MensRights26/03/14 05:50 AM
-4

The end where no one is murdered because officers got tired of waiting around. While I wish the news report would have made explicit note of this but it is said that it was 7:30 PM. I imagine the officers were trying to get the man in custody while they still had the light to do so. The situation would have been decidedly more dangerous at night. No one forced the officer to be within 8 feet of him. The officer was that close because he was attempting to effect an arrest as safely as possible gi…
/r/MensRights26/03/14 04:54 AM
-5

To what end? Those officers couldn't just let a man that is criminally dangerous simply leave after a three hour standoff in which he continually threatened murder. Mr. Boyd certainly needed help and I wish he would have got it but everyone else needed to be able to walk the streets without him out there. The officers attempted to gain control of Mr. Boyd in the safest way they had available, the canine. Once he drew his weapons, squared up, and threatened to kill an officer I think it's reasona…
/r/MensRights26/03/14 04:26 AM
5

I'd go with genocide, personally. We know it is occurring in several countries right now. Include political imprisonment and death, then you have Egypt, North Korea, and Sudan, at least. No one at all is doing anything about those events.
/r/MensRights26/03/14 03:23 AM
11

With a name like "stemlogicuser" I'd expect it may be an attempt to make the sub look bad.
/r/MensRights26/03/14 03:11 AM
-4

By that you mean he turned around? He dropped everything in his hands, pulled his weapons, and initially put his body in line with an officer in an aggressive "come at me bro" position. According to the report, he started his intent to kill that officer. He did turn after that but it's hard to see why from the angle on the video. Probably one of the biggest red flags for me was the fact that less than lethal was used AFTER he had been shot. This may be a misunderstanding of the force continuum a…
/r/MensRights26/03/14 12:35 AM
4

“Actually if you watch the video tape, all the less than lethal devices were in fact deployed. It was when the canine officer was down directing the canine dog that the suspect pulled out the two knives and directed a threat to the canine officer who had no weapons drawn. He was handling the dog,” Chief Eden said. And Chief Eden called the shooting justified at the news conference, saying officers used non-lethal force first and that there was a direct threat made at an unarmed K9 officer. Accor…
/r/MensRights25/03/14 10:35 PM
15

Incredibly sensational and misleading title. I hope people don't skip the report and video in favor of that editorialization.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 07:35 PM
3

1) Enough cops look out for each other that it would be foolish to discount it. I didn't discount it. I noted you haven't established that the protection from chief to patrol officer even exists, let alone established a rate of occurrence. It's a sloppy claim. 2) Lack of exculpatory evidence is not proof of guilt - nobody said it was. But it is often admissible as evidence (especially when such evidence is readily available in the form of a camera worn on the uniform). A lack of an alibi counts …
/r/MensRights20/03/14 08:29 PM
2

I was responding to /u/zau64 when they said "The defendant needs proof of innocence more than the prosecution need proof of guilt." That would mean the court was displaying an assumption of guilt. That is judicial misconduct.
/r/MensRights20/03/14 07:49 PM
3

Chiefs are cops too, and cops tend to look out for each other. This is a sloppy claim. "Some cops are chiefs, some cops look out for each other, therefore some chiefs look out for (some) cops" isn't a logically tight claim, even without challenging your premises. I think it would be a great idea if the choice to turn the camera on was replaced with an obligation to turn it on - so if a cop decides to keep his camera off and is subsequently accused of misconduct, his refusal to record the inciden…
/r/MensRights20/03/14 07:08 PM
2

Assuming guilt would be judicial misconduct and so you'd be entitled to an appeal and judicial review from an entirely different judge in circuit court. "they do that all the time to us" is a sloppy and antagonistic claim. Some people of any profession will make mistakes, that's why redundancy courts exist. We talk about miscarriages of justice so much precisely because they are so very rare, at least in this context.
/r/MensRights20/03/14 06:59 PM
2

"In cases like this, people sometimes express the opinion that the death penalty should be reintroduced—indeed, some have responded to Daniel’s case with this suggestion. I am not sympathetic to this idea, and I will not discuss it here; the arguments against it are well-rehearsed in many other places. Alternatively, some argue that retributive punishment (reactionary punishment, such as imprisonment) should be replaced where possible with a forward-looking approach such as restorative justice. …
/r/MensRights15/03/14 05:47 PM
15

Nowadays philosophy just means thinking of shit. No, it doesn't. This is an example of one Philosophy professor being an idiot. Well, idiots are everywhere. You could name literally any profession / degree / group and I could find you an idiot who is a member of that very group. A shame really, because with cybernetics and neurology we now have the tools to model and confirm philosophical concepts. Once we have the ability to quantitatively measure a subject, it moves from philosophy to science.…
/r/MensRights15/03/14 05:30 PM
4

Biologically incapable? 'They' used to keep their mouths shut? OP, I'm legitimately concerned you may be working through something bad that happened to you. You might find some support and relief addressing it directly here, if that is the case. I sure know I have at times.
/r/MensRights10/03/14 06:43 AM
7

I tend to cite the queen of England. She alone has to make it impossible for women to only own 1% of the world's property.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 07:28 AM
1

OP, could you connect the dots for me? I'm not sure how this relates to this sub.
/r/MensRights07/03/14 07:34 AM
4

What the author of the article is saying (as far as I can tell) is that one would expect shows that perform better to have longer runs, but plays written by women don't have longer runs on average. This isn't saying women are better at writing plays or that they deserve something better by virtue of being women. Then I suppose I'd disagree with the author's premise. Higher quality doesn't necessarily mean longer run. Eureka is a great and sad example, though that was TV and not a play. Point bei…
/r/MensRights05/03/14 07:15 PM
6

The article and the relevant study used this metric to show that women had to do better even to be accepted. That's what she meant by comparing to a higher batting average. That's how I understand the study but not how I read what I quoted. To me it seemed that the author was suggesting women do better work by virtue of being women, not by virtue of a higher threshold instilled by more selective female artistic directors. The next paragraph, where the author talks about clear evidence of discrim…
/r/MensRights05/03/14 06:33 PM
20

The answer is yes. Plays and musicals by women sold 16 percent more tickets a week and were 18 percent more profitable over all. In the end, women had to deliver the equivalent of higher batting averages, Ms. Sands said. I suspect that's because women's work has higher quality control, presumably courtesy of discrimination. I find it odd the author is presenting this as evidence women produce better work while ignoring one obvious possible explanation that would fit into a cultural differences f…
/r/MensRights05/03/14 05:06 PM
1

I agree and we've insisted but we can't go in there and drag him out, you know?
/r/MensRights04/03/14 01:22 AM
1

I insisted that he should and even offered to stay and give them a report of what I had seen. Unfortunately it can be hard to convince a victim of DV to act and they have a tendency to change their mind when the police actually show up. I was willing to take the chance if he called; it would have shown he was willing to take action.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 01:21 AM
1

Thank you for your empathy. I've told him what he should do and laid it all out as to why but people that are being abused sometimes can't force themselves out, sadly.
/r/MensRights03/03/14 08:22 PM
9

How old is your brother? Late 30s. Don't lose hope yet, I almost suicided my way out of my marriage but I made it out alive and fairly well once I hit bottom. Unfortunately his situation is admittedly complicated. He's disabled and receives assistance. She steals and sells his prescribed pain medication which makes his daily condition so unbearable he's willing to kill himself. She physically abuses him but also mentally abuses him. I'm wary to say mental abuse but she keeps a number of boyfrien…
/r/MensRights03/03/14 08:15 PM
17

So line up, little ladies. Get out that rainbow loom and whip up a promise bracelet as fast as you can. Because someday my boys will stop pretending to be heroes and actually become them. You're gonna want to be first in line. The thing that frustrates me most about this article is that the author doesn't realize there are a fair number of men that were raised exactly like this and that women aren't beating down their doors. I was raised in a fairly woman dominant family headed by a very feminis…
/r/MensRights03/03/14 07:02 PM
3

Up-to-date numbers are hard, if not impossible, to come by. According to 2010 Census records, of the 400,000 people receiving spousal support, only 3 percent were men. Last year, the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers surveyed its 1,600 members and found that 47 percent had noticed an increase in the number of women who are paying alimony. The title should be a complete sentence. "More men get alimony from their ex-wifes than a decade ago." I found myself thinking "more than what...?" And t…
/r/MensRights01/03/14 06:03 PM
1

Unfortunately sensationalism is often good for business and the unusual is news worthy. That means that people's perception of crime has been increasing even though crime itself has been decreasing. It's possible police misconduct reports are subject to a similar condition.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 06:34 AM
2

Say you get really drunk and I convince you to sell me your car for $5. You even have the title in your glovebox, so I drive home in MY new car, with all of it's paperwork. You would absolutely be the victim of car theft because you did not have the capacity to make that decision. That's an intriguing scenario and I thank you for sharing it with me. I don't think the votes reflect your contribution. That aside, I believe the critical point in your scenario is the 'convincing', not the alcohol. W…
/r/MensRights28/02/14 09:40 PM
5

We certainly may be seeing effects of high population density.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 06:18 AM
8

You'd be amazed the things people do while drunk. Why is it that, if I cut someone's face off, I'd go to prison but if I had sex then I've been raped? This isn't an unreasonable question to ask, especially when it is applied differently across the sexes.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 06:17 AM
1

Yeah, I distrust the police completely, that's because of my political views. I really urge you to consider the idea someone could just as easily say "Yeah, I distrust men completely, that's because of my political views." I really appreciate you taking the time to talk with me. I wish you all the best.
/r/MensRights27/02/14 02:43 AM
-1

Hyper-agency, in my view, is the assumption that, because of gender, race, or social class, some groups of people are more able to affect a situation than others. That doesn't apply here. I'd disagree. Profession is just as good a grouping as gender or race in this context. Many people suggest police are more capable than a human can really be in many situations. For example, the police should have divined and prevented a heart attack. I am saying that police officers accept a responsibility to …
/r/MensRights27/02/14 02:25 AM
0

Correct. A perfectly plausible scenario is that they asked everyone for ID, Mr. Rodriguez engaged in unspecified resistance, then the officers dealt with the immediate situation. Once that concluded the officers returned to what had been the task at hand, getting IDs from everyone present to ensure they were the family members they said they were. Tasks aren't necessarily completed in the order they start and we have no indication how the initial approach happened here, either by video or testim…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 11:29 PM
-5

Eh. You're not making unreasonable arguments, but I'm in one of those moods where everything I hear is suddenly 'fightin' words'. No worries, it happens to everyone. I appreciate the conversation, for what it's worth. Serious question, though. Have you ever been pepper sprayed? Twice in training with two different types of spray, then about 4 or 5 times while in a use of force. One time I had to spray myself at the same time I sprayed the other individual. O2 stats aside, it's still very hard to…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 11:21 PM
-2

They didn't ask the woman for ID until after the takedown and potential death. They walked up and instantly presumed the man was at fault and was the only one needing to be identified. I have not seen anything to show this is true. I assumed they were both asked at the same time and he's simply the one that became agitated by the request but, again, that is an assumption as well. Someone linked the full unedited video but I can't get it to work at the moment, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 11:16 PM
-6

This all presumes the police initiated, rather than responded to, the violence. The article is slightly unclear but read to me that the officers showed up, requested ID from everyone, and Mr. Rodriguez resisted in some unspecified way. The article does not say the police attacked Mr. Rodriguez and does say they were attempting to determine what was going on by asking for ID. I don't want to attribute to you something you're not saying but assuming the police attacked (and the phrasing used) seem…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 09:54 PM
-6

Now, I'm not a doctor, but isn't a heart attack caused by stress to the heart? A heart attack can be initiated by a rapid heart rate, among many other things, but that's not the fundamental cause. Heart attacks are caused by blood flow being abnormal due to blockages or leaks. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but wouldn't you say that not being able to breath properly would cause the heart to have to beat harder to push the limited oxygen it's receiving through the body? No. "Difficulty breathing" …
/r/MensRights26/02/14 09:44 PM
4

Well, I identify men's rights as offering evolutionary psychology based (rather than cultural psychology based) theories to explain natural phenomena. That in mind, I've heard it proposed that the value of a woman is the ability to carry, birth, and feed children while the value of a man is to provide material support. If that's the case, then a woman being better able to provide material support is very bad because a man can not carry, birth, and feed a child at all, let alone better than a wom…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 09:19 PM
-2

Well see, being pepper sprayed in the face makes it a little difficult to breathe, let alone being held down on your belly so you can't take a decent breath and with five people putting weight on you and pulling your arms behind your back. Positional asphyxia was not the cause of Mr. Rodriguez's death, according to a link further down. He died of a heart attack, word is, and I'm not aware of any study that shows pepper spray aggravates heart conditions. Wrestling around would, most likely, and t…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 09:15 PM
-5

The police force is an organized entity. Men are not. "The police force" is a colloquial term for a huge number of organized entities that are all loosely overseen by their local courts. My last city's Foreign Legion post had more members than their police department. There are good arguments to be made about police organization but we should recognize that various police departments are regulated by legislation in about the same way as any other group. They do not have any unique all encompassi…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 09:10 PM
-6

The request for ID is what started it, yet they jumped on the man first. Because he was violent, the article suggests. I don't know why this isn't lining up. Mr. Rodriguez - Violence - Restraint Mrs. Rodriguez - No violence - No restraint Cause of restraint = violence Cause of restraint =/= Request for ID There's an argument to be made for the idea that men are seen as more violent than women and that might have influenced that decision but you're not making that argument. You're saying people s…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 07:52 PM
-5

the police force doesn't get rid of those who clearly should not be trusted with their power. This is sometimes the case with certain departments and it is deplorable. That being said 'the police force' is no more a homogeneous entity than any other grouping. This is the same kind of usage that exists when someone says 'men are rapists.' It's false inductive reasoning that exists where statistics should be used. In this case, their involvement took the situation from a person trying to get their…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 07:46 PM
-3

The video starts with 4, increasing to 5, officers on top of him. So no, requesting ID from the woman later is no excuse. Many officers are used in restraining an individual to decrease risk. More officers means more control and more focused control so that it doesn't become a slug fest. As for priority, highest threat first is always how a situation is handled. The person resisting, and in need of restraint, is the first addressed. Mrs. Rodriguez wasn't attempting to fight or flee. There was no…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 07:27 PM
-3

It actually does seem perfectly clear he was. Assumably security and police were called because of the fight. Yet, the father was approached and detained by default. ID was requested from both adults, we see the officer on video requesting it from the wife. It's also worth noting he repeatedly tells her it's fine to record when she says she is. It doesn't matter if the call was "just" "Domestic Violence" so they presumed it was the husband either. I note in my original post that a call can have …
/r/MensRights26/02/14 07:07 PM
-3

I think your argument boils down to "defend the police because they're mostly men." That's stupid. You're right, that would be stupid. My argument is not that we should defend the police because they're mostly men. My assertion is that the police are attacked in the first place because they are mostly men. More specifically because the job entails some level of aggression and violence, traits that are part of 'toxic masculinity.' Police officers are assumed to be hyper-agents that are at fault i…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 06:56 PM
14

A study published in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, for example, found that male self-esteem dropped when men were told their wives performed better on a test than they did. Being told they were outsmarted and in the less-superior position had a real effect on their confidence. Women were not affected either way. Personal hypothesis: Men who are outperformed by their wives are more likely to suffer from lowered self-esteem because they believe (for whatever reason) their value lie…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 06:21 PM
-9

Why is it that we on this sub pretty consistently demand more information and a conviction for nearly every criminal claim ever mentioned but, when the traditionally masculine job of police officer (~90% men) gets mentioned, everyone slips into what I can only understand is a 'toxic masculinity' argument? If I were a gambling man, I'd say that Mr. Rodriguez didn't fully understand what was being requested of him and was very afraid for his wife. He attempted to defend her the best way he knew ho…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 06:03 PM
5

I'm incredibly concerned with most violence being attributed to men. We know that, in the case of domestic violence, it's done so by defining violence in a particular way. Out on the street, since prior suggest that it's due in part to some women instigating and then shaming men that don't act 'correctly.' Whatever the cause, I'd love to see some studies address this to see if it's something that has a solution.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 06:42 AM
13

I took this as an example of a double standard. Every 'how to avoid being a creep' article I've read has said to leave someone alone if they're reading or have headphones in. She was reading, he left her alone. He was listening to headphones, she was creeping on him. The article doesn't reflect the common advice given to men and we should ask if it's an example of women and men being held to different standards.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 05:54 AM
7

And higher education is not a right. Safety is a right. Higher education is a privilege. And that's why women have their own segregated colleges where they can learn safe woman things like teaching elementary school, filing paperwork, and answering the switchboard. Yes, they're not getting the same opportunity to learn mechanical engineering or trade skills but those jobs are dangerous and it's safety, not higher education, that they have a right to. /Victorian Era Justifications
/r/MensRights20/02/14 07:56 PM
1

One probably would have been fine but more is better. Thank you for the links, they're exactly what I was looking for.
/r/MensRights20/02/14 08:37 AM
0

Look, women objectively receive more pressure to maintain their appearance. Objectively means you can source this for us, please. Something inclusive about 'looks' with a methodology subject to review.
/r/MensRights20/02/14 07:45 AM
3

The power to enforce academic justice comes from students, faculty, and workers organizing together to make our universities look as we want them to do. It's odd that's how the author of this article would define academic justice because that's a great description of how a majority could (and has) oppressed a minority. 'That's just not the look they wanted.' This definition of justice is not something I'd recognize as such. It doesn't call to any universal or static values, let alone anything th…
/r/MensRights20/02/14 07:42 AM
1

The US doesn't feature until 17.
/r/MensRights20/02/14 01:25 AM
5

I know how modern policing is done. I agree that we should legalize and regulate both drugs and prostitution.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 02:35 AM
0

When people make claims here about men's rights they often offer statistical evidence, such as the rate of on-the-job deaths, suicides, or distribution of custody by gender. I'm only asking for something just as concrete to support your very specific claim that cops do more harm than good.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 07:45 AM
-1

I most definitely can. There's a wealth of information out there, all organised conveniently in a single sub (with its counterpart, that's much smaller due to having less to put in /r/Good_Cop_Free_Donut). You're arguing from a position of ignorance. Just stop. You're asserting I'm ignorant because it makes it easier to defend your point without providing evidence. Your methodology (a collection of anecdotes) is not sufficient to eliminate confirmatory bias.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 07:30 AM
-1

That's an absurd request, there's no way to do a study with specific methodology as the police are completely unaccountable. Then you can't make that claim without it being subjective personal experience that is influenced by observational biases.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 07:18 AM
0

The police in the US do more damage than good. Cite a source for this, please. A study with specific methodology which can undergo review.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 07:10 AM
0

More people are killed by cows than terrorists. You're suggesting both colloquial and misleading evidence.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 03:03 AM
1

Is that a personal opinion or could you cite some sort of source?
/r/MensRights16/02/14 01:42 AM
1

On the other hand, there's quite a few law enforcement positions that do not require good physical fitness. If the standards are lowered for women and that is taken into account, those positions will populate with women. Those positions will also have an increased supply of available workers, reducing the pay rate. Ultimately, women would populate the positions, the pay would reduce, and that would appear to support the idea women's work is valued less. It's an inch that becomes a mile.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 01:12 AM
1

Detectives almost always have several years of experience on patrol and often several years in the jail before that. It makes for a more capable officer and those are the positions that require fitness.
/r/MensRights15/02/14 05:56 PM
4

She's assuming that every accusation is true and that a low conviction rate is an injustice. I'm saying that anything can be proven true with a false assumption and that her claim isn't something that has been proven. The numbers we have now do not support her position. That's all the refutation needed. She's making a claim, she has to prove it. Assumptions aren't proof.
/r/MensRights15/02/14 04:30 AM
5

What if she was right though? What if for every boy expelled due to a false rape claim from such a stance was balanced with 10 women who were not raped because of the stance. Logically, anything can be proven true with a false assumption. 'What if she was right' is a good reason to begin testing a hypothesis, not a good reason to enact a fix. Assuming that being expelled and being raped are at least equally as bad, then she would be right in saying that such a stance would increase the safety of…
/r/MensRights15/02/14 02:29 AM
2

For what it's worth, I've found that the best way to hit these things is head on. If you're snarky or try to cut her down too then more people will see you as a weak target. Any time I feel self-conscious I just try to own it. People will get curious and she'll seem like a huge jerk for making fun of something you're not ashamed of.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 06:27 PM
1

we don't know the circumstances of the sexual act, if the woman had the proper knowledge of how to preserve the semen and impregnate herself, or if she was in a circumstance that allowed to transport the semen into a test tube in a short enough time period to prevent the sperm cells from dying due to poor conditions. According to both articles, she was a doctor participating in a six year long affair. Believing she can put together gathering a sample is more reasonable than not, given that infor…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 05:48 PM
1

Occam's Razor does not state that the most simple solution is the best but that the solution which makes the fewest assumptions is best. This is an extension of the fact (shown in truth tables) that anything can be proven true with a false assumption and a very significant distinction. In this case, you're assuming that he's lying even though the source of information we have does not state that as a possibility. The argument upheld by the court on Dr. Iron's behalf was not that the facts were i…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 05:12 PM
1

others need to wean themselves off the regressive idea that women are somehow more noble or morally pure than men. This was a very strong feature in my life when I was younger. I still struggle with accepting the fact that some women I know are not good people. While I don't feel as though I need the reminder intellectually to know women are no more moral than men, I still find myself displaying this bias often. I simply have more empathy and understanding for women for no reason other than them…
/r/MensRights11/02/14 04:58 AM
2

I generally read these as examples of how women can be just as dangerous as men, countering narratives such as 'never hit a woman' or 'you're homophobic because gay men could actually rape you.'
/r/MensRights11/02/14 04:53 AM
17

That seems to be the cause of feminism's ephemeral nature, everything is 'just a X.' There's not any peer reviewed canon that is considered a central tenet with which someone can disagree. We shouldn't let something being "just a blog" be a mosque to shoot from.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 08:59 PM
1

Please don't think like this. While it may be true sometimes, if you distrust everyone that is acting supportive your experiences on the topic can be nothing but negative. You choose how you understand the world and this would be a bad choice. I'd rather you be happy, internet friend.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 04:58 AM
8

Even if it was some sort of thieves honor, changing gender roles has specifically attacked those sorts of codes; chivalry is just one of many.
/r/MensRights05/02/14 04:18 AM
1

Here's where we'll simply have to disagree, I suspect. I'll note that our vote/representative system is designed to represent us all in the best way available to us now and that most first world countries use a Democratic Republic system which does result in appropriate consent, given the context. From here, your position will likely be that you weren't personally asked and don't agree to pay taxes. I'll note that would be an unworkable system which works perfectly into your initial premise that…
/r/MensRights04/02/14 07:02 PM
0

and all of which are funded by stolen money. You're assuming your conclusion. You have not stipulated what it means to be stolen in this context nor have you proved that the government is doing that. I'm criticising them for violating moral principles that I deem important. You've not specified those, let alone shown the government is violating them.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 06:42 PM
1

What? If government operated like every other agent ever, there would only be one form of government. Just like there's only one form of agent? You're treating government as anthropomorphic, suggesting that it is a thing that has human agency itself. Government consists of a number of agents that are all human and, as such, they operate just like humans. You're criticizing government for using a cost-benefit analysis while the model itself states that we can understand any agent's actions within…
/r/MensRights04/02/14 06:17 PM
1

That's a bold assertion to make. I'm prepared to defend it. It's true that the illusion of legitimacy, which is a big advantage for them, keeps them in check, but they can abandon that as soon as the costs outweigh the benefits. That is your framework for understanding reality, not an objective description of fact. We can use the cost-benefit model to understand literally any rational choice scenario but that doesn't mean people think just in those terms or, if they do, that the people who compr…
/r/MensRights04/02/14 06:05 PM
1

How about if I were a gangster who forced everyone on my territory to pay a monthly fee in return for me protecting them from violence, or for enforcing contracts? What makes the state any different to armed thugs? Nothing! Government can be held accountable and changed by the citizenry. Gangsters can not be.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 05:55 PM
8

Most people think the world makes sense and they understand it appropriately. That belief allows them to assert their skills in logic are top notch. If I could have convinced everyone of one thing while studying philosophy it would have been that the field is worthwhile in that it studies logic in a way no others do.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:55 PM
1

I agree she should not have received probation. I also agree that our plea bargaining system needs serious work, as does the entire justice system. I'm also not saying there aren't examples of women getting lighter sentences simply because they are women. I'm not even saying this isn't one of those instances. I am saying there's a mundane explanation that will suffice for most people and that can not be disproved with the information in this article. It's just a reach that I think would be debat…
/r/MensRights01/02/14 09:02 AM
9

Usually but a plea deal is determined by what a prosecutor is willing to offer given the charge. A sentence is what a judge decides (usually) after hearing all the evidence. It's rare but possible to get a better deal from a judge if the case warrants it. Many people plea because they know their case isn't exceptional and they aren't innocent.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 07:31 AM
7

By this one cannot claim that plea deals were the cause of the sentencing disparity either. I was just going to say part of the cause was that he took a plea and she did not. Why couldn't someone claim that?
/r/MensRights01/02/14 07:25 AM
10

OP, I hope you're still around. I don't like titles and don't call myself an MRA, anti-feminist, or much else. I can tell you when I stopped considering being a feminist a necessarily good thing and that was when I took Feminist Epistemology. My teacher was my absolute favorite, both in and out of the philosophy department. She wasn't the problem. The problem was that I couldn't get a straight definition of what feminism was. Every time I tried to pin it down it wiggled. From a philosophical sta…
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:46 AM
5

You can't appeal to safety then call everyone else whiny bitches. Well, you can, it just makes you sound like a dunce.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 05:28 AM
3

Perfect time to launch into a tirade about murder culture.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 10:55 PM
0

Again with the bad analogy, they ask about bullying to ascertain the motivations of the shooter and understand what happened. Every analogy is a bad analogy. I feel like we're hung up on it and circling. I really appreciate your time in talking with me.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 10:42 PM
1

Not all of the Columbine victims were bullies provoking revenge. The point isn't if they were or were not but that we actually asked the question. When a crime is committed, we ask about the victim and their actions. Rape is not excluded from that.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 10:08 PM
2

We aren't talking about determining guilt for a trial. We are taking about the tendency of when someone is raped, focusing on what they did "wrong". I gave an example of this kind of questioning in the Columbine reference. It's also worthwhile to ask about the actions of victims independent of a trial so we can determine how to avoid the same kind of event in the future. I'm reluctant to call it 'focusing on what a victim did wrong.' Asking how something can be prevented in the future isn't that…
/r/MensRights30/01/14 09:55 PM
2

Take a criminal driver who drives into people deliberately then. In this case, we wouldn't all focus on the fact that the victim was walking on that path, and out at a time when there were more lunatics around, we would focus on the drivers crime. You're presuming we know the driver's guilt pre-trial. Of course someone needs to ask what the pedestrians were doing. People sometimes jaywalk against a light, commit suicide by jumping in front of cars, hide in piles of leaves, et c. We can't rightly…
/r/MensRights30/01/14 09:05 PM
1

I'm pretty sure that teaching people not to murder has had a restraining effect on murders. And we teach people not to murder simply by making it illegal. Why wouldn't that have the same effect on rape, which is also illegal? That's the question we should be asking everyone that writes an article like this. What is so unique about rape that making it illegal isn't 'teaching people not to rape?' Plus, we don't concentrate our criticism when it comes to murder, on the fact that that murder victim …
/r/MensRights30/01/14 08:04 PM
1

I'm not saying I agree but this is the best definition you will probably get for objectification: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-objectification/
/r/MensRights30/01/14 05:05 AM
2

If women's one major advantage over men is sexuality, that admits that women are no more than equal in violence, where the bulk of criminal law focuses. I wonder how the author would deal with that, especially if the author holds the view that men are more violent than women.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 12:52 AM
2

I'd be just as interested to see them all being told they're playing the same or opposite gender but they're actually playing a computer opponent.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 08:45 AM
1

If there's one standard, applied evenly, then it's easier to change then several standards based on different characteristics all applied haphazardly.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 08:32 PM
2

I do believe this isn't too (as) bad. There is no way to measure this. What are your objective standards for determining if something is more or less bad? If you don't have an objective standard to determine badness, no one can possibly change your view.
/r/MensRights26/01/14 06:50 AM
1

I'm not sure how to approach this argumentatively. If you switch the genders I'd be in the same situation. I'd start with "why?" Right now it's a bare assertion. Women don't have to live with men once they're adults. In fact, some businesses that have been discussed here have also excluded men. Might not even have to work with them, either. Being that the internet exists, I'm sure enough like minded women could be found to form a commune, if desired. Any woman that cares to could go to / work at…
/r/MensRights25/01/14 09:17 AM
2

I'd say the problem, and reason this may be an issue for the MRM, isn't that these statements or profiles are being mocked. The issue is that these statements are being used to build a concept of "nice guys" as decidedly not nice. It's destroying a concept to push an agenda. If "nice guys" believe you owe them sex, and only want sex, then that's very bad for women. Being a nice guy exists in contrast to being a not nice guy. The unstated implication is that a not nice guy believes things that ar…
/r/MensRights23/01/14 08:48 PM
6

Do you damn the sky for being blue? The sky isn't a rational agent capable of self-awareness.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 08:04 PM
18

General rule: women can search men in a pinch, men can never search women. That's the legal reality of it.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 04:16 AM
16

I went to Dragon*Con a couple years in a row and had a few experiences that really informed my views on 'geek culture.' I think I can give you one perspective on things. What I mean is, do good looking guys or guys who look like they're athletic or muscular get the same kind of scrutiny? I think the idea that anyone gets "scrutiny" is kind of off the mark. People are at a convention because they share similar hobbies. It's only natural that people ask about them. If I come up to any person at a …
/r/MensRights21/01/14 08:53 PM
2

I was wondering why it's set there and also why the only person actually holding a beer is one of the guys.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 05:29 PM
2

I'm forever trying to convince my friends that being good at science doesn't necessarily equip someone to handle all philosophical concepts. This is good evidence.
/r/MensRights17/01/14 07:56 AM
1

You might think so.
/r/MensRights16/01/14 07:36 PM
1

I know the Army actually assigns battle buddies. Someone you don't go anywhere without and that you're responsible for. Assuming that your unit gives a poop, they should assign someone about your weight and frame.
/r/MensRights16/01/14 07:28 PM
6

In the subtext... Jack Straton earned a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree in photography from the University of Oregon in 1977, worked as a professional jazz drummer for three years, and then returned to the U of O in the 1980s to earn a doctorate in quantum theory I was curious what qualifications one needs to be a diversity trainer. I'm not a fan of digging in on the author but I felt the formatting was a little odd for an argumentative piece. Turns out he formed and funded the group he speaks for.…
/r/MensRights16/01/14 07:05 PM
1

I have three brothers, all of which have been, or are in process of being, obliterated by divorce. Each involves kids. I'll honestly pass and I imagine that is becoming increasingly common.
/r/MensRights16/01/14 12:20 AM
4

They commit a disturbingly large percentage of the murders, however.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 01:10 AM
1

The point of the cosmetic surgery statistic is about surgeries people think they need due to societal pressure and that are pursued consensually. Not only that, I have no doubt laser eye surgery is excluded in the methodology (if this is true) and I find it likely other common surgeries that would be defined as cosmetic by insurance and likely also excluded. The point is, to get this number, the methodology would have to make arbitrary exclusions that would not reflect honest inquiry. Hair resto…
/r/MensRights11/01/14 12:01 AM
2

Yea, but this is like saying "rain" and "pissing on the street" are the same thing because in both cases the street becomes wet. More like they're similar in that they cause the street to be wet. That is absolutely true and, if someone is worried only about the street being wet, useful. Here we have the same results (black only seats/women only seats) but due to entirely different motivations - One is arbitrary subjugation, the other is offering comfort to women who dont want to get into a group…
/r/MensRights10/01/14 12:12 AM
16

I'm sad you didn't hit... 95% of cosmetic surgeries are carried out on women... This number, if it is true, would be obliterated if circumcision were included as a cosmetic surgery. Since it isn't recommended as routine on all infants unless medically necessary, I suspect most circumcisions would meet the definition of cosmetic. and I had yet to meet a man ashamed of the hair on his legs. Men are often required to shave their faces, usually under threat of various dress code sanctions. I'd be fi…
/r/MensRights09/01/14 10:55 PM
1

Making a comparison doesn't mean two things are exactly the same and no one is saying it does.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 08:24 PM
1

If this does end up being the case, I can only hope it is well documented so that it won't be titled "patriarchy."
/r/MensRights09/01/14 08:21 PM
13

There has been controversy over wolves made entirely of dicks raping characters within a game within a comic strip. One thing the MRM seems to spend a lot of time noticing and requesting is simply consistency. If rape jokes aren't funny, even when removed from reality by multiple layers, then why isn't that standard applied to any other abuses?
/r/MensRights08/01/14 10:42 PM
2

The only complaint I have is that underreporting isn't the only possible reason why men are statistically less likely to have been raped over the course of their lifetime. It's also possible that the same men are repeatedly victimized.
/r/MensRights02/01/14 12:00 AM
19

Most men who were in combat in Viet Nam raped. Yeah... I'd need a source for that.
/r/MensRights01/01/14 08:14 PM
2

The way to estimate the population density of unicorns with any accuracy is with a statistical sample, not just by gathering all the unicorns you can find into one place and shouting, "Look how many unicorns there are!" Bullshit, unicorns don't exist. This is all these posts can do though; they prove that misandry exists, but they don't show any more than that. Exactly; we absolutely and totally agree. I'm saying there is value to proving something exists first, then attempting to show rate. I'm…
/r/MensRights29/12/13 05:05 PM
5

The sad truth is, no one gives a shit about these things, and frankly, no one's going to believe that there are legitimate society-wide men's issues out there, if all they find when they come here is links to individual crazed blogs/fb statuses by individual misandrist people. This seems to be your thesis and I'd like to approach it. The rate of something is irrelevant to a person that doesn't believe that something exists. If I told you the population density of unicorns, for example, your resp…
/r/MensRights29/12/13 05:27 AM
3

Hi and Merry Christmas (if a bit late.) I'd love to hear some more on why you feel that way and to have a conversion, if you decide that's something you'd like. It's important to see that people we disagree with are still human beings doing their best in the world, I feel.
/r/MensRights27/12/13 03:09 AM
14

I think unrealistic expectations are a result of being told one can and should have everything. Western women just so happen to currently fit the bill more than most, and we should ask why, but I'm not sure it's to such a level that marriage should be discounted entirely.
/r/MensRights27/12/13 02:02 AM
1

Former but sure. May I ask what part you think is misleading and why so I may clarify?
/r/MensRights26/12/13 06:54 PM
3

Autocorrect definitely got me.
/r/MensRights26/12/13 05:10 PM
2

Cops are public employees - it's nearly impossible to fire one. I hate to skulk through this thread but I feel obligated. This is factually incorrect. While the FOP and PBA supply lawyers for wrongful termination, if you're a member, officers are still subject to the same employment laws as everyone else. An officer employed in a right-to-work state can be fired at any time as long as the department has a half-competent HR department and isn't voluntarily involved with civil service standards. I…
/r/MensRights26/12/13 07:14 AM
1

Or people can disagree without someone having to be stupid.
/r/MensRights26/12/13 04:57 AM
3

Other people get to expires how they feel but not decide what I am.
/r/MensRights26/12/13 04:52 AM
0

I was a public servant myself. I retired from the military, which means I put in more than 20 years and gave and received plenty of orders. There were things I wouldn't do - not because an order was illegal but because occasionally my superiors were not right. And by "not right" I don't mean that I disagreed with a tactical decision, but sometimes I considered that to do what was asked of me would be unethical. I paid the price in career advancement for it: I retired as a Lieutenant Colonel rath…
/r/MensRights26/12/13 04:29 AM
1

"It is a moral imperative to strive to be a good person, but in today's society it is more important to strive for being a good man than it is to strive for being a good woman." Discuss. It's an assertion without substance. There's nothing to discuss because any response can be meet with "I didn't say..." The quoted sentence needs a "...because x."
/r/MensRights26/12/13 03:09 AM
-1

It's not polite to call people names either but here we are.
/r/MensRights26/12/13 03:03 AM
2

I think you mean person, and not position. Sorry, I do mean position, as in argumentative position. I don't know anyone to say what they as a person know so I can only speak to as what's being accounted for in an given position of debate. The rest of your statement doesn't really apply to officer discretion. Here's a rather exhaustive PDF on the subject. It doesn't really have much to do with teams of lawyers, elected officials, or the officer's memory. I'll read through that when I'm not at wor…
/r/MensRights25/12/13 04:32 AM
4

Which part? I'm sorry it's unclear and am glad to elaborate.
/r/MensRights25/12/13 04:01 AM
-1

But every police department deals with the concept of the arresting officer's discretion. Heck, there are even warning tickets that formalize the system for discretion in traffic court. Absolutely, just not in the way any position here understands it. Officers have discretion in situations as allowed by the department. If the sheriff makes something non-optional then that's the case. Teams of lawyers decide policy and take federal, state, and local statutes and declarations into account. No one …
/r/MensRights25/12/13 03:50 AM
12

Simply because something is statutory does not make it legal. There are a lot of statutes that are in fact unconstitutional and therefore illegal, for example. Sure and police departments hire teams of lawyers while also consulting the local judges to try to catch those legislative mistakes. It doesn't yield perfect results but the odds are much better than allowing someone with a few months of training in criminal law to make that call. We should blame LEOs if they participate in executing orde…
/r/MensRights25/12/13 02:53 AM
6

If you were given an order like that you should have flatly refused to carry it out... or resigned in protest. Those were your only two honorable options. Bonus points if you went to the media. Every time you put cuffs on a father for non-payment of child support you became part of the problem - either for a power trip or a paycheck, or both. Any public servant, police officers especially, has to put aside the juvenile idea that they know what is best for everyone in every situation. We have a s…
/r/MensRights25/12/13 02:25 AM
2

Lots of things are illegal, but cops don't do sweeps for them and arrest people that are barely breaking the law. If a warrant is issued, cops will do a sweep for it. My last department had five deputies that did nothing but serve warrants and, if outstanding warrants got above a certain level, every officer participated in a 'roundup.' That aside, this is still factually incorrect. Sheriff Arpaio orders immigration sweeps routinely and those are a great example if unlawful and disgusting action…
/r/MensRights25/12/13 02:20 AM
14

Our police have been failing us. When a cop is placed in a situation where he is expected to do something that can serve no good purpose for the community, such as placing someone in jail that owes $81 in child support during Christmas - and that cop follows through with that action, it is not something to be proud of. As a police officer, to read that article and not shake your head, you are part of the problem. I was a police officer for several years and I have the opposite feeling. The probl…
/r/MensRights25/12/13 01:06 AM
21

... by marrying or moving into a boyfriends place and becoming financially dependent? I suspect a combination of child support and higher college admittance (so access to dorm rooms) is more likely the bulk of the reason.
/r/MensRights22/12/13 05:43 PM
1

Nope, it's a perfectly fine stance to take as long as consistency is applied. If we, on the whole, are going to say this isn't a problem because men are just naturally more violent then we have to ask why we were concerned with admitting women to the Infantry, for example. I'd say that is the kind of question that OP is ultimately asking.
/r/MensRights22/12/13 04:09 AM
1

Men in every culture on the planet are the more aggressive, more violent gender. No real mystery. So your thesis is the men and women are fundamentally biologically different?
/r/MensRights21/12/13 11:12 PM
1

Shouldn't we ask why? We would (and should) for any other demographic.
/r/MensRights21/12/13 05:57 PM
2

Maybe it's just a fundamental philosophical difference but, when someone is afraid and angry, I don't want to give them a title (Nice Guy) to tear them down by. Generally speaking, I want to address the source of their fear and anger so the world get be just a bit happier and better. I'm not sure why anyone advocates for anything else but this video sure does.
/r/MensRights21/12/13 05:46 PM
3

I don't know, after everything I've read between this site and others, it seems like men are having a difficult time understand that you are being knocked down a peg to be equal with women. It's interesting you choose to frame your understanding of reality as if it is a linear progression from bottom to top. That structure will severely limit your ability to interpret ideas and your experiences. It is VERY VERY difficult for the privileged to give up that privilege-- any course in history will t…
/r/MensRights20/12/13 01:55 AM
1

Women aren't sexual predators because you find the idea absurd? Would you mind elaborating on that?
/r/MensRights20/12/13 01:27 AM
1

Turn and walk away to get hit in the back of the head? No thank you. Article says she's a former Marine and he knows that. There's no reason she should be treated as incapable of killing someone if she so desires.
/r/MensRights20/12/13 01:24 AM
1

I'm suspicious. We get exact numbers about real life ratio differences and animated ratio differences but we're not told which portrayal is closer to it's real life counterpart. Couldn't it be argued men are portrayed as overly large and study, like a beast of burden?
/r/MensRights20/12/13 01:15 AM
1

She was in US Marshalls custody due to status as a diplomat. Because the Marshalls usually deal with wanted felons, their procedures are unusually intrusive. This is a symptom of jurisdictional issues more than anything.
/r/MensRights20/12/13 01:08 AM
2

Nowhere in my post did I claim that women or men do it more or as often, he just wanted any sort of evidence that it does happen to women and that was posted recently and I just wanted to share what I read. Absolutely. I tried to disjoin your link from the author's claims. I always appreciate links. I think a human rights movement shouldn't try and discredit the fact that bad things women do to men also happen in reverse. Just a thought :) I certainly agree here as well. I only wanted to take th…
/r/MensRights18/12/13 09:58 PM
2

Sadly, the articles author is correct but only technically. There's no evidence women do it as much as or more than men because only (primarily?) women were studied, at least in your source.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 09:42 PM
9

To be fair, female genital mutilation is orders of magnitude more severe. To do the same thing to a male you would have to remove MOST of the penis, not just the foreskin. Only when people do things like compare FGM in Africa to Western circumcision. If you were to stay in Africa, for example, you'd find penile subincision traditions. Note: I didn't link anything because the articles I found have pictures of the results. No one needs that on their screen without warning.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 05:49 PM
6

I am corrected. I've never seen anyone object to the term FGM and it is seems to be commonly accepted in North America. I think having one terminology (whatever it may be) for both genders would do a lot to keep the conversation honest. I'll try to find more information on women who object to the FGM terminology.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 05:35 PM
20

That terminology doesn't seem to be a concern when on topic of FGM. I think using the same terminology for men really shows our inconsistency in application of the word "mutilation."
/r/MensRights17/12/13 05:24 PM
2

She has no power over students. An unruly student could presumably eventually reach expulsion and surprisingly easily with how the world is now. Students have to attend public school up until eighteen under threat of legal punishment. If Riley doesn't have a family willing to home school him and doesn't have another nearby high school option, he could potentially have a serious problem if he gets expelled.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 05:21 PM
2

I suspect the reason for this kind of segregation is so that men don't subject women to their gaze, to use modern 'Western' terminology. The segregation of men and women in some Islamic contexts is the ultimate destination of where the more 'helpless women' versions of Feminism are headed. I suspect that's why Saleem Chagtai states “Separate seating for men and women is not something we ever enforce. It happens naturally and if Muslim women were disadvantaged they would be the first to complain,…
/r/MensRights16/12/13 09:21 PM
5

Those officers had been ordered specifically to not react to those protestors. The department's recourse would likely have been legal action. Edit: Clarity.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 04:48 AM
11

The article says those officers were specifically ordered to not react at that time. Presumably the protestors were aware of that.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 04:45 AM
25

I'd be very pleased if this sub spent just a little more time on how public opinion of police officers is sometimes an exaggerated reflection of public opinion of men. She entered this officers space and subjected him to unwanted sexual contact because she knew he was not allowed to react. This correlates to 'don't hit women' and 'men can't be raped' in many ways.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 03:34 AM
17

All, however, focus only on girls’ clothing, and most of these restrictions are put in place to avoid “distracting” other students (i.e. the boys). This should be obviously incorrect to anyone that wasn't homeschooled. Boys have dress codes and they are often more strict. On top of that, those dress codes often impact MtF transgender students the most as it forces them to dress in men's clothes only. That was my experience, at least. In my high school, our single trans student was sent home at l…
/r/MensRights15/12/13 03:26 AM
29

“Being a good friend … as well as needing a good friend, is the equivalent of being girly,” Wade writes, so the boys end up opting out. This is stated as though it is axiomatic and I reject it entirely. It's the assertion the article needs to make sense and it is not, in any way, given support.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 06:01 PM
1

I suspect their system works but for reasons entirely different than their justification. I live in a city that rarely gets snow and so doesn't plow at all. We just had a big snow and I noticed the main roads cleared themselves first. The higher traffic keeps as much snow from hitting the streets and mills down the snow that does land into slush earlier. The side roads and paths are still covered and icy. It just seems like an example of a counter-intuitive solution viewed within an unnecessary …
/r/MensRights11/12/13 05:48 PM
3

Upbringing is another way to suggest cultural causes. That is perfectly in line with, and advocated by, Patriarchy Theory. I don't understand why she was upset except for maybe the inclusion of other possibilities.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 09:07 AM
8

There are documented instances of female soldiers killing male soldiers with their bare hands. This seems to me to be a case of 'weak when it's convenient.'
/r/MensRights11/12/13 08:59 AM
5

“Men can kill women with their bare hands, and they do. Women almost never kill men that way. They can’t,” she said. This is the nugget that caught my attention. This is an essential point in her argument. If women can kill men by hand then they are not justified in killing earlier out of preemptive self defense. It's not the only route for disagreement but I think it's a good one.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 05:52 AM
2

Your question is 'why are chests without breasts and chests with breasts treated differently?' That is a fine question and one I don't really have an answer for, I'd certainly read a study about it if someone wanted to delve into that realm however it's significantly different from my question 'why are people disregarding the established cultural differences between chests without breasts and chests with breasts?" The fact that comic books exist within a cultural context and that those books are…
/r/MensRights10/12/13 11:20 PM
1

I understand the books also idealize men, but at the same time these books often try to take a realistic and serious approach to the style. Which books are these books? If we're not looking at them and their art style at the moment, we're imagining a style to compare against and that simply may not be accurate.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 08:36 PM
4

I took a different approach. Instead of claiming comic books as having a particular global style, I noted that, when I see that twist in a book, the men are also idealized and displayed sexually within that very same book. I don't believe it is a pose that is applied unfairly to women (though it is applied uniquely to women) because the books themselves carry that style throughout.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 08:28 PM
20

Biotruths... the first time I encountered that argument was when I was suggesting that the reason women in comicbooks are portrayed with that distinct spinal twist, while men are not, is because it's needed to show breasts and butt in the same picture. Since men don't have breasts, they're not subjected to it. Someone ridiculing that assertion was downright shocking to me. I never thought I'd have to defend the idea that women actually have breasts.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 04:47 PM
2

I say we indulge her. How about whatever collection of double standards that collude to make it so that women are 10x less likely to find themselves incarcerated? That seems like a good deal.
/r/MensRights08/12/13 11:08 AM
2

I suspect a big contributor is men being willing to travel and approach, rather than having the expectation of being approached.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 09:10 PM
3

Being evangelical is not unique to the Catholic Church or religion. I'm simply trying to ask what it is about the Catholic Church that makes them more offensive than any other flawed, human made organization; specifically in comparison to feminism. I'm not sure if I'm relaying it well but I just want to understand your initial claim.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 04:36 AM
2

My point being the people being attacked in this video are not those very people who are committing rape or obscuring those claims, at least to our knowledge.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 04:32 AM
0

So it's the imaginary friend that rubs you the wrong way?
/r/MensRights05/12/13 01:53 AM
4

Misconduct exists in every single organization. The larger the organization, the more serious the misconduct. If that becomes a good reason to attack people associated with that organization, despite their lack of personal culpability, then we're all fucked.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 01:15 AM
6

The Catholic Church has a head, hierarchy, and state to be addressed in cases of misconduct. That doesn't mean everything always turns out right but it's much more recourse than is available when there are legitimate grievances against feminism.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 01:13 AM
7

Oh, woe is us, people expect us to succeed in life more easily than women or minorities...because it actually IS easier for us to succeed! Prove this claim please.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 02:53 AM
4

That's a sad read. He gave her a compliment she didn't want, didn't take the violent punishment she issued as punishment, so she increased the violence. It's sad to me that a compliment, even in poor taste, has been so conflated with physical violence that physical violence is sometimes used in response, as if self defense were warranted.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 06:53 PM
6

I'd be interested to see what would happen with an app where women rated other women anonymously but the results could only be seen by men. It might give insight into 'cattiness.'
/r/MensRights27/11/13 06:43 PM
3

Find a movie in which a man isn't judged by his benefit to others. This has been so engrained into me I can't even conceptualize another way to judge a man.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 08:50 AM
2

Interesting choice of insult when they're criticizing your views on gender.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 07:17 AM
0

I know you're trying to be funny, but the vast majority of women checking into DV shelters actually were abused by men. Certainly, most people are heterosexual so it will shake out that way. Imbalanced gender segregation ignores that truth for men. I know you don't support that, just saying that's why it's a topic here. Men being abused by women is ignored almost entirely and this may be another instance of that. Worse, this may be an instance if women's comfort being more important than men's l…
/r/MensRights24/11/13 07:01 AM
1

it's the entire purpose of licensing boards. why do you think you need a license to cut hair? nobody actually thinks that a bad barber would ruin society, current barbers just want to make it as hard as possible for new barbers to set up shop. Nothing against barbers, a great deal of professions do this shit For barbers that may be the case in its entirety. For practicing medicine, I'm sure quality control features at some point. I know it does for law enforcement, where my experience lies.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 02:53 AM
3

It's from logic. Sure! It was just inside a quote block, I thought specifically about this exact topic. I wanted to quote a source when repeating it.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 08:42 PM
3

Where's that from? That would be quite upsetting, considering the cost of healthcare.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 08:12 PM
23

International Men's Day is the perfect time to talk about the positive and negative aspects of being a man, so one of them say. Think that will be the case for women on International Women's Day?
/r/MensRights23/11/13 07:13 PM
12

Of the 24 medical specialties recognized in the United States, he said, it is the only one that is gender-specific, and it has been that way since 1935. Well how about that. I actually wouldn't have thought that's the case being there's a 'War on Women's Health.'
/r/MensRights23/11/13 06:51 PM
4

If you're going to criticize feminist theory, at least know a little bit about the most basic terms. I'll do you one better and already have a degree in Philosophy with several classes about Feminist Theory, Feminist Epistemology, Ethics, Logic, Marxism, et c. under me. The point I was making, in responding to a glib comment about "the menz" needing to be more organized, is that the author herself misrepresents Patriarchy Theory in a fundamental, and unfortunately common, way. Accepting your def…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 08:42 PM
1

Absolutely the etymology of the word. How I often see it used, when replacing Patriarchy, is simply as the same concept but with a more specific target demographic. Unfortunately, instead of being used to literally mean those specific people in power it's often used to signify a more specific (Christian, cis, white, male, heterosexual, et c.) stereotype as oppressor. As Feminism courts more rights movement groups, it will continue getting more and more specific as it did when the QLTBG and Athei…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 06:43 PM
1

As focus on intersectionality increases, we'll likely find a narrowing of the group considered to be the Kyriarchy. It was somewhat subtle but, in this work, they qualified not only white and male but also American and heterosexual. The 'white noise' line suggests a level of acceptance by "White Culture" is necessary as well and I feel that's reinforced by the final claim that one can become a rebel and thereby join the oppressed despite fitting the given stereotype of 'privileged.' That being t…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 05:56 PM
2

That's a question you could pose to any awareness campaign. I'm not sure the topic being men matters all that much if ineffectiveness is the complaint.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 06:55 AM
18

Lhitlerally.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 02:25 AM
230

apparently today is #internationalmensday a fact I didn't know until just now. Maybe if the menz were more organized #misandry If men aren't organized enough to designate a discussion day, how is Patriarchy even a thing? Hmmm #InternationalMensDay. How do we get some men to understand that while they feel powerless other men still have massive power? I don't think it's that powerless men don't understand, I think the problem is that's an arbitrary and inconsequential distinction. Most people in …
/r/MensRights20/11/13 08:14 PM
1

You should not bother arguing with me and I'll take you up on your offer. I appreciate your time and wish you the best in life.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 02:33 AM
11

Holocaust Culture.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 01:26 AM
1

Shouldn't you stick with making an argument instead of attacking a person? I think we should have absolutely every liberty possible because I've been to a place where they shoot little girls in the head for wanting to go to school. I'm not saying banning rape jokes is the same, which would be insultingly hyperbolic rhetoric, but I still haven't seen solid philosophical justification for treating rape as a unique crime.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 12:42 AM
1

Well, I've taken a cursory look of that blog post. To keep it brief, I'm going to talk about the only study cited in the article that I can get more than the abstract from. It's an interesting study but it doesn't track how long the attitude change lasts or the intensity of the change, because of that (and other less significant problems), it doesn't establish a rape culture. The rest of the blog proper simply makes a number of unsupported claims, even going so far as to leave satire unaccounted…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 09:42 PM
1

I'd be glad for a philosophical justification for why jokes are an exceptional case on par with threats of violence or defamation of character and thus deserve being restricted. Even in current American law, satire and comedy of all types is completely unregulated, even when applied to a business or individual in a way that would otherwise be illegal.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 06:41 PM
1

This isn't a "life narrative" I've created. Everyone has a life narrative. It causes things like selection and observation biases and we're all subject to it, myself included. And, no, freedom of speech does not give you the right to be an insufferable jackass. That's exactly what freedom of speech allows. I believe our world views are probably simply too different to have a gainful conversation. You're not going to believe any of my personal experiences I share with you. I appreciate your time,…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 06:24 PM
1

Really? Do you? I really do. Do you usually refuse to believe things that don't fit the life narrative you've created? There are many survivors, myself included, who find them insensitive, harsh, and unnecessary. Does that not matter? Sure it matters. No one is nor should be forcing you to make or listen to rape jokes. If you deal by avoiding the topic or only addressing it with utter seriousness, that option should be afforded to you. On the other side of that coin, if someone deals by making l…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 05:52 PM
1

Do you know many survivors who use jokes about rape to cope? Yes. Does that matter? I always see them used by insensitive people on the internet, and they often trigger those who went through it. I'm sure you accept what you see isn't always the case.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 04:39 PM
1

Do murder jokes normalize murder? I reject the premise. Some people deal with horrible things by using humor as a release.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 03:28 PM
4

Q. How many female novelists does it take to screw in a lightbulb ? A. Bamboo because fruit has edible seeds. Seriously, few of those made any sense at all.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 07:07 AM
2

Potentially. Ideally the comic will do well, women enjoying traditionally geeky pursuits will become more mainstream and, in doing so, contribute in making being a geek more widely accepted.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 07:46 AM
3

If that is the case, it will at least be another piece of evidence to explain the state of superhero comics as they stand.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 06:53 AM
1

Chicken scented soap... is the world so cool?
/r/MensRights08/11/13 04:17 AM
2

More fundamental than that, the jester's value is in comedy unrestrained by any limits at all. The power of humor is being able to address any topic. You don't have to find any particular joke funny but even feudal lords saw the value in freedom of speech within this context.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 04:12 AM
3

My most recent. The plan: sleep in my own bed like I do every night. The complication: Room mates friend drives over from the club. She's drunk as hell, recently divorced, in a short dress, and not wearing underpants. I expect she's looking for someone to take care of her, possibly including sex. The change: It occurred to me that the house only had two beds and the living room couch. If I slept in my bed and she slept on the couch, she'd be able to walk into either bedroom if she cared to and t…
/r/MensRights08/11/13 04:01 AM
15

The character, author, and artist are Muslim women, is my understanding. I say it's great. The consensus of the sub, as I've read it, is that if people of a specific demographic want media that speaks to them as that demographic then they should make it. So... mission accomplished, I approve.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 03:33 AM
57

I'd say it's because the current paradigm is that women control reproduction as the gatekeepers of sex, takers of contraceptives, deciders of abortion, and caretakers of children. It's a remarkably active role, narrative of sex roles considered.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 07:31 AM
1

I know this is how Booking worked in my county. We'd place the person in a private cell then turn the toilet's water off at the adjacent pipe chase.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 05:52 AM
2

Sure, facts are good. Your response doesn't account for the facts included, why they are chosen, and what that means to our understanding of the world as shaped in part by news organizations. The fact that the predatory pedophiles are identified by a trait they happen to share (being men) instead of the trait they necessarily share (being predatory pedophiles) seems very significant to me. No conversation into why the predators are all men (if indeed they are) was given. That means any inquiry a…
/r/MensRights05/11/13 07:03 PM
4

If 1000 pedophiles responded and all were men, that is inherently significant. They were all human, watched TV, used tooth paste, attended some sort of schooling, wore shoes, et. c. None of those traits are inherently significant, in that they're essential to the understanding of reality, they're significant (or not) within our understanding of the situation and culture that produces it and that's what the debate is. Being a man isn't an essential characteristic of a pedophile so, being that mal…
/r/MensRights05/11/13 06:36 PM
4

"Within seconds, like sharks, blondes were circling." If that were accurate, wouldn't you still ask why that piece of information was included? That's because we relay the information we believe to be relevant. Specifying that all the responding predators were blonde suggests that their being blonde is a fact worth knowing. Writing something down implies significance.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 05:45 PM
9

Like an onion.
/r/MensRights02/11/13 09:05 PM
1

While working detention in Afghanistan, my unit came across a young man that was so damaged by sexual abuse that he used to stand in the corner (as if he was being punished at school) and cry while forcing his hand up his own rear. We put him in isolation so he'd be physically safe but there's only so much that can be done after that much abuse. I'm glad this article addressed it, at least in part, even if I am upset with the other tangents the author took.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 03:47 PM
1

That's clearly not what your teacher was talking about. I haven't mentioned a teacher and don't know what you're referencing, except maybe OP. I am not OP. Your lecture in world history doesn't change the context of this post and discussion thread. It was relevant in my attempts to pin down your ethereal 'Google the origins of racism' snark. That was my mistake, I hadn't seen you say anything that would suggest you have any interest in making an intellectually honest point or taking an unambiguo…
/r/MensRights31/10/13 05:22 PM
1

Just give it a little thought. I have, degree and everything. Stating something without providing a compelling argument then telling anyone that asks for it to Google something is incredibly poor argumentation. You're arguing from an assumed intellectually superior position and it's not a position of good faith. I said whites don't have the moral platform or ethical consistency for complaining about it. There are places in the world where being white does not mean being the dominant race. Which …
/r/MensRights31/10/13 04:39 PM
1

Also, the dominant race doesn't get to cry "racism" Where is that in the rulebook? Where's the rulebook, for that matter?
/r/MensRights30/10/13 11:33 PM
1

Even a baby in a stroller. That was surprising to me, for some reason.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 12:09 PM
7

She argued that women are not build for this (doing hard work, running 50km etc.) and that men don't give birth to children. Suggest it would be fair (her position considered) if men's service was upped to nine months instead of six and, in return, every single Swiss woman was required to have at least one child. If they are physically unable, they will be fined at the same rate as men that can't serve. See how she feels about that.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 11:49 AM
1

People should avoid hypocrisy is a pretty universal belief.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 10:28 AM
-2

"Disorder" is a word we choose to apply to the world, not a descriptor of objective fact. If a person doesn't like the label why force it upon them?
/r/MensRights29/10/13 08:07 AM
1

'Some organization disagrees with me on a topic so we shouldn't support them in any way' is not a gainful approach. People are more apt to listen to a friend. I have a friend that just finished law school in Singapore and she's avoiding criminal law because of the double standard. Give it a few years, a new generation, and some friendship and this could be a thing of the past.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 01:44 PM
21

I am very honestly ready for the day women are drafted into the Infantry. It would be one of the biggest cultural shifts in American history.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 09:38 AM
5

Write "men's rights" on a hundred dollar bill and see if your friend is truly principled.
/r/MensRights21/10/13 01:37 AM
5

My personal experience is the same. It was made clear to a friend of mine by his lawyer that the mother of his children could legally take them several states away to live without warning or consideration. When asked if he could do the same, he was told he would be arrested.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 10:04 PM
3

The most disappointing part, I felt, was her use of fictional female criminals while ignoring infamous outlaws like Bonnie or Calamity Jane. It made the assertion, which was already suspect, fall apart as blatantly manipulated.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 09:01 PM
3

To be fair, she's an English professor. Outside of her realm of study her degree means little, if anything.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 08:58 PM
0

Grouping by ideology is different than grouping by sex or race, I'd say.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 08:00 PM
1

I find it disheartening that "the sisterhood" exists, presumably without challenge or complaint. It's a group of senators explicitly excluding everyone of a different sex and that's not right.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 04:03 PM
2

I'm glad to see the word privilege was used when speaking about benefits women have traditionally enjoyed.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 03:49 PM
1

What kind of condition was he in at the time?
/r/MensRights16/10/13 10:12 PM
1

That's because he had oral sex with her. That phrasing caught my eye.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 08:57 PM
2

Have you seen some of the poisonous comments that fly around when women cosplay? If they aren't "fake geek attention-seeking whores" they're "whales". I have seen some of those comments. They're terrible and we should talk about them, too. Specifically, we should talk about them in a way that accepts women aren't uniquely vulnerable, delicate, or unable to perpetrate such viciousness themselves. One of the few issues that I would say grants feminism the right to exist in today's world is how soc…
/r/MensRights16/10/13 06:00 PM
4

'The men that love geeky stuff love to make geeky women not love themselves' sounds exactly like the kind of claim I'd want Men's Rights to address, personally.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 04:53 PM
4

Hi! I'd be honestly interested in your objection to the post linked in your edit. I thought it was a gainful conversation.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 04:17 PM
2

I often upvote things like this with a top comment that debunks the claim in hopes people will read it and know better.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 04:13 PM
2

I wouldn't. One of many reasons I've never done it. Just pointing out that not having the same problems isn't the same as not having problems.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 10:04 PM
2

I've considered wearing a wedding ring to generate interest at various points in my life.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 09:45 PM
2

Females are depicted as objects available to satisfy male desires. Acts that are uncomfortable or painful for the female are depicted as desirable even though they bring no additional pleasure to the male, except the pleasure of establishing dominance over her. Don't some people like being made uncomfortable, being dominated, or enjoy feeling a safe (sometimes even unsafe) amount of pain during sex? I don't personally but I've dated women who have requested such things. I'm not sure saying "wome…
/r/MensRights15/10/13 09:10 PM
1

Meanwhile the feminists are okay with men being raped, and being forced to pay child support to their rapist. Those are the only cases of rapists getting custody I regularly hear about. I doubt they're included in the statistics cited.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 05:54 PM
1

If the author can accept the Sisterhood is not real maybe she'll be more open to the idea the Brotherhood might not be, too.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 05:58 AM
1

Imagine you meet a woman who, although she never said or implied it herself, you believe is an astronaut. I honestly can't imagine falling in love with a woman, thinking she has a job she doesn't, and neither of us ever mentioning her work. This whole scenario strips this hypothetical woman of any agency, honestly. She never brings it up? Never said anything about her work experiences? Does something for at least 40 hours a week but, with me, the topic is void? It's literally unimaginable.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 04:13 AM
5

Of course, one offensive part of what she's saying is that any man that wants but does not have a woman is a repulsive choad. It tells me she has a very dark, vicious soul.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 07:20 PM
9

I'm a little surprised that everyone is accepting her reframing of the MRM as a movement of sexual frustration rather than politics. Exactly that happened to feminism. The stereotype was that of angry lesbians. It's hard to approach someone who lacks empathy to the point they do the exact same thing that hurt them to others.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 06:37 PM
8

Does it matter what arbitrary demographic created it?
/r/MensRights05/10/13 09:54 PM
1

I've seen the use of dryer venting tube rather than tube socks. Much more powerful statement. Big dicks... patriarchy... oppression... something. Someone can put that together for me.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 09:53 PM
1

"I declare myself to be whatever I want to matter who says otherwise" sounds very punk to me. The yardstick I always used what that when someone said "I don't give a fuck," they were punk.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 09:51 PM
2

Correct and no one's arguing it should be OK to force an abortion via violence. The fact that, in this instance, someone being a person (and thus able to be murdered) depends entirely on the whim of someone else is unacceptable. It's a logical And legal inconsistency that needs to be addressed.
/r/MensRights29/09/13 10:14 PM
8

How about we don't consider it a decent complaint at all? Deal, as far as I'm concerned. I'm only noting a standard and how it should be applied consistently.
/r/MensRights28/09/13 09:11 PM
1

Depends, I suppose. It's also common military terminology so, when the topic comes up, I just politely disagree. Nothing about it sounds odd to me.
/r/MensRights28/09/13 08:53 PM
8

I have been told by a number of people interested in gender studies that "female" is used to dehumanize women. I'm not sure I agree but, if it's considered a decent complaint when done to women then it should be a decent complaint when done to men.
/r/MensRights28/09/13 07:06 PM
32

Oh, you're virgin shaming. I'm sorry I missed that and attributed genuine empathy to you.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 11:22 PM
28

Good thing this is purely a hypothetical dilemma for most guys on here. Every man in my immediate family has been divorced or is in the process currently. That rate is increasing every year and it's my understanding that most people will undergo a divorce in their lifetime. I've never met a man that went through a divorce or custody dispute that came out on top for any reason other than the woman's grace.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 10:42 PM
5

We tell people not to rape in the most forceful and unambiguous way possible, by making it illegal. There have been laws against rape as long as there have been laws. People get so frustrated with the "teach men not to rape" approach not just because it implies women know better already but also because performing the rape is the goal of a rapist. The idea that someone could accidentally rape someone else exposes a real problem in how were talking about rape. We'd never talk about murder like th…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 06:15 AM
1

A question I have is as follows; if all men need is to be taught to respect women, Patriarchy is based upon the premise that women were historically held to rigid social roles despite their objections, and teaching children is a Patriarchal social role of women, how is it possible that men within a Patriarchy didn't/don't already respect women?
/r/MensRights25/09/13 06:50 AM
4

I'd like to watch this as well, if you remember the name.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 09:06 PM
1

If it's a girl and you name her Holocaust, she could go by Holly. That might help her a little later in life, just a thought.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 05:01 AM
2

The Argyle Market.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 04:59 AM
3

Why would anyone? The condition placed upon the statement is incredibly valid, religious beliefs often have special rules applied only to women. Religious beliefs also have rules (such as circumcision) applied only to men but nothing about that quote is actually hypocritical. I don't think the MRM complaint has often been that any particular movement ignores men but that some engage in hypocrisy regarding men or claim to assist men but fail to do so. Those are good complaints, I think.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 11:27 PM
6

Kyriarchy Hasn't progressed much because it's a bankrupt idea, I think. It's true in a tautological sense. The rule of those that have been in charge... Not very insightful even though correct.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 03:46 PM
13

I feel as though, if someone blew smoke in a cop's face and he went to baton the view on this would be a very strong consensus that it was inappropriate.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 03:31 PM
3

I had no concept of true poverty until I saw Afghanistan, personally.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 09:37 PM
7

Sounds to me like she's saying women weren't subject to poverty very often, then divorce changed that.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 02:32 PM
1

I don't even think it will be great for men. The access to sex would be good for everyone but social attachments would be almost nonexistent outside of peer group relationships, if even those were allowed to continue. The 'dudebro' mocking might be an indicator of more to come.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 03:22 AM
1

I expect a more Bonobo-esque situation, personally.
/r/MensRights18/09/13 09:50 PM
1

I'd be interested in a source for that, if you have the time.
/r/MensRights18/09/13 09:32 PM
10

I'm not sure we want to use a picture of an intentionally posed model as evidence that a particular posture is natural or comfortable. In fact, there are huge uproars about how female models are posed fairly regularly.
/r/MensRights18/09/13 09:28 PM
4

'Bitching' is the scientific term, I believe. It has since fallen into disrepute.
/r/MensRights18/09/13 01:21 AM
8

Can't really speak to what the author meant but it clearly states "the men that love it." It's the male fans that are being blamed, in whole, for making the female fans not love themselves. It seems to be intent on moving the perceived Gender War into another arena and establishing men as the aggressors. Blaming the creators of "geeky stuff" could be one thing, though you'd have to ask why women are excluded from that, but blaming male fans wholesale while admitting to being a female fan is outr…
/r/MensRights17/09/13 04:23 PM
1

I prefer to think of it as a quantum effect a la Dr. Manhattan where I view something which is then forced to collapse into a state of being from what was endless possibilities. I know I'm being a little glib but this really is the complaint. The 'Male Gaze' presumably forces the viewee into a state of being i.e. "I was viewed as sexy and now that's what I am though I don't want to be." It's a really odd assertion.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 05:36 PM
1

Both via voting and attrition. We should be asking what's causing so many men in office and one huge cause seems to be that parenting is an option for women in a way it isn't for men.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 05:22 PM
3

Every time I've been to one, the other recruits were all watching, the officers administering the test (of course), and some medics of some sort.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 03:36 PM
14

Clearly wolf whistling etc would clearly be inappropriate, and there's no need for colleagues to watch someone take a fitness test anyway. When I've done obstacle courses, we've watched everyone. This is because the obstacle course takes up the majority of a gym room floor. It would be logistically nightmarish to stage everything outside, have everyone line up, then stand in line for hours (if you're toward the end) immediately prior to a fitness test. Inside the gym there are bleachers to sit, …
/r/MensRights09/09/13 02:52 PM
17

My local police departments use an obstacle course as well. They took over for a push-up, sit-up, run standard similar to military fitness tests because those were also labeled as sexist. It was argued that fitness exercises were not representative of skills needed or conditions actually encountered on the job, to which I agree. That being said, if an obstacle course is going to be declared sexist, Professor Jackson needs to actually offer an alternative. Personal opinion, declaring things like …
/r/MensRights09/09/13 02:48 PM
10

Why are we limited to only focusing on one thing and, of those things, the one you find most important? I'm pretty versatile, I can be upset by all those things.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 04:38 AM
12

Yeah, he quite possibly raped her though. Not according to any scientific or objective measure. All we know is that he was accused. Although it's a bit extreme to burn him to death even if he did rape her, is it really your priority to focus on these kinds of men? Someone being killed in a cruel and unusual way without trial for being accused of a crime that does not usually warrant the death penalty would be a huge concern in literally any other context.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 04:16 AM
12

They don't address any facts about the case at all other than a report was filed and an arrest was made.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 04:06 AM
34

I only live in one country. I'd better step up my game.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 06:33 AM
3

How do you even address this in an FAQ? "Things that have nothing to do with Men's Rights: Everything."
/r/MensRights05/09/13 05:42 AM
3

I'd love to see it posted in the FAQ or in the header so we can just get out out of the way for good.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 04:44 AM
2

I get it all the time and am forever explaining that my lips curve down at the corners. It's just my face! On topic, yet another example of a manufactured gender issue.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 06:41 PM
2

Look, I appreciate you trying to engage with me, I do, but you're ignoring a lot of my arguments. That whole analogy is important, because it reflects how we view sexism. When its subtle, we ignore it. I'm not trying to ignore your argument, that's why I responded to say I acknowledge it. There's just no claim to respond to here. The lack of women is subtle? That fact has been acknowledged by everyone here who has addressed the topic, that I've seen. I'm asking for an explanation as to why you t…
/r/MensRights04/09/13 05:27 PM
2

Your frog analogy doesn't make any explicit claims for me to respond to. So... I guess I'm just acknowledging I read it. Further, its not just "men favoring men=patriarchy". Exclusion of other views, whether passively or actively, contributes as well. The definition of Patriarchy certainly varies but, in order for the claim that it always is without fail to be true, it requires men to necessarily favor each other. We're seeing evidence that is not the case. As a tangent, another problem that bel…
/r/MensRights04/09/13 04:43 PM
4

Males dominate debate, debate discussion, participation and coaching. Also, most believe that we should have more women in debate. Most debaters, however, have strong backgrounds in feminist literature and will reject MRA arguments out of hand. Completely agreed. This suggests to me that men don't necessarily favor other men. Men necessarily favoring other men is the claim used to produce Patriarchy Theory.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 04:14 PM
5

A basic question we should be asking is how can we claim both that feminism is widely accepted within debate culture and also women are severely unrepresented?
/r/MensRights04/09/13 04:03 PM
5

I was always taught that the most sincere way to introduce yourself to someone was to give your name first, not request theirs. It shows a basic level of trust.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 04:01 PM
1

I find it interesting you claim an argument about male disposability won't do well while also noting debate is dominated by men. Wouldn't this be evidence that, if a Patriarchy does exist, it does not favor men by default? Patriarchy favoring men is the premise for your claim women have it worse than men in all contexts and beyond compare. You undercut that premise yourself.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 03:54 PM
15

I'd write something back to the effect of "Ma'am, if I was as informed as you I wouldn't have a need for your class. If a person could research all that information without guidance then the university wouldn't need to employ you. It is a teacher's foremost obligation to educate his or her students and that is my only request. You've presented something and I do not understand it. I'd like to correct this."
/r/MensRights04/09/13 06:18 AM
2

Keep trying, man. I know that application uses 'hostess' and 'waitress' to try to run you off but some day people will come to see that men can be beautiful and appreciated aesthetically. Someone has to be the first to break in, you know? Why not you?
/r/MensRights04/09/13 03:08 AM
1

Implying that men, who approach sex differently than women, are more interested in casual affairs than relationships. This has really been the bane of my 20s Lots of women just want to sleep with me and think they're doing me a favor but what I really want is a relationship. At first everyone thought I was playing the field enough to be able to afford to turn those women down, and some of the women lied about their intentions, but I've wised up and now some think I'm gay.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 03:00 AM
2

Women and racial minorities want people to get a job based on their sex or race? I don't think most would, even if it was to their benefit. Most white men don't want to get a job because they're a white man but because they're best qualified and will do well. I suspect everyone wants that. My point is that quotas don't provide that, anti-discrimination laws and blind hiring provide that.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 12:31 AM
2

For certain groups of "we", that's true. I'm not sure what you're saying here. It's OK for some people to be hired because of their sex or race but not others or at least some people think so?
/r/MensRights03/09/13 11:24 PM
3

Fine, but the problem is for equally qualified applications. There's a significant amount of research that shows a female application is less likely to be selected, all else being equal. The studies generally show hiring managers identical resumes with some of them having female names and others having male names, and the resumes with male names are selected more often. Also, the resumes with traditionally white names get calls as well. This is a great argument for blind hiring, which has been o…
/r/MensRights03/09/13 08:21 PM
6

How do you know that less qualified men weren't getting hired just for being men already? If they are, I have no doubt that would be just as illegal in the EU countries as it is in the States. We should improve enforcement of that law if it's a problem. I've already seen numerous instances in this thread where people automatically assume that a woman would be significantly worse at business. I've seen several people say quotas will make it where less qualified women will be hired upon virtue of …
/r/MensRights03/09/13 06:51 PM
2

Probably before that due to transhumanism... or Skynet.
/r/MensRights03/09/13 01:16 AM
1

Useless line of inquiry. There aren't any objective measuring standards for privilege.
/r/MensRights03/09/13 01:14 AM
1

This reminds me if the Daniel Tosh joke about why white people should always be given an extra point in basketball. The punchline, in that case, was that white people are better off. I'm not sure it has been satisfyingly explained how, in this case, someone could come to the opposite conclusion.
/r/MensRights03/09/13 01:13 AM
2

I was specifically referencing the line you had quoted. It's a good example.
/r/MensRights02/09/13 09:57 AM
5

Even if that point was agreeable, it's presented in the most accusatory and insulting way possible. It assumes the reader is an undesirable man and then yells at them for being so. It has to be terribly disheartening to any serious reader.
/r/MensRights02/09/13 05:59 AM
6

And even asking permission to pay a compliment is sex. If not well received, well... There's someone I know around here that will connect the dots.
/r/MensRights02/09/13 05:55 AM
1

'Police' is too generic of a term here. Few departments have labs to test DNA. I collected at a department before and we were fastidious but then it gets sent off to the local bureau of investigation. This is almost certainly a state funding problem, though I'm not sure how a crime lab is budgeted.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 04:41 PM
1

What do you think they're saying is going to be practiced?
/r/MensRights01/09/13 04:17 PM
3

The pundits refuse to accept that and so, in their minds at least, they're saying these things about a man. The intentional, repeated use of 'he' shows that.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 04:16 PM
3

From what I heard, she didn't want the Army to pay, just the clearance to undergo the treatment. In prison, all medicine is regulated by an on hand nursing staff.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 04:15 PM
4

Would you mind putting in the definition of patriarchy, please? I often see what it isn't stated but not so often what it is.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 03:38 PM
11

And now what? OK, you were 15, so she gets the child. Like that? I never said anything about custody or anything other than how you were framing the conversation.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 03:13 AM
6

No child support (when he starts working at a later age), no relationship with his child. Why not?
/r/MensRights01/09/13 03:08 AM
11

In matters of child support can we please focus on the innocent child... Is a young person that has been raped no longer innocent or no longer a child?
/r/MensRights01/09/13 03:01 AM
2

But being ladylike is the enforce traditional gender roles and is part of patriarchy. It would be totally unacceptable for him to lecture her on propriety. I'm not sure it's sarcasm when you present a usual counter argument that you think it trite so... whatever that's called.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 02:42 AM
3

If this is the case, and if Julian Assange were convicted of rape by deception for saying he was wearing a condom when he wasn't, I wonder what implications this would hold for those women.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 03:03 AM
4

Generally speaking, yes. Self-defense for women often carries the inherent presumption they will be significantly smaller than their attacker. Even martial arts that were said to have been developed by/for/are popular with women hold that assumption. Not saying it's right, just that it's there. Personally, I think all self-defense should assume that the student will be the smaller fighter. Not often a criminal, looking to pull an easy crime, attacks someone much larger than they are. Integrating…
/r/MensRights29/08/13 06:53 PM
8

Could you source any of that in any sort of way?
/r/MensRights29/08/13 01:21 AM
3

That's intriguing. I wonder if/how we'd get numbers for this.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:55 PM
1

The MRM didn't make that grouping. I'd say OP is speaking to his conditions and audience, not trying to exclude a race from his considerations.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:12 PM
4

Feminism has begun to lay claim to all social justice and, because of that, it's going to become more difficult to talk about just one topic like men. "Women and minorities" is an often conjoined concept just like we sometimes see "women and children" used. In the topic of this conversation, I'd say it's clearly relevant.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 03:01 PM
37

We might not be talking about the same thing. I'm referencing the fact that there are female condoms, sponges, and diaphragms.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:52 AM
3

Studded are usually marketed as "for his pleasure." Ribbed are for hers.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:48 AM
17

I find it funny they mention "ribbed" conditions without noting those are usually marketed as "for her pleasure."
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:47 AM
24

And they have more options to boot.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:44 AM
4

They don't even pay for condoms in that post.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:43 AM
3

Even across the world, women constitute 50% (of the population) but own only 2% of the assets," he said. I can't think of a claim that strikes me as more obviously false than this one. It's just not possible for this to be the case. Rich American women aside, England currently has a female monarch. There is simply no way that she doesn't own, at least in deed, a staggering amount of assets.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 09:20 PM
2

Maybe not garbage but with a lack of vital controls and only 43 subjects, this study should definitely be relegated to "cursory."
/r/MensRights27/08/13 09:11 PM
12

Obviously on the exceedingly rare chance it turns out to be a "false accusation", the expulsion could be overturned. Is there an appellate process that reviews these convictions or is this an entirely hypothetical "could be overturned?" It seems unlikely to me that people defending the value of false convictions would be to concerned with appeals.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 09:08 PM
5

I never mentioned or implied sexuality. I think the attempt would be ridiculous, as you stated, and I find humor in ridiculousness. It would be like a dog trying to join a sewing circle. They don't even have thumbs!
/r/MensRights27/08/13 06:13 AM
6

I certainly didn't say they were. I said I want to see it.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 05:55 AM
0

You're claiming a relatively unremarkable statement (as reflected in the voting) is representative of the sub, is my point. It's stereotyping a group based on what is clearly a minority opinion. That is also your complaint about the poster. I really enjoy irony, so I replied to bring light to it.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 11:51 PM
1

This is all presumptive, such actions are immature. If we're going to talk about this as s sub, I'd love it if we could here from someone that actually does this.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 10:38 PM
1

Don't those women have to sign a release to be shown?
/r/MensRights26/08/13 10:35 PM
2

If you think sending dick pics to some woman you don't know is cool, you're a fucking child. No one I've seen is saying that and certainly no one being agreed with and upvoted.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 10:26 PM
1

What power is that?
/r/MensRights26/08/13 09:44 PM
0

At a current 4 upvotes? That's an oddly low bar for a relatively large sub.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 09:42 PM
2

And maybe Chinese men will, like us in the west, be treated to articles pointing out how shitty they are for not being worthy of getting married and thus denying women their basic right of a family life. Boy do those articles shiver me timbers. I've read many that are directed at men which vehemently insist no one has a right to love. I'm nearing 30 and, despite being told I'm attractive, funny, stable, and a 'nice guy,' I've spent most of my time single. There's a lot more going on to the curre…
/r/MensRights26/08/13 09:38 PM
1

According to my last Chinese teacher, the One Child policy is only encouraged and via tax incentives. I think that context is important to the conversation when we rightfully recognize (as you did) that we're ultimately talking about a financial decision.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 09:33 PM
2

The only solutions I see are a war to kill off all the D grade men and for the A grade women to take A grade foreign husbands. Or hopefully for gender equality to take place in China. I honestly hoped you were going to say "Thunderdome." In Chinese history, wouldn't the A grade women have presumably become concubines for an Emperor or is the author suggesting this is a brand new cultural phenomena, you think?
/r/MensRights26/08/13 09:30 PM
20

Now I want to see a man try to get into a breastfeeding circle.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 09:00 PM
34

Isn't the problem with feminism so often expressed here that they exclude classes of people based on personal traits rather than quality of ideas? You're attempting to do exactly that and it's good to see that's unwelcome.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 08:54 PM
2

Ah, but you see, basic addition is not discredited. Neither is the Socratic method. It is both the linear and logical foundation of Western Philosophy. I don't think all of the problems some have with philosophy is the way it's taught, but I think that's part of it. Problems with education can arise in any field. I don't think philosophy is uniquely afflicted by them in any way.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 08:23 PM
2

To be fair, there's a lot of really bad philosophy floating about. Philosophy departments shouldn't start their courses with chronological order - teaching about the discredited things first makes the field seem more foolish than it actually is. Some people also do math poorly and we start with the most simple concepts, like basic addition, in all subjects. I don't think the problem some have with philosophy is just the way it is taught.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 06:46 PM
1

Your comment is the first time in this thread of discussion that 'equality' has been mentioned. Isn't equality supposed to be the yield of diversity? My understanding is that diversity is good in that it gives us equality, not just for its own sake.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 05:51 PM
2

I'd be interested in hearing more about what "feminist thinking" is. It's different from other forms of thinking and, if so, in what way? There's something going on here when they say "feminist thinking" and I think asking about that would yield some good results.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 05:45 PM
4

Do they not teach rationality or skepticism or even the Socratic method anymore? One would learn all those things and more in the philosophy department. Unfortunately that discipline is under attack by quite a few groups. Feminism and Reddit both seem to have a number of people that are vocal about their issues with philosophy, one because it's patriarchal and the other because it isn't STEM.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 05:25 PM
1

Certainly some evidence that financial incentives can work. We should be asking if that's the route we want to take, though.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 05:03 PM
6

Every time I read a man talk about how terrible men are, I wonder if they exclude themselves (and how) or if they're self-loathing.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 04:59 PM
2

I tell people I don't identify with any groups if I can avoid it. I judge positions upon their own merit and don't like feeling compelled to accept any ideas in order to claim an allegiance.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 04:55 PM
18

Yep. Smacks of limited testing to prove a hypothesis with an agenda.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 04:46 PM
3

But also people who are overweight, smelly and have childish hobbies. That's your definition of nerd/geek?
/r/MensRights24/08/13 07:04 PM
4

I find the audacity of a campaign like this from a movement that supports circumcision (at least in part) because an unaltered penis is ugly to be staggering. I can't see this without thinking the message in total is 'we're beautiful, you're ugly. Accept us, change you. Protect us, discard you.' It might not be their intent but a premise of Patriarchy Theory is that intent and individual participation aren't relevant.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 05:07 PM
6

The purpose of sending a dick-pic is sexual. I'm sure you mean the purpose of sending a dick-pic on OkCupid (as the iconic example) is sexual. That's absolutely true. It's also limited to a group of people whom are attempting to establish a romantic (and presumably sexual) relationship. By being present on a dating site, those people have expressed an interest in sexuality on some level and on pursuing it on that very site. I'm not saying that wantonly sending dick-pics on OkCupid is right but l…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 03:27 PM
17

It just hit me hard that your sarcastic statement honestly is the exact reasoning that would be given. I do not think my mind will ever be able to wrap around the idea that we should treat people differently based upon their sex to end inequality. It's all just really depressing. Edit: Messed up an important word.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 03:14 PM
1

People develop feelings for one another all the time; attraction isn't something that's controlled (and the person may not even be aware of it, at first). Absolutely and we have ways to talk about that. 'Unrequited love' is a popular term for it. What, are we going to become the thought police and judge each example as being the former or the latter? Hopefully, as with any word or phrase, people are going to use it in the agreed upon way. I don't disagree with you to any intellectual point. The …
/r/MensRights22/08/13 10:26 AM
1

My worry is that they added two percentages together without accounting for overlapping victims.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 03:57 AM
2

Even if all that were true, though it isn't, then what? The author suggests that, by being men, you benefit and so owe but if being a man is enough, can you ever return the debt? What if I already have, by any given standard, but no one believes me or I have to keep constantly proving it? It's not a workable system and we shouldn't apply statistical facts to individual expectations. I have, so far as I am concerned, done more for women's rights than any feminist I have ever personally spoken wit…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 03:34 AM
5

Sharp eye. Even if someone were to say 'obsolete to society' they would have to exclude men from their definition of society. The possibility that makes me cringe the most is that the claim might mean men don't offer anything unique. That was the goal of feminism, right? Eliminate gender roles. Was the end game to make men obsolete?
/r/MensRights22/08/13 12:58 AM
5

I vehemently resist this redefinition of the friend zone. The term, as I've always understood it, it a condemnation of someone that is intentionally misleading in expressing romantic interest in order to get something. This is a real thing that happens and I don't want to see the ability to talk about it stolen.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 10:31 PM
9

Better yet, give fathers the same amount of time off and just call it paternal leave.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 04:17 AM
10

It's an interesting disconnect that she sees 'men' like this but climbs into bed with a man she's vehemently defended as not at all like that.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 04:39 PM
1

True but surely if you had simply asked her why she thought you were sexist, asked if you said anything to make her think that way, you could have gotten a more tangible accusation out of her or caused her opinion to fizzle. Quite possibly. I still don't keep friends that will attack me in that way.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 01:00 AM
1

At some point, people are going to be shamed no matter what they do on every angle of their lives. I think we're already there. We've given up a somewhat stifling set of social standards for a suffocating series of unpredictable complaints from anyone self-righteous enough to think they know best. Some people are beginning immune, I think plenty are killing themselves or becoming reclusive.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 04:56 PM
1

Say for example: 'you are being slothful' or 'you are getting fat'. . These are criticisms which do attack our character, but may do so rightly, and can be levied in the interest of helping someone live a better life. I'm cutting out the rest of what you said because it's irrelevant at best and missing my point entirely at worst. Your two quotes are perfect examples of exactly what I'm talking about and exactly where we're disconnecting. Both the things you said are claims of what a person is ob…
/r/MensRights19/08/13 02:49 PM
7

To this day I still walk around my car before getting in, watch the cars in my rear view to check for tails, and vary my route so I don't establish a routine that can be exploited. In restaurants I sit with my back to a wall facing the door, note all available exists, and keep note of how many people are around and where. Granted, I'm more cautious because of choices I've made in career but those careers are dominated by men. To generalize women as the gender that has to be alert and afraid is o…
/r/MensRights18/08/13 04:17 PM
6

I could see how, at a glance, exploiting perceived biological flaws in the opposite gender could be seen as awful. MGTOW, in a true sense of just doing what you feel is right for you regardless of expectations, seems pretty upright, though.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 04:10 PM
17

Men don't get the whole "better not wear x in general society because Schroedingers rapist" type of programming. I think men certainly get advice on making themselves hard targets. In fact, the advice given by the cop that inspired SlutWalk was essentially a retooling of standard hard target advice. Avoid areas where the crime is most likely to happen, don't do/wear things that may make you an appealing target, stay aware of your situation. I've had that briefing on avoiding everything from anth…
/r/MensRights18/08/13 03:40 PM
3

...It's not a comic? We're talking about a man (whom is presumably a mechanic) stopping on the side of the road to help a woman with a car that has broken down for free. We've specified that he's stopping because he thinks she's attractive. You're asserting that, because he thinks she's attractive, he wants sex as soon as possible and nothing more from her. I'm of the position that a man can talk to (and help) a woman he finds attractive not only because it's the right thing to do but also with …
/r/MensRights18/08/13 02:57 PM
1

Well, you're either saying that all any man ever wants, in this given scenario, is to have sex. In that case I'd just need to show one man that would stop to help a woman he found attractive in hopes to learn more about her to see if they were compatible for a long-term relationship. Alternatively, you could actually mean literally me, having switched off addressing my argument and to addressing me as a person. Either way I have to ask, what would you accept as evidence that any man (or me speci…
/r/MensRights18/08/13 02:46 PM
3

Then you're very incorrect and should feel bad your world view is based on a very aggressively mean stereotype.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 02:28 PM
2

I've found the disconnect. You think finding someone attractive means I only like, and will ever only like, one thing about them. Is that how it works for you when you find someone attractive, you like one trait and disregard everything else forever?
/r/MensRights18/08/13 02:13 PM
1

It would be more pleasant, since you share a common interest, which likely isn't the case here. I share at least one common interest with almost everyone. I like a lot of things. yes you do. I'm afraid that, when it comes to what I mean to do, you're just going to have to take my word on it. I noted that to give you another impetuous to explain your position because I really don't understand it. Since you still haven't explained, I guess it will be one of life's mysteries. Thanks for your time a…
/r/MensRights18/08/13 01:03 PM
26

I think a better solution would be for more women to take an active role in dating. Passively waiting to be noticed by the right guy seems to be the genesis of the problem.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 12:56 PM
97

If one reads enough of these kinds of articles they will come to the inescapable conclusion that women don't find men physically attractive at all. I wonder how that effects our boys.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 12:54 PM
2

Sure but that's a pretty different mental picture being painted now. I'm still curious why stopping to help someone wearing a t-shirt from a band you like is fine. I don't mean to put words in your mouth but all I can imagine is that you're saying attraction itself is threatening. If that's the case, well you honestly do have my sympathies in regards to whatever may have happened to make you feel that way.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 12:32 PM
3

They're vulnerable because they're alone and stuck at the side of the road. I suppose if the area doesn't have a taxi service, cops, and your legs don't work then you're stuck. I reject the notion that, if my car were to break down, I'd be a helpless victim in waiting. I never suggested that's what being attracted to someone entailed. You're right. You haven't made any solid claims as to why stopping to help someone you find physically attractive is as reprehensible as you've suggested it is. I'…
/r/MensRights18/08/13 01:37 AM
2

Finding someone who is in a vulnerable place, who needs help and who cannot get leave isn't the same as approaching someone in a bar where you think they might want such attention. Needing help doesn't necessitate vulnerability. Having a broken down car doesn't mean someone can't leave. Being attracted to someone doesn't mean using leverage or intimidation to get what you want. You're writing this like a crime novel. If my car was broken down and a woman stopped to help me, offered her number af…
/r/MensRights17/08/13 11:35 PM
7

They're a complete stranger, who you want to "build a connection with" (fuck), purely because you're sexually attracted to how they look... Yes. Finding someone attractive and wanting to spend time with them to get to know more about them in hopes of building a connection is literally the cornerstone of sexuality. Why is it so weird to you that it might not be well received? It's not that any particular person might not be interested that is weird, it's the idea that there's something wrong in a…
/r/MensRights17/08/13 10:44 PM
3

You should share constructively, there are a lot of people here that would love sources that supported a different perspective. I want to learn as much as possible, myself.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 10:28 PM
7

They can flirt with people any time, they believe they'll get further if they do something for them, which can come across as rather insulting and belittling. That's why, in all my friendships and relationships, I refuse to do a single thing for anyone. That's the right way to build connections... right? Seriously though, when did doing something for someone, even with the desire to build a connection, become a terrible thing?
/r/MensRights17/08/13 10:16 PM
1

I appreciate that the author takes the time to talk about how meaningful relationships are being stripped from men in the process of this paradigm shift.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 03:59 AM
1

Why do that? Is it necessary for some reason? To even have a conversation. If we start at zero assumptions than OP first needs to prove his/her existence. That's not possible, we just assume it. OP made them sound important to me, talked about having a long history of confidence and conversation. That's something many would value. Then that would be something to ask OP. I do not read it that way. I do not value someone that would bully me through accusations of sexism any more than a 'friend' th…
/r/MensRights15/08/13 05:17 PM
1

My problem with this is the final analysis. The author notes 80% of the messages from women to male Brazen Cheaters were incredulous but doesn't even do the same calculation from men to female Brazen Cheaters, let alone try to control for the wildly varying rate of messaging. It's a fact in a vacuum to advance a particular world view. That's abysmal science.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 05:11 PM
2

My guiding star isn't 'getting what I want.' Despite this portrayal of Nice Guys, I suspect most genuinely nice people are concerned with more than controlling the world around them.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 03:24 PM
7

You know, if being a child soldier is better than being a refugee. I'm not into trying to make those kinds of comparisons.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 03:08 PM
5

Now I just look confused and say "I thought you were coming over to buy me a drink."
/r/MensRights15/08/13 10:34 AM
2

I had an English teacher in middle school that would pit us boys against girls. If the boys won, she'd change the point tally and tell us girls are better and always win. The points affected our grades.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 01:08 AM
1

My interest in how men are treated was a slow burn. I've been informed I'm a Nice Guy since I can remember and always as a compliment to soften a criticism. I've had more luck than most, as I understand it, when it comes to dating but almost always in a way in which I'm being used. I'm a good recovery boyfriend, I'd say. What should have been my moment (but was just the seed bring planted) was when a girl that was flirting with me heavily admitted she knew I was going to ask her out on a particu…
/r/MensRights15/08/13 01:01 AM
1

You're dropping into the CD of mind-reading here. Making a claim you think is strong, sure, but you don't know why they're making it. To advance a political agenda is an assumption being made here. A number of assumptions are being made. I assume OP doesn't have a history of sexist comments, lives in a culture roughly comparable to mine, isn't lying, is human, exists, and a plethora more. A better approach would be to say that, given the context we have from the post, I'm making an unreasonable …
/r/MensRights14/08/13 09:33 PM
2

Claims describing a group of people, and making slippery statements like 'a lot,' need to drop out a statistical source instead of a single example. This is classic inductive reasoning. Worse yet, she didn't even ask the guy about the response to gather enough information for even one solid but anecdotal example. This article is little more than making shit up.
/r/MensRights14/08/13 08:15 PM
7

I wonder how many men here have had a woman walk up to them, ask for a free drink, then just take it and walk off. I can't imagine another context where that would be acceptable, let alone seemingly praised.
/r/MensRights14/08/13 08:05 PM
2

Wow, you don't even bother to inquire WHY they think you're sexist? In context of this statement, no. This is someone that has been a friend for years and whom I've previously been able to talk with about ideologies and it hasn't changed our friendship. Suddenly they're making the very strong claim that I am, at the core of my being, sexist so they can advance a political agenda. I know that it's possible we could talk through our disagreement but they're choosing not to. I'm not particularly co…
/r/MensRights14/08/13 02:25 PM
2

I wonder what she studied that this article relays the most useful thing she learned at university. At least she seemingly admits to being a second, or third, tier woman. If I was like the person she portrays in this article, I wouldn't want to date someone like me either.
/r/MensRights14/08/13 02:56 AM
1

I agree. In fact, the US military is open to women on all levels now. So everyone that believes this will join out of self interest... Right?
/r/MensRights13/08/13 10:24 PM
1

To answer your question, I'm one of the (I'm sure) many people here that has been raped by a woman, given the presented definition. I was drunk, she was completely sober. We had a mutual feminist friend at the time that blamed me aggressively for 'making her friend feel like a whore.'
/r/MensRights13/08/13 10:18 PM
8

When this happens to me I ask, "You've known me for a long time, do you think I'm sexist?" If they say yes, I say their agenda is more important than our friendship and move on. You don't want a friend that will smear you to maintain a world view.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 09:43 PM
1

I see your point more clearly now. I could see why those same people would be hung up on the idea that men attempt to create obligations to get sex, because that's how they view sex themselves.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 09:14 PM
1

I might have sounded like I was disagreeing. That's my mistake. I was saying that, even when I've met women that eschew the paradigm, it's not out of interest in fairness.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 08:09 PM
2

Every woman I've personally met that even gives token effort to splitting the bill does so in order to avoid feeling as if they 'owe' the man for the date. I've never had one say, when asked, they did it because making the man pay is unfair.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 06:40 PM
29

I didn't see any ass level of retraction, myself. If I were Shermer's lawyer, I'd be all over the author of this.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 06:00 AM
2

To agree with you emphatically, I'm surprised the focus is on obstacle courses (which are arguably much more relevant to real world demands) and not on arbitrary metrics like pushups.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 02:49 AM
2

Super Rape Apologist is the nemesis of Everything Is Rape, right?
/r/MensRights08/08/13 05:01 PM
2

I used to go there. I'm surprised I never heard of it. None of those preachers were really that confrontational, from what I saw.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 01:56 AM
15

I played clubs in Nashville on the weekends during high school. You'd think that was 'talented' but there wasn't much benefit from it. This tweet is a projection of a fantasy ideal that person wishes for, not anyone's actual experience.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 03:45 PM
12

If a heartbroken woman holds up a boom box in the rain outside her ex's bedroom, the only sound it makes is the thud of a gavel issuing a restraining order. ...what? This is so far removed from the reality of who is statistically more likely to be served with a restraining order (or charged with a crime) that I had to immediately stop reading to check the numbers. I can't even find a study of how many men apply for, and are protected from women by, restraining orders. Here are just a few of the …
/r/MensRights06/08/13 02:08 PM
3

Lunatic is ableist? I don't think lunatic is an actual medical diagnosis. I don't get that one.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 06:28 PM
1

Never claimed she did teach them to act a particular way or not. Just noting she supports her daughter being mean for reasons perfectly applicable to her son. She supports him being nice. Two different standards with the reason being 'because Patriarchy.' To me, as a reader, she didn't establish sufficient justification.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 02:04 AM
10

Unfortunately, I don't think feminism has a metric for success. I'm not sure what, if anything, would signify the end of The Patriarchy.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 09:02 PM
1

Are there not creepy women that will exploit or harm a guy that's too nice?
/r/MensRights04/08/13 06:50 PM
1

Thank you for the response and I'd love to see that report, if you can find it again. I didn't mean to say the cause of hating police is hating men. I think both positions are possibly based upon some of the same general ideas like attribution of hyperagency, expectations of aggression/violence, skewed reporting/definitions, apex fallacy, and so on. So, the same general kind of thinking. It may or may not be applied to both groups in the same way anyone can hate one group of people but not anoth…
/r/MensRights04/08/13 06:44 PM
1

I only got 100. Not being rich or religious really messed up my score.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 03:10 PM
4

Not just be violent by proxy, attractiveness has been documented as inspiring people to trust and assist another unreasonably. Bring attractive may be more beneficial in many cases by allowing the attractive person to avoid conflict entirely. Evolutionarily speaking, that's a huge benefit.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:45 PM
2

This is good to keep in mind for either position in this conversation. I wonder if it's possible to get any statistical information about this.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 04:34 PM
4

I've been punched by more women than men. Those hypothetical posters should explain that to everyone.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 04:14 PM
0

At least $7 million, at $200 each and having done 35,000 procedures. That's certainly more than a lifetime's income for the average person.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 03:53 PM
1

I meant to ask if anti-feminist and pro-men was mutually exclusive. Grapeban phrases it as if they are, the MRM is cloaked as one because it can't be both, presumably.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 01:43 PM
2

If we had some sort of statistical claim for frequency of corruption, I'd believe that. We can find examples of any group doing bad things but how much time we spend focusing on them is determined by a series of factors. Frequency but also desired narrative, prejudice, severity, and so on. I'd say many people see the news, see how many reports are about police corruption, and assume that frequency in reporting reflects frequency in occurrence but I don't think that explains the hate completely. …
/r/MensRights03/08/13 01:41 PM
1

Our disconnect might be in timeline. As I read the story, the man came up, touched the child, the mother immediately got between them and disapproved, he left directly (while talking smack), the end. I simply don't see where and what specifically she was looking to have done and I certainly can't imagine anything that wouldn't extend the encounter unnecessarily. If the story involved him coming back, refusing to leave, or disregarding the mother's instructions, I might wonder why no one helped. …
/r/MensRights03/08/13 01:29 PM
6

The author stated how there were several witnesses, but no one said anything. I simply don't understand what a stranger would need to say that the mother didn't to ensure the child's physical safety. Somebody should still step in, children should know that people are generally good and will stand up for whats right. This is where I simply think we have different perspectives on the event. If it were my child, I would already be teaching him that. I'd also be teaching him that his esteem and pref…
/r/MensRights03/08/13 05:55 AM
3

Personal conjecture: police officers are generally seen as hyper masculine. A woman inside that profession is assumed to be more manly (violent, aggressive) than women usually are. I think a lot of hate for police officers mirrors or intertwines with hatred for men.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 04:29 AM
5

Sure a person did, the child's mother. That's the exact person you'd expect to do something, too. When she did, the man left. I'm not sure what the author was looking for but would the same complaint exist if it had been the child's father doing the exact same thing, getting between the child and the threat to state unequivocally the behavior was unacceptable?
/r/MensRights03/08/13 04:11 AM
2

I'm single simply because I don't ask women out. The culture of men pursuing has never say right with me, for a number of reasons, so I just don't engage. I'm disappointed by the simplistic view of that dynamic in every critique of the single man.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 01:17 AM
3

Are they mutually exclusive?
/r/MensRights03/08/13 12:52 AM
1

Generalizations aren't limited to circumstance of birth. Fans of Metal shouldn't be generalized in this way any more than it would be acceptable to do to Mexicans. If someone likes Metal, that's all we know given that information. If someone is Mexican, all we know is that they're born in Mexico. When we know someone's a cop, all we know is what they do for work. Saying they spend their time raping prostitutes, stealing teenager's drugs, and shooting unarmed black men in the back because we can …
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:37 PM
2

I think that argument, "women are punished for being women and men are punished for acting like women" is informed by the idea "women are human beings, men are human doings." Men can't genuinely be those things (whatever punishable traits are being used) because they can't be anything, they only emulate because they are only what they do. It's not a framing of the issue I accept.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:00 PM
1

Then we'd use that same argument against most examples of 'male' tyranny.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 06:44 PM
2

A source to refute would depend on what the original author means by 'vast' majority. Over 2/3rds, maybe?
/r/MensRights30/07/13 06:36 PM
1

Here's another article on the topic. Unfortunately it appears to have been dismissed at Grand Jury so there isn't an official judge's statement. The claim seems to be that the officer didn't, but should have, recognized Gelman as a BOLO. The statement "cops did not have a specific charge of saving him from Gelman" means they weren't on a personal protection assignment specifically for Lozito. They were where they were supposed to be, protecting the operator at a stop, and responded when they saw…
/r/MensRights28/07/13 04:06 PM
0

You're generalizing in a way that's no different from racism or sexism.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 12:43 AM
3

"But the thing that’s really, really funny is that people -- well, young white men in their late teens to early twenties -- are mad about this. Very, very upset. They feel that they are being unjustifiably targeted for something they took no part in (i.e. the ongoing oppression of women)." When the author mentioned this, then moved right along, I stopped and went to the end. Murder culture... is that a thing?
/r/MensRights27/07/13 02:52 PM
3

Also, you can save time and money by having a standard trainees can come prepared for. I may have no idea how fast I'd complete a given obstacle course but I can know how many push ups and sit ups I can do. If people that can't do it don't test then I can cut my candidate pool drastically before I even start the hiring process.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 06:19 AM
3

Especially considering she notes that he had graduated by the time she made the complaint. The university couldn't do anything even if they wanted to, since their punishment is limited to expulsion.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 03:36 PM
20

Servers. I had a female friend that was very insistent that it is always servers.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 03:18 PM
39

is the "perspective" that a subculture notoriously unsafe for women is fully of shitty people? Geek culture is "unsafe" for women? Not unwelcoming or even demeaning but unsafe? I'm not sure I'm willing to board that train without some convincing. I picked just that out because I think it's the root of the debate. Geek culture is certainly not more unsafe than the culture surrounding sports or the American university Greek system. I'm honestly forever baffled as to why the focus is so narrowed to…
/r/MensRights26/07/13 05:52 AM
5

Not when you frame the conversation as being about 'people not listening when things are debunked' instead of about the particular topic at hand and the ramifications of believing the now defunct research. Really, I believe OP wants to talk about the evidence that gender is not entirely a social construct and how disproving this research supports that.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 11:47 PM
2

So you are saying that you don't think men and women have differences in their nature? Obviously not, I even gave an example of a difference we can and have documented. I believe we're drifting too far from gainful conversation. Thank you for your time.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 02:28 AM
1

Except that you're saying human nature and women's nature are different. It may be the case, like the effects testosterone have on the body, but you need to source it.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 01:11 AM
8

What is problematic is the possibly that some might lift the phrase "emotion-driven cravings" to basically assert that women are strange, frail creatures who defy logic and are just silly. The person you're responding to is noting the author does exactly that to men by saying that 'ego-taming' is what is successful with men, implying it's because men (unlike women) are egotistical. The study doesn't say that at all but that men are successful when they change their bonding habits by focusing on …
/r/MensRights22/07/13 05:25 PM
5

Your claim is essentially that women lack empathy or the ability to reason within Kantian-style ethics. If that's true, you should source it instead of just declaring the world to be so.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 04:20 AM
0

I'd assume that man shops at that store. You can find me at the store every other week, at least. Odds of seeing two flat tires at some point are pretty good. Odds of still being a decent person between both instances are also pretty good.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 09:44 PM
-3

I don't know, man. If you have your heart set on jumping a fence plastered with 'warning, electric fence may kill you' signs, I may insist you don't. In fact, may insist a lot. That's just being a decent person, I think.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 09:41 PM
2

This was kind of noted in the blog. The author states men are singled out because she doesn't like them.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 06:42 PM
1

to the prosecutions own witnesses saying Martin made it home and went back to "get that cracker". It's not really relevant, so it would entirely be a favor, but I'd really like a source for this. My friends have been asking me about this case relentlessly and I'd love to be able to flesh it out more. I've been working during the new and coverage.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:35 AM
1

Not usually being attracted to people of a particular race has never been claimed as racism, that I've heard, but I'd be willing to hear an argument for it.
/r/MensRights15/07/13 05:44 AM
1

Mind sourcing this? Regardless, dating preferences do not necessarily indicate racism.
/r/MensRights15/07/13 12:34 AM
4

My insurance asks me how many miles a year I expect to drive and factors that into my rates. That being considered, it sounds like a penis tax.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 12:52 AM
8

I'd say that student is right. Those standards, when laid out like that, don't even doing like guilty until proven innocent. They just sound like guilty.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 12:49 AM
1

If there were some studies that showed women feel loneliness more acutely, I'd love to read them.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 11:39 PM
2

Correction, attributes longer sentences to less privilege. That's my very serious mistake.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 10:25 PM
2

I would certainly say that's the traditionalist view of men.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 02:26 AM
5

Chinese labor camps?
/r/MensRights08/07/13 06:37 PM
1

If you're Kantian, sure; always. Even if not, definitely when it's to keep a populace misinformed.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 02:32 AM
2

FGM would be the logical response, given the context.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 02:35 PM
3

That's what I came to say. I was in Afghanistan and, other than the warlords and a few of their crew, no one has it good. I mean, I can not imagine a country that would be worse for anyone to live in.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 02:33 AM
2

Do they even have separate sci-fi and fantasy sections? They're generally condensed. I've fairly recently developed an interest in writing and I've found that sci-fi (the classic young men's genre) is actually one of the most difficult to publish through traditional means. Publishing sci-fi short stories (to appeal to a demographic less likely to sit still for long periods) is considered to be almost impossible currently; At least, from what I've read. I can't say I have first hand experience be…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:12 PM
1

We'd have to compare against suicide rates among the atheist population with our subset excluded. It wouldn't be perfect control but, with a large enough sample size, it would be something.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 11:46 PM
3

I held this exact position for quite some time, up until yesterday. I've had to waver as we do potentially have a way to measure this. We'd have to see how many atheist rape victims committed suicide after their victimization. The atheist part is important in that they believe neither in an afterlife nor consequences for the suicide beyond being dead. It's not perfect, there's still a very strong social stigma, but the fact that we don't have even most atheist rape victims rushing to kill themse…
/r/MensRights02/07/13 10:36 PM
2

That would seem to support the premise that being dead is better than having been raped. I was thinking about that just yesterday and it is incomprehensibly ridiculous.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 09:47 PM
2

I'm really interested in knowing how this claim is justified.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 08:02 PM
6

I'd expect that, for someone sensitive to gender issues and language, he'd pick a better word to describe criminally violent men than 'dick.'
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:55 PM
6

Errr... There are four very efficient ways to prevent pregnancy for women: -Condoms -Tubal Ligation -Hormonal Birth Control in pill, injection, and ring form -IUD, hormonal or non-hormonal If you don't trust your partner, use any of these. If you do trust him you are willingly taking a risk. Note: Now it's an anti-abortion argument and one that is openly disdained. It's meant to end the conversation by diverting from the thesis of the argument, one person should not be obligated to give their re…
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:22 PM
4

Unfortunately in the last century many American men abandoned honest courtship and began exploiting a gaping weakness in the companionate system. Encouraged by the media of film, music and television, they increased their short-term chances of successfully finding a heterosexual partner by pretending to be emotionally compatible. Yeah... I'm going to need a source for that.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 08:54 PM
1

I spent quite a bit of my evening thinking about this and I have a personal hypothesis. 'Open Letters' like this aren't meant to be read by the person they're written to, or people like them, at all. Give it a read again (or not, I'm not the internet police) and notice what things are given detailed descriptions. They build setting, conflict, and sexual / suspense tones. Some choice examples are... That park is one of my favorite places to go, with all of the trees providing shade over the roads…
/r/MensRights01/07/13 06:10 PM
9

in a practical sense an average man has a better chance getting a date than an average woman. Because the 'average' man is in the top 20% of men, according to this.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 04:18 PM
1

It would sound much less ridiculous if it said "What if some men did X, some other men did Y, and some yet completely different men wanted to be loved by a woman," huh? It's the way the author makes men sound heterogeneous that allows for the apparent contradiction in behaviors.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 04:13 PM
1

I don't believe that, neither traditionally nor post-industrially. Post-industrially, relationships do not need to be about provision and, because of that, non-traditional arrangements such as gay marriage make sense, as well. In that case, women bring what any partner would, love. Their gender is entirely irrelevant other than preference of the partner.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 04:17 AM
2

Man as provider, woman as provided for is undesirable in a relatively safe, post-industrial culture.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 07:53 PM
2

My personal opinion, you're still playing the game by asking 'as a man...' That's the problem, I don't think most people here (myself included) want to 'fix' the traditional system and so we shouldn't even be asking things like 'what it means to be a man' as if that's a condition that matters. When I consider what I have in common with an individual, gender shouldn't be a large part of that and, if we were equal, it wouldn't be.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:48 PM
1

If you're someone with osteoporosis, why would your odds of getting it matter to you or justify a cost difference?
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:34 AM
2

Things should be voted up because they're worth discussing in some way. I often upvote things that are incorrect because they have generated good discussion.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:21 AM
2

The department I was in (a US university) did have courses such as Recent Continental Philosophy, Aesthetics, Philosophy of Music, et c. A number of those weren't doing anything we'd consider to be truly analytic but I agree that doesn't mean they're 'bad'. I just find that many people have a misunderstanding of what philosophy, at it's best, fundamentally is. Historically, philosophy is subjected to some of the most scrutiny because it doesn't necessarily require eight years of higher education…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:19 AM
55

Making it basically no different from philosophy or any other non-science. Philosophy comes up in this a lot and I always insist on putting on the brakes. Philosophy is the genesis of science, the subject that all areas of knowledge start as until we can collect enough data to create a foundation solid enough to support a more commonly understood scientific structure. Philosophy should not be confused for a pseudo-science or a discipline that isn't peer reviewed and founded on logic and evidence…
/r/MensRights25/06/13 10:07 PM
1

I was labeled a nice guy (not Nice Guy) long ago by my peers and I'm coming to resent the title no matter how it's used. When I first heard it is was with an implied 'but.' "You're such a nice guy..." It was used to soften incoming rejection, which happens to everyone. Now it's an insult. Some women called me nice, some other women said guys that are like that are really just jerks. I feel like I had no hand in my own reputation. It's a bias of a perception and entirely divorced from any reality…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 02:33 AM
12

The essence of it, when used as an insult. If she were a man, she'd have immediately been imagined with a neckbeard and fedora.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 12:59 AM
1

If a date is driving home, I'll often ask her to text me so I know she got home safe. I've never considered that controlling behavior. I'll have to think on it.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 06:29 PM
1

Nope, he lived, they divorced, he lost half of what he made overseas, I'm sure, the end. He had two children with different women before my mother, wasn't given custody of either. Military men are rarely given custody because they have often missed a year or two of their child's life, making them the noncustodial parent by default. Another of many problems.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 04:57 PM
2

My personal opinion, we shouldn't incentivize marriage or children through the tax system. If we left marriage as a purely social or religious institution then that would be as much as we, the government, could fix. We, the social body, are always going to conflict and if like it is groups with an agenda just accepted that.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 02:53 PM
3

I have three brothers. The oldest supported his wife for years as a sailor while their three children were young. After his enlistment he became a stay at home dad while attending college, she worked. This arrangement was explicitly agreed to. Even though their youngest child is the result of infidelity, he got over it and treats her just as amazingly as the other kids. She now wants a divorce, she's dissatisfied with a house husband. My middle brother is disabled due to genetic diseases. He has…
/r/MensRights20/06/13 03:10 AM
1

The idea that someone could believe that while England has a Queen blows my mind. She alone likely owns more than that.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 02:10 AM
5

Mind expanding on what it means?
/r/MensRights19/06/13 09:23 PM
2

We spent some time discussing it in Feminist Epistemology. The best I can figure, the primary goal currently is to reconcile abortion being the legal killing of a living human being inside an explicit philosophical framework. I think it has serious problems, personally. The logic used would allow us to kill those we already consider to be people.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 06:13 PM
2

It certainly is founded on the idea that the presence of women is a gift to men and that women need to be rewarded for enduring the presence of men.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:58 AM
6

If this ever happens, I have a brother in prison that I'd hope would be willing to contribute.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:09 AM
28

It's meant to be indicative of commonly accepted attitudes. While we can find examples of just about any random craziness, it doesn't hurt to gauge and discuss what are presumably common shared experiences. We'd be having a very different conversation if this said something like "Anyone know of any room mates? Preferably white since I own expensive things." It would be unconscionable. I don't think many of us would be able to relate to blatantly advertised racism like that. Even growing up in th…
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:03 AM
5

When I've seen this complaint, it has generally been in threads to an article bashing 'Nice Guys' or threads in response to 'feminist dating advice.' The argument, as I understand it, isn't that women prefer one thing or another but that many feminists claim to speak for women and, under that guise, offer contradictory advice on how men should be vs in what ways men are attractive. The root problem, as I see it, is that many feminists speak as though they are authorities on women, as if a person…
/r/MensRights18/06/13 07:02 PM
2

Sorry, per this other comment in this thread. The lifetime numbers for men are still much lower (rape + sexual violence for women is 75 million v.s. 26.5 million for men), even though the 12 month "made to penetrate" and "rape" numbers are the same. No one has linked the numbers I generally see on here directly so I'm operating under the idea these numbers are correct, they seem to come from that study, mostly because it's inconsequential to the point I'm making. Women having a higher rate of li…
/r/MensRights18/06/13 06:52 PM
1

Sadly, she blows the claim with the conjunctive. It does seem to be the case more women are victims of rape. With the same number of instances, that just means men that are raped are more likely to be raped repeatedly. Neither of those conditions say anything about perpetrators. It's entirely possible a few men are performing many rapes upon many different women, among other possibilities.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 06:27 PM
6

The lifetime numbers for men are still much lower (rape + sexual violence for women is 75 million v.s. 26.5 million for men), even though the 12 month "made to penetrate" and "rape" numbers are the same. Given that fact, I have no problem believing that men are more likely to rape than women are. Well, we should define what we're talking about. It seems clear from the numbers that, if men are raped as often as women but fewer men have been raped, the same men are being raped repeatedly. We don't…
/r/MensRights18/06/13 06:25 PM
2

The complaint isn't the preferences, it's the hypocrisy of attempting to change men then shaming the result and hypocrisy doesn't have to be illegal to be fucked up. You seem to agree with the premise but I think you're missing the importance of social complaints. Many preferences are learned and willingly embraced, that's why the hypocrisy is a problem, it's a willing double standard from a group that claims to fight them.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 03:22 PM
2

I can tell you that some people are working on an intuitive, rather than logical, ethics that they claim to be 'women's ethics.' Ethics was my focus, and I wasn't very interested in gender issues at the time, so I can't give any other examples without some research.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 03:05 PM
3

I was going to snag all the times the author contradicts herself, and they are many, but I think today will be a positive day for me. Instead, don't read anything but the following, which contradicts the body of the article anyway, then have a great day! The truth is, attraction is a mystery. You can do everything 'right' and still get rejected. You can do everything 'wrong' and still get a date. The only thing we can all do is show up fully as ourselves and see if there's a match. So show up as…
/r/MensRights17/06/13 02:30 PM
27

This sounds like your first appearance. In the county I worked, the judge will only take a plea of Not Guilty right now and will then immediately assign you a lawyer. That will be it, assuming you're American.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 01:41 PM
41

“In my opinion it’s paid rape,” she said. “Women are not consenting in their heart.” The woman that said this managed four brothels. I think it's interesting they call the clients 'johns' and she was called a 'madam' instead of a 'pimp.' For an article that's sensitive to the idea that Asian massage parlors may be developing a stereotype about Asians, it sure doesn't have any qualms developing gender stereotypes and specifically negative ones for men. If this article were to stop calling Tania F…
/r/MensRights16/06/13 07:25 PM
1

I don't think that's quite the claim. The probably didn't seem to be not enjoying it but the way it was described. I still think calling that misogyny is complete and utter bullshit but it's important to get the point right while refuting it so you don't get ignored by those that agree. Not enjoying the taste, look, or feel of something doesn't mean you hate it or the people it's attached to.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 12:33 AM
1

I personally suspect there are more men in jail / there are more single mothers / there are more breadwinner fathers accounts for most of the difference.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 10:29 PM
1

Totally correct, Americans would be center. We spell things differently sometimes.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 03:40 PM
15

''I want young girls and women to be able to feel like they can be included in public life and not have to face questioning like the questioning I faced yesterday,'' I think a lot of Patriarchy Theory is a symptom of 'the grass is greener.' This quote might not mean that it's fine for men to be questioned in the same way but that the author assumes men aren't. It needs to be made clear that men are subjected to just as much criticism as women and that is a part of public life.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 02:56 PM
1

If our current systems aren't having their intended effect, we should certainly reform them. What we shouldn't do is institute yet another program, adding to complexity and bureaucracy while limiting scope to a small subset of people that need help for an arbitrarily defined reason. If a person (in this case a child) needs help, their parents number, sex, gender, marital status, sexual preference, and any other factor I can think of seem to be wholly irrelevant. Tying our assistance to any of th…
/r/MensRights14/06/13 09:37 PM
1

We have systems, such as WIC, that exist for this exact reason. Saying that every single woman that decides to have a child without a man's support needs government money seems paternalistic and insulting. We could imagine a woman, rich due her own work, having a child when a man has abdicated fatherhood.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 03:49 PM
2

Non-Gawker link to the article being referenced. In this article, I find it interesting that the author complains about Mr. Finkel not putting his "indisputably geeky world championship title" in his profile in order to warn her. On the scale of injustices this isn't very high, I admit, but it's a clear expression of hypoagency in dating and that is certainly's a men's issue. Mr. Finkel asked her out, paid for their date, and was honest (if understated or modest) when the topic came up naturally…
/r/MensRights13/06/13 08:40 PM
4

That's intriguing. I'd like to see a post with that article and the text copied from the article it references (since it's a Gawker site) so we could discuss it without hijacking this post. I know it's old but there's new context to it with recent events, I'd think.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 06:26 PM
3

The "entitlement" is that she has to put up with something she doesn't want and still gets attention. But the attention is only caused because there's so many guys who don't consider "what does she want from me?" You're still framing this as the hypothetical woman being acted upon and the man being the agent. That's the entitlement, the complaint that people aren't giving you enough consideration while acting. Not having to act but still expecting certain results (or lamenting not getting those …
/r/MensRights13/06/13 02:47 AM
1

Hmm, I clicked the three top links on /r/OkCupid and they were all about feminist topics. That's odd, I didn't figure that sub would be so political.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 01:35 AM
1

Women do get a lot of unwanted messages. Research it more. I don't think the point is that they don't. The reference to entitlement seems to be this: Many women on OkCupid get a lot of messages that they do not find desirable. Some of these women then complain that OkCupid isn't working because they get those messages. At it's core, the complaint is "people aren't doing enough of what I want for me" and that's the entitlement because feeling entitled to something (as I understand it) means feeli…
/r/MensRights13/06/13 01:09 AM
0

I agree completely and that's entirely counter to Patriarchy Theory. Generally, feminists are identified by their belief in Patriarchy Theory; it is the central tenet of the ideology. What I'm wondering is how you can reject it while still being feminist. Do you find something else to be the defining trait?
/r/MensRights12/06/13 08:29 PM
1

Hi! I've read that you don't subscribe to Patriarchy Theory. That being the case, what would you say is the essence of feminist ideology, the thing you believe that makes you call yourself feminist?
/r/MensRights12/06/13 06:31 PM
2

So, one might very well argue that a woman would feel threatened and need to engage in self defense in that situation, and it's not unethical, and it is within the law. This is a huge mischaracterization of self-defense laws, as I suspect you know. You can't just 'feel threatened' and defend yourself, instead it must be "an honest and reasonable belief that another's use of force was unlawful and that the defendant's conduct was necessary to protect himself." As a lawyer, she'd certainly know ca…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 05:02 PM
3

Also waged the most successful anti-smoking campaign in history, interestingly enough. The quote given was definitely meant to deflect criticism, legitimate or not.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 03:55 PM
1

It's worth knowing that, even if his entire quote was true, it doesn't address the truth of feminism. We can conceive of a movement that is non-violent and educates people with the goals of 'safety, social welfare, X crisis centers, refuge support, and law reform' but that is still malicious. To be clear, I'm about to say something that I don't mean as an equivalency or comparison, just a thought experiment. We could imagine a totalitarian regime that is attempting to reach a state of zero crime…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 02:50 PM
1

In the video, she references hearing people laugh. That seemed to be what clued her in.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 02:39 PM
2

Or a murder joke... Possibly a 'that's what I say when I give my dog a bath' joke. One liners like 'it will all be over soon' are so incredibly common and used in so many contexts that saying they're always a rape joke tells more about the mind of the person making that claim. Could you imagine a mother trying to take a toy from her misbehaving child saying "give it to me or I'm going to take it" and someone saying it was a rape joke? It's something people say while using force, for sure, but no…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 02:15 PM
1

That is how most arrests occurred in the last county I worked, at least; people voluntarily going to booking on an outstanding warrant.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 09:45 AM
1

Our definitions of self defense agree. Other than disagreeing over if "reasonableness" is objective or not, I've lost what we're debating.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 12:26 AM
3

No, it wouldn't. If Mr. Jones happened to be a paranoid schizofreniac, he would believe people all around him was trying to attack him. That doesn't give him a right to go around punching people, just in case. That's why the law reads 'what a reasonable person would do' and that's what I said. Whether or not he had a right to defend himself is an objective determination. Throwing a drink isn't justification for punching someone, just no chance. It is not at all objective. It's subjective, the st…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 11:16 PM
4

Yeah, I suppose without the context of where I talk about what a reasonable person would think is occurring, or the part where the person I'm responding to says "I dunno, though", then it probably does look like I need a breakdown on self defense. What's I'm saying, explicitly and without relying on context, is that it doesn't matter much what she was trying to do or what it looks like to us as outside observer through a third person perspective. If a reasonable person in Mr. Jones' position wou…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 10:44 PM
7

That should make it a sufficient claim for self defense. What she intended to do doesn't matter much compared to if a reasonable person in the victim's position would perceive a serious threat. That's part of the problem, unfortunately. Some people think any man seeing any woman as a threat is not reasonable.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 10:30 PM
22

Even if that's the case, he wasn't charged under either of those laws. The judge refused a plea bargain that had been agreed upon by all parties (to include herself moments before) because she didn't 'like his attitude.' That's not a feature I want in my legal system, that a judge can disregard the prosecution, defense, and good reason because they feel offended or insulted.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 04:21 AM
5

Rape has historically been about forcefully taking someone's agency, I agree. This doesn't do that, through either drugs or violence, and I think we'd have a hard time showing a person intentionally misrepresented themselves for sex. Even if they did, we'd have to establish which sorts of misrepresentation are powerful enough to remove agency. Misrepresentation affecting agency isn't something we should dismiss entirely, it's something that happens during various expressions of hypoagency. I thi…
/r/MensRights10/06/13 04:42 PM
5

I'm sorry, a false rape accusation is not as bad as rape. This is a qualitative claim that can not be measured in any way and does not add to the conversation.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 02:36 PM
1

How do you rationalize that, do you hate yourself, as a woman, or do you believe you're exceptional enough to be exempt?
/r/MensRights10/06/13 12:40 PM
2

I have a friend that just graduated law school in Singapore, you're just on the surface. Only men can are subject to corporal punishment, mandatory military service, and I think the death penalty as well. She told me she's avoiding criminal law because of the inequality.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 12:30 PM
12

Bill O'Reilly not only tells people to shut the fuck up, he'll cut their mic. Don't get me wrong, I'm not for either party, but lets not pretend that any group is immune to doing absurd things.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 03:09 AM
3

Asking why something is like it is, and recognizing there are causes to things, is not a defense but an attempt to understand. We should do that with everything we can in life.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 07:12 PM
3

I think men are growing weaker over time because society tells them it's ok to do things like sit behind a computer screen masterbating and watching anime is ok. Now we're talking. So you're saying hover hand is a new or growing phenomena and its cause is men spending less time being social. A number of people here likely agree with that assessment, once they can get past your delivery, and think that the reason men are becoming less social isn't pornography or computers but the fact that societ…
/r/MensRights09/06/13 06:43 PM
6

Even if we accept your position as true, what do you suppose is the cause: It's always been like this or the 'pussy' birth rate is increased over time? If it's new, we should contend with the possible causes and that's what this thread is aiming to do, it seems.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 03:54 PM
1

An article popped her recently about exactly this, men hating modest clothing because it denies the male gaze; the exact opposite of the argument we often see. I think it's a great example of how Patriarchy Theory is not falsifiable which is a huge problem.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 02:49 AM
8

Telling people to "man-up" rarely gets a positive response here. If someone's going to tell me what it is to be a man they better have some stellar man credentials but people that are secure in themselves rarely feel the need to tell others how to be.
/r/MensRights08/06/13 08:35 PM
2

It seems like this is one part that a lot of women don't get it. How hard it is to approach a woman as a man. I have tried very diligently to express this to my female friends. I am of the opinion that the doctrine "straight white men are the default" has led to a belief that everyone is familiar enough with the 'default' to disregard experiences that come from that point of view. I have bought sisters of long term friends drinks / held conversations with them / offered them my own jacket when t…
/r/MensRights08/06/13 08:32 PM
2

There was once a time when men used to be real men... There are of course certain men out there who still have their affairs in order, but we are few in number. Nothing makes me hot under the collar more than someone that does this. "Every member of a group I belong to sucks... well, almost all of them, except for me and the people like me but we're super rare and special." Nothing sounds more egotistical and self-righteous to the ear. If part of being a man is respecting each other, as the auth…
/r/MensRights08/06/13 05:12 AM
2

In this video, it seems to me the person being quoted was hedging their position a lot thinking that if they said 'we could talk about men getting raped in a detached, technical sense' they might be able to speak without raising the hackles of their audience but it was instead taken as weakness in their position. It's interesting to see so I know not to do that. If I have to discuss it, I'll stick on target. Men get raped, the definition of rape makes it look like a lot less than it is, and that…
/r/MensRights07/06/13 11:00 PM
2

I can't imagine that, if you're a man that has been raped and you try to bring it up in a conversation about rape, the statistics showing that it was less likely to happen to you matter. I suspect that the insistence on telling people that are part of your conversation "that's not what we're talking about now" causes quite a few victims to feel shut down and cast out.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 10:33 PM
1

... so, you're not identifying as a feminist anymore?
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:57 PM
1

Then why call yourself one instead of just making up your own unique word for whatever views you're trying to represent?
/r/MensRights07/06/13 02:01 PM
1

My introduction to harassment as entirely dependent on the perception of the victim was in the Army and I honestly thought it was a joke, then absolutely ridiculous, of course. It's still a ridiculous concept in this context and I'm sad this person says it condescendingly.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 09:19 AM
4

... might not have been written by James Joyce but I don't see the dumb part. The rebuttal seems to be logically consistent, at least. If partially shown muscles are an implied threat, because they can be used for violence, then partially shown breasts can be seen as implied seduction.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 09:11 AM
1

Straw man alert: Not the slightest idea. There's a serious problem with focusing on irrelevant fallacies instead of a coherent rebuttal in semi-philosophical debate. Happens all the time.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 09:05 AM
1

You have a problem with a title being used to refer to the opinions of a very large and diverse group which is composed of individuals whose positions fall on a continuum rather than a set point? I'd say this is true of any group and it's why we use defining traits to label groups. Two woman can have literally nothing in common other than their sex and they can still be properly labeled women. Two people of Irish decent can have nothing else in common but still be labeled Irish. The question we …
/r/MensRights07/06/13 02:54 AM
1

I watch it with a female friend. She cheers for red and I cringe for the "blosers." It's definitely so redundant as to be unenjoyable but the other seasons I've seen are the same way. I'm not sure anything nefarious is happening but I'm not happy with the gender war concept either.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:50 AM
6

This is full of spoilers. As with any interpretation of art, tells just as much about the viewer. This is obviously bad for women, who are used as political pawns and very rarely wield institutional power on their own. But what Game of Thrones manages to do is demonstrate how it damages men as well. It's obviously bad for men as well. The rejection of hereditary monarchy predates feminism and was concisely written about by Locke, the same person that penned a large portion of the founding ideals…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:55 AM
4

Why does she call it spousal revenge, because he spent the night with his youngest wife? I wish she were more clear or used more appropriate wording that didn't imply he 'had it coming.'
/r/MensRights06/06/13 12:47 AM
1

No, not really. You continue to argue that white men are just as marginalized as non-whites. Never said anything relatively close to that. I'm not arguing degrees because to do so is highly dependent on location, time period, and individual experience. Even if we could reach some sort of consensus, it doesn't have any pragmatic value. I didn't identify you as one of them. Your insistence on the use of slurs does that. Now you say you do these other good things. Bravo, here's a cookie. It doesn't…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 04:14 PM
1

Ah, but I am SRS. You can be more than one thing at a time. And the they being made fun of is more the sorts that just unthinkingly proclaim that their desire to use slurs outweighs the hurt caused by their use. When you identify the 'they' you're speaking about, you don't identify them as people that don't understand what is like to be marginalized, regardless of race, sex, or gender, though. This is how the culture being developed in centered. You personally specifically identified cis white m…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 03:39 PM
1

Valid question. I don't. But others do, and I follow their lead. If you don't understand how marginalized groups feel, shouldn't you be 'over here' with us cis white guys being made to feel the way they do instead of participating? Doesn't the fact that even you don't understand, while presumably open-minded enough to participate, suggest that your ideology might suggest that goal is impossible? I don't follow you. I still identify as a cis white man. Where's the disjoint? Is it just that I don'…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 02:57 PM
5

I could have been more clear. When I said "...they hate it..." I mean the people doing the yelling, not white men.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 02:45 PM
11

I find it more likely they hate it as representative of Muslim culture. She then sees them as representative of white men, engaging in the exact same poor reasoning that they were; a match made in hell.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 03:39 AM
1

The thing is, SRS Prime is a joke. We're just trying to make the cis white guys (such as myself!) feel the way the groups they enjoy marginalizing in the name of "funny joeks" and whatnot. How do you know how the groups we (remember, yourself included) marginalize feel? If you don't, how can you make people feel that way? If you do, why is it you assume other cis white guys don't and how do you justify disjointing yourself from us? It's designed to piss you off. But then you step back and think,…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:31 AM
2

Here is the local news report, though it doesn't have much more information.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:21 PM
9

The fact that when he realized that all of his money didn't buy their love, he decided to withdraw it and shame them proves that the guy had the mentality of "I am not getting my money's worth" rather than "I am not being loved in return for the love I have for these people." I'm not sure if people intellectually choose to frame their understanding of life this way or if it's done subconsciously but I've never understood it. If a person spends ten years of their life providing for you I wouldn't…
/r/MensRights04/06/13 05:21 AM
20

It challenges the narrative that traditional gender roles harmed women and benefited men without exception or that women experienced unique pressures (like slut shaming) that were entirely unknown and are inconceivable to men.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 11:37 PM
3

I use that tactic sometimes because it's an easy way to lure someone's attention into a different topic. If a person thinks about sexism in terms of how it effects women, then I show them that things which effect men also effect women, before long they're thinking about how things effect men. It's like putting the frog in the water then bringing it to a boil instead of tossing it right in.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 07:59 PM
-1

Neither could any poor person. Does the genesis of the money really matter all that much? A woman rich via the work of her husband had her access to that property protected, women that were poor despite the work of their husband were just as fucked as him in all financial senses. This has always seemed to be an economic problem shoehorned into the gender sphere to me.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 03:18 AM
2

Definition in the sense that it's the essence of the idea, not in that you open a dictionary and that is how it is defined. Saying something is 'similar' is the distillation of the concept, the paragon, iconic, a textbook example. You're picking an irrelevant semantic point, do you disagree that he was making a comparison or that comparing some person/group to Hitler/the Nazi party is Poisoning the Well?
/r/MensRights02/06/13 02:24 AM
3

Maybe should be but isn't. If you compare someone to the Nazi party, part of the reason you're making that comparison isn't accuracy but shock. I'd venture to say no one has ever decided to make a comparison to Hitler or the Nazi Party because it was, of all historical options, simply the most accurate and for no other reason. It's so common an occurrence that a fallacy has been named for it and, in this case, the goal certainly wasn't accuracy.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 02:18 AM
11

That may be another cause. If women are more willing to request help, like filing for bankruptcy, then more of their debt may have already been forgiven. At a glance, it would read as though women have less debt without accounting for how much each gender accrues.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 01:15 AM
2

Another possible cause is that men are simply charged more for things the 'lower classes' consume, concert tickets, club fees, alcohol, et c.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 01:12 AM
1

I probably shouldn't have addressed if it is or is not a good comparison at all. That was my mistake. The point I should have stuck to is that, in our current social context, comparing something to Nazis/Hitler ends well meaning conversation entirely. While I agree that we shouldn't be overly sensitive when relaying ideas, we also shouldn't be callous for it's own sake. A Nazi comparison is shocking for no reasonable purpose.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 08:00 PM
2

No one's saying you're committing a grave sin, we're saying you are arguing poorly and you are. For example, saying 'similarly' is the definition of a comparison. When you then say "I wasn't comparing to Nazis" your argument comes across as fickle. It's what people do when they don't want to support their claim. People have said in comment to you that your ideas are fine but your presentation lacks. After watching you tell another guy 'fuck you' because he disagreed with what you said, I have to…
/r/MensRights01/06/13 07:00 AM
2

We're all ignorant of a number of things, no doubt. Comparing someone to a Nazi because you know something they don't is the height of Poisoning the Well. It's ridiculous to do in any sort of reasonable conversation.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 06:48 AM
6

Most people forget that most Germans (and members of the Nazi Party) didn't know the Holocaust was occurring in the way we do now. Concentration camps were almost unknown outside of the SS until the 101st began to find and liberate them. Point being, things are complex and we shouldn't judge by labels, it's why I'm wary to apply any to myself.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 06:37 AM
26

"Aren't a real..." is almost never a good way to go. A movement can have healthy internal debate and disagreement.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 06:31 AM
1

What would be the male equivalent to "bitches," so they can be compared? I'm not sure I want to type in "I hate dicks."
/r/MensRights31/05/13 04:16 PM
9

I'm sure many men would rather be barefoot and pregnant than in combat boots, in all honesty.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 04:07 PM
10

The indignation people have about the concept of "friendzoning" is regarding the mindset that friendzonees appear to have; that if they treat a girl a certain way - the way in which they were taught is "nice" behaviour - then they are entitled to win her affection, following which, complaints seem to stem from people thinking that they did not get what they were owed. I definitely agree this is what the people that are indignant about the Friendzone are speaking out against, I just don't think i…
/r/MensRights31/05/13 03:32 PM
1

That's really interesting, actually. The debate starts over a man finding a woman attractive not for her appearance but for her work. Isn't that exactly something many feminists say they want? I'd be interested to know why that's sexist, though the comic never gets there. Also, the subtle statements of equivalence (bitch, dyke, cunt, and over-reacting) are tough to read.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 11:53 PM
3

She'd make a good Wonder Woman.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 04:46 AM
0

It will be covered up and lied about virtually every time... could you source that for me? It's counter to both my experience and all the statistics I've seen.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 11:41 PM
2

In fact, many of your columns are quite entertaining; a few of them are even insightful... You have absolutely no idea what it means to be a woman; you can’t fathom what we go through. The author frames the conversation so as to keep the discussion away from things that can be gainfully discussed (entertainment, insight) and shifts it to a completely unknowable claim. I'm not convinced I fully understand what I go through myself, let alone what anyone else goes through, definitely not half the p…
/r/MensRights28/05/13 10:23 PM
1

Most women I know don't want more respect simply for being women either. I don't disagree at all. My argument isn't that this is a non-issue but that 1) I'm not sure this is something so powerful as to have a significant or far reaching affect on social attitudes and 2) Framing this as disempowering, as one of many ways to talk about unequal treatment, might be reaching. Trying too hard to be polite or accommodating to someone due to their gender is certainly not what we should be doing but does…
/r/MensRights28/05/13 04:25 PM
0

I don't necessarily disagree about generalizations but I don't think specific complaints against individual claims work. You don't seem to either, though that's what you call for, because you dismiss the theoretical specific complaints as cherry picked already. A case against feminism, as a whole, would be a complaint against its core philosophy. Unfortunately it seems that the movement itself tries to obscure that, if an entire movement can be said to do one thing, by insisting its goal is its …
/r/MensRights27/05/13 09:21 AM
5

Very correct! Thank you for taking the time to help me improve.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 01:13 AM
6

I thought this as well. It's something he said, relayed by the reporter, in the very last second of the video. Before that it's just alluded* to. Edit: Super quick correction! I checked again and a "Crime Victim's Advocate" said it. I can see how OP might make that mistake, since I did and had to go back specifically looking for it.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 11:26 PM
0

I'm skeptical of the claim that being Atheist is heroic, at least in most circumstances, but I'd be willing to listen to the case all those articles might make, were that magazine a real thing. I find using those stereotypes as an insult as baffling as using a perceived racial food preference as an insult.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 04:34 AM
5

I'd have liked if the article had sourced its claims. Saying a person in a leadership position, or even several, has violated women doesn't prove it is systemic. Military culture, while different, is incredibly focused on breaking down the social differences between men and women. They have a buddy policy for all soldiers and it is men with men or women with women... I could go on but the point is that this article is almost entirely counter to my own experience, entirely unsourced, and begins w…
/r/MensRights26/05/13 04:30 AM
5

I was an MP in Afghanistan. We had quite a few investigators that handled rape cases. There might be command invention and tampering but it's not like the cops are saying "no big deal." When someone says an organization is doing something, I look at their laws / rules / tenets and the UCMJ is the only American law code that allows for the death penalty for crimes other than murder. One of those crimes is rape. From a legislative standpoint, no one is more harsh on rape than the US military.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 04:17 AM
4

That's an interesting view and was not at all my experience while in the Army. No one had the job "killer." My unit adopted a village, built a hospital for women, a school, funded a women's soccer team, ran supplies to what we built, and did it on our own dime / rare days off. That's about 50 soldiers that freely gave their very limited time and money to go above and beyond, none ever fired a shot. I'm not sure what other units did but I can sure say not everyone goes over to kill. We went to he…
/r/MensRights26/05/13 04:13 AM
1

This is unlikely. In the county I worked, bond for resisting was capped at $2,500. I suspect his bail for stabbing someone was much higher than that. Resisting alone wouldn't account for double another person that shared the other charge, I wouldn't think. I haven't had a chance to read the article yet but that's my initial impression.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:50 AM
1

He's doing it on his own voluntarily, trying to get ahead of the accusation.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:46 AM
0

Language has subtle and covert power over our social attitudes towards all sorts of things. I hear this a lot and have previously accepted it as truth but I think this might have pushed the concept to the point that I'd like some sort of source for the claim. I can see this clearly being the case with racial slurs, for example, but ladies is literally a term of respect. Framing the situation as disempowering, by giving women more respect than men in their terminology, is labored, I'd say.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 08:44 PM
3

I get told to smile all the time. My face is such that my lips curve down at the corners, making a neutral expression look like a frown. I didn't realize this was something people thought only happened to women.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 04:48 PM
1

Sorry, I was unclear in my point. I believe the problem is that safety advice is considered to be victim blaming, even from a source like law enforcement.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 06:39 PM
1

Slut Walk was inspired by tips from a police officer, I believe.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 06:18 PM
2

Those people are generally excluded from the sentencing of a murder trial during selection.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 06:15 PM
6

I have a philosophy degree. It was generally accepted that the number of women in the field was critically low.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:00 PM
1

"You don't get it and I'm not helping." That's your approach? Sometimes hearing the same thing in a different way can aid in learning. Telling someone they don't get something just to say so has never helped anyone get anything.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 01:40 AM
2

Depends on how you want to frame your experience of the world.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 01:36 AM
1

It was until the roles reversed, rich people became thin and the poor became fat.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 08:51 PM
5

For men, this is because the submissive role was for the younger, less established man. It was a boy's position. We could rightly say our own society looks down upon the young with insults like 'childish' but it's a slightly flat evaluation.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 06:24 PM
8

If we're talking rape I'd say it doesn't say much about the sexual preference of the rapists at all, assuming we subscribe to the view rape isn't about sexual pleasure but about violence.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:40 PM
24

A more direct attack at that quote, both Greek and Roman society were so accepting of homosexual activity that they didn't even recognize a preference dichotomy like we do. They still had plenty of instances of gang rape. That would suggest that there are other factors at play, at very least.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:38 PM
6

I can explain how a man can be the victim of domestic violence very simply. Imagine you can be hurt. Imagine someone that lives in your house wants to hurt you enough to actually do so. You are now imagining yourself as the victim of domestic violence. I've worked in the military and law enforcement. Even children kill plenty of folks, sadly.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:58 AM
1

They're about to find out.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:54 AM
3

Why is "professional" so often clean shaven only? Random social convention. The Ancient Egyptian priests used to shave all their body hair and women used makeup to highlight varicose veins. It's almost entirely arbitrary. A better question, I ask myself, is how people that object to pornography because shaved pubic hair makes a woman look 'childish' reconcile that with workplace rules that actually require men to shave their faces upon threat of punishment/lack of opportunity/lack of advancement…
/r/MensRights22/05/13 08:57 PM
8

I sadly suspect that this will be viewed only as an example of racism and that no major outlet will ask if this happened because it was a man with these children instead of a woman.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 05:10 PM
5

I don't think it's true that any single man 'just wants sex.' Sex is a very small part of romance/relationships/procreation. Even if we accepted that men were only interested in breeding, providing a level of protection and education to a child dramatically increases survival rates, clearly. If we accept that men can want more than passing their genetics, the idea that men just want sex because laughably one dimensional. Every person wants companionship, intimacy, approval, new experiences, et c…
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:21 AM
6

This is demonstrably correct in the US when looking at maternity leave (as opposed to paternity leave) and the concentration of female teachers. If the way feminism depicts Patriarchy is correct, they absolutely must accept that women raised children almost exclusively until the 50s.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:16 AM
3

If Vasalgel required getting punched in the teeth first, I'd still be the first person in line. I'm always wary of conspiratorial thinking but I have to wonder why a male contraceptive took decades to get on the market while clearly in high demand.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 05:07 PM
3

Whenever I see a post like this in this subreddit, I start to wonder if OP is actually concerned for men's rights, or just has a problem with women in general. Accusations out of the gate are not welcome or acceptable. You're attacking the poster, not the content. It's unnecessary. Furthermore, I wonder in this specific case if OP is unaware that blacks in South Africa have still not dug themselves out from under Apartheid, and black women in that country especially do not have equal rights. Thi…
/r/MensRights20/05/13 04:50 PM
4

I find it curious that sperm banks were not mentioned at all. Acquiring sperm isn't the problem at all and so neither is getting pregnant. The complaint seems to be that some women can't find a man willing to parent their children or, in worse circumstances, subsidize them. When read like that, the piece seems to be entirely about entitlement.
/r/MensRights19/05/13 10:43 PM
3

She admits that men do the things that women do to display their love, just argues that it's moral, not emotional. She admits men can use the linguistic terminology of love, as you said that you have. If you want to be pithy, I'd say "If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck..." If you want to be more serious, I'd say that she agrees men do everything women do that can be perceived to prove they love, it's on her to prove they don't. Simply offering alternatives (it's just moral, not emotio…
/r/MensRights19/05/13 04:09 PM
1

He's frustrated because he thinks he's unattractive but with other positive traits. Those positive traits haven't given results. This seems to be the exact same kind of frustration that creates an "All Bodies" campaign for women. I think it's a great example of how we're all pretty much the same when it comes to this. "Just stop wearing a fedora/being a creep" is just like "lose some weight" in my mind and it's sad the people saying these things don't realize just how the same it all is. That be…
/r/MensRights18/05/13 06:26 PM
8

You're 18 but making claims about buying alcohol at bars and clubs... do you have something other than experience to cite as a source?
/r/MensRights18/05/13 11:47 AM
1

You can tell that from a photo? Share one of yourself to open up to the possibility of the same ridicule, please.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 01:54 PM
3

This is something I learned from Superman. Huge variations in perceived status can make the same person unrecognizable.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 06:31 PM
153

This is my concern. She was within the second trimester, when abortion would be legal. Establishing a murder precedent would effect how we justify abortion logically and presumably legally. What I'd hate to see is the idea that a fetus is a person when the mother wants it to be but not when she doesn't want it to be.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 06:22 PM
2

I have to wonder what the world might look like if that were true and we knew what definition of Feminism was being used.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 08:03 PM
4

I have two brothers that are SAHDs and they're both having serious marriage problems that are centered on or started when they began staying home. I'd certainly say society at large hasn't adjusted to them yet.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 04:33 PM
3

That's not a claim either position could even begin to measure.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 07:10 PM
2

Over 99% of the officers in any given year are not even accused of any sort of misconduct. Usually I'd link a source but I'm on vacation, so my apologies for that. Also, the State as a concept means the institutions of power. We only give 'all the power to the State' because that's the literal definition of the concept. America has local, state, and federal ask divided into three opposing branches all of which resist each other; at one point to the extent of war. There are good, legitimate criti…
/r/MensRights14/05/13 05:25 PM
1

Against doing so by force.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:19 PM
1

This is a statement of ethics. We haven't established we can or can't do either.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:36 AM
1

Then how can you assert your interest is in guaranteeing a certain quality of life for the child?
/r/MensRights11/05/13 01:28 AM
1

Do poor people get to have kids?
/r/MensRights11/05/13 12:27 AM
1

By making sure they're not born?
/r/MensRights10/05/13 11:21 PM
1

I'm using violence to mean the act of inflicting harm and I'm including emotional harm.
/r/MensRights10/05/13 06:31 PM
1

Harmful to who? The child? No, equating existence with violence would make the concept of violence almost meaningless in this context. The father? Doesn't matter, violence isn't justified with the goal of stopping a person from harming themselves.
/r/MensRights10/05/13 02:24 AM
1

We had several suicides in bathrooms while I was over, all men. Part of the stress, I believe, was more men housed together than women and more control over their time and actions. The need to be inoffensive definitely plays its part.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 10:07 PM
1

Force is justified in use when it prevents the person subjected to it from harming another. Is a man without this injection going to harm another due to the lack of that injection? If not, force is not justified.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 09:57 PM
0

Proof that education and intelligence are not the same thing. I hate to leave a single cynical quip but feel free to skip this next part. This author clearly left behind any guise of scientific impartiality. I know it's not a scholarly article but this is still excessive. He doesn't compare violence by gender in any way to establish his base position, there is such a thing as 'male violence.' 'Some people are violent and those who aren't physically able to express it use violence by proxy' is a …
/r/MensRights09/05/13 09:49 PM
2

That is intriguing. 1/3rd of mob justice was against men accused off rape. I wonder what the rape rates were at the time, among other things. Regardless, that seems to thoroughly disprove the idea that rape culture existed immediately prior to feminism. The President himself calls it the worst crime and it was clearly the single most crime where the accused were subjected to extrajudicial punishment.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 09:21 PM
1

I think this is a spectacular example of how men's sexuality is viewed, actually. A bikini is no less modest than most wrestling attire, neither mud nor jello suffer ex in themselves, and wrestling as a sport dates back to Ancient Greece, at least. It was done in the nude and while covered on oil at the first Olympics. There doesn't seem to be any unique, singular component to make this unacceptable.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 06:24 PM
1

I'm on my phone for a week but I'd love to see a link for this, if someone has the time to indulge me.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 06:20 PM
0

You're extending my analogy into a similarity I'm not claiming. I didn't do that to yours and specifically noted a simile isn't evocation then before it was in benefit of my point. You should consider the point I'm making. Also, entertain the possibility that a group can address gender issues independently of feminism, or even while being antagonistic toward it, and still continue positively to the discussion. Thank you for the conversion, I appreciate your time.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 02:00 PM
2

Knowing that he owes $6,000 or more (possibly much more) and works washing dishes but still gave the reward to the victims actually makes me like him more. The domestic violence / child support law system makes it almost impossible for someone caught up in it to make their payments. Even if he did everything accused of and without reservation, that doesn't mean what he just did is any less.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 03:31 AM
5

He plead "no contest" which could potentially be a symptom of believing he couldn't win the case and would prefer to serve whatever was offered as a plea bargain. While he was certainly found guilty, it might be worth questioning the system that produced that verdict and what the descriptors “gross neglect of duty” and “extreme cruelty” might mean. I'm not familiar with Ohio law but, in the state I worked, a direct threat of violence was assault. I can't imagine what "extreme cruelty" might be b…
/r/MensRights09/05/13 03:20 AM
3

The Onion!?
/r/MensRights08/05/13 11:52 PM
6

By my reading, the words are literally saying that women appreciate these traits but the turn is that they are obviously inappreciable. This is textbook satire, overemphasizing approval of something to show contempt for it. For that kind of satire to work, it has to support the idea that the thing being praised exists as characterized. That's the complaint about this article, it is saying that men are all these horrible things, the wit is in saying these things are good instead of bad.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 11:49 PM
1

Shouldn't we be saying that men and women are people regardless of how they choose to act? This comment feels like it's saying that we should eliminate masculine and feminine gender roles in favor of a single androgynous gender role. If the goal is supposed to be that people can act however makes them comfortable, isn't that going to be the exact same problem just applied identically to both sexes.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 10:01 PM
0

No, and no it doesn't. I'm sorry, I probably should have been more clear here. I'm not saying you're claiming an equivalency. A simile definitely requires you to make the claim the two things are similar, at least in some way. I asked my initial question because I was curious as to what ways you think they are similar, which you've answered, so thank you! I'm pointing out how, much like the gradual shifting of gender roles has so far shifted the burden of household responsibilities from being en…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:57 PM
11

This is the same kind of response that is generated in some conversations with feminists when it is pointed out very few men rape. "Oh, you want a cookie for not raping? That's what you're supposed to do." It makes it impossible to view anything through a positive lens and I'm afraid that kind of cynicism will only hurt you. Be careful with yourself!
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:16 PM
1

Do you mean to compare being a woman to being enslaved? Your offense requires that position.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 05:26 PM
2

I agree. I've always understood it as a concept meant to explain statistical deviation that has drifted over into talk about individual experience. People use statistical trends to justify stereotypes pseudo-intellectually which isn't at all a new phenomenon. It's essentially the same as using skull dimension averages to claim women are less intelligent.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 08:35 PM
37

My feminist activism involves privileging women’s voices over men’s voices. I now only read books written by women. I don't think I will ever understand this reasoning. The claim is that men's voices have been privileged (wrong use but keeping terms) over women's. How could any person possibly think that doing the exact same thing for a different group will lead to anything other than the exact same situation but with a different group.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:22 PM
11

We have something close to overall gender equality in the US now, but considering the song's references to female circumcision and Salem's witch burnings, it seems she is referring to what happens in other countries or what happened historically... basically anti-woman policies wherever they exist. These are two very interesting examples. First, male circumcision is still practiced in the US while female circumcision has been banned. Second, those sentenced to death at Salem for witchcraft were …
/r/MensRights05/05/13 03:03 PM
2

Movies portray a while host of traumatic events, from car accidents to murder, that we don't react 'properly' to. Part of being art is eliciting an emotional reaction and no one gets to decide how other people feel. The normative claims and shaming happening here are trying to do just that, it's wrong.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 05:11 AM
1

This is a fair question. Even if the actress does find it demeaning, that's a very different claim than asserting it necessarily is such. I don't think the link does anything more than assume their position is apparent.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 05:07 AM
6

You'd think they'd just add on to the current list instead of constantly reordering it.
/r/MensRights04/05/13 06:38 PM
0

You know what happens to monarchs that make vast, sweeping social changes before society is ready? They get dethroned and beheaded. If that is the case, I don't think we can blame male monarchs any more than female monarchs for the existence of Patriarchy, as neither could simply dismiss it. We'd have to trace Patriarchy back to the conditions that created it to properly cite blame, if such a thing can be done in either sense, and that means going back to before recorded history. If that's the c…
/r/MensRights04/05/13 04:21 PM
8

I often see in the comments that this is not valuable because it doesn't show prevalence. To preempt that, prevalence can't be shown because many people are currently operating under the idea that this never happens or happens so rarely that compiling statistics is a waste of resources. I support people posting these stories as is until such a time as people have to admit that this occurs with some level of frequency, then we can get statistical data to use.
/r/MensRights04/05/13 04:58 AM
1

Women have been voting for less than a hundred years and have not been systematically educated or prepared for an independent life until very recently, so while they did become part of a patriarchal society, it was more or less the only option for many. While I certainly don't debate this, the majority of men have not been allowed to vote, systematically educated, or prepared for independent life until very recently, either. It's worth noting that schools for affluent women came before the poor …
/r/MensRights04/05/13 03:21 AM
2

That all property and involvement in politics was controlled by men until relatively recently? I have a problem with this as a justification for the idea of Patriarchy Theory. It is simply factually incorrect. Not only have women held significant amounts of political power historically, many do currently and have for decades. Queen Elizabeth II alone is sovereign of 16 states. Unless you're over 61, she has been in power your entire lifetime; she has ruled for over twice my lifetime. Boudica, Cl…
/r/MensRights04/05/13 01:40 AM
15

Bears.
/r/MensRights04/05/13 12:00 AM
1

I don't disagree the draft is almost always unjust. I simply don't think it's an injustice that politicians will stop using without a change in conditions. The Selective Service was dismantled in the 80s and re-instituted almost immediately (speaking in political time). I'd expect a repeat if we tried to do so again but if the Selective Service was expanded to include women, I think we'd see something new and I hope it would be more discretion in the use of a draft. If the draft was used and wom…
/r/MensRights03/05/13 09:30 PM
1

I'm afraid Selective Service will be abolished, personally. If we get into war so deep that a draft may be needed, I'd rather we have a long standing law requiring women to be drafted than the inevitable White Feather campaign that would result otherwise to shame men into enlisting in order to achieve the needed manpower. Having to send their daughters to war in equal numbers might make the Senate more critical about entering into a major conflict.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 02:49 PM
48

It is my sincere hope women are included in the Selective Service, parents do get incredibly upset, then we get to see what solutions are presented and by whom.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 12:06 AM
2

Thoughts on feminism working on these issues... I take a foundational "it doesn't matter" approach. The disagreement with feminism is deeply rooted in ideological differences. Even if feminism were addressing every issue, they would still be subject to criticism on the grounds of Patriarchy Theory.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 02:55 AM
1

It's really rough out there for women. This is a gender divide where there simply doesn't need to be one. The statistical concentration of victims within any arbitrary guideline will vary depending on how we care to define the concepts. It's a very shaky ground that is wholly irrelevant to any individual interaction. People say "Women are more likely to be X" like that matters when it comes to me talking to any particular woman. Her likelihood of being anything has no practical bearing on if she…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 03:33 PM
1

Men are hurt by “nice guy syndrome” because it destroys women’s agency to take initiative in a relationship. I'd read an article about this statement all on it's own. I've been told "You're so nice," or some variation there of, by almost every woman I've befriended or dated. Sometimes I hear Nice Guys are self-identified by "syndrome" makes it sound like it's caught like a disease. I'd be intrigued to know how this author explains the idea that having caught the Nice Guy disease destroys a woman…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 12:41 AM
2

The internet is not a safe space for anybody, ever. I really agree with your sentiment but I think we should reject the 'safe space' language entirely. Having someone disagree with you isn't 'dangerous' and we shouldn't let the conversation make it sound like it is. The internet is actually imminently safe, in terms of "safe" and "dangerous" referring to physical violence and it classically does. I believe some ideologues really get some leverage through making it sound as if disagreement is vio…
/r/MensRights28/04/13 11:32 PM
2

This is the video that introduced me to an idea about gender other than feminism. It was shockingly apparent to me once I'd heard it and I still have no idea how male disposability is argued against.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 10:16 PM
1

... really? I've breezed past this story a few times now and I always assumed the logo was something at least undeniably vicious.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:30 PM
1

He seems even the tiniest bit gay. He's racist or homophobic or misogynist. Ironically, when I read 20 I thought to myself "Wow, that might be the most blatantly homophobic thing I've read in quite some time." In her defense, she didn't say he can't be hypocritical.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 02:45 PM
20

While the article does seem to be tongue in cheek, I have to wonder what her husband does for work. If this injury might result in him losing his job, I could see him having quite a bout of anxiety. A man without a job is teetering on the edge of worthless in the common narrative.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 02:01 PM
1

If nothing else, all that bullshit about how there would be no war if women were in charge will go out the window real quick. I honestly don't see how this idea persists in the mind of someone that even has even the most bare knowledge of history.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 01:07 AM
47

It's a great description of people from any ideology when we focus on 'winning' instead of dialogue.
/r/MensRights25/04/13 01:36 AM
2

Right, but the difference there is that women are an historically, globally oppressed group and men are not. Honestly, this sounds like you're saying "Yeah, but the difference is that I'm right." The argument is not that women were never oppressed, it's that the majority of men were oppressed too. An example I often use is Rome. At the age of fifteen, all men were forcibly conscripted for ten years. During that time there were subject to a system of discipline called Decimation. Should your unit…
/r/MensRights24/04/13 09:03 PM
1

Hi! I see we disagree, which is definitely a good thing, and I'd like to respond to that. There's a lot to what you're saying. Why, because calling a creepy guy a creep is some kind of serious problem? Like the ACTUAL FACT of women being discriminated against when seeking positions of power in our society? Can only one be a problem or do we have to order problems from most serious to least serious and address them like that? I couldn't imagine being asked to talk about that friend's new born son…
/r/MensRights24/04/13 01:10 PM
2

When I argue, I try to take my cues from two different people, Aristotle and Bruce Lee. From Aristotle I've learned syllogisms which, when done correctly, give a conclusion that can't be directly refuted. It allows me to limit the points of contention to only a few premises that I can prepare to defend. From Bruce Lee I've learned that the most direct strike is a straight line. I try to ignore all extraneous BS to make my point as simply and directly as possible. In your case, I might say someth…
/r/MensRights24/04/13 02:54 AM
5

I was reading a comment about women's historical oppression by law when it occurred to me that there have been a number of female monarchs in history who's word was literally law. I was looking for a list (for my own reference) when I came across the idea that women couldn't be dictators in an article titled "A List of Female Dictators", of all places. It occurred to me that part of dismantling the idea that women never were uniformly subjected to The Patriarchy for all of history might be found…
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:56 PM
-15

Not being told you're creepy doesn't mean you've never been called creepy. I told a female friend that being called creepy is so prevalent that, if it were a death penalty offense, every man would be dead. It took that for her to really begin paying attention to it.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 10:23 PM
67

The instigator yelling in back was the one that really upset me. It's forever linked with criminal behavior in my mind. He was yelling "He's hitting people!" even though the man in the video never did. Even if the guy was talking between sets and being an all out jerk, that doesn't justify the violence they used against him, which I'm sure we all agree on.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 07:46 PM
2

I would agree. My brother has been diagnosed and treated for a serious mental disorder. He's currently in prison instead of a mental health facility and, while he crime was violent, it was decidedly less violent and effected fewer people than the Yates case. Even in cases where the person has been diagnosed and under treatment prior to the crime we (as a society) are still inconsistent.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 04:04 PM
13

I'd suggest bluelisting. It's essentially blacklisting someone but through internet perception instead of professional contacts and job references. The color blue has a historical computer context.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 11:43 PM
1

The protesters did their job, interrupting the lecture by pulling the fire alarm and delaying it temporarily. That made me cringe. The job of protesters is to interrupt rather than openly offer their dissenting view? I sure hope not.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 02:42 PM
1

I wonder if he actually openly made the call before we got the confirmation, otherwise that's just postdiction and not impressive at all. I do it all the time with a nearly 100% success rate.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 11:53 PM
2

Certainly, I was replying to the original post that says... If a man ran onto a beach volleyball court or tennis court, ran up and grabbed some ass, he'd be imprisoned and there would be a national outcry for Justice. We can't make this claim until we know if she was charged with a crime or not.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 07:35 PM
1

I'd say this article is receiving downvotes because it embraces the paradigm of feminism. While that's fine, many people associated with the MRM here are also anti-feminist and reject that paradigm. An article that stops several times to reassure the readership that women still have it worse than men is subtly undercutting itself while inside a framework that suggests it accepts Patriarchy Theory.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 05:44 PM
23

We'd have to know if she was charged with a crime and what that crime may be before we'd know if there is a double standard here.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 04:46 PM
1

Reddit is a boy's club, but if you try to mention that, the boys get upset. I find that comment interesting. It makes it sound like there's a sign up and a bouncer. There happen to be a lot of men on Reddit and they say what they want to say. I'm not sure what this comment is advocating but I can't think of anything to make Reddit less of a "boy's club" that I'd support.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 03:02 PM
1

They're not domestic first responders outside of the National Guard's usual response to natural disasters but soldiers are very much first responders overseas. I suppose their inclusion would be dependent on the scope of the study.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 08:07 PM
3

I find it slightly sad that war, concentration camps, and cruelty are equated (on some level) in the first sentence. When I was in Afghanistan my unit sponsored and built a school, hospital, and soccer team for women. The Taliban restricted all three heavily in their laws with regards to women. The War in Afghanistan, like it or not, has provided the vote, law reforms, and education for women (and many more men). If feminism wants to distance itself from that, I'm afraid they may find many peopl…
/r/MensRights18/04/13 07:29 PM
8

That's not really an intellectually honest depiction of the MRM, as I understand it. If I were to quickly define feminism and the MRM, for comparison purposes, I'd say both movements are trying to explain why traditional gender roles developed so that we can modify or eliminate them. Feminism does this via Patriarchy Theory, the MRM by Evolutionary Psychology. An article about that would be "really interesting", I'd say.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 06:43 PM
3

Most men I personally know that are having a hard time launching are veterans attempting to find a space in the civilian job sector. That's a factor I think should be examined in a discussion about the topic. It effects more men (about 90% of the military) and this is the first time in US history veterans have had a higher unemployment rate than the general population. I'd say something is happening that relates to the military, at least in part. The volume of unhandled veterans claims may be a …
/r/MensRights15/04/13 02:47 AM
14

If psychological damage is the measure, and murder causes none like this person says, then every crime is worse than murder. I don't like that reasoning.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 08:56 AM
35

I had an Anthropology teacher that was very careful to be inoffensive. He used African-American and, realizing it would be ridiculous to then use white, Anglo-Saxon. Fortunately, my family is Irish and, when he called me Anglo in class, I corrected him with "I'm Celtic" perfectly straight faced. It's a perfect example of how not saying what you mean in favor of saying what is 'inoffensive' creates a level of unnecessary bullshit.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 07:35 PM
3

Fuck femininity, amirite? To get anything done, the character has to be in boy's clothing, look mostly-male, and use a male's playing style. He makes sure to describe her fighting style as dexterous and replaces the shield (which would require considerable strength to use well) with a magic gauntlet. I think it all looks cool but it really shows that no one knows how to make a female protagonist doing things that are 'male things' while accepting Patriarchy Theory as their intellectual paradigm.…
/r/MensRights12/04/13 03:36 PM
10

I find it interesting that both the extreme conservative and liberal positions agree fundamentally, men objectify women, they only disagree on how to address the problem. This is a great example of why another viewpoint is needed.
/r/MensRights11/04/13 01:44 PM
3

I'd go this route. According to the Department of Justice, in 2005 only 52 (1.6%) of the 3,254 inmates on death row were women. That is the largest sentencing discrepancy between any two groups far and away. That is proof of very serious discrimination against men in the same way that 42% of those inmates being black while only 12.7% of the US population is black is often cited as proof of discrimination against black people. If she doesn't accept that, I'd ask why. She'll either be forced to sa…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 12:27 AM
1

Personally, I hate that bossy argument most of all. Being bossy is a negative, male or female. I don't disagree at all. I'd say men and women are expressing this same emotion, wanting to control others, but being perceived in different ways. While little girls are called bossy, little boys are often called bullies, brutes, or violent. Her analysis of this is definitely flat, little girls are called bossy the most (in my experience) but that doesn't mean boys are encouraged to express the same ur…
/r/MensRights10/04/13 05:29 PM
5

It sounds like sexual assault 1, however, because there was no weapon used and the victim does not appear to have suffered significant bodily harm. Sounds like DiManno is suggesting it wasn't 'legitimate.'
/r/MensRights10/04/13 01:09 AM
1

If I recall, there as a high profile gang rape news story recently and the victim was a woman. This tweets says a lot more about the author's mind than it does about reality.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 09:21 PM
7

I'm a fan of Jon Stewart and wouldn't mind playing devil's advocate for him here. I think he did incredibly well. First, on his show he's rarely antagonistic, if ever, even when people he often bashes in his comedic routine (like O'Reilly) come on. I think he did any excellent job of keeping his guest from ambiguously dumping everything on The Patriarchy. He about the role women play in the expectations placed upon them and even jokingly subverts the idea of a monolithic Patriarchy the moment sh…
/r/MensRights09/04/13 08:54 PM
7

A wonderful description of what it would feel like to lose one's status as a human being and the descent into the condition of a human doing.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 08:22 PM
4

It sounds more like it's only a gender issue if it affects women disproportionately. Right. I've always been amazed by people that hold that double standard as it reinforces the "men as the standard person" idea that feminism tries to modify on other fronts like word usage (i.e. fireman to firefighter.)
/r/MensRights09/04/13 05:32 PM
67

It's also possibly a way for men to claim status over each other, per a recent GWW hypothesis I thought was exceptionally astute.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 10:02 PM
32

and acknowledged that she was right anyway. So she was right in that if one person performs a sexual "favor" for another, they are owed? This is counter to any sex-positive feminist theory I've ever heard which talks about continuing enthusiastic consent and vehemently resists the idea that one can 'keep score' in a sexual way. If we're regressing to more 'traditional views', like sexual debt, couldn't it be argued she owed him oral sex for the date anyway? "If you doing that for me hinged on me…
/r/MensRights08/04/13 01:43 PM
8

Is there a source for that you can share? I'd love for that to be the case and I haven't seen numbers one way or the other.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 12:25 PM
17

The person you're responding to didn't say they don't exist, they said the prevalence is skewed.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 12:17 PM
4

that perhaps they are just a "cog in the machine" I found this reference intriguing. After I came back from Afghanistan, my unit was identified as a unit that needed special attention from psychological professionals because of our duties. One thing that was asked of us was if we ever felt like a "cog in the machine" that was the Army. I responded with "Obviously that's what we were." I mean... so fucking obviously it made me laugh when he asked me that with a straight face. This doesn't apply t…
/r/MensRights07/04/13 11:53 PM
1

I'm watching it now, the movie actually differentiates and says hebophilia is very normal within the first few minutes.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 03:50 AM
1

I'm watching this movie right now. They start with the history of sex, define the differences between infantophilia, pedophilia, and hebophilia, talk about the double standards between the genders, then talk about pedophilia fear mongering. So far it's actually worth the watch.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 03:48 AM
5

Breaking civil law isn't generally considered criminal, breaking criminal law is. Contracts are civil law and are dealt with in an entirely separate court system, civil court.
/r/MensRights06/04/13 07:58 PM
2

Unfortunately, after military service a man is more prone to homelessness and unemployment, as things stand. So it's a short term solution that may develop into a long term problem.
/r/MensRights06/04/13 06:53 PM
1

It is not streaming in the US.
/r/MensRights06/04/13 06:49 PM
1

Have men really become victims of modern sexism or is the increase in sexism justified? This is intriguing. Can sexism be justified? If so, I think Feminist Theory has some very fundamental problems. If not, then clearly it can't be justified against men. I'll have to find the documentary to see how they address it, I guess.
/r/MensRights06/04/13 06:48 PM
6

These are actual skip tracers/bail enforcement agents. I think they were overly aggressive with their weapons handling, but they were doing their job. I'm not sure this is the case. In the county I worked a bonding company could not revoke a bond for failure of payment, which is their claim according to the article. We'd have to know the local laws on this. Violating the bond contract is not a crime but likely a small claims court issue.
/r/MensRights06/04/13 06:40 PM
37

They're "bounty hunters" which is the old-style slick was of saying bond enforcement. The man had paid part of his bond (which may or may not have been a bad check) through a bonding company but failed to keep with payments, according to the bond enforcement folks. A bonding company can not return a person to custody for failing to pay (at least where I worked in TN) but they often cite a person as a "flight risk" instead. That means the bonding company and the accused (who has been returned to …
/r/MensRights06/04/13 06:34 PM
1

I'd be interested in hearing why you think a man and a woman, of approximately the same weight, couldn't both be equally capable professional fighters. Please don't read that sarcastically, I don't mean it that way. If I'm incorrect (and downvotes from this thread suggest many people think that's the case), I'd like to consider the reasons for why that may be.
/r/MensRights06/04/13 02:15 PM
1

You've never played sports have you? Soccer, baseball, and various martial arts, if you consider them a sport. Definitions vary. You realize that it would be dangerous for kids to play adults at baseball, right? Because children are significantly smaller than adults. This is why I claim that peewee leagues are currently operating as a de facto weight class system. If we were to get rid of the idea of peewee leagues (segregated by age) and went to weight class-style leagues (middleweight baseball…
/r/MensRights06/04/13 01:25 PM
0

Really? You don't think there is any other reason why men do better than women? If we're speaking statistically, then men tend to be larger than women. It is easier for people that are taller or have more muscle mass to excel in certain sports that are currently popular. It's just as possible that, in the future, sports that favor smaller people could become more popular. On an individual level, I think women tend to perform worse than men in sports that use things such as weight classes because…
/r/MensRights06/04/13 01:20 PM
1

This would likely be the case for a generation or more until women were expected to be as capable as men. Even then, we'd probably be looking at middleweight or lower for the best showing. I just don't think this has very much to do with inherent capability.
/r/MensRights06/04/13 05:08 AM
1

I don't follow, I'm sorry. Are you saying then women are not unique (in the same sense) as "women athletes" or that they wouldn't be able to win in desegregated conditions?
/r/MensRights06/04/13 02:21 AM
4

That's an intriguing idea I've never really thought about. So far as I know, professional leagues do not exclude anyone for being too young, too old, or disabled. As to why someone can't 'play down' into what we'd consider an easier league, I believe peewee leagues only exist in sports that don't have a weight class system. I'd suspect that peewee leagues operate as an impromptu weight class system. I could see an argument being made for basketball, hockey, et c. needing a system similar to weig…
/r/MensRights06/04/13 02:15 AM
9

Lets let women fight with the men lets see how it works out. I think this is exactly what we should do, desegregate everything. Black athletes currently dominate basketball in the US, we don't segregate it. White athletes currently dominate hockey in North America, not segregated either. I personally suspect women perform at lower levels than men across the board because there are simply less women competing in sports. Less competition means a lower quality of athlete. By advocating for segregat…
/r/MensRights06/04/13 12:42 AM
1

He said "nice looking sweater", not "professional-looking sweater". That seems to be willfully missing the point, particularly when he noted their office is casual and that a 'nice sweater' is acceptable attire for women. The point seems to be that there are varying standards between men and women for no apparent, justifiable reason. Sure, it might not be life or death but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed or that it needs to be justified.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 11:38 PM
8

Who was saying misogyny can't happen?
/r/MensRights05/04/13 10:53 PM
0

There is also men's clothing that lacks a collar but which maintains professionalism. The poster even provides an example in his HR request.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 10:45 PM
2

This article is an intriguing example of how the wage gap may be effected by choices as to who customers prefer to interact with. Thank you for linking it.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 09:14 PM
1

It's unfortunately unspecific as to what "anti-abortion leaders" are but, if they mean in elected political positions, we'd expect to see in the ballpark of 77% if there was an even distribution. That is because women make up between 17 to 24% of elected positions.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 01:54 PM
7

If you stick with it to the end, they point out it wouldn't mean the extinction of men at all. The title is sensational and the body plays to the idea of a War of the Sexes but the science isn't and doesn't. It's sad a news source would be unnecessarily decisive but there we have it. I suspect this kind of article is why people get the perception that men and women are against each other more than we really are.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 01:32 PM
1

Yes, there would, and those accusations would be misguided. I certainly agree here but I still thinks that makes this a topic for the MRM. Now we're talking about accusations of sexism as a form of social control and, from my experience, a pervasive one.
/r/MensRights02/04/13 03:48 PM
5

If I wanted to rebut this, I'd present the following. The author admits that men are held to traditionally masculine values in the same way women are held to traditionally feminine values. The author then says that women are systematically set up from birth to be under-qualified for all jobs except those that reinforce traditional femininity. That is sexism, according to the article. Logically this means... If women are excluded from jobs that are masculine because they are not masculine If men …
/r/MensRights29/03/13 07:27 PM
1

Depending on time, place, and universe, in this case. It's not impossible for even a straight white American man to have experience as a minority. Even that being on dispute, being a member of a minority group doesn't make one an expert or mouthpiece for 'minorities'. The author is being discounted by the same logic that would be rejected if the position was expressed by a gay black woman.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 05:10 PM
8

Sure. The reason I thought this exchange was interesting is because the person writing for Ladies Making Comics said it's upsetting for a straight white man to put words into a minority's mouth, as if the two are mutually exclusive, while talking about doing so for a character that is a straight white man and a minority. It discounts the idea that there are minorities outside of gender, sex, and race. It also discounts the idea that being a minority is dependent on context. It struck me as a cla…
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:14 PM
17

Sorry if the title isn't really good, I'm still getting the hang of choosing titles. I know this is twitter but it's a conversation between the writer himself and an author focusing on gender issues in an industry that is under siege by people focused on gender issues. With the current context of the comic industry, and 'geek culture' on the whole, I think this is a relevant cultural example of attitudes. The author is being attacked for being a straight white male while actually writing a strai…
/r/MensRights29/03/13 02:25 AM
3

This is a legitimate question and I questioned my perception about it for a long time. Two experiences convinced me that was exactly what was happening. First, I started running in a new area (a park) that had a moderate amount of traffic. I'd pass people often but they were generally alone or in their own group when I did, not with other random people around. At first, it felt like younger (teens until fifties) women were avoiding me but I told myself it was just me being paranoid. The idea was…
/r/MensRights29/03/13 01:37 AM
5

When I came back from overseas I spent six months sleeping on friend's couches. It was difficult for me to sleep in a room alone, though I had one. Initially one of my other military friends slept on the floor (the first night I was home) but I knew he couldn't forever so I started moving from couch to couch. My friends endured me more than welcomed me and that's part of why my recovery took so long. I was always told that 'not talking about it' was what made people eventually break down so, des…
/r/MensRights28/03/13 03:29 PM
2

Oh, and stop lying. What makes you think OP is lying?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 03:04 AM
1

This study hasn't shown a causal relationship to even make the claim "A leads to B." They've only shown a correlation and that assuming their methodology (how they determine what is and is not sexist) is solid. So I definitely agree with you, just think you're being too nice in this specific case.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 02:50 AM
8

This is what I have a problem with. Joan of Arc (who she compared herself to) was a self-proclaimed religious prophet that claimed to speak with with God directly and who also saved a country in the midst of a war. Saying you feel like that is just worrisome, even if hyperbolic, in reference to dealing with someone telling a joke. If I agreed with the rape culture concept, I'd suggest that there is also a violence culture and specifically so in reference to war. Being a person that believes in r…
/r/MensRights28/03/13 02:33 AM
2

I'd be interested in what she means here, as well. I want to give it a forgiving reading but I'm not certain on the exact reference because people use 'feminism' in such a diverse way.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 07:51 PM
6

If Feminism didn't focus on how gendered words effect perception and need to be changed then the evolution of language argument would be rock solid.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 04:18 AM
2

The real issue here is women feeling like they have the right to define social interactions with only their own comfort and needs in mind. On the one hand, women demand to be treated as equals, and then on the other hand, they want special consideration for their overwrought sensitivity to things like dick-jokes. I'd say this is the essence of the article and very correct. I may have stipulated some women but, not being a woman, I'd feel the need to hedge often so I can't really critique that po…
/r/MensRights23/03/13 02:46 AM
3

Honestly, I think this is wonderful. If you find yourself in a position where someone dismisses you because you are not a feminist, or a real feminist, you can tell them you meet the definition and link this. It will make you impossible to dismiss (since they can't tell you what you think) or they will be required to define feminism in a more specific way.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 02:33 AM
1

I had this initial perception as well. In her account of the events, she retells an explicit sexual joke that she was told earlier and I'd think, if she wanted to, she could have used that. I have to wonder why she picked the guy she did and why she didn't share his jokes as faithfully. Sadly, we could only speculate.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 01:15 AM
3

I followed the link to her account of events because, at this point, I just want to know what the jokes actually were. They're just obliquely referenced as though that guy would personally stand over any young woman attempting to enter the field, then repeat them to bully each one of those women until they left. It feels very overstated.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 11:50 PM
17

It happened to me. She means, "I actively did this." The empty inbox isn't karmic retribution, it's the effect of her actions. She actively misled sixty men. Most people on a dating site never even talk to that many people. She likely had a profound effect on the local online dating pool.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 11:28 PM
1

I'm reading and trying to follow along. Thank you for your time.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 09:13 PM
2

As the Cleveland Plain Dealer explained, “The 16-year-old is charged with one misdemeanor count of aggravated menacing for threatening the life of the victim on Twitter. The 15-year-old is charged with one misdemeanor count of menacing for threatening bodily harm to the victim on Facebook.” The threats against the victim were merely the latest ugly attacks in a case that was, from its beginning, about the devastating power of online community’s hostility toward girls and women. I find it interes…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 09:02 PM
2

What? You said that I'd have to give time to a post before declaring that the community supported or denied its statements. Is this no longer your position? To say the community supported a particular comment. If you're making a broader claim, like Men's Rights supports homophobia, you'd need a cross section of comments to see how the idea is supported across multiple contexts. If you're talking about finding another comment, then we're no longer talking about the comment that spawned this conve…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 08:48 PM
2

I'm sure another will be along shortly. I'll use your requested elapsed time of one day before commenting. Waiting until a comment has been up a day, and is the positive numbers, before commenting to say it proves your expectation is literally the definition of confirmation bias. We'd have to find a multitude of homophobic comments as they were posted, monitor them, then see how often they reached a significant number of upvotes. This presumes that I haven't considered it. I have already conside…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 08:23 PM
1

I don't think we do. A better question might be "how do we increase accountability on the topic?" We certainly wouldn't want to develop an SRS style public shaming forum. Anonymous quoting would unfortunately draw the common response "that's not a true feminist." I think the best was can do it a comment at a time like we are right now.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 08:06 PM
2

I'm not sure how we'd have a control, other than intentionally posting a homophobic comment to monitor. Even then, if you're not willing to consider you may be experiencing a confirmation bias, I'm not sure that would be helpful. From a scientific standpoint, the best you can say at this moment is that the data has been corrupted so you can not make a claim about the attitudes of this subreddit.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 08:04 PM
2

So essentially, only a little less than half of it is in support of a morally repellent, homophobic comment? It's now at -5. Almost 2/3<sup>rds</sup> of those whom have voted so far have been against it. If this was congress, we'd have a 3/5<sup>ths</sup> super majority. If it was a presidential election, it would be a shameful blowout. Does characterizing it like that, instead of 'damning faint praise,' encourage you to reconsider the possibility that you may be confirming a bias?
/r/MensRights22/03/13 07:49 PM
8

I don't have visibility to that information. As of this comment, it's 9/8, it was 9/7 when I first commented. So it went from 2 to 1. Even without visibility it's clear that it's not a resoundingly supported position. Or perhaps I simply keyed into a misogynistic and homophobic comment with a positive score at the time of my comment. Reads as "1 hour ago" right now on a 4 hour old post. By those standards, I could find a terrible comment on all but the most active of subreddits that still reads …
/r/MensRights22/03/13 07:03 PM
2

Honestly, I just wouldn't be comfortable with the comparison that women are like children and men are like adults. We'll never have gender equality if we justify attitudes by infantilizing women. I'm surprised to find someone advocating that stance at all, it's textbook misogyny.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:53 PM
9

How many of you were told - by a relative or older friend- to 'get an education so you won't have to rely on a man'? I feel that, if the author really wanted the full picture of this, he'd ask something like "how many of got the impression that you didn't have to worry about education because you can rely on a woman" right after. Apparently 25% of women (down from 50%) have received that impression about men... right? As far as I'm concerned, women not even having the option to rely on men (when…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:47 PM
19

I say something like this every time. We're not saying men are too weak to control their impulses. That position presumes that all men are rapists, no matter how much the people who use it object. When someone says that women should make themselves hard targets, it's not because men can't control themselves, it's because rapists want to rape. It's their explicit goal, so much so we've named them after it.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:44 PM
19

That comment has a very unfavorable ratio of up to down votes. Perhaps you've focused on it because it confirms your belief about this subreddit? Couldn't I go to literally any subreddit and find a terrible comment or two?
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:41 PM
-3

Could you define sexism and clearly show how the exact comment in question meets that definition? It's not clicking for me.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:00 PM
2

Unfortunately, the news titles says she called out "sexual harassment." If that were the case, I could see why the would be bad. I'm afraid the definition of sexual harassment is being over-inflated here.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 11:31 PM
4

To defend Jab's position (since I'm also a Cross), he doesn't say every woman wants to be part of it, his claim is a conditional, "any woman who..." I believe there's a truth to what he says in a The Grass is Greener sense. The Boys' Club isn't really a thing, as far as most people here are concerned. The best reading I can give him is that some people think this fictional thing (The Boys' Club) exists and they want to be part of it so they emulate what they think makes the fictional people in t…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 11:20 PM
9

She may not identify as feminist but she does directly invoke the concept of White Male Privilege. That's the essence of Feminist Theory. It's simply no longer a well defined concept, anyone can be feminist, or not, as they please in any way they please because no one is willing to make any strong, global claims as to what that means.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 10:03 PM
9

DDOS terrorists! Wow, that's incredibly hyperbolic. If I were the kind of person to want to be offended, that would do the trick.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:56 PM
8

Hi! I saw this and would like to hear more. Disagreement can be very healthy for people, we should all have our beliefs and opinions challenged. If you have time, stating more about why you disagree would be appreciated by me, at least, and by many people here, I suspect.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:48 PM
3

When a limb suddenly goes missing, the shock will constrict major blood vessels for a short time. We were warned about it in my combat lifesaver course, it leads people with only a little medical training (such as myself) to think a major wound isn't as bad as it really is. A lot of times a tourniquet may not be applied when it's really needed because the blood flow doesn't look that bad. If an ambulance got there pretty quickly, they might not have had much of a problem with the wound.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 02:04 PM
4

Willingness to be offended isn't limited to women. If you return, you might be able to make a powerful statement by having several people who won't speak.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 11:01 PM
1

"No one should feel unsafe in a public space." - Benjamin Franklin
/r/MensRights19/03/13 07:51 PM
1

If it is just a feature of the OkCupid demographic, we'd have to wonder why the female attractiveness distribution was a spot on bell curve exactly like we'd expect it to be.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 02:27 PM
9

I'd say it's a good article. The author says online dating is easy for women, hard from men, that is a privilege, and she has supported it through complacency. I disagree with some of her core beliefs but she applies them evenhandedly. I thought it was worth noticing, as an aside, it's hard for her to admit her privilege and that she isn't fighting against it. It reinforces my personal belief that the concept of privilege, when used on a personal level, is clearly used as an attack.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 04:42 AM
2

I don't assume ignorance or maliciousness on the part of the MRM; I see it everyday when I check in. It's not something I WANT to see. If you haven't done a statistical analysis to determine the prevalence, I'd say you might have yourself a case of confirmation bias right here. With your complaint being "a deliberate twisting and cherry picking of statistics," I find it surprising. No one would deny that the MRM (or literally any movement in history) has people that identify with the movement bu…
/r/MensRights17/03/13 07:31 PM
5

I don't care that you aren't a feminist. I very often here see the idea that feminism causes and perpetuates the very gender roles that it is trying to destroy, and that is an incorrect assumption. I find it interesting you label it an assumption and not an opinion or deduction. Many people here are familiar with feminism but simply disagree. Before you can really make the claim to us that feminism doesn't perpetuate any gender roles at all, you'd have to define feminism. I just care that you al…
/r/MensRights17/03/13 05:23 PM
1

We can argue with statistics in this case easily, correlation doesn't represent a cause. It may be the case that men are more likely to get in an accident, followers of Judaism are more likely to repay loans, or even that left handed people are more likely to speed on Sunday. None of that means being a man, being Jewish, or being left handed cause those conditions. The insurance companies could just be using a hot/cold gambling strategy. It is our expectations of those groups (often in the form …
/r/MensRights17/03/13 01:25 PM
1

If we were to speak in a purely statistical sense (i.e. Women are more likely to be underemployed, men are more likely to be subject to violence, black people are given the longest sentences in the American criminal justice system) then we could address any sort of institutionalized discrimination. The problem with the concept of privilege is that it is generally used in a way that assumes no statistical outliers. "Check your privilege" specifically is used that way, as it's meant to be used on …
/r/MensRights15/03/13 07:02 PM
2

Not only in different ways but different times, places, and contexts. Privilege is not a worthwhile concept on an individual level because individual experience is so highly varied.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 03:29 PM
10

If a website has rules against hate speech, reporting something so they will enforce their own rules is not abridging freedom of speech. That website is not required, as a business, to host any particular content.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 05:04 AM
1

Personally, I have a hard time believing that women who lament their situation like that would be happy with a man not interested in sex at all. While there's certainly I middle ground, I think they're ignoring it.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 08:40 PM
2

Mother's day, nationally recognized in 1914. Father's day, nationally recognized in 1972. I did not know that.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 01:56 PM
2

Possibly. I read it to likely mean that some men think they're getting consent at the same time some women think they aren't giving consent. I suspect that the dominant feminist position will be the same and we'll disagree on cause. Calling men who think they are getting consent but aren't rapists is disingenuous. I'd guess that percentage may represent, in part, women that think they couldn't, not didn't, give consent.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 11:57 PM
8

One of the primary factors in crime is weather. The sexual assault rate could have dropped simply due to a harsh winter (that would keep everyone home) or a mild winter (that would keep everyone out of the bars and enjoying nature). A single year's data, when talking about crime, is nearly meaningless.
/r/MensRights10/03/13 01:37 PM
3

I thought this myself just today while looking through a post of porn stars with and without make up. It does show the other side of the coin, however. While women can be judged (and harshly) based upon their looks, it could also be taken to show that men are not afforded the opportunity to be beautiful should they want to be.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 11:01 PM
9

When I initially came to this board, I was a bit put off by the focus on feminism. As I read more I notice that Patriarchy Theory is inextricably linked with Men's Rights. I still don't call myself anti-feminist, I think most are trying to do what they figure is right, but Patriarchy Theory is most definitely incompatible with a world view that will allow equality; even modern feminist theory is growing into accepting that. This picture isn't a picture about feminism, I wouldn't say, but a pictu…
/r/MensRights09/03/13 07:05 PM
11

I was going to say those in deep poverty. How many potentially genius African blood diamond miners or Afghan dirt farmers might there be? The fact that we have places in the world where there is almost no education, income, or industry is, without the shadow of a doubt, the largest untapped reservoir of talent in the world; men and women both.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 07:02 PM
12

Seriously, how do men get "thanked" every day in a way that women do not? I don't know but I'd like to see this acted out in sketch comedy so we could see just how ridiculous the idea is. Like when you see someone walk down a line of people and they shake the black dude's hand differently but instead they turn up their nose and walk right by the woman.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 01:21 AM
2

Busted
/r/MensRights09/03/13 01:03 AM
-5

The words [norm](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm_(social) and normative are prescriptive terms when used generically. They are said when "relating to an ideal standard or model." Wikipedia isn't authoritative, of course, but is an excellent source when talking about how words are commonly used. Calling transsexualism uncommon would be more accurate with the way it is being used. We shouldn't ignore the context of the word 'normal.' It will get in the way of what is being said. I think it's imp…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 04:24 PM
-5

Accuracy is based on common usage and etymology. The word normal does not mean common. Normal is generally considered to be a value judgment, in this the applicable definition would be "according with, constituting, or not deviating from a norm, rule, or principle." Norms, rules, and principles are standards we, as thinking things, apply to our environment. People that use 'abnormal' to describe others who do not fit into traditional gender binary aren't referring to how common it is, especially…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 02:21 PM
14

The post itself was a coherent summation of their position and I agree the opinion shouldn't be censored. The repetition of the post so that it is the only definition on the page is itself an attempt to censor, undermining the message of the post. I think it shows that, for at least some feminists, just being heard isn't the issue. Being the only one heard is as important.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 02:30 AM
8

I doubt there's any proof that he called the deputy. Our differing opinions hinge of this fact. Sadly, I don't think there's a way to clarify this more. The court could request a copy of the incident report which should exist if the deputy was called and if he treated it as a crime needing investigation. Just because the department didn't assign an investigator doesn't mean a report was not properly completed. IANAL, but I doubt he could ever get a conviction or even win a civil lawsuit against …
/r/MensRights03/03/13 08:35 PM
10

You get really tangential in this comment, to the point of not really being on topic. The point is that the quoted stance "if the sex was voluntary, then the parenthood is also" is clearly not the case. Abortion, adoption, and legal abandonment are all options that can take place after voluntary sex to prevent parenthood. Voluntary sex is not a sufficient condition for parenthood. As this article shows, it isn't even a necessary condition.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 05:24 PM
22

There is something interesting about how this was characterized in the article. Of all three examples, the boy that was raped was only described as passive in one of them. The 15-year-old in California who was seduced by the 34-year-old mom next door. The 13-year-old boy in Kansas who had sex with his 17-year-old baby­sitter. The 15-year-old boy in Florida who impregnated a 20-year-old. The idea that being seen as the agent in an interaction is always beneficial seems to actually be damaging in …
/r/MensRights03/03/13 05:21 PM
42

He even did contact police 2 weeks after (compared to other rape cases where women don't contact police AT ALL and still get a conviction, 2 weeks is pretty damn good) This seems incredibly important to me. They dated for another month, that means he didn't know she was pregnant or about her infidelity at the time he reported the incident. It would be incredibly difficult to report your current significant other for rape and, I imagine, just as difficult to follow up once people could think you …
/r/MensRights03/03/13 05:16 PM
1

Current social perception. If we accept the Feminist platform that men are viewed as actors and women as objects (I do, to an extent) then this kind of language can be see as reflecting that. Describing sex between a minor and an adult (by current legal definition) as he (the minor) got sex is saying it in an active way. He's being characterized as an agent when we likely wouldn't say it that way when talking about a woman.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 08:11 PM
12

Some, if not all of the girls, were minors. Well this would make a huge legal difference, wouldn't it? It's not illegal to view a naked photo of an 18 year old woman but it's definitely illegal to send such a photo to a minor.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 04:35 PM
4

He got sex from a looker. This is the ultimate point of this entire thread. He got sex, a female victim would have been forced to have sex by a male offender. The problem isn't really the decision, it's the inequity of how the decision was applied, as other people have said. I'm only pointing out that the way we talk about these things shows how we think about them. It's an example of a male as agent / female as object view. That's not equal.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 04:18 PM
15

Also, feminized. She might find that attractive but I'm not sure the author, speaking through that character, really wants to make the claim that all women prefer men of a particular type. A character can be sexualized in a number of different styles. This comic shows the woman drawing a body type exactly counter to the man she's speaking to. Being directly told I'm the opposite of what is attractive would make me uncomfortable too. This isn't telling in a general sense, either. She's speaking d…
/r/MensRights28/02/13 02:37 PM
1

What is the difference? The private organization charges a fee in exchangeable for a service I believe the Supreme Court's position is that public business has a significant effect on interstate commerce and the ability of people to travel. Private organizations do not have that effect and, because of that, public business' discrimination can limit a group's freedom to travel or live where they care to.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 06:58 PM
3

An, in my opinion, unconstitutional and certainly immoral part of the civil rights act. Constitutional and moral or not, it is not legal for a business to refuse to hire someone based upon their sex. The State is defined as the organization with a monopoly on the initiation of force or violence within a geographical area. I'm not going to debate this, actually. It's tangential and I already know we fundamentally disagree. Sort to divert. For the same reason, businesses like Curves that cater to …
/r/MensRights27/02/13 06:12 PM
5

Freedom of association. No big deal dude. They have every right to hire whoever they want for whatever reasons. Not according to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII. Be concerned with systemic issues that lead to violent power (the state). You should define your usage of The State and justification for calling it violent. The guy who sued Hooters to try and get hired looked like a petty idiot, not a gender warrior for equality. I don't think he looked petty at all. He's correct, it is accept…
/r/MensRights27/02/13 02:10 PM
2

I believe you missed what I was saying. I was offering a number for what percentage of the war correspondent positions are occupied by males to give the numbers context. Occupying 75% of the positions but incurring 100% of the deaths means something different than occupying 95% of the positions and 100% of the deaths, for example.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 10:46 PM
2

There are also people that try to avoid labels all together. They're worth considering in order to view the idea from a different angle. I don't self-identify as either, personally.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 06:56 PM
2

I feel like an article could be written titled "You want proof that criminalization does not work? Look no further than the War on Drugs" which would have a much stronger position. A more reasonable claim would be that criminalization may sometimes work.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 06:35 PM
7

Not the most specific numbers, sadly, but a Harvard publication says "Three quarters of these journalists are male." So even an 88% male death rate is significantly disproportionate, let alone a 100% rate.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 06:12 PM
11

When I looked this up, to make this same argument about law being a clear lesson not to rape, I found that a prohibition against rape goes back all the way to Hammurabi's Code. People have been told not to rape literally as long as codified law has existed. I've yet to see a society which had laws but did not have laws against rape. The only other law with that pedigree is murder, so far as I am aware.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 03:39 PM
5

I'm not sure this is a fair characterization of MR. Not only do many people vocally disagree with this approach but it is a common tactic in Feminism and was in the Civil Rights Movement. Showing the privilege of a group, to use Feminist language, so that it may be known. Checking a group's privilege is not an attack on that group or the individuals of that group, Feminism holds.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 11:34 PM
4

By specifying the United States, OP is also specifying a democratic republic that allows all citizens over 18 to vote. That information really changes the character of the question.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 11:28 PM
3

I'm only talking about the quote given and the context of the article being on topic of Feminism. I'm not into the article yet. I was saying that, of the given quote, the part that makes me feel it is a criticism of all men is the 'global system' line.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 03:11 AM
4

It's the "global system" part that makes it sound like the article is accusing all men, at least to me. I'm not sure what exactly they mean by that but the image immediately evoked is a long table filled with evil men twirling their waxed moustaches as they hold proceedings for a shadow government that dictates to all men how to oppress women. The natural evolution of a concept titled The Patriarchy.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 02:42 AM
3

I had success with it in an Aesthetics class. The same professor was my Feminist Epistemology teacher. This message can be successful in a Feminist sphere as long as it's fully developed.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 04:28 PM
3

She prefers the term "supporters of feminism" and thinks that men who insist on self-identifying with the F-word "probably need to readjust their feminist thinking". I wish we had her definition of Feminism for this claim. Most Feminists define a Feminist as "anyone that believes woman and men are equals." I want to know if this woman defines it differently or thinks that men, by definition, can't believe women are equal.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:11 PM
2

I advocate that we should view this as the difference between beauty and utility. The All Bodies Are Good Bodies campaign is targeting women to tell them they are beautiful no matter their size. Men aren't beautiful, however. The message doesn't apply and it's almost impossible to convince people that a fat man can be of as much use as a lean, strong man. As a microcosm, look at fat cops. They're not made fun of because they're not beautiful, they're ridiculed because they can't possibly be as c…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 02:23 PM
9

When the 'men aren't valued for their body' point comes up, I always offer an alternative. What if what we're really seeing is the inability of men to be considered beautiful? That's why no one cares about men in porn, addressing the confidence of overweight men, approaching boys with eating disorders, et c. I suspect the inability of men to be considered beautiful could be the cause (or an aggravating factor, at very least) of what we currently call Female Objectification. The truth is we also …
/r/MensRights22/02/13 02:11 PM
4

None of you know what the fuck you are talking about on this issue. If you assume no one that disagrees with you can be educated on the topic, and I also assume you feel you are, then you can't possibly be open to a conversation on the topic.
/r/MensRights20/02/13 03:18 PM
1

I don't think it matters if someone feels it's harder for them than someone else. I feel like I'm being unclear. It being difficult or not doesn't matter when talking to men. A smaller man is not given any consideration or benefit because of that. There's no reason a woman should. Their body dimensions are irrelevant in a conversation centered around being able to perform the tasks; they better be able to do it. I think we agree but are just addressing the topic from different angles. The compla…
/r/MensRights20/02/13 03:10 AM
1

I know it's a particularly unpopular opinion here but I don't think women would perform much below men, if at all, if sports were desegregated. Olympic records between men and women show very little variation and that's even considering that many more men compete in sports than women. A higher rate of competition produces higher records and better players. If sports were completely integrated, I believe women would be perfectly competitive in a generation or two.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 08:11 PM
1

Examples of "corrective measures" are lowering the physical requirements for a job (such as firefighting) to allow more women to join, or reproductive rights for men (such as the ability to forfeit financial responsibility during pregnancy). Neither of these limitations (fitness or finances) are biological. To point out that fitness tests often favor areas some men excel in (like push-ups) which have little relevance to the job is a legitimate complaint. Some police departments are altering thei…
/r/MensRights19/02/13 08:01 PM
1

I simply don't think that matters, assuming it is true. We're moving full force into a society without gender roles. Harder or not, it may not be optional.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 10:49 AM
-1

Can a single woman carry a single man far enough and fast enough out of harms way to be treated safely? The military doesn't measure this and the PT test does not require it. Average male/female are also not standardized measurements. You're not really making a claim here but I think you've assumed I'm saying something I'm not. The military is populated with a surprising amount of 'weak' men. I'm not particularly strong myself. The thing is, no one cares. Not performing is not an option. The rea…
/r/MensRights19/02/13 04:31 AM
0

I think women are perfectly suited for the Infantry. I don't think a draft has been needed to populate any other positions but I can't check right now. I'm on my phone.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 09:33 PM
1

All those jobs are certainly needed, I just don't recall ever reading that draftees were needed to populate those ranks. When a draft begins, it'd imagine a lot of people enlist into those positions to avoid possibly being drafted into the Infantry. Sadly, I'm on my phone so I can't readily check that.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 09:31 PM
4

It is my understanding that a draft is used to populate the Infantry. I'm not sure that is how it would work in the future but I believe that is how it has worked in the past. That clarification could have played a role in the answers, had it been provided.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 08:59 PM
21

I found it more interesting that the majority of Republicans thought women should be drafted. It seems to conflict with how Republicans are characterized in the 'War on Women'. As a demographic, they're more progressive than the women polled. Of course, we don't know how many of those women were Republican to really compare. I wish we knew the political leanings by gender in those numbers.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:28 PM
19

I guess if you're going to teach people that any amount of alcohol makes them incapable of making decisions then making it a gender neutral message is best.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:22 PM
1

If a draft were to occur, it would be to draft Infantry. That's the MOS that gets drafted, historically. In the Army and Marine Corps both, the primary job on any individual is Infantry, more explicitly so in the MC. If you feel women can not effectively be Infantry, they should not be in either of those branches at all.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 05:56 PM
5

Honestly, I wouldn't even frame this as a decision made against the mother. A person can do something in their own interest rightly and without it having to be against someone else. People are not obligated to submit to other's desires. In a world where everyone can work, there is government assistance, and where we allow single parenthood in many other instances, child support is a desire, not a necessity.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 03:31 PM
7

I don't think you know what the naturalist argument is, (Sounds like your complaining that men can't get pregnant?), but assuming you do know what it is I'll be clear. I'm not saying it good because it's natural I'm saying that's the way it is. In that case, you're not even having an ethical or prescriptive argument. You're just reminding us how everything is without contributing. You can see how that might confuse people, since you used words like equal, balanced, and most especially fair which…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 03:23 PM
11

You are correct, but the thing is pregnancy is something which is almost entirely a female matter, it's not equal and to claim that something is unfair because it's not balanced doesn't make sense, if you don't like the fact pregnancy isn't 50/50 take it up with mother nature. Many people have used the naturalistic argument against women over the course of Feminism. We have altered out entire educational system under the premise that women learn in a way that is different from men. We've altered…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 02:18 PM
1

How am I avoiding things? How am I being dishonest? Sorry for the delay! I don't mean to say you're intentionally lying or any other thing negative about you personally. Your argument is employing a tactic meant to avoid debate by appealing to an authority that doesn't exist. It means what it means. Striving for equality of the sexes. It has been commonly defined as such. I'm saying that definition is inappropriate. When you then say "but that's the definition" your argument is tautological, out…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 12:42 AM
2

You're arguing against an objective, dictionary definition of a word. Please stop saying this like it matters. The dictionary only exists to document the common usage of a word. It is not objective, factual, or authoritative in any why when it comes to questioning how words should be defined, as opposed to how they are currently commonly defined.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 12:29 AM
6

Definitions are not a scientific observation of an event in nature that we could title a fact. Calling any definition THE definition is avoiding a conversation. Feminists themselves have gone after numerous definitions. If you don't want to talk about it that's fine but you should be intellectually honest about it.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 09:40 PM
5

I believe the dissent may be your definition of Feminist. You have listed the goal of the movement but I'd argue multiple movements can share a goal. Feminism would be better defined by Patriarchy Theory.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 08:49 PM
3

What men, in the US, get jailed for that? Can you post the specific laws? Or, better yet, the case law you're referring to? IE the cases where men were prosecuted, under US/State etc law, for this? Having sex without a condom when his partner requested one is part of the claim against Julian Assange, he has been charged with rape in regards to that. If equal standards were applied to men and women in sex, birth control, and consent then he could possibly have had a legal claim for a rape charge.…
/r/MensRights17/02/13 03:44 PM
2

1) There are certainly people like that, I just don't think the behavior is limited to men or to wanting sex. Historically, we've called them con artists. People deciding that this specific grift needed a title, and one that is identical to what we would have actually called people genuinely like that, is damaging. Now men that actually are nice are being berated and an intense skepticism is forming around the idea of niceness in general. Because men only want sex, a Nice Guy (or nice guy) must …
/r/MensRights17/02/13 12:00 AM
1

I've met some perfectly nice men in my time... Hi! I hate to snipe out on thing in a long thread because I feel like I'm being misleading or unfair. I agree with you in a general sense, the chivalry contract isn't relevant anymore but that doesn't mean niceness is irrelevant too. That being said (and emphatically meant), I don't think we can ignore the collateral damage that Nice Guys are currently taking. There is a conflict, seemingly independent of a debate over chivalry, that is being waged …
/r/MensRights16/02/13 11:19 PM
4

As a philosophy graduate, I was waiting for that degree to pop up the entire time.
/r/MensRights16/02/13 10:53 PM
2

Bagram primarily. I was an MP there.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 02:17 PM
1

Honestly, I see it as a similar argument that's used against uncircumcised men and smegma in relation to that. It is produced by both sexes but I have never heard a woman's aversion to smegma be blamed on misogyny, misandry, Patriarchy or any such concept. I think feminist articles like this are damaging in that they portray a difference between the sexes where there isn't one. It's like crying wolf.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 03:30 AM
5

Currently, Infantry does not have a different PT test than any other MOS, with the exception of Special Forces. SF has higher standards than everyone else. Women should be able to be drafted into the Infantry without a problem, assuming things stay as they are.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 03:14 AM
7

If we were both, as public servants that had to deal with the results of war, just told that second that a major American engagement had ended, I'd probably be down. Criticism of this image often lacks fulfilled context. Like the fact those two were reunited decades later and both still held fond memories of the event. It was a spontaneous celebration of extreme happiness and relief. When I got back from overseas, I could have choked to death on my own vomit in the gutter for what society cared,…
/r/MensRights15/02/13 03:08 AM
1

She probably assumed that her readers would know what she referred to, and anyone who didn't would do their research before commenting about how awful she is. I agree that she let some personal feelings interfere with her writing- but I don't think those moments are meant to be taken too seriously. I certainly never said she is awful, I don't know her. All my criticism was oriented to the article. On that topic, making an article sometimes serious and sometimes not is going to have a confusing, …
/r/MensRights15/02/13 02:54 AM
1

That's certainly the initial stance, however she doesn't define what those traits are and is later fairly inflammatory without making that distinction. Anyone that doesn't perform oral sex is bad at sex, not just misogynist assholes that refuse to get to know a woman's body. I'd have assumed the best on that one but I looked couple points where she's contradictory like that. They were not the only ones. The entire article swings between being reasonable and being mean.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 01:32 AM
2

If this was a story about a particular ex, that would be one thing. This article isn't that, however.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 07:30 PM
1

I found the use of the term 'pathologize' interesting. Isn't an uncircumcised penis treated as unhealthy? Even in pseudo-scientific ways and not just for being 'icky'.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 07:25 PM
6

We don't know, from the information in that story, anything about the qualifications of those women.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 04:01 PM
8

So of course you should never coerce or pressure anyone into a sexual act he or she isn’t comfortable with. Later... He’s definitely not entitled to blowjobs either Isn't not doing something you don't mind because someone else won't do something they do mind exactly what coercion is? I mean, look: If you have a spine issue that makes the head angle excruciatingly painful, ok, I get that. I do not doubt that straight men exist who don’t eat pussy for some reason other than being misogynist asshol…
/r/MensRights14/02/13 03:58 PM
2

The problem is that nobody, including and especially other men, is stopping men from abusing women. This is factually incorrect, given how her statement (and entire response) implies the claim is founded in an acceptance of Patriarchy Theory. If society makes laws (as is necessary to be called a democracy or repubilc), men are in control of society (as Patriarcy Theory posits), and abusing women is illegal (all forms of physical violence are), then it is only men that are stopping men from abusi…
/r/MensRights11/02/13 10:21 PM
10

Children do not have retractable foreskins until they begin puberty. Prematurely retracting them will cause scarring and potentially other issues. That's something interesting I didn't know. If just retracting the foreskin before puberty can cause damage, that makes circumcision sound more even more dangerous at a glance.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 10:00 PM
47

Can a person call all men rapists and not then be dismissed as a vocal loony?
/r/MensRights09/02/13 03:02 PM
2

That's absolutely correct. I probably should have said that accusation should not or is not equivalent to a conviction.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 08:20 PM
2

Unlike this statement suggests, a person could conceivably feel s/he did not give consent but the person with whom they had sex can still be legally found not guilty of committing a crime. The accusation wasn't false and an accusation does not mean a conviction, as implied. The accused may simply not be guilty, either because of clearly perceived consent or some other reason. Then, of course, there still are false accusations, her statement doesn't disprove them like she thinks. Someone could si…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 05:52 PM
6

You invoked the circlejerk verbatim. I think trying to keep it here is pretty reasonable of OP.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 02:55 AM
18

Or you see your involvement with kids a source of power and feel entitled to it. Certainly seems to be the case. Another thing I found intriguing about that, when she does things for her children it is a sign of caring (I'd assume by the tone of her article) but when he does it then it is seen as a play on power dynamics and as him 'maintaining his objects.' I'd say this is a very clear case of rationalization/confirmation bias. She already believes men treat other like objects and relationships…
/r/MensRights03/02/13 04:54 AM
1

Thank you, I'll correct this now.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 02:36 AM
5

I wasn't even talking about if feminism is good or not. The initial question was "is feminism anti-men?" That's all I was addressing. Things change and, in the future, being anti-men could presumably no longer be the case but that speculation isn't really doing anything for us in this context.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 12:52 AM
18

I think all of us have difficulty discussing what feminism is as a movement. A movement isn't its followers (though they can be a good indicator of certain factors at times) but the core tenets that must be believed to carry the title, in this case the title "feminist." It is my position that people often confuse a movement's goal (in feminism's case, equality for women) with its core tenets. It is common to hear "if you believe in gender equality, you are a feminist" but that's conflating a goa…
/r/MensRights02/02/13 11:14 PM
1

I have a hard time understanding her logic here. Perhaps in the past when women were unable to vote this may hold true... I see this one a lot, and I don't mean to snag it out of your post to snipe you, but I think you might end up addressing this with her. In America, universal manhood suffrage predated universal suffrage by only 100 years. If voting across the entire group is a prerequisite for Patriarchy, there's really only a good claim for men (on the whole) in America to have universally b…
/r/MensRights01/02/13 03:32 PM
1

I said the pistol was superior for self-defense, self-defense in my understanding is the capability to either dissuade an attacker through possession of a firearm or to capably incapacitate an attacker without killing them. Intent to kill or simply wound is not part of the definition of self defense. At the point another person is attempting to kill you, your motivations in a violent response are legally irrelevant. Which i will admit is tragic, i'm not some sort of idiotic crusader trying to st…
/r/MensRights30/01/13 11:19 PM
1

I'm not sure someone from the West saying "women and children first" is so unprecedented as to warrant this response. I've heard it many times in my life.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 10:20 PM
17

Mrs. Grenen and her husband, Jim, both attorneys, were in the midst of a yearlong quest to enact change at the state level by helping to author a common-sense bylaw that would disallow boys from playing on girls teams. Is it common-sense that boys and girls shouldn't play contact sports together because boys are more durable? I know it's not exactly a sport but war is sure-as-fuck full contact and complete gender desegregation is being hailed as a great advance (with which I agree.) How are both…
/r/MensRights29/01/13 05:20 AM
5

It's not equitable. Even in hookup culture, men still do most of the work, pay for everything, and take the brunt of rejection. It's not as far of a departure from traditional gender roles as women seem to think it is. The only addition I would make to your explanation is this: in hook-up culture, when men do achieve success, it is short lived in comparison to a traditional model with long-term relationships. Not only are men still doing everything but doing it even more often.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 04:35 AM
7

It's nothing more than a bunch of guys voicing their frustrations, and I'm certain women have similar problems. It is and they do. The problem with the term 'mansplaining' is that women are encouraged to share and place importance on their individual experience while, if men participate in the same system, they are dismissively shut down. Mansplaining is the word used against only men when they attempt to engage in the dialectical method of conflict resolution that some people have determined to…
/r/MensRights27/01/13 06:18 PM
14

Even more sad, it's probably one of the primary reasons she considers him to be nice and not at all like the other men she dates.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 02:10 AM
1

For one, things like sexuality are acknowledged to be fairly immutable. People can stretch the boundaries or explore new routes, but it's more or less fixed. That's not the case with general personal beliefs, no matter how internalized. I believe we may simply disagree here. To my knowledge, the "can people change" question has not been scientifically answered. While being "nice" is certainly a subjective social quality (to a point), an individual having strong convictions to be moral is simply …
/r/MensRights26/01/13 10:15 PM
21

I agree. Rape has been a crime since society very first codified law. People have been told not to rape since people have ever been explicitly told what not to do.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 04:41 PM
3

How exactly is this relevant? The "common trait" is a specific mistaken, unethical view of sex and relationships It's relevant in that the unethical view on sex is being intentionally portrayed as overly simplistic in order to make the Nice Guy easy to rail against. To be clear, I am not saying the Nice Guy has a healthy view of relationships, I'm saying the Nice Guy is presented as reprehensible because his unhealthy view is characterized as more simple (and extreme) than it really is. I know t…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 05:16 AM
2

This thread provides many examples of the very concept Grapeban is referring to, it's hardly "manufactured". The only "error" in it is that women can act the same way. It is manufactured in it's two-dimensionality. No one has polled self-proclaimed Nice Guys to get a comprehensive cataloging of the majority opinion. There are no codified guidelines or a signed constitution. Nice Guys do not publish academic articles nor recognize anyone as an authority on Nice Guying. It's a diverse group of peo…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 02:43 AM
2

I'm not saying the angry Nice Guys are justified. I'm saying being frustrated or wrong doesn't make someone contemptible and deserving of out-of-hand dismissal.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 12:26 AM
4

The terminology is different. I'd say the comparable, and ubiquitous, fake trope is the complaint "men only want one thing, sex." Also included are terms like "hump and dump" or even the All Bodies Are Beautiful campaign. While male and female relationships vary, I think this is the same miscommunication. Some men think women can be appeased with niceness and nothing more, then get upset when they accept that isn't true. Some women think men can be appeased with sex (or attractiveness in general…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 12:19 AM
0

Certainly, it's as great an argument against categorizing women whom have dated an asshole as "women who date assholes" as it is against the idea that, if a nice person has done one thing wrong, they can not be nice. Maybe I was convoluted in my point. People aren't one-dimensional. A nice person can occasionally be or date an asshole but still be nice.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 12:12 AM
6

While Nice Guys certainly are bitter, for at least some length of time, I'm not sure we should dismiss that as unimportant. We should ask why. I'd say the answer is, unequivocally, that they are getting their ideas of how to interact with others from somewhere; that's the very essence of society. The message of how to be romantic is so pervasive it has a movie genre, music genre, and numerous types of literature devoted to it. Not only that but commercials, and even Facebook posts literally titl…
/r/MensRights25/01/13 11:03 PM
2

Maybe it's just me (and this is coming from someone that grew up as a nice guy), but if someone else is breaking the "rules" without recourse, perhaps I don't know the rules as well as I thought I did. I'd say this encapsulates the frustration that Nice Guys are expressing. They have been playing by what they understood to be the rules and have passed denial to anger in their understanding of the fact that they have unreal expectations. The real argument here, as I see it, is that one group thin…
/r/MensRights25/01/13 10:49 PM
6

"Nice guys" have been lamenting their lack of affection in the form of bitter tirades against women. The girl in the article is right. "Nice guys" brought this upon themselves for their inability to accept rejection with tact. Women can also have problems with accepting rejection and lamenting men choosing other 'types' to date. The question we should really be asking is why is this a trope for men that requires push back but not so for women.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 10:44 PM
2

I feel like we've passed each other. I'm saying a Nice Guy can never have been condescending and, if they ever are, it will be proof positive they never we nice. While a person never being condescending would be an awesome individual goal, it's most likely impossible, particularly because we can't measure nice or condescension. Someone doesn't even have to mean to be condescending to be perceived that way.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:45 PM
4

You're also assuming that Nice Guys can never be condescending or myopic at any time in relation to any topic. That's certainly an unreal expectation. I'd say, by that standard, no one is nice.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:20 PM
16

I'd say a very legitimate problem with the idea of the Nice Guy is that it is a manufactured concept. It's an incredibly two dimensional portrayal of a robust, complex human being used to dismiss their frustrations with society, or their own personal deficiencies, that is used to ridicule people. Not only should we not ridicule people (for being sluts, Nice Guys, or anything else) but the choice of terminology is used to attack an inappropriately broad group. It's not much less inflammatory than…
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:18 PM
17

If we're boxing and you continuously headbutt me in sight of the referee, though it is against the clearly codified rules, and go on to beat me using that very tactic while I follow all rules then it would not be unreasonable for me to be upset. The person you're responding to is saying this is what's happening to 'nice guys' is dating is viewed as a game.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:10 PM
9

How does this thread prove that claim correct?
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:07 PM
3

I would hate to send women to the front lines to be captured and raped, mostly as a consequence of selective service. When male soldiers are captured, what often happens to them is no less terrible than rape. I don't see why one would matter more than the other.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 06:15 PM
7

It should be noted that the police are restrained in what charges they can file based upon the warrant a judge or judicial commissioner will issue. While this article doesn't specify who called the police, often they can just be proxy for a citizen filing a complaint. If the girl said she believes her sparring partner hit her with the express purpose of causing injury, she may be thus filing charges with the officer there just investigating the crime she is alleging and collecting evidence.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 09:02 PM
20

I found that line interesting as well. She says the women's lounge serves unspecified women's needs in some unspecified way that would be impossible to do if it were coed. By not disclosing what those needs are or how it would be impossible to do it in a different environment, she's deliberately hamstringing a rebuttal; either that women don't need that lounge or that men may need the same thing for the same reasons. It operates under the premise that women need more care than men and that is be…
/r/MensRights23/01/13 10:08 PM
2

Feminism is really hard for dudes. Between second-wave and third-wave and post-feminism and men’s rights subreddits, we’re not sure when we’re being helpful and when we’re getting it wrong. This suggests that men can't possibly understand gender equality, the definition of feminism most often given. The idea that women have some inherent or special knowledge of such things (they are just as unaware of what it is like to be a man, after all) is itself sexist, just a beneficial troupe that is ofte…
/r/MensRights23/01/13 01:24 PM
47

This shows a core misunderstanding about what the Fake Geek Girl is supposed to be and how that relates to the stereotypes geeks endure. The reason unattractive women aren't accused of being Fake Geek Girls is because being unattractive is part of the geek stereotype, even more so than being male is. The reason attractive women are viewed with suspicion is because male geeks are told ad nauseam that attractive women will never like them or the things they are interested in, just as they are told…
/r/MensRights22/01/13 09:50 PM
4

So men have a duty to have sex with women and not with men. That is rape culture and it is feminists demanding it. Oh, and forced heterosexuality for men. Can you see the difference between these people and Sarah Palin or Rick Santorum? Me neither. I find this to be a possible argument against the whole of feminism that is intriguing. While it's fair to say that this quote was delivered in a time that most people did not understand or accept homosexuality, and that we should not apply those olde…
/r/MensRights22/01/13 09:14 PM
-1

MGTOWs seem to think that no women are good, and refuse to trust women or believe any could be found to be trustworthy. I have been disenchanted with marriage since prior to hearing the idea had a movement and associated term. I do not believe any of what you've said is representative of that reasoning. If you will say that feminism is not a homogeneous movement, how can you then claim MGTOW is? In your initial comment you admit feminism (or at least some feminists) may have initially held discr…
/r/MensRights22/01/13 09:08 PM
2

Police officers experience this as well. Domestic Violence calls are the most dangerous because, once handcuffs go on the primary aggressor, the victim often turns of the officers and attacks them.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 08:17 PM
5

Statistics suggest men rape much more because the definitions of rape used to collect those statistics do not allow men to be victims to women. When that is controlled for, the gape narrows considerably. I've seen a CDC (I believe) source for that claim on this subreddit many times. I'm confined to my netbook due to internet issues so I can't snag it really quick but I'm sure someone would link us if you're interested in seeing it. Worse yet, when I was working in a jail I found that women were …
/r/MensRights22/01/13 08:12 PM
3

I find it difficult to believe that any feminist would advocate a concept that is an extension of the idea men act but women are acted upon. The idea that a person with any level of intoxication is no longer an agent, then restricting that idea to rape (regarded as a woman's issue), is exactly that.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 03:09 PM
-1

Initially, it was meant to be that one cannot consent if they are so drunk as to be immobile, if conscious. Essentially, they are so drunk they can not present any agency. It's gotten out of control.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 03:07 PM
2

Most men ARE better than the small minority of men who treat women like nothing more than sexual objects. I don't disagree it's a very small minority of men that treat women poorly and like objects. That's part of the reason things like flyer campaigns don't make sense to me. The only crimes I've really seen treated like that are endemic (pirating media, seat belt laws, drunk driving) and very common. The idea of creating a campaign to stop something that has been illegal since we first codified…
/r/MensRights20/01/13 02:55 PM
2

I'd have serious methodology questions. It's my understanding that contractions start out relatively mild, increase in intensity, and then culminate in giving birth. Were these men on a timeline like that, with an end goal that they simply didn't meet? The article mentions a nurse controlled the intensity but nothing more specific. It is just as possible she kept increasing it until the men relented. Cranking it up: The nurse in charge of the experiment turned the electricity coming through the …
/r/MensRights20/01/13 05:24 AM
3

I know this is a caveman trope. I would be curious to know what mating was actually like prior to agriculture. If no one has already done the research, I just might and then post that for everyone.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 04:22 AM
2

Unusual in that they are not creeps among other things, I have no doubt. To be a feminist male can mean holding quite a few beliefs in negative ideas about men. It was the first time I started to question the ideology, actually. I come from a family of strong women and when I was told feminism was just the word for gender equality, I never had a reason to doubt or reject that. It wasn't until I met male feminists in college, and saw how a number of them acted arrogant, that I actually addressed …
/r/MensRights20/01/13 04:20 AM
7

I generally find it intriguing that men (which the posters say they are) would post messages like this. The suggestion that men must actively learn to manage their sex drive, respect consent, and deal with rejection in a way other than rape suggests that the men producing these posters believe themselves to be exceptional among their gender. It's an incomprehensible position to me; I don't assume I'm better than anyone else.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 12:50 AM
13

If you want to address the PT test, I'd suggest the following position. If the PT test has varying levels, that means we are either accepting women by testing them below the standard that is needed to be a capable service member or we are arbitrarily excluding men that would be capable service members by expecting them to be more fit than necessary to perform the job and doing so simply because they are men. Neither of these options are desirable. The PT standards should be set to the level it i…
/r/MensRights20/01/13 12:16 AM
3

This would be correct if you would stipulate something like "When a right has been recognized in modern Western society, some men have had it." It's often noted here that men didn't have universal suffrage until just before women (relatively speaking). Even if you had made such stipulations, I don't believe that statement would get far before you'd have to speak about circumcision and how it relates to a right to bodily integrity, which is referenced not just to oppose FGM but also restricting o…
/r/MensRights20/01/13 12:00 AM
1

Therefore it will be self defense in the women's case almost 9 times as often as men's cases. This isn't exactly correct. The rates in intimate relationships is more 66%/33% (according to your source) and it's important to look at the victims, not the perpetrators, for your claim. This should mean that we'd be looking at women using self-defense at a 2:1 ratio. Unfortunately, we don't have specific numbers to see if that is the case, we should not assume that everyone whom was not convicted of m…
/r/MensRights18/01/13 02:23 PM
1

I'm sorry, I'd like to respond but I'm just not sure on what exactly your claim is. I appreciate that, statistically, men are more likely to commit murder and there are a number of potential reasons for that. I'm saying that, when it comes to per capita statistics, we should be looking at the same rates of conviction and the same average conviction length. With a large enough sample size, they should be very close even if men commit 88% of homicides. I believe what you're trying to say is that, …
/r/MensRights18/01/13 05:21 AM
2

On an individual basis, I would agree with this. Looking at a large sample size, as we are, these individual variations should spread evenly to very similar statistics unless there is a difference between how men and women act or how they are treated. I believe this poster does a compelling job of showing that men and women are either acting differently or being treated differently and that we should investigate. Taken in a context of speaking about feminism (which holds that genders are not inh…
/r/MensRights18/01/13 01:44 AM
4

For some reason, it makes sense to place the blame on women for men's lack of success. That is absurd. Women have every right to be attracted to whatever they want. I believe the frustration is due to the disconnect between what these "nice guys" are told as opposed to the their experience. If the social narrative is that women are looking for men whom are sensitive and romantic, yet being sensitive and romantic leads to a very obvious detriment in relationship success, frustration will arise. I…
/r/MensRights17/01/13 04:53 AM
3

The image of two men in expensive clothes being leered at through a window by a group of women struck many as sexist, tone-deaf, and worse. The existence of the critics' own social narrative is apparent immediately. Both groups are smiling and making eye contact. All of the skirts are even fingertip length or longer, acceptable in school or church. This is clearly a complaint with an agenda.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 04:34 AM
6

I believe it could be well argued that people lack confidence and self-respect due to how they are treated, not as an inherent trait. Confidence and self-respect are likely social traits, not physical traits. If "nice guys" do lack confidence and self-respect, we should probably ask why that is instead of offering quips and moving on.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 04:18 AM
8

I see misandry as a celebratory, empowering, self-aware phenomena that actually has very little to do with men. I use misandry as a way to get riled up about how hard and shitty and somehow still rewarding it is to be a woman in this world. It’s an affirmation of my tough, aggro, female-ness and a reclamation of violent power. I think that sums up the post. She enjoys the idea that misogyny exists and potentially exaggerates the scope to which it does because the existence of misogyny provides h…
/r/MensRights15/01/13 04:10 AM
9

I really didn't want to click that link to add traffic to that page. For some reason the kill all men part struck me. Here's just the text for anyone who needs it or also may not want to visit the page for one reason or another... Misandry is real and it’s also a joke and both of those things are okay So I’ve been tracking the misandry tag again. Always a source of frustration, exhaustion and amusement. AAAnd it seems like the big question asked and argued by both men’s rights crusaders and rad …
/r/MensRights15/01/13 04:04 AM
3

It looked to me like she was attacking him because he was recording her antics on his phone. I may be wrong but that's how I read the situation.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 02:53 AM
1

Hopefully they would be taught to navigate the area more honestly as well. While we can debate about if it is giving good advice or not, that face that it is titled "sneaky ways to keep things casual" makes the intent clear. It was not meant to teach a young lady how to politely reject an interested man but keep him as a friend; it was meant to teach a girl how to convince a boy a relationship is not as casual as it is.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 01:05 AM
16

This is exactly what jumped out at me. The article doesn't advocate just being friends if you don't want to be in a relationship, it explicitly states "sneaky ways to keep things casual." It is advice on how to keep a man interested and under the impression he is or will be in a relationship while not believing that as the person doing this. That is the definition of the friendzone complaint. It's even better they use exactly that word. It's clear documentation it exists.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 12:49 AM
1

If we get rid of the term creep, what is left? "Stalker", maybe, but given that stalking has a fairly specific legal definition and serious consequences for someone accused of it, that's probably a worse solution. I think this is an infinitely better solution. If someone is doing something which is actually wrong, it is likely criminal and we should note that so it can be addressed. If they're doing something wrong and it isn't criminal, we should address that. If they're not doing anything wron…
/r/MensRights13/01/13 01:28 AM
4

17 days, it reads. I thought it was odd too so I looked at the booking photo provided (which would have been taken the day the report was done.) I didn't notice a black eye, myself. It's also worth noting that is the only case of physical abuse she claims and her daughter says "I don’t believe that my mother was a victim of abuse, I truly believe my mother was mentally disturbed." This is definitely a poor case for people to choose to defend her but all five top comments do just that.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 02:59 PM
6

I believe there is a good ontological argument to be made against that idea. Feminism etymologically means of or pertaining to women. It was coined before gender roles and sexes were disjointed. It's a hard sell to say something that means of or pertaining to women originally meant equality in all things.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 10:30 PM
1

I think there's a disconnect here between how you're using the word, as it is defined, and how other are using the word, as they see it being presented in practice. I really enjoyed your link and, if people used Kyriarchy as a way to speak about "The Powers that Be" in some shorthand, that would be fine. Generally, I do see Kyriarchy being used as a repackaging of Patriarchy when people bother to use it at all.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 03:59 PM
1

It didn't strike me as a lead in to rape, either. It's odd to me that's why it was removed but that's the claim. Part of understanding other people is understanding what they may expect. While it's clear not all men expect sex when inviting a woman over for a movie, even if all men did why, shouldn't we discuss that?
/r/MensRights09/01/13 06:39 PM
5

This is surprising to me in that we can't seem to have a conversation about the expectations that pertain to sex without Rape Culture coming up. I didn't learn about the "movie as code for sex" idea until I was twenty-three. The woman that told me had come over to watch a movie with me. She was shocked when I actually put in a movie, sat on the couch with her, and intently watched it.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 03:01 PM
1

I am. I only did some rudimentary copy and paste, I am not at all skilled. Sometimes visualizations just help me.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 11:16 PM
1

That doesn't make for a good infographic though. I agree with your complaints. I have a lot myself. I'd definitely be interested in doing/seeing the same kind of graphic but with some very solid numbers and sources. Something that shows the false reporting rape at around 8-10% (I believe is the best rate I've seen) and that doesn't title literally everyone in the chart a rapist. Also, that take recidivism into account. I'm afraid I just don't have all those sources and numbers on hand.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 03:16 PM
50

On their site they admit that as much as 50% of rapes may be reported. They go really, really low to inflate their figures.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:25 PM
1

What follows is a list of said "rape apology" - she probably should have included those sentences in quotes to prevent this confusion. I could see that may be the case. Unfortunately, it does seem like she author smoothly transitions into the facts of the event in the same paragraph. If I do read it like that (where she presents rape apologist justification she doesn't believe) then I honestly have no information about this event, either factually or how she feels about it. It really only leaves…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:20 PM
1

... still implying that all the unreported, reported, trialed, and jailed people are actually rapists. I'm not sure whether divine providence informed you of that fact, but I don't know where you got it. I'm not supporting those numbers. As I said, I didn't correct the numbers, I only showed what it might look like if they used the less scary spectrum of their own flawed numbers. Even when they use their own problematic studies, they have to show the extreme position. That's what I was trying to…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:59 PM
3

This just came up in another thread that suggested correcting the chart. I wouldn't say I did that at all but here's the same chart with a 45% reporting rate instead of a 10% reporting rate, as the original source says reporting might be as high as 50%. I used the same 5% difference from maximum they gave from the minimum. I added the false accusations in with those whom faced trial, though there's no way for us to know if they did or did not, really. I wanted to give the most favorable reading …
/r/MensRights08/01/13 03:11 AM
6

To give some perspective, here's the same chart but with a 45% reporting rate instead of a 10% reporting rate. The same 5% difference from maximum they gave from the minimum. I added the false accusations in with those whom faced trial, though there's no way for us to know if they did or did not, really. I wanted to give the most favorable reading for their position, other than rate. It looks much less daunting like this, even assuming that everyone accused is a rapist. Just a visual for thought…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:10 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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