TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Storm_cloud Archive

View 3 posts and 262 comments by Storm_cloud on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
7

Why would it be better to encounter a white man in a conference room than a white woman?
/r/MensRights07/05/24 01:27 AM
0

It was not his employer's expectation, and that was made clear to OP. But it was. You're lying. He would not have been subject to verbal abuse had he followed directions. He did. You're lying.
/r/MensRights25/02/24 03:01 AM
-1

He was fine until he made a scene about the bill, and argued with the hostess, who was obviously in charge, otherwise he wouldn't need to go to her at all. He was given more chances than most employees would be given, he did not follow expectations, expectations that were laid out to him multiple times. You are legitimately stupid and should never be in charge of anything, least of all other people.
/r/MensRights25/02/24 03:00 AM
1

And if so, then the "lead" allowed a customer to steal. He was back talking the person in charge, after he was told multiple times not to act like this towards customers. Again, you are an idiot. He was not told to allow customers to steal. And he was "backtalking the person in charge" because she allowed customers to steal, contrary to what the boss said. Because the boss did not tell him to allow customers to steal.
/r/MensRights25/02/24 03:00 AM
2

.....He got punished because the boss was sexist and fired the OP for disrespecting women. How exactly do you think it is possible to avoid a scene when confronting a customer for stealing, assuming the customer does not meekly stop when confronted? You are legitimately an idiot.
/r/MensRights25/02/24 01:50 AM
1

.... If a customer is stealing, and the boss doesn't want to simply allow the customer to steal (as expected), how exactly do you think it is possible to "avoid conflict"?
/r/MensRights25/02/24 01:49 AM
3

You are quoting but not reading. but that if I'm going to get punished for trying to do the job right then next time I see somebody stealing the salad bar I won't stop them. My boss was like "no, no, no don't do that". OP said "ok, if I get punished for trying to stop customers stealing then I won't stop them". And the boss said "no, don't do that". This is as expected, since bosses typically don't want to let customers steal. Then the OP got fired for again not letting customers steal, as the b…
/r/MensRights25/02/24 01:26 AM
3

Nope, you didn't read it. You are wrong and making shit up. He actively went against expectations that were reasonable, What "reasonable expectations"?
/r/MensRights25/02/24 01:23 AM
2

Nope. You didn't read it. He didn't get fired for not following the boss's instructions. The boss explicitly told him not to let people just eat without paying. I said that race had nothing to do with it but that if I'm going to get punished for trying to do the job right then next time I see somebody stealing the salad bar I won't stop them. My boss was like "no, no, no don't do that". He got fired because the boss said he couldn't talk to women like that (i.e. tell them to do their job). He go…
/r/MensRights25/02/24 01:13 AM
11

"Throwing out a child's father is perfectly legal" - not without just cause. You don't need just cause, or any cause, to file for divorce. Getting a divorce does not mean the father loses custody or responsibility for any kids. The part about responsibility is right. The part about custody is not.
/r/MensRights24/08/23 03:48 PM
7

And the exact same is true for rape. It is not random violence. A stranger leaping out from the bushes to rape a woman does happen, but it is extremely rare.
/r/MensRights02/08/23 12:43 AM
3

That's completely wrong. For one, you didn't actually link to a source. That's because if you had, it'd say that not only was the data from the 1970s and 80s (with no bearing to today), but it literally just lied. In reality even when looking only at cases when fathers seek custody they are less likely to get it than mothers. Here's one study. https://www.courts.wa.gov/subsite/wsccr/docs/ResidentialTimeSummaryReport2016.pdf Only 2.4% of the cases were contested in that study. But of contested ca…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/06/23 05:06 PM
43

The study says how many. The majority of male victims of completed or attempted rape (86.5%) reported only male perpetrators with no statisti- cally reliable state estimates. The majority of male victims who were made to penetrate someone else reported only female perpetrators (78.5%), with 7 reportable state estimates ranging from 71.8% to 89.7%. Similarly, the majority of male victims of sexual coercion reported only female perpetra- tors (81.6%) with 7 reportable state estimates ranging from …
/r/MensRights27/04/23 04:39 PM
47

The article says she knew that his wife was Asian.
/r/MensRights29/01/23 12:40 AM
20

If there isn’t any, you should be prosecuted for saying she’s lying. You think it's a crime to call someone a liar?
/r/MensRights23/12/22 05:14 AM
2

You had a fire department where the only physical requirement was to step up and down on a box and be able to breathe? Bullshit.
/r/MensRights15/12/22 01:23 AM
3

Are you trolling? You said that fathers who try to get custody almost always get it. The studies I linked showed that they don't and that even when looking only at contested cases, mothers are still heavily favoured in getting custody.
/r/MensRights14/12/22 10:51 PM
23

Fun fact: except in the case of extenuating circumstances (ex: domestic violence), a lying birth mother (ex: doesn't know who dad is), or if you live in the wild state of Utah... women CANNOT unilaterally relinquish rights of a child for adoption. Of course they can. You just said how women can unilaterally relinquish parental rights without the consent or knowledge of the father. Women can do that and men can't. That means (in the overwhelming amount of cases) that BOTH the mother & the father …
/r/MensRights12/12/22 04:30 AM
2

No, my argument is based on looking at contested cases. Obviously, if you want to know the chance of fathers getting custody in contested cases, you have to look at contested cases. Not cases that weren't contested. Like I said, you just gave random bullshit. I gave actual studies.
/r/MensRights11/12/22 12:52 AM
1

but in the US men who ask for partial custody almost always get it, Bullshit. Your links was just random bullshit, including posts from random people on reddit. Here's one study. https://www.courts.wa.gov/subsite/wsccr/docs/ResidentialTimeSummaryReport2016.pdf Only 2.4% of the cases were contested in that study. But of contested cases, over 65% of those resulted in 70% or more custody time to the mother. Almost 25% of the contested cases resulted in 100% custody for the mother. Note that all of …
/r/MensRights09/12/22 05:30 PM
3

Your links was just random bullshit, including posts from random people on reddit. Here's one study. https://www.courts.wa.gov/subsite/wsccr/docs/ResidentialTimeSummaryReport2016.pdf Only 2.4% of the cases were contested in that study. But of contested cases, over 65% of those resulted in 70% or more custody time to the mother. Almost 25% of the contested cases resulted in 100% custody for the mother. Note that all of the contested cases had no risk factors for either parent (risk factors are dr…
/r/MensRights09/12/22 05:30 PM
16

The hypocrisy is that it's the same person saying both things.
/r/MensRights20/11/22 05:35 PM
2

That’s crazy. It’s statistically very unlikely to be assaulted by a woman. For it to happen twice is insane. No. You're just lying. Domestic violence for example is equally committed by women or even more in some studies. E.g. https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2005.079020 Results. Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent. In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of th…
/r/MensRights13/11/22 06:25 PM
2

So you're admitting then that your article you linked https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03392-8 Does not state that the leading cause of death for pregnant women is homicide? If you won't admit that you lied about that, and doubled down on it, you're getting blocked. Or, go ahead and try to show where in that article it says that the leading cause of death for pregnant women is homicide. You won't, because it doesn't.
/r/MensRights30/08/22 05:41 PM
2

There is no other cause of death that happens to pregnant women more often. None. Ok, where's your proof then? The nature.com article you linked never says that. That’s why it’s the leading cause of death in pregnant women. And it never says that either. Please, show me where it says pregnant die most commonly of something else. No. You need to show where in the article it says that pregnant women die of homicide more than any other cause. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03392-8 You w…
/r/MensRights30/08/22 05:22 PM
2

The text LITERALLY said the leading cause of death in pregnant women is murder. It literally did not. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03392-8 Pregnant women in the United States die by homicide more often than they die of pregnancy-related causes The researchers found that US women who are pregnant or were pregnant in the past 42 days (the post-partum period) die by homicide at more than twice the rate that they die of bleeding or placental disorders — the leading causes of what are u…
/r/MensRights30/08/22 05:07 PM
2

What the fuck are you talking about? Everything in the comment was pretty simple. Can you not read or something? Again, what I said was, homicide is the leading (most common) cause of death for pregnant women. Stop lying.
/r/MensRights29/08/22 07:54 PM
1

No, they don't. I literally pasted the text from one of your links to show you were lying and you couldn't even read it.
/r/MensRights29/08/22 07:53 PM
1

No they don't. Again, can you read?
/r/MensRights29/08/22 07:51 PM
1

It literally says "twice the rate...of of bleeding or placental disorders". Not "twice the rate of any other cause of death". Can you read?
/r/MensRights29/08/22 06:09 PM
1

This is untrue. The number one cause of death in pregnancy is murder by the partner Why are you changing the goalposts? Number one cause of death for women teens to 50ish is at the hands of a man who feels they need intimate relations That was wrong and I disproved it. Homicide doesn't even make the top 3 for women of any age, per the CDC. As for your article, you didn't even read the first sentence: Pregnant women in the United States die by homicide more often than they die of pregnancy-relate…
/r/MensRights29/08/22 04:22 PM
9

Number one cause of death for women teens to 50ish is at the hands of a man who feels they need intimate relations Wrong. Not only does your link not say that (because it's false), but here's a source disproving you. https://www.cdc.gov/women/lcod/2017/all-races-origins/index.htm Homicide (of any kind) doesn't make the top 3 causes of death for any age of woman.
/r/MensRights29/08/22 06:20 AM
1

but the basis of her hypocrisy is not about genitals & freedom to do what you want with them whereas controlling women’s sexuality very much is about that… therefore it’s discrimination based on sex = misogyny No that makes no sense. Wanting to marry a virgin isn't controlling women's sexuality, any more than wanting to marry a rich man is controlling men's finances or career. Wanting to marry a virgin also isn't discrimination based on sex. You need to stop making shit up to defend your sexism …
/r/MensRights27/08/22 07:44 PM
1

But this issue is about sex which as we know the sexuality of women has been oppressed for thousands of years. It’s about control, a belief that ‘I am allowed to practise a basic function of the human body but you are not’. What does any of that have to do with your earlier bullshit? There's nothing misogynist or misandrist about expecting a partner to do something you don't. If a woman wants her partner to earn a high income and support her while she herself earns little to nothing and obviousl…
/r/MensRights26/08/22 04:13 PM
1

It’s the same vein as black people commit more crimes, therefore I don’t trust black people It’s a ‘statement of fact’ The first part is a statement of fact, black Americans do commit more crimes than the average American. Is that another fact that you dislike so you try to deny it? The second part is just your own attitude, not a fact. Seems that you can't understand the difference between a fact and someone's personal beliefs.
/r/MensRights26/08/22 05:19 AM
1

It's not an overgeneralisation. It's a literal statement of fact. Again, just because you dislike doesn't make it false.
/r/MensRights25/08/22 11:44 PM
0

The variables you state don't actually refute or change the conclusion. You're just trying to explain it. But you haven't disproved it. Something's not inappropriate because you dislike it.
/r/MensRights25/08/22 11:39 PM
0

It’s an inappropriate conclusion It's a factual statement. Not inappropriate. Again, you just don't like it.
/r/MensRights25/08/22 11:19 PM
1

That’s a lot of claims without any source.. please stop spreading misinformation. Except it's not misinformation. It's true, you just don't like it.
/r/MensRights25/08/22 10:47 PM
1

It’s not misogynistic to have preferences, what’s misogynistic is when you expect something from a woman that you don’t abide by yourself. No, that's not misogynistic. Go look at a dictionary. If a woman expects a rich man and won't date a man who isn't, while she herself isn't rich, does anyone call her sexist against men? No, and you don't either. Ironically you saying what you did shows your actual sexism.
/r/MensRights25/08/22 10:46 PM
4

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf 1.1% of men reported being "made to penetrate" in the last 12 months. Made to penetrate is rape (e.g. a woman forcing a man into vaginal sex), except they don't call it rape. For context 1.1% of women reported being raped (which they defined as penetration) in the last 12 months. Of the men made to penetrate, 79.2% reported only female perpetrators.
/r/MensRights18/08/22 06:33 PM
38

Women raping a man is not a common scenario, Yes it is. Unless of course you define a woman raping a man as something other than rape. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf 1.1% of men reported being "made to penetrate" in the last 12 months. Made to penetrate is rape (e.g. a woman forcing a man into vaginal sex), except they don't call it rape. For context 1.1% of women reported being raped (which they defined as penetration) in the last 12 months. Of the men made to…
/r/MensRights18/08/22 04:36 AM
3

LOL... 1/ Your link is talking about national data and thus the Pennsylvania definition of rape is irrelevant. The below statistics are from Sexual Assault of Young Children as Reported to Law Enforcement: Victim, Incident, and Offender Characteristics published in 2000 by the National Center for Juvenile Justice. 2/ That source is only talking about victims of sexual assault who are under 18. 3/ And most importantly, that source is only talking about data reported to law enforcement agencies. T…
/r/MensRights16/08/22 03:51 PM
16

In my state (Pennsylvania) which uses the forced to have sexual intercourse definition, the percentage is still 92% men and 8% women. No it doesn't. You're just making shit up.
/r/MensRights16/08/22 01:49 AM
2

They're either just lying or making dishonest deflections. E.g. The claim that if men seek custody, they are on equal footing as women and have the same chance to get custody. Their source was a random link that simply said it without any actual data or study cited. In reality: "We're giving them identical case facts and we're only changing a couple of variables that should be legally irrelevant -- race and gender," Miller said. Judges in the shared-custody case were more likely than laypeople t…
/r/MensRights08/08/22 04:35 PM
3

Sure, except you weren't just asking questions and "trying to understand". The very first thing you said was: Because women as a group are in the same category as rapists and murderers. Tysm Which was quite stupid, and even after myself and others clearly explained the argument, you doubled down. You absolutely should call people stupid for saying stupid shit.
/r/MensRights06/08/22 11:46 PM
2

This whole thread started with someone comparing women making laws for woman to a rapist making laws for a rapist. Or a murderer making laws for a murderer. That sexist shit. No, it started with someone saying that men shouldn't be able to make laws that affect women because they aren't women is like saying that if you're not a rapist, you shouldn't be able to make laws that affect rapists. And saying the logic is bad in both cases. There's nothing sexist about that because the argument has noth…
/r/MensRights06/08/22 09:09 PM
3

By not giving women access to abortion, you are legally requiring them to give birth. So that’s a law. You're first assuming that women don't have access to abortion. Then you make the even more incorrect leap that if they don't have access to abortion, they are legally required to give birth. Tell me, what would happen if a woman did get an abortion? Would the law punish her because she broke some law? No? Then women aren't legally required to give birth. You still did not provide a law that fo…
/r/MensRights06/08/22 06:13 PM
2

Ok so you just confirmed that you are categorizing women into the same group as murderers/rapists. No, I just confirmed you're too stupid to understand a simple point, or (if you did understand) too dishonest to discuss a simple point. And who says they can’t?? YOU DID!! No, I didn't. That was a hypothetical question that would follow from your logic. You're not actually trying to pretend that you think female legislators aren't allowed to make or vote on laws about men (and only men), are you?
/r/MensRights06/08/22 05:53 PM
3

Please show me a law in the United States that requires men to be circumcised. I said that it's legal to circumcise male infants, but only male infants and not female. Because there is a current law in the United States that forces women to go through birth. No there isn't. And you didn’t name some laws. You listed some, what I believe to be, hypothetical questions and something about rights? Yes I did. Conscription for example used to be legally required. Selective Service is still enforced by …
/r/MensRights06/08/22 05:52 PM
2

1000% yes absolutely. Except they do have that right though. Female politicians and legislators have every right to make laws about things like conscription (for men only), or circumcision on infants (male only). Female voters also have every right to vote about such laws. And there aren’t any laws that do so. Are you trolling? I just named some laws.
/r/MensRights06/08/22 05:28 PM
2

Women can’t make laws over their bodies Who said they can't? What point am I missing? The point is obvious and you're quite stupid for not getting it. If "X group" cannot or should not make laws about "Y group" because X group is not a part of Y group, then why should it only apply to men making laws about women? That's just special pleading. If that argument was actually good (it's not), then it should apply to all cases.
/r/MensRights06/08/22 05:22 PM
4

When it’s a women’s only issue, yes, men should have no right over what they decide to do with their bodies. It’s not even just “men” though. No one should have the right to tell others what to do with their bodies. So women should have no right to make laws about male-only conscription, or circumcision for male infants (but not female)?
/r/MensRights06/08/22 05:20 PM
2

Here are some studies. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/w073pj/if_men_could_get_pregnant_we_would_have_abortion/igf66v4/?context=3 Also here: https://www.courts.wa.gov/subsite/wsccr/docs/ResidentialTimeSummaryReport2016.pdf Only 2.4% of the cases were contested in that study. But of contested cases, over 65% of those resulted in 70% or more custody time to the mother. Almost 25% of the contested cases resulted in 100% custody for the mother. All the contested cases had no risk factor…
/r/MensRights29/07/22 01:15 AM
2

Why'd you disappear after lying and getting called out for your lies?
/r/MensRights17/07/22 06:36 AM
4

Problem is, the first person didn't state any facts. They just lied. Studies do count as facts. And here is my comment with a link to several disproving the lies. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/w073pj/if_men_could_get_pregnant_we_would_have_abortion/igf66v4/
/r/MensRights16/07/22 06:03 PM
3

Men actually get custody a disproportionate amount of time when it's contested, and I think it's something ridiculously sexist like 80%. Nope, you're lying. "We're giving them identical case facts and we're only changing a couple of variables that should be legally irrelevant -- race and gender," Miller said. Judges in the shared-custody case were more likely than laypeople to give a mother more time with a child than a father. The judges gave mothers, on average, about half a day more time with…
/r/MensRights16/07/22 06:01 PM
7

the posts serve as propaganda reinforcing the established beliefs of MRAs How is it propaganda if it's true? I have not seen anything from @thetinmen that isn’t mentioned in RBOMI or reiterated in r/MensRights. So? Maybe it feels good to you to have your opinions validated by colorful graphics, but no gain of information is actually occurring. You assume that everyone who reads it already knows the facts being stated. That is incorrect.
/r/MensRights22/06/22 04:46 AM
2

Except people did explain why all the bullshit you say is stupid. In response you either disappear or play dumb, then re-appear in other posts spouting more bullshit.
/r/MensRights21/06/22 11:45 PM
5

Stop being dishonest. The actions of actual feminists and feminists groups with influence (e.g. National Organization of Women) absoluitely do represent feminism. Anyone who claims they don't is a disingenuous liar. Meanwhile, random misogynists online don't represent men's rights. Why? Because they have no power or influence.
/r/MensRights18/06/22 05:34 PM
5

Yes, you are. Virtually all your comments here are in bad faith.
/r/MensRights15/06/22 11:39 PM
5

Stop trolling and playing dumb.
/r/MensRights15/06/22 11:29 PM
12

Toxic masculinity prevents men from opening up therefore escalating the negative emotions. No. It's that people, particularly women, react badly to men opening up, thus teaching them not to. Sex based scholarships don’t explain why boys do worse in school than girls before university. The reason why boys do worse in school is because teachers, who are mostly female, are biased against male students and discriminate against them. https://www.bbc.com/news/education-31751672
/r/MensRights15/06/22 11:18 PM
20

Because you spend a ton of time making dishonest comments that justify sexism against men on a men's rights subreddit. And when called out on it you just disappear. Not many men would want to date a woman like that.
/r/MensRights14/06/22 08:22 PM
1

You disappeared without naming any of these laws that discriminate against women. Because you were just lying. Why do you come here to lie?
/r/MensRights12/06/22 09:47 PM
2

Many laws are "gender neutral" but in practice discriminate against women. I mean, feminists have been saying this for years. LOL bullshit. Name the laws that discriminate against women.
/r/MensRights12/06/22 12:54 AM
4

Like I thought, they just lied. They're not comparing the same work, just lying and saying they are. They don't even bother to control for hours worked, let alone actually compare the same jobs rather than simply using broad job fields.
/r/MensRights08/06/22 07:23 PM
3

Saying random words without a link isn't a source. And it almost certainly doesn't compare the same work. Just lies and says it does.
/r/MensRights08/06/22 05:34 PM
3

Why are you linking random articles that don't prove your claim?
/r/MensRights08/06/22 03:53 AM
5

It took you more time to write this than it does to literally google it. Google what? Female circumcision is different from male circumcision with only harmful effects. That's why it got banned. Wrong. All types of female circumcision, even ones that are less harmful and have less impact than male circumcision, are illegal (e.g. a ritual pricking which has no permanent effect). And women have less bodily autonomy which is why it got unbanned. Stop lying.
/r/MensRights07/06/22 07:43 PM
8

That's wrong too yes. but it's not legislative. It literally is the law. It's legal to circumcise male infants, but not legal to circumcise female infants. Female circumcision is still legal in some US states too. No. You're lying. At some point it was illegal across the country then some judge ruled it was "unconstitutional" to forbid it. Nothing like that ever happened for men. Nothing like that happened because circumcision has always been legal for men. America nor any other Western country …
/r/MensRights07/06/22 05:54 PM
7

Men get custody just as much as women (actually more) when they fight for it. Most men just don’t. 60% of men get custody in contested cases. Wrong. That link you gave? If you actually read it, its only "source" for the claim that 60% of men get custody in contested cases is a letter to a Chicago newspaper in 1994. Not an actual study or anything. But simply someone saying so in a letter to the newspaper. Some actual studies: Of the custody resolution events awarding physical custody either to m…
/r/MensRights07/06/22 04:45 PM
9

Your right to bodily autonomy has never been an issue. This is just flat-out wrong. Conscription has happened multiple times, and selective service still exists. Circumcision for male infants only is still legal and fairly common.
/r/MensRights07/06/22 04:33 PM
6

in highschool equivalents I dont have the statistics but at least in my case I had more teachers. In high school nearly 60% of teachers are female. Far higher in elementary school and middle school. https://fourpillarfreedom.com/visualizing-u-s-occupational-employment-by-gender/ Yeah way more men are in prison, however the difference in crimes women commit vs the ones men commit statistically differ. Wrong. Men get harsher sentences (63% more) and are more likely to be convicted for the same cri…
/r/MensRights07/06/22 04:30 PM
2

Moreover, when men are victims of sexual assault (an estimated one in 71 men, and one in six boys), 93 percent reported their abuser was a man. Nope, you're lying. That one in 71 men? That wasn't sexual assault. That was rape - or specifically, what the CDC called rape, which was penetration. Of course when women rape men, they aren't penetrating them because they don't have a penis. Instead the CDC calls it "made to penetrate". Table 2.2 on page 19 states that 1.1% of men reported being made to…
/r/MensRights02/06/22 06:45 AM
3

So you are either trolling or an idiot then. See ya.
/r/MensRights30/05/22 11:09 PM
5

No, you didn't. What you said had nothing to do with anything. As for how it made sense, again are you trolling? It's incredibly simple, a claim not being proven false doesn't mean it was true. Just like a claim not being proven true doesn't mean it's false. Some claims are proven true, some are proven false, and some are unknown. You are claiming that all the unknown ones are true, which is wrong and dishonest. Just like claiming all the unknown ones are false is also wrong.
/r/MensRights30/05/22 11:08 PM
7

No it just made no sense. No, it made plenty of sense. I just explained it, and you had no refutation.
/r/MensRights30/05/22 10:44 PM
5

Right so it’s still word against word. Not evidence at all. Are you trolling? If someone is another city and there are many witnesses who saw him in another city at the time of the supposed rape, you think that's not evidence? What if there were witnesses who happened to see someone committing a rape - is that not evidence too? Since it's "word against word"? Yeah. NYT is known for how reputable and accurate it is 🤦‍♀️ Again, are you trolling? That article isn't the only one about that case. Fee…
/r/MensRights30/05/22 10:43 PM
7

Because I already know you’re wrong sweetheart. LOL, great argument. You just saying I am wrong but not actually explaining how or giving any sources. Meanwhile I already proved you wrong and linked actual sources. Women are 2X likely to lose custody if they claim abuse.. Nope, that's a lie too. Notice how you gave zero sources. I can admit I’m too lazy to type everything out though I’ve dealt with too many men like you😂 You mean you're too dishonest to admit everything you said was bullshit. Ed…
/r/MensRights30/05/22 10:34 PM
5

I didn't say you're wrong because I disagree, you're wrong because you're wrong. The 90% may not be enough for CONVICTION but they do mean there is enough evidence that it cannot be proven false. Which means an incident did happen. ..... Are you trolling? Or are you actually this stupid despite being a court intern? The fact that in 90% of cases there is not enough evidence for it to be proven false, does not mean that all of those 90% are true. Again, if 10% are proven true, does that mean the …
/r/MensRights30/05/22 09:01 PM
6

If 10% of accusations are false, then 90% have some sort of evidence or are true. Wrong. If 10% are proven false, that does not mean the other 90% are true. Saying that is extremely stupid. 10% of accusations are proven true and result in conviction, does that mean the other 90% are false? If I said that, everyone would mock my stupidity. False means different things. Some places assume “insufficient evidence” is equivocal to false and included in that data. Wrong. There are no places that do th…
/r/MensRights30/05/22 06:23 PM
6

That whole comment made little to no sense. Sure it did, you just didn't understand. You claim that only 2-10% of rape claims are proven false, so the rest are true. But only about 10% of rape claims result in conviction (meaning they got proven true). Does that mean that the other 90% are false? No, you'd obviously say that it means that there wasn't enough proof to prove it was rape, not that they are all necessarily false. Yet you also say that all claims not proven false, are true. Because y…
/r/MensRights30/05/22 06:20 PM
8

How can you be an eye witness to something that didn’t happen Simple, you witness something that proves the allegation didn't occur. If someone is accused of rape at X time and date, but someone else witnesses them doing in a different city at the same time, that's a witness proving they didn't do it. and physical evidence can only be found shortly after the event. Wrong. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/24/nyregion/24perjury.html In addition, new DNA tests had shown that a wound on Ms. Peguero’s…
/r/MensRights30/05/22 06:18 PM
1

The part where you pretended that abuse was limited to murder alone. And the part where you lied and said "feelings are literally the only source" despite someone already linking you to stats.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 06:36 PM
1

Why do you have no reply after getting called out for lying?
/r/MensRights09/05/22 04:22 PM
22

You're literally lying. You replied to a comment about abuse but then started talking about murder. Do you think abuse is limited to murder alone? As for "invented beliefs based on feelings" and "feelings are literally the only source" - did you miss the reply with a bunch of studies and stats? https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/uk9o6g/women_can_be_abusive_too/i7p67nh/
/r/MensRights07/05/22 09:33 PM
3

It's not but the other person didn't say it was. They said "In countries with a more gender-equal culture, the differences between what jobs men and women choose are bigger" and proved it with stats from the article linked. You got proven wrong yet keep lying.
/r/MensRights30/04/22 06:25 PM
3

Except he didn't. Enforced monogamy isn't the same thing as forced marriage. https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/ “enforced monogamy” does not mean government-enforced monogamy. “Enforced monogamy” means socially-promoted, culturally-inculcated monogamy, as opposed to genetic monogamy – evolutionarily-dictated monogamy, which does exist in some species (but does not exist in humans). This distinction has been present in anthropological and scientific…
/r/MensRights28/04/22 03:08 AM
22

Except he never said that. You're lying.
/r/MensRights27/04/22 05:34 PM
1

Yes, it did say that. And why? Not because car manufacturers somehow discriminate against women. But because women are more likely to drive cars that are more dangerous in a crash. That's not discrimination.
/r/MensRights18/03/22 10:43 PM
1

What do you mean? Men certainly shouldn't claim that something is a men's issue if said issue also affects women just as much if not more. What specifically are you talking about?
/r/MensRights16/03/22 04:07 PM
7

No, you didn't. You falsely claimed things were women's issues when they aren't. If both males and females don't get enough food, and in fact more males than females don't get enough food, then not getting enough food isn't a women's issue. For something to be a women's issue, it has to apply exclusively or almost exclusively to women.
/r/MensRights16/03/22 12:12 AM
10

This is largely bullshit. You simply pasted a bunch of made-up claims with zero sources. Women are 47% more likely to suffer severe injuries in car crashes because safety features are designed for men That for example is wrong. Researchers say that overall, the variance in risk is related not to physical differences between men and women but to differences in behaviors and vehicle choice. In two-car crashes, men are more likely to be driving large, heavy vehicles (especially pickup trucks), whic…
/r/MensRights16/03/22 12:10 AM
1

One of the mods and most common posters there, /u/takeittorcirclejerk , actually tried to speak up on TrollX when they were going full misandry. He expressed his concerns in the only way he felt was OK: apologetically, and with a long-winded nonconfrontational rant about how one of the comments made him feel. They fucking shit all over him, and he soon disappeared from the comment section, forcing himself to forget how shitty it must have felt to have the people he spends so much time and effort…
/r/MensRights19/09/21 08:27 PM
26

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/dhines/files/2012/01/Douglas-Hines-2011-helpseeking-experiences-of-male-victims.pdf Table 4 on page 9.
/r/MensRights19/09/21 05:06 PM
10

You keep saying men have to pay alimony even in some cases where the woman has more money. You keep lying. The other person never said that, not even once, let alone multiple times.
/r/MensRights28/08/21 07:13 PM
12

People don't get how it works. If it came to a fight, of course a big guy could beat up a smaller woman. Problem is, it's not a fight. If he did lay hands on her (even in self-defense), he's probably going to jail. And he knows that. And if he's scared of going to jail (as most men are), then that's how a man gets intimidated by a small woman. Not because he thinks the woman can beat him up in a fair fight. But because he knows the woman can do whatever she likes to him, and he can't defend hims…
/r/MensRights21/08/21 05:34 AM
1

So you ignored the sentence right before the one you gave (because you're discussing in bad faith). 93.3% of men rape victims reported male perpetrators. .... Did you not read what I said? If you classify "made to penetrate" as rape - and if you don't, you're a literal rape apologist, then most male rape victims are raped by women. I said, if you classify made to penetrate as rape (which the CDC didn't). If you do, since it is, then most male rape victims are raped by women. Because there were f…
/r/MensRights21/08/21 05:29 AM
1

True. Math corrected. If we allow that out of the 970,000 completed penetration rapes, all men are raped at least 2 to 3 times (not 5 times), we get about 400,000 victims of completed force rape cases, for a total of 1,267,000 + 400,000 = 1,667,000. No. You still have no idea what you are talking about. You're talking about how many men and women are raped, per year. The 1.267 million men who reported being made to penetrate, that statistic was for the last 12 months only. Of the 970,000 men who…
/r/MensRights19/08/21 11:35 PM
10

Men are more likely to be raped, but by who? It's mostly by other men. Completely wrong. If you classify "made to penetrate" as rape - and if you don't, you're a literal rape apologist, then most male rape victims are raped by women. For three of the other forms of sexual violence, a majority of male victims reported only female perpetrators: being made to penetrate (79.2%) https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf
/r/MensRights19/08/21 04:26 PM
6

The "Made To Penetrate" row in the last column says a total of 1,267,000 victims of "made to penetrate" but they do NOT list victim numbers for "forced penetration" (actual rape for both sexes), even though they list 970,000 (almost a million) incidents. Assuming all men were raped at least 5 times (which is a ridiculously high number) it still leaves some 200,000 male victims, for a grand total of some 1,667,000 men being raped. Your math here makes literally no sense. You have no idea what you…
/r/MensRights19/08/21 04:24 PM
5

Nope, you are lying. Note how you never actually gave any sort of link or evidence, but just vaguely claimed there is "reporting". The FBI's broad label of "unfounded" includes accusations that have been investigated and dismissed as not meeting legal criteria, without being proven false. Wrong. Stop lying. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/1996/96sec2.pdf The “unfounded” rate, or percentage of complaints determined through investigation to be false, is higher for forc- ible rape than for any…
/r/MensRights14/07/21 05:46 PM
13

Edit : some of y'all are gonna have a stroke so here, it's France. But before you REEEEE at it, I invite you to re read my initial comment, which specifies 'on children'. People can cut up their own dick if they can consent to it I guess. Why are you lying? Circumcision of male infants is legal in France. Prove me wrong if you can. You won't.
/r/MensRights02/06/21 06:46 PM
12

Wrong. Iceland proposed a ban on circumcision but that law was never passed. Prove me wrong. You can't.
/r/MensRights02/06/21 04:56 PM
20

So some other guy is wrong then? How does that make you any better? Why won't you prove that you're right? Because you can't, since you're lying.
/r/MensRights02/06/21 04:16 PM
28

No, you're lying. There isn't a single country where male circumcision is illegal. Prove me wrong. You can't.
/r/MensRights02/06/21 04:13 PM
7

This peer reviewed study makes the claim that women receive longer sentences but only for killing their partner. No. That is a sample of 82 cases in a single county, which is irrelevant. The actual stats say otherwise: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/SPMUREX.PDF On average, convicted wives received prison sentencesthat were about 10 years shorter than what husbands received. Excluding life or death sentences, the average prison sentence for killing a spouse was 6 years for wives but 16.5 yea…
/r/MensRights21/05/21 10:00 PM
6

That is completely false. The women's organization who said it just lied with no source. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/SPMUREX.PDF On average, convicted wives received prison sentencesthat were about 10 years shorter than what husbands received. Excluding life or death sentences, the average prison sentence for killing a spouse was 6 years for wives but 16.5 years for husbands Granted, this is older data from 1988, but the supposed statistic from the women's group is from the same time per…
/r/MensRights21/05/21 04:33 PM
2

WTF that isn't true either. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/mar/19/myths-about-rape-conviction-rates The conviction rate for rape is 58%. That bears repeating. The conviction rate for rape, is 58%.....A conviction rate is the amount of convictions following a trial, and is calculated for all reportable crimes. 58% meaning 58% of rape cases that are prosecuted end in conviction.
/r/MensRights13/05/21 03:47 PM
3

Half of all accusations never make it to court For the other half that do, only 2% of them ever get prosecuted, with 98% getting off Scot free Do you know what "going to court" means? If a case goes to court, that means it is being tried and prosecuted. It makes no sense to say that only 2% of cases that go to court get prosecuted.
/r/MensRights12/05/21 06:17 PM
2

Even if you get to court as an innocent man the likelihood of being found guilty is still minuscule You do realize that even if you aren't convicted, simply being arrested, charged, and prosecuted for rape has significant negative consequences on someone's life? If they're actually guilty then all those consequences are deserved (and are in fact not enough), but if they're innocent then it's a different story.
/r/MensRights12/05/21 06:14 PM
2

Isn’t it something like men are 230 times more likely to be raped by another man than be falsely accused overall (edit: including prison statistics, but the overall point still holds up, maybe even apply it to prisons, should we segregate men into individual prison cells?) Nope, that's incredibly false. You literally made all your statistics up and haven't presented a single stat. For one, most male rape victims are raped by women, not men. See this article, which discusses an actual scholarly p…
/r/MensRights12/05/21 06:11 PM
6

Do you have a link to the threads so we can see the bias?
/r/MensRights23/04/21 04:35 PM
6

They aren't random. They are feminists that support shared parenting. It is random. I just said why. Posting random articles that have zero influence and get zero attention is meaningless. Instead we should look at actual influential feminist groups that do actual lobbying that affects actual law. That is obviously meaningful. We should be celebrating logical voices within feminism. Sure, except they don't exist. You posting random articles is meaningless. If there were actual feminist groups lo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/21 08:31 PM
21

You posting random articles that have zero influence and get zero attention is meaningless. In contrast, feminist organizations like National Organization of Women have decades of lobbying against joint custody, going so far as to say that fathers shouldn't be given custody because they are abusers. And a more recent example: A coalition of women’s groups including the National Organization for Women, the League of Women Voters, Breastfeeding Coalition, National Council of Jewish Women and Unite…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/21 06:32 PM
2

LOL what? Why the fuck would it in be inappropriate to ask what a co-worker claimed made them uncomfortable, when they are accusing you of saying/doing something wrong? Unless you think it's ok to accuse someone of wrongdoing or harassment but not actually tell them what they allegedly did? If so, then you're a piece of shit.
/r/MensRights19/04/21 05:07 AM
3

Nope, you're just in denial and also have no clue of the facts. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/?menuItem=c14683cb-c4f4-41d0-a635-52c4eeae0245 77% of women are on facebook. 44% on Instagram. Of 30-49 year olds (not broken down by gender), 77% of them are on facebook. 50-64, 73% are on facebook.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/04/21 03:40 AM
11

Right. Feminists should be judged by their political movement. Right, they should be. So for example feminists like the National Organization of Women (one of the largest feminist organizations in America) should be judged for their decades of aggressive lobbying against joint custody reform and portrayal of fathers as abusers. Feminists should be judged for creating and continuing to support the Duluth Model, which leads to male victims of DV being arrested and of course not receiving any help.…
/r/MensRights13/04/21 04:57 AM
60

That's because there was an in-depth investigation and it was proven to be lies. https://quillette.com/2018/06/21/a-literary-inquisition-how-novelist-steven-galloway-was-smeared-as-a-rapist-even-as-the-case-against-him-collapsed/ To cite just one example: MC texted Galloway in June, 2012, over a year after the date on which, she later alleged, he assaulted her at sea: “Can I write on your boat for a few hours this afternoon. Around 3:00. It’s not safe to be at my house.” Not only was MC not afra…
/r/MensRights09/04/21 11:26 PM
6

Why didn't you answer my question? Why do you keep lying on this subreddit then disappear after getting called out on your lies, but keep commenting in other threads with more lies and bullshit?
/r/MensRights08/04/21 05:17 PM
10

They found that 1.6 percent of men had been made to penetrate in their lifetime. Why are you lying? From your link: while an estimated 1.7% of men were made to penetrate a perpetrator in the 12 months preceding the survey. Disregarding that 1.7% is slightly higher than 1.6%, is 12 months the entire lifetime of a man?
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:36 PM
1

LOL no, I picked two random ones near the top and one older one that I had seen previously. More to the point, you said "PEW only surveys about 1000 people." and that is completely wrong. Even if they did one or two surveys with 1000 (which I didn't see), a quick look at any of their recent surveys shows that most of them are far more than 1000.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 01:59 AM
1

No they don't. I just looked at a few Pew surveys: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/08/20/nearly-half-of-u-s-adults-say-dating-has-gotten-harder-for-most-people-in-the-last-10-years/ 4860 people surveyed. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2017/07/11/online-harassment-2017/ 4248. https://www.pewforum.org/2021/03/30/most-democrats-and-republicans-know-biden-is-catholic-but-they-differ-sharply-about-how-religious-he-is/ 12055. Didn't see any that were 1000 or even close.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 11:43 PM
1

No they can't. An individual Catholic church has no bearing on what the Vatican does, just like one feminist group has no bearing on an unrelated group. But all Catholic churches are still held responsible for what the Vatican preaches and does. Guilt by association is a fallacy, only because one person is not responsible for the actions of their friend simply because they associate with them. You may have heard the saying - If you have one Nazi sit at a table with 9 others, and they welcome him…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/21 10:06 PM
1

The Republican Party is an organization, feminism is not, that is a bad comparison. Feminism is a movement and ideology that people willingly join. There are major and influential feminist organizations that people willingly join. You are just in denial if you think that feminists doing bad things - and not random people but influential feminists and feminist organizations - doesn't mean that feminism itself is a problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/21 09:32 PM
1

You are pointing to bad things done by feminists, not problems with feminism itself. Nah, that's is bullshit. That's like saying "you are pointing to bad things done by Republicans, not problems with the Republican party itself." The bad things done by mainstream feminist organizations are problems with feminism itself.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/04/21 08:37 PM
7

“Feminist’s needs” are a better world for men and women, along with everyone else. Nope. This is a meaningless non-statement. Any time someone says that their goals are "a better world" "improve the world" etc. but doesn't actually elaborate on any specific matters, they are full of shit. In the case of feminism specifically we can point to actual things that are bad. E.g. Duluth Model, decades of lobbying against joint custody and to preserve the family court bias in favour of women, etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/04/21 07:17 PM
1

Sure, and men don't have to fear that their significant other could beat them or strangle them. Of course they do. You are just wrong here. If you say that domestic violence perpetrated by women - nope, that is completely false. If you say that a man doesn't need to be scared because he's stronger than his SO, again nope, that is completely false. Assuming that he actually is stronger (which isn't always the case), that is still completely irrelevant. Because being stronger is irrelevant if you …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/21 09:23 PM
3

Unwanted physical contact is sexual harassment. Wrong. Specifically, the 97% survey that is used as the basis for this "stat" does not define sexual harassment as unwanted physical contact. https://www.unwomenuk.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/APPG-UN-Women_Sexual-Harassment-Report_2021.pdf The 2021 survey highlighted that the most common forms of sexual harassment of thoselisted are being cat-called or wolf-whistled (51%), being stared at (44%),
/r/MensRights24/03/21 04:50 PM
1

https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/17/lies-damned-lies-and-social-media-part-5-of-%e2%88%9e/ It's a complete lie. Anyone who says that proves themselves to be an idiot. It then goes on to calculate that, given the average man has sex 99 times per year (who is this average man?!) there are 5.1 billion acts of sexual intercourse in the United States each year among American men 15 – 39. Divide 5.1 billion by 6,750, and therefore, in Clymer’s words “the odds of any sexually-active male between the …
/r/MensRights23/03/21 01:28 AM
4

https://imgur.com/a/6Hx9dJt Although at an earlier time a woman may have felt compelled to kill her abusive spouse as her only defense, she now has more opportunities to escape the relationship through means such as protective orders and shelters (Dugan et al. 1999; Fox et al. 2012). As a tragic irony, the wider availability of support services for abused women did not appear to have quite the intended effect, at least through the 1980s, as only male victimization declined. https://sites.oxy.edu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/03/21 12:55 AM
5

According to feminists, this is not true. They say that most men do not fight for custody and most of the time it's settle out of the court. This is true, but irrelevant. That doesn't contradict the fact that women are more likely to win custody of their child then men, and the fact that women are more likely to win custody of their child than men if there is a custody battle. They even say that men are much more likely to win custody if they fight for it, especially if the woman alleges abuse. …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/03/21 07:29 PM
6

So? Just because a post is removed by the mods doesn't mean you lose the link.
/r/MensRights11/03/21 11:08 PM
2

.... Anyway, the thing is, as it was posted I said I would do a post reversing the genders of the washing machine post, and it was related to a snow blower You said you made a post that was reversing the genders. Where is the link to that post you made?
/r/MensRights11/03/21 09:40 PM
3

So let's see the link to the thread you made then. Why would you post something and then immediately get rid of the link?
/r/MensRights11/03/21 09:12 PM
6

But lets be honest women ARE more likely to be in danger walking alone out at night. No they aren't. People just say that even though it's false. Men are more likely to be violently attacked by strangers.
/r/MensRights11/03/21 05:41 PM
19

https://www.reddit.com/r/askwomenadvice/comments/m1jirx/my_25f_bf_26m_told_me_we_are_sexually/gqfgpsa/ very misogynistic comments over how her (now ex) bf needs to grow a pair bc he doesn’t enjoy rough kinky sex bc apparently all men are into that and should be grateful to have a kinky girlfriend! Just goes to show how deluded these people are. Comments from a woman, attacking a man for not being manly enough...is sexism, but against women. How? Because they are so deluded that they can't compre…
/r/MensRights10/03/21 06:39 PM
2

No it doesn't. It doesn't give a single piece of evidence about how women are unfairly imprisoned when compared to men. Because they're not. You also ignored the previous link showing the sentencing disparity against men in the legal system is far greater than that against black people. http://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/features/Pages/starr_gender_disparities.aspx After controlling for the arrest offense, criminal history, and other prior characteristics, "men receive 63% longer sentences on …
/r/AntiFeminists08/03/21 04:59 PM
3

I’ve already sent a link which includes male rape and yet they still aren’t in your favour No you didn't. Stop lying.
/r/MensRights08/03/21 04:57 PM
3

How am I lying exactly? You're lying because the shit you're saying is false. How is that hard to get? Everything I said is easily google able. No it's not, because again, you're just lying. Show the proof that women get higher sentences than men for the same crime. You won't be able to. Because it's a lie. Instead of typing this shit out, read a book, research and read from credible sources LOL, people have linked many credible sources to you such as the CDC's studies, etc. And in response you …
/r/MensRights08/03/21 04:55 PM
3

Do you have a link to that? To the two threads.
/r/MensRights08/03/21 04:57 AM
3

Why do you keep lying and making shit up? Everytime someone proves you wrong you just double down and come up with even stupider bullshit to try to rationalize your position. You keep getting disproven with actual studies and sources and then you simply deny them and double down, while continuing to make up bullshit like: Actually a fun fact- women get higher sentences in male dominated crimes. Literally just bullshit you made up. Then you keep insisting that women are oppressed and men aren't -…
/r/MensRights08/03/21 03:17 AM
4

Are you saying men as a group do not hold the power? Even if we ignore 80% of the world where women are treated as in middle ages, and just focus on extremly small part of the wealthiest western countries do you genuinely believe that the fact that nearly all billionaires are male, that 90% of millionaires are male that 75% of senators and congressman are male, LOL no, countries like Saudi Arabia do not make up 80% of the world. As for most politicians being male etc., you don't even understand …
/r/MensRights04/03/21 05:19 PM
1

Ok, so you are just trolling.
/r/MensRights04/03/21 04:26 AM
6

Lol. The first one had zero sources and second one didn't have a source past 2002. What are you even talking about? My first link was literally a source (a study done at a university). And in some of those sources it even disproved your point and the article it was on. What are you even talking about? What "point" do you think was disproved, and how was it disproved? Are you just trolling?
/r/MensRights03/03/21 11:33 PM
10

87% of stalkers are men. Nope, completely false. E.g. Women are more likely than men to stalk, attack and psychologically abuse their partners, according to a University of Florida study that finds college women have a new view of the dating scene. In a separate survey of 1,490 UF students, one quarter (25 percent) said they had been stalked during the past year and 7 percent reported engaging in stalking, of whom a majority (58 percent) were female. https://news.ufl.edu/archive/2006/07/women-mo…
/r/MensRights03/03/21 07:44 PM
3

Yup, and then notice how they disappeared after I called out their lies.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 05:19 PM
12

One of them I couldn't read. But the first, albeit surprising, was for a very specific crime. No, it wasn't. They literally just lied. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2019/jan/12/intimate-partner-violence-gender-gap-cyntoia-brown The average prison sentence for men who kill their female partners is two to six years (the illustration here takes the midpoint of those values). By contrast women, who kill their partners are sentenced on average to 15 years. The article …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 07:08 AM
9

You’re cherry picking an example of literally the only case where women get punished more harshly than men do for similar crimes. But they don't. They literally just lied. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2019/jan/12/intimate-partner-violence-gender-gap-cyntoia-brown The average prison sentence for men who kill their female partners is two to six years (the illustration here takes the midpoint of those values). By contrast women, who kill their partners are sentenced…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 07:07 AM
6

That's not how it works. Burden of proof is on you. I can't claim that say, female surgeons are inferior to male surgeons and more likely to kill their patients, unless I have some proof. The burden of proof is on me, and if I say "go google it", then I'm in the wrong. Also, why have you not responded to my comments calling out where you lied and/or didn't even read the sources you cited, given that they contradicted your claims?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 07:06 AM
10

You never heard of it because it's not true. They are literally just making shit up and not even reading their own sources, which disprove them. https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/lwd6sx/female_supremacy_in_the_justice_system/gpi60kk/
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 07:02 AM
15

I can easily flip the narrative around and talk about how many female sexual assault victims have killed themselves, or how a judge said a man should get leniency cause he came from a “good family” No you can't flip the narrative around. That is literal whataboutism. Which is a fallacy, if you didn't know. dispite the fact a man is 230 times more likely to be raped then fasely accused off Nope, that is completely false. You literally just made that up. And the fact you’re comparing social shunni…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 07:00 AM
2

Specifically, the documents where women's groups are pushing the idea that all men are the perpetrators of violence. Also, I'm confused as to the relation between women's groups saying stuff, and documents from the Department of Justice? Like why are women's groups part of the department, or what is going on exactly?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 06:04 AM
2

Can you link to some of these documents you talked about?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 05:45 AM
8

If they can't even manage to link studies that support their claims (and in fact refute the claims), I wouldn't expect much insight into "basic psychology".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 05:42 AM
14

Are you not even reading your articles? https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.courier-journal.com/amp/3102148002 Doesn't say that female judges give equal sentencing to male and female convicted criminals. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2110855?seq=1 Also doesn't say that female judges give equal sentencing to male and female convicted criminals. In fact, it said the opposite. Oh and the study's data was from the 1970s - of a grand total of 7 judges in one city - making you a hypocrite for attacking som…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 05:28 AM
12

Your first link only talks about homicide of a partner and the study they claim show it is over 30 years old. The first link is literally just lying. There was no study, just a women's group literally making up a lie. "It was first published by the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence in 1989." https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2019/jan/12/intimate-partner-violence-gender-gap-cyntoia-brown The average prison sentence for men who kill their female partners is t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 04:39 AM
13

It’s basic phycology that women are less likely to hold gender bias during sentencing which is why they give men lighter sentences, which you love to claim. Let's see your source showing that female judges give equal sentencing to male and female convicted criminals. I doubt you have one. If you do, let's see it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 04:39 AM
11

That women are sentenced more harshly than men because a woman who makes it to sentencing must "truly" be a monster? But they don't. They just lied and said they did, when the opposite is true.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 04:37 AM
14

You’re using a 2012 statistics. Women are already given harsher sentences but nice try. Nope, that's a complete lie. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2019/jan/12/intimate-partner-violence-gender-gap-cyntoia-brown The average prison sentence for men who kill their female partners is two to six years (the illustration here takes the midpoint of those values). By contrast women, who kill their partners are sentenced on average to 15 years. The article said this, however…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/21 04:36 AM
2

Right...and again, all the stuff you talk about is just evidence of Depp being fucked up. Not evidence of Depp committing abuse or assault. Again, you have zero evidence that Depp committed any abuse or assault. Meanwhile we have Heard outright admitting it. And does she say something like "Well I hit you but you were fucked up and I was defending myself"? No she doesn't. She calls him a baby and says she can't promise she won't get physical again. And then you conclude that it's more likely tha…
/r/MensRights04/02/21 11:33 PM
3

All evidence against Depp and Heard is completely circumstantial, but there’s a helluva lot more circumstantial evidence against Depp than Heard No there isn't. In the article you linked, it gives exactly zero evidence that Depp attacked or was physically abusive to Heard. Zero. It says bullshit like "Texts like these do not support the idea of Johnny Depp as a kind and gentle soul who’s utterly incapable of abuse." Those texts are evidence that Depp said bizarre and offensive things, yes. But n…
/r/MensRights04/02/21 06:26 AM
1

Yeah more men get murdered, but men also commit murder more often than women. So? Why are you deflecting away from the actual topic? Are you arguing that somehow the higher rate of murdered men in Russia is the fault of women or at the hands of women, despite your source not saying that? No, I'm saying that the other person was wrong in saying that women are worse off, in Russia or otherwise.
/r/MensRights19/01/21 06:17 AM
2

I have a law degree and I worked in a criminal defence firm in Russia but ok buddy lol So? That's completely irrelevant even if you were telling the truth, which you probably aren't. Do you have any studies that were about people in Russia? No? Then you have no idea. Are you sure it’s not prisons where most of it happens? Read the article.
/r/MensRights18/01/21 08:32 PM
2

Yeah but it’s the men who’s killing the men dumbass. So? How does that change the fact that men are more likely to be victims? More men get raped than women too but guess who’s doing that lol No clue about Russia (and you also don't, don't even try to lie and pretend you have Russian studies), but in America the majority of male rape victims are raped by women. https://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/
/r/MensRights18/01/21 08:20 PM
2

Then you should specify that you’re talking about the US! No we shouldn't. If a Russian is talking on a Russian website about an issue does he specify he's talking about Russia? No. For example in 1993 when addressing the UN, Russia reported more than 14000 women murdered. LOL, and you fail to realize that the murder rate in Russia is 3-4x higher for men than women? https://www.statista.com/statistics/1046137/russia-homicide-rate-by-gender/ You're delusional.
/r/MensRights18/01/21 08:07 PM
18

I’ll have to look up the stats on vehicular accidents but I wonder who is doing all the violent crimes against men........maybe other men? No it couldn’t be. What does your statement have to do with the topic? Question: is it true that men are less safe than women if on the street at night?? Answer: Yes, men are more likely to be victims of violence. You: And men are committing that violence. Do you see how your statement has literally nothing to do with the question? I'd hope you aren't too stu…
/r/MensRights18/01/21 06:29 PM
9

This issue is gendered as fuck. Look up actual crime statistics from places where they don’t have much feminists like Russia or India. Why should we, if we don't live in Russia or India? You haven't given any stats but let's assume that in Russia almost all DV victims are women. So then we can say DV is gendered in Russia. But that has nothing to do with DV in America where that isn't the case. And people give male dv victims shit because evolution built you to fight and hunt and you let some bi…
/r/MensRights18/01/21 05:13 PM
9

Yeah men are totally fucked that's why most men charged with rape aren't convicted Most women charged with crimes aren't convicted. So how is that bias against men? and most men that want custody of their kids get it after divorcing, Nope, you just lied and made that up. because the courts, which are comprised mostly of male judges, are biased against men. /s Why are you implying that male judges aren't biased against men? We know that they are. EDIT: By the way, here's confirmation from the hos…
/r/MensRights05/01/21 05:37 PM
1

You trolling? https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/kklrq2/a_long_time_ago_i_was_falsely_accused_of_rape_i/gh71m75/ You linked a source that you claimed stated that 40% of rape reports were proven true. As the other person pointed out, your source did not say that, or even close. And then after they pointed it out, you just kept trolling rather than admitting you had lied.
/r/MensRights29/12/20 03:34 AM
1

No you didn't. You just lied and said your source supported your claim but it didn't.
/r/MensRights28/12/20 06:29 PM
7

Are you trolling? https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/in_brief_domestic_violence_not_always_one_sided#:~:text=Women%20admitted%20perpetrating%20more%20violence,been%20the%20first%20to%20strike. How is that a "men's commentary site"? https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.2005.079020 How is that study a "men's commentary site"? The hell are you even saying?
/r/MensRights27/12/20 11:08 PM
1

How are you "attempting to fight for men's rights" by making shit up?
/r/MensRights27/12/20 10:36 PM
9

....He did make an argument. He said you were wrong, and then proved it by actually linking to studies and pasting their findings showing that you were wrong. WTF are you even saying?
/r/MensRights27/12/20 10:36 PM
1

No you didn't. You lied and said your source shows that 40% of rape reports are proven true. But it didn't. You just lied.
/r/MensRights27/12/20 10:24 PM
9

LOL, why are you pretending that there's something wrong with copy and pasting? If what's being pasted is words from an actual study refuting your lies, then what's the problem there? I mean, I can see why you wouldn't want your bullshit being refuted, but that's your problem.
/r/MensRights27/12/20 10:14 PM
34

Yes the tape is publicly released and you can listen to Heard yourself admitting her abuse. https://www.newsweek.com/justiceforjohnnydepp-trends-amber-heard-admits-hitting-actor-1485267
/r/MensRights22/12/20 04:51 PM
9

Hahahah! You are so all over the place and got lost in your ranting. By "ranting", you mean answering your question "Which special benefits do women get?" As we can see there are tons of benefits that women but not men get. The fact that women get sent to jail less than man for domestic violence is not because of feminism either...not even a little bit. Oh, but it is. It was feminists who created the Duluth Model. Feminists who perpetuate the myth that domestic violence is perpetrated by men aga…
/r/MensRights18/12/20 07:54 PM
1

Brock Turner was convicted of sexual assault and put in jail. Not "let go free".
/r/MensRights20/10/20 05:40 AM
15

There is no discrimination. Of course there is. A new study on gender disparities in elementary-school performance — the first study to examine both objective and subjective performance — found that boys were given lower grades than girls, even in cases (such as math and science) where their test scores were either equal to or higher than the girls’ test scores. https://ideas.time.com/2013/02/06/do-teachers-really-discriminate-against-boys/ An OECD report on gender in education, across more than…
/r/MensRights09/10/20 05:35 AM
5

Yes, I linked news articles that discuss the findings of actual studies. You are clearly too dishonest or stupid to discuss the subject.
/r/MensRights28/09/20 07:33 PM
5

I literally linked you articles that discuss studies showing that. Why are you lying?
/r/MensRights28/09/20 07:29 PM
6

Sure I can. If teachers give worse marks to boys due to their gender rather than because their work is worse - and they do, as we can see from the studies done - that is discrimination.
/r/MensRights28/09/20 07:04 PM
3

So? Whether they do or not is irrelevant. That doesn't change the fact that teachers discriminate against boys and give them worse marks because they are boys, rather than because their work is worse.
/r/MensRights28/09/20 07:01 PM
3

Yes, news article that discuss scholarly studies. Sorry that you don't like the facts, but they don't change based on your feelings.
/r/MensRights28/09/20 07:00 PM
6

Ah ok, so now you are just denying facts then.
/r/MensRights28/09/20 06:58 PM
6

Of course there is discrimination. It's proven fact and there are many studies showing that teachers discriminate against boys. E.g. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/female-teachers-accused-giving-boys-lower-marks-6943937.html https://www.bbc.com/news/education-31751672 An OECD report on gender in education, across more than 60 countries, found that girls receive higher marks compared with boys of the same ability.
/r/MensRights28/09/20 04:13 PM
1

So you are lying then. Men and MRAs are not the same community. Most men are not MRAs. In fact, there are likely more men who are feminists than men who are MRAs. And not all MRAs are men. So you are lying when you say that men as a whole are part of the MRA community. Second, where are MRAs claiming that there are no men who dismiss male rape victims? Point to it.
/r/MensRights30/05/20 06:53 PM
1

Forgot to address this: That's not what that comment is saying and you know that. No, I don't know that. You said: It means that this community is unwilling to blame it's own even when they're at fault. This community is MRAs. So you are saying MRAs are at fault. I ask again, how are MRA's at fault here?
/r/MensRights30/05/20 06:33 PM
1

No, they don't. That is a delusion belief if you have that. I literally just gave you an example. Don't lie. Quite often actually. No, don't lie. Point to some examples of feminists talking about the large proportion of female rapists. You won't be able to. Majority of the legal system is male. You want to fix that problem, start by questioning why male judges, most of whom are conservatives as well, are ignoring that fact. How is that relevant to what I said? It's not. Doesn't even address it. …
/r/MensRights30/05/20 04:57 PM
6

No it isn't. That's alt right propaganda bullshit that's been plaguing this community. No. Feminists indeed erase male victims. When was the last time you saw feminists admit that men raped by women make up a large portion of rape victims, or that women make up a large portion of rapists? Never. They just lie and claim that most rapists are men by pointing to crime statistics - ignoring the fact that female rapists are largely ignored by the legal system. And in fact we have prominent feminists …
/r/MensRights30/05/20 06:04 AM
1

Link?
/r/MensRights03/05/20 05:52 PM
18

Your post was terrible and made very little sense. If you're actually going to do posts like this, you need to write them properly. For starters, I am a computer coder (25F) In april 2020, my daughter suddenly developed this strong desire to have a dog. sH=he begged and begged for a cat from my wife (27M). It is true that the sub is extremely biased against men. But your post is still terrible.
/r/MensRights03/05/20 02:49 AM
4

No, the source is not from 1990. It is from the 70s and 80s. E.g. Analyzing 700 divorce cases in Middlesex County between 1978 and 1984, researchers found that in the 584 cases in which the mother had primary physical custody of the children, alimony (in conjunction with child support) was awarded in only 10% of the cases. Far more common was an award of child support only (48% of the cases). If I publish a study today that discusses data from 1950, my study is not a current one that reflects wh…
/r/MensRights29/01/20 06:49 PM
19

Skimmed through the thread - as far as I could tell, either zero people there were smart enough to figure out this was completely false, or they were but the moderators deleted it. https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/17/lies-damned-lies-and-social-media-part-5-of-%E2%88%9E/ To highlight exactly how awful this is, suppose we wanted to trivialize rape itself through the same methodology. The average woman, as per the article’s statistics, has a 1/4 chance of getting raped during her lifetime, which…
/r/MensRights16/12/19 07:38 PM
6

No. You didn't even understand it properly. It said that men are less likely than women to perceive sexual advances as negative. That's obvious and no one disputes that. It also said that both men and women are more likely to perceive sexual advances as harmful from unattractive people. The two statements are not contradictory.
/r/MensRights30/11/19 11:20 PM
2

Women who commit the same crime as men are given far lighter sentences, and this disparity is far greater than the disparity between blacks and whites. http://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/features/Pages/starr_gender_disparities.aspx This disparity is not limited to sentencing, but all aspects of the legal system. Less likely to be arrested in the same circumstances, less likely to be convicted, etc.
/r/MensRights08/07/19 02:20 AM
8

You have a very strange idea of what feminists think about those two topics. It might help if you go to an explicitly feminist rape support forum and see how actual feminist experts in sexual assault treat male victims of sexual assault by women. Nope, going to a forum tells you nothing. https://wordpress.clarku.edu/dhines/files/2012/01/Douglas-Hines-2011-helpseeking-experiences-of-male-victims.pdf Alarge proportion of those who sought help from DVagencies (49.9%), DV hotlines (63.9%), or online…
/r/MensRights23/05/19 03:49 PM
3

The only hate being spewed in this thread appears to be from you. You call yourself educated, but that doesn't make you rational, reasonable, or smart.
/r/MensRights06/05/19 06:09 PM
3

Maybe it's because I'm educated, but I don't just draw my own conclusions when it comes to "raw facts"....So, to conclude, you can't just look at random "raw facts" and use it conclude your own preconceived notions. You call yourself educated, but what you really mean is biased and trying to deny facts. We can be sure that if the evidence supported your argument, you'd be quick to agree with it. Example of your bias: Yeah fuck that guy, he's actually educated and doesn't get all his opinions fro…
/r/MensRights06/05/19 06:08 PM
2

Dude, go check yourself into a mental hospital. You have to be hallucinating or some shit to be this delusional. Nah man, no one "hallucinated" the fact that I provided evidence and links and you didn't. You actually refused to provide links when I asked.
/r/MensRights06/05/19 04:24 PM
2

That's kinda my point; they aren't differentiating on a factor that I consider very important when studying national sexual violence behavior. Do you think that matters? No, because the CDC is still asking about rape. Not "wanted sex" as you call it. Guess what, if someone is drunk or passed out and doesn't consent to sex, they're still raped even if they weren't physically beaten or overpowered. Again, you seem weirdly fixated on downplaying rape victims simply because they weren't physically b…
/r/MensRights03/05/19 04:37 PM
1

.6% of the female respondents reported attempted or forced penetration, which would translate to 33 - 37 women, not 23. I said forced penetration because I was referring specifically to the 0.4% of women who reported forced penetration, not the 0.6% who reported forced penetration or attempted penetration. That 0.4% only represents 23 respondents, but also represents 517,000 women total. Therefore, that means we know your statement is wrong when you said "but I'd hope that if there were 300K who…
/r/MensRights03/05/19 01:26 AM
2

That's theoretically possible, but I'd hope that if there were 300K who reported being "forced" in response to the survey telephone questions, then the survey would mark that data as statistically significant and reliable enough to report on. Except that's not how it works. Only 23 women reported forced penetration in the last 12 months (0.4% of the total sample), which translated to 517,000 total women. If only 20 men reported forced made to penetrate in the last 12 months, that'd be around 450…
/r/MensRights03/05/19 12:20 AM
2

That still doesn't specify whether that remaining amount (179,000) is "forced" rape. Does it? Yes, it does. They only have two types of made to penetrate - forced, or alcohol drug facilitated. If there are 648,000 alcohol facilitated, then the rest must be forced. Moreover, that doesn't mean it's "only" 179,000 as forced. As you yourself pointed out earlier, there can be multiple respondents to both categories. So if there are 827K total, and 648K alcohol, there could well be 300K or more forced…
/r/MensRights02/05/19 11:50 PM
2

OR that "Cell size was equal to or less than 20", meaning I suppose that 20 or less people responded in the affirmative to the survey question. Yes, and if 20 people had answered yes, that would be 20 out of 4323, which would be 0.465% of men surveyed. Which is not that different from the 23 women who reported completed forced penetration in the last 12 months (0.4% * 5758). Which still ignores the fact that you are trying to downplay male rape victims (but only men, not female rape victims of t…
/r/MensRights02/05/19 11:34 PM
2

So the CDC isn't qualifying any of the "Made to penetrate" events that occurred (for men) as 'forced' events. And as the table says, it doesn't mean no one reported it. It just means that their margin of error was too high for them to include the stat. It does include that, So then, why are you trying to argue that it's not rape? There is no reason for you to do that other than dismissing male rape victims, considering that you (nor anyone else) ever tries to dismiss the female rape victims who …
/r/MensRights02/05/19 10:16 PM
1

But notice how the men have virtually no instances of "forced" rape (under 'rape - forced' OR 'made to penetrate - forced') whereas women have 719,000 instances of "forced" rape. Do you suppose that 827,000 minus 648,000 is "virtually zero"? Or we can look at the lifetime category, and see that 2.7% of men reported "made to penetrate - completed or attempted forced" versus 5.5% of men "made to penetrate - drug/alcohol". Is that "virtually zero"? Also worth nothing that the 2015 study had signifi…
/r/MensRights02/05/19 10:14 PM
2

Also, I'll restate that the CDC itself distinguishes between forced and non-forced sex, and says that men in the 12-month period experienced virtually zero forced rape. No. The CDC says there was an estimated 827,000 male victims of "made to penetrate" in the last 12 months, in their 2015 survey. They also say there was an estimated 648,000 victims of "Made to penetrate - completed alcohol/drug-facilitated" in the last 12 months. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/2015data-brief508.pdf P…
/r/MensRights02/05/19 07:52 PM
3

Nope, you are either lying or just extremely misinformed. Women actually can perform the 2015 definition of rape. But men do it more often to other men than women do it to men. While true, the CDC's definition of rape does not include women forcing men into non-consensual PIV sex. If a woman forced a man into PIV sex, which is obviously rape, the CDC does not count it as rape. Rather, they count it as "made to penetrate". [Still, the majority of male rape victims (an estimated 79.3%) had only ma…
/r/MensRights02/05/19 07:42 PM
1

I'm not going to go dig for evidence for you LOL, what are you talking about? I'm not asking you to 'dig for evidence' since you claimed you already provided it in another comment. Asking you to paste a link isn't "digging". when you've already demonstrated that you're extremely biased and unlikely to do anything but ignore it regardless. No, don't project. You're the one that ignored the evidence I provided. Nothing I said was biased and dishonest, but your comments were. It's impossible to hon…
/r/MensRights24/04/19 12:08 AM
1

Are you trolling or just really stupid? If you have evidence, then link it. Don't just say it's in another comment and expect people to go look for it.
/r/MensRights23/04/19 09:29 PM
1

I obviously did, why are you lying and ignoring it? Where? I replied directly to your comment where you made the claim, and there was no links. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/bg5sw3/women_are_not_opressed_we_are/eljf0xn/?context=3 If you gave any evidence, then reply with it. Don't expect me to somehow know you gave evidence in another comment. Oh and meanwhile, you completely ignored the actual evidence I provided that directly contradicts your claims. Note how I actually gave lin…
/r/MensRights23/04/19 09:24 PM
1

But you gave no evidence. Why are you lying? You just said "Men aren't nearly as likely to experience sexual assault or rape." But gave no link or evidence.
/r/MensRights23/04/19 07:26 PM
3

You made a false claim with no evidence, and I refuted it with a link to a study. Yet you call me delusional? You're either a fool or a liar.
/r/MensRights23/04/19 04:47 PM
2

The link you gave doesn't support your claim at all, and that's a single example. Sure it does, you are just trying to deny it. Here's another example: We identified factors that lead to the persistent minimizing of male victimization, in-cluding reliance on gender stereotypes, outdated definitions of sexual victimization, and sampling biases. Yet we remained perplexed b ysome of the more striking findings. The Centers for Disease Controland Prevention (CDC), for example, found that women and me…
/r/MensRights23/04/19 04:23 PM
2

This bias also causes men to be seen as more competent than identically qualified women who apply for jobs than women Funny you link that study, because it is actually yet more evidence of female privilege. Why? Take a look at the study, and its pathetic sample size of 127. Now look at this study done at Cornell with a sample size of 873, and had the opposite findings: http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2015/04/women-preferred-21-over-men-stem-faculty-positions Now, one of these studies got 10x the…
/r/MensRights23/04/19 05:50 AM
5

Most of what you said is either mostly or completely false, or not actually a privilege. It is quite pathetic actually. E.g. Men aren't nearly as likely to experience sexual assault or rape. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/11/the-understudied-female-sexual-predator/503492/ Men can report violence that dominantly affects them without being responded to with claims that it's a nonissue, over exaggerated, victim blaming, etc., etc LOL....so you mean, the fact that male victims are …
/r/MensRights23/04/19 05:48 AM
-16

You just making shit up that you don't know about isn't much better than lying. She testified that she was solicited for sex but she killed him before they actually had sex. Still murder, but not of a "kind passerby".
/r/MensRights18/04/19 04:24 PM
-10

Feminist icon 1) prostitute who murdered innocent kind passerby who gave her shelter & food, while he slept, then returned to her pimp LOL, you mean the "passerby" that knowingly hired a prostitute. She did kill him while he was asleep and then robbed him, which makes her a murderer and that's why she was convicted. But you're lying if you call him a "kind passerby".
/r/MensRights18/04/19 04:01 PM
5

What strawman? The hell are you talking about?
/r/MensRights21/03/19 11:12 PM
3

the police did nothing wrong in issuing an amber alert for a child they were told is missing. Yes they did. Otherwise literally any woman could just tell the police their ex-husband (who legally has custody) kidnapped the kid, and then the police would send out an amber alert without proof. Obviously that is wrong. Before sending out an AA, you first need to establish the child has been kidnapped. This is common sense. Unless you have a study that shows fathers are not believed in cases of missi…
/r/MensRights21/03/19 09:29 PM
9

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/york-region-father-daughter-abduction-1.5063232 It's very interesting reading the article and interpreting the police rep's statements: Police initially said Jaffri was not supposed to have access to the girl, Why did they think that? Obviously because the mother said so in her report to police. However, the police have now confirmed that was a lie. On Wednesday afternoon, York police Const. Andy Pattenden confirmed there are no orders court orders barring …
/r/MensRights21/03/19 07:30 PM
1

When the same application was given to scientist (men and women) who were hiring lab workers , women were rated lower on competence, hireablity, and starting salary. That study had a sample size of 127. A similar study with a far greater (close to 900) sample size had the opposite findings: http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2015/04/women-preferred-21-over-men-stem-faculty-positions Funny enough, the study that contradicts feminist narratives didn't get nearly as much citation, despite being a bett…
/r/MensRights13/03/19 05:31 AM
2

Why aren't men leaving at the same rate? If all things being equal, shouldn't men be wanting to stay at home with their children? Someone has to work to earn income, obviously. So if a couple has a child, they cannot both quit work. There are close to zero women who want to be mothers but also want to work full-time and support an unemployed husband who raises the child. Some exist, but they are very rare. Meanwhile, there are plenty of men who want to be fathers and also want to work full-time …
/r/MensRights13/03/19 05:27 AM
2

Link to this? Or a name?
/r/MensRights13/03/19 05:03 AM
1

Sure, whatever works for you.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 11:19 PM
5

I'm here to say that when it comes to making the laws of the land women MUST be represented equally for both genders to get their voices heard. But that argument also makes no sense. The argument assumes that only a female politician can represent the interests of women, which is not only untrue, it goes against the principles of democracy. Democracies mean that each person has an equal vote, thus giving them equal representation in the political system. Nothing more. Moreover, that argument dir…
/r/PussyPassDenied26/02/19 10:32 PM
1

Sure, go ahead. As long as you can figure out how to truthfully divorce the left-wing aspect from it, without lying or being deceptive. I'll PM you the twitter link.
/r/MensRights26/02/19 06:19 PM
3

It's a pretty clear line. In this case, she knew for a fact that the guy was about to commit suicide and then changed his mind at the last minute. She then berated him to convince him to go through with it. If you say to some person online to kill themselves as a random insult, even if they actually did, a reasonable person would not believe that action would actually cause someone to kill themselves. But if you were someone's loved one and they were about to commit suicide at that moment, and t…
/r/MensRights25/02/19 05:20 PM
2

Sure, go ahead. If you want I can PM you the twitter link where I got the images from.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 05:17 PM
2

Ok, if they can hide the fact that their study which supports company X's desired beliefs was in fact funded by company X, then that's a big problem as well. There should be some law against that. Like how ads are regulated and need to be clear it's a paid advertisement. Studies should be legally required to make it clear who they were funded by.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 06:16 AM
2

That's true, but not really a big deal. People can easily see that a study which supports the beliefs of the funder shouldn't be trusted. But when you have hundreds of "unbiased" academics only citing things that they agree with, while ignoring the findings that disagree with them, it's not easy to tell they're being dishonest. If you're not very familiar with the research, there'd literally be no way to know they're being dishonest. Whereas anyone can read a study and see it's funded by X compa…
/r/MensRights25/02/19 05:47 AM
6

instead of just sticking to the facts of the issue, which in this case would have been the feminist leaning of the citations. I'm not sure how you can argue that the overwhelming left-wing bias of professors/researchers in academia has nothing to do with it. There's little distinction between left-wing bias and feminist bias in this context. I don't really support Republicans or the right-wing. I disagree with their pro-life stance, their opposition to universal healthcare, etc. But as the facts…
/r/MensRights25/02/19 05:34 AM
2

I got it from someone posting it on Twitter, who in turn got the data from Google Scholar. I can't link to Twitter, but if you search: "Look at the first two lines. A small study showing stereotype biases? Over 1000 citations. Failed replication of same study? 50ish. Shoot me now." It should be the first result.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 12:08 AM
17

I know, they are incredible hypocrites. If I told you "only 15% of rape reports are proven true and result in conviction. So 85% are false", then you'd be able to immediately see the huge stupidity in my statement. And a feminist would too. But yet the exact same person will blindly repeat "only a few % of rape claims are proven false, so the other 90%+ are true".
/r/MensRights24/02/19 04:59 AM
15

Why do you equate attacking feminists with attacking women? That's like saying criticizing Black Lives Matters is attacking black people. From my position, no one works harder to ensure the real and legitimate problems men face are laughed at and ignored as much as men's rights activists. Really? Here's an example of a feminist, Mary Koss, who claims that men who were forced into sex by women are not rape victims. This feminist is also responsible for advising the CDC on research done on rape, m…
/r/MensRights22/02/19 12:10 AM
1

Yes, Cosby committing rape is worse. That's why he was convicted and sentenced. However, Lena's actions are not acceptable and also the media is being dishonest by claiming she only did things at 7 years old. If a man talked about how he was deliberately masturbating next to his 10 year old sibling when he was 17, he'd have been rightly attacked.
/r/MensRights20/02/19 05:32 PM
7

You mean, Dunham was up to 17 years old. Not seven. https://www.bustle.com/articles/47399-the-lena-dunham-molestation-accusations-arent-about-her-theyre-about-female-sexuality I shared a bed with my sister, Grace, until I was seventeen years old. She was afraid to sleep alone and would begin asking me around 5:00 P.M. every day whether she could sleep with me. I put on a big show of saying no, taking pleasure in watching her beg and sulk, but eventually I always relented. Her sticky, muscly body…
/r/MensRights20/02/19 12:53 AM
21

No, that is wrong. Many media outlets just lie and say that Lena was seven years old, while omitting what Lena said she did when she was 17 years old. I shared a bed with my sister, Grace, until I was seventeen years old. She was afraid to sleep alone and would begin asking me around 5:00 P.M. every day whether she could sleep with me. I put on a big show of saying no, taking pleasure in watching her beg and sulk, but eventually I always relented. Her sticky, muscly body thrashed beside me every…
/r/MensRights20/02/19 12:53 AM
2

First off, the person is obviously trolling (and the comment history proves it). Also, "Reddit" did not support her. What you mean is, the bigoted users on TrollxChromosomes, who are extremely biased against men, did. That's like saying "Reddit loves Donald Trump" by looking at a post in the_donald.
/r/MensRights12/02/19 06:09 AM
2

Is there a link to this study? I tried to find it but couldn't, as it doesn't even say the title.
/r/MensRights08/02/19 05:42 PM
7

The idea isn't to be scared that every female co-worker would make a false rape accusation. That would be irrational, the same as a woman being scared that every male co-worker might rape her out of the blue. There's no reason to fear someone if they haven't given you any reason to be scared. But you should be scared of someone that does give you a reason to be scared. If a male co-worker kept putting his hands on you even though you told him to stop, then the woman should be scared he'd rape he…
/r/MensRights03/02/19 06:20 PM
4

1) You cherry-picked a study that has a huge sampling problem that makes its generalisability extremely limited; its sample group covered age demographics representing approximately 18% of the population. You realize that is far from the only study? SUMMARY: This bibliography examines 286 scholarly investigations: 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses …
/r/MensRights07/01/19 08:15 PM
3

I start with a common rhetorical exaggeration not intended to be interpreted literally and you dwell on that to dismiss the rest of my comment. What you mean is, you made an outright false statement. Also, even if your statement was true, it doesn't even matter. Even if it was true that 99% of perpetrators of violence are male, so what? That doesn't mean that it's "whataboutism" to point out the fact that there is no reason to focus on violence against women when violence against men is more pre…
/r/MensRights07/01/19 06:41 PM
6

Being raped, not very plausible on a crowded airplane. Sexually assaulted? Extremely easy and plausible on an airplane.
/r/MensRights12/12/18 04:33 AM
2

How TF do you not recognize that generations of preferential treatment that have been given and still is given to heterosexual white males may require some sacrifices to balance out. What preferential treatment to white men do you claim is being given? If you are a hetero white male you have already statistically speaking been gifted a head start that allows significantly more of us to be eligible for a scholarship like this than any other race gender or sexual orientation. What "statistical hea…
/r/MensRights29/11/18 08:32 PM
1

The fear of being accused of sexual assault for saving a life is the complete opposite of rational, it is simply following the narrative that all women are out to accuse you for no good reason, just like an NPC. Of course it's rational. The risk is non-zero, given that we can see examples of false accusations for similar circumstances. Like doctors or paramedics being falsely accused. So it's quite rational to not want to put yourself at risk in order to help a stranger. That doesn't require "fo…
/r/MensRights11/11/18 04:57 AM
3

NPCs are brainless characters who can't think for themselves so they follow the narrative set out by the narrow world they live in. That's you guys to a T in this thread. No it isn't. There is no narrative set out saying that men shouldn't do CPR out of fear for themselves. The people here came to that conclusion on their own, out of rational self-interest after using simple logic. That's the opposite of NPCs.
/r/MensRights10/11/18 06:08 PM
15

He didn't say women can't be pedophiles. He accepted it might happen, but thought there is not good evidence for it. Yes he did. The judge wrote (and read aloud in court): “Dr. Pearce testified that the current research suggests that women do not suffer from paraphilic disorders apart from masochism. This fact lends further weight to the conclusion that pedophilia does not apply to you.” Problem is, that is false. There is no such research that says that.
/r/MensRights09/11/18 12:02 AM
81

No, she was labelled as a sex offender. However, she was not labelled a "dangerous offender" (separate classification). The real problem is that the court accepted "as a fact" that women cannot be pedophiles, simply because the "expert witness" lied and said that the research showed that. Complete lie though, no research says that.
/r/MensRights08/11/18 07:26 PM
2

It makes zero sense for you to talk about murders when trying to discuss domestic violence as a whole. Just like it makes zero sense to talk about helicopter and private jet transportation when talking about commuting as a whole. Why? Because you're ignoring the vast majority of cases and focusing on a very small subset. I'm not a fan of models that blame one gender for something. I'd like a source that details the extent to which the Duluth model is in our justice system and used by cops. Got a…
/r/MensRights27/09/18 04:34 PM
3

I'm really not invested in this point. Then why are you even here? That is a pretty key point in the discussion, whether or not fathers are treated equally when requesting custody. Do you have solid evidence to the contrary? I just linked a study showing that fathers were far less likely to get custody.
/r/MensRights15/09/18 05:53 PM
5

I think that's unfair, What is unfair? What I said was a fact - you lied earlier and gave a link that you claimed proved that fathers are very likely to get custody if they request it. But in reality, your link didn't even have any statistics as to how likely it was for fathers to get custody if they request it. but a brief googling effort isn't showing me any knock-out links to that effect Exactly, because it's not true. You just made it up.
/r/MensRights15/09/18 05:47 PM
4

That conflicts with other things I've read that have shown that fathers are as or even somewhat more likely to get custody in disputed cases, What "things"? Show me a study that states, when requesting custody, fathers are just as likely to get custody as mothers. Not like when you lied earlier and gave a link that didn't actually say what you claimed it did.
/r/MensRights15/09/18 05:22 PM
6

Men typically get custody when they request it. They request it a lot less. No, that is a lie pushed by feminists. You gave this link: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/cathy-meyer/dispelling-the-myth-of-ge_b_1617115.html And it doesn't even have any evidence related to that. You didn't even read it, as nowhere does it say that most fathers who request custody get it. Of the custody resolution events awarding physical custody either to mother or father or jointly, the mother received primary physic…
/r/MensRights15/09/18 04:44 PM
12

Thanks. To be honest, there is a lot of this on r/relationships. The people there are absolutely toxic. I just saw one earlier today where the community was condemning a man who had a child. He had never wanted the child, and had wanted the mother to get an abortion. He was paying child support, but he wasn't raising the child because he had never wanted it. And they were saying that was immoral, abandoning his own child, and totally condemning him. So in the case of birth control failure or eve…
/r/MensRights22/11/15 01:59 AM
3

Yup. As I said, I have no condemning someone who is just mooching while their spouse is working. My only issue is the double standard - men get condemned and insulted, while women get concern and "she is depressed and needs help".
/r/MensRights22/11/15 01:51 AM
6

I don't think that being 27 and unwilling to get a job is any different than being 37 and unwilling. In both cases (assuming the person is healthy) you are expected to be able to provide for yourself and not be a leech.
/r/MensRights22/11/15 01:49 AM
8

The top comment is saying that she probably has depression: Why do you think she doesn't have issues with depression? (Hint: sleeping a lot and giving up on life are symptoms.) Many other comments, all upvoted, say similar things: I'm saying this, but I also sympathise with your partner. Being unemployed is really difficult, and the pressures and judgement from people around you (including loved ones) can make it worse. Possible depression due to unemployment? She may feel "anger" because you ar…
/r/MensRights21/11/15 08:13 PM
6

I put the links in the wrong order. I fixed it now.
/r/MensRights21/11/15 08:10 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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