TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

TheMortalOne Archive

View 2 posts and 122 comments by TheMortalOne 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)
3

I am going to assume you took the picture rather than the picture having been taken by someone else. In that case, why did you like her 2 comments?
/r/MensRights06/10/13 08:08 PM
1

Thanks, this is exactly what I was looking for.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 04:28 PM
1

I don't know why you'd expect random sampling to exaggerate one side but not the other. I am not, I do expect that given enough studies, some will be skewed in each direction even if measures have been taken to avoid it (non-sampling error). I am worried that the CDC might be an example of such a case, which is why I was wondering if there is another source to support its finding. Also, keep in mind that the study only concerns rape and sexual abuse between intimate partners, not all rape or sex…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 04:16 PM
1

To be fair though. Fox (and other right leaning news sources) are generally just as bad, though for different reasons.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 10:57 PM
2

I have some Facebook friends that link to jezebel every so often. They tend to link to the more reasonable posts though (at the very least, I haven't seen one that they linked to also posted here).
/r/MensRights25/07/13 01:27 AM
3

If it makes it any better. Note how (at least when I made this comment), the top comment saying how it's just a dumb joke got more net upvotes than the pic.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 05:32 AM
9

Even if it arguably fits, I would argue it's counterproductive. If the person seeing it agrees with your views, it's unecessary. I don't need to point out why it won't works on most feminists (note that I am considering the feminists that could be labeled as egalitarian in the next group). If the person seeing is undecided on their views, the extremism of the comparison (even if technically valid) is likely to cause them to to simply ignore it and not read the details.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 06:20 AM
0

You may have just convinced me to watch breaking bad. I have heard some decent things about it, but it wasn't particularly high up on my "to watch list"; this moved it much closer to the top of the pile.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:14 PM
9

IIRC, in the UK rape requires penetration with a penis. (penetration with another object or forcing penetration don't count). Because of that, all rape is, pretty much by definition, done by men, and so all rape of men must be male-on-male rape.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 04:46 PM
2

Decided to look her up after seeing the video, since she seemed reasonable. Then I saw this on her wiki page... In the early 1990s, Wolf garnered international fame as a spokesperson of third-wave feminism[10][11] as a result of the success of her first book The Beauty Myth, which became an international bestseller.[7] In the book, she argues that "beauty" as a normative value is entirely socially constructed, and that the patriarchy determines the content of that construction with the goal of r…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 03:51 AM
3

IMO insurance premiums should be based on your driving record, nothing more. While in theory I agree that this would be best, it's impossible to get a good estimate for young drivers that way. If the insurance companies charge rates based on overall average of men and women, they may lose money if men apply (*more) than women. This forces them to give overall higher rates or take a risk they would rather not take. edit in brackets with symbol
/r/MensRights08/05/13 12:23 AM
1

No quotas at all (at least as far as I can tell, though it wasn't particularly difficult to get into those classes if you wanted to, most just didn't to take the harder courses). If there was an interesting distribution though, it would be that the classes tended to have a very high number of asian/chinese students compared to the general student population (30-50% of class, 5-10% of student body), many of the others were also not born in Canada (I was born in Israel, a friend of mine in South A…
/r/MensRights31/03/13 08:23 PM
2

I don't remember my classes exactly. I went to 2 different high schools (one in grade 11-12, one for grade 10-12*), and the AP/enriched math classes were about even by gender. AP physics was mostly (as in 70-80%) males though, and I had male teachers for all those classes. *meant 9-10, keeping original to show mistake
/r/MensRights31/03/13 02:45 AM
3

Keep detailed notes of what goes on at the meetings. I know this can be hard especially during debates or discussions, but those notes are your paper trail. It keeps people from saying something happened that didn't. Might be better to go a step above that and actually record the meetings. Either a full recording or just an audio recording.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 04:10 AM
3

Mileage method would be difficult to implement, since part of the point of insurance is that you pay the premiums to the insurance company before any accident occurs, and it's impossible to fairly charge without knowing in advance. realized while writing this However, I can see insurance companies modifying your odometer so that it constantly sends updates, which after passing a certain amount charges you. Not sure if the complications are worth it to the companies though, which is the factor th…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 11:19 PM
2

Of course it's poor children. The question whether poor families are likely to stop funding the daughter's education in favor of the son's (which I can theoretically see happening, at least on an individual basis), or whether there is basically no gender difference. Either way, I am mostly looking for something I can reference in response to those arguments.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 02:35 AM
3

Half of peace agreements that don't have women as part of it fail. That half must be because there were no women. Half of peace agreements that have women also fail, but for other reasons. The above is why the argument is BS. If you have nothing to compare it to, the statement is meaningless.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 10:52 PM
1

Thought it was uWaterloo when you wrote: That's going to be difficult to pull off when the majority of the men at my campus are in CS/Engineering ... I am an Actsci student at UW (3B term now). I don't know too much about how the bureaucracy works there, but if there is any way I can help then let me know.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 06:20 AM
1

The article was iffy, the report was more interesting. link for those interested: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svjfry09.pdf EDIT: hopefully you see this, forgot to say thanks for the link (wouldn't have found the report without it).
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:46 AM
1

Interesting. didn't know that, and good that it came from an attempt to balance out the other inequality. I would still rather allow sex to be a factor for both, but if it is in one it applies to one type of insurance it's only fair that it would apply to all.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 09:24 PM
5

Every year 10,000 boys are abused by female staff in juvenile detention facilities. Got a source for this? I don't doubt you (especially since it seems reasonable). It's just something that would be good to have access to.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 09:20 PM
1

It is a double standard. I would argue that the way to go would be to fix the health insurance prices to account for it rather than the reverse. Sadly, I doubt it will happen any time soon, especially considering the outrage that happened in Europe (can't remember which European countries) they made (or tried to make? haven't been keeping track) car insurance have to be independent of gender, in effect raising the insurance for women. That despite the fact that health insurance also had that and…
/r/MensRights28/02/13 06:18 AM
2

women and men should be paying equally I agreed with you on everything but this. Insurance companies use many different factors to determine how much they should charge a person. If gender happens to be one of the factors that make a statistical difference, it makes sense that the amount payed should not be equal either.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 06:02 AM
1

I actually saw on another reddit thread that there are certain studies which point to false rape accusations being as high as 90%... 90% seems way too high. In general the number of rape reports that cannot be conclusively proven either way is much higher than 10%.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 06:04 AM
3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQ2xrnyH2wQ This is the first of a 7 video series. Generally speaking (in these videos, I don't know enough about either field to conclude for all) it's the psychologists who actually do the data based research and the sociologists who just make stuff up and ignore the data.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 03:27 AM
11

You are missing: -get paid to go to conferences to talk about how you are somehow a a victim.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 03:48 PM
1

As far as I know, those same MRAs that hate woman that do not reject feminism also hate men who do not reject feminism. Their hate is therefore not towards women but towards what they view as a hate movement, feminism.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 04:45 AM
1

there are different movements within feminism itself and not all of them are anti-male. Just like not all MRA movements are anti-women. You are claiming here that parts of the MRA movement are anti-women, not that they "appear" (or percieved as) anti-women, falsely implying that the 2 movements aren't that different because they both have a part that hates one of the genders.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 04:29 AM
2

I disagree since that falsely equates feminism with women. Regardless of whether feminism is in fact a hate movement, claiming it to be one is only anti-feminism, not anti-woman.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 04:14 AM
2

Just like not all MRA movements are anti-women. Mind if I ask which MRA movements are anti-women?
/r/MensRights21/02/13 03:34 AM
5

I would be tempted to sarcastically thank them for reminding me. Making sure the sarcasm is extremely obvious.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 07:51 PM
1

Perhaps, but when people discuss the pay gap they aren't talking about a 1-2 percent effective pay gay (which I could see existing), they are talking about a 10+ percent pay gap, which is impossible to maintain due to the reason above.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 06:38 PM
16

Is there even a need to look at statistics for this wage gap myth? If women did earn less than men for the same job, it means that a smart person could start a company with only female workers, pay them somewhere between the common male wage and the female equivalent, and beat all competitors in the market thanks to the saving. Simpy the fact that this doesn't happen is proof that there is no real wage gap.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 05:15 AM
3

I am personally against any sort of affirmative action, and quotas in particular. However, running campaigns to try to convince men to go into teaching (like there are for girls for STEM fields), as well as giving them more protection from claims of sexual harassment (ones without proof) would help improve the situation.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 11:55 PM
6

MW definition of gay: a : happily excited : merry <in a gay mood> b : keenly alive and exuberant : having or inducing high spirits <a bird's gay spring song> Sadly I am not gay, which is why I am not particularly gay.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 03:01 AM
6

The courts were going to give joint custody (we don't know enough about her past to outright say that was wrong of them). She got life sentence for the crime (no pussy pass apparent). If she somehow does end up getting a shortened sentence, then I can see this being something to complain about. As is, this article doesn't seem to to have much to do with men's rights.
/r/MensRights07/02/13 10:24 PM
8

While without a doubt the situation back then were better than now. Even the first wave of feminism wasn't about correction (as modern feminism would make you think). In the past, both genders had gender roles that restricted them, and were arguably equal in their net advantages/disadvantages. Early feminism was about lifting the restrictions on women, removing most of the social disadvantages that women had, while maintaining the advantages (chivalry rules, maintain previous options, etc) and f…
/r/MensRights06/02/13 06:54 PM
1

Except by controlling all gender studies courses in University as well as any gender based sections of government, they in effect have control of both which studies get published as well as which studies are used, and which are ignored (for example, any that show equivalence in DV). It doesn't matter if the stats and real history contradicts what they claim if they shut down anyone trying to show those things to the public, so that the general population still believes their lies.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 06:35 PM
6

Agree. if he had used "another possible explanation to be considered" (or similarly worded statement) instead of stating it to be more likely (implying that we should assume the person lied, rather than that we just can't know) it would have likely been received much better.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 05:49 AM
0

Alone the fact that it's called feminism by itself results in a bias that consistently favors women. Even before I knew about Patriarchy theory and that went along with it as well as all the other messed up things caused by Feminism I refused to call myself a Feminist even though I agreed with all (or at least most) the popular outspoken claims (treating both genders equally, etc) simply because I found it absurd that a movement that's supposed to be about equality calls itself based on a single…
/r/MensRights03/02/13 03:39 AM
6

I assume a decent number don't live in the US, this also hasn't been up for too long, and it has in particular been hours when most US citizens would be in the middle of school/work.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 06:39 PM
2

The conviction rate for rape cases that go to trial is 55-60% depending on region, which is similar to murder. Which shows that there is a bias in favour of conviction in rape accusations, rather than the reverse. My reason for saying this is that in theory rape should be much harder to prove than murder, because there is no such thing as consentual murder/slaughter (I know there is assisted suicide, but it's extremely rare and illegal too), unlike consensual sex which a person could claim was r…
/r/MensRights01/02/13 02:57 PM
4

I know my cousin left his girlfriend of over a year because she wasn't making enough (more accurately, less than him). He ended up marrying a woman that earns more than him later on.. So it does happen with men, though definitely not as often. In my example though he also still works, so it's not like he is completely financially dependent.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 03:33 PM
1

That does sound like perjury then.. even ignoring the validity of the rape claim itself, if she claimed she was injured by him and it was proven otherwise, that makes it quite clear. Still, I would prefer it if those labeling accusers as false accusers are aware (and for the sake of others state) why the accuser is most likely lying.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 03:28 PM
3

Ask him if it would matter if the woman was ugly for situation 1.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 03:47 AM
6

The ones guilty of that are false accusers like his ex To play devil's advocate here. As far as I understand there wasn't enough proof that it was a false accusation (if there was, ignore rest of this), just not enough proof of rape. There is a chance she was saying the truth. that chance isn't a reason to treat him like he is treated now (I believe he should be treated as innocent), but it's enough that she shouldn't be shamed or accused without basis of perjury for it.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 01:53 AM
3

I flew alone when I was 12 or 13. It wasn't that bad. I also remember there were a few others that flew alone at the same time, some may have been a bit younger.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 08:27 PM
3

So basically you believe that if 2 people marry, even with a pre-nup or some mid-marriage agreement, the one that isn't bringing in the money gets a 50-50 cut of any interest or other profits made from the money of the other in a divorce. For example, looking at inflation (most funds give above that), $100 in 1982 would be about equal to $215 today. If we lower it to 14 years (numbers of years between contract and divorce in that case) it would be about $135. Assuming we swap that 100 for 100m, …
/r/MensRights14/01/13 11:57 PM
1

Let's assume 2 people get married (and ignore the gender). They recieve $100m to start off from one parent, with a marriage contract so in case of a divorce, it cannot be taken. Thanks to a low risk investment of that money they now have $104m a year later. If the two divorce, do you think the person whose family put nothing in deserves half the profits, $2m?
/r/MensRights14/01/13 11:24 PM
3

I missed originally the part that states that it was only 16 years into the marriage that he made her sign it. I think it's logical, when you consider that any money they would lose for being disowned is money that is the father's, not theirs. Therefore signing a contract saying that in the event of a divorce she can't get it seems perfectly reasonable to me. Especially factoring in how much she was supposed to receive even with that signing, which is hardly small, and is probably a better repre…
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:58 PM
3

True, I did miss that. It doesn't really change much though. The father gave something to his son and wanted to ensure that in the event of a divorce, the wife couldn't get it. The amount she was supposed to receive even with that is far from small. Or do you believe that she deserves more than 7 million and at least a few million more in property?
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:50 PM
14

So the father, wanting to avoid exactly this kind of situation, with the wife divorcing and taking millions, is somehow in the wrong..? He didn't stop her from marrying him, he basically said that if she wanted an equal share of their money, his son would have to start from scratch (disowned) and so all the money would be money they earned together, rather than his (the father's) money.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 08:55 PM
1

While the facts you said is true, showing a "woman did something bad" post doesn't help solve the problem. Especially when the woman does get a reasonable punishment for the crime. While to many emotional people numerous examples work better than a statistic, a single story means nothing, and actually detracts from your point if the woman is fairly judged. To reiterate and make clear, I am not saying such stories have absolutely no merit. This, among others, could be a good reference along with …
/r/MensRights14/01/13 04:15 PM
2

Exactly. Why not instead state state "more commonly have a the interest and ability required" or some other variant. Stating it like that implies that if you pick a random boy and a random girl, the boy will be smarter (even the term smart is wrong here because there are numerous forms of intelligence), which is different from the actual (though may still be debatable) fact that as a percentage of the population boys are more likely to have aptitude for STEM fields (at least some of the STEM fie…
/r/MensRights14/01/13 02:38 PM
1

I am not disagreeing with that, but is there any proper study you can refer (link would be even better, if possible) me to that supports it?
/r/MensRights13/01/13 04:01 AM
2

I suggest you stay. There are still many decent posts getting upvoted and the comments tend to also be more reasonable and on point.
/r/MensRights12/01/13 02:46 PM
14

Can we seriously stop posting and upvoting such links? The whole "woman did something bad" doesn't really support men's rights nor does it really show any problem. If there is a case where the woman got off easy for being a woman, then that would be a valid reason to post to point out the hypocracy. This doesn't seem to be the case here though, at least not yet.
/r/MensRights12/01/13 02:30 AM
1

Was she a bit drunk too? if she was then by feminists standards you did the raping.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:43 AM
19

Suchy wrote that Linda told her she made up the story about rape because she was then pregnant with the baby of her boyfriend, and he pushed her to press rape charges, saying that she would have to "get rid of Hetherington or he wouldn't take care of the baby." Expect the anti-male feminists to point out how it was all the boyfriend's fault. And the woman is just another innocent victim.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 06:41 AM
7

And they are important. Otherwise the "if it was reversed" can be just countered by "how do you know it would be different?"
/r/MensRights02/01/13 04:56 AM
35

I think there needs to be a distinction between actual criticism of a policy, situation, or well known feminist saying something misandrist, and hypothetical jokes that paint this subreddit as if views all feminists by the most extreme.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 02:46 AM
1

AFAIK, the belief wasn't that it prevents aids, just lowers the chance of it passing, which I can see potentially being true (ignoring evidence for or against).
/r/MensRights30/12/12 01:35 AM
4

you mean the UN cares if the Israeli government isn't happy? that's news to me. It's more likely to be an issue with the Arab/Muslim countries.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 01:33 AM
3

and the noun...
/r/MensRights27/12/12 05:58 AM
1

I would say that's an important part of the story. When I first read the story, I couldn't tell whether I should be siding with your uncle on this, or consider him a jerk for attempting to get away with as little as possible, since her kicking him out may not be enough of a reason to make it low.
/r/MensRights27/12/12 05:50 AM
16

It's also sexism, as it's basically implying that only men lie.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 07:11 PM
6

Will you? and if so. Do.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 09:24 PM
1

I stopped later on. I disagree with that, but I can at least see the logic behind it (though really, looking at average for it is wrong, it's when too much time is spent that it actually becomes a problem).
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:09 PM
31

I have more issues with the judge here than the girl.. There will always be people making false accusations, but the judges job is to make sure that these false accusations aren't enough to convict alone. The fact that the judge overturned the entire Jury, and only the daughter confessing that the accusations were false were enough, is absurd. The judge shouldn't be convicted on putting an innocent man in prison. He should however be convicted for putting a man in prison despite insufficient leg…
/r/MensRights14/12/12 06:14 PM
3

I enjoyed reading the r/feminism comments from 1 year ago in response to the site.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 05:12 PM
2

and is attempting to appeal it (for more).
/r/MensRights13/12/12 09:36 PM
1

Exactly. It's not like someone needs to be actively watching it, making additional cameras somehow harder to manage, just record it and play back if there is a claim.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 07:32 PM
5

<extreme side of ideology I disagree with>. People tending towards <extreme side of ideology I disagree with> tend to end up as mass murderers. One of the selling points of <the ideology I follow> is that we are <the best>. FTFY
/r/MensRights12/12/12 04:32 PM
2

I think you might have misunderstood my argument, though I should probably have used "a major flaw" rather than "the major flaw". I was pointing out how they aren't taking into account the possible negative effects of their proposed solution.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 05:14 AM
4

I noticed no one here has stated the a major flaw in their argument, being that working at a University is far from the only job after doing a graduate degree in biology or other sciences. Unlike some other degrees, there is a market demand for people with graduate degrees in biology. Meaning that by reducing the number of people able to enter graduate studies, you end up you are affecting a lot more than just when the competition occurs. There are the other obvious flaws, but others have alread…
/r/MensRights12/12/12 04:34 AM
8

A Westville woman admitted Wednesday she pushed her boyfriend from a RiverLine train platform as the train was approaching. Unless I am misunderstanding what it says, it seems like attempted murder...
/r/MensRights09/12/12 10:28 PM
-2

The victim was a man, this is a group that exists to protect the rights of men. That's not exactly what this group is. This group is to protect the rights of men from issues involving gender inequalities. However, in this case there was no gender inequality and nothing to argue about from a MR POV (unless you believe the purpetrators got off too lightly, or have something specific in how the article was written to talk about, in which case you need to specify). That is not to say this is not hor…
/r/MensRights07/12/12 04:00 PM
3

Well, video games are either 1) On the Internet 2) Offline, in which case it's no different from being alone in your room.
/r/MensRights07/12/12 03:45 PM
1

Yes, no idea how I got it to link to this page...
/r/MensRights04/12/12 07:30 PM
4

Exactly. Unless she was somehow let off easier due to being a woman, or for some reason the father was blamed despite conclusive proof, then it would have it's place here. As is, it doesn't.
/r/MensRights02/12/12 10:46 PM
1

The question is whether she really wants unilateral control, or whether she would be satisfied with the option still being open. The way this was stated, it seemed like it just might be the second. Of course, she just wants the unilateral control, then there is nothing he can do about it, though recording said conversation would likely help his case if a divorce does occur in order to gain help custody.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 04:14 PM
7

Did you suggest freezing some sperm, or point out that you could potentially adopt if you both decide you want another child later on? If all she wants is the option to have another child in the future if she wants it (and doesn't want it now), those 2 options might convince her.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 07:00 PM
2

The last couple would be a bit hard, but the first 2 are necessary.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 03:31 PM
1

Thanks, that's the one I was thinking of.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 12:25 AM
0

Wierdly, I literally saw that video for the first time yesterday.. There is a term for that, though I can't remember the name..
/r/MensRights14/11/12 08:05 PM
2

Yea, that is bad. Also, just making sure here, when you are saying Feminism is that bad. you are referring to r/feminism? right?
/r/MensRights09/11/12 09:04 PM
1

That makes sense, but statistics to back it up would be nice.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 06:51 PM
5

Wondering if anyone knows what were the number of upvotes and downvotes there before the r/mensrights link. Right now, this gives the impression that r/feminism might not be too bad, as it has under 0 net upvotes.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 06:39 PM
1

Makes sense. Would appreciate to a link to the statistic if you (or anyone) can find it, particularly the second half of it.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 04:52 PM
3

with 66% custody for the mothers That's actually much lower than I would have expected.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 03:46 PM
8

For the sake of fairness though, it should probably be noted that due to the court systems there are more women than men in a position where they could commit child abuse. Not sure how the stats go once it's accounted for. If anyone knows, I would like to see.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 03:30 PM
12

Men's right doesn't claim that by only focusing only on it you will achieve gender equality.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 03:26 PM
2

Did you try stating in a way that makes it clear that your older sister didn't attack a "man", she attacked a "child" (12 should still be young enough). Might work on the less crazy ones.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 09:35 PM
3

To some degree, that is understandable. For example, if a person is a chef and leaves the kitchen with a large knife, it can make people uncomfortable. There are also other valid scenarios (which I am too lazy to come up with now) where a person does something unusual that makes others around them uncomfortable. The issue though, is that they aren't asking people not to do some unusual action that can validly make a person uncomfortable, but things that are normal everyday actions.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 07:30 PM
2

I stated my reasoning as to why I think it would have helped. The main one being that it's very likely that the reason his wife filed the RO was in order to get a way out of the marriage where she wasn't viewed as the instigator, since divorce has a large stigma. If they weren't officially married, she might (though we can't be certain) not have gone that far.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 02:52 PM
2

Well, they have to notice that you are an MRA, was just wondering on how small a thing he was banned for.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 11:41 PM
1

Really? mind giving me a link to wherever it says that?
/r/MensRights07/11/12 11:28 PM
2

your comment reminded me of this comic: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2334
/r/MensRights07/11/12 09:53 PM
3

lol. What did you say?
/r/MensRights07/11/12 09:37 PM
3

Shit reddit says. Basically unfilitered feminism I literally asked same question and got this answer a couple of days ago, having checked it, I have to agree..
/r/MensRights07/11/12 09:08 PM
3

It doesn't tell you about how they will react in divorce mode, but it will give you a better idea on whether the marriage has a chance for success, and puts lets pressure and complications in case you realize things don't work out.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 08:47 PM
12

I am not sure how often it's stated, but it's generally better to try to live with the person before getting married, as it can help you find much more about them and avoid unecessary divorce problems or attempts to keep a marriage that isn't supposed to last. It might have helped you here in that you would have given both you and her the option to break up without the stigma of a divorce, as I assume one of the main reasons your wife went through that was to cause a breakup that is 'not her fau…
/r/MensRights07/11/12 06:54 PM
5

Comments there are disgusting though. So many people naming it a hate group simply because some extremist feminist group put it on its list, without having visited here once.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 04:02 PM
26

I wouldn't be surprised if there are a couple, just hidden well. This is a good indicator though that there definitly aren't thousands of thousands (or even just thousands).
/r/MensRights07/11/12 03:36 PM
1

IIRC, something only has to be 65% the fault of one person for it to be sufficient to claim that it is, in fact, their fault. So even if theoretically rape isn't 100% the fault of the rapist, but rather 90%, that still doesn't in any way exuse the crime.
/r/MensRights06/11/12 07:42 PM
1

what about male prostitutes? Or do they get a bye because there are much fewer of them?
/r/MensRights06/11/12 07:31 PM
9

Mind if I ask what in DA2 points to that? I played DA2 and found it horrible compared to the original (though not too bad if first is ignored), didn't notice anything anything that seemed to fit the comment (though I wouldn't be surprised if I missed it, cause I was far from looking at it).
/r/MensRights06/11/12 06:31 PM
1

mind if I ask what SRS stands for? tried googling and didn't find anything meaningful.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 09:25 PM
2

Then you should specify female primates (or whatever broad category you are including here). Either way, a source is needed.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 09:08 PM
1

I would say that's pro choice. Pro choice if letting people choose. Obviously it's not a "you must have an abortion under condition X", which would not be 'choice'.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 09:01 PM
8

The issue was more the fact that she demanded the sit from someone obviously disabled due to the fact that friends were sitting beside near his sit. If it had at least been someone who looked like he could stand, it would be much more reasonable.
/r/MensRights03/11/12 03:23 AM
1

False accusations are kept on record since they went through a court process (though I suppose a person can make the claim that she threatened to make the claim on them).
/r/MensRights02/11/12 12:04 PM
7

That's exactly what I am saying (though my choice of the word "sadly" might be misplaced). The penalty only applies where it's clear that it's a false accusation. Nothing can really be done in the cases where it's unproven either way, except keep both names on record in case they are part of another case.
/r/MensRights01/11/12 10:47 PM
2

You have a point. I don't completely agree with the sentiment above either, however that is one of the reasons for it, and it doesn't seem to be nearly as unreasonable as some other laws.
/r/MensRights01/11/12 08:07 PM
10

One of the reasonings for this is that in the cases where the accusations are true, by naming the suspect you increase the chance that previous victims will speak out and confirm. If the name is hidden, it becomes impossible to find others who were raped by the same person. The logical response is to severly increase penalty for conclusively false accusations with malicious intentions (insufficient evidence sadly not enough here), to deter false accusations. Of course, both of the above should a…
/r/MensRights01/11/12 05:49 PM
1

the issue with that is that it doesn't allow people to choose to go to the alternate servers if they wish without getting themselves banned from the original, which I can assume some might want to.
/r/MensRights01/11/12 02:45 PM
4

Just thought of a much better alternate that the game company can do. Instead of banning people for sexism (and let's add profanity and other similar things in here, to be fair), create a second server where sexism/racism/etc. can get you banned. However, you are only banned from that server, and can still go to the other one. This will (in theory, at least) mean that some players will get to play without assholes, meanwhile those who can't help themselves, or for whom it's just a harmless joke,…
/r/MensRights31/10/12 11:08 PM
1

fair enough. I was mostly responding to the first part your comment. I completely agree that there is a lot more imbalance than just the father not having an option to opt out. The situation gets more complex if both want the child, but not together (kind of like a divorce, but not quite, too much to go into). The case of just the male wanting the child is basically a non-issue since the female can (validly) just have an abortion.
/r/MensRights31/10/12 09:40 PM
2

You shouldn't do the deed if you're not prepared to become a wage slave to a woman and child. Why I specifically mentioned examples where the woman deliberately tricks (or rapes) the man into ensuring she gets pregnant. Furthermore, the man choosing to give up his right as a father is basically no different from giving the child for adoption to the mother. Last I checked biological parents do not need need to support their children once adopted, even if the adoptive family has monetary issues. E…
/r/MensRights31/10/12 09:15 PM
1

most likely they won't monitor, but anyone will know that if they said something they could be reported. And I am quite sure that the type of people that normally do say those types of things are more than likely to report someone else that said it that they dislike to get them banned.
/r/MensRights31/10/12 08:19 PM
13

Exactly. If anything, the law should be changed to allow the male to opt out of being the father if the decision is made within the first month or so, or if it's clear that the female has intentionally hidden her pregnancy. Because at the moment, it's far too easy for a woman to tamper with the condom (or say she is taking the pill, or even rape, etc), then get pregnant and force the male to pay child support for a child that was more likely than not, he doesn't want, often ruining the guy's lif…
/r/MensRights31/10/12 07:39 PM
22

Agree with this. He should probably record this conversation however in case things don't go well. Hope for the best, but be prepared for the worst.
/r/MensRights31/10/12 04:29 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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