TheOceanBoy Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
1	I'm so glad that my redpill kick didn't last that long Great post.	/r/ExRedPill	24/01/20 03:08 PM
3	I(23m) realize my ex gf used PUA tactics on me and It's killing me from the inside ,what should I do? My best friend was in a LTR relationship with a psychologically abusive manipulative woman. I’d go so far as to say it was like a cult, with her as the charismatic leader. It took a long time for him to totally heal from it. He was in his teens when it started. He harbored a lot of anger—at her, and himself—for a while. When you’re young, there’s not a lot of life experience you have to draw on to recognize these patterns when someone is doing it to you. There’s no shame in that. It was just bad…	/r/ExRedPill	24/01/20 03:05 PM
2	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? Those certainly sound like some really awful examples of people treating each other poorly. I'm sorry that's been your experience, because it doesn't have to be. I know it's hard to imagine it's possible, but people do choose to live differently than that, and in my life I see many many examples of couples who treat each other with respect and love. They still have disagreements and no one is perfect, but at the core is the idea that no one is trying to "win" or dominate the other. I have friend…	/r/MGTOW2	21/04/19 01:06 AM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? You've provided not one, single source, other than a youtube link. Not one. Not one for the stats you keep claiming to be true, not one for the claim that more women voted for Hitler. Not one. I've now provided three different sources for the stats on infidelity, one of which from an Islamic university, which would be a hard one to claim is feminist funded. If you can't because you're incapable, say so. Or stop being a baby and hiding behind the "well you wouldn't believe me anyway! Wahhh!!" Jus…	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 08:35 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? Also, here's one from the Islamic Azad University, Iran. You want to argue this is funded by feminists? Just read the first paragraph. Just that. http://www.ipedr.com/vol19/34-ICAMS2011-A10054.pdf Oh, and General Social Survey (GSS) conducted annually since 1972 by University of Chicago researchers. For 37 years, they have asked a representative national sample about infidelity. The results have been consistent. Every year, 10 percent of spouses admit cheating--12 percent of men, 7 percent of wo…	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 08:24 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? You've provided none. How's that for lazy?	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 08:04 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? I’ve seen Stefan Molyneux. He certainly knows how to talk like he knows what he's talking about, despite very little academic research. He cites this and cites that, and presents it as the whole truth. Again, a YouTube video is not the actual research. And again, you say there is research and statistics but literally also just put down intellectuals who need sources and studies. Make. Up. Your. Mind. So find the studies. Read them. Cite them. And I’m still waiting to have you prove your assertio…	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 07:17 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? Never saw the picture. So your racist claim is bunk. You have zero sources. Just emotion. And yet you claim women base their actions on emotion. Funny. You don’t use facts, you use feelings. Prove the studies are funded by feminists. I’ll wait. You just made a claim that women are ruined by sex, with...statistics. Yet a few sentences earlier you claimed a person didn’t need studies, just experiences. You contradict yourself at every turn. Source the statistics or stop embarrassing yourself. I sp…	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 06:51 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? Like I said, he is black, and thus you are a racist. I didn't know he was black. There was no image of him, only audio. How did you know he was black? Most studies are actually funded by feminists and liberals, that want their agenda proven. Prove it. Why should I waste my time finding sources, if you're only going to not believe them? You've provided no sources at all, so how do you know I wouldn't? Are you not capable of backing up your assertions? You still haven't bothered to refute any of t…	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 06:11 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? I'm saying that your conclusion that women think relationships are about power, more than men do, is wrong. And that if you continue to think about relationships as power struggles, with winners and losers, no one wins. Expand your mind to the possibility that relationships can be about partnership.	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 05:23 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? Solid rebuttal.... You feel many men don't think relationships are about power? This is literally what people are writing about, over and over; how to get it, keep it, etc.	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 05:13 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? That's a hefty dose of word salad, there. I don't care if he's black--I care that he doesn't have sources. Like you. You just believe him because of confirmation bias, which is lazy. Of course feminist and biased studies will show ... Prove they are funded by feminists, and how are they biased? Do you know the funding sources? Back up your assertions (you have yet to do this even once--are you lazy or not good at research?). I already sourced all of mine. You have a childs mentally It's "child's…	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 04:54 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? A quick read of threads on this sub and similar ones show men obsessed with controlling women, how to be seen as dominant, be alpha, how to have the upper hand, how to win, etc. And the title of this thread is literally about how men can be dominant. 🤷🏼‍♂️ It’s always the other sides fault.	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 03:30 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? A youtube video of someone talking isn't evidence. Are you truly that challenged? Let's go with another study, that has higher rates of infidelity overall. It still shows men committing more infidelities than women. https://www.truthaboutdeception.com/site-info-and-resources/sources-and-references.html https://www.toddkshackelford.com/downloads/Buss-Shackelford-JRP-1997.pdf If you simply use life experience, you'll see that women are more impulsive. Anecdote is not evidence. Women voted the most…	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 06:43 AM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? There was a study that proved that 60% of women cheat. End of story. no there isn't. All reputable studies have not shown close to this. The National Health and Social Life Survey found that 4% of married men, 16% of cohabiting men, and 37% of dating men engaged in acts of sexual infidelity compared to 1% of married women, 8% of cohabiting women, and 17% of women in dating relationships. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188691100050X?via%3Dihub Then why do women always do wh…	/r/MGTOW2	19/04/19 04:29 AM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? Either person thinking relationships are about power, dominance and control is the problem. Expand your mind and break free from that paradigm. It doesn’t have to adversarial. No one wins.	/r/MGTOW2	18/04/19 04:03 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? You don’t do math too well. Surveys show repeatedly that men, across socio economic boundaries. engage in infidelity more often than women. The raw numbers show more men than women. Period. Spin that however you want. You dismiss the study because you don’t like the conclusions, not because you have any data to back it up. That isn’t wise or intelligent. Many definitions of manhood are largely social constructs, yes. Including how much money a man or woman should make in order to fit that constr…	/r/MGTOW2	18/04/19 03:45 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? Repeated surveys consistently show men engage in more infidelity than women, though the gap is closing. Overall, the stats hold true, despite your hypothesis which has no actual data. The article links to the study, which has all the data, sourced and reviewed. You only dismiss it because you don't like the conclusions, which conflict with your narrative. Either you're interested in truth or you aren't. Men and women alike will attempt to improve their social standing through their choice of mat…	/r/MGTOW2	18/04/19 03:05 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? People, men and women, cheat. Men certainly do, and in higher % than women. Men are so terrified of this they try to control women, like you advocate. Not all western women cheat—that’s ridiculous as saying all western men cheat, or all Muslim men cheat. Some do, some don’t. That’s life. Your 20% statistic has been proven to be false and hyperbolic. There’s literally no evidence of the numbers being even close to that. https://www.medicaldaily.com/you-are-not-father-380843 For someone who thinks…	/r/MGTOW2	18/04/19 02:33 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? I’m in good shape, thanks:) And even if I wasn’t, it wouldn’t really have any bearing on things. Here’s the difference; my partner isn’t with me because I control her, she’s with me because she wants to be with me, loves me, wants me, is attracted to me. She has options and still wants to be with me. That’s actual power. Autonomy and independence. Free will. There’s no glory in controlling someone. It’s a sign of weakness. You use cattle as an example because you think of women as commodities, a…	/r/MGTOW2	18/04/19 02:01 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? You’re projecting your own fears, I’m afraid. Again, why are you afraid to let your partner be free? Is it because deep down you know if you did they would choose not to be with you? That’s where real confidence comes in. Someone choosing you is far more powerful than being coerced. Being controlling, for a man or a woman, is a sign of fear, nothing more. Why are you afraid?	/r/MGTOW2	18/04/19 12:09 PM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? If they hold beliefs similar to yours, then yes, they absolutely are. I won’t say all Saudis because beliefs vary there. But if any man is too weak, insecure and fragile that he has to imprison a woman to keep her, then yes that is sad. And if they have to compensate for it by killing people who feel otherwise, they are even more insecure and cowardly. Real power is the confidence to let someone be free, and being appealing enough that they want to be with you for who you are. Real power is havi…	/r/MGTOW2	18/04/19 05:54 AM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? What a sad, little and insecure version of manhood you have. True power is when someone is with you because they want to be, freely. If you need force someone, you’re showing how weak you really are.	/r/MGTOW2	18/04/19 03:19 AM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? If you think dominating a person means being able to hurt them or intimidate them to the point the police might get involved, you have a very small and insecure sense of self, and of what power is.	/r/MGTOW2	18/04/19 03:16 AM
1	How can men be dominant in a relationship these days? Or, expand your mind and cease seeing relationships as inherently about power and antagonism and dominance. 🤷🏼‍♂️	/r/MGTOW2	18/04/19 03:13 AM
2	Are tomboys less hypergamous? His issue is that you don’t fit into his “strategies for men”. Read into that what you will. (Hint; women are things to have or get.)	/r/PurplePillDebate	18/04/19 02:41 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Goodness. Well, you do seem committed to your imagined adversary, your rage, and your victim mentality. Hope you can move past it.	/r/MensRights	04/04/19 10:03 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. It does seem, tbh, that you’re continually trying to find ways to interpret the data differently than it is presented or what the researchers concluded. Specifically, it seems that you want the numbers of male and female sexual assault to be equal, even though no reputable data anywhere has ever indicated this to be true, this report included.	/r/MensRights	02/04/19 03:05 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Well, in my world, using outliers as evidence for a claim is considered fairly weak. Possibly 400 or more women dressed as men to fight in the Civil War So 400 (let's double it to 800 to be safe?) out of 2.75 million equals... .0003%. I don't see how this gives much weight to your argument, and is in no ways a 'significant' amount. Prohibition Women's push towards prohibition was a reaction to the consequences on them and their families that drinking was bringing. Chronic drinking meant chronic …	/r/MensRights	30/03/19 11:19 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. You're still locked in trying to find examples of behavior that upsets you on the other "side". Dragiewicz is an associate professor in Brisbane, and visiting researcher at a few other places, and she looms like Godzilla in your mind. Not to mention the case you're gnawing at like a bone was in 2009. The dialogue is ongoing. Read, for example, this article by a man about his experience with domestic assault. He speaks of all the things I'm discussing; that the patriarchal model traps men in the …	/r/MensRights	30/03/19 02:34 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. I find that patriarchal models encourage us to ignore men's emotional experiences, men's pain, and anything that doesn't fit the sexist model of what a 'man' should be. And yes, feminists are as capable of perpetuating aspects of patriarchal models as anyone. But the dialogue is changing, and the more it is seen as an adversarial arena, the more everyone loses. It's possible to acknowledge that, for example, more women experience sexual violence than men do, and still advocate for a system that …	/r/MensRights	30/03/19 01:44 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Hey, they even answers whether "Is free bleeding unsanitary" This is kinda funny, and you're really straining for an argument here. Look at the first paragraph: "it’s the practice of a very select group of women"...a tiny minority of women. It isn't a movement any more than people who practice sun gazing or a meat-only diet are a "movement". I think you know that. I don't understand your "100%" comment. I also don't understand your comment that 1/4 women are homeless. Ok. And? There are more hom…	/r/MensRights	30/03/19 12:26 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Update in regards to your question, from the 2015 report: "self-report data are vulnerable to recall bias and telescoping, in which respondents report incidents as having occurred closer in time than they actually did; such bias might affect 12-month estimates especially. However, allowing the respondent to report their lifetime victimization is likely to reduce the potential for telescoping." So it seems the lifetime stats are considered more reliable, not the 12 month.	/r/MensRights	30/03/19 12:01 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. You're very angry, and clearly didn't read my other post. If you always need an "enemy", you're sure to find one. To a hammer everything looks like a nail.	/r/MensRights	29/03/19 11:42 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Is your entire argument against feminism based on finding the most extreme voices and using them as Exhibit A for what feminism "really" wants? Because I can take a stroll over the Incel sub if we want to go head to head on that..... Here; I posted it elsewhere, and is a good example of what actual, intelligent and widely read feminists talk about. Let me quote a feminist, who fights not against men, but against patriarchy. "It is no accident that feminists began to use the word “patriarchy” to …	/r/MensRights	29/03/19 09:57 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. It's a buzzcut, dude. Is this the hill you want to die on? Granted, it's coming from a place of assuming men are dirtier than women. In these prisons, I don't know whether the basic hygiene levels differ, as I haven't been there, but overall, it seems unnecessary. That, amigo, is the result of patriarchal beliefs, which both men and women perpetuate. Your enemy isn't feminism. It's gender roles that limit both men and women, and is a result of a patriarchal model. That isn't anti-male to fight a…	/r/MensRights	29/03/19 09:44 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. It does seem you’re doubting the numbers because they don’t entirely align with what you believe. Have you considered contacting the researchers for clarification? Also, do you not think that many older women under report their own sexual assaults, given how ideas on it have also changed? They said yes to 'this much', so how can it be rape if she didn't want the rest? Maybe they asked for it, kinda.. This generational cloudiness in the definition would affect both sides, if it exists, so the ove…	/r/MensRights	29/03/19 09:16 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Maybe you can show which part of the article you linked--I don't think I'm going to go ahead and translate the whole thing to try and find it. But it isn't a restricted phenomenon at all. As far as I remember, "Women's rights" groups lobbied against gender neutrality in rape laws in India and Israel, arguing that gender neutrality would be employed to harm women with false accusations. And men have lobbied against marital rape being a thing at all, for far longer. Far longer.	/r/MensRights	29/03/19 05:14 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. I'm saying that...if the perception is that women's prisons are cleaner than men's (and from what I just read....Brazilian prisons are fucking hell holes for everyone), then a few options exist: 1) The conditions at women's prisons are in some ways better than the men's, and so the perception is that women are cleaner inmates. Again, I haven't been in either, and Human Rights Watch calls both of them abhorrent. But I haven't been there. 2) The notion that women are cleaner than men is frankly a …	/r/MensRights	29/03/19 04:57 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Dude, if the crux of your position rests on haircuts, I think you may be lost in the weeds a bit.	/r/MensRights	29/03/19 03:52 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Do you have a source for that quote?	/r/MensRights	29/03/19 02:12 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. In some states it was possible, yes. But there are a lot of laws that existed and yet were rarely if ever applied.	/r/MensRights	29/03/19 01:55 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. How are men subjugated by this Act? Although the title of the Act and the titles of its sections refer to victims of domestic violence as women, the operative text is gender-neutral, providing coverage for male victims as well. The 2005 reauthorization added a non-exclusivity provision clarifying that the title should not be construed to prohibit male victims from receiving services under the Act.The 2013 reauthorization added a non-discrimination provision that prohibits organizations receiving…	/r/MensRights	28/03/19 10:55 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Because of a narrative that sees women as the weaker sex, generally. Funnily, the delicacy of their constitution has been used as a reason to deny rights for centuries. It benefits both sexes when these narratives are broken down (though neither deserves flogging). Do you have any stats on the number of men imprisoned for advocating for specifically men’s rights (not general human rights ) vs # of women imprisoned for advocating for women’s rights in Saudi Arabia?	/r/MensRights	28/03/19 10:37 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. I find that unfair, absolutely. It should be extended to men as well. If a couple decides the man will stay home with the child, that should qualify for parental leave. Question is, does it stem from a patriarchal belief that presumes women are the better caregivers and parents and it is woman’s work? That is the standard narrative.	/r/MensRights	28/03/19 10:23 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. In fact death penalty for rape was the norm in USA until 2008. No it wasn’t. According to this info, there were precisely 2 executions for rape only, and it was of a child. Louisiana, to be precise. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/death-penalty-offenses-other-murder	/r/MensRights	28/03/19 10:13 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Hey--some really good stuff here and I want to unpack it. Can you reformat your reply so that the times when you're quoting me and you're replying are clearer? I'm losing the train of thought. I finally got to read (well, peruse) the other study you linked (had to find it elsewhere as the link was dead) and it is a really interesting study, not really well summarized by taking a few numbers out of context. The gist of it speaks to the heart of the matter, I believe. Meanwhile, since I have to ru…	/r/MensRights	28/03/19 06:56 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Seems like the narrative of victimhood is one you think applies to men, then? Goodness...how weak and easily manipulated they are. Golly! I don't think men are cut out for leadership if pillow talk can so sway them, do you? I'm pretty sure the "I was only following orders" defense has been used...not so successfully...in other contexts. If only I could remember where... Also, do you really feel that this example only applies to women? Advisers behind the scenes, whispering a-la-Wormtongue in the…	/r/MensRights	28/03/19 04:44 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Thanks for the reply. I replied to your other post but adding to this, You have broadened my understanding of this and I’m grateful for that. Perhaps I should have acknowledged this better. I do acknowledge it was more complex than moustached twirling villains hating all those with a uterus. (Though I’ll say that in other places in the world it pretty much is exactly that. The Taliban, for example). However, as I implied in my other response, you aren’t going to have much success denying women t…	/r/MensRights	28/03/19 04:01 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Problemredditor, I didn’t completely disregard it. I’m saying that it is complex. You want to reduce it down to (and again, only focusing on UK/USA) it being purely a class struggle, and I’m saying that yes, that was indeed part of it, but that deeply entrenched misogyny was undoubtedly part of it, and has been globally in every place where women have fought for the right to vote. Elites crafting narratives to serve their own purposes is nothing new, but they had fertile soil into which they pla…	/r/MensRights	28/03/19 03:51 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. That’s super interesting. And i definitely agree that, for men and for women, the elites have always resisted the unwashed masses having the power of the vote. The elites, however, were a small % of the population, and their domestic lives were not representative of what the majority lived. The sentiments against suffrage due to the list I presented were indeed widely held, and it doesn’t matter whether a misogynist belief was being promoted by a man or a woman, does it? Do you care especially i…	/r/MensRights	28/03/19 03:00 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. In another reply I list reasons given by various anti suffragists, which includes the assumed fragility of the female mind and constitution. The letter didn't specifically use those words, no. Many others have. Re. how men view their own sex, or how society does, in one global experiment called the “Goldberg paradigm,” researchers asked men and women in one group to evaluate a particular article or speech supposedly written by a man. Then they asked a similar group to judge the same material, th…	/r/MensRights	27/03/19 08:18 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. She did spend a year writing letters to different schools only to be rejected Was she rejected on merit or due to her being a woman? I'm glad she found a school to accept her. So she was the first...why was there a need for there to be a "first"? What was keeping more women from being there before that? How many other female students were there? Pulling individual cases is not really helpful. Look at larger data sets. It's meaningless to mention outliers and assume they define the trend.	/r/MensRights	27/03/19 07:59 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Interesting! Glad to be made aware of who you are. I don't really take much stock in people's call signs here, since they could mean anything, and didn't really even clock what yours was. My assumption was entirely wrong and I apologize. And I gave you reasons I would hesitate to vote for a woman. Anyone who can pull the "historical oppression based on immutable characteristics" card in order to avoid accountability should be vetted thoroughly to determine whether they're the type to play it. …	/r/MensRights	27/03/19 07:36 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. If you read right next to table 3.5, under Made To Penetrate, does it not say “subtypes of made to penetrate were not statistically reliable.”? And does the report not also state, “Across all states, estimates of lifetime prevalence of contact sexual violence of women were approximately 30% or higher.” ? Do you feel that 'Teach men not to rape' and the debate on rape only being about male-on-female is a good way to include male victims and punish female perpetrators? Does that make it easier for…	/r/MensRights	27/03/19 05:00 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. How low an opinion must have have of oneself if you think voting is too great a burden for your delicate mind...? Also, if men and women were truly believed to be equal, then why the need to forbid the vote? Why instead was the attitude not "Let's leave it open. If you feel the burden is too great, you aren't required to vote, so you don't have to worry. But if you feel up to it, you are truly and equal and have the opportunity."? The anti suffragists were arguing, essentially, from a place of t…	/r/MensRights	27/03/19 03:09 AM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. This is a great example of how blind we can be to our own position and privilege, actually. I’m a bit of a fan of the saying “To those in power, equality feels like oppression.” For example, a white candidate doesn’t ever have to talk about white issues in the USA, except if they engage in scare tactics about brown people in caravans coming for them or something. The white issues are the norm. They’re the baseline, and representation is everywhere. So when a black candidate talks about racial is…	/r/MensRights	27/03/19 01:08 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. My mistake. Sorry.	/r/MensRights	27/03/19 12:44 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. This is a great example of how blind we can be to our own position and privilege, actually. I’m a bit of a fan of the saying “To those in power, equality feels like oppression.” For example, a white candidate doesn’t ever have to talk about white issues in the USA, except if they engage in scare tactics about brown people in caravans coming for them or something. The white issues are the norm. They’re the baseline, and representation is everywhere. So when a black candidate talks about racial is…	/r/MensRights	27/03/19 12:33 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. I’m sorry, but your fantasy view of history seems more informed by movies you’ve seen, which I think explains why all your references are celebrities.	/r/MensRights	27/03/19 12:14 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Perhaps I’m misreading the link you sent. Can you tell me what you see when you compare table 3.1 and table 3.5 in terms of numbers and prevalence (which includes forced envelopment)? In addition, from those charts, from what I can see, the rates of sexual assault of women by their intimate partner is over double that of men. Did I read it incorrectly? Again, I can’t speak for Stemple. Why don’t you write her and ask instead of assuming? Or I could if you like. In the links I sent re her work an…	/r/MensRights	26/03/19 09:40 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. There’s another poster in this thread where someone has copy pasted the same things you have. :) Might want to give it a perusal. It seems we both believe the other is guilty of not denying the “real” reason for denying women the vote. For my part, I’m not as laser focused on the UK as you seem to be. And I also don’t take much stock in whether a majority of women polled (in an era when polling science was to be fair,... not advanced) at that time wanted it or not. What is popular and what is ri…	/r/MensRights	26/03/19 06:26 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. I never said that male rape victims were statistically insignificant. I said, perhaps not specifically enough, that there are fewer male victims of rape by women, compared the female and male victims of rape by men. I think that's pretty obvious. There is increasing awareness of the amount of assault by women of both men and women, and I'm glad for that awareness, because all victims deserve to heard. It's absolutely a surprise for people to learn that men are raped by women, so there is still m…	/r/MensRights	26/03/19 05:25 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Continuing this thread, I did have a few questions. Thanks to this discussion, I've furthered my knowledge about the struggle for Universal suffrage, which is as you pointed out is a complex subject. I'm grateful to know more. What I find curious, though, is a reluctance to cleanly acknowledge that the primary reason the vote was denied to women was due to misogyny. I fully acknowledge that men were denied the vote, various races and castes have been denied the vote, etc. That is wrong no ma…	/r/MensRights	26/03/19 05:02 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Can you link a source for that, please? Here's one thing I know-- a good friend of mine is a male rape counselor, and he himself was raped as a teen. One thing he has said is that it wasn't until years later he was even able to call it rape. He got to a place of calling it 'molested', but it took a long time to use that word, because it was so shameful. Oftentimes the first long step in his work is bringing the victims into a place of being able to name what happened to them and the resistance i…	/r/MensRights	26/03/19 04:50 PM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. I think if you look elsewhere on this thread you’ll see I never denied that one reason given for denying women the right to vote was as you described, but it was by no means the primary one. There were many reasons given that were entirely based in misogyny, which can be held by men and women alike.	/r/MensRights	26/03/19 04:36 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. I enjoy this discussion. You’re informed and reasoned and I appreciate this. We can continue in the thread, or via direct message. Will reply later but thanks in advance.	/r/MensRights	26/03/19 03:45 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Thanks for the detailed reply. It’s a far cry better than the previous poster standing firm on the notion being because women were in a perpetual state of recovering from childbirth. :) I don’t deny that for some, the reason was as you laid out. But you are perhaps deliberately underplaying the rampant misogyny (which can be perpetrated by either sex) which made up the bulk of the arguments. Here are some of the reasons argued against suffrage. Too “ungodly”. Religious leaders stressed that “nat…	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 11:15 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. I don't know how many--can you tell me? For the record, I advocate for and have volunteered for campaigns to raise awareness of the plague of male rape in prison, which is horrific and an epidemic. So I do know a little about male rape statistics. The National Crime Victimization Survey showed a sharp rise in male reported sexual assault. This is tremendous progress in terms of the discussion. And lest you think Feminists are against this, I quote Lara Stemple, a feminist and researcher at the H…	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 06:05 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. And where did I say "men are evil", exactly? When you have a country enshrining laws designed to subjugate one sex, that's worth examining. We don't need to dismiss it because other groups are oppressed also, since the reasons why the oppression happen are different. One race may be oppressed due to the color of their skin, and that has different roots than groups that are oppressed due to their sex, or religion, or caste. Yes, it is all oppression, but there is nothing lost by talking about the…	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 05:55 PM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. He denied it was possible for one sex to oppress another. Scroll up.	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 04:41 PM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Sorry, what specific sources have you linked, exactly? You seem to think having a child renders a woman bedridden and near death every time. My great grandmother (who was denied the vote until later) gave birth to 8 kids and worked the farm as well. Pretty sure she could have made it to the voting booth, but based on her being a woman was denied that chance. You keep confusing the fact that while many people have been denied the vote, it is undeniable that women were still denied after their mal…	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 12:57 PM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. The person I was responding to specifically denied it🤷🏼‍♂️. Do you deny that countries exist today where women are oppressed? Saudi Arabia, for example?	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 12:47 PM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Thanks for the reply. I’m not sure what you’re getting at, though. I in no way would argue that serfdom/slavery didn’t/doesn’t exist and that this is a gross violation of human rights. It oppressed men and women alike. But you seem to agree that, in situations where a population was not laboring under these conditions, women were not afforded the same basic rights as men and were in many ways considered property. Yes?	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 01:19 AM
1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Your argument is that because they were busy with child rearing, they should be forbidden to vote? What about childless women or those past child birthing/raising years? And why were men with demanding jobs not also told they were too busy to be allowed to vote?	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 01:07 AM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. No, you’re misreading. I was replying to the notion that one group (sex) was incapable of oppressing another. I used Jim Crow laws as an example of how one group (whites) can make oppressing a group very simple.	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 12:58 AM
-1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Are you equating being able to vote/pursue a particular career with a criminal enterprise? Why are surveys about someone’s relative happiness your metric for whether an oppressive structure exists? A political prisoner might be able to find greater internal peace and happiness than their guard, but is still be unfairly detained. I understand what you wrote. I can’t help that it doesn’t add up.	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 12:36 AM
2	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Pretty messed up logic.	/r/MensRights	25/03/19 12:26 AM
-3	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. So you acknowledge laws have and do exist that oppress one gender over another. That’s progress. It isn’t uncommon to find people who willingly support structures that further their oppression. People don’t vote for politicians that hurt them? There weren’t slaves who willingly defended their masters? Think about it; in every system where oppression occurs, there are those suffering under it who are more comfortable with the status quo than the discomfort of change. That’s true throughout histor…	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 07:45 PM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. There have literally been laws that forbade women from attending school, joining organizations, pursuing specific careers. You must know that. To deny this happens is like saying it’s impossible for one race to oppress another. Jim Crow laws were a thing, weren’t they?	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 07:11 PM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. I’m going to assume you haven’t read the report. It’s dangerous to presume things from memes and quotes. The Koss report wasn’t defining rape of males at large as only if it included penetration. It was saying that in the context of this report, in tabulating results for men, they would count and classify as “rape” those who were penetrated. The report was compelled to make some distinctions. It discussed the challenges of codifying the information. Rapes reported in phone interviews were less t…	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 07:07 PM
-2	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Mostly because the number of male rape by their wives is statistically insignificant in comparison. I’m not saying it is non existent. Most people aren’t even aware it’s possible. The law was brought into existence because the overwhelming majority of rape within a marriage is m2f. The benefit to men of having this law codified is obvious, but likely would never have happened without women fighting to have it acknowledged that their husbands shouldn’t be legally allowed to rape them. It often ta…	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 06:26 PM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Even if your math is right, that doesn’t explain forbidding all women in principle, does it?	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 06:20 PM
1	Save this for the next time a feminist claims that men need feminism. Case of feminism helping men: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moritz_v._Commissioner "Finding a case that harmed a man by discriminating on the basis of sex was intended to serve a broader point. The Ginsburgs were looking for a way to expunge all of the many sexist laws on the books at the time, and this was to set the precedent that would underlay it all, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit."	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 05:19 PM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. How many days in a given year do you think a woman was bedridden from childbirth exactly? Women were indeed legally excluded from a great many professions, just looking at England, since you mentioned the Queen. In 1540, Henry VIII created the charter for the company of Barber-Surgeons, but were barred from professional practice, is one such example. I was reading a lengthy article about the history of women’s legal rights, which was very interesting. Things varies greatly from culture to cultur…	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 04:00 PM
-1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. This is actually a good argument for feminism, though you may hate that fact. By pushing to have sexual assault of a spouse recognized and made illegal, it benefits men as well. By having it never talked about and kept in the shadows guaranteed neither sex would be taken seriously or have legal recourse. The feminists who worked to have the laws changed help men in this case. That’s what equality should look like. The US law refers to it as spousal rape without specifying gender.	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 02:49 PM
-1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Also...re the shekels, while I agree there can be multiple interpretations, you do realize that forcing a woman to marry their rapist is still very common, is a long held tradition, and it’s safe to assume that if in these modern times it still occurs, it can only have been even more common in the past?	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 02:42 PM
0	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. You’re missing the point; why was being able to bear a child/having a uterus the reason to legally exclude women from voting/higher office? Not all of them had children. Many were past childbearing age. It didn’t matter. If you were a woman, you were excluded. That isn’t oppression?	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 02:40 PM
-1	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Quick question; However the inequalities arose, Which I will comment on later, isn’t what is important the fact that men in fact have prevented women from entering or participating in these fields? They became seen as male-only fields, and laws and attitudes and resistance firmly excluded women. This includes basic education. Hell, men felt so strongly that women shouldn’t run the Boston marathon one of the organizers tried body check the first woman to try off the course.	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 02:36 PM
5	People constantly overstate the extent to which women were "oppressed" in the past. Really interesting post. I liked the history.org link especially--that was very educational and I learned a lot. My great grandparents were homesteaders on the prairies and the women were out there plowing the fields with the men every day. Hard, hard workers, all of them. I think you go too far, though, in saying there was no patriarchy holding women down, and to dismiss these as mere burdens/obligations/disadvantages is a disservice. It's possible for the narrative surrounding women's oppressi…	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 07:40 AM
1	The Good Things of Feminism I know former escorts who are in LTR and marriages, so 🤷🏼‍♂️. You’re equating having had any sex whatsoever with being a professional sex worker. I personally don’t judge someone for sex work, but it seems you do. Putting that aside, though, since I answered your question, what is it about having had a single penis before yours that so defiles a woman?	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 03:08 AM
1	The Good Things of Feminism I'm genuinely curious, because it isn't my experience; what is it about having had any other penis than yours that diminishes them?	/r/MensRights	24/03/19 02:14 AM
1	The Good Things of Feminism That’s pretty silly to think that women lose the ability to bond emotionally because of having sex with other people. And utterly not backed up by any data. I think the idea of a woman who owns her sexuality must be pretty threatening to you? How does getting a tattoo damage a woman and not a man? The studies you cite are showing correlation but you do realize that isn’t causation? Marriage rates have declined but our attitude towards marriage has shifted and that isn’t a bad thing. Both men and…	/r/MensRights	23/03/19 09:15 PM
1	The Good Things of Feminism Why is having sexual partners not feminine? Who defined that as masculine or feminine? Did you have sex before marriage? Re. your question, there are a lot of issues in Men's Rights that I'm curious about--not the least of which are why men hide what they feel, their abuse, bias in sentencing, unreported sexual assaults of men, and such stories. There isn't, I hope, a monolith of belief that one has to pledge allegiance to in order to read and post respectfully on this sub. My parents have been …	/r/MensRights	23/03/19 07:51 PM
1	The Good Things of Feminism Hm. Not sure what circles you move in but this isn't my experience. I know and have dated intelligent, accomplished and sexual women who both had open views on sexuality, had tattoos, and were good partners and communicators. Neither of us were damaged goods because we had had sex before. Sex can exist on a wide spectrum, for bonding, love, pleasure, fun, procreation, adventure, excitement. Don't knock it til ya try it:) Do you have sex with women you're not married to? If so, in your world, doe…	/r/MensRights	23/03/19 07:00 PM
1	The Good Things of Feminism I'm not diving into what radical feminists believe, so much as your declaration that having tattoos makes someone a radical feminist and that they all have them. I think you know that isn't in any way true. I mean, if you don't care what tattooed military men do, why is it your business what women do with their tattoos? It's cool if aesthetically you just don't like tattoos, or choose not to do drugs or drink, etc. I'm more interested in the questions I posed regarding what makes someone a slut?…	/r/MensRights	23/03/19 05:45 PM
1	The Good Things of Feminism Sorry, your syntax and grammar are making it hard to decipher what you're saying.Is English your second language? No problem if so, just curious. What's a 'slut', to you? How many people does one have to sleep with before they are a slut? What makes someone an "alpha", to you? Does it mean you have to be in charge of the relationship? There's no one person in charge of my relationship. I don't think google image search is really all that scientific in terms of determining whether all radical fem…	/r/MensRights	23/03/19 05:08 PM
1	The Good Things of Feminism What do tattoos on men mean, then? I think you may need to expand your horizons a bit. Tattoos are an indication of nothing more than someone wanted a tattoo, at the most basic level. After that, the reasons vary. Spiritual, artistic, self expression, curiosity, are all reasons, and have no correlation to STI rates, drug use (also, which drugs? Alcohol? Some marijuana? Maybe psychedelics? I've used all those and have no tattoos), or abortion rates. (Is having an abortion a crime? I have friends …	/r/MensRights	23/03/19 04:10 PM
1	The Good Things of Feminism Why is it common sense that someone with sexual experience makes a bad partner? I’ve had plenty of experience and it’s made me a better partner; I know what I like, I know boundaries, I understand the difference between fantasy and reality, I am a good sex partner, etc. Maybe examining the meaning of the word “slut” is in order anyway. Women or men aren’t cheapened by having had sex with multiple people. And the goalposts are so arbitrary. Is 5 too many? 10? 42? Are guys made worse or better by …	/r/MensRights	23/03/19 03:35 PM
0	The Good Things of Feminism It seems a little pearl clutching to use the word “slut”, honestly. It has this whole notion that someone is devalued by having too many sex partners, which is silly. I sure as hell never would want to marry a virgin. My current gf has a ton of sexual experience and we laugh and celebrate swapping stories, because I’ve slept with a lot of women in my day as well. We’re both “sluts” by most definitions. But only people with hang ups about sex and weird notions of “purity” would shame us for it. A…	/r/MensRights	23/03/19 03:28 PM
0	The Good Things of Feminism Question; why shouldn't women sleep with whomever they want, before they are married (assuming the marriage or relationship is one that both parties have agreed is monogamous)? Men and women alike should be free to do that, or not, to their hearts content. Sex is normal and healthy, and people can do it with however many partners they like, however they like, as many times as they like. That's equality, no?	/r/MensRights	23/03/19 09:13 AM