TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

The_Original_Gronkie Archive

View 0 posts and 213 comments by The_Original_Gronkie on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
10

My son is 25, and has beautiful long flowing hair, halfway down his back. My wife and I tell him all the time how great it looks. Women don't like your hair because its nicer than theirs, and they don't like someone having better hair than them, especially their boyfriend .
/r/MensRights06/01/24 05:03 AM
0

If he lingers on life-support throughout the duration of her trial, she'll go to jail for a long time for the current charge. But the moment he dies, she'll be recharged, and retried, for murder.
/r/MensRights22/06/23 07:44 PM
82

If he lingers on life-support throughout the duration of her trial, she'll go to jail for a long time for the current charge. But the moment he dies, she'll be recharged, and retried, for murder.
/r/MensRights22/06/23 06:47 PM
18

It's the old "Two Wrongs Make A Right" excuse, also common among shallow political thinkers - it was wrong when your guy did it, but since your guy did it, my guy gets to do a worse wrong thing. It's a specious argument, but stupid people don't comprehend that.
/r/MensRights11/06/23 06:11 PM
16

Google the CEO's name, find their corporate email address on their corporate website, and send him an email. It will get noticed.
/r/MensRights31/01/23 02:35 AM
10

I doubt it. She got life without parole.
/r/MensRights25/09/22 05:33 AM
49

Coincidentally, the one child she chose to focus her anger on enough to commit murder was the one child that wasn't a blood relative. Classic step-parent abuse. Let her rot in prison for the rest of her worthless life.
/r/MensRights25/09/22 01:03 AM
8

Her hairstyle is the real crime.
/r/MensRights19/09/22 08:53 PM
5

What a total monster. She actually succeeded in having children PERMANENTLY removed from their homes. The kind of damage that would do every member of those families is incalculable. There is no jail sentence long enough, and no civil financial penalty too high. I can't imagine how poorly she'll be received in prison. Many of those women have children of their own, many of those kids are probably in the foster care system, and many probably came up through the foster care system. They aren't lik…
/r/MensRights26/08/22 03:47 PM
3

$
/r/MensRights29/03/22 02:32 AM
1

I hear you.
/r/MensRights26/03/22 01:58 AM
3

The first thing to remember is that you are presumed innocent. It is not up to you to prove your innocence, it is up to her to prove your guilt. She can't have much besides her story, and whatever you told the cops when they questioned you. You should have kept your mouth shut and refused to speak without a lawyer, but that's water under the bridge. Reasonable doubt is your friend. They can't have much more than her word against yours, so anything you can find as far as texts or voice messages w…
/r/MensRights25/03/22 10:13 PM
4

Tell them over at r/legaladvice. Trust me, they'll have lots of good advice for you.
/r/MensRights15/12/21 04:22 AM
6

Post in r/legaladvice, and tell them your state in your headline. They'll be able to give some idea of your rights and how to fight back.
/r/MensRights14/12/21 11:23 PM
7

When I was a kid, my dad had season tickets for the Cleveland Browns in the old Municipal Stadium, which had stood since the 30s. I was just a young teen when I first went to a game, and visited the rest room, only to find a giant trough, with countless men jostling into position and squeezing between each other to pee into this trough. I noped right out of there. I could never go with other men leaning against me on both sides, and looming behind me, ready to squeeze into my spot when I was fin…
/r/MensRights18/11/21 10:49 PM
1

Dude, corporations are NOT job creators, they are job PROVIDERS. Consumers are job creators. When consumer demand goes up, jobs are needed to meet the demand, and corporations provide those jobs to meet the demand. No corporation has ever created a job that wasn't filling a need created by consumer demand. The billions that Sociopathic Oligarchs are leeching are created by keeping profits that should have been shared with the people who do the actual work, and create the corporate value. Most em…
/r/MensRights14/11/21 11:42 PM
1

Dude, you are so lost in your partisan hate that you may never find your way back. I've heard every single thing you say on Rush Limbaugh's show. I suspect you were an avid listener, and thats where you got most of your political education. I'm not going to go down your list point by point, it's pointless. Your basic premise is wrong: I am not a liberal, except by your weird partisan metric where everything is binary. People like you think in a simple 2 dimensional axis because that's easy to un…
/r/MensRights14/11/21 11:07 PM
1

It is never justified to take money that someone earned and give it to lazy fucks who didn't. This is something that Sociopathic conservatives have a difficult time with, intellectually. Social safety net programs like Social Security, Medicare, Welfare, and others benefit ALL of society in multiple ways, even you. Without them we would have enormous tent cities everywhere, disease and suffering would run rampant in our population, threatening everyone. Republicans tried to wish Covid to only st…
/r/MensRights14/11/21 03:38 PM
1

Unemployment doesn't come out of your pocket. Someday you may find yourself unemployed through no fault of your own, and discover that finding a new job in your career is difficult and takes a while. You will be glad that your employer has paid into unemployment so that you don't lose your house and have your family go homeless, or be forced to throw away the career that you took years to build just to take a minimum wage job to try to hold your life together a little bit. Of course, when it hap…
/r/MensRights14/11/21 01:45 AM
1

Impossible to prove and total nonsense. Your argument is "it's bad but it would be worse cause I say so" In 1917, mobs of whites in East St Louis indescriminitely attacked black citizens killing dozens of innocent people, and kicking off the "Red Summer," a period in which over 2 dozen prosperous black towns and cities were attacked and thousand of innocent black citizens were murdered, and thousands of black buildings and businesses were burned. This is historical fact and beyond debate. These …
/r/MensRights13/11/21 08:53 PM
3

Unemployment for the pandemic has ended, so that excuse is bullshit. Anyone collecting unemployment right now is because their job has been taken from them. Unemployment doesn't come out of your paycheck in any way. True welfare, in which people with extremely low incomes get supplemental payments so they don't go homeless or starve, is relatively rare, and difficult to qualify for. Nothing is damaging America more than corporate welfare to wealthy companies, which is far higher than welfare for…
/r/MensRights13/11/21 07:55 PM
1

Except what you wrote is wrong. Nobody believes it except the worst sort of racist conservatives. The fact is that the demographic of the black middle class family has exploded since LBJs legislation. It hasn't helped everybody, but it has helped lots of people. Without it, we would have had far worse poverty and crime in the years since. That legislation allowed black people to move out of restricted neighborhoods and buy houses everywhere. It allowed black children to get educations equal to w…
/r/MensRights13/11/21 07:16 PM
-5

17 years old, huh? With what I've learned, I wish I could be 17 again. I've been an unaffiliated independent since I first registered to vote almost 44 years ago. I voted for Reagan in 1980 (which I regret), and have voted Republican, Democratic, and Third Party in every single election since. My political and economic knowledge has grown greatly in those years, and all these years later I am more independent than I ever was. I could write posts about my positions on some issues that would convi…
/r/MensRights13/11/21 07:09 PM
3

Let's clarify: Jobs that pay enough to live on, pay off student loans, rent an apartment, buy and maintain a car, pay for health care, raise a family, etc. Even at $10 an hour (a rare pay scale in many places) that's only $400 per week, BEFORE taxes. Because you know, when you are making a mind-boggling $400 per week, the government needs your money more than you do, even if they let rich people.get away with paying less, or nothing at all. And that's if you can work for a company that will give…
/r/MensRights13/11/21 06:51 PM
-2

Right, I'm sure that the continuation of brutal Jim Crow laws would have produced a much more productive black population if it had continued. After all, it was already doing so well until LBJ came along and ruined it for everybody. 60 years later and things haven't improved for America's black population at all. /S Stop thinking like a Republican, and start thinking like an American. And a human.
/r/MensRights13/11/21 04:56 PM
-14

Standard boilerplate racist bullshit from the Conservative Propaganda Machine. It's much easier to blame all societal ills on legislation from 60 years ago then face what is really happening today. Everybody knows that all crime stems from freeing the slaves after the Civil War. What you said sounds just as stupid.
/r/MensRights13/11/21 04:49 PM
3

Like free community college or vocational training for high school graduates. That alone would probably cut crime in half.
/r/MensRights13/11/21 04:46 PM
12

There is no doubt that I've over 21 (I'm old, fat, with white hair), but Walgreens cards me whenever I buy beer or liquor. They card everybody, no exceptions.
/r/MensRights02/11/21 03:33 PM
30

Run the details past r/legaladvice, and don't forget to post your state. They live for this sort of stuff over there.
/r/MensRights24/08/21 02:12 AM
2

This was also 10-15 years since FDR, the most Socialist president we've ever had, and widely regarded as our 3rd best president (after Washington and Lincoln). Thats a tough act to follow (i know, Truman was in the middle), and also an indicator that thats the direction America wanted to go. Luckily for Eisenhower, the Depression was over, so instead of having to spend the nation's money on distressed Americans, he could spend it on projects that supercharged the economy. Today's Republicans wou…
/r/MensRights01/09/20 06:05 PM
2

And that tax rate was combined with an enormous infrastructure program which built the national highway system, airports, bridges, urban improvements, housing developments, TV broadcasting, colleges, space exploration, etc., all of which created millions of high paying jobs. Dwight Eisenhower was America's last great Republican president. Rather than use America's money as a rebate to the wealthy, he used the money to make America the greatest nation on Earth.
/r/MensRights01/09/20 04:54 PM
1

The difference between then and now is that the machines of the industrial revolution required humans to operate them. Companies were able to get people to work 12 hours a day, 6 days a week (with only one day off to go to church), and do it for literally pennies per day. Compensation was so low that people would put their kids to work in those same dangerous factories. At those rates, company owners didn't mind hiring many more workers. Today it is all about profits, driven by shareholder deman…
/r/MensRights01/09/20 04:31 PM
0

I get your point. You think that the unemployed 50% are somehow participating in the economy, which keeps the 50% of skilled labor employed. To a small extent, those unemployed will find a way to access the economy, but theIr lack of money will greatly limit that. More likely they will be responsible for an increase in crime and the black market. Given the problems that the permanent unemployment class will cause (and which will be amplified by opponents), there will be a push to decrease the pe…
/r/MensRights01/09/20 04:17 PM
3

People will still have to make the pay of a full time job, even if they are asked to work half the time. Should we ask the Ownership elite to pay twice as much money? They already scream as if their nuts are being cut off with a dull, red hot spoon at the merest mention of a minimum wage increase or a tax increase. The federal minimum wage hasn't gone up in over 11 years. Before that, it hadn't been raised in 10 years. Since 1997, 23 years, it has only risen $2.10. The political and economic mot…
/r/MensRights01/09/20 04:04 PM
1

What if they decide to keep the skilled force - those that caan design, program, install, maintain, etc. the robots, or otherwise manage businesses, write, entertain, govern, etc., but decide to get rid of those who aren't employable or trainable? Or perhaps they are trainable as robot techs, etc., but we already have enough recruits to do that job, so the are excess. The fear is that there will be a proactive strategy to eliminate those who aren't able to make a contribution. And its not a doom…
/r/MensRights01/09/20 03:46 PM
2

That policy was under governor Rick Scott, who got rich as a hospital CEO with a Medicare scam strategy. Over 20 years ago, his company paid the record fine for Medicare fraud, even though his fortune was never touched, and he never went to jail. Instead, he went on to become Governor, and now he's the Senator of Florida, enriching himself though various schemes (mostly insider trading and investing in businesses that then get huge state contracts). His net worth doubled in his term as governor.…
/r/MensRights01/09/20 02:54 PM
6

There's a long term objective as well, of softening up the country for some difficult decisions in the not so distant future. We are at the leading edge of a Robotics/Artifical Intelligence wave that will define the next 20+ years. It has already started with websites like Amazon and Apple which has destroyed the music business, among others, and is currently destroying the book.publishing business. Retail shopping is fading quickly, and millions of lower skilled, lower paying jobs are being per…
/r/MensRights01/09/20 02:44 PM
3

You should post this over at r/legaladvice, but mostly they are going to advise you to get a lawyer. They may still give you an idea of what the lawyer can do about it, though.
/r/MensRights14/06/20 10:16 PM
40

I had several vigorous debates at the time about "Believe ALL Women," and I pointed out the many cases of false rape allegations against men. I also made the point that absolutes like that tend to come back around and bite you in the ass, and mow we have the Tara Reade situation to prove me right. Suddenly we have a woman who it is okay to not believe.
/r/MensRights22/05/20 02:23 PM
4

I'm torn. I'd like to see her never work again, but on the other hand she needs to make a lot of money to pay back Depp for all the financial damage she's done to him.
/r/MensRights03/04/20 12:28 PM
13

People think that media is in the news or entertainment businesses, but they are 100% wrong. Every media outlet is in the advertising business. All the rest is just bait to attract eyeballs and ears to ingest their advertising. They would run nothing but ads for 24 hours a day if they thought anybody would watch it. So they show the bare minimum of content/infotainment that they have to so they can fill the rest with ads. So they don't give a shit about anything. You think a station is anti-Trum…
/r/MensRights14/03/20 12:46 AM
4

This is one of those 2 dimensional battles that we are encouraged to have, like Conservative vs Liberal, so that we stay at each others' throats and don't notice the real problem in our society, which is that Sociopathic Oligarchs are exploiting the labor force for slave wages while they accumulate the vast majority of the wealth produced by decades of hard work by the average citizen. He points that out in his argument that it isn't ALL men, it is a very tiny number of them, and they aren't rea…
/r/MensRights05/03/20 02:37 PM
2

A couple of weeks ago, a poster called me an insulting name, and I replied that I've been married nearly 30 years, so I've been called far, far worse, and they'd have to do better than that if they wanted to insult me. Some female Redditor latched onto that and took me to task for insulting my wife, and told me how horrible I am, even though the statement is true. I tried to explain that when people have been married nearly 3 decades, things get said, and one grows a thick skin, develops the abi…
/r/MensRights16/10/19 06:31 PM
-6

Of course I believe you, with your wealth of details and an impeccable source. I'll just go around spouting this like it's totally fact.
/r/MensRights27/09/19 08:16 PM
35

An hour ago my son texted me to say that he was hanging out in a park, reading. I guess I've failed as a parent for raising such a suspicious character.
/r/MensRights26/09/19 09:22 PM
4

He played Jay Sebring, one of the people murdered by the original Manson killers. He plays a sort of third tier part, so No, I dont think he had that sort of effect on the audience. His role was likeably bland.
/r/MensRights03/08/19 05:46 AM
35

I just saw Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (its awesome, go see it), and my son had an interesting take on her role in it. She plays one of the Manson girls, and seems to be in charge, since she starts bossing people around as soon as she appears on screen. The scene starts off with everyone on screen in a good mood, and ends with Brad Pitt at odds with the Manson people. My son suggested that the moment she appears on screen is when things start to go bad. He further suggested that Tarrantino del…
/r/MensRights02/08/19 10:17 PM
11

Other countries have a far lower bar for defamation cases than the US.
/r/MensRights06/07/19 06:34 PM
1

Post this r/legaladvice.
/r/MensRights12/03/19 08:41 PM
4

Because while it looks like she grabs him, it was just barely off camera. That's why a person asked the question, and 90 more upvoted the post. They were confused as well. That's enough to demonstrate to a prosecutor that there could be reasonable doubt, if she denies it.
/r/MensRights04/02/19 06:45 PM
22

Your confusion is why she won't be prosecuted. That's reasonable doubt and the State Attorney will decline to prosecute. She'll probably still be arrested and booked, have to pay a bunch of money for bail that she'll never get back, possible legal fees for a lawyer, and have a mug shot floating around out there.
/r/MensRights04/02/19 02:08 PM
2

Citations on those statistics please.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 04:13 PM
5

And the last 50 deaths in America werent caused by illegal immigrants. So what's your point? Some illegal immigrants are going to be bad people, some regular Americans are going to be bad people. That's the nature of humans. You could keep every foreigner outside the borders, and people would still get murdered. It doesn't have anything to do with their status as citizens.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 03:31 PM
-2

Thats easy logic for you, isnt it? No sense putting any work into it. After all, thinking is hard.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 03:27 PM
4

How was she anti-American or anti-white?
/r/MensRights28/08/18 03:17 PM
3

Wouldn't you love to have her as your boss?
/r/MensRights04/08/18 11:09 PM
14

And men.
/r/MensRights04/08/18 11:03 PM
3

A little perspective here. The problem wasnt the all-male cast, it was the use of #metoo and #timesup to promote it. They are irrelevant to the subject matter (except maybe Taking of the Shrew, but that's a separate discussion, and an interesting one, actually) and obviously poor PR attempts at drawing attention. Doing Shakespeare with an all male cast is actually authentic to the original productions, but why would you use those hash tags? Hey look, it's in iambic pentameter, let's promote it a…
/r/MensRights24/07/18 03:23 AM
1

What's the number? Asking for a friend.
/r/MensRights21/06/18 01:19 AM
8

So it's nearly equal? So bullets don't discriminate based on gender?
/r/MensRights22/05/18 06:52 PM
24

Because the definition of sexual assault is constantly changing and is different depending the person's perspective. So she has been told by people that incidents that she was fine with are considered sexual assaults, so she's now confused. That's the sign of a weak-minded individual who is easily manipulated by stronger people with their own agenda.
/r/MensRights18/03/18 03:09 PM
2

I wouldn't assume that of any other country. India has a caste system. They discriminate on levels you can't even imagine. There are probably people who aren't even allowed on the bus at all.
/r/MensRights09/03/18 04:05 PM
3

I've literally heard that multiple over the years from various people, including cops.
/r/MensRights04/03/18 09:00 PM
2

Just look at him. If he didn't get convicted for this, he would have been convicted of something else anyway. /S.
/r/MensRights04/03/18 07:07 PM
61

Right, it has now gone so far that now men can get in trouble if they can't read minds.
/r/MensRights15/01/18 08:55 PM
3

Oprah is in the pocket of Big Foreskin.
/r/MensRights12/01/18 04:49 PM
1

It's always been that way. Why do you think we see cases nearly every day of innocent people being released from prison after decades. Nearly every one of them is a case of judicial.misconduct of some type.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 08:51 PM
2

In the court system they all cover for each other. The prosecutors know the cops are lying on the stand but they cover for them anyway. It's all about getting a win and improving their statistics. It has very little to do with justice.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 05:46 PM
0

The best lawyers I've had were women, and the worst lawyers I've had were men.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 05:42 PM
7

Great, she gets to keep her anonymity while his name and reputation get dragged through the mud. For the rest of his life, whenever a potential girlfriend (or her family) or a potential employer Google his name, this case will come up. Of course, it shows he was innocent, but a lot of people would still avoid him just in case.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 05:41 PM
8

That's exactly what happened, it just took a while to get there. Nobody knew the smoking gun texts existed except the cops and the prosecution, who told everybody that the file didn't contain anything relevant to the case, and everyone believed them. Then they declared that the texts were too personal to share, and everyone believed them. But the guy's lawyer finally decided that she should see for herself, and found them. So he didnt look through them personally, but his lawyer did it for him. …
/r/MensRights23/12/17 05:35 PM
1

The Sanders thing was a poorly presented sarcastic joke, but I wouldn't be surprised if some feminists at the DNC decided to try it.
/r/MensRights19/12/17 11:57 PM
4

All jobs will be done by robots, who will also create the robots, who will decide that people are too inefficient in both hardware and software and eliminate them. Problem solved.
/r/MensRights19/12/17 11:55 PM
6

If women want to make an accusation then they have to own it and put their names to it. Half the women who accused Al Franken remained anonymous and yet they still ruined his political career. Any woman with a personal ax to grind can make any accusation she wants. She can ruin a man's career, marriage, standing in the community, his relationship with his children, etc, and she will suffer no repercussions. We all know there are unhinged women out there, a browse through r/publicfreakouts will p…
/r/MensRights19/12/17 11:52 PM
20

I'm sure there are many women who head to Hollywood with the thought that theyll do anything - ANYTHING - to become a star. They do whatever they have to, and some of them may have even become stars out of it. We're never going to hear from them, though.
/r/MensRights19/12/17 03:46 PM
2

That we do.
/r/MensRights09/12/17 02:27 PM
3

I think there's a big misinterpretation here. I think she is actually complaining about the fact that 4 of the 8 Franken accusers was anonymous, and one of the named accusers complained that he put his arm around her waist at a party. I think she is pointing out how wrong it is that someone could be ousted with such little evidence. Of course, the way she puts it leaves it open to the idea that she's suggesting the same think happen to Sanders, but her follow up tweets seem to indictate that the…
/r/MensRights09/12/17 01:59 PM
3

A lot of women probably approach him because of his WWF connection, and they probably want a little taste of that, so he obliges them.
/r/MensRights01/08/17 07:48 PM
2

No, birth control is not a guarantee.
/r/MensRights06/07/17 10:17 PM
2

Cross post this to /r/legal advice and see what they have to say. I expect that they'll tell you to take it to small claims court, but you will need proof that this woman snatched the phone out of your hand. If you were filming at the time, that may be all you need. I would also go over the heads of the cops on the scene. There was no reason to consider you guilty on the word of two busybodies.
/r/MensRights30/05/17 05:32 PM
11

He's not the "accused." He's the victim.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 10:10 PM
5

Her bitterness indicates that she obviously didn't have the kind of father that raises a girl into a fine woman. Probably just the opposite, in fact. I feel sorry for her for missing out on that experience.
/r/MensRights03/04/17 03:30 PM
7

Hah, joke's on you! Married are getting divorced because they aren't getting laid.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 03:27 PM
5

The guy probably woke out of a sound sleep thinking he was on fire! How could anyone think that was funny?
/r/MensRights07/02/17 02:02 PM
-1

Yeah, but a woman's reproductive window closes at some point, while a man's doesnt. If she dies, or leaves him, he could still meet someone younger to share his life with, but what if she wants to have kids, and it's important enough to her to be a deal breaker? Getting your tubes tied can be easily done laparascopically, and it's barely more invasive than a vasectomy.
/r/MensRights04/02/17 03:46 PM
1

Part-time isn't defined by how much you earn, but by how much time you put in. With pregnancy sticks you have to pee on them with your first pee in the morning, so she can only devote a few minutes a day to this particular job, making it a part-time job. Like I said, that's a pretty nice part-time job.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 08:24 PM
3

Anyone trying to pull that scam would make that letter sound like it was coming from a Nigerian prince.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 05:47 PM
1

I'm with you guys. It's 78 degrees and sunny today.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 05:46 PM
1

That was almost a Haiku.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 05:44 PM
4

$1400 a week is pretty good part-time job. I'd buy them by the case and piss on 10 at a time every morning. Gotta put some in the bank for when that kid breaks out of there eventually.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 05:43 PM
101

I think trust went out the window when she tried to use a fake pregnancy test to trap him.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 05:41 PM
13

I was working in an office at the time, and one of my co-workers, a black girls with whom I was very good friends, stormed into my office. She put a fist in front of my face and opened it. In her palm was a Brazil nut. "What is this called?" she demanded. For a moment I was confused about this, but as the fog cleared, I understood what she was asking me. In my horror, I could only stammer... "Um...uh...it's... it's..., well, I've NEVER called it that, but.... some people....um...not me..." "Ugh!…
/r/MensRights29/12/16 05:39 PM
1

Despite occasional evidence to the contrary, shit is not equivalent to a child. As for the sperm-in-condom case, I don't agree with that, but judges have had a different interpretation. To me, it seems that by catching the sperm in a condom sends a very clear message that the man did not intend to use his sperm to conceive a child. Perhaps she can keep it as a souvenir and claim it as a gift, but using it for a purpose that is clearly at odds with the man's intention is wrong. But what do I know…
/r/MensRights15/11/16 09:54 PM
1

That's too much of a simplification. Those embryos are HER DNA, and she wants control of children born of her DNA. That's understandable. He wants those embryos because they are also HIS DNA. Otherwise, why not just adopt? Or marry someone with children? A person has the right to control the distribution of their own DNA, so she has a right to say NO to having children of hers in the world that she has no connection with. It is a simple fairness issue. If the shoe were on the other foot, and she…
/r/MensRights15/11/16 05:54 PM
10

I don't see the relevance in naming these women. They have a right to their privacy. On the other hand, I think she is correct in wanting those embryos destroyed. She does not want to have a child with him, and she has that right, just as if the situation was turned around and she wanted to bring them to term and he didn't. He'll just have to find a woman willing to have a child with him. That shouldn't be so hard to do, there are plenty of women looking for a man who is willing to be a dad.
/r/MensRights15/11/16 03:54 PM
11

Evidence indicates otherwise. Obama has been a fairly centrist president. Far left progressives certainly wouldn't consider him a member of their club.
/r/MensRights14/11/16 06:29 AM
1

This particular story has had very little to do with Trump's impending loss. His worst enemy is not women with unfounded sexual abuse stories, but his own big mouth.
/r/MensRights30/10/16 03:37 PM
3

Awesome comment
/r/MensRights27/09/16 05:24 PM
10

The Universe is DEFINITELY creating a hostile environment for men.
/r/MensRights03/09/16 11:41 PM
27

I read the headline to fast and thought it said the "Universe" was being sued, and I wondered where I get in line. I got a few gripes against the Universe.
/r/MensRights03/09/16 06:55 PM
7

If you shoot at the king, you best not miss.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 04:02 AM
1

A bit of a surprise, yes, but a judge's personal political beliefs shouldn't enter into their decisions, especially at a level as high as the Supreme Court. One of the things that has made me angry at both Scalia and Thomas is that they obviously think about their cases from a political POV first, then try to think of a Constitutional path to justify it, and sometimes they get pretty convoluted, and just plain wrong. Citizens United is a perfect example, where they ignored a century and half of …
/r/MensRights08/08/16 09:16 PM
1

I doubt that we'll see Clinton nominate someone like Scalia or Thomas. As I said, I doubt Ginsburg it would replaceable, so yes, technically it is a shift slightly rightward, but the conservative activism that we've seen over the last couple of decades would be severely blunted, if not ended altogether. Actually with Ginsburg's seat shifting right and Scalia's seat shifting left, what were seeing is a balance toward the middle, which is where the court ought to be - representing those in the mea…
/r/MensRights08/08/16 06:27 PM
2

Again, you are probably right to some extent, but SOME of those jobs would convert to legal jobs. Also, you can't discount the motivation and ambition of many people who come to this country. Many want to start their own legitimate businesses and can't. If they were legal they could come out of the shadows and start new legal businesses and create jobs that will contribute to the tax base. We can argue about the level of impact that legalization would have, but there can be no argument that it w…
/r/MensRights08/08/16 06:25 PM
0

I understand that, but a lot of them are already working, and those jobs could be converted to legal, tax paying jobs.
/r/MensRights08/08/16 04:42 PM
2

The primary difference will be Supreme Court justices. The next president will be nominating at least two, and possibly three new justices, who will serve for at least 20 years, probably more. Hillary will nominate justices who lean more to the left, balancing the court from the activist conservative stance it has had for a couple of generations. However, one of those justices will probably be replacing Ginsburg's, and it is doubtful that anyone as liberal as her would survive the approval proce…
/r/MensRights08/08/16 01:37 PM
1

They will also be paid on the books instead of under the table creating a massive amount of new tax revenue without increasing taxes for everyone else.
/r/MensRights08/08/16 01:31 PM
3

Yeah, old news. How about keeping up with the current events rather than using old ones to stir up the mob.
/r/MensRights04/08/16 12:46 PM
21

Actually, a drunk man having sex with a sober women would probably be described as an out of control drunkard raping a defenseless woman. So no matter who's drunk, the man is a rapist.
/r/MensRights21/05/16 04:21 AM
7

Nobody should be serving a day in jail for sex with an 18 year old. That's absurd.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 11:28 AM
2

to combat Cyber Bullying Uh-huh
/r/MensRights17/04/16 08:48 PM
9

What is pissing a lot of people off, including me, is the fact that she was absolutely delighted that he had made physical contact because she thought that she could then use to ruin this guy's life. It was only the fact that her confrontation was filmed that her plan was foiled. If this video didn't exist, she'd be making a formal complaint against him and he'd be expelled and possibly criminally charged, all for nearly no contact at all.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 02:32 PM
4

As a white person, would I be allowed to approach a well dressed, well spoken black person, and demand that they change their personal style because they were culturally appropriating white culture?
/r/MensRights30/03/16 02:13 PM
1

First, it was relatively stable when we pulled out. ISIS changed that. Second, the Obama administration wouldn't have had anything to do with the Middle East militarily if it hadn't been for Bush. He inherited the situation, remember? And the idea that Obama "willfully" destabilized those countries is laughable conservative propaganda nonsense. Bush started it all. You can try your hardest to deny it, but history will remember it properly. Your lame attempts to lay the crimes of George Bush at O…
/r/MensRights09/12/15 03:46 PM
1

The destabilization of all those countries was the result of the Domino Effect started by Bush's Iraq Crusade, and was the specific objective of his Neocon advisors. ISIS is led by ex-Saddam Hussein military officers and weaponized with equipment that we gave to the new government that the Bush administration established. This is all an outgrowth of the Bush administration's Middle East policies, and trying to deflect the blame to anyone else is childish and silly. EVERYBODY, even Republicans, k…
/r/MensRights09/12/15 01:26 AM
4

Most of them. I think these are simply cases of regret that have fermented into something else after a few years.
/r/MensRights09/12/15 12:01 AM
3

Wait until it is him or his son being accused, he'll change his tune quickly.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 11:55 PM
1

Seriously, the Bush administration's unprovoked invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with the entire region blowing up, the rise of Al Qaeda, then ISIS (using former Iraqi military personnel and equipment), the radicalization of young Muslims responding to propaganda and recruitment using the Bush Crusade as a starting point? The Bush Administration's entire Middle East policy was based on the Neocon's concept of deliberately destabilizing the region, but now that is has gone wrong even more than …
/r/MensRights08/12/15 10:30 PM
1

All current instability in the Middle East, no matter the country, has its roots in the Bush Crusade. The weaponry that ISIS is employing are weapons and equipment that the United States supplied to Iraq, and was captured by ISIS when they chased the Iraqi army from their military bases. ISIS' military is led by ex-Iraqi officers who were thrown out following the fall of Sadam Hussein. To claim that Bush has no responsibility in the rise of ISIS when they are using the weapons and personnel that…
/r/MensRights08/12/15 09:10 PM
0

So then you are willing to admit that the conservative policy of destabilizing the Middle East with an elective war is responsible for the rise and empowerment of ISIS and the radicalization of countless young Muslims across the world.
/r/MensRights07/12/15 12:30 AM
2

Hmmm, if he has to pay child support, then he has been financially damaged by her crimes. So couldn't he then sue her in civil court and get damages for the amount he has to pay her?
/r/MensRights06/12/15 04:40 PM
4

Because there has never been a case in which a woman has lied... /s
/r/MensRights30/11/15 09:07 PM
1

Seriously? I thought we invented it. We called it Best Falls.
/r/MensRights07/11/15 02:28 PM
1

Yeah, it was a blast. We would get creative and ask for things like "Shoot me with a machine gun, but in slow motion." And then you could die while slowly flailing around as you tumbled down the hill. Or have the guy throw a series of hand grenades at you so you could throw yourself into the air several times on your way down the slope. Now and then someone would request an A-Bomb for a big dramatic death with a huge leap into the air. Hilarious, but alas, now illegal.
/r/MensRights07/11/15 12:58 AM
20

My elementary school's playground had a large hill at one end of it, and we used to play a game we invented called Best Falls. One kid would be at the bottom of the hill and the rest would be at the top. One kid at the top would shout down to the kid at the bottom the kind of weapon he wanted to be killed with (a machine gun, a hand grenade, a bow and arrow, etc). The kid at the bottom would make at big show of firing the weapon, while the kid at the top would act out a dramatic death as he fell…
/r/MensRights06/11/15 06:23 PM
1

That's not such a bad idea. What if there was a website where men could look up the name of women they were interested in or had recently started dating, and see if they had a history of false allegations? It could also help employers avoid hiring women who might be troublemakers who pursue unfounded sexual harassment charges.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 01:01 AM
5

Right, it had nothing to do with the fact that men weren't as interested in the big tease when they could get any hardcore porn they wanted, with women just as beautiful, for free on the Internet.
/r/MensRights27/10/15 10:35 PM
3

He's a Rush Limbaugh listener. Those phrases have been in the Limbaugh Lexicon for a couple of decades. His listeners have been subjected to many years of Pavlovian socialization in order to properly react to those and many other key phrases.
/r/MensRights05/10/15 03:56 PM
3

I was robbed at gunpoint and they (accidently) caught the guys. In the pre-trial period I got a call from the state attorney explaining that these guys would get a mandatory minimum of 10 years each for committing a crime with a gun. He asked if I would be willing to waive the mandatory minimum sentence. I said no. They are now each serving 15-20 years, and they don't have any chance of seeing parole before 10 years. So the victim has a lot to do with bypassing minimum mandatory sentences, at le…
/r/MensRights02/09/15 11:32 AM
14

Look folks, the judge is on Reddit!
/r/MensRights08/08/15 03:31 PM
0

Tooken
/r/MensRights04/08/15 02:36 PM
10

You've just solved the single worst offense in human history with a little diplomacy and common sense. And without buying a $900 handbag. I'm still unclear how that handbag is "fighting" the problem.
/r/MensRights19/07/15 01:32 PM
1

If i were this kid, and had such a sentence, I'd seriously look at disappearing. Get a new identity, move across the country, maybe even a little plastic surgery, and stay out of trouble. My parents would know how to contact me, but I'd never visit them or my home town again. We could meet on a cruise ship vacation once a year or something. It would be a pain in the ass but not nearly as bad as being on the sex offender registry for the rest of my life.
/r/MensRights06/07/15 05:11 PM
1

What does having a child have to do with marriage?
/r/MensRights28/06/15 03:36 PM
14

Before we start fooling around, would you mind texting me a "Yes?"
/r/MensRights24/05/15 02:28 PM
3

She lost out on a job in CLEVELAND. If she'd gotten it, she would have had to spend the next few years in CLEVELAND. I grew up in CLEVELAND. Trust me, she dodged a bullet. She should be thanking them.
/r/MensRights17/04/15 01:49 PM
3

Could be an alternative account.
/r/MensRights05/04/15 06:10 PM
1

That's just stupid.
/r/MensRights15/03/15 09:47 AM
2

You might want to post this on /r/legaladvice.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 08:58 PM
4

Whenever I see someone exonerated on rape charges, I wonder how many other innocent people are still serving time for drugs, robbery, murder, etc because the crimes the were convicted of didn't include a deposit of DNA that could later be tested and proven it wasn't them.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 02:18 PM
2

Yeah, that works great until someone needs a couch moved. Guess who's job that is?
/r/MensRights26/12/14 03:09 PM
2

And this was after complaints of catcalling and sexual assaults. It sounds like these guys were being complete idiots and now they are being punished for it. I saw it when I was in college. The language building had a nunber of male students from Middle Eastern countries who thought it was perfectly acceptable to confront American female students and openly proposition them and make rude comments for the amusement of their friends. In their country, women who dressed like American women dress wo…
/r/MensRights27/11/14 03:12 PM
4

I see they play "Gotcha" politics in England as well.
/r/MensRights28/10/14 06:31 PM
3

Sounds familiar.
/r/MensRights01/10/14 11:40 AM
80

You can't be both the perpetrator and victim of the same crime. Talk about a slippery slope! If this became a thing, then they could arrest masturbating teenagers for child molestation.
/r/MensRights08/09/14 01:05 AM
5

In the real world, rape and sexual assault are crimes punishable by going to jail — and rightfully so. Why is this left up to schools?” This is what I have been wondering all along. These accused are Americans with Constitutional rights. If they have committed these crimes, then they need to be tried in a court of law under the protection of the Constitution, not a collegiate kangaroo court populated by students.
/r/MensRights22/08/14 02:02 AM
6

It's my prime rule of life: People are most suspicious of that which they are most capable of. Cheaters think everybody is cheating on them. Thieves think everyone else is stealing from them. If someone is constantly accusing you of cheating, then they are doing it themselves or at least thinking about it. This girl will eventually cheat on him, and rationalize it by thinking that he was already doing it to her.
/r/MensRights16/08/14 01:57 PM
29

What if she demands sex while she's drunk?
/r/MensRights13/08/14 12:07 PM
5

The real question is: Did the money problems cause his depression, or did his depression cause him to focus on his money problems and make them a more prominent issue than they really were? He was a highly paid, very in demand entertainer. He could have systematically worked through his financial problems. Many people don't have that option. I suspect that his financial issues weren't really as bad as he made it sound, but his depression had him tightly focusing in that direction.
/r/MensRights12/08/14 09:23 PM
4

Part of the evidence against her was that she had ordered castor beans and lye over the Internet, so it would seem that she did produce it herself. Probably figured that if Heisenberg could do it, so could she.
/r/MensRights27/07/14 01:19 PM
3

And the banks. And the malls/ shopping centers. And the gas stations/ convenience stores. And many rural drieways. Cameras are everywhere. You can buy a nice set of several cameras that can be monitored on your smartphone for a few hundred bucks at any wholesale club.
/r/MensRights08/06/14 06:44 PM
-1

Let's see if his Republican opponent chooses to use this in Grayson's next re-election. It's my guess that he will.
/r/MensRights02/04/14 11:55 AM
26

"How To Be A Woman, By Men" edited by a man. Imagine how well THAT article would be recieved? So men, any suggestions? How should a woman be a woman?
/r/MensRights14/03/14 03:19 PM
1

So I understand that there is only so much time they can give her for abusing animals (although those laws are far too lenient), but it seems like the child pornography possession clearly gives the authorities the opportunity to lock her up for a significant period of time, as well as force her to get psychiatric treatment, which everybody seems to want. So why aren't they doing that? What am I missing here?
/r/MensRights11/03/14 07:55 PM
11

The only human lives they value are their own. All others are to be sacrificed to save themselves.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 10:21 PM
10

About 15 years ago i was laid off from my dream job, because some accountant somewhere made a decision for my life. I was absolutely brokenhearted, but started the job hunt and got a couple of decent offers from competing companies that knew me. I considered taking them until i met a guy in a similar position. He'd had a great job, making millions for a company and ended up in the hospital due to exhaustion. Nobody from his company visited him or even called him, and it gave him time to think. I…
/r/MensRights15/02/14 06:05 PM
5

Why is divorce so expensive? Because it's worth it.
/r/MensRights04/01/14 04:14 PM
9

Tthey expect the same thing they expected during the marriage - her way or the highway.
/r/MensRights04/01/14 04:12 PM
2

One way to avoid the issue is to have a girlfriend, and wait a bit before getting intimate. In the case of a breakup there is a better chance that she will harbor at least some warm feelings to keep her frim making a claim, and if she does it will be a lot harder for her to declare rape if everyone knows you were in a relationship.
/r/MensRights03/01/14 05:41 PM
8

You have no idea what you're missing.
/r/MensRights03/01/14 05:36 PM
17

The difference was probably that she wasn't a true consumer of the CP, she was just using it as a tool. It is unlikely that she had possessed it before or ever will again, so the bail is probably based more on the falsification charges.
/r/MensRights23/12/13 04:17 PM
16

Hmmm, farm animal justice. Makes sense. /s
/r/MensRights23/12/13 04:15 PM
1

I get that just fine. He doesn't have to go bragging about it. Just keep his mouth shut. He's only keeping $700 a month. He'd have to start making a lot more than that before anyone would notice that he's got a lot of disposable income. Presumably she got the earlier judgement when they were breaking up and neither she nor the father were making much money. The ex is now married, and her husband is providing nicely. They would have a hard time convincing a judge that they need much more out of h…
/r/MensRights19/12/13 01:44 AM
-1

If a person doesn't have enough money to live on, they have two choices - spend less or make more. With only $700 per month to live on, spending less probably isn't much of an option, so the other choice remains - earn more. If he's making such a low amount of money, he's probably working a minimum wage job, and probably not getting any overtime. In fact, most MW jobs try to keep the hours as low as possible to keep from going into OT. That means he's got lots of extra time. I don't want to even…
/r/MensRights18/12/13 08:17 PM
1

How dare he...
/r/MensRights17/12/13 09:50 PM
1

That would be true if that's what this picture depicted. But this is a different picture than what you described.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 03:00 PM
4

It'll never happen.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 02:58 PM
2

Our school district has had an anti-bullying campaign for several years, and it seems to be very successful, judging by my son's reports. He says it almost never happens, and isn't tolerated by other students. On the other hand, it seems like the bullying now comes from teachers. I hear about that almost every day from lots of students.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 02:58 PM
2

I don't even think proctologists. Their specialty is the prostate. Just because that's the entrance to their workspace doesn't make them anal experts any more that the guy that removes tonsils is a dentist. I'd say it falls to the gastro-enterologist. He's already chasing cancer through the entire pipe, wouldn't the exit be his jurisdiction?
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:49 AM
1

If the person you confront then attacks you to the point you feel your life is in danger, you can kill them. I'm taking this out of order, but I thought I'd address this first. Under Florida's Stand Your Ground law, you do not have to feel your life is in danger, nor do you have to use all avenues of retreat before resorting to deadly force. You only have to feel threatened. TM certainly felt threatened, and since he was unarmed, physical violence was the only weapon he had at his disposal. Afte…
/r/MensRights24/11/13 08:11 PM
1

I don't understand that logic. If a hit man's victim fights back and then the hit man kills him anyway, does the hitman get off on self-defense? If a rape victim fights back and the rapist kills her, does the rapist get off on self-defense? So if you want to kill someone, all you have to do is goad them into a physical confrontation amd then you can kill them and claim self-defense? GZ controlled this entire situation from beginning to end, and yet he gets the benefit of self-defense? I agree wi…
/r/MensRights24/11/13 06:25 AM
1

I understand the differences between civil and criminal trials. I was pointing out that I have some experience in crafting a coherent case. The GZ prosecution was incoherent. People are convicted on nothing but witness testimony every day. Like it or not, it carries more weight with juries than circumstantial evidence. What happened when TM disappeared and reqppeared is specualtion on anyone's part. Mine is based on a study of the neighborhood, TM's state of mind (panic), and the fact that he wa…
/r/MensRights24/11/13 04:22 AM
-1

What the fuck are you talking about? There was no gay bashing! TM had a creepy silent stranger following him, and the girl on the phone with him made a comment that maybe the guy wanted to rape him, to which TM responded with horror. This subreddit is very concerned with the idea that men can be raped as well as women, and like it or not, sometimes the perpetrator of that rape is a man. I made no judgements about sexuality at all, I only pointed out that we have every reason to believe that TM w…
/r/MensRights24/11/13 03:15 AM
-2

There absolutely was evidence in that GZ TOLD the police he chased him, and you can hear him huffing and puffing on the 911 call. So, yes he was running after TM. As for TM going home, he tried that. As I have pointed out in several posts here, the neighborhood consists of identical looking townhouses, it was night, it was raining, and TM had only been visiting his Dad for a few days and didn't know the layout. Once he went off his normal path, it would have been very easy to become lost among t…
/r/MensRights24/11/13 03:07 AM
-5

Not at all. It is a simple narrative based on the facts of the case, in which a scared 17 year old was chased at night by a creepy silent stranger. How is that "wild and inaccurate?"
/r/MensRights24/11/13 01:52 AM
-2

Getting your head pounded into the ground is what happens to you when you chase someone through a neighborhood and corner them without identifying yourself and your intentions. What would you do under the exact same circumstances as TM?
/r/MensRights24/11/13 01:51 AM
-1

Too bad it's still not illegal, so he is still innocent. As a Florida resident, I have the same permit to carry as he did. I'm glad it's legal. However, he was NOT Innocent, he was found "Not Guilty" at trial. That is not the same as "Innocent."
/r/MensRights24/11/13 01:49 AM
-4

No, I had more information than the jury because there was information in the media that was never presented at trial, which means that I knew what the jury knew, plus more. Living in the area means that I was able to watch the entire trial, and what I missed was comprehensively recapped on local news specials. We had more coverage of this trial and the evidence in and out of the courtroom than anywhere else in the nation. If you think I sound stupid because I studied the evidence and came up wi…
/r/MensRights24/11/13 01:46 AM
-4

The problem with your analysis is that it is all speculation. None of my scenario was speculation. Everything I said was backed by actual evidence, and some of it was introduced at trial, such as the phone call he had with the girl. Other things were not introduced or emphasized for some reason known only to the prosecution, whose case was haphazard at best. I have been involved in a few civil cases in which I helped out my lawyers with the direction of the case, and we have won every time. The …
/r/MensRights24/11/13 12:44 AM
-3

I have always avoided the race issue in this case because I think that had very little to with the actual altercation between the two. I think had TM been hispanic or even white, GZ would have reacted the same. He was a cowardly ticking time bomb looking for a fight, and pumped up because he had a gun in his pocket. Anyone he confronted that night would have been in trouble. On the other hand, I think race had a lot to do with why the local cops just brushed it off at the scene and afterwards. B…
/r/MensRights23/11/13 11:26 PM
-5

They needed to characterize TM's attack as justifiable under the Stand Your Ground law, which could have easily been done by emphasizing the fact that GZ NEVER identified himself despite multiple opportunities. This led TM to determine that GZ was up to no good throughout the pursuit. He was on the phone with a girl who testified that she joked that the guy would probably rape him, which TM responded to angrily, showing that he was frightened of that very scenario. Something else that was never …
/r/MensRights23/11/13 11:22 PM
-7

You, sir, are a liar.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 11:18 PM
-4

The evidence presented in court was not enough, I'll agree with that. It was a winnable case, however, had it been presented properly. The Orlando prosecutor's office has demonstrated their ineptness a second time (first being Casey Anthony).
/r/MensRights23/11/13 10:55 PM
-8

I can't believe we are still debating this nonsense, especially since GZ has proven himself to be a loose and loaded cannon multiple times since his acquittal, but here goes: Under Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, TM had EVERY right to attack the creepy silent stranger who had been relentlessly pursuing him throughout the neighborhood. He had every reason to believe that GZ was dangerous since GZ never identified himself or his intentions. The GZ apologists disingenuously act like TM simply ju…
/r/MensRights23/11/13 10:53 PM
-7

You can denounce black slavery and still be a racist. was aquitted by a jury of his peers who had more information than you or me Well, I live in Orlando, where the crime and the trial were held, and the entire trial was shown on TV, and every detail recapped in the media, and there were details that the jury never heard, but were reported anyway, so you could say that we actually had more information than the jury. The trial was lost by the same prosecutor's office who lost the Casey Anthony ca…
/r/MensRights23/11/13 10:16 PM
-5

I don't harbor a lot of hate, except for murderers who get away with it.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 10:15 PM
-19

Two things for you: 1) George Zimmerman is a cowardly little pussy who got away with 2nd degree murder of a minor. 2) I'm not interested in your link to a racist apologist.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 09:38 PM
-20

Cases like this bitch and OJ and that Aruba asshole going to jail give me hope whenever some other piece of shit like Casey Anthony or George Zimmerman gets away with it. Sooner or later some other crime will catch up with them. Dickheads like these can't help themselves, they'll do something stupid again and then they'll pay for it. edit: Good God, I can't believe we're debating George Zimmerman again. You all know this fucking idiot is in jail again for waving a shotgun in his new girlfriend's…
/r/MensRights23/11/13 09:16 PM
9

I don't see anyone mentioning that the hospital billed the VICTIM! This was done on the orders of the police department, aren't they on the hook for the bill?
/r/MensRights05/11/13 08:59 PM
1

What is an abusive wife costume? I guess the abused husband costume could include a black eye, but other than that I'm confused.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 04:25 PM
2

I always think about that. Let's say five years down the line he meets a girl he really likes, they start dating and things are going well. He is going to have to tell her about this. How does he do it? What does he say? How is she going to feel? Won't there always be some lingering doubt? The same goes with an employer. This will leave a deep ugly scar on his life that will never go away.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 08:10 PM
1

I went right to that. Imagine if he'd started his response to her that way....
/r/MensRights06/10/13 02:46 PM
1

Thanks. I'm in Florida, where it looks like ALL parties have to consent, so the plan of recording her wouldn't work.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 04:08 PM
0

Hey, I'm not giving legal advice, just throwing out some ideas. Others are advocating just recording her, I'm saying it might be a little more complicated than that, but there might be a way around it. Unless you're talking about recording her not being much a crime, and I still maintain that it's not. I doubt there is anyone in America serving time in prison for recording a coworker's bad behavior. I still wouldn't do it without finding out the legalities, though. A LAWYER WOULD KNOW and I'M NO…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 03:57 PM
-1

Recording without permission is illegal almost everywhere I think, but it's not really a crime. You won't go to jail for it, you just can't use it as evidence in court, which also means HR probably can't take action based on it. However, it is possible that since your workplace is probably monitored by cameras, she has given tacet permission to be recorded. I'm not a lawyer, I just play one on anonymous message boards. I'd be interested in true legal opinion.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 01:51 PM
2

I'm not a lawyer, I just play one on anonymous forums, so I don't know the answer to that, but I don't think so. Maybe a real lawyer or someone involved with the system could answer better. I have just always heard that getting a judgement in small claims court is the easier part of the process. You have been officially stamped the winner, but actually getting paid is still a problem.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 12:42 PM
3

But the court won't help you collect. If the losing party just says "No," you're pretty much on your own.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 02:18 AM
10

This is seldom discussed in this debate. While women in the locker room are intrusive, so are men. These guys just got off the field/ court, and they deserve the opportunity to sit, relax, and get their head together before being asked a lot of stupid questions. Men/ women, it makes no difference, it is all intrusive. Set up a space outside of the locker room for reporters to wait for the players to leave. Nobody outside of the team gets in the locker room - it's that simple.
/r/MensRights03/09/13 10:38 PM
7

Jackson made the claim that he cradled a dying Martin Luther King's head in his lap and Jackson used that story to claim "inheritance" of the Martin Luther King legacy. In reality, he was in the parking lot, and King was killed instantly. All Jackson did was smear King's blood on his shirt and make sure he was photographed and filmed by news reporters.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 10:14 PM
0

I'm comparing David Duke's present day exposure with Al Sharpton's. Duke is long gone, while Sharpton is still in public eye. I never said Sharpton represents black people (I don't believe that he does), but you made the claim that Duke does represent whites, based on voting statistics in one state over 20 years ago.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 09:19 PM
1

David Duke has been irrelevant for over 20 years. Al Sharpton still gets on TV every day. Whether Al Sharpton represents black people is debatable, but there is no debate where David Duke is concerned. He didn't represent the majority of white people back then, and he sure doesn't now.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 09:03 PM
1

in America, proper channels are set up to prevent accountability The truth. Only media attention and lawyers will get it taken care of properly.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 07:16 PM
3

Oh, come on, I've heard about the ladies room. They have a piano bar with complimentary drinks served by muscular men in skimpy attire, massages, a hot tub, etc.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 03:37 AM
31

Jehovah Witnesses aren't actively campaigning against other people having birthdays, or calling birthdays an "abomination" or calling for public hangings for people who celebrate birthdays or trying to rehabilitate people through prayer into denying their birthdays or telling people who celebrate birthdays that they can't get married.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 11:59 PM
-5

Really? We're going to parse every combination? Okay. I think a smart, fat woman can go pretty far, but she'll eventually hit a wall. Think about it - of all the women CEOs you see, how many of them are overweight? A dumb, beautiful woman can go farther than she probably deserves based on her looks, but she'll eventually hit a wall as well, and probably sooner that the smart, fat one. Of course, when her looks fade, as they eventually will, she'll have nothing going for her. So probably the smar…
/r/MensRights18/05/13 09:39 PM
3

Given a choice between going through life as an intelligent, beautiful woman or a man, I'll take being a woman. If the choice is between being an unattractive, overweight woman and a man, I'd rather be the man. Of course, this only goes for the western world, particularly America. The reality is that a smart, beautiful woman can go pretty far in this society, even farther than the average man. But unattractive overweight woman have a much, much harder time of it. I'm not saying it's right, but i…
/r/MensRights18/05/13 08:50 PM
28

Unless you're an unattractive and/or overweight female. Then you're totally screwed in life.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 05:32 PM
6

"Removed By User"
/r/MensRights13/05/13 07:59 PM
39

Dude, she's just a teacher, not a cop. She can't really hurt you. Now that I'm an adult, and older than most teachers, I know how full of shit 90% of them are.
/r/MensRights10/04/13 12:32 AM
1

I saw something by the guy where he said the term means to use the other guy's technology, or borrow it, or something. It was some kind of inside lingo among his co-workers that sounded dirty to someone on the outside. The Dongle comment still stands, but what the hell, the word is Dongle. I never say it because I can't see it or hear it or say it without thinking about dick.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 11:23 PM
2

It was sexual, not sexist. There's a difference.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 11:20 PM
4

This is the biggest clue to what a hypocrite she is.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 11:17 PM
1

Gloria Allred
/r/MensRights22/03/13 11:16 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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