TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

TheyCalledMeMad Archive

View 1 post and 407 comments by TheyCalledMeMad 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)
9

TheyCalledMeMad/r/MensRights25/08/12 04:42 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Being an outsider isn't so bad. If the system you live in is wildly fucked up, then get out, and feel good about escaping with your brain intact. It can be a lonely thing, but at least you have integrity.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 01:31 AM
1

Sounds like treating a symptom: famously ineffective.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 03:56 AM
3

In this article: A gallant and noble Good Man throws himself upon his sword and encourages other Good Men to join in on the fun. You do want to be a Good Man, right?
/r/MensRights27/05/15 05:35 PM
9

It's socially acceptable to designate white men as the villains of the story.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 03:36 AM
4

It costs you respect and gains you nothing rhetorically What you are describing here is not respect. If this "respect" is so casually taken away by you actually saying what is on your mind, it isn't respect. At best, polite non-aggression. If telling someone about your experiences is enough to land you in the contempt category, you were already there.
/r/MensRights11/04/15 05:22 PM
1

Well, no, that wasn't the conclusion at all.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 09:34 PM
17

Yeah, that actually makes a lot of sense. I often get the impression when I see people discussing MRAs that they are talking about some silly and exaggerated character of fiction. There is a story being told here, and it gets grander and extremer with every telling. It might not be long before I hear stories about how MRAs eat kittens and revere Hitler. I guess casting someone as a villain is easier than listening to what they're saying.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 01:38 AM
2

So from I've picked up online, a fair definition of feminism is simply “a person who believes in the social, political and economic equality of the sexes". This is Feminist Theory. This is a starting point that one can use to view the topic of gender politics. Stating this as a definition does not mean that someone associated with the title of feminist will act in accordance with this Theory and nothing else. There is a world of difference between Theory and Practice, especially when it comes to…
/r/MensRights05/10/14 12:13 AM
2

The word "Ally" is used, but I really don't get the impression that this is intended to be a partnership of equals. If men's feelings and/or opinions can accepted on the merit of their content, then there could be the potential to be allies. If, instead, men are claimed to be "Mansplaining," or if it is claimed that men inherently have privilege and therefore are less worthy of being part of a conversation than women are, then this is not a relationship of allies, this is a relationship of servi…
/r/MensRights26/09/14 12:46 AM
5

This individual wouldn't even be particularly interesting if it weren't for the blatant hypocrisy. She rails against the story of damsels in distress, and then casts herself in to the role of distressed damsel. "Oh no, parts of the Internet aren't eagerly eating up my narrative, please send me money to save me!" Professional victim.
/r/MensRights15/09/14 06:03 PM
5

Yeah, Greek mythology had a lot to say about Sirens, too. Didn't end so well for the men involved.
/r/MensRights30/08/14 08:31 AM
12

Instead of having a bunch of contrived rules created by men, you could have a bunch of contrived rules created by women, and all the while you get to hear about how women do everything better. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
/r/MensRights28/08/14 01:43 AM
2

Hey, feminism supports women in making any choice they want with their own bodies*. *As long as they are the "correct" choices.
/r/MensRights20/08/14 11:11 AM
5

Sometimes it seems like any time men mention the topic of sexual violence, it's used as a convenient excuse to attack them, unless it's an unconditional admission of collective guilt.
/r/MensRights31/07/14 12:03 AM
1

Nothing new. It's the same one-sided talking points that have been regurgitated time and time again. These aren't conversations, just a series of monologues.
/r/MensRights30/07/14 08:16 PM
2

"You see, pay discrimination is bad, so we're going to do exactly that."
/r/MensRights23/07/14 10:15 PM
1

Nah. Men's Rights Enthusiast, maybe. But hardly an activist. I'd like for the well-being of men and boys to not be ignored and made invisible, but I don't like to indulge the bullshit of identity politics.
/r/MensRights22/07/14 02:47 AM
7

A lot of people are angry about the existence of sexism, is that a sign that it is still needed?
/r/MensRights18/07/14 12:41 AM
0

Oh, has it been a day already? I was already bored of the last "just leave feminism alone!" post. I had hopes that maybe this one would come up with some original content instead of parroting the same concern-trolling all over again, but I guess that didn't happen. Maybe tomorrow's will be better.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 08:38 PM
2

Well, fuck. Maybe the topic (boys in the education system) needs to get a whole lot worse before it will get better. I'd like to think that if things are bad enough that people will react and back out of a bad system, but it doesn't always work out that way. What I do know is that anti-feminism is a symptom of feminism, and that at least some of these boys will realize the bullshit that has been mandated to them... eventually. It would be nice if they didn't have to get so many scars in the proc…
/r/MensRights09/07/14 04:48 AM
9

You're free to make any choice you want, as long as you select from our list of pre-approved decisions. Wouldn't it be nice if this turned out to be some prank to highlight the corruptibility of democracy? Wouldn't it be nice.
/r/MensRights07/07/14 04:28 AM
1

That's just what education needs, even fewer men. It's important to strive for gender parity, except for when we have women outnumbering men. Then we need... fewer men. Moral Myopia
/r/MensRights06/07/14 08:53 PM
16

So, in such situations, how is it imagined that the accused will provide evidence of consent? Sex tapes? Signed & notarized contracts? Witnesses?
/r/MensRights06/07/14 06:06 AM
3

Discussions of sexual deviancy have a rich history of bullshit, much of which is shared by this blog post. It's awfully easy and convenient to label things as pervy or unwholesome, it doesn't take much deep thinking and it discourages dialogue. If the blog post just mentioned the topics of bestiality and incest with this tone then it would have been much more of a grey area, but to lump prostitution in to the same category reeks of prudish moral-panic.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 04:27 PM
342

"Here are some excuses for why other people don't deserve compassion but I do."
/r/MensRights22/06/14 04:46 AM
2

Anything that tells you how much you "should worry" about any given topic isn't doing it for your benefit. Get your head out of your ass and learn to recognize fear-mongering.
/r/MensRights16/06/14 11:21 AM
7

"Actions speak louder than words!" "WELL I GUESS I'LL JUST SCREAM LOUDER THEN!" Repeatedly stating that "Feminism is X" isn't going to be persuasive when actions of feminists demonstrate a different version of "Feminism is X."
/r/MensRights21/05/14 11:32 PM
1

In games such as WoW where the player specifically designs the appearance of their character (other examples: Skyrim/Oblivion, Mass Effect series) and frequently sees them, it has been my experience that the most of the available appearances for male characters are some of the stupidest looking apes in the world. Appearance options for female characters, by contrast, tend to receive much more detail and charm. When I play such a game, I'd like for my character to have a pleasant appearance in ad…
/r/MensRights13/05/14 10:31 PM
3

Not terribly bothered by this. There are a lot of assumptions that could be made as to the motivations of adding a specifically gendered subreddit to the "default" category, and some of them would directly conflict with one another. The catalyzing effect of making a subreddit "default" for reddit may well change r/2x to make it largely unrecognizable from what it was before. There will be waves of new viewers & posters who are mostly uninformed and unfamiliar with the subreddit, and it will prob…
/r/MensRights08/05/14 04:09 AM
1

This topic pops up semi-regularly, and each time I get the impression that the asker doesn't see the ambiguities in the question. Men Going Their Own Way isn't exclusively about men who have sworn off dating and romantic entanglements. This seems to be what many people have in mind when they refer to MGTOW, and I think that being a man going his own way can certainly involve this, but to end the topic there would be to completely miss the point. The core of being a Man Going His Own Way is this:…
/r/MensRights25/04/14 11:31 PM
10

This is one of those times where I read a URL and think to myself, "Nah, I see enough bullshit without reading what looks like it will be verbal syphilis."
/r/MensRights24/04/14 10:05 AM
1

Y'know, it's an odd thing. My first reaction was that the picture would be way more entertaining if she were wearing a strap-on, because then it would unambiguously be a sexual thing and some people are in to that (dom/sub). But even without the sexual aspect some people are in to dom/sub, so maybe that's okay too.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 09:10 PM
2

Because "nurse" is one of those job titles where people frequently point out if the nurse in question isn't of the expected gender. The person probably isn't referred to as a "male nurse" because a crime occurred. If he had saved a baby from a fire or somesuch it seems entirely possible that the description of "male nurse" would have been used. It's fairly silly in my opinion, but not malicious.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 04:15 AM
9

Honestly it's kind of a bad question. One, because neither term is precise (both male and female circumcision can involve a wide range of procedures and effects), and two, because competing for who gets to be the biggest victim is super depressing and frustrating. Imagine you have a culture where, at birth, some infants had their right leg removed. Sometimes all of it, sometimes part of it. And, also, some infants instead had their right foot removed. Then, whenever someone suggested that maybe …
/r/MensRights26/03/14 05:17 AM
8

In my opinion a lot of this is due to the letter of the law. Most sex crimes are committed by men because when they are committed by women we don't call it a sex crime, we come up with some other name that alludes to the same thing but for some reason is vaguely different. For example, in recent years there have been a rather visible and noticed number of female teachers statutorily raping underage male students, but news on the topic rarely refers to it as rape.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 08:57 PM
4

If men want to be "allies" in their own liberation, they need to stop trying to make the conversation. I really don't care if I "miss out on all the men that support equality," because if they really did support equ(al)ity, then they wouldn't be so concerned about shaping discourses around themselves. Aside from being just one more example of totalitarian controlling of discourse and discussion, this is also terrible, terrible advice. "If you want to get something done, then shut up, sit still, …
/r/MensRights09/03/14 11:43 PM
3

It's also a term used widely by TvTropes, a hugely popular and addicting website about elements of fiction.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 06:11 AM
15

"Man up" is a phrase used to coerce a man in to doing something that isn't in his own best interest, holding hostage his social approval.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 09:27 PM
8

Constantly. I constantly hear men speak of their adoration and fondness for women. At times that adoration takes the shape of men describing what they find sexy, and many times it doesn't take that shape at all. Many men have their most intimate and significant relationships with women - and they know it! For many men, women are confidants and companions, supporters, and sources of joy and brightness. I can't be sure if this is a deliberate omission or if the author has feminist tunnel-vision wh…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 01:09 AM
8

I agree with distancing from marriage - it's an antiquated system with a toxic legal environment, it doesn't operate to the benefit of the people directly involved. But why not child rearing?
/r/MensRights06/02/14 09:39 AM
1

Clearly the answer is to treat people like villains and monsters and then demand that they act otherwise.
/r/MensRights24/01/14 12:13 PM
6

My advice is: Don't accept either answer, and instead remain skeptical of both of these ideas. I think that one of the best things you can do for the topic of inequalities is refuse to attach yourself to any identity group (in this case, MRAs) and instead remain an individual who cares about the topic at hand. Identity politics is toxic, and a complete waste of time. Specifically regarding the idea of MRAs having little to no sympathy for alleged female victims, I would guess that this has to do…
/r/MensRights11/01/14 03:46 AM
13

Well, I liked the part where she mentioned that frequent assertions of "not all X are like that" is part of a silencing tactic. I don't imagine that it was written with any irony in mind, but I can't help but remember the hundreds of times I've seen/heard it shouted back at me that not all feminists are like that. Other than that it seemed like a pretty standard instance of "Shut up and let me dictate the truth."
/r/MensRights18/12/13 11:41 PM
2

She kinda seems like a person who only hears: "Oppression! Women are trash! Almighty Penis!" any time someone opens their mouth. It's like she's reading off lines from a script and the other person is talking about something completely different, but she responds to what she thinks the other half of the script is.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 08:59 PM
3

One big reason comes to mind for why a group might want to have a monopoly on the discussions of a topic: controlling the narrative. If you get to have the only voice on a topic (and label any dissenting voices as "hate speech") then The Truth is what you decide it to be. I greatly prefer to have a giant clusterfuck of voices on the topic.
/r/MensRights14/12/13 01:38 AM
8

Y'know, you're right. We should just have one sub for everything. There should only be one politics subreddit instead of one or more for each political ideology - the users will disagree about everything, but it's the same topic so it'll be fine. One tech subreddit instead of geek, gadgets, programming, and a hundred others. One porn subreddit instead of the several billion it takes to encompass each fetish or topic. I don't really browse r/AskReddit all that much, but it should just be merged w…
/r/MensRights13/12/13 09:48 PM
11

This would still be pretty messed up without the completely gendered language used, but the constant use of "female-victim male-villain" language used really highlights the myopic morality in play here. That is to say, it sounds like she is advocating for murder only in the context of female killers and definitely not men in similar situations. I guess that's the power of the threat narrative. If you can scream loudly and often enough that men are violent, anything you do to them is permissible.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 05:01 AM
3

How could I? It changes by the minute, and in five different directions each time. Ask ten people what is offensive and you'll get at least twenty opinions. "Offensive" is entirely subjective, which makes it entirely arbitrary for using as a standard.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 06:44 PM
-17

"Offensive" is useless as a qualifier. You can't make someone offended, it is entirely a thing that people do to themselves. Furthermore, denying that a situation has shades of gray is zealotry, which is a very lazy and ineffective solution.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 06:29 AM
1

If you want to lend a helping hand, then I will high-five you, friend. I like to help the people in my life with whom I have a positive relationship - not all the time, but when I am happy to do so. Giving is great when you give joyously. An obligation to give is a trap used to manipulate.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 10:15 PM
1

If there are variables and it isn't black-and-white, then how can it be a "male" privilege?
/r/MensRights02/12/13 09:50 PM
3

Very imperial. I have no interest in being a cog in the grand machine - I've been insulted and berated for it many times before, and I'm sure there will be many times more.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 07:44 PM
1

It seems a bit arbitrary to decide that gender is where we draw the line for "groups". Why not humans have an obligation to help humans? Why not all vertebrates? Why not group by eye color? Why would sharing a biological demographic with someone make us in-part responsible for them or their actions?
/r/MensRights02/12/13 07:41 PM
3

An obligation for whom, and why?
/r/MensRights02/12/13 08:02 AM
2

Sounds like you're describing an obligation.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 01:49 AM
3

If you decide to take on a responsibility to help a situation because you're in the proximity of it, fantastic, that's your decision, and hopefully you can feel good about doing it too. But if someone else comes along and says: "Hey! You! Why the fuck aren't you helping this? Don't know you that you have an obligation to do something about this?" This is something else entirely. Any obligation here is entirely manufactured.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 11:43 PM
7

The way that the term "privilege" is used in gender politics seems very similar to the concept of "original sin." In short, they're both systems of collective guilt.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 11:02 PM
119

This is exactly an ideology. Men are oppressors, therefore things that men do is oppression. Start with a viewpoint and then use it to shape all incoming data. Arguing with ideologues is impossible - they already have all the answers they want.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 07:47 AM
21

I agree. There has been much discussion about the real meaning of "Man up," how it is both toxic and malicious, how it tells men to ignore their pain (or at the very least never admit it to anyone). I think my favorite summary of "Man up" came from John the Other - I don't remember the specific source so here's a paraphrase: When someone tells you to "Man up" what they're saying is that they know you are a person with flaws and faults and pains like any other, but in spite of that they want you …
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:34 PM
2

The title of "Judas" is bullshit. The notion of "gender traitor" is as asinine for the context of Men's Rights Advocates as it is for Feminism - there is no brotherhood or sisterhood to betray, we're not a member of some collective because of our genitals, and we don't automatically owe anyone of our gender (or any gender) anything. Now, I agree that the picture in question is just more of the same social-justice regurgitation that has been seen a thousand times before, despite all evidence that…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 06:13 PM
15

The description starts out well enough, seems like it could be about an actual rebirth of male identities, but then the language shifts halfway through to being about social-engineering political correctness, being "good men." Thanks but no thanks, I've seen this too many times before.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 07:09 PM
3

"I'm going to define who and what you are, and if you have a problem with any part of this situation then I'm going to tell everyone that you are a bigot."
/r/MensRights04/11/13 03:16 AM
12

If women are disproportionately affected by a shutdown of government services, then this implies one of two things: 1) Women are receiving more government aid than men - which stands in opposition to the idea that men are uniquely privileged over women. or 2) Women are more in need of government aid than men - which stands in opposition to the idea that men and women are equal. Feminist doublethink never fails to baffle and sadden me.
/r/MensRights09/10/13 02:09 AM
3

Sounds like some good stuff. Shining some light on feminism's toxic mindsets is always a great topic.
/r/MensRights03/10/13 08:15 PM
2

Sleep well my friend, and dream of large women.
/r/MensRights13/09/13 06:48 PM
2

Apparently it's quite expensive.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 06:20 PM
1

Definitions can be slippery things, especially when it comes to politics, ideologies, and social movements. For example, feminism has had many definitions, many of which conflict with one another. Ask ten feminists for their definition on feminism, and you'll get twenty opinions. Please do not try to impose an ironclad definition of Men's Rights Activism - there will be no consistency or consensus, not among people who participate in Men's Rights Activism, and certainly not among people who decr…
/r/MensRights09/09/13 01:39 AM
7

I've said it before and I'm sure I'll be saying it again later: Urban Dictionary is not worth your time or attention. It is among the scummiest of Internet scum-pits; trolling and vomit-inducing bigotry is nothing but entertainment for that place. Don't waste your time with it.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 11:45 PM
13

I think you're probably on the right track. I know that many men who have a connection with geek culture have experienced social shaming and estrangement from men and women both. There are two cultural shifts that have evolved to create this topic ("fake geek girls" and reactions to them). One, computer technology became much more wide-spread and accessible than it previously was, and the topics of geek and nerd and tech became more casual and less exclusive as a result. Two, the cultural narrat…
/r/MensRights11/08/13 03:09 AM
7

It is an irony if one takes feminism at its proposed definition of the pursuit of equality. If feminism really is about improving the conditions of women, then it isn't very good at it - rampant fear-mongering doesn't do any favors for women of the world. Fear-mongering is the behavior of something that is struggling to remain relevant. It has to create boogeymen (sorry, boogeypeople), because otherwise nobody would need it.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 09:14 AM
3

That's just nonsense. "I'm sorry" is a statement about the speaker, not the people they're speaking to.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 02:55 AM
0

It seems to me that some people really want to hate themselves and see themselves as the devil. I don't understand it, I'm not sure what it is that they get out of this self-loathing and hate-preaching, but I've seen this enough times to recognize that it is a recurring mindset. Seems like an unhappy dude.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 02:54 AM
11

So here's what I'm getting from this article: Gender is something to be reviled, something to be destroyed - gender is the enemy. But let's talk about everything in terms of gender dichotomies. I hate gender, but men are the devil and women are goddesses.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 02:50 AM
1

I agree - men and women are counterparts, they are not "opposite" genders but complementary. Men and women are inextricably connected, one doesn't work without the other. This isn't even about romance, love whomever you want, but men as a group and women as a group need each other. Not just for reproduction (though also that too), but societies are fundamentally built upon having both men and women present and engaged.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 11:45 PM
5

I agree. "Swearing off romance" can be one form of going your own way, and it seems that this is sometimes seen as the iconic or "main" way of MGTOW, but it would be very limiting as well as mistaken to say that this is all there is to Men Going Their Own Way. I do not think that MGTOW needs a streamlined redecoration, especially one as specific as dedicated/confirmed bachelor (which, as already noted, has another meaning). Men Going Their Own Way has a lot of depth to it, /u/JesusSaidSo gave a …
/r/MensRights09/07/13 10:59 PM
6

Buying a pill for her seems like the least headache/clusterfuck-inspiring solution. It might sound like fun to play the blame game, but it won't be fun to actually go there.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 02:00 AM
1

Actually pretty funny
/r/MensRights05/07/13 11:45 PM
2

I don't think that women as a sex will ever become obsolete. The potential exists that sex (male/female) at some point will not be relevant anymore, but it would be an all-or-nothing thing, I think, not just one or the other. It could well be said that many women are getting bogged down and lost via the toxic bullshit of gender politics and other mind-traps, but I would not say that this makes them obsolete. Men and women are complementary - they are two parts of a whole. We need both.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:11 AM
5

I really don't understand this "[X] shouldn't be allowed to have an opinion on [Y] because [demographic]" bullshit, other than as an obnoxious silencing tactic. Would they really be happier if it were a female politician defending abortion laws? Conservative female politicians are hardly uncommon.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 01:37 AM
2

Shame, I would guess. Men aren't "supposed" to be victims of things like this, and they're definitely not supposed to besmirch the good name of woman. Men tend to be better at physical conflict than social conflict, and women tend to be better at social conflict than physical conflict. One of these is significantly more illegal and stigmatized than the other.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 09:33 PM
1

Stuff like this seems like a sign that Patriarchy theory is just more feminist projection. Feminist ideologues put their support behind a female contender, regardless of context or qualification or opposition - and so they assume that men do the same! If you give someone your vote primarily on the basis of their sex, you're gonna have a bad time.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 09:28 PM
7

Hey now, don't drag swearing in to this. Swearing is fucking great.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 06:40 AM
5

Good thread.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 07:05 AM
12

Perhaps people are reluctant to identify as feminists because of articles like this. Childish insults and fear-mongering seem like a pretty solid indicator that maybe feminism isn't rainbows and compassion, as is claimed.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 05:17 AM
5

I've been there, man. Pretty dang frustrating. Looking for an apartment/sublet is stressful enough, but when fully half of them advertise "female only," that's an even deeper level of bullshit.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 11:36 PM
2

So much hypocrisy. Feminists complain about areas that are "boys clubs" and how intimidating it is for women to enter those areas. So what do they do? They either form an external group on the same topic but for women, or form an internal group for women. But when men do this it's sexist. When women do it, it's empowering women to break into male dominated areas. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. This is a sadly common dynamic with oppressors and oppressed, one that greatly predates gende…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 12:08 AM
1

Yeah, Sinfest has been pretty heavy-handed with its message lately.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:21 PM
2

If women are always right, what happens when two women have conflicting opinions? Are there explosions?
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:28 AM
2

I concur - a good read.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 09:27 PM
5

Spiders weird me out, this is true, but they also eat the bugs that annoy me way more, so I think that makes them pretty cool.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 06:27 PM
59

Sometimes I forget that women are known for their stoicism and men known for their expressiveness.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 06:26 PM
8

In this article: Women are needy, codependent, and frequently spew bullshit. Men, it's your job to manage this. Fuck that noise.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 12:25 AM
1

Not sure of troll or idiot.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:23 PM
44

You know what seems like a really powerful display of "privilege"? Deciding that someone else has an abundance of privilege and needs to be balanced out by giving you preferential treatment. Sadly, people like this will likely never recognize it for what it is. Self-appointed-victims are very practiced at cognitive dissonance.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:12 PM
1

Are they? Based on what?
/r/MensRights21/04/13 06:33 AM
1

Seems to me like this wouldn't be much different than male feminists and/or traditionalists who espouse the same bullshit.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 01:41 AM
5

I see that the Esoteric Order of Radfem is still alive and kicking. Cults like this seem to fall out of the public eye just long enough for me to suspect that they've fallen apart, then they pop back up still as crazy and violent as ever.
/r/MensRights15/04/13 08:14 PM
3

They don't. Reddit doesn't collectively like or dislike anything - not even silly cat pictures, which seems like it would be the most example. However, redditors who do like or dislike specific things tend to be quite vocal about it, which I suspect is largely rooted in the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory. Since the topic of Men's Rights is politically incorrect, it provokes a reaction.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 10:42 PM
2

If someone tells you that a cactus is an apple, it doesn't mean that you're going to get an apple, it means they're trying to sell you a cactus. In other words: don't believe something just because someone wants you to. They have an agenda.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 03:43 AM
2

I wonder what happens if people see a woman abusing a woman in public. Do heads explode?
/r/MensRights08/04/13 10:56 PM
1

That's a pretty good quote, and I think many people will choose to misinterpret it. For the sake of clarity, I'll spell it out: I already do all of those things as much as I want to - rape and murder and beat and steal - I don't do them at all, which is exactly as much as I want them. That's part of what is so damn insulting about the "Teach Men Not To Rape" canard - not only am I a super-expert at not-raping, I was never interested in raping in the first place!
/r/MensRights08/04/13 08:09 PM
2

If the only important factor were a person's utility, then sure, your logic would follow. If I were an expansion-oriented dictator who saw his citizens as tools to be used, then yes, that's probably how I would organize things. Fortunately, neither of those "ifs" apply. Also, in case the point went unnoticed, what I was trying to say is that social trends are all about generalizations. They work well for topics of broad scope, but not for topics of narrow scope. Trends do not describe individual…
/r/MensRights08/04/13 04:06 AM
10

Hey, whimsical_pizzaa. I have two responses to this. Anti-feminism is by no means recent on this subreddit. It could very well be said that many Men's Rights topics have anti-feminism as a foundation - that is to say, a significant amount of Men's Rights discourse is a response to feminism. There have been some very public events lately in the realm of American gender politics, and I think that what you are interpreting as recent hate towards feminism is an enthusiastic response to these recent …
/r/MensRights08/04/13 03:32 AM
4

I disagree - I do not think that the article was saying any of those things. Men, in general, have an affinity towards masculine traits, and women, in general, have an affinity towards feminine traits. I think what she was saying was that the nature of the beast (politics/government) lends itself better towards masculine characteristics than feminine. This doesn't say that women at bad at politics (nor does it say that men are bad at nurturing), but that generally speaking many of the people who…
/r/MensRights07/04/13 10:26 PM
4

How delightfully politically incorrect. I look forward to hearing about how she's been excommunicated by the holy sisterhood.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 07:58 PM
4

Don't forget Catherine the Great, Empress of Russia whose leading hobby was starting land wars. This is the reason that Russia is such a geographically large country - Catherine was kinda bloodthirsty.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 08:22 AM
24

Classic bully.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 10:11 PM
6

My answer is: Don't. Just be a compassionate individual. Don't sink in to bs identity politics, and don't attach yourself to a particular label. It all comes down to compassion. Even if you choose to believe that women consistently get shafted (which is debatable - don't accept it as a fact just because it's politically correct to do so), even if, please have the same compassion for men that you would for women. This is easier said than done - many people have the same reflex reaction as yours, …
/r/MensRights23/03/13 07:53 AM
13

And she still finds a way to lay the brunt of the blame on men. I want to be surprised, but I am not, not even a little.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 07:34 AM
0

Oh I see! So really men who are punished harshly for crimes are privileged because it's a recognition of their agency. I see now. All this privilege sure is fucking great. Hey maybe if I'm really lucky I'll get conscripted or be legally obligated to send alimony payments - I mean, these are just a government's way of telling me that I'm a badass dude who can do anything, right? There's a great Warren Farrel quote about this - "Men's greatest weakness is their facade of strength, and women's grea…
/r/MensRights20/03/13 04:41 AM
4

It's okay. The feeling is mutual.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 05:07 AM
3

It seems like you're pretty set on maintaining the story you've been fed. A lot of ideologues react hostilely when their narrative is challenged.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 05:04 AM
5

Sure, if we're still living in caves and don't know what the fuck tools are. When you introduce tools in to the equation, the physical strength difference between men and women becomes a lot less important. In this context, a tool could be anything from a baseball bat that clocks you over the head, or some drugs slipped in to your drink. Or social blackmail, as another commenter pointed out.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 04:46 AM
4

Although I agree with what I think your conclusion is - that feminism is largely dishonest about its motives/ideas - I think that this particular approach to it won't be particularly convincing. This very readily leaves available a typical feminist response of claiming that the feminist banner covers a whole bunch of noble and progressive and egalitarian stuff as a means of deflecting criticism. That is to say, I think that the response to your challenge will be more of the same feminist histori…
/r/MensRights18/03/13 05:32 AM
1

What are you interpreting as "special"? If I were a man who braved blizzards, there would also be other men who did the same. What would be different if a woman did it as well?
/r/MensRights17/03/13 08:56 PM
8

My belief is that we're all part of the same damn unit. Male and female are not opposite sexes, they are complimentary sexes - if there is a flaw in men or in women (and there are plenty in each), then those flaws exist in both men and women. It only works as a system, the parts don't function individually. The sexes are different. I love that they are different, the differences are something to celebrate, not bemoan or destroy.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 07:08 AM
2

I don't really understand this "adapts better to change" line that has popped up more than a few times. If one person fails in a shitty system and gets out of it, and another person slides in to fill that gap, that certainly is "adapting" of a sort, but don't see the value in it. At least, I don't see the value for the individual - I definitely see how it values the system they're in. Maybe that is the sense behind this line.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 05:08 AM
7

It actually makes a lot of sense to me that government officials would be ignorant (either willingly or accidentally) of the psychological cost of violence - it would probably be much more difficult to manipulate situations like wars if you didn't dehumanize soldiers.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 06:50 AM
3

I do not think that this is a recent trend.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 05:02 AM
7

I sincerely hope that fixing it doesn't become "fixing" it.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 06:57 AM
13

Lots of practice, that's how. Echo chambers where any dissent is swiftly shamed, mocked, and censored. Cults and abusers work on the same principle - only thoughts that agree with the divine [insert ideology] are allowed, everything else is dangerous.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 04:36 AM
5

Oh, radfems. I don't know what version of reality you live in, but I'm glad I don't have to share it with you.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 12:03 AM
3

What happens if a woman decides she just doesn't like you?
/r/MensRights27/02/13 11:03 PM
6

Finds a situation wherein a woman is potentially being faulted or otherwise implied to be responsible for something. Reminds everyone that there are also a bunch of men involved in the situation. Retells the story in a way that makes sure everyone knows that a man, sometime, somewhere, is really the one pulling the strings in this scenario. So beautiful, it's a curse. Just a helpless leaf floating wherever the wind takes it. I feel like I see this exact formula every single day.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 11:00 PM
3

Hey, good on you, chief.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 08:40 AM
4

Well, you could not get married. You already seem to be in favor of that mode, and I would suggest it even if you weren't. Here's one thing to think about, see if it describes the situation: You have to do what meets your needs. Doing something that actively works against your needs is going to fuck things up for you in a major way at some juncture. If not getting married is one of your needs, that's a pretty important thing. It is entirely possible for there to be a loving, romantic relationshi…
/r/MensRights25/02/13 08:38 AM
11

I completely disagree, there is no common consensus on "equality." It is a buzzword, an easy talking point. John the Other did a pretty good video about this exact topic a few months ago, and I think that he articulates it better than I likely would. Equality is not a real political goal.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 10:20 PM
10

I think what you're saying is: Most everyone wants "equality," but many of them have different definitions/understandings of "equality"? If this is the case, then a large part of the problem is in the language. It would be fallacious to say that most everyone wants equality, because this is not actually referring to a common thing (common as in a common definition between these sources, not common as in frequent).
/r/MensRights24/02/13 09:57 PM
15

Based on what? The truth is in someone's actions, not their words.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 09:43 PM
3

Yes, I imagine it is. The sunny side is: perhaps this means what you're fearing isn't as bad as you let yourself believe.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 07:51 PM
5

Not particularly concerned. If people eat up what they are spoon-fed, they are a loss anyway, let them be. Many individuals will just be curious about what all the fuss is for, and come to investigate - some will remain willfully ignorant and find and excuse to leave, some won't. Sounds pretty usual to me.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 07:25 PM
13

This is definitely one worth watching, it is a concise and logical breakdown of ideology fundamental to feminism.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 02:10 AM
6

Yeah, it's the mantra of a lot of movements. Describing something as "true equality" doesn't actually make it that. Put your money where your mouth is, and display that this accurately describes you, otherwise you're just blowing hot air.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 01:47 AM
5

Oh, it's you again. Feminists say pretty much the exact same thing about feminism, and many mra's are skeptical of this because what someone says isn't the same as what they do. A lot of people have promised to be a benevolent dictator, but it never seems to work out that way. If I were Emperor of the Universe, everyone would be a badass and have a real great time.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 01:30 AM
7

Yes, yes, all hetero sex is rape, men are eternal oppressors and our sexuality taints whatever it touches. But feminism is not about hate. Remember that. You know how I know it's true? Because a feminist told me. Up is down, all dogs are now blue, and censorship is free speech. I'm pretty sure this is how holy wars start.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 01:07 AM
1

I don't enjoy the idea that part of my taxes go towards paying for someone else's sex life, but it does seem like a much cheaper alternative to welfare babies, so I'm okay with it. I would prefer if the topic didn't involve choosing the least terrible option, but that seems to be what the choice is.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 09:25 PM
1

True story. Evolution doesn't give a shit about the individual. Male black widow spiders haven't evolved to evade death after they make sweet spider love with their soon-to-be executioner, and it's possible that they never will. Evolution doesn't need them after that point. Civilization works the same way. My intent is to repay that same level of shit-giving. Learn to see where the grand machine uses you, and don't let yourself get trapped in it.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 05:42 AM
4

I've often thought of "alphas" as being analogous to stallions. The stallion is the badass of horses, he looks more imposing and impressive than the other horses, he's more aggressive, and he gets to breed. He's also a complete tool - that's "tool" as in "something that gets used a bunch." The stallion gets to be the badass of his fish-pond (little bit of metaphor-mixing here), but he's really part of a bigger ocean that doesn't give a shit about him except for his part in the food chain. In thi…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:20 AM
2

One issue is that focusing on presentation often isn't recognized for the flaws that it contains. That is, when the content gets distorted by the form, when the message gets lost in the ways that you shape the presentation, it can easily go unnoticed. For example, if men's rights advocates decrease or do away with the anti-feminist tone in their position/arguments in order to make the topic of men's rights more approachable to people who are unfamiliar with the topic, this leads to a failure to …
/r/MensRights19/02/13 11:09 PM
14

Criticism is scary. Wouldn't it just be so much easier if we didn't get any of it?
/r/MensRights19/02/13 07:19 PM
17

For starters, I would find it difficult to believe that anyone agrees with most everything posted on r/mr, simply because of how many clashing opinions there are. I am a men's rights enthusiast, but I still disagree with a significant of the people I see commenting here - either because they exhibit much of the same bullshit social programming that irritates me about feminism (example: clinging to political correctness), or because some people care more about the approachableness of a message ra…
/r/MensRights17/02/13 01:57 AM
7

Urban Dictionary is useless, and inhabited by a mob of bigots. It is a losing battle, leave it be.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:37 AM
0

Yeah, insisting that my comment was angry and needs to relax doesn't actually make it true. This is a classic shut-down technique - one employed regularly by feminists and other bullies. You are a coward.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 12:15 AM
8

Bullshit. People who will be driven away by such a discussion are people who will be driven away. They will find some excuse to disregard the topic, it doesn't matter what it is. The topic of anti-feminism is politically incorrect and uncomfortable for many people - they want an excuse to disregard it, and most of them will find one easily. You are censoring yourself, and for someone else's benefit, certainly not your own.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 12:13 AM
10

I disagree, there are many similarities between feminism and a religion - the blind defense of ideological thinking, for example - and as anti-feminism is very connected to the topic of men's rights, such a discussion would hardly be off-topic.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 11:27 PM
2

Good interview that talks about some of the bullshit social programming we're shaped by. Highly recommend it.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 07:11 PM
10

One clear indicator of an ideologist is that they become outright hostile at anything that could potentially challenge their ideology. Sorry about your shitty friends.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 08:01 AM
18

The debate of "we should censor ourselves so people will like us more" is bullshit for several reasons. Here are a few of those reasons. Feminists and associated trolls have demonstrated a number of times that they do not need valid points with which to mock and demean the topic of men's rights. An innocuous or otherwise uncontroversial statement or position can be sensationalized and dramatized to infinity, or a completely new hot scoop of mra's behaving badly can be fabricated out of nothing. …
/r/MensRights12/02/13 04:20 AM
1

Yeah, so this is pretty much a cult.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 12:12 AM
17

Right you are, friend. If this flavor of courtesy is a good/virtuous thing, then why are only women deserving of it? Should not men be treated with the same kindness? In addition, if women truly are equals to men in every significant way (as we are told, loudly and often), then why do they need special treatment?
/r/MensRights09/02/13 05:16 AM
5

Yeah. Things like this are how I know that feminists and associated trolls still don't understand the MRM (and other men's rights-centric topics). Men's rights enthusiasts are a symptom of pain felt by men - and a significant part of that pain comes from the regular belittlement of men by women and society as a whole. Symptoms can't be squashed, they have to be healed at the source - men's rights enthusiasts aren't going to go away unless men stop having pain derived from being male. tl;dr: you'…
/r/MensRights09/02/13 04:28 AM
11

Well, Feminism is not a clear or unchanging thing. So, no.
/r/MensRights09/02/13 03:45 AM
1

I do love the information age, but I had been hoping that it wouldn't lead to greater and grander ways for people judge and rate one another.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 11:35 PM
6

I often see people defend feminism by listing some definition. This seems completely backwards to me - something's alleged definition doesn't in any way influence what it is, if I call a cactus a rose that doesn't stop it from being prickly. In a context like this, a definition's only purpose is persuasion. If you want to learn about a religion, don't ask a believer.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 09:19 AM
3

There are two kinds of people who treat women like queens: the king, and then everyone else. One of these two groups gets treated as autonomous humans with wants and needs of their own, the other group gets treated like servants, whose only value is their utility. You are not the king in this scenario.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 02:50 AM
1

I wish you the best of luck, dong_wizard, but I suspect that this is far from the best place for you to search.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 10:44 PM
4

When the actions of feminists stop portraying them as people who want women to have special privileges for being women, then yes. Until then, no. The oft-quoted "definitions" of feminism contrast strongly with the actions of feminists.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 08:24 AM
2

Yeah? I heard that MRA's eat kittens and want to take us back to the Before Time when all men were kings and all women were serfs. Better burn them just to be safe. tl;dr = How about a nice tasty plate of fear mongering? Eat it up yum.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 05:54 AM
1

I rarely see hate here. Frustration, certainly, and in great abundance, but not hate.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 06:27 PM
2

Yeah, that seems like a real possibility. But it's not worth not trying, I would think.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 06:25 PM
38

Talking to your dad about all this seems like a good place to start. If you're not sure what to say or where to start, you could forward this thread to him.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:14 AM
122

Some significant part of her writing argues that the foundation for problems regarding men is that men don't empathize/feel empathy. I suspect that the astounding irony of this is lost on her, as she certainly displays a complete void of empathy towards men! Projection truly is a nasty bitch.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 03:10 AM
6

You are slightly more entertaining than the garden variety troll, but not by much. You do not seem genuine, but if you are, you seem childish and very egotistical. Please do not claim to represent people - any person that is not yourself.
/r/MensRights02/02/13 05:33 AM
4

but yes, i think sending a positive message that increases the likelihood of ending discrimination, improving human rights and bringing people together to solve problems is worth censorship. "Hey, come on guys, we're only sacrificing a little bit of liberty in the name of virtue! This is all for the greater good!" -Said by every politician ever who proposed tyrannical legal changes. Censorship is violence - it's bullshit used by people who can't win using reason. Also you sound like a tool. Usin…
/r/MensRights02/02/13 05:30 AM
21

Ask her if homeless men are capable of being sexist, under this definition. If the answer is yes, then it contradicts the chosen definition (homeless men have neither influence nor power) - if the answer is no, then it admits that there are more factors involved than a person's sex. Either way I think that the "sexism requires prejudice + power" definition is bullshit - it's an attempt to rationalize why a person/group need not be accountable for the things they say/do. In this case, it's a woma…
/r/MensRights01/02/13 07:09 AM
121

Yeah, it's this again. If someone is trying to tell you what "a real [X]" is, they are trying to sell you something. Don't buy it.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 08:04 PM
22

Exactly. "Should" has nothing to do with reality - reality doesn't give a fuck about what you think "should" happen.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 06:46 PM
1

I agree that marriage is a poor idea in this era - it's all-around outdated and antiquated, and it's a raw deal for men - but this isn't a good example of that.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 09:17 AM
5

Sadly, feminists trying to colonize the success and sympathy of egalitarian acts is nothing new. It enables feminism to claim a very long list of accomplishments and push all kinds of propaganda. It's also a criticism-shield - you don't want to criticize egalitarianism, do you? Of course not.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 09:16 AM
1

This is of such poor quality that it is not even worthy of contempt, much less criticism. It is bad<sup>2.</sup>
/r/MensRights23/01/13 03:39 AM
0

Bullshit. Terms like "man up" are used to state that the target isn't these things, and that they are a failure because of it. It's social blackmail - either you be a "good man" and be every kind of impeccable human shield we want you to be, or we'll make sure everyone knows what kind of scumbag coward you really are. The word "dick" as a pejorative is incredibly common - and somehow that makes it better? That makes it worse! It's so ingrained, so internalized that we just associate it automatic…
/r/MensRights22/01/13 08:18 AM
1

Come on, you can do better than "no real man."
/r/MensRights21/01/13 03:27 AM
8

Fuck, that's bloodthirsty.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 07:56 PM
3

Could you elaborate? Which part are you referring to?
/r/MensRights09/01/13 12:25 AM
4

It seems as though you're hunting for an aggressive confrontation. I'm not interested. My words were: "the topics of obligation and blame are infantile bullshit," and I'm going to stick with that.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 11:21 PM
12

I love it when fear-mongers are upfront about what they're trying to do.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 07:49 PM
10

People have needs. The men referenced in the article, for example, have a need for companionship and warmth, a need that is going unmet. I am not saying here that someone has an obligation to give this to them, because the topics of obligation and blame are infantile bullshit. When someone has a need that is going unmet, they suffer, and they try out new ways to have that need get met. In this case, one simple and excellent way for these people to find what they need is for their cries for help …
/r/MensRights08/01/13 06:23 PM
24

Good post. The contempt and antipathy on display here is what this whole damn topic comes down to. Suicidal men, angry men, violent men, men who decide to pull out of society entirely, these are symptoms. These are things that are not going to end until something changes with what is causing them, and the cause is shit exactly like this. The respect that we as a culture had for men is gone. Whether it was actually there to begin with is something I can only speculate on, but what is certain is t…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 08:34 AM
7

/r/MensRights rarely does "general consensus." I don't intend that as a criticism - I think it's great. I usually enjoy Paul Elam. I enjoy that he writes with enthusiasm and doesn't bow down to political correctness, and I enjoy that he's lived through more than a few years of this topic.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 08:13 AM
1

Oh, it's far from the only thing being taught, certainly. I am talking about the feminist indoctrination of "women have always been oppressed by men, and men have always been oppressors." Hearing that as an adult is one thing (and can still have quite an effect), but hearing that throughout a person's most significant development years is guaranteed to seed some torment and self-hate.
/r/MensRights06/01/13 06:58 PM
44

I have witnessed feminist's version of teaching boys respect, way more than I would have wanted to. Those poor sons of bitches are the most underdeveloped, self-loathing and pained individuals I've seen in a long while - and it doesn't even work! They don't grow up respecting women (but they grow up loathing themselves), they tip-toe around like good little boys, being seen and not heard, except for when they're trying to show off by lamenting the horribleness of their sex. And then eventually t…
/r/MensRights05/01/13 09:12 PM
9

I'm sure that Bowser will just stop kidnapping if someone tells him to. Or maybe kidnappers are going to kidnap regardless of what discussion we have.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 06:11 AM
39

Enabling a spoiled child is a great way to keep having a spoiled child.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 11:07 PM
7

That's right! As we all know, we here at /r/MensRights are only capable of focusing on one thing at a time, so whenever we bring up humor it means that we're surrendering all other topics. In other news, you are a clown.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 09:20 AM
1

Good one. Men's respect, generally, is not automatic, it is earned. More than that, it is overt that this is the case, there is not a sugary-sweet facade of respect, if a man doesn't respect you, you'll know. There are positive and negative aspects to this, but on the whole I think it's positive. With men, I rarely have to worry that they are just treating me a certain way because of ulterior motives, or because they're just being polite, or because they don't want to seem like a villain. With m…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:34 PM
4

Okay, so she begins with ruminating over the interconnectedness of living beings in an ecosystem, and then goes on about how men and women are completely different? What? There are an awful lot of differences between the genders, I agree, but if the context is something as scaled up as an entire ecosystem/biosystem/whatever, then those differences are largely irrelevant - men and women are a unit, we're complementary, we're a pair. If men are historically complete bastards twirling their mustach…
/r/MensRights31/12/12 04:31 PM
66

"Let me tell you about how hardships suffered by men are actually hardships suffered by women."
/r/MensRights29/12/12 07:35 AM
3

You know, I kind of miss it when my life involved shit-tests. -Said by no-one, ever.
/r/MensRights28/12/12 10:55 PM
34

Oh, another "you don't need men's rights, you need more feminism" article. It had been a while since I'd seen one. Not long enough, though.
/r/MensRights28/12/12 05:49 PM
1

Humorous comic, friend!
/r/MensRights25/12/12 05:58 PM
19

Well at least the article didn't focus on what horrible, demonic creatures that men are. Except for all the parts that it did.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 08:37 PM
10

This is a popular narrative. "Feminism has an exclusive claim on egalitarianism - if you are an egalitarian (and you want to be, don't you?), then you are a feminist." This is a cheap and easy way to suppress any criticism. I mean, who would want to criticize the fight for equality? Anyone who would do such a ghastly thing would have to be some kind of satan figure.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 01:08 AM
2

Hey, you nailed it! The field of gender politics is significant, even if it is terribly frustrating, but for me gender politics is not the most significant (or interesting) facet of this specific topic.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 02:11 AM
14

I think that I would enjoy of more female characters were well written, and had much more depth beyond their gender. If "FEMALE" is one of the most significant and interesting traits of a fictional character, if "FEMALE" is used as a basis for why a character is sympathetic or is supposed to tug on our heartstrings, then that character bores me. As far as gender politics goes, I don't particularly give a shit. But I do care about quality writing.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 09:52 PM
3

Empathizing is not the same as endorsing. I have no interest in participating in physical violence (or any other kind of violence), but I understand why people do it.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 01:16 AM
11

Something something his body his choice.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 08:51 PM
1

I would recommend avoiding the comments section, unless you are looking for your daily dose of repetitive bile.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 09:19 PM
10

I might be able to take this article seriously if it didn't attempt to keep manhood and masculinity and "a real man" in to a narrow area of what is permitted. That is to say, no, I don't want to be the kind of man who gets married and works for the system and mans up and teaches his sons to be good little drones like me. I am a man, but I'm not that kind of man. This article would try to frame this as a failure on someone's part that I am this way. Bullshit.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:53 PM
2

Yeah, that isn't actually evidence. I get that a lot of people don't like him, I'm not that familiar with his actual activities, but that doesn't magically turn this in to valid evidence. This is smearing.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 01:15 AM
2

Ok. So what? What does "problematic" even mean in this context? Everything is offensive to someone. People like to get offended. This is not new.
/r/MensRights16/12/12 10:01 PM
7

I think that the specific wording of the quote is more problematic than the stance itself. That is to say, it is worded in a way which makes it very easy for people to get offended at. It makes for an easy soundbite. What I think he is saying is that one part of modern dating is the sexual dynamic of put-on hesitance, "playing hard to get." Men have been familiar with this dynamic for some time, accepting it as at least somewhat usual. This is what he is referring to. But, the recent history of …
/r/MensRights16/12/12 09:27 PM
1

I'm not familiar with the entire context (some, though) of this, but I do think that criticism of both the MRM and this subreddit specifically is a positive thing. As more people subscribe/read this subreddit, more and more of the often-repeated and often-responded rhetoric will pop up (for example, concern trolls and "feminism and men's rights are really just on the same side") - some of it accidentally (ignorance) and some of it deliberately. I think that calling this out when it happens is fo…
/r/MensRights16/12/12 02:05 AM
3

There are some valid points in what he's saying, but also a lot of other noise. It's all mixed together, and adding that to the context of what Rush Limbaugh often talks about, it's tempting to reject the entire piece simply because I don't like him even a little. It is tempting, but it would be lazy and dishonest, and also more black-and-white than I prefer to be. So here's where I think he made some good points: People (men and women both) have been being told over and over about what kind of …
/r/MensRights16/12/12 12:40 AM
5

I completely agree - and the article make a point exactly about this, that forgiveness in such a context is an act of enabling. Or, an alternative way to put it: If you don't stand up for yourself, people will walk all over you.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 07:36 PM
7

Good article. I believe that forgiveness is a positive & compassionate thing, but I do not hold such a belief about "fresh starts." The past happened - pretending to ignore it or waving a magic wand and declaring that it doesn't matter is not only dishonest (because people do remember what happened in the past, even if they claim to be over it, and many of the feelings continue to exist beneath the surface) but also immature. Forgive, but don't forget.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 07:04 PM
7

I agree. Every time I see someone blame a vote-brigate, my reaction is that they're seeing downvotes and want to assume that it's all about hatred, and not about criticism.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 04:07 AM
2

It seems like the idea of "equality" is awfully central to this discussion/topic, and you really just can't be bothered to describe what you mean by it? Bullshit. This is a convenient way to not have to defend your opinions from criticism. You reek of dishonesty.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 08:27 PM
5

Well-written blog article. Good on you, oneiorosgrip. I think it captured pretty well the feeling of why the MRM is largely based in anti-feminism - there's an awful lot of historical baggage, and there continues to be even more.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 08:04 AM
2

Indeed! There are more than a few passages from the article that could be regendered and sound exactly like valid and common criticisms of feminism. Projection.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 11:04 PM
3

I feel you, brotherman pigman. There are a couple of my favorite writers and podcasters that come to mind, I love their work but sometimes when I hear them apart from their stuff they just spout the same bullshit programming I've heard a thousand times before. Hard not to be disappointed. Chris Cornell, I love his voice and his work. "You Know My Name" blows me away.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 05:40 AM
0

MRAs have to be squeaky clean and stuff like this doesn't help. What? No! Are you really that afraid to challenge status quo? Be objectionable! Offend people! Disagree with people! Political correctness is for drones. Let people think the worst, that's on them. I don't need to cater to someone else's bullshit, and neither do you.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 05:37 AM
12

The mustached alien was a seasonal thing for Movember and not the logo/symbol for the subreddit. The month of November has come to an end, and so the picture has returned to its previous form.
/r/MensRights02/12/12 01:21 AM
2

It's a good article, I think. More than anything it defies the notion of "sacred" women, that women have some inherent moral superiority or pureness that those awful pelt-wearing men just can't understand. It doesn't go on to say that men are the ones with moral excellence, it doesn't try to imply that men really are the angels here and are being misrepresented, no, it's not about that. Shittiness and virtue have nothing to do with gender - trying to insist that one gender has a monopoly (or eve…
/r/MensRights30/11/12 07:44 PM
4

Also known as: Let's use political topics as an excuse to charge people more and be congratulated for it. No, really, I'm impressed. Whoever pitched this idea is probably getting all manner of high-fives from their company. It has the whole package, mo' money, mo' praise. I respect how devious it is. Now if they could find a way to go about this without being shitty and dishonest, that would be even better. I mean, the logic behind the story of this is dismal, it really is. Charging men more to …
/r/MensRights29/11/12 01:38 AM
2

I often get the feeling that many men (regardless of race) feel as though they are not appreciated. If every day really is some kind of male appreciate day, we're doing a very bad job of it.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 05:53 AM
2

I agree. I think that the best way to explain why I agree is by responding to one of the comments from the linked post: Whomever can't handle a little snark probably can't handle actual problems. Feminism has more important concerns than convincing a few people with a few too many first world problems that women deserve human rights. If snark invalidates the concept of human rights for women to you, even just a little, you were never that open-minded about feminism in the first place, and thus n…
/r/MensRights27/11/12 09:48 PM
4

Shitstorm is already in progress, and has been for some time. Shitstorm is not new.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 09:00 PM
106

I for one think that it is incredibly unfair that women don't have the same opportunities to get prostate cancer that men do. Patriarchy.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 03:19 AM
16

You have titled yourself a feminist. You have titled yourself after an ideology with foundations in hatred and bigotry. Do not be surprised if people associate you with the things you have named yourself for.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 06:02 PM
0

I agree. I think that one of the major reasons that feminists attempt to claim that someone who supports equality of the sexes is also a feminist (regardless of whether or not that individual agrees with the title) is that this allows feminism to colonize and claim. I've often heard feminists heap praises upon the magnificent things that feminists of the past have done, but I am skeptical about how many of those people actually were feminists, or if they were just claimed to be feminists so that…
/r/MensRights25/11/12 05:56 PM
3

I think that this is a difficulty of language. That is to say, it is difficult to be both specific/clear and concise. Concision is often necessary for communication, because if an argument (or topic or discussion) is too lengthy, the listener or reader will tune out or get lost somewhere along the way. This is why humans tend to phrase things as if they were broad generalizations. I don't actually disrespect all feminists and all feminisms, but my experiences have given me a disrespect for enoug…
/r/MensRights25/11/12 01:10 AM
3

I disagree. Many times I have seen people discussing the topic of gender politics in other subreddits, followed by someone pointing them in the direction of r/MensRights. This is a positive thing. There are going to be many cries of "omfg misogynists," but there will be and has been many of the opposite. Also, I'm really not troubled by the kind of people who would insist that /r/MensRights is a hate site just because it was referred to as such by a website. The kind of people who will take this…
/r/MensRights24/11/12 10:26 PM
5

I dream for a day when holy goddess mommies stop acting like children.
/r/MensRights24/11/12 06:03 PM
3

Sometimes, I feel the same way about feminists that I do about police officers. I want to believe that they have done great things, and strive to do great things. I want to believe that, and that is the image often being put forth. But I also see an awful lot of dishonesty coming from those people, I see them exploiting their position and growing egotistical because of the power that position grants them. I see that they go far out of their way to protect their own, even when they are protecting…
/r/MensRights24/11/12 04:44 AM
2

It sounds to me like the qualifiers you're offering up as "bad" - whether it be nonconsent, deception, coercion, or something else along those lines - have nothing to do with porn, just that porn is one possible setting for those to exist in.
/r/MensRights24/11/12 04:32 AM
57

So much for the claim that men aren't "slut-shamed."
/r/MensRights24/11/12 04:28 AM
6

Daraghblor, what you have described is an ant drone. Live for the glory of the hive and queen. All drones are interchangeable - as long as there is someone there to do the work, who really gives a fuck what else they are. Certainly not the queen. This is a very miserable creature you describe.
/r/MensRights24/11/12 01:42 AM
2

Scumbag stiffy2005: Complains about feminists Repeats the same "men are dogs" stereotype anyway
/r/MensRights22/11/12 02:40 AM
0

Fun Fact: Gentlemen aren't described in reference to women, they're described in reference to other men. If you are a better man than most, act like an upstanding citizen, participate in government, dress nice, treat everyone with respect, and work hard through adversity, you are a gentleman. I don't know what everyone else here thinks the word means, but that's what I've always been my operational definition. So go be gentlemanly. You're a god-damned adult and it should be expected of you to be…
/r/MensRights20/11/12 06:09 PM
4

When I was younger, I was rather attached to the idea of being a Gentleman. There's something about this romantic ideal that is appealing, it seems noble and respectable and upright and so on. But romantic ideals are fantasy, they're fiction. The question to ask yourself is: Why? Why be a gentleman? Is it because you think it is the "right" thing to do, or even some other intangible notion like because it is the "classy" thing to do. If you're a gentleman out of some notion of "duty" or anything…
/r/MensRights20/11/12 07:54 AM
1

I see what you might be getting at. When someone makes a demand of you, whether you submit or rebel you are still just reacting (and these are some very predictable reactions, at that) to them and not making "your own" decision.
/r/MensRights18/11/12 05:25 PM
1

Some parts of feminism are thriving and continuing to preach their "Truth", some parts are dying as they expose their own bullshit and agenda. All in all, I think that feminism is more on its way out than on its way in.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 10:43 PM
-1

It's hard to tell if "Santa" is an overbearing girlfriend or an overbearing mother. I'm going to hold out for the hope that "Santa" is some guy's mom that cares most about her son staying with his girlfriend than the other stuff. That would be the least fucked-up scenario I would associate with this kind of letter. (spoiler: The actual context is way more fucked up than that.)
/r/MensRights14/11/12 03:58 AM
12

This is the same kind of privilege as "getting" to work a job to support yourself and "getting" to fight and kill (or die) people in someone else's name. Yeah, I'm really fucking loving all of this fabulous male privilege.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 03:54 AM
3

Definitely. I've always been dissatisfied with "the rules" of social interaction and that whole topic, and the origin of this for me was not gender politics, but I think gender politics is just a facet of the whole. There are quite a few things broken with the systems of our current culture, not the least of which is all the noise surrounding interactions between men and women. Building your own way is frustrating because by its own nature it is undefined and requires making mistakes. Going with…
/r/MensRights12/11/12 06:10 AM
3

The image seems like a very odd choice to pair with the text - I'm pretty sure that's from an episode of Community, and the topic wasn't at all about this or even anything tangentially related.
/r/MensRights10/11/12 04:56 AM
2

I object to the notion of "a true MRA" being not a misogynist as much as I object to the opposite. This "a true [X]" bullshit is shallow thinking and has much in common with numerous feminist fallacies. It is policing of language, and it is manipulative. I'm not angry, I think that your ideas are bad, and I write with enthusiasm. The problem with your position is that you're assuming that you'll get a rational argument from the kind of people who buy in to this "omfg you are a misogynist you hat…
/r/MensRights09/11/12 06:52 PM
14

I completely disagree. Not just because of the "if you're a true mra" thing, which is bullshit and a poor use of language, but because this very clearly leaves the door open for the other person to derail and take the conversation wherever the hell they want to. If this other individual is going to regurgitate the same usual tripe and scream misogynist at you, chances are pretty good that they aren't going to hold a rational argument with you and respond to the points you make, only the points y…
/r/MensRights09/11/12 04:44 PM
8

Most definitely. I often get the impression when I hear/see people talk about the topic that they are using the repetition of this idea (that the gaming community is largely hostile to women) as evidence that it is true. Very much "everyone knows that [x]" type of logic.
/r/MensRights06/11/12 07:36 PM
18

Or just cook your own food. Bad analogy is bad.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 10:31 PM
1

Well at least the article doesn't reek of agenda and victim-culture. Except for all the parts that it does.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 05:26 PM
2

I will freely admit that my knowledge on the origins of feminism is limited. What I wrote is what my impression of the topic is, and given the subject matter it is not only possible but likely that this impression is influenced by the (hey it's this word again!) narratives of feminism. Or someone's.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 01:56 AM
0

I would like to make what I think is a significant distinction: Feminism during its early years, and Feminism as it currently is. These are two very different things. Feminism during its early years existed around a theory: striving towards women having legal equality with men. Whether or not it lived up to this theory is a different topic entirely, whether or not this was Feminism in practice. This was the theory. Feminism as it currently is exists around narratives. For this, let's define a Na…
/r/MensRights02/11/12 01:02 AM
2

Jerry is hilarious. But I don't think that I would describe him as "abused." Mocked, certainly, and I think that if it were happening to a female character there would be people who wanted to describe that as abused (which I would disagree with for the same reasons as this scenario), but this is far from uncommon. I think that it most/many social circles there is a guy who is routinely poked fun of by the rest. There are varying degrees of this some of which could border on the territory of mali…
/r/MensRights29/10/12 09:47 PM
5

I think that one rather significant problem with trying to liken Men's Rights to Feminism is that Men are not Women. That is to say, Feminism as an ideology/movement/whatever is based on feminine traits, and MRA's tend to be people more possessed by masculine traits. For example: The idea of Men Going Their Own Way is, to me, incompatible with unionizing and creating a consistent consensus on political topics. For me, MGTOW is about saying: "The system I'm living is is broken. Fuck it. I'm build…
/r/MensRights25/10/12 11:07 PM
3

If the title of this thread were accurate, I'd be filled with disappointment - SAM is great, I lived in Seattle for years. But the title isn't accurate. This is going to be a seasonal exhibit, and then it will be gone. SAM does this. Also, I did not see the quote in the title appear in the article. Where is it actually from?
/r/MensRights25/10/12 09:25 PM
2

If men have to take the fall for the negative things done by men throughout human history, that means we get to take credit for all the awesome things too, right? Right?
/r/MensRights25/10/12 06:35 AM
1

Everyone should be able to do anything they want so long as it doesn't harm someone else. Who gets to decide what constitutes "harm"? One argument heard from religious fundamentalists is that gay marriage harms marriage. If a feminist were to claim that looking at an attractive woman is harming because it objectifies them, is this going to become illegal/something we "shouldn't" do? The idea of "harm" is completely subjective. Basing a definition of equality off of harm leads to something exactl…
/r/MensRights23/10/12 04:23 AM
1

I want this to be a parody, this is so ridiculous and hateful that I want it to be a parody. For some time now it has been getting difficult for me to tell the difference between fictional feminists and nonfictional ones, with how similar they sound. The implications of this make me more than a little bit disappointed in our species.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 04:57 AM
6

I support nonviolence for anyone who wishes to have that be the shape of their life. Violence is not more or less acceptable (or wrong) depending on which gender is harmed by it. To say that violence against women is somehow "more wrong" than violence against men is a bigoted view which relies on violence against men being at the very least somewhat okay. Additionally, the argument that violence against women is different than violence against men based on the general physical differences betwee…
/r/MensRights20/10/12 06:00 AM
2

Starting off by claiming that you know a whole bunch about the topic of Men's Rights is a great way for me to pay attention the parts of the article which expose this claim as bullshit. The meme of "MRA's should just lay down their struggles and fight with feminism" has been repeated so many times and been answered so many times that it has lost meaning - something you might be familiar with if you were the expert you claimed to be.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 08:29 PM
15

No, no, the patriarchy hurts men too, which is why all men should work with feminism! But it's also spectacularly good for men, which is why all men fight to keep it alive! disclaimer: this is sarcasm and now it's depressing.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 05:45 PM
76

Well isn't this awkward - the competition between wanting to be politically-correct and inclusive about trans people and politically-correct and inclusive about female people. If one were to take the article at its word and interpret it as being without bias, then it would be pretty easy to "pick a side" as it were in this particular conflict. But, every single chance the article gets, it tries to portray the individual in question as being creepy and predatory. I really don't know how much of t…
/r/MensRights08/10/12 11:04 PM
6

I went through my years of this (and it seems likely that I will again), and I know that what I did not need at the time was for someone to tell me that I'm wrong or that I should focus on how my behavior affected others, or that it was somehow my fault. "Suck it up/Man up." The anger is there. Be with it. It's unpleasant to be with, and if you never get past it then it will be unpleasant then too, but it's all a part of it. Anger is uncomfortable for other people too, and they'll try to get you…
/r/MensRights07/10/12 11:54 PM
46

The cynicism that comes from negative experience is itself not a positive thing, but it is part of a positive thing. Live with it, take the positive from it (learn not to let yourself be taken advantage of), and hopefully eventually move on from it. This is not a short process, but it is a beneficial one. Or, to put it another way: Fuck it. Fuck the way you are "supposed" to be, fuck expectations, don't indulge people's bullshit, and don't let yourself get melted down by the inevitable backlash …
/r/MensRights07/10/12 11:32 PM
4

There was a recent video by Fidelbogen about Feminism as "perpetual revolution" that I think discusses this exact topic pretty well. The short answer: The idea of "job done" is not compatible with the feminist narrative, it has to keep on moving otherwise it will fall apart.
/r/MensRights07/10/12 04:52 PM
3

Yeah, so this reads like obvious fiction. The entire story is constructed around delivering an Aesop or a moral. This isn't an anecdote (or at least not an honest one), it's too clean and purposeful for that, every detail serves a specific purpose of guiding the story towards a set destination. This is a narrative.
/r/MensRights03/10/12 01:04 AM
4

I think that the only time a man should hit a woman is in a Tae Kwon Do tournament, taking down a female criminal (that is not pregnant) and in self defense. And: I do not believe in special rights for either gender. Do you also believe that the only time a woman should be able to hit a man (or a man hit a man or a woman hit a woman) is in these same circumstances, and no other circumstances?
/r/MensRights02/10/12 01:01 AM
14

I really don't get this writing "style" of not using capitalization. It's a language tool, and a rather useful one at that. But, in regards to the actual writing, it seems like yet more mental gymnastics to create a viewpoint where women are never at fault and men are always.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 07:05 PM
3

I agree, language is very much being used as a tool of manipulation. For clarification, I wasn't disagreeing that the attempted redefinition is happening, I disagree with the validity of the "new and improved" version.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 10:32 PM
5

Most of the time you're just arguing over semantics and wasting your time. This is an odd statement to me. Not odd in that it is unusual, I see it frequently, but it seems bizarre and backwards. Of course semantics are important. Semantics are regarding what a word means, semantics are what a person is trying to get across with their message. If I say someone is acting like a bitch and they infer from that that I hate women, but I really just mean that this specific person is acting like a drama…
/r/MensRights27/09/12 08:38 PM
2

Fear-mongering luddites are even more obnoxious to me than "morally superior" feminists, and the combination of the two makes me disappointed in our species, though it does not surprise me in the least.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 06:53 PM
2

I used to be a Dovakiin like you. I still am, but I used to be, too.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 04:58 PM
2

Okay, you're making an argument based on taking something to its extreme. This is a common and terrible method of arguing. And, risk-aversion is how to do the same thing that's already been done. That is literally what that is. Doing new things, by definition, is risk-taking.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 04:58 PM
8

I think that if you aren't concerned about people reciprocating your good will & effort, then they'll recognize you as a doormat and treat you like one.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 01:09 AM
9

Although I strongly agree that the persistent notion of a "real man" does far more harm than good, I also have a respect for competition and risk-taking. That's how stuff gets done, and it's how new things are able to come in to existence. I think it's terrible that these two traits are often considered to be a necessary part of masculinity, but I fully support them being voluntary.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 10:36 PM
1

Too true, too true. Everyone should have a zombie plan. It would also be relevant to mention, in regards to comparing zombie-awareness to rape culture, that zombies are fictional. So I agree, it's a great parody.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 05:27 PM
1

Hey, that's cool.
/r/MensRights22/09/12 12:55 AM
3

There was not a reference one way or the other about what manner of "choose" the OP meant. As you say, they choose each other, and one part of the OP's standards of choosing is their political stance in regards to feminism.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:03 AM
9

Good job keeping your cool, JtO. I am very much a man of peace, but that scene of cackling bullies would have been difficult to withstand without wanting to hulk out from frustration and disappointment in one's fellow man.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 01:51 AM
9

I've never understood the thought process behind this, that a rise in successful women is leading toward "the end" of men. This is a common theme I've noticed in the articles about this topic, and often uses this exact kind of language, "the end of men." Why would that end men? In centuries past where women were allegedly getting the opposite kind of deal, that wasn't "the end" of women, was it? Is the implication that if men ever stop being necessary, that they'll simply be done away with? "Oh,…
/r/MensRights07/09/12 07:36 PM
13

Unfortunately, most all of the article is consumed by the Christian slant it is written with, and not many actual points are made. Though, I would agree with the idea that feminism has become She Who Fights Monsters, and now mirror the same thing they were originally fighting against.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 12:54 AM
3

I don't think I have nearly enough booze to drink to this. Or livers. I would need additional livers to survive such a drinking game.
/r/MensRights04/09/12 07:39 PM
6

people should be nice to each other regardless, not with expectations. if everyone learned how to act right this wouldn't be an issue. "Act right"? Whose version of "right"?
/r/MensRights04/09/12 07:34 PM
1

Why couldn't you be one of the creative trolls? At least when they mix things up a bit it's interesting, but you just repeat the same garble of inane words over and over. Even spam-bots change things around.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 07:06 PM
1

Adding the smiley emoticon doesn't actually make you less of an asshole. You sound like a thirteen year old who is cobbling together as many swear words as they can in an effort to sound cool.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 06:55 PM
15

This is a pretty egregious use of the word "literally."
/r/MensRights31/08/12 06:36 PM
3

Hey, that's cool. I'm a man who gardens - plants are great. I'm not the least bit interested in being part of a club related to the topic, but it's cool that it is a thing.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 04:48 AM
2

Seems like pretty much all of those things have to do with the topic of public/social perception of the individual. I have a great method of dealing with that kind of thing: I don't give a shit, and do what I would have done regardless of social bullshit. Women have this option available to them as well.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 04:44 AM
6

Pretty much all of the comments on this specific thread have been regarding the speaker Ann Coulter, and not the topic she was speaking of. I am unfamiliar with this particular individual and so have nothing to add to that point, but the topic of women and Daddy/Hubby government is one that I've seen numerous times before, and parts of it do make sense to me.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 04:42 AM
1

I'm not terribly concerned about not killing if my life in jeopardy I can appreciate that. That said, I am concerned about that for me. I respect a person defending themselves, but I think it could be entirely too easy to see killing as "the only way" or "I had no choice," which is bullshit.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 08:57 PM
2

I agree. Having an adequate means of non-lethal self-defense is incredibly important if one of your goals is to avoid killing people. Violence is a very present part of life, even for people who aim to practice non-violence. If you get in to a fight, it doesn't necessarily have to result in a death or even serious injury. But if all you have is a knife or a gun, blood is going to be spilled.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 08:10 PM
1

I appreciate that you own up to the existence of shitty feminists, witnessing the denial of the topic can be very frustrating, and I think I'd agree with the way you go about it, call em tools and move on. When people who call themselves the same thing you call yourself are acting shitty, sometimes it's easier to call them liars or pretenders. Isn't accurate as a maxim, but it's easier.
/r/MensRights25/08/12 07:55 PM
1

This actually demonstrates pretty well one of the points I would like to make about the topic: Giving something (a person, an action, a group, whatever) a name doesn't make that something the same as the rest of the things that name is placed upon. But, in the context of feminists deciding who is and is not a feminist, it is frequently treated as if it does make them the same. An earlier comment on this topic: Why? Because it allows these feminists to claim credit for things that had nothing to …
/r/MensRights25/08/12 07:24 PM
2

Well written, friend.
/r/MensRights25/08/12 05:13 PM
0

Do you ever worry that your trolls and parodies are becoming stale? Some creativity would just make everything so much better.
/r/MensRights25/08/12 09:16 AM
3

I think there certainly could be some examples of that among this subreddit - many (if not most) men have been white-knights at some point or another (or several points) in their life, and that can be a difficult thing to shed. Though, also, there can be a practical benefit from hearing topics of men's rights being spoken by women, so some of the positive reaction to positive female posters in /r/mensrights are responses to that. Although it is often easier to speak in generalities (and I'm incl…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 03:41 AM
1

I honestly don't know if this is satire or not. I really, really want it to be, but I have sadly seen this sort of text written seriously enough times before to be skeptical about the topic. It's depressing how often this exact uncertainty happens, these days. I quite suspect it isn't satire. =(
/r/MensRights22/08/12 12:46 AM
1

I quite like mine tall, black, and strong.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 04:12 AM
3

I like it when people make statements containing assumptions they couldn't possibly have context or evidence for. -Said by no one, ever.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 05:20 AM
2

I remember your site - the stories posted were a significant part of how I became introduced to the topic of men's rights some years ago. You may be right, that this provided a convenient icon for "nice guys" that many people found objectionable because not denying it would be unpleasant for them. For many people, it is rather uncomfortable to think that you might have hurt them quite a bit. Easier to just claim that someone else is the cause, and that their suffering is their own doing. I remem…
/r/MensRights13/08/12 03:42 AM
5

A good read, I agree. The woman that is quoted throughout (Penny Young Nance) is a great example of why many men are no longer finding it worth it to "man up" and keep going through the typical job/dating/marriage/divorce treadmill. I wouldn't want to get involved with a harpy like that even if there were no cost, and she thinks I should do it and also structure my entire life around a job I don't like for people who annoy me so I can barely be tolerated by such a woman? What? What the actual fu…
/r/MensRights12/08/12 10:34 PM
7

Pointing out to someone that you feel they don't respect or trust you is a pretty good step towards fixing it, I think. And even if you aren't telling this to that specific person, identifying the problem (example: much stress in the relationship comes from that you feel your partner doesn't respect you) is also helpful. So, I disagree, there is use.
/r/MensRights12/08/12 08:08 PM
4

Respect and trust aren't things that you should automatically have, or should be provided with by laws. They're things you have to earn I agree. And disrespect and distrust, similarly, should be earned and not the default.
/r/MensRights12/08/12 08:00 PM
1

Only if you think fraud is okay and don't care about the victim's suffering. "If you're against feminism it only means you're against women having rights." This is the exact same kind of bullshit.
/r/MensRights12/08/12 07:59 PM
15

You're conflating the "nice guys" label with a generally nice guy. Yes, that is the point I was trying to make, that there is both the "nice guy" label (occasionally with quote marks included) and a guy who is nice. Why are these two different things? The "nice guy" label has a slew of negative connotations, and this greatly affects the perception of describing someone as a nice guy (sans quote marks). It could have been (and maybe or maybe not used to be) that describing someone as a nice guy w…
/r/MensRights12/08/12 06:49 AM
16

It's a pleasant fantasy to hope that it might not happen. I am puzzled by the transformation of how "nice guys" are typically interpreted/viewed in recent times. Am I incorrect in thinking that even in this recent decade there used to be appreciation (if not necessarily respect) for nice guys? Now it seems that any time I see the phrase ("nice guy") it is either used sarcastically or insultingly, it always seems to be accompanied by an insinuation that these people are not genuine, or that there…
/r/MensRights12/08/12 03:00 AM
-3

Hey, that's cool. I wonder how it will turn out. If the whole thing doesn't work out and people still find a way to blame men, I'll be disappointed, if not surprised. I hope it doesn't go that way, for everyone's sake.
/r/MensRights12/08/12 02:51 AM
17

Nope. I can't do it. I thought I could watch at least a few minutes of these exquisite examples of humanity before having a rising urge to destroy the world, but I just can't. I wonder if the men involved in these sorts of groups get tired of constantly having to show that they're "one of the good ones" by throwing all the rest ("the bad ones") under the bus. I'd like to think that they do, but I have the sad suspicion that many of them just rationalize it away.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 07:55 AM
1

I'm a little bit disappointed that neither the article nor any of the comments I've seen have mentioned the small irony of using the word "boycott" in this context. It's good that we can have a discussion without needing to make a joke about the banality womyn wyrds, but I had expected to see at least one, is all. In regards to the article, it seems to me that the two men referred to are seeing enemies where none need exist. Specifically: a collaboration of all men is not inherently a sign of a …
/r/MensRights31/07/12 01:39 AM
1

I agree. There is a wide range of action between self-defense and homicide.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 02:55 PM
4

I think the attempted point was that we shouldn't try to force men and women to be the same, that the distinctions between masculinity and femininity are beneficial. That men, generally speaking, have more of an affinity with masculinity, and women with femininity. Each of those combinations fit well. Also, it might be helpful to reiterate that masculinity and femininity both have a wide range of characteristics - two people could be described as masculine without an implication that they are th…
/r/MensRights28/07/12 04:56 PM
58

There is a delightful quote I'd like to pull from this article. Immediately before this quote, the writer of the article is pondering that men might be replying "no" to an offer of sex as a means of regaining some power in the relationship/dynamic. The quote I'm specifically referring to is the last line of the following: From the article: Now that women are prioritizing sexual pleasure, men are changing the rules. They are recognizing that sexual performance can decline with age just like beaut…
/r/MensRights27/07/12 05:56 PM
12

Urban Dictionary is a miserable boneyard home to a legion of misandric and obnoxious vultures. It is a lost cause, don't bother.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 12:57 AM
29

It is uncomfortable to read about these things because of the emotions that they stir up. It is uncomfortable, but it is still relevant. We have a culture of pervasive misandry, casual demeaning of men, a culture wherein it is entirely too easy to pick up the idea that men are morally inferior to women. This is an idea that needs to be challenged. If logical arguments were enough to do so, I would be in full favor of only using those - but they aren't. Another method of challenging to is to brin…
/r/MensRights25/07/12 04:12 PM
3

The point still stands, though. Some clarity might be obtained by taking a close yet simple look at the name. Men going their own way. This is not a single method of restructuring yourself (example: no more romantic relationships with women), it is creating a new path for yourself that works better than what has come before, whatever form that new path may take. The way I interpret MGTOW is this: You have been scarred during your time in this world, and it has finally gotten to the point where i…
/r/MensRights23/07/12 05:13 PM
4

I'd agree about the point of greater potential access, though I'm inclined to disagree that people of the previous century were less interested in or conscious of sex and violence. History is often white-washed, and American history in particular succumbs to this. The previous century had no shortage of wars or hedonists, they just didn't have the high-speed internet to broadcast it.
/r/MensRights22/07/12 09:07 PM
3

Games are about fiction and entertainment. Wish-fulfillment and/or self-insertion are far from uncommon, but they are not absolute.
/r/MensRights22/07/12 06:17 PM
4

There's really nothing new about the human fondness for sex and violence.
/r/MensRights22/07/12 06:13 PM
1

Humans, generally speaking, are deeply uncomfortable with people who have something they don't, or with people who could be considered to have "more" than they do. This is the cause of my least favorite bullshit dichotomy that frequently pops up: Anyone who is worse than me at [x] is a noob, a loser, someone to be derided and insulted, and anyone who is better than me at [x] obviously has too much time on their hands, and should just get a life. The "overcompensating for something" tripe is pret…
/r/MensRights20/07/12 04:49 AM
2

Oh, I see that you've found a way to blame men for your own shortcomings. This is new and original.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 04:37 AM
3

It seems to me like there are several shades of "Feminist", from egalitarian to radical. Is that a valid defense against criticism, do you think? If a person defends by saying, "Look, there are many versions of [x]," does that then negate the negative aspects of it?
/r/MensRights19/07/12 11:34 AM
1

It was okay, not great.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 12:15 AM
3

Yeah, Jedi were full of a lot of bullshit.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 11:15 AM
21

Only a Sith deals in absolutes!
/r/MensRights13/07/12 02:01 AM
8

So, to summarize, men's problems are insignificant because they aren't the problems that only women have. If this was indeed written by a woman that you are in a relationship with: get out of there. It's only a matter of time until your problems are just as meaningless as all other men's problems and the relationship is 100% about her.
/r/MensRights09/07/12 12:28 AM
1

I agree, and I would love for governments to have systems to shield people from non-consenting mutilation in the name of religion (or any other excuse). My comment was more of a pithy response than a full reflection of what there is to be said about the topic.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 08:30 PM
1

Using the same standards for two sets of things is literally the opposite of discrimination.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 01:31 AM
1

Definitely, keep the government away from our junk. And knives and other sharp things. Keep those away, too.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 12:53 AM
1

How would you describe the difference, then, between censorship and deleting a subreddit or other forum because someone finds it "offensive"?
/r/MensRights05/07/12 08:24 PM
1

Wow. Obnoxious and cynical. A truly unfortunate combination.
/r/MensRights02/07/12 10:55 PM
2

I don't have information about the topic of erotic novels for men, but there is definitely no shortage of other erotic literature literature aimed at men. Sites like Literotica, for example, which have enormous archives of a full spectrum of delightful porns.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 10:19 AM
11

It is possible to criticize an action or a person or a behavior without condemning an entire group. "Yeah, but some MRA's do that too," is not a valid defense against criticism.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 01:38 AM
1

Frabjous.
/r/MensRights18/06/12 02:52 AM
2

Wow, that's pretty shitty all around.
/r/MensRights16/06/12 04:33 PM
1

Hey, good on you, chief!
/r/MensRights14/06/12 10:47 PM
2

fuck, that's the worst kind of cancer.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 08:39 PM
4

Because delivery is a part of making a point. it wasn't an unreasonable misinterpretation on my part. You know what they say about making assumptions. All it does is make an ass out of you and mumptions. ...Or something like that.
/r/MensRights10/06/12 10:29 PM
2

This is precisely the point I was attempting to lead towards. I guess it didn't really work out that way. If you want to learn about a religion, don't ask a believer.
/r/MensRights10/06/12 10:15 PM
3

You are mistaken. It also seems that you are trying to dictate my thoughts/words, which is a very dishonest thing to do. As an aside point, I've always thought that trying to label people as feminists despite that they haven't labeled themselves as such (example: "anyone who supports equal rights for men and women is automatically a feminist") is a very similar thing, and is equally inaccurate. This back-and-forth could go on for a while before I'd be able to get to my point, considering how it'…
/r/MensRights10/06/12 10:12 PM
2

No, I did not say any of those things. How can it be irrelevant for something to not fit its purported definition?
/r/MensRights10/06/12 09:54 PM
5

Feminism is supposed to be about gender equality Okay. But what about when it isn't what it is "supposed" to be?
/r/MensRights10/06/12 09:33 PM
4

Disagree. It often seems like the threshold of evidence for being called a "pig" is so very very low.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 11:10 PM
2

For real. All the stuff in Ghost Story about wintery Chicago and Mab just fit together so beautifully at the end, very excited for Cold Days.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 11:07 PM
3

No, I haven't encountered those ones yet. Turn Coat, I think, is my most excellent Dresden File, largely because of all the history with Dresden and Morgan. Manly tears were cried.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 11:03 PM
3

Chivalry, nah, that's getting all abused out of him at this point. It's only a matter of time before he comes up with a solution to the sniper thing, too. Ghost Story was some amazing stuff though, right?
/r/MensRights09/06/12 10:58 PM
3

I suspect that Harry Dresden isn't the best guy to tough-talk against.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 10:00 PM
3

I do not think that "hypocritical" applies, unless the poster was suggesting that Feminism and the MRM are basically similar entities, gender-counterparts to one another. Which, I very much think they are not.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 06:05 PM
2

There may be some misinterpretation happening here, so I will attempt to clear it up. The above poster was positing that Feminism and Misandry are linked, that feminism itself is misandric. Following from this, someone who adheres to a feminist ideology or narrative would influence any child they had with those very same ideologies/narratives (for example, the classic: women are victims, men are oppressors). I think that the above poster was suggesting that this would be an ill effect on childre…
/r/MensRights09/06/12 05:57 PM
3

No, it sounds like he is equating them.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 05:33 PM
13

Size and strength difference matters a whole lot less when tools and weapons are taken in to account. Women do not have any less potential for doing damage than men do.
/r/MensRights07/06/12 11:47 PM
2

Men who push anti-male legislation are also an issue. Having an interest in women who push anti-male legislation is not stating that it is only women - it is a similar yet different topic.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 06:11 PM
3

Definitely. Pedophilia hysteria is a bullshit scare-tactic.
/r/MensRights05/06/12 05:00 PM
2

If someone calls themselves a feminst and doesn't believe in complete equality between genders then they are not a feminist, they are a supremacist. It's as simple as that. Why? Why does your definition of feminism get to trump theirs? It seems likely to me that these so-called not-feminists would make a similar claim, that their definition is correct and the other "feminisms" are the ones in the wrong. What makes your version better or more "right"?
/r/MensRights05/06/12 12:31 PM
0

The first couple paragraphs had me cracking up for a good while afterwards. I thought it was great. Crass? Perhaps, but it also helped to make the point.
/r/MensRights05/06/12 12:28 PM
5

Some of the things you have been taught about women and how to treat them are things that will cause grief for you. If something stands out to you as being rather unfair, try to remember that the people who taught it to you might either A) Have an agenda and are influencing you based on what they want, or B) Don't have complete knowledge on the topic. You are probably going to inherit a lot of your parent's collective baggage, but you don't have to take all of it, and it doesn't mean they are ri…
/r/MensRights31/05/12 11:27 AM
5

The whole thing sounds exceptionally narcissistic.
/r/MensRights30/05/12 10:41 PM
2

For me, this forum represents the belief that men deserve to be treated as human beings and women need to be treated as adults. This highlights a very significant part of the Men's Rights Movement, I think. Rights and Responsibilities, in an ideal society, would be necessarily connected. The power afforded to a person by their rights also bestow upon them responsibilities in kind, and as well, a person who decides to shoulder certain responsibilities is granted certain rights because of it. With…
/r/MensRights30/05/12 03:45 AM
6

I'm not one to advocate in favor of shame - and I don't intend to start now - but self-deception is another thing entirely. The article reads like it is one long attempt by the author to justify that sugar-daddying isn't really akin to prostitution, so it must be okay, right? I don't have an issue with prostitution either, if you just have the cajones to call it that. The double-standard irritates me, too.
/r/MensRights29/05/12 11:18 PM
1

I greatly enjoyed Fidelbogen's video about "Men Can Stop Rape?", and would recommend it (and the points made in the video) to anyone who interacts with the phrase "[you/men] can stop rape."
/r/MensRights29/05/12 07:02 AM
10

Her claim that feminism isn't about man-hating and that feminists don't engage in man-hating might be more convincing if she didn't spend the entire blog post blaming solely men for these issues.
/r/MensRights29/05/12 05:37 AM
9

When someone hits you, you hit back, period. As far as maxims go, this is a pretty shitty one. Also, an easily predictable and exploitable one. You are capable of being a clever and rational creature, don't waste that opportunity.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 08:55 AM
2

The fact that no-one in their right mind would argue for the castration of all men and the euthanising of the handicapped? People have argued for that. Whether or not they were in their right mind is a topic up for debate, but it doesn't change the fact that it has happened. The text is so hateful that it would be easier to disbelieve it, but that notion doesn't have any effect whether or not it is true.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:59 PM
8

The key/lock analogy is a pretty terrible one. Not sure if spoken seriously with it.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 09:31 PM
6

I have often noticed an ongoing struggle to make r/MR more "accessible," which I feel quite conflicted about. It can be difficult to distinguish between people who genuinely believe they are finding r/MR to be an inhospitable and overly-antagonistic environment, and people who are trying to label the direct/confrontational/masculine approach as "wrong," the approach that r/MR largely (both presently and in the past) has taken of treating feminism as a bigoted ideology and not being shy or politi…
/r/MensRights05/05/12 11:00 PM
1

While I read this, a thought happened upon me: Do people often tell women to "get in touch with their masculine sides"? And, if so, how does that go over? Also, the comments were amazing. Recommend.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 12:41 AM
1

This is a good example of a very lazy and uncreative way to argue.
/r/MensRights03/05/12 11:38 PM
2

Most all of the people I have met who explicitly reject the feminist narrative of women-as-victim and men-as-oppressor are people who themselves had/have a good relationship with their father. Your story is an unfortunate one, and, sadly, a common one.
/r/MensRights03/05/12 11:32 PM
9

You must have quite an ego to assume that everyone who disagrees with you is just being irrational/immature.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 07:09 PM
4

Perhaps she is referring to the secret White Man Power Council Meetings we all go to to control the world. (Hint: this doesn't exist.)
/r/MensRights15/04/12 10:39 PM
8

Obvious troll is obvious.
/r/MensRights15/04/12 10:21 PM
1

Because radical feminists are still relevant to the topic of Men's Rights.
/r/MensRights15/04/12 02:25 AM
20

I am curious what would happen if the claim that this "exploits the underprivileged women who act as surrogates" interacted with the mantra: "her body, her choice."
/r/MensRights07/04/12 10:55 PM
1

This is interesting stuff - I need time to process it. Well-written, though.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 02:35 PM
14

Come on, dude. You don't even have the pretense of subtlety, it's embarrassing.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 07:16 PM
1

The format and delivery of the post served to make a point, and I think he did it fairly well. It was a point that requires a closer look from the reader, but that doesn't mean it is needless or confusing.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 01:56 PM
1

TvTropes is pretty cool about recognizing double standards. It is also a black hole that will consume your life.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 06:53 AM
7

Dude, don't get in to it with Cthulhu cultists. It will not end well. Cthulhu fhtagn
/r/MensRights17/12/11 10:10 AM
3

I think that "He who fights monsters" has a lot of truth when it comes to some MRA's, and certainly some of us on r/MR. I feel conflicted about that, I really do. I'm not sure how "political correctness gone mad" fits in to that, but I can see how there could be a connection between those two things. What I do know is that it frustrates and irks me - and I do not think it will do us enough good to outweigh the bad.
/r/MensRights10/12/11 08:13 AM
7

Yeah. I've seen a few comments on r/MR along these same lines, and each time I've started trying to tell myself it wasn't the case, but it's getting more difficult to keep doing that. Being politically correct will help to attract people to the idea of MRA's being reasonable and on the right track when it comes to blatant and pervasive misandry - but it will take away from the point of it all. Excuses are being made in an effort to avoid offending people. Explanations are made until it turns out…
/r/MensRights10/12/11 05:13 AM
1

What age are you (or what age were you when this began)? I have not had the question posed to me, but this might have as much to do with my age of early-twenties as it does my family's opinions of bachelorhood. You could give an honest and simple answer, if you're in to that sort of thing. "Why aren't you married yet?" "I don't want to be." If that is the truthful reason. I certainly have an appreciation for witty one-liners, but oftentimes they aren't necessary.
/r/MensRights22/11/11 02:37 AM
16

I want to believe that this is satire, but I'm honestly not sure.
/r/MensRights19/10/11 02:16 AM
2

YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH WHEN YOU'RE TALKING TO ME!
/r/MensRights17/10/11 10:20 AM
9

NPH is a super cool dude.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 12:57 AM
2

If a person doesn't get any satisfaction from giving someone else oral sex, then that is an issue of its own. If any of the people involved, male or female, don't enjoy it, then they shouldn't have an obligation to do so.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 12:59 AM
3

People like to get offended. People on the Internet like to get offended even more easily. aka: Haters gonna hate.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 12:48 AM
6

If you're advocating censorship/banning as a means to create a space for Men's Rights, then it seems to me that the problem is you. We get bigots and trolls rolling up in here, then downvote them and label them as they are - when we can be certain that is what they are. Getting trigger-happy with the banhammer is a terrible and dishonest solution. Yeah, there are a lot of loud and different opinions on this subreddit, and we get to have that because we don't ban people who have different viewpoi…
/r/MensRights28/09/11 11:21 PM
11

The hate is strong with this one.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 11:14 PM
1

There's a direct-download link right on the page. Just right click -> save as.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 11:04 PM
2

Blaming men for being risk-takers is a bizarre and not very well thought-out idea. Or, if it has been thought-out by the complainers in the article, this is even more depressing. Taking risks? That's where stuff comes from! That's the root of all technology and social change that has ever happened. But that's not it at all. She's not saying that change and risk-taking is a bad thing, it's only a bad thing when men do it for causes that relate to men.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 10:35 PM
0

Condescension is rarely necessary, but in this case it is both hilarious and warranted.
/r/MensRights23/09/11 11:31 PM
8

Definitely a good article to read over. The comments are largely well-articulated and interesting, too.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 03:02 PM
8

No. Only guys do. We're not supposed to talk about it with women-folk.
/r/MensRights23/08/11 06:41 PM
1

Balance, I agree. However, I do not think that adding more obligation via mass-guilting (which is what obligation is) simply to outweigh that which already exists will result in balance. It will be balanced in the sense that both sexes can suffer from the same thing, but that really is not the kind of equilibrium that I am interested in.
/r/MensRights20/08/11 09:14 PM
1

I think that the aggressive meme of having an obligation to society is a large part of what got us in to this mess.
/r/MensRights20/08/11 08:59 PM
7

The more I ponder it, I think the comic is pretty dead-on. And if you were to switch the genders around, it would be just as true. Gender-politics flame-wars are like any other kind of flame-war, and misandry/misogyny/"No my gender is more oppressed!" is a very flame-baity topic. The topic has a tendency to make people angry and otherwise-emotional, and for some pretty understandable reasons. The injustice of institutionalized misandry pisses me off, too. I'm guessing it's similar for women, jus…
/r/MensRights25/07/11 05:59 AM
13

It isn't only a Men's Rights issue, but it is one of issue of MR.
/r/MensRights24/07/11 04:43 AM
1

I thought the ads were pretty funny for how over-the-top they were. I kind of felt like that was the point, that the things the men are feeling the need to apologize for are blatantly and hilariously irrational, that they're doing it to avoid flak from the overly-emotional and self-entitled girlfriend/wife. The notion that they feel like they have to do that at all is tragic and unfortunate, yes, but it calls attention to the fact that it happens, which I can appreciate. Or maybe that wasn't the…
/r/MensRights23/07/11 08:33 PM
5

Eloquently and classily phrased. Have an upboat.
/r/MensRights16/07/11 01:43 PM
5

It is some very tragic irony, that one effect of Feminism is pigeon-holing women's character/identity during the course of trying to prevent exactly that. At least, I have always thought that was one of the goals of Feminism, not sure if I invented this information or not. It's very much a pendulum-swing, I think. They (in this case, they: women believing in feminist ideology) were repulsed from one side and latched themselves on to its opposite. Even to drift towards the previous state (example…
/r/MensRights16/07/11 01:41 PM
3

Okay, the blog in question was pretty over-the-top man-hating, but doing a 20-minute scream-vlog wasn't a great reaction to it either. On the other hand, I had a similar emotional reaction to being labeled a rapist/rape-supporter forty times in a row, just without all the yelling and raaaaaaglahaghglg'ing. So, I get it. Why not? Get mad. But, damn, that beard is entrancing. It was hard not to stare.
/r/MensRights13/07/11 06:42 PM
1

Hey, it's your reddit birthday, scooooot! Happy birthday! Sadly, you've still decided to resort to the exact same carbon-copy shaming-language used by everyone else who can't come up with a logical argument for the topic. Maybe by next year you'll have come up with some original material, or, even better, you'll decide to start contributing instead of trying to make someone else in to "the bad guy." I'm rootin' for ya.
/r/MensRights11/07/11 09:22 PM
1

For many people, it takes a rather strong slap-in-the-face for them to stop being a fool (metaphorically speaking, just so we're clear). So, yes, I agree, but "only a fool" still includes an awful lot of people.
/r/MensRights08/07/11 10:27 PM
6

I concur, in a fair world we should not be automatically assumed to be any one thing, just because of our sex. The other people of our sex are not us, we are not responsible for them and they do not determine us, and vice versa. However: Haters gonna hate.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 11:05 PM
3

Yeah, I really think they just wanted you to articulate a point. Some things may seem like they should be "obvious" and not even needing of an answer, but there can still be benefit from putting it in to words.
/r/MensRights04/07/11 12:37 AM
4

This idea, it is a terrible one. Making shit up and labeling a guy a pedophile because you don't like what he's doing - regardless of what it is - that's pretty fucked up, man.
/r/MensRights02/07/11 08:38 PM
3

Sometimes bro's are just bro's. And that's love, baby. No need to make it into something it isn't. Good read.
/r/MensRights02/07/11 10:33 AM
6

You know, I wouldn't have minded the entire we're-bragging-but-not-really-bragging overmuch, but then she brought up Death from the Sandman. Keep your bullshit gender politics out of my amazing Neil Gaiman stories.
/r/MensRights30/06/11 09:29 PM
5

This is a good thing to realize. People - as a general group - will always try to shame you for deciding your own Self/Character instead of what they try to mold you in to (shit, maybe even then too), but the shame/shaming is entirely about them, not about you. Be someone who you think is awesome, and don't apologize for it, I say.
/r/MensRights26/06/11 05:38 AM
2

Toxic people validate other toxic people's bullshit, and they then go on thinking they're being both truthful and fair. ("Toxic people" is also interchangeable with "idiot," in the previous sentence.) You keep rockin', rantgrrl. There are a lot of them and they are particularly full of bile and bs, but that doesn't mean you're in the wrong.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 01:32 AM
5

The "Men's Rights Movement" is all about heterosexual rights, as far as I'm concerned. You're either an obvious troll or a painfully toxic individual (though the two are often the same). I'll spell it out simple-like to avoid ambiguity: The Men's Rights Movement is a Movement concerned with the Rights for Men. Gay men possess the quality of being men, so their interests are included in the movement.
/r/MensRights23/05/11 04:24 AM
9

Aw, hell. I really thought this was a satire, until I made it to the blog's comments. It would be difficult to describe that precise moment when I realized it wasn't a hyperbolic parody, but the words "emotionally crushing" and "I am ashamed to be the same species as this person" come to mind.
/r/MensRights19/05/11 03:36 PM
5

I have not heard the phrase "benevolent sexism" either, though I would guess it is something along the lines of "positive discrimination" which very much is an existing idea. 1 (Wikipedia link, redirects to "Affirmative Action" page.) 2 (TvTropes link to "Positive Discrimination" page.)
/r/MensRights18/05/11 10:06 AM
2

There certainly is a religious tone (and some racial subtext) to the article that I do not agree with, but he does present some good points about women and accountability (specifically: the lack thereof). If there is any one thing to get from this article, I think it is this: In the cultures of our current era, Marriage is a raw deal for men. It is not worth it anymore.
/r/MensRights16/05/11 05:52 AM
1

I'm not particularly a fan of the "alpha/beta" thing either, but it's an easy articulation for people to understand, so that's cool. Everything has multiple names. If "Zeta Male" is a term synonymous with MGTOW, which is the understanding I get from reading this, that's something I can get behind. If the game is broken, then play it the way that works for you, not the way the "rules" say you need to.
/r/MensRights13/05/11 12:26 AM
1

Oh! I think I have been misinterpreted. I am not suggesting that MRA's should only be peaceful and avoid antagonizing people. I agree with you, we need both. Neither extreme is going to be very beneficial. But, between the two of these - angry attackers and peaceful reformers - I think that the former is considerably more active than the latter in the area of Men's Rights. Which is why I am suggesting a different focus for someone who is considering blogging about the topic.
/r/MensRights16/04/11 11:41 PM
8

One thing that I perceive to be lacking (or at the very least: underrepresented) among Men's Rights Activists is the idea of Men's Rights WITHOUT an Enemy. That is to say, not making another group a target to blame our problems upon. Yeah, there are a lot of terrible and damaging lies being spread by people who oppose or misunderstand Men's Rights - and this hasn't stopped being important - but focusing on that and making them The Enemy also does a lot of damage, a lot of people get distracted w…
/r/MensRights16/04/11 09:01 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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