TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ThrustVectoring Archive

View 0 posts and 238 comments by ThrustVectoring on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

"Meninism is about women too" would make a hilarious T-shirt slogan.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 01:06 AM
3

Errr, it sounds like you missed my point. I don't think an official policy of being pro-immigration will help Japan much. Their culture implicitly discourages immigration. Culture is much harder to change than law.
/r/MensRights30/12/14 05:57 PM
8

Allowing immigration wouldn't help that much. Something like 99% of people living in Japan are Japanese, and their culture has the xenophobia to match. Even if you're allowed to emigrate to Japan, you're not likely to get welcomed there.
/r/MensRights30/12/14 05:32 PM
1

They don't stand for a general principle of "don't enforce cultural mores on people's clothing choices". Their position is more along the lines "The cultural mores that the Reds try to enforce are bad, we'll fight them and impose our own cultural mores." Horseshoe theory.
/r/MensRights15/11/14 03:58 AM
1

You can also argue that these games give people a safer, more acceptable outlet for their violent urges. I mean, if someone has urges to hurt people, would you rather they fulfill those urges by fighting people or by playing GTA?
/r/MensRights03/11/14 06:05 AM
4

No, the SJWs are kind of schizo about transgender issues. On the one hand, oppression points. On the other, though, they're allowed to hate people with very thin logic, so they often come up with reasons to hate the transgendered.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 08:52 AM
1

That's really the big issue with the SJW community - they are eager to get vicious and drop civility like it's a liability. People who value niceness, community, and civilization can wind up on the wrong side of, say, trans issues, and what happens is they think they're weird and leave them alone. The alternative is being on the wrong side of an issue and engaging in scorched-earth warfare.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 06:53 PM
5

They aren't kidding
/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:47 PM
23

Neoreactionary. Their beliefs are unusual - like, "the wrong side won the American Revolution" level.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 02:25 PM
2

Atheism+ isn't an atheism group, it's a social justice group that's around to critique atheists as insufficiently pro-social justice.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 01:56 AM
5

She's missing the entire goddamn point of punishment. There are three general ideas - to scare people into following the law, to hurt bad people so that people feel better, or to build a fence around bad people so we don't have to interact with them. This idea fails the first reason because it's only a more severe punishment. More severe punishments have very little deterring effect - most of the deterrence is from the immediacy and inevitability of getting punished. Make it more certain and mor…
/r/MensRights15/03/14 02:13 PM
2

There is a pay gap, it's just very misleading to talk about the pay gap alone and leaving the reader all alone to explain it with sexism. Women, as a class, tend to be better at getting non-monetary benefits from work -- things like time off to raise children, prestigious jobs like teaching, a safe and clean work environment, etc. It doesn't take any more than a freshman economics course's worth of understanding to see why choices like that make you earn less money.
/r/MensRights04/01/14 03:22 PM
5

the mods on 4chan are basically bailing out a ship that's getting drenched with a fire hose.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 06:48 PM
3

I'm much more okay with controlling the video recording of the inside of my house. Lock it up under crypto and require a trusted third party to divulge the key only with a court order.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 02:53 AM
2

You don't need nearly as much stuff as you think you do. Buy a bike and camping gear. Work under the table or raid your savings for food money and replacement gear. You can spend roughly 4% a year of your savings indefinitely. For $400/month, that means you need $120k.
/r/MensRights12/10/13 02:29 AM
2

When I try sharing my POV in class (I am in a health-centered program) I am dismissed as 'unenlightened' & 'anti-woman.' This is why feminism as a movement is crazy. The sane ones get attacked as 'anti-woman' and get driven away.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 07:06 PM
20

If a GIRL enters a sport dominated by men it would be surprising to see that she did well. Because she is a female and either has higher testosterone than average females (which is possible) OR she is extremely talented. Before puberty and the hormonal changes that it brings, this isn't really the case.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:47 AM
1

I don't really have enough information to make the claim one way or another. There are probably rape accusations that are worse than getting raped, and vice versa.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 10:47 PM
0

I apparently did not make it clear enough. Getting a false accusation of rape may be worse than getting raped. It may be better. It's almost certainly not the exact same amount of harm.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 10:46 PM
1

The symmetry isn't really convincing enough to enact a non-optimal punishment policy. I agree with your points that false rape accusations are a serious crime, I just don't think that it is exactly as serious as rape is. I'm not even claiming that it is either more or less serious.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 06:02 PM
1

The punishment for a false accusation should be the same as the punishment for the crime. Ehh, that's not really fair. False accusations have a different amount of harm done, so it needs a different amount of deterrent in the form of punishment. Even if getting wrongly accused of rape is exactly as bad as getting raped, false accusations waste police resources and make it harder to prosecute rapists.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 05:35 PM
9

Let me rephrase things, then. Humans aren't that much different than other animals.
/r/MensRights20/10/12 04:47 PM
25

It's mass-market pandering to women. There's actually some sort of truth behind it - people are a lot closer to animals than you think they are. A lot of the same things that work for getting animals to do what you want works for getting people to do what you want. If you reward the behaviors you want to see and ignore the ones you don't, soon you'll wind up with more of what you want and less of what you don't want. Reinforcement works.
/r/MensRights20/10/12 02:56 PM
3

The point isn't to pit your VP against the higher-ups. The point is to convince the VP to not try to screw you over, because it will be costly to do so and they have to do it in writing. The fact of the matter is that if you let them, there are supervisors that will make decisions in a way that lets them blame you if they go wrong. You're trying to stop that blame-assigning behavior, and getting instructions in writing is the best way to do that. Supervisor tells you to do X. If it's not in writ…
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:46 AM
12

Hell, get everything in writing or in email. It'll save your ass.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 09:06 PM
2

Not quite. It only makes sense if you think that people will oppose your inclusion in a group. If I say I am a lumberjack, but I don't actually cut down trees, then actual lumberjacks will say that I'm not a lumberjack. If I say that I identify as a lumberjack, what the hell can a lumberjack say to disagree with that? My point is that it's impossible to tell someone that they do or don't identify a certain way, so it's a choice that is much safer socially.
/r/MensRights13/10/12 11:42 PM
1

Sadly, being the voice of reason in this case is taking the side of sex traffickers. Nobody wants to be for sex trafficking and everyone wants to oppose it, so the only real debate is between hard-line anti-sex-trafficking and harder-line anti-sex-trafficking.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 07:57 AM
12

The best time to plant a tree was twenty years ago. The second best time is now. Contact your son and ask him if he'd like to get in touch. Just do it. The worst that could happen is he says no, and then you're no worse off than you are now.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 07:21 AM
10

Nonono. Respond with "Think about the children". An accurate medical history is very important and the parents have no right to deprive their children of it.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 08:42 PM
3

Even if it is community debt, he's still stuck with half.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 02:11 PM
-1

The sub has, to me at least, been rude, unwelcoming, and unable to accept when people A) make an honest mistake or B) have a differing opinion. I'm tired of it, it's always so negative and most people there are so mean. It's because everyone who isn't as pro-woman as feminists think they ought to be are easily branded as misogynists. It's the sort of thing you get when you attack the less extreme members of your group - the moderates leave, and the group as a whole gets more crazy.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 11:06 PM
1

True. That's the reason why feminism doesn't deal well with dissent, though.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 10:01 PM
3

No, that's not the problem with feminism. The problem with feminism is that they're too good at painting people who aren't sufficiently pro-women as misogynists. Hence, feminism as a group tends to have debates between extreme feminists and more extreme feminists.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 12:31 AM
5

It's not even that. Lay people are really bad at using statistics to get accurate information. "The average woman makes X cents for each dollar the average man makes" is a true but misleading statistic; people infer inaccurate causes as to why this is true. Specifically, they blame sexism, when really it's the kind of choices the two genders tend to make that's at fault. More specifically, women work part time more often, in safer and more personally rewarding fields, and take more time off for …
/r/MensRights27/09/12 02:59 PM
2

Yeah, that sounds about right. Words are levers that when pulled, get certain kinds of thoughts out of people. The word "sexism" gets certain kinds of thoughts, regardless of what you think you are defining it as. Feminists are worse about this with the word "rape".
/r/MensRights25/09/12 10:12 PM
3

I think I may have explained things poorly. I'm saying that Feminism is trying to use the word "sexism" when and only when "prejudice + power" is relevant, even though the word "sexism" still carries connotations that aren't accurate for feminist use of that word. When feminists say "sexism" and mean "prejudice + power", people still think of the connotations of the word "sexism".
/r/MensRights25/09/12 09:58 PM
1

It's not just a name, but some math behind it, IIRC. "Rational" means something rather specific mathematically.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 09:42 PM
7

You can't just define words however you want them. Words have connotations that you can't avoid. Feminism's strict definition of sexism carries all the connotations of the common usage of the word sexism.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 05:27 PM
3

Aumann's agreement theorem. If a pair of people have common knowledge of each other's prior beliefs and knowledge, and are acting rationally, they come to the same conclusion.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 05:26 PM
1

It's really just another case of feminists failing to give women any agency. If you don't want to have sex, and you fail to do anything that would stop a reasonable man from having sex with you, it's obviously the man's fault.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 03:12 PM
1

The increase in college tuition is because of the generous terms given to lenders of student loans. This means that more students can afford to take on loans to go to college, which means that universities can charge more and still have full enrollment.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:31 AM
3

If she doesn't live there and you do, then just tell her to leave. If she doesn't, call the cops and ask them to remove her for trespassing. It's a bit trickier if she lives there. Then you file a civil suit for both the damages and the trespass.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 12:27 PM
3

Have him fucking wait until he's of age to make decisions, then. It's not that hard.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 01:43 PM
1

It does make sense - rape and littering is worse than just rape, etc. We can then also do the legislative loading on violence committed in order to rape as additional penalties on the violence - vaguely like how brandishing a knife and robbing a store is less severe than brandishing a knife while robbing a store.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 01:52 AM
5

I think I see what you're saying - all rape is close enough to other rape that it doesn't really make sense to group them in two different categories, even though there's variation in what exactly happens. It's like saying someone with disfiguring second and third degree burns and limited mobility of her arm is WAY better off than the girl who lost her arm so the girl with the burns should feel better because it wasn't that bad. It's more like saying that the legal system ought to punish more ha…
/r/MensRights20/08/12 07:19 PM
13

Distinguishing "forcible rape" as different from "other rape" is bad because it takes the "badness" away from non-forcible rape. Non-forcible rape is less bad than forcible rape, end of story. The first has violence or the threat of violence attached to it, and the second doesn't. Non-forcible rape is still bad. But it doesn't need to be seen as bad as forcible rape. Perhaps the solution is to separate out forcible rape with an extra-bad word.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 06:49 PM
1

IIRC, there are two randomly selected groups. First gets asked to sign, then put up a sign (iirc it's like a week later), while second only gets asked to put up a sign. The numbers may be total percentage of people reached that actually ended up putting up a sign.
/r/MensRights06/07/12 03:30 PM
2

Gender may be a bona-fide occupational requirement in this instance. As another example, it's okay to exclude you for a waitress position in a topless bar. That said: Commitment to unlearning internalized oppressive values You don't want this job anyways.
/r/MensRights05/07/12 09:47 PM
11

I really don't think that atheism is a coherent community. You could label me as such, but I don't really identify as one. You need a little bit more than "not wrong on this one topic" to make things work out for a coherent group.
/r/MensRights05/07/12 08:58 PM
2

Thanks, I honestly don't remember where I learned that little bit of neuroscience.
/r/MensRights05/07/12 08:41 PM
5

Signing something makes a big difference in the choices that people make later. People who sign something along the effects of "please drive safer" are much more likely to later be willing to put a gigantic ugly sign asking people to drive slower in their yard or window. IIRC, it was something along the lines of 30% -> 70%.
/r/MensRights04/07/12 12:06 AM
4

This doesn't necessarily imply that kids who run into issues did so because of a lack of a father figure. It's more of a strong suggestion. Statistics is tricky. I mean, a higher percentage of car owners live longer than the average among both owners and non-owners than non-owners, but that doesn't mean you fix life expectancy by giving people cars.
/r/MensRights16/06/12 05:50 PM
2

It's surprising how well many men and women are programmed to not stray, as well. Getting caught doing these things would easily deprive your offspring of valuable resources. "Cheat as long as you don't get caught" isn't really enough to stop enough of these cases, which is why there's the thought of "be an upright person, even if you think you can get away with bad things". Most people are worse at lying and hiding their misdeeds than they think they are, which is why people feel bad when they …
/r/MensRights13/06/12 05:03 AM
12

Being gay is also a bad thing. Why? It's really not obvious. I mean, it's seen as a bad thing by many people, but that doesn't make it a bad thing.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 04:27 AM
4

Paternity testing should be mandatory. For the children. People with missing or inaccurate family medical histories can and do receive sub-optimal medical care. Who are you to deny children their right to an accurate family history of disease?
/r/MensRights07/06/12 05:13 PM
14

That's not justice. The crime of false rape accusation is twofold: wasting police resources and attempting to incarcerate or ruin the reputation of someone. Both already have punishments that society has deemed "fair". We just need to apply them.
/r/MensRights01/06/12 05:41 PM
-1

It's sexism, but reality is sexist. There are more risky male drivers than female. I'd like it banned anyways, so that insurance companies start measuring driving skill directly, rather than indirectly through demographics. Start having to charge women drivers much more, and there'll be a market for measuring driving skill and offering discounts based on results.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 05:37 PM
1

It's not that aggression is always a useful strategy. It's that it's been a useful strategy when encountering the kinds of situations that make people angry. Anger is a process that makes people take aggressive behavior in rage-inducing situations. That might be closer to what I was trying to say.
/r/MensRights18/05/12 04:25 AM
1

"anger" from an evopsych perspective is little more than a lever to produce confrontational behavior that has happened to help in situations that made people angry in the ancestral environment. Wow, that was a doozy of a sentence, hope it makes sense to other people as well.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 07:41 AM
5

Statistics should only be shown to people who have an education in statistics. They're extraordinarily unhelpful to those who have non-rigorous thought processes. Gender causes one group of people to make certain kinds of decisions, while it makes another make a different kind. One group winds up in more difficult jobs, working longer hours with less vacation, in less personally rewarding fields, and incurs much higher rates of workplace death and injury. They also get paid more. It wouldn't be …
/r/MensRights15/05/12 02:35 AM
17

Don't beat yourself up too hard about it, you can't change the past. Only point of feeling like a jerk about doing something is to not do it again later. Introspection in general is a very difficult process, and realizing something that you want to change about yourself is the first part of becoming a better person.
/r/MensRights15/05/12 02:23 AM
9

Any gender-based capital gap for new ventures only exists because of a gender-based gap of ideas worthy of funding. If women's business ideas that are seeking funding were more likely to be good, then you could make a ridiculous amount of money by only looking at ideas from women.
/r/MensRights04/05/12 02:30 PM
2

You're statistically more likely to make decisions that lead to a larger salary. It remains to be proven whether or not those decisions are good ones. Those sorts of decisions also lead to working longer hours in more dangerous, unpleasant, or stressful jobs.
/r/MensRights03/05/12 12:26 AM
1

I almost think that statistical results shouldn't be shown to people who don't understand statistics, just because it's so easy to mislead people with them. Here's my understanding of the pay gap. It's something that is fully explained by a "decision gap" between men and women. Men tend to make decisions that lead to higher pay, while women tend to prioritize other things (such as safety, raising a family, having lower-paying but more fulfilling careers, etc). When faced with a choice between $X…
/r/MensRights19/04/12 04:59 PM
1

They don't mention it inside /r/lgbt though, since iirc the mods of /r/lgbt are completely batshit insane.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 04:41 PM
-2

The difference between people existing who happen to share your genetic information and not is minor enough. After all, the lives of sperm donors isn't appreciably different than non-donors. By far the most important facet of the case is the financial one - "I don't want more children, period" is an argument that's really only brought up because "I agree, conditional on not being involved in their life and not paying child support" is not an option.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 05:07 PM
12

Men's rights issues spill over and affect women, too. This is another case of that. The obviously fair approach would be to to give the woman the children she wants, and the man the freedom from child support payments that he wants. The problem, though, is that child support is owed to children but given to parents. The woman in question cannot give up the right to collect child support payments for her children in an irrevocable way. If she wants to get her ex-husband to agree to it, she has to…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 03:22 PM
2

It's a fine assumption. Personally, I'd go with counting name X's salary as Y% male and Z% female, where Y and Z are the percent of people who are men or women with that first name.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:22 AM
2

Add in a live-in nanny and it's still half as cheap as a divorce for a sufficiently wealthy man. And half of all marriages end in divorce.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 07:32 AM
3

Good luck adopting as a single father.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 07:29 AM
13

What do you need a wife for as a man with high income? If you want children, you can adopt or find an egg donor and a surrogate mother. If you want someone to do housework or raise children, you can hire a maid or a nanny. If you want companionship, you can get a girlfriend or an escort. At the point that all this becomes half as expensive as a divorce, you can no longer reasonably justify getting married.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 09:21 PM
3

If you talk in person, record those conversations too. Better idea: do NOT talk in person.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 10:23 AM
-2

That said, other philosophical positions are just as non-sensical. All the sane people became naturalistic reductionists. And that's not really viewed as a philosophical position like many of the others.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 11:40 PM
3

The wage gap is a real thing, in that if you divide the amount of wages paid by hours worked, men come out ahead. The thing is that the wage gap between men and women is entirely explained by a decision gap between men and women. Men decide to work longer hours at more dangerous or unpleasant jobs. They decide to take time off to raise children less often. They tend to ask for raises more often. Etc. Once you take into account the decisions that men tend to make as compared to women, there's no …
/r/MensRights27/03/12 09:05 AM
1

How is it any more begging the question than assuming the fetus is a lump of cells worthy of no more protection than an appendix? I didn't make that assumption. I gave an argument for why the very early stages of a fetus are more like an appendix than a person. I'm still not entirely sure when fetuses gain personhood, but I'm sure it's some time after conception. if you kill a pregnant woman, you'll be charged with the murder of her baby, too IIRC, those laws are the result of the pro-life movem…
/r/MensRights26/03/12 11:46 PM
3

because the heart of the anti-abortion argument is that you are fundamentally violating the right of another human being to exist. That's begging the question, really. Is a fetus a "human being"? Does it have personhood? I mean, after all, we only prosecute people for those that they actually murder, and not the hypothetical possible children that they may have prevented from coming into existence. And the most aggressive "personhood begins at conception" stance is false as a simple matter of fa…
/r/MensRights24/03/12 06:30 AM
7

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Or in this case, a free party. Men pay with money, women pay by convincing men to pay for them.
/r/MensRights23/03/12 03:15 AM
48

It's that, and because the presence of women at a party will cause more men to be willing to spend money to be there. It might not be fair, but it at least makes economic sense given what groups of people are willing to do what.
/r/MensRights22/03/12 09:36 PM
3

There's a difference between people in interracial relationships and people who are willing to be in interracial relationships.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 09:39 AM
-1

At some income level single fatherhood with a live-in nanny is much cheaper than the male half of shared custody times the divorce rate. It's sad, really.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 09:13 AM
1

Perhaps grandmaster So and So has the highest score, but is he really the best at playing chess? That's exactly the point I was trying to make. The difference between "highest score" and "best" is exactly the distinction I was trying to make. Regardless of anyone's ranking of chess players, there's some sort of physical truth about who would win/has won what games under what circumstances, and our ranking does essentially nothing to change those games. And if you want to choose a chess player su…
/r/MensRights12/03/12 11:54 PM
1

I think that my "physical fact about men and women" comment distracted from the main point I was trying to get across. Changing how you select which chess players to label as "best" doesn't change which chess players are actually best. Same thing with management - how you select which candidate is the "best" for the job doesn't change which one is actually the best candidate.
/r/MensRights12/03/12 10:46 PM
0

I don't think I phrased that well. I wasn't trying to speculate on the cause of why more of top rated chess players are men rather than women. I was trying to get across the point that the reason that men have top ratings in chess is because there are more men playing at the level required to win the games necessary to gain a top rating. That's all that I was trying to get across. I may have done a poor job of it.
/r/MensRights12/03/12 06:27 PM
8

I think you're missing the point of the article. The point isn't that chess and management is somehow comparable. The point is that selection processes that do not care about your gender can and do produce selections that have an "unfair" gender balance. It's not that the selection process is unfair (after all, a computer with zero access to the gender of chess players can assign rankings). It's that there's a physical fact about men and women which makes more top-form male chess players than fe…
/r/MensRights12/03/12 11:54 AM
4

There's still confounding variables in your statistical example. Once you start comparing groups that have made similar decisions in life, the wage gap disappears. I remember one comparison between "college-educated childless engineers" where women made slightly more than men.
/r/MensRights05/03/12 04:27 PM
47

The wage gap exists, but isn't a problem. Yes, women as a group earn less money than men as a group. But if you compare two people of different genders that make the same decisions, you're not particularly better off in terms of income if you have one set of genitalia or the other. There's a "wage gap" between those with and without high school education, but nobody really considers that to be a problem. Neither do they consider problematic a "wage gap" between people who work less than twenty h…
/r/MensRights05/03/12 08:14 AM
3

The alternative is even more extreme - capitulating to the unreasonable demands of people that aren't worth having in your life (even if they are family).
/r/MensRights03/03/12 07:27 AM
2

I'm sad to say that it is mainly mothers who forget that their child is a human being It's not only in the context of divorce in which this is true. Have you seen the show Toddlers and Tiaras? Many parents try to live vicariously through their children.
/r/MensRights02/03/12 04:04 PM
3

Most people who point out "victim blaming" are missing the point. The point isn't to assign responsibility for past events. It doesn't make a whit of difference to me whether walking alone at night bore responsibility for me getting mugged or me being a white man in the wrong neighborhood at the wrong time. The point is to identify which future courses of actions have what risks, so that people can make informed decisions. If you imply that people don't get raped while they are blackout drunk be…
/r/MensRights20/02/12 11:22 AM
3

You're not thinking big enough. Wealthy parents have college-educated children. How much is their son's ivy-league education worth to them? A hundred thousand dollars? Five hundred thousand? Millions? You have the woman involved make the accusation first, then contact the parents as the person they need to pay in order to make the problem go away. Kind of have to have a significant bankroll to the operation, though. Also, you have to be a cheaper option than university staff.
/r/MensRights20/02/12 11:14 AM
3

Fuck thinking about the father. Fuck thinking about the mother either. Let's approach this entirely from a think-of-the-children standpoint. Isn't everyone better off if they have an accurate family medical history? Shouldn't they be entitled to the best effort we can give them for getting one?
/r/MensRights04/02/12 08:12 AM
2

she is attempting to communicate on a deeper level or has momentarily forgotten that she is speaking with the opposite sex. So terribly, terribly condescending. It's implying that men cannot communicate on a deep or meaningful level. Stopped reading at this point.
/r/MensRights20/01/12 11:15 PM
4

I think part of the problem is that people are bad at math/statistics. There's two possibilities - did it, and didn't do it. There are two options - prosecute, and don't prosecute. You want to prosecute those who did it, and not prosecute those who didn't do it. It's fairly easy to do one or the other perfectly. You simply either prosecute everyone, or nobody. Anyhow, you can do a better job of solving this problem with minimal errors if you have evidence that particular categories have proporti…
/r/MensRights20/01/12 11:04 PM
1

So what this really means is "bright" girls really aren't bright after all. The will to improve oneself is completely orthogonal to intelligence. There are some perfectly fine minds of both genders that are completely content with the way they are, and never become what they could be.
/r/MensRights09/01/12 07:00 AM
1

It's not the only reason, but it's the biggest reason that is within your control.
/r/MensRights29/12/11 10:44 PM
-2

You know what the best thing people can do to minimize how often they are the victim of domestic violence? Not fucking hit the other person. Seriously. It's that easy. Don't want to get hit? Don't hit.
/r/MensRights29/12/11 07:16 PM
9

There is a practical link between the two, at least as far as social policy goes. Minimizing the false negatives of failing to convict rapists and the false positives of baseless rape accusations are contradictory goals. Well, punishing the guilty and protecting the innocent have always been contradictory goals for the justice system. It goes against hundreds of years of American tradition to focus on punishing the guilty over protecting the innocent - for good reason. Since the founding of our …
/r/MensRights25/12/11 05:52 PM
2

The courts can mandate the therapy she apparently needs Somehow, I don't see wife beating getting viewed in quite that light.
/r/MensRights22/12/11 01:59 PM
5

It's not an exaggeration, courts have actually ruled this way.
/r/MensRights30/11/11 06:04 PM
3

Yes, you were duped into being a father. Or you weren't of age when the child was conceived. This doesn't matter, because you paying child support is in the best interests of the child.
/r/MensRights30/11/11 05:45 PM
1

You can make a dead man get an erection. Erections are correlated with willingness to have sex, sure, but they aren't the same thing.
/r/MensRights22/11/11 08:15 AM
2

Perhaps I worded it poorly. The fear of imminent legal trouble? It's the dreadful anticipation that I'm trying to talk about.
/r/MensRights23/09/11 02:03 PM
3

The cheater has made some bad decisions, sure, but he's still a human being who doesn't deserve even the threat of the punishment that convicted rapists receive.
/r/MensRights23/09/11 11:44 AM
9

Talk. To. A. Lawyer. Best way to deal with law issues.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 07:27 AM
4

Really, it's about conflating these two statements: Sexual offenders are likely to be men. Men are likely to be sexual offenders. And the first is more in perception than in truth.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 11:59 PM
1

Working for a particular sub-group's rights may be the best way to fix the worst abuses of human rights. "Injustice anywhere is an affront to justice everywhere" - MLK There are real injustices being done to men, particularly in the West, and to trivialize these by saying "Human rights are more important" is a travesty.
/r/MensRights23/08/11 07:21 AM
12

I wouldn't be surprised if DSK's rape accuser had already gotten quite a bit of money merely for making the accusation. I mean, the benefit for his political adversaries has already been fully realized...
/r/MensRights20/08/11 07:21 AM
2

Let's take a compromise then - you don't get "biological father" listed on a birth certificate without a paternity test. You get "purported father" instead, and the government treats the two differently. Surely the government gets to determine under what circumstances it gives out certain certificates, right?
/r/MensRights16/08/11 07:39 PM
2

They ought to be mandatory, for the benefit of the child. After all, the child is better off with accurate genetic information, since it is an important part of someone's medical history.
/r/MensRights16/08/11 04:51 PM
1

I don't think you have a good understanding of "provably". The program has to look at all possible responses to each move, otherwise it hasn't been proven to be a winning position. Even if there are only ten moves you have to consider for each side each turn, it still means that each move is a hundred times harder to solve than the last. If we have 20 moves done by computers, and we expect a perfect game to last at least 40 moves, then we are 1/10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 of the wa…
/r/MensRights11/08/11 05:59 PM
1

and a lot of board positions would be imposiible to achieve if players are working towards winning as an objective. But how do you know that a random queen sacrifice doesn't win the game unless you physically check it?
/r/MensRights11/08/11 08:43 AM
1

Sequences are worse off than number of positions, due to 50-move rule and 3-position repetition (positions are not unique game states, with identical positions and different move histories, a move can either advance the game state or force a draw) Furthermore, even if you had a candidate 'perfect' player who can win every game with white, you still need to iterate through each possible black response to perfect play from white in order to confirm that white wins every time.
/r/MensRights11/08/11 08:24 AM
1

I know that modern chess has a lot of opening memorization. I doubt that a very large pool of known openings is enough to "solve" chess. Why? Because the Black player has almost all of the choice as to what kind of game to play, and the White player is the one who is most likely to have a solved-as-won solution.
/r/MensRights11/08/11 05:06 AM
2

The problem is that risk-taking doesn't explain the gender difference. I think I glossed over that part a bit too quickly. Extraordinarily successful men were the parents of more children (or grandchildren, by winning the healthiest women in the group) per-capita than extraordinarily successful women. The "risk pays off on average more on men than women" kind of genes out-bred the competing traits to extinction.
/r/MensRights11/08/11 04:39 AM
1

I played chess fairly casually during high school. But your assumption is wrong. The inability for computers to solve chess makes chess a much more interesting game, not less. Tic-tac-toe is easily computer-solvable, and is uninteresting.
/r/MensRights11/08/11 04:33 AM
2

I disagree. It is the same reason. Fundamentally, brains are made the same way muscles are - it is the protein instructions found in DNA, and men have different DNA than women do. There's no good reason that a difference in brains among the sexes should be treated differently than a difference in muscle mass. One is just more obvious than the other.
/r/MensRights10/08/11 11:38 PM
0

it's possible with computer power ever increasing that an ultimate sequence of moves may be discovered (a solution for the game which leads to victory for white... Or at best a draw for black) I don't think you have a good understanding of how many possible games of chess there are. In order to store each possible position in a game of chess using the matter in the solar system, you'd need to store a position in about a microgram of matter. And use the entire solar system for this purpose.
/r/MensRights10/08/11 11:34 PM
7

It stems from the situation that it was easier for our species to survive if the reproductive potential wasn't involved in the environment testing. We may be thinking of the same thing, but I wouldn't exactly phrase it like that. The source of this difference is that in the ancestral environment, risk-taking paid off more in men than in women. This causes both an increase in variation of ability in men compared to women, as well as an increase in risk-taking behavior among men. It is fundamental…
/r/MensRights10/08/11 11:24 PM
3

A mental difference is, after all, partly the result of a physical difference. When you get down to it, the brain is an organ much like any other. A mental difference is a physical difference - specifically, women tend to have physically different brains than men do.
/r/MensRights10/08/11 11:19 PM
19

Yes. The fundamental skill of chess is visualizing what the board will look like after a series of possible legal moves. This is a spacial reasoning skill.
/r/MensRights10/08/11 11:18 PM
23

This is generally the argument for equality of opportunity, as opposed to equality of outcomes. If men are, on average, willing to work more dangerous jobs for more hours than women are, and are willing to spend less time with their family, then it is tremendously unfair to pay them less for this sacrifice than women.
/r/MensRights10/08/11 10:58 PM
3

What's your answer? Saying bad things about non-traditional gender roles? That's nice and all, but that's not going to really make people conform to traditional gender roles. Government-mandated rules about how your family must live? That's a cure that's worse than the disease. Hell, 9/11 could have been avoided if Bin Laden decided to be a nicer person, but we simply don't have the ability to change that part of reality.
/r/MensRights10/08/11 09:20 PM
3

There's a difference between "you'll probably be happier with a traditional gender-role family" and "not raising your family with traditional gender roles will cause terrible things to happen". The former is true, and the latter is false. Nuance exists.
/r/MensRights10/08/11 08:38 PM
3

Define "forcing" for me, and then ask... why not? Because what works for one family doesn't necessarily work for another.
/r/MensRights10/08/11 07:49 PM
5

Due to differences between men and women that are beyond anyone's individual control, traditional gender roles often lead to happier people. Many women feel valued and derive great joy from raising a family and taking care of their children. Many men feel valued and derive great joy from providing for their family. I don't advocate forcing these roles on people, but if a man would be happier providing for his family while his wife would be happier spending more time with her children, who am I t…
/r/MensRights10/08/11 04:27 PM
18

What the father did wasn't to tell his children stories about how psycho his ex-wife is. What he did was post the stories on the internet, where, IIRC, the ex-wife showed it to the children to try to turn them against the dad.
/r/MensRights09/08/11 03:21 PM
2

She chose the mediator, and the mediator decided that 85% of his income was his ex-wife's fair share. What the actual fuck?
/r/MensRights09/08/11 12:26 PM
9

I don't think they will learn. The point of threatening to filing a false police report is to coerce the man to do what the woman wants. Simply filing a false police report does not cut it - all it does is inflict harm.
/r/MensRights08/08/11 08:39 AM
12

In other words, you don't believe in saying nice things about men, under any circumstances. Don't feed the trolls.
/r/MensRights06/08/11 04:32 AM
2

This fallacy is old as hell. Even if the Nazi party supports something, that doesn't mean that supporting that thing is wrong. IIRC, the Nazis wanted young people to wash behind their ears and otherwise practice good hygiene. If you remove the context of wanting to garner support for their heinous policies, that policy can't be bad in and of itself. Reversed stupidity is not intelligence.
/r/MensRights27/07/11 01:49 PM
1

I just don't believe that a given female applicant for a job is less likely to be qualified than a given male applicant. That's not exactly what I'm talking about. My hypothetical situation is where a higher percentage of one kind of applicant meets expectations than another percentage. It has nothing to do with how qualified the qualified applicants are. It has everything to do with how many unqualified applicants you have to look at to find each qualified one. If there are massive hoards of un…
/r/MensRights21/07/11 03:43 PM
1

The fact is that on average and as a class men worker longer hours than women, take less time off, do more demanding and physical work than women and do it in more dangerous and less sociable places. This is why on average and as a class, men get paid more. Its also why on average and as a class, men die or get seriously injured on the job more.
/r/MensRights21/07/11 10:23 AM
3

Interesting assertion. What is this value? If you believe that businesses are systematically turning down more qualified employees, you must also believe that someone is turning down free money they could earn by hiring these rejected employees and setting up a more efficient competing business. The value is in the average competency of hired employees. If you have any trait that correlates with employee competency, then discriminating based on that trait (in either hiring decision, salary offer…
/r/MensRights21/07/11 10:22 AM
1

Write down everything you remember of the night - who, when, what happened, etc. Then talk to a lawyer.
/r/MensRights18/07/11 07:39 AM
1

Immediate federal medical research investments should be made to ASAP provide men with same level of contraception as women's pill or IUD. There's good hope on this front. Reversible vasectomies are one thing, but there's another. Pro: No change in hormones or sexual function - all it does it drop your sperm count to pretty much zero. Its also completely reversible (eg, not sterilization) Con: It takes a significant amount of time. The method? Submerging your testicles in hot water in order to k…
/r/MensRights26/06/11 01:31 PM
7

If a man does want children, the best path is to get married to a non-Western woman. Seriously though, figure out how to hold down a telecommuting job, then move to a country that wants you to have a functioning family (instead of merely paying for whatever a woman wants to do after having your children).
/r/MensRights02/06/11 11:00 AM
4

There are enough unethical people in the world that the viable sperm of moneyed men has a very high value. Specifically, you can use it and a willing woman to extort money via the legal system. I mean, honestly, "pay $1000/month or more or men with guns come and lock you up" is an amazingly good criminal model.
/r/MensRights29/05/11 09:42 PM
1

Talk to a lawyer. This is a very specific issue that really needs the insight of an expert of law. Lawyers are experts of law.
/r/MensRights14/05/11 11:11 PM
5

Of course there are things worse than circumcision. Infanticide, for one. Just because morality is shades of gray doesn't mean that some shades are closer to black than others. Infant circumcision (at least for nonmedical reasons, but the medical reasons by and large can wait for an informed decision by the child) is less moral than laws banning circumcision of minors.
/r/MensRights13/05/11 06:52 AM
2

I really don't see much difference between the deceptiveness of artificially created vagina and artificially enhanced breasts.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 04:43 PM
7

don't even have to marry them
/r/MensRights03/05/11 03:07 PM
6

I vehemently disagree with the message of that sign. Its basically like telling people "Don't tell white people not to carry around hundreds of dollars of petty cash, tell ghetto trash not to rob people" I know, argument from analogy is weak, but I have a point. Telling people that rape is never the woman's fault is the same as telling women that there is nothing they can do to change the likelihood of getting raped. This is incorrect as a simple matter of fact. Walking around alone at night in …
/r/MensRights01/05/11 05:42 AM
2

I remember reading some statistic about how out of urban childless people between some age range like 23-29, women make something like 7% more money than men do.
/r/MensRights21/04/11 12:05 AM
3

Facebook is probably the best way to go about this. Either with an assumed identity or with the explicit help of someone who is already Facebook friends with the woman in question. Set up something to automatically email you whenever she changes relationship status.
/r/MensRights17/04/11 01:54 AM
16

So we ought to feel bad about universities having many more women than men because women can't find dates? Are you fucking kidding me?
/r/MensRights16/04/11 11:22 PM
2

Check with the legality of recording audio without consent of an involved party in your state beforehand.
/r/MensRights16/04/11 11:02 PM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer There's certainly a social component to it, but its an empirical fact that how someone is treated is not enough to determine what they think their gender is.
/r/MensRights16/04/11 11:41 AM
1

Expect to see more court-sanctioned extortion of wealthy men by anyone who can get a hold of their sperm by any means.
/r/MensRights14/04/11 02:37 AM
8

I believe the bigger evil is how term "sexual offender" has broadened in meaning. People who urinate in the wrong place or get railroaded by the courts for consensual sex at a young age get lumped in with the people who are truly dangerous for your children to be around. Its dangerous, as well as unfair for people convicted of nonviolent and non-coercive crimes that involve someone's genitalia.
/r/MensRights12/04/11 06:59 AM
10

It probably also makes males doing the gazing lose math ability too. Its called "being distracted". Whether its by looking at women, or being looked at by men, its still something you're paying attention to that isn't the task.
/r/MensRights10/04/11 02:49 PM
3

I have, but it was from a female manager of a 16ish person workplace with no attractive female employees. She thought that hiring women would be "distracting".
/r/MensRights09/04/11 11:40 PM
15

The wife said he was violent to her and their children. Five bucks says that the quoted statement is a complete fabrication from the wife.
/r/MensRights09/04/11 05:57 AM
1

In a slightly off-topic note, what the boy did with a stranger is the safe kind of stranger interaction. Most people are decent, so if you approach someone at random they'll be a decent person. Most people who approach little kids and offer them candy are NOT decent people, though, and those are the strangers you have to watch out for.
/r/MensRights26/03/11 04:00 AM
7

That's beside the point. If my understanding is correct, the issue is not about his in-school performance, its about his later digital alteration of that performance for artistic purposes.
/r/MensRights18/02/11 07:25 AM
21

The work arguably has serious artistic value, which would grant it protected status under the Miller test.
/r/MensRights18/02/11 04:10 AM
28

If I understand it correctly, he replaced the audio of him singing to a first grade classroom in order to make a video. If this is a case, this is a clear-cut first amendment free speech case.
/r/MensRights18/02/11 03:12 AM
1

Because nobody else in this thread said it: French Foreign Legion.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 11:45 AM
5

There's a difference between the nonverbal mental feelings of arousal and the logical verbal process of desiring to engage in some action. Plus, you can get an erection out of a corpse.
/r/MensRights04/02/11 12:01 AM
8

Conception by deceit really ought to be a crime. If I can get my hands on a rich guy's sperm and a female accomplice that could plausibly have been fucked by that guy, I could steal his money via child support payments. The solution is clear. Jail the woman for committing a crime by deception, and hand the child over to either the father or foster care. Sure, its not the best solution for the child, but we can't just allow theft by deception on adults, right? -edit- after trying to get child sup…
/r/MensRights01/02/11 09:10 PM
3

Just because repressed memories could be real doesn't mean that its a reliable indicator that some crime actually happened in the past. Simply because it is possible for someone to fabricate a repressed memory in someone else is enough to qualify for reasonable doubt (at least in a Bayesian sense)
/r/MensRights25/01/11 08:20 PM
11

Here's exactly how psychologists/policemen/other figures of authority coax statements claiming abuse out of children: They talk to them for a long time, until the children start trying to figure out how to leave the situation and do fun things again. The only options the children have is to say things, so they try saying different things until they find something that gets them out of the conversation. Its seriously how it works. Sit any child down in a room and ask them if someone touched them …
/r/MensRights25/01/11 08:18 PM
5

But at least dietary products to increase muscle mass are more readily available for men. What? Milk is just as available to women as it is to men.
/r/MensRights28/12/10 11:19 AM
-3

Gaining weight is fairly easy - you need to eat more. Drinking a gallon of whole milk every day will do the trick.
/r/MensRights28/12/10 11:18 AM
2

Is it because of higher physical strength or what? Say, being able to physically handle someone who is freaking out, or help lift someone back into bed, or something like that? I am not a nurse and honestly don't know.
/r/MensRights11/12/10 12:32 PM
1

Obviously this is anecdotal, but I've never met a single uncircumcised man get a circumcision as an older child or adult. To be fair, there's some men with severe phimosis who get circumcised later in life (or some other similar surgery).
/r/MensRights24/11/10 05:36 AM
5

Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I thought I was. Many women (and men) have been heavily conditioned to attack when men talk about any way that women have an advantage. This is not a specific issue to talking about how women have an advantage. This is an instance of the general pattern of people avoiding thinking about uncomfortable things. Its not so much about attacking the person who is making statements, its about derailing the conversation to the point where the derailing person no longer has t…
/r/MensRights17/11/10 09:35 PM
29

Its more than just an ad hominem attack. "Check your privilege" is a means of derailing the conversation when it starts to touch upon subjects that are uncomfortable to think about. False rape claims psychologically maul young men and destroy their lives? Say "check your privilege", and start thinking about how men are privileged over women instead of how horrible false rape claims are.
/r/MensRights17/11/10 09:15 PM
1

When a lone 45 year old man requests to stay on my couch for a night, part of me says no! stranger danger! A random 45 year old man is so exceedingly unlikely to be emotionally capable of rape that worrying about it is pretty much pointless. That said, a 45 year old man who is a couchsurfer isn't a random 45 year old man. You have prior information for deciding the odds, so there's absolutely nothing wrong with using it. A 45 year old man, travelling alone. Its sketchy enough that its probably t…
/r/MensRights31/10/10 09:38 PM
4

from a security point of view one's more at risk from known friends than strangers, generally. I hate to be contradictory, since this is mostly sound. The correct statement is that a randomly selected stranger is ridiculously unlikely to be dangerous. There were 1.3 million violent crimes last year in the US, out of 300 million people. 1.3/300 is much less than 1%, and you have to further adjust this number down for people who commit multiple violent crimes, violent criminals who commit a crime …
/r/MensRights31/10/10 09:30 PM
0

There's actually a social stigma to being circumcised in some cultures. IIRC it was some Los Angeles area high schools, where being circumcised was a social signifier for being from a wealthy family, and was looked down upon. So even the social reasons for circumcision are bullshit. Good decision.
/r/MensRights29/10/10 04:31 PM
3

How long before you take the tea bag out of the hot water before it's already made fresh sperm that's ready to be ejaculated? Yes, your testicles constantly make sperm. But its essentially a pipeline down there, and the new sperm can't get out until you ejaculate all the dead sperm first. Plus, newly made sperm isn't immediately able to impregnate women, it has to develop too.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 08:47 PM
4

There is a non-pill treatment that temporarily and reversibly lowers one's sperm count to zero. Unfortunately, its submerging one's testicles in hot water for a long enough period of time that the heat kills the sperm (but heat alone doesn't permanently destroy the sperm-making apparatus). Its uncomfortable but not painful from what I've heard, but its also no small wonder why it's not popular.
/r/MensRights15/10/10 05:35 PM
3

Most sex offenders are male, so its a mens-rights issue. Just like in the 50s, most people unable to vote were african-american, so voting rights was an african-american issue.
/r/MensRights06/10/10 10:57 PM
1

demonstrate “with reasonable particularity that it knows of the existence and location of subpoenaed documents.” The mere fact that a person has truecrypt installed and a seemingly-random pile of bits is not enough to demonstrate that someone has subpoena-able documents in the apparently-random pile of bits. The government either has to observe the decryption process in order to know that it is decryptable.
/r/MensRights06/10/10 10:54 PM
5

Being banned for life from a vast majority of housing options for looking at things on your computer is a men's rights issue. Sexual-offender laws are flat-out ridiculous in the US.
/r/MensRights06/10/10 07:57 PM
3

Its impossible for him to tell whether or not there's something to hide without him having access to the de-encrypted files. Due to the complexity of laws, the government could probably find something to nail him for. Suppose it is drawings of underaged girls engaged in sexual activity from Japan. How is he supposed to know his loli is fine?
/r/MensRights06/10/10 07:55 PM
1

assert that encryption keys are non-testimonial. Which is bullshit if the prosecution can't prove that there is encrypted material on the hard drive. to simply order the defendant to turn over an unencrypted copy of the information. Properly constructed container files could give the defendant an out, where he turns over his tax records, copies of passports and other documents, and legal pornography. There's extra space in the container, but its cryptographically impossible to tell whether or no…
/r/MensRights06/10/10 07:53 PM
11

I'm actually going to be supportive of the woman's position. The man obviously doesn't want to be a father, since they both consented to using birth control while having sex. I don't see that there's that much of a difference between taking actions before sex to prevent having a child, and taking actions after sex to prevent having a child. Then again, I'm not religious and don't consider fetuses people, so it might be different if the boyfriend is a bit less rational. Also, secrecy is usually b…
/r/MensRights03/10/10 10:51 PM
1

He did say that, but he was trying to distinguish between coders who are a joy to watch and those who aren't, and unfortunately called those coders who aren't a joy to watch "bad coders". Its like calling a skilled draftsman a bad artist.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 06:57 PM
2

Why do they tell men to develop their own swagger... and then spend 184 pages describing the exceedingly narrow window in which that swagger can take place? There's actually a decent reason for this - the difference between breaking social conventions out of ignorance or through deliberate action. If you ignorantly break social conventions, then you are a social klutz. If you deliberately break them, you are boldly forging your own way. In other words, you have to be aware of social conventions …
/r/MensRights01/10/10 06:51 PM
2

Here's what my wife Ingrid said when I was ranting to her about this book: "There are a million different ways to be a man, and there are a million different ways to be a woman." And we each need to find out for ourselves what being a woman or being a man means for us... and how we want to express that. <autism mode> Its a lot more than a million, since apparently activities such as owning a cat are part of being a man or woman. Apparently everything you do is part of being a man or woman. If yo…
/r/MensRights01/10/10 06:48 PM
1

It doesn't "seem" like he wrote "bad coder". He literally wrote that I'm a bad coder. Either I mis-phrased my sentence or you parsed it incorrectly. I meant that he said you were a bad coder when it seems that he meant to say that you aren't a great programmer. I meant to slap the "seems like" onto the entire sentence, since its merely speculation because I am not that person and don't know for sure.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 06:39 PM
3

It seems like he said "bad coder" when what he meant was "a coder that lacks greatness". The vast majority of people lack greatness.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 06:30 PM
3

The easy way to not be charged with rape by fraud is to not lie. Rape by fraud is a bad, bad, horrible term. What these sorts of actions are is romantic or intimate fraud.
/r/MensRights01/10/10 06:23 PM
2

All right, it was clumsily stated. Men gain more of a reproductive advantage from multiple sexual partners than women do, since a man with two women can have two pregnancies at the same time.
/r/MensRights27/09/10 03:24 PM
2

Men and women unwittingly disagree at an earlier stage in the process: identifying whether or not a transgression has occurred. It seems like this is another aspect of the risk-taking divide between the sexes, where women don't gain a reproductive advantage from multiple sexual partners while men do. Not apologizing for a trivial slight is safer, since you are less likely to antagonize a rival, but is a distinctly non-dominant behavior. Dominant behavior more often leads to multiple mates, so ev…
/r/MensRights25/09/10 07:55 PM
8

I guess her legions of fans will find that out the hard way when their boyfriends go to jail because they thought it was ok for her to hit him. There really needs to be a better anti-domestic violence advertising campaign based on "Don't want to get hit? Don't hit them." Its seriously the number 1 way to reduce domestic violence.
/r/MensRights23/09/10 02:22 AM
17

Unless we keep every single man's DNA in the country, how would we make bio-fathers aware that they have a child once we find out that a woman's husband is not her child's father/how would we find the real father? I'd assume that the woman would know who she has had sex with at or around the time of conception.
/r/MensRights19/09/10 09:37 PM
19

This would be in the best interest of the child But what about the best interest of the father?
/r/MensRights19/09/10 09:07 PM
1

Only those who would be even or come out ahead in a divorce would marry when they think that their marriage will end in a divorce.
/r/MensRights14/09/10 09:56 AM
6

Why would I put anything that's MINE on line and jeopardize MY future. There is very little room for OUR future or OUR financial freedom. Right, young men must be selfless, gallant, and willing to throw their lives away for the State. </sarcasm> You're perpetuating the belief that the lives of young men are somehow unimportant. Stop it.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 06:06 PM
6

And yes, 50% of marriages end in divorce, which means 50% don't. Find out what those 50% who are succeeding are doing right, that makes far more sense than planning for failure. Those who would succeed in avoiding divorce are more likely the ones who wouldn't leave someone just because they refuse to marry them.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 05:49 PM
9

That's pretty much bullshit as there are far more factors involved in making relationships work. You're missing the point. The point is that half of the people who think that their marriage won't end in a divorce are wrong.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 05:48 PM
2

But you're completely missing cynar's point. Read carefully. there are good reasons to expect men to excel slightly more. to excel slightly more He's not arguing that humans have a harem social structure, he's arguing that high levels of success help men have more children more than it helps women. For fuck's sake, 0.5% of men in the entire world are direct male-line descendants of Genghis Khan and his close male relatives.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 09:12 AM
1

He is saying that women may intrinsically have less aptitude. No, he is not saying that. He is saying that there are less women with sufficient aptitude than there are men.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 05:36 AM
2

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1214729 Do some actual research. Humans are slightly polygynous by nature.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 05:34 AM
2

But worse, casting MR and feminism as two sides of a coin excludes other viewpoints. How? There are still reactionaries in support of traditional gender roles, and they are working against both Feminists and MRAs.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 03:09 AM
1

Even if it comes up, what's to say that they won't take him?
/r/MensRights12/09/10 10:09 AM
7

French Foreign Legion. Its a better option for that young man than slavery.
/r/MensRights11/09/10 06:37 PM
2

Nope. Pulling a submission out of the spam filter is functionally equivalent to posting it yourself. So you should only pull things out of the spam filter that you think should be posted in the subreddit.
/r/MensRights10/09/10 06:02 PM
1

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=are+rich+people+more+likely+to+have+male+children seriously though, don't be lazy. edit: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101142.html
/r/MensRights09/09/10 02:53 PM
3

if the probability of getting a girl is not dependent on any factors relating to the dynamics of the relationship between the parents But the probability of getting a girl is not independent of who the parents are. Rich families tend to have more male children, while beautiful families tend to have more female children.
/r/MensRights09/09/10 09:00 AM
2

French Foreign Legion. I'm going to try to stay in good physical shape so that it is always an option for me.
/r/MensRights08/09/10 07:50 PM
3

2 % of work hours were done by people who are both male and female.
/r/MensRights07/09/10 02:08 PM
1

Each individual man has much less power over executing the duties of their office than you'd think. If a District Attorney stopped prosecuting, say, Marijuana laws, he'd quickly be replaced by a man who would enforce said laws. If a Governor of a state pardoned everyone currently in jail for using marijuana, they'd get replaced by someone who is 'hard on crime', etc.
/r/MensRights06/09/10 07:49 AM
2

Domestic court orders are not enforced outside the US. Even if they were, at some point its just about time to join the French Foreign Legion.
/r/MensRights06/09/10 01:07 AM
9

Right, because Real Men don't care about what anyone else thinks and shows no feelings, ever. riiiiggghhhttt
/r/MensRights06/09/10 12:19 AM
2

Men are a subset of humans. If all humans naturally organize and cooperate, then all men naturally organize and cooperate.
/r/MensRights30/08/10 08:40 PM
2

This. One merely has to look at history to show that men cooperate. Now, whether or not higher testosterone has anything to do with male cooperation takes science. As a first experiment, see if they are correlated. Test a bunch of people on the cooperation game and measure their testosterone levels, and check correlation between them. If testosterone is correlated to game results, design more experiments to try to disprove your hypothesis. SCIENCE!
/r/MensRights30/08/10 07:33 PM
9

Disregard females; acquire currency
/r/MensRights29/08/10 05:25 PM
24

Not every woman is out for money or a divorce True, but family law enables and promotes the women that are.
/r/MensRights27/08/10 03:55 AM
1

But just because they are spending more money does not mean that they are spending it on themselves I know. But isn't it funny to imply things without saying them?
/r/MensRights25/08/10 04:37 AM
1

I vaguely remember some statistics in a marketing context or something but can't remember much. This counts shared expenses like women doing grocery shopping, etc.
/r/MensRights24/08/10 03:34 AM
1

Its swung pretty far the other way, now, with wives spending significantly more of the money that the husband earns than he does.
/r/MensRights23/08/10 10:37 PM
4

Given all that, it's hard not to conclude that, in public discourse at least, men's lives aren't valued as much as those of "women and children." Orwell called out strategic bombing critics on these grounds - essentially, they'd rather have soldiers (young men) die than a cross section of society. Society has always viewed young men as its less valuable and more disposable segment.
/r/MensRights20/08/10 06:05 PM
2

I remember watching movies as a kid and then again as an adult and now I can see things there I just did not pick up on as a kid. I've had this with books. Specifically, Brave New World. I read that at 12 and again at 14. I totally missed all the orgies and child sex the first readthrough.
/r/MensRights20/08/10 04:46 AM
2

most of those are targeting people they know, not stranagers Exactly. There's not that many crazy people who kill or otherwise harm strangers - the vast majority of people require a good reason before they kill others.
/r/MensRights12/08/10 09:13 PM
8

The daughter did things absolutely right. If you pick out a person at random, odds are they are going to help you - there's no reason to be afraid of strangers that you approach, since there's maybe a few hundred or thousand who would rape and/or murder you out of 300 million americans. You just have to be careful of strangers that initiate contact with you.
/r/MensRights12/08/10 02:52 PM
6

"No. I think its time that we consider that you shouldn't be seeing our daughter so much." read the fucking post.
/r/MensRights11/08/10 01:14 PM
13

Yeah, the first story is totally going to help sooth my introversion/anxiety when I go to a large public institution in three weeks.
/r/MensRights04/08/10 12:28 PM
10

Its worse than that. No one will stand up for someone accused of being a sex offender, for fear of being lumped in with them. Modern-day lepers.
/r/MensRights02/08/10 08:37 PM
12

from the article: "People have the right to be where they want to be,'' Couch said in an interview. "But as a mother of two little kids, anything to keep my kids safe is all right with me.'' Made me rage so hard. 'Oh hey, I'm going to acknowledge a valid point and then totally disregard it because THINK OF THE CHILDREN'
/r/MensRights02/08/10 06:34 PM
8

this is rape because I said you raped me derp
/r/MensRights31/07/10 07:08 AM
4

Maleness is only partially learned. They tried to raise a boy who had his genitals destroyed at birth as a girl. It did not work. He later committed suicide.
/r/MensRights24/07/10 10:30 PM
1

she's done exactly that and the guy still has to pay, anyway. The point is to A) never be a biological father, and B) never be a father figure to any child with a mother. Vasectomy works for A), as well as helps with B) because any pregnant woman is pregnant with some other person's progeny, which makes it easier to break up on the cheating significant other. Really, the cases you've seen are a result of not following B)
/r/MensRights12/07/10 09:43 PM
1

The point of getting a vasectomy is so that if the woman you are having sex with gets pregnant, you can contest paternity and get out of the relationship before the courts would consider you a father. Plus, if you don't tell her you've had a vasectomy, hilarity can ensue as she tries to get money out of you.
/r/MensRights12/07/10 09:33 PM
4

in arrears for child support, actually. 'stay at home mom' implies children.
/r/MensRights10/07/10 05:30 PM
4

My (female) manager at a pizza delivery chain store actually said that she wouldn't hire any women since the employees there were men except her and a thirty-some year old obese ex-con, and it would be 'distracting'. I'm pretty sure this sort of thinking is much more common among women than men. Its not really misogyny, its misandry.
/r/MensRights05/06/10 06:04 PM
16

2) With your lawyer, take those recordings to a judge. Argue for sole custody, a restraining order, and child support. ftfy
/r/MensRights29/05/10 07:02 PM
5

Because with anonymous rape accusations, you can't tell who has been 'raped' dozens of times.
/r/MensRights27/05/10 03:49 PM
1

uhhh, I can't tell if this is sarcasm... I request a clarification in regards to whether or not Poe's law is applicable in this situation.
/r/MensRights28/01/10 12:06 AM
2

Lets Talk More About How Capitalizing Every Word Makes What You Are Saying Seem More Important.
/r/MensRights13/01/10 10:46 AM
2

agreed, 'you would be legally mandated' is the correct phrase in this context.
/r/MensRights08/01/10 11:12 PM
3

Think a variation of Poe's law - the point is that its not obviously a sarcastic joke.
/r/MensRights20/12/09 01:54 AM
-2

men man the fuck up
/r/MensRights11/12/09 07:33 AM
-1

man the fuck up.
/r/MensRights10/12/09 04:01 PM
-2

'Man the fuck up.'
/r/MensRights10/12/09 03:52 PM
22

Good. If the court went the other way, I could see american sperm banks emptying out due to lack of donors.
/r/MensRights02/10/09 02:28 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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