TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

TomBayes Archive

View 0 posts and 213 comments by TomBayes 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)
1

I imagine it has a lot to do with mating strategies, wide with little investment in offspring, or tall with heavy investment in offspring. When men perceive wide strategies are viable (like when sex is plentiful), they are more likely to invest in said strategy if they are capable of doing so (able to procure sex easily). Naturally, the most desirable men will be the most successful at going wide. Sounds like if women want commitment from desirable men, they're going to have to commit themselves…
/r/MensRights04/09/17 06:48 PM
6

The paper in question has been thoroughly debunked. Just look at the list of who cited it: it's a laundry list of people correcting them. In fact, many of the corrections are published in the exact same journal that originally published the research. I noticed this making the rounds again recently on facebook, despite being from 2014. It's bad science.
/r/MensRights12/07/17 02:44 PM
1

Sociological systems tend to have a much higher noise to signal ratio than in physics. From that perspective (and I say this as a STEM person), their problems are indeed a lot harder to solve. That said, I think the difficulty of sociological problems is exacerbated by the quality of individual tasked with working on them. They just don't get the same kind of rigor in their training.
/r/MensRights17/06/17 08:53 PM
17

From what I understand, this is true of both sexes in healthy relationships.
/r/MensRights08/06/17 01:41 PM
1

I'm a statistician. I loathe Nate's website because of how low quality the technical aspects of 90+% of the articles are. People should stop reading it.
/r/MensRights09/03/17 04:18 AM
1

Nothing's wrong with race. And that's why it's concerning to me: women are choosy about it according to the article. That's a form of bigotry. Since you think it's OK that women are selective about the race of their mates, why do you think this is OK and not a sign of bigotry?
/r/MensRights23/07/16 01:26 PM
0

This doesn't surprise me one bit and I find nothing problematic about it. I'm substantially more concerned by the greater emphasis women place on race and childhood affluence. I'd understand affluence now, but where you grew up? Sheesh, women.
/r/MensRights23/07/16 04:04 AM
1

I provided nothing but questions and doubt because I doubted the validity of your statement within the context of the paper. Given I couldn't figure out how you drew your conclusions from the paper, rather than calling you wrong, I sought to understand. Now that I have prodded and you replied, I am still not convinced the argument your provide is supported by the paper. I feel your assertion is too strong for what the paper is capable of supporting. It seems clear to me that societal and environ…
/r/MensRights24/06/16 12:38 AM
1

I'm not being selfish, I just not going to put effort into something of small consequence. I provided my citation: the documentary. If you are not satisfied with it, that's on you to read deeper into the literature to find original sources.
/r/MensRights24/06/16 12:29 AM
1

I put the amount of effort I am willing to put in. If it doesn't satisfy you, I'm sorry.
/r/MensRights24/06/16 12:12 AM
-3

I'm familiar with this statistics, I just don't see how it translates into 'attractiveness' within the context of dating sites like okcupid or tinder. While the figure does show that the size of the female portion of our ancestral population is much larger than the male portion, it doesn't offer an explanation as to why. Attributing it simply to 'attractiveness' (even if in the most general sense) isn't particularly useful or insightful.
/r/MensRights23/06/16 11:20 PM
-1

They must have been cut when chopped it up into pieces for the website. Not that they would give full citations. But they give the researchers names and institutions, so you can look over their publication list.
/r/MensRights23/06/16 11:05 PM
1

Could you please quote the passage from the paper you cite that corresponds with your claim: This study on Y chromosomes shows that men have always been less attractive than women. If you could find no studies, then that's probably a lack of your ability to search. You can watch the doc here for relevant citations: http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/other-shows/videos/other-shows-science-of-sex-appeal-videos/
/r/MensRights23/06/16 10:26 PM
0

I saw this Discovery Channel Documentary on sex. In it they claimed some scientific studies found the men and women end up with people of similar attractiveness, on average. I think that's probably true. So when I see data like this from dating websites, it makes me think that what we're seeing is an artifact of the online dating environment. I imagine there is some element of competition that is either removed or hidden while using online dating sites that skews expectations.
/r/MensRights23/06/16 07:17 PM
1

Please, don't use Google's top results as a political statement. Google tailors its search results to the individual searching. It says a lot more about your search habits than it does Google's political outlook as a company. If you search using a non tailored search engine, such as DuckDuckGo, you will find what you should expect: information about International Men's Day.
/r/MensRights19/11/15 05:35 PM
4

I have heard it said before, if you want to kill someone, do it with a car. The punishments for road rage, vehicular manslaughter, etc. are much lighter than their non-car involving counterparts. Keep that in mind when reading a news story involving car accidents.
/r/MensRights07/11/15 04:49 PM
6

OK, so all of the replies you've been given don't answer the question of why stacked bar charts are bad. They answer the question of why it's problematic to report percentages when counts are available. Here are a couple problems stacked barcharts have inherently: It's visually difficult to make comparisons across the charts as the edges of the corresponding categories don't line up cleanly. Again, this is true whether scaling to the same total is appropriate or not. It has a low information to …
/r/MensRights28/08/15 05:48 PM
14

I propose the hypothesis that such games already exist in large quantities and are already popular. And that funding the creation of new games for this purpose is a waste of money. It could be better spent understanding what video games lead to healthy life outcomes.
/r/MensRights06/06/15 06:31 PM
2

I think this article is useful if you cut it down to a few sentences (edited to remove dramatic effect and entitlement): In the past, excuse me was usually a whisper that left my body while I prepared to make myself smaller. In the new excuse me, there is no grinding my teeth while juggling four bags, no passive discomfort while dreaming of the alternate universe where I advocate for myself. Now, I excuse myself and sit in the empty seat. I don't think any of that is particularly difficult to un…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 10:49 PM
1

There were two meanings and I understood the movie to be far more about the feminist theory of Objectification of women than about any actual AI. While I agree that your interpretation is a valid interpretation based on the content of the film, this comment still says much more about you than it does the film. Your willingness to dismiss much of the film as: just a bunch of banal pop-culture bullshit is proof of that. As you've produced a thought terminating argument that does not offer any addi…
/r/MensRights30/05/15 03:37 PM
1

I find it fascinating you never stopped to consider the question asked in the film which is never answered: Are the AIs women at all? You just jumped right to the conclusion they are women. If the film doesn't answer such question for you, your interpretation based on an answer to that question, ignoring alternatives, is more indicative your personal biases than it is the films.
/r/MensRights30/05/15 02:27 PM
2

There are many of joys of going to the movies: Experiencing new worlds, stirring new thought and discussion, exploring in general, sharing experiences, etc. Once a movie is out in the world, every individual has a right to their own interpretation of its meaning and its implications (if any). In that sense, I would defend these writer's rights to their thoughts. That said, having seen the film, I experienced something very different than these two writers that does leave me quite critical of the…
/r/MensRights17/05/15 01:50 AM
2

This blog was very disappointing. FiveThirtyEight is known for being pretty spotty with the quality of their analyses, and this one is no different. The author sets up and argument for why the things aren't want they seem according to the person asking the question, then the author falls on their face when linking the two. Instead, we just get a 'data blog' fill entirely with speculation, instead of any real convincing analysis.
/r/MensRights22/03/15 04:15 PM
19

Can we get a content tag for this post for the violence? Naturally, I'm fine with the content being here. I would have just liked to have known it was a picture of a guy with a stiletto lodged in his skull, so I wouldn't click.
/r/MensRights15/03/15 01:55 PM
11

Did any of you take a closer look at the image at the bottom of the article? http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/20150108gr_cosbylondon003.jpg?w=620&h=465
/r/MensRights09/01/15 04:12 PM
23

I'd watch those crime shows on TV a decade ago. There were frequently women who hired hitmen to kill her husband. They'd succeed at killing him and they'd all get caught. The shooter would get the death penalty the wife would get 10-25 years. Pissed me off SO much. I oppose the death penalty. But if you're going to execute the shooter, you should execute the wife. Seemed rotten to me she'd get a pass simply because she was too much of a coward to do her own dirty work.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 02:25 PM
15

It’s not because they’re “opting out” of the workforce when they have kids, but because they’re allowing their partners’ careers to take precedence over their own. In other words, it's not your kids holding your career back, it's you!
/r/MensRights18/11/14 10:39 PM
4

I really hate that attitude. I hope you're not right =\
/r/MensRights26/09/14 01:20 PM
5

Well, the did sort of break his will a while back after he said something they didn't like. He hasn't been the same since.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 05:08 PM
2

The more I thought about it, they may actually apply to a slightly younger demographic of men than you listed. Oh well, give it a shot.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 10:41 PM
2

I never read them, but my brother really liked the YA novels of Chris Crutcher.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 10:33 PM
6

This is pretty disappointing. I'm OK if they separate out children from adults. But if they're going to note how many women, they should note how many many. It is overwhelming men. The other thing about children, it is overwhelmingly male children. So when they say it is children paying a terrible price in Gaza, in a certain sense, what they really mean is boys are paying a terrible price in Gaza.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 03:09 PM
1

I really wish the article gave a reference or link to the actual study. It sounds like it'd be fascinating read.
/r/MensRights15/05/14 01:48 PM
1

It's missing an important comma: president Obama, joined by members of his cabinet, signs a presidential memorandum creating a task force to protect students from sexual assault, in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC. Now that I've added the comma, we can see another problem: it's bad writing. It doesn't end the sentence with the most important piece of information. This is much better: president Obama, joined by members of his cabinet in the East Room of the White House in Washi…
/r/MensRights15/05/14 05:31 AM
12

I like your post, except this: You want us to keep our eyes off you? Why don't you girls keep your hands to off us? There's an implied 'if-then' to the statement, but I don't think there's any logical step from one to the other. This is probably better: You want us to keep our eyes off you? Well, we want you girls to keep your hands off us. It allows them to keep their outrage, but should force them to recognize they aren't the only sex who has something to be outraged about.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 04:33 AM
1

I'm glad we can have different opinions on what is funny.
/r/MensRights28/03/14 01:28 PM
0

I thought the commercial was quite funny. It's a very well constructed joke, even if the punchline is dark and mean-spirited.
/r/MensRights27/03/14 11:43 PM
17

Her requests are actually completely reasonably... if she were seeking employment at an R1 university where research is the main focus for tenure. But she isn't. She's seeking employment at a teaching university. So Nazareth's response is also completely reasonable and a correct assessment of the situation. She is definitely making a scene over nothing.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 05:11 AM
4

Respect is earned, not given. Mathematically, this rule taken as a maxim ends with nobody respecting anyone. It is bad advice, stop spreading it.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 05:19 AM
1

I don't know, the most affecting thing I've seen at the Olympics was when Aleksandr Karelin broke down into tears after losing to Rulon Gardner in Greco-Roman wrestling at the Sydney Olympics. Karelin had been undefeated in his professional career, over 800 wins. He was a giant who was finally toppled. It was very humanizing to see his response to the defeat.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 03:38 PM
2

I've pretty well been convinced that there are biases against women in STEM. However, what bothers me about the discourse is how unscientific it too often is and how limited in scope and understanding the solutions tend to be. Basically, since gender is something that cannot be randomly assigned, many of the studies are observational. Which is fine, except they are too often content at stopping with 'because she's a woman,' instead of looking further and more critically about what exactly about …
/r/MensRights25/01/14 03:48 PM
3

I disagree, insofar as I think the issues such as this are complex. Of course the economy plays a big part. But when she says, 'men need to become more like women,' what she should be thinking is we need more social programs and policy to aid men and boys in need. Feminism is a social movement which at its tamest is indifferent to such a need, and at its worst, actively combative of such policy for a perceived negative impact on the advances of women. But what I really think her point is that me…
/r/MensRights10/01/14 05:09 PM
3

In a very general sense, boys like being active, they like games, and they like competition. Let them move around. Let them be noisy when working. Let them yell out answers instead of raising their hand. Group work is good if you can turn it into a competition between the groups. Otherwise, avoid groups larger than size 2. Listen to what they do and don't like about assignments (was it boring, hard, stupid, or not relevant to them, etc.), and try to make changes accordingly. Try to encourage the…
/r/MensRights03/01/14 04:00 AM
1

What is your annual salary adjusted for cost of living?
/r/MensRights31/12/13 10:22 PM
2

I admire the idealism, but I think too much emphasis on idealism gets in the way of progress. I am not someone who thinks the end always justifies the means, but in this particular case I think it gets the job done.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 04:08 AM
8

If that what gets some women worried and wanting to change things, then so be it. The fact of the matter is we are all very selfish creatures who like doing things that benefit us and not stuff that doesn't. If we can build a better society off of their own self interest, who the heck cares?
/r/MensRights16/12/13 11:05 PM
1

Maybe. The real winner of an argument is the person who learns the most from the process, not the person whose thesis is declared 'correct.' Second place goes to the person who helps the other learn something. So if these feminists you argue with are not changing their minds as a result of your argument, then I would not say the argument was worthwhile. If you're pleased with yourself with such a result, all you're really doing is going through an narcissistic exercise to feel validated. I suppo…
/r/MensRights15/12/13 10:21 PM
1

I watch Bob's shows. His critical thinking and analytical skills are great... most of the time. He has this problem where he seems to have wholly consumed the feminist theory of his women and gender studies course in college and is incapable of thinking outside of those walls, to the point where he denies such an outside exists. As in, he likes to completely ignore actual scientific evidence, such as the kind reference in this post that shows he is flat out wrong about how the world works. Which…
/r/MensRights11/12/13 03:16 AM
3

The problem with this study is it looks only at race and doesn't control for other confounding factors. I can assure you that the population of white, Asian, black, and latina women (and men, for that matter), are not the same population just with a different skin color (Just look up demography of the US on Wikipedia). But let's suppose we did control all those things and still found this result, well so what? People are allowed to be attracted to something for whatever reason they want, no matt…
/r/MensRights06/12/13 01:17 AM
1

I think the image prompting the original article potentially paints an incomplete picture by focusing only on who responds the most and least, which can skew our understanding of what is going on. Also, I find it highly off-putting that the article is so focused on men's preference for Asian women, but is other-wise not as interested in women's preference for white men. I am even more off-put by how unscientific the commentary is, with only female commentators. The icing on the cake is the image…
/r/MensRights02/12/13 04:44 AM
1

I gave you the story about my brother's fiancee, which my logic stems from. That is factual. You ignored it. But I am fine with you continuing to take it as a no. You win this internet argument, congratulations. Your anger, aggression, and thick-headed-ness has prevailed.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 11:22 PM
1

Either way it's ludicrous. That's, like, your opinion, man. Can you explain how you came by this extraordinary secret magic information which enables you to tell us all things wd don't even know about ourselves? TIL using logic is tantamount to performing extraordinary secret magic. edit: spelling.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 10:55 PM
1

Your revised claim is even more laughable. It's not revised, it's exactly as I intended. I apologize that my post was not clear enough for you to understand it without completely blowing a gasket.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 10:31 PM
2

It I [sic] absolutely clear that you are accusing everyone, and by extension me, of responsibility for misogyny leading to misandry. I am accusing everyone, and by extension you and myself, of participating in behaviors that can contribute to misogyny leading to misandry (and the point you like to avoid because it doesn't suit you: misandry that leads to misogyny). To be clear: this is not the same as actually being misogynistic (or misandric). These can be benign behaviors that when added up ov…
/r/MensRights17/11/13 09:33 PM
3

That's a good point, and possibly flaw of his rhetoric. Though, if you take the logic of the statement to its natural conclusion, you get that result I described. So I don't think it's a big deal. Especially considering the article is about sources of misandry, and not sources of misogyny.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 08:46 PM
1

entitles you to accuse us of misogyny At no point have I done that, nor have I done this: accusing us of causing people to hate us by hating women. So given your continued misinterpretation of what I am saying, I don't think any amount of facts or evidence will help me.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 06:26 PM
2

Yes, on a list that is 12 things long, the one that points out that people who are treated badly tend to treat others badly in return means the whole list is bunk. Your reddit handle it all too apt here.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 05:56 PM
-1

Then perhaps you can explain the ways in which I'm at fault so I can stop and contribute to the solution? Calm down. No need to be so defensive. And if you really want me to answer that question, write down your life history, and I'll give you a PO box number to send it to. I'll read it and give you an answer. If the idea of that sounds absurd, good. It should. I don't rape or sexually assault anyone, I don't commit domestic violence of any kind, I don't discriminate against women at home or at …
/r/MensRights17/11/13 05:37 PM
3

Psychology today is all over the place in terms of quality, but this is definitely one of the good ones. I get tired of hearing women complain that men are oppressing them, and men complain that feminism is oppressing them, but use the term synonymously with women. Whatever social structure we have come up with is enforced by everyone. You can't just focus on the opposite gender to solve whatever issues are facing your own's. And you can't solve your own's issues without working on both, because…
/r/MensRights17/11/13 07:01 AM
1

I have met quite a few number of women who are supportive of the ideas. These tend to be women with brothers and/or sons, or women who are very nurturing (even more so than your stereotypical woman is 'supposed' to be). The women who seem to be the least supportive always identify themselves as feminists (though, this is not to say all feminists), tend to have no brothers/sons, and often have quite pronounced issues with self esteem.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 05:03 AM
2

I don't think men get really any say at all in what masculinity means, just as women don't get any real say in what femininity means. Ultimately, these are the characteristics that create attraction from the opposite sex, or are the natural side effects of said characteristics. By this definition, they are determined by somebody else. Which is why I don't care about what it means to be masculine in any other sense than what it means stereotypically, because that's the only definition that matter…
/r/MensRights31/10/13 07:02 PM
3

Cool. I never knew he had done it before. I admit, my own biases would not have pegged him as the kind of person who would have done so.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 04:04 PM
18

I don't think he even realized he was doing it until it was done. It looked like he just let his mind go, and that's where it brought him. Fascinating.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 11:27 PM
1

How large a group is needed depends on the amount of variation in the data and the effect size you wish to detect. 55 people can be more than enough.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 02:36 PM
2

I saw this pretty cool special on the Discovery channel, The Science of Sex Appeal. It noted that humans are 'odd' in a sense since it seems to be the women that adorn themselves with ornamental trinkets to attract attention, while men seem to dress quite plainly. Contrast this with many other species, particularly birds, where the males are the fancy looking ones when it comes to attracting mates. Why is that? Well it turns out it's because human females are afforded the luxury of not having to…
/r/MensRights29/10/13 04:08 PM
17

I'm perfectly fine with people asking the question. Yes, it gets annoying and how something's a men's rights issue is often blatantly obvious. But if this movement can't be bothered with that level of scrutiny, it is doomed to failure. I would go so far as to say it should fail because it would then be actively avoiding the issues. Did you already forget this article from yesterday? edit: fixed link
/r/MensRights26/10/13 02:34 PM
17

This is a really great article. I really don't like the direction the discourse on bullying has turned. This is a very good article about how certain aspects of bully are ignored, and not only are they ignored, but we end up on focusing on the wrong things.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 05:30 AM
28

Simply saying these are the most popular searches says nothing about why they are the most popular searches. Andy 'why' is what people actually care about. You can't tell if the people are searching 'women should have no right's' because they agree with the statement and want to find like-minded people, or if it's because they disagree with the statement and are looking for violations, or any other reason for that matter. And it's a sneaky trick to try to imply it's one thing to support an agend…
/r/MensRights21/10/13 08:31 PM
2

LoZ is a power fantasy. You're saving the world from evil, after all. But there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with having a power fantasy about saving the world. That's why so many men and women enjoy it.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 01:12 PM
1

A lot of the top comments on this article are very insightful and offer great criticism of its content. I encourage everyone to read them. Reading them might actually be more useful than the article itself.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 01:07 AM
-1

Well no crap he said female, it's in the replies to an article about females in science.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 02:30 PM
0

Ugh, you guys are overreacting on this one. Do you see where he says outstanding female undergraduates? This isn't preferential treatment, it is recruiting.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 05:19 AM
1

It could have just been the agency my Dad worked at. The first year it was daughters only, then they switched it the year after because it was discriminatory.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 07:25 PM
1

The federal government recognizes how this is sexist, has bring your child to work day.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 03:44 PM
0

That's very idealistic, but not useful in practice. In proportion to the number of qualified applicants isn't perfect either, but it's much easier to evaluate. And for a lot of things, it's a pretty good proxy. I left out the word qualified in my original post. I will add that.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 04:14 AM
2

You're right, that would be the fairest. I also know very few people that actually do that as a maxim. It's also hard to evaluate externally.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 04:12 AM
2

There is a fair number. It's proportional to the number of qualified applicants of a given gender. Which can make things tricky, since it varies by position you can easily run into Simpson's Paradox by trying to look at the problem from a macro level (that is, across positions). edit: added 'qualified'
/r/MensRights11/09/13 09:55 PM
3

From what I understand, people really shouldn't be bothering with a legal marriage unless they intend to have children in the near future. And I don't say this as many men do here, that marriage isn't worth it. It isn't worth it for men OR women, unless they want children.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 03:43 PM
1

Then the justice system failed you. Just as it fails the fathers who are not abusive, but still denied access to their children by mothers who can't be bothered to follow court ordered visitation. The solution to a broken system is not to break it more as a work-around. It's to fix what's broken. So how about lobbying for actual solutions to the problems you faced, instead of trying to squash the solutions to other people's problems because it stops an illegal work around to your own problems.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 09:45 PM
2

Me and my feminist buddies? What the heck are you talking about? Cool down, and quit with the diatribe. It's unbecoming. My point was if these signs are so bad, then they should be red flag enough in and of themselves. No additional signs needed. So the person complaining is getting worked up over nothing. And if they're not red flags, then again, they person complaining is getting worked up over nothing.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 04:39 AM
0

I'm confused, so these signs the person is complaining about, they don't send the same message? Why is that?
/r/MensRights24/08/13 09:14 PM
5

My love of reading was beaten out of me by the public education system before the end of the 8th grade. I understand that parents have their priorities all out of whack of boys, but the least the school system could do is let young boys read what they want to read, instead of putting all these arbitrary restrictions concerning the plot, page length, etc.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 02:58 PM
-1

Ugh. You know what's crazy? This lady is just like the male geeks who decry 'fake geek girls.' Geekdom is a culture defined by social ostracization. In other words, victimhood. For this woman, many of those oppressors are men. For those men, many of those oppressors are women.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 05:27 AM
1

The feminist part of me wishes people weren't so bitter. The feminist part of you? How about the human part of you. The selfish part of me doesn't want to date MRAs because we generally don't share the same value system You can date whomever you want for whatever reasons you want. But your logic on this seems quite flawed. Why would you want a pool with men removed due bitterness and turmoil, when you could have a larger pool where these men are living healthy and successful lives? It seems rath…
/r/MensRights27/07/13 05:13 PM
1

Well if their problems can be solved by feminism, feminists sure aren't doing a very good job trying to solve it. And if feminists won't solve it, which is what it seems like you want when you say this: I'm honestly not sure that I want it to go away then what MGTOW need is definitely NOT feminism.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 03:03 PM
1

I had not seen it, and while I did click the link, I didn't actually stay on it long enough to hear anyone sing. I really don't care to, whatever the content. Instead, I'm going to move forward ignoring you shared the video. As I said, I am sure you can find men who do think just awful things about women as a gender. I already stated that. Some of these men been hurt pretty badly, some of them never had things all put together right in the first place. So while I can understand to an extent that…
/r/MensRights27/07/13 04:49 AM
6

who believes that women as a whole are manipulative, controlling, and irrational That's a bit of hyperbole when describing the situation, though I am sure you can find many men who do feel that way. It's not because women as a whole are that way, i.e. over 50% of them are that way. It's because the amount the man can lose, when combined with a woman who is that way, is too great. So the proportion of women who are that way can be perceived to be substantially less than 50% and still have it be c…
/r/MensRights26/07/13 06:35 PM
10

Fact is that single childless women make more money over their lifetime than single men and you'll never heard that from a feminist My friend's wife is a mega-feminist. In general, she is actually a very smart woman. She recognizes this fact as true, and it is definitely on her mind. However, she refers to it as "ponderous," because while she recognizes it as true and that it conflicts with the idea of a discrimination-based gender wage-gap, she is ultimately incapable of considering the idea th…
/r/MensRights14/07/13 10:38 PM
0

A teacher's salary is a living wage. Sounds like they're doing just fine then.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 04:11 AM
2

"The slut begging to be raped" is a straw man you've created to spin the reality that some men and women make very poor decisions concerning how to conduct themselves in public, which increase the chance of being raped (similarly for other violent crime). And yes, this includes rape perpetrated by individuals acquainted with the victim.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 03:36 AM
6

I don't think it's different, it's just extremely unpleasant for us to think that our own actions might have led to such an awful crime being committed against us. But the fact of the matter is that yes, our own actions are always going to come into play. However, to what extent this is the case (and if anything could reasonably be done to change it) depends highly on the context of the situation, something /u/backhairparty conveniently left out of the situation they described.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 01:50 AM
-1

Are you aware how condescending you are being?
/r/MensRights15/06/13 04:30 AM
2

I think that's viable criticism, but then again, this discussion is so 'new' in a certain sense that somebody needs to get on the ground and talk to people to figure out what might be going on. After some sort of proposed narrative has been established, then a more rigorous investigation of said narrative's validity can take place via my formal and scientifically rigorous studies. Researchers need a starting place and this kind of work is fits the bill.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 03:36 AM
6

Yeah, strike out philosophy and replace it with art history. Though, the women I know who majored in that actually turned out to be rather successful in their careers, which is not something I can say for the women and men who majored in English and women's studies.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:55 PM
11

Dating 65 lb women apparently.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 01:46 PM
1

Makes me think of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd9a685jzCg
/r/MensRights06/04/13 02:35 PM
1

Wonder if some history buffs may be able to enlighten me as to anything important that might have happened around 1947--1960? That's the period where the fraction men attending college declines in Figure 1b? At all other times it appears the fraction of men and women attending college is increasing at roughly the same rate. It makes it look like some important societal shift occurred and ever since then men have been playing catch-up.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:03 PM
0

Yes, that's it.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 03:49 AM
1

Yes, that's it.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 03:49 AM
2

I know I have seen it, but can't find it. Do you have a link to that episode of Extra Credits?
/r/MensRights19/03/13 01:28 AM
8

Personal experience: women dislike ugly women more than men do.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:05 PM
8

Honestly, I have a hard time buying it. This is a link to the annual academic salary survey results done by the main professional organization in my field. Table 3 breaks salary down by gender. As you can see, women at the assistant and associate are outperforming men in terms of salary, at all levels of experience. Does this concern me? A tiny bit, but I'm not going to jump to any rash conclusions. What I can say is that it looks like women in my discipline that entered the field in the last 10…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 02:07 PM
6

Yeah, I think so. The budget is large enough and the pedigree is still there. Also, 11, 12, and 13 actually sold incredibly well. There was just divergent opinion on the quality of each.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 12:07 PM
1

Several billion dollars is monetarily huge, yes. But, it says nothing about number of employees. Particularly number of full-time employees that are actually sex-workers, and don't qualify for other categories such as secretary, etc.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 12:09 AM
1

OK, how big is huge?
/r/MensRights16/02/13 03:34 PM
0

Not all jobs have enough workers for BLS to calculate a meaningful ratio.
/r/MensRights16/02/13 04:26 AM
1

I can't think of a single atheist group that congregates. Come on dude, just Google it. If it's really too much work for you, fine: there was an atheist student group where I went to college; I have a friend who went an atheist reddit meet-up. Happy? I don't understand how the two are not requirements of one another. Let's start with the definition of theism. Theism has only one condition (which is both necessary and sufficient): belief in a god or gods (see the definition you linked). The "espe…
/r/MensRights11/02/13 08:58 PM
1

Theists prescribe to a specific philosophy that corresponds to their religion False. Theism does not require religion, and vice-verse. In terms of atheists that congregate around their atheism, I'm curious where these congregations are taking place. Anywhere they want to. Just Google it, you'll find them. it's not as if atheists enjoy tax free status to setup atheist churches False. Seriously, where the heck do you come up with this stuff?
/r/MensRights10/02/13 11:46 PM
2

Can you name one common interest shared by all atheists? They don't believe in a god or gods. If that doesn't suit you as an acceptable answer, then I ask you this: can you name one interest shared by all theists? We all have very different life philosophies, we all are from different parts of the world, ... that's really about it. The same is true for theists. Not all (or nearly all) atheists subscribe to /r/atheism. It often acts as a shout box for people who live in areas where they do not fe…
/r/MensRights09/02/13 06:23 PM
2

If that's true, why the heck does /r/atheism even exist? Listen, I understand atheist are a diverse people (along those lines, so are theists), so lumping them all together often doesn't make sense. But to act as if they never congregate around common interests specifically related to being atheists is incredibly ill-informed and naive.
/r/MensRights09/02/13 02:11 PM
2

What is that supposed to mean?
/r/MensRights09/02/13 03:01 AM
4

Well, people using okcupid have the option to make their information private. That is, only members can see it. Some sort of privacy issue could be raised concerning that. However, this seems much less like a violation of privacy and is instead closer to cyber bullying. Though, the laws are so new on that I don't know what actually qualifies as "cyber bullying."
/r/MensRights19/01/13 10:08 PM
1

The more general term is "within subject effect." For this particular study each resume was used twice, once with a male name and once with a female name. As a result, the results for the names that share a resume should be correlated. So you'd want to account for the effect of each resume to account for the correlation of names within resume. If you are familiar with statistics, the most basic example of this would be a paired T-test.
/r/MensRights27/12/12 03:09 PM
1

For the most part the study seems fine. My only issue is that it is unclear to me if they properly accounted for the "within 'resume' effect." Granted, I did only skim the actual study. I doubt this is a big reason to discredit it, either. sauce
/r/MensRights27/12/12 05:23 AM
2

You are correct. However, from what I understand the benefit to boys is even larger than it is for girls.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 07:25 PM
7

Your point is valid. I think people are upset because they see the court system as favoring mothers in custody cases (something mothers seem to be hunky dory with) when it seems quite clear that for custody of sons, this has been a particularly bad decision and sons really do need ample access to their fathers to grow up healthy and stable. So while it might not be the mother's fault that the system favors her, she is complicit by allowing it to do so without thinking about what is best for her …
/r/MensRights19/12/12 03:55 PM
1

I'm not even sure why you're responding to me at this point. Because you keep responding to me and because I think you're thought process is way off base.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 01:36 PM
1

I don't see your point. Of course you don't. Even if it is a metaphor, plenty of people in this thread agree that it's okay to buy a car without consulting your wife. Well no duh. We live in the real world, not the fantasy world of the commercial. We know buying a car without consulting your wife is a bad idea. But if we're going to remain fixed on the real world we live in, and not the fantasy land the commercial exists in, I find it very strange you're so set on having us admit the men made ba…
/r/MensRights10/12/12 04:40 PM
1

You are continuing to insist upon the commercial being comparable to real life.The commercial is NOT real life. Stop using logic as if it were. Edit: The whole thing is a metaphor
/r/MensRights10/12/12 02:48 AM
1

You are continuing to insist upon the commercial being comparable to real life, that the man behaved inappropriately. The commercial is NOT real life. Stop using logic as if it were. If you switched the genders the only thing that would change is that men would be confused about its meaning instead of women. The commercial is selling a dream. A dream of freedom and independence. The women in the commercial are shown as angry not because the man made a bad decision (again, NOT REAL LIFE), but bec…
/r/MensRights09/12/12 05:57 PM
2

It's pretty obvious from the reactions of the wives - "What is this?" "Look at that price!" that the car was bought without consultation. All right, I'll give you that that's pretty convincing. What are you talking about? The cultural phenomenon where some men feel trapped in unhappy marriages with little control. Consulting their wife isn't about having a discussion where pros and cons are considered, but asking her permission to do something, like a child might ask their mother. The commercial…
/r/MensRights09/12/12 02:38 AM
2

How do we know there was no consultation? At what point does consulting your spouse turn into getting permission from your spouse? If you have to get permission from your spouse, is your marriage really equal? Would you want freedom? You're getting bogged down by what might have literally happened in the commercial (man bought a car that his partner didn't want him to) instead of thinking about what figuratively happened (man did something that made himself very happy and his partner was incapab…
/r/MensRights08/12/12 11:21 PM
1

There is clearly an issue with guys who claim they are nice not getting any women. I made several points explaining this buy you just haven't read what I have typed clearly enough to see it. As far as I can tell you've tried to make two points: 1.) The approach Nice guys use is ineffective at picking up women. 2.) That approach is manipulative. I agree with point 1.) and disagree with point 2.). And for the record I'm not disagreeing with the golden rule, I'm saying that if you are going to trea…
/r/seduction07/12/12 02:59 PM
1

You were clearly implying that he was unable to properly read what you had typed and that was why he was in disagreement. Whether it was your intention or not that is very condescending. I wasn't implying anything. I stated exactly what I thought the problem was, which was that he misread my posts. I find it ironic I'm being scolded for being direct in a thread concerning the indirectness of nice guys. You're saying it's okay to do something only because you want someone to do something in retur…
/r/seduction07/12/12 01:28 AM
1

You seem to still be under the assumption that if you are nice to a girl, whether you state your intentions or not, she will like you. I think you're confusing my disapproval of the representation of nice guys by their lowest common denominator with approval of the methods nice guys think will lead them to success with women. What specifically did I say that made you think I support the latter? I find it ridiculous that you would say something so condescending. I find it ridiculous you would thi…
/r/seduction06/12/12 02:50 AM
2

I think we're actually in agreement, you just haven't read what I have typed clearly enough to see it. I framed none of my points in absolute terms, which I think is the mistake you are making while reading it.
/r/seduction04/12/12 11:55 PM
3

I for the most part agree with the rest of your post. However this statement bothers me: "girls are not vending machines you put kindness coins in and sex comes out." It's not that I disagree with the statement. It's that I don't think it actually reflects the reality for most "nice guys", so using it to describe them is incredibly disingenuous. In general, nice guys don't think of girls as vending machines you put kindness coins into and sex comes out. What they do think is that if they are kin…
/r/seduction04/12/12 06:09 PM
3

Nice guys aren't compassionate or attentive out of the goodness of their heart, they do it because they want this girl to approve of them, to fuck them, to talk to them, to confirm they're not going away to leave them all alone in the frightening cold world. Wait, wait, wait. Let me get you straight. Nice guys are compassionate and attentive because they want somebody to be compassionate and attentive in return? Wow, those asshole. Seriously though, this post is so full of misinformed, misguided…
/r/seduction04/12/12 03:39 AM
1

Anecdotal, but I don't know any women that have purchased a male prostitute or stripper. I do know quite a few women who have purchased female prostitutes or strippers.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 11:40 PM
2

I like DotA =\
/r/MensRights10/11/12 10:15 PM
2

My bad, but that doesn't really change my point, since it is still part of Canada.
/r/MensRights10/11/12 12:47 PM
-2

While you could make that argument for Canada as a whole (though I wouldn't buy it, even with their lower crime rate), there are provinces with crime rates quite comparable to the US (e.g., Nunavut). Edit: Seriously, why the downvotes? Canadians that mad I mixed up Nunavut?
/r/MensRights10/11/12 02:42 AM
1

I see the subtlety of your point. Correlation does not imply causation, but causation does imply some form of correlation. And knowing what causal relationships are not supported is useful. But you haven't convinced me that there are cases where you're going to end with model that could be described as causal unless such cases were incredibly contrived.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 04:13 AM
1

From everything I understand about about SEM (which appears to be the topic of Causality), they are not really causal models at all. You're not ruling out certain causal structures, you're ruling out certain "correlated" structures.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 03:03 AM
2

I could try and explain it, but I'll need to know how much you know about statistics first.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 02:17 PM
4

It pains me that such a smart man would tell such a terrible, terrible lie to his students: First a very simple but important point about statistics. Statistics cannot be used to establish causation, they can only show correlations. Whether the statistics and be used to infer causation or not it dependent on how the data were collected. Specifically, it was done in a controlled experiment with random assignment of treatments to groups. This is why you'll never see a causation study involving sex…
/r/MensRights25/10/12 03:16 AM
2

Yeah, sounds weird. I'll probably have to see it.
/r/MensRights22/10/12 11:07 PM
2

Depends on what's going on in the movie. I haven't seen it, so I'm speculating. If you've seen it, it would be nice to have greater context concerning the actual scenes. Since right now, you told us that something happened, instead of telling us why it happened. Again GIVE US CONTEXT.
/r/MensRights22/10/12 04:16 PM
1

I haven't seen the movie, so this is all speculation (have you seen it?), but isn't the gender reversal effectively the training sequence in Kill Bill 2? Edit: I'm making a lot of assumptions about what is actually going on that could be false. I'm making assumptions on what happens in the movie based on the preview that maybe I shouldn't be. However, original poster really isn't providing any additional information about what is going on in the film. Context matters and OP has provided none. Ho…
/r/MensRights22/10/12 04:07 PM
1

From what I recall of the preview, all that seems appropriate and in context makes sense. Why the outrage?
/r/MensRights22/10/12 01:20 PM
4

While I agree that a lot of them might be off topic, I don't see any reason to treat them with extra special attention compared to other off topic material. The PUA community is diverse. It seems an overreaction to intentionally distance ourselves from the community as a whole, rather than the specific subsets are the real root of the negative association. If a post is relevant to MR and just so happens to relate to or originate from PUA, it should be postable.
/r/MensRights20/10/12 05:14 PM
1

I think what I liked most about game is that it starts with the assumption that all men have value, the problem is expressing that value successfully. Like you're applying for a job that you're qualified for it, but your resume isn't the best. How can we improve that resume? So, game is a set of tools for figuring out how to better express the value you already have, essentially tools for improving your resume. What tools are relevant depends on who you are, what you have of value, and who you'r…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 05:56 PM
1

I'd highly suggest finding out who's in charge of it and asking if you can join, even though it's advertised as just for girls. Tell then what you told us, that you love working with Python, but can't find any alternatives to the class. She'll say one of three things: (1) yes, you can join, (2) sorry, this is girls only, but here are some similar classes you might like instead, or (3) no, girls only, sorry. So if she says (1) or (2), you're set. If she says (3), ask for alternatives like in (2).…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 03:28 PM
7

Her logic is that men make the rules (patriarchy) and thus no matter who the system favors or disfavors, men or women, it's men's (patriarchy's) fault. I have to say, if you believe in patriarchy, the logic is sound. The stupid thing about it, and what has always bugged me about feminism/feminists, is that they only fight what they call patriarchy when it favors men, and are too busy to fight against it or, worse, they fight for it, when it favors women.
/r/MensRights13/10/12 09:37 PM
8

My friend's wife says it's patriarchy in action. But, she isn't about to go out and try to get someone to do something about it.
/r/MensRights13/10/12 03:15 PM
3

I remember being told that latino (hispanic?) men actually outlive white men. However, there is some debate on whether the data collected on them is as accurate. It's a very interesting issue in epidemiology. Also, no sauce, sorry :S Edit: found some sauce: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr59/nvsr59_09.pdf Page 6.
/r/MensRights13/10/12 03:08 PM
2

That moment you realize what should be a tautology Girl Gamer acquired a derogatory slant based on a small and very obnoxious minority of its population, a la Nice Guy.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 02:48 PM
1

If you're using any of IE 6 through 9, stop using it now. There is a huge security bug that Microsoft recently announced and has yet to patch. Upgrade to IE10 or use another web browser like Firefox, Chrome, etc. Edit: saw you use Chrome in another post. Mah bad.
/r/MensRights22/09/12 01:18 PM
3

I have no idea what's going on right now.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 03:43 AM
3

This isn't "news" in the sense that it already washed through the papers decades ago when it was first made public. Scouting got in a lot of trouble, re-organized their safety standards accordingly. This isn't a story you should be worried about. It is just sensationalism to rile people up after actual recent snafus with the BSA concerning gays in Scouting.
/r/MensRights16/09/12 11:45 PM
3

Well, the community itself is massive. Like-minded people get together. So on local scales, there is quite a bit of policing. So people move around to find where they fit. If they are a jerk, they fit in where there are jerks, or go solo. If they aren't a jerk, they avoid groups dominated by that type. I guess that catch comes in environments based around highly competitive play. Unfortunately, the winners make the rules, and if the winners want to act like jerks (and oh boy do they so often do)…
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:08 AM
9

A view on your view. Those out-and-out jerks are jerks to everyone. Those guys guys that quiz your credentials, and if you fail turn into total jerks, do that to everyone. And while I'm sure the getting hit on part is a huge pain in the butt, that's pretty much because there are so few women. The more dashing male geeks I know get hit on awkwardly by geeky girls with some frequency as well. It's simply a numbers game that women will continue to lose (or win, if you hate competing with other wome…
/r/MensRights10/09/12 08:36 PM
7

Saying women make 52% more than men in part-times jobs is just as disingenuous as saying women make 75% of what men make in full time jobs. Chiefly, it ignores actual hours worked and occupation.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 12:12 AM
2

Can attest, bad knee, uses elliptical.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 01:45 PM
2

Please, tell us more. This is an interesting train of thought I have not heard before.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 12:54 PM
57

Besides the obvious, I'm also pleased the word 'rape' wasn't used. By doing so, along with presenting the two perspectives, they completely change the tone this sort of poster usually has. It changes it from being something very aggressive and accusatory to something that is still firm, but without the negative edge about its audience.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 02:49 PM
2

Man, I can't remember the last time I read something that reached this level of irony.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 01:43 AM
48

The difference between Shrodinger's cat and Shrodinger's rapist is that for Shrodinger's cat, after an hour you open the box and the cat is either alive or dead, experiment over. For Shrodinger's rapist, after an hour you open the box and if the man isn't a rapist, you close the box and wait another hour. This process is repeated till either the man is a rapist, or he dies of starvation from being locked in a box.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 01:32 PM
2

I am sure some will find certain points a bit extreme (at times I did), but it should be a great conversation starter. It also is a nice break from the very female-orientated frame of reference normally taken in these discussion.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 04:16 AM
2

I was always partial to, "Men are jerks. Women are psychotic." from Timequake by Kurt Vonnegut.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 02:26 AM
3

Start voting in primaries, then. A lot more variety there.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 01:24 AM
4

I hate to say it, but this story only encourages my belief that it's a rude neighbor. There is a big difference between treating everyone like they will cause you harm, and everyone like they could cause you harm. It's the difference between paranoia and preparedness.
/r/MensRights28/07/12 10:17 PM
3

To state this another way, the odds of a woman experiencing road rage is about 23% higher than the odds of a man experiencing road rage.
/r/MensRights28/07/12 05:25 PM
31

I have to be honest, that could mean almost anything without any more clues about the actual context.
/r/MensRights23/07/12 03:20 PM
5

That thread was a train wreck. The banned redditor in questions started making some very good, though controversial posts. The more he responded the further down the rabbit hole we went, and the crazier he started sounding. Still, I found the whole discussion very informative, and I think it is too bad he was banned. They were really ganging up on him.
/r/MensRights23/07/12 01:19 PM
7

To play devil's advocate, how do you know it doesn't cost 8 times as much to keep a woman as healthy as a man?
/r/MensRights17/07/12 09:36 PM
8

If you're going to put vasectomy for men, might as well put "tubes tied" for women. That'll make the lists more comparable. Edit: also, condom should be on both lists. Just as a man can refuse sex with women who won't let him use a condom, a woman can refuse sex with a man who won't wear one.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 05:17 PM
11

I really like Dave Chappelle's bit about men being raped. He makes light of it in a way people usually expect, then turns it on its head, highlighting actually difficulties men deal with who have been raped. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwrel&NR=1&v=LLWlBgj0uOc
/r/MensRights16/07/12 02:57 AM
2

I have to admit, I actually did get a chuckle out of that one.
/r/MensRights28/06/12 02:41 AM
3

It doesn't worry me one bit. You are right that words can have powerful meaning. Murder and rape are two such words. But encouraging self censorship of such words sanitizes the world we live in. It removes emotion and experience. That's far more worrisome to me. Rape definitely seems to be a fad word right now. That will pass.
/r/MensRights27/06/12 02:42 AM
3

How do you feel when someone says about the losing team in a sports match, "Wow, they're sure getting murdered out there".
/r/MensRights27/06/12 02:26 AM
3

Gandhi was also shot and killed. Guess they don't have that kind of conviction.
/r/MensRights07/06/12 06:03 PM
15

I believe the story also ended up being a fake.
/r/MensRights05/06/12 09:34 PM
3

Considering the quality of U-dub's school of public health, anything less would be a big disappointment. Kudos to them.
/r/MensRights01/06/12 11:09 PM
12

This reminds me of an experience I had at college football game. I went to to a tailgate before the game, and brought a 2L bottle of soda in a backpack. I left the soda at the tailgate and brought my backpack to the game. This backpack was COMPLETELY empty. Seriously, nothing inside. No paperclips, pencils, anything. I got to the gate, the security guard wouldn't let me in with my bag. I said it was empty, unzipped every single pocket and shook it around in the air. He said, I still couldn't bri…
/r/MensRights23/05/12 03:07 PM
2

I am generally in favor of the views of Andrew Sullivan describes in his book Virtually Normal. Which means I am a proponent gay marriage and allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military. I don't support anti-discrimination or hate-crime laws.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 02:52 PM
22

Here's what I got out of this article: Women that really want to succeed at the work place like High Powered Men need to act like high powered men. It means taking on challenging projects, then knocking them out of the part. It means sticking up for yourself. It means being vocal and confident about what you believe. It means, at times, making sacrifices in your work-life balance. There is probably discrimination at work, but the solution isn't hidden or a secret: it's playing the game harder th…
/r/MensRights18/05/12 04:10 PM
1

Those aren't materials everyone has readily available, believe it or not.
/r/MensRights16/05/12 04:33 PM
4

This isn't victim blaming. It's a description of how the population of female victims tends to be different from all other females. That kind of information is incredibly helpful for women trying to be safe in case there is really is some kind of causal relationship going on. That is, it's helpful to women who believe in their own agency.
/r/MensRights16/05/12 01:04 PM
6

You have two professional leagues because you want to see the best female players too. It's why there's also a seniors tour. People want to see the best old players.
/r/MensRights16/05/12 01:41 AM
9

If you look at all the best male golfer and how long their drives are, then compare to the best female golfers, you'll understand why it's segregated.
/r/MensRights15/05/12 11:20 PM
1

Do you think her hand hurts from patting herself on the back so hard? Or is that another one of those women are tougher than men, so she can't tell?
/r/MensRights15/05/12 02:22 PM
3

Mom is Feminist, was not damaged by it. In fact she was, and still is, very concerned about how the public education treats boys. She recognized quite a few female teachers and administrators I had from K-6 that had active biases against male students. She also read a lot of masculinist literature on the plights of boys.
/r/MensRights15/05/12 03:46 AM
1

I was having coffee with a few friends - a married couple and another dude. I don't know what prompted her to say this, but whatever discussion we were having crashed into the ground. She said: If you take away a man's power, all you're left with is a sperm donor. Remember 3 dudes, one of which was her husband. Thankfully the other dude knew how to change the topic of conversation immediately. I already knew she was quite the indoctrinated feminist, and she is usually good to be around. But that…
/r/MensRights14/05/12 07:33 PM
1

Pay for your dates when your date has done something that deserves it being paid for. Did she just help you move? Did she buy the movie tickets? Did she cancel plans with her girlfriends to hang out with you? Did she drive all the way across town to pick you up because your car broke down? Did she go with you to the hospital to see a sick relative? If you are going to pay for dates, make the sure the cost of the date is small. Like just a coffee or an ice cream. Something you might buy for a fri…
/r/MensRights11/05/12 07:09 PM
3

This thread is useless without actual data.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 11:46 PM
2

If I have children someday, I hope I can afford the luxury of home schooling for K-8. Especially if I have a son.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 05:02 PM
2

I think you're just being more anti-kid than normal. Having kids is a pseudo-optional lifestyle choice. Somebody has to have the lifestyle or our species dies out. But a more immediate issue for the economically developed cultures you describe is that there becomes an overabundance of elderly supported by the government and not enough younger individuals paying into the system to support them. See China. I agree that if you're going to have children, you need to have the money to support them, 1…
/r/MensRights28/04/12 03:20 PM
1

Yes, you are correct, Mr. Buzzkillington.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 03:32 AM
5

New pick-up line: Girl, you have the emotional complexity of a VCR.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 04:41 PM
2

Double anecdote time: 1.) My sister has had male and female bosses. She doesn't like female bosses because she has had several that were mentally unstable. Seriously, they were passive aggressive bipolar psychos. 2.) I have had male and female bosses too, and much better luck than my sister. So I would say I don't care what the gender is. But, the only boss I have had that I would consider bad was female. She was also mentally unstable.
/r/MensRights12/03/12 07:21 PM
1

What do you think it is classified as then?
/r/MensRights01/03/12 11:24 PM
7

It's called reckless endangerment.
/r/MensRights01/03/12 05:52 PM
18

It's called something like reckless endangerment, right?
/r/MensRights01/03/12 05:51 PM
42

This is the sort of story that makes me pause from my normal optimism and instead hate the human race for a couple minutes.
/r/MensRights01/03/12 12:39 PM
28

I've heard people at the counseling center at some unnamed state school say it is very difficult when a woman comes in who feels she was raped while she was drunk at a party, but all the signs point to morning regret after realizing she just slept with somebody she wouldn't have had sex with if she had been sober. It is a slippery slope for the counseling center. On one hand, they can't know for sure and would hate to steer her wrong if she really was raped. On the other, they don't want to ruin…
/r/MensRights18/02/12 03:30 AM
7

Tangentially related: When I was in college they had female only dorms and coed dorms. At orientation when it was asked why there weren't any male only dorms, they said it is because when they did that and only 4 or so men requested those dorms, so there wasn't really a demand for it. They could easily fill an entire dorm with women who requested it. So it actually ended up being a sort of punishment for the men who didn't want to be in an all male dorm, but got assigned to it anyway. So some qu…
/r/MensRights17/02/12 02:56 PM
5

This is a troll account. People should ignore.
/r/MensRights05/02/12 08:29 PM
1

DV = "Domestic Violence". Though, the article refers to PV = "Partner Violence".
/r/MensRights05/02/12 05:35 PM
4

I have no problem advocating men's rights. I do have a LOT of trepidations about organizations whose sole focus is doing so. I know someone's got to do it, but when I see how out of control some feminists groups have gotten, it worries me that someday MR will have the same issue. Basically, feminists have set a bad precedent. And while I think Warren Ferrell is fantastic, some other vocal members of MRM make me nervous. One minute they'll say something I agree with, then they'll start justifying…
/r/MensRights02/02/12 12:20 AM
3

It is baffling to me that feminists seem to be so bad at statistics. Women have excelled at the discipline for over half a century. Why is it the ones who decide to promote feminism suck so bad at it?
/r/MensRights01/02/12 10:53 PM
6

It made you the man you are today? Please elaborate on how it has shaped you as a person. Edit: Oh I see, xpost. Man, too early in the morning.
/r/MensRights30/01/12 01:03 PM
3

I know a lot of women that wear cargo pants. They all enjoy hiking and the outdoors. They are well put together, reasonable, and are fun to be around. Based on that correlation, the world might just be a better place if more women would just wear cargo pants.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 03:05 PM
9

If you read the paper, particularly the conclusion, instead of the abstract, you find that the author of the originally linked article was right on the money.
/r/MensRights26/01/12 06:03 PM
1

I was being sarcastic. I assumed talking about cooties would make that obvious. It looks like you didn't get it. I have failed.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 06:52 PM
8

My brother's girlfriend gets super mad at him when he does this. What she doesn't realize is that he holds the door open for everyone, not just her and other girls.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 02:14 PM
3

Because those corporations are run by men, and men don't like icky girls with cooties. So men don't pay the women as much because they don't like them.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 01:58 PM
3

Ah, positive reinforcement. It sure is nice to be encouraged to do the right thing, instead of discouraged from doing the wrong thing.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 02:07 PM
1

Though what you say makes sense, I don't think it would make people happier unless culturally things change. That's because equality isn't usually thought of as equality of skill, but equality of representation.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 01:41 PM
1

No, the concern is that women don't actually have the physical stamina and strength required to be placed on the front lines. Feminine hygiene (i.e. taking care of their lady parts) is a also a huge issue. Their bodies are literally not capable of handling the same physical stresses the military places upon men.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 05:50 AM
9

Let me Google that for you... You shouldn't have to cite common knowledge.
/r/MensRights09/01/12 05:23 AM
1

I am still not sure what I think is the best choice here. I agree it is both parties' job to make sure adequate measures have been taken to prevent unwanted pregnancy, like using a condom. Suppose those measure were taken, and then it broke? This does happen with enough frequency that it is scary. I do think it's in appropriate to force a woman into a medical procedure like abortion if she doesn't want to. But even if men did have the legal right to forfeit financial obligation to the child, I d…
/r/MensRights08/01/12 03:44 PM
-8

The ramifications of having a baby vs being circumcised are so incredibly different that this juxtaposition is insulting and is damaging to the men's rights movement as a result.
/r/MensRights31/12/11 02:51 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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