TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ToraZalinto Archive

View 10 posts and 549 comments by ToraZalinto on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Yeah. No. Lets not go and water down Misandry just as SJW's have done to Misogyny.
/r/MensRights17/08/16 02:58 AM
2

That's fucking impossible because this whole situation revolves around real names. This is stupid.
/r/MensRights19/08/14 07:01 PM
1

There's also the fact that "self-esteem" isn't something you can assign a value to.
/r/MensRights17/03/14 02:37 AM
4

The Vow is also a good movie for this as well. SPOILERS AHEAD. When the lead female (who is suffering from amnesia) finds out that her father cheated on her mother years ago with her then best friend she questions her mom and asks (not a verbatim qoute) "Why didn't you leave him?". The mother responds with "I almost did. I had everything packed and was ready to just take you kids and walk out the door. But then I thought about the house and our lives together. And all the things that your father…
/r/MensRights22/12/13 06:38 AM
8

Many a truth was told in jest.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 02:27 PM
13

Stopped reading at point number one. (The Last of Us spoilers) To them Ellie became a "weak" character because she broke down. She just went through something traumatic and was in a fit of hysteria. Of course she'd break down at that point. Whether Joel showed up or not. As soon as she stopped hacking at David's face she'd have succumbed to tears. Not because she's female but because she's human.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 04:49 PM
9

What a load of horse shit. >_>
/r/MensRights31/08/13 01:27 PM
1

Oh there's drama to be had for sure. Just saying that this guy doesn't come off as "entertaining". Though hearing about all the shit he's done in his life makes you feel like you've accomplished next to fucking nothing.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 05:54 AM
2

Integral math is a very dry experience if you've not watched him before. But he's extremely thorough and informative.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 05:31 AM
2

The only video I can think of on hand was one from Integral math where he goes through Matt's "summary" of what happened. Basically Matt went into the forum under a sockpuppet account and voiced some concerns he had and was, as you can imagine, banned. He revealed who he was and a shitstorm brewed from there. I think this is the video
/r/MensRights19/08/13 05:22 AM
1

I agree. But I'm able to understand that while I find he's wrong on one issue that doesn't make him entirely not worth listening to on other issues. I also feel that, especially after running into shit with the A+ crowd, he's starting to see that A+ and feminism aren't EXACTLY what he thought they were. Ever since he "went undercover" to show that the A+ers weren't as bad as people say they are and the shit hit the fan he's stopped supporting it as openly.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 05:06 AM
2

I still watch AronRa's lecture videos and the Atheist Experience to hear Matt speak about Atheism. But yeah it's cringe worthy when they try to bring up Atheism+ or feminism.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 04:40 AM
12

Thunderf00t is probably one of my favorite youtubers. His "Why people laugh at creationists" and "Feminism is poisoning atheism" series are pure gold.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 02:57 AM
3

I can't afford it. That's why I don't go unless I have to.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 03:42 PM
1

An overwhelming amount of "skeptics" are Atheists. But it's not a necessity.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 02:12 AM
6

Unless she's wearing something that's going against the office dress code it shouldn't matter.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 09:43 PM
11

Wait it flat out says in the rules that you can't present data that disagrees with Feminism? What the hell?
/r/MensRights21/07/13 02:48 AM
1

His point wasn't that we SHOULDN'T be able to talk about it. But that we're told we're not allowed to.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 04:16 AM
826

Thanks for not leaving anything for the rest of us to say.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:49 PM
1

I can understand her sentiment but I disagree. My father raised me and my siblings alone for years. And we celebrated both Mother's and Father's day for him. It's meant to honor the person for doing what they can by themselves when it's supposed to be a two person job.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 03:18 PM
9

Honestly this is my favorite series by Thunderf00t.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 03:12 AM
1

Because the broken ass system is broken ass because it's forgotten innocent until proven guilty. And a life in prison is still a life. And actually not the worst kind either.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 02:20 AM
3

That's actually the basis to any sound legal system. Innocent until proven guilty is there to make sure fuck ups are limited. And personally I find the death penalty completely and totally immoral. Especially since the trial system is not totally infallible. Until the day it is the death penalty is too much of a risk. One innocent being killed is too much.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 02:26 PM
1

The fact that it does happen. And when it happens it gets a lot of publicity doesn't mean it happens with great frequency. Lets not start forming "Fake Rape Threat Culture" conspiracies.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 09:54 PM
8

Youtube user Integralmath calls out AFVM on their recent comments that sound dangerously like the emotional bullshit we hear from feminists.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 03:39 PM
6

The problem with your theory is that he pays the majority of the bills. The only thing she pays for is the mortgage. The rest of her money is all spending money.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 07:04 PM
11

Do everything you can for this guy. Seriously.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 02:22 AM
2

I actually read that one.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 01:49 PM
17

But simply saying "Feminism" did EVERYTHING BAD EVER is not gonna get us anywhere. And this is a case where throwing "feminism" into the article was done in bad faith.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 04:51 AM
7

Upvoting to keep this elevated.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 04:50 AM
8

Age does not beget maturity.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 06:46 PM
8

He was telling everyone else that they shouldn't care about it.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 03:09 AM
9

The point is that saying "Oh, it's no big deal for me" Doesn't mean it's not a big deal. If someone is raped but shrugs it off and keeps going that doesn't make rape something we don't need to talk about does it?
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:26 AM
8

It was just long enough my friend. And I felt it definitely needed to be read here. Your arguments were very precise and probably the best refutation of circumcision I've seen. Even better than the Bullshit! episode on it.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:21 AM
5

Yeah. I never hit the like button in the desert. ;)
/r/MensRights17/04/13 10:06 PM
1

I would say in most circles that Cheap doesn't even always carry the meaning of low cost but simply inferior quality.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 03:20 PM
6

What happens if you tell them to fuck off?
/r/MensRights11/04/13 01:36 PM
22

I always look for realism in my porn. No joke. When the situation and the characters are just one giant trope I pretty much always click off to another video.
/r/MensRights10/04/13 01:04 AM
4

Here's the problem. You're conflating Women's Rights with Feminism. One does not necessitate the other.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 04:44 AM
1

I think they understood your comment as "Some parts of American/UK society women have power but most of it is male dominated" as opposed to "parts of the world"
/r/MensRights01/04/13 03:11 PM
2

If they can still interbreed and create viable offspring they are still the same species.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 02:09 PM
1

You can teach your kids that. But don't start telling the government that the science class rooms have to teach it.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 03:02 AM
1

I wouldn't want to charge you with Child Abuse. But if you're teaching YEC then I would have a problem at that point. And the constitution grants both. The freedom to freely practice or to NOT practice. By that affect I am granted freedom FROM your religion. Not freedom from ever encountering it. But being from from it's restrictions.
/r/MensRights24/03/13 01:14 PM
4

That last bit is why people are afraid of them. And to be honest that's with good reason.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 02:01 PM
0

I can accurately say I've never been angry at random women giving me a boner in an awkward situation. My anger has always been reserved for my penis.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:58 AM
0

No I don't. But I do have to respond to them appropriately.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 12:05 AM
-11

It's actually pretty dumb. And it's simply a personal attack on Sarkeesian without actually addressing her arguments.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 10:25 PM
2

It was shown to be a troll post BY SRSwomen when it was posted. It was posted in two different places by new accounts.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 10:05 PM
1

Commenting here since it will likely get buried. The thread being screencapped is a trolling attempt. It was posted by two different accounts around the same time that were both new accounts. Showed up in SRSsucks a while ago.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 10:04 PM
1

This is something I noticed with a lot of discussion in r/truegaming. Everyone simply kept asserting the conclusion "woman-object" into their premises. Without actually showing that the character or the player is supposed to view the female character as an object.
/r/MensRights10/03/13 01:07 PM
5

I don't feel it will ever really be settled. Because the entire thing is usually based around one's opinion on "Where does life start?".
/r/MensRights08/03/13 09:39 PM
10

I've been pro-choice only for a relatively short while now. But I definitely agree with you. It's never been about "controlling women" and taking away their rights. Both sides love to straw man the other side.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 07:04 PM
-1

Oh trust me I don't want to ban porn. I lurve me some titties. Just pointing out that there hasn't been a demonstrable link between porn and sexual assault. There's a lot of factors to control fo. I'm not saying it can't be related just that, as far as I know, no study has.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 02:50 PM
27

Correlation =/= Causation.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 06:07 AM
6

Every time I see your username I read it wrong. >_> You did that on purpose.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 06:39 PM
2

I wasn't trying to say it was her fault. The policy is still batshit insane. But I do know that MY high school said that if you somehow bring a weapon to school or come into posession of one you should bring it to the office. I did that with a pocket knife once (Yes I know people bring them to school all the time but I'm a do-goody) that I forgot to take out of my pants pocket. They gave it back later.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 02:20 AM
7

Yeah. The schools expect you to bring it straight to them if you somehow come into possession of a firearm or weapon. Leaving in the restroom probably wasn't the best idea. Also..why did he take it from the guy in the first place?
/r/MensRights03/03/13 05:57 PM
3

It does matter. Because how we look reflects on how we actually are. If the brunt of our movement is just a bunch of appeals to emotion than we will have built castles in the sand.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 02:27 PM
8

Possible variant of the dunning-kruger effect?
/r/MensRights02/03/13 02:16 PM
-2

As much as I feel for you this seems like a post ripped straight out of SRSwomen with the genders reversed. You're complaining about the situation that your gender finds itself in but nothing anything that you yourself have particularly gone through yet. (Mayhaps you have but your post doesn't indicate that much) We need to be better than the people we struggle against. Venting about issues you're going through personally is great. It lends anecdotal credibility to the "realness" of our cause. B…
/r/MensRights02/03/13 02:15 PM
1

Nope.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:29 PM
1

At the time I hadn't really hit that "red pill" moment and figured out that sexism COULD be directed my way. I had always known something was a little off with patriarchy "theory" and what not. But at that stage I just took the punches.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 03:42 AM
16

IIRC that's not correct. Hooters was forced to create male positions (Cooks and busboys) but are allowed to keep the server staff completely female.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 02:53 PM
19

I went to apply at a Ryan's buffet once. THey only took applications/interviews on Mondays for one hour. I got all dressed up and biked down there (In the cold!) to apply. I got there about 15 minutes before the window and I ended up waiting 30 minutes for an application. At that 30 minute mark a young girl walks in. A relatively hot blonde. She's wearing a hoodie and jeans and asks for an application. They hand her one immediately and completely forget about me until I ask for one again. We bot…
/r/MensRights27/02/13 02:50 PM
4

I just saw this broadcast on my local news station. During the broadcast they say these will be used at the "final stage" of an injunction. These are the same injunctions that can be obtained with ZERO EVIDENCE and upheld after the initial time period based on simple heresay alone. I have seen them used on more than one man in this way. This is a gross violation of privacy by the government based on almost no evidence.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 03:23 AM
146

Seriously. Thank you for the consistency. We don't want to immediately assume that anyone is guilty.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 04:09 PM
1

He is taking it for what it is. An unnecessary coaxed letter.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 04:18 PM
1

Nuclear bombs are a strong weapon. Doesn't mean you should use them to end every war.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 03:45 AM
1

But you can do that without uneccessary appeals to emotion.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 01:21 AM
1

They aren't winning. Not any more. And that's because the facts are on our side. We should be focusing on truth. Not on ideology.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 12:50 AM
1

No this is exactly what we need to avoid. Focusing on emotional appeal is how you get sucked into sensationalism. We are not here for a good time. We are here to spread awareness about a serious issue.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 04:05 PM
1

3 months and that's what you come back with?
/r/MensRights04/02/13 06:24 PM
3

it's a couple hundred dollars to fix.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 02:36 AM
4

Because you believe without good evidence. Aside from personal experience (which is only good for the person who had the experience) there is no good reason to justify your faith. An atheist believes in one less religion than you do. That's all.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 03:56 AM
5

Logic is not science actually. Logic is it's own methodology. Science is simply a methodology of observation, hypothesis, and testing.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 12:08 AM
3

Science is a methodology. It is not a body of knowledge. It's purpose is to expand and refine that body of knowledge. It is all about what "we currently know to be true." Not what we believe is true. But what we can see about the universe based on what we've observed. There's no guess work. There's no faith. There's only hard and rigorous testing. That is why the theories are the highest point in science. Because Science never claims objective knowledge but continuously seeks it.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 12:01 AM
5

Science is a methodology. It can not be wrong. It can only not have all the information. Science, by it's very nature, adapts to incoming information. Religion does not.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:53 PM
2

I should have added "based on your posts".
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:51 PM
6

That wasn't his argument. And it was not a false statement.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:44 PM
8

You have no right to be respected for what you believe simply because you believe it. Because your beliefs determine your actions. And this explains why Atheists speak out against religion
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:29 PM
5

No where did he insult you in order to discredit your argument. He actually directly addressed your argument.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:27 PM
1

Why atheists wish to limit the power and spread of religions
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:25 PM
5

What you're doing is exactly what the statement is attempting to point out. You're simply moving God into the "gaps" of knowledge by making it completely vague and unverifiable.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:22 PM
2

Not every atheist is a true skeptic. Though the ratio is heavily skewed towards skeptics.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:19 PM
11

Only because the existence of "God" is dependent on the claims made. If we reject those claims due to a lack of evidence for them there's no reason to suspect that there's some other God besides. So if we reject all the claims for a deity than yes the logical conclusion is we do not believe a deity exists. That does not grow into the claim "No god could exist." Or "Strong Atheism" as it were.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:18 PM
9

I actively go around not collecting stamps.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:14 PM
14

Set a minimum standard for what needs to be done and anyone that passes that standard is eligible. The majority will be male but it should be based on what is needed to the do the job. Not on gender.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 12:10 AM
10

I thought you said "she saw sense". My bad.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 03:33 PM
7

ctrl mousewheel if you want to be cool about it.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 03:07 PM
61

She didn't see any sense. She is still acting as if she's the victim. "He broke up with me and threw a party! sob"
/r/MensRights16/01/13 03:05 PM
71

Dude looks like a lady!
/r/MensRights16/01/13 03:04 PM
11

I think though that a lot of this can be explained by the sheer fact that women are indeed working more. There are almost always more people available to work then there are jobs to be worked. So some men are finding an increase in competition from women in the workforce and that makes jobs more scarce. As both sexes working or women working and men staying at home rises in popularity we'll continue to see this sort of trend.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 06:54 PM
1

Uhhh this has nothing to do with "Changing definitions" but actually talking about how this word is commonly used to simply mean a strong persuasion. Which wouldn't be a problem in that sense. But the actual definition of coercion entails something much more sinister.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 04:12 AM
2

I've heard it used as simply a strong persuasion in more places than I can count. Whether that's a correct usage of the word or not is up in the air but it does show where some confusion arises with the use of the word.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 01:44 AM
-7

Coercion in the common usage means to persuade. It's actual definition may be of a more forceful manner but that's not how most people use it and where the discrepancies come into play.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 10:26 PM
4

It is definitely a liberal leaning sub as is most of the internet. But not on every issue. And the MRM is not tied to any political affiliation. You could describe me as a liberal and I'm an MRA.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 10:14 PM
3

Most of the comments over there seem pretty positive to the MRM. That's a good thing.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 10:13 PM
10

The only problem here is that there isn't any data, that I know of, that suggests a women who is dressed more provocatively is more likely to be raped. However this is the one feminists assert MRA's say to "blame the victim" when, if it comes up at all, the only thing that's usually said is "They shouldn't have been alone late at night" or some other obvious safety risk that could have been avoided.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 02:49 AM
0

Woo. Almost put my foot in my mouth. I assumed the "breakdown of the family" comment was gonna come from a "God made man, woman, and child!" style argument and was going to comment accordingly. I decided to finish the entire article though and I saw that this politician seems to have her head on straight and included homosexuals. And not after the fact either.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 12:18 PM
2

Kind of like an Iron Chariots Wiki for MR stuff? I like it.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 03:20 AM
16

According to the article no one really did.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 07:03 AM
1

To be fair I've seen it once or twice. lol.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 02:09 PM
2

Poes Law.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 02:08 PM
1

You misunderstand. She agrees with me on a few issues. She just doesn't like hearing about any of it. And tends to avoid discussions of that nature.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 01:37 AM
2

Kind of going through the same thing with my fiance.
/r/MensRights28/12/12 10:02 PM
2

Blaming an ideology =/= blaming a gender.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 01:47 PM
7

Putting someone through school is often just another way of extending your control.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 04:22 AM
8

Family is only important if they act like family. After you get through school and are financially independent cut ties.
/r/MensRights17/12/12 01:37 AM
0

IIRC the driver reacted with an unwarranted amount of force compared to what happened to him. And that was the point of contention around the incident originally.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 02:28 PM
0

Oh if I were setting up my own tv/internet I'd definitely go with this. I'm currently paying 40$/month to my "landlord" for 40mbs. The 70$/Month for 1gbs is 25 times better for not even double the cost. If I could justify the extra 30 dollars a month right now I would probably grab it.
/r/MensRights09/12/12 03:57 PM
4

It's an article commenting on a specific aspect of a larger issue.
/r/MensRights09/12/12 03:56 PM
0

Their website says 70 dollars a month for 1gbps. You got me all hot and bothered for a lie!
/r/MensRights09/12/12 04:15 AM
0

My fiance posted it like a year ago. I ripped into it in just that fashion.
/r/MensRights09/12/12 04:13 AM
2

Ok maybe I don't get exactly what was going on. But I feel that her statements weren't unwarranted. I only watched a few minutes. During that time she only refuted the guy's statement that someone else was a misogynist by showing his misogyny. And to be perfectly honest the examples she gave did show him to be a touch misogynistic. It's a fact that women are under represented in politics. And that's something that's slowly getting fixed over time. To say that they shouldn't be because they just …
/r/MensRights09/12/12 04:11 AM
8

While not directly related to any infringement on our 'rights' it does have baring on how "male dominated" areas of society are regarded as cesspools of sexism and misogyny.
/r/MensRights09/12/12 04:02 AM
1

slow clap
/r/MensRights07/12/12 04:37 AM
4

Being beaten up isn't the problem. It's being beaten up and left to be EATEN ALIVE.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:51 PM
-4

Yeah but it was unnecessary to lie. I understood that she never actually called them. But the threat would have been just as effective without lying. They WERE breaking the law by detaining her.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 10:12 PM
7

I would say it was wrong of her to say they've threatened her with violence since there was another perfectly reasonable reason to call the cops. They were blocking her departure with their positioning. That alone would have been truthful and been able to get police to interfere without jumping to "They threatened to hurt me!".
/r/MensRights26/11/12 08:41 PM
3

That's pretty much a completely separate thing.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 01:14 AM
18

Almost every grocery store or other such place with larger bathrooms usually has one in the men's restroom here in Ocala, FL. Not sure how it is in other areas.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 12:57 AM
8

One can be assertive without being aggressive. One can not be aggressive without being assertive.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 12:55 AM
4

Add to that Incest (between consenting adults) isn't inherently wrong either. It's odd to say the least. But what two consenting adults want to do is what two consenting adults want to do.
/r/MensRights19/11/12 02:01 AM
146

Educate them.
/r/MensRights18/11/12 09:32 PM
11

I don't even get how incest plays into it. Are they implying we wish to rape our children?
/r/MensRights18/11/12 09:14 PM
1

He confessed...she told them that he said he did it. They compared his fingerprints with the ones they had on file. If you're not in the database (he had a clean record) they don't pull you up. Unless they have other evidence (such as testimony) to warrant getting prints from you personally.
/r/MensRights10/11/12 08:19 AM
1

It doesn't highlight that at all though. It highlights a proper course of justice. Nothing to do with gender.
/r/MensRights10/11/12 05:36 AM
1

This is not an issue of a "woman" accusing a "man" and her word being taken as gospel. This is a woman bringing evidence forward that collaborated with other evidence taken well before her coming foward.
/r/MensRights10/11/12 04:50 AM
-4

THis story has very little to do with anything men's rights. Other than a man was jailed. There WAS evidence. His defense is making the allegation that the evidence was planted but there's no evidence for that other than hearsay and circumstantial. His story COULD be true. But we don't have much to prove it.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 04:21 PM
-2

This story does no such thing.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 04:18 PM
2

They can only say you can't if they see it.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 03:47 AM
0

IANAL but I think that you waive your rights to not being recorded when you walk into stores with video surveillance already. So if they have their own recording equipment set up you can take your own hidden cams in.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 01:53 AM
2

I live in florida and our system is much the same. Test are 70%, Project is 10%, Classwork 10%, Homework 10%.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 05:31 AM
4

Generally speaking you're right. Sometimes their made out to simply be so crazy it wasn't their fault. But not always victims. There are a handful of cases where the female is just regarded as a vile bitch. But they're relatively few and far between. You can REALLY see this if you watch some of the older court focused shows like Perry Mason. Almost EVERY time the woman is the killer it's because the man was an insufferable ass that forced her into it.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 01:48 AM
0

You're awful antagonistic aren't you?
/r/MensRights03/11/12 01:32 AM
29

It wasn't a good way to end things. You should have kept your spot. You got to the line first (and didn't rush) and had fewer items. She shouldn't have opened her mouth. And by offering her the spot you legitimized her actions.
/r/MensRights01/11/12 12:59 AM
2

Last I checked the general consensus from feminists was that 50 shades of grey is just further proof of the patriarchy. Don't ask me how.
/r/MensRights28/10/12 01:11 PM
1

In my experience the girls who didn't take the game "seriously" always wanted to be healers. Almost always. Once you hit end game you saw a wider variety of class choice.
/r/MensRights28/10/12 01:08 PM
0

Keep it classy.
/r/MensRights28/10/12 03:11 AM
1

No. I have a part time job. Would like a full time job but I don't have any special skills or education to get one in this economy. And it's not Obama's fault either. It's my fault for fucking up in school.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 08:10 PM
2

While I don't like Obama's pandering to common feminist myths I still think Romney is an overall worse candidate.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 05:56 PM
5

Fuck periods;
/r/MensRights22/10/12 03:52 AM
1

I don't mean that it can't comment on racism in the world. Or that race wasn't relevant for the underlying message.. But it wasn't a factor in the main character's motivations. I But the game does not exemplify or encourage racism. If anything it brings the issues more into the minds of the average gamer. But people and the media lambasted the game as racist just because it was a mass amount of blacks being killed. Without providing any context.
/r/MensRights22/10/12 03:47 AM
1

I think we're both in different arguments here. I only took issue with the fact that people (not necessarily you) think the game is racist because a white man is shooting up a bunch of uncivilized Africans. But when you look at the game race was not really a factor. The powerful oppressing the powerless is what was going on. The game did mirror some real life atrocities that are being committed. But if they're highlighting that (as negative) then how does that make the game racist?
/r/MensRights22/10/12 03:22 AM
1

When did I defend the game claiming it was fantasy? I said the game was about "killing zombies" not "killing black people". I claimed that the setting was chosen to be rural Africa and the game reflects this. Chris was an established character thus far in the series so it's not strange to see him. Just because now all of a sudden the majority of the enemies are black it becomes a problem? Would it have made more sense for their to be a large amount of white enemies in rural africa? No. It wouldn…
/r/MensRights22/10/12 02:26 AM
1

The game is set in rural africa. Where there are still tribes in reality. So...yeah. You're seeing racism where there is none. If they were blacks set in a modernized area that regressed to spear throwing THEN you might be able to make a claim. But the setting allowed for it.
/r/MensRights22/10/12 02:15 AM
1

No shit. Hispanic is. African (In that context) isn't a race either. Racist imagery is just a buzz word. The game is either racist (with intent) or it's not.
/r/MensRights22/10/12 01:58 AM
1

Why is africa racist but spain isn't? Hispanics are a minority as well. You can "feel" that the game is racist. But that doesn't mean it is. Because race was irrelevant. The people who claimed that it was racist brought race into the discussion. Before that it was about shooting "zombies".
/r/MensRights22/10/12 12:32 AM
1

That was the controversy around Resident Evil 5 though. The villain had nothing to do with it. It was all about Chris Redfield and a lightly brown Sheva killing black people. But that wasn't what the game was about. It was set in rural africa. Nothing about the game changed from the other's except for the setting and all of a sudden it became racist.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 12:36 PM
2

She was putting the video in the form of a debate and was taking the extreme opposite of the extreme position that Sarkeesian was taking. But she may indeed be right. Misogyny implies intent. You can't "accidentally" be misogynistic. Because then it doesn't fit the definition.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 04:32 AM
1

Resident evil had no political commentary. Africa was simply the setting chosen for the game. It had no racists agenda. However a game like Spec Ops: The Line DOES have a message.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 04:31 AM
42

Essentially it means you are a gender and then identify as that gender. In other words the default.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 06:35 AM
6

I would but my penis is tiny.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 01:50 AM
2

The last point is what I found to be the most disconcerting. That they were caught on film gawking at it and then just denying it afterwards. The only woman who didn't want to look at it was the one woman in red that kept looking away.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 01:49 AM
4

This made me sick.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:09 PM
5

Because working all day and then coming home and doing all the work after that is "leaving that poor women with all the work" apparently.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 01:05 AM
0

That's what I heard, more or less. But that part of the conversation was never caught. So it's all hearsay.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 03:59 AM
19

Actually it's Observe > Hypothesis > Research/Test > Analyze Results > Conclusion > Repeat > Theory. So the correct methodology would be "I observe differences between the treatment and expectations of the genders. I hypothesis this is due to society favoring and being directed by the gender that seems to be more dominant. I will research society's expectations and requirements throughout periods of time and determine the reasoning for those expectations and requirements and weigh in all relevan…
/r/MensRights15/10/12 01:42 AM
1

Just posted this on Facebook. Most people on my friend's list tend to ignore my MRA related posts. We'll see what happens.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 01:40 AM
17

The only time I find myself disconnecting from her is when she gets a bit too sarcastic. That's not very often however and most of the time she's to the point and very easy to understand. And she seems to think before she speaks.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 01:35 AM
36

Feminazis: We don't hate men. We have brother's and boyfriends and husbands! Feminism doesn't hate men! MRA: Well we have wives, girlfriends, sisters, and mother's. And we don't hate women. Feminists: You're still misogynists! Note: Neither statement is a proof of lack of misandry or misogyny. But it's funny how the argument works for them but not for us. They know that so they generally try to call us neckbeards to make it look like we live alone and no one loves us.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 01:29 PM
5

Female policies are going up 25% and men going down by 10%. What the actual numbers come out to is anyone's guess.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 01:42 AM
4

"He told me he got a vasectomy!"
/r/MensRights10/10/12 12:02 AM
6

Because the way they view things violence outside the home is just "boys being boys" while violence to a woman inside the home is from an evil asshole.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 02:51 PM
26

Pretty damn sure it's illegal too.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 04:35 AM
12

The part you're having a problem isn't what you should be having a problem with. You SHOULD have a problem that she disagreed with facts. Not that she hated the fact that you held a belief. Beliefs are voluntary and subject to scrutiny. Facts, however, are not.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 01:46 AM
2

I do as well. Sucks when I get caught up on a series. Then I have to wait like everyone else.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 07:58 PM
7

I cook better. So no. :)
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:07 PM
2

They blame men for it.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 06:20 PM
6

But they do.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 05:11 PM
31

It's not even really an issue of the "right" to pursue it. Women vote more than men. So women keep electing men. O_o
/r/MensRights01/10/12 05:02 PM
1

Yeah. Ever read that oath? It's a bunch of hogwash.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 04:57 PM
1

I agree.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 03:03 PM
1

Says who? Why isn't it right? If you grow to trust me as a friend and we fuck am I abusing my position of power?
/r/MensRights01/10/12 03:02 PM
2

That still seems pretty damn high.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 02:59 PM
1

Teenager's are not children.
/r/MensRights30/09/12 03:28 PM
0

His comment was a reply to my comment which was a reply to him. Why should he be called out for acknowledging the comment?
/r/MensRights30/09/12 03:26 PM
5

This is actually a bad notion. You're willing to sign a petition in support of someone just because you were told they do stuff for AVFM but not because you know what's going on? We can't just be cheerleaders blindly cheering on "our team." Now that doesn't mean this guy doesn't deserve support but we should always be checking the facts before throwing in our lot.
/r/MensRights30/09/12 01:27 PM
0

Opinions are never truth but they are often lies.
/r/MensRights30/09/12 01:05 PM
0

Just because something is against the law doesn't mean it should be. That's exactly the point I'm arguing. This SHOULDN'T be unlawful. The only consequences should be social. I know people fall for the wizard's first rule all the time but that doesn't mean we should be bringing action against someone whether it be judicial or administrative. Unless she's actively disrupting the classroom or found to be inciting violence against the girl there's NO reason to involve anyone.
/r/MensRights30/09/12 02:44 AM
0

You're using the same arguments that people used to tear down the posters in vancouver.
/r/MensRights30/09/12 02:29 AM
1

A small amount of kids do this. Not enough to form policy around.
/r/MensRights30/09/12 02:29 AM
0

Nothing should override free speech.
/r/MensRights30/09/12 02:28 AM
0

If it would be allowed in the "real world" it should be allowed in school. Bullying is a problem. But bullies will bully. You need to empower victims. Not tell bullies not to bully.
/r/MensRights30/09/12 02:28 AM
-7

No it's logical that school should follow the same rules of society. Not give special rules and then change them when they're released into society. EDIT: I was a bit too hasty in my response there and didn't fully process what you said. You're right there should be limitations to an extent. But we shouldn't be bringing actions against students for rumors and lies.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 06:13 PM
-8

I doubt it. And still it's not a threat of violence only a declarative statement about someone's state of being. Free speech means assholes win sometimes. But that's necessary and good. We can't play into the same silencing tactics that feminists try to use against us.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 03:49 PM
-15

Harassment, to me, is a bullshit way to legislate speech. People need to be thicker skinned. Someone threatening me is a promise of violence but someone calling me a neckbeard neo-nazi racist mysognistic asshole is perfectly within their rights.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 03:44 PM
-5

As shitty as her opinion is until she does something violent I recommend against this sort of action. She has the right to say whatever vile shit she wants. Free speech and all that.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 03:29 PM
1

The article stated that he was placed on the sex offender registry.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 06:20 AM
2

He was slapped on the SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 06:05 AM
1

How the hell do you feel that's reasonable?
/r/MensRights29/09/12 06:05 AM
2

Pedophilia paranoia is heavily tied into the Men's Rights movement. If I give a drink to a minor that I THOUGHT wasn't alcoholic but turns out it was I'm technically now "guilty" of giving alcohol to minors. But I'm not really because I didn't do it on purpose. It would be bullshit to prosecute me.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 04:37 AM
45

The Aladdin summary is far far far from accurate. It was being rich and "not himself" that made Jasmine initially reject him.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 02:30 AM
10

No. It's not. Intent is a BIG factor in determining whether or not a crime took place. This man did nothing wrong other than a technical mishap. And now he's on the sex offender registry for life. If you accidentally drop your receipt for a coke on the ground should you be fined for littering? Fuck no. >_>
/r/MensRights29/09/12 02:28 AM
-8

I think you're confusing the term "Jailbait" which simply means an attractive yet underage individual. And that while their are a relative FEW instances of illegal material being posted they are quickly dealt with.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 04:03 AM
1

This is a watered down explanation. I learned it in high school some time ago. But basically the explorers who settled greenland wanted to convince people to go there despite it's conditions and so gave it a much nicer sounding name.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 03:35 PM
6

Honestly that's because it's the most irrelevant one. Not walking through a shady part of town is a good tip. But it almost always comes down to what the girl was wearing. Which is, generally, not a factor in a rapists selection.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 02:43 PM
30

I would assume it's due to the general perception that a man who cheats is just looking for more sex. Whereas a woman only cheats because her partner isn't giving her the attention she needs. Even though that's the same leading "reason" for cheating on the male side of things as well. People still think all men think about is sex. And that's the only thing they want. I've gotten on my fiance's case before when she was chastising a man from the Sex and the City movie. Basically one of the couples…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 02:34 PM
1

We can't be at war with women. Women, as a group, are not against us. Feminists are.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 02:31 PM
1

No. We give them a reason to respect us.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 02:30 PM
11

While I do identify as an anti-feminist. I do not agree with you that we are war with females. Feminist =/= Woman.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 12:44 AM
6

This isn't a literal war. So yes, there will be moderation.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 12:42 AM
9

No. THat's not what we need to do.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 12:42 AM
5

Aye. I was going to say this as well.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 04:47 PM
3

Background checks usually only bring up convictions and where you used to live. The more shit you order in a check the more expensive it gets.
/r/MensRights16/09/12 09:22 PM
9

Wouldn't do any good. YOu have to list any prior aliases when you apply for a job.
/r/MensRights16/09/12 05:41 PM
3

and vote.
/r/MensRights15/09/12 02:26 PM
2

The video accompanying the audio was given a silencing order. It can't be made public.
/r/MensRights15/09/12 01:07 AM
17

Can you imagine the children feeling safe with their father after he wins custody and that feeling of safety barely even setting in before this horrible fucking shitbag of a judge goes and sends them straight back into the warzone? This thought shakes me to the core.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 07:29 PM
19

You know...I've never understood the mindset behind "Trigger Warnings" before. But now I can kind of understand them (Still don't think they're necessary). Listening to this crazed woman brought back all the memories of my mother's fits of rage. I started to tear up.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 07:21 PM
14

Aye. Me too.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 01:11 AM
2

From what I know the Men's Right movement got started around the 60's about the time second wave feminism was hitting it's stride. While I'm glad you're recognizing the issues men face I feel like you're still seeing the world through a feminist lens rather than being objective about it. I'm not a "With me or against me" person but if you still believe in things like rape culture and patriarchy theory (You haven't stated that but you might) then I don't think you've learned quite enough yet. You…
/r/MensRights12/09/12 01:45 AM
1

I read that once that the term "vegetable" is really only used for culinary purposes.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 04:29 AM
3

Pretty sure florida does. Worked with a guy who got put on it for public urination.
/r/MensRights09/09/12 01:31 PM
5

Ehhh. The original women's right's movement was started by the upper class white women who wanted more shit to do. The average woman wasn't very interested in the right to vote for a LONG time.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 02:59 PM
4

Despite paying plenty of attention to her while she was ill.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 02:48 PM
2

Heart warming to say the least.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 04:40 AM
36

One more reason to love the powerpuff girls.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 03:18 PM
5

Actually the way the US legal system works the law is subject to interpretation. Constantly. We constantly revise it to spell things out clearer if we feel a definition was too vague.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 11:59 AM
16

No exceptions.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 01:46 PM
1

Granted that's the literal extreme of the definition. But it's what makes "Objectifying" someone wrong. Using the term sexual objectification is more or less about watering the true meaning of the term objectify to say you're only valuing someone for their sex appeal and not their other qualities. Well the simple fact of reality is your "worth" as a person to anyone is built up overtime. And the FIRST thing ANYONE notices about you is how you look. It's impossible to get around. Porn stars might…
/r/MensRights26/08/12 04:25 PM
2

The opposite of object is agent. So...agentify? O_o
/r/MensRights26/08/12 05:57 AM
5

In order to be "objectified" someone has to be regarded as incapable of independent thought or action. (Like a rock or a tool) Being gawked at does not devalue one's ability to make choices.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 05:55 AM
2

The problem with the term objectification is that it doesn't mean what people think it means. When I "objectify" someone that means I view them, entirely, as only an object. They are incapable of choice. Incapable of independent thought or action. Not that they are MY object. But that they are less than human and as such worth no more consideration than a rock. "Sexual Objectification" is just bullshit rhetoric that's purposefully vague in order to make those who find someone they find physicall…
/r/MensRights26/08/12 05:53 AM
9

I would also say that maybe it would be worth taking a copy of the policy down there yourself and presenting it and try to pick up your child that way. But definitely get a lawyer to cement yourself as the primary guardian.
/r/MensRights25/08/12 02:38 AM
2

Actually..yeah. Because she's spoken out on the very thing before. She's been accused of "begging" for "donations" from men before. Something she's never done.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 12:12 AM
5

Depends on the day. Seems about a 50/50 split on reasonable people to tumblr like feminists.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 01:33 PM
14

I lost it when it told me to stop playing video games.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 01:53 PM
1

She wasn't awarded the 1.5 mil from the state for his conviction. Her mother sued the schoolboard for "letting the rape happen".
/r/MensRights13/08/12 04:34 AM
3

He was jailed by taking a plea deal. THat's the problem with the system. THey gave him 10 minutes to decide and told him "The jury wont believe you." The thing is they're probably right.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 04:23 AM
0

Personally I wouldn't care who supplied the wood for the house. As long as I get the rights to it I'll move in.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 02:29 AM
1

That may be a lot of posters opinions. But if you read what the guy actually wrote you can see he is not really worried about the child being his or not. He's worried about whether or not she cheated based on blind paranoia.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 02:28 AM
1

In this way men don't have the "ability" to do the job. Because part of the job is having big tits.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 02:26 AM
-4

And you are an example of a misogynist. You have an irrational mistrust and hatred towards ALL women. For no other reason then they are women. Because you feel women, in general, are evil. Get out of my movement. And don't follow this up with "concern troll" nonsense.
/r/MensRights12/08/12 02:38 PM
-2

And how do you suggest he goes about doing that before the birth of the child?
/r/MensRights12/08/12 04:42 AM
-5

A paternity test will not help his issue. His issue is not "Is the child mine" it is "Did she cheat on me?" If you bothered to read what he actually wrote you'd see that. A paternity test will only tell him the child is his. Not that she has not been unfaithful. He is paranoid and insecure.
/r/MensRights12/08/12 04:41 AM
-10

She wouldn't lose anything tangible. But she would be hurt by his accusation because he doesn't trust her. And she's done nothing to deserve it except for having boyfriends before the OP. Which last I checked was not a crime. It is not on her to prove that she didn't cheat. (And a paternity test would not indicate she didn't) If I were her I wouldn't want to be in a relationship with someone who thought I was cheating for no fucking reason.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 08:08 PM
-13

No. You're conflating the two issues. His issue is his mistrust. With no evidence for it. The pregnancy only brought the issue to the forefront. He is being needlessly paranoid.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 08:06 PM
-7

But that's not HIS issue. His issue is not "Raising a child that isn't mine?" it's "Did she cheat?" It is NOT the same issue. They're related but you can't conflate the two.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 08:04 PM
4

Didn't say obama was getting my vote. But Romney just definitely isn't.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 08:03 PM
-7

That's not his issue. He makes it clear the issue is "Did she cheat?" not "Is it mine?".
/r/MensRights11/08/12 05:19 PM
4

I refuse to support a man who simply ignored a suffering man who asked what he's supposed to do if Romney were to ban medical marijuana. And one who practically designed "Obamacare" and supported it but flip flopped when it was politically convenient (along with every other issue) And tells me that corporations are people too. The man cares about nothing but money and power.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 05:16 PM
-18

You're oversimplifying it and not regarding their relationship at all. He will have to tell her, with a straight face "I think you might have cheated on me and I want to make sure the kid is mine first." This is a relationship not just a business contract. I only say he's being a coward and insecure because he said he has no qualms about raising a child but that he just has a paranoia that she cheated on him. Based on no information. At all.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 05:14 PM
8

I agree. In this situation it's not discrimination that men aren't good enough. They just don't meet the physical requirements for the job.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 05:08 PM
-1

I haven't decided who is getting my vote but I know Romney will NOT get my vote.
/r/MensRights11/08/12 05:00 PM
-5

Ehhh. If you read the guy's whole story his only "reasoning" behind getting a paternity test is he's afraid she cheated on him based on senseless paranoia. And the fact that she's had a 12 boyfriends before him. Which isn't indicative of faithfulness or a lack thereof. He makes it clear that he's willing to be a father. His issue is trusting that she didn't sleep around. So in this situation I would say he is cowardly and insecure. His issue isn't "Is the kid the result of my sperm?" but "Did sh…
/r/MensRights11/08/12 04:58 PM
3

Excellent post.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 05:31 AM
5

I would wager that it probably comes from the fact that Men are, on average, physically stronger than Women. And so it's probably not the best idea to pick a fight you can't win when you'd be better served just getting away.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 04:18 AM
3

That's true for the majority of america. That's why we're a majority. Well the white part. THe male part comes from the fact that men are more likely to be interested in men's rights initially.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 04:15 AM
-2

In a lot of ways I think it's bullshit that judges aren't held legally accountable for illegal rulings.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 02:19 PM
3

Child support is considered a reproductive right issue. It is a right revolving around one's ability and desire to reproduce. Personally I want children and I would gladly pay support (granted I get access to my children) but I support the right for men to not be obligated to pay for a child they did not want when a woman is not obligated to keep (Abortion, adopting out, or safehaven) the child. I'm not saying he should be allowed to force her to have an abortion. But she should likewise not be …
/r/MensRights06/08/12 05:17 PM
5

Yeah this was pretty stupid.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 02:20 PM
3

This isn't misandry. But it is showing that a wedding should only be what the bride wants and anything the groom would like is just stupid. Honestly I'd MUCH prefer his wedding than the usual.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 02:15 AM
3

Reproductive rights are one of our major battles. The problem isn't the image. It's the fact that women have reproductive rights and that men don't. EDIT for clarity.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 02:12 AM
3

And wind up right back in jail.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 01:54 PM
7

And suddenly I want to watch Babe 2.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 01:15 AM
14

This image diminishes the gender irrelevant sacrifice of these men in order to berate other men into pointless acts of servitude for women. While it is nice to hold the car door open for people it is not to be expected or demanded. When was the last time girlfriends felt obligated to hold the car door open for their boyfriends? These men gave up their lives not because they "should" but because they loved the women in their life. Women; if you're seeing this then what you should take from it is …
/r/MensRights30/07/12 07:34 AM
3

The end of the show has them arrested for not helping a man who was robbed thanks to good Samaritan laws.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 04:22 AM
4

While rapes might be hard to prove that doesn't have an effect on false rape accusations. A lack of rape evidence is not an abundance of false accusation evidence.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 12:10 AM
2

Tell that to the cast of Seinfeld.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 12:07 AM
3

To play devil's advocate I'll mention that wage "negotiation" doesn't really happen until you get into the upper ranks.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 12:05 AM
0

Out of the top three comments in this thread one is mine and the other 2 agree. So I think I'm getting somewhere. This isn't an example of misandry. It's not an example of sexism. It has nothing to do with rights being infringed. It's just people being retarded.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 01:02 AM
0

Actually it is. We're a community that polices itself. And I, personally, have deemed this trash that has no place in this community.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 12:41 AM
0

It's not my job to make a place for people to put this content. It doesn't belong here. If they feel strongly about posting that content then THEY can make a space for themselves. It has nothing to do with the MRM. It has nothing to do with misandry. No man's rights are being infringed upon. It's just social commentary on "Look, women are stupid!" This DOES NOT BELONG HERE.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 11:34 PM
1

How does this have ANY baring on our RIGHTS.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 09:55 PM
6

This has NOTHING to do with Men's Rights. If there was ever a more appropriate time for this to be said it's now.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 03:31 PM
2

I was siding with you. The wrist "grab" wasn't inappropriate in the context of your relationship. Her reaction was certainly uncalled for.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 02:39 AM
32

You don't win a debate by convincing your opponent. You win it by convincing those watching. A weak emotional appeal has to be overcome with extremely strong logic.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 04:33 PM
8

She wasn't "Trying to get away" she was "walking away." She wasn't escaping.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 04:27 AM
12

It's VERY common and socially acceptable to get someone's attention by lightly grasping their shoulders, wrist, or something of the like.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 02:45 AM
-3

Here we are at the scene of the bullshit. Watch as this witness explains the bullshit in breathless terms.
/r/MensRights21/07/12 02:13 PM
-7

I lol'ed.
/r/MensRights21/07/12 07:57 AM
1

True. But I think that "gender roles" generally refers to within the family structure. But in a broader sense you're right.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 01:18 PM
6

Yeah this wasn't really a gender roles thing. Other than the "Men = violent reckless assholes". Which is more of a stereotype. Find new friends.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 11:26 PM
9

And that's easily explained by the "I deleted my account because I was ashamed of all the things I once said."
/r/MensRights14/07/12 08:55 PM
10

I'm in the morgan freeman school of thought in regards to white pride. We don't need a place to celebrate white people. We just need a place to celebrate people in general regardless of race.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 01:10 PM
6

Actually the majority of known history is NOT about white people.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 01:09 PM
40

His point is that those things shouldn't be either.
/r/MensRights12/07/12 05:57 AM
1

As afndale said I don't know how you walked away thinking he was holding the position he was actually tearing down.
/r/MensRights05/07/12 01:36 PM
4

THIS IS NOT SRS! Stop with this kind of bullshit comment that adds nothing to the discussion. We are not out here to start screaming </matriarchy> or some other bullshit.
/r/MensRights05/07/12 01:32 PM
3

It's kind of a tie in with the whole basement dweller xbox player who trolls women online stereotype.
/r/MensRights05/07/12 03:57 AM
30

When no was said sarcastically? =P
/r/MensRights03/07/12 09:03 PM
3

I have a similar situation with my fiance.
/r/MensRights03/07/12 02:09 PM
1

Every single thing the author listed was pure paranoia.
/r/MensRights03/07/12 02:06 PM
1

Nothing concrete either way. The articles says that the study doesn't indicate that environment (I.E. Chemicals in food and vaccines) is responsible but rather that SOMETHING, in addition to diagnosis proficiency increase, is responsible for the increase in cases. All we got out of it were "More research needs to be done"
/r/MensRights03/07/12 01:57 AM
3

Far as I know there's no real evidence, that I'm aware of, to indicate environment (or vaccines!) have anything to do with it.
/r/MensRights02/07/12 06:09 AM
11

Actually Autism is up because we've gotten better at diagnosing it. Jus' sayin'.
/r/MensRights02/07/12 04:51 AM
1

He only kept swinging after they tried to get up. The details came out in articles about the story.
/r/MensRights01/07/12 03:39 AM
1

Second hand smoke's negative effects are statistically irrelevant. Jus' sayin'.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 04:09 PM
2

Health doesn't mean "live or die." it also means quality of life. And losing the ability to fuck is certainly a major drop in the quality of life.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 03:36 AM
0

Bitch isn't inherently gender based though. While dick is. A bitch refers not to a woman but to a female dog. Specifically a female dog in heat. Who is acting erratic as a result. Jus' sayin'.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 03:35 AM
3

What are the health risks of losing a foot?
/r/MensRights29/06/12 01:35 AM
21

That will never happen. "offensive" language simply changes form. You can't eliminate it.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 01:29 AM
6

insert taco girl reference here
/r/MensRights26/06/12 10:18 PM
33

She considers The Onion pornography?
/r/MensRights25/06/12 04:25 AM
4

The driving point of the article is that women often deliberately seek the bottom of the barrel when it comes to men and then attribute all their bad dating decisions to all men everywhere.
/r/MensRights24/06/12 07:37 PM
2

I don't have words to describe the outrage.
/r/MensRights24/06/12 05:24 AM
6

I teared up.
/r/MensRights24/06/12 03:23 AM
1

As we've grown in readership we're getting a lot more vitriolic comments. And I honestly don't know if I want to be a part of it anymore. :( Which is sad. This place has been a sanctuary for me.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 08:37 PM
1

Pointing out is one thing. Saying we should irrationally nail group A too is another.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 08:16 PM
8

That is not concern trolling. That is pointing out a big problem here. We can't just ALWAYS say it would have been worse if it was a man. We just can't do that. We need evidence. We need data. We can't just say it would have been. That argument is the basis for patriarchy theory. And we all know how retarded that is.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 05:16 PM
10

You are simply spouting anecdote. And you're acting irrationally. Neither a man or a woman should be put on the sex offenders registry for this.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 05:14 PM
1

No she didn't sexually assault a boy. She performed an unjustified search of the boy. That is not the same thing. You are over exaggerating the incident. This is not the kind of justice I want for men or women.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 05:12 PM
4

They probably knew about it before any publication did.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 03:02 PM
8

And that's the issue we should address. Not try to put the same bullshit train of thought onto women as well.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 02:53 PM
14

We are not here to seek injustices that we're dealt to be applied to women as well. That's backwards thinking.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 02:53 PM
11

"retiring" is a nice way of saying "Quit or we'll fire your ass."
/r/MensRights21/06/12 02:52 PM
3

Sadly one day we could get the same way.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 01:43 PM
19

No examples DONT need to be made. That is not how a justice system should work. As wrong as this was there was no sexual intent. And to argue such is folly. She lost her job for not following the job's procedures. That's enough. MR why did you upvote this shit?
/r/MensRights21/06/12 01:37 PM
2

I agree as well. Power dynamics are often "cited" as the reason why the relationship is bad. But I've never seen any hard evidence on that. Just people speculating.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 09:58 PM
5

What the actual fuck? You're completely demonizing women as a group with no evidence. That is not what we stand for.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 09:57 PM
1

Personally I'm not against sex with 16 year olds. Even 15 year olds. Wasn't against it when I was that age. And I'm not gonna be against it as I get older. Do I think it's the best decision? No. But I'm also relatively conservative when it comes to sex in my personal life. But I don't think it should be illegal. And I'd like to see some actual studies done on the power dynamics. I've never ever ever been shown a source for that statement. But it's spouted out all the time. However the article he…
/r/MensRights20/06/12 09:53 PM
2

I'd say about 50% (bullshit statistic) of people I know look down on owning a firearm. Especially if you have children. Also going to edit that "bare" lol
/r/MensRights20/06/12 05:34 PM
3

A martial artists blows are actually less likely to inflict greater injury. Mainly because you've practiced your whole life to hold back and not go full force. Martial arts as it's taught today is a sport first. A weapon second. Someone who's in a blind rage will hit FAR harder and in more deadly areas than a trained martial artists would.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 04:09 AM
2

Of course there was. But MOST people would switch to that. The law has to take that into account.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 04:06 AM
0

Having the right to do something does not mean that people will approve. I have the right to bear arms. But a lot of people will look down on me for owning a gun. I'm still gonna do it.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 03:56 AM
2

We need to start plastering this kickstarter on our facebooks and what not.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 02:05 PM
5

Five bucks. sort of proof if you need it
/r/MensRights19/06/12 05:08 AM
2

Aye. My sentiments exactly.
/r/MensRights18/06/12 02:12 PM
2

Not an apt analogy. The problem isnt' that you spent money on a bomb but that you used that bomb to directly harm someone. Personally I don't give a damn if you spend money on a bomb. Just as long as that bomb doesn't harm anyone else. You can blow yourself or your house up. I don't care. It's your money/life.
/r/MensRights18/06/12 02:11 PM
0

Yeah. I'm not actually seeing a lot of good material here right off. Personally I don't agree with the notion that showing idealized characters is damaging to the mind of individuals. Add to that they kind of seemed to be pointing at all triple AAA characters/games as bad while Indie game's/characters are good with their picture choice.
/r/MensRights18/06/12 03:02 AM
-6

The only thing i'd say is do we see much of the same on mother's day? Of course it's not really something to get mad at. It's not against men. Just for single moms.
/r/MensRights17/06/12 07:29 PM
1

woosh
/r/MensRights17/06/12 02:25 AM
2

I'm trying to get you to take a step back and get some perspective. See the attitude you're both displaying. Your posts are riddled with hostile superiority. You're not being rationale and you're certainly not being tolerant.
/r/MensRights17/06/12 02:20 AM
1

Dude. You're not exactly exemplifying a humble attitude here.
/r/MensRights17/06/12 01:37 AM
1

I haven't played a single game where a main or even "side" character was portrayed as a bimbo unless it was part of their character. The main complaint is how attractive and or sexual a woman is in the game. Most games don't have overtly sexual characters but they almost always have attractive characters. People can claim that this sets some unnecessary precedence that women feel the need to meet and they can't. But that's actually a problem with the viewer. I am not very attractive. Even if I w…
/r/MensRights16/06/12 07:16 PM
1

Seriousness of the situation aside; Did anyone else chuckle at the city's name?
/r/MensRights16/06/12 07:10 PM
8

If you are conscious you can give consent. End of debate. Blacked out? Rape. Awake but not at full capacity? Not rape. You knew alcohol would make you more prone to doing things you wouldn't normally.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 09:35 PM
11

When they say drunk and make terrible decisions. They mean get drunk and have sex with people they wouldn't have. That's not rape.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 08:49 PM
2

This is only a recent change from what I understand with health insurance. Women should pay more if they cost more. That's the whole reasoning behind insurance fees.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 03:12 AM
6

I second that.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 03:08 AM
2

Ladies getting free drinks and men not is not a battle I would choose to fight. We can't just blanket ANY INEQUALITY as something bad that needs to be changed. The mindset behind ladies night is that guys are the hunters romantically. And so if there are ample amounts of women available more guys will show in order to try and woo one or simply be in the company of women. And in practice this is probably true. It doesn't mean that men, in general, are slaves to sex. It just means we're more proac…
/r/MensRights08/06/12 10:31 PM
3

In this situation the social worker didn't take your child. She simply advised the taking of your child. My mother did the same thing. And once we were in the shelter there was NOTHING my father could do to get us from it other than fight for custody in court. It took months.
/r/MensRights05/06/12 06:43 AM
2

A similar situation happened to me. I was the child in the incident. The only thing you can do is start up a legal battle to get your child. Outside of a court order you will never be able to come on to the premise and take your child. The only other option would be to try to "steal" her back from another location but this can get you into trouble despite there being no legal reason why your child was taken. I don't recommend that course of action. As others in the thread have said simply start …
/r/MensRights05/06/12 06:41 AM
35

Lets, for the sake of entertainment, accept the situation the way they believe it be. That it's been illegal for people to be paid unequally for 50 years. But a group is still being paid less. And rather than tighten down on enforcing that law they're gonna send out e-cards saying "Hey, be nice. Pay equal!"
/r/MensRights04/06/12 05:05 PM
4

Shelters will not allow the father any contact or say bar a court order (and even then). And actually attempt to move the mother and child to a new shelter if she expresses a fear for her safety. I know this from experience. I was taken by my mother into a shelter. And they FREAK THE FUCK OUT if they even THINK someone knows where they are.
/r/MensRights03/06/12 07:42 AM
17

Your title is not appropriate for this forum.
/r/MensRights03/06/12 02:24 AM
2

I'm glad he's got some career prospects.
/r/MensRights01/06/12 10:26 PM
0

The thread might have been fake but was all the discourse involved fake? It seemed like many people were discussing with each other rather than the OP.
/r/MensRights01/06/12 02:33 PM
1

He'd make the excellent spokesman for an anti-false accusation organization or something of the like. Though it would not pay nearly as well.
/r/MensRights01/06/12 02:20 PM
3

Good deal but unless they roll him on as a PR stunt nothing will actually come of this for him. He's probably not nearly as skilled as he was when he went to jail. Here's hoping someone signs him on and he's able to perform. I want this guys life back in order.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 11:14 PM
2

In regards to combat they should be allowed to join. But they need to meet the same physical requirements that a man has to. If she can't, she can't join. This would be in order to keep soldiers combat ready. And really the "right" to participate on the front line is something men were forced to do for the majority of history. Volunteer armies are a relatively recent thing. Even in france you have mandatory military service upon graduation of their equivalent of high school.
/r/MensRights30/05/12 03:57 AM
1

I think the problem is focusing on clothing. While I agree it probably has some sort of an affect, albeit slight, the "dangerous area" aspect is the thing you should focus on. People are going to bait you into arguing the weaker point to the argument and use that as a straw-man to eliminate the validity of the stronger point of the argument. You can't let them do that.
/r/MensRights29/05/12 11:00 PM
3

I'd like to see more clips for sure. Just to see what kind of reactions they were getting based on gender. The man definitely got a much more hostile approach than the woman. But that could be a fairly isolated incident.
/r/MensRights29/05/12 10:49 PM
0

I know. And I think they know that to. That thread isn't the place to fully discuss what he should be able to do. Just what he needs to do. And we have to operate in the confines of the current system.
/r/MensRights29/05/12 01:06 AM
1

I can see that after thinking about it a bit more now.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 07:28 PM
1

I think the advice in the thread is pretty solid for the most part. Calling the police in these situations is pretty pointless. It doesn't stop an abusive person from being abusive. You simply need to remove yourself from them. However there are certain cases where they are of the "I'll fucking kill you if you leave" mindset and then you'll need more protection. It might be a good idea to both leave AND get a restraining order.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 06:07 PM
10

At the time it probably cost the furtherance of her career. This wasn't a politician speaking the popular "unpopular" truth. She simply stuck to what she believed in.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 05:27 AM
5

The only problem with the definition is that it leaves out being forced to penetrate. Other than that it's fine. It doesn't really change non-rape victims into rape victims. The problem is defining consent really. So I agree with you that this doesn't really fit the OP's title. So it's getting a downvote from me. EDIT: Well it sort of does. "Slight" means it now covers what was sexual harassment and places it as rape. But really if you're in a position to slightly stick your dick, fingers, or fo…
/r/MensRights28/05/12 02:40 AM
2

My favorites were Fluttershy and that one baby one Apple Blossom. When she popped up for the first time when I was watching it with my sister this was my reaction!
/r/MensRights28/05/12 02:35 AM
1

I really did like the first episode. I think the show's pretty high quality. I was just dissapointed that the narrative they seemed to be trying to set up in the first episode ended in the second one. I was hoping for something a little more than "Story of the week." I still watch an episode here and there. It's a good show.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 02:32 AM
2

Only one that comes to mind is Mr. Deeds.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 02:18 AM
1

I figured it would have to have something to do with emancipation if it were true. But the article didn't mention any of it. Only made it seem like her parents abandoned them and she's been raising her sister while still underage. So the story isn't bullshit. Which honestly doesn't make any of us feel any better about it. I wish it weren't true.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 06:09 PM
1

I looked up other articles and watched the video with it. I still don't see how she could be the one in charge of caring for her sister while still being under age. They would be in foster care or something of the sort. There's information missing here.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:44 PM
1

Sorry. I was thinking your reply was to another thread. My mistake.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:41 PM
-1

EDIT: Wrong thread. Sorry.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:36 PM
2

Being "hit on" and being asked to coffee are NOT the same.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 03:02 PM
3

Funny. Why did the man in the story automatically have sexual intentions? His words were "I find you pretty interesting. Would you like to have coffee with me?" That implies he wants to get to know her. Is sex something he'd hope for? Maybe. So why is acceptable for a woman to assume that ALL MEN WANT IS SEX FROM THEM AND TO RAPE THEM AT ANY TIME BECAUSE YOU CANT GET OVER THE FACT THAT MOST MEN WANT TO HAVE A MEANINGFUL INTERACTION WITH A WOMAN AND NOT JUST GET THEIR DICK INSIDE HER?
/r/MensRights27/05/12 03:01 PM
1

We just need to start upvoting the actual content.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 02:51 PM
-2

Not a Men's Rights issue and also I'm gonna call bullshit on the story. The judge's quotes were extremely flippant and the situation makes no sense. If she's old enough to be "left on her own" to take care of her sister she's also old enough to decide whether to go to school or not and thus immune to any truancy issues. The article also doesn't provide any sources or reference the location of the incident other than "Texas."
/r/MensRights27/05/12 02:50 PM
2

Just like all of them eventually do. Of course to the troller they think it's mission successful no matter the outcome.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:24 AM
12

I'm finding it hard to sympathize with you based on what information you're telling us. It sounds like you antagonized both of them deliberately. r/mensrights is not a place to just get blind support and have us all go "Bitches be crazy, m'right?". Were there actions appropriate? I don't think so. But you're leaving an awful lot of holes in your story, and truthfully, I think you were just flaunting how "superior" you were to them.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:20 AM
3

Aye. They should.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 03:12 AM
3

I concede to your point.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 08:45 PM
3

We shouldn't stoop to the same level. We can't let the MRM become what we hate most.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 06:06 PM
8

Discrimination shouldn't be a dirty word. I am "discriminated" against when I try to join the army because I don't meet the height-weight requirements. And because of my build I never will. Even if I were in perfect shape. If women cost less, charge 'em less. If we cost more charge us more. That's equality. If you want to say it's not fair for insurance companies to charge an individual based on the actions of other people then that's one thing. But simply saying women should have to pay as much…
/r/MensRights26/05/12 06:04 PM
1

And that's bullshit and needs to change. If women cost more they should pay more. Pure and simple. Same mentality for the other way around.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 05:51 PM
0

No. Equality is the way it is currently. I don't want bland androgyny. Equalizing the two payments regardless of data showing that men generally cost more is stupid. The sexes are equal but different. I'm ok with women paying less for car insurance just as long as we start also enforcing physical standards for women in jobs that men have to meet. And other such things. That's equality.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 03:56 PM
2

That's more or less how it's supposed to be. People have issues with conflating legal and religious marriage. Gays should be able to obtain a legal marriage with no issue. But religious organizations shouldn't be forced to sanction them (though they could if they want to). That way everyone stays out of everyone's business.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 03:52 PM
3

I can agree with that. But I don't think we should try to co-op the movement. And I think most MRA's here are pretty much for gay rights even if they don't actively campaign for them. Honestly gay rights is one of those "Duh" things that people really should just understand. Even if you don't think it's right to be gay you don't have the right to tell other people what they can and can't do with their personal lives.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 03:15 PM
1

This wont solve anything. It will just raise the rates of women. Unless they've specifically legislated it to not do that?
/r/MensRights26/05/12 03:05 PM
1

It really sucks he was pressured to take the plea deal. He shouldn't be able to be convicted based on he-said she-said evidence. I hope he's able to get some sort of recompense for the lost career.
/r/MensRights25/05/12 01:20 AM
1

The article fails to back up it's main point at the very end with any actual evidence. Just the same kind of "political talk" you hear on the news.
/r/MensRights24/05/12 05:19 PM
1

You notice in the bullet points the author flat out accuses everyone of being racist. You're only left with the option that you don't realize you're being racist.
/r/MensRights24/05/12 03:42 PM
0

I think it was meant more along the lines of "If you see it happening, do something." Its hard to convey someone's line of thought through only a few brief words.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 05:46 PM
2

I'm not too impressed with this article. It makes a lot of generalizations and actually puts a negative light on what I wouldn't consider "white knighting." While it sucks we don't get the same messages reversing the genders I wouldn't say it's unreasonable to think positively on someone who kicks the ass of an abuser to protect the victim. Look at it this way. If the genders were reversed I'd be ok with it too.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 02:52 PM
5

Using the term patriarchy DOES blame men. Because it's saying men are in charge. And so anything bad about the situation is the fault of men.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 02:48 PM
2

I think this is the best route. Make it public. If you can stomach it though. I know I feel awkward whenever I need to throw "a tantrum"
/r/MensRights23/05/12 12:53 PM
54

Just not give a shit what others think. Easier said than done. And never able to be done 100%.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 12:46 PM
1

I must have missed the bigamy part. But I'm fairly sure you missed the fact that I'm not in support of the father. However there isn't enough information to go off of to say which parent really deserved the children in the first place or if either of them do.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 06:45 PM
7

While I sympathize with the father wanting to see and have his kids the facts presented in the article make it difficult to side with him. He skipped the hearing completely that (admittedly probably would have screwed him over) and this is the second time he's been caught taking the kids. Should he have custody? I don't know. Is the wife crazy? I don't know. We can make assumptions and demonize parties based on our rhetoric all day long but that wont get us anywhere.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 02:10 PM
2

Who are you to define what beautiful looks like? </sarcasm>
/r/MensRights21/05/12 07:24 AM
4

For what it's worth I agree with you. Maybe in the early years you can justify uniforms for uniforms sake. But by time they hit the tween area they need to start trying to form some type of identity.
/r/MensRights19/05/12 01:27 PM
3

I remember the one cop saying they wish they could do something but there are no programs set up to help someone who thinks they have a problem. The only thing we do is throw them in jail. The cop couldn't do anything because he hadn't actually committed a crime. I believe it was the first one he talked to. It's been a long time since I watched that episode.
/r/MensRights18/05/12 11:57 PM
8

It was about women coming out against the comment that women can't get anywhere due to discrimination. While one of the CEO's did say that she tended to be overlooked at first glance as long as she asserted herself she got the recognition she deserved. And that can happen to anyone. It happens to me.
/r/MensRights18/05/12 05:06 PM
16

Not every article people post here is meant to be a "Look at this shit!" kind of thing. I believe this was a "Hey, this is a good read!"
/r/MensRights18/05/12 03:57 PM
5

Add to that you can get the recording and find out later if you're a two party state.
/r/MensRights18/05/12 02:55 PM
2

And this is exactly how people expect relationships to be. I admit I used to subscribe to the idea that guys just didn't pay enough attention. (And to be honest we don't) But women also tend to forget that men "speak a different language" when it comes to problems of the heart.
/r/MensRights18/05/12 01:04 AM
3

TL;DR Couples are horrible at communicating their problems with their spouse and men need to work on it. >_> dafuq?
/r/MensRights18/05/12 01:02 AM
4

Saying things even remotely in bad taste does not qualify as misandry or misogyny. Those shirts are more attacks at other women than men. We can't water down these words to simply meaning "Something somewhat unpleasant related to men/women."
/r/MensRights17/05/12 05:01 PM
16

Pisses me off just as much as the term reverse racism. It implies that it's simply a reaction to the sexism or racism that we ourselves poured out.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 01:26 PM
3

Couldn't agree more.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 06:37 AM
3

When he was kicked out of the house the police were supposed to give him time to gather clothing, toiletries, and tools of the trade.
/r/MensRights16/05/12 04:46 PM
1

This shit is getting sick now.
/r/MensRights14/05/12 01:43 AM
7

If the rape happened it's appalling. But man his attitude is shit.
/r/MensRights13/05/12 08:04 AM
1

Sorry. My math was done based on the fact that rape is about equal between the sexes. So I simply doubled the amount of rape cases by adding in the other half of the human population but still using the "4%" that they came up with. That was my thought process. I just didn't fully elaborate. And it wasn't meant to be accurate. Again, I apologize.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 02:07 AM
1

Ahh yeah that too. But I think they meant that all men are capable of being victims. But that would still be about 2% and not 4% since you'd have to factor in women obviously.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 07:54 PM
2

The problem is that most male rape situations are classified as "other sexual violence" instead of rape.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 07:16 PM
19

Article drops the ball at the end by listing how men still have all these so called advantages. Especially that whole "president" thing. I didn't know being born with a dick made me president.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 05:17 AM
73

I don't think it should be illegal. Let the market charge what people are willing to pay. Vote with your wallet.
/r/MensRights09/05/12 06:56 PM
34

The first sign sounds good.
/r/MensRights09/05/12 04:02 AM
1

Happened to a friend of mine's brother. He got fired from his job because he had a girl on his lap while he read her a story. The father saw it and complained.
/r/MensRights09/05/12 02:24 AM
3

Attractive people are attractive and you want to do sexy things with them. That is not a problem. Never has been, never will be.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 06:21 PM
1

That's not the point I'm trying to make. The point was, to him, it was a child. It was his child and he was happy to have it. And it was taken from him. That's why he's angry.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 03:55 PM
1

The reason I view his post that way was because when he was told she was pregnant he was "overjoyed." That right there shows he was excited at the prospect of being a father and it was immediately ripped away from him.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 02:26 PM
2

No that's not how he should feel. His child was killed without his consent. That's how his belief structure operates. And he has every right to be angry. Does that override her right to get an abortion? No. But does that mean he has to stay with someone who's beliefs contradict his own? Nope.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 02:03 PM
11

Until an equal sign becomes a greater than sign.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 01:11 PM
4

We do. And I'm going to. Pigman's PS in his last comment was completely unnecessary.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 01:07 PM
2

Not the first time it's popped up here. It's real but it's just not all that close to hitting the market yet.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 06:39 AM
1

I think the point is to say that feminism tries to say it's for equality but the legislation it pushes for doesn't give a shit about men.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 03:13 PM
2

I'm up for a survey, but a few of those questions aren't really right for a survey about who we are or where we stand. It should be questions such as "Do you think MGM is legitimate medical practice?" or "Do you believe the pay gap is due to discrimination?" And any survey is more than likely going to show we're predominately white males. Because white males are a large majority. I am one. Even SRS is predominately white male.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 12:25 AM
1

I might be mistaken but I believe he did touch on racism, or featured comments in the images indicating it. And while I do think people should take the things said online by trolls a little less seriously I don't think we should just say "it's always been this way, so no point in changing it." The processes they came up with were some fairly good ideas (though I only really like the auto-mute one). I just felt they made a mistake by pointing out misogyny without also pointing out misandry. Becau…
/r/MensRights04/05/12 02:14 AM
0

I would think that's due to the fact that we assume that every example is perpetrated by a male even if we don't know their identity. While it's true the overwhelming majority of gamers are male it doesn't mean that only men harass. I've met several mouthy players who were female in my time in MMO's.
/r/MensRights03/05/12 02:42 PM
1

Extra Credits is usually a pretty balanced and well thought out show. But I felt like they dropped the ball here by shifting all the blame on male gamers. Here's a copy of the email I sent them. I just finished watching your video on Harassment. I felt like the ideas you put forward were fairly well thought out and, once again, you took a balanced approach to things. However I felt you shifted a little too much blame on the male gaming community. It might not have been your intention but you shi…
/r/MensRights03/05/12 06:17 AM
4

heard about him through phillyd. Posted the article on facebook. Guys a fucktard.
/r/MensRights03/05/12 05:07 AM
4

I wasn't implying that there wasn't a crime or something of the like going on. I'm just saying that the title implies the step-mother drugged and then raped the boy which is far more serious.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:43 AM
3

I read his story. He may have be a victim of statutory rape but he wasn't "drugged and raped." They ended up only kissing after the drugs and had sex a couple of days later.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 02:56 AM
5

Definitely opposed to forcing the mother to abort without her consent.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 02:38 PM
5

Debates aren't about convincing your opponent. They're about convincing the audience.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 02:22 PM
2

Of course someone will probably come along and say it's because men make so much more money that they're able to give more to the candidate they like.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 02:52 PM
1

What baffels is me is how people keep adding to the story. All you hear in the article is that they broke up at some point prior to the incident and then he went to her for the procedure. The people in the comments keep saying things along the lines of "Well you shouldn't have broke her heart asshole. Hope you like the dentures!"
/r/MensRights30/04/12 07:21 AM
1

I would say they (and men) get dressed up to be seen by anyone who will look. We all try to garner respect via our looks. And the more heads we turn the more satisfied we are.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 07:16 AM
3

Relevant
/r/MensRights29/04/12 05:49 AM
8

Sounds like you guys have a pretty good relationship going. Kudo's to you two.
/r/MensRights29/04/12 01:53 AM
3

Because the only way to make change to those programs is to cut their funding and start new ones.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 02:55 AM
11

Fuck.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 02:53 AM
6

I even hold open automatic doors for people. I never get a thank you though. ;)
/r/MensRights27/04/12 02:49 AM
35

Probably with how what we say is considered offensive and not actually argued on it's merits from those type of feminists.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 01:40 PM
8

This doesn't belong here honestly. It's not adding anything to the issues But I would say that it's essential for us to downvote comments even from our own people simply because we want the right ideas showing up and the bad ones thrown out.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 04:02 AM
9

This is just bullshit. They called us a "hate site" which might've well had just said hate group. This way they can say they did nothing wrong but at the same time get the very message out they're saying they didn't say.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 06:30 PM
1

Old white males didn't, and still don't, rule the majority of the world. They "hold sway" over some of the developed world. But the rest of the world is actually predominantly Asian. So there's a hole there. And no one says a woman can't be a fire fighter. They just really don't want to on average. And no one in there right mind would say they can't. As long as they can meet the physical requirements that a man would have to meet in order to be one. Maybe, and we're stretching here, maybe we'll …
/r/MensRights14/04/12 02:53 PM
2

So I did a little Googling. This post from a blog called Exposing Feminism, “The Catalogue Of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics,” is a pretty thorough list of the various “shaming tactics” that women supposedly use to abuse men, such as comments like “You make me feel afraid” or ”You’re are so immature!” If you are wary of ripping open your appendectomy stitches from all the laughter.... ....Allow me to translate: “creep shaming” is a word, oft-employed by “men’s rights activists” and their sympathizers…
/r/MensRights14/04/12 08:01 AM
1

In an ideal world maybe but that's not going to happen. SO you need to account for it.
/r/MensRights14/04/12 07:53 AM
1

Read the beginning of the article again.
/r/MensRights14/04/12 07:46 AM
12

Got to love how the author deliberately spins it so that it's absolutely ludicrous to believe a woman could be abusing a man.
/r/MensRights14/04/12 03:26 AM
1

You're right, but only because that's not what patriarchy is. The idea of a patriarical society isn't that all men are evil creatures actively working to oppress all women. No one in the entire feminist movement (who I wouldn't consider severely, violently troubled) thinks all men are the enemy. The Patriarchy is mostly built from momentum. It says men are men and that's all they can be, and women are women and that's all they can be. It's a tool invented by the (male) ruling elite in our societ…
/r/MensRights14/04/12 03:15 AM
1

Patriarchy (as in the global conspiracy by all men to oppress women due to man's innate nature) is a myth. And lets suppose it IS true. Just because a group was once oppressed does not mean they now have the right to do the oppressing. And like I said we are not trying to play the "Well we have it just so much worse!" game. There are imbalances all over the place. But to say that our issues are never equatable to women's issues is down right sexist. LPS stands for Legal Parental Surrender. Which…
/r/MensRights13/04/12 01:47 PM
1

Men are raped too and are ignored and disbelieved far more regularly. And everything you said in those last few sentences. That's exactly what you're doing to us. Not the other way around.
/r/MensRights13/04/12 07:07 AM
1

He brought up the unwanted fatherhood in reference to LPS. That's our solution for it. And where did I say we should take the rights away from a woman? I said if she's got rights then we should have them to. Are we having the same conversation?
/r/MensRights13/04/12 06:37 AM
1

sigh He brought up the issue of LPS. You shot it down as being irrelevant and marginalized it. You claimed it's not the same as abortion. I spelled out exactly what the problem is and why it should be fixed. I'd say that's related.
/r/MensRights13/04/12 06:25 AM
3

You're marginalizing the issue without addressing the facts. You're simply telling us "Your problems aren't big enough." And false accusations are anything but petty. Being accused of a crime is damn near as damaging as actually being guilty.
/r/MensRights13/04/12 06:20 AM
4

Well over 90% of abortions are strictly due to a financial/lifestyle burden issue. It has nothing to do with it being "her body" but "her life." The body is not the issue. It's the freedom. If women are allowed to end/prevent a life to avoid those issues than so should men be allowed to absolve themselves of any financial responsibilities. At most a man should be responsible for paying for half of an abortion if he decides to surrender his rights as a parent and the woman decides not to keep it.…
/r/MensRights13/04/12 06:16 AM
3

Yeah he stole the children and violated a visitation agreement. I don't see the problem.
/r/MensRights09/04/12 02:10 PM
0

They do operate the same way. A black american alive today has no more reason to be offended by nigger (other than being told they should be) then a white person should be by cracker. There really isn't a shade of grey in this issue. And you're still trying to add more weight to the degrading aspect to women than the degrading aspect to men. Nothing about the word "dick" shows any sort of positive quality. Society may perceive some things as worse than the other but that's the inherent thing we'…
/r/MensRights09/04/12 02:06 PM
3

You're not following your own logic. Dicks are inherently male. Pussies are inherently female. Your line of reasoning supposes that associating pussy with weakness or cowardice associates those traits with being female. Associating a dick with being an nasty, mean, or asshole of a person associates those qualities with being male by the same extension. And just because it's not how the world works doesn't mean its not how the world SHOULD work. You can't get pissed off at someone calling someone…
/r/MensRights09/04/12 12:49 AM
11

Problem with the comparison with jerk and weakness is that you're forgetting that aligning "being an asshole" with being male by using dick to describe it. So it's the same as saying pussy.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 04:12 PM
8

This is the one thing I fear. I don't want the pendulum to end up swinging WAY back in the other direction again. I want it to fall dead center.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 04:49 AM
4

But it doesn't do anything to address a man's rights. It just takes a jab at women. Which is not what we're here for.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 03:00 PM
1

Actually we went from "He might be lying, but just in case" to "Shit, fucker lied."
/r/MensRights06/04/12 02:14 PM
1

And bam. I'm banned from SRS. Post that I got banned for
/r/MensRights06/04/12 03:38 AM
11

They tried to HELP SOMEONE. That's like saying "ha ha" to someone who gets mugged while trying to help someone with a supposedly broken down car. "You should have known." Yeah. Thanks.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 03:35 AM
2

First post from a mod essentially tells MRA's not to go defend themselves.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 03:34 AM
1

While the points brought up were nice I didn't like a few of the jabs that were made. But that happens in just about any form of blogging.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 04:57 PM
3

He linked to only a video or two but said there are thousands available to watch. An example was all that was needed.
/r/MensRights01/04/12 04:57 AM
3

I would argue that youtube videos are going to get the attention of more people than reports. Ideally you should have a mix of both.
/r/MensRights01/04/12 04:01 AM
6

Na. Most MRA's regard the biological differences between men and women. Men should be allowed to have feminine traits but masculinity shouldn't be redefined to be feminine traits. Nor the other way around.
/r/MensRights31/03/12 02:06 PM
11

Why? Why should masculinity be redefined as naturally feminine traits? That invalidates it's usefulness as a word or idea. It ceases to be feminine nor masculine and simply is. And the fact remains that plenty of people didn't do anything to help. Most people wouldn't. And the video is evidence of that. Because all of those people are the average joe.
/r/MensRights31/03/12 05:43 AM
3

Yeah. This is kind of grasping at straws here. We can't demonize the courts for pointing out a basic flaw in someone's accusation. This was due process.
/r/MensRights31/03/12 04:53 AM
3

This story stuck out more than any other I read. He had to paste it elsewhere to fit it all.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 04:54 AM
0

Future tech. Probably doesn't take much strength to pull it but it's got a hell of a punch to it. It's "magic technology" It doesn't need to make sense. It's simply there to move the story along and it doesn't need an explanation.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 07:43 PM
2

It's not intrusive to get a drug test. You piss in a cup. You have to get a drug test to get most jobs these days anyway. Guess who babysat the druggies children while they went out and had a "good time" with their "abusers"? Me. That's who. Women like that don't need protection. They're abusing the system. I'm not saying that every woman who comes to a shelter should be drug free or they get turned away. But perhaps she shouldn't be the responsible for the children. And it could actually add pe…
/r/MensRights26/03/12 07:43 PM
7

At least half the women in the shelter openly admitted that they attacked their husbands/boyfriends first. Some also used the shelters as free housing and simply went out and did drugs with their boyfriends.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 01:44 PM
13

Yes. They should. I lived in those shelters. You don't know the kind of people they attract.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 03:12 AM
1

The author of the article completely lost me when he said that the females being able to fight/kill other males was not believable. Right there they lost all credibility. The females often use their skill to kill as opposed to their strength. Clove and her knives, Katniss and her Bow, Rue and her ninja-tree-hopping.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 01:38 AM
3

I saw this trailer before The Hunger Games the other day. I was examining it to see if I detected anything derogatory towards Dads but what I found it to be was simply...Dads. The only part in the trailer that I almost got mad at was when they started listing off the outrageous places they'd found their kid. But I've seen those same jokes made against mother's in media as well. Most of the Dads seemed to have their shit together in the trailer. We'll have to wait to see more of the film before I…
/r/MensRights25/03/12 01:00 PM
4

We get taught that we're not supposed to hit women at five.
/r/MensRights25/03/12 12:49 PM
1

For the longest time I felt that I should pay for every date my fiance and I went on. This actually made it so we couldn't go out that often because I was always "broke." Eventually I sat her down and explained that she needs to pay her half of things when we go out. This doesn't mean I don't treat her to something nice every now and then. Or that she doesn't do the same for me. In retrospect it should have been that way from the beginning. When someone says "I'd like to have coffee with you." t…
/r/MensRights25/03/12 02:20 AM
2

I think he was trying to play "devil's advocate" to some extent. Saying that even if it doesn't directly harm boys. It's damaging a young girl's outlook on life by making her feel like she's special simply for existing.
/r/MensRights23/03/12 01:58 PM
3

Elementary school is where I first started to notice that the "rules" weren't right in the world. I'd been taught not to hit girls. It's wrong. But in third grade there was this girl and her friends who constantly got in everyone's face when they could. At one point she tried to hit me. As she swung at me and said "I can hit you, but you can't hit me back because I'm a girl!" I had my first introduction to "This doesn't seem right." Later on in High School I was riding a bus home. There was, onc…
/r/MensRights23/03/12 01:56 PM
2

This is the problem. I don't want it so no one can make jokes about either sex. But that we can both joke around equally. Fuck PC. Lets laugh a little. :)
/r/MensRights23/03/12 01:39 PM
1

More people need to watch this video.
/r/MensRights22/03/12 05:01 AM
1

THis isn't really possible. At least not initially. Some insurance companies are offering a way for you to demonstrate your own safe driving habits. You place a camera on your vehicle for a while and then send it back and they evaluate it. And they do take a look into how long you've been insured and how many accidents you have. Your baseline risk is determined by data.
/r/MensRights21/03/12 12:28 PM
15

The thing is, with insurance, it's not discrimination. Insurance companies examine the odds of who will end up filing claims and price themselves accordingly. Should there be new studies periodically to re-evaluate the risks for different genders, race, etc? Yes. Should we get equal pricing. No. If males are statically more likely to get into an accident and require a payout then by all means charge us more for it. But if a woman is more likely to make health insurance claims than a male. Then b…
/r/MensRights21/03/12 12:25 PM
2

The thing is you don't hear about that in the mainstream much at all. We HAVE to pull those examples out into the open to change the perception. It's raising awareness to the fact that women are JUST as violent as men can be. Not that they're more violent.
/r/MensRights21/03/12 02:06 AM
2

In my old telemarketing job the men were required to maintain business casual attire. Except on friday's. The women however frequently came to work in their freaking pajamas. This was due to my boss being an old perv more than anything. But it was still bullshit.
/r/MensRights21/03/12 02:01 AM
6

I'm against the death penalty and I almost want this guy to be killed as a result. He shot their father in front of them.
/r/MensRights19/03/12 01:45 AM
6

Or just not put them on the list for shit that's not sexual assault/pedophilia. I worked with a guy who was on the list for the very thing you just detailed. He pissed around the corner (where no one could see him without being there) at a baseball game and a girl walked up and saw him. Next thing he knows he's being arrested and is on the sex offender list for life.
/r/MensRights18/03/12 06:27 PM
3

That's the thing though. Nothing that we can achieve or be that you could call "good" is inherently male. And none of it is inherently female either. It's simply about being a good PERSON. Not a good man.
/r/MensRights18/03/12 04:01 AM
1

Yeah once it's born she shouldn't have any right to exclude him. That's the only part that needs to be changed. And the OP said he's working adjusting it.
/r/MensRights18/03/12 03:59 AM
3

sxephil did a bit on this the other day. People are getting all up and angry about people giving the homeless....jobs.
/r/MensRights18/03/12 01:19 AM
2

Yeah. I've heard pretty much everything he said from many women I know.
/r/MensRights18/03/12 01:16 AM
1

Like I said it depends on their relationship dynamic. You need to know what your SO is or is not comfortable with. And if you don't know then err on the side of caution. And rather than scream rape at your SO for something that was fairly obviously something comical in nature you should talk with them about it. Relationships are not perfect little bubbles where we never "violate" someone's boundaries by mistake. There are lines we don't know are there until we've stepped past them. And it's up t…
/r/MensRights18/03/12 01:10 AM
1

You didn't answer his marriage proposal. Don't leave him hanging. :) Seriously though, keep up the videos! I like listening to them while I craft in FFXIV. I first watched your video on male disposability a while ago and since then I've been watching everything you put out. That video addressed so many things I'd thought about since I was a wee lad in elementary school.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 04:37 AM
-2

The thing here is it's not rape if that's something the dynamic of their relationship allows. She's being playful. There was no ill-intent to be seen. If he expressed displeasure and that he felt violated after than that would put up a new rule in their relationship. It just has to be ok the other way around as well. We can't be so quick to define any seemingly unwarranted contact as rape like feminists. Especially something like this which was not something sexual in nature but rather comical. …
/r/MensRights17/03/12 04:29 AM
2

That it does. And since threads evolve so quickly we can be more focused on writing quickly rather than writing properly. We're all guilty of it somewhere along the line.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 04:24 AM
1

I try to avoid editing in that case simply because I don't want to seem like I'm hiding where I fuck up. So I left my mistake out there to be seen with the rest of the thread. Though I suppose a simple "EDIT" notation would do the trick?
/r/MensRights17/03/12 04:16 AM
1

Read the rest of the thread.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 02:45 AM
1

There's a difference between an incentive and making the assistance shit. Most of the stuff you want people to buy is horrible for them. And most people on food stamps DON'T buy lobsters and expensive steaks. They have to budget that money like anyone else. It's not a free ticket to expensive meal ville. My single father and my 2 siblings were given 200/month while he was on unemployment. 200 is enough to feed the kids "decently" for the month. (Frozen crappy shit they can throw in the microwave…
/r/MensRights17/03/12 12:05 AM
-1

And a system that's more tightly monitored would provide that oversight needed. However, currently, the money is simply deposited into their account and they can do whatever they want with it.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 12:02 AM
0

Already retracted the statement. And said so multiple times.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 12:01 AM
-1

I've already retracted that statement. It was a mistake. No need to keep ragging on it.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 12:00 AM
1

Even if this wasn't fake I view it as more of a prank than rape. They're both in the relationship and if that's their dynamic then so be it. If he expresses that he felt violated then she should apologize and never do it again. I'd think the same if it was the other way around. The problem would be if the sexes were reversed and the was a public outcry of "Rape!"
/r/MensRights16/03/12 04:34 PM
-1

That IS evidence. It's as good of evidence as a tape recording of you planning to commit a crime. Is it as air tight as video evidence of you perpetrating the act? No. But it's definitely not inadmissible.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 04:31 PM
2

I made a mistake in my haste to write my post. It's not how I really feel. I apologize.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 04:27 PM
1

It's not misogyny! Misogyny (play /mɪˈsɒdʒɪni/) is the hatred of women or girls. ~Wikipedia Is it stupid to believe in this STD? Yes. Was it misogynistic to believe an STD can only originate in a woman? No. There's nothing hateful there. It's just bad health information. It has nothing to do with slut shaming and everything to do with poor sex education.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 04:26 PM
2

No one's said "who cares about facts" We've said "Look, here's some evidence." And you decided to make justifications WITHOUT evidence to contradict it.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 04:23 PM
1

And there isn't evidence for the supposed contradictions you bring up. Your argument is just as "flimsy" if not more so. We DO have evidence of her misusing the child support. We DON'T have evidence otherwise. I started this thread saying that 4chan's justice is sometimes overboard. But in this case, as far as I know, they're simply notifying the authorities and the father. Anything beyond that is wrong.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 04:21 PM
1

Get some food stamps. Even in my situation I'm eligible for 15 dollars/month from food stamps. And you, if you're on your own, are no doubt eligible for a lot more.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 04:16 PM
1

What does that have to do with an STD supposedly originating only from women? It's not outside the realm of plausibility. And girls believed it as much as guys. It's not misogynistic. It's simply misinformation about STD's.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 04:14 PM
4

The cost to distribute that food would be far more than you'd save compared to the current system.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 04:08 PM
4

That's not the case here. And you know it. And I want it so child support can be spent on the child and only the child. Not the mother. I didn't mean to say that child support should only be dolled out based on the woman's ability to provide. That was a mistake on my part. I just want it regulated to either go towards the child's immediate needs or their future. The food stamp model is a good fit.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 04:07 PM
2

The only thing I found odd about the article was the need to bring in "corrupted modern christinaity." While divorce rates are just as high among the self proclaimed religious that doesn't mean it's smiled upon. There are MANY marriage movements by the christian sector to revitalize marriages and prevent divorce.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 03:14 PM
9

Food stamps aren't as abused as people see think. Yes someone on foodstamps is able to eat lobster. But they do so at the cost of not having other foods that they could have fit into that budget. Every now and then they may treat themselves to something nice by short changing another area of food.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 02:57 PM
28

It's documentation of intent. It establishes plenty. And if she's able to take care of the child's needs without the support and can then spend the support on herself it's evidence that child support, as it currently stands, is not about the child's well being but the mother's comfort. Child support should be regulated in a fashion similar to foodstamps. EDIT: I retracted my statement implying that if a person can pay for the child's expenses all by themselves than they shouldn't be entitled to …
/r/MensRights16/03/12 02:50 PM
1

At one time people "believed" the world was flat. It wasn't based in religion but on the fact that things seemed rather...flat. Eventually evidence came along to challenge that belief. And it's VERY hard to rewire yourself to not believe that thing you've always assumed (or was told) was true.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 02:48 PM
1

K. That's what I thought. But there was also that possibility I was falling victim to it. O_O Mind fuck.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 02:45 PM
80

The fact that it ISN'T legally wrong is the problem. If he's being forced to pay for the child's well-fare than she should be legally forced to make sure it's used appropriately. Not to buy herself some shoes. If she can't find anything to spend it on FOR THE CHILD then it should go into a saving's account FOR THE CHILD's college fund.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 02:43 PM
1

If you mean one that we would like to date/marry? Attractiveness aside (we all want that) I would say... 1.Ability to reason logically. 2.A strong respect for individual rights. 3. Is caring for, but not hyper-protective of, her children 3b. Is willing to actually punish her children when they screw up. None of this new-age bullshit. But without going overboard for every little thing. 4. Able to work as a team in marriage.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 01:23 PM
1

How did she turn a (fake) "STD that only originates in women" into misogyny? Women are the only one's able to get breast cancer. That's fucking misogynist. >_> (Yes I know men can get breast cancer to. But the overwhelming majority are female)
/r/MensRights16/03/12 01:15 PM
1

I'm not sure if that was aimed at me or not.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 01:10 PM
5

Feel free to still cook, clean and have sex with them if you want that money. You mean feel obligated!
/r/MensRights16/03/12 12:34 PM
55

Sometimes. Their "justice" goes too far sometimes. But this case is pretty open and shut.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 12:33 PM
5

This is a sad view of things. Questioning one's beliefs IS a difficult thing. Acting as if it isn't is just as ignorant as the people you're condemning. If you're able to quickly toss your beliefs out without any internal turmoil then that makes you easy to manipulate. Not some high being of reason.
/r/MensRights16/03/12 12:31 PM
1

If only someone could slap some sense into my brother. He's even gotten to the point where he says he "hates heteros."
/r/MensRights16/03/12 12:29 PM
1

I saw this yesterday when I was at the gym. It ticked me off that this is even in dispute. He did nothing illegal.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:24 AM
2

I was near brought to tears by the end of that story.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:22 AM
1

I think I replied to the wrong comment. My comment doesn't make any sense in this context. shrugs Meh. My bad. Perhaps I just read things wrong this morning.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 06:12 PM
4

I can personally attest to this. Those who claim "Children are a nightmare" are those who just suck ass at parenting. I practically raised my little sister (my mother couldn't give a fuck about being a mom at this point) from 0-3 at the age of 11-14. (and have had other child caring experiences since then). Is it an easy job? No. But it's no more difficult than my job at my Deli. Kids are, generally, only as difficult as you let them be. (Not to say there aren't some bad apples out there. I've m…
/r/MensRights11/03/12 01:10 PM
-5

He didn't generalize. He said feminists. Not women. And Feminism, as a movement, supports life long alimony. You just made the mistake of equating feminism to women.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 01:02 PM
3

She drug you down into the bed while you were both equally drunk. Why should you feel guilty? You did nothing wrong and committed nothing even close to rape. As chocoboat said; just because she feels bad after doesn't mean you did something wrong. It just means she's not sure about your relationship after throwing sex into the mix.
/r/MensRights08/03/12 04:54 AM
12

Should friends advise their friends not to make rash decisions while drunk? Yes. No sane person would be in disagreement with that. However the problem with this article is equating it to rape. It's been said before but if a woman were to get behind the wheel of a car drunk (not passed out, drunk) she would liable for her decisions. Friends SHOULD advise against this behavior. But demonizing men for wanting to partake in the exact same activity (getting drunk and having sex) is completely backas…
/r/MensRights04/03/12 06:49 PM
2

What I found interesting was the former feminist president was a supporter of the idea. That's a breath of fresh air.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 06:42 PM
2

The problem is spinning it as men being immature and women being mature. It simply shows that women are more secretive and actually give a damn about who their friends are on facebook. I use my facebook to share interesting shit I find on the web (Read: Reddit). That's about it. I've got no need to hide anything.
/r/MensRights27/02/12 02:12 PM
1

All this ended up doing was getting us more bad exposure.
/r/MensRights27/02/12 01:43 PM
3

Resources almost undoubtedly comes down to cash. Or a means to get that which cash grants indirectly.
/r/MensRights27/02/12 01:57 AM
2

But Guns DONT kill people. You've probably heard this before but the saying "If guns kill people then I can blame misspelled words on my pencil." The gun is an object. It has no ability to choose, reason, or act outside of the will other forces exert on it. And very few deaths are a result of an accident with guns. They're, very overwhelmingly, due to malicious or suicidal intent. If you take away the guns you simply make them find another way to do it. You don't actually fix the problem. And yo…
/r/MensRights26/02/12 07:05 AM
1

Sorry. I see where your point of contention was. My statement of "Guns aren't responsible for deaths." I had a bit of a disconnect there. I apologize. I would still say though that it's still not a counterexample. The gun simply existing can't make it responsible. Because it's just as likely that a child would harm themselves to some other object or chemical. The gun isn't responsible. A child somehow getting a hold of something harmful was "responsible." It's natural for us to try and find some…
/r/MensRights26/02/12 07:00 AM
2

You said it was a counterexample. But it's not really. It's an unfortunate circumstance in which the gun could be substituted for just about any other harmful tool or substance. But it's also too minor to be valid. If the problem doesn't even effect a single percent of the available portion of the population that it's related to it's not something that needs desperate law to get a handle on.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 06:44 AM
1

I actually need to amend my post. I misquoted some info. But my prevailing point was that gun control laws don't really have an effect on unintentional child death due to firearm access. And that the deaths are so few in number that it's not what you could really call any sort of great societal issue.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 06:37 AM
2

The same logic could be said for helpful chemicals stored around the house. In 1999 only 214 Child deaths were ruled as unintentional gun deaths. And the death rate for Teens (Homicide, Suicide, or otherwise) was 0.0081% and climbed to a whopping 0.002% between 1970-1993. The majority of firearm deaths are from people who generally acquire firearms illegally and use them for illegal ends. Heck blunt objects beat out firearms for leading murder weapon by far in the US year after year.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 06:22 AM
4

Speaking of gun rights. This is the kind of situation that makes restrictive gun laws completely pointless. Those who are using gun's inappropriately (muggings, robbery, etc) don't give a damn about the laws. They're using it to commit a crime obviously. So restricting the use of guns by non-criminal citizens in an effort to fight gun crime is back asswards. You're simply expanding the definition of what constitutes a gun crime.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 05:41 AM
6

A firearm to feel safe? No one thinks that. A firearm is about preventing loss. Loss of life, property, etc. You step into my domain with the intention to harm and I WILL use force on you to protect myself, my loved ones, and what I own. Guns are not responsible for deaths.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 05:38 AM
1

How are you supposed to get it to the range then?
/r/MensRights26/02/12 05:36 AM
2

I can see where you're coming from. I just think it's a slippery slope.
/r/MensRights24/02/12 01:47 PM
6

Not necessarily true. Sometimes we have to try to fight on principle. Even if our personal situation wont get better. Taking a stand in court is the kind of thing we need to get these rulings reversed. Simply rolling over and refusing to confront it just perpetuates the problem. He's being abused by his wife and the courts. Should he just take the beating? I don't think so. And in the long run. If she can manipulate even these minute details of his life she's going to tear the kids away from him…
/r/MensRights24/02/12 01:30 PM
32

That law is fucked up as all hell. They both participate in consensual (though underage) sex and only ONE of them gets hit with it because he can't get pregnant? >_> FUCKING RETARDED.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 08:19 PM
1

The only thing I can say, after reading all the comments, is that you need to be open with your wife about where you disagree. Politically, religiously, etc. A relationship built entirely around one side's opinions is not much of a relationship. I'm not telling you to leave. I'm asking you to be honest with your wife. Shit might hit the fan or it might get better. But better it hit the fan now than make for a miserable marriage for years and years to come. Opening up room for confrontation can b…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 01:33 PM
4

The worst thing this guy says is that he thinks the girl in the video he linked is "pretty awesome."
/r/MensRights22/02/12 03:21 AM
3

Court TV is actually "private" arbitration. Both parties agree to abide by whatever decision the arbitrator (The judge) comes up with by the end of the show. The kind of shit that goes on wouldn't fly in a real court room. Real court is boring as sin.
/r/MensRights21/02/12 02:29 PM
7

Yeah. Females going out clubbing in a group isn't what I'd call sexist. The only thing remotely close to it was the "that guy" comment. But I think we can let that slide.
/r/MensRights21/02/12 02:16 PM
0

It depends on what you mean by marriage. I said the paper doesn't mean jack shit. To me. To my beliefs. The paper is merely a financial contract as opposed to a relationship covenant. A religious marriage is simply an agreement between two people before their God. It doesn't require the piece of paper provided by the state. It exists the same way a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship does (In the hearts/minds of the two involved) but with more potent emotional implications because of it's ties to …
/r/MensRights19/02/12 07:16 PM
-1

I can agree with the OP here. I have a lot of things to be emotionally scarred over. But I simply don't allow it to control my life. Yes there are things that remind me of the wounds from time to time. And it isn't a pleasant memory by any means. But I don't let it subdue me and I go about my day. Not everyone can do that though.
/r/MensRights19/02/12 02:35 PM
5

Legal marriage has no benefit for the relationships. For some (like myself) though it's a religious writ and hold some weight in that manner. The piece of paper doesn't mean jack shit.
/r/MensRights19/02/12 02:24 PM
1

I deny it. Because that's not me. And I'm glad to be a bloody fool if that's the case.
/r/MensRights13/02/12 06:20 AM
2

My fiance posted this a few days ago. I immediately posted "Wifi allows multiple connections from multiple devices."
/r/MensRights13/02/12 06:18 AM
1

No. He simply acknowledged it as a factor. Albeit a minimal one. You added that on your own.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 03:17 PM
1

You keep stating that he's saying it's the woman's fault. When he never did. The only problem Vic is having here is the need to post his replies to you quickly without out first thinking through what he's writing in order to prevent himself from writing anything slightly ambiguous that you could twist against him. First off both of you need to steer clear of hyperbole. Your DUI defense, NiceGuy, is the definition of the word. When Vic says "Scantily clad" he does not mean a woman who is dressed …
/r/MensRights10/02/12 01:33 PM
3

That's not true. While they're under your roof you're still responsible for them. And teaching that you don't deserve everything you have simply for existing and that there's consequences for your actions IS imparting wisdom. Her laptop is on loan to her. He owns it. She abused the privilege and he revoked it. Shooting it had more of an effect than just selling it. That way she can't say it was just a money thing. He didn't need the money. He just wants her to learn. I've been in an abusive hous…
/r/MensRights10/02/12 05:21 AM
2

Kids can lack the giving of shits whether or not you do a "good job" parenting. Especially at the age of 15 that child is now making their own decisions about how they behave. A parent can only do so much. And what the father in this video did, while "extreme", was not uncalled for and not truly over the top.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 05:16 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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