TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Tyrien Archive

View 1 post and 384 comments by Tyrien 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)
2

Men and women "not getting" isn't necessarily a natural concept. It's constantly perpetuated in the media. People have made fortunes off perpetuating the idea that men and women are so different that there's a secret answer to it all. The longer we think there is a means full difference then there will be one.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/14 02:30 AM
3

That is adding to the discussion. It's just vague. It's saying that there's a large group of people who advocate TRP that like to cite 1950's culture as the golden age for dating, relationships, marriage, and all around men.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/14 03:59 PM
6

haha the red pill is where good men go to die because years of rejection have made them bitter, That's the underlying tone I get from a lot of the diehard advocates of RP Theory. There's a lot of "I've been hurt" or "This is because women are all xyz". There's a very large sense of betrayal and to an extent they have been betrayed. Not by woman though, by what it's easy to believe women are. The sooner more people stop treating women as if they're "women" and start treating women as people then …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/14 03:57 PM
2

That doesn't mean there are universal truths to human behavior either.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/14 12:38 PM
7

Alright, if oversimplifying everything to tell yourself you know it all helps you, then more power to you. The world isn't black and white though.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/14 03:30 PM
6

So that's why there are hundreds of conflicting dating theories and attitudes towards what the opposite sex 'wants'? Furthermore, that's why there are many different psychological theories? Even if everyone is truly the same and can be simply explained by some universal truth of human nature (which it can't, but for argument sake) the whole idea of 'X does Y because of Z' as a blanket statement ignores the human element and life experiences that build someone's character.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/14 03:04 PM
3

Believing that X group does Y because of Z is usually not a wise idea. People are fucking complicated.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/14 01:18 PM
4

There's nothing wrong with going with the flow and fitting in. Many people like that. I just dislike the idea of people saying: "Well he's a guy. Of course he likes sports!" If that's the person than fine. If the expectation is based around circumstance beyond simply looking at gender then that's fine too. Ex: "Oh well all his brothers and dads are big hockey fans, so I'd assume he is too."
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/14 03:33 PM
4

When I say expectations: Expecting men to be 'tough', hairy, love beer and scotch. Like sports and always wants to have sex. Incapable of showing emotions and should hide everything. Expecting women to be dainty, flowery, like dolls and shopping. Emotionally fragile and of weak constitution. Shouldn't be interested in certain aspects of education. Should have long hair, etc etc. I'm not talking about trends based on demographics. That's different. I'm just stalking about stereotypical expectatio…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/14 03:26 PM
6

Expectations based solely on gender. People are people.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/14 01:04 PM
6

but when it's a woman being abused, she isn't told to leave the relationship? She most certainly is told to leave the relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/14 03:24 PM
4

This is the only reason why I'm against it in a legal sense. I have zero issues if someone wants to gave a multi-partner relationship. Marriage is mostly a legal contract in today's world.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/14 12:01 AM
18

and not all men will date rape - doesn't mean they couldn't. See how poorly that works? Bad dating experience are bad dating experiences. If one is consistently finding themselves dating a person they don't like, then they should re-evaluate the types of people they're attempting to date.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/14 06:06 PM
11

Why are you using an example of a school's misguided decision made by a bias dean as a basis for this question, when the real world proved this to be an non-issue? Said it yourself: Police report does not charge boy because lack of evidence The real world, i.e., the police, reacted appropriately to the situation and no charges were made because there wasn't evidence to establish the girls story. She may believe rape occurred, she may be lying, there wasn't proof either way so it's dropped. That'…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/14 06:05 PM
5

Probably going to be told how I'm wrong, but from what I've gathered part of TRP philosophy is focusing on self, and I rarely see concern for the happiness of the partner. It's always lines similar to: I need this I'm not getting that She's acting this way etc
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/14 03:49 PM
5

Yup. Like an atheist is not anti-christian, just not believing in god.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/14 03:44 PM
1

Since I'm not acting on the women in the videos, I'm not objectifying them. Therefore, watching porn is not objectifying women. by helping an industry stay alive, you are. By consuming the media you send the message "this is okay". Going in circles at this point though.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/14 06:14 PM
2

You're focusing on porn and sexualized advertisements saying they should be exempt from objectification because they are not a direct interaction with the person being objectified. Now you're being explained how viewing certain style of porn and accepting sexualized ads is objectification in a direct manner. If you're talking about men having a fascination with the female body, and being attracted to women physically, then why are you trying to say porn and sexual advertisements are not a form o…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/14 06:02 PM
1

But I take serious issue with saying that men who like looking at women's bodies objectify them. and that's the indirect interaction I talked about. It's like every person wearing fur is a small part in helping kill animals solely for their pelts. It's also like how every person who throws a plastic bottle into the garbage instead of the recycling bin is helping to fill landfills needlessly. So if someone is watching the class of porn that is toxic to the perception of women, then they are a sma…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/14 05:42 PM
3

No? That's sidestepping the issue and trying to take it to literal terms. The issue is that there is an industry developed around using women like objects. That's what women have issues with. It's not a direct interaction, but an indirect one. People who made the porn realized a need, and people who demanded that style of porn create the need. Therefore the demand is creating that indirect interaction in treating women as objects for pleasure. The concern arises from the unrealistic light. By sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/14 05:32 PM
3

Porn can be objectified in the sense it can often show women under an unrealistic light. Also that it's common to show women treated as submissive.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/14 05:17 PM
2

That's what I don't understand, why does one group proposing a reasonable, cost effective, and useful solution take away from other efforts? No one is saying "okay, that's all, problem solved!".
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 01:07 PM
2

If it makes you feel better, as a 20something guy I still feel uncomfortable walking home alone at night after a few drinks. Especially in the city. There's some fucking scary people out there who will do shit for little cause.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 01:02 PM
1

My issue with this is that the people who make these critiques seem to only believe it can be one side of the coin. There is nothing wrong with protecting yourself. Suggesting and inventing ways people can efficiently protect themselves does not mean that people are saying the reason it's a problem is okay either. I buy locks for my home because there are bad people. Having a lock doesn't condone people who want to steal my stuff, and that's still a problem we work on through other avenues. Ulti…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 12:58 PM
1

You're asking TRP why society thinks of men as more "disposable" than women? Doesn't TRP have some theory about spinning plates, and 'cum and dump'?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/14 12:58 PM
2

It might have something to do with his clothing line that has 'I do alpha male shit' all over it, and TRP focusing on being 'alpha'. So i could see a connection somehow
/r/MensRights21/08/14 07:49 PM
2

I've seen guys, when rejected, get pissed and say "you're not as hot as you think you are" or some other insult. Even if 95% of /r/creepypms are fake, this is still true.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/14 12:53 PM
5

a procedure that exists to make sure she did not make the decision rashly, under emotional duress, or was not coerced into it. The problem is this assumes every woman just thought "well I guess I'll have an abortion!" and got in the car. Except it's just about always a long thought out decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/14 12:51 PM
-3

Attempting to maintain objectivity is a bad thing? The article ends with saying it's not black and white because each video starts after the event began, and finishes before it was over. I'm all for calling out idiots, and was falm palming over the woman upset over swearing, and extremely annoyed by video one and two, but that's no reason to ignore the possibility something else happened.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 04:13 PM
3

Poorly placed when many don't get it.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 04:04 PM
0

Wouldn't even say it's so much that as wanting to have a romanticized, or beautiful death. aka, don't want to leave a mess behind, still want to be recognizable, have a peaceful dead look.
/r/MensRights31/07/14 02:17 PM
3

Yup. More women attempt suicide, more men successfully go through with it. This is why I think it's a total cop out to say "well more men commit suicide!" because it's dodging the issue of suicide all together. It's not about actually going through with it, it's that people think suicide is a viable option that is the issue.
/r/MensRights31/07/14 02:15 PM
3

I'd also argue that because the previous generation of men have been raised to think red meat, beer, second helpings, whisky, smoking etc = manly (basically taking poor care of your body via food/substance intake). So it's no surprise heart disease is talked about more often in men, because men have historically taken shittier care of their bodies because we were told it's the manly thing to do.
/r/MensRights31/07/14 02:12 PM
4

I'd argue it has something to do with most media stories, pop culture, and entertainment mediums revolving around an older man having a heart attack and disrupting a family. So one of those things that no one really thinks about, but the subconscious go to is a grey haired dude on the ground holding his chest.
/r/MensRights31/07/14 02:07 PM
2

Goes like this: 'Well obviously because the message is only saying women should be careful it means nothing is being done to stop the people spiking drinks!'
/r/MensRights24/07/14 05:28 PM
1

I always seem to be met with a sour attitude every time I do this, but I'll answer the question. This is an interpretation and trying to explain an opposing view point. It's not an apologist attitude, or saying the person who wrote that isn't looking too deep into things. Okay. It's 'victim blaming' because, on the surface, it can be interpreted as ignoring the real issue. Some people go too deep and read into this as saying that it's a woman's fault for not being careful with their drinks and s…
/r/MensRights24/07/14 05:25 PM
-2

I only have a problem with this because I don't believe in responding with violence with violence unless the situation calls for it. This was, albeit a reasonable one, an act of revenge rather than necessity. Please keep in mind that I'm translating this to any situation. I don't believe in the hit-back-because-you-hit-me mentality many are quick to judge. I do not care about gender in that, I just don't believe escalating violence is a productive measure unless necessary. That said, in this cas…
/r/MensRights18/07/14 12:47 PM
1

I'm just going to take this time to point out that subscribing to, and posting in a subreddit does not mean someone automatically subscribes to the core principles/general ideology of the sub's community.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 11:01 PM
2

So you're saying you happened to grow up in a household with a strong, traditional feminist mindset and are arguing that means it's the norm? Sounds like it sucked to grow up that way. However you read as cynical, if anything. Cynicism doesn't make a good argument and can easily make someone think with narrow eyes.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 05:46 PM
-1

That makes both of us.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 05:35 PM
3

Outside of university/college?
/r/MensRights17/07/14 05:34 PM
-4

Okay then. Continue to present issues with men rights and gender inequality as a battle against feminism and see how constructive your discussion will be.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 04:21 PM
21

Yea the end of the story is what makes me think this isn't quite real. When I confronted her on this, she completely lost it. She started screaming about how pornography is misogynistic and perpetuated "hetero-patriarchal objectification of women's bodies." She continued yelling about how her son was participating in rape culture and that I was raising him to be a rapist. Right there is what made me think this isn't quite possibly probably not a real thing that happened. In the real world it's v…
/r/MensRights17/07/14 03:24 PM
-5

Really need to stop saying "feminists XYZ". I don't care what you think. What I care about is taking focus on real issues and appearing like we want a fight. Had you simply said in the title "Writers are the Daily Dot..." or "the Daily Dot thinks..." Then you can only focus on the issue, only focus on what the specific people causing this issue are talking about, and not open the topic up to side railing. Sometimes I really think that this sub wants there to be some kind of gender war, rather th…
/r/MensRights17/07/14 01:55 PM
1

That's not what the article said at all.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 02:17 PM
2

I think it's more of a testament towards people being easily corrupt when put in a position of power, especially over someone else's financial well being. That's my take though.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 02:13 PM
2

I'm happy to see the top post a level headed one. It's truly refreshing.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 02:02 PM
2

Except it's not saying what the title is suggesting; the women are saying it's not their fault the sexual harassment happened, but the fault of a male dominated tech industry. The title is misleading, and the quote is out of context, at best.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 01:46 PM
3

That's great if that's what was actually said. "You'll see more sexual harassment cases in Silicon Valley because of the male dominated culture," said Mathew Da Vega, a lawyer representing Shi. He acknowledged this particular case is different because it involves two women. That's the statement, by a male lawyer, which immediately says this is a different case because it's two women. I'm all for calling out gender buillshit, but all I take from this is a general statement saying there's more sex…
/r/MensRights15/07/14 01:43 PM
1

If you're going to do this then at least point out that that quote came from a male lawyer. Also I think it's being taken out of context. "You'll see more sexual harassment cases in Silicon Valley because of the male dominated culture," said Mathew Da Vega, a lawyer representing Shi. He acknowledged this particular case is different because it involves two women. As in he's suggesting men are more likely t perpetuate sexual harassment in the work place. He immediately followed by saying this is …
/r/MensRights15/07/14 01:36 PM
2

are you gonna deny that most of the TRP is negative as fuck? I prefer cynical when I look at the sub, personally.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 08:34 PM
1

Except it wouldn't be a public setting. It'd be a private venue/film set/home.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 05:43 PM
1

Except in porn production everyone present would be consenting. Both verbally and extremely likely in written form as well.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 05:21 PM
1

If someone is not consenting, as in the 3rd person did not consent to the act to happen. So if you and your wife, husband, boyfriend, whatever, start having sex in your own home in front of someone and they're not okay with that.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 04:52 PM
3

Well I don't see anything in that article stating male or female, so if a man was accused or being raped then he could very well say he was raped as well and the burden of proof would then be placed on both parties. I mean he would still need to prove he didn't rape her, but she would then need to prove that she didn't rape him.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 04:16 PM
1

This is most certainly not a women's issue however. It may adversely affect a small number of women, but it's primarily an issue for gay men and as you mentioned, Oh don't do that. Downplaying something that also effects women as a non-issue for women under the pretext of only affecting a small amount of women isn't helping your case at all. It's definitely an issue for young gay couples. There's no reason to draw lines though. If anything also advocating this as an issue for women too creates a…
/r/MensRights10/07/14 03:55 PM
-1

That's thing thing, it's such a narrow window that can be involved, and even then there's precedent in place that no charge would be filed when there's satisfying evidence of consent.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 03:53 PM
0

That's thing thing, it's such a narrow window that can be involved, and even then there's precedent in place that no charge would be filed when there's satisfying evidence of consent.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 03:52 PM
0

If the people in the film are 16, or 17 years old. Even then, no judge would be stupid enough to put down a teenage gay couple on anal sex charges.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 03:50 PM
1

True, I suppose what I meant to say is laws shouldn't be interpreted in black and white. When police, courts, prosecutors, and judges hand down judgement based on the black and white read of the law.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 08:37 PM
1

What should be done is not have the law be black and white for cases between minors. It's just silly.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 08:25 PM
1

Boom, my mind.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 06:59 PM
5

What I don't understand is how someone can be charged like an adult with producing/manufacturing child pornography of themselves. If the material is child pornography then isn't that self defining that the person themselves is a child?
/r/MensRights09/07/14 05:23 PM
9

Mostly cynical.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/14 07:54 PM
1

When you know the other person is with someone and make the decision to press forward you're at least somewhat guilty in causing someone else misery.
/r/seduction04/07/14 04:27 AM
1

And then on you.
/r/seduction04/07/14 04:25 AM
1

Getting closer.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 03:55 PM
5

You mean that there's a thing called relationship dynamic and it has a massive impact on how the relationship evolves and the course of action each party involved takes? Well shit. I thought I was just supposed to say "Nah brah, men always do this and women always do that."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/14 12:57 PM
5

Same, I look to see the best in people too. It's bit me in the ass once or twice. But I've been cynical before and it made me miserable. I also know that most people just want to be happy in life and do have good intentions, it's just easy to hear about the bad before the good. So this is why I'm just cautious now!
/r/seduction24/06/14 08:00 PM
25

That doesn't sound like much of a break up as much as you got dumped and she was never serious about you from the beginning. Doesn't support anything other than you encountered a person who mistreated you. I'm sorry for that.
/r/seduction24/06/14 05:11 PM
-2

Do you have any friends that are women who have gone through a breakup? It's just you.
/r/seduction24/06/14 05:09 PM
1

Well, at least TRP taught me something useful.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/14 07:02 PM
4

Speechless.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/14 01:08 PM
5

Well that's spinning my question then. So you're saying that TRP works for everyone?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/14 12:24 PM
6

So there's only one answer if you're not born with it? That's a rather glib philosophy to hold.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/14 12:12 PM
-3

Explain to me how the infographic proves there's a sex disparity? There's a shitload of data we need to look at before saying "welp, that settles it! Society wants to put the menfolk in jail!"
/r/MensRights21/06/14 03:22 AM
-1

This subreddit really likes to yell "feminism BAD!" for the sake of it.
/r/MensRights20/06/14 11:26 PM
-4

No. It's a race issue, if anything. Comparing men and women like this is rather baseless without other points of data to compare.
/r/MensRights20/06/14 11:25 PM
5

Oddly enough if you compare the racial groups of men and women you'll find that the ratio is roughly 6~7x larger regardless. So that's equal at least.
/r/MensRights20/06/14 11:23 PM
0

I look at debating gender issues on this level the same way as conducting a science experiment: If you devise a hypothesis then a single piece of data between two groups and draw a conclusion, you'd be laughed at in academia.
/r/MensRights20/06/14 11:21 PM
4

That's a different argument though. It's also a hard one to make because crimes are not cut and dry, and a judge often takes context of the specific crime before deciding on the number of years. The laws only state minimum and maximum sentences. What I'm saying is, to your same argument, we could look at 100 murder convictions committed by men and find different sentencing times.
/r/MensRights20/06/14 11:20 PM
2

What if this was cross referenced with arrest numbers by gender? I tend to be realistic about things like this, because I don't believe cynicism is a good motivation for making a judgement based on data. This is why my first thought is that all the data shows is men commit more crimes that are that yield prison sentences. Now prison rape is a real problem, not even touching that. I just don't want to make a quick conclusion without cross referencing data. If we compared arrest rates and they wer…
/r/MensRights20/06/14 11:17 PM
16

That's why you make it general! If there's a specific campaign just telling college-age women to not drink so much and maybe they will find they have less unwanted hook ups, then of course it will be attacked as victim blaming. Now if you make a campaign educating everyone on campus about all the dangers associated with over drinking you cannot be told you're specifically targeting one group.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 08:37 PM
-3

Yes, I'm a moron for not immediately taking a cynical interpretation towards the poster. I didn't immediately think it is suggesting all men are rapists when they drink and need to be controlled by their peers. Okay, you win. Found me out! So clever.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 04:14 PM
1

The thing is this is 1 of 4 in a series, which appears to be part of a larger campaign that has 26 posters, so each can target a different sub-demographic for the whole campaign.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 04:12 PM
-1

I'd assume the entire campaign, not just this one, is designed to educate college aged kids about rape and aim to lower instances of rape, and ultimately prevent rape in the future. I didn't say the campaign was well executed, at all. Though just because I believe they did a shitty job doesn't mean I cannot interpret what the intent was.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 03:33 PM
-2

Awareness campaigns aren't designed for direct action, but slow progress.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 03:28 PM
2

No, the poster is incredibly ambiguous and can be interpreted as saying guys should make sure their friends do not get too drunk or they will rape women. It doesn't help at all. That and it's horribly composed, has shit copy, and looks ugly. I want to believe that the people who made this intended on saying that we should make sure our friends do not intentionally get someone drunk to have sex with them. Some people do that, and it's the mark of a shitty human.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 01:13 PM
-4

You definitely missed what I'm saying. I'm saying that we cannot deny that there is a number of men(albeit small), typically young men and in college, who do purposefully encourage women to drink for the sole purpose of raping them. It's deceitful, it's wrong, and it's not okay. That's what I felt this ad was targeting. and you know what, it's not even "...the men's responsibility to watch over the girls and not let them drink alcohol." it's that people should be looking out for people. So I thi…
/r/MensRights19/06/14 01:07 PM
-7

You're right, it is ambiguous. It's the ads fault, but I honestly feel interpretation of that level requires a certain level of cynicism. Upon reading it over and over, the copy is just awfully written to. One because people don't talk like that, ever. Not even in after school specials. Two, it just reads awkward and unclear. I personally read the ad as saying "Let's not let someone get a girl drunk just to have sex with her". So yea, the fact it's open to interpretation isn't good either. I don…
/r/MensRights19/06/14 12:49 PM
-5

Going to get burned for this... Not that this poster is really the right approach because it does unfairly make a blanket statement... We cannot deny that there ARE a number (higher than anyone should be comfortable) young men in in college who do honestly believe "Just get her drunk" is acceptable. It's not, it's really not okay. It is a real problem, and we shouldn't get angry when someone tries to address it. When should become critical. The problem I have with this poster (if we can call it …
/r/MensRights19/06/14 11:21 AM
3

Can vouch. Was a sub but only to see the posts, not because I believed in that shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/14 02:34 PM
1

Further supported by /r/thebluepill stating in the sidebar they are satire.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/14 06:34 PM
1

Physically yes, because men and women have hormonal differences. Mentally different I don't quite go with. I say hormonal differences because hormones do have an effect on our brain chemistry.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/14 03:52 PM
2

I don't want to bag on your experience, but I think the problem was you married so young. From the sounds of it you weren't together for several years first either and it was a quick decision. Early twenties are the years of our lives that are full of regret over life decisions.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/14 03:46 PM
1

I don't want to get deep into this, but just touch on parts at the top: First of all, women most certainly judge men on their sexual experience too. A guy who's in his twenties and still a virgin would get chewed up and laughed at by most women. Honestly not my experience. I was a virgin in my early 20s and didn't have an issue with that when I started getting serious about dating. In my experience the kinds of people who will shame someone for being a virgin aren't interested in a relationship.…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/14 01:32 PM
2

Why did you marry a 22 year old?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/14 01:11 PM
3

So because it's less likely we should advocate going in the opposite direction and lowering the rights of others? Overall this would result in less incentive to change how selective service works.
/r/MensRights10/06/14 07:50 PM
2

I can't agree with this stance. This is how I read it: "Well that's probably not going to happen, so for the sake of making it equal we should make it worse for others!" If some of us have to suffer then ALL of us should!". Sorry, I just do not see that as productive, at all. Not the right way of looking at things in anyway. Equality should never be about lowering one group to meet another, and should always be about raising a group to meet the other. The issue here isn't that women aren't requi…
/r/MensRights10/06/14 07:48 PM
2

or no one should have to sign up for such basic government programs.
/r/MensRights10/06/14 07:44 PM
-7

All this illustrates is that "feminists" are not some organised group with a common agenda. Of course that doesn't stop all the top comments referring to feminists as "they".
/r/MensRights09/06/14 02:16 AM
1

Well the guy was at -3 or something when I made the comment.
/r/MensRights06/06/14 06:51 PM
10

I think you were downvoted because a lot of posters here want this to be 'us vs them'.
/r/MensRights06/06/14 04:56 PM
1

Because it's not about you? It's fine if you don't care if you personally are looked down upon, but that is not the point I'm getting at. I don't care if you're looked down upon either. The problem is that you, and many others act this way yet wonder why others do not take the concept of "MRA" seriously. Think whatever the hell you want. But don't be selfish. Putting ourselves between feminists and others isn't going to help anything, its only going to create a divide. Want equality? Want to all…
/r/MensRights04/06/14 11:39 PM
1

Your title makes it sound like she got upset and you had to firmly insist. As if there was some stand off. Your content post describes you asking for the money for the ticket at the last moment, making her think you forgot about it, and her giving you the money without a word. By the way, upset about her investing zero time in getting to know you? You went to a movie. A movie is a shitty date to get to know each other. Some people hate talking during movies and want to sit there and watch the mo…
/r/seduction04/06/14 11:22 PM
-1

It is just as unproductive to say statements like "Christians believe X" when talking about a negative behaviour. During our lives we will always encounter people who identify with a group; be it political, religious, or sociological, and poorly represent the 'brand' of the group. Usually these people are the loudest as well. Not all christians are crazy bible thumpers that believe homosexuality is the highest of sins and should be punished through severe emotional and physical retribution. Not …
/r/MensRights04/06/14 11:02 PM
0

ITT: generalizing all feminism. You are NOT helping people take the MRM seriously if the only response to misguided feminism is anti-feminism and generalizations. It's not productive. Looks like OP was banned because a mod decided. Did you message the mod that banned you and ask? If they won't reply or won't tell you then it was something being a dick, not because you did anything wrong.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 08:38 PM
11

Ideally, take it a step farther. There are no teams and we just recognize and accept people are different from one another.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 11:35 AM
1

Well option B is more along the cultist belief. So it's not a typically rational.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 07:15 PM
1

Do you want the truth? Because people who call themselves feminists and do this either have: a) been legitimately invalidated by men while growing up. Sorry to say, is still a real thing. It's a bad thing too because it helps breed hateful people like this. b) Have been led to believe by other people who call themselves feminists and believe the same thing that men do invalidate women. I feel sorry for group A, because they were honestly mistreated by people simply because of their gender. I fee…
/r/MensRights29/05/14 01:07 PM
4

That's my point. it paints the anti-hero picture. "No one pays attention to me now... but if I do this I'll be immortalized. Even if the world hate me, at least they will known my name."
/r/MensRights27/05/14 10:57 PM
9

That's what I find hilarious. TBP wasn't designed to be the anti-thesis to TRP ideology. The subreddit's sole purpose always has, and always will be to mock the ridiculous posts from TRP that attempt to justify dehumanizing women with pseudoscience. I'm not sure how TBP started being viewed as a legitimate 'social ideology' destined to wage war with TRP. Maybe it's the same types of people who have posts highlighted in TBP that got this idea. These guys took it the 'red pill' metaphor so serious…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/14 10:53 PM
7

Actually stop plastering this kind of event on the news every time it happens. Stop making the shooters out to be anti-heros. Stop publically obsessing over their dark and twisted mind. Stop showing everyone the kids face. Just stop. Virginity was this guys catalyst. But it's not the core issue.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 10:50 PM
0

Need to at least have the intent to hit someone in the face.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 04:13 PM
0

This is true! But unless she was biting viciously, I didn't consider breaking a jaw 'protecting' oneself. Self defense is great, but not a license to harm someone. I'm just not a fan if violence.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 12:33 PM
-4

From the weak description of events of a few Facebook comments in an image... Of he can hit her hard enough to fracture her jaw, then he could have simply restrained her. Self defense isn't a license to hurt someone. Is this saying the woman was allowed to attack his daughter, or that the man wasn't allowed to resist her and protect his daughter? No. But this is saying this doesn't sound like reasonable force that self defense entails. Then again, this is only a small amount of the story from a …
/r/MensRights26/05/14 12:20 PM
-4

Oh I'm sorry? I'm going by the idea that potentially drunk woman at a bar sees someone who isn't a woman come into the woman's washroom and try and take away a drunk person. No, he shouldn't have been attacked, but it was irresponsible of the venue to not send staff with him to keep proper context. I'm not excusing shit. I'm saying venue could have handled the situation better.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 06:51 PM
8

What its really saying is teach your children to NOT treat women differently because they are women.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 05:27 PM
2

Why? Should be part of a larger, inclusive, campaign for sure bit it hits on a very serious issue. There ARE a lot of teens and young men who hold zero respect for women because they are women. A lot of that comes from how their dads treated women.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 05:26 PM
-17

That sucks that it happened, but I can somewhat understand where that woman was coming from. A bouncer or staff member should have gone with you to explain the situation to anyone else who happened to be in the bathroom. Some people get really picky about public bathrooms adhering to gender rules.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 03:09 PM
3

That's what I figured you were getting towards. I agree.
/r/MensRights21/05/14 03:10 PM
0

MensRights isn't, or RedPill isn't? I know RedPill isn't all like that, problem is that's what the face of the sub portrays.
/r/MensRights21/05/14 03:06 PM
21

Redpill isn't on our side.
/r/MensRights21/05/14 02:21 PM
8

It's definitely a dismissal tactic. I've had it used against me for simply offering my interpretation of a situation. All I could think was "what..?" The interesting part is I'm fairly sure it was me offering an explanation of why a guy may have acted a certain way, in trying to offer an alternate perspective.
/r/MensRights21/05/14 02:16 PM
4

What's the blue pill started simply to mock the red pill, and not as an 'opposing view' subreddit?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/14 12:49 PM
9

You do understand part of emotional abuse is questioning that you've done something wrong for feeling a certain way, right? I was talking about him manipulating her. Not the other way around. I didn't think there would be a confusion with this.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/14 07:10 PM
4

RPer justifying the boyfriend in question manipulating the woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/14 07:07 PM
13

Justifying emotional abuse and manipulation.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/14 05:15 PM
1

We shouldn't be laughing at the act of physical violence one person inflicts upon another.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 11:37 PM
2

If you're in a casual hook up/fwb situation then just reply "Yes, that's what we do most of the time, do you want something more? Because I don't think I do."
/r/seduction03/05/14 03:06 AM
1

It's the latter under the guise of the former.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 11:18 PM
2

Meh. Honestly both are rude things to say. I don't agree with labeling the terms as inherently offensive, nor do I think there should be a "speech code" in which allows words to be banned on campus.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 11:17 PM
3

Because, to quote, "that's what they want to hear" That's what makes this insulting, regardless of gender.
/r/MensRights18/04/14 10:05 PM
2

I'm going to translate some other meaningful life advice to match this situation. It's always said you cannot truly love someone else until you learn to love yourself. Well I also believe that should not have someone be proud of you, unless you can be proud of yourself first. So if you're making strides and looking for someone to show pride, look within yourself.
/r/RedPillWomen18/04/14 08:56 PM
1

Well I wasn't intending on going into specifics and technicality. I'll just backtrack and define what I mean by "addictive". I don't mean a simple dopamine release. I refer more to those that cannot handle a simple dopamine release and make that THE dopamine release.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 09:39 PM
1

Its the same as drinking. People get addicted because they have addicting tendencies, not because the activity is inherently addictive. /r/nofap, for example, would like to believe its the porns fault, and not their addictive personalities.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 07:10 PM
1

They'd why you're acting like such a twat right now.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 12:19 PM
1

Oh, since we are going that way. Its not shaming to call someone out for being a dick.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 02:55 AM
1

So.. cynicism, that's your excuse?
/r/MensRights10/04/14 03:19 AM
1

Except originally this comment tree had no indication of that. It was a simple question and it was met with direct hostility. Even then, if any strong movement should be willing to accept that others will not be interested, but still willing to explain and educate. If a movement shuns outsiders then it harms the overall credibility of the movement; makes the movement appear elitist and arrogant. Humility is an incredibly strong thing.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 02:24 AM
7

If members of a community or movement cannot be bothered to explain their ideology to an outside interested in understanding the movement then it's not a very good movement.
/r/MensRights09/04/14 02:58 PM
1

Have you tried talking to a therapist? Medical doctors wouldn't deal with ways to support the male in a pregnancy because that's not their job. There may be the rare one that takes an active interest though.
/r/MensRights01/04/14 12:49 PM
3

You linked to tumblr. Crazy is more likely than not. You'd get along well with /r/tumblrinaction
/r/MensRights13/03/14 11:24 PM
1

Sounds like given education. Reality this is just years spent in higher education.
/r/MensRights13/03/14 11:16 PM
4

Also mentions that he plead not guilty.
/r/MensRights13/03/14 11:02 PM
2

IMO victim blaming means blaming the victim for what the perpetrator did. Why is that an IMO, or even a question up for debate? It's a self describing word.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/14 03:26 AM
2

Greentext is rarely real.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 08:06 PM
1

Aren't you perpetuating such behavior and also adding a Messiah complex by increasing your own count while believing you are doing the right thing?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/14 12:36 AM
2

No. Creep shaming is shaming a negative behavior that targets a specific person and results in the target feeling uncomfortable. Slut shaming shames a behavior that some consider negative that does not target a specific individual and some choose to be bothered by. Slut shaming men exist. The double standard is that most do not care if a man is a slut. For equality we need to either care that a man is a whore or stop caring if a woman is one.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 11:51 PM
-1

The daily mail. You made the mistake of taking the daily mail seriously.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 04:31 PM
11

And here I just tuck it under my belt and pretend its not there.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 06:20 PM
6

With a $1.50 per use in app purchase.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 06:18 PM
25

Oh it doesn't need to be your landline. Any will do. Even a payphone. The copper was laid out by us menfolk after all.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 03:28 PM
105

The patriarchy central office of oppressive standards and measures handles erection switch replacement. Call 310-DICK on any landline.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 02:50 PM
25

or morning wood.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 02:25 PM
289

Probably thinks guys can just will an erection on and off. Hint: the switch is behind our left ear.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 02:24 PM
1

I was just talking about that one instance described in detail.
/r/TheRedPill27/12/13 08:07 PM
5

Disagree, must be troll lol amirite
/r/TheRedPill27/12/13 05:41 PM
3

I think no means no when you are alone afterwards and sit down and cry. Personally I'm shocked how supportive the husband is, I wouldn't want to stay around. That's a different story though.
/r/TheRedPill27/12/13 01:29 PM
1

Calls herself a feminist with NAG being one of the methods.
/r/MensRights22/12/13 02:04 PM
-2

But the whole point is making a fair comparison, so if it's already unisex then what's there to change?
/r/MensRights15/12/13 03:41 AM
0

Bitch isn't a synonym of idiot. Asshole would be comparable.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 03:21 AM
2

Yea. There's a shitload of shirts that stereotype women. If anything this is true equality.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 03:20 AM
2

Don't be an asshat.
/r/seduction15/12/13 12:08 AM
0

No, lol. If you sit down and get to know someone before you stick it inside them then there's an incredibly high chance you'll be able to judge whether or not they will cry rape on you or not. Regardless of how cynical you may or may not be, that doesn't make an outlier the standard.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 02:24 PM
-4

or just don't blindly sleep with a woman if you're that worried about being mis-labeled a rapist.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 03:44 AM
1

Well shit, in that case we may as well not even try.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 06:29 PM
-3

k be filled with cynicism and ignore the reasoning behind this story getting so large.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 04:25 PM
-5

But that's what I'm seeing an issue in. There's a complaint that it was a girl that caused this to happen and no a boy. It very well could have been a boy in the news, but you know what? It's also less likely for a boy to be blackmaled with nude photos and propositioned via webcam. I'll be blunt; it's a supply and demand thing. It's just not something that is as likely to happen. The reality is that this particular story that got so much attention was a literal shitstorm and left the media saliv…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 04:08 PM
-4

That's a different issue though and an problem with the system itself, not the rules. The rules do not define a bias towards a single gender. It's not the laws fault if prosecutors do not enforce it equally. It's not that that's an important issue, it's a very important issue. It's a different issue though and the take away from this particular legislative move is that it's designed to help EVERYONE.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 03:45 PM
-4

You're still ignoring the fact that the legislative proposal has the ability to help everyone. /r/mensrights is supposed to be about equality, is it not?
/r/MensRights21/11/13 03:42 PM
-5

The thread title is positioned in a way that's suggesting the proposed legislation is for women, and ignores the fact that the proposal doesn't even address gender and makes liberal use of the term "person". Do nekkid pictures of women get passed around more than guys? (eg: relationship revenge, schoolmates passing something around to wank, or general assholes) Sure. Still a proposed rule that can help anyone. This is the petty shit this sub shouldn't be focused on. The whole premise of this thr…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 01:53 PM
60

Proposed legislation is gender ambiguous, so who cares? Let's bitch about it though because the major media story that drew a lot of attention to the issue happened to be involving two girls instead of boys.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 01:46 PM
1

Black history month is just a political PR stunt. It's also a pretty good reminder of how messed up slavery can be. Fathers and mothers day actually has something to it. It's meant for people to think and reflect upon everything their parents gave them. I suppose you could argue we should have a "parents day". A men's day, or women's day though doesn't really do anything. Maybe water cooler conversation and makes whoever put the effort to coin the term feel good about themselves. So I guess I'll…
/r/MensRights20/11/13 02:53 PM
3

Don't want it. A day for a gender is ridiculous.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 02:50 PM
-1

Being 13 is plenty excuse, and this started at 11. Under developed brain means shitty decisions without properly thinking out the consequences.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 01:04 PM
2

Yup. Totally the parents fault. Even if it was entirely the fault of external influences that caused the kids to go forward with this, it's still the parent's fault for not being vigilant enough to see it going on, and being a shithead about standing behind he kids.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 01:01 PM
5

or, they're children. Children have this habit of doing stupid things, just because. When I was 9 I paid a friend the potato chips from my lunch to call this girl 3 years older than us a cow because I thought it was funny. I don't even know why I thought it was funny. She wasn't even unattractive or overweight, she was a tall slender girl. Where am I going with this? Kids can do fucked up things for no reason, that we as adults would know better than to do. I'm not saying they shouldn't be punis…
/r/MensRights19/11/13 03:11 AM
-1

I think you meant to post to /r/confession.
/r/TheRedPill09/11/13 06:53 AM
1

You need to be licensed to do a wet shave I believe. At least in Ontario. It's one of the reasons it's difficult to find a proper place that will do it. and no one is FORCING a barber to do perms or highlights. Yes, they have to learn how, but no one is forcing them to sell that as a service. Jesus Christ. Stop making everything a gender issue, it diminishes the severity of real issues.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 05:06 PM
1

The real issue is they designed this for new entries to the field, and no considerations were made for existing participants in the field. I think everyone who wants to specialize in hair cutting/styling should be forced to learn the basics of all aspects. I don't think those who have had businesses open for years should be forced to go back and learn something new though.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 04:53 PM
-1

It's not a gender issue at all. Any trades certification will have the individual learn more than he or she will ever use in the field. This isn't preventing specialization, it's setting a baseline. That baseline may be wider than it needs to be. Nothing is preventing someone from expanding their knowledge on a specific area of hairstyling though.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 04:51 PM
0

Lol. This isn't a men's rights issue. This is an issue with the way the province chose to handle the certification process. Current barbers who are more than qualified have to go through the current curriculum which encompasses all aspects of hair styling, yes even those that are traditionally women only. Look at it this way, a man should also be free to request any hairstyle he wants. Maybe that is a perm or highlights, who cares? That's beside the point. This legislative move was created with …
/r/MensRights03/11/13 04:47 PM
-3

This isn't feminism. It's the government making a thoughtless decision when it comes to the certification process for barbers specifically. It has nothing to do with women. Look at it this way, a man should also be free to request any hairstyle he wants. Maybe that is a perm or highlights, who cares? That's beside the point. The way the government is positioning it is that everything that can be hairstyling is hairstyling, so everyone who wishes to go into the field needs to be certified on all …
/r/MensRights03/11/13 04:46 PM
8

I'm going to assume this is just in reference to college bars, and not real world adult bars.
/r/TheRedPill31/10/13 02:07 AM
15

In addition to that: can generalize it even farther by recognizing that groups/individuals are generally okay with discrimination when that group/individual directly benefit. Doesn't necessarily be a concious thing either.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 07:35 PM
0

I think it's not necessarily a woman thing, or even a relationship thing. This is a societal issue that transcends gender. It does often show up in the context of relationships though. Simple fact: people's perceptions change when money is involved. Now this is douchey. It's also blatantly shallow. It's even rude.
/r/TheRedPill16/10/13 12:19 AM
0

You can't really be angry about it... it's only ignorance. It's ignorance based on social stigma. Circumcision isn't something most people sit down and talk about. A social taboo, if you will.
/r/MensRights13/09/13 03:19 AM
3

I'm going to assume you're only talking about looks, and not personality.
/r/TheRedPill07/09/13 02:48 PM
3

Here's the thing, if you feel the need to defend the community's actions and philosophy, but can only say "people just don't understand us!" or "a small group is spreading lies!" then you need to question the community.
/r/TheRedPill07/09/13 11:32 AM
1

I'm saying that if you just take all the numbers and average it out, women make less then men. That ignores context though and doesn't provide an accurate representation.
/r/TheRedPill02/09/13 08:10 PM
-7

It's true with pure numbers, but the statement ignores context. Without context, numbers are not worth much.
/r/TheRedPill01/09/13 02:43 AM
0

Well, I guess what I was getting at was that the cases, while rare and small in number, seem to garner so much attention that it creates an illusion that such behaviour is far more common than it is.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 04:20 PM
8

You're saying that those who think otherwise are the very, very vocal minority?
/r/MensRights25/08/13 04:07 PM
3

Should have been clearer. Those that run it are what I meant by community. My point is, deal with it. Let it go and don't make a thing out of it. Best case scenario you'll eventually get an answer and not be satisfied. Worst case scenario, there will just be a lot of e-drama over it. This sub seems to focus far more on what other groups are doing or how other subreddits view the subscriber base than discussing mens rights issues. If the subscribers here focused on improving the content rather th…
/r/MensRights23/08/13 10:00 PM
0

The feminist viewpoint on porn differs wildly depending on who you talk to. Some say it is liberating because a woman is choosing to use her body how she wishes; an ultimate expression of sexual freedom. Others say it's demeaning and exploitation because it objectifies a woman; a woman is a thing to be viewed and sold. It's not necessarily a double standard, as it is tunnel vision. The people who hear against pornography and say it's exploiting women don't necessarily view people working in prof…
/r/MensRights23/08/13 09:57 PM
3

See what you did there is interesting because you compared the positive viewpoint of pornography with the negative viewpoint of working as an MMA fighter. The person working in porn could easily hate their job, but do it because the money is so great. The fighter could easily love their job and get a thrill from living on the edge and going in the ring.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 09:55 PM
22

Just as a reminder, this is how reddit works. Each subreddit is its own independent community that is allowed to make up its own rules. Anyone can create a subreddit, so anyone can decide what is and isn't allowed to be posted within a subreddit. We can call this censorship, but it's not because anyone can make a subreddit, and anyone can show the content they want in their subreddit. So /r/bestof, as a community, decided that they don't want posts from here. Whatever the reason may be is irrele…
/r/MensRights23/08/13 09:41 PM
-1

Hey, another group of people complains over stupid shit, so everyone should.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 03:55 PM
-1

I think it's being shared because of the double standard. It's just such an asinine place to take focus that it makes anything serious look like a joke by proxy.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 12:43 AM
0

The serious reaction, and sarcasm reinforcing it sure is.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 12:42 AM
4

Yes. Yes that is the message being interpreted. Don't take a few upset blog post interpretations as the intended, and mass received message.
/r/MensRights14/08/13 12:01 AM
1

Isn't it far easier to lose weight you suddenly gain than to lose weight you've carried for years? He did so for a noble, and understandable reason though.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 11:59 PM
3

Why would facebook copy and paste the article text. It says "post:" and then shows the post. It's hard to tell anyway because the image is all edited.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 03:25 PM
4

You copy and pasted the content of the article, by doing so you implied that the writing is your own. You basically plagiarised the article. Wouldn't have happened had you simply linked the article and wrote your own synopsis.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 02:57 PM
14

I refuse to take this seriously when the image labels facebook as a "police state", and underlines it as if people are not only forced to use facebook, but in fact live, breathe, and work on facebook. It's a free website run by a company with publicly traded shares. It can do whatever it wants. It's not a country, city, or state. It's a website. Don't use it if you don't like it. Beyond that, it's been mentioned several times that the concern wasn't even the subject, but an intellectual property…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 02:54 PM
8

Regardless of the fact, it's not even a real definition. I dislike definitions that reference the root word rather than explaining the word.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 07:32 PM
1

You realize this is in reference to scripted, glorified, high-budget, "professional", Hollywood beach house porn, right? The obviously fake stuff that happens in situations we know aren't real. Most people can't make the distinction.
/r/TheRedPill07/08/13 09:26 PM
0

what am I doing wrong? Not talking to her about it.
/r/TheRedPill07/08/13 09:20 PM
5

I'm still literally Hitler, because sexuality and gender aren't visual traits. More SJWs have assumed I was straight than regular people have, it's kinda funny when they accuse me of being homo- and trans- phobic. Which is even funnier because I've seen so many rants about how you are the worst kind of person for assuming someone's sexual orientation by looking at them. I'm pretty far up there. I just need to start making more money, then I'm ready for world domination.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 03:33 PM
9

SSS, Super Saiyan Shitlord.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 03:07 PM
7

That... makes a surprising amount of sense.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 01:25 PM
24

Sounds like you need to spend more time in /r/tumblurinaction and familiarize yourself with the ridiculousness that is the modern day internet Social Justice Worker. You're literally hitler if you're any one of the following, bonus points for combinations: White Rich (or middle class, just not poor) Heterosexual Cisgender (Meaning you consider yourself the gender that matches the bits between your legs) Thin Male Now please note, it only needs to be ONE of those things, so it's not exclusive to …
/r/MensRights07/08/13 12:49 PM
0

Many seem to forget too that games that stylize like this are designed for asian audiences. Sex isn't a huge taboo there. At least not like it is here. Focusing on breasts isn't the end of the world. The worst offenders come from a different culture than the culture being offended by it. Objectification and/or inaccurate representation in fantasy media is largely a western issue.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 12:36 AM
1

There's a difference between not liking homosexuality and treating others differently because they are gay.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 05:01 AM
18

Unless the men are gay.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 12:02 AM
-4

Hate to be the bitch, but this is one of the reason the sub was probably banned, the inane cynicism by many users.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 10:52 AM
1

but the fiancee has no legal place in the custody battle; what the story/article is about.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 03:57 PM
2

The biological mother? She isn't contesting the case, she didn't name him. As far as I've seen, she hasn't even been trying to gain custody. All the legal battles are being fought in the father's name.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 06:05 PM
2

The mother is ignored because she's not responsible for naming the child. The girlfriend didn't mother the child and has no rights in the battle. The mother is not fighting for custody. It's only the father fighting for the right to name his child Adolf. By focusing on the fact that it's the father in the spotlight (because of HIS decisions) you're ignoring the actual issue around the story, it's arguably child abuse to name a child "Adolf Hitler" because of the culture the father follows, and t…
/r/MensRights12/07/13 07:35 PM
3

Seriously? You're extracting that and fuelling your logic with cynicism, not rationality. This article does NOT say that. It's also an extremely valid case for child abuse due to both the background of the father (and now fiancée), plans for naming their new child, and the social stigma surrounding the name. It's reasonable to assert because the choice was made to name the kid this, he is going to have a shitty life.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 07:26 PM
9

Because this is a story for laymen, not the court documents. I know you want to think this is a MensRights issue, but most people who read this story see "father" and translate it into "parent". I'm sorry, but it just feels like you're trying too hard to validate your concerns.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 07:24 PM
3

Just seems like every day there's more and more links to articles posting things like this/interpretation of articles. Which, seems counter because... the sidebar describes this more as a run-off and/or hyperfocused /r/seduction.
/r/TheRedPill12/07/13 07:00 PM
2

I like how this sub is slowly become a another /r/mensrights.
/r/TheRedPill12/07/13 06:42 PM
-3

The fact that this has been blown out of proportion to translate into "all men are rapists" is absolutely ridiculous. The campaign isn't "teaching men" on how to not comit sexual assault, assuming all men will otherwise comit sexual assault. It's educating young men on what is and isn't sexual assault. Truth is, too many people think a lot of this is okay and that's not right. If we seriously can't admit that that's an issue then we have a major problem ourselves. Just because something is sayin…
/r/TheRedPill11/07/13 05:37 PM
3

This is stupid Legoland. There are no change rooms, and you have cameras everywhere. Hire competent security.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 12:43 PM
1

That's a contextual call. I'd say if he goes into a bar sober with the sole purpose of bringing home a drunk girl who would have otherwise said no, then he's kind of a rapist. To go a step further, if he does the above and take her home, and she's saying no, and he thinks "oh she's just drunk, she won't remember, she doesn't mean it, she won't really care". Then he's definitely a rapist. Sure, it's not the violent and dramatized pin her down, rip her cloths off, and just shove it in her all the …
/r/TheRedPill07/07/13 04:12 PM
2

You're projecting this in the wrong way, aren't you? If you get drunk and someone does something to you that you'd otherwise have not allowed them to do had you'd been sober, it's your fault for getting drunk. That doesn't mean the person who did something to you is innocent either. It doesn't have to be black and white with one party clearly in the wrong and one party clearly in the right. In this situation? She's lucky that she had someone to look out for her after she made the shitty decision…
/r/TheRedPill07/07/13 03:57 PM
2

Because every person handles alcohol differently?
/r/MensRights05/07/13 04:55 PM
3

You know what, fuck logic.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 03:24 PM
5

or just be a reasonable person and take context into account.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 02:58 PM
0

This is a stupid idea because it falls along the lines of "don't get yourself involved with police unless you need to".
/r/MensRights05/07/13 02:58 PM
10

She was a drunk college girl being a shithead. It's what drunk college kids do. I don't know about you, but I've done a lot of stupid shit that I'd never dream of doing sober. Several times I've had to stop and ask myself what the hell is wrong with me. I'm not defending, just explaining her. You're looking too much into the situation and ignoring the presence of alcohol.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 02:55 PM
30

I used to think this was unreasonable but let's try and paint the setting from her end. To understand why she reacted as she did we need to do a "put yourself in their shoes". So you're walking home alone at night. You're just trying to get home and smoke your cigarette. You hear two unknown people from behind you ask for something. Maybe you didn't hear them clearly, maybe you did and think it's just an excuse to get close to you. You just know one thing, they're behind you, they're probably bi…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 02:52 PM
4

True, but many posters here get so into the sarcasm they stop being seen as serious.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 08:44 PM
41

I know you're being sarcastic, but that really doesn't help change people's mindset.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:06 PM
2

Keep strong, document it. Save all the emails sent, and record in secret. Have a friend do it and follow you, or use audio in your pocket. You need to have proof of harassment before she (if she does) does accuse you of sexual assault. This way you can have evidence to present a case when you report her and she will look silly for waiting until after you report her to make a sexual assault report. If she's just signing you up for stuff then go to your school's IT department and request a new col…
/r/MensRights15/06/13 04:44 PM
7

In other news, people can be conditioned.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:40 AM
3

Get it looked at. I'm in the same boat. Went to the doctor, referred to get an ultrasound, and then to see a urologist. Long story short, it's a benign cyst that I can have removed, but medically there's no reason to unless it becomes uncomfortable/painful. Still glad I found out.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 02:53 PM
19

and then we turn to actors that have had to play the Joker. :|
/r/seduction25/04/13 03:05 PM
-7

Not a gender issue. This is a byproduct of a horrible world war that only ended less than 2 decades and government pro-patriotism propaganda. If any gender had been eligible for the draft/military service then the response would have been the same. It was instilled (and still is to a degree) that if you're against serving in the military then you're against the country.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 11:05 PM
3

This is a general rule when you're being accused of any crime you didn't commit.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:34 PM
8

This isn't your gender, this is just an idiot.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 04:49 PM
8

See, to me I hold no issue with it because it's over with. It's not as though the company actively needs x many foreskins in order to perpetuate their business. They don't. It's even arguable that while this company profited from fibroblast initially derived from a discarded foreskin, the science behind what they do has helped a lot for a variety of other uses outside of cosmetic beauty. If the company was actively using disgarded foreskin and not generating cultures for 2 decades initially base…
/r/MensRights10/04/13 03:27 PM
10

I gave it a good go and cannot find any direct/open endorsement of the company/cream by Oprah. If she did at one point, she no longer is. No results for searching "oprah" on SkinMedica's website. No results for searching "Skinmedica" on Oprah's website. The only articles/reports I can find of Oprah explicitly stating endorsement of the product/company are from 2009 in the earliest. Everything else is talking about oprah getting shit for it, the majority of which is talking about this particular …
/r/MensRights10/04/13 02:46 PM
5

I wouldn't use one, personally, or change the name if they insist on using an acronym. Project can be come... Endevor? Group? Movement? Edit: Forget group. Just realized Can-Fag/C-FAG is worse.
/r/MensRights10/04/13 02:25 PM
19

I... I know this is serious but COME ON Representing what he calls the Canadian Foreskin Awareness Project, or Can-Fap for short, ಠ_ಠ
/r/MensRights10/04/13 01:17 PM
1

Wouldn't happen. Would create more problems than it solves.
/r/MensRights02/04/13 11:41 PM
6

8 month difference. May be the same person, but can you safely say you think the same way you did 8 months ago? Also could have been handled by different editors.
/r/MensRights02/04/13 12:04 PM
4

Android is fragmented, more variables to consider when making an app. It's also very easy to pirate an android app.
/r/seduction01/04/13 11:26 AM
-12

Didn't know this sub was becoming /r/atheism. aka, stupid shit people who don't believe the same thing as me say.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 02:12 AM
-1

"but we need to be critical of feminism or else they won't know they're doing awful things!"
/r/MensRights01/04/13 01:46 AM
7

I've probably lost about 100~200 comment karma in /r/againstmensrights and have not been banned. /r/againstmensrights is arguable one of the most hostile subreddits due to their excessive monitoring of this subreddit. If you're personally experience banning then question how you're posting, not what you're posting. If you think this is an issue, but haven't personally experienced it from your own posting then question how those telling you they got banned present themselves, and subsequently the…
/r/MensRights31/03/13 12:42 PM
-2

ITT: Different people are not allowed to have different views about the issues a man can face for being a man, and if you don't jerk with us, you're against us. Seriously, if this sub can't accept that there's going to be a difference of opinion even between men then it has a lot of work to do before discussing any movement.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 12:35 PM
2

If a man registered then there's probably nothing they could do about it.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 10:36 PM
6

I refuse to trust a donation fund where the manager won't reveal their identity, or refuses currency that is not bitcoins.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 02:12 PM
2

Great quote, but isn't this more /r/relationships or /r/dating_advice material?
/r/seduction26/03/13 10:48 AM
2

How you choose to react doesn't change the technical definition.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 07:24 PM
7

Lol. Anonymous threats on the internet aren't harassment until a threat is actually followed through?
/r/MensRights23/03/13 02:42 PM
9

You mean that sketchy bitcoin-only donation fund that doesn't specifically state where the money goes to?
/r/MensRights23/03/13 02:39 PM
4

Bro, just trust me. It's worth watching. So worth watching I can't even articulate the core point with the written word.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 04:30 PM
1

Not saying you are. I made a similar post here a few week ago, was labeled as a concern troll as well. Edit here we go. Admittedly it was more of a knee jerk rant, but meh. Same underlying concern.
/r/MensRights16/03/13 12:12 AM
12

I can't tell if this is supposed to be serious or not. I honestly stopped reading when you said women are not predisposed to logical argument or rational thought. You associate yourself with the wrong women.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 09:52 PM
6

We're not being taken seriously if they can dismiss us through careless mockery, vs logically deconstructing our arguments. Sorry, but to twox this subreddit is a joke.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 09:22 PM
5

Have to ask yourself though, if a subreddit is getting alleged concern trolls, then maybe there's some merit towards it? There's far too many douche bags in the subreddit.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 09:21 PM
-2

So act hostile and hateful back accomplishes what? Sure, it makes the "us vs them" message clear to offenders, but makes "us" look bad to the rest of the world. It's not about being treated with less hostility, it's about not appearing hostile to neutral parties. That's one of the reasons websites like this are being blanket blacklisted without just cause. I find it hilarious though, that posts like this are downvoted because I don't advocate being a douchebag. An eye for an eye doesn't work for…
/r/MensRights15/03/13 12:12 AM
-12

I never quite understood this logic. "Well they started it so why shouldn't we bother?" I mean sure, Feminism can improve, but saying that Feminism has the wrong idea in some respects is a really shitty justification for acting hateful.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 03:18 PM
3

Why is this here?
/r/MensRights11/03/13 12:41 PM
1

Perhaps a suitable compromise would be the father being able to choose the adoptive parents for the child, as often happens when women decide to carry a child to term but cannot/do not want to care for them. That opens a huge ethical debate though.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 04:05 AM
1

That's the difference between you and I then, I don't define my child by genetics. I'm just not tied to it. I define my child by emotional experience and investment. What i'm saying is that I would consider a child my child if I'd accepted it and had an emotional attachment, as well as an influence in its life. The child doesn't need to be one of my seed in order for that to happen. I honestly believe that our society has evolved beyond the need to embrace that baser instinct of inherent genetic…
/r/MensRights09/03/13 01:19 AM
1

This is true, but it's difficult to create laws and punishment around deceit that results in betrayal. When it results in physical damage it's much easier to quantify damage. That's why it's different. Each parties obviously feel betrayed in each situation.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 06:55 PM
2

The only real crime would be the legal obligation that falls on the "father". I mean, as much as we want to act like it's no different, it is different because of the physical side to pregnancy. What I'd like to see is that if it can be proved (because let's be honest, legal battles between couples are an absolute mess of "he said she said") that a woman tampered with the birth control to become pregnant, then all legal obligation to father the child is waived. Her punishment is that she's left …
/r/MensRights08/03/13 06:47 PM
-7

why wouldn't someone who's interested in mens rights be interested in what's posted on /r/againstmensrights ?
/r/MensRights02/03/13 10:18 PM
-5

Because we are multi-faceted creatures with the ability to subscribe to some, but not all parts of a belief system? I can agree with points A through C, but not D through F.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 10:15 PM
-1

I wasn't stating that particular discussion was an attempt to lowering women. I should have brought in examples but the this post itself was a knee-jerk reaction to some extent. It's anecdotal, based on viewing this subreddit for a few months now. I mean, i even admitted that that was the case at the end of the original post. I'm okay with that though. I don't regret it either. I'll probably forget about it in a week, to be honest. I do feel overall it's necessary though. There are some issues h…
/r/MensRights02/03/13 10:04 PM
-4

and not everyone who calls themselves a feminist would align themselves towards that.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:58 PM
1

That's probably true. I'm able to admit that what I wrote to that specific person was written more out of emotion than logic. I'm not going to delete it though.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:49 PM
-2

So you're saying that any time anyone misunderstands you it's their fault, and there was nothing you could have done to make the message clearer? Because that's what I'm reading.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:48 PM
-3

Except you're not forced to say their and make it an "use" vs "them". When feminism encompasses an incredibly large group of people with an even larger group of viewpoints from both ends of the spectrum, you open the dialogue to be sidetracked. That is why it's not productive. It's the same for mens rights. It's a large group of people with a wide spectrum of opinions. There's no unified viewpoint. It's very easy to get sidetracked.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:47 PM
-8

No, it's allowed to happen because a group is able to lobby their way through to legislation is the problem.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:39 PM
-1

All our problem? No. Some of our problem? Yes. Obviously if the message can be misinterpreted then it's not clear enough. If we are consistently misinterpreted then yes, it's an issue with the receiving party interpreting it. It's also an issue with how the message is being conveyed. It's incredibly arrogant to operate without humility.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:38 PM
-1

Something else is to blame. The general idea is that if one group is free to manipulate society in a manner that oppresses another group then something is wrong with that society.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:15 PM
-2

That's the tone that's taken away though. and I'm able to believe that one method is not right without being able to know an absolute answer. I'd be arrogant to pretend I'm all knowing.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:15 PM
-4

Why is that allowed to happen? That's the real problem.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:06 PM
-6

A blame culture is not productive though. Sidestep the catalyst and focus on the real issue: the society that allows such groups to behave in such a manner. Think about it, how reputable does it look if a vocal majority of the dialogue revolves in "Oh well it's all the feminists fault! We need to stop the feminists!"? Then eventually breaks down into blaming women in general? It's the same idea as feminism blaming men in general. It's not constructive to just blame men, and say that there's some…
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:06 PM
-5

I certainly don't think having an overall tone of /r/againstfeminism is constructive. There's a difference between advocating mens rights by focusing on why society is the way it is rather than advocating against feminism in general. How is it productive to start a blame game? It just goes in circles and accomplishes nothing.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 08:54 PM
4

Hm. This is interesting. I post there because I disagree with how many mindlessly cite posts here, quote out of context, and circle jerk around themselves. I get downvoted there, relentlessly (should note, don't care about the karma, just mentioning it for the connotation associated with the act of downvoting) for posting a difference of opinion and not agreeing in absolute. I get labeled an MRA as though it's an insult, despite myself not actually aligning with such a title. Then anything I pos…
/r/MensRights02/03/13 08:19 PM
-4

It can be both.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 03:40 PM
-3

I don't care then. If you want to be cynical then go for it. Request a test at birth.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 03:36 PM
-3

or... optional where if either parent says they want it done, then it happens. Regardless, the idea of paternity testing, forced or not, has the potential for creating an issue.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 03:27 PM
-3

Oh just fuck off. Even if it's mandatory and it happens with the result being it's your child, there's still room for a "manipulative woman" to make you feel awful about it. Ex: "What, why didn't you fight the test? Don't you trust me!?". Etc, etc. People who are assholes will be assholes regardless of the fact the test is mandatory or not.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 03:26 PM
-5

I'm not? I'm fully for making it an option. I'm fully for making it fully known that the question will be asked at the hospital when the baby is born. I'm fully for making it an option to agree to having the test at birth as soon as the initial meeting with your ObGyn. What I'm not for is being told that I need to have this test because it's for my own good. I'm getting the impression that you, and others don't just want to have a paternity test at birth, but rather NEED someone to tell you and …
/r/MensRights01/03/13 03:05 PM
-2

This isn't a men's rights issue, this is just how men treat each other. If you want emotional support after a break up then make friends with women, or find men who are more emotionally comfortable with themselves. It's really a matter of who you associate with.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:59 PM
-5

I thought I already explained this in another post. It has the potential to create necessary and uninvited drama. So... since at this point I'm just getting downvoted left and right for wanting to preserve my right to choose a paternity test over being forced to have one, kindly go fuck yourself.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:41 PM
-10

Why are so many adamant about removing my choice to not know? I don't understand this. I was under the impression this subreddit was mens rights, but this desire steps on the rights of a small number of men.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:26 PM
-8

Except if it was standard that it's an option then both parents would be fully aware the question is coming 9 months down the road. Could even be something you agree to before hand when you make the arrangements with the hospital.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:12 PM
-7

It's not necessarily fraud though. In this context fraud is what the parent is allowed to decide. I just think mandatory testing at birth is ridiculous because, regardless of the reason, it may not be what some couples want. It's that simple. You don't have to understand why they don't want it, you don't have to like it, but you do have to respect it. Having an option at birth? "Would you like to test paternity?" Fine. It's something both parents can be aware of between inception and birth. Eith…
/r/MensRights01/03/13 01:46 PM
-6

I'm advocating the choice what I'm not advocating is making such a test mandatory because that's also removing choice.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 01:43 PM
-13

I honestly don't care if you think it's dumb. It's not your right to choose for someone else.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 01:30 PM
-16

I don't, that can ruin relationships that were not meant to be ruined. Some people don't want to know and are happy with that. Yes, it's willful ignorance but who are you to decide for others? Fine with the option, but mandatory is ridiculous. Not everyone lives by the view that only children they make can be children. Some are fine with the children you raise are your children, seed or not. If you spend 5, 10, even 15+ years raising a child and find out it wasn't your sperm, that's still 5, 10,…
/r/MensRights01/03/13 01:19 PM
3

Exactly. You'd have to physically force it from me, and then there'd be an entirely different issue on the schools plate; assaulting a student.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 12:52 AM
1

I don't believe it's productive in cases like this because it's a broader issue, not one exclusive to feminists. The thing is that any time an attempt is made to single out a behaviour as feminist it will not be productive. Why? Just like the concept of Men's rights, it's not a collective group. To try and explain simply, all women who focus on how women are depicted in fantasy media such as video games may call themselves feminists, but not all women who call themselves feminists will focus on …
/r/MensRights01/03/13 12:42 AM
1

I just think with this issue in particular, it's not constructive to try and bring it back to an issue with feminism.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 04:41 PM
6

Not even misogynistic. It's as simple as taking the ignorant parent point of view: "I know better than you because I say I do, you must listen to me because I'm right. It's not possible for there to be another valid perspective" I honestly wouldn't beg this as just a feminist thing, because it's not. It's a problem with society's trend towards hyper-sensitivity. It has nothing to do with feminism and everything to do with being told we must constantly be aware of how others think and feel and ho…
/r/MensRights28/02/13 04:25 PM
0

It actually is different for women on some levels. The main difference is history.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 04:22 PM
8

"Oh look how he's dressed, obviously it's telling you that that's the way to dress!" Well shit, he also has a 6ft long sword he can shoot fucking lasers out of. Does that mean I should aspire to do the same? Or let's do the female equivalent. Bayonetta is a fun example! Oh... she's wearing a skin tight body suit, has unrealistically long legs and massive breasts. Clearly the game is saying that this is what women should look like and anything that deviates is undesirable. She is being shown as a…
/r/MensRights28/02/13 04:14 PM
44

How about games are fantasy worlds and not meant to depict real life in any way?
/r/MensRights28/02/13 12:17 PM
20

Well... in technical terms nothing really gives on the right to have sex with another person. That's implied consent written all over it though.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 04:20 PM
3

Both are instances of appearing to change your mind.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 04:18 PM
5

I was under the impression rapists aren't taking their time.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 12:31 AM
-26

How about you keep it in /r/TumblrInAction
/r/MensRights20/02/13 02:51 PM
17

I'm date raping myself right now.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 01:15 AM
1

Some people go by the notion that the child you raise is your child. You raised it, you influenced his or her life. You were there to support it. Personally, if the fact that it wasn't your sperm makes you want to leave is a horrible idea. Especially the longer it's been since the kid has been born. Now... if you said "So, it's illegal to find out if the woman you're married to was fucking other guys before your child was born?", that's something different.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 11:44 AM
1

No, you make a valid point. The problem I that religion is ab entirely different topic. Difficult to compare with.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 06:54 PM
0

Where did I say anything of the sort? I was interpreting the logic which drove the university caution such a warning, not speaking about what I do or do not want to see. and you know full well that religion is an entirely different topic, from a cultural standpoint. Especially in the western world.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 05:00 PM
-2

Doesn't matter if he has points to back it up. The topic still presents itself as an attack on a specific population of the university. The university cannot have that happen by clubs sponsored by any university administration staff.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 04:32 PM
1

The warning is based on the fear that the club will attract negative attention because a specific topic calls out a specific group as bad while claiming a specific group is good. It's a founded fear, especially in a university where it's the worst kind of PR to have any member of the administration seen as supporting the idea of putting down a specific group. It's an extremely delicate situation. It seems a lot of people forget that universities are always in the public eye and can easily lose s…
/r/MensRights13/02/13 04:30 PM
21

You're part of a club dedicated to free flow and discussion. This means, for the sake of retaining that free flow of discussion for all topics then the club must appear to be neutral. He wasn't trying to censor you, he was telling you to be careful and not make a thing out of it for the sake of what the club represents. You were doing that though. The topic you present isn't free discussion, you're shutting down one group and promoting another. (you even admitted in your post that you presented …
/r/MensRights13/02/13 04:26 PM
4

It has nothing to do with men's rights. While I disagree with the punishment (because I do not believe in executions, especially in the US where overcrowding in prisons stems from petty possession crimes, not murderers), I agree with the premise of your post.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 01:06 AM
-2

Defined introversion/extroversion is roughly split even between the population.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 06:58 PM
-2

Okay let me put it this way. Continue to perpetuate it as a gender argument rather than a humanitarian one. See how times you end up being sidetracked into discussing gender bias across various levels of society rather than discussing the actual issue. That's all I'm saying. Also, female circumcision often results in serious health problems later in life. Not nearly as often for males. Take that as a reason why there's been a law to specifically protect women, and as an example of how making thi…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 09:24 PM
-2

No it's not. Saying "anti-male discrimination" implies there is some active force perpetuating the action. It's totally passive based around ignorance and inaction to do anything about it; leftover from a time when people didn't know better. Call it what it is: inhumane treatment of people. Keeps the debate as narrow and clear as possible.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 09:11 PM
0

Never contesting it to be a men's right's issue. Just saying that labelling it as a gender bias sidetracks the issue. Focus on the core reason: inhumane, and not the fact that it's one gender over the other. When it comes down to it, if there is one side being treated inhumanely while the others are not the best way to peruse change is to argue with logic that moves beyond the issue of gender. tl;dr: it's definitely an issue for men's right, but don't list "well women are protected from it!" bec…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 09:10 PM
-3

Religion. Female circumcision evolved as part of other religions. It just happens that in the west the religions that believed in male circumcision were the predominant ones. It's just a societal norm because, for generations, it's just been something that happens. No one put thought into it. It's really that simple. Something needs to change, I just don't believe making it into a compare and contrast between genders is the appropriate way to go about the change, or even the proper attitude to l…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 09:03 PM
-6

Yes because the bias isn't because of gender. It doesn't stay this way because men are men and women are women. It stays this way because of religious roots and the societies tradition. Calling it a gender bias is misguided because it is attempting to turn this into a gender issue when it's really a humanitarian issue. You're also trying to equate circumcision to abuse/rape laws. Not the same. Circumcision, rape, and abuse are very serious and horrible things, but they do not need to be used to …
/r/MensRights26/01/13 08:52 PM
0

I'm aware of that, but this is a petition towards the US; a country that does not have the same religious roots in society and therefore female circumcision has not grown up as an accepted part of society. This is why female circumcision is accepted in other parts of the world where such religions have had an impact on said country's societal evolution.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 08:08 PM
-2

This has nothing to do with gender bias, it is just cruel. The only reason it isn't banned is because it is a cultural norm left over from religion.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 07:46 PM
1

Technically it's true, just not in the way you read it as.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 12:48 PM
2

So you're only posting this because it was a woman that had two of her charges thrown out?
/r/MensRights26/01/13 05:26 AM
5

This is the kind of thing where normal loving adults who have a functioning relationship and want to have a child sign. Some guys would still want to keep the child and raise it as their own even if they found out a few years later she cheated and the kid is biologically someone else's. It's not about waiving rights. It's about saying "this is my child, and I want this child. I accept the responsibility that comes with that".
/r/MensRights25/01/13 02:50 PM
4

because as I stated, everyone has a different process of thinking. At the core there is a chemical basis. Above that there are infinite variables and experiences at play that shaped the person. It's not as simple as flipping a switch and deciding who you are. You can do it and that's wonderful, but not everyone is able to do so.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 01:35 AM
2

But you aren't everyone, and that's my point.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 01:17 AM
3

I'm sorry you had to go through that, but personal experience does not dictate potential outcome. Different people respond differently to different situations.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 01:08 AM
4

because a victim of child abuse is conditioned into thinking that is normal behaviour.
/r/MensRights24/01/13 12:33 AM
5

You're essentially saying that you need to be verbally abused hundreds of strangers on the internet before you realize how that's not going to help. and you believe in negative reinforcement? You realize this teaches a child that it's appropriate to act negatively towards someone to get what they want, correct?
/r/MensRights24/01/13 12:30 AM
27

It makes a lot of sense. She's essentially saying "Yes, my daughter did something horrible. It's my job to reprimand her for it, not yours." Seriously, she's 11 and probably got caught up in the moment. I snapped once and kicked my younger by the back of his head into a table and split the back of his ear open. Had that video been posted online I'd would have been ridiculed to because it probably looked horrible. I was also 12, a child. Layering on abuse from strangers would have done more harm …
/r/MensRights24/01/13 12:28 AM
1

Nonetheless, the services available would probably be not as good as those available to women. Sorry to blatantly call you out, but that's just cynicism and won't help anything. I think of this logic as self sabotage.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 10:57 PM
2

There's gotta be an app for that.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 10:07 PM
5

Did anyone try calling the men's line and asking for advice on being abused to see what happens?
/r/MensRights23/01/13 05:23 PM
36

That's not really feminist, it's just how a hollow and fallacious internet argument works.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 03:47 PM
3

I paused it to make this comment, but at the start of the video he admit's to being a troll.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 11:35 AM
1

You do realize that this is just a petty internet war, right? The fact that both halves of this shit show (a community of 59k on reddit v a community of 1500 on reddit) are convinced that they represent a unified body for anyone and everyone who may have a similar viewpoint is ridiculous. Don't engage them. The only point of that subreddit is to post threads/posts here and mock them to feel superior. Just ignore the subreddit. What I find the funniest about /r/againstmensrights is that they seem…
/r/MensRights22/01/13 11:30 AM
9

Usually goes hand in hand, no?
/r/seduction18/01/13 07:34 PM
8

Hardly recognized by any legitimate dictionary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misandry http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/misandry http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/misandry Origin of MISANDRY mis- (as in misanthropy) + andr- + 2-y First Known Use: circa 1909 ಠ_ಠ
/r/MensRights17/01/13 12:34 PM
8

So I learn of this subreddit and think "Must subscribe.. for science!" I have this thing for observing crazy, from a distance of course.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 12:26 PM
1

Also: This made me chuckle: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrSqetNwRlU&list=UUsEq_XHRKHP1_b5ZM58B6AA&index=4 I know far to many people with two X's that behave like that.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 12:23 PM
2

When you have a manifesto, it's clear there is a problem.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 12:15 PM
-1

Notice how this is a reference to /r/feminism, not /r/womensrights
/r/MensRights14/01/13 05:38 PM
2

That's the thing though. When we focus on one gender we automatically drown out another. There's cases where it works, and then there's cases like this where I feel it does more harm than good. It shouldn't be man or woman, or boy or girl, it should just be people.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 12:37 PM
2

I tossed away the whole idea of being buff a while ago. Sure, I'd like to be a little toned but that's a personal thing and in no way brings me down. I realized though that outside of attempting to attract people (and even then I've noticed personality goes much farther than looks do) the concept of holding physical prowess is all but useless in today's society. I don't need it to eat. I don't need it to make money. I don't need it to get from one place to the next. Unless I choose to follow a p…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 12:34 PM
1

Even though it's sarcasm, I'll respond to those who you mock. No it's not. In this case it's irresponsible though. Everyone is still a person, and everyone has the potential to face such serious issues. This should be a people issue, not a gender issue. It's different when speaking about one sided legal system, or societal gender bias on certain issues where women are free to take advantage of public perception and sometimes manipulate it to their will, but this isn't that. To me this would be a…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 12:28 PM
1

These are all serious issues. Why does it have to be used as grounds for a gender battle? It's something that concerns all people. I get that these are issues typically associated with females, but still. In my eyes they are too serious to try and sideline into a gender battle. I'm only concerned because I'm afraid that such thinking will downplay the severity for some people when looking at members of the opposite sex. Awareness is very good, but not when it is generated at the cost of current …
/r/MensRights08/01/13 12:22 PM
2

I guess if it led to identity theft. I'd make sure everything is recorded and noted to keep precedent if that happens. Personally I wouldn't press charges if she wanted a child and was willing to walk away without expecting me to be involved in its upbringing.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 03:35 PM
5

Should have clarified. Lack of specifics on my parts probably led to this. Shouldn't be punished for the act. She should be punished for attempting to get child support on false pretence, but not making herself pregnant from a man's sperm without his permission.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 03:26 PM
12

and I might feel guilty, but if she stole my sperm there would be a huge act of betrayal between us and I'd distance myself from her shortly after discovering she was pregnant. I wouldn't know when she gave birth, let alone how she was doing. This may sound callous, but in my mind there's no real attachment to the child. Sure, it may be biologically mine but I hold no love for it. I didn't ask to bring the child into the world and have no desire to care for it. Hearing the story would make me fe…
/r/MensRights04/01/13 01:47 PM
0

I'm explaining how it can be misleading to some. Whatever though. Every day I'm finding it more difficult to have a level headed conversation with someone in this subreddit.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 01:34 PM
-3

It's actually quite misleading because of how the title is worded. Reads: "Man does X, is punished by system. Woman does Y, which is practically the same as X, and is not punished".
/r/MensRights04/01/13 01:27 PM
10

See the woman shouldn't be punished, she just shouldn't be sided with and he shouldn't be ordered to pay child support for it. As far as I'm concerned, if she wants to be pregnant I don't care if she stole my sperm. It's not my child though.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 01:26 PM
0

This isn't a double standard though. It'd be a double standard if she was being stuck up about it and just didn't want to do it because she didn't like the idea. You've already outlined that there's obviously some underlying issue with her. I'm not sure why you're trying to suggest there's a double standard happening here.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 02:18 PM
7

This isn't mensrights, this is a guy acting like a kid out of spite. I wouldn't call it selfish, I'd call it immature. It's one thing to not enjoy doing something and getting past it your your significant other, it's another to be so put off by something that it triggers such an emotional response. There's likely a serious reason for such a reaction. Maybe she is just acting that way for attention. Maybe there isn't really a reason and maybe she's manipulative. Still a shitty way to handle it be…
/r/MensRights20/12/12 02:16 PM
3

But the changed wording gets the message across even better. It's not excluding the fact you may not want to fuck but it's also clarifying that just because a guy is stiff it doesn't mean he will jump on the first person who walks by,
/r/MensRights05/12/12 07:23 PM
11

This is a far better alternative.
/r/MensRights05/12/12 04:59 PM
2

I think you either need to: a) get over it and accept the fact that regardless of how you act about having cancer, that will not change how others view cancer and act towards those who do have cancer or b) Lie about it and do not say you have cancer or acknowledge it. I see no other options for you. As I said, as positive, casual, okay, etc you are with dealing with cancer you cannot change how someone else will react to the fact. I saw you post below "what happens happens". Well it is what it i…
/r/seduction02/12/12 01:31 AM
1

Apparently I'm always "online" because of my phone/tablet also having facebook messenger with (usually) constant internet connections. Someone asked me the other day "Hey, why are you always online FB chat?"
/r/seduction01/12/12 07:06 PM
1

If you were being overbearing to someone who wasn't interested, would you want them to tell you?
/r/seduction01/12/12 06:59 PM
4

"That does change things, sorry."
/r/seduction27/11/12 04:08 PM
1

Even so the linked material only states during the cold water stimulation, not that cold water stimulation reduces overall testosterone levels.
/r/seduction26/11/12 11:27 AM
2

When I have a cold I take cold medicine to treat the symptoms while my body unconsciously deals with the problem. The medicine is there so I can do what I need to do while my body does it's job. So airplane mode would allow me to get on with my day while my mind gets used to it.
/r/seduction05/11/12 10:53 PM
2

Makes sense on paper, that's for sure.
/r/seduction06/10/12 03:42 AM
2

Probably not, but those are subreddits designed for specific advice based on the described situation and personality of the other person, not general advice.
/r/seduction12/09/12 07:19 PM
-2

or go to /r/relationships or /r/dating_advice
/r/seduction12/09/12 01:52 PM
2

"I'm going to miss you, want to spend the weekend together?" Seems cut and dry to me, given the circumstance.
/r/seduction16/05/12 01:26 PM
1

I think you're ignoring the context that denotes the specific friendship between said girl, and said friend when you asked this question.
/r/seduction30/04/12 12:08 PM
3

and this is where the problem with using excessive euphemisms and abbreviations comes in.
/r/seduction03/04/12 05:08 PM
-1

and she could like it.
/r/seduction26/03/12 12:25 AM
-1

Well the way I see it, if he was actually going to go with what we told him to say in a robot voice the he's already in a "I have nothing to lose" mentality. So with that said show her this, she may find it funny. If she doesn't "nothing to lose".
/r/seduction25/03/12 11:05 PM
2

May be too late, but show her this.
/r/seduction25/03/12 10:36 PM
2

Damn man, you should have showed them and took advantage of that poor girl.
/r/seduction20/03/12 02:55 PM
2

Yea haha. I found them and got one for myself and a friend.
/r/seduction10/02/12 12:28 AM
2

Well I do have a WWGGGD band on my wrist... Apparently too... there was a conversation at work where my co-workers concluded if I was a meme, I would be good guy greg.
/r/seduction10/02/12 12:15 AM
3

Doesn't address the issue of not everyone seeing it the first time. This gives the repost value. The whole point of posting something on reddit is to share it with others, is it not? At least half of the time I see a post where top comments are calling out someone for reposting I think "but I haven't seen this before". I spend a LOT of time on reddit too. I should be working right now, if that's any evidence to support the time I waste here. Karma has no real value, so even if a repost is obviou…
/r/seduction09/02/12 11:42 PM
3

it IS my fault ;_; if I saw it the first time then I wouldn't want to upvote reposts!
/r/seduction09/02/12 11:33 PM
23

It's asshole's like me who didn't see it on Reddit yesterday that allow reposts to make sense.
/r/seduction09/02/12 11:18 PM
2

There's a reason with enough alcohol in one's system it can legally be considered rape.
/r/seduction27/01/12 04:30 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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