TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Volundarkvioa Archive

View 2 posts and 309 comments by Volundarkvioa 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)
-4

Seriously, where is that information? I must've overlooked it in the article, because I don't see anywhere where it says she helped organize getting rid of him.
/r/PussyPass29/06/14 09:10 PM
-7

My apologies for looking at this from an equal perspective. (:
/r/PussyPass29/06/14 04:26 AM
1

And apparently a freak in other departments too!
/r/PussyPass28/06/14 09:16 PM
1

Well, that's what you get for trying to look at it from a rational point of view. /s
/r/PussyPass28/06/14 09:15 PM
-10

Or the mentally ill man was obsessed with her and killed her husband to be with her. I don't know, and even if I did, it is not my job to deal with the situation; that is the magistrate's job and the jury's. Either the DA couldn't find motive or couldn't attribute her as having lead on the boss to proceed with the killings. Had they, she would've been found as an accomplice to the murder.
/r/PussyPass28/06/14 09:10 PM
-16

Whilst I agree that if it were a man, things would be a LOT different and he'd probably be serving a lot longer than just 8 months, we should still at the very least look at their side of the story too, right? Imagine if it was the mother who died and the father who was getting the murder charges, but later had them dropped (in favour of his boss getting the charges). Do you think that, if possible, the father shouldn't still get the right to keep his kids, even if he had committed perjury (seve…
/r/PussyPass28/06/14 09:08 PM
-17

To be fair, in this context, it seems right for her to get the kids. The charges against her for the murder of her husband were dropped and instead put on her boss, who was said to have (possibly) been in a sexual relationship with the woman. She was also helping out other convicts with education, which likely added to good will with the warden, allowing for an expedience on her pardon (as far as I know, that's completely legal).
/r/PussyPass28/06/14 05:41 PM
1

Maybe this will help with what I was saying. "Feminists don't believe in body dysmorphia.^^<sup>/s</sup> "
/r/MensRights02/05/13 04:44 AM
1

Feminists don't believe in body dysmorphia.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 12:27 AM
16

I would do it to my future sons, assuming that, by the time my wife and I have one, no new information for or against it has come out. And then later this magnificent man says this: I know, I've seen them around. Truthfully, I'm pretty neutral on it, myself. I've got no reason to hate it because it worked out fine for me, and there are plenty of other painful aesthetic practices that people, including the anti-circumcision folks likely practice on their children that don't catch as much flack as…
/r/MensRights30/04/13 11:26 AM
1

I would say the theory itself is designed to oppress women with how it's written and argued, but that in reality, such a thing does not exist. It really falls back to male disposability and the kind of gender roles that it created over time, and how those gender roles still flow a bit into today's times (due to the fact that times have changed only so very recently). I'd love to argue this, but a fellow Redditor /u/girlwriteswhat has a much, much better video arguing the male disposability theor…
/r/MensRights30/04/13 08:23 AM
9

Well there is a quote stating that they're working on building a similar scheme for female prisoners as well. While that doesn't necessarily mean they will do that, usually a newspaper will say "X official had no comment on how this would affect female prisoners" if they weren't working on a way for it to affect female inmates as well.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 07:52 AM
4

This comes off as very misogynistic. Just use a condom and spermicide if you're that worried, and if she asks for you to not use a condom (and you really don't trust that logic), just don't have sex.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 07:49 AM
6

Yeah, whenever a girl has sent me nude photos of herself, it wasn't usually my demands. It was more of her demands for me to rush my ass over to her place to give her some satisfaction. Oh wait, girls don't have any sort of libido, do they? Nope, it's just us men using our Jedi mind tricks on them!^^<sup>/s</sup>
/r/MensRights30/04/13 07:46 AM
8

Heroin. Look, they support intravenous drug use!
/r/MensRights30/04/13 04:05 AM
2

You do realize that's SRSWomen, right? Almost nothing they say is true and/or it's extremely exaggerated. It's a lot like /r/TalesOfPrivilege.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 04:01 AM
8

Misogyny definitely exists, as does racism, homophobia, etc. I am completely for women being treated to the same level as men, I'm simply against the systemic acceptance of misandry and the widespread lack and hatred towards anything that even remotely attempts to suggest that males have issues as well. I'm also against the "second-class" approach that some feminists take towards male issues; that being that while some will agree that males have some issues, they are nowhere near as bad as the i…
/r/MensRights30/04/13 01:46 AM
3

I don't know why there's a world record for it either. This is one of the most disgusting events I've ever seen.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:12 PM
1

My problem with patriarchy theory and I'm sure with most of the people here isn't that we don't believe that most leaders are men, rather it's the context of patriarchy theory; men rule the world and men are only making it benefit men; they're holding women down and oppressing them. Whenever someone typically talks about patriarchy theory, this is what they allude to. There's no question that for the most part men run most of the world, but it's people saying "they're holding us girls down!" tha…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:10 PM
3

Probably not to Postpartum Depression, but the death of a child can lead to severe depression for either gender.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:29 AM
20

Personally my biggest issues and that I think most of us on /r/MensRights are vocal about are: Circumcision, primarily on infants and youth. Nobody here wants FGM, nobody here would love for it to be endorsed, but we do get sick and tired of having belittling comments like "you think that's bad? Look at Gishiri Cutting/FGM!". It's much along the lines of someone speaking about a FBI (foodborne illness) epidemic, such as spinach infected with high amounts of E. Coli, and then having someone say "…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:15 AM
9

This is over a year old, but I recently came across it and believe it needs to be shared. It is very graphic, but it shows the pain that circumcision can bring and in my opinion, regardless of someone's religion, it's disgusting that there's a mass event for something such as this. If you're questioning whether or not to have your children circumcised, just take a quick look at that video. Just be warned that they literally show the cutting of the foreskin, so be prepared to cringe or even have …
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:28 AM
6

Situations differ, and soldiers aren't always ready. It's much like a service dog. They're trained to respond to certain situations when a collar is put on (or a voice command). Once that happens, they know they need to react a certain way. Once the collar comes off (or another voice command is released), the dog knows it can relax and go back to having fun. A soldier won't always be prepared for combat situations unless they're on a combat mission. In that circumstance, they know they need to s…
/r/MensRights28/04/13 10:14 AM
7

Okay...? It's an old philosophical dilemma where you have to decide between letting five people die, or sacrificing one life in order to save the five. Typically the one life is someone on top of a bridge, and there's a trolley down below that's driving out of control. It was a joke utilizing the old philosophical dilemma.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 03:00 AM
-1

Too bad there wasn't a trolley car about to hit five people you could save! (For anyone unfamiliar with this ethical debate, here's the trolley problem)
/r/MensRights28/04/13 02:54 AM
1

Some of the questions were WAY too ambiguous. As for what I put down: the "social father" should always have a right to know whether or not his child is his biological offspring; he'll be raising the kid, he deserves to know if he ever questions if the child is really his or not. The "biological father"/the father who walked out should only have a right to be found provided he didn't file certain paperwork (e.g. he went through a sperm bank and declined to have his personal info be given to the …
/r/MensRights28/04/13 02:47 AM
6

I want to give her the benefit of the doubt at the moment, as it would be hypocritical of me to condemn those who automatically assume the presumed guilty are in fact guilty, yet automatically condemn this woman myself, but... The woman is 50 years old; she should have learnt how to control her painful memories from the past if it still affects her to this day. Traumatic episodes can reemerge, but if they had (assuming those things really happened to her and she's not bullshitting the court), th…
/r/MensRights28/04/13 02:36 AM
1

Did /r/TalesOfPrivilege release the Son of Patriarchy among us all? To spread chivalry and oppression to all edges of the Earth!^^<sup>/s</sup>
/r/MensRights27/04/13 08:25 PM
3

Thanks /u/PeterPrinciple /u/Aavagadrro, well they do incite people sometimes as well. That's the whole point of the documentaries. =P
/r/MensRights27/04/13 08:13 PM
23

I actually like Vice for their documentaries; they're very insightful, even if they are a bit rude sometimes with how they say things/act. Although those articles were both idiotic. That's not even based off of emotions, that's just based off of how they wrote them and how they came out. Did they hire a bunch of UC Berkeley dropouts to write those articles?
/r/MensRights27/04/13 10:40 AM
3

Even if you decided to stay as a female, you'd be accepted here. Nobody expects /u/girlwriteswhat or /u/typhonblue to grow a penis before they can post. Likewise with yourself. At least that's from me. I cannot speak for all the members of this subreddit, but I'm sure many would agree.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 10:20 AM
2

I'm aware. /u/muttmonster showed me that portion that I missed.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 07:41 AM
9

And if that evil man even thinks of leaving her, she'll take half of his savings. That'll teach him for not respecting her decision to enter into a committed relationship without believing in commitment!
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:13 AM
3

There's a problem with your two stories though: They're two different cases. One is fraud (failing to pay taxes), the other is attempted murder. The man had eight different charges put against him. You remember the guy who hacked into the phones of several celebrities and was looking at 121 years in prison? That's due to multiple charges. Luckily for that idiot though he's only serving about 10 years. It's a little issue with our legal system; sometimes it's not the severity of the crime, it's h…
/r/MensRights26/04/13 11:38 PM
3

Ah, I missed that part. Well I still hope he seeks penalties.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 11:22 PM
5

Ah, my apologies. I thought you meant the man in specific. The better reasoning is simply not to marry someone who showcases the signs of narcissistic personality disorder.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 09:45 PM
2

/r/TalesOfPrivilege
/r/MensRights26/04/13 09:41 PM
10

My mother is a diehard Christian as well, always trying to convert me, but she would never do anything like this to me or my father. How someone could go to those lengths, male or female, is insane. I hope the guy's father is released from jail soon and that he can seek damages/penalties for what happened from both the mother and the court.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 09:41 PM
16

The problem though is the guy doesn't know. =/
/r/MensRights26/04/13 09:36 PM
8

And people wonder why less and less people are getting married these days... Things like this make me question the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement a little bit less with each passing day. And this is coming from someone who hopes to be a father one of these days. =/
/r/MensRights26/04/13 08:55 PM
41

THINK OF THE CHILDREN! -Mating call of the radical feminist
/r/MensRights26/04/13 08:46 PM
22

I certainly think it is unnatural to be monogamous. There is a lot of evidence that cheating is an important part of human evolution. Men try to spread their seed beyond their relationships. Women such as myself try to get the best genes for their children. I think society is in a losing battle with trying to change the way we are wired. Everyone should accept that monogamy is unnatural. As women, our goal in life is to secure the most resources and best possible genes for our children. Sometime…
/r/MensRights26/04/13 08:44 PM
52

More importantly, she doesn't even have the ovaries to just ASK him if he'd be cool with it, if he'd be accepting of it. Instead she has to create these lies and loopholes just to make sure he stays committed to her while she doesn't stay committed to him. I love the fact that she's married when she doesn't believe in monogamy.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 07:20 PM
12

Remind feminists of rape* There's a very, very big difference between the two. Men are from Mars and women are from Venus. Feminists...Why they're not even of this universe.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 06:23 PM
7

So all Siberian Huskies are rapists? Oh dear god, I'd hate to see the outtakes of Snow Dogs (2002)...
/r/MensRights26/04/13 06:16 PM
1

No no no, we don't need to throw him in prison. We just need to teach him proper grammar; "I" refers to one's self, "you" refers to another person. Clearly he meant to put down "I" instead of "you", that's all. (:
/r/MensRights26/04/13 06:08 PM
7

BJS statistics on female offenders Hmm...That's unusual with what she's saying. Let's look at table 3 from the BJS report (note this is from 1999, but it's the best I could find at the moment): Violent crimes committed by females and males For anyone looking for the image, it's on page 2 of the report. If you cannot access either the report or the image (or don't want to open them), here is the info in question: Offense|Female|Male|Women as a % of violent offender All| 2,135,000| 13,098,000| 14 …
/r/MensRights26/04/13 05:24 PM
1

Assuming the section also includes older authors (e.g. from the 1800s and so forth), men may still be a dominate percentage of the authors. Even if not, some women tend to want to find female authors that will inspire them, hence people go to the lengths of creating separate pages like this to help them out.
/r/MensRights25/04/13 10:27 PM
2

Yeah, I don't really understand the need for prison time either (unless it WAS non-consensual and she didn't stop touching the girl, which would be sexual assault), and the registry...Oh god, don't even get me started on that. I get it's purpose, but it's got so many loopholes that I'm amazed the entire population isn't on the registry.
/r/MensRights25/04/13 06:27 PM
1

1 2 3 4 5 For anymore searches (Note: Most are on misandry towards Black males. I left those ones out from my sources, but if you'd like to include those, check out the additional search responses).
/r/MensRights25/04/13 06:24 PM
1

No no, I know you meant articles about misandry, not articles that necessarily include misandry (e.g. rape is committed by men; women are the victims). I was just uncertain if you meant from the title that any media would work, or if you only wanted a specific kind of media (e.g. academic journals) on the subject of misandry. Anyways, a lot of these websites with the journals require you set-up an account. I've gone ahead and set up an account for you, which I will PM to you along with a few art…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 06:11 PM
2

-sigh- The image has it in the violence against women section; I didn't put it there. I'm simply addressing the context of the image/webpage. That's a discussion that should be on the Wikipedia discussion page instead.
/r/MensRights25/04/13 05:55 PM
1

Wait...Is it any sort of media you want (e.g. television) or academic journals? They can be very distinct things. Respond back to me which you need (whether it's media or journals, or if you'd like portions of both), and then I'd be more than happy to help find sources for you.
/r/MensRights25/04/13 05:52 PM
6

I'm well aware of the atrocities my people have committed (e.g. drone strikes that have killed plenty of innocent civilians, or as we call them "collateral damage"), but yet again you're twisting my words. I'm not implying that my society is better; I didn't even address which societies in specific condone these types of actions. I simply stated that I don't understand how people can think up such brutal ways of attacking a person.
/r/MensRights25/04/13 05:38 PM
4

How the hell am I on a high horse? I didn't mention anything about Gishiri cutting or any sort of FGM. I mentioned an insane thing that's mentioned in the picture that I noticed. Although I'm new to Reddit, I've been on plenty of the threads about circumcision and voiced my opinion (it's not cool to do to infants, but it's cool if you want it later in life if you can consent).
/r/MensRights25/04/13 05:32 PM
2

Your title is misleading. The judge ruled in the opposite favor. The feminists are protesting because the judges ruling (to the average citizen) sounds preposterous; her jeans (at least from the context of the article) weren't ripped, and as they were tight, needed some sort of help to be removed. That isn't necessarily true, as it's possible to get the jeans off without assistance (just the girl may not have fought back for whatever reason). So the protest actually does make some sense; the way…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 05:29 PM
3

I'm pretty sure he doesn't realize the difference between "you" and "I". It was probably just a little typo he made. (: (P.S. I don't honestly think he should be raped, just trying to bring in some humor. Although he definitely needs to be educated as to why a viewpoint like that is extremely idiotic. I say everyone at the school should just counter-protest them like we do with the Westboro Baptist Church. Or just stop giving the ignorant fuck any sort of attention).
/r/MensRights25/04/13 05:18 PM
2

I don't really understand what you're trying to say, OP, but I will put out a few points on the article. Nothing in the article insinuates it was consensual. Touching a breast shouldn't really be "rape" per se though, that fits more into the category of molestation (at least in my viewpoint). I've never even heard of "object rape" before. It's a (sexual) relationship between a minor and an adult; a 17 year old and a 22 year old. That's illegal in certain parts of the US (certain parts because in…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 04:56 PM
7

Suggestions for format One day write about men's rights issues, next day write about women's rights issues. If there's ever a case that's both a men and women's issue, both of your write up an article together (use some sort of font change/font color or insignia such as <sup>JD</sup> for "John/Jane Doe" (change the initials for your initials) to distinguish the two). Blog platform I would suggest something like Wordpress or Blogger. There's plenty of sites (Wordpress, Weebly, etc.) that allow yo…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 04:43 PM
3

More like they don't have anything else to write about. "Hmm...I have to submit a story by the end of today, but there's nothing interesting to write about...Oh wait a second! Wikipedia is trying to make an American FEMALE novelists page?! PATRIARCHY!"
/r/MensRights25/04/13 04:04 PM
6

Oh, I'm well aware of that. Just sometimes the malevolence of the human race keeps surprising me.
/r/MensRights25/04/13 03:39 PM
1

You have got to be kidding me. This is like an old April Fool's day prank, right? 1) Wikipedia can be edited by pretty much anyone (I say pretty much anyone because a lot of false edits may get your IP blocked from editing information). If you really care that much, why don't you just change the name? All you need to do after the edit is go to the discussion page on the webpage in question and explain your reasoning for changing the name. Once you do so, if the claim is legitimate, then the peop…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 03:19 PM
39

You may want to edit that arrow a bit, because right at the point of the arrow where it says "Equality!", it's pointing over "forced prostitution". =P But yeah, that's awesome that someone edited the Wikipedia page and put in links to other pages like androcide. One of the things I admire about Wikipedia is that anyone can edit the pages, but the editors of Wikipedia make sure to edit any false information added to pages, so the risk of allowing anyone to edit the info drops down a bit while all…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 03:14 PM
1

Thank you! I read the article and while the judge's wording/the title sounded insane, the actual case made sense. She said "pull out" and he didn't accidentally cum inside of her, he purposefully did that. Plus doing something during sex that someone doesn't want is still technically rape, whether that's anal when they say no anal, not pulling out on purpose when she told you to pull out, etc. I was getting worried that this subreddit was getting stupider, because it seemed like some people didn…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 03:08 PM
3

"Unless its to pee. Then I totally need to stand up."
/r/MensRights25/04/13 02:58 PM
15

All thanks to the patriarchy! /s
/r/MensRights25/04/13 07:36 AM
3

"people to accept*" You did want your stuff corrected. =P
/r/MensRights23/04/13 09:03 PM
11

Part of the bill is about child custody. I'm pretty sure it's relevant.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 08:59 PM
1

I knew it was a fuck up on Google Translate's part, but I didn't know if that meant she would later serve the other 120 days or what. xD And yeah, parole would be the correct term (at least for the United States).
/r/MensRights22/04/13 01:21 PM
28

A woman in her 20s has been sentenced to eight months in prison, of which 120 days be suspended Can someone help explain this part for me? So she's getting 8 months in prison, but 120 days (roughly 4 months) of the prison sentence will be on hiatus? I'm a bit confused over this.
/r/MensRights22/04/13 11:57 AM
13

Ah, my mistake. But yes, that is definitely a terrible way to go. =/
/r/MensRights22/04/13 11:54 AM
4

It's known as an "anti-climax"; it's a type of "punchline" if you will to certain jokes. Something complex is solved through a very trivial manner (e.g. man and woman go to college for a better education. Man and woman go to Jupiter). Another example of a classic anti-climax is the "self destruct button" concept. Something so vast, so complex, is easily destroyed by pressing a single button. The hero has fought valiantly through hordes of enemies...To press a button.
/r/MensRights22/04/13 11:53 AM
-5

And? The point is she stabbed him and it led to his death. Unless it was self-defense, that constitutes murder, or at the very least, manslaughter. Or are you saying you can't believe it took him 10 days to die? In which case, why is that bizarre?
/r/MensRights22/04/13 11:43 AM
2

I suspect a lot of this has got to do with societal attitudes. That's what I meant when I created this and in my initial post. I'm glad that it didn't traumatize him as well, and I told him if he felt like it didn't bother him [that much] he doesn't need to press charges, just it was a little weird (and also a bit appalling) that if a woman was in the exact same circumstances he would view it as rape, but that his case wasn't technically rape. It's not so much about the fact that he wasn't bothe…
/r/MensRights22/04/13 11:38 AM
7

Mhmm. I even saw one dumbass say: No you didn't. Flaccid blow job != sex. Last time I checked putting your mouth on or around someone's genitalia and did so to induce pleasure still constituted oral sex. I guess if you're not hard it doesn't count though, am I right?! /s
/r/MensRights22/04/13 11:27 AM
2

I decided to submit this after the Redditor said this: I don't know. It just feels wrong to include myself among the ranks of the actual female victims. And yet, would certainly call it rape if the same happened to a woman, which is why I don't want to not include myself, either. I don't know. Please don't flame his thread if you decide to comment on it. Any sort of "hate", please direct it to this thread. Thank you. As for the purpose of this thread, I just started it to showcase yet another ex…
/r/MensRights22/04/13 10:34 AM
7

Awesome study. The only thing I have to say though is the top commenter is an idiot. Not convinced – I’m guessing any test will demonstrate that fathers are better at recognising the mothers every time – unless you meant “Fathers Recognize Their Babies’ Cries Just as Well as Mothers DO” (‘as do mothers’ would be even more correct) of course That's the title of the article (although the "do" or "as do" is left out). How is it even possible to be that stupid? Is it true that some parents really di…
/r/MensRights22/04/13 12:14 AM
1

I didn't say it was instantly dismissible; if I had, I wouldn't have made such a long-winded explanation for the narrative of the story and why the story was written the way that it was. And you did say there was a wider message; that's what the cultural narrative part is (e.g. District 9 is a movie about aliens that are placed into camps to be separate from the rest of humanity as they are less than human. The cultural message of the movie is to highlight the atrocity that was the aparatheid in…
/r/MensRights22/04/13 12:02 AM
1

Yes, I am. Did you not read the second part of my last comment? It was about cultural narrative. You are constructing the idea that the wider message is a dissemination of feminism, and I was telling you the errors of such a thought.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 11:04 PM
1

And what I was explaining to you is that this is not an underlying message of feminism being rejected; it's a tale of the hero failing and the villain being an unconventional one (fighting for little personal gain). This only becomes a sign of feminism falling when you create the idea that the message behind the story (be it conscious or unconscious) was entirely that. I'm telling you what makes that idea fallible through its design.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 10:52 PM
1

Or it might just be that Judi Dench was getting tired of the Bond franchise and/or they needed a new plot. The one they figured would be best would be a story of a villain who's entire goal is frivolous and asinine. At the same time creating a circumstance in which the protagonist is weakened or hampered throughout the process. Take The Joker, for instance. He's a character who does everything for what reason exactly? Who the fuck knows! He makes an excellent villain because his motives aren't f…
/r/MensRights21/04/13 10:27 PM
1

Masculinist wasn't accepted as a word by dictionaries (at least Merriam-Webster) until about 2011. The online databanks don't update their words with every single word all the time. To the same degree the term "misandry" is still seen as an error whilst "misogyny" is seen as an accepted word. This isn't necessarily feminists doing this though (although the widely spread acceptance of feminism has in part lead to these words, such as misogyny, being so used that they become accepted words), simpl…
/r/MensRights21/04/13 09:43 PM
1

I don't get it (this is feminism losing it's stranglehold). The entire plot of Skyfall is that Javier Bardem's character has an obsession with M; M is essentially the Mother who never gave him enough attention and where her other children (e.g. Bond) were the apples of her eye. The point of killing off [female] M was to suggest that Bond failed once again (just as he had when he was accidentally shot in the chest by the other agent. In that circumstance he failed as he was never able to complete…
/r/MensRights21/04/13 09:37 PM
6

Because of religious tenets that have bled into society and have been studied to make them seem more appealing. Female circumcision (e.g. Gishiri cutting) wasn't performed in Judaism (yes, yes, I know that it's believed that the concept pre-dates Judaism, but Judaism and from there Christianity is what has made it such an accepted and wanted procedure in the Western world), as the act of circumcision was the symbolic means of proving a boy had become a man. It was also utilized to showcase that …
/r/MensRights21/04/13 09:22 PM
14

This is off-topic, but I can't believe I just got that old saying right now. I've heard it used quite a bit, but I always thought it meant three other people were pointing back at you. Now I realize it means that three of your fingers are pointing back at you. Wow, I feel like an idiot.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 05:52 PM
1

Why is she taking her child to school at 5:30 am, and secondly since when has it been illegal to be naked in your own home? Are the police going to arrest me for public intoxication the next time I get drunk in my own home as well?
/r/MensRights19/04/13 06:32 AM
12

"Oh, but the boys do it to each other in the locker room all the time!"
/r/MensRights19/04/13 06:22 AM
2

There's a reason I'm not in Congress or trying to go into it. =P I get your point as well, but I wrote that up in like two minutes, so there's going to be plenty of loopholes. xD
/r/MensRights19/04/13 05:35 AM
4

I can see how this could be taken offensively, but not as an MRM issue. You do remember Representative Lisa Brown's last year where she said "Finally Mr. Speaker, I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my vagina, but 'no' means 'no.'". The comment wasn't taken as offensive because she used the term "vagina", it was the context behind the message. If a Senator says something along the lines of "rape necessitates the intentional attack on a person's genitalia without their consent. This ra…
/r/MensRights19/04/13 05:05 AM
8

What a humerus comment!
/r/MensRights19/04/13 04:56 AM
1

There's only one way to find out. ;)
/r/MensRights18/04/13 07:27 PM
1

Right; a better word would've be inhaling.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 07:25 PM
3

She can't even spell privilege correctly! Sorry everyone, I just had to exercise my grammar privilege.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 03:11 PM
2

That, or if anyone has any issues with smoking marijuana, you can always ingest it (or use a vaporizer. Still technically "smoking" it, but there's less of the carbon monoxide coming into your lungs). Ingestion also generally makes the effect last longer. As someone who used to use marijuana for dealing with GERD (it's commonly called "acid reflux"), I approve of your message.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:28 PM
1

You managed to read everything I wrote, correct? Not just the first sentence? I've nearly been hit by plenty of female drivers as well, but you can't lump them all together. I've seen men hit people with their cars, just as I've nearly been the victim from female drivers (three in total). That sucks for your buddy, and I'm truly sorry it happened to him (especially since he's got to live with it for the rest of his life), but that's no reason to insinuate all women are bad drivers.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 10:27 PM
1

This is turning into one heated discussion!
/r/MensRights17/04/13 09:47 PM
25

Rapists cause rape? STOP THE PRESSES! WE NEED TO GET THIS INFO OUT, PEOPLE!
/r/MensRights17/04/13 05:20 PM
4

You could make the argument that YOUNG women are safer drivers than YOUNG men, but this implies ALL men are careless drivers compared to ALL women. But even that is far-fetched in today's times. I hate to use anecdotal evidence, but I can't tell you the number of times I've nearly been hit by female drivers texting while driving. Thankfully I've got fast enough reflexes to jump the fuck back from a 2,000+ weapon, but if I hadn't, I'd probably have a broken femur or be another statistic.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 09:43 AM
3

Seriously! I don't how some of the people here DON'T see that as creepy. The only "talking" he did was ordering her to stop and then saying "we should get some coffee some time". That's extremely creepy for either sex!
/r/MensRights17/04/13 09:39 AM
4

What? Because I think the case of getting killed by mobs of white knights sounds a little unusual? Because I asked for a source behind this accusation? Because I bothered taking 5 seconds to do research on the Brian Banks thing and noticed that he plead no contest, hence his conviction without the evidence?
/r/MensRights16/04/13 06:46 PM
-2

Asking someone out isn't creepy. It's the matter of he was staring her down then asked her out without even talking to her first (aside from the stop and proposition to get some coffee). Yeah, women like confidence, but at the same time most women I know, regardless of how attractive the guy is, wouldn't go out with them if they didn't bother to make a little small talk first (e.g. "how's it going?" "My name's ____, what's yours?" "It was nice talking to you. We should meet up together again." "…
/r/MensRights16/04/13 06:42 PM
1

Looks like it's from a store that sells signs, correct? Publicly shame their business and don't do business with them.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 06:20 PM
-2

Okay, I don't like how everyone took in the story took this (e.g. the husband slapped the guy and the police/FIR did nothing about this, and also about how the woman might've called the women's helpline and made false allegations about him), but why the hell would he ask a girl he didn't even talk to if she'd like to go out for some coffee? Sure, if a random woman I didn't know and didn't even bother talking to me asked me out for some coffee I wouldn't go so far as to call security on her (unle…
/r/MensRights16/04/13 06:08 PM
31

Why? Because it would make for a GREAT turn of events with this case. Judge Judy would've gone along the lines of asking the man if this were true and if he denied the allegations, Judy probably would've asked for some proof or told the woman off for possibly lying in the courtroom (or said that initially for all of the lies earlier surrounding the case). While these cases are real, they're brought to the show to be settled for ratings for the network. Something like that would really interest s…
/r/MensRights16/04/13 06:01 PM
28

Trust me, they would NOT have edited that part out if she brought it up.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 05:55 PM
1

That's why I said this part: His returns in this circumstance are miniscule in comparison to actually going to case and then from there, after looking at the evidence the opposition provides and how the judge is looking at the evidence provides that dropping the case now/accepting a smaller settlement would favor much more considerably than from trying to keep on fighting. When I said "going to case" though, I meant "going to trial". I just realized the typo. D; The lawyer/legal advisor at this …
/r/MensRights16/04/13 05:51 PM
1

Correct, but the lawyer hasn't actually taken a case yet. As I stated, right now he sounds like a legal advisor. As in he either listens free of charge in the hopes of winning you over to take the case, or more likely, he charges you a fee of $200-$300 to go over the facts and then from those to estimate whether going to trial or not will actually benefit you. He hasn't actually gone to trial yet (at least according to what the OP wrote) and as such hasn't decided that the best course of action …
/r/MensRights16/04/13 05:38 PM
1

The lawyer does two things: 1) Looks at the facts behind the case, laws and regulations pertinent to the case. 2) Estimates based off of these items how likely the case is to benefit both the lawyer and his/her's client, and ultimately decides whether it would be better to go to court or not. At the moment it sounds as if the lawyer is simply a legal advisor. If he's earning any money, he's only earning a small paycheck for looking over the logistics of the case and giving advice back to the cli…
/r/MensRights16/04/13 05:26 PM
60

I cracked up at the belt part. Really? You've been lying the entire time in the court, and now you want to bring that up? More importantly, you want to bring that up AFTER the case has been closed? Even if that WERE true, you should've tried bringing it up at the beginning of the freaking case!
/r/MensRights16/04/13 04:28 PM
1

He's a junior in a 4-year program. He's in his 20s by now, unless he managed to be one of those 14 year old kids who graduated high school extremely early (in which cases finding scholarships would be a breeze). Besides, that sort of scholarship would make it easier for him to get into a certain field. He may not have wanted to necessarily work with rubber, but he's now got a larger opportunity to get in if he got that scholarship. For instance I'm studying programming languages to become a comp…
/r/MensRights16/04/13 03:57 PM
1

Which will give him visitation rights. He wants custody rights; maybe not complete custody, but at least some custody. The judge may tell him that because he continued to visit his son he shows that he cares for his son and he'll get visitation for X amount of days per month, but he most likely will not give him custody of his child because: 1) The wife did something technically legal. While it was outright suspicious, there was no sort of legal powers that were forcing her to stay in the state …
/r/MensRights16/04/13 03:14 PM
1

My apologies, I missed that part on the first one. I looked for those right before I passed out. As for the fourth one, it's a scholarship aiming to bring the person into that given field. Getting the scholarship and going down that path would probably make it easier to get a job in the rubber industry; after all, you were the recipient of this scholarship, they're bound to want you if your grades and any thesis papers were good. Also every scholarship is competed for by millions. I can't contro…
/r/MensRights16/04/13 03:03 PM
1

1--------2-----------3------------4 Also if you're in the US, you can always apply for FAFSA *-NOTE: FAFSA is NOT a scholarship, it is a loan. You are expected to pay it back within time, however it will help out with financial needs to a degree.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 05:32 AM
1

This doesn't make any sense when I read stories about people killed by mobs of white knights Source please? stories like Brian Banks who was convicted without evidence Except he was convicted because he plead no contest, hence why no evidence was used against him.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 05:18 AM
7

Your lawyer, willing to fight or not (and trust me, he is. That's how he gets a paycheck) is just trying to give you the best advice. The court will ask you questions like "why did you let your wife take your son to Utah for so long?". Both the judge (and the jury) will not care about the fact that you did visit your son, they're going to wonder why you let it happen at all. It sucks, I know, and while you can look for a new legal advisor, they're bound to tell you the same thing. Read up on Uta…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 10:47 PM
2

If you're going to sue for slander/libel/defamation (I should've said sue originally instead of press charges in my original post, so ignore that typo on the slander & libel part), find all the necessary evidence and head down to your local small claims court. Get the appropriate documents, fill them out, and pay the filing fee (it's usually $35). A summoning notice will be given to the girl, you two will go to the court on a date and you'll be asked how this all affected you and to what degree …
/r/MensRights15/04/13 09:01 PM
1

Correct, however I was explaining the only avenues he can really take with this kind of matter. Edit: I understand though that me saying "press charges" (generally something you file to the police and that's a criminal matter) isn't the right terminology. I should've said sue for damages, as that's more appropriate.
/r/MensRights15/04/13 08:50 PM
2

Bay Area, California. If you're in the Bay Area or just need someone to vent to, shoot me a message over Reddit. I'm pretty much on everyday or at least every other day.
/r/MensRights15/04/13 07:24 PM
2

You could sue for slander and libel...But those are both a little hard to prove (especially slander), and it's only if the allegations to you are untrue (since you two had sex you'll have to prove that it was consensual and not rape). Even more so, slander & libel look at how the rumors have damaged your reputation. Did you lose your job? Did it cause any sort of damage to your ability to find work? Did it ruin your relationships with your partner and friends and so forth? If not, then you're li…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 07:22 PM
2

What I mean though is the only sort of "backlash" the government can do if she files for bankruptcy is: 1) Liquidate some of her assets (and this is questionable). 2) Damage her credit for going down that path. Basically, in the context of paying restitution it'll be our tax dollars rather than actually coming out of our pockets. Instead the only punishment we might be able to see is a little bit of prison time for lying to the law and committing fraud. Otherwise all we'll see is a little slap o…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 05:36 PM
2

Oh I how I wish this was just a joke and not a foretelling of the future threads that'll start popping up all over this subreddit... P.S. Can you give me next week's lotto numbers, Mr. Smith?
/r/MensRights15/04/13 04:50 PM
2

What a horrible, horrible person. Part of me wants to say "Good riddance!" about the issue, but I don't know what caused this issue and how future instances can be reduced (because anyone who believes it'll ever truly stop has a much more optimistic outlook than I clearly do). Nonetheless I hope we can work on not only educating people more that violence is wrong (except when protecting yourself and/or others) and that we can also work on better mental evaluations to figure out solutions to work…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 04:49 PM
0

Yeah, I really don't understand why she brought that up either. Did she find out who killed her dog? Does she know it was from a feminist? If so, does that inherently make feminism a bad movement or does it simply mean that the tree has a few bad apples? That said, I do admire Erin's work though and I think that's the defining factor of why she's a good member to be endorsed via AVfM. However I am sure that in the future feminists will probably make a meme out of the whole thing (or at least bri…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 03:36 PM
0

Is objectification really that bad though? At least in the context of a potential partner. We all have the concept of a certain person. For a heterosexual male we're going to have a "perfect" woman along the lines of: Specific height, breast size within a given range, definition of the buttocks, weight level/certain body fat level, possibly hair colour, certain regions of the body to be shaven and/or have a lack of visible hair, possibly to be a member of a certain ethnicity, and possibly to hav…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 02:52 PM
2

Sports bras for men? Quick, get the patent! And maybe slip me in some change for helping out with the idea? ;D I've luckily never had the issue of nipple chaffing. I always wear loose shirts, but I feel sorry for anyone who goes through that ordeal! And I never realized that silk was so rough. I wear a silk-like type of boxers (it's actually made of 100% polyester, but it feels and looks like silk!), so I'll make sure to think of that if I ever buy silk underwear. I don't want my penis chaffing …
/r/MensRights15/04/13 02:37 PM
4

Plenty of scientific studies are frivolous just as plenty are legitimate. Need I bring back up the study about women caring about penis sizes? =P Tis the problem with science; through the pursuit of knowledge we open the door to all types of knowledge, be it reasonable or frivolous both in its attempts and through its findings. As for the study itself, I haven't read it (only the blog article), but assuming they didn't take those parts into consideration that is a bit unusual and idiotic. That's…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 02:08 PM
14

So by that logic if I have a female doctor checking my genitals and giving me medical advice that I shouldn't listen to them? Thanks, Ms. Orr! Let me also make sure that if I ever get a lawyer to defend me, they better be of the same group, otherwise they won't understand what I'm going through! How's about this article, should I not listen to Proffesor Nicola Cherry on her findings (I'm neglecting Dr. Allan Pacey's findings at NICE since he's a man, so my exaggeration would make some sense in t…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 12:20 PM
3

Did Cosmo make this?
/r/MensRights15/04/13 12:10 PM
1

You forgot to mention "fucking scum". I almost bought the logo, but it lacks that vital detail. Also some potential sellers are showing me "Big Red". It's going to be a tough time trying to beat that logo!
/r/MensRights15/04/13 11:54 AM
2

She'll probably just file for bankruptcy though, forcing the state to pay the money to the school. Only thing she loses in that case is her credit history. -sigh-
/r/MensRights15/04/13 11:41 AM
3

He means this Affirmative Action does not mean that managers are expected to hire unqualified applicants. Additionally, Affirmative Action quotas are not automatic. The implementation of quotas must be ordered by a court of law. A true quota situation has rarely occurred across the United States. Affirmative Action is usually implemented as a voluntary goal oriented program. While that quote is on affirmative action, the website speaks about both. This quote however is what brings up quotas.
/r/MensRights15/04/13 11:01 AM
2

Woah woah woah now! The first rule of feminist fight club is you don't talk about feminist fight club!
/r/MensRights15/04/13 10:45 AM
2

You dislike Buddhism more?
/r/MensRights15/04/13 09:44 AM
6

You're looking at the topics page, which anyone can write. The members of Cracked write articles and/or the videos in the video section. This is also why the topic page doesn't include an author, as it's made by anyone. I'm not saying the topic was funny or well-written, just explaining that if a topic hasn't been made, pretty much anyone can make one (although I don't quite remember if it's automatically brought in or if it takes someone to approve of the topic first). The articles, videos, and…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 09:39 AM
5

I'm normally a fan of Louis CK. His show has been a little "eh" in my opinion, but his previous stand-ups have been amazingly funny. This one was just...I don't even know if he wrote his own material or if his manager/HBO/someone wanted him to do a different routine. It was just so different and there was only one joke in the beginning I actually found funny (it was about how at his new place he was messing with another resident who thought he was just a bum since he wasn't in a suit and tie). A…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 09:32 AM
17

You've got to be stuffing kidding me!
/r/MensRights15/04/13 09:08 AM
3

And you saw my context, correct? You brought up foreskin regeneration after I stated it couldn't regenerate. That's why I asked you "so we should just go ahead and chop off the foreskin now and restore it later?" That's the important part about the whole "since you mentioned foreskin regeneration procedures". And you're avoiding the question. Do you think we should just chop it off now and then regrow it later? If so, should it be something that is paid for via healthcare and/or the government, …
/r/MensRights14/04/13 04:45 PM
1

Whatever it takes to put these idiots (the gym owners) in check!
/r/MensRights14/04/13 02:22 PM
3

I didn't say it couldn't be regenerated. I said "So we should just go ahead and chop off the foreskin now and restore it later?" since you mentioned foreskin regeneration procedures.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 02:20 PM
1

Yeah, I know. Your title said they didn't even provide a link to the original article. I assumed you were asking for help in finding the article.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 02:16 PM
1

I only remembered the man in the wheelchair off the top of my head, but yes, that's a very valid point. I cannot wait for this gym to get sued.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 02:15 PM
4

So we should just go ahead and chop off the foreskin now and restore it later? I think the fact that most Europeans don't get circumcised and don't seem to be having any sort of STD-based epidemics from not having their foreskins removed is a clear enough sign that it really isn't as necessary as some people make it out to be. Also it seems like the AAP is the only group actively supporting infant circumcision.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 02:13 PM
4

There's nothing wrong with prevention, yes, but the benefit of that prevention versus the outcome of slicing off the foreskin is not a strong enough reason. The UTIs can be easily fixed with the right antibiotics. The foreskin however cannot regenerate once it's been removed.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:57 PM
5

http://www.babycenter.com/0_urinary-tract-infection_10910.bc?page=2 UTIs can be treated. It's still not a good enough excuse.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:50 PM
1

The gym is a private institution. They earn their income via their clientele; they do not receive assistance from the government, be it local, state, or federal. As such they are free to create discriminatory policies towards their clientele (not their employees though). That's where property rights come into play. Private institution, their building, their rules. Of course they also dug themselves a grave, because if they don't refund the money to the males, they're likely to get sued for givin…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:32 PM
1

Yeah, I think it should be called out and the gym hopefully loses a lot of customers over this. My issue wasn't about that though; I was just being a bit of a legal Nazi, hence my rant about rights via private institutions. And as far as the membership base goes, there was quite a bit of men there. The gym may have a bigger female audience, but losing most if not all of it's male clientele would still be a big punch in their pockets. Most likely not every guy is going to follow through with it, …
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:30 PM
1

EA's a rather sluggish company. They're not going to include women until another company has done so and has made a hefty ROI off of the addition. Such is the issue with being an IPO and one of the biggest video game publishers out there.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:25 PM
21

This has got to be one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. 20% of the UK women's prisoners are likely to self-harm? Well then do what American prisons do and put certain inmates on suicide watch. The rest of the article is just too idiotic to even try to justify. It comes off as extremely misandristic and suggests that far more men are likely be criminals than women, and as such we should just give the ladies some extra privileges. Let's continue sending men to these harsh pri…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:18 PM
0

By they do you mean the people asking for these changes via that petition? Maybe it'd have to do with not owning a software company nor having the expenses to create a women's FIFA game? I don't get what exactly is wrong with asking for them to be in the game. I mean really all you have to do is create a "women's cup" edition that just changes the character models to female characters. Stats remain the same, but now you've got females and the female avatars are in their own specialized mode. I f…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:06 PM
3

Congratulations, but what does this have to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:01 PM
3

I don't know statistics on how many males read books versus how many females read books, but the three authors you gave you're not realizing why they're the biggest named authors at the moment. In the context of JK Rowling, she wrote a teenage story. She wrote about a child, Harry, who is hated by his family and ends up becoming the hero even through his perils. He's essentially the teenager's dream to become someone important, and also stuff about how their parents just don't let them have enou…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:00 PM
3

My point with the life-threatening surgery is you should only opt for that versus something like circumcision, which isn't life-threatening, because the former could mean your child will die or develop long-term issues. Circumcision, while it has benefits, isn't really necessary til the later years of your life. There's no point in getting it as an infant and some men, when they find out all about circumcision, are happy their parents didn't have a doctor cut off part of their dick.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 12:17 PM
4

The point isn't benefits. The point is circumcision, in any context, is never a surgery that will save your life. At best, if you get phimosis, it'll reduce pain. Along with that, it's something you're going to live with for the rest of your life. Some men get pissed over the fact that they weren't allowed to decide whether or not to have part of their dick removed for whatever reason (be it phimosis, religious reasons, aesthetic appeal, etc.).
/r/MensRights14/04/13 11:38 AM
4

It may loosen it up a bit, but I doubt to the full extent that it will feel like an uncircumcised penis once again. But yes, I hope we are the final generation to get circumcisions. I hope within my lifetime I'll see an end to it, at least in North America where I preside. And I'm not upset over my circumcision. I'm not happy about it, just a bit indifferent. I'm fine with who I am now, even though I never had that choice, but it's not something I'm pissed over.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 10:39 AM
4

This one?
/r/MensRights14/04/13 10:13 AM
3

I'm not the majority, but I was circumcized, and while I'm not mad at my parents over it (my penis still works very well and the reduced sensitivity has made me pretty good in bed), I wouldn't have it done to my child. At least not until they were of a big enough age to decide. But yeah, letting him decide later on would be better, even if it means he won't remember any pain if it was done during infancy. There's plenty of men that are pissed because they didn't have the choice, and I'm sure you…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 10:11 AM
4

The issue isn't circumcision itself. No one's outright trying to ban circumcision, because in some situations it's actually a viable medical condition. The issue is circumcizing infant boys. If a grown man, or at the very least, a teenager believes a circumcision would be the best option for them (and depending on if they're still a minor, getting parental consent), then by all means, get a circumcision. The issue though is putting newborns through something that is going to be extremely painful…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 09:44 AM
3

Yeah, we will (we being circumcised men), but as long as the doctor only removed your foreskin and nothing else, you'll still be able to have a wonderful sex life. Just we'll never know how good an orgasm really could've felt. -sigh-
/r/MensRights14/04/13 09:40 AM
8

That's only a cosmetic change. It doesn't bring back the thousands of nerve endings you lost from having your foreskin cut off. If you prefer the look of a circumcised penis, by all means go for it. But if you're doing it because you believe it might bring back something that's forever lost, good luck with that. Maybe with stem cell research we'll get there some day, but for the time being foreskin restoration's just a pointless cosmetic change.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 09:38 AM
2

Once that random woman said "She's [Oprah] done more for this world than you ever will!" I nearly snapped. Yeah, I'm sure you've also done a lot more for this world than these protesters have done, right? Oh, but it doesn't matter if they have done more, because they happened to say Oprah supports a product that they feel is disgusting and vile. I'm glad at least a few people were willing to listen to what they had to say.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 09:34 AM
3

There's probably some out there, but good luck finding them. It's like looking for a needle in a haystack. Oh wait, a needle is phallus shaped, obviously patriarchy! /s (Sorry, had to throw that in there. Perfect chance to do it!)
/r/MensRights14/04/13 07:58 AM
5

Wait...You expect feminists to take the bad with the good? Like an actual adult? Please take me to your fantasy land! I don't want to live on this planet anymore!
/r/MensRights14/04/13 07:51 AM
3

Provided it's a private institution and the discrimination is directed at potential clientele rather than employment opportunities, segregating whites from blacks would actually be legal (I think, I could be wrong though). A good example of this would be Augusta National, who used to prohibit Black people from joining their affiliation up until around the 1990s. Morally wrong? Yeah, it definitely is and this whole BS of needing to segregate any group is utterly ridiculous. However it is still le…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 07:43 AM
3

In this context, yes. In any context? No. We shouldn't discriminate at all, at least not on the grounds of things that can't be changed (e.g. gender, race, etc.). But since it's a private institution, they can discriminate like this. Unfortunately they cannot cut out a certain part of their clientele after the clientele has paid for the service.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 06:21 AM
-2

No, I said they don't have a right to be free of sexual discrimination. That's why I included the part about a broken service. They're entitled to a working service as they've paid for this and the legal agreements they consented to said their membership would be valid for X number of time (whether it's a certain amount per month or a lifetime membership). By changing it from being co-ed to one gender only and especially in the case of the handicapped man, they've created a situation where a bro…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 06:19 AM
2

Let me get this straight real quick... You went to Google then to Yahoo! Answers and you're taking what's said on Yahoo! Answers as being factual (you also only stated the question, not any sort of answer to said question that you found)? While people tend to blast Wikipedia a lot for being open for everyone, it has a strict policy with material and generally finds sources on articles to link to (that's what those little [1] things are for); Yahoo! Answers is a community group where people ask q…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 06:12 AM
-1

basis that they're now providing a broken service to some of their clients. Yes, I addressed that very issue (see above quote from myself). I stated that my issue was about them proclaiming they can't do it simply because they're men; it's a private institution so that type of discrimination is acceptable. But I also stated that they're being provided a broken service and need to sue based off of that.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 05:56 AM
1

Two issues with those examples though: 1)In the case of The Citadel, it's a public, military academy. As such, it must follow public law to the fullest extent. If they were a private institution, they most likely would have been protected under their ability to discriminate based off of gender. Of course they also work with the military and aim to make recruits for the military, so this could be a bit of a gray area. However, the main basis is they're a public academy. 2) The Augusta National wa…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 05:18 AM
36

Now THAT is justice! I'm so glad she didn't give into the fake tears and saw through the fraudulent practice the ex-girlfriend was trying to pull. Serves her right.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 05:04 AM
2

You realize that's from some comedy sketch, right? Hence both the Fox logo and the obnoxious laugh track.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 03:13 AM
4

Control issues are because of patriarchy! Duh! /s
/r/MensRights14/04/13 03:10 AM
20

Woah now, we still need to give her the benefit of the doubt, at least until further evidence comes forward. I'm glad you're reporting this as it needs to be seen, but for now we need to presume that either one could be lying/be at fault. If we want to stop false rape accusations, we need to start with controlling ourselves when something like this happens. Get the information out, but say that he claims this happened or that she's assumed to have done it.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 03:07 AM
2

If she violates the order, you have the ability to call the police and have him brought back to you. You can explain that the orders say she cannot change his school and by her keeping him there when he's supposed to be in school, she's violating the order. As far as judges go, I'm not too sure. Get a lawyer or speak to one you may be currently seeing for better advice and any legal actions you can take if she tries to hold him longer than she should be holding him for. For the moment you can't …
/r/MensRights14/04/13 03:02 AM
1

I don't like the whole "women's only" policy (I wouldn't like a men's only policy either!), but it really grinded my gears when they tried saying they have rights when it comes to this facility. It's a private facility, not a public facility. It's not open to the public; you need to pay/get a membership to use the gym (although they may or may not allow people to try it out). Just as it would be difficult to try to sue a private boy's only school (if you were a girl) or a girl's only private sch…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 02:59 AM
3

I don't know whether to be disgusted by the comments or to feel neutral about them. We still need to give the IRS agent the benefit of the doubt (until more evidence surfaces about the whole ordeal), but at the same time I'm seeing people say things like "He was probably patting himself on the back that he got such a beautiful babe! " I feel as if the roles were reversed, we'd be crying that the IRS needs to be hung for his crimes, but at the same time I want to still assume the IRS agent could …
/r/MensRights14/04/13 02:52 AM
5

I felt so disrespected because she contracted me in public. She told me later the woman was annoyed I had said that. What? But you just said she said it and now she says you said it? I don't understand... Anyways, I assume you're married to her because you love her (at least I hope so, otherwise you two will have a very rough marriage), but if it really affects you that much why don't you talk to her about it? We don't know everything you're going through, we don't know what makes you laugh and …
/r/MensRights14/04/13 02:45 AM
1

There's a big difference between being an "apologist" and not caring enough about an issue. I dedicate more of my time to gender issues and poverty in my country. Does that make me a third world poverty apologist? No; I would just rather focus on my country first, where I know (some) of the laws and rights granted to me before I tried to fix another nation's problems where I don't know their laws and rights. Is there an issue with them being against FGM but not MGM? Yes, of course there is. Ther…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 02:15 AM
1

What I have a problem with is people trying to put a spin on things. Suggesting that "it's a boy, it's a female teacher, must be discrimination against boys!" is just as bad as a feminist taking something like the Donglegate issue and suggesting that a harmless joke is an attack against women and extremely sexist. Or more appropriately, it's like when Michigan Representative Lisa Brown said "And finally, Mr. Speaker, I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my vagina, but 'no' means 'no.'"…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:26 AM
3

My only question is if they do one about men, will it be women making sure men get home safely, are protected from other women, etc? Or will it be more realistic and be something along the lines of "real men know when to stop"?
/r/MensRights13/04/13 11:02 PM
1

In the one night stand context, you just need to take a paternity test. You're not in the child's life nor acting as a father figure, therefore you can't be forced to pay child support. In the case of step-parent liability, I think it makes sense if the step-father was the main source of income and was with the family for quite a long time (and obviously was also married to the mother/legal guardian of the children), and without his payments, the family may have extreme difficulties staying aflo…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 10:09 PM
10

That's tragic that the girl committed suicide, and I'm sure that the rape really did happen if she would go that far due to what happened in court (I could be wrong, but then again I wasn't there nor on at the trial)...But you can't let something like this all of a sudden change the way we look at these trials. Yes, it's difficult to go to the police and to report the issue; we hate being weak, we hate being victims (at least most of us, not necessarily everyone), and so seeking help especially …
/r/MensRights13/04/13 10:03 PM
2

Yup, that would be it!
/r/MensRights13/04/13 09:56 PM
3

Well just remember there's some men like herself as well (although probably not dipping their hair in kool-aid like it appears she did), and for every one crazy individual like herself, there's at least 3 other women out there that are normal people. As for listening to her claims, yeah, it's difficult to give any shits about what she has to say.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 09:48 PM
2

Take your pick
/r/MensRights13/04/13 09:39 PM
1

I think the OP (YuriJackoffski) meant that when we hear about revolutionists in the feminist world, we're not really hearing about him. We'll hear about Rosa Parks, for instance, but not Arunachalam Murganantham.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 09:24 PM
3

I'm not to sure I would either, especially when he mainly started out this project to help her (along with plenty of other women, but it stemmed from what she was using and the reason she was willing to use a dirty cloth), but he also said that in the early days he did things to win her over. So maybe he just loves her a lot and can't see himself with another woman (plus this is India, where arranged marriages are huge, and not many people choose their partners), so maybe he also just feels like…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 09:22 PM
5

I thought so. Once I started seeing patriarchy after every single word, it sounded like her. Although I had a little trouble believing it because I didn't hear enough profanity and being told to shut the fuck and listen.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 09:00 PM
1

Thanks for the link; it was an interesting video.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 08:03 PM
4

Did Big Red write this? (Big Red is the feminist from the UofT protest that was incredibly rude and kept telling everyone to shut the fuck up) Feminists do not want you to have to pay for dinner. We want the opportunity to achieve financial success on par with men in any field we choose (and are qualified for), and the fact that we currently don’t is part of patriarchy. The idea that men should coddle and provide for women, and/or purchase their affections in romantic contexts, is condescending …
/r/MensRights13/04/13 07:53 PM
7

That is such an awful thing to even insinuate. There's a difference between wanting to have group sex/an orgy and being sexually assaulted, just as there's a difference between wanting to be dominated and wanting to be raped. Part of the concept of rape and other sexual assaulted based crimes is you don't want them to happen! Part of the legal definition of rape (at least in the US) is that it's non-consensual sex; you didn't ask to be raped, you didn't tweet out to everyone in your area "hey, I…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 07:43 PM
9

I haven't heard anyone praise this guy. He figured out an easy solution to making these and offered not only the design to people around India but even helped them with affording to build/buy one. This guy is an inspiration, and while he got his wife back, that's terrible that through trying to do something wonderful, he was demonized.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 07:32 PM
2

Aren't we all a "rescuer" in some way? We tend to do things based off of an underlying motive that may be separate from the surface motive. For instance I tend to hold open doors for people when I notice they're close by, coming in or coming out. Why do I do it? Well partly because of how I was raised via my father, but also because of the sense of satisfaction I get from getting thanked over a relatively small task. It was an interesting read though. Thanks for supplying it, Blemish.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 07:26 PM
1

Or she'll just file for bankruptcy so she doesn't have to pay the lawyer fees herself and instead rely on the government to pay it for her.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 06:14 PM
2

How dare that ex-husband try to contend that he shouldn't pay 95% of his entire net income per month on her! PATRIARCHY! /s
/r/MensRights13/04/13 06:13 PM
1

Or a job just might not want to hire you because you've got so many qualifications, they expect you'll be asking them for a very large salary they don't want to pay. Overqualification
/r/MensRights13/04/13 06:11 PM
3

Just checked; yup, you're right. I'll edit that part out.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 05:20 PM
2

It was funny watching him defend his position several times and yet the audience still felt awkward and couldn't understand what he meant. There's many reasons to hit someone, but that doesn't make it right. There's many reasons to commit murder, however none of those reasons are right (and even if they were, it would no longer be murder, it'd be a separate charge such as self-defense).
/r/MensRights13/04/13 05:00 PM
3

That's a bot (as in it's a computer-generated program), not a person. If you click the (Why?) link, it will explain why it automatically copies your text and creates that link.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 04:56 PM
2

You can't force her to get an abortion; that's still up to her. As far as child support goes (assuming you don't wish to help raise the child if she doesn't have an abortion or she doesn't have a miscarriage) you'll have a harder time getting out of that one. If you're afraid of that, get yourself a good lawyer to try to battle the charges or lower the amount you may be required to pay. If you're concerned about getting your ass kicked by her parents, then either don't visit them or ask to visit…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 04:55 PM
8

It seems more like they didn't like him because he was being pretty rude in some of his comments. I do not know what his opening post included as that has since been redacted, but based off of his comments to them it's no surprise that he got his opening post deleted (along with several other posts). Simply because he's a man asking a question in a woman's subreddit and his question was not liked does not mean this specific thread was sexist or misandristic in nature. This may be the internet, b…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 04:45 PM
10

But think of the feminists and how the sniper rifles might hurt their precious, little eardrums! /s
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:56 PM
1

I'm not going to put myself at risk for somebody who doesn't need my help. That situation was just too fishy to justify letting a stranger into my car. Let me quote myself to show my point: I'm fine with you protecting yourself first. If a person is drowning in the ocean or a pool, I wouldn't want you rushing in to save them unless you knew how to swim and to bring someone with you. If you feel as if it's a risky move or it could be a harm to your safety as well (e.g. she wants to get into the c…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:51 PM
1

I cannot find reverse situations because either: A) They're not addressed via the media; they're addressed within the school facility itself and don't get publicized. There's no issue with that provided male students/teachers who have an issue and utilize the school's speech policies as their defense, aren't discriminated against based off of their gender and told to "man up". B) They're blanketed under the vast Google searches that bring up teachers getting fired for cussing, girls taking pledg…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:46 PM
2

About as much protection against any other type of claim (e.g. breaking someone's rib while conducting CPR or accidentally killing someone in an attempt to save their life). I was actually lucky enough to find this story about a cab driver who was accused of raping a woman he assisted after she stated to the driver that she had just been sexually assaulted. But Miss Colborne said CCTV footage of Masood’s movements showed her behaving in a carefree manner until the police arrived. Masood, of Brom…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:13 PM
1

The point of an argument is to find weak points in the opposition's arguments and to counter said arguments. Likewise, I didn't take what you said out of context. As far as the roles getting reversed, once someone says something along the lines of "wow, he needs to man up" (male teacher trying to get female student taken out of class) then it becomes a gender issue. Also if the teacher used either her or his gender for her validation, then it becomes a gender issue. However the argument was base…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:03 PM
0

How about examples of feminists getting pissed off over words having sexual connotation? When the claim of sexual harassment comes into claims, it becomes a gender issue (e.g. MRM, feminism, gender egalitarianism, etc.). Sexual connotation wasn't brought into this. The teacher did not state that through the usage of the word "fuck" that she took it in a sexual way or as something that was detrimental to her gender. It does not matter if she is a feminist. I never said that it matters whether or …
/r/MensRights13/04/13 02:44 PM
14

We've already got a topic on this in this subreddit (in fact it's at the top of the page for the "hot" section). Also, this isn't a men's rights issue; this is an academic issue.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 02:31 PM
0

Well I'm pretty sure the school has sexual harassment charges that are separate from this, or at least most college/universities that I know of have the sexual harassment policies as separate from any speech policies. But yes, if gender came into this discussion, it would then turn into a men's rights issue, but based off of the information we have at the moment this isn't a gender issue.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 02:13 PM
31

Seriously, what the hell is up with all of these stories that have nothing to do with the individuals' genders? Yes, this is an idiotic story, but just because it was a female teacher and a male student doesn't mean this is a men's right issue. This is just another teacher getting a little too over-the-top based off of something innocent the student did. They don't sell pop-tarts that come in a gunmetal black color and are the size of an actual gun.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 02:10 PM
2

This isn't really a parenting issue either. They didn't use an actual baby in this video and there's no claims that she's depriving her child and/or hurting it. This is just three mothers (or at least one and two friends) trying to make a funny video that came out as more idiotic than humorous.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 02:06 PM
0

Yes, but both of these cases are about context. Donglegate was an issue for two reasons: 1) The joke was considered sexual in nature, and while not directed at Adria Richards herself, she made a claim that this was sexual harassment. 2) Adria Richards utilized gender stereotypes to validate her claim ("If I didn't stand up to these two men, that little girl on the screen would never become a programmer!") This case isn't about a woman saying "who do these men think they are, using words like tha…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 01:47 PM
-2

Two men lost their jobs for making a joke between the two of them about dongles. Can you get me a source? Sorry for nitpicking but last time I checked "donglegate", only the guy who actually made the joke lost his job. Unless it changed and the other man lost his job as well, it was only the initial joker and then later Adria Richards. The rest of your response is valid and I agree with it, but I'm not aware that the other guy lost his job as well.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 01:38 PM
2

Yes, I am. And I'm fine with you protecting yourself first. If a person is drowning in the ocean or a pool, I wouldn't want you rushing in to save them unless you knew how to swim and to bring someone with you (it's easier said than done; sometimes when people are having trouble staying afloat, they tend to push down on someone's head). However trying to say that you wouldn't help out a woman who got raped simply because of the fear of reprecussion from helping her is not a good enough excuse. T…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 01:08 PM
6

Being against freedom of expression isn't exclusively a feminist thing though. The concern to join the concept of freedom of expression with freedom of speech (so that it would include things that weren't verbally spoken or written down could still be protected under freedom of speech) did not stem from the feminist movement. So you are correct that she claimed this because she was offended by his usage of profanity, but that does not support cannotfindWMD's claims.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 01:03 PM
3

You are aware of a little thing called good samaritan laws, right?
/r/MensRights13/04/13 08:59 AM
18

This isn't about a [female] professor getting pissed off over the fact that he has an X and Y chromosome, a penis and testicles, etc. this is about the guy saying the word "fuck". Until you can show me feminists getting pissed off over the word "fuck", your exaggeration makes no sense.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 08:49 AM
1

It's funny, but rule #1 states no memes or rage comics. Those are technically memes.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 02:16 PM
7

First something off-topic: Is that the Canadian version of Barry White? Holy crap, his voice is amazing. Secondly, I love that he approached it in a meaningful way. He both called the act of doxxing idiotic and called out the RSU for their childish ways of not wanting to listen to someone. This is obviously a student body that has no idea what the concept of a discussion is and shouldn't be allowed to operate as a student body government until they understand that simple concept.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 02:07 PM
5

Do you speak it?! I understand that you're speaking about the redheaded feminist from the UoT protest, but you really need to work on your English skills, please.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 01:37 PM
3

Well we do love to say we love democracy, even if we live in a republic. =P
/r/MensRights12/04/13 10:44 AM
9

Well it's the internet, what do you expect? We just happen to absolutely love our vigilantism here. =/ I've joined in to help you out though. You made a valid point, but it obviously doesn't matter. -rolls eyes-
/r/MensRights12/04/13 10:17 AM
3

I get that headlines are intended to bring people in (trust me, I make sure my headlines are incentivizing as well), but you've got it worded incorrectly. She isn't being allowed to use Twitter; she's being allowed to call a person who tweets for her and tells her what her followers have to say and/or what the news has to say. Technically what she's doing is legal and anyone, regardless of their gender, can do it provided they're given the ability to make phone calls (because many people may be …
/r/MensRights12/04/13 08:02 AM
1

Hell yes! Those are the types of things I like to hear women speak about with female issues; that not everything can be fixed with the law and some things can even be detrimental when laws are put in place. That sometimes you need to "woman up" (like the term "man up", as in to fix the issue yourself or attempt to rather than expecting someone else to fix it for you) and that the video was both respectful and informative (explaining how the civil rights act of 1964 and the equal rights act of 19…
/r/MensRights12/04/13 07:54 AM
3

Honestly I never even heard of "happy wife means a happy life" until today with that image that's been circling this subreddit. That being said, something that irritates me is the fact that an image like this is considered funny, but something like this is considered inhumane and unjust. I'm not implying that we should laugh at women who get abused (quite the opposite), but rather the fact that the first example can be considered funny in certain cases, but the second example is never funny what…
/r/MensRights12/04/13 07:38 AM
9

I don't understand either, but if you find an answer notify me about it!
/r/MensRights11/04/13 07:16 PM
1

My favorite part about that statistic that women earn 70 cents on average compared to men is true. You know why? Because it incorporates EVERY single job of EVERY single sector and bases it off of gender (and I believe some other criteria as well). It neglects to break down the fact that certain positions women are in (e.g. nursing and teaching) pay less than some paths men are taking (e.g. technology and business). Occasionally there's disparities between men and women in a similar field, but t…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 06:54 PM
2

"misandry is just misogyny affecting men (ie when you are expected to lift heavy stuff, its because misogyny says that women are weak). it is legitimate to be upset with inequality but it is inaccurate to frame what you are experiencing as an institutional hatred of men. this tshirt is a joke describing how frustrating it can be to be lectured by mens rights activists and pointing out the disparity between the injustices men may experience for being men and any real form of oppression. obviously…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 06:46 PM
14

If that WAS acting, then she deserves to get a major acting gig because she completely fooled me, but something inside of me just says "I wish this was fake, but it wasn't". It pains me to say it, but some people are just that crazy. ):
/r/MensRights11/04/13 06:23 PM
1

What? No, I was saying if the woman initiated the date/was the one to ask the guy out, in that circumstance, she should be the one to pay for the date. Once the two of them are a couple, then they can start splitting the bill. I used the Sadie Hawkins dance as an example because it's a common situation where a girl asks a guy out. Like I said, the date is a gift. The proposer is the one who pays for the gift for the proposed. Because in most cases the man asks the woman out, it's generally his o…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 06:13 PM
4

I'm not a fan of the term either and while it is used in derogatory terms by some transgenders it's mainly a way for them to separate trans from non-trans. I tend to not have an issue with the word until myself or someone else is getting hated on and the term "cis" is being thrown around. In most cases though it doesn't tend to bother me. In the context of this video though, it pisses me the hell off: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUhXMGO7Cfw&list=LLNmHOH0Dy0qebcy_h_u-4Cg
/r/MensRights11/04/13 06:05 PM
14

Warrants can be as fast as possible. All you need to do is see a judge, explain your reasoning for searching the premise, get the details on what can and cannot be searched (if anything can't), and then present the warrant to the owner of the household (which they didn't seem to do...).
/r/MensRights11/04/13 06:01 PM
21

It's an automated response. Anytime you make a new thread it pops up. No reason to apologize. xD
/r/MensRights11/04/13 05:59 PM
1

By damage the accuser's life I mean make it public knowledge via the news. "Hey everyone! Look! See this person! They made a false rape allegation!" Of course via the charges laid out on the person it may become public knowledge and that will harm their life, but rather I meant the media shouldn't go spouting it out necessarily. We should seek high penalties for something like this as punishment for what they did, but an eye for an eye isn't always the best solution. We're supposed to have a reh…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 05:49 PM
2

Well I apologize for taking your example out of context. The way I've been reading it it's been seeming like "well it's power hungry men, but if it weren't men we might not have this issue". I apologize for the assumptions I made from your posts. As far as why most of the top is filled with men: The baby boomer generation. It's been the largest generation by far and plenty of them are still alive today; they're mostly what makes up the top men in the fields and the reasons why men may be selecte…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 05:13 PM
4

Two things: 1) You shouldn't lean towards women's issues just because you're a woman. It would be wrong of me to avoid the plights a Black person or a homosexual may face simply because I'm a straight, Caucasian male. Likewise it would be wrong of me to avoid any issues women are facing simply because I'm a man. When it comes to equality you shouldn't use the "protect your own" argument. Now that doesn't mean you need to fight for EVERY issue out there (obviously if you don't care too much about…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 05:05 PM
29

IF YOU'D SHUT THE FUCK UP, I CAN READ MY LIST! PATRIARCHY, PATRIARCHY, DID I MENTION PATRIARCHY ALREADY? /s
/r/MensRights11/04/13 04:58 PM
2

That's not a male issue though, that's an avaricious issue. Even if a majority of women took over these positions it wouldn't necessarily stop the issue. The issue truly at hand is that these people have too much power and they need to be shown that the consumers/civilians are the powerhouse and backbone of this nation/planet. Yes, my ideal situation is far from our current one and I doubt I'll ever see it happen in my lifetime, but nonetheless it's not an issue of power-hungry men, rather it's …
/r/MensRights11/04/13 04:50 PM
3

When lack of privacy = the potential to cash in on quite a bit of money, nope!
/r/MensRights11/04/13 04:34 PM
5

This is just downright creepy. I did online dating a bit (-cough- Myyearbook -cough-) and while I read the stuff that some girls wrote on their profiles, I didn't actively search for their Facebook accounts/any other accounts tied to them, nor did I search for any exes they may have had to see what the girl was like. The internet's both a blessing and a curse. We have this great resource that can get us practically ANY information available so long as you know how to look for the right things, b…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 04:32 PM
1

Wow...That is just completely messed up. While I don't think we should necessarily damage the accuser's life (though they should still get a hefty fine and some jail time for wasting everyone's time and damaging someone's reputation), that's completely messed up that it's going to stigmatize him for life. Someone like Michael Vick is able to get his career back even after being found guilty of forcing animals to fight each other, but a man like this has to find a whole new career because one sim…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 03:31 PM
1

Well I'm glad you two got things sorted out, and I apologize if I came off as rude. Just the way you wrote it made it seem more like you were only thinking of yourself rather than her as well. That being said, it's fine to vent to others, but in the future always talk to her first. You say she's very considerate, which is great, so utilize that consideration more in the future. As far as her lack of ambition goes, does she have any degrees or is she in college? If not, try getting her to go when…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 03:22 PM
13

His choice in women shouldn't matter. This isn't about him getting a divorce, this is about him having to give up something he's worked his whole life for. There's very little chance he will ever get another championship ring like that, and even if he does, he'll just be haunted by the memories of his original being taken from him just to pay for the legal fees of someone he's fighting against. Not only that but we don't know why they divorced (at least not from that article alone). They may hav…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 10:10 AM
1

Oh no doubt about that. Just explaining what the site is typically used for.
/r/MensRights11/04/13 08:36 AM
0

But yes, it's essentially the man's job to pay since 99% of the time men are the ones to ask out.
/r/MensRights11/04/13 08:35 AM
0

Well assuming the girl did ask the guy out (e.g. Saddie Hawkins dance), then she should be the one to pay. It's essentially a gift, just the gift is a fun night and possibly food (if you go to a restaurant or concession booth).
/r/MensRights11/04/13 08:35 AM
1

I think it's a good idea for leaders of any group, be it male, female, black, white, etc. to portray a do what must be done (so long as it doesn't hurt us in the long run financially or morally). I think it's a good idea for people to run for office or to try to achieve the status of being a board member/ CXO of a company because they genuinely care about what they're doing. I think what we need is more leaders and business runners who don't put profit as their number one achievement. Make sense…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 12:49 AM
12

Not really. While Tom Robinson was accused of rape, it reflects more on him being a Black man than simply being a man. To Kill A Mockingbird is a better example of racism in the early 1900s than it is of a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights11/04/13 12:38 AM
3

"'Believing men are treated unfairly in several sectors and circumstances in society doesn't mean you are a misogynist.' Yes it does." H-How? This makes no sense whatsoever (P.S. It's from the comments section of the article). How does seeing that the world might not be completely equal for men either and wanting to fix those issues make you a misogynist? I understand that there are some MRAs out there that are misogynists, but just like feminists, those aren't most of the audience, just the mos…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 12:30 AM
3

Maybe it has to do with the fact that women have only recently in the past few decades started getting a great education, the opportunity and strength to run for office, etc. But at the same time does the number of women in office really matter? I know some people say things like "I wouldn't want a woman for president unless she was in menopause" (the presumption that she'll PMS and hit the big red button), but honestly at least from my standpoint I couldn't care less who's our leader so long as…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 12:10 AM
1

I thought the two words she never wants hear was "condom broke".
/r/MensRights11/04/13 12:05 AM
1

Yeah; it's commonly used to post funny stories that happened to you.
/r/MensRights10/04/13 11:50 PM
0

The way I see it, it works like this: If you ask someone out and take them out on a date, it's your responsibility to pay for them. Whether it's a girl or a guy making the first move to ask each other out, that person pays. After that when the two of you are dating though, go ahead and split the bill. There's no reason to fake it if you don't want to pay or would be turned off by a guy who doesn't pay the bill.
/r/MensRights10/04/13 11:27 PM
0

No, I would be fine if they stated "you can't come in because this is a women's only swim meet. We cannot allow males in either as swimmers or as lookers during this time. I'm sorry for the inconvenience, but it's the rules. If you'd like, we can switch your daughter into a mixed class where you can watch her." My issue is using a religion he may not be affiliated with as an excuse. Let me use this as an example: I used to work as a cart attendant/janitor at a local Target. One of the things I h…
/r/MensRights10/04/13 09:23 PM
1

It's not impossible, it's just a lazy excuse that brings in a lot of implications. As I said, I'm fine with women's only swim meets. The rules dictate that members of the opposite sex, whether swimmers or observers cannot come in during that time. If they said that it would've been fine; the father still would've been pissed most likely, but they would've just been enforcing their own rules. By stating that the reason he can't go in is because there's Muslim women in there is not a good excuse f…
/r/MensRights10/04/13 09:07 PM
1

“Without a female-only program, there would be women that wouldn’t be able to participate in swimming,” Jackson said. “This is the way it needs to be in order to accommodate the programs. We’re not opening the door to one cultural group only — this is all females we’re accommodating.” Above that quote it states that it was set up for religious and cultural reasons, and the story details that parents must be of the same gender to watch if the child is not in a mixed class. However it still doesn'…
/r/MensRights10/04/13 08:54 PM
1

Can you show me where? The link is down and I went to an alternative address (see my previous post) which had no information on it being for Muslim women; it only stated that the swim meet was women's-only, which I don't see as an issue. The issue I see is them using Islam as the reason the father couldn't walk in, but there's nothing I could find on the story which stated the father was told (either directly or via paperwork he signed) that it was a Muslim women's only swim meet.
/r/MensRights10/04/13 08:37 PM
2

Even though this is in a men's rights forum, I'm pushing aside gender issues. I have a post above which states that I'm completely fine with the no-men/no-women timeslots. They're acceptable and not discriminatory to either gender. So yes, this is essentially a secular issue. The issue I'm stating is that there's no information stating that it was made clear that this was a Muslim-women only swim meet, only that it was a women's only swim meet. They also used Islam as a defense. Perhaps the rule…
/r/MensRights10/04/13 07:44 PM
1

Woah woah woah, first off did she already leave you or are you still together? From the sounds of it you're still together but you're coming here for advice because you want to leave her (or have her leave) because you feel like she won't be pulling any weight. Assuming she's still with you, did you ever try talking to her about it first? And did you also consider that maybe she isn't working at the moment because it would either cause her a lot of pain and/or might harm the fetus? If she's work…
/r/MensRights10/04/13 07:34 PM
10

So essentially we should give into tyranny of the majority? If you're unfamiliar with tyranny of the majority, it's a hypothetical situation centered around the concept of true democracy, where the most votes win out over anything. Whether or not there's one Muslim girl or fifty, religion alone shouldn't be a qualifier to stop the father from seeing his little girl swim unless the swimming center made it expressly clear that this class would ONLY be for Muslim women and that certain parts of Isl…
/r/MensRights10/04/13 07:27 PM
5

Like you, I'm completely fine with the no-men/no-women timeslots. However the issue is that his daughter was allowed to go to this swim meet but he couldn't go watch his daughter swim during the timeslot. If they wanted to make a Muslim-women only timeslot, I'd be fine with that as well, BUT it needs to be expressly made clear that during this time there will be Muslim women swimming and that males cannot enter due to religious reasons. However it seems like from what we can gather from the stor…
/r/MensRights10/04/13 07:11 PM
26

Because he's making a satirical photo about one that's been a trend on Facebook for a couple of years (it's a picture of a cowarding woman with a photo of a man holding a belt. It has a caption that reads "a man who hits a woman is not a man"). He's using the recent issue of the Toronto man getting sexually assaulted by four women to insinuate that sexual abuse affects men as well, but that it is grossly overlooked.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 03:22 PM
3

My apologies.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 02:01 PM
3

Well please accept my apology for the mistake, oh great one! I am new to the ways of Redditquette!
/r/MensRights09/04/13 12:54 PM
3

Fixed!
/r/MensRights09/04/13 10:58 AM
1

Yes! It's all your fault for being born with a penis! How dare you have a Y chromosome! I'm kidding btw; I know you're pissed right now, but I wanted throw some light-hearted sarcasm into the mix. The people you're talking to though don't do very much research. They're at most looking at Wikipedia (which I'm not insinuating is unreliable, rather the Wikipedia entries are looking at US-based federal research) and utilizing that as their counter-point. They're not checking to see how that research…
/r/MensRights09/04/13 10:37 AM
1

A headline is built to draw attention and it's not completely inaccurate. Men and women have certain aspects in society where we're not different or at the very least should not be treated differently. In this context I was concerning law and using law as an example because that's the main part that we can fix. Non-legal societal issues need to be fixed via the population over time. But have a nice day. (:
/r/MensRights09/04/13 08:53 AM
1

No, I'm not. Again, my usage of rights and laws was an example. But legality itself falls under society. Do men and women typically promote themselves differently in society? Yes, but that's a small fraction of what defines society. Legality is but another part of society. My usage of socially is not incorrect. In the picture with the debate neither of us talk about laws whatsoever. We're speaking about the University of Toronto protest. The feminist speaks about how these feminists give feminis…
/r/MensRights09/04/13 08:41 AM
2

How is my terminology wrong? If you're going to nitpick rights and laws those were examples, (which you are correct fall into legality, but legality falls into the bigger picture of society) and men are perceived that way! Certain laws are discriminatory towards men; the way that we view certain things in society is discriminatory in men (e.g. we view rape as needing penetration, making it next to impossible for a woman to technically be a rapist, even if she has committed sexual assault. P.S. T…
/r/MensRights09/04/13 08:12 AM
1

so·cial /ˈsōSHəl/ Adjective Of or relating to society or its organization. Legality is a byproduct of society. As society develops, legality is developed to adhere society towards a common design (e.g. don't kill people, unless it's in self-defense). Rights and laws fall into legality; legality falls into society.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 07:57 AM
1

Socially refers to things such as rights and laws. Biologically speaking, yes, men and women are different. When it comes to laws, gender should not play a part in the issue. Care to explain how men and women should be different when it applies to laws and rights?
/r/MensRights09/04/13 07:43 AM
5

Wait, so me first ISN'T what equality is about? It's about making sure everyone has the same basic rights as each other? Oh, the horror!/s
/r/MensRights09/04/13 07:24 AM
1

Overview of Mod Policy: Spam/Off-Topic posts will be removed. Use self-posts for related topics, justifying their relation. This has absolutely nothing to do with Men's rights and should not be here.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 02:46 AM
4

I think it makes no sense. Why would we have a society built by men, for men, that says that men are idiotic creatures that can only settle their differences with war and have a single type of attraction (that being physical and being small-waisted women with Triple Z breasts). It's just a way for feminist to shift the blame of her sexism to a new entity and to say that she's trying to battle that entity.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 02:42 AM
0

Most of the posts on here ARE about how men are unequal. Yes, there's the occasional feminism sucks thread, but you think threads on the MRA sucking don't appear on the feminist subreddits? They do. It's the internet so some people will decide to say that.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 02:38 AM
-4

I figured this would be appropriate. xD http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPtjcT1t64I Edit: This is off-topic, but it should give you a good laugh.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 01:30 AM
2

Pretty much, yeah. Some things I understand having a precaution for, even for some medical conditions! (see vaccines as an example) But in the case of circumcision, it's really a much lesser issue that pretty much makes it an archaic procedure. I'd be fine with it in cases of phimosis when other procedures didn't work or in the case of cosmetic surgery (because some people think a circumcised penis looks better and seem to have a fear that someone won't fuck them if they are uncircumcised).
/r/MensRights09/04/13 01:21 AM
1

Yeah, that's what I meant. I should've written my answer a little better. >.> I don't understand why they didn't call for some backup either, especially when it got that big. I doubt there'd be a big deal calling in either another precinct or another department that isn't very busy to help assess the situation (e.g. Vice division or homicide division).
/r/MensRights09/04/13 01:16 AM
1

Ah, thank you. I read the story a while back but I didn't remember the exact details. I could've sworn it WAS through an official sperm bank, but that's good that it wasn't.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 12:58 AM
4

He should've gotten a Wii instead; at least then he would have had a weapon on his person. (if you don't get this joke, when the Wii first came out, the little remote tended to fly out of peoples hands and smashed into their TVs, breaking them)
/r/MensRights08/04/13 10:17 AM
5

Technically yes, although it's really up to the court. It is possible that your judge may see it as unfair to make you pay child support, but in some cases (see Deansdale's post) it has happened. There's also been cases of this happening with sperm banks, but I cannot remember if that was a US issue or what nation it may have been that that happened.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 10:10 AM
5

I was circumcised at birth as well, but the issue is about infants getting circumcised. About the fact that part of their body is being removed when they have no ability to consent. Circumcision is fine to have around, but it should only be utilized in extreme cases (or for plastic surgery if someone really has a problem with their foreskin) when the boy in question has some capacity to consent and make his choice aloud.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 10:06 AM
84

Cheering for her ideas? What ideas? That if a man doesn't eat you out then you have every right to beat the shit out of him til he finally consents? Isn't it illegal for police officers to make a criminal sign a plea bargain under duress? That magically doesn't extend when it's a man who won't go down on a woman? I'm all for eating a girl out (hell I love doing it), but under no circumstances should you ever utilize physical violence to get your way. I don't care if you have a vagina, you have n…
/r/MensRights08/04/13 09:54 AM
1

More like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBwS66EBUcY
/r/MensRights08/04/13 06:58 AM
1

I'm just going to assume she's being a troll or trying to be sarcastic, because while I have seen feminists bring in stupid concepts I've never seen any feminists actually assume that accidentally touching someone would be considered harassment. Dear god, please tell me I'm right and this wasn't serious.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 06:17 AM
3

You'd never slap a girl, but there's nothing wrong with slapping a guy for something he said wrong. There's still a slight grammatical error with #3. I've edited it for you in a more grammatically appropriate manner. Sorry for giving you a third edit. D:
/r/MensRights08/04/13 05:39 AM
1

Very true. On the bright side in a very dark way, I think the recent circumcisions in New York City that have been spreading one of the herpes viruses to infants may be a starting push to really get people to start saying that maybe, just maybe, they should go against letting their doctor snip off a piece of their little boy's willy. Or even advocating more people to get a legal bill passed to prohibit circumcision until a certain age.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 05:32 AM
2

It is during "unlawful protests" or riots, but apparently not during peaceful protests. And there was a police car in the background going through. Don't know why they were watching the civilians better though, especially when shit like this is bound to happen. =/
/r/MensRights08/04/13 05:25 AM
2

That's why I said an age like 14 or above should be the only time a child could get circumcised. Also I was unaware that phimosis could also be treated via special creams and stretching techniques. If that would work and take away the pain and "locking" of the foreskin it should have precedence over circumcision, but in the situation where there's an incredible amount of pain and non-surgical procedures work (or the male in question asks for a circumcision), then I believe it would be okay for p…
/r/MensRights08/04/13 04:58 AM
1

I'm saying that the OP should blur it out because it could be considered doxxing, which is against the rules. I have nothing against public shaming the girl, but the forum rules need to be followed if the OP doesn't want to get banned.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 02:27 AM
38

I've never understood it either. I'm a circumcised man, I was circumcised while I was an infant and while I am not mad at my parents nor the doctors for the procedure, I do feel like circumcision is wrong (except in the case of phimosis. That's the ONLY time circumcision should be acceptable, and ONLY when the individual in question has a good enough ability to agree to the procedure (let's say at age 14 and above as an example)) and it seriously needs to be campaigned more to be stopped as a me…
/r/MensRights08/04/13 02:08 AM
15

Well I admire the fact that you stood up and stopped the fight. Not enough people do that these days when they see violence unfolding right in front of them. So major props to you, OP. I can understand his decision not to press charges, but I hope a police officer at least sits that masked man down and tells him that the next time he does something like that he can expect to ride in the backseat of a police cruiser.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 02:04 AM
101

Wow, that's terrible. =/ I've never been homeless nor needed to stay at a homeless shelter but I used to cook for one. Luckily the one I was helping out was for anyone regardless of age or gender, but that really sucks that it's for women and children only. I honestly don't understand how excluding men (especially a fucking 16 year old. You'd have been lucky to have gotten a job at McDonald's!) is any bit good. It is up to the discretion of the shelter, but it's still messed up. =/
/r/MensRights08/04/13 02:01 AM
2

Yeah, the poster (or you, the OP) should honestly at least blur out her location. Everyone's well aware that this happened at the University of Toronto but her actual location should be blurred out (and possibly her profession). That being said though, the irony of this is amazing. Thank you internet, you have made my day. <3
/r/MensRights08/04/13 01:57 AM
25

I'm honestly glad the camera man not only caught that but also made sure to intervene and stop it. I understand in some circumstances the best course of action is to stand back and just videotape the event for evidence, but in this case it was nice seeing the cameraman stop the attacker. Too bad that coward had to wear a mask so his identity will be a bit harder to prove (with the video evidence).
/r/MensRights08/04/13 01:54 AM
2

That's a very fair point. As long as the womens-only clinics allow men (that's a bit of an oxymoron though from the name) to utilize there clinics for certain things, I wouldn't have an issue with it or with them calling it womens-only clinics. But they should just probably provide more funding to the free clinics instead for these kinds of things instead.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 12:39 AM
1

It's moments like this where I wish a Hell did exist. She's far too close to death's doorstep to go through any serious torment before her passing. Also the grandson is a fucking idiot. I hope he does get a life sentencing.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 11:26 PM
3

Planned parenting isn't the only organization that does abortions/pregnancy screenings. What he's talking about is the fact that there are women's healthcare centers and isn't looking completely into what these organizations do. As I stated, it would be nice, and the organizations should allow men to get free or cheap screenings for STDs/UTIs/etc. as well, but the primary purpose of these organizations is to help women with pregnancy screenings and/or abortions at an affordable cost (be it free …
/r/MensRights07/04/13 11:20 PM
3

Apparently not if it's for religious reasons.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 09:54 PM
3

The only issue I see with what you're talking about is the fact that (at least to the best of my knowledge; anyone correct me if I'm wrong), most of these women's health care centers mainly only focus on pregnancy and abortion procedures/screenings. Yes they check for UTIs and STIs as well, but the main focus is on pregnancy and abortions. It's essentially there so that a woman who couldn't raise a child could abort the fetus rather than possibly being forced to pay thousands of dollars for the …
/r/MensRights07/04/13 09:51 PM
7

Is it my lack of a sense of humour or just that your joke failed to actually be humourous?
/r/MensRights07/04/13 09:39 PM
4

It was outside of a club and [at least one of] the women offered him a ride home. Your logic doesn't work because even if said girls were strippers, they were now outside of their work environment. They were on public streets, not in a facility designed for showcasing your genitals to earn cash. The guy also reported it as a crime; that implies he obviously did not want it at all. Yes, false accusations are made at times (e.g. Morgan Triplett), but they are few and far between.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 09:27 PM
6

No, it should not be. There's no sort of gender inequality from wearing clothing and the testicles can easily be cooled by wearing the right clothing. If it's summer or you're in a hot region, invest in shorts and more comfortable underwear. When I go to work out, I typically wear a nylon-based short (which is very stretchable and allows a great area of motion along with having big enough gaps to cool my nether regions). Men's rights issues should stick to gender inequalities and taking them out…
/r/MensRights07/04/13 09:21 PM
19

Assuming it's a joke, that joke is drier than the Atacama desert. Assuming it's truthful then I sincerely hope someone comes up to that Nadia girl through a dark alley, stops her, and then proceeds to...Tell her why she's an idiot for that comment and that she should be ashamed of herself.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 09:15 PM
7

Personally I feel that way as well, but the only reason the MRM exists is solely because feminism, the bigger entity, neglects the plights men face as well. If feminism or a new, larger entity fought for both sides, the MRM wouldn't exist in the first place (assuming men had an equal or good enough fight as well).
/r/MensRights07/04/13 04:17 PM
1

I think like any group it has it's fair share of crazies that are looked at far more than the more rational ones, but I do think it's a bit archaic. There are some things that I understand women want to have changed (e.g. not being seen as weaker than men, such as the common phrase "you throw like a girl!") but much of the ideology is filled with either archaic or ignorant theories (e.g. patriarchy) which along with the crazies tends to drown out the real issues feminism may be fighting for (e.g…
/r/MensRights07/04/13 03:31 PM
10

Pretty much in the context the guy mentioned. If a girl pulls a knife out on you, you have every reason to attack her. In the case of domestic violence (e.g. attacking a woman because she pissed you off), it's not okay.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 08:37 AM
2

Jesus Christ, she could learn a little respect.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 08:33 AM
3

You wear all the leggings (and clothing apparently) you like, sir. I'm going to stick to my jeans, thank you very much.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 08:08 AM
6

I wish Obama would have made a public apology that went along the lines of "Oh, I'm so sorry that all of you don't know how to take a joke. Let's forget the fact that Ms. Harris and I are friends and look instead at the fact that I made a joke about her attractiveness. Carry on, America. I really wish my birth certificate was fake just so I wouldn't have to constantly be reminded of some of the people I'm running this country for."
/r/MensRights07/04/13 08:06 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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