TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

VoodooIdol Archive

View 37 posts and 2,054 comments by VoodooIdol on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
236

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights10/12/13 01:02 PM
144

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights10/02/11 01:41 PM
141

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights20/09/13 11:47 AM
92

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights10/12/12 04:36 PM
87

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights20/06/13 11:49 PM
71

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights16/06/12 04:25 PM
63

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights19/06/13 05:19 PM
51

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights13/07/10 07:57 PM
47

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights19/09/13 07:48 PM
44

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights10/04/13 07:02 PM
37

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights15/01/12 09:54 PM
37

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights17/02/11 02:16 PM
33

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights29/01/09 05:17 PM
27

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights20/09/13 08:23 PM
26

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights06/11/13 05:43 PM
22

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights12/11/14 02:50 PM
17

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights01/09/11 10:10 AM
11

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights19/08/08 12:38 AM
10

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights30/04/12 05:31 PM
8

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights08/05/14 07:15 PM
8

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights07/12/10 02:59 PM
5

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights10/07/13 06:11 PM
5

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights08/09/12 06:25 PM
4

re: FeminismVoodooIdol/r/MensRights10/05/14 04:37 PM
4

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights18/08/08 09:47 PM
3

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights23/04/14 08:17 PM
3

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights10/10/11 05:03 AM
3

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights04/12/12 12:35 PM
2

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights25/01/13 09:00 PM
2

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights21/09/09 08:12 PM
2

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights18/08/08 09:58 PM
1

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights07/08/13 11:25 PM
1

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights16/12/10 01:25 PM
1

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights03/10/13 07:10 PM
0

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights08/05/13 05:54 PM
0

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights13/05/12 01:39 PM
0

VoodooIdol/r/MensRights08/05/13 05:43 PM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 2,054 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-17

Because it isn't. Grow up.
/r/MensRights27/07/26 08:48 PM
3

Common law marriage exists in many states in the U.S., too.
/r/MensRights29/04/18 12:26 PM
1

You haven't said anything I don't already know re: sourcing a story. This story has none, however. Any article that doesn't link its sources is automatically written off. It only makes vague references to where it find its information. And no one should ever even bother to read a media source that is known to be run by a ridiculously corrupt government. Either find a better source or leave it in the dust where it belongs. Why would you even give clicks to a propaganda rag? Yes, the ministry of j…
/r/MensRights08/03/18 12:59 PM
-2

A Russian state run media is somehow reliable?
/r/MensRights07/03/18 12:23 PM
1

This is not the jungle. Social hierarchy has changed and "survival of the fittest" no longer has anything to do with physical strength. And, no, all humans exist for society. Without it we would never have made it to where we are. We must all learn to navigate this new social dichotomy or resign to being left behind and marginalized. Adjust, adapt, overcome. Men aren't the sole arbiters of safety. Many societies value women just as much as men in social safety roles. Countries like Israel conscr…
/r/MensRights24/02/18 04:57 PM
1

I'm doing no such thing. You, however, are deflecting.
/r/MensRights24/02/18 04:50 PM
1

Your experience has not been my experience. However, you are correct that there is evidence that shows that in couples where the woman is the principal breadwinner there is a higher divorce rate. Now, might a part of that be that men in these situations get depressed and/or resentful that it's not them in the top earner position? Why do you feel that this statistic falls on the shoulder of women squarely?
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:53 PM
1

If males didn't have the propensity for violence then women would have stepped up to fill that role. This happens everywhere in the animal kingdom. However, this ain't the jungle/forest. The chance that you'll encounter life-threatening violence in your lifetime is almost nil. This being the case we need to determine why men aren't moving forward in the new social dichotomy. By staying in that same place we always have we're losing ground and opportunities.
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:43 PM
1

So, you're saying both are toxic, but one is good when it's toxic?
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:40 PM
1

He's emasculating himself. I'm just bringing it to light. If you can't talk about your emotions it's because you're scared to do so, making you the opposite of masculine.
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:39 PM
1

Firstly, my wife is the main bread winner and works more hours than I do. I have my own business but I probably being home about $40 - $45k per year and she makes over double that. So, yeah, my share of the chores is a bit bigger. However, I don't do all of the "man stuff" - she'll get under a car with me, sometimes does her own oil changes, and will pitch in on cleaning on weekends. She cleans dishes after dinner (although most often I help with that because I like conversation with her and we …
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:38 PM
1

Agreed. 100%.
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:22 PM
1

So then why is there contention when someone brings this up as a mainly male issue? You seem to agree that that's true.
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:21 PM
1

Most women prefer a 50/50 partner. How many women have you dated for over a year? How many have you lived with? Every been married? How many of your closest friends are women?
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:20 PM
1

What do you take contension with?
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:18 PM
1

This is about all women, not strictly feminists. So, which is it?
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:17 PM
1

In what way?
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:16 PM
1

You're deflecting.
/r/MensRights23/02/18 08:15 PM
-1

It's over 97% male.
/r/MensRights22/02/18 11:19 PM
-10

Horseshit. I'm way, way left and run in fat left circles. Almost all of the women I've encountered in those circles appreciate that I'm (mostly) masculine without being a shitty person (yes, it's possible). I repair and modify all of my own cars, I own my own detailing business, I enjoy watching sports (like boxing - can't get much more masculine than that), I can drywall, tile, do some minor carpentry, electrical work - you name it. I work out regularly, have facial hair, and cuss like a sailor…
/r/MensRights22/02/18 11:19 PM
5

You're speaking in absolutes, which is almost always incorrect. There are plenty of women who don't mind a man crying. Most of those even appreciate out because he's showing that he's human.
/r/MensRights22/02/18 11:07 PM
-7

But equally strange that we have seen only a very small number of female mass shooters in the States, so there is a point to be made. Between '82 and '17 the mass shooter demographics were 92 males, 2 females, and 1 couple. if you go back to '66 there were about 10 more - all male. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/mass-shootings-in-america/?utm_term=.b6a2fd3b7573 edit I love how I'm being downvoted for actually showing statistics that plainly show it's one sided.
/r/MensRights22/02/18 11:04 PM
3

This is nothing more than the result of rampant sexism - specifically, the idea that men are to protect women and that women are more valuable than men. Social engineering for real equality is the only thing that will stop things like this from happening.
/r/MensRights20/02/18 08:56 PM
1

Never go full Milo.
/r/MensRights16/02/18 01:07 PM
1

You don't "conjure up desired emotions". You have an emotion and you can decide whether or not to act on it. And, yes, every person alive has the capability to squelch unwanted emotions. Without question. It's just a matter of whether or not you desire to reign in your reactions or not. You can respond to the most disgusting sights, smells and thoughts with pure rational composure--because you don't even feel the disgust? No, because I can choose to react to the disgust or not. You're capable of…
/r/MensRights18/01/17 01:08 PM
1

Abso-fucking-lutely. That's the entire basis of humanity. If you can't do so then it's because you've never bothered to try and you are, then, no better than a dog.
/r/MensRights10/01/17 02:28 PM
1

In species that don't have the ability to reason to the extent that humans do? Sure. That answers both questions. Go read The Moral Animal and get back to me.
/r/MensRights10/01/17 02:13 PM
1

There is no emotional difference between men and women unless you implant one via indoctrination as children.
/r/MensRights06/01/17 01:29 PM
1

Non-human animals don't have the capacity to reason that humans do, so they don't even enter in to the picture here. I mean, if you want to compare humans to animals that haven't evolved past our earliest ancient ancestors, then feel free, but understand that no one with even a tiny smidgen of intellect is going to do anything but roll their eyes at you. The entire planet? Yes. All court systems are rigged in some fashion or other, because all governments are corrupt.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 04:43 PM
2

I don't think it makes any point at all except to show how the court systems are currently rigged. Most men don't even attempt to get custody because they can't afford the long, drawn out legal battle and are likely to lose anyway - it has nothing to do with their willingness to be the primary caregiver. So, again, you have made no point here at all.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 02:28 PM
3

That's true, however, that doesn't mean the kid is going to fall for that shit. I'm living proof of this. My ex got custody of our daughter when we divorced and her and her mom (my daughter's grandmother) did nothing but talk shit about me and my entire family to her. However, I stayed the course and spent 10 years scraping money together to get back to court for visitation rights - the judge in the divorce left visitation up to her 100% because she "seemed reasonable". She would do everything s…
/r/MensRights04/01/17 01:28 PM
1

Democrats aren't liberals. They're center-right. That's why you see right wing philosophy creeping in - it's because that's what they are. The only people calling the Democrats liberal are non-liberals.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 01:17 PM
2

the kind that as you said, fights the idea of the tender year doctrine because it is feminist Does that actually exist? I've never encountered a single feminist who actually attempted to fight such an idea. They pay excellent lip service to it being an anti-feminist concept and then do absolutely nothing about it, and instead fight tooth and nail against de facto shared parenting.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 01:15 PM
2

because the risk is low, and the pay is high I'm with you with everything you've said in this thread so far except this. Enlisted military pay is most definitely not "high". It's a meager existence of just barely scraping by paycheck to paycheck, even with free food, lodging, and healthcare.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 01:13 PM
3

That says nothing at all about capability, so you have not made a point here at all.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 01:07 PM
1

I'm mostly with this, but it's worth it note the following: I was born in 1968 in Pittsburgh, PA. There hasn't been one single bullet fired for my freedom by anyone since I was born.
/r/MensRights30/12/16 08:10 PM
1

The verdict is based on a bunch of things that aren't true. Which is entirely the point.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 01:39 PM
1

You apparently haven't spent any time around the courts, lawyers, or really anyone involved in the criminal justice system. Lawyers don't care who is telling the truth and who isn't. All they care about is winning their case. This is precisely why anything that is said in a courtroom is most likely not the truth.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 01:20 PM
1

?? I never said he should even be brought up on a charge of such. I merely said that it was a possibility. And, if I were a cop, that's an avenue I would pursue. It would likely die out quickly, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't even be considered. It's not like it doesn't happen.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 09:27 PM
1

No, there is definitely a greater chance that the father would have done something like this with friend than someone else who wasn't molesting her to begin with.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 09:18 PM
1

Surely - it's why I chose the words that I did. It's a chance, nothing more. Not even so much as an accusation.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 08:49 PM
8

Court decisions are simply court decisions. They aren't fact or non-fact. If you view anything that gets said inside of a courtroom as "fact" then you clearly don't understand how the criminal justice system works at all and are very, very naive.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 02:01 PM
6

Exactly. If her step-father was abusing her like that then there is a solid chance, him and the cop being friends, that he pimped her out to the cop.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 01:58 PM
2

Nah, not exactly. It was definitely tried, but no way is it ever going to pass. At least not in the next 50 years or so. And, once Trump appoints his SCOTUS justice(s) you can kiss any hope of that goodbye for probably even longer. They ruled on it once in favor of it being men-only and you can bet your ass that a SCOTUS stuffed with his picks will do the same.
/r/MensRights10/12/16 09:59 PM
3

Oh, no, the Senate actually passed the bill: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/us/politics/congress-women-military-draft.html But the House and Senate have to reach agreement on the bill before it can proceed. And you can bet your ass Trump will veto it. So, unless a whole lot of the GOP in both houses get together to override a Trump veto, it's not going to happen. Which means it isn't going to happen. This is a good summary of the situation: http://www.snopes.com/2016/06/29/women-must-register…
/r/MensRights10/12/16 09:46 PM
2

You must be doing some serious drugs. https://www.sss.gov/Registration/Women-And-Draft There is an attempt to change this that's been going back and forth between the Senate and the House, but you can bet your ass it isn't going to make it through under a Trump presidency.
/r/MensRights10/12/16 09:29 PM
1

I'm well aware - I've been an MRA for about 25 years. Things we can all agree are sexist: Family courts - they basically tell women that all they're good for is caring for children and men that they aren't needed to care for children. So, very obviously sexist in both directions. Genital mutilation - yes, there are some nutcase feminists out there who will say that this is no big deal when it comes to men, but they are few and far between. I know a lot of feminists because I have a ton of lesbia…
/r/MensRights10/12/16 08:34 PM
1

Totes the patriarchy!
/r/MensRights10/12/16 07:17 PM
3

Right? There is a shit ton of overlap between the two that you would think we could get together to get some things done.
/r/MensRights10/12/16 07:16 PM
3

Jesus. Those two are morons.
/r/MensRights10/12/16 07:15 PM
1

What is she saying was sexual harassment? What was the content of the post(s) that she took issue with?
/r/MensRights10/12/16 07:10 PM
-6

Found the 13 year old.
/r/MensRights01/12/16 05:47 PM
3

Just out of curiosity: Who of you guys here has had a serious relationship with a woman just because the opportunity arose? Not because you loved them in any way, shape or form, or felt some kind of special connection to them, but because hell, they were just so darn easy to get? I did it often when I was young (48 now). I also saw literally dozens of military guys do exactly that when I was in the Navy. Men generally have such low opinions of themselves that they'll latch on the first girl that…
/r/MensRights22/09/16 11:38 PM
1

psssst... "sentence"
/r/MensRights18/07/16 11:57 PM
1

Exactly. That makes this the lead: "The trial of a man who served 28 years in prison for a rape he says he did not commit has been postponed for six months."
/r/MensRights18/07/16 12:27 PM
1

Point being: the "dream" bit of the story wasn't the lead in this article. Maybe you don't know what a "lead" is as far as news articles are concerned?
/r/MensRights16/07/16 02:06 PM
0

I know. Point being, the "dream" component wasn't their lead.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 12:00 PM
0

That isn't the same article that the OP linked the image of. The image OP linked is from the DailyMail, the one /u/unbelievablepeople posted is from the Denver Post.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 11:47 AM
1

This was in no way the case at this job. Weer essentially did the same work, but the supervisors took escalations. That was really the only difference.
/r/MensRights01/07/16 02:35 PM
2

At my last job I found out that I was making more than the guy who trained me, and he was a supervisor and I was just a line level employee. I kinda felt bad for him but, hey, I worked it hard. They wanted me, I knew it, and I wasn't taking less than what I wanted.
/r/MensRights29/06/16 06:41 PM
4

I never answer that question. I tell them to make me an offer and then I negotiate from there. I'm consistently one of the highest paid people in the department I work in, regardless of employer.
/r/MensRights29/06/16 05:31 PM
3

If it's just "women shouldn't be Ghostbusters" then they have a point. If the criticism is "this reboot sucks", then they can go fuck themselves.
/r/MensRights10/06/16 04:59 PM
1

I'm not assuming anything. I'm saying what often happens and stating that it very well could be happening here as well. And that's the entire point - it may sound genuine but that doesn't mean it is, and precisely why they put a hard age limit on these laws.
/r/MensRights05/06/16 03:44 PM
1

You do realize that people of all ages who have been raped have a hard time facing their accuser and talking about these things publicly/answering honestly, right?
/r/MensRights04/06/16 04:02 PM
1

If it were a simple matter of just asking them don't you think that that's how this would be playing out in the courts? You do realize that people of all ages who have been raped have a hard time facing their accuser and talking about these things publicly/answering honestly, right?
/r/MensRights04/06/16 04:02 PM
2

How would the courts go about determining if all of those variables are met to state that a teenager was capable of consenting?
/r/MensRights04/06/16 11:06 AM
0

If the teen "victim" was cool with it then 3-6 month in jail or something not too harsh for both genders. No. The teen isn't mentally developed enough to make that kind of choice/judgement in a scenario like this. The adult holds all of the power.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 12:25 PM
-6

Ah, I see, so you're an ephebophile. Fucking disgusting.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 05:33 PM
7

Yeah, girls are more mature. So, what you're saying is that if either a male or female at that age were to be held accountable for what they did, it should be the girls and not the boys. What the underage, mentally undeveloped child thinks about what happens isn't what's important - it means absolutely nothing. What's important is what the adult did, knowing it was wrong. It's also important to note that the boy would flaunt it and the girl would feel ashamed because of the way we raise our chil…
/r/MensRights01/06/16 05:21 PM
14

Flip the genders and let's see if you feel the same way.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 05:12 PM
141

No one is blaming the kid. That's entirely the point.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 05:10 PM
1

No one said anything about a new trial - there is an appeals system.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 12:20 PM
2

Non-sequitur?
/r/MensRights17/03/16 05:01 PM
-1

Wrong. There could be an appeal and you could be found guilty. You cannot be proven innocent - this is, very specifically, not possible.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 05:00 PM
-9

He wasn't found innocent. He was found "not guilty". This is just poor reporting. The two things are not the same.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 12:57 PM
1

It's in the linked article...
/r/MensRights11/03/16 01:54 PM
3

Yeah, but the rest of their positions are pretty much batshit insane. Like they want to legalize necrophilia and incest.
/r/MensRights10/03/16 06:46 PM
0

Well, that's just like, your opinion man. http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/police-are-three-times-more-likely-kill-black-person-white-one-when-will-madness And a pretty uninformed one, at that.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 12:33 AM
-3

There was not psychotic or sociopathic about that. What is psychotic is not having enough empathy to understand what it is that they're protesting. Let me explain it to you like this: Bob is sitting at the dinner table. Everyone else gets a plate of food except Bob. Bob says "Bob deserves food." Everyone at the table responds with "Everyone deserves food" and continues eating. Although "everyone deserves food" is a true statement, it does nothing to actually rectify the fact that Bob has no food…
/r/MensRights02/03/16 08:04 PM
1

There is nothing shocking about non-violent protest.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 07:06 PM
6

And now everyone knows why people avoid blacks That was you, yeah? So you're a racist.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 07:04 PM
-4

He works for breitbart. Who cares? Nothing they publish is worth even half a thought. Absolutely brainless propaganda worse than Fox News.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 02:52 PM
1

That's why they say "suggests", which is a correct assessment. Still kinda CNN-like to report on something that might be.
/r/MensRights14/02/16 03:17 PM
2

My kid is in college - I am not overestimating the standards. Hell, she's in community college finishing up her Associate's and even there this guy would fail for that paper.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 02:57 PM
2

I definitely didn't see any bullying in the blog post, but it was written so incredibly poorly, replete with spelling and grammatical errors, that there was no way this guy was ever graduating from college.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 01:57 PM
-7

Here's how your sure this isn't entirely honest: There's no link to the actual document.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 09:26 PM
0

Why would you link to shitty breitbart instead of the source?
/r/MensRights28/01/16 02:32 PM
1

It's still statutory rape. http://www.thehoffmanfirm.net/statutory-rape.html Not a false conviction.
/r/MensRights05/12/15 03:29 PM
1

I grew up on the East Coast of the U.S., specifically in the mid-atlantic region. I had no idea what unmolested space was until I met my wife, who was living in Kansas at the time. I had mostly lived between western Pennsylvania, Maryland, and the eastern part of Virginia with a brief stint in New Jersey. To give you an idea of what that's like, check out this map: http://statchatva.org/files/2015/11/Northeast-Corridor2-991x1024.jpg It's just one giant city from Washington D.C. (around which I s…
/r/MensRights25/11/15 03:35 PM
1

Yeah, Australia is one of the few other countries where I figured this would be similar. That 6 hours between Austin and Dallas is also really just "a few towns over". There isn't fuck all for long stretches of that drive - especially if I take the state route instead of the federal highway (281 vs. 35, in case you bother to look at a map).
/r/MensRights25/11/15 02:30 PM
1

Yeah, "over there". Do you realize how big the states actually are? I live in the center of Texas - it takes me over 6 hours just to get out of the state. For most of the rest of the world that's like a country and a half away.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 02:27 AM
3

I decided a long, long time ago that it served no purposed to pull punches with my parents - I'm glad someone else decided the same. People who truly care about each other call each other on their shit.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 06:36 PM
-1

Everything that breitbart publishes is questionable, at best. You can't trust one single word they print or a single second of a video they create. They're about as trustworthy as Huffington Post or World News Daily. That is to say - not at all. If you show that you read them at all then you show yourself to be a not very smart person. If you want to maintain credibility and not turn people off completely right off the bat, linking to the original article instead of insane breitbart would seem p…
/r/MensRights17/10/15 12:50 PM
-16

breitbart? Seriously? I'm starting to taking this movement less and less seriously by the day, and I've been involved since the late 80s.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 08:58 PM
1

Because the husband still isn't subservient no matter how you slice it, probably.
/r/MensRights28/06/15 03:21 PM
0

It attempts to define "sexual immorality", and in so doing is "ew sex" except for when between a married man and woman, and it subjugates women to their husbands. So it's 99.9999999999999% "ew sex". Let's just call it 100% then.
/r/MensRights26/06/15 07:38 PM
1

I'm pretty sure "ew, sex" was introduced by the Abrahamic religions (and therefore by men) way before feminism was even a word.
/r/MensRights24/06/15 07:59 PM
1

Tell me about it. My daughter is almost 21, I pay her car insurance every month as she's going to community college. I call her every Sunday and she answers the phone maybe once every 6 weeks or so (we live nearly 1600 miles apart). I bought her a car this past year for Christmas (used, older Honda Fit). No thank yous, no Happy Father's Day. No Happy Birthday. Nothing. At this point I'm just waiting to die. It really couldn't happen soon enough. My time here is without worth.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 03:01 PM
5

I miss my baby girl and I know I'm not going to hear from her this Father's Day, just like all of the others.
/r/MensRights21/06/15 08:58 PM
1

Touche, mon frer, touche.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 02:41 PM
1

I guess it was the overall tone... you seemed to be asking rhetorical questions as if they were examples of things that people would never do.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 02:23 PM
1

Then why did you table the question as if people don't? confuzzled
/r/MensRights16/06/15 01:33 PM
1

It could be a sign of true character, yes. We definitely know that the former is true, however.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 01:32 PM
4

He decided to stay classy because he doesn't need to give that segment of the populace any more ammo and he has a reputation to uphold in order to make money.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 10:28 PM
8

Do you commission a novelist to write you a poem? Do you request a water colour painter to sketch you with charcoal? Do you ask a carpenter to chisel you a stone bust? Yes, people do this sort of shit all the time. For example: I'm a network engineer so every one automatically assumes that I can fix all of their computer/phone/tablet problems.
/r/MensRights15/06/15 10:11 PM
1

The book is amazing. I've given it to all the women in my life, and they all took something away from it. Well worth it.
/r/MensRights09/06/15 10:31 PM
1

My wife is the beneficiary of years of practice. We swing and I'm still the only one who's ever made her orgasm - not even other ladies have been able to.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 10:51 PM
1

Because the milk is awesome and you can have it all to yourself?
/r/MensRights18/05/15 10:50 PM
-2

P.S. "you're" You are correct though... my back hair pretty much flows right in to my ass hair.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 09:11 PM
0

Women don't marry for sex or love. They marry for resources. What this means is that you see all women as materialistic. Remember that the next time someone tries to lay a stereotype on all men and you get all in a twist about it.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 09:10 PM
-1

I'm really not sure how you got that from "you ought to be able to tell a real orgasm from a fake one". What that implies is: If you were able to tell the difference then if your girlfriend were faking them then you would know and you would either be able to work it out with her or move on. Conversely if you were able to tell the difference and she is having orgasms then the likelihood of the sex ending after marriage is almost nil.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 09:09 PM
-7

If the sex ends the day after the honeymoon then you had no idea how to tell a fake orgasm from an actual orgasm, and that's your problem.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 07:35 PM
-13

I'm sorry, but you can't blame me for your inability to comprehend what you're reading. Well, you can, but you'll just look like an even bigger ass than you already do.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 06:34 PM
-11

No, your reading comprehension skills just aren't that great.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 06:17 PM
-12

No, I didn't miss the point at all. I made a counter point.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 05:12 PM
-13

Number 1 is utter garbage. Why wouldn't you marry someone that you continually have awesome sex with? I've never understood that mindset. One of the major reasons I married my wife is because we're so damned sexually compatible.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 04:47 PM
11

I've been reading this all over the news, so I'm not sure what you're on about.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 03:53 PM
-5

So you think fascism is defined by foreign invasion. No. If you could read you would understand that I said that it is a product of fascism. So you're just going to flat out ignore the wiki article that tells you you are wrong? Um, yes. Wiki isn't the be-all-to-end-all, and its sourced references were sparse and not anything that any PoliSci major would be able to use as reference material for anything other than a laugh. There is nothing "ostensibly" liberal about the American Democratic party …
/r/MensRights01/03/15 11:41 PM
-6

If you believe in military foreign invasion, you are not a liberal. You are a fascist, and fascism is not liberal. And, no, I'm nearly 47. Most definitely not newly liberal. I got the idea that it was conservatism from history and spending a few decades on this planet. Tony Blair - not liberal. No one in the U.K. considers him a liberal - and especially not the uber leftist circle that I have some very, very good friends in over across the pond. And, yes, I understand fascism quite well. Fascism…
/r/MensRights01/03/15 11:21 PM
-9

Yeah, there are literally zero liberal people who would support this. Foreign intervention isn't a liberal thing. I do like how they give the American Democratic part as an example. The problem is that the Democratic party isn't liberal in any way. And, no, we shouldn't be using our military to make the rest of the world do what we want it to, you fascist. War hawk = fascist = conservative.
/r/MensRights01/03/15 10:49 PM
-4

You need to get your facts straight. Firstly, Democrats are not liberals. Some Democrats are liberals, but not all liberals are Democrats. There isn't a person alive with actual liberal values that would support Hillary - she's a war hawk, which is very much not liberal. She's also cozy with Wall Street - not liberal. She's pretty much Reagan in female form. Scott Walker, on the other hand, who is a moron who absolutely destroyed the economy of his state and rolled back worker's rights about 100…
/r/MensRights01/03/15 09:39 PM
0

Yeah, don't think so.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 05:56 PM
0

You started with intellectual dishonesty, so I can safely assume that everything else you wrote follows suit.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 05:55 PM
1

I think that "useful" is debatable.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 05:53 PM
-5

The liberalism that allowed for women's suffrage without men's responsibilities I'm not reading anything you wrote after this. It's not like, at the time, women would have ever been allowed to serve in the military or, really, do any of the jobs or take on any of the roles that men traditionally did at that point. You're just being intellectually dishonest.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 12:15 AM
8

Angry Harry, definitely. Zed is ringing a bell but I can't really place it. Zenpriest I'm not familiar with. Lee Rancouter - I can't even scare anything up on google about. Your litmus test essentially means nothing though. It's like some hipster trying to prove his credibility naming off his favorite bands and expressing disdain if you don't know them.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 12:13 AM
-7

Ok. Whatever you say.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 12:05 AM
1

Because they recognize that liberalism created the problem and more liberalism isn't going to fix it. Hilarious. Liberalism in the U.S. hasn't had a political voice for over 40 years. Maybe you can explain to me how this happened, because so far you aren't making much sense. But go ahead and keep thinking that the MRM is "feminism for men" and see how far that gets you. I never said anything even remotely like that. For one, I don't think the MRM sees men as persecuted or victims the way that fe…
/r/MensRights16/12/14 12:01 AM
-5

The way they just plain old make up statistics out of thin air and turn everything in to a fear mongering campaign. Straight out of the far right GOP playbook.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:57 PM
1

I've even offered to entertain your argument with an open mind. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA You did no such thing, ever. Wow, now you resort to just plain old lying. I haven't called you a moron, or a bigot. You're plain old making shit up. Someone else may have, but it wasn't me. Keep trying though, tough guy. One day you might put a cogent argument together.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:55 PM
0

The irony of you telling me that the left co-opted a movement when you fully admitted that conservatives did just that is pretty much what lands you in SRS land.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:54 PM
0

You know, you can keep making these accusations, but it won't make them true. Of course they won't. You can't make something true that is true. It doesn't matter what was or wasn't accomplished. You conservative types jumped on the bandwagon when it hit your wallet. End of story. You calling me a blowhard is hilarious. The amount of projection you're spewing here is just... well, at this point it's hilarious. You can't handle the truth and you're all pissed off about it. Cry me a river, SRS trol…
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:40 PM
0

Out of curiosity, have you read the other posts I've made in response to you?
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:37 PM
0

Oh, I've stated precisely why elsewhere, and you know it. You also know you're a little bandwagon jumper and didn't get involved until it meant money.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:23 PM
0

You're the pretender here, bandwagon friend.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:20 PM
1

The warren Farrel types started this movement...sort of. No sort of, they did. So at least you can now admit that it not only started as a left wing movement, but it still is today. And you talking about lefties "jumping on the bandwagon"... Friend, let me tell you something - it's you conservatives who finally jumped on the bandwagon, not the other way 'round. That's a fact. You had no interest in this movement or any other equality movement until it started really hitting your wallets in the l…
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:18 PM
0

No one believes you, tough guy.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:12 PM
-2

Look, troll, just give it up. It's painfully obvious you haven't even the vaguest clue what you're talking about. 20 years active in the MRM and you didn't even have a reddit account until a year ago, with this being one of the focal points of the MRM? Yeah, whatever you say, tough guy.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:06 PM
2

...knowing that the leftist version of property rights amounts to 'it all belongs to the State'. LMAO!!! Where do you get this from? As to your deep knowledge of the history of the MRM, perhaps you had a different handle in the old days? I don't recognize you at all, and I've been active for about 20 years now. I've been posting here for about 6-ish years, although not all that frequently in the past 2 years or so. I've been involved for well over 20 years at this point. The movement basically s…
/r/MensRights15/12/14 11:00 PM
1

Really, we don't need your negativity and divisiveness in this movement. I hear SRS has a place for you types.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 10:54 PM
-1

Of course it's not all bad, but at this point it's mostly bad. It pisses me off to no end that they start campaigns about shit like trying to get men to close their legs on the subway/bus, but here are all these seriously oppressed brown women in other countries and they aren't doing fuck all about it. I think feminism was a once great and necessary movement, and then we took money from public schools and started teaching the test instead of just teaching, and this is why some seriously under-ed…
/r/MensRights15/12/14 10:53 PM
0

Of course not. sigh
/r/MensRights15/12/14 10:51 PM
7

Feminism is the primary force against gender equality right now. I'm pretty far left, and I'm here to tell you that feminism has gone off the right wing deep end.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 10:24 PM
2

The 'cutting edge' of 'far left politics' is equality before the law, property rights, and personal autonomy? Always has been, yes. But the MRM is MUCH bigger than this place. This is actually one of the biggest gathering places for the MRM on the 'net, if not the biggest. If you don't think the MRM is about social justice, you've got another thing coming. Of course there are a plethora of SJWs on the right as well as on the left, but that's another conversation. Get over yourself - this is a le…
/r/MensRights15/12/14 10:19 PM
0

The people might not consider themselves to be left wing, but the movement is most definitely on the cutting edge of far left politics. This is precisely how every equality movement has evolved, and this one is no different. I know you conservative folks don't like to hear it, but you're fighting a left wing fight.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 10:09 PM
0

Glad to know there's someone in the party that understands that the MRM is left wing and is willing to promote it. I'm sorry, however, that you had to go through this. I'm guessing no one called the police on her and charged her with assault?
/r/MensRights15/12/14 08:42 PM
1

Well, I'm glad I could provide some amusement for you. Here's to you, Mr. Partisan Hack Man...
/r/MensRights14/12/14 05:12 PM
1

Or from people who are willing to call you out on your shit.
/r/MensRights14/12/14 03:07 PM
0

Sorry, that wasn't logically sound. I know it is in your head because you really, really want it to be, but that doesn't make it so. If there's one thing I'm not, it's partisan. Fucking hilarious to suggest that I am. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2ornia/great_post_from_r4chan_about_sjws/cmqa99o
/r/MensRights10/12/14 11:36 PM
0

It wasn't an argument. It was as statement. Man, you really suck at this, don't you?
/r/MensRights10/12/14 10:18 PM
1

I guess you think fag still means cigarette in this country too. No-sequitur. The term SJW was created for a reason, and it has a specific meaning. Correct. And I quoted that meaning, and it proves you to be wrong, clown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5PHaLmIyMc
/r/MensRights10/12/14 10:16 PM
0

You can keep thinking that, and you can keep being wrong. It's all good in the 'hood. Fuckin' clown. Are your mom & dad Bozo & Clara?
/r/MensRights10/12/14 09:52 PM
1

You can keep thinking that, and you can keep being wrong.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 09:52 PM
1

Because that totally has something to do with this conversation.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 09:44 PM
0

You are a partisan hack. The Tea Party are SJWs. You don't understand how the term is used and you're just trying to apply it to liberals because you don't want "conservative" and "SJW" to be similar.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 09:44 PM
1

Being concerned with social issues makes one a Social Justice Warrior. The Tea Party concerns themselves with social issues, and the movement as a whole concerns itself with those issues, making them SJWs. You can keep denying it, and you can keep being wrong.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 09:43 PM
1

You and me both. It's what you get when a movement gets invaded by a bunch of low-brow, conservative dicks.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 09:42 PM
1

Not according to the definition of an SJW.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 09:41 PM
0

Maybe you should try a sentence that makes sense. The answer to "What are you?" would never be an age.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 09:40 PM
2

Most likely a Libertarian, which means conservative, even if you don't like it.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 09:40 PM
1

Or maybe someone should just admit they're a partisan hack.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 09:37 PM
2

They're also anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti marriage equality - all social issues, which makes them SJWs, simpleton.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 12:37 AM
-4

What exactly is the point you're trying to make here, because you're an obvious Liberal on a witch hunt trying to pigeon hole someone else with a label, Man, this is one of the funniest, most ironic things I have ever read. You're a clown. I can't even read anything else you wrote after that. You told me to check your post history, I did, and found exactly what I said I found, then you try to backpedal like the clowning little weasel that you are. Fuck off, troll. The entire Tea Party are SJWs, …
/r/MensRights10/12/14 12:35 AM
-2

http://np.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/2oj86e/john_stewart_is_amazing/cmnufsx Really? Here's another gem: http://np.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/2oi926/my_dad_spent_16_years_turning_an_old_plantation/cmnipu7 While some of your premise I agree with there, they weren't slaves, they were indentured servants. And you could argue that they were treated worse than slaves because they cost money instead of being worth money, but it's typical Faux News misrepresentation and spin. "Ah, at least I understand…
/r/MensRights10/12/14 12:26 AM
-4

Your post history reads like a Faux News correspondent.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 12:21 AM
-1

Really? http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=SJW Social Justice Warrior. A pejorative term for an individual who repeatedly and vehemently engages in arguments on social justice on the Internet, often in a shallow or not well-thought-out way, for the purpose of raising their own personal reputation. It would seem that you don't know what an SJW is.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 12:17 AM
1

Keep saying denigrating things about "liberals" and then keep trying to convince people you're not a partisan hack. Seriously, how do you people get to be so amazingly ignorant? Is it on purpose?
/r/MensRights09/12/14 11:33 PM
1

The Tea Party are SJWs as well. As a matter of fact, you commenting on this makes you an SJW by the very definition of the term.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 11:32 PM
-6

The Tea Party are dyed-in-the-wool SJWs. This moron is trying to equate "liberal" and SJW (social justice warrior). And, for what it's worth, both feminists and MRAs could both be called SJWs. Especially here on reddit. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=social%20justice%20warrior In other words: It's a meaningless term that is basically just the latest pejorative used to lump everyone senselessly in to one group.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 11:31 PM
-18

I read about 3 sentences, said "This guy is a fucking moron who has no idea what he's talking about." and clicked "back" on my browser. If these are the types of nimrods the MRA movement wants to hold up as voices of "reason" then this movement is doomed. Dude sounds like he's just getting socially and politically active at about age 13.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 11:25 PM
1

I would be completely honest with my child. I would tell them that I support whatever decision they make, but here is the reality of it. I would finish the talk by again stating that I will support whatever decision they make. I'm a firm believer in arming your child with as much information as humanly possible so that they can make the most informed choice that they can.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 09:42 PM
1

Yes, precisely.
/r/MensRights12/11/14 04:20 PM
3

Agreed. I'm a die hard socialist and that whole thing just pisses me right off.
/r/MensRights11/11/14 07:29 PM
2

I'm with you on this, but do you have to link to that shitheel of a site Daily Caller? Why not link to the original in the WP?
/r/MensRights11/11/14 07:26 PM
3

Why is this idiot a friend?
/r/MensRights05/11/14 10:39 PM
1

What in the actual fuck?
/r/MensRights04/11/14 06:52 PM
3

Eat nothing but meat and veg for the next few months, as much red meat as possible, and blow those bathrooms the fuck up. They'll be male only by the time 45 days are up.
/r/MensRights03/11/14 11:54 PM
2

Hi, SRS.
/r/MensRights02/11/14 08:28 PM
-1

Which is why the entire Palin family still gets coverage.
/r/MensRights02/11/14 08:22 PM
1

I'm not disagreeing with you philosophically, but that just doesn't fly in the real world. The police have a warrant. They are going to arrest you. That's that. You go along with them or you pay the consequences. Personally, I like to be a dick about it and let them keep stacking up the charges against themselves. Just like them lumping charges on you, you can do the same to them. It's not as easy, but you can definitely do it.
/r/MensRights26/10/14 09:22 PM
5

i still wonder what he did to invoke a protective order in the first place (not that it matters regarding the false report, but it paints a picture of character and following [possible false] accusations toward police as well). Misandrist. No doubt about it. The woman lied about this, but you automatically assume she was telling the truth to get the protective order to begin with. Why wouldn't you automatically assume she was lying then, too?
/r/MensRights26/10/14 03:12 PM
3

In this case they had a warrant for his arrest, so if he resisted that in any way, even verbally, it could be considered "resisting arrest". And he was arrested for another charge - violation of a restraining order. Don't get me wrong - "resisting arrest" is way over utilized and there are cases in which people are charged with that and only that, and it's bullshit for the reasons you stated.
/r/MensRights26/10/14 03:07 PM
5

I was taught by my parents in the '60s to respect the police and look to them for help and protection. The police themselves have taught me they are not worthy of my respect and I need to protect myself. This right here. It was the 70s for me, but otherwise exactly the same.
/r/MensRights26/10/14 03:03 PM
7

i still wonder what he did to invoke a protective order in the first place (not that it matters regarding the false report, but it paints a picture of character and following [possible false] accusations toward police as well). Misandrist. No doubt about it. The woman lied about this, but you automatically assume she was telling the truth to get the protective order to begin with. Why wouldn't you automatically assume she was lying then, too?
/r/MensRights26/10/14 03:01 PM
1

I explained to you, in no uncertain terms, how your purposeful omission made it biased. There is no question here. What part of this is confusing to you?
/r/MensRights22/10/14 10:24 PM
3

You need to get this up to the administration. If they don't right the wrong then organize a school-wide walkout of all male students and get the media involved. At the same time you and your friend need to take your video evidence to the police and file assault charges on the girl.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 10:11 PM
1

I think it is institutional given that the school has not publicly sided with Timothy and has not instituted a policy to address something that was bound to occur. If their stance is to let the students decide for themselves then it is not institutional. To be institutional it has to be actively enforced by the institution. I did not post this thread. Someone else did. You said it was your blog post. I quoted from the New York Times in my blog post. That was you, wasn't it? I did post a link to …
/r/MensRights22/10/14 06:00 PM
5

Why does it matter?
/r/MensRights22/10/14 05:53 PM
1

And it means that there isn't any patriarchy or rape culture.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 05:48 PM
2

I once, dressed as Ron Jeremy with a 3 foot plushy dong under my robe, went to a Halloween party full of transgendered folks and lesbians. I won "scariest costume". It was absolutely hilarious. /end tangent
/r/MensRights22/10/14 05:46 PM
2

The Times tries to be more nuanced, however, there is no way of doing it that does not sound like pandering. That's not true at all. You made it sound like something the institution did, but it wasn't institutional - that's a nuance that you very clearly concealed by not just linking directly to the NYT article instead of your, now very obviously, biased blog. And, as I said: It's still fucked up, so there's no need to spin it in this way.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 03:49 PM
1

It was the students themselves who rebelled against Boatwright being the MAC. The blog post isn't entirely accurate and full of spin as it bases it's writing on an article from the ultra-conservative National Review Online, which was short on details - very obviously on purpose. It's still fucked up, so there's no need to spin it in this way. Here is an article with much less bias and more nuance. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/magazine/when-women-become-men-at-wellesley-college.html?_r=0
/r/MensRights22/10/14 02:09 PM
3

"median" means nothing here, really. It's adding up the salaries of all women and dividing by the number of women, and same for men. It says nothing about whether or not they're working equal hours, working similar jobs, or anything of the sort.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 04:57 PM
1

Maybe keep it relevant to the discussion?
/r/MensRights15/10/14 04:49 PM
1

First, feminism keeps claiming that it isn't just about helping women. If it was only about helping women and was honest about it, it wouldn't be a big deal, that's how groups work. But it isn't, how many times have I been told that feminism is about helping both women and men. I don't give a shit what feminism says about itself - I'm talking about reality. I completely understand feminism wanting to focus on unique women's issues. We all know they aren't honest about it. You're not adding anyth…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 04:12 PM
1

I'm not disagreeing, but I think each demographic has both overlapping and unique concerns. Feminism should, in my opinion, address those issues that are unique to women.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 03:45 PM
1

I think you've read me entirely wrong. I'm no fan of modern feminism. ...is that it reinforces the idea that women and only women in third world countries are victimized and men are not. No, it doesn't. The point has been that the current incarnation of feminism doesn't give a rats ass about the hard issues that women deal with around the world - it only cares about relatively small items that white western women deal with. As the conversation was about what feminism does and doesn't do then you…
/r/MensRights15/10/14 02:23 PM
1

Well, this explains why you don't mull any of this over in your own head before you spout bullshit.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 09:22 PM
1

Now you are just lying. A fact isn't a lie. He isn't trying to choose what major. He's telling her what she may not major in. Huge difference. Zero difference. A job with a basic degree in film averages about $25k per year IF you can find a job in that business. So, you just admitted defeat because you kept the same line of reasoning. I rarely find people this stupid, but here you are. Again, you are lying. Show me exactly where I said it. I just did. No, it's knowing what is not in the best int…
/r/MensRights14/10/14 08:20 PM
1

He is happy to pay for her education. No, he isn't. He's happy to pay for the education that he chooses, which completely ignores who she is as a person. ... a stupid major that gives her next-to-no employment choices nor adequate income. I outlined quite plainly how this is a complete bullshit line of reasoning. It's not valid, stop using it. If you keep using it you're doing nothing short of admitting that you have no idea what you're talking about and forfeiting the argument completely. He an…
/r/MensRights14/10/14 08:05 PM
2

Literally have. I worked as part of recruiting efforts for a Fortune 250 company and in my department they shrugged off non-business/STEM fields immediately. No, you haven't. Unless you were hiring for STEM jobs. notice how you're admitting UG/Arts is useless No, I'm not. Read the links and then maybe you'll get it. I'm not really counting on it though as you're obviously an anti-intellectual with no actual real-world experience. Yes, that's right, you're just plain old making shit up.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 07:04 PM
0

No, he is not going back on his word. He is limiting her choices. In this case - same difference. I believe it makes him a great Father. Which is what makes you a dick. My money, my decision. See above. You're an anti-intellectual, small minded, control freak of an asshole. Seriously. So is this dude we're discussing. Doing what you know is best for someone is love. When it comes to someone else's adult education you don't know what's best for them. You might think you do, but you don't.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 07:03 PM
1

I've sat in interviews and heard people go, "lol nah, <arts degree>" and toss resumes. No you haven't. That's simply a bold-faced lie. Forbes states... And I specified that engineering and medical type degrees are a different animal, so Forbes agrees with me 100% across the board. And then you go on to just talk some shit that is completely made up so can be ignored completely. You have no argument. They don't go to Arts UG/Arts and then work in medicine. Who said they did? You need a medical de…
/r/MensRights14/10/14 06:14 PM
0

And he is correcting that problem now with the ultimatum. He's going back on his word is what he's doing. It's his money. That means it does not leave his bank account unless he agrees. which is what makes him a dick. Yes, it is an investment. No, it is not. See the links I posted elsewhere for detail. No one should understand, respect, have compassion for nor listen to bad choices nor decisions that gambling away the future. Ah, because you're older you always know better, no matter what, right…
/r/MensRights14/10/14 06:11 PM
1

Unless she's coming from a top prospect film school then going to any other university to get a degree with very little marketability isn't wise. You do realize that only a very small percentage of people who get a college degree get a job in their field of major, yeah? However, regardless of what type of degree you get, you are very likely to start at a salary higher than that of your coworkers who did not get a degree even if the job isn't in your field of major study. That invalidates your en…
/r/MensRights14/10/14 04:35 PM
-2

If it's her education why can't she choose it? You haven't given a good answer to that yet. Education is not an investment. So, let's just throw out that completely stupid argument right now, shall we?
/r/MensRights14/10/14 04:34 PM
1

He may not have completely thought this through prior to now... That's his problem. He's older and he should have known that his kid was fully capable of choosing a career that he didn't think was a good one. And, honestly, having a bone to pick with your kid over their career choice is a dick move to begin with. You outline why you think it's a bad idea and then you support whatever decision they make with the knowledge that you imparted to them. They aren't always going to choose the way that …
/r/MensRights14/10/14 04:32 PM
0

Who's education is it? He's doing no one a favor. There is no such thing as a worthless education.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 04:23 PM
0

"They have it worse, therefore yours are illegitimate." Except that no one is saying that. What's being said is "Theirs is worse, so let's quit sweating the small shit and deal with the greater issue."
/r/MensRights14/10/14 04:16 PM
-7

No, he's most definitely being a dick. Who's education is it?
/r/MensRights14/10/14 04:15 PM
2

No, she's not entitled to it, but if he told her he was going to pay for school and didn't add caveats and is now adding caveats, he's a dick, plain and simple. She is choosing with whimsy and emotion. Oh, horseshit. She's choosing what she wants to do. Any college degree is better than no college degree. Unless you're going for engineering or economics no one gives a shit what you actually have a degree in - just that you have one. You sound like a spoiled and petulant child who feels entitled …
/r/MensRights14/10/14 03:55 PM
4

Oh, really? I'm a far left liberal and an MRA. Men's Rights is about as bleeding edge liberal as you can possibly get.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 03:44 PM
2

Horse shit. https://www.google.com/search?{google:acceptedSuggestion}oq=aclu+sides+with+conservatives&{google:instantFieldTrialGroupParameter}sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=aclu+sides+with+conservatives&pws=0
/r/MensRights14/10/14 03:43 PM
1

The presumption of fitness as a parent shall only be rebutted upon a showing by clear and convincing evidence. The court shall support departures from equal parenting time with written findings of fact and conclusions of law. I fail to see the problem. There is a way, at the initial custody hearing, to state your case as to why shared parenting is not appropriate in your particular case. And this: 4) Parents that claim to be "fit" are allowed to automatically reopen their judgments and request h…
/r/MensRights14/10/14 03:33 PM
-4

Make no mistake about it, he's being a dick. What she decides to study is her business. If he wanted to pick her field of major he should have said so from the beginning. If he didn't then too bad. That's what you do as a parent.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 03:20 PM
-4

This argument is fallacious because it assumes that a bad thing doesn't matter because something else is worse. No, it doesn't. It correctly states that some things are trvial compared to others - not that they don't matter at all. It's trying to push for fighting for those who need it most. When that is done we can deal with the smaller issues.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 03:13 PM
0

I've been trying to tell people this for 20 years.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 03:11 PM
0

You keep telling yourself that. One day you might even believe it.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 05:21 PM
1

I didn't say that the practice was OK, I'm just saying it isn't the norm. I hate it when they do this for cops, too, but it doesn't have shit to do with the topic at hand. I would argue that you don't actually know any teachers.
/r/MensRights06/10/14 04:25 PM
1

I've been working in IT for the last 15 years, and I'm here to tell you that you're just plain old wrong.
/r/MensRights06/10/14 04:24 PM
1

You have no idea what you're talking about. They have to spend their paltry salaries buying supplies for their classrooms and they often work 60+ hour weeks.
/r/MensRights06/10/14 04:24 PM
2

What does people on paid administrative leave have to do with anything?
/r/MensRights05/10/14 11:01 PM
2

If you think teachers are done working at the end of the school day and don't do fuck all job related on weekends then you have another thing coming.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 09:15 PM
7

Women leave IT for the same reason that men do - there are always a few thousand people ready to take your job when you leave, so the employers don't have to do fuck all to keep you happy.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 09:14 PM
1

Since I took Jon's quote as raising a point that the media always asks what the girl was doing "wrong" before she was assaulted, but never questions what was wrong with her attacker... I haven't seen the media do this since the 80s. Do you have recent examples? ...I thought there was an implication that whatever happens is her/his own fault when a person makes poor decisions. No. Some (obviously depends on the circumstance) do share some of the blame for what happened, however - a small percenta…
/r/MensRights24/09/14 07:01 PM
1

...she doesn't deserve to be raped. Where are you getting that people believe that she does? Is it their fault if some shitbag decides to have their way with them while they are passed out/incoherent? No one is saying that it is. Normal people don't think like that. Which is why it isn't being questioned - the answer is: because they're fucked in the head. We don't really need to ask.
/r/MensRights24/09/14 04:08 PM
1

Who ever said that rapists shouldn't be held accountable?
/r/MensRights24/09/14 01:12 PM
1

In the feminist world being "intimidating" is spin for "unpleasant to be around".
/r/MensRights14/09/14 05:17 PM
-1

I see a lot of people in this thread noting that this should get more attention and that we need to be done with "bottom trawling", and I agree. It's time then, gents, to stop voting that shit up. Vote up the things that matter. Spend time on the "new" page.
/r/MensRights03/09/14 05:19 PM
10

Both valid points. Thanks to the both of you for discussing this rationally and making cogent arguments.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 05:39 PM
12

No one even remotely alluded to that not being the case.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 05:37 PM
0

Correct.
/r/MensRights01/09/14 01:22 PM
-5

It's nothing like that here at all. I've never seen a male/female designation for any barbershop or hairstylist ever. Curves is a gym that caters to female clientele. It's pretty unfair of women to try to elbow in to a space like this and scream discrimination while not doing so about Curves. The point I was making to TheRabid, however, is that this isn't about Curves. It's about a single barbershop. In this particular case I think they were pretty silly as she wanted a men's hair cut, so what's…
/r/MensRights31/08/14 08:42 PM
0

Just because Curves exists doesn't make the practice right. What part of that is confusing to you?
/r/MensRights31/08/14 07:50 PM
-17

No, it isn't. This is about a barber shop that refused to cut the hair of a woman. If you have issues with Curves, then take them up appropriately. By making this argument you are treading very close to the irrelevance fallacy. Just because Curves exists doesn't make the practice right.
/r/MensRights31/08/14 07:41 PM
-22

Those aren't at issue here. Stay on topic.
/r/MensRights31/08/14 07:21 PM
2

Ah, yeah, I suppose I should have thought of that.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 06:55 PM
1

This is how I try to be with my daughter, and I hope one day she also realizes it. Her mom and I split when my daughter was 3, so it's been nearly 17 years since we saw each other with any degree of regularity. Took me 10 of those years fighting in court to get an actual visitation schedule - before that the courts left it up to her mom. Needless to say her mom would gank visitation on the regular because she could. It's created an emotional chasm between my daughter and I. We talk often, but it…
/r/MensRights24/08/14 06:54 PM
6

He's a dick, likely needs to go see a shrink. Why in the hell did she have the baby?
/r/MensRights24/08/14 06:48 PM
2

Wow... that is some chilling shit right there.
/r/MensRights19/08/14 02:00 PM
3

So, in the context of this thread, half of daycare would be part of that. You alluded to the non - custodial parent needing to pay all of the day care.
/r/MensRights13/08/14 05:20 PM
34

It's not supposed to pay for day care. It's supposed to pay for half of day care.
/r/MensRights12/08/14 09:16 PM
1

Is it an LLC? Yes. What is the purpose of an LLC? To separate the people from the business. A business cannot have a religion.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 05:18 PM
1

Corporations can't have a religion.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 03:02 PM
1

I guess if you can't figure out how the SCOTUS argued Roe v. Wade then there is no amount of explaining I can do that would help you understand. After all, it's right in their ruling.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 03:01 PM
1

It's not my genius. This is legal precedence that has already been set. If you know how the SCOTUS argued Roe v. Wade, then you know the correct way for the SCOTUS to argue this issue, as both issues deal with the same core item. I'm not here to educate you - go educate yourself.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 07:51 PM
1

Plan B is not an abortifacient. And you still don't have it. If you can't figure this out for yourself you have no business even discussing this topic.
/r/MensRights08/07/14 05:08 PM
1

What in the world are you talking about? No one is asking to have abortions paid for. You still don't seem to grasp the violation of our Constitution. Try again. Hint: It's in the Roe v. Wade decision, but it has nothing to so with abortion specifically.
/r/MensRights08/07/14 12:39 PM
1

If you don't already know this then you really don't know fuck all about U.S. SCOTUS history. I'll give you a hint: It's outlined in the case for Roe v. Wade.
/r/MensRights07/07/14 09:09 PM
1

except for a majority on the SCOTUS of course. They are all idiots, right? In this case (and, quite frankly, many others), yes, absolutely. They ignored prior legal precedence and the Constitution itself in this case.
/r/MensRights07/07/14 08:47 PM
3

Yes, I'm aware we're dealing with a separate legal entity - the point I am making is that just because a corporation is legally a separate entity does not imply that they have no or less rights, unless you believe rights are solely a product of legal fiat rather than something which human beings (and thus, as a consequence, the voluntary organizations they form) have by nature. Nope, sorry. A corporation is not a human being, so they can't have the rights that human beings do. Why is this so har…
/r/MensRights03/07/14 06:36 PM
1

Non-sequitur.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 06:34 PM
4

And the SCOTUS, on this one, is right out of their minds, and the reasons are painfully obvious to anyone with half a brain.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 01:48 PM
1

Completely untrue - that's the entire purpose of corporations. To form a corporation itself is a contract. Of course, they're not what they were ever supposed to be - they were only supposed to exist for as long as it took to get whatever work they were formed for completed and then terminated - all corporate contracts used to have time limitations. But I digress. Not having rights has nothing to do with the ability to enter in to a contract or not - the entity just needs to be legally recognize…
/r/MensRights03/07/14 01:47 PM
2

Firstly, this isn't about the owners of Hobby Lobby - it's about Hobby Lobby, which exists specifically so that the owners can't be held liable to things the company does, making them distinctly different entities. As well, the NYT is a news outlet and they very specifically have much more freedom of speech than everyone else. So, you're completely and utterly wrong in the first part. In the second part: Then why aren't they a 501c3? If they were all of this would be moot anyway.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 01:43 PM
1

I never said anything about contributions or anything like that. We're talking about a corporation having "rights", which it should not.
/r/MensRights02/07/14 03:52 PM
4

Congratulations for not understanding insurance and how it works.
/r/MensRights02/07/14 03:50 PM
1

If we just call it a "legal entity" then the entire idea of "corporate personhood" goes away. It's an amazingly stupid idea.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 09:44 PM
4

Apparently you've never been poor. I spent about 20 years not being able to scrounge up $50.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 09:39 PM
2

But they are by Hobby Lobby's insurance policy.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 09:32 PM
-4

What do you think "morning after" pills are?
/r/MensRights01/07/14 09:30 PM
3

All of the compensation that you receive from your employer, and benefits are included in your compensation package, is your money. That's what they're going to tell you when you interview and ask about all of your compensation, so they have no right to tell you what to do with the money that you earned.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 09:28 PM
5

Hobby Lobby isn't a citizen.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 09:26 PM
3

Hobby Lobby isn't paying for contraceptives to begin with. They purchase an insurance plan for their employees, and part of that plan is supposed to be coverage for prescriptions. As some forms of birth control are a prescription then they ought to be covered. The right that is violated is your right to a private relationship with you and your doctor. It shouldn't matter to Hobby Lobby what treatments you and your doctor feel are best for you. What happens when a company decides that a heart tra…
/r/MensRights01/07/14 09:26 PM
1

Yes, most definitely.
/r/MensRights21/06/14 01:07 PM
8

Have you see the politicians these places churn out? It really shouldn't be a big surprise.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 06:31 PM
2

I don't agree with your conclusion, but I agree that it's retarded.
/r/MensRights18/06/14 03:29 PM
2

I got to that point when I busted my ass to be in my daughter's life for 16 years and, upon her graduating from high school, just stopped talking to me completely. I was hoping she's want to make up for some missed time once she was old enough that her mom couldn't really fuck with our relationship, but it just didn't happen. Instead she just tossed me aside like yesterday's news.
/r/MensRights15/06/14 02:40 PM
1

It's been a building trend within feminism since the 1960s. It started getting a real voice within the movement in the 80s, and by the 90s was in the process of taking over the movement entirely.
/r/MensRights19/05/14 04:51 PM
1

In the world as a whole this statistic is false: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Global_demographics Obviously this will vary from country to country, so if you meant something more specific then maybe you should add a caveat to your statement.
/r/MensRights19/05/14 04:48 PM
0

This woman's obviously gone off the deep end. Then she and about 70% of modern feminists have as well. I would consider myself a feminist in the sense that I acknowledge that they are (at times) an oppressed minority. Well, you're half right. They are, at times, oppressed in some way. They are not, however, a minority - at least not in western countries. Furthermore, whatever individual feminists may say, the movement on the grand scale espouses this same rhetoric every time they fight against e…
/r/MensRights19/05/14 04:44 PM
2

THE GUARDIAN? Considers itself "an ethical cut above the rest"??!?! Seriously? IT seems to be more like Weekly World News than any reputable news outlet - and this is coming from a very far leftist.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 04:01 PM
41

Welcome to modern feminism.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 03:59 PM
9

At least the comments show how much people hate this idea. It's the only saving grace I could find in it.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 03:58 PM
1

You're unreasonably paranoid and need to seek the help of a professional therapist.
/r/MensRights16/05/14 10:22 PM
1

If you mean sperm, douching. Ah, I see you know absolutely zero about the female body. This conversation is over right there. You really need to go back to your 4th or 5th grade health/sex ed class. You aren't anywhere near equipped or qualified to have this conversation. A stance which you cement here: You had said "I pointed out that it is (at least partially) the fault of men." and that could similarly imply 'all' No, no it couldn't. The word "partially" is there for a reason. Do you know wha…
/r/MensRights16/05/14 08:05 PM
1

If you hold an object in your body that's definitely taking possession of it. Oh? And what method is there for expelling it? I don't think I said 'entirely' :) Oh, but you did: ...child murder is the fault of women... Nowhere in there did you even allude to it being a subset of women. Which is to say "all women". I view women as responsible for their reproductive systems, so of course it's their fault. You view women as being responsible for the result of sex, period. Which is entirely the probl…
/r/MensRights15/05/14 06:30 PM
1

I know that it would be incredibly difficult for me to go through that procedure. No, you don't. You imagine that it would be difficult. Until you're faced with that situation you really aren't sure how you're going to react - this is something my 46 years on this planet has taught me. I also know that in order to get the procedure you often have to face people calling you 'babykiller', etc. Possible, but far, far more rare than you think. And you didn't address the possible medical complication…
/r/MensRights13/05/14 02:15 PM
0

Well, if men could just read a woman's answer from her body language it wouldn't matter if she is straightforward or not Exactly my point. That quote from the article isn't true. It's not a defense mechanism. It's how women are raised - they are raised to be "pleasers", so just telling someone "no, I'm not interested" isn't really in their vocabulary. Because of the way women are raised they never want to cause someone distress, so they beat around the bush in situations like this.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 02:13 PM
1

1) you don't "take posession" of sperm during sex. How amazingly retarded. 2) No. It would make child murder partially the fault of women. 3) No, we call that "backpedaling". Your statement meant, quite plainly, it wasn't the fault of men at all.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 02:10 PM
2

Unfortunately a lot of Feminists have the idea that men are all the same. Ain't that the truth. And it's kind of funny because fully a third of their movement is about the world not recognizing each woman as her own individual, yet they adamantly refuse to do the same. It's the type of duplicitousness that I've come to expect from feminism in general.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 08:27 PM
-2

No, I alluded in the title of my post that this was a poor article - the reasons why are painfully obvious. However, even in something so bad we can glean something from it and use it to everyone's advantage. What I said is absolutely true, and the way I noted to fix it is also absolutely true.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 08:25 PM
-7

While I generally agree with you that this is kind of silly, there is a point to be made here. Men, in general, aren't raised to be terribly empathetic/sympathetic. Because of that and the fact that we are raised to be protectors, the only real body language that we read is for "fight or flight" purposes. We're not as in-tune with the breadth and scope of human emotions as women because, quite frankly, we're taught to just shut all that shit down. If this were not the case then the women wouldn'…
/r/MensRights10/05/14 04:55 PM
3

I agree - the issue is that they're framing it as a problem that only affects women.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 04:52 PM
1

1) document everything with times and dates. Everything that happens to the kid - every injury she sustains, the excuses given for it. Every foul or derogatory word the mother utters towards him and/or their child. Literally everything. If you can get any other evidence (pictures, video, other material evidence) then get it and file it with the written documentation. 2) hire a lawyer 3) he needs a place where he and his daughter will each have their own bedroom to sleep in. Until he has this cus…
/r/MensRights10/05/14 04:49 PM
1

Isn't everything on film in the UK? Just have your lawyer subpoena the film records.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 04:46 PM
5

In my experiences working for large corporations (Sprint/Worldcom in the late 90s, AOL in the early 00s, AT&T very recently, TimeWarner (formerly RoadRunner Internet, and The College Board (think AP classes and SAT) I have found that they are pretty much the safest places to work. No one seems to give a shit about feminism or political correctness. Unless you're in California.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 04:44 PM
3

It also lets you know who the idiots are in no uncertain terms.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 04:41 PM
2

This is precisely what I came here to ask.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 04:40 PM
1

No it isn't. I went over all the options earlier. Also, it's not "incredibly emotionally difficult". I've known at least a dozen women who have had them, one of them an ex of mine who aborted our child, so I'm intimately familiar. To claim that it is "incredibly emotionally difficult" is to admit that you haven't the foggiest idea what you're talking about. Can you even follow a conversation? You want men to be able to just walk away. Yes, because women can.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 10:42 PM
1

If feminism were actually a human rights group then you might have a point. I've demonstrated how they aren't. And, really, if they even bothered to fight for the rights of women in places like Africa and Afghanistan and Sudan then you might have a point. But they're arguing about a 9 cent difference in pay checks for white women in the western world, who are the most protected class that exists. Yeah, such a massive human rights record these past 30 years or so!! Are you feeling like an ass yet…
/r/MensRights09/05/14 10:21 PM
1

The position of being pregnant? No, the position of carrying the baby to term and getting rid of it. The only one that can make that decision is the woman. You know, the thing we've been discussing?
/r/MensRights09/05/14 10:19 PM
1

Both of her options are worse than his. That's your opinion. If you were a man faced with being forced to support a child that you didn't want, and stuck with it for the next 18 years, you might feel completely differently. Personally, I'd rather go through a year or two of shame and sadness. I've been down both paths (a girl had a kid of mine aborted and I've had to be an absent father of a child who is now in college). I would much, much rather just plain old lose a child than have to go throu…
/r/MensRights09/05/14 01:24 PM
1

He's right. Admit that you've been full of shit because of your own ingrained expectations and then maybe we can actually have a conversation. Until then you're nothing but a troll.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 01:21 PM
1

He did directly imply women shouldn't have the right to vote since they don't earn it like men who are forced to sign up for the draft, yes. I did not misinterpret it. No, he didn't, and yes, you did. He very plainly said the following: There are 3 views of the right to vote referenced in my post: men should have to earn it but women should not have to both men and women should have to earn it. neither men nor women should have to earn it. By earn it, I don't mean that you have to have served in…
/r/MensRights09/05/14 01:20 PM
2

It's honestly an (often infuriating) lifetime passion. It might even be an obsession. It comes from growing up under highly uneducated parents.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 01:08 PM
1

I didn't say anything about saying positive things about men on /r/feminism - I specifically said that if you challenge the feminist view (and especially if you use concrete facts, references, and statistics) then you'll get the ban hammer. They aren't interested in actually debating the facts - they just want to spin their propaganda over and over and over. Also, you got your ass handed to you in that mensrights link because you were purposefully misrepresenting what was being said and, in gene…
/r/MensRights08/05/14 06:21 PM
3

I find at least on the subreddit there is a lot less off-base blatant bashing of men than on here... Try voicing a dissenting opinion and see how quickly that changes. They won't necessarily bash you, but they'll drop the ban hammer on you so fast it's not even funny. They don't allow dissenting voices. I even had some banter with a guy that said women shouldn't have the right to vote where I was downvoted more than him... Yeah, sorry, I'm just not really buying that. It even says right in their…
/r/MensRights08/05/14 04:21 PM
4

I subscribe to both as well. I don't find the feminists terribly agreeable and was banned from posting in that sub simply because I posed questions to them (with proof) that challenged some of their belief structure.
/r/MensRights08/05/14 12:59 PM
11

Yeah, unfortunately people who actually identify as feminists (and this includes every single one I've ever talked to in my entire life) believe that "patriarchy" means "men have it easier in life because men run everything and they are actively trying to oppress women". edit Also, this is how wikipedia defines patriarchy: Patriarchy is a social system in which males are the primary authority figures central to social organization, occupying roles of political leadership, moral authority, and co…
/r/MensRights08/05/14 12:46 PM
11

This is actually true, although I can't claim I understand how it's possible. I dated a girl like this a while back. She was super sweet, thoughtful, intelligent, sexy... but she kept bringing up patriarchy (in a time where I couldn't find a job to save my life and went from making $60k/yr to under $20k/yr and was on the verge of bankruptcy). In the end I couldn't stand hearing about the Patriarchy. I explained to her how and why it has never benefit me to be a man and how the "patriarchy" is a …
/r/MensRights08/05/14 12:18 PM
2

Incorrect, it is the fault of a woman because it is her responsibility to keep her womb clear of debris. Both parties are responsible for what happens to the sperm. Sorry, bro, but you're just dead wrong here. That's THOSE men's fault. Man, you're really having a hard time putting this all together, aren't you? You said that it isn't the fault of men that women get called sluts for being sexually active. I pointed out that it is (at least partially) the fault of men. Sorry again here, bro, but I…
/r/MensRights07/05/14 02:09 PM
2

Why the fuck is this our problem when pregnancy is her fault? The pregnancy is the fault of both people, not one or the other. Not our fucking fault. C'mon man, be reasonable. It's at least partially our fault. There are certainly enough men who would label a woman a slut for engaging in sexual activity. If you want to sue someone for emotional damage for this shit then do it to the people actually saying it. I think that's pretty fair though.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 01:21 PM
1

Okay, she still has to deal with the emotional cost of being pregnant, as well as the medical bills, possible medical complications, and the general unpleasantness of pregnancy and childbirth. She decided to do so. That's her business. Then there's the emotional cost of giving her child away. See above. Plus the negative way people look at women who give their children up for adoption, calling them "horrible mothers", "selfish", etc. Oh, and on top of that, while she's single and pregnant she mi…
/r/MensRights06/05/14 01:19 PM
1

Ah, yes. I'm well familiar with the concept (and would like to see it legally enacted) but just hadn't seen that abbreviation before. Thanks for enlightening me.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 01:18 PM
1

What's LPS?
/r/MensRights05/05/14 10:26 PM
1

I'm qualified to say how traumatic it is: Not at all. Not for me, and not for her.
/r/MensRights05/05/14 10:25 PM
3

It's fair because she can have the baby, not name a father, and give it up for adoption, drop it off at a fire station (in states/counties that allow this), etc. Only when men get the right to a "financial abortion" will there be equality of choice.
/r/MensRights05/05/14 10:23 PM
0

Meh. The most the police will do is tell him not to lock his door. There is no down side.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 01:07 AM
1

If you live someplace expensive then move someplace cheap.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 05:46 PM
4

Install your own deadbolt on the inside of your bedroom door. NOt a fucking thing she can do about it.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 05:44 PM
6

Family law: Default shared custody, realistic child support guidelines, being able to claim your child as a dependent if you pay child support, paternity tests required for all births.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:50 PM
0

No. When the lid is up and you flush the toilet you spray the entire area with toilet water. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB-l05yiwvY
/r/MensRights31/01/14 01:59 PM
1

Personally, I can't stand a toilet left open at all. When you're done, drop the seat and the goddamned lid, you heathens. What do you think the lid is for, anyway?
/r/MensRights30/01/14 09:25 PM
1

Ah, well, that explains a lot. Thanks for trying though.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 06:34 PM
1

http://libcom.org/files/Woodcock,%20George%20-%20Anarchism,%20A%20History%20Of%20Libertarian%20Ideas%20And%20Movements.PDF http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Woodcock http://www.amazon.com/Anarchism-Documentary-History-Libertarian-Volume/dp/1551642506 http://attackthesystem.com/beyond-conservatism-reclaiming-the-radical-roots-of-libertarianism/ We can do this all day.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:44 PM
0

Holy shit you're hilarious! And you wonder why the Libertarian party can't gain any traction in the United States. Well, now you know why - you're idiots.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:39 PM
1

It would prove that you're too immature to even begin to have this conversation. Only the young, immature, inexperienced MRAs use "white knight" in any capacity. I've been doing this for going on 20 years. How about you?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:37 PM
0

I love that when presented with facts you still deny it. You really are a conservative, aren't you?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:34 PM
1

If that's what you want to think, that's fine. I don't mind when morons try to insult me.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:34 PM
0

Keep on thinking that. I don't mind. I'm still on top.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:30 PM
0

You're right. It is gold. Even with it right in front of you you refuse to see the association. Good job there, smart guy. You're wearing a clown nose, aren't you?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:28 PM
0

Ah, "white knighting"... and there we have it. You're under 25, aren't you?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:27 PM
0

The one wrong here is you, and you and I and everyone else knows it.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:17 PM
0

The one. It's the only one I ever use. The funny thing here is that you still think you're right. It's fucking hilarious.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:16 PM
0

Yup. It's right there in black and white.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:15 PM
-1

You owned nothing. I just owned you, friend. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke John Locke FRS (/ˈlɒk/; 29 August 1632 – 28 October 1704), widely known as the Father of Classical Liberalism Wheeeeee..... Or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#Individualist_anarchism Are we having fun yet? I sure am.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:12 PM
1

Not the etymological root, the English root. But, you know, you're educated and know the difference, right?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:07 PM
1

Sorry, alleged cheating. Where there's smoke, there's fire. Ah, so if you're girlfriend/wife/whatever accuses you of cheating, regardless of what happened, you're cheating. Is that what you're saying? Man, you are full of shit. And the MRA movement definitely doesn't need you.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:05 PM
0

I'm actually laughing hysterically at you. I went to the root word, genius.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:05 PM
0

The delusional one here is you - you can't even figure out how to use a dictionary. And you even have one with links so you don't have to think! Note that the definition you are using is #4 of 4, making it the least common use of the word. But hey, you know, remain stupid and sound like an idiot for as long as you like. Dumb as a box o' rocks - that's what you are.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:02 PM
0

How stupid can you be? http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assimilation 1 a : an act, process, or instance of assimilating b : the state of being assimilated What happens when you click on the link for "assimilated"? that's right, it takes you to the definition for "assimilate". Same thing with the link for "assimilating". Jesus christ, you are the most stubbornly ignorant person I've had the displeasure of trying to educate in quite some time.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 04:58 PM
-1

You're going to have to go do some research. You can start here and then move on to the footnoted texts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#History I think it's important to understand the terms you're using. If you don't then you're just spouting nonsense. Yes, you are definitely spouting nonsense, so you need to go figure out what you're talking about first.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 04:54 PM
0

Jesus, you're retarded. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assimilate as·sim·i·late verb \ə-ˈsi-mə-ˌlāt\ : to learn (something) so that it is fully understood and can be used Would you, for the love of all things holy, learn the fucking language that you seem to be trying to speak?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 03:00 PM
-1

Regardless of what people think and where they generally place their political affiliations, the movement of the minority to overcome the majority is, was, and always will be the domain of the far left.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 02:58 PM
0

If you notice the final divorce mentions nothing about infidelity, and neither party has actually admitted that it happened. If you think she "gave up" her children and that this makes her a shit-hell, then you think the same about every man who has ever not wanted or thought he should have primary custody and don't really belong in the MRA movement.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 02:57 PM
0

The Libertarian movement is an offshoot of the anarchist movement, so that's pretty far left.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 02:54 PM
0

How wrong you are - I dislike MSNBC for the same reason I dislike breitbart.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 02:53 PM
1

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assimilate First definition (therefor the most commonly used): to learn (something) so that it is fully understood and can be used Now, what was that you were saying, Mr. I Don't Understand The English Language? You, sir, have been bested - badly. Just give up now while one or two people have some respect for you.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 09:15 PM
-9

At least you're finally admitting your weakness. Assimilation isn't your strong point, I'm gathering. Have a job where you're just told what to do every day and no opportunity to think for yourself? Yeah, thought so.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 08:53 PM
-2

Congratulations for not being able to read. Good job, sucker!
/r/MensRights22/01/14 08:48 PM
-8

Breitbart has nothing to do with Republicans or Democrats. It's nothing but misquotes and misinformation, as evidenced by this hitpiece where they clearly didn't bother to read the source material. P.S. The MRA movement is about as far left wing as you can get. Feminism has crossed over in to right wing conservative territory, regardless of which party they have latched on to (it's not like the Democrats are leftist - they are just less right wing than the GOP).
/r/MensRights22/01/14 08:46 PM
8

Here's the source that breitbart cited: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/headlines/20140118-as-wendy-davis-touts-life-story-in-race-for-governor-key-facts-blurred.ece Over time, the Davises’ marriage was strained. In November 2003, Wendy Davis moved out. Jeff Davis said that was right around the time the final payment on their Harvard Law School loan was due. “It was ironic,” he said. “I made the last payment, and it was the next day she left.” Wendy Davis said that as a lawyer, she contr…
/r/MensRights22/01/14 07:41 PM
9

He filed for divorce. The loan was paid off while they were still married and before the divorce was finalized. Maybe you should actually read the source instead of that shit breitbart article. You can't actually expect journalistic integrity from them.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 07:27 PM
4

What do you expect from breitbart? That's all they publish.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 07:10 PM
12

It isn't. Check the source of shitheel breitbart. If you're downvoting this you're the reason people think the MRA movement is full of crazies. Just so you know. P.S. If you're downvoting this, you are crazy and sabotaging the movement. Please go fuck off with your ultra-conservative bullshit. The world passed you by 40 years ago.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 07:07 PM
4

The ones she's paying child support for as he has primary custody? Shut the fuck up. Seriously. You're making an ass of yourself.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 07:05 PM
1

I'm a Texan. The only thing great about this state would be Big Bend and it's audacity.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 07:04 PM
13

How do you know someone is losing a political argument? When they cite breitbart. FTFY.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 07:02 PM
6

Unless you actually check their source and see that they're completely full of shit.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 07:01 PM
8

Seriously... can we ban retard sites like breitbart?
/r/MensRights22/01/14 06:59 PM
14

Temporary suspension does not equal withdrawing from classes and refunds. It equals no refunds and a failed class.
/r/MensRights15/01/14 06:15 PM
25

Not exactly. It's "guilty unless you have the money not to be".
/r/MensRights15/01/14 04:54 PM
15

Why would you temporarily suspend someone based on an accusation? That's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights15/01/14 04:54 PM
2

You're going to lose part of that tax return. That's pretty much that. It sucks, but it's the way it is.
/r/MensRights14/01/14 07:58 PM
-1

Breitbart? Really?
/r/MensRights14/01/14 07:33 PM
1

No. However, the custody issue in question is sexism against both men and women. Women are assumed to be more nurturing and therefore the better caregiver, which is sexist towards women as certainly not all women are this way. Men are assumed to not be very nurturing and are therefore not the better caregiver, which is sexist towards men. It just so happens that, in this case, the sexism towards women more often than not results in a benefit for women instead of a deficit.
/r/MensRights10/01/14 04:55 PM
2

Not all the time, but definitely the vast majority. My older brother's ex-wife had primary custody of their daughter and he ended up winning custody. I will agree that it's far too rare for it to be this way, however.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 07:30 PM
1

Well, this was unexpected and well received: I asked above why I should bother to get on the rollercoaster ride of being the asker instead of the askee, and I think the reason it’s worth trying is the reason it’s worth trying many things that make you uncomfortable; empathy. Many times in my writing I ask men to try to understand how women feel out in the world, to take a walk in their shoes, to try on a different perspective to understand their own privilege. I believe exercising those empathy …
/r/MensRights08/01/14 06:21 PM
-1

Well, check out /u/CornyHoosier above, and I think we may get an indication of what they're talking about. Our western culture paints blatant staring as improper, so we're fairly furtive about it. This apparently isn't the case in India. I would argue that such impropriety cultivates a culture wherein women aren't valued as human beings, thereby making rape a less-than-awful crime, as we tend to attribute acts not committed against humans with mucher less severity.
/r/MensRights30/12/13 08:27 PM
3

What in the actual fuck? Why in the world did they drop the sexual assault charge?
/r/MensRights30/12/13 07:51 PM
2

Came to say the same thing, so +1.
/r/MensRights30/12/13 07:24 PM
2

I was wondering what happened to Fathers and Families! Thanks a ton man!
/r/MensRights27/12/13 05:43 PM
1

My favorites are to organizations doing research and protesting against parental alienation and lobbying for equity and reform in child custody. Do you have a few of those that you could link? I'd be interested in donating as well.
/r/MensRights27/12/13 05:35 PM
2

Except that I'm an MRA and have been for just shy of 20 years. How old are you? 18? 19? Fuck off.
/r/MensRights27/12/13 01:18 PM
5

"Say.. what's in this drink?" cough
/r/MensRights26/12/13 05:51 PM
4

You're both assholes. Who gives a shit?
/r/MensRights24/12/13 05:46 PM
2

Jesus. That's fucked up on a whole lot of levels.
/r/MensRights24/12/13 05:42 PM
1

I don't think that you can be ignorant and great at the same time.
/r/MensRights24/12/13 01:58 PM
1

They're both idiots. Dump the fool. They aren't smart enough to waste your time on.
/r/MensRights23/12/13 07:22 PM
2

For example, men who put other men down for liking feminine traits, or how male rape/molestation victims aren't treated with the same respect as female ones. While feminism does work to address these problems We do focus on these things in a very big way, and feminism does everything to deny that male rape/molestation is even a serious issue. There are those who do, but they are such a small minority that any time they speak up, they are over shadowed by the large majority and/or downvoted into …
/r/MensRights19/12/13 02:52 PM
3

It would be nice if there were anything even remotely factually correct in that thread.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 06:00 PM
3

This is what I came to say. As well, if they don't want you disciplining this child then one of them needs to do it. Let them know that it they won't then you will, and if they don't like it they can shove off. If your girlfriend is siding with them then she isn't a girlfriend worth having.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 05:55 PM
1

There must be something blocking the pic because I checked again and I'm still not seeing it.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 01:48 PM
1

As far as I'm concerned anyone who identifies as male is welcome here. I can't speak for everyone, but I hope that at least most who identify as MRAs would feel the same way.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 06:25 PM
1

I don't see any picture. Maybe adblock is blocking it.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 06:12 PM
1

What in that article would have led me to believe that this kid is black? I had to click on one of the links in that article to discover this: http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/24209980/student-suspended-for-a-year-for-hugging-teacher But I didn't do so until you started throwing a fit. I think you're way, way out of line here.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 06:06 PM
2

No shit. Especially a "surprise" hug from behind. I don't care if the student was male or female, this just seems strange and uncalled for.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 06:03 PM
1

Look, I'm as displeased with feminism as the rest of you. However, these lame attempts at trying to shame it by linking it with communism is just flat out retarded for several reasons - mostly because anyone conflating these two things is some dumb ass ultra conservative nitwit who has no idea what either of them actually are. It's easy to destroy feminism with facts - stop with the ham-handed psuedo-science bullshit.
/r/MensRights13/12/13 05:43 PM
1

I went through the same thing. I know how to talk to these people because I used to work in hotels. My wife had no clue, isn't girly in any way, and was happy to have me take the lead. No one wanted that though. They all assumed that she would be the ones holding the reins and that I would be taking a back seat. I felt it was disrespectful to both of us that they would automatically assume that because she has a vagina that she would be the one planning the wedding. Hell, I even wrote our entire…
/r/MensRights12/12/13 05:52 PM
0

You know damned well you got a warning that this was already posted before you posted it. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1sjm2b/as_it_turns_out_successful_women_are_embarrassed/
/r/MensRights11/12/13 08:05 PM
1

I basically agree with her, but for completely different reasons. Someone will eventually try to take it to far - but it's because they have mental issues, not simply because they're a man. If men offered the same service to women then some woman would eventually do the same damn thing - because she has mental issues.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 08:03 PM
2

I've circulated the book to many women in my wife, and they have all taken things away from it that they didn't know before and took it seriously.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 06:19 PM
3

Every time I hear her speak about this or read parts of the book I'm brought to tears by how accurate she is. It makes me both elated that someone who is not a man is finally taking notice of these issues and talking about them publicly and sad that we men are socialized by our mothers, fathers, relatives, and the institutions that we are raised in to shut our feelings down like this.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 06:18 PM
1

They drive company cars and don't wear uniforms. I'm willing to bet most, if not all, states require them to be bonded. The insurance thing is most likely out of those to really drive prices up.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 03:41 PM
1

Come to think of it, I wonder if it's because they need to be bonded?
/r/MensRights11/12/13 02:20 PM
1

We do, but it's just a little local company. I think they only have like 3 cars which equals 3 crews of two women each.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 02:08 PM
1

WTF? That place is hella expensive. Why the hell out here in Austin, which is cheap as dirt, is house cleaning so damned expensive?
/r/MensRights11/12/13 01:58 PM
2

Yeah, we do have a 2000 sq ft house (3 BRs, and the master is way bigger than it needs to be), so it seems like we're paying a similar rate, but we get 2 days per month and no meals. I live in the Austin area where the cost of living is low. We did shop around though, and this rate seems to be pretty average for here. Thank the gods you don't have to pay that alimony any more. Yeesh!
/r/MensRights11/12/13 01:10 PM
1

Where in the hell does she live? I might need to move there.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 01:07 PM
2

The older I get the more progressive I get. I'm 45. So, no.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 07:52 PM
3

I could be a househusband. My wife makes enough money to pay all of our bills and put some savings away. I make about 60% of what she does, but it's absolutely unnecessary. I do it so we can do more posh renovations to our house. That's my excuse right now, anyway. In truth, I don't know what I would do with myself if I didn't have a job. I like working. I'm sure there are women who feel the same way.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 07:43 PM
2

Out of curiosity, what do you pay for that service? I pay $250 just to have my house cleaned twice per month.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 07:37 PM
3

No one said it was a surprise. We just now have verifiable proof.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 07:35 PM
1

The worst part about this is that this caveat needed to be included: I appear to have kicked the hornet's nest. It think I should make one thing clear: the discussion of privilege checking was a framing device used to identify the objectionable thing about the 'male power fantasy' argument. I'm really not concerned with bringing the phrase 'check your privilege' into common MRA jargon, way too much baggage. I see this happen here all too often. We're supposed to be the rational ones, but instead…
/r/MensRights10/12/13 05:47 PM
1

In VA it's 65%.
/r/MensRights10/12/13 01:05 PM
3

One in which we respect and trust each other equally. With that in place everything else should fall right in line - splitting of household chores, bill paying, being able to calmly and maturely negotiate arguments, etc.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 04:19 PM
2

The state is just going to take it directly from your paycheck.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 04:01 PM
3

He can't do anything about what he already owes, but he can go back to court and have his support obligation reduced - if the judge is feeling nice.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 07:09 PM
1

Even though it took way more "evidence" than it should have required, I'll give you an upvote for honesty - it's appreciated.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 02:59 PM
9

Tell her that you don't need anyone defining gender roles for you.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 08:20 PM
1

You should be able to go back to the top of the conversation and, armed with the knowledge that I just armed you with, suss it out for yourself. And, no, this wasn't a disagreement. This was me commenting about the "women are wonderful" effect, and then you accused me of "...convicting her as someone who willfully sicced her ex on the guy who allegedly raped her." That last bit in quotes was an exact quote by you. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1re1gh/woman_gets_three_man_to_murder_…
/r/MensRights03/12/13 05:10 PM
1

OK, you're a troll. I posted one two comments above. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1re1gh/woman_gets_three_man_to_murder_her_alleged_rapist/cdrpsve
/r/MensRights03/12/13 03:40 PM
2

Article is from 1/9/13 and various links to this story have been posted at least monthly, if not weekly, since.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 07:29 PM
1

I'm just going by what I'm seeing and reading. You utterly mischaracterized my post and, from what I can see, a number of others. What else are we supposed to think?
/r/MensRights02/12/13 05:51 PM
1

I started by explaining how the "women are wonderful" effect is relevant to this particular issue and you said that I was "convicting her as someone who willfully sicced her ex on the guy who allegedly raped her." That's way, way far away from what I was even talking about, and shows very well that you came in to this with a preconceived notion about what you were going to find and started accusing people of it who never even discussed whether or not she were guilty. With that in mind, you are l…
/r/MensRights02/12/13 02:59 PM
1

So, I was one of those early respondents to you - you mischaracterized what I said, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say you did that for a lot of other people as well.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 08:46 PM
1

That said, when I first posted to this thread, all the posts which questioned the idea that she was fully responsible for the murders were labeled as trolling. What was your tone? can you link me to some of those?
/r/MensRights26/11/13 08:17 PM
1

You may want to go back and reread the comments with a neutral lens. There was no 'possible', it was all 'fact.' You are utterly full of shit.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 06:03 PM
1

Well, I see many people here assuming she had willful intent You don't see "many", you see a small handful. At least make some small attempt at being honest. It doesn't matter what the feminists in the article want, so long as there is a trial. That's kind of the point here, isn't it? Feminist protests like this one can gain traction and force the hand of the state. Without people speaking up against it then where would we be?
/r/MensRights26/11/13 06:03 PM
1

The comments all assumed she had willful intent to at the very least beat the guy up via her ex. No, they mostly say that it's possible that she had willful intent. Feminists want the case to be dropped entirely, which is what people are taking up arms about. It shouldn't be dropped entirely just because she claims she was a rape victim (we have no evidence that she was), which is what feminists want. Let it go to trial, and if she's guilty let her rot. If you can't prove guilt, set her free.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 05:14 PM
1

She cannot be found guilty of murder if there is not hard evidence that she planned this. Obviously. The issue being taken here really isn't with whether or not she's guilty, but that feminists are calling for the case to be dropped entirely.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 05:13 PM
1

Fair enough.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:32 PM
1

Then the boyfriend insisted that she point the guy out to him and she did because she feared the boyfriend... And what if she just "never saw the guy again"? She didn't have to point him out. No one knew who he was or what he looked like. She could have just said she didn't see him.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:31 PM
1

Always err on the side of caution - that's how our justice system is designed.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:30 PM
1

Well, you all are convicting her as someone who willfully sicced her ex on the guy who allegedly raped her. No, we aren't. We're noting that it's a very real possibility based on the information at hand, and more likely than her not having any ulterior motive. It has also been noted, however, that she may have been coerced in to doing so. So according to your own logic, she should not be convicted of anything. I never said she should be convicted of anything to begin with - only if she is found …
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:30 PM
1

I think ultimately it falls on you to snap out of it, get the hell out, and learn to avoid toxic people. We don't teach out children to navigate interpersonal relationships really at all. This is really where the problem lies - both for men and women.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:27 PM
1

Not true. I disagree with a lot of sentiments here, but no one here is labeling me a troll. I can't stand all the petty "white knight" name calling bullshit and get downvoted for it, but people will actually reply why they think it is necessary and/or useful - without calling me a troll. I don't think that feminism in and of itself is evil (however, I think it's been co-opted by a cabal of female supremacists) and people will (hotly) debate me over it, but I'm not labeled a troll. I'm a far left…
/r/MensRights25/11/13 09:37 PM
1

I suppose you may be right depending on the state in question. Some will convict a complicit party of murder right along with the person who did the deed, some states differentiate. For instance: http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2923 No person who is convicted of committing a specific offense, of complicity in the commission of an offense, or of conspiracy to commit an offense shall be convicted of an attempt to commit the same offense in violation of this section. So, they're basically saying (as they…
/r/MensRights25/11/13 09:23 PM
2

That is precisely what "complicity" means. com·plic·i·ty kəmˈplisitē/ noun noun: complicity 1. the state of being involved with others in an illegal activity or wrongdoing. She wasn't an accessory after the fact, she was an accessory before the fact (if she actually did what she has been accused of doing) because without her having pointed the guy out then the rest of the crime could not have occurred. This is the very definition of "conspiracy". The above user said by her own admission she is a…
/r/MensRights25/11/13 08:53 PM
1

Cause: "women are wonderful" Effect: she said she was raped so all the woman's groups are rallying behind her That is all. but rape is one of those crimes that evidence does not always mean much when it comes down to he said/she said. Wrong. Evidence means everything. No evidence, can't convict. End of story. But if it was a he said/she said then we need to err on the side of caution and not assume guilt without proof. Ah, but not when it comes to the actual rape. This is me scowling at you.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 08:52 PM
0

You're doing the bidding of others, making you beta.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 08:50 PM
3

There are. The real problem is that so, so many men are brought up with absolute zero self esteem. They see themselves as amazingly lucky that a woman would even talk to them, so all reason goes out the window. I tried to talk several friends out of stupid relationships like this, but they all went on to marry the cheating, philandering skanks.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 07:01 PM
3

Yes. I saw it way more than I ever would have believed in my 4 years in the Navy.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 06:58 PM
0

If your sister/female relative told you she was raped and you believed it to be true, would you go out and hurt that guy? I have a 19 year old daughter in college, so this is a tough question. I know I would want to, that's for sure. I would like to think, however, that I would wait for a trial - if he were found guilty I'd likely await his release and then go do what I had to do. Can she not tell anyone what happened to her lest they inflict vigilante justice on her behalf? There's a difference…
/r/MensRights25/11/13 06:53 PM
0

I realize this - I was just exposing it in the most clear, concise way possible so there couldn't be any doubt or wiggle room.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 06:50 PM
1

While I generally agree, he is still responsible for his own actions. He has agency over himself.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 05:59 PM
-1

Sounds like the "beta" here is you.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 05:58 PM
0

Cant Get a job? The other gender is blocking me out! Cant get laid? Its bullshit that women have such high expecations and don't want to fuck me and they have all the power in dating! Cant get asked out? NO IT's society's fault people dont find fat as fuck attractive! There aren't any MRAs saying anything like any of this. Troll.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 05:55 PM
0

You mean to tell me that every man is just waiting to hack up another man with a meat cleaver should any woman claim rape? He said nothing like that. He said: No reasonable person could have believed that her actions would have led anywhere but violence. Violence could be anything from giving someone a black eye to killing someone with a meat cleaver.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 05:53 PM
3

If you have knowledge of a murder and don't go to the authorities then you are complicit because you helped to cover it up.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 05:44 PM
2

I did not get the "women are wonderful" effect. I'm pretty sure this is referring to all the people shouting for her to be released and the prosecutors drop the case. There is no justification for this other than "she said she was raped", so the logical conclusion is that the "women are wonderful" effect is in play.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 05:34 PM
2

So, the only thing we have to go on is her saying that she was raped, and people don't want her to face charges? How does this make sense?
/r/MensRights25/11/13 05:32 PM
1

You should also know for future reference that Wikipedia is never a valid source. Idiot. I actually quoted the sources for that wiki statement right after it. The think progress article you posted was a biased article from a liberal website. Which is why I quoted the Guttmacher study it was referencing immediately after it. The Guttmacher article deals with mental health of woman who were denied abortions, not with the mental health of those who had abortions. If you bothered to read the study y…
/r/MensRights25/11/13 02:39 PM
1

Just because your aborted baby mama had no emotional effects doesn't make that normal. That's true - I was supplying anecdotal evidence to support another claim - but you already knew that and you're just being thick. There is a difference between knowing you made the right decision and not having emotional troubles. You don't say! I doubt the majority of woman who have had abortions walked away with no emotional pain. Well, actually, they feel relief most often. http://thinkprogress.org/health/…
/r/MensRights22/11/13 05:24 PM
1

I'm not sure how me recognizing that you, in fact, admitted to trolling equals an "echo chamber", but OK. If you insist.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 03:48 PM
1

Ah, so you are a troll. Fuck off - but well done.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 03:31 PM
1

Holy shit... you're either retarded or a really, really good troll. I'm going to have faith in you and opt for the latter, and pat you on the back for a successful troll. Well done.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:08 PM
1

You summed men's reproductive rights up as "Use a birth control!". I showed you the flaws in that line of reasoning by stating that birth control isn't 100%. Then you stated basically "Well, we should try to strive for less abortion/no abortion questions. I informed you that we are mostly talking about what happens once abortion/no abortion are your choices. I then tried to illuminate why men have issues with their current choices once a woman becomes pregnant, and the type of reasoning that you…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:52 PM
1

Way to miss every point I made and sidestep the issue entirely. Let me know when you're interested in having a serious discussion.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:29 PM
2

Then you talk about it and decide how you will work it out? And if she changes her mind the law doesn't give a rotten cow fuck what the two of you worked out. How is my argument anti-choice? Because you're saying that once someone is impregnated that they should just give it up and be parents.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:09 PM
1

I know birth control is not 100% but it's always good to lessen some of the risk so it doesn't have to come down to abortion or not abortion. That's missing the point entirely. What about when it does come down to abortion or not abortion? That's what's being talked about here. If a man needs to own up when he impregnates a girl, despite the measures used not to, then why doesn't a woman need to own up when she gets impregnated under similar circumstances? I'm pro-choice, by the way, but the arg…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 06:23 PM
2

I've fathered a child that was aborted. For the mother, it was about as traumatic as getting a mole removed. It was about the same for me. This is the norm. Mental issues following abortion are not the norm. Don't be a brick.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 06:03 PM
2

I don't think it's right to just leave the "cleaning up" to the woman. Then you're saying that there should be more than one person involved in the choice?
/r/MensRights21/11/13 06:02 PM
2

When I had my abortion I took the guy's wants into account, he wanted to terminate as well. Would you have if he didn't?
/r/MensRights21/11/13 05:57 PM
2

Wouldn't some still feel an obligation to the child? Wouldn't some still want to be fathers if they aren't still in the mother's life? I wouldn't give up my relationship with my daughter for anything.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 05:56 PM
0

No birth control is 100%. Every time you have sex you're taking a risk. And, really, if that's your stance are you against abortion?
/r/MensRights21/11/13 05:54 PM
1

Look, I'm going to come right out and say I despise Israel and wish they would die a slow, horrible death. However: Just picture me laughing at you. A lot.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 03:24 PM
2

After going through this shit myself and watching my brother go through it, I can assure you that /r/legaladvice is dead wrong. If she is getting DUIs and fighting cops, regardless of where the kid is, her ability to parent is immediately suspect.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 09:13 PM
1

If your lawyer thinks that's the best that you can do then you need another lawyer.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 09:09 PM
3

Israel. That is all.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 08:43 PM
1

I don't know how to be more clear: That is a bullshit definition with no real meaning.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 08:10 PM
1

You have no expectation of free speech in a non-public venue, so despite the wiki definition, it is not censorship. It's only censorship if you have a legitimate expectation of free speech.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 06:18 PM
0

Actually, yes it does.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 06:06 PM
7

It's not censorship, it's making something blow up in feminists faces. Big difference there, Bucky.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 09:02 PM
2

It's a private site, so it's not censorship.
/r/MensRights14/11/13 08:52 PM
1

Should the father be able to force an abortion? No. If he doesn't want the child should he be able to abdicate responsibility? Yes.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 07:05 PM
9

I love how they provided no feedback from those who voted against it.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 06:50 PM
2

I must not be a very manly man then. heh. I just didn't find it to be stressful. After working in cube farms for years I would much rather be a stay-at-home dad.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 09:27 PM
10

For every girl who takes a step towards her liberation, there is a boy who finds the way to freedom a little easier. I think the implication is that breaking down gender roles for women/girls highlights the need to do it for boys as well, and when we finally do decide to really attack this part of the gender role problem that it will be easier to accomplish because we've done it once already. We know what works and doesn't. I think that's at least partially true.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 09:16 PM
3

I would argue that they are, indeed, apt descriptors. I found parenting to be stupidly easy and can't understand why people say it's so hard and exhausting.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 08:22 PM
2

Well, I would argue that you should care so you know better what it is that you're fighting against (e.g. the stereotype of fathers that so many people have stuck in their heads). It can help provide better direction. However, I fully understand that you may already know this and thus any further research on the subject wouldn't benefit you at all.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 06:48 PM
1

<3 FOTC
/r/MensRights06/11/13 05:53 PM
1

I'm in America (Texas, even) and I could get to it just fine.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 05:53 PM
1

I think that this is generally because full-fledged female sterilization procedures (which having your tubes tied is not one) are done for medical reasons and not as an elective. I fully admit, however, that this is speculation and that I could very well be wrong.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 05:45 PM
0

No, you didn't. Yes, I did. You asserting that I didn't doesn't make it true. According to you. According to any thinking person.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 03:02 PM
18

Urm, that's not really subtle. It's his entire schtick.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 06:17 PM
1

Interesting. I've never been asked this question in Turbo Tax and I've used it exclusively for about 12 or 15 years.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 06:02 PM
1

Oh? Can you link me to any case law or federal statutes about this? Or are you talking at state level?
/r/MensRights05/11/13 02:17 PM
1

No. The non-custodial parent cannot claim their child as a dependent - at least as far as federal taxes are concerned. I've only lived in a handful of states in the U.S., so I won't claim that there are no states that allow you to claim your non-custodial child as a dependent, but I'm not aware of any.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 09:14 PM
2

Well, no, not really. That's not how language works and not how definitions work. Words mean what they're used to mean, and etymology gives us clues into that. Horseshit. If all words still had their etymological meanings half of English wouldn't mean what it means to us right now. While certainly Oxford Dictionary must be at least a little more authoritative... In intellectual circles they're considered to be the authority. /end argument. You're the one claiming to know that there is "dislike" …
/r/MensRights04/11/13 09:13 PM
1

While I understand this, I feel that I, as the non-custodial parent, should get at least partial dependent credit for tax purposes, because I am supporting a dependent.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 08:46 PM
1

No. However, I should be able to claim my child support payments as partial support for a dependent. So, I should get a tax break on it, and it should be income for my ex, and she should pay taxes on it. Because it is income.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 08:45 PM
1

Firstly, she doesn't have to claim child support on her taxes anyway. Secondly, in my opinion, you don't want to get in to a situation where she tries to hide that money somehow and says you didn't pay her. The second reason is precisely why I let my child support go through the courts, and it worked mostly fine. There were a few years where the state of VA wasn't applying my payments in a timely manner (they would cash them and then hold on to them for weeks before applying them to my case) whi…
/r/MensRights04/11/13 08:44 PM
1

You can disagree with it all you want, but that is the definition. Besides, again, nothing about not wanting women to vote necessarily implies dislike of women or contempt for them. How doesn't it? Imagine if we applied that standard to everything. I don't want children to vote, that means I "hate children", I harbor deeply rooted hatred for people under a certain age. Really? No, sorry, that's a bad analogy for several reasons. you can defend not wanting children to vote because they don't poss…
/r/MensRights04/11/13 08:40 PM
2

Isaac Asimov - few men in history have accomplished as much in their life as this man did. He wrote literally hundreds of books (468, to be exact) on subjects from science to history to science fiction to mystery, mathematics, religion, and more. He had 2 children, and was an excellent father to them, all the while teaching, writing, and being a political activist. What a fucking amazing man. Hugh Hefner - this man nearly single-handedly redefined modern sexuality. He helped change the way we vi…
/r/MensRights04/11/13 08:29 PM
1

That particular euphemism is used because quite frankly, no guy in his right mind wants to end up with the town doorknob. Speak for yourself. I'll take the experienced gal who knows how to please a man (as long as we're compatible on several other levels). I dated a girl like that for quite some time and we could easily have ended up married, but our lives went in different directions.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 08:12 PM
1

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/misogyny dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women
/r/MensRights04/11/13 08:10 PM
-1

Let me ask you this question: What is on the "heads" side of a quarter? What is on the opposite side? Does this make more sense now?
/r/MensRights04/11/13 07:44 PM
1

In my personal opinion, a man is sort of the Victorian definition of a man - well versed in sports, hunting, cooking, painting, poetry, music, literary works, theater, working with his hands, science and math, politics, is a gentleman, and is chivalrous. Now, I take that and put a modern spin on it - I'm chivalrous towards everyone, not just women. (e.g. I hold a door open for anyone who is behind me, especially if they are loaded down some how) I believe that part of my duty, as a husband/boyfr…
/r/MensRights04/11/13 07:28 PM
1

As soon as I see "alpha male" or "beta male" in a post all I can think is "SRS troll". No one is that douchey on purpose, are they?
/r/MensRights04/11/13 07:19 PM
0

I had to cut those crazy, bigoted fucks loose on facebook. I just couldn't take it any more.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 07:17 PM
1

Turns out you can't live long without eating though. I see that went flying right over your head. ...and you're more likely to reach old age with healthcare. Not with for-profit healthcare you aren't. Where there is for-profit healthcare, average life expectancy is significantly lower than where healthcare is socialized. That doesn't refute my statement. It does, but you apparently haven't dealt with the budgets of large busiensses, so you wouldn't know. Pointing out the problem with an argument…
/r/MensRights01/11/13 04:51 PM
1

Or the reality is that they don't make money on you being unwell or hungry, but they only make money by making you well or fed. The grocers don't care if you actually eat the food you buy, as long as you buy it. Which is why clever in-store marketing has you buying so much food that you throw large percentages of it away before you can even eat it. And, no, the healthcare industry makes money off of you buying services, labwork, medicines, tests, etc etc. The more well you are, the less money th…
/r/MensRights01/11/13 04:35 PM
1

They aren't mutually exclusive. Yes, they are. You can't have quality healthcare with a profit motive. You get either profit, or you get healthcare. No one who runs a for-profit business is going to forgo profit margins to make people more healthy. They make money on you being unwell. I think it would be very naive to think that a company would argue honestly about the merit of something that benefits them. I never said they were. I'm using a commonly understood term to discuss a topic without w…
/r/MensRights01/11/13 04:00 PM
2

'nani
/r/MensRights01/11/13 03:44 PM
1

I am clarifying now that I think people should choose what they want covered for them and pay accordingly. No. For-profit "healthcare" is all about profit, and not about healthcare at all. That phrase is just clever marketing. You and I both know what it means to the insurance companies - stop being pedantic.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 03:35 PM
1

Further, saying women shouldn't have to pay for men's stuff is intellectually consistent. You've said no such thing. It is not a shared risk pool. I don't think you understand what that phrase means to insurance companies.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 03:06 PM
1

Such as: there are plenty of male only health items that are subsidized by women. shared risk pool
/r/MensRights01/11/13 02:47 PM
1

Your second point was so full of holes that it is sinking without my input.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 02:27 PM
1

Not in countries that actually implement socialized medicine. "Basic care" is what is determined by a panel of physicians.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 02:13 PM
1

No. They live in very, very blue Maryland and Delaware. I should also mention that they are generally rude, not very smart, and racist people.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 07:29 PM
1

Car insurance companies shouldn't be allowed to do it either. Just because one is doing something slimy doesn't mean that everyone should be slimy.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 07:23 PM
1

They're Teahadis. My older brother is running some sort of impeachment campaign.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 07:22 PM
1

My parents and brother, for example.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 07:13 PM
1

Ah. Apparently there was a sarcasm tag edit. Sorry about that - didn't pick up on that earlier.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 07:10 PM
1

That's not the same thing as "changing rates based on gender". Changing rates based on gender would be: Men pay $75 for policy A. Women pay $50 for policy A.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 07:09 PM
2

If people are paying out of pocket for it, someone is making a profit.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 06:50 PM
0

Except you haven't yet said anything even remotely like that until this one post. Maybe you should be more clear?
/r/MensRights31/10/13 06:37 PM
2

No. You have to remove profit from healthcare entirely for it to work to actually benefit the people. As soon as you introduce profit, someone will seek to maximize it, which means that the health of the people will suffer.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 06:36 PM
-1

What in the world are you on about? The discussion was about pooled risk, and you asked why auto insurance doesn't also pool risk. They do.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 05:07 PM
0

There is so much stupid in the replies to this post and the post itself that it's not even funny. Let me know when you guys are over 25 and actually understand how insurance works. Until then - wallow in your own self pity and let me know how that works out for you.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 04:48 PM
2

Why stop there? You have diabetes, you cost more, so you pay more! So much so that you can't actually afford it so you let your disease run rampant and die! What a fucking stupid idea. Shared risk, people. It's what insurance is all about. Don't like it? Get rid of insurance companies altogether and go single payer.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 04:45 PM
1

This issue is exactly why centralized healthcare is a bad idea: you can't buy the insurance that you need because you have to buy the insurance that john smith down the road needs. Urm, that's not what centralized healthcare is. Under centralized healthcare all basic (and most major) healthcare issues are covered by your taxes. You can buy premium plans, but you certainly don't have to and most people don't.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 04:43 PM
-2

You do.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 04:41 PM
19

I'm glad to see some non-white men speaking out about this as it would seem that marriage laws, the penal system, custody, and visitation affect them more than it does us white guys (not that it's good for us, but it's worse for them). And, with minorities on board, we are likely to get more attention than if it were just a bunch of white guys. Sad, but true.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 04:34 PM
3

Congratulations. You just discovered SRS.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 04:41 PM
1

You're probably right there - it most likely wouldn't help millionaires and such, but for the average schmoe who doesn't have much to begin with (which are the vast majority of divorce cases), it can help you save some of your hard earned possessions from being absconded with by the ex.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 06:58 PM
2

I don't care. Ann Coulter is an evil harpy. I really don't want anyone like her speaking up for male issues any more than I do some rad-fem. They're equally bad in opposite directions.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 05:23 PM
3

I like this idea.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 05:12 PM
1

Never said you didn't have to "sell" it for anything aside from fair market value. And the bills of sale are just bullshit - no money is exchanging hands. As long as you claim it was done in cash then there is no money trail. Obviously you're not going to get away with selling your house or a car this way because there is other legal documentation involved, but for items inside the house you can get away with it relatively easily - I know because I did it myself. The ex was trying to take everyt…
/r/MensRights24/10/13 04:43 PM
0

The investigators have to report what they find. If they find bills of sale and items listed where they should be based on those bills of sale, then there really isn't anything they can do. They can think it's suspicious, but suspicion doesn't fly well in court. Evidence, however, does, and you have that on your side.
/r/MensRights23/10/13 08:05 PM
1

Your friends will still have to rat you out. They would have to say "Correct. This bill of sale is fake and I paid nothing for this and I'm going to give it back when the divorce is final." when questioned.
/r/MensRights23/10/13 07:54 PM
1

The judge can't find out unless one of your friends rats on you. Alimony, of course, is a different (and possibly more heinous) issue entirely.
/r/MensRights23/10/13 07:44 PM
-2

I would say that would be an equally good fit, not better. Carry on with your Taliban self. P.S. You can also "sell" things to your friends. Deal with friends who you can trust 110%. Draw up "bills of sale" that are totally bogus. Have said friend hold whatever assets you want them to hold until after the divorce. Pretty simple, really.
/r/MensRights23/10/13 06:48 PM
-1

I was pretty well dead serious.
/r/MensRights23/10/13 06:31 PM
-1

Hi, Taliban.
/r/MensRights23/10/13 05:42 PM
1

Your employer isn't going to forgo a court order. You will lose this fight.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 02:58 PM
6

I wonder if we dads should start petitioning these stores to get rid of magazines that demean our daughters and give them unrealistic body images to strive for like Cosmo and such?
/r/MensRights15/10/13 04:59 PM
57

practically no guns allowed. This is a plus, not a minus. Just sayin'.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 04:46 PM
2

Doesn't matter. How it works is this: Both parents have to list their obligations, and one of the obligations noted is how many children live in the household. The more children you have in your household, the less your portion of the child support obligation is, regardless of where those children came from. It's a crock of shit, but that's the way it works.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 04:42 PM
1

The support case has to originate in the state where the divorce or child support order was initially ordered.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 04:41 PM
2

Virginia does the same thing.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 04:39 PM
1

I know in Virginia that they can do this, and it happened to me. I got mine raised about $175 per month because my ex had two kids after we split. One of which she was pregnant with before the divorce was finalized. This is one of the things that pisses me off the most about child support law.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 04:39 PM
13

To be fair, they're crazy ass SRS radfems.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 05:28 PM
1

I had to run screaming after perusing the comments for about 30 seconds.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 12:56 PM
1

I did, but you used the word "refuse". Apparently you don't know the difference between "refuse" and "didn't know how to determine that they were bogus." Newsflash: they're not the same thing. I hope you don't think that swallowing everything you're fed without doing any research even when someone brings a debate is intellectually forgivable. I think it's the de facto stance for about 95% of the populace. They just accept what they're spoon fed and don't question it. If information people hear "…
/r/MensRights10/10/13 12:16 PM
6

Definitely has nothing to do with the massive numbers of black men incarcerated. It's all incenitivization, right?
/r/MensRights09/10/13 07:02 PM
0

The third option is that you only ever received bogus facts and didn't know how to determine that they were bogus. This should be painfully obvious to you.
/r/MensRights09/10/13 01:48 PM
1

You made the statement so it is up to you to provide proof of it.
/r/MensRights09/10/13 01:17 PM
1

Begging the question is a logical fallacy.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 07:50 PM
3

There was so much retardedness from both sides in that conversation that it was hard to watch. Both got the meanings of common words completely wrong, and women were just flat out cunts.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 05:01 PM
2

You pose a fair question at the end there. Here is my take on it: "Unfair" and "oppress" are basically varying degrees of the same thing. Unfairness can exist under specific circumstances, while oppression is a more across-the-board type of thing. I personally think that the issues that we, as MRAs, are concerned with, are relegated more to the "unfair" side of things than the "oppressed" side of things. However, if things keep going for another 40 or 50 years at their current rate, it will end …
/r/MensRights08/10/13 04:44 PM
3

Hmmmm... Well, I don't work out like I should, I'll admit that, but I've been working on it. I always use nice soaps, keep my hair pretty short, wear clothes that fit well (I'm a bit of a style-snob), and keep my house well decorated (I design pretty much everything in the house my wife and I have built - from color choices to where and how art hangs on the wall). Guess I just blew that retarded pigeon hole right out of the water, didn't I? Should she be telling feminists to go to the gym, too? …
/r/MensRights08/10/13 04:36 PM
1

I really doubt that it's that simple, which is my point entirely - I didn't miss your point at all.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 01:06 PM
1

Why would any liberal not want businesses held accountable? I really don't get that.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 07:42 PM
1

Well, it depends on if you think "being a proponent of one model, but not seeking to outlaw other models" to be a uniquely Liberal viewpoint. I would say that in the United States it is, but it isn't elsewhere. I'm probably also a centrist, but I lean much further towards the left than I do the right. I do have some views that far left liberals would call downright fascist, however.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 07:31 PM
2

Because the ultimate goal is equality, and that is a liberal stance.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 06:59 PM
2

I think the problem with most who are "anti-MRM" isn't that they're all scum (but surely some are), but that they don't really understand what we stand for. They've been fed so much bullshit that it's hard to see outside of it.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 06:51 PM
2

I don't think anyone is trying to pressure anyone in to escaping their gender role, but letting those who don't feel at home in it that it's OK to be that way.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 06:48 PM
1

Sounds like a liberal view point to me. :)
/r/MensRights07/10/13 06:45 PM
1

These last few posts are some of the best discourse on Men's Rights that I've read in a while. Hopefully this thread will continue, because I'd love to read more of it.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 06:44 PM
2

I would argue that Men's Rights is about as far left as you can get at this point. It shouldn't be, but it's so far out on the fringes of politics that that's where it really lies. Feminists are more like center-right these days, but they have their hooks in the Democratic party, which bills itself as left wing but most definitely is not.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 06:39 PM
1

Not building houses, no, but I have taken in a homeless person until they were able to get on their feet.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 03:04 PM
-2

That was... amazing? Hahahahaha
/r/MensRights04/10/13 08:17 PM
-2

That's up there on my list of things to read. It's been there for a long time - I really need to just break down and read the damned thing.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 07:24 PM
1

I guess I'm not sure what you're referring to, specifically, when you say "how things should be". I think we should be working to make public schools more gender neutral, to get more men interested in teaching again, to push public awareness campaigns to help people be better parents to boys (teaching them that showing feelings is OK instead of internalizing, for example), raising public awareness that masculinity is not, in and of itself, evil. I would like to see family law become gender neutr…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 07:12 PM
-3

Eh, it's one of a handful of subjects that I'm very well read on and understand intimately. Learning about how our animal id controls us and tricks us into thinking we're doing things for the greater good when they're really just selfish, and how our reasoning, conscious brain can over come that, is one of the most profound things I've ever learned. It really helped me overcome some personal issues, and means a lot to me.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 06:39 PM
2

Evolutionarily speaking, you are not correct. Neither human nor animal behaviour is determined by our genetic makeup. This is so massively false it's not even funny. I suggest a slew of biology classes.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 06:35 PM
2

Yes.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 06:34 PM
0

If it's down to one man, then the man. But it isn't, so this line of argument is moot.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 06:19 PM
1

I think I see what you're getting at. Can men give birth? No. Can women? Yes. One man can impregnate many women and proliferate the species, but you would definitely need more than one woman. These facts make women a more valuable reproductive resource, evolutionarily speaking.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 05:53 PM
-3

That makes no sense at all.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 05:27 PM
1

Incorrect all the way through. Firstly, if you look at simple scientific classification we are animals before we are human beings. Nothing will ever change that. Secondly, it is a biological imperative to protect women. This was developed via evolution because women are a more precious reproductive resource in the grand scheme of genetic proliferation. The last part of what you said is at least partially correct - we, having the ability to reason, can overcome our animal id and rise above those …
/r/MensRights04/10/13 05:05 PM
2

Horseshit. I'm on AVFM right now on T-Mobile via 4G.
/r/MensRights03/10/13 07:28 PM
1

If you think men being treated as nothing but piggy banks with barely any involvement in their children's lives post-divorce is trivial, then fuck you right in the ass.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 05:51 PM
3

One of my best friends is a trans woman, and she knew she wasn't supposed to be a boy before she even made it to grade school. So, I'm going to say you have no fucking idea what you're talking about.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 05:40 PM
2

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20032-transsexual-differences-caught-on-brain-scan.html#.UkxVuVOJpsI
/r/MensRights02/10/13 05:20 PM
3

Actually, yes it does. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20032-transsexual-differences-caught-on-brain-scan.html#.UkxVuVOJpsI
/r/MensRights02/10/13 05:20 PM
3

Man, I've literally taken my entire shift today at work to read most of these (I have to read in about 3 minutes at a time when I have downtime). As much as I've been an advocate for male victims of sexual abuse I really didn't know how prevalent it is (especially the female on male bit - I know it happens because it happened to me, but I didn't think that it was this often). Thanks for opening up my eyes.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 08:24 PM
1

No, sorry, that makes no logical sense. If you're a pro-lifer then you never considered abortion, so you don't figure in to the equation at all. Yet you seem to think that if someone were to advocate against the killing of hobos, then it is their duty to go around building houses for hobos until every person has a home. No. A fetus is not a person. A hobo is.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 01:05 PM
1

I'm sorry, but that just doesn't logically follow.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 01:02 PM
3

it is assumed that men want sex all the time and that when they say that they don't, they're lying. So, you're saying that men wanting sex is rape? What am I missing here? How is this "rape culture"? Don't get me wrong - I think the idea is stupid and wrong, like any blanket statement is. I just don't understand how it equals rape culture.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 06:58 PM
2

There are plenty of pro-lifers are taking care of children that were conceived accidentally. Plenty for what, exactly? This is obviously false as there are still so many foster and orphaned children.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 12:23 PM
-8

Here is what I say about right to lifers: Fuck you. Fuck you right in the ass. Are you raising these unwanted babies? No? Then shut the fuck up.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 08:01 PM
2

I also reported the two that weren't removed.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 04:12 PM
1

Wow. That was a really fantastic read. It sounds almost exactly like both myself and my daughter when we were young children.
/r/MensRights24/09/13 04:52 PM
1

I think this guy was being a dick, but he didn't say anything sexist.
/r/MensRights23/09/13 02:32 PM
2

I don't feel intimidated by then - just disdain. My wife is highly intelligent and I'm not intimidated in the slightest. In fact, I find it sexy.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 05:21 PM
1

The Onion is a parody site. This article was a parody. It's really that simple.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 11:48 AM
1

This is precisely how I see - very well said. I wouldn't change a single word.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 05:47 PM
6

I am also a socialist and advocate for men's rights. I'm glad to see so many of us posting here.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 12:35 AM
1

For the record, the RIAA, speculation and trading firms, the Telecom companies are very much conservative in their donating trends and with who backs them. Unions and Hollywood are way closer to the mark.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 12:33 AM
3

Funny, to me it sounds like the Tea Party and GOP.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 12:29 AM
3

This. Precisely this. I think that, if there is anywhere this movement can take off, it's in the political left. The big problem is the massive amounts of money that feminist organizations pour in to the pockets of non-right wing politicians. And I say non-right wing because the Democrats aren't fucking leftist. They're center leaning right wing, if anything. Leftism has always been on the cutting edge of politics, and the MRA movement is most definitely cutting edge. It's the right place for it…
/r/MensRights11/09/13 12:25 AM
0

Um, no. Women in Pullman, which is a neighborhood in Chicago, all worked for 4 different pimps. They didn't find solely four pimps in the entire city. And it didn't say the women were safer in general, but that they are arrested less. What it doesn't talk about is how unsafe the women are from the pimps themselves. No where in the study does it allude to forced prostitution. The "why" wasn't the focus of the study. This study doesn't examine the "why" of prostitution in any way. Now, I fully do …
/r/MensRights09/09/13 06:45 PM
0

Oh, yes, it is. I've met a woman who used to try and pull this horseshit on me.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 11:21 PM
-1

That's hilarious - she got discrimination and racism backwards.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 11:21 PM
1

Brother, I understand. Like I said, I felt the way you did until I found out like studies like the above existed and what the results were. Once you have that information it's kind of hard to deny that some people are just born with the wrong genitals. I still wrestled with it for a while - old habits die hard and all that - but I'm at a place now where I empathize and I can be the friend to transgender folks that they need. My good friend, who is MTF, I had a hard time referring to with female …
/r/MensRights05/09/13 06:57 PM
1

I guess that when a cause is good enough then it is okay to be violent or to threaten violence, eh? Yes, absolutely. Anyone who suggests that should be beaten, right? No. Anyone who denies reality (in general, but in this case specifically, that the largest majority of prostitutes are trafficked) should be. You know nothing about the subject matter but are playing the white knight. No, I'm very, very well informed on the subject, and I'm not playing "white knight". I'm just not one to ignore rea…
/r/MensRights05/09/13 06:49 PM
1

I think it makes sense, especially given the high rate of suicide in post-op transgenders. Some realize at some point in their lives that they made a mistake, and now it's too late. So, yeah, therapy makes sense to me, too.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 12:48 AM
1

Most genius level people are poor at being social, typically don't have a lot of empathy, and plain old don't understand other people in general.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 12:47 AM
2

Let me put it to you like this: A person born male but who identifies as a female looks at their penis and just doesn't understand why it's there. They feel like there should be a vagina there. They feel like they should have breasts and that they are missing from their body. Does that spell it out enough for you?
/r/MensRights05/09/13 12:46 AM
3

I am simply saying BASED ON THE SCIENCE, she will never be a man. Based on the science, you are wrong. http://openmindedhealth.com/2012/01/results-of-transsexual-brain-studies/ http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/85/5/2034.full edit I used to feel like you did until someone showed me the results of scientific studies like these. It made it all click in to place for me. Pretty hard to argue the way you are once you realize their brains are the opposite of the sexual organs that they were born wi…
/r/MensRights05/09/13 12:35 AM
2

But what I don't understand is my brain does not have a gender, a gender is something ascribed to me by society. This is massively not true. Do you feel like doing girly things? Do you feel like dressing in girly clothes? Do you ever look at women and say to yourself "I feel more like that than I do a human with a penis"? Do you ever look at men and say "Whoa, those are strange beings, and I'm genetically one of them, but I don't seem to feel and behave the way that they do?" If none of these th…
/r/MensRights05/09/13 12:26 AM
1

Also, transgender people are required to go to therapy for a year before a doctor will allow them to get the surgery. Not disagreeing - just pointing out that this is different from state to state in the U.S.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 12:23 AM
3

The one trans woman that I am personally very, very close friends with knew from a very, very young age that she was in the wrong body. Being a male just never, ever felt right to her. So, for some at least, it's not that they "don't feel comfortable acting the way their brain tells them to inside of their own skin" - it's quite the opposite. They feel very comfortable acting the way their brain tells them to - but that action doesn't jive with their body parts. There have also been numerous stu…
/r/MensRights05/09/13 12:22 AM
7

As an MRA I would say that if you identify as a man, then I believe there is a place for you in the MRA movment. I personally have a fair number of friends who are trans, so this may affect me more than it does other MRAs.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 12:15 AM
0

However, if they have people advocating violence on their behalf I would suggest they deal with that. They don't. What I'm saying is that if you told her, someone who works directly with thousands of these women, that trafficking was rare, that she would likely be enraged enough at your stupidity to hit you in the face. A lot. In fact, I'd hold you down for her. I do see that they propagate the myth that women only prostitute because they are forced to by male pimps. No, they do not. They do und…
/r/MensRights04/09/13 09:29 PM
0

HIPPS is a sham? How so, exactly? All they try to do is make sure prostitutes are healthy and have food and someone to talk to.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 07:30 PM
-7

Tell this to my friend who runs HIPPS in D.C. so I can watch her beat you to the ground for being a callous, unreasonable asshole.
/r/MensRights03/09/13 07:36 PM
1

What you should do is get the people together who have all experienced this and go to H.R. and report that she is making false claims of sexism, and that it is affecting people's careers.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 10:38 PM
1

Yes, precisely.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 05:19 PM
2

Being a woman doesn't mean she can't cut your hair. You've just been to bad barbers. After a dozen or so who gave shitty flat tops I gave up on that bullshit. I'm pretty sure that not all of them were bad barber shops. Sure, I could always wait for a specific person, but I don't want to sit around for an hour or two to get a haircut. I'll just go to shops where it's men only - so far I haven't had a bad cut using this method. Some have been better than others, obviously, but all have been signif…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 12:08 AM
2

How about something from a reputable site? Like the original posting in the newsletter, for example?
/r/MensRights27/08/13 08:20 PM
1

Yeah, I'd still be finding another barber shop. I've been going to barbers for over 35 years now and I've never had a woman cut my hair even remotely close to as good as a man does. I've also never seen a place labeled a "barber shop" with women cutting hair that didn't also do perms, hair coloring, etc.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 06:30 PM
2

So, I'm invited to work out at Curves then?
/r/MensRights27/08/13 05:30 PM
1

That is pure sexism. No, it is not. The first is a fact, the second is me wanting male spaces that are strictly male spaces. Women have plenty of spaces that are strictly for women - why can't we have the same thing? You are the one being sexist. How do you know a woman doesn't want to talk about sports & beer & sex like the rest of the guys. I don't give a fuck. She can do that at the bar. The scene you describe is like the childish "women haters club" from The Little Rascals. So then you agree…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 05:29 PM
1

I never said it wasn't. I think the true fear here is that a woman will come into your space and fit in better than some of the males. Utter horseshit. My wife fits in in male spaces just fine - she doesn't even really like other women very much, and I obviously have no issues with her, so, no.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 05:27 PM
2

Go check out her website and then come back and tell me that all she wanted was a hair cut.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 05:26 PM
3

If I walk in to a "barber shop" and there are women I turn around the leave. That's a hair stylist.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 05:25 PM
1

Avenue Barber Shop on SoCo
/r/MensRights27/08/13 05:22 PM
1

At times I believe it is, but I wouldn't say that as a blanket statement. I think a lot of times a woman may go in to a barber shop, say, to wait for her husband/boyfriend/son/whoever to get their hair cut (this is probably the majority of cases). Her intent isn't to shut down conversation, but that's the end result. I think instances like this one, where she very clearly had an agenda, are thankfully relatively rare.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:00 AM
5

The presence of men makes it more difficult for women to focus on working out properly, as they will have to worry about how they look doing it. Because they aren't wrong -- before a woman can pass any other test with us, they have to pass the attractiveness test. I kind of agree and kind of disagree. I would say that if you haven't "passed the attractiveness" test the men stopped looking at you about 2 seconds after they started.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 10:31 PM
10

Eesh - you ain't shittin': http://lylamiklos.com/
/r/MensRights26/08/13 10:18 PM
5

I'm not sure that shutting down free conversation is the intent, but it is the end result. Face it - most men still try to treat women like "ladies" (whether or not this is correct/sexist/whatever is another conversation entirely), or at the very least are concerned about being labeled a sexist, and therefor curtail free conversation.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 10:13 PM
0

non sequitur?
/r/MensRights26/08/13 08:47 PM
5

Eh, I think he probably pulled that one out of his ass, and I would say it likely doesn't really apply in this case. I could see it if he were talking about a woman getting some complicated 'do, but this gal wasn't looking for that.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 08:47 PM
2

My flat top takes a fair amount more time than that. Closer to 30 - 45 minutes.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 08:12 PM
50

I don't think it's silly at all. It's one of the things I LOVE about the barber shop I go to here in Austin. Everyone is free to talk whatever shit they want about whatever they want. Inject a female presence in to that atmosphere and it does nothing but squash the free flow of conversation. The difference is that when women walk in there and realize what the place is (which takes about .5 seconds), they have the decency to just turn around and walk out. I won't come to your breast feeding circl…
/r/MensRights26/08/13 08:11 PM
1

You aren't even trying at this point, are you?
/r/MensRights23/08/13 05:57 PM
1

It was written on 6/26/13. I have no idea what you're talking about. So 292 conservative groups to 6 liberal groups who faced additional scrutiny, this is equal treatment? Where do you get it was only 6 liberal groups?
/r/MensRights23/08/13 01:22 AM
1

So let's read liberal bias like Politicus No, don't bother to read it. Read the internal IRS memos instead. You can read what Politicsusa was talking about without even looking at their site. You don't even have to click on the link. Just go read the internal memos which I linked separately. I've told you this twice now - why it's still an issue for you I'm not really sure. You truly are brainwashed. Yes, yes, which is why I'm an MRA to begin with. Totally fucking brainwashed, even though I thin…
/r/MensRights23/08/13 12:50 AM
3

Give me this right fucking now.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 10:59 PM
1

The newsmax article is 2 months old. It is from 6/27. That's 4 days shy of 2 months, but you can add, right? Since 6/27 we have found out that what newsmax published is simply not true, and that liberal organizations were targeted just the same, and the internal IRS memos prove it. And it is complete BS that I have to read your posting from some left-wing cyber rag but Heaven's forbid you read something from Newsmax or NRO. That's why I followed up by posting the actual memos that the article wa…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:58 PM
1

3 liberal groups were denied tax-exempt status And no conservative groups. ...nearly 300 conservative groups had their applications under review, delayed and scrutinized. As they should have been. And you are saying this is equal treatment? Yes, I am. You apply for tax exempt status you should be prepared to prove you deserve it. Read the NRO article. No. It's a biased source. Find one that isn't and I'll read it. During the session with the Cincinnati office, it is clear that they provided no a…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:53 PM
1

This came close to happening to me. Fortunately I found a job delivering flowers for like $8 an hour under the table, so I was barely able to pay support and keep a roof over my head. I was making about $1300 per month, and $450 of it (at the time) went to support. I had under $1000 per month to eat and pay rent with, and my rent was $600. I had to use Netzero for dial up internet (this was before broadband) when it was still free. The only reason I had cable is because I had a descrambler and t…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:48 PM
1

It's more like 18%, but yes. I was 30 and had to rent a room from an 18 year old kid in the 'hood where dudes sold crack on the corner, and I didn't have enough money for a car or anything so I had to walk everywhere.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:46 PM
1

Progressives are centrists. Leftists are leftists. Here are the groups that were actually denied tax exempt status: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/21/business/advocacy-groups-denied-tax-exempt-status-are-named.html?_r=2& Note that all 3 were female or feminist oriented groups. BOLO list directly from the IRS: http://democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov/sites/democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov/files/BOLO%20Replacement%20Pages.pdf Note that it is targetting "ACORN" successors and marijuana advocacy - bo…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 12:53 AM
1

No. Read the article. I won't even deign to read an article from a biased source like newsmax. Not to mention that it's an article from 2 months ago and many, many more facts have come out since then.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 12:47 AM
8

In the state of VA it can be up to 65% of your gross pay (not net pay).
/r/MensRights21/08/13 10:05 PM
-1

If the divorce doesn't happen in Texas and/or the kids don't reside in Texas then this isn't going to help you.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 10:05 PM
1

P.S. http://www.politicususa.com/2013/08/20/definitive-proof-republicans-irs-lied-congress-public-irs-scandal.html
/r/MensRights21/08/13 07:13 PM
1

Why are you friends with an idiot?
/r/MensRights21/08/13 12:01 AM
1

It's fairly well degrading to both genders, honestly. It assumes that all men are milquetoasts and all women are unreasonable.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 09:00 PM
1

So banning table salt? Banning trans fats? Banning 16oz soda pops? Banning smoking? None of that is liberal. Some of it is health conscious - some are overbearing, some are reasonable. Things like obesity and cancer raise insurance rates for everyone and make healthcare, in general, more expensive, so it's in the best interests of the [insert government entity here] to have regulations. Banning firearms? Nobody is doing that. Raising taxes on the incomes of individuals in order to confiscate the…
/r/MensRights19/08/13 06:16 PM
1

And liberals do not believe in liberty. They do, actually. They believe in the liberty for homosexuals to marry. They believe in the liberty of a woman's body. They believe in the liberty of sexual expression. They believe in the liberty of what you put in your body. What they don't believe in is the liberty of businesses, because businesses aren't people and don't deserve liberties. They deserve regulation.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 06:23 PM
1

You are in denial saying that anarchist/libertarian political ideologies are in the same camp as progressive liberalism, communism, marxism, socialism. No, I am not, because they were coined by people who were communists. I already showed you the proof. The one in denial is here, because you're denying the origins of those words. This makes you an anti-intellectual buffoon. And if Rand Paul is a libertarian, and libertarians are leftists like you say, then why would you not vote for Rand Paul? B…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 06:22 PM
1

OK, so we have numerous sources showing that anarchism came from left wing ideology, and that libertarianism also came from the same anarchist ideology, but you're still in denial. I don't need your chart - I have reality and history. I've already proven what I've said in no uncertain terms. If you disagree with the very people who coined the terms then guess who's in denial there, bub? Since when does the Nolan Chart become the be-all-to-end-all? Brooks, Frank H. (1994). The Individualist Anarc…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 01:27 AM
1

Libertarianism is not a left-wing ideology (it is neither right or left). Are you just retarded, maybe? Liberal is the fucking root word of "libertarian". Liberty. Liberal. Libertarian. Are you seeing the connection yet? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism The use of the word "libertarian" to describe a set of political positions can be tracked to the French cognate, libertaire, which was coined in 1857 by French anarchist Joseph Déjacque who used the term to distinguish his libertarian …
/r/MensRights15/08/13 10:50 PM
1

You cannot advocate for more state control and consider yourself an anarchist. Who is it that's doing this? It surely isn't me. Fact of the matter is that anarchism is a radical left wing ideology. Period. End of story. Conservatives are also statists - they want the government to control who you fuck, who you marry, what you do with your body, what you put in your body, and on and on. Now if you go to a G20 Summit, you will see "anarchists." They are rioting and raising Hell and then when you a…
/r/MensRights15/08/13 06:37 PM
1

anarchists are leftists? Yes. That's about as far left as you can get. Anarchists have always been leftists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#Origins Anarchists participated alongside the Bolsheviks in both February and October revolutions, and were initially enthusiastic about the Bolshevik revolution.[103] However, following a political falling out with the Bolsheviks by the anarchists and other left-wing opposition... Also see: Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman. These are some early an…
/r/MensRights15/08/13 01:14 AM
1

Hahahahahaha you're idea of what a leftist is is so far off base it's not even funny. Anarchists are leftists, and they're definitely not looking to grow the government, and they're definitely not statists. What you listed are dictators, and regardless of whether a dictator is a rightest or leftist they do the same thing - steal and butcher. Leftists, in the common use of the word, are people who are looking for social equality. Seriously, guy, you should get a handle on what you're talking abou…
/r/MensRights14/08/13 05:55 PM
1

You are trolling. You are a brainwashed leftist all the way. Obama not a leftist? Pelosi not a leftist? No, no, and no. Warren might be, but the jury is still out on that one. The problem is that you don't have any idea what a leftist actually is because they haven't existed in American politics in close to 30 years. The closest we've had was Dennis Kucinich. No leftist would have ever voted for the Patriot Act. Pelosi voted for H Amdt 84 - not leftist. She voted against H Amdt 71 - not leftist.…
/r/MensRights14/08/13 01:11 AM
1

Where were you for the "war on women? There aren't any left wingers in Congress or the White House. We have conservatives and right-leaning centrists. The left is full of self-proclaimed feminist politicians. here is a list of all the politicians supported by the National Organization for Wilde beasts- not a single Republican And not a single leftist. These are not the policies of Rand Paul. He's a Libertarian, but he's crazy conservative in plenty of other ways. He's anti gay rights and is a st…
/r/MensRights14/08/13 12:05 AM
1

So, she said that the jobs have unfair expectations period, not that they're unfair specifically for women. She did seem to think that this hurt women more than men, and I kind of get where she's coming from but I think it's because of women's choices and values, not because of any sexism. I agree that any job that requires over 40 hours per week and to basically give up having any meaningful relationship outside of work is unfairly demanding. That type of expectation shouldn't be awarded with o…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 10:37 PM
1

He's also the foreign war expanding, Muslim killing, expanding spy programs, drone using, propping up big business guy. Those are all far right policies. What you have noted above are centrist policies, not leftist. The majority support all of them, and the majority are not leftists. And yet you vote Democrat and call Rand Paul a crazy? Yes, because he's crazy. Libertarianism is so amazingly naive that you just can't take it seriously once you pass the age of 13. No leftists have expanded the wa…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 06:07 PM
1

Since the GOP is also a big group of man-haters like you said. They must be waging a war on men as well as their war on women. I see, you're actually just trolling. He is still a leftist Horseshit. He's a conservative. He's also a bible thumper - he originally wanted to become a Catholic priest. And why do you think child support, alimony and child custody disputes are won by women most of the time? They pay for the best lobbyists, obviously. Then the leftist lawyers become progressive leftist j…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 01:28 AM
1

I didn't say anything about a "war on men". Most child support and alimony laws (the focal point of the MRA movement) were written decades ago and dredging up information on them is tough. I like that you include Jerry Brown though - one of the least liberal Democrats in the United States. "After taking office, Brown gained a reputation as a fiscal conservative.[10] The American Conservative later noted he was "much more of a fiscal conservative than Governor Reagan.""
/r/MensRights13/08/13 12:52 AM
1

Where do you think those laws came from, exactly? If you think that liberal politicians believe in strict gender roles you are sadly mistaken there, tough guy. That is strictly the realm of conservatives.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 12:35 AM
1

I most definitely can be both. This world isn't black & white, my friend. By your estimation you can't be conservative and an MRA either, because every conservative candidate believes that men are piggy banks and women take care of children, and that circumcision is a religious right.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 12:01 AM
1

At 45 I'm old enough to know when I should and shouldn't go to the doctor. I go when a doctor's help is needed and for annual physicals and bloodwork.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 11:05 PM
1

Except that the Republican party actually taxes you worse than the Democrats do. Check historical tax rates under various presidencies and check who held the power in Congress at the time. The Republicans sure do talk a good game, but then they do the opposite of what they say once they're behind closed doors.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 10:59 PM
1

It's not preposterous in the slightest. The far left is always on the cutting edge of politics, and the MRA movement is on that edge. I'm a leftist MRA and I won't vote for Clinton, sorry to bust your little pigeonholing-fest there. I wouldn't vote for Rand Paul because he's a crazy bastard. Voting Republican doesn't equate to voting MRA - the Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats where it comes to Mens Rights - they believe that a man's place is as breadwinner and that he should supply b…
/r/MensRights12/08/13 10:54 PM
1

Why would I form meetup groups with feminists? And no, I would never support Hillary Clinton. Not a snowball's chance in hell.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:54 PM
3

You should've let it go at work and just filed a libel or slander suit against her - that's where you fucked up. If you persisted in communication when she wasn't answering - especially about non-work related issues, then you are in the wrong here, plain and simple.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 09:20 PM
0

You have guessed wrong. Voted for George Allen in '94. Voted for John Warner a couple times. I also voted for Bush Sr. the first time he ran for president. I bet you have no idea why an insurance company would lobby against a government plan that gave them tons of new customers.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 08:57 PM
1

404 error
/r/MensRights06/08/13 07:58 PM
0

I'm a liberal, Democrat, and an MRA. You, on the other hand, are a putz.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 08:12 PM
0

I'm no troll. In fact, I fucking hate cops (check my post history for proof), but this guy did everything to get himself shot shy of pointing a gun at the cop.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 05:32 PM
2

With this exception: If the cop feels threatened in any way they can shoot. Kind of a bullshit code, if you ask me, but I'm not sure what can be done about it.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 10:37 PM
-2

Really? This guy was told to get on the ground twice, didn't comply, then moved towards the officer while aggressively asking "What are you going to do, bitch?" and we think this is a men's rights issue? What the fuck is wrong with you people? I fucking hate cops (check my post history if you don't believe me), but this guy was asking for some type of response from a cop who had a weapon drawn and pointed at him. How is that not a justified shooting?
/r/MensRights02/08/13 10:35 PM
1

If you're buying insurance, unless you go with a single policy and not a group policy (which is what you have if you get insurance from your employer), then you're already subsidizing other people's health care. In fact, that's the entire point of group plans. EVeryone pays in to it, and what the insurance companies bank on is that a bunch of healthy people pay in that never use it, which pays for the people who need/use it quite a bit. They almost always end up with a huge net profit from this.…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 11:40 PM
13

MRAs love to claim courts are biased against men, but really they are mostly biased against the income earner (the payor of support) and against the person who moves out first. Patently not true. It is biased against men, specifically. Show me a woman who has to deal with the type of support burdens that men do. For example: My older brother and I both divorced our wives within a couple years of each other in the same state here in the U.S. He got custody of his kid, I did not. His ex was ordere…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 11:33 PM
2

I think that you may have a valid case for never having been made aware of the child support order, and it even sounds questionable as to whether or not one exists. Get a new lawyer, and don't ever listen to them saying that you don't need to be in court.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 08:41 PM
3

You didn't answer my question, Colbert.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 08:18 PM
1

You can sue your lawyer, sure, but good luck trying to find an attorney who will take the case. I would get a new lawyer and challenge everything if what you are saying is true. However, you should have been told in court what the child support amount will be - they typically don't deliver the results of a court case by mail. Were you not in court when this happened? What is the date on the order? Were you in court that day? Also, it would seem that you aren't all that involved in what's going o…
/r/MensRights31/07/13 08:11 PM
2

Who said I supported President Obama? You are a caricature of a conservative - kinda like Stephen Colbert, which is how I know you're an SRSer trying to make MRAs look bad.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 08:06 PM
1

As I said elsewhere in this thread: both my younger brother and I are registered Democrats - not that the party represents us because we're far left liberals, and we're both MRAs. Hush yo' mouf.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 08:02 PM
2

The Tea Party was started by the Koch brothers, who are libertarians, to support Ron Paul. They have been using it, since inception, as a way to get their libertarian ideals in the spotlight.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:54 PM
2

I'm a Democrat and an MRA. So is my younger brother. Maybe you need to fuck off?
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:52 PM
0

I see SRS is out in force with their weird ass "conservative MRA" alts.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:51 PM
1

Can we actually get some facts instead of relying on some shitty blog posts? Seriously. Also, that Reuters article shows plain and simple that the claims are bunk: The figures released do not factor in substantial government subsidies that will be available to many consumers based on household income, which will offset their actual out-of-pocket expenses. As well, the figures cited are for "high deductible plans for individuals" and doesn't say shit about it affecting only men, or affecting men …
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:49 PM
3

So, if you had a court order to pay a specific amount of child support and you didn't pay that amount, then you violated the court order, plain and simple. Whatever agreement you had with your ex likely doesn't matter at all - even if it's in writing and notarized. If you were unemployed for a while you should have petitioned the court to lessen your child support payments - if you didn't then this is also your fault. As far as the arrearage, you're likely shit out of luck on that front. For the…
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:34 PM
0

Honestly, I think it's people who are the analogue of redfems. It's a problem with feminism, but it's a bigger problem for us because the community is so small that it seriously dilutes the message
/r/MensRights31/07/13 12:14 AM
0

So reaching out to him would probably be a better idea than shaming him, no?
/r/MensRights30/07/13 08:38 PM
1

I was addressing a single post.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 08:36 PM
2

There are plenty of men's rights websites that use the term "white knight", so that's just patently untrue. Same with feminist sites and "neckbeard". Fedora is a new one on me. http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/White_Knighting http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/chivalry/the-white-knight-problem/ http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2011/06/01/white-knighting-explained/ http://www.stuffyouwillhate.com/2011/11/whats-wrong-with-white-knighting/ http://www.somethingawful.com/news/neckbeard-beginners-gu…
/r/MensRights30/07/13 01:21 AM
-8

"white knighting" is a childish term used by petty people who are in to shaming instead of looking for solutions.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 10:59 PM
0

He's no "white knight", he's an idealistic 16 year old kid who has no experience in the world. F'reals, people, why the name calling of a little kid? Are you really that desperate to use the term "white knight" today? He might be more mature than anyone who labels him a "white knight". At least he's thinking instead of reacting - whether or not his thoughts have been steered in the wrong direction is another story.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 10:15 PM
1

I really can't figure out what you're on about at all.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 06:17 PM
1

Uh huh. I bet your penis is also 10 inches long, you're huge and buff and make a couple mil per year - like everyone else on the internet, right? And, no, it isn't flawed. There are multitudes of scientific studies that show full well what I am claiming. http://www.intervida.org/en/publications/intervida-news/the-importance-of-early-childhood-stimulation http://www.aboutourkids.org/articles/stimulation_development_during_infancy_tuning_in_your_baby039s_cues http://www.gnb.ca/0000/ECHDPE/learn-e.…
/r/MensRights27/07/13 01:30 AM
3

Children should have learning stimulation from the time they are born. It's been well proven that kids who are educated earlier fare better all the way through life. You may want dumb, trashy kids, but I don't. The daycares I am referring to don't provide learning stimulation Then you're talking about a babysitter, not daycare. Big difference.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 01:17 AM
2

You are delusional. I live just outside of NYC in Somerset, NJ, and it was over $700 per month for a single child in 1994. In Crystal City (Arlington, VA, just outside of D.C.) it was $900 per month in 1997. Unless you're talking about a private person who just watches your kids and provides no other sort of learning or stimulation - then you might have a point.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 01:04 AM
1

What are you on about, exactly? I can't figure out if you actually have a point or if you're just babbling away for the sake of your health.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 05:40 PM
3

It's an arrears, so no.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 01:05 AM
2

I stopped reading for precisely this reason. He just came off as an insensitive asshole. edit Because of Revoran's note, I read the entire article. Well, that's not entirely true either - I skipped the bits where he was being satirical and got to the meat of the article. He does make good points. The problem is that the people who need to see those points aren't ever going to get to them.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 12:06 AM
2

I'm pretty much a far left liberal and I'm 45. I get more liberal with each passing year. I'm not a communist, but I do believe in tenets of both capitalism and socialism. So... I guess you're pigeonholing isn't really working, is it? I could make assumptions about you too, but where would that get us?
/r/MensRights24/07/13 12:07 AM
2

For being a divisionist, which is precisely what I said elsewhere in this thread. Which means it was not implied. So, want to take that foot out of your mouth now?
/r/MensRights24/07/13 12:01 AM
3

I'm a liberal and I'm offended. I said no such thing.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 11:47 PM
4

I thought you'd like to know that you make no sense.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 11:14 PM
1

The man pays child support for the next 18 years.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 09:04 PM
2

When I was about 13 I started doing baby sitting for a couple families around my neighborhood. It was decent money for mostly doing nothing and all of those folks loved me. Now, this was like 1981 or so... a lot has changed socially in the mean time. I was always trying to make a buck back then. Had a paper route, mowed lawns, raked leaves, and shoveled snow for ducats. I always had cash on me.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 09:01 PM
7

I'm an MRA and liberal. Why don't you go fuck yourself?
/r/MensRights23/07/13 08:43 PM
1

This is me not believing you.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 10:26 PM
2

I replied to a specific post. I didn't reply to a group of posts. I think maybe you don't understand how reddit works.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 09:56 PM
0

The sidebar is your friend.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 08:51 PM
2

SRS in the house ^
/r/MensRights22/07/13 08:49 PM
3

The bars allow this because vaginas in house = penises in house. Penises spend more money on drinks than vaginas (mostly because they're buying them for vaginas in the hopes of getting in, which they likely aren't going to). It's really that simple - it's a business decision. Sucks, but it's the truth. And sexist.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 08:48 PM
5

Reverse the genders and tell me how you feel.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 08:45 PM
6

Who still eats at KFC?
/r/MensRights22/07/13 08:44 PM
1

What I want to know is who didn't already know this aside from children?
/r/MensRights19/07/13 09:03 PM
5

Just seems like a dumb teenager to me.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 08:43 PM
1

What is never the best lesson, however, is humiliation.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 06:09 PM
0

How about we just try to show them the error of their ways instead of slinging insults at them?
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:49 PM
1

I disagree that it is juvenile. That's fine - you're just wrong. It's juvenile to call people names period.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:48 PM
1

Correct. It is hurting the cause as a whole.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:46 PM
0

I don't find it necessary at all. It's divisive. We should be trying to win these men over to our cause, but calling them "white knights" isn't going to accomplish that.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:46 PM
-19

You have good points, but I'm downvoting you for using the juvenile term "white knights".
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:42 PM
1

nd I'm sure that after engaging in the exact same behavior a dozen times you are just as likely to spend 2 hours in a cell and not be slapped with a more serious charge. That is correct - you will not be. You go on believing what you'd like. I don't have to believe anything - people have been doing just this for decades. I've seen it. I've done it.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 10:13 PM
1

No. Jail and prison are two different things. For typical acts of civil disobedience you would only spend a few hours or maybe a single night in jail. Then you can go about your business. So, yes, you lack conviction.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 09:58 PM
1

If you're not willing to go to jail for it, yes.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 09:47 PM
0

That's precisely what "If a rule is bullshit then you have an obligation to break it." means.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 09:45 PM
4

Ah, you just lack conviction. Check.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 09:02 PM
3

People like you can never give me a good reason why abortion -- and only abortion -- gets this special carve out, which no other treatment of medical procedure receives. Because no other medical procedure faces being legislated out of existence. Nothing in the constitution specifically or implicitly guarantees a right to medical choice. You have a right to privacy in the Constitution, and that right to privacy extends to the medical decisions that you and your doctor make.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 08:52 PM
4

Civil disobedience. Learn it. Love it. Live it.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 08:50 PM
5

largest feminist online community [citation needed]
/r/MensRights16/07/13 08:49 PM
3

Yes - by legal definition, it would cease to be murder. Like the "Stand Your Ground" laws that allow you to shoot and kill someone.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 08:46 PM
-4

What does your argument about when a person becomes a person have to do with men's rights? Nothing.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 08:43 PM
1

Weird... it only says Dad in the subject, but I'm seeing both the mom and dad in the picture.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 07:39 PM
2

By "they" I'm referring to the group I wasn't referring to the group. I was referring to a specific poster who did nothing but spew epithets. So, you're entirely out of context.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 06:34 PM
3

You're full of shit, and here is why - you said: They clearly can debate, and do, with points. How do you know? The comment was removed, so you have no idea if this person used "points" or if they are even capable of doing anything aside from slinging around insults. So, either A) you are that person, or B) you're just dredging up some 30 day old post for no discernible reason. I'll take "A" for $1000, Bob. B makes no bloody sense.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 12:30 AM
4

Oh, yeah, it would appear that it tricked me, too. Heh Thanks for pointing that out.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 11:21 PM
2

WTF? Did he commit suicide? They talk about his passing...
/r/MensRights08/07/13 08:53 PM
8

When I see "liberal" and "republican" or "conservative" in the headline of one of these posts I immediately think "SRS troll". Stop being partisan hacks. This has nothing to do with liberalism or conservativism.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 08:50 PM
2

60% is the maximum amount that PA can take for child support - it's not a guaranteed thing. They have the same law in VA (although it's 65%), but they "only" took about 45% of my pay. Thank the gods I didn't have to pay alimony.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 08:48 PM
1

No, my reasoning is spot on. They clearly cannot debate - they make no salient points at all. The reasoning is most definitely not there. I know full well how to look past offensive language to get a point - The Redneck Manifesto is one of my favorite books and is testament to this. The comment was removed for being so offensive and without any merit. How do you even know who posted the comment? The only way would be if you are the poster and this is a sock puppet account.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 06:45 PM
0

which most feminists I know and have spoken with would disagree with. Except that most in that thread disagree with you.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 09:53 PM
0

Yes - mostly by MRAs trying to respond to the thread - can suss this out because very, very few feminists responded. I also want to note that when such a thread was posted by an MRA that it was hidden and the user was banned. So, they will only even tolerate this type of discussion if it is tabled by a feminist, and will only respond positively to other feminists. As soon as someone jumps in and starts asking questions the conversation gets ugly - from the feminist side.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 07:51 PM
0

It is true. The majority of responses were from /u/WhenWillILearn, who was doing nothing but attacking the entire idea of MRAs and the things that we find important. I don't sort by top comment. I sort by new. I got about 4 pages down in replies and all I saw were people saying they had the same experience on both ends and that one dipshit telling everyone who even tried to talk about men's issues that they were wrong and stupid. So, that entire post and the general attitude over there can go fu…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 07:28 PM
1

All I see are anti MRA posts interspersed with a few people who say they have had the exact same experienced on both ends that I have outlined. I feel attacked here just for being a feminist and reaching out. It is sad. You haven't been attacked for being a feminist yet. That's your imagination and a thin skin.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 06:59 PM
2

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/03/07/one_of_the_acorn_employees_caught_in_those_2009_video_stings_has_won_100.html http://mediamatters.org/blog/2010/07/21/never-trust-andrew-breitbart/168003 http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/03/there_are_lies_damned_lies_and_andrew_breitbart.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breitbart.com#Controversies They flat out make shit up and report it as news. Anyone that gets news from breitbart is automatically branded a complete idiot and should not be taken…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 11:15 PM
0

4 pages back and I'm not finding a link.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 10:36 PM
1

I really am trying to be respectful, but I feel like people are telling me "feminists think this..." Or "feminists think that..." It's because you're reading in to things. We're telling you what our actual experiences are in trying to engage feminists on their own turf. And, like it or not, feminism (the movement, not the individuals inside the movement) is moving to remove men from the conversation on many different fronts, and is creating spaces where men are just plain old not allowed. These …
/r/MensRights04/07/13 07:35 PM
1

So, why don't you link to your conversation on the "feminism forum" so we can engage in discourse with them about finding some common ground? $10 says you never do it because it isn't actually happening.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 07:29 PM
-2

This is an example of an SRS troll.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 07:17 PM
1

Who is blaming a victim here? Who is endorsing violence? I think that you really know that you don't have a point and just refuse to admit it.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:55 PM
1

Yeah, they sure do talk a good game, don't they? If I hadn't been banned from /r/feminisms for valid critiques I might even believe you.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:20 AM
6

Who did she praise, exactly? What makes her self-loathing?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 10:43 PM
0

And what evidence of that have you got? Go find the wayback machine (it exists on the 'net) and read through some old Something Awful forums.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 10:24 PM
1

Shit Reddit Says.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 10:23 PM
8

You're a feminist, you're not feminism. I think the more men get involved in it the more their voices will start to be heard with the whole. Only if they toe the feminist line - not if they disagree in any way. And there are plenty of feminist spaces where men are strictly verboten. Yes feminism needs some changes and I think a big change it needs is the inclusion of men in the movement. Then they need to stop treating men like shit.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 10:22 PM
6

Downvote for linking to a piece of shit site like breitbart.com
/r/MensRights03/07/13 10:20 PM
-2

Another SRS troll!
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:55 PM
2

Nothing born of Something Awful could reasonably be taken as "activists against wrong thought". And I don't believe that they think that this is what they're doing. They look for easy targets and troll the fuck out of them. In fact, those denying that this is true are likely SRS trolls.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:55 PM
0

By what standard are they not feminists? They really believe this shit. It looks like you've successfully been trolled. If they werent in fact feminists and just trolls it would mean they are just pretending to be radical feminists and dont really believe anything they say. DING DING DING! We have a winner!
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:54 PM
7

Again: I think they could be. But since feminism as a whole adamantly refuses to engage in any criticism of their movement and refuses to work on instances where men are actually treated unfairly - hell, feminism refuses to admit that there are instances where men are treated unfairly, and instead fight for laws that disenfranchise men and prop women up on a pedestal, it isn't going to happen.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:46 PM
9

They're always here. When you see all the ultra-conservative posts on /r/mensrights and talk of "manginas", "white knights", those god-awful liberals, and how incredibly awful women are in general, you're reading the post of an SRS troll.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:42 PM
1

People, in general, aren't predisposed to rational thought. We're animals, and we act instinctively. Most people don't realize this so don't even bother to rationalize anything unless they are trying to excuse their own bad behavior.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:25 PM
7

And they'll still find a way to blame it on "patriarchy" or "rape culture".
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:23 PM
2

I find people as a whole, in the West especially, are petty, selfish, and shallow.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:28 PM
6

You obviously completely missed the point of that post. Way to go.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:02 PM
2

SRS aren't feminists. They're professional trolls - no more, no less.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:00 PM
11

While you are correct that these are feminisms stated goals, the issue is that these aren't actually the goals that they are actively working towards.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 06:23 PM
4

I think that, theoretically speaking, they could be two branches of the same tree, however, with the current climate of antagonism from both sides and the feminist side refusing to engage in a meaningful dialogue in any way, shape, or form, that this just isn't going to happen.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 06:12 PM
1

The best thing about being a scout was doing cool shit. I didn't give a rotten cow fuck who I was doing it with - as long as they weren't an asshole.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 08:05 PM
-2

What does this have to do with Men's Rights, exactly? Am I missing something?
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:51 PM
4

Why should you?
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:45 PM
9

Yes. I won.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 10:23 PM
1

medically speaking, it is medically necessary to restore function. the function is unnecessary for life, so it isn't medically necessary - just as (except for some specific cases) abortion isn't necessary. Both are choices - except that viagra is a choice 100% of the time. And, no, it's not the same as osteoporosis. Osteoporosis causes pain - E.D. does not.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 07:47 PM
9

When is Viagra medically necessary?
/r/MensRights29/06/13 01:10 AM
6

Plenty of men in their 70's and 80's have penis' that work perfectly fine without viagra. And plenty don't. Abortion is the choice to end a perfectly normal body process. So is Viagra. t is medical only if the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother if carried out. All pregnancies are medical. We're not talking about abortions, we're talking about pregnancy. Pregnancy is a medical condition. You can elect to carry it to term or not. E.D. is a medical condition. You can elect to take medicatio…
/r/MensRights29/06/13 12:35 AM
12

Both are the body functioning as it was meant to function. As you age, your blood pressure falls, so erectile dysfunction is entirely expected. Every pregnancy is a medical issue. Period. End of story. Not just abortions - the entire pregnancy. Do you need to have a boner to be able to live? No. In fact, the body functions just fine without genitalia at all (as long as you're able to urinate). So fixing erectile dysfunction is entirely elective and it is a lifestyle choice. It is never, ever med…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 11:59 PM
12

abortion is an elective lifestyle/reproductive choice. Pregnancy is a medical issue. How is desiring the ability to have a boner any less an elective/lifestyle choice than an abortion?
/r/MensRights28/06/13 09:29 PM
3

It it's "all about the rights of the child, then are we saying that women are incapable of raising a child on their own? Because, if the former is your argument, then your reason is the latter. That is to say: feminists are saying that women suck and can't financially raise children on their own. Think about that for a minute.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 09:24 PM
1

Thanks! I will.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 06:08 PM
10

When you say "stop hurting, blaming, shaming, handicapping boys..." Can you expound on that? I know there's a lot of talk about boys having a harder time in school, but I haven't really read a lot about it (not for lack of wanting - lack of time), so I was hoping you might be able to summarize it for me.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 01:24 AM
3

Yes, I do. I tell those people to fuck off and refuse to be friends with them any longer.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 01:20 AM
6

Judging but what I read I'm not terribly surprised.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 10:44 PM
17

WTF? None of those replies were contextual and they didn't address a damned thing you said. What a bunch of reactionary assholes.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 07:57 PM
1

Who said anything about preventing anyone from working? And how would doing so be sexist in and of itself? Unless it were based on gender lines it couldn't possibly be called "sexist" - how completely ludicrous. If you had actually read the article you would see that there have been plenty of studies that show that productivity and profitability actually improve with a 4 day work week. You do realize that no one is suggesting cutting your hours, right? They're talkinga bout 4 10 hour days - stil…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:35 PM
1

What has been tried? What doesn't work? Are you talking about the 4 day work week or some other aspect of this conversation?
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:32 PM
2

Yes, it is. You're acting like what you dislike.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 12:58 AM
3

Did you even read the article? "The notion of the four-day work week was introduced in the 1950s by American labor union leader Walter Reuther, but workers -- or, more specifically, bosses -- have been slow to buy in. By most accounts, the American workweek is now at its most saturated: Nearly 86% of American men and 67% of women work more than 40 hours in any given week, in the name of productivity, financial necessity and, according to at least one study, happiness. In her book "White Collar S…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 12:50 AM
6

I really don't care why, I just want to change it to a 4 day work week. Use whatever excuse makes you feel good.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 08:42 PM
1

How dare they, you shouldn't have to ever speak if you don't want too. I know you said this facetiously, but at least you get the point. This is precisely right. Simply being in the same relative vicinity of you is not an offer for communication. ...either you made a point that has to do with absolutely nothing which is just in general people should be mindful of other people How is that a point that "has to do with absolutely nothing", as that was the point the blog poster was trying to make (p…
/r/MensRights25/06/13 06:52 PM
2

I've raised enough of them to know.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 12:43 AM
1

If you want to believe it is a fallacy then you will continue to go through life in a very unhappy manner.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 12:43 AM
1

The way I see it, if your goal is to pick up on a woman and she is giving you clear signals that she is not interested in talking to you, continuing to try to talk to her is a poor strategy. Obviously. It is not her right to have no one talk to her. I don't know that I agree (and I think we could easily leave the gender pronouns off here), but I understand your argument. If someone is clearly going out of their way to not be engaged with other people then you, as a rational and decent adult, sho…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 11:52 PM
1

There are two things at play here: The urge to procreate, and this is the first step in the mating process. We're animals - we have it. The need to elevate ourselves within our own economic/social strata (in this case, by being nice to someone) in an effort to make as much of the gene pool available to us as possible. Read: The Moral Animal by Robert Wright. It explains this process and ideology very, very well.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 11:32 PM
1

Ok so you've avoided it again. Not only are you really taking this article out of context and trying to say all people should watch body language,which isn't what this article is saying it's pretty specific. I already addressed this - I'm not doing it again. I'm saying yes but they shouldn't have to second guess themselves and really be that concerned... This is where you're wrong. You're saying you get it and "fair enough", but you clearly do not. I don't think anyone here would disagree with t…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 11:30 PM
1

I'm just curious as to why it's so important to give women excuses not to speak up for themselves. I didn't say anything about women - I addressed people as a whole. It would seem that reading body language when approaching strangers might be prudent - what if they looked like they wanted to put a fist through the face of the next person that talked to them? Might it not be prudent to read that and leave well enough alone? Why do you think it has to apply to just this one situation? Are you purp…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 10:23 PM
2

It's not just about reading body language though. It comes down to why do men have to be on the constant watch for everyone. If you are a person and thinking about approaching a stranger, you should be watching their body language to see if such an imposition would be prudent. The blog talks only about a dichotomy between men and women, but common sense says that this should apply all the time. For all of the things wrong with this blog post (and there are plenty to pick through), I think it got…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 10:08 PM
2

Give it up. I've tried to talk sense, as you are here, in to people here in /r/mensrights. They see a couple of phrases they don't like and the entire thing becomes suspect. Admittedly, the whole "Schroedinger's Rapist" thing is full on retard, but the tone of the article is exactly as your portray it - learn to read body language, fuckwit! The biggest problem here is that men aren't really raised to be attuned to that particular type of body language. We can see threats and recognize them throu…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 08:47 PM
1

I agree, but I'm not really counting on it.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 05:52 PM
2

Well, I see this as a good opportunity because, normally, to get any attention on an issue you need to show how it affects either women or children. Here we have pretty solid evidence about how it negatively affects children, so it can easily be a magnet for attention.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 05:20 PM
1

Oh, I agree. I was just sort of half-assed giving a warning that if we don't carefully guard that data that someone will use to to put one or the other gender down - we should always be wary of situations like this. Sorry I wasn't more clear.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 11:03 PM
1

100% agreed.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 10:37 PM
1

That seems logical. Approach it from a scientific standpoint. If one gender is being, say, scolded for a particular issue more than the other, then what can we do to change this? Is there something the parents can do? The teacher? The student? The class? A lot of good data can be had with this approach - how to use it is another story entirely.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 10:37 PM
1

I feel you - I hate it, too. However, I feel better knowing that I did something instead of sucking off the government tit.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 09:48 PM
1

I suppose that depends. Most jobs will pay better than welfare/unemployment will. I know I've always chosen working over sucking the tit.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 09:23 PM
4

Yeah, I found that sentence to be suspect as well.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 09:19 PM
1

In my case, her mother has a job - and she makes a good deal more than I do. However, I pay about 70% of what the court says it takes to raise my child per month? Why? The whore ex went out and got pregnant during the course of the divorce, then had a 3rd kid shortly after. Because of her having more children (who aren't mine) the state of VA says that I have to pay a larger percentage of the support amount. That's right, I'm being penalized for her having more kids by someone else.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 06:30 PM
2

I know - I pay $550. Well, until the end of this month, anyway. My daughter graduates on Thursday.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 06:02 PM
1

Well, the income bit... if you want to be a parent you need to support your child, so it shouldn't really be "against your will". Note that this is if you actually want to be a parent. Now, there is certainly a lot to be said about how a child support amount is arrived at, but that's a different thread entirely.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 05:48 PM
3

Man, everyone was being totally reasonable until the last 12 minutes or so. I mean, I understand how that woman feels - I've gone through it every weekend when I had to take my daughter back to her mom's - it hurts to have to let your child go and be away from you like that. However, you have to know how and when to pick your battles. This was one she wasn't going to win on that particular day and she should have let it go, difficult as that may be.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 10:00 PM
1

I'm not. I don't watch it.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:48 PM
2

Exactly.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:47 PM
1

That shit's gonna happen anyway, and you're not going to stop it. Get over it. It's shitty reality TV. The entire point is watching people treat each other like shit. If you watch it then you're part of the problem.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:47 PM
-3

That's not really a good excuse. "They're doing it too!!" doesn't fly.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:32 AM
1

You're using the "No true Scotsman" logical fallacy. If someone identifies as an MRA, they're an MRA. Same goes with feminism - if someone identifies as a feminist then they're a feminist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:30 AM
0

I think "SRS" immediately.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:26 AM
3

I feel precisely the same way. I think it's every bit as stupid a term as "white knights" and "manginas". It reduces us to a bunch of 8th graders who will never be taken seriously.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:25 AM
-2

So, while this is completely fucked up... why in the fuck are you contributing to this bullshit by watching such a piece of shit, sexist show in the first place?
/r/MensRights06/06/13 11:10 PM
2

Not disputing that at all.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 11:53 PM
2

Yeah, it was kind of tongue-in-cheek. I roll my eyes at all the "million mom" marches and stuff like that, so I was kinda making fun of them.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 11:41 PM
2

Also, in being completely fair, there are instances where women are forced to allow visitation time to their rapists, which I also find abhorrent. This should be stopped.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 10:57 PM
2

Taking steps to prevent it,aside from complete abstinence,does not mean a person( male or female) is not responsible for said child in our society. Then explain abortion. Disclaimer: I am all for a woman's right to choose.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 10:55 PM
6

So do I, and it's because I actually want to be a father. I wanted to be a father from the get-go, so this makes perfect sense. Men, however, who do not want to be fathers and have taken precautions against this should not be held accountable. The woman has the choice to abort, so the man should have the choice to refuse parenting. It's legal parity.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 09:09 PM
6

So, there is definitely a double standard here - no question about that, and it's troubling. However: Men don't go "Oh my god i touched her boob, it was so amazing" This is misleading. Most men don't - but there are some that do. But you were talking about 12 year old kids. 12 year old boys do exactly that - they're just actually excoriated for it.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 08:37 PM
2

Maybe we should have a march on playgrounds.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 08:22 PM
7

This is how we know you're a troll: ...scared little bitch... ...lolol! ...faggot cowardice... Why would anyone want to engage in "debate" with such a "person"?
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:45 PM
-1

I see no problem with A. B. is kind of a bitch, but that's the card you sometimes get dealt if you play the A. card. C. actually works sometimes - don't knock it.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 08:33 PM
2

Damn. I wish I were able to listen at work. I've always loved her program, and this promises to be a good one. Hopefully I can find some time to stream it later this week.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:09 PM
5

You should read her "Self Made Man" book. In fact, every man and woman should read it.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 03:57 PM
0

I think the title should read "guy makes fun of coworker and gets a letter from HR for it".
/r/MensRights25/05/13 01:36 PM
2

No. Yes. There was no conflict. That's a big question and precisely what the subreddit is all about. Keep reading. Organize? Hand out fliers for a meeting that you or someone else will chair? Plenty - I'm sure others have covered this so I'll let their answers stand.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 03:43 PM
1

I like this idea.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 03:29 PM
3

I'm an egalitarian, so I believe in everyone being treated precisely the same way.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 05:34 PM
1

It most certainly is. I am going to take from your reticence to reply that you are still in high school, which is no surprise at all because you're acting just like you're in high school.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 07:47 PM
0

This comment feels like it's saying that we should eliminate masculine and feminine gender roles in favor of a single androgynous gender role. It's saying no such thing. It's saying that people shouldn't feel the need to squash themselves in to some perceived idea of a gender role. You should just be yourself - there is no chance in hell that anyone, when being themselves, fits neatly into any idealized "gender role".
/r/MensRights15/05/13 07:45 PM
0

How old are you?
/r/MensRights08/05/13 09:44 PM
0

No one ever said you were doomed either. You're just being childish - showing that you're unable to hear what another person is saying. You're going a long way to proving feminists right - good job! How old are you?
/r/MensRights08/05/13 09:22 PM
0

No one said you needed to do anything. You can obviously do whatever you want - just don't expect much out of life on anything but the most shallow, basic level.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 09:10 PM
0

There's no reason that a discussion of feelings is hinged on a comfort with masculinity. No one ever said it was. What was said is that your comfort as a person depends on it. I can be comfortable with my masculinity and still not want to discuss feelings. Correct. You'll just never understand yourself or anyone else. However, if you're not comfortable talking on a deep, personal level with other men then you are definitely not comfortable with your masculinity.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 09:02 PM
0

You still have your own self hatred, you need to let that go. You're full of shit. Wait, that makes no sense. It makes plenty of sense. You can't grasp it because you don't understand your own emotions because all you've ever done with them is stomp them down in to your subconscious. The alternate version is that she was always a toxic, nasty person but she fucked with your head enough that you blamed yourself. I can assure you that this didn't happen. It took me years after our divorce to put e…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:51 PM
1

Because people do (all of them except sociopaths) have a wide range of emotions. It's just a fact. Do you feel comfortable enough in your masculinity to discuss the things you feel with other men?
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:46 PM
0

Why do you get to define what is means to be a person? Do people have emotions? Yes they do. If you don't acknowledge them then you aren't a person. Pretty simple, really. What if I want to be traditional? No one actually wants to not be able to express emotions. It's a role you're forced in to when you're being raised, just like women are forced in to the role of being a nurturing mother. Both deny people their humanity.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:45 PM
0

The construct of masculinity that paints men as sex-obsessed "alphas" is really harmful. So, you actually agree with the linked TED talk. Well done. However, so is a hegemonic definition of what it means to "be a man" - why should traditional masculine traits be abandoned? No one ever said that they should be. You're reading things in that simply don't exist. Be masculine. Celebrate your masculinity. Don't, however, bottle up emotions because it leads to problems. Why is this so difficult for yo…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:41 PM
1

I'm pretty sure he's just trolling.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:37 PM
-1

You need to let go of this "traditional" bullshit and just be yourself. Men aren't people when they refuse to act like people. Just like women aren't people when they refuse to act like people.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:37 PM
-1

Fuck you right in the ass. Don't you fucking tell me to look at what I'm saying - I know full fucking well what I'm saying, and I most certainly don't sound like a feminist. It's you who needs to take an objective look at what you're saying because you sound like a child. Straight up - if you were in front of me right now you would be knocked the fuck out for some of the shit you're saying. Tell me I'm no fucking MRA. I will clean your fucking clock. You need to realize how deep, and ingrained f…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:35 PM
2

Man, I just had it around with this ignorant fool as well. Don't feed the trolls is what I'm going to say. This guy sounds like a 15 year old who just got dumped and is pissed at the world about it.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:24 PM
0

Really? 60 days later?
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:20 PM
-2

And you're clearly a fuckhead. You folks have done a great job over the last 6 months of showing me exactly why the MRA movement is so hated. You are a bunch of meathead fucks who think that being masculine is fucking anything that moves and being "alpha". Let me explain something to you - you're no better than a dog. You have no idea what it is to be a person so you can't possibly even begin to be a man. Let me know when you grow some hair on your balls, Jr. High.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:09 PM
-1

I'm not in to anything anti-male. What I'm in to is showing people that men aren't just ignorant meatheads who are ruled by their cocks, and instead are living, breathing human beings with emotions, wants, and needs. What you are is a knee-jerk reactionary and likely not over the age of 21.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 07:59 PM
0

You are a clueless fool. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't you fucking dare tell me I'm not an MRA. I'm the guy who helped his brother get custody of his daughter. I'm the guy who had to help his brother out when he was only awarded $15 per week child support. I'm the guy who had to fight the family court system for 10 fucking years just to get a goddamned visitation schedule for his daughter so she could spend time with me without her cunt of a mom pulling it for stupid reasons like "it's snowi…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 07:58 PM
1

Only going on 5 years subbed. I've been an MRA for over 20 years. How about you?
/r/MensRights08/05/13 07:57 PM
-2

I looked at your comment history and refrained from calling you a concern troll in spite of the general consensus here thus far that the speech is largely antagonistic towards men. It is no such thing. I found it to be a great talk that mirrored experiences I have had in my own life - and I've been an MRA for 20+ years. Extend the same courtesy towards me. I did. Then you proved that you didn't listen to the talk at all and were just making things up, which puts you firmly in the realm of trolli…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 07:57 PM
0

Now tell me that men benefit being taught how to be more like "people." It sure helped me a hell of a lot. Once I had someone help me work through being able to express my emotions in something other than anger my entire life changed for the better. If you want details I can give them. I can say beyond any reasonable doubt that the benefit is tremendous. It's so insulting to even think about. What's insulting is that you really don't know what you're talking about yet here you are talking about …
/r/MensRights08/05/13 07:35 PM
-3

He could talk about how "being a man" means helping and believing your fellow man, if they come to you claiming to be abused by their spouse. This makes no sense contextually. At all. Be he could say we need to find ways that work for men, rather than the feminist version which is you need to express emotion in the same way women do. You need to forget about "man" and "woman" when it comes to emotion and think "person". This is precisely what he is on about - emotions aren't about gender. This a…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 07:32 PM
-1

Both need to occur. However, we have men that weren't raised to act like people by parents who didn't treat them like people. So, for those men it would be a great help to them to show them how to just be people. For young boys it would be beneficial to treat them like people, which is precisely what he is saying.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 06:38 PM
-3

He doesn't shame male sexuality in any way. He says the same things that we say - that men aren't just cocks looking for a place to put it. As to strike 4 - he mentions that because he's talking about men and how the way we are raised can manifest itself later. He's talking about men being in touch with themselves and who they are as people, so talking about men being abused doesn't fit in to the scope of the issues that he is addressing. Strike 5 - showing feelings isn't "act like a woman", it'…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 06:37 PM
-4

No, it's all about men learning how to be people. He is one of the foremost coaches in the country of boys, so he knows full well what role sports play in a boy's life. Not showing emotions other than anger is not synonymous with "masculinity". To state so is to be completely ignorant of the human condition.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 06:34 PM
-3

Ah, I see, so guilt by association. I suppose you're aware of the logical fallacy there, so I'll just let you seethe in your hate. P.S. It's exactly your destructive behavior here that is being discussed. It's really too bad because you have much to gain by listening. P.P.S. I'm an MRA and definitely no misandrist, and would not link to misandry.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 06:29 PM
0

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Carry on with your bad self.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 06:28 PM
-5

There is no attack on men and masculinity - quite the opposite, actually. Maybe you should listen to it before you judge.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 06:00 PM
-4

There is nothing hateful about men in this at all. You obviously haven't actually listened to it. Good job.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 06:00 PM
5

I honestly have been stationed all over the world, and I don't see this pervasive attitude of accepting sexual assault, or accepting some guy being an asshole to a female. Are you sure you're in the military? This doesn't sound like the same military I served in at all. It was one of the most sexist places I have ever been. Women were treated like shit and talked to like pieces of trash. We take it more seriously than the civilian courts do in most instances. I find this to be flabbergasting - i…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 03:41 PM
5

Jesus! The three of your are adorable together. Nice 'chops, too. I sport some pretty wicked ones myself. :) Hah! I also have a flat top... hahahaha
/r/MensRights03/05/13 10:11 PM
3

I think you both have good points. I suppose I would have moved had I been asked as well, but I definitely shouldn't HAVE to move and swapping the child with someone sitting next to the mother should also have been an option.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 10:08 PM
9

Good on you for taking that little girl under your wing.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 10:06 PM
3

Damned sound advice.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 10:00 PM
6

Legbeards. I love it. I'm giving you an upvote for that and that alone.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 09:55 PM
9

Sadly, I'd have to say that, being a gay man, you're probably more likely to be a victim of discrimination like this than we hetero guys are. It isn't right, but so, so many people still see pedophilia and homosexuality as going hand-in-hand that it's actually quite shocking. Keep doing what you're doing and try not to let it get to you - the world needs more men like you.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 05:53 PM
2

Do what the rest of the rich do - offshore accounts.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:51 PM
3

Sure as hell is, brother! Welcome to /r/mensrights, and to the MRA movement in general.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:09 PM
1

Example 1 is a pretty shitty example: Fast forward again until I was 12 years old, and a 7th grader. I hadn't even kissed a boy yet, and I noticed something was wrong down there. I had a single open sore on my genitals, and I vividly remember the intense amount of pain I was in. It lasted 5 or 6 days before the pain went away. Sounds like she had a herpes outbreak before she was sexually active. It could have happened.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 09:08 PM
0

Still not buying that it's the average cost.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 05:48 PM
1

There is no way in hell that this is "average". My divorce cost me about $2000. My brother got one that cost him about $40k total. I know a number of other people who have been divorced for under $10k. I don't know anyone who paid over $40k.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 04:45 PM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flunitrazepam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flunitrazepam#Drug-facilitated_sexual_assault
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:15 PM
2

Lawyer up. Immediately.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 04:44 PM
3

This is actually true. For more information read the book "The Moral Animal" by Robert Wright.
/r/MensRights11/04/13 06:30 PM
2

I haven't found that to be true at all. I have quite a lot of friends and all of them are egalitarian.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:35 PM
1

Sounds like you need a new social group.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:25 PM
1

Its ok though, logic and reason will never penetrate the liberal delusion. You're a funny guy. My older brother is a tea partier, as is my father, as is my mother. They're all a bunch of hate spewing racist, homophobic shitbags. My older brother kicked his daughter out of his house when she came out as lesbian at 16. Oh, yeah, totally just dudes with "dont' tread on me" signs: http://www.examiner.com/article/guns-at-new-mexico-teabaggers-tea-party http://helenair.com/news/local/tea-party-encoura…
/r/MensRights05/04/13 07:28 PM
-2

Except tea partiers are civilized. Are you hittin' the crack rock? Have a coherent message. Act Mature and respectful... Yes, yes you are. ...and any other fringe group that wants to scream against the "man". Doesn't that describe the Tea Party?
/r/MensRights05/04/13 06:12 PM
4

Was that in the video anywhere? I'm at work and don't have a full 14 minutes to dedicate to watching it...
/r/MensRights05/04/13 06:12 PM
1

Same thing happens here in the united stats, but it always happens here. Only the primary custodial parent can claim the child as a dependent when it comes to taxes. So, even though I pay $550 per month to support my child, by tax law she isn't my dependent so I get no tax break. edit I should also add that her mom doesn't have to claim the money I send as income. what a crock of shit.
/r/MensRights04/04/13 06:03 PM
1

I've never even heard the term myself, so I'm not so certain how widespread it may even be.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 02:36 PM
1

He quite explicitly disavows the idea of this being a problem for men No, he doesn't. He says that this is a problem with the "ways we gender discussions of illness". He finishes that thought by saying: ...and supports an ideal of men as powerful and not dependent on others. Which is enforcing his earlier statements about gender roles being forced on men as well as women. He then makes an observation about the gender roles that are foisted on men, noting that: An ideal, of course, which serves t…
/r/MensRights03/04/13 02:33 PM
0

You did see that they are actually arguing, at least in part, that men are being subjected to shitty bullshit gender roles, right? My discomfort with the term[1] stems from the way it intersects with ways we allow men to talk about their illnesses – or don’t. By “we” I mean a sexist, patriarchal society which continually polices people’s gender and demands they conform to certain arbitrary – but nonetheless often damaging – roles. The way “man flu” gets used in everyday life seems to me to refle…
/r/MensRights02/04/13 09:22 PM
3

I suppose that's a fair assessment. Point taken.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 06:39 PM
2

Well, technically she isn't a pedophile - she's an ephebophile.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 04:44 PM
1

I totally am. Also, she's 12 years my junior. And a belly dancer. We met when I was 35 - do the math. ;)
/r/MensRights29/03/13 07:47 PM
2

That's pretty much how I feel, although I would add a deep-seated love of science in to the mix. Fortunately, I found just that, and she has an equally juvenile, sick, twisted sense of humor.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 07:23 PM
5

So? Men should hold the same standard. I've tried dating people who were intellectually beneath me and it was not a fun time. Once I realized what a problem this was causing me and that I shouldn't base a relationship solely on two points: being physically attracted and someone generally treating me well, then my relationship problems went away.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 06:57 PM
2

I suppose I misunderstood you then - it sounded like you were saying that we should fix the family court system first and worry about the marriage bit later. So, yes, it does appear that we do agree. Thanks for clarifying.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 02:21 PM
1

Both are definitely important - no question about that. In my personal opinion, however, equality is first and foremost - everything else comes after. If we took your advice blacks and women still wouldn't be able to vote because the system is so fucked up.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 02:11 PM
0

No, but it was a lesbian that was raped and killed in Nebraska. And, yes, he is adding caveats in religiosity.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 06:45 PM
1

It's not institutionally because it's not codified in to law. There are plenty of discriminatory laws against homosexuals though. Therein lies the difference.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 06:44 PM
0

Maybe you need to make yourself a bit more clear?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 05:50 PM
-2

I see, now we're adding all sorts of caveats. You do realize that the United States has a huge problem with religious extremism, right? Which is precisely why there is so much violence against gay men. Well, according to you, those are outliers and should be dismissed as "out of the norm". You're just not making a cogent argument here.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 05:49 PM
3

Do you know how many gay relationships involve fathers? Right. No gay men have ever fathered children. Ever.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:48 PM
0

Tina Brandon http://www.washingtonblade.com/2011/08/05/5-lesbians-attacked-police-refuse-to-take-report/ http://gothamist.com/2012/06/16/lesbian_attacked_at_sizzler_breakfa.php http://www.kentucky.com/2011/08/25/1856382/alleging-hate-crime-harlan-county.html Do you need more examples?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:29 PM
5

I disagree. The bigger issue is equality. Family courts come second. Upvote for an interesting argument though.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:25 PM
8

This is probably the stupidest thing I have seen posted anywhere on the internet in the last 10 years. Disclosure: Proud MRA for over 20 years.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:20 PM
2

I guess the distinction I am making is that she wasn't explicitly malicious in her intent. Yes, she was. She specifically stated that his needs didn't matter - what she wanted was what she was going to get. There is no question that this is malicious.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:14 PM
1

I do not think she intended to rape you. Yes she did. She said "I don't care what you want." That's a pretty clear indication of her intent.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 05:31 PM
0

Call the police and report a sexual assault. Right now.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 05:31 PM
2

I think you're drawing the wrong conclusion. The title of this post should read "If you're a sexist, you probably like big boobs."
/r/MensRights27/03/13 05:11 PM
-3

I managed to get away, and then they spat at me. That's assault. A fair bit different than someone just calling you names. And, really, you can't honestly be this dense, can you? I used to be a very violent person and I never hit anyone just for talking shit. My nose has been broken three times. I've had dozens of stitches in my head. Every single one of my fingers have been broken at least once, most of them twice. ...he shoved her away because she wasn't backing off with the following and the …
/r/MensRights23/03/13 08:58 PM
-2

Oh no! Someone was yelling at me! The horror!
/r/MensRights23/03/13 07:49 PM
1

I mean if someone was literally an inch away from your face shouting at the top of their lungs, at what point does that become assault? When spit from their mouth lands on you. I shit you not.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:32 PM
-6

You don't have to do shit. You can walk away. He started a fight and he couldn't finish it. His fucking problem and not a "men's rights" issue.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:32 PM
8

So, we don't know what was taken out of context, we don't know what that context is, we have admission that the things said could have been taken as offensive, and there were "illustrations of difficult situations and behavior," but we don't know what those illustrations may be. I would say we don't have enough information to really make a judgement one way or the other in this case.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:27 PM
30

I did it for you, because I don't give a fuck.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:14 PM
2

No. I've had a pretty easy time of it, actually. My daughter starts college this fall semester.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 09:13 PM
1

Anytime I'm in a nightclub or at a concert or pretty much anywhere where people are drinking I'm at risk, because intoxicated people like to start fights. I also feel at risk anytime I'm walking somewhere that isn't my 'hood.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 05:59 PM
1

You dont report an incident to the police because you didn't think it was suspicious. You didn't say "suspicious". You said: If she has a good reason to think a man is following her... I even said: Maybe dude was acting suspicious. Definitely a troll. ...exactly what I've been saying the whole time. I never said it wasn't a non-event. I simply said that it wasn't a case of two people passing each other. TRROOOOLLLLLLOLOLOLOLOLO
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:18 PM
1

If she has a good reason to think a man is following her I have no problem with the idea that she filed a report about him. There is nothing in the report that would indicate anything like this was occurring. To assume such would be folly. Regardless of what you suggesting being more likely (which I debate, but that's another story entirely) that's not what is indicated in the post. That's really all you need to know. You're reading something in to it that isn't there. I'm taking it precisely as…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 08:09 PM
1

She filed a police report. She is irrational.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 06:22 PM
1

How would I possibly be able to explain her motivation?
/r/MensRights12/03/13 05:43 PM
1

I can only conclude at this point that you're just trolling.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 01:34 PM
1

You assume... I assume nothing. That's what the link says. She turned around. He walked the opposite direction. That is the order in which the story unfolds, that is the context, so that is what the link is describing. It specifically says she turned, remember, it doesnt say she turned and walked back the way she came. It says she "turned around". What part of "turned around" are you having trouble with? Congratulations. You also posted a paint picture of two people not passing each other. You a…
/r/MensRights09/03/13 10:03 PM
1

Ok, so if she turned around and walked the opposite way, and then he walked the opposite direction, then what happened? (note that they cannot pass each other if she turns around at all) Does this help you? (note that the man could have been approaching from several directions initially, so this is just one of many possible entrance scenarios) http://i.imgur.com/8BA11te.jpg
/r/MensRights09/03/13 08:04 PM
1

Actually, I've explained it several times. It doesn't say two people walked past each other going different directions. Again: The woman turned around and walked the opposite direction. What part of "turned around" are you having difficulty with?
/r/MensRights09/03/13 07:31 PM
1

You are misinterpreting what's there. I'm trying to teach you how the English language works.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 05:33 PM
1

No, I never said that. Oh, really? You said: If you have a kid, regardless of the circumstances, you're a total piece of shit if you don't help support it. This means that all parents of a kid (and a fetus totally counts, right?) are pieces of shit if they don't support it. Aborting is not supporting. I hope your dick falls off before you have a chance to leave more kids without a father. Well, firstly, my child does have a father - I'm very much active in her life. Secondly, I never intended to…
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:02 PM
1

You clearly are not.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 02:58 PM
1

So, you're saying that women who abort or adopt out their children are total pieces of shit. Check. You're sexist in every direction or you're a stupid little troll. P.S. I'm the responsible parent here. It would seem that it's you who needs to grow up.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 09:48 PM
1

You'd care more about your money than any child you'd have. Wrong. I have an 18 year old child and am divorced and pay my child support every month (she just turned 18 in December and hasn't graduated yet). I also spend as much times as I possibly can with my child, and I will continue to assist her financially through college. The point is that not everyone wants a child, and fathers should have an ability to divorce themselves from parenthood that would equal a mother's ability to do so. It's …
/r/MensRights08/03/13 08:37 PM
0

I'm sorry that you don't understand English.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 07:58 PM
1

I suppose you'll have to scroll up and read again where I pointed that out.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 07:58 PM
1

I quoted this in my initial response. OP did not state or suggest that anyone should force women to carry or abort, but the question he asks here does essentially amount to forcing if both opinions are heard and the man's decision is adhered to regardless of the woman's decision. And if you read that question in context with the rest of the OPs post you see that he isn't calling for anyone to force an abortion on anyone. This is my point. Probably a bad choice of wording on the part of the OP - …
/r/MensRights08/03/13 04:20 PM
0

That's precisely what you said. You just don't like it when you are confronted with the reality of it.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 04:16 PM
1

You made shit up, which I demonstrated above. you are a troll.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 04:16 PM
0

So, women should be able to opt out of parenting but men should not, because the child is only important when it's not the woman who wants to not be a part of the child's life. Check. Misandrist.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:43 PM
1

Did the OP say something like that? The specific scenario that he proposed was about keeping the child, and then went on to say: ...but it's outrageously unfair that a woman can hold a man financially responsible for two decades under those circumstances without a similar window to opt out of or consent to care of the child. So, it would seem that you're reading something in to this that simply wasn't said or proposed.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:42 PM
1

You are correct - it is possible to have a difference of opinion without being a troll. That isn't the case here. You're being downvoted because your trolling isn't contributing to the conversation.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:35 PM
1

Nice mental gymnastics you're doing there.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:33 PM
0

It's entirely relevant. That you can't see the connection just marks you as an anti-intellectual.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 10:33 PM
1

By saying it should be a woman's responsibility to have an abortion if the father request it You're making shit up. You said: You're saying, that although both the man and the woman created the baby, it's the woman's responsibility to get an abortion if the father isn't interested in being a father? too which I replied: Why not... Where did you say anything about this being the father's request? You didn't, so that isn't what I was replying to, so that's not what I said. He knew the risks when h…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 10:32 PM
0

That's what I found in ten seconds of searching. Which means you should easily find more. I don't know that I'd call it an "epidemic", but it's definitely a very, very huge problem, and it illustrates very well how all birth control and family law benefits women and detriments men. Women hold all the cards and can abdicate completely, regardless of what the father wants, or hold the father's feet to the fire, regardless of what the father wants. In other words, women have the ability to oppress …
/r/MensRights07/03/13 10:22 PM
1

Because we do not force people to have medical procedures done on them. Who said anything about anyone forcing anyone to do anything? You asked if it should be the woman's responsibility, and I asked "Why not?" This debate is about whether a father is responsible for helping support his child. If he has no say in whether or not that child is born, then why should he automatically be responsible? If you really think children are better off without their father's support, you're a misandrist piece…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 10:11 PM
0

She can keep the pregnancy and delivery away from the father. There is no need to name a father on a birth certificate. And even still there have been plenty of instances of the mother just adopting the baby out with no notification to a father who was trying to be involved in that child's life. Google it. Is the problem becoming more apparent? Here's just one that I found in less than 10 seconds: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2242567/Terry-Achane-Married-fathers-horror-wife-places-bab…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 10:05 PM
1

Why not, if it's the father's responsibility to pay for the child's upbringing if the woman decides to keep the child? And make no mistake about it - the amount of child support that is adjudicated is full support, not a portion of the support. There is no child of public-school going age that takes $550 per month, in-and-of-itself, to support. How about celebrities that end up paying in the thousands and tens of thousands of dollars per month in child support? Yeah, it's totally equitable and i…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 09:54 PM
0

So, the only one that has to consider the child is the father? The mother doesn't have to consider the child - she can abort the child or put it up for adoption and doesn't even need consent of the father to do so. Please explain to me how this is equitable or in the best interests of the child? It isn't, so you can't. It's in the best interests of the woman.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 09:51 PM
3

Fuck that! Thank you for standing up for all of us by way of standing up for yourself.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 09:01 PM
2

If one parent can abdicate their responsibility (abortion/adoption), then the other should be able to do the same. I want to be clear here: I think women absolutely, positively should have the right to choose once conception has occurred - and I would reinforce that by saying that I don't think abortion should have any restrictions what-so-ever. What I'm arguing is that men should have a similar right to choose (for themselves, not for the woman).
/r/MensRights07/03/13 09:00 PM
1

I didn't say anything about where a child would or wouldn't be better off - I'm stating what the norm is moving towards. http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/acrossstates/Rankings.aspx?ind=106 Do children deserve two parents? No, they don't. If that were the case what would we do with children who had a parent die? Should the state find a replacement parent? But if you have a kid, at the very least you're responsible to help support him/her financially. No you aren't. That's why there is adoptio…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 08:34 PM
2

I don't think anyone is suggesting that women should be forced to abort or forced to carry (although I could certainly be wrong). I think that the suggestion is that men should be able to divorce themselves from any and all aspects of parenting as a sort of "male abortion".
/r/MensRights07/03/13 07:39 PM
1

A vasectomy is easily reversed, so it's really not a bad idea.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 07:38 PM
1

I don't get why a child is entitled to support from two parents when single parent homes are becoming the norm.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 07:35 PM
6

Good job, man! Go get 'em!
/r/MensRights07/03/13 07:29 PM
0

If she turned around (which it does say), and what you say is correct, then he would have walked away with her. The context is that he walked in the opposite direction that she did when she turned around. It doesn't way "The male walked away in the opposite direction from which he entered the area." There is a sentence about which way the woman went, and in the next sentence it states that the male went in the "opposite direction." Contextually, this means he went in the opposite direction from …
/r/MensRights07/03/13 03:32 PM
-1

That is directly from the link. I added "[from the woman]" for emphasis. Maybe you need to read it again? Slowly? Maybe draw yourself a diagram while you're reading it? It literally said, verbatim: The female turned around and left the area. The male walked away in the opposite direction.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:37 PM
-1

"The woman turned around and left the area. The man walked in the opposite direction [from the woman]." This is two people walking up to each other and turning around and walking away.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 09:46 PM
-1

No. They are reporting two people walking towards each other, and then both people turning around and walking the other way. No one walked past anyone in this report.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 07:47 PM
2

Forgive me my ignorance, but how is this a "rape incident report"?
/r/MensRights06/03/13 07:45 PM
2

There is nothing reasonable about sanctioned discrimination.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 03:58 PM
6

You, sir, are everything that no movement needs. Substitute "male" and "female" with "black" and "white" and let me know if you think it would be legal.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 10:01 PM
1

Manginas? Pretty much every 8 year old boy I've encountered in the past 10 years or so.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 04:52 PM
0

Calling them childish names does nothing but invalidate the movement.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 10:36 PM
1

Well, since I'm typing I guess we're A-OK.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 07:05 PM
2

That word doesn't mean what you think it means. ver·bi·age /ˈvərbē-ij/ Noun Speech or writing that uses too many words or excessively technical expressions.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 06:59 PM
1

You are projecting, mon frere. Are you over the age of 15? I'm betting not.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 06:32 PM
0

You wield a double-edged sword with the practiced hand of a feminist. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 05:50 PM
1

They will value their circumstance and their children above your interests, which in turn, is usually a bad thing for two people in a budding relationship. So, my wife shouldn't have married me then? Because I was a single father and my child was and is valued above every other person on the planet. I must be white knighting. AMIRITE? You're a fucking retard.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 04:56 PM
0

If he went to Courts-Martial then, yes, it is legal.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 04:52 PM
1

How did I know Michele Bachman would be on this list? No. I cannot support the idiocy that comes out of that retarded person's mouth on a daily basis. You've got to be shitting me.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 04:50 PM
1

You ruined a potentially nice compliment with "white knights" and "manginas".
/r/MensRights02/03/13 04:48 PM
2

That's pretty much what I suspected.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 03:10 PM
0

So, I've searched all over the kotaku site and can't find this article. Did google searches as well - nada. Can someone link me to the original article?
/r/MensRights23/02/13 09:49 PM
0

It is, however, not nice to put other people through all of that. I maintain that if you're in that position you shouldn't be in a romantic relationship. It serves to cloud the issues and more often than not leads to enabling behavior on the part of your S.O. which makes recovery slow at best and not happening at all at the worst.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 07:05 PM
1

You can't help him. The only person that can help him is him. Take it from someone who has been there and got his shit straightened out.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 08:54 PM
5

Well, firstly, I'm not "going nowhere". I also have a good, well paying job with plenty of room to move if I so desire. Secondly, my wife has no such social pressures. We eliminate stupid people from our lives with prejudice. We don't tolerate bigots, sexists, racists, homophobes, etc etc etc. Her family (two sisters and her parents) both like me quite a bit and, honestly, they're the family I always wish I had had in my own youth - that's how much I care about them. None of our friends give a s…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 08:49 PM
-5

Sounds like he really shouldn't be in a relationship until he gets his shit squared away.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 07:55 PM
-5

Maybe you two shouldn't actually be married?
/r/MensRights21/02/13 07:29 PM
4

Meh. My wife makes more than me. She's my sugar momma! What could possibly be bad about that?
/r/MensRights21/02/13 07:29 PM
1

Did I say anything about patriarchy? Nope.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 11:05 PM
0

That doesn't change the fact that it's sexist both towards men and women. Non-sequitur.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 11:03 PM
2

Potentially so, yes.
/r/MensRights09/02/13 10:25 PM
3

I'm not familiar with the "tender years doctrine". Thanks for the tip - that was an interesting read.
/r/MensRights09/02/13 08:48 PM
2

Hence "partially correct". I should have made that more clear.
/r/MensRights09/02/13 08:32 PM
13

Actually, this is at least partially correct. It is the assumption by quite a lot of people that mothers are automatically better care givers. This is sexist both towards men and women.
/r/MensRights09/02/13 07:43 PM
1

I'm an egalitarian who is also a man. As a man I realize that feminism is acting to subjugate men and is no longer interested in equality, hence my also being an MRA.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 09:00 PM
-7

Rape, brutal abuse, etc etc.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 08:10 PM
-2

Au contraire - that's exactly why I should. Justice is bought and sold in the United States. Those with the highest priced lawyers win, regardless of guilt.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 06:23 PM
-1

While I generally agree that people deserve due process, I really don't hold it against anyone who fucks up their abuser/attacker/assailant.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 02:54 PM
-4

I don't give a rotten cow fuck - linking to your own blog is against reddiquette. http://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette Bullet point #8. Also, this one: Feel free to post links to your own content (within reason). But if that's all you ever post, and it always seems to get voted down, take a good hard look in the mirror — you just might be a spammer. A widely used rule of thumb is the 9:1 ratio, i.e. only 1 out of every 10 of your submissions should be your own content. So far this person has a…
/r/MensRights07/02/13 08:16 PM
-12

Downvoted for linking to your own blog. Link to the piece in the Sunday Times.
/r/MensRights07/02/13 07:54 PM
-18

I'm going to disagree here. If even half of what she says occurred is true... hell, if just 25% of it were true, I'd say he got off lightly. People who do things like he is accused of deserve nothing but the slowest torture resulting in death.
/r/MensRights07/02/13 07:50 PM
1

The New Republic? Really? They have been busted so many times not fact checking and publishing completely fabricated articles that it's not even funny. No one should ever read anything they write - unless it's for a laugh.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 07:02 PM
1

You don't see this post: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/179uo7/white_house_petition_require_women_to_register/c873dr8 I have shown all of the above and haven't made a factually incorrect statement. You, however, have clearly demonstrated that you're a liar and are completely incapable of using a web browser, so nothing at all that you say can be taken as anything but mutterings from an imbecile who probably needs to be institutionalized.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 10:14 PM
1

You're a fucking liar and a moron. I showed where you started the insults and you're still trying to say that I started it. Way to go, you delusional little fucknugget.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 09:13 PM
1

I love how you can't make sense of something plain so you call me a "knee-jerk reactionary" and then tell me that I'm immediately "resulting" to name-calling because I disagree. Not only are you amazingly stupid, but you're hilarious as well. I also want to note that the name-calling began right here: You sound like an SRSer. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/179uo7/white_house_petition_require_women_to_register/c84p17w Then you followed it up again here: Nah, you sound like a knee-jer…
/r/MensRights31/01/13 09:02 PM
1

And you're an SRSer. Hahahahaha. I'm an MRA. Good try though, racist.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 08:19 PM
1

What he was saying boiled down to "I don't agree with you, but I'll fight to the death to defend your right to express it". Horseshit. What he said was "I agree with your right to discriminate and I don't believe the federal government should create any law telling you that you can't." ...but using laws to try and fight private prejudice is itself injustice. Yup, you're a racist.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 07:14 PM
1

Again, not being able to tell the difference between private prejudice and government-enforced inequality shows your utter lack of depth of understanding. The Civil Rights Act worked on both - not one or the other. You're free to think whatever you want and you're even free to talk about it. However, you are not allowed to close your business to anyone based on any discriminatory reasoning. Not privately, not any way. That's Civil Rights. If you're against the Civil Rights Act in any way it's be…
/r/MensRights31/01/13 05:25 PM
1

You make not even the slightest bit of sense. Discrimination is discrimination no matter where it occurs. Ron Paul argues that the Civil Rights Act doesn't allow business owners to discriminate. The end. He's a racist fucktard. And, no, you can't possibly reach that conclusion by my thinking - the ACLU isn't racist when they defend the right to free speech. Ron Paul is racist when he defends the rights of people to discriminate in their place of business. There's a huge difference between the tw…
/r/MensRights31/01/13 04:26 PM
1

I think you're right, but that change has been nearly infinitesimal. The media at large and the overwhelming majority of public opinions sees feminism in a positive light and will swallow nearly anything they table.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 04:23 PM
1

This says discrimination shouldn't be outlawed amongst private citizens. That has nothing to do with discriminatory state laws,... What in the actual fuck? How is that cognitive dissonance working out for you? You are easily the most delusional person I have ever encountered - including the mentally challenged homeless people on the streets of D.C.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 10:49 PM
1

Stupidest comment I've seen on reddit to date. I haven't met a homeschooled kid yet that wasn't an imbecile in comparison to kids that have had a "traditional" (for lack of a better term) education.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 10:48 PM
1

I'm pretty sure, sockpuppet, that you get the point.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 10:47 PM
1

What part of this sentence does not illustrate precisely what I said? The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 09:25 PM
1

And then you linked the article that said this: And the context is that Ron Paul believes that the Civil Rights act infringes on property rights by forcing employers not to discriminate. You're a fucking moron of astronomical proportions.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 09:12 PM
1

Go on with your bad self, sockpuppet. I do kinda resent your assumption that all people must work in an office with dress codes. It might make you feel better to know that many people are bucking that norm, and able to work in a very freeing environment. Can you go to work in a speedo and nothing more? I bet you can't. Guess what? You have a dress code.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 08:46 PM
1

What you are talking about is someone else making the decision on behalf of young people everywhere what they will do with two years of their lives. How about that requirement to go to school for 12 years? Is that infringing on your freedoms as well?
/r/MensRights30/01/13 08:45 PM
1

You linked to an article that supports property rights, not state sovereignty and state-government civil rights issues as you had originally claimed. It seems that you are not able to follow logic. Hope that works out for you.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 08:45 PM
1

Those are his own words. http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/civil-rights-act/ Let's see you try to squirm out of that, racist fuck. See section 3 of his "We The People Act": http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.539:
/r/MensRights30/01/13 07:52 PM
1

Ah, so he is using reddit against reddiquette to drive traffic to his websites. All while posting through a sock puppet account.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 07:50 PM
0

Seriously? I keep talking about a 2 year conscription. We currently don't have any conscription, so this is entirely hypothetical, and it is the hypothesis that I tabled, so yes, I'm absolutely positively sure that that is what I have been talking about. You really aren't paying attention at all, are you?
/r/MensRights30/01/13 07:48 PM
0

If you back Ron Paul, then that's what you back.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 07:23 PM
1

That's what I thought - another Libertarian who thinks liberty is being able to discriminate at the state level - which is precisely what Ron Paul was all about.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 06:55 PM
0

I run three publications and employ eighteen people. If you were you wouldn't have this much time to reply on reddit, so, no. Good thing I didn't go into the army. Yeah, that 2 years would have been an absolute travesty! Oh the humanity! You wouldn't be able to keep working at Wal Mart or your local coffee bar.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 06:19 PM
0

You have to follow a dress code with just about any job you have, and there are things you can and cannot keep at or bring to work. I am failing to see the issue here. The military is a job like any other. And, yes, there are supposedly "off duty" restrictions - no one follows them. I wasn't really allowed to dress like a little punk rocker when off duty but I did. Even checked in and out of leave dressed as I normally do when I was off duty - no one said a word. Ever.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 06:13 PM
1

I think that may be true, but you're probably looking at a time frame of a couple decades at a minimum. It takes quite a while to sway public opinion. Look how long it took to change the public opinion of smokers/smoking.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 06:10 PM
1

I hate SRS with a passion. What I sound like is someone who actually pays attention.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 06:09 PM
1

What would happen would be that the massive feminism lobby would get mobilized to get rid of it. They have a far better chance of succeeding than we do, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 05:52 PM
1

Feminism is here to stay, like it or not. I don't think we'll ever be able to push it towards egalitarianism, and I don't think it's going to go away.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 05:51 PM
1

Well, he's also a racist, sexist, homophobic fucknut wanting to restore the confederation and slavery, so his one or two reasonable positions don't really matter. Also, he's no longer campaigning for anything.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 05:50 PM
0

When your tour of duty is to guard poppy fields in Afghanistan so that heroin can be shipped elsewhere in the world. We've already discussed my stance on this and you're ignoring it, so I'll ignore any more comments you make about it. You tell me that you feel that paying my taxes isn't enough to give back to my country? No, not really. So what else do you want? I thought it was obvious that this is precisely what we're discussing. What if I'm creating jobs for others? What if I'm developing a n…
/r/MensRights27/01/13 05:49 PM
1

That said, I would be very angry if your solution was implemented on me. I did nothing to deserve forced service. It's not a punishment. You live in your country. All citizens, in my opinion, should do something to support that country in some point in their lives aside from paying taxes. There's nothing wrong with serving in the military. I believe that good parenting is something that we should all strive for. Of course we should - most people don't, however. My parents did a fine job... Based…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 07:37 PM
0

The only way? Surely not. A way that most people and the country itself would benefit from? Absolutely. Seriously, this is the most full-of-shit statement I've ever fucking read. How about solid parenting? How about good role models? How about community involvement? What part of the word "few" did you not understand? Obviously the things you outline here would work as well, but solid parenting... please. Most parents are absolute shit at it and really should not be breeding in any way. Good role…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 05:05 PM
1

No. I think that's a fairly well hyperbolic and nearly entirely unrealistic attitude. I think having selective service isn't a bad idea, but that it should only be used in the case of imminent foreign invasion. Also, I served 4 years in the U.S. Navy right out of high school. With the benefit of hindsight I feel that it was both a boon and a bane for myself, personally. (I was little punk rocker in the 80s and the military isn't the best place for a very individualistic mind set and it got me in…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 04:14 PM
1

What made you think the U.S. gave a fuck about human rights?
/r/MensRights26/01/13 03:33 PM
1

What do you think would happen if women being required to register would suddenly become an impending law?
/r/MensRights26/01/13 03:32 PM
3

Well, that's kind of the point, isn't it? No one cares about selective service now because it only affects men, and no one cares about men. Add women to it and suddenly everyone cares about selective service. You'll see selective service vanish over night.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 03:31 PM
2

Pushing for legal parity in signing up for SS is the best path to abolishing SS completely. When you make everyone see it for what it is then something will be done about it. As it just affects men now, and no one gives a rotten cow fuck about men, nothing will be done about it.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 03:29 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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