TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

WaitWhoMe Archive

View 2 posts and 120 comments by WaitWhoMe 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)
57

Social IssuesWaitWhoMe/r/MensRights08/06/17 11:19 PM
44

Marriage/ChildrenWaitWhoMe/r/MensRights23/06/17 10:31 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

shrug. Ok.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 01:30 AM
1

I won't begrudge anyone who finds love on a public bus, it's just not where I would look. Maybe the reason is that talking to strangers on a bus is itself a socially abnormal thing to do. If there are 50 people on a bus, 49 might be perfectly normal people who adhere to social norms. The 1 person who doesn't adhere to social norms might be perfectly normal, but also, he might be someone who otherwise makes you uncomfortable. I suspect this guy, if he exists, probably is a little socially awkward…
/r/MensRights13/07/17 01:28 AM
0

I think colleges should defer to the legal system for this. Though feminists are trying to corrupt them too, the courts are still the best mechanism we have for finding truth & dispensing justice. From a liability standpoint, that's not exactly how it works. Not for employers, schools, or any other institution. The justice system is exclusively responsible for meeting out criminal punishment. But in civil law, any institution that doesn't do what's considered reasonably necessary to provide a sa…
/r/MensRights13/07/17 12:29 AM
2

Well, I can certainly understand not being interested in the dating prospects of a public bus. Frankly, I try to avoid conversation of any kind when I'm in that kind of situation. (Fortunately I live 10 minutes from my office by car.) But yeah. Probably hitting on men or women on a public bus isn't going to work. Fair enough. I'm not sure what sex has to do with it. EDIT: BTW, a few months ago I struck up a conversation with a woman on a plane. We were both flying first, so alcohol was involved,…
/r/MensRights13/07/17 12:10 AM
10

Jokes are part of misandry culture.
/r/MensRights12/07/17 11:19 PM
9

Maybe it's the Republican federalist in me, but I fail to see how sexual assault on non-federal property is even a federal issue. Criminal law and education are state issues.
/r/MensRights12/07/17 11:04 PM
116

Man-hating and feminism is are two different things. Grammar!
/r/MensRights12/07/17 11:00 PM
3

It's getting more and more common
/r/MensRights28/06/17 11:07 PM
6

Everyone is gender fluid. When you're doing something courteous, that's your femme side. When you're doing something rude, it's your toxic masculinity. Or didn't you know?
/r/MensRights25/06/17 11:40 PM
1

At a public toilet, most women I know say they don't touch the seat and prefer to hover.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 11:38 PM
2

Yeah, the bad news is that many attorneys (myself included) don't go into matrimonial law. My understanding is this: the money is only good in the top tiers, the law can be capricious, the clients can be high maintenance, and there's no career path past just family law. I work setting up LLC's, partnerships, and small corporations. Business people can be vindictive as all hell when things go south, but I'm sure it can't hold a candle to matrimonial law.
/r/MensRights24/06/17 04:58 AM
2

Haha. My law school professor said, "your lifestyle in marriage is precedent for your lifestyle in divorce."
/r/MensRights24/06/17 04:51 AM
4

First, finding a lawyer: AVVO can be a good resource. It should be a starting place, not a finishing place. Referrals are good. Know someone who's been in a divorce? Ask them about their lawyer and whether they got a desired outcome and experience. Evaluating a lawyer after you find one is challenging. These are some good questions to ask: Ask how many cases like yours they've handled in the past year. How long have you practiced not just law, but this specialty? What about fees? Do not be embar…
/r/MensRights24/06/17 04:47 AM
3

Is there anything she can do legally if we ever break up to try and get money out of me? To an extent, yes. In general, any contract that has both your names on it could be problematic. If a lease says you both owe $1000/mo for rent, and she skips town, you'd be on the hook. The same applies to credit cards, loans, mortgages, and anything else. Depending on Oregon law, she may be able to claim joint ownership of possessions in your home, even if you bought them yourself. Also depending on state …
/r/MensRights23/06/17 11:19 PM
1

There are few things that could be less neoliberal than the wage gap argument, which is that the government should create equality of income regardless of qualifications. And in fact, again, look at your neoliberal case studies: The United States, Singapore, Hong Kong, and find me statutes feminists ask for regarding the wage gap. In contrast, in much-more-leftist Europe, you have Scandinavian countries imposing quotas on how many women must represent each company's board of directors. Then go a…
/r/MensRights23/06/17 09:56 PM
1

Well... I'm in my 40s and I don't remember it.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 07:26 PM
1

Neoliberalism does produce problems, aren't we all always talking about the problem with modern, liberal feminists? I'd invite you to check out third wave feminist ideology and see how many of them are neoliberal.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 07:24 PM
16

Perhaps because an engineering major earns more than a First Nations Gender Studies PhD. Ok, that was mean. But while women are way overrepresented, they are still underrepresented in degrees that earn money.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 07:07 PM
3

Yeah. Bad behavior is universal. FWIW, I've generally found men more amiable on planes to give me the armrest when I'm in the middle seat. I'm 6'4", 200lbs.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 06:26 PM
1

I feel like the same womyn are also offended if a man doesn't offer his seat to her. It's not equality they are looking for. This is a thing? Admittedly, it's been a long time since I took a train anywhere, but I would never presume to give my seat to anyone who isn't in some way infirm.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 06:25 PM
3

There might be some price discrimination, but in the case of consumer goods, I don't think the pink tax has much to do with it. Take shaving products. Women's razors are larger, have more aloe and other products around the blades, and probably sell fewer per day, thus resulting in higher inventory costs for every step of the supply chain. You would also want to look at the cost of marketing women's products, as well as who is doing the purchasing. Women do a whopping 85% of purchasing decisions …
/r/MensRights21/06/17 06:17 PM
1

Those libertarian Institutes are bought and paid for by Koch Brothers. They receive money from the Koch brothers. Aren't the Kochs entitled to have political beliefs, and put money behind them, just like George Soros or Warren Buffet, who are on the center-left? There is an a consensus beyond that, that more mixed economies out perform free markets. These free market propaganda sites don't tell you about the poverty. Sure, Singapore and Hong Kong are more free than european countries, but you wi…
/r/MensRights21/06/17 06:11 PM
1

Actually, you won't have to look far to find judges who do apologize to male convicts for mandatory minimums. It's extremely common.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 06:02 PM
1

(as did Hillary Clinton's campaign platform). Oh?
/r/MensRights21/06/17 05:59 PM
16

I would say embracing the idea of the pink tax requires accepting two contradictory statements: That men's products and women's products are identical, and thus, should be priced the same. That women could not avoid the pink tax because they require products specially designed for women. I for one choose not to believe that women are simply brainwashed by marketing to overpay for consumer goods. But if women really are being price gouged, that should be a massive opening for a disruptive upstart…
/r/MensRights21/06/17 05:02 AM
6

Yes. I'm all for equality.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 04:36 AM
1

I'd invite you to actually study the cause and effect of free market vs non-free markets. Again, look at Singapore vs the Philippines and decide yourself where you'd prefer to both live and earn the median income. The same could apply for Argentina vs Chile in the 2nd world. Or for a third world comparison, check out Botswana vs Zimbabwe, two neighboring countries that less than a generation ago were very similar, but have taken radically different paths. Botswana has embraced neoliberalism, and…
/r/MensRights21/06/17 01:39 AM
1

What I want is to earn western money and live in a developing country. So you want to be the 1% in a country with low wages.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 12:23 AM
3

Good article and quite refreshing coming from Vox. Something else that needs to be pointed out is the gender spending power gap. While men typically earn money, most consumer spending decisions are made by women, which is why ads are targeting mostly women. (See also ads that show clueless men and brilliant women. It's an old trope at this point. So in real terms, men actually have less financial power than women, even if that's because they voluntarily enter into family arrangements where women…
/r/MensRights21/06/17 12:03 AM
1

CATO and Reason Magazine are also charities. Libertarianism is astroturf because its looking for political support from the masses, when in reality is about more money for the rich and less for the masses. That's your opinion. A person with a hair braiding business who is shut down for not having a salon license might disagree. Or more broadly, people who think they pay too many taxes might disagree.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:51 PM
1

What would you hold up as a country you would want to live in?
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:49 PM
1

Is there any reason to believe this was the result of sex, not simply a disconnect between the crime and the punishment?
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:47 PM
1

I disagree. First of all, the whole point of being a judge is that you are allowed to exercise common sense. There are sentencing guidelines that eliminate most discrepancy, while still allowing for common sense. Second, if you think judges have more power than prosecutors, as a jurist I'm here to tell you that in criminal cases with mandatory minimums, you're grossly misinformed. The judge essentially only runs the trial. There's still individual biases in sentencing, but against the tradition …
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:45 PM
0

Just look at how Fox covered every major sexual abuse scandal. During the Catholic Priest wave, other news outlets reported rape. Fox reported "inappropriate relationships."
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:30 PM
1

Singapore has an average per capita income of $81,000 USD. Would you rather live in Singapore on that income or in the Philippines on its average income? Also, Singapore is a city state with millions of people in an area smaller than most US counties. Of course housing is a precious commodity.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:28 PM
1

If you look at most groups, you often find wealthy benefactors. I would not accuse, say, Planned Parenthood or Amnesty International of astroturfing because of their wealthy benefactors.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:26 PM
1

Call a teenager whatever you want, but most family court cases where gender identity or sexual orientation is a factor will involve teenagers. The Canadian law is concerning minors. At 16 year old is a minor.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:24 PM
2

Businesses like Hooters do it because they say their servers are also models, which is sort of fair actually.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:08 PM
-2

Sure it is.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:46 PM
7

The Sun is a sister company to Fox News. Fox News has a long history of, well, sugar coating sex abuse.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:45 PM
1

How do you explain actual wages that seem to be the opposite? Go ahead and Google countries by medium family income. Then overlap that with an economic freedom index.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 12:05 AM
2

Male circumcision in America has a lot more to do with religion than profit. And therein lies the problem... It is part of at least two religious traditions and both seem to have sincere adherents: Jews and Christians. (Christians less so.)
/r/MensRights20/06/17 12:01 AM
1

I don't disagree, but FWIW, Houston hovers close to 90% humidity. It was built on a swamp. Dallas is a bit more tolerable. El Paso is actually comfortable.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 11:45 PM
1

I'm from New Mexico. It counts as summer.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 11:40 PM
1

They don't have air conditioning in the UK?? Cuz when I was in nearby Ireland, any place you'd wear a suit and air conditioning.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 11:38 PM
0

Suppose a XX chromosome person is born with androgen insensitivity syndrome, and as such, develops with a small penis but no functional sexual reproductive abilities. Around 16, this person realizes she's a woman. She comes out to her parents, who disown her, pull her out of school, and put her in a "bootcamp." Would it be your position that she's pretending to be an attack helicopter?
/r/MensRights19/06/17 11:36 PM
0

Sigh... This is fake news. There's a reason only the very far cray-cray right is following it. The law actually overhauls an old one and, among many things, allows protective services and judges to consider the child's sexual orientation and gender identity. So for example, if a son is gay, and his conservative Muslim father bans him from seeing other boys or tells him he will disown him, that *can now be considered" abuse. Like all abuse, it doesn't necessarily result in the child being placed …
/r/MensRights19/06/17 11:32 PM
2

There's room for hate crimes. For example if you light a burning cross outside of someone's home, you need to be charged with something more serious than an unlawful camp fire.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 11:11 PM
0

Look at the OP's source. That all you need to know it's bullshit.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 11:09 PM
1

You really think academics like Milton Friedman really sat around and said, "how can we suppress wages?" You should really check out South America sometime. Look at the difference between Argentina, which is very protectionist, and Chile, which is neoliberal. Wages are higher and stuff is cheaper in Chile. When you look at something like protectionism, it does help the individuals who are protected, but at the expense of everyone else in the economy. Protect everyone and the net harm will still …
/r/MensRights19/06/17 10:54 PM
1

Read the deposition itself, not some radio host summary: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2158445-cosby-deposition.html It was never "with" women. He said he did not take any him himself, but rather, gave them to women to have sex with them. He directly explains as much. He doesn't tell anyone what these drugs are, instead simply referring to them as "party drugs." He was asked whether his accuser, in this specific case, was physically able to consent. He said he did not know whether she …
/r/MensRights19/06/17 01:17 AM
1

Why?
/r/MensRights19/06/17 12:57 AM
0

Ok, kid
/r/MensRights18/06/17 11:02 PM
2

Usually I interpret "neoliberal" as an economic model based on free trade and international commerce.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 06:31 PM
1

Well, Muslims are members of a religion, not an ethnicity. But I've only ever heard person of color in reference to black Americans.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 06:30 PM
5

Especially in at-will US states, wrongful termination is going to be almost impossible.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 06:27 PM
10

Personally I have no problem referring to anyone however they want: white, Caucasian, European-American all work for white to me. Black, African-American, person of color all work for black people to me as well. Latino, Hispanic, and on and on. As long as it's not a slur, I'm indifferent.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 06:25 PM
0

I'm not sure you read my post, but... That's 100% grade A bullshit. First of all. Quaaludes are sleeping pills that interfere with memory. He said he gave women sleeping pills for the purpose of intoxicating them to have sex with them. He did not tell them what they were. He testified that they were unresponsive when he penetrated them and that he did not have permission. That's the first class legal definition of rape, at least in the state I practice. If you think otherwise, not only are you w…
/r/MensRights18/06/17 06:06 PM
1

Also keep in mind that he swore under oath that he did exactly what he is accused of. But keep in mind, even if you know someone is a criminal, to lock him up, you still need to prove specific crimes. If a mugger named Steve steals my wallet, and is known to steal wallets, that doesn't mean I don't need evidence to prove it.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 07:29 AM
1

Well, he himself said under oath that he raped women. I take him at his word and I would say the evidence is overwhelming to the point where, indeed, saying he is innocent of all these accusations is utterly laughable. The jury wasn't asked, however, whether Cosby had ever used drugs to have sex with women against their will. They were asked to decide 3 specific charges​, which were all covering the same incident with the same accuser. They apparently could not agree whether the incident happene…
/r/MensRights18/06/17 07:25 AM
4

Actually if you include India and Russia in that, it might well be true. But rape culture where it is actually part of the culture isn't something we prefer to talk about. Listening to SJW's, you'd think it was a western export.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 07:12 AM
1

Yeah. I think Panama might? I'm not sure but the US is definitely unique.
/r/MensRights16/06/17 02:44 AM
1

Really?
/r/MensRights15/06/17 10:32 PM
8

Yeah. Maybe. Ideally people would just be nice to each other. I myself have some spinal injuries from an accident years ago. Standing for a long period of time can be excruciating, but I look perfectly fit and in fact do work out. I would get dirty looks disabled seating, but at times, I need it even after taking a Vicodin.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 10:30 PM
1

America has a gun choice. We choose to live with firearms. It does make it easier to go out and kill someone, but also, it makes investigating murders a lot easier because of all the forensics surrounding firearms. But in the US, you're going to have a hard time explaining to, say, a Vermonter why he should give up his guns. Vermont has a murder rate far lower than Western Europe, but has probably the highest gun ownership rate in the US and maybe the world.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 06:56 PM
1

Well except the job of the police is not to prevent crime. The job of the police is to respond to crime. If they do prevent crime, all the better, but it isn't their lawful mandate
/r/MensRights15/06/17 06:51 PM
2

Which is among the many reasons why we presume innocence.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 06:49 PM
1

That's true and there are cases where a preponderance of evidence can be used to deny someone a firearm in the US as well. For example, if there's a protective order against someone, usually they can't buy a gun, at least not without further hoops to jump through. But being arrested is not really a standard of proof at all. Gun ownership is a right, not a privilege, so being stripped of that right should (and does) require more than a mere allegation in one's past.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 05:33 PM
29

Well, certainly there's a concern to be had about whether people convicted of violent crimes should have guns. But as usual, the gun control lobby seems to be unclear on how presumption of innocence works. He was not convicted of any domestic violence, and thus, does not have a "history" of it.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 05:13 AM
3

Well they invalidated a law, but didn't write a new one in its place. That's how the courts are supposed to work. Congress is free to extend the more generous rules to both genders, however.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 05:08 AM
10

I'm not sure how being condescending was gendered in the first place. I've met know-it-all types of all sexes and cultures.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 04:41 AM
1

How so?
/r/MensRights15/06/17 04:38 AM
1

I'm not saying it's not somewhat fucked for some people. But there are usually reasons a judge would do it. Someone being adjudicated married under common law based solely on cohabitation would be pretty unusual. There are also some hypothetical benefits, such as inheritance, end of life decisions, etc. At any rate, slavery? C'mon.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 04:36 AM
2

So, she lied about being on birth control... Yeah​.... Be careful out there, kids.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 04:31 AM
1

Common law marriage is more than just living arrangements. It has to be romantic and usually there's evidence of the relationship beyond just cohabitation (eg, joint checking accounts, two names on a mortgage, etc). The reality is that if you have a lot of common property as boyfriend and girlfriend, common law marriage makes a lot of sense. It lets the court apply marriage laws, which make sense to apply given the circumstances.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 12:58 AM
3

That's how it can work in some states. It's sort of a backdoor alimony. It's less than if she got full custody, obviously, but this guy was also an idiot and did it without a lawyer.
/r/MensRights15/06/17 12:53 AM
0

Most subreddits openly consider all the users here to be Trump supporters, sadly/hilariously. Nothing will kill an agenda quicker than tethering it to partisanship or ideology.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 10:00 PM
1

Common law marriage is not the same as forced marriage because the two are not forced to cohabitate. Basically common law marriage is where the court says, "well, for all intents and purposes you were acting married, so we're going to treat it that way."
/r/MensRights14/06/17 09:26 PM
3

Is that where people defend that excuse for a human being?
/r/MensRights14/06/17 09:19 PM
9

I would more look at the character of the person. Labels are worthless. Most women self-identity as feminists because they want equality. Very few women I know or have known, for example, will say extreme feminist bullshit like, "all sex is rape." If you want to try to figure out whether she's really fair minded, say you have a friend whose girlfriend lied about being on birth control because she wants a kid. Tell her he's excluded from the kid's life but still makes child support payments. If s…
/r/MensRights14/06/17 09:19 PM
3

This really underscores the need to address the rape exception to the usual requirements​ of evidence. In any other case, a prosecutor would look at an accusation with no other evidence and say there's no proof. In rape cases, prosecutors push forward based on accuser testimony alone. Unless the victim is a male of course. Then extraordinary evidence is required.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 05:52 PM
1

You'd be surprised. When female-only gyms opened, there were a rash of challenges, several successful. Many states, Colorado among them, amended their gender discrimination statutes to allow some gender-specific businesses, specifically because those challenges were successful. I don't know offhand, but statutes dealing directly with gender discrimination outside the workplace are not as common as you'd think. Maybe half of the states have one. Anyway, my point is, trying to use the Civil Rights…
/r/MensRights14/06/17 05:34 PM
0

Good luck with that. I think a more productive path isn't to complain about ladies night at the movie theater, but rather, protect the handful of male refugees that still exist. EDIT: I should also mention, the case law you're likely thinking of is most likely about equal protection. Equal protection only covers government action, such as same-sex marriage rights. Equal protection does not compel businesses to behave in any specific way. That's why, for example, in some states a baker might be c…
/r/MensRights14/06/17 05:25 PM
1

The problem is, it's just not credible. Remember the Bob Menendez lies? They published information they knew to be false, paid sources based on how damaging their story was, and never retracted it. I'm a registered Republican BTW.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 05:16 PM
1

It was.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 05:13 PM
2

You'd have to show injury, especially if you're going the case law route. But the Civil Rights Act isn't going to help you. Sorry.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 02:22 AM
6

I passed the Bar, so I think I know how to read a law. And yeah, it was an intentional loophole. At the time, it was probably more for the benefit of the number of businesses, at the time, that very purposefully served only one sex. In the 1960s, it was not at all uncommon to have gender-specific businesses, and the Civil Rights Act was never intended to change that. I'd invite you to show me where I'm wrong. EDIT: This is, for the record, also why autoinsurers can charge different amounts based…
/r/MensRights13/06/17 11:09 PM
1

Really, people shouldn't go to prison based on witness identification alone. It's consistently unreliable.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 10:33 PM
2

I would add... Men are such pigs. You couldn't understand. Men can't ask for directions. Men are more violent
/r/MensRights13/06/17 10:32 PM
8

Yup. He got court-mandated joint custody. He also pays child support.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 10:26 PM
1

In terms of sex discrimination, the Civil Rights Act covered employment, not public accomodations. Examples would be male only colleges, a couple of which still exists, or barber shops. I recall some uproar over this one recently in Australia, which admittedly is under similar but different laws: http://www.news.com.au/finance/small-business/close-shave-with-human-rights-commission-for-menonly-barber-store/news-story/96b3dfab677fee8c5c4a3bbca4eebabb But aside from some state laws, there's nothin…
/r/MensRights13/06/17 10:23 PM
12

Read the text: SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin. Notice that sex isn't part of the public accomodations clause. That was on purpose. If you're going to be a condescending dick, know your shit.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 10:06 PM
1

Lol
/r/MensRights13/06/17 08:03 PM
-3

I'd prefer a source not linked to the alt right.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 08:02 PM
3

I don't blame anyone. My parents were following what was, at least then, established medical advice for parents. I do think I'm probably missing out on some sensitivity. I often have to adjust my junk when the top is rubbing wrong on my underwear. But it's something that is who I am and have no control over. But I think for future generations, we shouldn't make that choice for anyone. If an 18 year old wants to do it, let him. But involuntary body modifications aren't something we should continu…
/r/MensRights13/06/17 08:01 PM
2

Yeah, a friend of mine did exactly that.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 07:57 PM
-2

There are actually some businesses that are for male customers, too. That's ok.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 07:55 PM
-1

Actually, no, it didn't. The Civil Rights Act covered sex only with respect to hiring and firing of employees. It does not cover sex with respect to public accomodations.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 07:51 PM
1

Cultural appropriation! Haha
/r/MensRights13/06/17 07:47 PM
1

Actually Hindi terrorism is pretty common around the Indian Pakistan border. And certainly in Northern Ireland, there were a lot more Christian terrorists then not during the "troubles".
/r/MensRights11/06/17 08:08 PM
-1

Personally, I'm not interested in the opinions of that woman.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 03:28 AM
16

Devastation? How about, equality? Good parents are good parents. Sometimes they're men, sometimes they're women.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:22 PM
10

Well, I certainly wouldn't get serious to the point where she could claim mutual ownership of property.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 07:20 PM
1

A park? Are parks short on personal space now?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:41 PM
1

K
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:29 AM
2

Suppose a woman lies about being on birth control. A woman says her tubes are tied, they are not, and she gets pregnant. Not wanting to be an involuntary parent is reasonable. But also, we want to live in a civil society, where children are cared for regardless of their parents' choices, right?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:18 AM
1

Political realities aside... First of all, there are men who sleep around. I don't think they are discouraged or encouraged by child support. Most men, and indeed most women, however behave responsibly. The best way to help them with that is with free reproductive healthcare. In terms of why you should pay for someone else's kids. That's what the difference is between a use fee and a tax. A use fee pays only for your immediate use of a public resource (like paying to park in a city owned garage)…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:37 AM
1

I'm ok with this. Businesses should cater to whom they want to cater. Including, for example, harbor shops.
/r/MensRights08/06/17 06:05 AM
6

Once I got into a debate with a hard-core social conservative in the 90s. This was hot on the tails of conservative frothing about Murphy Brown being a single mother, The Simpsons teaching kids to "disrespect" their elders, etc. The Sopranos would soon debut, but movies had already featured protagonist gangsters and unlikeable cops. As a social liberal, I made the point that the purpose of movies, books, and television isn't to model but is to entertain, reflect culture, delight, and provide esc…
/r/MensRights08/06/17 04:48 AM
1

Funding of disease research is a separate issue, though breast cancer is more fatal than prostate cancer. The best way to equitably fund research would be a cost/benefit analysis. A dramatically over-simplified version: severity of condition, multiplied by number of patients affected, divided by how promising the treatment is... ;) Something like that. But that's separate from whether women make more insurance claims than men.
/r/MensRights08/06/17 04:22 AM
4

If these boards were in charge of deciding something that decides a woman's fate, can you imagine the outrage? Suppose for example that there were a board to decide whether women should have the right to an abortion. Men would automatically be on such a board, while women would have to be invited. (I don't mean to conflate abortion with conscription. One is a medical procedure, the other is involuntary violent servitude. Ideally, I'd like to see Selective Service abolished and all draft dodges, …
/r/MensRights08/06/17 04:19 AM
18

Rather than opting out of child support, I would frame it as whether they should be coerced into having children. If two people agree to have a baby, they should both be on the hook for that baby's well-being. But men should not be coerced into parenthood any more than women should. They'll likely, and reasonably, respond that the point of child support isn't fairness, but rather, child support. If that's the case, why isn't it an entitlement program like welfare, where everyone pays into the we…
/r/MensRights08/06/17 04:14 AM
1

What about gay men? What about them? I've never heard of an MRA hating on gay people. In the context of reducing male/female interaction to Darwinian reproduction, what about gay people? My point is that human behavior can't always be explained with such simple survival ideas. Individual behavior certainly can't and shouldn't. Um, that was the point. Men work longer hours in more difficult and dangerous jobs and so make more money. And pay more taxes. Well, exactly. Not to say there aren't victi…
/r/MensRights08/06/17 04:10 AM
1

So, to dissent, I don't think these kinds of polemics are particularly helpful. First of all, reducing all female/male interaction to a biological imperative is just too reductive. There may or may not be various Darwinian reasons for certain behaviors, but making broad strokes with those Darwinian behaviors eliminates all kinds of complexities and, frankly, personal choices. What about gay men? What about lesbians? What about asexual people? Or on a personal level: What about you and me? The fa…
/r/MensRights08/06/17 03:48 AM
2

Just on a practical note, you might consider a change in fabric. You're probably wearing cotton khakis, right? Well, cotton is a lousy fabric for managing heat. Let me give you some alternatives: High-quality linen pants are great for heat management, though they wrinkle like all hell and aren't super durable year over year. You think of wool as a winter fabric, but you're wrong. Wool can be a great summer fabric, it just depends how thick it is and what kind of wool you can use. On a more casua…
/r/MensRights08/06/17 02:38 AM
3

I actually have a female friend who is quite good lucking, generally a pleasant person, and cannot convince her husband to have sex with her. He can't get hard without porn, and when they do occasionally make love, it must always be with porn. I'm hesitant to say it's a sexual dysfunction, because if people are content with porn, why not let them be? But it's good to be upfront with your potential partner about your sexual wants and needs.
/r/MensRights08/06/17 02:22 AM
5

Its neat, because most men go through this so the sexual balance of power really changes as you go through your 30's. By the time you get to your 40's its the women chasing the men around. You get to be yourself, get some if you want it, and not deal with all the drama. This is very, very true. I had no idea how easy dating would get. I also recently heard someone say something I really have come to believe. Adulthood is liking what you like, being yourself, and treating others with respect rega…
/r/MensRights08/06/17 02:19 AM
4

I'm a little curious whether putting your purse/tote on the seat next to you faces the same amount of outrage, as I see that pretty regularly. Though last time I was in Spain on mass transit, I was groped by an old woman looking for a wallet or cell phone more than once. Pickpocketing is so bad there that common moneybelts are easily defeated. They'll slide a letter opener (this kind), cut the belt, and bolt. Mens' manbags (remember Seinfeld) typically advertise steel bands through the shoulder …
/r/MensRights08/06/17 01:54 AM
3

Well, after much misplaced resentment (eg, is the condition of LGBT people in primitive cultures really caused by the proliferation of western values? Really??), the final statement is one I'm really kind of indifferent to: So despite what’s chic in contemporary fashion these days, we should honor our politics and think deeply about the representations we embody when appropriating military apparel. K. You do that. (Also, is cameo chic? Apparently I know nothing about fashion!)
/r/MensRights06/06/17 11:03 AM
2

Well, in fairness, the 3rd post on oneychromosome is from a year ago. It's not a very active subreddit.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 10:47 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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