TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

WaitingToBeBanned Archive

View 0 posts and 1,363 comments by WaitingToBeBanned 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)
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,363 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

That does not make the odds much less staggering.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/06/17 09:05 AM
2

The average female height in the USA is 5'4" with only something like ~1% being over 6".
/r/PussyPassDenied28/06/17 11:54 AM
2

6'3" is monstrously tall for a woman.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/06/17 11:30 AM
1

Unless she is stupidly tall then she is very fat.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/06/17 11:29 AM
1

The most likely situation is that he did not even think about it and continued on per usual.
/r/MensRights16/06/17 09:25 AM
1

But only for some people.
/r/MensRights29/05/17 05:24 AM
1

But that is not realistic.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/05/17 12:01 PM
1

I only now got around to reading your comment in full, but it has already helped me to understand some peoples behaviour. Thanks.
/r/MensRights01/10/16 08:33 AM
0

Murderers cannot be prevented from murdering people by many means, the options are basically just prison or a lobotomy. False accusers by comparison rely on proxy power which may be taken away independently of their autonomy or frontal lobe. Simply snubbing them and fining them appropriately would nullify them as a future threat, recoup costs, and discourage future false accusers. I think that you want to see these people hurt and are only limiting your suggestion for the sake of appearing fare.…
/r/MensRights12/09/16 05:52 PM
0

Yes that is exactly what that is. Laws are ostensibly for the net-benefit society, but there is no benefit to simply punishing people for its own sake. Imprisoning murders ensures that they cannot murder people, which is an objective benefit to society. It is not so much a punishment as a means of neutralisation. Punishment would be beating them, which is also done in many places. False accusers can be dealt with by vastly cheaper and more humane means, just like many other crimes which do not w…
/r/MensRights12/09/16 05:06 PM
0

Yes I am aware of that. But hurting somebody for the sake of revenge is pointless.
/r/MensRights12/09/16 04:35 PM
1

They have a net negative effect on everything, so what is your point?
/r/MensRights10/09/16 08:05 PM
1

Does that really matter?
/r/MensRights07/09/16 11:54 AM
0

A net positive response.
/r/MensRights05/09/16 01:38 PM
0

That would make a nice holiday.
/r/MensRights05/09/16 01:37 PM
2

Make a backup of that video and do not tell anybody about it.
/r/MensRights05/09/16 01:37 PM
12

She must be high as a fucking kite. And that guy deserved an award for his exceptional composure.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 04:52 PM
0

Albeit in slightly different ways. From what I have observed the left is far more aggressive while the right is far more passive about this. The left goes and harasses suspicious peoples while the right would have their daughters go out with appropriate supervision, such as a sidling or other relative.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 04:23 PM
1

They are dangerous to have out and about, whereas false rape accusers could simply be snubbed.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 04:10 PM
1

You could try.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 04:01 PM
1

Like murderers and rapists and thieves? That is necessary.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 04:00 PM
1

It is inefficient.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 02:15 PM
1

That would be an area or surface.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 01:55 PM
1

I would support that kind of argument if it were in the name of equality (for better or worse), but not as its own independent cause.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 01:50 PM
1

If you just want them punished then I would recommend flogging. I would prefer justice and stability over vengeance.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 01:43 PM
8

I have never seen any of that around here.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 09:55 AM
3

I disagree with the notion that false rape accusers should be punished as rapists, just because it would be a waste of resources.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 09:54 AM
1

Okay then; To reiterate. You are wrong.
/r/MensRights04/09/16 06:03 AM
1

The variation within groups is greater than the variation between groups. I disagree.
/r/MensRights03/09/16 02:47 PM
0

What the actual fuck are you on about? PS: Cock refers to a rooster, which in case you do not know is a male-chicken and extremely annoying.
/r/MensRights03/09/16 02:35 PM
-1

I suppose that could be considered gendered, but I would not considered it to be as gendered as bitch.
/r/MensRights03/09/16 02:14 PM
1

Men and women simply have different social protocols.
/r/MensRights03/09/16 02:09 PM
-2

Nope, none of those are gendered or carry the same connotation.
/r/MensRights03/09/16 10:39 AM
-3

Also relevant however is that a woman behaving in the manner of a strong man is also a bitch.
/r/MensRights03/09/16 10:38 AM
5

All of the above. People are stupid animals and easily trained.
/r/MensRights02/09/16 02:46 PM
2

It has been a lesbian movement for several decades now.
/r/MensRights02/09/16 12:41 PM
1

Do you understand the basics of radar technology? I doubt it, and that information is easily accessible. Masculinity covers more than just biology, which is easily comprehensible. Many people simply reject anything which is beyond their personal experience as impossible or absurd, hence the shitloads of women whom do not understand male competition and just think that it is stupid.
/r/MensRights01/09/16 11:16 AM
1

They do no like it simply because it is different and they do not understand it.
/r/MensRights01/09/16 10:47 AM
3

Cool story, bro. - Nikola Tesla
/r/MensRights29/08/16 08:14 AM
6

They are obligated to do a whole bunch of stuff, and restricted from doing other stuff.
/r/MensRights28/08/16 04:38 AM
2

Or just for shits and giggles, because kids are evil.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 12:25 PM
2

The fact that somebody married Margaret Thatcher is evidence enough that men have not has issue with genuinely powerful women.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 12:25 PM
1

Try showering with a market, just write it on a wall when the idea comes back to you.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 12:12 PM
2

Girls brains mature earlier more so than faster.
/r/MensRights27/08/16 11:58 AM
3

How would you recommend going about becoming a teacher?
/r/MensRights27/08/16 11:55 AM
2

Not to the extent as it was in China. Apples to Apple™.
/r/MensRights26/08/16 12:41 PM
1

China is a unique situation. Of course they rely on men like any other country, but they also have a stagnant population with a lopsided sex ratio.
/r/MensRights26/08/16 12:41 PM
1

Realistically speaking? yes. That would fall under being a decent person, and there are probably applicable (theoretically) laws regarding that.
/r/MensRights26/08/16 11:26 AM
1

Many people do punch them in the face, and many more recognize that as being totally justified, hence relevant laws, etc.
/r/MensRights25/08/16 11:59 PM
1

I think you are using an excessively broad brush on the matter. Of course everybody agrees that beating the shit out of your wife for fucking up your evening Martini is terrible and should not be tolerated, but some people go to great lengths to get themselves punched in the face. Hence why there are specific laws pertaining to these sorts of things.
/r/MensRights25/08/16 11:47 AM
1

That is doubtful.
/r/MensRights25/08/16 02:21 AM
2

That is beside the point, which is that many other laws are not complied with or respected. You will have to actually prove that the wage gap does not exist rather than pointing at legislation which ostensibly disallows it.
/r/MensRights24/08/16 09:26 AM
1

Reciting legislation does not work when so many more serious laws are already blatantly ignored.
/r/MensRights24/08/16 05:41 AM
1

Not very, but it is a LOT more complex than that. Not conceptually more complex, but there are dozens of relevant factors.
/r/MensRights24/08/16 04:49 AM
2

That sounds like something a stereotypical Feminist would think.
/r/MensRights24/08/16 04:48 AM
8

My username is like a magic ward against shitty moderators. I have literally shit talked moderators and just dropped my own username and not been banned, it is hilariously awesome.
/r/MensRights24/08/16 04:07 AM
8

How much wood can you chuck, assuming that you can chuck wood? or are you not a real woodchuck?
/r/MensRights24/08/16 01:11 AM
10

I have a sneaking suspicion that being an attractive woman is not a precursor to suicide.
/r/MensRights24/08/16 01:09 AM
1

Could you offer insight into the Asian honour system? Because from what I can tell it is just a system of 'face' and ethics with no moral backing.
/r/MensRights22/08/16 11:16 PM
1

Ass is what I am for, but to each his own.
/r/MensRights22/08/16 10:18 AM
1

Regardless of OP being a troll, the headline is actually true. Japanese culture has different values than western cultures, and cuteness is much more important over there, so is etiquette. Of course they still value tits and ass and every other feminine curve. NSFW: proof
/r/MensRights22/08/16 10:16 AM
1

The fact of the matter was that if you wanted to vote you had to sign up for military service, that much was equal. Of course that was the limit of the times equality, but it was still something.
/r/MensRights22/08/16 08:02 AM
5

To a limited extent yes, but that is meaningless.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 11:14 AM
10

I am not sure about in the US, but in the British Empire and by extension Canada women could actually vote under equal terms. Tens of thousands of women voted prior to 1920 because they served as nurses during WWI.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 09:04 AM
2

Less than background levels do not register.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 09:02 AM
1

What a great rack.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 09:01 AM
1

I am amazed by how much money some men spend on guns. Owning a gun for hunting is one thing, owning a few guns for various hunting purposes is pretty much the same thing, and then there are the people who own literally dozens of guns for what amounts to an obsession.
/r/MensRights19/08/16 11:32 PM
1

But that term actually makes sense.
/r/MensRights19/08/16 01:25 AM
2

That does not make sense.
/r/MensRights19/08/16 01:04 AM
8

Men buy loads of garbage as well, it is just marketed differently.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 11:22 PM
1

Reversed-racism would make sense.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 10:11 PM
1

We still give them female names, half of the time.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 01:47 PM
3

Actually they alternate, it is just chance that the last few big ones have been female.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 12:06 PM
3

Part of that is simply that people are less likely to lash out against women, such as in customer service.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 12:06 PM
2

Russian ships are male, while French depend upon the namesake, and German ships depend more upon role. I wonder how Feminists would react to that information?
/r/MensRights18/08/16 12:05 PM
1

You mean vibrators?
/r/MensRights18/08/16 12:04 PM
1

Chivalry still makes sense in the sense that it can be understood, but it used to be genuinely practical beyond social stability.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 11:49 AM
1

Reverse-racism does not even make sense as a term.
/r/MensRights17/08/16 10:04 PM
23

A better comparison would be if you went around flat out attacking people.
/r/MensRights16/08/16 11:30 PM
1

Those women do, but the majority of Canadian do not.
/r/MensRights16/08/16 01:37 AM
6

My bad.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 07:59 AM
-13

Black is a lot of a colour while white is the absence of visible colour.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 07:15 AM
-1

Women would probably respond similarly.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 07:14 AM
1

Am Canadian, can confirm; Nobody gives a shit about the Summer Olympics.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 06:52 AM
-2

That is not in any way a form of censorship as literally everybody can still see it.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 06:50 AM
1

Gawker, although I suppose that was a very general statement.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 06:00 AM
4

Handbra, problem solved.
/r/MensRights14/08/16 09:26 PM
1

You say that as if they have ever needed a foundation for overzealous claims.
/r/MensRights14/08/16 09:22 PM
1

What in the world did I just watch a minute of?
/r/MensRights14/08/16 09:21 PM
2

That reminds me of a car commercial which depicted women as getting mad which was then cancelled because women got mad at it.
/r/MensRights14/08/16 01:43 AM
1

Too bad that movement never took off, such a shame. /s
/r/MensRights12/08/16 10:24 PM
2

I did not see it then.
/r/MensRights10/08/16 09:33 PM
1

Or perhaps if escorted by a responsible party?
/r/MensRights10/08/16 09:32 PM
1

That is important and probably a net benefit, but that does not fully excuse the blatant sexism of it.
/r/MensRights10/08/16 09:31 PM
1

Devils Advocate: I am inclined to believe that men and women deal with addiction differently, so this may simply be practical.
/r/MensRights10/08/16 09:30 PM
3

What?
/r/MensRights10/08/16 09:26 PM
1

It can be both. My point is that you can argue against logic, while you cannot argue against faith.
/r/MensRights05/08/16 06:34 PM
0

That is fine. I think it is a baby-step in the right direction.
/r/MensRights05/08/16 04:41 PM
-3

Some kind of faith based system which relies on magic or gods.
/r/MensRights05/08/16 04:15 PM
-3

That is still better than the alternative.
/r/MensRights05/08/16 03:49 PM
-6

At least they are trying to justify it with logic.
/r/MensRights05/08/16 03:01 PM
2

Mental health issues have existed for a long time, most of them probably have nothing to do with modern/current society but have existed since forever, or at least civilization.
/r/MensRights05/08/16 02:37 PM
1

wasn't it only used for research?
/r/MensRights05/08/16 12:35 AM
1

Somebody would rage, like you, but most people not not care.
/r/MensRights05/08/16 12:34 AM
1

We have a large population, comparable or superior to most European countries.
/r/MensRights04/08/16 06:04 PM
2

They probably did, that is what makes it so bad.
/r/MensRights04/08/16 05:02 PM
1

Why should I have to?
/r/MensRights03/08/16 03:45 PM
1

I am mocking you for being either an idiot or a troll.
/r/MensRights03/08/16 03:44 PM
0

This feels weird and wrong...
/r/MensRights03/08/16 03:44 PM
1

Women should cry and scream less. As it stands I have no idea if the crying and screaming I hear outside is from my neighbour being raped or just her kids playing.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 07:45 PM
0

That would be your prerogative.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 07:42 PM
1

How so?
/r/MensRights02/08/16 03:05 PM
9

Reminds me of of the Nazi Olympics. Hitler was told to either shake every bodies hand or nobodies, but not just the Germans. He chose nobodies.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 03:03 PM
2

One thing that made me feel good was that a woman stood up when she was explicitly asked to remain seated. Not sure why she did that but it made me feel a bit better. She probably needed to stand up to see over the chuclefuck standing in front of her.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 03:03 PM
1

That would be moronic and possibly hypocritical.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 02:53 PM
1

The sex drive thing is true but somewhat misleading as the primary difference is in selectivity. Men are attracted to healthy women, whereas women require far more for attraction. Hence the endless dating sites full of men and bots existing at the same time as women wondering where all the good men have gone.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 02:17 PM
1

Generalizations are necessary, otherwise we would be wrapped up in literally endless trivial bullshit. The problem is that those people are moronic hypocrites, generalizing or not.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 02:14 PM
1

What did you just try to say?
/r/MensRights02/08/16 01:09 AM
1

FemiNazis, supporting gender equality and recycling since 1933.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 01:03 AM
-9

This subreddit has gone to shit, so that is expected.
/r/MensRights01/08/16 03:39 PM
1

That depends on how you define it, but generally yes.
/r/MensRights01/08/16 03:39 PM
1

through observation, which you then record and describe in a dictionary.
/r/MensRights01/08/16 03:38 PM
6

But are we FemiNazis?
/r/MensRights01/08/16 03:36 PM
1

Men do fine in those tests, younger boys do terribly, but men do fine. And we are talking specifically about physical tests.
/r/MensRights01/08/16 02:43 PM
2

Technically yes, but not really. A test which allows a significant percentage of women to pass will have the vast majority of men walking through without breaking a sweat, while conversely any test which excludes a significant percentage of men will likely never pass a single woman. It is either or.
/r/MensRights01/08/16 01:49 AM
2

They are relatively decent.
/r/MensRights01/08/16 01:48 AM
1

They had other reasons which were valid, but this is what it turned out to be.
/r/MensRights31/07/16 11:14 AM
3

Nobody goes, they have been going on momentum for a while now.
/r/MensRights31/07/16 11:03 AM
2

It is relevant. It means that any physical test designed for men will invariably exclude women, and conversely any physical test designed for women will be a free pass for men.
/r/MensRights31/07/16 10:40 AM
2

Original source, because OP is a fag.
/r/MensRights31/07/16 10:38 AM
-1

That is just paranoia.
/r/MensRights30/07/16 07:39 PM
2

Or more likely a uterus.
/r/MensRights30/07/16 05:41 PM
222

They do not care about that, they just want more women in specific positions.
/r/MensRights30/07/16 11:46 AM
1

Into a vagina?
/r/MensRights30/07/16 11:29 AM
2

Because there is still a chance that you can fuck them.
/r/MensRights30/07/16 01:23 AM
1

Or the elderly, apparently.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 09:10 PM
0

That is only practical. Women are far more likely to flood a washroom or two, and to give a shit about who else uses 'their' washroom. There are no superior alternatives.
/r/MensRights28/07/16 03:24 PM
1

I have not observed that.
/r/MensRights28/07/16 02:29 PM
1

Not true. That is enough to win. Of course, that is what I have been saying; More or less.
/r/MensRights28/07/16 12:14 AM
4

Only ~15-25% of people identify as Feminists when prompted, but that does not mean that they do not believe in many of the same stupid and/or sexist things which Feminists often support. And in any case she only needs more support than the runner up, not the majority. So it makes sense to target the largest voting blocks which are women, blacks, and retirees.
/r/MensRights27/07/16 03:20 PM
-2

Women are the majority of voters, she only needs them to elect her.
/r/MensRights27/07/16 02:15 PM
6

At least they actually investigated.
/r/MensRights27/07/16 10:29 AM
7

You can feel bad some somebody for being stupid and getting scammed, there is no confliction there.
/r/MensRights26/07/16 08:33 AM
1

Although technically true, it is not meaningful.
/r/MensRights26/07/16 08:32 AM
6

Women are not responsible for men.
/r/MensRights26/07/16 08:27 AM
3

Well he did have a mild run in with SRS.
/r/MensRights24/07/16 01:21 AM
1

That will and should take some time, but it is inevitable at this point.
/r/MensRights24/07/16 01:21 AM
17

I am genuinely surprised to see that she is depicted as wearing proper business attire. EDIT: In retrospect she is actually missing either a tie or the female equivalent of a tie, which I do not remember the name of.
/r/MensRights24/07/16 01:20 AM
6

I have seen a few tests which have claimed to be universal but then contradicted themselves in the next page or even sentence. Canadian military fitness tests for example.
/r/MensRights24/07/16 01:18 AM
1

What the other guy said.
/r/MensRights24/07/16 12:58 AM
4

Twitter does no give a shit about that. There is just cause to ban both of them, but only one of them actually had to go, so they want with the option which was more to their liking.
/r/MensRights23/07/16 01:19 PM
1

Would that even be worthwhile?
/r/MensRights22/07/16 11:20 AM
5

Why stop there? how about your car, internet, rent, etc. Basically everything which is necessary to hold a job.
/r/MensRights22/07/16 11:20 AM
1

It peels like an inside out onion, the cramps 'shake loose' the pieces.
/r/MensRights22/07/16 11:19 AM
2

I think a closer parallel would be a nice suit.
/r/MensRights22/07/16 11:18 AM
2

Most of them are fine. Go clean the sand out of your vagina and add it to the list.
/r/MensRights22/07/16 10:56 AM
2

There are exceptions in laws.
/r/MensRights22/07/16 10:49 AM
2

Google is too big to pick and choose, unlike Tumblr or even Facebook which are tiny by comparison and must pander to demographics.
/r/MensRights22/07/16 10:39 AM
2

[citation needed]
/r/MensRights22/07/16 06:58 AM
1

Rather easily. Assuming that they move out at 18, and that is the cutoff point. Four kids four years apart would be 12 years, plus 18.
/r/MensRights21/07/16 07:30 AM
1

It is a valid point.
/r/MensRights21/07/16 02:23 AM
1

Either way would be progress.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 09:11 AM
1

For that price you could have just bought a new Chevy Sprint every year.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 09:08 AM
1

That quote is obviously in reference to World of Tanks players, and is sound advice. You would have known that if you understood the context. I know exactly why I have been banned, it just so happens that I have never broken any rules. It also just so happens that breaking rules is not what gets you banned, annoying moderators or Feminists is what gets you banned. PS: I actually have broken a few rules on another account, but it remains un-banned.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 02:41 AM
1

Or maybe that other guy is different from myself in one of a near infinite number of ways which could somehow impact this kind of decision. There you go. Happy now?
/r/MensRights20/07/16 01:55 AM
1

All things considered I find that somewhat doubtful. You would be banned as well if that were the case.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 01:53 AM
1

I am genuinely impressed by your ability to say nothing with so many words. My username is like a magic-ward against shitty moderators, however originally it was meant as a simple joke as I figured I would be banned again despite never breaking any rules.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 01:36 AM
1

Maybe that other guy is retarded, who knows.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 01:04 AM
1

Your reasoning is similar to that of a Flat-Earther, somebody who believes that the Earth is flat because that was at one point considered a fact. And because they are stupid, which was why and how I was mocking you. I do not know if having to explain this to you makes it any more or less funny. I would like to discuss the relevant points of evolutionary psychology, but I do not know much about it and you seemingly know nothing. Post stalking typically means that your position is wrong. And you …
/r/MensRights20/07/16 12:53 AM
1

My reasoning is valid.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 12:31 AM
16

They are definitely above average.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 01:35 PM
18

Do hot women just have it easier than unattractive ones? Obviously yes. What could an attractive and otherwise decent woman benefit from Feminism? the correct answer is not much, but the defective-snowflake depends on it.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 01:33 PM
4

That is standard procedure over there. The mods probably have no idea what you were banned for.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 09:13 AM
1

No, I think it is because I am a heterosexual male.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 08:59 AM
1

I am mocking you for being backwards.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 08:58 AM
3

Doubtful, it takes a lot more than that to stop people from fucking and reproducing.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 02:06 AM
3

From the same think-tank which concluded that water is in fact wet.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 02:04 AM
4

They already had that idea.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 02:03 AM
4

Correct me if I am wrong here, but was that not exactly the cause of their falling grades?
/r/MensRights19/07/16 02:03 AM
1

most of them did not do that, and they only did it if they chose to.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 11:49 PM
1

Evolutionary prerogative.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 11:49 PM
1

I see, you are a Flat-Earther.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 11:46 PM
1

Of course, and most royalty did not go anywhere near a battlefield, which is the relevant point.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 11:39 PM
2

I think that drops considerably when you exclude the last two queens which have ruled for like a century apiece.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 12:19 PM
2

The vast majority of kings would only ever be at the rearmost of whatever battle. There may have been princes or whatever closer up, but it was still extremely rare to have any proper royalty actually fighting and dying.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 12:18 PM
1

Birds are a common exception, and many species where the smaller female is more aggressive...such as budgies.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 12:15 PM
2

Record LITERALLY every interaction with her, for your own protection.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 09:55 AM
3

To my knowledge the 8% figure is represents provably false court cases according to the FBI. It should be treated as an absolute minimum.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 09:30 AM
-1

There is a valid argument for that. Not one which I agree with, but it is still there.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 09:26 AM
1

Quite low.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 12:27 AM
1

People would be more pissed about me pushing the woman, and that could be dangerous.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 12:05 AM
1

Yes.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 11:59 PM
1

All you did was repeat that you think it is meaningful, you did not provide any kind of argument or reasoning.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 11:55 PM
0

Nah, Turkey is basically irrelevant.
/r/MensRights17/07/16 11:16 AM
1

There is no front any more, otherwise that would be a valid idea.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 10:21 PM
3

Those soldiers would still have been leaps and bounds more capable than women. And it is not the 40s, the military has no need for anything but the best.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 10:20 PM
1

Not surprising or even particularly meaningful. I would have expected 75%. I would rather throw the man, off, and for multiple reasons.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 10:16 PM
-4

Technically true, but irrelevant.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 11:22 AM
1

You forgot about the politics of it. The vast majority of people will never know or care about this kind of thing, but a small minorities vote may be swayed.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 11:20 AM
1

Chiropractic medicine is different in Canada, they tend to be fine. I just have not seen mine in about three years. The last time was when I almost dislocated my shoulder and the hospital said it was fine but it still really hurt, my chiropractor fixed it in about ten minutes.
/r/MensRights15/07/16 11:38 PM
1

Good to know, I will have to have this checked out. I am Canadian.
/r/MensRights15/07/16 03:19 AM
1

Is that what causes that? I get a weird feeling in my shoulder-neck area sometimes and my arms start feeling almost numb.
/r/MensRights14/07/16 11:28 PM
1

It is probably the worst thing to happen to them, the worst thing in their world.
/r/MensRights14/07/16 11:27 PM
1

lol
/r/MensRights14/07/16 08:33 AM
1

Those kinds of people do not learn those kinds of lessons, otherwise they would have already learned them from history books.
/r/MensRights13/07/16 11:52 AM
2

You say that as if government incompetence could not continue forever.
/r/MensRights13/07/16 11:52 AM
2

Not literally every single one of them, but enough to accurately generalize.
/r/MensRights07/07/16 12:29 AM
3

Yes it is, otherwise it would be nothing but raving lunatics screaming on all sides.
/r/MensRights06/07/16 07:53 PM
7

Feminists do not believe in evolution, or science in general.
/r/MensRights06/07/16 06:24 PM
0

Or just examine all available information.
/r/MensRights05/07/16 06:22 PM
1

That is a fair point if she was speaking of morality. Doing something which you know is wrong is morally worse than doing that same thing if you do not know it is wrong. Like stealing food for fun vs stealing food to survive.
/r/MensRights05/07/16 12:49 AM
-1

He said study, not experiment.
/r/MensRights05/07/16 12:47 AM
73

This is Bug Light we are talking about, not an actual beer company.
/r/MensRights03/07/16 05:12 PM
5

Technically true but somewhat misleading. Breast cancer is objectively worse, but it gets a LOT more attention. That is kinda sad when you think about it. That prostate cancer could be made a non-issue with a fraction of the funding of breast cancer.
/r/MensRights03/07/16 05:10 PM
3

The third option seems promising.
/r/MensRights03/07/16 05:07 PM
0

No I do not. I would rather this subreddit have slowly become more popular while maintaining quality, opposed to gaining like 20k subscribers over a weekend and going to shit. Now it is like 90% shitposts and kneejerk downvotes.
/r/MensRights02/07/16 01:09 AM
-10

This subreddit has gone to shit since it has become relatively popular, which is pretty normal.
/r/MensRights01/07/16 08:21 PM
1

On the flip side, with automation reaming the job market that could allow for 100% employment.
/r/MensRights30/06/16 12:49 PM
1

No it does not.
/r/MensRights29/06/16 02:41 PM
2

Real answer? Because that is not considered to be the more profitable approach.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 09:18 PM
-2

Not necessarily. And that is not the point.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 09:05 PM
-3

There are a few theories, the one I read was that people tend to conform to stereotypes when pressured.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 07:11 PM
3

That at least has some reasoning behind it. You can argue against it for sure, but it is at least grounded in the observable world.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 12:23 PM
-11

You do not need to open your mouth, they only need be aware of the stereotype. Stick the black kid in a class full of nothing but white kids and they will do worse for it.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 12:22 PM
2

Try to relate your story to her, to make her emphasize with your situation. And throw the word and definition of equality at her, a lot.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 09:03 AM
1

Is it really nessisary to keep female breeding stock after the age of 30? Milfs.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 09:01 AM
3

Imagine that you are doing a job and making money, now imagine that you could get paid more money if you complained about something. End of thought process, it is just profit motive.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 04:06 PM
1

Just that loads of people are full of shit and attempt to excuse their shitty behaviour by pretending to have good motives.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 03:02 PM
1

Because she had no reason to do so. She goes to work, she does her job, she gets paid. End of story.
/r/MensRights26/06/16 05:24 PM
1

I think that you are too optimistic. Many people have used that line for support for their own personal gain.
/r/MensRights26/06/16 04:46 PM
1

She probably never thought about it, and why would she? How much of what you do in a day do you actually think about and contemplate?
/r/MensRights26/06/16 04:37 PM
0

That was not the focus of the experiment.
/r/MensRights26/06/16 04:35 PM
1

Every show like this is imperfect, that does not make them any less interesting.
/r/MensRights26/06/16 04:34 PM
1

And his penis, and some other guys penis.
/r/MensRights26/06/16 04:23 PM
1

Who cares if women have stronger immune systems? Doctors. The real danger here is ignorance.
/r/MensRights26/06/16 10:32 AM
1

Women have higher white blood cell concentrations.
/r/MensRights26/06/16 10:30 AM
2

Not all of those are false.
/r/MensRights25/06/16 03:26 PM
2

If it were a competition then men would collectively give a shit about it.
/r/MensRights25/06/16 03:26 PM
1

Or pay for either.
/r/MensRights25/06/16 02:24 PM
0

Iraq was also an almost incredibly safe war to participate in, at least on the American side.
/r/MensRights24/06/16 05:25 PM
-1

That was the joke...
/r/MensRights24/06/16 01:21 PM
-7

No you do not. Go away.
/r/MensRights24/06/16 01:11 PM
7

Can a child carry ~90lbs of gear over a several day hike roughly a million miles from Bumfuck Nowhere? The answer is no, which is also why they have had to repeatedly lower the physical standards for women in the military just for them to qualify for non-combat roles. The idea of a female marine is as laughable as a prepubescent marine
/r/MensRights24/06/16 12:33 PM
0

I doubt that.
/r/MensRights23/06/16 02:46 PM
0

XD All I see is a literally retarded minion face, or some arcane Facebook bullshit.
/r/MensRights23/06/16 02:11 PM
1

There are probably people around you who would bang anything with two or more legs, they are factored in as well.
/r/MensRights23/06/16 02:03 PM
6

It is about the opposite, actually. Most women are average, some are super hot, and relatively few are actually ugly. Although the source which I got that from excluded people with obvious deformities, which seemed to include being fat.
/r/MensRights23/06/16 01:40 PM
1

And fucking awesome.
/r/MensRights23/06/16 10:38 AM
12

They seem to generally oppose being drafted themselves and many are suddenly against the draft as a whole. I have not seen any practical support for it.
/r/MensRights22/06/16 11:57 AM
2

It takes less effort than shortening the url.
/r/MensRights22/06/16 01:47 AM
3

Still...just format it properly. [word](link)
/r/MensRights21/06/16 11:35 PM
2

Shortened links will expire, do not use them for anything which you expect to be looked at past a week.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 11:00 PM
1

And? What is your point, Poe?
/r/MensRights21/06/16 09:58 PM
1

Your source was too old, deal with it.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 08:07 PM
1

Evidently.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 08:01 PM
1

I find it funny how the most shocking thing about #8 is that they dye their underarm hair. Not shaving? meh, personal preference. But colouring it brightly like a rainforest-frog? lol
/r/MensRights21/06/16 06:23 PM
1

Your source is 22 years old.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 06:03 PM
1

If you say so; You would know better than I.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 05:53 PM
1

Are you stupid? I guess Poe strikes again.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 01:59 PM
1

Nah, it is just that I understand fractions.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 01:52 PM
1

Deflections, the first resort of those with no argument.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 01:51 PM
1

That is by far the largest program, probably accounting for the vast majority of spending. And yes, single digit percentages being female-specific makes it pretty much irrelevant.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 09:25 AM
1

That is not even what I said. Can you not read?
/r/MensRights21/06/16 09:24 AM
1

How about not being a fucking idiot and using a damned calender?
/r/MensRights20/06/16 09:35 AM
1

Such as? You just made that up. We could probably learn something from the Japanese.
/r/MensRights20/06/16 01:10 AM
1

Nobody is suggesting that we act like monkeys, just that we can maybe learn from aspects of their behaviour.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 02:43 PM
3

Sweden is probably the worst offender.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 11:35 AM
1

Not on hand, but some other guy threw out a 5billion figure for female-specific health spending, which would be like 1.5% of general health spending.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 11:11 AM
1

Probably not, but HIV/AIDS is less of an issue than what I listed.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 07:54 AM
3

Probably about how I described it, but more realistic.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 05:56 AM
1

The idea was that women would choose gentle peaceful men other Stalin and Hitler, who come to think of it were not exactly successful from a reproductive standpoint, although apparently Stalin had a daughter who was literally one of two people Stalin did not hate.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 03:15 AM
1

Somebody else would be into that.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 03:14 AM
-4

Does that really matter? at the end of the day they have still largely substituted violence for sex.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 03:12 AM
6

Domestic violence, depression, rape, and so many more things could be solved overnight. I will get the 10-1 scale solid osmium [female name] Peace Prize ready.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 03:10 AM
1

Because women have different medical requirements, and actually go to doctors. My point was that sex-specific health spending is pretty paltry compared to general health spending. That said, women actually take up WAY more resources than +20%, it is closer to 3x in some places...admittedly that place is Norway so the figures may not be directly comparable.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 02:53 AM
1

Both.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 02:47 AM
3

Doubtful, in any case they probably have more important shit to do than get offended. And if not then oh well it was probably unavoidable anyway.
/r/MensRights18/06/16 11:56 AM
14

I think that this is more targeted at the dipshits which actually advertise Fathers Day as being about and for women, which is stupid.
/r/MensRights18/06/16 09:45 AM
9

Those people would be fine with it by virtue of not caring.
/r/MensRights18/06/16 09:44 AM
1

Not much is actually spent on women's health.
/r/MensRights18/06/16 09:25 AM
1

No.
/r/MensRights17/06/16 10:27 PM
1

Possibly.
/r/MensRights17/06/16 09:40 PM
1

Medicare?
/r/MensRights17/06/16 09:37 PM
1

Hundreds of billions are spent on Medicare each year.
/r/MensRights17/06/16 09:36 PM
-5

Technically true but likely irrelevant considering how relatively little is spent on woman-specific health programs.
/r/MensRights17/06/16 04:48 AM
1

They are dealing with it, badly.
/r/MensRights16/06/16 08:19 PM
2

She would still have been considered thin.
/r/MensRights16/06/16 08:18 PM
1

That used to be a thing, to an extent. It had more to do with children.
/r/MensRights16/06/16 01:00 AM
1

Neat.
/r/MensRights15/06/16 09:20 PM
1

Yes and no. Done.
/r/MensRights15/06/16 09:20 PM
9

When was it ever a great time to have kids?
/r/MensRights15/06/16 08:34 AM
1

They probably did not think about it being "Me want!"
/r/MensRights14/06/16 10:21 AM
2

Busy teaching economics, probably.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 10:19 AM
3

Because retarded dogs destroy stuff, and cats are halfway retarded to begin with.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 12:54 AM
5

Even my retarded cat thinks.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 12:40 AM
13

Yes, they is actually how they think.
/r/MensRights13/06/16 08:32 PM
14

All of the above? Maximum appeal to multiple groups.
/r/MensRights10/06/16 11:37 PM
6

It may not be legally applicable, in which case they may get in trouble for it.
/r/MensRights10/06/16 01:42 AM
2

Only as a keepsake.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 06:09 PM
-1

That is not even a real thing.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 06:07 PM
1

I should have said "At one point-". There were many factors. As a result of the 2008 military reforms total numbers were reduced and standards were raised, so not everybody was guaranteed a job. Basic pay was also basically doubled and the years immediately following were pretty shitty for the job market anyway.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 05:57 PM
1

Loads of places have conscription which works out relatively well. At this point in Russia there are mothers bribing officials to get their sons conscripted, because it is a good deal.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 01:04 AM
1

Logic also says that you could just be an idiot, which is extremely likely. Admittedly my initial assumption was unwarranted, but understandable under the circumstances. You then implied that it was correct, or that you were an idiot.
/r/MensRights08/06/16 11:59 PM
1

I am equal to men in this regard Implying that you are not a man.
/r/MensRights08/06/16 05:22 PM
1

You could be a woman, which is what you implied.
/r/MensRights08/06/16 12:58 AM
1

No you are not.
/r/MensRights06/06/16 10:59 PM
1

How about with the idea of being equal to men in this regard?
/r/MensRights06/06/16 12:22 AM
1

It could be both.
/r/MensRights03/06/16 12:21 PM
1

Probably quite well.
/r/MensRights03/06/16 12:21 PM
1

Somebody misused a word, I corrected them. Why did you attempt to intervene anyway?
/r/MensRights03/06/16 12:20 PM
3

There is some overlap, but that is no excuse for lazy language and insulting actual cults.
/r/MensRights03/06/16 12:24 AM
-4

Nope, they are distinctly different things, and not even what you described anyway.
/r/MensRights03/06/16 12:24 AM
8

Because reasonable people just disagree with the 'god hates fags' group, but reasonable people do not make bomb threats.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 04:06 PM
-2

Google defines a cult as the following: a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object. a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister. a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing. And a religion as this: the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods. Christianity is a religious cult, many actual religions are n…
/r/MensRights02/06/16 04:04 PM
1

How so?
/r/MensRights02/06/16 03:50 PM
-2

Google it, they are different things.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 03:49 PM
10

They are not the same thing.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 03:20 PM
1

People who make no difference. Does it really need a substitute? Nimrod used to mean something different.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 03:19 PM
1

Those people are irrelevant. I am not talking about changing words, I am talking about updating dictionaries. Case and point, nimrod.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 03:02 PM
12

It is not technically a cult, it is a religion.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 02:41 PM
1

Fair enough. But dictionary definitions do not dictate what words mean, they only define their past usage. In this case I would lump Liberalism along with Feminism in that the dictionary definition is wrong and needs updating.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 02:32 PM
0

Otherwise?...
/r/MensRights01/06/16 10:00 PM
0

Why not? How are they mutually exclusive?
/r/MensRights01/06/16 09:54 PM
0

How would a person even manage 2+ bags?
/r/MensRights01/06/16 12:26 PM
-8

You should go to see a doctor if that is actually happening. Sure it is uncomfortable, but only because you need to flex your legs while sitting.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 12:25 PM
3

Unless they win the fight, then you lost.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 10:49 AM
8

They are probably both.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 10:49 AM
-9

Reminds me of my go-to comment for whenever I get irrationally downvoted. All downvotes not accompanied by comments will be interpreted as enthusiastic upvotes.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 10:49 AM
1

That is pure conjecture.
/r/MensRights31/05/16 05:35 PM
1

While that is arguably true, it is not really relevant with regards to Australia.
/r/MensRights30/05/16 02:35 PM
1

They never had the opportunity to steal a country.
/r/MensRights30/05/16 02:34 PM
2

I will trade my hurting eyes for your hurting brain.
/r/MensRights29/05/16 02:58 AM
0

Okay then, whatever.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 03:46 PM
1

I thought that went without saying.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 03:27 PM
-5

The sacrifice is if you throw out one to keep the other.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 03:26 PM
-5

Yes, a choice to sacrifice steak for lobster, a choice which many people would make and which should be respected.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 03:17 PM
1

To reiterate: Individual people do what they think is best for them, with little to no regard for others. Those men may think that their actions could get them laid, or just think that they are immune to this shit, or they could simply be stupid.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 03:16 PM
-7

It would technically bee a sacrifice.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 03:15 PM
1

"an act of giving up something valued for the sake of something else regarded as more important or worthy."
/r/MensRights28/05/16 02:56 PM
2

Devils Advocate...kinda: I think that you are looking at it from a cynical lense. People support whatever benefits them, and that is about it.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 07:21 AM
3

I have reached my limit. Normally I try to imagine what the other person in a debate is thinking and use that to be my advantage, but ate this point I am stumped. I can understand emotions beung relevant obviously, but not understanding logic and reasons? nope, that is beyond my comprehension.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 07:20 AM
1

An elephant could stomp on said birds, and birds are pretty stupid.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 07:13 AM
2

No shit Sherlock, they (and we) are already everywhere, but they are toxic.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 07:12 AM
1

If nothing else this should be interesting.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 06:45 AM
1

I think that generalizing is a useful tool. The same goes for metaphors and stuff.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 06:34 AM
1

Right...but if you were to group everybody according to their group, the MRM would have basically nothing, Feminism would be associated with various mental disorders, and the church would have miniature black-holes.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 06:05 AM
1

You are, completely coincidentally, not who Hillary Clinton is targeting.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 02:44 AM
1

The latter group would probably not vote for her anyway, and is therefore irrelevant in this context.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 02:43 AM
1

Very, and they are right.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 02:42 AM
2

Why?
/r/MensRights28/05/16 02:41 AM
64

The argument which I have always heard and generally supported was that they sacrificed a lot of potential to ave kids or whatever and needed temporary support to become truly independent. PS: I am not supporting any of this crap, just giving my two cents.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 02:41 AM
11

I also liked seeing that, but do we actually know what it is? for all I know it is for teenage boys who are worried about becoming abusers.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 02:40 AM
9

That would be Microsoft, and you would be surprised.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 02:39 AM
1

Cool story.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 02:18 AM
1

Nobody disagreed with or contracted any of what you just said.
/r/MensRights27/05/16 11:59 PM
7

All true, he is a prissy little fag. But he is also extremely entertaining and educational to watch.
/r/MensRights27/05/16 12:21 PM
2

While technically true, you have low IQ zealots in here as well, but the Catholic Church still has some scientific achievements which make the MRM ans Feminism look like a middleschool debate class.
/r/MensRights27/05/16 11:29 AM
1

That is politics, they tend to be insane in any significant side and actually do require strict moderation to operate.
/r/MensRights27/05/16 11:27 AM
3

claps approvingly Welcome.
/r/MensRights27/05/16 11:26 AM
1

Not particularly. But I would be interested in seeing you attempt to defend your position.
/r/MensRights27/05/16 11:06 AM
1

No you did not.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 06:47 PM
0

You are an internet nobody.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 06:45 PM
-2

Those are physical characteristics. Less genetic redundancy is a genetic characteristic, and definitely not a good one.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 02:29 PM
2

They play against adolescent boys as they are about as physically capable, meaning fast.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 12:17 PM
1

That sentence does not even make sense. Men are physically superior in most respects, but definitely not genetically superior.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 12:16 PM
2

He can still hope.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 12:11 PM
1

Marriage is on the downturn for everybody and men have not stopped having relationships. The biggest factor here is that men will now buy products marketed for them which they would previously not have. Could you imagine a body wash commercial for men in the 80s?
/r/MensRights26/05/16 11:38 AM
6

The other few hundred posts in this subreddit, probably.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 09:50 AM
1

Fuck it, just colourize the photo.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 09:13 AM
1

Alternatively they could just be very very stupid and not understand what is going on.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 09:13 AM
1

I asked an honest question, dipshit. No need to get all passive-aggressive on me.
/r/MensRights26/05/16 12:47 AM
1

Such as?
/r/MensRights25/05/16 01:47 AM
1

Second to the back on the left appears to be maybe black(ish).
/r/MensRights25/05/16 01:45 AM
2

Yes. I recall reading a British study/report which involved tens of thousands of investigations over the course of nearly twenty years and they had exactly zero confirmed cases of date rape drugs in drinks. Loads of people who should have eaten before drinking, but literally zero cases of spiked drinks.
/r/MensRights25/05/16 01:42 AM
2

Most of that is due to good reasons. Russian men die like 15 years earlier because they smoke and drink waaay more than Russian women.
/r/MensRights25/05/16 01:30 AM
4

No, there are plenty of women who care about language, just not many Feminists.
/r/MensRights24/05/16 11:41 PM
24

Because nobody actually gives a shit about what words mean.
/r/MensRights24/05/16 03:59 PM
1

Meh, I am more interested in the positive impact of Minecraft. I should rebuild my house in there. It was basically a concrete bunker, on the moon, with nuclear power, and a forcefield, and a cloaking device...woo hoo for mods!
/r/MensRights23/05/16 10:59 AM
1

Comrade is a nice word which I hope does not get sent to the figurative gulag.
/r/MensRights23/05/16 10:26 AM
-1

Neither would I or almost anybody else, circumstances permitting. But I am sure that you would mind being executed via blue waffle.
/r/MensRights23/05/16 10:25 AM
4

There is some overlap.
/r/MensRights22/05/16 03:08 PM
2

Fair enough hypothesis. I wonder if a Feminist who is both Asian and male would me more or less fucked up?
/r/MensRights22/05/16 06:54 AM
1

Being objectively correct still has its advantages, all other factors notwithstanding.
/r/MensRights22/05/16 06:32 AM
3

Really? Why?
/r/MensRights22/05/16 06:30 AM
1

Fair enough, but as a general rule it is just fine for basic stuff, like the history of swords or some plane or whatever.
/r/MensRights21/05/16 11:54 PM
1

Not a genuine hazard, just not up to code. And there is somebody living in it.
/r/MensRights21/05/16 11:52 PM
1

Sure, but in either case there will be somebody going "huh, what happened to that?" and a pushback.
/r/MensRights21/05/16 11:46 PM
2

If you were to demolish a shitty house without replacing it, would that piss somebody off?
/r/MensRights21/05/16 12:03 PM
2

It is great for anything non-controversial and well known, but fuck all worthless for anything else.
/r/MensRights21/05/16 12:01 PM
1

Idiots have always existed, so have clever people, and normal idiots.
/r/MensRights21/05/16 11:56 AM
1

Nope, that would still not be an earning gap as you are now comparing different positions.
/r/MensRights21/05/16 12:53 AM
1

What about "and does exist now"?
/r/MensRights21/05/16 12:53 AM
1

No they are most definitely not.
/r/MensRights20/05/16 10:09 PM
1

And totally fine, because it is not a wage gap.
/r/MensRights20/05/16 08:28 PM
2

More like instructions.
/r/MensRights20/05/16 08:36 AM
1

A mountain of bullshit will break any camels back.
/r/MensRights20/05/16 07:58 AM
4

Its a joke. Laugh and move on.
/r/MensRights20/05/16 07:56 AM
3

Not Lenny, Moe.
/r/MensRights20/05/16 07:46 AM
7

Devils Advocate: Murder victims die. If they got over it then maybe murder would be a less serious crime.
/r/MensRights20/05/16 12:23 AM
1

They are both theistic cults.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 10:51 PM
6

That would not even be communism, or socialism.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 10:50 PM
1

Still more bangable than Trigglypuff.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 10:46 PM
2

That is an earning gap.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 10:44 PM
-8

One of those things is not like the other, and they are all bullshit. In any case he could still consent, and she was not a rapist. She should be fired and maybe barred from similar positions.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 11:23 AM
6

A good but not particularly successful movie which is coming up on its 30th birthday.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 10:46 AM
5

Two adults having sex is not criminal, inappropriate under the circumstances, but that is all.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 10:24 AM
12

How about electing better politicians regardless of their sex?
/r/MensRights19/05/16 09:52 AM
4

It could be for people who have been living under rocks for the last half a century.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 09:46 AM
-4

Not really, 20 years would have been absurd, and 7 days is probably the minimum technically allowed.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 09:36 AM
2

The wage gap never existed, and this will probably only have a minimal effect on the earning gap while being a net detriment.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 09:17 AM
3

Assuming that your observation is correct, that still means that Feminism has been defunct for the better part of a century.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 09:15 AM
1

Is that news? no. Is there news? yes, but it is unrelated to that. Egypt has commissioned its new French-Russian amphibious assault ships. That is news.
/r/MensRights18/05/16 10:01 PM
1

That would be very complex. How would you even define success? sex? a relationship lasting longer than X? marriage? How about dodging a figurative bullet?
/r/MensRights18/05/16 10:00 PM
4

More like an admission, which is one of the few ways which saying that is considered acceptable.
/r/MensRights18/05/16 07:21 AM
1

Its mostly just a terribly unflattering picture.
/r/MensRights17/05/16 07:42 PM
1

I wonder what they would think of the Borg :/
/r/MensRights17/05/16 07:19 PM
1

I am more worried about the thugs.
/r/MensRights17/05/16 07:14 PM
10

Less Puritan, more Victorian.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 11:57 PM
1

Okay...and?
/r/MensRights15/05/16 11:00 PM
1

Some of them are, some of them are also crazy.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 10:38 PM
1

Everything? The show is basically how they describe The Patriarchy™.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 09:51 PM
4

That is just how Star Trek works. I wonder how Feminists would react to watching a show like Star Trek or MASH?
/r/MensRights15/05/16 07:37 PM
1

You suggested punishment, I simply gave a suggestion on how to improve such a system. My idea is more along the lines of damage mitigation.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 01:53 AM
1

Yes.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 01:52 AM
1

Because that would be immoral and senseless. Your turn.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 01:50 AM
1

At that point there is no point in giving a shit about anything regarding legal systems, as they are all out to get you.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 01:26 AM
1

Fuck it, why not just beat them? That would make infinitely more sense if your goal is to punish them.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 01:24 AM
1

Did you even read my comment, or do you just not understand what I mean by a black mark?
/r/MensRights15/05/16 01:17 AM
1

It protects you from false accusations. She could accuse you, and it would go nowhere by default.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 01:16 AM
1

You are definitely missing the point.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 12:50 AM
0

You were done a while ago.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 12:47 AM
1

Bullshit. His comment did not even address my comment. It worked about like this: Me: The house did not burn down. Him: How do you plan to replace the house which burnt down?
/r/MensRights15/05/16 12:46 AM
0

Why? Are you also up for imprisoning children who talk shit over Xbox Live?
/r/MensRights15/05/16 12:45 AM
1

That would not stop anybody from burglaring. Maybe making them wear a GPS tracker, and fining them a whole bunch, while making them perform community service. That would work, and be a few orders of magnitude cheaper than prison.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 12:41 AM
1

Sure, but prison is expensive.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 12:40 AM
1

You are missing the point entirely, and I suspect deliberately.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 12:39 AM
0

Justice says to kill them, which would be more expensive than simply blacklisting them, which would also achieve about the same effect.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 07:53 PM
-2

You are an absolute moron if you think that your initial comment made any sense.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 07:48 PM
1

Why would you bother with any of that if you could just neutralize them as a threat? At that point it would not really matter that profession they had, as they are no longer a significant risk.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 07:12 PM
0

How about you go and read what I actually wrote and then respond accordingly?
/r/MensRights14/05/16 07:12 PM
1

Maybe, that would be a potential consequence, and I think it would be acceptable. Maybe barring them completely would be overkill, but their ability to influence the legal system should definitely be at the very least severely mitigated/reduced. I think the idea of limiting the amount of damage which these people could do is a better idea than simply putting their names on a list, which nobody would check anyway.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 06:06 PM
4

A lot of the time it is not so much an unwillingness to pay as an inability to pay. As in it is either rent or child support.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 06:01 PM
2

Great...now if only you could pull me out of the karma-gutter.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 05:46 PM
0

You are definitely being deliberately obstinate. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 05:40 PM
1

False rape accusers could be managed far more efficiently simply by blacklisting them. What would that do? You know what I would do because I already told you. Put a big assed black mark on their record, probably saying "false accuser" which would bar them from giving testimony or having any real say in legal stuff. Their word would be meaningless in law.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 05:39 PM
1

The difference is that..nevermind, you clearly do not even care. Take away Hitlers army or SWAT and these psychos are harmless. Done.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 05:37 PM
1

Why bother? With that big ass black mark her word is worthless.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 05:36 PM
1

Attempted murder ≠ actual murder.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 05:35 PM
0

Not being deliberate? because you are definitely being obstinate. The point is that if somebody were appropriately blacklisted then their accusations would be harmless thereafter. Now you need to explain how an accusation which has no effect on anything is somehow constitutes dangerous violence.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 01:31 AM
2

That makes some sense, but there need to be vastly more stupid people in your analogy. And with regards the marshmellow theft a 3$ fine would work better, that would be profitable while punshing genuine thieves and still functioning as a disincentive to anybody who does not want to pay a 1000% markup on a marshmellow. Opposed to wasting ~$120,000$ a year for somebody stealing a single marshmellow, which seems to be what you are supporting.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 01:25 AM
1

But you just said that it was akin to murder.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 01:21 AM
-1

You definitely are.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 01:18 AM
-1

Not unless they can actually have it done, which is what I am getting at. Remove their influence, which is a proxy, and they are harmless.
/r/MensRights14/05/16 01:08 AM
-1

Are you being obstinate on purpose?
/r/MensRights14/05/16 01:06 AM
1

Because you do not benefit from them. Whether your shit is confiscated and you have to perform community service or are imprisoned for a decade before being executed is almost irrelevant, in either case a smart person will not bother with it while a stupid person will not think about the consequences. Your theory does not explain criminality, mine does.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 10:42 PM
1

See above.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 10:38 PM
2

I am saying that the kinds of people who think far enough ahead to realize that assault and theft are stupid ideas are not the same kinds of people who commit assault and theft in the first place, or get caught. Do you think that the average convicted felon thought things through? I assure you that the vast majority of them did not.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 09:26 PM
1

False accusers need to be locked up because if they are not locked up then they will continue to falsely accuse people. /u/RASion4191 I disagree; I think that there are other ways to deal with false accusers, more efficient ways.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 09:20 PM
0

An ineffective one, as it is only a disincentive to those who are least likely to commit crimes in the first place. Or at least that is the case for crimes like theft and assault.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 09:12 PM
-2

Fuck it, why not just go all the way down the chain and execute everybody who voted that administration into office? PS: Sarcasm tags are necessary and should be used whenever applicable.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 08:59 PM
3

It would cut them off from their source of proxy-power. By themselves they cannot do anything of consequence.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 07:30 PM
-11

So put the police in prison, problem solved. /s
/r/MensRights13/05/16 06:29 PM
0

So...death penalty?
/r/MensRights13/05/16 06:28 PM
3

Yes, and I am suggesting to eliminate their ability to abuse the system, cheaply.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 06:28 PM
-14

Short answer, no.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 06:08 PM
-16

Profit, politics, incompetence, etc.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 06:04 PM
-7

You just took a giant shit all over your own argument; What if [inset group] is innocent? There are standards for proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and if those standards are met then appropriate actions should be taken. Rapists need to be locked up because if they are not locked up then they will continue to rape people. False accusers can be dealt with more cheaply.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 06:04 PM
1

Yes, but they can be neutralized as a threat by means other than incarceration, which is expensive. Not really, that has been the standard since forever. Prison systems have been used for loads of things from profit to politics, but as a general rule it is the violent offenders which prisons were made for.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 05:59 PM
10

They would attack that as well.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 05:52 PM
7

How about a big black mark on their police record which says "false accuser"?
/r/MensRights13/05/16 05:27 PM
-46

That would be pointless. Prisons are supposed to be for dangerously violent persons. False rape accusers could be managed far more efficiently simply by blacklisting them.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 05:25 PM
0

Same shit goes if you protest on the sidewalk, you will be moved out of peoples way.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 05:05 PM
1

I am not sure that they can be aptly compared, as a huge factor is when you enter the foster care system. If you enter as a baby then you are adopted by well off parents before the day is over, but as a disfunctional child which somebody else already abandoned? at that point you may be screwed no matter what.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 04:44 PM
1

To continue your analogy; If you protest in the middle of a busy street you will be removed, regardless of what/how/why you were protesting.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 01:58 AM
2

Meh, you are wrong but you are obviously wrong so I do not really care.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 01:54 AM
-1

I reiterated, just for you.
/r/MensRights13/05/16 12:29 AM
0

Typical "single mothers are the worst thing in the world" idiot. No, a single mother is not the best option for a child most of the time. Statistically speaking a single-mother is actually the worst thing for the child, short of cancer that is. I am sure a part of that is due to family court bullshit, which favours shitty mothers over decent fathers, but that is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights12/05/16 11:06 PM
1

Nuclear reactors are self contained and shielded. You could sleep on top of one all day every day and be fine. XX has more redundancy and less complexity than XY, and ovaries are more 'shielded' than testicles.
/r/MensRights12/05/16 05:06 PM
3

Even then that would not be discrimination.
/r/MensRights12/05/16 12:48 AM
2

Because it is perfectly shielded, and men are marginally more susceptible to radiation anyway.
/r/MensRights12/05/16 12:46 AM
3

Does that really matter?
/r/MensRights11/05/16 07:15 PM
1

The radiation thing is bogus, although there are/were real concerns about infection and such. The actual reason why they are still more or less banned is because the sub community is relatively small and 'isolated' and really does not want to have to deal with women, like the rest of the navy, and airforce, an army, and coastguard, and police, etc.
/r/MensRights11/05/16 06:45 PM
3

Nope, that is a reasonable explanation.
/r/MensRights09/05/16 10:34 PM
5

You never get too old to hate dishonest or misleading advertising.
/r/MensRights09/05/16 03:20 PM
5

That is also retarded.
/r/MensRights09/05/16 12:37 AM
10

Fathers Day is already a thing, so fuck off and stop trying to co-opt Mothers Day, which is and should be for mothers.
/r/MensRights09/05/16 12:24 AM
6

I recall reading that there was a significant disparity of serious injuries from domestic violence, not really surprising as there are multiple contributing factors, but still potentially misleading.
/r/MensRights09/05/16 12:20 AM
1

Was that an actual Twilight Zone episode?
/r/MensRights08/05/16 04:14 PM
2

Inconceivable. /s
/r/MensRights08/05/16 04:13 PM
0

Nobody is arguing with that, but there still needs to be more clarification.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 03:56 PM
3

That is all interesting and such, but right now I want a woman.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 03:55 PM
3

To be fair, there is a limited overlap in perspectives. We can all see that Feminists are crazy, but while the MRA will try to reason with her, the PUA will try to bang her, and the MGHOW(?) has already fucked off.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 09:49 AM
1

Okay...who is willing to do this?
/r/MensRights07/05/16 09:47 AM
2

You are aware that these peoples motto for dealing with shit is "make the personal political", correct?
/r/MensRights06/05/16 06:23 PM
2

That will never happen.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 05:33 PM
1

You would still be surprised. They would rather hire a woman who failed the course and just have her re-take it than hire a man. Something to do with government contracts.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 05:23 PM
-3

Kinda, I was pointing out how it is not the best comparison.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 02:45 PM
3

Illiteracy. Some people never read a dictionary, or do not accept it. There is an idiot in /r/unpopularopinion who has tried on several occasions to argue that discriminating, which means telling two or more things apart, is not always discriminating because reasons. They actually do not know enough English, or any other language, to hold a conversation.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:51 AM
-7

Protecting yourself from gold-diggers, there is really no downside. Except maybe for gold-diggers, but fuck them anyway. Opposed to living in perpetual fear of all men and trying to change the world to accommodate your paranoia, that cannot be good for anyone.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:45 AM
1

Nice strawman.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:41 AM
3

Some people think chivalry is a vague concept which simply puts women above men, and not a form of etiquette.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:41 AM
1

The double standard is a problem, but realistically speaking 28 year old's having consensual sex with 15 year old's is not a serious problem. the fact that this person was a teacher is a problem, but that has been dealt with.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:40 AM
3

Probably in with you in grade school.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:38 AM
-6

Which is why she should be fired and probably fined, but that is it.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:36 AM
3

14 is pretty standard, but that is the minimum with a maximum age gap of 4 years I think.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:36 AM
-1

Although stepping back for a minute, that definitely makes things less-bad.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 10:34 AM
-9

Big difference, that has no repercussions. Like locking your door.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 09:11 AM
-3

I wonder if these kinds of sentences are due to the boys not really being mad about it. Just a thought.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 08:44 AM
1

Cry harder; My blanket is drying.
/r/MensRights05/05/16 09:16 AM
3

How about no.
/r/MensRights05/05/16 08:23 AM
1

Their fine motor skills develop earlier, about when writing is taught.
/r/MensRights05/05/16 08:12 AM
1

What is that supposed to mean?
/r/MensRights05/05/16 08:10 AM
1

What could this possibly have to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights05/05/16 08:05 AM
0

Okay...but why Boy Scouts?
/r/MensRights04/05/16 02:24 PM
0

Avoiding an entire institution because you dislike or disapprove of some of its literature.
/r/MensRights04/05/16 02:20 PM
-1

Why bother?
/r/MensRights04/05/16 02:13 PM
1

It had more to do with heritage, the family name and such was passed down the male line.
/r/MensRights04/05/16 10:45 AM
1

I think that would be manslaughter if it were accidental, or just an accident.
/r/MensRights04/05/16 08:32 AM
2

What people think is relevant.
/r/MensRights04/05/16 08:14 AM
2

I think zombies and disease in general should be an exception. Think killings vs deaths.
/r/MensRights04/05/16 08:10 AM
1

Does that matter?
/r/MensRights04/05/16 08:08 AM
0

Probably, but not necessarily.
/r/MensRights03/05/16 02:26 PM
0

My hypothesis is that it was simply less important. For the vast majority of history young women were married off regardless of their sexuality, so unless they stirred up shit, which would have been stupid, it may not have even been noticed.
/r/MensRights03/05/16 08:55 AM
2

I am imagining that kid turning around and proclaiming to his friends that the carpet, in fact, does not match the drapes. I find that funny.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 05:31 PM
-2

That is not what I meant. This entire topic is absurd in that the vast majority of people do not give a shit about it. Why does nobody care about women in the men's room with boys? because that is a stupid thing to care about, on-par with caring about seeing-eye dogs going in with blind people.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 02:02 PM
1

That is a unique exception as men do not have the same rights as women. But as a general rule, calling the cops on the person who just called the cops on you makes you look like a bitch who is probably in the wrong.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 10:23 AM
1

Not quite, it means that they absolutely can but will probably choose not to.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 10:20 AM
2

Just make sure not to make the same decisions as the last generation of people who read similar words.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 10:19 AM
5

Mostly because that would require society to care about boys and treat women as potentially bad people, but more realistically (in my opinion) it is because nobody has anything to gain from that, and because this whole shitfest is artificial.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 10:15 AM
1

People are simply growing tired of the spam.
/r/MensRights01/05/16 12:34 PM
3

How about you take that over to /r/mensrants or /r/funny?
/r/MensRights01/05/16 09:06 AM
1

Universal income, but that is not gender exclusive.
/r/MensRights30/04/16 10:54 AM
1

Are you sure about taht?
/r/MensRights30/04/16 09:57 AM
4

I disagree. While Selective Service needs should be discontinued, pushing women into it is definitely a step in the right direction. For one thing, equality is good. And for another, that would probably end up killing it faster than The Vietnam War: II.
/r/MensRights30/04/16 03:12 AM
1

Arguably, but they are still a tiny minority. It could be interpreted either way.
/r/MensRights30/04/16 02:02 AM
1

How about the fact that no woman has ever passed these tests? They have been trying for decades now with no success.
/r/MensRights30/04/16 01:41 AM
1

Are you joking? There have been programs trying to push women into the armed forces since the 80s. None of them have really succeeded.
/r/MensRights30/04/16 01:39 AM
2

Not in this case, unfounded means proven to be unfounded, and probably false. Like a complaint to customer services, in an attempt to get free shit.
/r/MensRights30/04/16 01:35 AM
1

I wonder how this will compared to Children of Men, which is an excellent movie and definitely worth watching.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 11:02 AM
4

It is probably counting repetitive attempts carried out by women.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 11:00 AM
1

If it looks stupid but it works, then it is not stupid. Wait and see.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 10:58 AM
1

I do not think that 'radical' means what he thinks it means. In the context given it more means 'divergent'.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 10:54 AM
3

steals popcorn This should be interesting.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 10:51 AM
0

The IDF is not really a good example here.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 10:41 AM
1

What would you accept as a valid source? This is something which can be confirmed simply by looking at men and women, or sports records, or the Wikipedia page on sexual dimorphism in humans.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 09:19 AM
1

You are underestimating the physical disparity between men and women. G.I Jane is a fictitious character, not unlike Wonder Woman or Batman. To date no woman has meet these standards, so why do you think they can?
/r/MensRights29/04/16 09:17 AM
0

Theoretically? She would need to be like 6'4" and built like a brick shit house with roids mixed into the mortar. In which case she would still be irrelevant, and definitely not worth the expense of testing literally tens of millions of other women for one maybe adequate soldier.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 09:14 AM
0

Why is it that you think women can match male physical capability? Women are clearly smaller and have less muscle...and thinner bones, shallower joints, smaller hearts and lungs, lower red blood cell counts, etc.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 04:09 AM
-1

Because that would be pointless, because women could not meet the standards anyway. I pointed out how even the physical peak for women would not be enough. The strongest women would not be able to meet the basic strength requirements, let alone enough to actually compete with non-scrawny men.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 03:48 AM
0

That did not make sense. But yes, women cannot match men in physical capabilities. Literally every sports record shows this. There are teenage boys who are faster than the fastest woman to have ever lived. And I do not mean 19 and in the Olympics, I mean 14 and on their highschools track team.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 11:21 PM
1

lol
/r/MensRights28/04/16 10:50 PM
1

In this context the 2% figure was definitely just made up, although it may have legitimately correlated with something else down the line. And the point is that the 8% figure is confirmed, whereas most statistics on or around this subject are at best educated guesses.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 10:46 PM
1

I am not supporting any of that shit, and I have not even insinuated that I have supported any of that shit. I just stated that it is in fact empowering, by the dictionary definition.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 10:44 PM
0

This is not a hypothesis, it is an established fact.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 10:42 PM
2

No.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 01:55 PM
3

I think they modified it; You have to actually post in /r/Feminism for it to look at your history and auto-ban you.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 01:50 PM
1

There are no actual anarchists.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 01:49 PM
3

Nobody gives a shit about your personal taste. Unless you prefer Star Wars to Star Trek, in which case you are a godless heathen whom shall neither live long nor prosper.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 01:47 PM
3

You failed to give an actual example.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 12:32 PM
5

So you are voting based on a rumour of an offhanded statement without context?
/r/MensRights28/04/16 12:15 PM
3

You need to substantiate your position.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 11:27 AM
7

Such as...
/r/MensRights28/04/16 10:15 AM
1

Yes?
/r/MensRights28/04/16 08:37 AM
1

Meh, different strokes. I would need more information to make a meaningful decision on the matter.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 08:36 AM
1

No, this means that the FBI investigated and found these cases to be unfounded, meaning unsubstantiated or false.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 08:35 AM
1

I do not.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 08:33 AM
4

Or just different definitions or understandings. What you may consider harassment others may not and I would probably ignore.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 12:40 AM
2

General ignorance is another big issue. A lot of people, especially stupid redditors, do not know what harassment actually is or how to deal with it.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 12:39 AM
1

Because women cannot achieve the same physical standards as men, regardless of how much they train. The end result would be the exact same, a bunch of women who cannot meet standards.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 12:09 AM
1

I suppose that is a valid hypothesis.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 12:08 AM
1

Maybe not, but pushing for more women in positions of power/authority certainly is.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 12:07 AM
1

That is okay.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 10:31 AM
1

You are wrong. If nothing else it wastes time to unnecessarily hit somebody when a gesture would suffice. The point of these exercises is not to brutalize people, otherwise they would fight to the death with daggers and eat their opponents heart. This is meant to teach basic skills in a controlled environment where everybody can learn. PS: He should have stopped and the lesson of how she fucked up should have been explained to everybody present.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 10:28 AM
2

They often are, just not introspectively.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:51 AM
5

But there is not even any noise in their echo chamber.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:50 AM
7

Money.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:24 AM
2

the few, the proud...the feminine... The United States Navy.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:24 AM
5

Determination is not the determining factor. Even female weightlifters are not strong enough to match the average Marine, because biology is unfair.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:23 AM
6

Do you know what else does not give a shit about fairness? biology.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:22 AM
2

But that would not be an actual alternative. And I would rather have less military casualties which are all male than more which include women.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:21 AM
1

To be fair, once somebody is on the ground you are not supposed to actually hit them, because that would be pointless. Also, it looks like she could have been trying to get the foamy-thing back.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:17 AM
-1

Oh? Empowering women is something which Hillary Clinton actually does support, to some extent. Not that empowering one group over another is a good thing.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:14 AM
2

Baseless in this context means proven to be baseless.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 08:54 AM
2

The military has been chronically underfunded for over a decade (0.9% GDP). You underestimate our incompetents, it is not that we do not have excellent training or modern equipment, but that everything is managed so poorly as to be embarrassing. Just look at the submarine fiasco. We bought broken/sabotaged submarines from the British. They caught fire and are still non-operational after more than a decade of work money being poured into them. But we did fix the M16A2 as the C7, which is neat.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 11:24 PM
1

None. I live in Esquimalt.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 10:47 PM
1

Those positions are not as dangerous as you may think.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 10:42 PM
3

I think it boils down to a relatively small group of agitators leading a relatively large group of idiots on a crusade to stir up shit. Female gamers do not give a shit about any of this stuff.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 09:22 PM
3

Tell her that she should not wear that shirt, and then let her wear the shirt. At some point she will likely be called out or start shit and end up getting destroyed, in which case you just have to be supportive while saying "I told you so."
/r/MensRights26/04/16 09:14 PM
1

Well, the lack of it for one thing. Almost all of our stuff is old and/or broken, and because we have the worst military procurement on Earth nothing will get done about it.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 09:10 PM
4

The 8% figure is from the FBI and refers to provably false court cases.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 09:03 PM
1

I do not think they really care about that.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 09:02 PM
1

No idea, but spamming anything enough will get you banned from anywhere...unless you are Silence in /r/warshipporn.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 09:54 AM
5

With a cheque.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 09:14 AM
9

Are Meninists not a satirical parody of Feminists?
/r/MensRights26/04/16 08:34 AM
11

The 2% figure was made up while the 8% figure refers to something else and is correct.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 08:26 AM
1

Would you like that to change? Just look at our military.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 08:25 AM
4

They probably could.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 08:24 AM
22

Selective Service is different from actual military service. It is just volunteering (Soviet-style) to be conscripted. The last time it was used was to bolster forces in Western Europe while fighting a progressively shitty war in East Asia.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 08:24 AM
-1

In that case it would be the liar, assuming tit-for-tat is applied. Which is why if somebody takes your eye, you god damned better kill them then and there.
/r/MensRights23/04/16 10:02 PM
1

Ostensibly.
/r/MensRights23/04/16 10:01 PM
1

Good to know. I now have it tagged as a troll.
/r/MensRights18/04/16 09:22 PM
7

No, two or more wrongs do not make a right.
/r/MensRights18/04/16 06:03 PM
0

14-16 worldwide, but with stipulations.
/r/MensRights18/04/16 05:53 PM
9

What is that supposed to mean? Women already have bodily autonomy.
/r/MensRights18/04/16 05:52 PM
1

That is just another factor.
/r/MensRights17/04/16 05:36 PM
5

Mothers maiden name, social security, etc.
/r/MensRights17/04/16 05:32 PM
4

In later news; Water is wet, and nobody gives a shit.
/r/MensRights16/04/16 06:22 PM
1

That is not ironic.
/r/MensRights16/04/16 06:18 PM
3

Easily. I guarantee that you have done the same, back when you were a child. Some people never have to mature.
/r/MensRights16/04/16 04:35 PM
3

They do not need to find it funny, just you do.
/r/MensRights16/04/16 04:33 PM
2

I was unaware of that.
/r/MensRights16/04/16 03:46 PM
2

Technically true, and definitely relevant. But nobody has actually been convicted for that in a relatively long time.
/r/MensRights15/04/16 08:58 PM
13

Meh, I make female characters for purely practical reasons. Another reason is role-playing, which sounds weird at first, but the idea is to make my character distinctly/fundamentally different from myself.
/r/MensRights15/04/16 06:18 PM
19

Reminds me of Star Trek Online where I made a female character for just that reason. I was tired of being left down during Borg stuff.
/r/MensRights15/04/16 03:38 PM
1

That is not all or nothing, just 'enough to be significant'.
/r/MensRights14/04/16 06:01 PM
1

Wikipedia is fallible, just like Encyclopaedia Britannica. You seem to be glossing over the fact that Wikipedia fired this woman.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 08:57 PM
1

Not unless she is an outspoken Feminist.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 06:15 PM
9

Women are welcome, Feminists are tolerated, trolls are banned. Watch yourself with that new account.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 06:13 PM
2

Are you willing to make that happen? I am confident that most businesses would allow you to privately fund that kind of renovation were you so inclined. Otherwise they will spend 20$ putting up a new sign.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 06:07 PM
4

Because then Hillary would go on about the Gender Wage Gap™ and rake in more votes.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 03:22 PM
2

The Soviet systems was so different as to be incomparable to our current system.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 03:21 PM
1

For whatever it may be worth, that has never happened to me. Most women are not that stupid and will just assume that something was up with the men's room. Also, wash your hands.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 12:44 PM
8

Because women care about this more than men, and their restrooms are the only ones to ever overflow.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 12:42 PM
-1

And that would be equally wrong.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 07:20 PM
0

Hopefully not.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 05:09 PM
-4

Arguably correct, as it is drivel.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 04:37 PM
4

Yahoo used that system for Yahoo Answers, it was a terrible system which resulted in the 'Feminist Reportskis' having de facto mod powers.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 04:10 PM
1

Evidently they managed it long enough to develop such awesome antlers. I thought it was some minor environmental change which actually ended up killing them off?
/r/MensRights12/04/16 01:00 PM
2

Our control is limited.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 12:34 PM
4

And Mother Nature is a sadistic cunt, creating elk with such gloriously huge antlers that they went extinct.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 11:21 AM
11

The answer is yes.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 04:55 PM
-2

Neither is posting here, but many people would disagree with me. Freedom of speech has consequences, tolerating stupid shit like this happens to be one of them.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 04:33 PM
1

Probably more dated than anything else.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 12:56 PM
-15

That is still bad. She may be a cunt, but that should not get anybody fired as a fucking receptionist.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 12:54 PM
1

Okay...Do you mean like public washrooms?
/r/MensRights10/04/16 03:40 PM
3

Nope.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 02:07 PM
4

You mean like a public washroom?
/r/MensRights10/04/16 01:49 PM
7

Women may care about men's health, so it makes sense to inform them about it. Breast cancer is already covered.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 12:51 PM
12

I disagree. Women as a whole already have their whatevers checked regularly, men do not.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 12:38 PM
22

Why not both?
/r/MensRights10/04/16 12:19 PM
1

double whoosh
/r/MensRights10/04/16 10:48 AM
1

whoosh
/r/MensRights10/04/16 09:08 AM
2

Discrimination = Anything which nots not overtly/directly benefit Feminism and women.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 03:19 AM
1

Female Vikings, using soft power instead of hard power, and ravaging their lands instead of others. /s
/r/MensRights09/04/16 03:18 AM
3

The long and short of how I got interested in this stuff was an argument with my mother, she ended up telling me to research Feminism before criticizing it and I did. A day later I found GirlWritesWhat and a new kind of coffee.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 03:17 AM
1

Here is a test. Do you accept that you are not very mature, but virtue of being only 17 years old?
/r/MensRights09/04/16 03:16 AM
4

Those comments are cancer.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 03:14 AM
1

There used to be one, it archived the contents of new posts so that they could not be tampered with and used as propaganda after the fact.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 01:02 PM
1

Perspective is everything. They may consider themselves to be heroes living happily ever after.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 11:26 AM
1

I never thought about it that way :/
/r/MensRights07/04/16 11:22 AM
1

This reminds me, what ever happened to the archiving bot?
/r/MensRights07/04/16 11:18 AM
2

Even the Soviets were not that bad.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 02:10 AM
4

How about no.
/r/MensRights06/04/16 11:06 AM
5

I think you meant rug, it is rather hard to sweep something under a carpet.
/r/MensRights06/04/16 12:03 AM
3

I have won a few of those arguments. I explained to a kid how the horizon works.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 11:34 AM
9

Less than that. Only a few decades ago infant surgeries were done without anesthesia. Although I think there were other reasons, like them not remembering, or anesthetics being considered more dangerous.
/r/MensRights03/04/16 11:12 AM
16

Not necessarily. We can assume that none of them actually give a shit about this, which is probably a good thing.
/r/MensRights01/04/16 10:37 AM
1

Also a terrible policy. Head for an eye makes way more sense.
/r/MensRights01/04/16 10:35 AM
1

I do not think men would notice, I certainly would not. But no, I do not think men would react positively.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 10:22 PM
1

That is not what I meant. If Princess Auto has a no-women day, men would not react positively, whereas somebody clearly thinks women react positively to no-men days.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 09:38 PM
1

Kinda, I am saying that businesses will discriminate if they think they can profit from it and get away with it, and that those conditions only really result in female>male discrimination. There are other factors though, namely that men do not currently react positively to that kind of thing.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 11:34 AM
1

I would be willing to bet that bike shops have a MUCH larger female base than automotive shops. And I am not saying that Princess Auto would not do something similar, maybe, to try and get new customers. Just that they would never do the reverse, because that would be stupid.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 10:03 AM
9

Hmm, that could easily be misinterpreted.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 09:58 AM
1

Businesses still care about men, just not as much overall. But it really depends on the business; I doubt Princess Auto gives a shit about their 10% female customer base.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 08:49 AM
1

Same here, but it should still be considered.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 08:39 PM
0

That would not make any difference to congestion, but it would piss off a few women, which would be bad for business.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 08:22 PM
0

That would not make any difference to congestion, but it would piss off a few women, which would be bad for business.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 08:22 PM
-5

Nah, more like "How can we arrange these for minimal congestion?" There is nothing nefarious about it.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 01:17 AM
-8

That is the best system for managing congestion. Get over it.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 01:15 AM
1

It could be a Hagraven.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 09:59 AM
1

There is a stark difference between working construction and being tortured to death via progressively heavier rocks.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 09:59 AM
1

Did it sound like that scene from Mars Attacks?
/r/MensRights29/03/16 09:56 AM
2

Think of it as an oversight. For the longest time men got de facto default custody as the primary caregiver/provider, and then practically overnight that changed head over heels, without time acclimatization.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 09:55 AM
1

Because people are terrible. If you do not believe me, then go and put your information on 4chan, see what happens.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 09:51 AM
1

Feminist subreddits?
/r/MensRights29/03/16 09:50 AM
1

Jews could probably be considered a race as well, considering how genetically distinct they are.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 04:16 AM
1

It is also an ethnicity.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 04:16 AM
1

I mostly agree.
/r/MensRights27/03/16 10:55 PM
12

We are not talking about just a few dozens, we are talking about literally thousands upon thousands of different groups. Then there are the more tribal cultures found in the Middle East and Southern Asia, which complicate things even more. It is simply impossible to refer to every group with absolute correctness. Hence why we call them Russians, Arabs, and Native Americans/American Indians, etc.
/r/MensRights27/03/16 10:53 PM
2

Loads of reasons, such as maintaining economic production.
/r/MensRights27/03/16 10:50 PM
12

And 'Russian' is an ethnic group. What is your point?
/r/MensRights27/03/16 10:48 PM
5

Only when loosely regulated, which is why many places with legal prostitution have elevated prices. Looking at you, Australia.
/r/MensRights27/03/16 08:09 PM
30

Because men, as a whole, do not care about this shit. At least those appear to be normal parking spaces, opposed to giant ones which taper outwards. Which are actually pretty funny, and probably beneficial due to who is likely to use them. This is also about business. Somebody probably thinks that women are more likely to shop somewhere if they can park nearer the store and are shown some kind of special treatment, and they are probably right.
/r/MensRights27/03/16 08:04 PM
1

Nah, it would just be a different kind of noise.
/r/MensRights27/03/16 08:01 PM
2

To be fair, there is such as thing as being too drunk to consent. The problem is that instead of dealing with that problem Feminists and Liberals have swept everything under the rug, or under a bus, or whatever analogy fits best.
/r/MensRights27/03/16 07:55 PM
23

That is simply not practical. Imagine trying to apply that logic to the dozens (more?) of different kinds of Russians.
/r/MensRights27/03/16 07:51 PM
6

Welcome to the English language.
/r/MensRights27/03/16 07:49 PM
1

What point? Those are probably the shitheads...always pushing themselves into positions of power.
/r/MensRights26/03/16 06:16 AM
2

I suppose so.
/r/MensRights26/03/16 05:38 AM
0

The relevant part is how Microsoft's AI, which is literally rapist-Hitler, is being censored. Relevant, but not really surprising or particularly meaningful.
/r/MensRights26/03/16 04:56 AM
2

It is vaguely relevant, but not really meaningful.
/r/MensRights26/03/16 04:46 AM
6

They could be busy doing other stuff, simply not care, or be better at math than with words.
/r/MensRights26/03/16 04:40 AM
10

Reality does not work that way. Men still get screwed, just in slightly different ways.
/r/MensRights26/03/16 04:38 AM
3

Which is probably quite far, all things considered.
/r/MensRights26/03/16 04:37 AM
3

That is still pretty hilarious, and demonstrates how racism can be learned.
/r/MensRights26/03/16 04:33 AM
7

They were, that is how we got into this mess in the first place. Do you know what the Civil Rights Movement is doing right now? nothing, because it stopped existing (mostly) after achieving the majority of its goals.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 06:28 PM
1

Its rarity is irrelevant. Double (or whatever) is still double.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 06:27 PM
2

The weirder thing is that 'reversed discrimination' would actually make sense, but that term is never used.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 02:21 AM
2

Not really.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 03:56 PM
0

Oh joy, more reasons to go to the doctor.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 03:53 PM
2

Feminists will also harm other women.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 03:50 PM
1

Our goals, by our own definitions and understandings of each others definitions, are largely incompatible. We want equality, they also want equality. It just so happens that we want equality of opportunity while they want equality of outcome, and that those are incompatible concepts. If I were hiring 100 people, and had valid 300 applicants, 250 male and 50 female, I would hire 80 men and 20 women to achieve equal representation (1/5) while maintaining equal opportunity. Feminists would hire 50 …
/r/MensRights24/03/16 03:46 PM
3

Cossacks?
/r/MensRights24/03/16 03:06 PM
-1

I think that depends on where and how it is conducted. The Russians had a pretty good system where it was mandatory, but they also had an almost entirely defensive military (contrary to popular belief), and it was largely a matter of training the population for mass-mobilization (basically their equivalent of the draft) in case of WWIII. The problem Americans have with the draft is that the last time it was used was to maintain numbers in Europe while fire/chemical bombing children in Vietnam fo…
/r/MensRights24/03/16 03:06 PM
2

When you cater to relatively fit men, and fashion is not a factor, you really do not need many sizes to fit everybody.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 03:03 PM
2

You could be drafted as a nurse, that is a thing.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 03:01 PM
25

Not surprising. Most people do not support the draft.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 03:00 PM
21

To be fair, it is a bit of both. A white person would not have been able to do that, no matter how racist they were.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 01:49 AM
3

I can imagine it now. This room is as manly as a scotch drinking beard, but something is missing... Women? Women.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 01:15 AM
2

Really? So did the KGB.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 01:12 AM
1

Not really.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 10:10 PM
1

If I recall correctly, that actually has to do with less genetic redundancy, leading to higher rates of basically autism.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 06:38 PM
1

Easier said than done while dead or dying.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 06:34 PM
1

Soldiers.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 06:16 PM
1

A five minute mile is considered an achievable milestone.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 05:48 PM
1

Because that would be self defeating. The military does not need body builders or power lifters, it just needs adequately healthy and fit men.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 05:47 PM
2

Israel had similar experiences, which is why they stopped using coed units, and now actually make a point to segregate men and women.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 03:30 PM
2

I would be sceptical and curious, as that would likely require some kind of physical augmentation.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 03:28 PM
3

Damn, if I was a woman I could pass as a woman....as a basement dweller who has not gone outside this week.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 03:27 PM
1

Quick, but not unreasonable for a fit adult.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 03:23 PM
2

Almost all men, which is a part of their problem here. If you lower the rest so that women can pass, almost all men can also pass, and you run into the same problem of requiring outright sex discrimination to push any women in.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 03:22 PM
1

I recall the regular failure rate being something like 95% anyway, so a small disparity is not really meaningful.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 03:21 PM
1

I thought they ran out recently :/
/r/MensRights22/03/16 03:19 PM
1

The problem is that many people think that women do pass, actual standards and all.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 03:17 PM
1

Because it is not a software patent.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 03:16 PM
1

How about 'more pertinent"?
/r/MensRights22/03/16 03:14 PM
1

The vast majority of men are significantly stronger than the vast majority of women, and above the male median line there are virtually no women.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 02:59 PM
2

I don't believe there's anything stopping a man vs woman fight however. Common sense. It would be a forgone conclusion, and therefore pointless.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 09:32 PM
2

That would also explain how they got on the hose in the first place, and how easily they go from on to off said horse. Its not like they would be able to do it under their own strength.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:52 PM
1

Source?
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:40 PM
27

She is probably not stupid enough to try and make the MMA coed. She would be destroyed, figuratively and then literally.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:39 PM
5

More aptly, more pay for the same work.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:37 PM
1

Fuck those things in SupCom 2.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:35 PM
4

Nah, I think they descended from a very high horse.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:35 PM
1

They automatically pre-ban you from their entire 'Fempire' whenever you are banned from any of their subreddits.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:34 PM
1

A) Suffragettes gaining voting rights for women pre-dated Feminism by several decades. B) Neither group has ever supported equal voting rights/privileges.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:32 PM
1

Than 'real feminists' are not real.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:30 PM
5

They look like children...
/r/MensRights19/03/16 03:33 PM
1

Wear a sweater.
/r/MensRights19/03/16 02:46 PM
4

What the actual fuck was that?
/r/MensRights19/03/16 02:42 PM
-3

Because a very small percentage of spectators overreacted. And also, because you are not supposed to hit the person once they are on the ground and you obviously can hit them. He won the instant she went down.
/r/MensRights19/03/16 02:42 PM
26

She was probably not expecting to actually get hit in the face with a giant pillow.
/r/MensRights19/03/16 02:41 PM
1

To be fair, it is more like 50/50.
/r/MensRights19/03/16 02:39 PM
1

They are not that big, not compared to 'real' companies like EA or AMD.
/r/MensRights19/03/16 02:38 PM
3

Of course, that is what new tech typically does. But it was still cool.
/r/MensRights19/03/16 02:33 PM
2

Mothballs smell really bad and are used to keep animals away, any and all animals.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 02:11 PM
8

Some of those look to be potentially legitimate complaints about medical bullshitting.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 02:10 PM
1

This username is like mothballs to shitty mods.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 01:57 PM
3

There is a pay gap, which is fine. It is the wage get myth which gets perpetuated by morons.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 01:35 PM
4

I suppose some of them could be poisonous, that is far less likely than all of them being delicious.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 01:27 PM
1

The other side could be imaginary.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 08:51 PM
1

I do not know what I was expecting, but that guy looks relatively normal and decent.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 08:01 PM
2

Resources in general, more is better.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 10:31 AM
3

Always scout, always have multiple production facilities built, never let your adversary built supers, etc.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 12:17 PM
3

That sounds like a conspiracy.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 12:15 PM
2

For the record, we have a volcano base. It was cheaper to heat than the moon base, and the Nazis would have made terrible neighbours. Compare this subreddits figures to those of Feminist subreddits. We are relatively big, but too bitchy and overly restrained.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 12:11 PM
11

Most games teach lessons more along the lines of always checking behind waterfalls, sometimes pulling levers, never trusting pedestals with stuff on them, and buying drugs from cats.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 06:24 PM
0

Men need women to reproduce, whereas women need men for everything else. Men also need other men for everything else, and most women do want men but also want everything else. It is complicated.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 06:17 PM
9

To be fair, we just downvote the shit out of obvious trolls.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 12:17 PM
1

That is disgusting.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 11:02 AM
2

At the end of the day men will still want and need women, always have and always will. What needs to change is public opinion, it needs to be shameful to abuse and steal from men.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 11:00 AM
2

Nope, the relevant laws will simply change slightly, and nothing else will change significantly. This shit has been going on since forever.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 10:43 AM
3

Those would be admins, and no not really.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 08:33 AM
2

Right...I am pretty sure you are a troll. Goodbye.
/r/MensRights14/03/16 02:19 PM
2

No.
/r/MensRights14/03/16 02:51 AM
2

Human error, biological and behavioural.
/r/MensRights13/03/16 01:23 PM
9

That is 80% effective 20% of the time.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 12:23 PM
59

While it may not be relevant, condoms are a few orders of magnitude less effective than female contraceptives.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 12:22 PM
6

While you are absolutely correct, I doubt that kind of logic would be accepted by somebody who already thinks voting for Hillary Clinton and being a Feminist is not the epitome of sexism.
/r/MensRights11/03/16 12:47 PM
3

I disagree. Not all emotional responses are justified. A good example is when somebody stubs their toe and gets genuinely angry, that is not justified. Frustration is justified, but not anger.
/r/MensRights10/03/16 02:04 PM
1

Then why were you attacking me as an MRA, seemingly from a Redpill standpoint?
/r/MensRights10/03/16 12:41 AM
0

Cool story bro. Tell TRP I said hi.
/r/MensRights09/03/16 11:59 PM
-2

Doubtful, there is very little overlap outside of perception, which also means very little conflict or confrontation.
/r/MensRights09/03/16 11:18 AM
5

Youtube is a business, they would make a video for Men's Day if it were sufficiently/comparably profitable.
/r/MensRights09/03/16 10:50 AM
6

With identical presentation, just to fuck with people.
/r/MensRights08/03/16 01:18 PM
3

Only if you said it openly, the practice itself is the same.
/r/MensRights07/03/16 10:28 PM
5

That sounds eerily similar to 'Final Solution'.
/r/MensRights07/03/16 10:28 PM
1

Probably not, but they may try if prompted.
/r/MensRights07/03/16 10:13 PM
1

Neat.
/r/MensRights06/03/16 11:05 AM
1

I think that would be a safe assumption.
/r/MensRights06/03/16 11:04 AM
1

TRP is for people who do not want to be stalked and stabbed by crazy women. Oh, and looser virgins who do not want to be looser virgins.
/r/MensRights06/03/16 01:08 AM
1

They ban anyone for anything. They also pre-banned you from other Feminist subreddits.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 08:06 PM
2

Hidden from public view, like political motives.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 02:30 AM
10

Worse, actually. They seem to feel entitled to 'stuff' without any understanding of resources. They may feel entitled to a three course lobster dinner, but have no idea how much it actually costs in terms of money, or time, or materials, or anything.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 02:28 AM
1

Do not contract a crazy, fake names and such. TRP probably has actual advice on this.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 02:26 AM
9

They can and easily do, but more money is better than less money.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 04:33 PM
2

Maybe to you, but probably not to them. Especially if they were raised to believe that their civilization was perfect. I think we can assume we can assume they had writers, artists, poets, etc. Seeing as how their island is based off of ancient Greece. How about Vulcans? In Star Trek: Enterprise they were depicted as having more advanced technology only by virtue of being in space longer than most races, but they were lazy and did not really care for exploration. Humans overtook them in like 1/1…
/r/MensRights29/02/16 03:51 PM
1

lol
/r/MensRights29/02/16 03:46 PM
2

In Justice League it is explained that she was basically made to be perfect, gifted special powers by the gods, and has magical armour. Kinda like Batman, kinda.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 11:39 PM
3

Why would they have bothered advancing? they are borderline immortal with a stable society which was probably considered idyllic a few thousand years ago.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 11:37 PM
0

Do you have any point at all, and if so please make it, or are you just going to keep on projecting and responding to your own projections?
/r/MensRights28/02/16 11:30 PM
0

[citations needed]
/r/MensRights28/02/16 10:12 PM
1

Those women probably have nothing better to do, and no real issues to deal with. They would probably stop their bitching if dropped in Ukraine.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 09:58 PM
2

Sometimes, yes. Throwaways are VERY common for various reasons, namely trolling/spamming.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 09:37 PM
0

I was being serious. I was talking about how guys are getting screwed because of this etiquette. Hey guys, we have a special snowflake here! Only he knows the answers and way the world really works! Amazing sir, truly amazing. Cool story, bro.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 09:34 PM
-1

The topic was dating etiquette and your stupid sarcastic comment contributed nothing, you were just being disruptive. Go away.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 09:19 PM
-2

Yes, really. Idiots upvoting your stupid does not make it relevant, just visible.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 08:41 PM
-8

You are not contextually relevant. Go away.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 06:52 PM
-5

Yes it is.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 06:23 PM
-18

That is a false comparison.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 05:56 PM
-14

We are not talking about equality, but simple etiquette. You would not invite someone to dinner and then ask or expect them to cook, would you?
/r/MensRights28/02/16 05:30 PM
1

That would be pointless.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 05:13 PM
19

You are a terrible person.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 02:08 AM
1

Children are weird in that way. She is investing in her own financial future.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 01:53 AM
6

Yes.
/r/MensRights27/02/16 08:29 PM
6

Not true. Donating to a food bank, for example.
/r/MensRights27/02/16 08:28 PM
2

On an unrelated note, Halo Wars II is confirmed. Buy it.
/r/MensRights27/02/16 02:19 PM
1

I think that would depend on exactly what games you were playing. CoD with a semi-automatic and twitch-sensitivity? start exporting power to California. Halo Wars? lol
/r/MensRights27/02/16 02:11 PM
8

The winner's idea was for a games controller which harnesses kinetic energy from thumb action using wind-up triggers. That is a fucking brilliant idea. To bad I am still left wondering whether the dipshit journalist meant thumbsticks or triggers.
/r/MensRights27/02/16 02:08 AM
1

You are wrong.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 05:46 PM
1

I generally agree with you. I just disagree with the automatic assumption that influence of any kind equals literal rape.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 05:05 PM
-1

I think that would depend on the severity of the threat. There is a stark difference between threatening to kill someone, threatening to ruin someone, and threatening to ruin Game of Thrones for them.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 05:03 PM
-6

All of the nope. Rape is forced sex, as in you cannot say no or saying no changes nothing. In those situations you could say no and report the indiscretion to whatever higher authority. That may not work, but it is still different from actual rape.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 03:47 PM
-1

That to, but there is the aspect of authority kinda fucking with the idea of meaningful consent, in youths especially.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 02:07 PM
1

nom nom nom
/r/MensRights25/02/16 12:43 PM
11

Because I consider myself to be a decent(ish) person?
/r/MensRights25/02/16 12:26 PM
3

But the standard is not consistent, it never has been. So why argue for more bullshit instead of less?
/r/MensRights25/02/16 12:15 PM
38

Which is equally wrong.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 11:19 AM
21

And that is absurd. Is it inappropriate and punishable? sure, but it should not be conflated with actual rape.
/r/MensRights25/02/16 11:06 AM
2

Nsh, they just get pregnant and sent home.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 09:56 PM
-1

Actually, it was. It has been Russian for hundreds of years now.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 06:48 PM
2

Are you referring to the qualifications which have been de facto removed for women?
/r/MensRights24/02/16 04:44 PM
1

Why? if they have nothing to gain or loose then why would they do anything?
/r/MensRights24/02/16 04:43 PM
1

Even then, any and all of those are still relatively difficult and dangerous compared to simply accusing somebody of rape.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 04:39 PM
0

there is no need to quote you and then reply to those quotes. No, according to everybody. Whatever you say, proud 'Murican.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 02:20 PM
-1

You know which one. Russia was justified in invading Georgia. I am just making fun of yo at this point, the fact that you do not comprehend makes it even funnier.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 01:45 PM
-1

That sentence does not make any sense. Ukraine is complicated and Georgia was asking for it. And? Better nuke them before their nuke defences get any better. /s
/r/MensRights24/02/16 01:21 PM
6

Doubtful, seeing as how actual rape is difficult and dangerous, while accusing someone of rape is easy ans safe.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 12:55 PM
-1

Crimea is Russian, Ukraine is a complex situation, and their only foreign port is in Syria.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 12:52 PM
-2

According to everybody. Okay, so for the last several hundred years it has been Russian. Your point? Evidently you do not know what the word 'invasion' means. Cool story bro, tell me more about how their smaller and more professional army will manage to invade and conquer the American Navy, and Freedom™.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 12:51 PM
-1

Cool story bro. Russia could have annexed Georgia after Georgia attacked the, they chose not to. The Crimea is Russian, always has been. Now it is just official, like it has been for most of history. All good defences are forward defences. Look it the fuck up, they are focusing on nuclear submarines, conventional submarines, corvettes, and frigates. Not destroyers, cruisers, or carriers. A smaller and more professional military makes sense for defence, not expansion, as a land power that is.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 12:38 PM
-3

Good thing Russia has no interest in expansion. They are focusing on securing their defences, rebuilding their brown water fleets, and generally professionalizing their military.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 12:24 PM
0

The draft is not a practical concern.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 12:24 PM
1

This username is like a god damned magic ward against shitty moderators and admins.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 12:22 PM
1

There are also quite a few men who probably answered yes to something without considering it domestic violence, or significant.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 10:24 PM
1

Its actually like 99.6%.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 10:20 PM
1

That is stupid. The best pace out of any situation is a brisk but calm walking pace.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 01:18 PM
2

I wonder how the average Feminist would actually react to genuine racism direct towards them, any ideas?
/r/MensRights23/02/16 01:11 PM
19

To a lot of people they are the same, literally indistinguishable. How would you tell your privileges apart from your rights? PS: Rights are defaulted while privileges are granted. The only way to tell them apart, that I know of, is laboriously cross-checking. If I have a right and you do not, then it is actually a privilege.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 01:09 PM
9

This is Reddit, you may say asshole, fuck, balls, or even cuntfart if you are so inclined.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 01:06 PM
2

Yes, somebody here has. I will try (lazily) to find it for you.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 01:03 PM
1

I think he may have meant measuring as in measuring out, so as not to be dishonest.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 01:00 PM
1

That is an interesting contradiction.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 10:32 PM
1

/crying intensified
/r/MensRights21/02/16 04:09 PM
1

Marketing, and it worked.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 04:09 PM
2

I have no idea what your first example means :/
/r/MensRights21/02/16 02:08 PM
2

More like 'women are valuable' in an objective sense.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 02:07 PM
1

Please elaborate. Do you believe that equality is the current status, or do you support it as a goal? do you mean equality of opportunity or result, as the two are mutually exclusive? etc.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 02:06 PM
1

To be fair, that is a totally valid method of arguing, assuming the goal is to 'win' and get something.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 02:04 PM
3

Many can and do, but for the vast majority there are simply too few points of commonality for comprehension let alone understanding.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 02:02 PM
2

I could be okay with that reasoning, but I do not think they have thought it through that far and probably just assume that things will be fine.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 02:01 PM
24

Yes, although maybe not in the way you would think. There probably were retards sarcastically victim blaming, possibly for the purpose of shutting down discussion.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 07:40 AM
1

Nah, they say the US.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 04:08 AM
-13

termination of your contract with Sony Replace Sony with Microsoft/Xbox Live and crying rape suddenly seems semi-reasonable.
/r/MensRights20/02/16 05:15 PM
4

And then China, depending on who you ask.
/r/MensRights20/02/16 05:14 PM
1

The USA only deployed nuclear artillery in Europe for a relatively short amount of time The entirety of the 80s. A decade is not such a short time. Wrong nuclear-artillery. And a decade is not a long time. This is categorically wrong. I was there. Our nukes were in response to Soviet chemical weapons, not nukes. Weapons of mass destruction, whatever. My point is that they would not have ended the world in response to a conventional attack. They whined about it a hell of a lot for not caring abou…
/r/MensRights18/02/16 05:18 PM
0

In this context "most people" are irrelevant, especially retired couples, I simply updated my comment to more clearly express that.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 05:06 PM
1

A few full scale wars could constitute a world war. The USA only deployed nuclear artillery in Europe for a relatively short amount of time. By ~1980 the vast majority of nuclear weapons were only to be used in response to other nuclear weapons, or in defence of Moscow...or maybe to blow up a carrier, but that one is kinda irrelevant. PS: The Soviets did not consider nuclear-artillery to be a significant deterrent.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 05:03 PM
0

No it does now. Tell me right now what percentage of young Americans have had full time and year round employment consistently for the past five years.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 03:45 PM
0

Yep, that sure explains why the USA and USSR built up over 40 years for a massive conventional confrontation. /s Nukes change a few equations, but they do not eliminate the possibility of full scale war.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 03:42 PM
0

Your source does not contain that information.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 03:32 PM
0

And what percentage of young Americans have consistently had full-time year-round jobs these last few years?
/r/MensRights18/02/16 03:28 PM
1

Actually it is only something like 45%.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 03:20 PM
0

Were you people born yesterday? This is 2016 and most people with jobs are still below the poverty line.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 03:00 PM
5

Lots of reasons, bad reasons.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 01:06 PM
1

Unlikely for most people, but not at all uncommon.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 01:05 PM
9

Wrong child.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 01:05 PM
-16

That does not necessarily make it untrue. There could be many women with children whom without alimony would be below the poverty line, even with child support. PS: The trolls are right, this place has gone to shit. I have been downvoted into oblivion for pointing out an economic factoid.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 01:03 PM
2

*maybe risk, it is not even a definite.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 01:02 PM
0

Please feel free to explain what is unrealistic about my position, just try not to build any strawmen, or call be a libertarian again. PS: Or just downvote me, I suppose that serves the same purpose.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 07:44 AM
1

It is not a joke I have heard before.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 07:28 AM
0

By fucking off. They do not want you.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 07:26 AM
9

Its like an autoimmune disorder :/
/r/MensRights17/02/16 07:26 AM
13

The Soviets used it to good effect in WWII propaganda posters.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 06:32 AM
1

Insurance is one thing, but paying people for for having kids is another, especially with other peoples money.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 06:26 AM
1

How would you even know? Anyway, every study ever has shown that bottlefeeding is inferior to breastfeeding, significantly. Also, formula is excessively expensive.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 06:23 AM
2

Would that not be a good thing?
/r/MensRights17/02/16 05:10 AM
6

The funny part is that they pre-banned you from /r/askfeminists as well, so you cannot even ask them what the fuck happened. lol
/r/MensRights17/02/16 05:08 AM
1

So it is just wealth distribution...
/r/MensRights17/02/16 05:07 AM
1

Pumping is, simply put, not always a viable option. Nurse maids are expensive. Formula is shit.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 05:00 AM
2

Sure, but to not acknowledge them as legitimate is just stupid.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 04:59 AM
1

Right...but how much of that can I expect to see?
/r/MensRights17/02/16 04:58 AM
1

Actually, a pesticide was directly responsible for most of it. And there were many reasons why people of the time hated Jews, some of which were even arguably valid.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 04:53 AM
1

I suppose so. But that is still a shitty business model.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 11:19 AM
1

Not long term, you would be out of business.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 08:45 AM
3

Could I get that money back otherwise? or is it just plain and simply wealth redistribution?
/r/MensRights16/02/16 08:44 AM
1

Not good enough.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 08:42 AM
1

Then that is your loss.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 08:41 AM
-2

Devils Advocate: It could be considered a social manslaughter. Still pretty bad though.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 08:34 AM
1

That reminds me of a slightly older show on the comedy network...something about chronic porn addicts eventually hitting nuclear launch codes by pure chance.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 08:31 AM
0

The employer has nothing to do with it.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 08:07 AM
2

Do you have anything to feed it?
/r/MensRights16/02/16 07:32 AM
2

Hey, as a young white male I take offence to that! I am not as dumb as this guy!
/r/MensRights16/02/16 07:31 AM
2

They would find a way to make you cry, or at least scowl and wince.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 07:28 AM
3

Many people have different perspectives of the MRM and Feminism. There are those who see the MRM as being as batshit insane as we see Feminism. Of course those people are delusional, but that is beside the point.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 07:27 AM
1

There are no meaningful concrete definitions of what constituted an MRA or a Feminist. But I would say no, because the two as groups are more or less polarized.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 07:25 AM
1

You are a fool. Do you know what once killed ~7,000,000 Jews? words, rhetoric, and public opinion.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 04:41 AM
2

My sister and I are just now getting over a flu, I was eating yesterday while she is still slowly dying, just less slowly than before.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 04:40 AM
1

It fucks up societies impressions of men.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 09:47 PM
1

How about performance?
/r/MensRights15/02/16 08:51 AM
5

This is a smaller issue, but still an issue.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 08:46 AM
3

When cold strikes, men revert to little big boys– and the only way to get your Big Strong Hubby back is to lovingly nurse your Man Child with the secret weapon his own mummy used against colds when he was just a wee boy – Vicks VapoRub.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 08:46 AM
1

Maybe the men from Little Big Planet? /s
/r/MensRights15/02/16 08:44 AM
2

Why is it that men seem to recover from a flu more quickly?
/r/MensRights15/02/16 08:44 AM
2

Nah, they do it because they know there are many women who will buy it, literally and figuratively.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 08:43 AM
4

Are you trying to say something?
/r/MensRights15/02/16 08:42 AM
1

Nope, you were too lazy to do that and instead tried to have me do it for you. Go away if you have nothing to contribute.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 03:11 AM
1

No, you come up with your own arguments.
/r/MensRights13/02/16 06:34 AM
1

They are a couple. therefore decisions like this should be mutual.
/r/MensRights13/02/16 06:34 AM
1

To an extent, I suppose. But that is still not relevant to men's rights, at all.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 10:59 PM
8

Yes, as it is a far less severe surgery.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 09:28 PM
1

It is not a matter of personal decision.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 09:14 PM
-17

Nobody thinks that, now fuck off.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 12:56 AM
-24

Funny but not relevant. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:12 PM
1

Well, that would certainly end the conflict rather quickly. I say go for it, but from a purely strategic perspective.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:11 PM
1

They will tell you the same as I have told you.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 09:41 PM
0

Not helpful, or even useful.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 12:16 PM
1

Do you propose an alternative, or at least some reasoning as to why proxy-violence is not an appropriate designation?
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:41 AM
3

How about proxy-violence, as it is still violence but committed via a proxy?
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:22 AM
0

This is not the appropriate subreddit to vent in. I believe your conclusions are incorrect. Men will always want families, and families require women. Also, there is a fool born every minute.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:20 AM
5

It is proxy-violence.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:07 AM
1

"Stupid quotes are stupid." - Me
/r/MensRights10/02/16 01:53 AM
2

You ever heard the saying to not attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity? yeah, that is a terrible philosophy.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 11:05 AM
2

Common sense?
/r/MensRights09/02/16 11:03 AM
-1

I misread the title, my bad. In any case, this entire subject needs to be burned to the ground. Restrooms are segregated by sex, biological and apparent, and perversions should not be allowed.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 04:09 AM
-10

Restrooms are segregated by sex. If you disagree with that then that is fine, but they are still segregated by sex. If this person was biologically male, than they deserved to get into trouble.
/r/MensRights08/02/16 04:34 AM
13

Do not insult the intelligence of extreme racists, some of them really know their stuff. I once had an intelligent debate about tanks in Storm Front and it was more calm, rational, and informative than I have experienced before or since...until they started gathering facts and figures regarding black tankers in the US...then it got weird and I realized where I was. But seriously, they are on a whole different level from even the most extreme racists.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 05:01 AM
1

Okay...and then?
/r/MensRights04/02/16 04:32 PM
1

Sorry, but this was a few years ago. It is also a relatively popular conspiracy theory. The Soviets were sufficiently different from the Americans so as to make a budget comparison more or less meaningless. That said, their military budget was actually pretty comparable, and the KGB had a WAY larger budget than the CIA.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 11:20 AM
2

Related; I vaguely recall reading a Cold War story about how the KGB at least considered funding/supporting Feminism in the 70's, because they figured it could turn into a shitshow within a decade. They had a lot of plans to destabilize America.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 07:58 AM
-1

Alternatively, they could simply be extremely ignorant of history.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 01:37 AM
4

How so?
/r/MensRights03/02/16 10:09 PM
1

Because they do, because they still need to. Disagree all you want, it makes no difference upon reality.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 09:42 PM
1

Your point is unsubstantial. Everybody still marches everywhere, they also drive everywhere, but they still march everywhere. But now I am curious, what do you think soldiers actually do?
/r/MensRights03/02/16 09:12 PM
1

Yes, too bad they are irrelevant to this discussion.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 03:04 AM
2

I think you are reading into this a bit too much. I am simply saying that the detrimental forms of discrimination, the forms which are uncalled for or unjustified, are unfair and therefore bad. I am not in favour of having protected groups or censorship.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 10:48 PM
4

Yeah, but you can yell at them and kick them out for being retarded pussies.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 09:22 PM
1

I simply do not have a perfectly sound method of determining what is fair or unfair in this regard, and I accept that. Do you?
/r/MensRights02/02/16 09:18 PM
3

22 A few years ago I got into an argument with my mother regarding gender equality, she was trying to say that even a two decades ago women were paid less than men, while I said that did not make any sense and is extremely unlikely, she suggested that I research the subject before professing anything, and I did. Fast forward and now I identify as an MRA when others identify me as an MRA, but not otherwise.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 09:15 PM
1

Is that before or after they lug around 40kg of gear for a week?
/r/MensRights02/02/16 08:56 PM
1

There is a real chance that literally zero women would meet the physical requirements. And I am not saying that women should be exempt from conscription, just that the idea of conscripting women into combat roles is absurd, and that support roles are not equal to combat roles.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 08:54 PM
1

A vague one...which is probably along the lines of cost-benefit.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 08:50 PM
4

True, but even those have physical requirements if they are anywhere near combat. And women are not being relegated to those roles, they are being shoved into combat positions and onto ships by and like idiots.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 06:46 PM
9

Women do not meet the physical requirements for any professional military, but that has not stopped a bunch of morons form shoving them in anyway.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 05:22 PM
1

I an not sure what you mean, relating bad and fair.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 05:19 PM
1

Yes, but I see no rational alternative. Discrimination in regards to women in the military, men in teaching, blacks in law enforcement, or education, can all be objectively analysed and judged accordingly.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 05:01 PM
1

Through examination and with a margin of error.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 04:49 PM
27

He is a politician.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 12:12 AM
1

I simply define sexism or racism as the unfair discrimination on the basis of sex or race. There are many instances where discrimination of things which are beyond our control is perfectly fair and valid, such as medical stuff, or women in the military. Of course some people will still bitch and moan about that stuff, but those people are objectively wrong.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 11:30 PM
1

Sweden has an incredibly low rape rate, and the majority of rapes in the past few years have been committed by noon-Swedes.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 11:26 PM
7

Yet 70% of MRA's bought into the rape hysteria and "rape culture" claims since they coincided with their political beliefs about immigration. [citation needed] Sweden also pretty clearly shows how immigration does lead to rape, and has for a while now.
/r/MensRights31/01/16 05:17 PM
1

Like the Nazis and Stalin :/
/r/MensRights31/01/16 05:15 PM
1

Nah, it is simply a learned behaviour, remarkably rational.
/r/MensRights31/01/16 05:09 PM
6

Feminism has been trying to attach itself to other movements and groups for a while now.
/r/MensRights31/01/16 05:05 PM
1

They to were conscripted, typically as officers.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 08:20 PM
1

One would think, but one would be wrong. Women could vote in Canada before women got the right to vote in Canada.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 08:16 PM
1

Israel has semi-successfully integrated sex-segregated infantry, although Israel is unique. Just saying.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 08:11 PM
2

we could they died You done fucked.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 02:50 AM
2

Ah, I see. You have drawn your own conclusion that women should not vote.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 02:43 AM
1

Seriously?...
/r/MensRights30/01/16 02:40 AM
1

Fix your comment.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 02:29 AM
2

Doubtful.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 02:27 AM
0

Yeah.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 02:02 AM
3

They could have not given them voting rights.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 01:58 AM
-2

Pick an angle, damnit! And the problem is that all women are relatively weak, and it is likely that literally none would ever meet a reasonable physical standard if it were required of them.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 01:55 AM
-4

I think it was actually 300%, although I only vaguely recall that figure from an Israeli report of some kind.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 01:54 AM
1

Same here, but for different reasons. Women simply do not want to be drafted, but want to be in the military. Men do not want women in the military. Generally speaking.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 01:53 AM
3

Stranger things have happened since.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 01:52 AM
0

Bad leaders have spoiled everything for everyone at some point. Rockefeller even managed to spoil capitalism and alcohol of all things.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 01:46 AM
1

Everyone and everything is unique on some level, but not always on a level which is relevant. Being discriminatory is not bad. Being racist is bad, being sexist is bad, but being discriminatory of other things is fine.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 12:31 AM
2

Because it makes sense to them. Then there is this thing.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 12:28 AM
0

A society which does not permit theft, rape, and murder, is inherently flawed? Whatever, still better than your shithole.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 12:22 AM
0

Uh, no. They had Lenin for a while and then it took Stalin a while to take over after Lenin died.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 12:20 AM
1

They still voted for Stalin, everybody voted for Stalin.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 12:17 AM
6

To a limited extent, yes. But not all natural instincts are healthy or 'good' in civilized society.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 04:25 PM
7

Most of those are rigged.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 03:34 PM
-4

Actually, women could and did vote with men at that time, the only difference is that their military service was less dangerous and optional.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 03:33 PM
22

Not true. Women voted equally (conditionally) to men for a long time, until ~1920 when women were given unconditional voting privileges. There were even female veterans of WWI (nurses) who voted immediately after the war.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 03:30 PM
17

The Russians were interesting that way, as they went from backwards-imperialism to progressive-socialism practically overnight. In 1916 the majority of Russian peasants were illiterate and had no concept of voting, but by 1924 they were mostly semi-literate and voted on equal terms. Not really comparable to the western world, par usual. Lenin rendered Feminism obsolete.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 03:28 PM
1

Discrimination is simply telling things apart, the discussion should be whether or not it is justified. And there should be discussion, as not every issue is yes or no.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 11:10 PM
2

Depends on what you classify as "ignoring the discrimination". Not seeing it as discrimination.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 08:57 PM
0

Nope; I am observing.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 05:06 PM
1

You are a sad person.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 05:02 PM
0

Let the downvotes decide.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 04:54 PM
5

False comparison, try again later.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 04:18 PM
4

Because half of those words do not have meaningful definitions and are probably younger than the children themselves.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 04:11 PM
1

Which would you consider to be worse, ignoring that discrimination for whatever reason, or justifying it in some way?
/r/MensRights28/01/16 03:26 PM
1

Even accounting for height or weight, men are something like 25-50% stronger. Not to mention more efficient and tougher.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 03:22 PM
2

Not necessarily.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 03:20 PM
8

I do not think that anybody has accused Russian men born in 1923 of being privileged, ever.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 12:39 AM
3

There are people whom think women are faster runners than men.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 12:28 AM
0

Even TRP would downvote this crap. My hypothesis is that the women live closer.
/r/MensRights27/01/16 01:59 PM
2

How could this possibly relate to male rights?
/r/MensRights27/01/16 02:13 AM
5

The vast majority of untested rape kits have no reason to be tested as they are from thrown out cases and such.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 09:46 PM
4

Why?
/r/MensRights26/01/16 09:44 PM
-4

, to.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 09:38 PM
1

Yep. They have money and no intention of staying, so they just wreck everything and consider the damage deposit to be an insurance payout.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 06:04 PM
1

Alternatively, the discrepancy could just be small and meaningless.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 02:39 PM
1

I have found women to be generally better tenants; Just an anecdote, but the house across from me has had about a dozen different people in it in the last ~3 years (quadplex), and out of them only 2 women who have been fine, 2 men who have been fine, and ~8 men who have been shitheads and practically destroyed the place. Never rent out to oil workers, crab fishermen, etc.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 11:44 AM
2

That sounds a bit high, considering for comparison that the Clintons get ~100k per talk, and they are high level politicians.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 11:29 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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