TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Worshack Archive

View 9 posts and 126 comments by Worshack on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Apparently that old poster isn't around anymore, but their new one isn't much better.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 02:36 PM
8

We should band together to kill tribalism. It'll be an anti-tribalism... umm... syndicate.
/r/MensRights16/05/15 05:55 PM
22

It's Australia, everything is trying to kill you, even (especially) the law.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 01:33 AM
1

Thanks, will use that in the future.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 05:41 PM
5

That, and the above poster misses the point here. CopCams are great for male citizens, because police brutality... But cops hate them. Here's a great example of the CopCam probably saving this guy's career... Helps to make the case to cops to wear them.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 08:12 PM
5

Honestly, it makes abstention the best policy. Who would have thought that the SJWs would be better at promoting abstinence than the religious zealots.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 03:45 PM
13

Perhaps one of the most prolific serial killers of all time...
/r/MensRights26/04/15 12:27 PM
5

I call Poe's law... This HAS to be satire... (creeping terror in the back of my mind that it's not)
/r/MensRights22/04/15 11:25 PM
2

Seems to work for me...
/r/MensRights22/04/15 11:22 PM
2

Wow, while I both knew of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire, and accepted the premise you deployed it to defend, I never really thought to put them together. That really is uncanny... Thanks.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 01:08 PM
3

Yeah, that's a slippery slope toward dystopian totalitarianism... How long before they turn mandatory DNA testing into a mandatory DNA database of everyone.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 06:29 PM
2

Well, as a lawyer (but not a criminal lawyer), I'd be totally into this question. It probably merits a detailed answer stretching several pages. I'd look at multiple sides of each issue (of which I see no less than 5 off the top of my head: drug use, distribution, rape, and depraved indifference and/or felony murder). The rape issue would merit probably half the answer, as I look at all sides of it, (consent, capacity to consent, whether or not in your jurisdiction a male can be raped, etc) depe…
/r/MensRights20/04/15 10:36 PM
14

Correct, and that's what makes it brilliant. No one who sees that protest is going to miss it or forget it.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 10:20 PM
1

Thanks for this. I've setup my seedbox to pull down that file, and I'll also seed for awhile.
/r/MensRights16/04/15 12:49 PM
-1

Oh for fuck's sake. A) I wasn't praising her for not making false rape accusations. Saying "at least" is merely a recognition that it could easily have been much worse. For instance, when I say "at least my fiancee slept around before we got married," can't be read as praise of my ex by anyone who isn't either perfidious or stupid. B) Even if you can somehow read what I said as praise, so fucking what? In today's society, it is highly likely that were she to level a false charge, everything woul…
/r/MensRights14/04/15 06:04 PM
4

It is, by those paying attention. However that isn't most people, so the arguments live on. It is slowly changing, however. As the idea gets more press, more people understand it as bullshit.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 01:12 PM
-3

You're telling me that she's not blaming the male participants? Come off it. No. He said that she's not only blaming the men. This was a fucked up situation, and everyone who participated is responsible. If a group of people decide to do something stupid, and one gets hurt, who's fault is it? Well, at the end of the day, they all did something stupid. At least the female participant had the balls to admit what she did, and not cry rape.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 01:08 PM
1

So, not that different from universities in the US... except that bit about prison.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 12:58 PM
3

She's obviously suffering from false consciousness, integrated patriarchy, and/or scabies. /s
/r/MensRights04/04/15 03:46 AM
3

Do you live in a one-party consent state? If so, have your smartphone make an audio recording of every interaction with this woman. If you catch her saying something like this, good. If you catch her on two separate occasions, great, you just established a pattern.
/r/MensRights02/04/15 08:13 PM
3

"Blocklist" and "blacklist" may differ by one letter, but they don't differ in any other way. The issue is not that you might construct a personal one, the issue comes if you publish it. Or do you mean to suggest that the blacklisting of actors due to "communist sensibilities" (perhaps unfounded) during the 20s and 30s was a totally acceptable and good policy? Those blacklists hardly prevented studios from hiring the listed actors... They just didn't.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 03:57 AM
6

Really? I don't get that from the vast majority. And from many who do say he'd cheat, they say he'd be justified. Even many women seem to be saying that.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 04:35 AM
1

Bake cookies. Vicious, hate & chocolate filled cookies. With almonds & oatmeal. Because they're hate cookies, and oatmeal in a chocolate cookie is just mean.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 04:06 AM
11

Well, actually, he's right (and it holds for most western democracies).
/r/MensRights27/03/15 02:46 PM
23

Facts be faced though, looking at history it is plain to see that nobody has a good track record... FTFY
/r/MensRights27/03/15 02:39 PM
1

Wasn't it ZQ who initially cried mysogany? As the prime mover, she caused feminism and journalistic ethics to be fully intertwined from the beginning. Though I think your broader point is basically accurate-- that the match was a breach of journalistic ethics, struck by a moron in a room full of hi-test leaded feminism vapors. Without the latter, this would have been a relatively minor incident.
/r/MensRights24/03/15 03:56 PM
1

I used to experience something like this... I mean, I'd enjoy it, but it felt somehow less than what she was feeling. It was like that from my teens to my mid-30s. Then I had my testosterone & estrogen tested, and sure enough, T was low and E was high. Got those fixed and now I'm the loud one who's orgasms just keep going...
/r/MensRights23/03/15 11:58 AM
1

~~I'm having trouble finding the referenced opinion (State v. W.R., 181 Wn.2d 757 (2014)). Neither Google nor Google Scholar (case law) is pulling it up. Also, I don't have westlaw / lexis access that includes Washington. Do you have a link for it you can throw on here?~~ Nevermind, found it.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 10:54 PM
2

Economic Left/Right: 6.38 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.13
/r/MensRights04/03/15 06:56 AM
3

If this guy is willing to argue that we should breach the medical records privacy protections surrounding anonymous donation, then it's a short jump to concluding that bone marrow donation by a matching donor should be mandatory. I mean, come on, it's just a needle. Jimmy here, who you just met since we violated your privacy this morning, is dying. Oh, and you owe back child support, you deadbeat. You thought that privacy statement and absolute surrender of parental rights protects you? That's s…
/r/MensRights09/02/15 05:59 AM
11

It's spelled donor; and yes I am a spelling Nazi. It's okay I am from Germany. FTFY. Your brown shirt needs to be pressed, mate.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 05:45 AM
15

Money. If they win, it is essentially a mandamus action, with no monetary recovery. So it is expensive. It takes principal to stand on principle.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 05:10 AM
1

If you're referring to the WSJ article, you should be using the more charitable reading of the author's intent (at least from a men's rights standpoint). James Taranto is no Feminist, and has made a name for himself in calling out feminist stupidity. I'd provide references, but there are so many, and I'm on my phone. He does take some practice reading though, as often he tries to make one meaning seem to be the point, with the real meaning slightly hidden. He also will stretch things to make pun…
/r/MensRights30/01/15 01:33 PM
1

Oh my god. If I hear one more millennial complain about college debt, I'm going to punch them.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 01:22 PM
3

Sorry, perhaps I should have put in a "would they?" or /s?
/r/MensRights18/01/15 04:29 AM
15

No, don't make paternity tests routine, that is a waste, and needlessly pokes the bear. No, make full genome sequencing (or snp-mapping like 23andme) routine. Because it's all about the health of the child, and no feminist would stand in the way of protecting the health of children... Of course, the ability to determine paternity is an automatic consequence of genetic testing, but hey, it's all about the child's health, and as a minor, the parents have access to their medical information.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 08:13 PM
1

I haven't seen the study, but it's possible that the idiot who wrote this is merely stating: What if men and women suffer autism equally? Is that the case? Or is it mostly males? Well, if your question wasn't rhetorical, the male:female ratio of autism spectrum disorder is 4:1.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 06:00 AM
0

I agree. This video doesn't have anything on it that I find problematic. The excessive child-coddling that is en vogue nowadays is insane, regardless as to whether it is applied to men or women. (NB: if a guy did the same thing, I'd still have the same opinion). Indeed, this pales in comparison to some of the beatings I received as a kid, and I have no ill will or negative effects from those. (Knowing myself, I deserved them).
/r/MensRights09/01/15 11:54 PM
1

Not to mention Canada and India. These are world-wide issues.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 03:09 PM
8

"No person shall be ... Deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...." and "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right... to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." Sounds like you don't like such things. But no, Dershowitz isn't innocent because "we defend all men", he's innocent because he hasn't been proven guilty, hasn't …
/r/MensRights05/01/15 05:57 PM
1

That duplicitous guttersnipe managed to issue the most whiny and prolix piece of tripe I have ever read. Wish there was an un-read button.
/r/MensRights31/12/14 12:46 AM
8

I dunno, sometimes it's amusing to laugh at the utter inanity of the other side. Keeps perspective, especially when no one was really hurt.
/r/MensRights29/12/14 04:49 AM
2

What's a power of ten between friends?
/r/MensRights23/12/14 02:08 PM
2

Selling of biological/medical waste without a license. And if it's not a crime already, that's how you make it a crime... Totally leave the "fraud" part out of it, because no one would really oppose licensing for proper biohazardous waste disposal (and medical wasre, which this is, qualifies as biohazardous).
/r/MensRights19/12/14 02:44 PM
4

By itself? It's not (or shouldn't be). Miscarriages happen pretty routinely, most often before the woman would otherwise know she's pregnant. Especially with first pregnancies.
/r/MensRights19/12/14 02:41 PM
2

Oh good. I was worried there for a bit. Breitbart doesn't seem like the kind of site that would bow to feminist pressure (or anyone really), at least not when Andrew Breitbart was running things. I hope this is just a bug, and not evidence of atrophy of the spirit he left there.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 03:11 PM
2

This is tremendously unfortunate. These were great articles, and were both timely and cutting. Does anyone here know how to get in touch with the author? Was there a part 3 planned? If so, I really want to read it, and hope he can find another place to publish it.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 03:08 PM
1

Totally understand your moves here - partly because I live many of them (well, except for the trained fighter bit). Good luck in your political career. We do need more MRAs in power positions.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 01:35 AM
2

Vox doesn't come out and say it, but the subtext is "because men". Well, with women having a numerical majority in 39 states, it's not men's fault that the women keep not electing other women.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 01:24 AM
17

Was this in the USA? Contact The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). They are like the ACLU, except they specialize in these kind of cases, and frankly they're better than the ACLU. As others have said, it's going to take a lawsuit.
/r/MensRights13/12/14 01:26 PM
1

Wow, this is the first time I've heard the master/slave issue vis-a-vis feminism. I've heard of people objecting to it due to, you know, slavery and apartheid South Africa, but this is new.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 08:00 PM
2

This. I was sued once under a bogus theory. Cost $7k to defend and win, maybe could have settled for $1k. I decided it was worth the $7k (would have happily paid up to $20k) to fight and win. Standing on principle is expensive.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 02:00 PM
8

Agreed, don't make the perfect be the enemy of the good.
/r/MensRights18/11/14 09:01 PM
1

California's 2-party consent law applies only to "confidential communications". The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002). I'd say that there is at least a reasonable argument that a conversation in a private residence qualifies, at least enough to survive a motion to …
/r/MensRights18/11/14 05:37 PM
2

/u/eletheros is right on this one. A lawyer would recommend he not release it, at least until his lawyer has reviewed it. Source: I'm a lawyer. Edit: you asked for a "California statute" to cite. How about wiretapping? CA is a two-party consent state. If he recorded sound, without the other people's consent, there could be issues there. What about, say, illicit drug use? Not saying that there was any or that the guy is anything other than straight-edge, but it is a video of the inside of his res…
/r/MensRights18/11/14 05:45 AM
8

That is awesome. You all sound like you're giving that boy the best start in life he could have. Don't ever change.
/r/MensRights28/10/14 12:18 PM
2

But there are just so damn many stupid people... It's actually hard not to accidentally befriend one every now and then.
/r/MensRights09/10/14 12:03 AM
9

He mentions Chinese traditionalism, by which I think he is referring to the cultural norm where the eldest son is the parent's retirement policy. So having sons is very important. Second, the one child policy. While it is highly illegal, one can envision, in a society where sons are critical to your support in old age, daughters may be... retroactively aborted.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 04:02 AM
9

And that's what's wrong with the community. Gonna have to disagree with you a touch there. I'd say it's what's wrong with /u/velocom and some members of this community. Reading through this thread, I see many members of the /r/MensRights community going out of their way to be understanding. OP appears to be genuinely horrified at her actions and the affect they had on her SO. If OP can be believed, it was a singular act, and her disgust in her actions is so strong that she is not only very unlik…
/r/MensRights01/10/14 11:59 PM
0

No, no. You have it all wrong. Having higher oppression points doesn't mean you rape less... But you can take your oppression points and exchange them for Rape Offsets. Since cis-het white males have no oppression points, they can't purchase Rape Offsets. They can try to use their old Patricharchy Points, but most people don't accept them anymore.
/r/MensRights26/09/14 12:51 PM
-1

How does it not apply? The democrats are just as bad as the republicans. There is no practical difference between the two of them, just differences at the margin. Especially on men's rights issues.
/r/MensRights20/09/14 03:36 AM
7

Well I certainly understand your avoiding Oceana for Eastasia. FTFY.
/r/MensRights20/09/14 03:29 AM
0

Equality of opportunity is indeed a right-wing position. However, that opportunity is tempered through the belief generally in negative rights, not positive rights.
/r/MensRights12/09/14 03:54 AM
3

/r/bigdickproblems
/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:46 AM
1

Sorry, yes I did mean C-130. MOABs were designed to be delivered by C-130s. I believe they push them out the back. It may be one of the C-130s you describe though. See wikipedia.
/r/MensRights09/09/14 12:50 AM
3

I don't want to blame the woman who hurt me, or myself, or my friends. In many ways, we are all victims, all part of a society that assigns strict borders to situations where there is an immense amount of space in between. Yeah. "I was sexually assaulted by a women, but we're both victims, because patriarchy."
/r/MensRights09/09/14 12:30 AM
2

Ok, so quick-fix for that problem. We just ship a few B-130s piloted by women, along with some MOABs or Russian ATBIPs. It's the only way to be sure.
/r/MensRights09/09/14 12:18 AM
2

Incorrect. Once someone is invited in to your house (an invitee or licensee) you cannot simply withdraw consent. You must communicate the withdrawal of consent. Otherwise, they may reasonably understand to have it. Now, it does not extend to everything, and they can become trespassers if they go snooping. But, assuming no snooping on their part (say, if they just smell bad), you have to tell them to leave, not merely think it.
/r/MensRights08/09/14 04:28 AM
3

Actually, I think that this is likely a better case than most. Not sure of NY laws, but where I am, this would be defamation per se. He should be able to at least get an injunction.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 01:10 PM
12

Life w/ parole after 7? Sounds like the judge gave her the maximum sentence possible (considering the guy didn't die). She was convicted of aggravated mayhem (CA Penal Code 203), and the max sentence is life w/ parole, unless the victim dies. Also, I'd think she'd still get parole if she were a man - CA is very overcrowded.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 01:00 PM
0

I would say not yet. I think it currently attracts liberals (especially SJ apostates who realize that men have become an oppressed class), conservatives (partly as a reaction to liberal SJs, and for other reasons), libertarians (duh), and pretty much anyone else who recognizes the injustice. Basically, I think the movement is too young to have been invaded with a strong political ideology. The longer it is resisted, the better for the movement. I guess if pressed, I'd say it's nominally libertar…
/r/MensRights03/09/14 09:32 PM
0

Certain people are predisposed to being "moralizers". These people have an abiding need, a hunger, to feel morally superior to others. This poisonous mindset has no political ideology, but the expression of the mindset is highly influenced by ideology. Left-wingers tend to get their moralistic jollies by "helping" oppressed people. SJ is really just an outgrowth of PC, which traces back to the 60s. Right-wingers tend toward religion for their moralistic jollies. So, naturally, you'll find this p…
/r/MensRights03/09/14 01:48 PM
1

How well will this work? Aren't most ads run by a dispatch, where the advertisers don't really choose the particular sites? For instance, last week I looked at Mailgun for a coding project, now i see their ad on about 10% of the pages visit.
/r/MensRights03/09/14 06:12 AM
0

Can't tell if serious... or sarcasm
/r/MensRights03/09/14 05:25 AM
2

Yes, that and generally prosecutors don't have the time/desire to press all lower-level crimes when the victim doesn't care enough to assist. Higher level crimes, like murder, or crimes where the victim is (legally) incompetent, are a different story.
/r/PussyPass02/09/14 04:53 PM
4

It is almost like they want to define "being generically rude" == sexual harassment == rape.
/r/PussyPass02/09/14 04:48 PM
1

It is super-shitty. Take a look at UMD's code of student conduct: UNIVERSITY JURISDICTION 9. This Code covers conduct that occurs: (a) on University premises; or (b) at University-sponsored activities; or (c) not on University premises if the conduct would otherwise constitute a violation of this Code had it occurred on University premises and if in the judgment of the Director of Student Conduct the conduct affects the safety of the University community or the orderly operation of the Universit…
/r/MensRights24/08/14 02:03 PM
2

You are getting down-voted (perhaps for the incorrect statement that the guy is 100% protected from expulsion - not always true), but your argument is actually very interesting. Feminists have responded to NAMALT in many ways, but one big way was to make up things like "schrodingder's rapist". That argument goes like "sure, not all men, or even most men, are rapists. But I don't know you, so I'm going to assume you're a rapist, because I have no evidence to the contrary, and it's too risky other…
/r/MensRights24/08/14 01:29 PM
2

Guy shouldn't have snapped like that, but it is understandable given the circumstances. I think a much more effective response would have been: Stop dead. Turn and face woman who said it. Walk over to her. Ask "so you are uncomfortable with me taking my daughter in there?" Of course she'll say yes. Pick up daughter and put in her lap. "Ok. You go change her diaper then. And while you're at it, feel free to deposit your bigoted, BS ideas about all men being pedophiles there as well."
/r/MensRights14/08/14 01:04 PM
5

Not in NC! Here, alienation of affection, and heart balm actions are still valid. Rarely used though.
/r/MensRights13/08/14 11:56 AM
4

Normally, being from the US, I think the defamation laws of other Common Law countries are overly harsh. In this case, I daresay they may not be harsh enough. Go and fuck their shit up!
/r/MensRights08/08/14 03:17 PM
1

Ahh! 'Twas a typo! ಠ_ಠ
/r/MensRights29/07/14 05:03 AM
3

Using one individual to paint feminism with a broad brush is itself an ad hominem fallacy. But, when did I use one person to paint all of feminism with a broad brush? As far as I can see, only the commentator was being called stupid, and with justification. And, in this case, wouldn't it be an ad feminem?
/r/MensRights29/07/14 03:31 AM
5

The attack is essentially an ad hominum, which is a logical fallacy, and is therefore stupid. QED. Of course, now I must be a misogynist, since "hominum" means man, fallacy is basically phallic, and I also accused a feminist of being illogical. So I guess I'm wrong too.
/r/MensRights29/07/14 02:49 AM
3

Albert Hofmann, a Swiss citizen, first synthesized LSD in 1938, in Basil Switzerland, while working for Sandoz, a Swiss pharma company. So, no, not the US. Not even a little bit.
/r/MensRights23/07/14 03:50 AM
4

That isn't a legal threat. In fact, that is the opposite of a legal threat. To be a threat, there has to be either at least the appearance of an intent to follow through. He explicitly says he doesn't want to sue, so he is explicitly not threatening. Now, this does provide the reader with the sense that the guy isn't defenseless, and knows what's up, but that is about all.
/r/MensRights12/07/14 07:11 PM
7

NCGS 14-27.7A: (a) A defendant is guilty of a Class B1 felony if the defendant engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with another person who is 13, 14, or 15 years old and the defendant is at least six years older than the person, except when the defendant is lawfully married to the person. Why charge with "indecent liberties with a minor" and not statutory rape? EDIT: Oh, and the same day, this happened: Raleigh Man Faces Child Related Sex Offense. Guess what? Black man (in Raleigh) ge…
/r/MensRights08/07/14 04:08 PM
2

What is this nonsense? Why would a company who boycotts another, be a codefendant? If the Doubletree counterclaims for damages, the boycotting company would be an exhibit, or at worst, a witness.
/r/MensRights07/07/14 05:34 AM
10

"Hands, fists, feet, etc." is a reporting category under the Uniform Crime Reporting Handbook. It merely describes an aggravated assault with "personal weapons". The reporter was probably just parroting the definition from the police report, which probably had a checkbox.
/r/MensRights05/07/14 04:03 PM
1

Polygraphs are usually considered adversarial, like a cross-examination. Here in the US, leading the witness on cross is totally fine. Is that not the case in Canada?
/r/MensRights02/07/14 01:06 PM
3

It is the return of the Puritans. Same "sex is bad, mmmkay" message, this time with 100% less god.
/r/MensRights25/06/14 04:17 AM
4

It is called a writ of mandamus. Essentially an order from a higher authority for a lower authority to do their damn job. In this case, the law (Servicemens civil...) says "shall" not "may". This means that the judge has no discretion to deny the continuance. I bet the JAG officers come in, file interlocutory appeal, and get a quick mandamus. They CAN'T let this stand, as it would severely impact all overseas military.
/r/MensRights19/06/14 05:30 AM
0

Is this the Taranto column you're talking about? If so, he has talked about the issue since, such as here, in April. James Taranto isn't easily silenced...
/r/MensRights14/06/14 08:41 PM
1

While this is, of course, true, wouldn't the POV matter? The state, by refusing to charge the woman at the same level as a man, is refusing to provide equal protection to the man. I think it is a different issue issue if the judge/jury refuses to punish the woman similarly in the sentencing phase. However, there is no compelling state interest in charging men and women differently for the same crime.
/r/MensRights09/06/14 02:49 PM
3

Kid should press charges, and hire an attorney to remind the prosecutor what he would have received had the situation been reversed (or if he didn't have video evidence). Promise to sue the city under equal protection if the prosecutor doesn't treat her as harshly as he'd have been treated.
/r/MensRights09/06/14 12:26 PM
2

The "likelihood of success" language relates to the judge's partial grant of the plaintiff's injunction, not the denial of duke's motion to dismiss. The standard is different, but you can still lose. Basically, "likelihood of success" should be read as "has a shot at success". General standards for a preliminary injunction, though NC courts may have a slightly different standard.
/r/MensRights03/06/14 02:36 AM
18

He hasn't won yet. He just got an injunction preventing the expulsion for now.
/r/MensRights03/06/14 02:28 AM
1

At least they are honest and forthright about their misandry. Bonus: makes it easier to sue them under Title IX.
/r/MensRights01/06/14 12:52 AM
2

Your comment displays a lack of compassion. Very few people choose to be overweight. If it were this easy, there would be much fewer overweight people in this world. You misunderstand. "Easy" is not a moral judgement. Indeed, some of the "easiest" actions are rather difficult. This is one. Owning up to one's faults is another. However, I believe I was clear that in this case easy was equated with simple or straightforward. Not that the act would be painless. Dieting is painful. You are, quite li…
/r/MensRights31/05/14 10:45 PM
40

It is "easy" in the sense that there is nothing more than willpower required. Just eat less and take a walk. Repeat daily for a year. Easy.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 05:36 PM
8

Why not hire some police officers to act as security for the event? I'll be glad to kick in some money for that cause. The hotel wants a minimum of 7 cops, 24 hours a day for the conference. That will be pricy. Source
/r/MensRights31/05/14 05:16 PM
3

A notarized statement would only be good as of the precise moment it was notarized. Perhaps we need a "consent chaperone" to watch the hook-up and ensure that both parties continuously consent to everything. Yeah, that's the ticket. It would require the universities to hire about, what, 10-20% of the student population in additional employees, to ensure that one is available and on call for every random hookup. One benefit of this, it would help to justify the $1,000,000 you're spending on your …
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:36 PM
3

It’s normal to overlook the female orgasm. So women are entitled to sexual pleasure, but men aren't. that is where I got stuck. Your point looks at the hypocrisy of that statement, which is rather extreme. I stopped at the merits of the claim... Who, really, does this? While I am sure it happens, I have never encountered a man who wasn't at least concerned that the woman was satisfied. But normal? Please. If men truly don't care (as is implied), what would be the purpose of a woman faking an org…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 01:30 PM
2

You (sir/ma'am) have an enlightened view. I for one am pleased to have you here. The MRM needs to actively and vocally denounce out fringe elements, not only because it is right to do so, but also because those elements will continue to hinder acceptance of our broader message.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 01:54 PM
2

Is "reverse racism" a thing? It should't be. It is just plain old racism. The "reverse racism" term perpetuates the implication that the real racism is white on non-white, which is a manifestly daft notion. Indeed, the "reverse" modifier does no other work than calling to mind that implication. Similarly, it isn't "reverse sexism" when an action prefers women over men. It is just sexism.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 01:50 PM
0

The guy should sue the woman, and her employer for, among other things, tortious interference (his inability to have quiet enjoyment of his leasehold property), IIED, sexual harassment, and, since this is Oregon, anti-gay discrimination.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 05:05 AM
10

Not scientific, but apparently it is hard, but not impossible, to beat a good dishwasher. Even still, i'd say that the dishwasher wins over the long term, as it is highly likely that the de minimus water savings achievable by vigilant hand-washing is far outweighed by the time savings for the dishwasher.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 10:24 PM
14

Yes, it is disgusting, however the cops probably saved the man's life. Apparently, the fire was too hot for the firefighters. If the fire really was as bad as the fox news story above says, he wouldn't have been able to get in either.
/r/MensRights11/05/14 10:04 PM
1

I'd point out that this is a great example of the No True Scotsman fallacy, but I'm sure it'll be seen as sexist.
/r/MensRights11/05/14 04:39 AM
2

Well, both super glue and surgical glue are cyanoacrylate.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 01:23 AM
2

The point is less that neither party has actually consented, but rather that the presence of any level of inebriation renders actual consent impossible. Therefore, both parties are incapable of consenting, and under this standard, both parties are rapists. Party A is inebriated. Party B is inebriated. Parties A and B engage in a sex act, which was mutually consensual at the time. Party A's consent was invalid due to inebriation. Party B's inebriation is not a defense to rape. It must also follow…
/r/MensRights29/04/14 02:04 PM
2

Gender matters. When the pollsters asked the uninsured whether they planned to stay that way, despite the individual mandate, 37 percent of men said yes, compared with 29 percent of women. Further confirmation, if anyone needed it, that men are statistically more likely to be morons. That, or further confirmation that men are statistically more likely to avoid punitive pricing regimes and act rationally (guaranteed issue, "hardship waivers", etc.).
/r/MensRights18/03/14 12:13 PM
5

The apostate and heretic are usually hated more than the heathen. They are much more dangerous, as they have the power to away others away from the main idea.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 11:43 AM
3

It is not a flip-flop... That implies a disingenuous aspect. She seems to genuinely have evolved. Wonder if she had a son? To Wikipedia. Nope. 2 daughters. Even better. She came to her new ideas without being forced to confront her old ones in the context of her children. Good for her.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 12:42 PM
1

The other disgusting thing about this is that children are being judged as the equivalent of disease.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 12:30 PM
1

Right, this limitation also unnecessarily leaves out not only men, but also all women who, for one reason or another, are unable to become pregnant. They should have stopped at fraud nullifying consent.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 12:28 PM
2

If the boy is employed by the university, I wonder if this opens the university up to a retaliation claim under the EEOC.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 11:58 AM
1

8th Amendment says "cruel and unusual" - so if it is cruel and usual, there is no constitutional problem. At least, there shouldn't be, because and != or.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 11:56 PM
2

I think you may have misunderstood my point. I was not stating that this does not belong here, but rather that a cross post to the legal forums would be helpful. As you say, these discussions need to move out of the cloistered ivory towers of the law. But as an attorney myself (and former law faculty-albeit in a totally different area), I fear that the legal field is content to overlook these abuses. Your original blog post was artfully drafted to point out the injustice, without triggering a kn…
/r/MensRights28/02/14 04:59 AM
2

You should post this in /r/law and /r/lawyers.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 12:00 AM
3

Record the classes (audio only, maybe on your iPhone?). Send recordings to FIRE. Under CA's wiretapping law, you SHOULD be OK, since a lecture is not a private conversation.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 02:46 PM
1

I think you take it a bit far. I don't think 99% of culture thinks poorly of the MRM, simply because 75+% of the culture has no idea that MRM exists. Perhaps 99% of those that do know think poorly of MRM, but that 25% is an odd sample, since it would be enriched with militant feminists, SJWs, and others who are strongly predisposed to dislike the MRM. Those types have a vested interest in tainting the perception of the MRM, since a positive perception would necessarily reduce their monopoly on t…
/r/MensRights28/01/14 02:27 PM
32

Leave it up. If they remove it, then you can leverage that fact into greater publicity.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 12:31 AM
3

"Sooo, lemme get this straight. I told you a story about a drunk & disorderly girl, who is trespassing in my home, and committed assault & battery on me. You believe me. So you are going to do me a favor by arresting me for a lesser crime? How about you arrest the drunk trespasser instead!" Yeah, that would have gone over well. Unfortunately I have a smart mouth, so I'd probably say something like that too quick.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 12:18 AM
1

There is a problem here, in that the list is speech. While commercial speech isn't as strongly protected by the first amendment, political speech is very strongly protected. If she, in posting the list, did not do so to profit, and instead claimed it as a political statement, there would, at least, be a colorable first amendment defense.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 05:17 AM
0

If anyone ever says this to me, I hope I'll have the presence of mind to respond either: "Yup, still there." or "What? It was here when I left the house this morning!"
/r/MensRights09/12/13 06:01 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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