TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

WorthlessPeritsi Archive

View 0 posts and 324 comments by WorthlessPeritsi 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)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

You're not speaking English. You're speaking word salad (like lying that you "didn't say that the OP gendered an already gendered post" and also going on to accuse him of that, again, anyway, as an example). You are still victim blaming. The "stat" you're "pointing" out is victim blaming. Why are you still blaming men for what happens to them? You've said already that, "Yes, a violent crime [is] most likely caused by another man. Fucking idiots". And that the "root of the problem" is your own ge…
/r/MensRights28/06/21 03:37 PM
2

If people are to take you seriously, be consistent. Either take back your original comment, or admit that you blame George Floyd for his own death simply for the crime of being a man (and doing male things, presumably) which you say you don't. There was no "layer" in what you originally said. If the OP is responding to a gendered argument, he cannot make a gendered addition, it's already there. He responded to emotional victimhood and manipulation with a short and simple reality check. And you'r…
/r/MensRights28/06/21 02:25 PM
6

George Floyd was killed by a man. Be consistent and laugh at him too. Why are you still victim blaming? The OP was made in response to gendered, hierarchical victimhood.
/r/MensRights28/06/21 01:43 PM
14

For you or for the medical establishment? To me that sounds like a dismissal. Smoking causes death by "natural causes" too.
/r/MensRights28/06/21 01:39 PM
8

"Natural causes"?
/r/MensRights28/06/21 01:21 PM
5

How is that victim blaming? I'm not "blaming other men". It is clear victim-blaming to lack sympathy for a victim of a crime simply because their perpetrator was a part of the same demographic, of some kind. Do you blame George Floyd for his death?
/r/MensRights28/06/21 01:16 PM
1

What an emotionally manipulative website. Unhinged.
/r/MensRights28/06/21 01:09 PM
6

That's victim blaming.
/r/MensRights28/06/21 12:51 PM
1

No, the furniture. 😐
/r/MensRights03/06/21 06:36 PM
3

No, they don't, because everything can be spun, and that is what they do. They only have to "feel" like a victim, then they are one.
/r/MensRights03/06/21 06:01 PM
1

If she was saying that the rate of female suicide increased and that's a problem and we should focus on women's mental health I would agree with you but she's not. That is what she said in 3 words: "especially among women". You've chosen to interpret her words and ignorance sympathetically, I haven't. We're both going by the exact same information here, unless you're privy to something about her that I'm not? If you are, then let us know it, instead of treating your own word like the gospel.
/r/MensRights30/05/21 09:02 PM
0

There's "no need" for her to mention anything at all and the suicidal thoughts analogy really would be irrelevant because they are not on the graph, right next to each other. I haven't made a mountain out of anything. I already said that.
/r/MensRights30/05/21 03:14 PM
1

I'm not mad about anything, weirdo. That's 2 of us attributing intentions. "Magdalena" is ignoring the elephant taking up 70% of the room when she could have acknowledged it. That word "especially". Women are being singled out. Do they need more help than men and special treatment? I reckon Magdalena thinks so.
/r/MensRights30/05/21 12:44 AM
1

That "especially" is deliberate, and it wasn't put in brackets. It would have been exceptionally easy to just say "4% rise in the suicide rate in less strict Japan" blahblah. We can all see the graph and its breakdown. She was making a point beyond statistics (one part of that point being that COVID's affect on women is worse than on men - unproven), and I find it dismissive. I find societal attitudes towards male suicide dismissive.
/r/MensRights29/05/21 10:41 PM
1

That's clearly not "all she was saying". The male rate is still more than double the female rate, and has always been considerably higher, so the rise "especially among women" should be a footnote, not the highlight ("especially"). It is deliberate and ideological and indicative of attitudes regarding male suicide.
/r/MensRights29/05/21 04:34 PM
2

Lmao you responded pretty fast, as if you had false rape allegation statistics at the ready. Looks to me like an obsession. No, it's called knowing what you're talking about. That's one of the stupidest statements I've ever read on reddit. What an achievement. 🤣👉 But there's another!: We’re supposed to remove certain boundaries just because 45 percent of allegations are false? What like, we're supposed to wear safety helmets just because some people get hit on the head by falling bricks? Like, w…
/r/MensRights29/05/21 04:16 PM
5

No statistics needed. Lol.
/r/MensRights29/05/21 12:57 AM
6

Only your stupidity triggers people.
/r/MensRights29/05/21 12:55 AM
15

Lol @ every sentence.
/r/MensRights29/05/21 12:50 AM
1

If the obviously false accusation leads to court proceedings before its exposure then I see no reason for the accused to have to go through a separate civil suit. That is specific, not broad. People are not going to get a knock on the door and a "What was that you were saying earlier?" It's perjury (not a crime in all countries). It gets prosecuted (and continually ignored) all the time. Considering the extra punishments that go with being accused of a sexual crime (registers, restrictions on fr…
/r/MensRights28/05/21 04:06 AM
1

He asked a question: "Why would rape accusations be any different?" And you answered "Just because, different", followed by blahblah. This is a theme.
/r/MensRights28/05/21 03:16 AM
2

Why don't you explain yourself? Rather than ramble. It's different because it's different. That's is not an answer. Generally speaking, killing is immoral. So if you're hinging your it's just different spiel on relative morality and biology, that's the simple moral counter to the idea that the father is abandoning the child. That's a minefield you won't come out of with your limbs intact, so why don't instead you move away from the idea that it is a competition for who has it the hardest, and in…
/r/MensRights28/05/21 03:15 AM
4

That's NOT ad hominem. You really are slow! And fucking stupid! (still not ad hominem). Making it comparable is the same as saying it!? 🤣 I'm rich. Thank God saying it actually means I am it. I'm buying a Bentley. Bought it. There, now I've got it. I'll repeat these 2 reasons as much I I need to, even though you'll never reply directly, because you are a moral and intellectual coward: "They both concern each parent's responsibility to the child, and both decisions are taken at the same time in t…
/r/MensRights25/05/21 04:46 PM
6

That's an insult. You really are slow. This is really funny and ironic because you literally just did that but with saying that they are comparable. Where did I "literally" do that? I gave 2 reasons, which I'll repeat for you: "They both concern each parent's responsibility to the child, and both decisions are taken at the same time in the child's life". I didn't rely on emotionally manipulative rhetoric about "importance" and "lives" but I can: You're right, lives are more important than financ…
/r/MensRights25/05/21 04:03 PM
6

Ad hominem? Where is that? 😐 They are comparable because I've made them comparable. I repeat, for the slow: "They both concern each parent's responsibility to the child, and both decisions are taken at the same time in the child's life". Saying they are not comparable because I say so and bolting on some mindless emotionally manipulative rhetoric about people's lives is a fallacious argument much closer to "ad hominem". Newsflash.
/r/MensRights25/05/21 02:39 PM
1

A pre-"contract" in every situation is always "workable" if that's the kind of hyper-legal, thoroughly depressing and easily abused, society you want to live in. There isn't one solution, there are multiple ones concerning both parent's situations: The woman should be legally compelled to inform the potential father[s] (this could include some kind of legal notification, less depressing than a "contract"); Once this is done, at any stage, the man should be given time to decide what he wants to d…
/r/MensRights25/05/21 02:30 PM
4

Since you're slow I'll repeat: "They both concern each parent's responsibility to the child, and both decisions are taken at the same time in the child's life." That is how they're "comparable". So newsflash, they are.
/r/MensRights25/05/21 01:45 PM
4

Here's how they are "comparable": They both concern each parent's responsibility to the child, and both decisions are taken (should be - I'm treating this "male right to choose" as I think you are, as as final as abortion) at the same time in the child's life. Financial circumstances may change after the child is born - that applies to both parents though.
/r/MensRights25/05/21 01:07 AM
1

Your point, if it is one, was that they're just "different" (😐) due to the uniqueness of pregnancy. I said that the father's physical role is unique as well. I didn't back up your point. I mocked it. What difference does the "unique"-ness of pregnancy make? You haven't explained. Where does welfare come into the woman's choice? Remember, these choices are being made at the same time. If you are so concerned about the child's welfare, I trust you're scrutinizing the both of them equally, yeah? Un…
/r/MensRights25/05/21 12:23 AM
-1

Enlighten us and give us some answers.
/r/MensRights24/05/21 11:11 PM
1

My "point" is simply asking you where your point is in the comment you made. It's just an inquiry. So, where is your point? 😐
/r/MensRights24/05/21 10:58 PM
4

So are you in favour of no-choice child support? Why don't you explain yourself rather than repeat yourself, wimp.
/r/MensRights24/05/21 10:40 PM
3

What?
/r/MensRights24/05/21 10:35 PM
1

Where's your point?
/r/MensRights24/05/21 10:34 PM
2

Are you capable of actually arguing against anything he said or are you just an embarrassing imbecile? The father's role is also biologically "unique", how is any of this an argument against his choice?
/r/MensRights24/05/21 10:31 PM
19

Should the accused remain anonymous too?
/r/MensRights24/05/21 10:12 PM
-5

Yeah, they kill you for them. The whole theme of the thread.
/r/MensRights14/05/21 10:24 PM
3

Because I read it. Aside from just being stupid, the analogy doesn't work because he is not considering the commenter's post's whole context. The rough with the smooth. Men get neither.
/r/MensRights14/05/21 10:14 PM
2

Because you don't understand what the person he replied to actually said.
/r/MensRights14/05/21 09:54 PM
11

It's not important for a woman to be considerate of a man's feelings though, as you have demonstrated.
/r/MensRights14/05/21 09:47 PM
7

What?
/r/MensRights14/05/21 09:44 PM
-2

You compliment a man and he threatens to kill you for it. The number of times I've seen this... 😐
/r/MensRights14/05/21 09:43 PM
45

You didn't do anything to be white. He didn't do anything to be a man either but he still has to take the blame. Why isn't that collective feeling dumb?
/r/MensRights07/05/21 04:00 AM
12

Men are not a class.
/r/MensRights07/05/21 03:54 AM
6

In the red corner we have a well written, thought out and researched post from a man, while in the blue corner we have a witless, brainless and hysterical comment from a slug. Mismatch of the century.
/r/MensRights07/05/21 03:20 AM
-2

incel
/r/MensRights07/05/21 03:13 AM
-1

small men
/r/MensRights07/05/21 03:13 AM
3

This "societal conversation on consent" would never end and they would never run out of grievances or enemies. There's power in victimhood.
/r/MensRights07/05/21 03:09 AM
1

The first one, you got it right.
/r/MensRights07/05/21 03:03 AM
1

At least I have feelings.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 11:19 PM
1

It's obvious that you haven't gotten over any issues. It's not possible in your case. Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer Nazi sympathizer
/r/MensRights02/05/21 11:14 PM
1

Childish turnaround. I’ve worked really hard and gone to therapy to help me get over those issues.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:59 PM
2

I am a very kind and generous person that enjoys sharing what I have with others.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:52 PM
1

Don't flatter yourself. There is no hope here.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:50 PM
2

you barely qualify to be treated as an animal.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:49 PM
1

I am a very kind and generous person that enjoys sharing what I have with others. ​ I’ve worked really hard and gone to therapy to help me get over those issues. ​ If we follow that argument to its logical conclusion, we get some really nasty results whereby we take a small sample of people and extrapolate their characteristics onto their entire respective groups.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:48 PM
2

Proud? Jesus. I keep replying just to see if there is a flicker of humanity. But instead it's just wall-to-wall insanity and paranoia.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:46 PM
1

I am a very kind and generous person that enjoys sharing what I have with others. ​ I’ve worked really hard and gone to therapy to help me get over those issues.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:43 PM
2

How is it possible to be so empty... Do you think you'll feel ashamed of the things you said tomorrow?
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:41 PM
1

What a horrible thing to say.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:32 PM
2

People like you make the world a much more depressing place. The craziness is overwhelming. You should be in a mental asylum.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:31 PM
3

I'm going to repeat myself: I don’t like the ideology [Islam]. Then: I don’t have an issue with Indian people one bit.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:25 PM
1

inbred JzxGamer wants the untermenschen to kill himself. You're a psychopath.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:24 PM
2

Take a shot every time he types "Nazi". What a creep.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:22 PM
1

Everyone is a Nazi sympathiser except JzxGamer, who is an actual Nazi.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:20 PM
4

I don’t like the ideology. ​ I don’t have an issue with Indian people one bit. Another redditor.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:19 PM
2

You just told me to kill myself for calling you out? You really are unhinged. And a Nazi. I am a very kind and generous person
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:17 PM
4

Do they rope other males into the coalitions too? Simp army?
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:14 PM
0

I really don't care guys, you mental midgets. I am also a very kind and generous person and not a drooling and unhinged loon.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:05 PM
1

Your existence triggers me.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 10:01 PM
1

Most Indians are not Muslim. I don't know why you brought them into this. Hmm.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 09:59 PM
2

If she is so terrified of a stranger she shouldn't talk to them. It's not at all rational to be that terrified but if she is to be then her taking continuing pre-emptive action protects us all, not least of all the stranger.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 09:57 PM
2

Print it out.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 09:45 PM
3

Go on then.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 09:43 PM
1

Look how much I don't care guys.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 09:40 PM
2

You're unhinged. Just like a Nazi.
/r/MensRights02/05/21 09:37 PM
2

Lol, you two fucking idiots started to argue with each other instead of that moron. Wires crossed. 🤣 I suppose it can get confusing!
/r/MensRights02/05/21 09:34 PM
2

Lol. Report back on her findings for us. I don't think he'll give you any edge, even if his observations are right!
/r/MensRights01/05/21 11:06 PM
12

I thought its just a normal sub for women ( its not ) It is.
/r/MensRights01/05/21 10:39 PM
2

You're putting a lot of stock in "Angela Confidential" if you think she's going to give you an edge.
/r/MensRights01/05/21 10:38 PM
1

And what points are they? I'm glad you agree that women should get boob jobs because their tiny tits are so undesirable though.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 08:10 PM
1

Imagine being so stupid you discredit yourself yet again but carry on anyway.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 05:41 PM
1

We will change ourselves a thousand times throughout life to be sexually desirable to women. Cool. Does the same apply to women for men? I will respect you for your consistency.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 05:39 PM
2

If i ever come across one of those K.A.M. or A.M.A.T women, i would tell them: "lady (not really), if you could Thanos snap all men away, I would dare you, I fucking dare you!" Lol, well I wouldn't.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 05:26 PM
3

Another example of men suffer, women most affected.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 05:24 PM
1

If his answer was "no", what difference would that make? "Lucky you, you got what you wanted before you knew it." ? "Now, onto what really matters: what women think. Women don’t like uncircumcised dicks."
/r/MensRights29/04/21 05:19 PM
1

One, no woman likes an uncut dick. It’s not a “small subset of the population.” ​ Personally, I’m American, so perhaps this is the result of cultural bias Imagine being so stupid you discredit your opinion in the same post but carry on anyway.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 05:13 PM
2

Groping is only semi-sexual? Lol, no, I'm accusing you of being someone who keeps his mind pure to ward off the devil from possessing his penis. Erections might be more common to a teenager, but until there's an actual physical problem you're still going to get them, even when you don't want to.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 04:54 PM
1

Just think of God, homeland and concentrate on the job. Or be an old man. semi-sexual situations What are they?
/r/MensRights29/04/21 04:39 PM
1

Surely long, light and loose-fitting clothes are better?
/r/MensRights29/04/21 04:35 PM
1

Trans-exclusionary as in opposed to women identifying as men? Well, if you really want to take the harder path in life...
/r/MensRights29/04/21 04:29 PM
1

Do you actually want to wear short shorts and walk around in public with an erection? Is this a cause close to your heart?
/r/MensRights29/04/21 04:25 PM
2

I also don't know why you're getting a boner in public unless there's a very good reason behind that Lol, "burninginthedistance" only thinks of Jesus in public.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 04:14 PM
-1

You are aware that a dicks and boobs are not the same thing right? Neither are your ass and your elbow, were you aware of this?
/r/MensRights29/04/21 04:12 PM
3

In your example, there no way to make the woman who killed the man the object, because a dead man can't take action), so they leave her out altogether. Man found dead affects woman most.
/r/MensRights29/04/21 03:14 PM
1

Lol. You didn't read the post then. Pathetic.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 09:53 PM
4

I agree with you. Men are more romantic and fall in love more easily. And lust drives masturbation not relationships. It's there, because of the physical realities of male sexuality, but if I'm friends ("friends") first with a woman and then I develop feelings for a her, then that's because of her, not the call of the wild. If I'm still "friends" (friends) with a woman after that, that is because she rejected me as not good enough. It becomes a hollow friendship then, which is what Steve Harvey …
/r/MensRights28/04/21 08:44 PM
1

If you're against conscription completely then why did you say "I don’t see this needing a change" like a pointless devil's advocate? The change is: no conscription or all conscription. Not the status quo.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 08:26 PM
1

If all roles are open to women in the UK military then why not here, in Singapore, in the added context of conscription, too? If they are capable of volunteering in any role (which you agree with?), they are capable of conscription. It never fails to surprise me that I have to still boldly link two things together, instead of relying on the other person's intuition, even on reddit.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 08:00 PM
1

You know best. 🤣 UK military: All roles are open to women. You: [...] while leaving out females for physiological differences
/r/MensRights28/04/21 07:49 PM
1

You've "proved" me wrong? Commenter: All roles are open to women [in a NATO army] You, in reply to male-only conscription in Singapore: I don’t see this needing a change. You then, in reply to commenter: Ok? Do you think I’m trying to say it’s impossible for women to join the military? Everyone else: 🤣👆
/r/MensRights28/04/21 07:38 PM
4

The real voice of feminism.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 07:31 PM
0

Yes it does.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 07:18 PM
0

I don’t see this needing a change. ​ Sure gender equality is nice and all but the sexes are frankly not completely equal in practice.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 07:15 PM
0

I don’t see this needing a change.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 07:07 PM
2

she's talking about vaccines and wanting autonomy over her body and you're response is 'but what about my penis?!'. Lol, it's funny when you put it like that.
/r/MensRights27/04/21 04:13 PM
1

How likely do you think 2. is?
/r/MensRights27/04/21 04:03 PM
1

It's a bad take I know
/r/MensRights27/04/21 04:01 PM
1

When you read the whole thing in full and see it in context as well, it's obvious as day what the author thinks. The way she writes her article is a perfect example of the insidiousness of mainstream fake news. It looks reasonable and just informative... but it's completely biased in one direction. There are selective quotes and research. The woman is portrayed as the real victim, the "victims" themselves are the dehumanised oppressors, and won't someone please think of the children!
/r/MensRights27/04/21 03:53 PM
1

they are sentenced to death more harshly reddit moment.
/r/MensRights27/04/21 03:16 PM
2

How do you be 1000% sure?
/r/MensRights27/04/21 02:56 PM
1

You announce the conscription. 1000 men and 1000 women come to you. You are denying 100 men and 950 women because of physical characteristics. You got 950 soldiers instead of 1800. You were doing stupid things for gender equality at an important moment. Is this supposed to make sense to anybody that doesn't live in your head? "Health" is gained in the army. There is no room for the unfit. The experience that can be gained in the army is very useful in real life, obviously. Discipline, teamwork, …
/r/MensRights25/04/21 01:17 AM
15

Phoenix Wright: "PROJECTION!" 👉
/r/MensRights25/04/21 12:27 AM
1

This is a flawed, or at best oversimplified premise, which might be at the root of your question. Did you threaten to overrule him? Why do you feel that feminism prescribes that men "are supposed to protect you"? A lot of feminism is about dismantling traditional ideas of gender roles, and one of those traditional roles is that men are supposed to protect women (think white knight). That doesn't mean that we are supposed to be indifferent to each other, just that we shouldn't make the idea of pr…
/r/MensRights25/04/21 12:23 AM
1

And when they do, you'll be there. "This is not a rational use of gender differences." Mandatory service is needed to "popularize" fighting ability and awareness, discipline, self-respect, teamwork, comradeship and patriotism among girls and improve their average health. "Some" women's sports is not enough. Winning "some" wars with women in the ranks of the military is also not enough, like you say. Therefore a better use of resources would be to maintain the ban on mandatory service for women i…
/r/MensRights25/04/21 12:10 AM
1

So they get to continue to play sport competitively despite it being impossible to hold the top human records in anything or attract as big a paying audience or following. This isn't a rational use of gender differences. Why aren't they taking entry-level jobs instead, where they can use their superior natural abilities like obedience to outperform their male peers, who should be cleaning toilets in the military? We should make this mandatory and I'm I would oppose the idea of recruiting women a…
/r/MensRights24/04/21 11:34 PM
1

Do you want to ban women from sport since they're useless at it?
/r/MensRights24/04/21 11:10 PM
2

How can we prove it isn't a hate movement? "Proof" doesn't matter to these people.
/r/MensRights24/04/21 10:54 PM
1

As soon as pads, contraceptives appeared, and the bulk of work ceased to depend on physical strength, it became irrational to use women as housewives. What can't women do outside of the military then? They have to lose out in this "rational use of gender differences" programme somewhere.
/r/MensRights24/04/21 10:47 PM
2

It is about the rational use of gender differences, not about oppression. Go on then, expand on this. Let's hear some more "rational use."
/r/MensRights24/04/21 10:45 PM
4

Compulsory service for women would basically equate to compulsory sexual violence. Lol. "Oh, he's dreamy 😍" says the feminist in FrumundaThunder's fantasy.
/r/MensRights24/04/21 10:42 PM
3

Are you saying women can't learn self-control and discipline and are useless at post-tsunami infrastructure rebuilding and aid relief?
/r/MensRights24/04/21 10:40 PM
3

Why is mandatory service necessary for "self-discipline". Why not mandatory meditation instead? The entire purpose of the military is for fighting wars, whether they actually engage it in or not, that's why they're armed. It's not "self-discipline." How are men here cowards for pointing out an obvious inequality in military service, exactly? Are you going to give each of them a white feather?
/r/MensRights24/04/21 10:38 PM
2

There's a gem of a line right after the paragraph you quoted: I can absolutely sympathize with the frustration of having one's freedom and personal choices taken away - any woman can.
/r/MensRights24/04/21 10:19 PM
3

Why would they need an instruction booklet?
/r/MensRights24/04/21 10:01 PM
4

What?
/r/MensRights24/04/21 09:55 PM
2

Moo
/r/MensRights23/04/21 09:01 PM
2

Can't wait to hear about all the prosecutions of women.
/r/MensRights23/04/21 12:47 PM
15

Men and women aren't oppressed in today's society Glad you agree.
/r/MensRights23/04/21 12:08 PM
22

Quinton Flynn Replaced as Kael’thas Voice Actor in WoW; Despite Judge Ruling Sexual Misconduct Allegations Came from Obsessive Stalker
/r/MensRights22/04/21 12:57 AM
-43

Y’all are making an issue out of nothing.
/r/MensRights22/04/21 12:11 AM
1

🤣
/r/MensRights22/04/21 12:10 AM
8

It's a recipe for blackmail. Prostitutes are behind the times anyway. There's OnlyFans.
/r/MensRights22/04/21 12:09 AM
22

Oh, I know. That's why I switch between them. For shopping, it's Google. For news, it's often DuckDuckGo. I was referring to your edit.
/r/MensRights21/04/21 11:49 PM
1

#Notallmen.
/r/MensRights21/04/21 11:45 PM
-52

Lol, the modern world makes men so paranoid.
/r/MensRights21/04/21 11:44 PM
-44

Google is the world's biggest search engine. The world is full of small injustices like this, like that man who "stared" at you.
/r/MensRights21/04/21 11:42 PM
52

Google is still the far superior search engine, unfortunately. I have to keep switching between the 2.
/r/MensRights21/04/21 11:39 PM
1

Ah, all men are rapists.
/r/MensRights21/04/21 11:28 PM
2

They'll accuse the company of being fully aware of what they are doing with the juxtaposition (it's a German acronym that makes an English word, with an English slogan) for the same reason that French Connection UK (FCUK) knew exactly what they were doing with their own branding in the 90s. Maybe they'll relate it to "male chauvinism" and a "lack of opportunities" for women in engineering. There's lots they could do, if motivated. Are you underestimating them?
/r/MensRights21/04/21 11:24 PM
1

Not all men.
/r/MensRights21/04/21 11:05 PM
3

We're all on our periods.
/r/MensRights21/04/21 11:04 PM
1

see how much more mature and developed the conversations are All men are rapists.
/r/MensRights21/04/21 11:00 PM
6

Since this "forum" is for free expression it's also for attention-seeking narcissists like you to bore everyone with your attention-seeking narcissism.
/r/MensRights21/04/21 10:57 PM
1

Sacha Butlin, 23, hit Thomas Henry Le Vavasseur Dit Durell, with a glass after drinking half a bottle of vodka during a night out at a club in St Helier, Jersey. I bet he wished he stayed in Jerusalem .
/r/MensRights21/04/21 10:56 AM
18

Why are you talking to yourself?
/r/MensRights21/04/21 10:44 AM
2

Non-sexual? And you make no comment about his constructive dismissal, I wonder why? (I know why)
/r/MensRights19/04/21 03:51 AM
2

I'd get more sense out of this bottle of water in front of me than dealing with you. The male liberals are not being protected by their maleness, unfortunately, but by their being liberal. The OP's comment isn't attacking their gender. He's attacking their liberalism. And he was warned for it. Men are not protected. Liberals (as just one example highlighted, you simpleton, and regardless of gender or species) are, as shown. This relates to a previous post I already linked to. Why are men, as a d…
/r/MensRights19/04/21 03:33 AM
5

100%. So much for men being scary.
/r/MensRights19/04/21 02:50 AM
3

I don't mind repeating myself for the really fucking stupid either. Hate against men is not considered possible on reddit. You won't get banned for it, or even warned. This directly affects how men's rights can be expressed on reddit (which doesn't take them seriously). "Liberals" get the same protection as "black people" (why are liberals considered vulnerable?). Whether they are men too matters as much as the socks they're wearing, in the context we're talking about, because they won't be judg…
/r/MensRights19/04/21 02:46 AM
3

I don't mind repeating myself for the stupid. In an earlier incident concerning "hate", men were judged by reddit to not be a protected group, and no action was taken. In this incident concerning "hate", "liberals" were judged by reddit to be a protected group, and a warning was given. This is how they are related. They don't have to be holding hands. reddit does not take men's rights seriously. reddit has a bias towards women, liberals, trans, and anything else on the side of good. This is one …
/r/MensRights19/04/21 02:20 AM
1

I would take her advice and see what happens.
/r/MensRights19/04/21 02:12 AM
5

You don't exist now.
/r/MensRights19/04/21 02:10 AM
2

reddit's "Rule 1" did not protect men, in general, in an earlier incident highlighted on this sub. reddit's "Rule 1" does protect "liberals" here though, because they are apparently marginalized and vulnerable. It directly relates to men's rights as they are expressed on reddit. "Running your mouth" is not related.
/r/MensRights19/04/21 02:02 AM
13

He eventually prostrated himself in front of the reddit narcissists.
/r/MensRights19/04/21 01:43 AM
6

Another "opinion" from an empty vessel at the Guardian. Clickbait.
/r/MensRights19/04/21 01:28 AM
2

Neurotypicals (NTs) Do they have their own language, like Klingon?
/r/MensRights17/04/21 08:07 PM
2

That doesn't mean that you understand "autism" as a diagnosis better, even more so considering that it is on a spectrum. You only "understand" your own situation.
/r/MensRights17/04/21 08:04 PM
4

It's won and we are under occupation.
/r/MensRights17/04/21 07:56 PM
2

Look, try to understand. There are 2 kinds of MRAs: nerds, and jocks. As a jock it is his responsibility to give the nerds a hard time.
/r/MensRights17/04/21 07:47 PM
1

Of course they’re going to fetishize women and lose their minds if you objectify them. This sentence does not make sense to me. Lol.
/r/MensRights17/04/21 07:34 PM
3

traditionally feminine hobbies like ballet Ballet as a hobby? I only know the name of one ballet dancer and he was male: Nijinsky.
/r/MensRights17/04/21 07:24 PM
1

It is standard journalism. This is science in the mainstream media. That's why you have to be inquisitive.
/r/MensRights17/04/21 07:10 PM
1

What a world. How serious is her threat? What kind of birthday party was this!?
/r/MensRights17/04/21 06:30 PM
17

This website's most powerful sub. What a disgrace.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 10:19 PM
0

Hey! That's my favourite sub!
/r/MensRights14/04/21 10:16 PM
2

lies about being on birth control Do you think that will be a crime? The slippery slope is more taboos, "sexual assaults," "rapes," "rapey behaviour" and so on and an emphasis on greater punishment (a man who removes a condom is a "rapist", a woman who lies about being on a pill is a "rapist."(..)) These things are already dealt with hysterically, which makes it so hard to talk about.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 06:06 PM
2

Not always and not if she's a "witness" too. Bring her to the stand!
/r/MensRights14/04/21 05:48 PM
1

I've just looked at your profile now, and your wall-to-wall privilege. Aren't you lucky. OnlyFans info also available upon request.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 04:42 PM
1

Lucky I'm here, maybe I'll get in before I get blocked! not have to try to argue about it like a petulant teenager. ​ but I'm sparing my brain cells and blocking you The miniscule self-awareness of the average redditor never fails to surprise me. It doesn't have to be an "attack" to be an ad hominem. It needs only be a negative comment directed at the person instead of the argument Well done on contradicting yourself in the very next sentence, yet again! It doesn't have to be an attack it needs …
/r/MensRights14/04/21 04:38 PM
2

What?
/r/MensRights14/04/21 04:14 PM
2

Yeah, go on, explain to me how deceit stops being deceit just because you say they like it. You could argue that in front of a jury, just like you can with anything, and win, but argue against it as a law. It does not change the act in any meaningful way. In countries where condom removal is already covered legally that is not how they prosecute it. It is always an issue of consent.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 08:28 AM
1

It's deceitful, but that's it. You still consented up until the point you didn't. After the fact my opinion is less strong. I haven't really thought of after the fact. You did still consent. Now you're embarrassed, maybe disgusted, but is that enough? In all honesty, I just hate society's attitude towards sexual "crimes." It's too heavily influenced by feelings and victimisation. But it's also a taboo so I usually keep my mouth shut.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 07:50 AM
2

World's worst competition.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 07:40 AM
2

They're targeting the vast majority of people who simply don't give a shit that they look worse without makeup. They are? Then why are they wearing it then? Both condoms and birth control should fall under consent. They don't affect the physical act as such, that's the same: sex. Why should the un-consented absence of one be a sexual crime and the other just be a civil case? There are mitigating factors for the woman (she has to deal with the potential pregnancy, physically) but that doesn't aff…
/r/MensRights14/04/21 07:40 AM
1

What is it too late for? What are you intimating? If you're no longer comfortable and you withdraw your consent, tell them to go away, it's not too late for that. You both willingly went into this. You just want the law to save your embarrassment. The law should stay out of personal relationships as much as possible. These things should be rolled back not forward.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 07:11 AM
1

It's that shadowy altrightinati again.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 06:43 AM
2

You can do anything. Grab 'em by the crotch!
/r/MensRights14/04/21 06:38 AM
2

Lol, Guardian "Opinion" formers are notorious for this crap.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 06:37 AM
3

No, it's not always as simple as that as makeup can drastically alter someone's appearance, more than you would expect. Also, knowing that you don't know is not a defence for the 'culprit'. People who fall for obvious scams can and are still treated as victims, as the judgement of their stupidity and oversight is subjective. A more attractive, false face can be used to charm someone who wouldn't normally be attracted to you. Most importantly though, where are you drawing the line? I think the pr…
/r/MensRights14/04/21 06:31 AM
3

Look at that lack of brainpower. It would take 100yrs to get 10secs of light from one of those little LED lights with that.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 06:20 AM
1

Yeah, what's "too late" then? Too late for what?
/r/MensRights14/04/21 06:13 AM
2

Believeallwomen.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 06:12 AM
6

You don't know what she looks like underneath though do you? So you don't then "know" everything. That's the whole point of makeup. if there was no "deception" or "concealment" (mentioned in the article) involved, it wouldn't exist. Why are you drawing the line before it? What are we allowed and not allowed to deceive people with before having sex, which is what this law would just cover?
/r/MensRights14/04/21 06:10 AM
3

I agree with you but you're dealing with your average reddit moron here. It is the stupidest place on the internet.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 06:01 AM
1

When would it be "too late" lol?
/r/MensRights14/04/21 05:57 AM
10

It would be ridiculous if it was made mandatory. It is too easy to legislate against everything. Laws of this vague, subjective nature should always be last last resort unless there is a well-defined crisis that needs a short-term solution. Like with social distancing laws - which are all over the place, inconsistent and sometimes make no sense whatsoever - but are necessary in a pandemic.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 05:54 AM
1

What?
/r/MensRights14/04/21 05:37 AM
1

Men deserve to be victims of other men (and women by extension) because they are men.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 05:37 AM
6

Your first 'point' is "Men deserve to die because they are more violent," while your second 'point' is just a lie.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 05:35 AM
6

Another example of female privilege: Wanting men to write your lists for you.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 05:31 AM
1

What do you the mean the "definition" says nothing about "attack?" Why does it have to have the word "attack" in the definition (you obviously just entered it into Google and took a look at one of the top single-sentence results) to be an attack? An ad hominem is clearly an attack. Typing "hit" into Google doesn't bring up "attack" in the definition either, does that mean it isn't? Obviously not, so you realize that you contradicted yourself in the very next sentence? I didn't attack anything. T…
/r/MensRights14/04/21 05:26 AM
1

It's neither because I wasn't attacking you. Lol.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 10:55 PM
1

I wasn't attacking you though. That's called being presumptive.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 09:31 PM
1

Lol. C- op. I think you deserved my mocking. That wasn't an ad hominem. Lol, we'll leave it there then.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 09:24 PM
8

Lol, "allosexual." Sounds like a dinosaur. Fucking reddit.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 09:18 PM
11

A woman's greatest protection is that she is a woman. Men don't have the same protection, obviously. That's why they get assaulted at a far higher rate, especially by strangers in "dark alleys." Not all men are the same size and have the same fighting ability.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 09:14 PM
1

Telling us that they are better maintained and more numerous is the same as saying they are better funded. Geez, you know your similes and analogies but not your intimations. "Women's shelters are in better condition than men's shelters. Not to mention there are more women's shelters than men's shelters." Happier, yeah? 😀 Sorted. It might be a "silly" comparison but do you not think it was even sillier to bother pointing this out when the sentiment is clear? You must prefer animals to people tho…
/r/MensRights12/04/21 09:01 PM
1

Oh right, so what analogy would satisfy you? And why can't his analogy or "comparison" between an animal shelter and a men's shelter be a simile instead? Would that make you happier? If he reworded it poetically? He said animal shelters were better maintained and there were more of them. You said that that is a bad comparison. Why? The commonality here is "shelter" and he's making a point that one type is better funded than the other (implying one type of victim is thought of better by public ch…
/r/MensRights12/04/21 08:20 PM
1

They're improved by distance? "I ambled all alone as a concrete block." Comparing an orange to the sun is poetic, as well symbolic, useful and convenient, They're very different too. You said that was "really bad" though. How do the differences between animal shelters and men's shelters make a comparison "faulty?" Women's shelters don't euthanize women, did you know that?
/r/MensRights12/04/21 07:49 PM
3

Yeah,[comma] you seem totally stable [redundant text removed]. I'm not going to argue with a sexist online [better English]. It is [avoid contractions when writing] a waste of my time and energy. This sub will probably be banned within the next couple of [word missing] months. Also,[comma] your grammar still blows.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 07:31 PM
1

"I wandered lonely as a cloud...." Excuse me, clouds aren't sentient, they can't be lonely. They don't "wander" either. What a faulty opening line, Wordsworth.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 07:27 PM
1

A friend of mine once tried to compare an orange to the Sun. I said, "An orange doesn't burn at 15 million degrees you fucking idiot, what a ridiculous comparison!" That shut him up.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 07:20 PM
1

councilors
/r/MensRights12/04/21 07:09 PM
2

Thank you for introducing me to this site.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 07:01 PM
1

They have fur too. I don't have fur.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 06:58 PM
4

It's a privilege whether they can control it or not, like male physical strength is a privilege. In this case though, it's also a societal privilege (I don't know whether females live naturally longer lives if you take away all the variables). Men live harder lives and are more frequently the victims of violence.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 06:56 PM
6

I'd take a pet black mamba over you.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 06:50 PM
0

I've heard most of these animals have 4 legs! Men only have 2 (a lucky few have 3). Thinking about it, this comparison gets more ridiculous by the second. Animals can't even talk.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 06:49 PM
5

Hey guys, why is living life longer a good thing? Why do I need money? What is money? What is the point of food? We need oxygen to breathe you say? This doesn't make sense.
/r/MensRights12/04/21 06:36 PM
1

It's not ad hominem, you don't know your Latin either. I'm insulting you. My "definition" fits with both those things you've uncritically posted, as I already said and is already clear to see to anyone who isn't a snivelling weasel looking to ignore and gaslight. Explain how faking is different from faking, please. I'd really like to know. You are blaming the "poor sap" not only for the "high beauty standards" which he is not in control of (but is apparently imposing) but also for her deception.…
/r/MensRights12/04/21 06:31 PM
1

Leaving aside how embarrassing it is for an adult to reference Wikipedia at all, especially straight after attacking me for my opening sentence, that definition fits in exactly with what I said. Do you not understand the most basic English? English is not my first language either. It is far harder to fake "personality" than image, obviously, this is why taking advantage of the halo effect and thirst is the most common form of catfishing (e.g. pictures of models). Pretending that you are in need …
/r/MensRights11/04/21 04:27 PM
1

u ok hun?
/r/MensRights11/04/21 12:24 AM
1

WHAT are you talking about? Catfishing is when someone pretends to be someone else to get something from you. On dating sites, they frequently do this by using a profile picture of a model. Everything else may be exactly the same, including personality, which is harder to fake. The charade ends when you meet the person, if ever. With this example, the women have "catfished" men by faking their appearance and the charade doesn't end when they meet. These women are admitting to never showing their…
/r/MensRights11/04/21 12:22 AM
28

And children. They were fair all round.
/r/MensRights11/04/21 12:11 AM
1

I'm the opposite of upset. Reading your comment again has cheered me up. I love that unique cocktail of stupidity and arrogance that redditors possess . I mean it's obvious how you've messed up but you're so oblivious, it's great.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 10:43 PM
1

That user is permanently ill in mind and body, that's why "men's health" doesn't matter.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 10:32 PM
1

Well done on being really, really stupid. Maybe you'll have an epiphany about how you were really, really stupid some time in the future, but I doubt it.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 10:06 PM
1

With the way games are going —not for long.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 10:04 PM
2

- Men are more likely to commit suicide in every single country, "man card" or no "man card." Firearms are used in America due to their prevalence and efficiency. Men driven to the very lowest depths of suicidal thought are not going to be preoccupied with the most "masculine" way to commit suicide in the midst of their despair. That is absurd. People like the author who treat men's mental health so superficially are vermin. - Men are less likely to seek help due it being seen as un-masculine, b…
/r/MensRights10/04/21 10:02 PM
2

James "Time's Up" Franco?
/r/MensRights10/04/21 08:46 PM
5

There are enough good MRAs out there to call this behaviour out. I hope to see that. Lol, what a pathetic attempt at emotional manipulation.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 08:45 PM
8

Lol, Marvel.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 08:38 PM
4

We're only at the first loop-the-loop. Hold on tight!
/r/MensRights10/04/21 08:19 PM
1

It'll never be "enough." Power has a bottomless pit for a stomach.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 08:17 PM
1

I read you right.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 08:15 PM
2

Menace II Society.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 08:12 PM
14

That's just a standard FemaleDatingStrategy opinion.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 08:03 PM
2

Lol, where'd she go?
/r/MensRights10/04/21 08:01 PM
-1

Eww, a creep.
/r/MensRights10/04/21 07:50 PM
2

Fucking "allies" are the worst of the worst.
/r/MensRights08/04/21 02:07 PM
3

Feminist men are even worse.
/r/MensRights08/04/21 01:25 PM
3

Feminist women are even worse.
/r/MensRights08/04/21 01:05 PM
2

They'll make fun of some guy's body, penis size, height, emotions and a lot more Yeah, women.
/r/MensRights08/04/21 12:40 PM
2

Maybe you aren't all bad. Imagine if he had said "Jesus, what a sad life you live when you're terrified of people online who havent done anything to you" to her in reply instead. Is that a good reaction? If you can say that to me, he can say that to her. Would you have a problem then? This is a test here. Are you going to give her an excuse again?
/r/MensRights08/04/21 10:19 AM
1

You've got me wrong. We're talking about blood clots.
/r/MensRights08/04/21 09:31 AM
2

He said, "Can't sleep?" you creep. He didn't respond to her the way I would have but he should never have been put into that position in the first place, over nothing. He was attacked over nothing. The time is irrelevant since it was online, Jesus. You defended her when she was indefensible. You're pre-emptively defending future reactions like hers too ("And the women around me would be happy to know that I think OP becoming antagonistic at 2am at night over DMs is a bad thing.") so his response…
/r/MensRights08/04/21 09:28 AM
-2

No, genuinely I think you're wrong. You give these types of people (the histrionic narcissist type) what they need in the short term then go no contact in the long term. That's how you do battle with them. Especially if you're dealing with a threat straight off the bat.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 08:54 PM
5

Victim of a threat. Victim of being made to feel small. Over nothing. All because he saw her online at 2am and said "Can't sleep?" over the team messaging system, directly to her because SHE was the one online. That's weird? He didn't crawl into her room and whisper it into her ear. It's ridiculous that I even have to defend him. What kind of twisted life are you living? In all honesty, I find your comment really creepy, and by extension you. "A two word question isnt acting like a decent human …
/r/MensRights07/04/21 08:42 PM
5

Maybe, maybe. Maybe you're victim blaming?
/r/MensRights07/04/21 08:21 PM
4

Lol, I hope she finds this thread and you, bro. 2 loons together. ❤
/r/MensRights07/04/21 08:19 PM
1

Well either you or me has read that wrong because I think that 0.0003% is referring to normal yearly deaths from this specific type of blood clotting (due to being overweight, or whatever) while the additional 0.0001% is referring to people (mostly women) who are dying from the same blood clots but linked strongly to the vaccine. So you would add those together.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 08:14 PM
7

Wow.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 08:06 PM
1

How does it replace it? Unless there's absolutely no link between the vaccine and blood clots. Still doesn't equal a high figure regardless. How many men are fighting for their lives in ICU? COVID is affecting men disproportionally.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 08:00 PM
2

I agree with your attitude and your name. It's all about power. Like it always has been.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 05:51 PM
2

Imagine wanting to identify as an "ally" 🤮
/r/MensRights07/04/21 05:40 PM
5

ICUs are FILLED with men suffering from COVID.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 05:36 PM
5

That 0.0001% is being added to the overall 0.0003%.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 05:33 PM
1

Thanks.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 05:29 PM
0

I would be interested in your advice regarding women.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 05:13 PM
0

I want HARD data that this is true. Numbers, graphs, nothing second-hand. So I can look over it.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 05:05 PM
-9

No, the apology will give her the supply she needs.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:59 PM
9

Wikipedia is right because Wikipedia says it's right. Citation not needed unless it supports the editor's bias.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:58 PM
21

Lol, so claiming something is false is not an argument but claiming something is true is an argument? So all he has to do is reword what he said to "But it's true that it doesn't affect women and girls primarily" and he now has an argument on a par with yours! Go sit in the corner.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:53 PM
7

So is it a competition or not?
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:50 PM
10

Lol, here's your morsel "men." 🤮
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:42 PM
-1

And she now has her own "harassment" story just like you.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:36 PM
-18

OP, the solution to this is SIMPLE. You apologize in person. Not because she deserves it. Not because you did anything wrong. But because she has no morals and is a sociopath. Once you have done this, you never speak to her again (but don't make it too obvious). People like this ruin the lives of everyone around them. No contact, as best as you can.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:33 PM
5

I agree!
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:30 PM
48

She didn't just react negatively she reacted threateningly ("I will definitely be including something about it in my peer review").
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:30 PM
2

None of these people have any friends.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:12 PM
0

My point is to give you the HARD data that you whined about, and then see you ignore it all. And then keep reminding you of this and of the HARD data that you made a pathetic effort to understand, then got it completely wrong. I'm doing this because you're a condescending prick. What's your point?
/r/MensRights07/04/21 04:03 PM
1

I want numbers, graphs, HARD data. I want to see the data myself, not secondhand.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 03:59 PM
1

If you keep downvoting me maybe it will make me cry.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 03:57 PM
0

That's not HARD data, that's blurbs. I thought you wanted HARD data ("graphs" etc) that you could then study at your leisure? You can spend as many years as you want on them.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 03:56 PM
0

Hey, not only did you realize you were wrong after refusing to, then silently 'correct' so that we wouldn't notice - you still got it wrong! Slightly closer to correct still equals completely wrong. Read that HARD data that you desperately wanted to teach us all a lesson with, again.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 03:50 PM
0

Ahhaha, you're not even arguing in good faith. Look who's talking. I said "there's multiple studies in the list that you literally provided that counters what you initially said." And that counts as a meta-analysis, yeah? Oh, and what did I initially say? "Hurr durr, tekchnikally you pointed out one study and that invalidates your point because you said one study doesn't count (even though you referenced multiple studues!)" I don't talk like this. Multiple studies (2, that you didn't read) is no…
/r/MensRights07/04/21 03:47 PM
0

Woah! Don't get your panties in a twist! YOU'RE the one who asked for the HARD data as I continually have to remind you.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 03:43 PM
0

Lol. Not only did you still not read ANY of the studies (the HARD data that YOU asked for), but you just took the "conclusions" straight from that page! Did you think I wouldn't notice? Did you think I wouldn't notice you then taking random bits and pieces from the other blurbs that you think back you up!?
/r/MensRights07/04/21 03:38 PM
1

Peek a boo.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 08:30 PM
0

Realizes he was wrong. Edits it A DAY LATER. Is still wrong. Lashes out. That's you.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 08:29 PM
0

Also, I thought "singular studies" didn't matter? Can't even stay consistent from one comment to the next.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 08:28 PM
0

No, they don't. You haven't read a single one. You can't even read a study posted directly to you without fucking the basics up.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 08:27 PM
1

Who are you responding to then?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 08:24 PM
1

Still can't understand a basic study.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 08:22 PM
0

Who's you?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 08:20 PM
1

That's why I gave you a list.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 08:18 PM
0

Oh, look! What kind of sad cretin innocently asks "what about?" after silently editing the post I originally replied to a day after posting it! And still gets it wrong!
/r/MensRights06/04/21 08:18 PM
0

Stop laughing at yourself. Why wasn't that HARD data good enough for you?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 08:16 PM
1

You're the one who asked for them, not me.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 06:37 PM
0

No. 2 can play the kiting game.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 06:37 PM
0

You asked for a citation of sources, redditor-style, and I gave you them. But that HARD data wasn't good enough, now you want me to conduct a meta-analysis with my lab team. "What do you think I think?" is a question I should ask but it looks like you've already decided: "You (and many others in this sub) claim that women are more violent than men." Here's what I think of you - you're so anti-men's rights that you'd be perfectly happy to try and kite around us for ever. I'm sorry but your painst…
/r/MensRights06/04/21 06:35 PM
1

Like "literally" everything. Did you got through all those studies you wanted?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 06:23 PM
0

Oh, look! What kind of sad cretin innocently asks "what about?" after silently editing the post I originally replied to a day after posting it! I just noticed that! And guess what, you are STILL wrong! HAHA.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 06:22 PM
1

Saying the "studies literally concluded the opposite of what you claim" isn't a "synthesis and interpretation of [the] data." What do you think that is? Whatever was in your mind when you said this I'm not sure whether it's men or women that are less likely to report.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 06:12 PM
1

Like "literally". Like duh. Did you go through each and every one of the studies that come up after those 2 (that "literally" agree you, like duh), in search of that HARD data that YOU requested?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 05:45 PM
1

What has that got to do with you being wrong?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 05:42 PM
1

Didn't dispute? You said: I'm not sure whether it's men or women that are less likely to report. In reply to my question. That is a dispute, regardless of whatever else you might also have had in mind. Yeah, "seem". Let's add "literally concluded" now.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 05:39 PM
1

I'm tempted to throw in a final barb but I won't.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 04:56 PM
0

Yeah, same as you've been though each and every one of them in search of that HARD data that you requested.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 04:52 PM
0

No, I'm not going to explain as it's really embarrassing considering your attitude how you are still unable to read the simple conclusions of that study, and I'm enjoying it. I want HARD data not some old guy rambling.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 04:51 PM
1

Yeah, the keywords there are "skimming" and "seem." You want me to provide HARD data that men might find it much more emasculating to report themselves as victims of violence, compared to women?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 04:44 PM
1

Why do you keep forgetting that you listed male violence yourself as a component of "toxic masculinity" at the very start? 😐 Male violence is not a static element of "toxic masculinity." The apparent trust in the American military reflects a range of attitudes, an important one being its status in relation to other, less 'trustworthy', governmental institutions, and the military is not seen as simply violent in itself, regardless of its capabilities. It has not become an important part of the di…
/r/MensRights06/04/21 04:40 PM
1

The majority of violence definitely does come from "toxic masculinity." Men are presumed violent, either because of the poisonous nature of "male-dominated" society, or inherent traits. Both find stock in the current discourse over "toxic masculinity." In no way is the violent and dominating intentions of men considered an "extreme" view, or even just "include[d]" as a part of it. It is the conclusion of all the male traits that can make up this horrible character, potential or actual. It doesn'…
/r/MensRights06/04/21 03:10 AM
1

Yeah, just last week.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 02:21 AM
1

I disagree with what? I don't take the entire concept of "toxic masculinity" seriously. It's great that you've accepted violence now (again) as a part of the "common" definition of "toxic masculinity" but do you acknowledge that this undermines the majority of what you've said especially your belief in this: " I don't think the violence in the Lord of the Flies is an example of toxic masculinity"? It fits perfectly. It's male. It's violence. It's egos. It's power. It mirrors the tribal, propense…
/r/MensRights06/04/21 02:12 AM
3

Women specialise in psychological abuse. A stick can't compete.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 01:36 AM
1

I'm under no doubts that you ARE a dick. Do YOU believe "toxic masculinity" exists or not? I don't think that's what most people understand the phrase toxic masculinity to mean Are you saying a propensity for violence is not an issue of "toxic masculinity" despite including it in your "common" definition?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 01:24 AM
1

Lol, poor you. I'd rather post in an "echo chamber" than use Wikipedia to back up my opinions! 🤮 What's this "common definition" that the salt-of-the-earth common man like you believes, that apparently doesn't include violence (something that you listed!) as a part of its definition? Do YOU believe any "toxic masculinity" actually exists or not?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 01:17 AM
1

Do YOU believe any "toxic masculinity" actually exists or not?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 12:58 AM
1

A single 15yr old article that references a single review on science entries. A lot has changed in 15 years. I'm not surprised that you uncritically parrot the opinions of other people, people like you, who write these articles. HAHA.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 12:55 AM
1

You haven't been civil. Lying and ignoring what others say is not civil. I know you're not bright enough to understand this. I don't think the violence in the Lord of the Flies is an example of toxic masculinity. Then you also don't believe that " willing[ness] to violently defend one's pride " is an example of toxic masculinity, yeah? Make up your mind. And I don't think most people think that the Lord of the Flies is about toxic masculinity I never said the whole book was either. I specificall…
/r/MensRights06/04/21 12:48 AM
1

Do you believe any "toxic masculinity" actually exists or not? Your reply to him would not make sense unless you didn't. Even then it still wouldn't make much sense. "Careful on the accusations of comprehension," lol. fully extreme definition of the phrase A fully extreme definition that YOU agree with — "willing[ness] to violently defend one's pride." You can ignore that as much as you want but I will just keep bringing it up! I've referenced Wikipedia HAHAHA.
/r/MensRights06/04/21 12:37 AM
1

"Let me put it this way," lol. For someone who babbles like an idiot you're very arrogant. Why are you unable to grasp what I am saying, no matter how clearly I lay it out? Why would you just talk to your friends about a marooning on a Pacific island 50 years ago? Is this something they would usually be interested in? What does the former "discussion" have to do with male violence? 😐 Is the violence in the Lord of the Flies an example of toxic masculinity or not (YOU listed this type of violence…
/r/MensRights06/04/21 12:29 AM
0

What? Are you implying that you don't believe "toxic masculinity" actually exists now, then? How else is he meant to attack you for your belief in "toxic masculinity?" Through code? Your comprehension skills are very poor. Do you understand you're communicating with other people and not another part of your brain?
/r/MensRights06/04/21 12:20 AM
1

I'm not making your point for you. 😐 I'm also speaking very clearly. 😐 The "average person" whoever this is ("not very precise" is it?), is going to be influenced by what the "radical feminist" says. Discussion about "toxic masculinity" is mainstream. This sub documents examples of how "toxic masculinity" is used against us daily. It is not fringe and it perpetuates. "Toxic masculinity" now includes the "male gaze" and even just silence itself. Male violence is so endemic that men are advised to…
/r/MensRights06/04/21 12:12 AM
2

I'm going to answer for him. What?
/r/MensRights05/04/21 11:50 PM
1

No, it doesn't "boil down" to that, so none of them. "Toxic masculinity" means anything and everything, what ever is useful to that person (feminist) who wields it (and it is a weapon). It's used to manipulate, divide and conquer, and shame. Which is why stories like this always have a place. Even in desperate circumstances with little resources, men co-operate. This runs counter to a specific feminist idea, an idea that perpetuates through contemporary society, that "patriarchal" society has ma…
/r/MensRights05/04/21 11:47 PM
29

They're cowards.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 10:53 PM
5

You don't need strength, you need tactics and need to know how work with pressure points etc. And Feng Shui.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 10:52 PM
2

Oh right, reddit must have shadow-blocked that comment because this is a 'new' account. Nice. No direct link then: web.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 10:44 PM
1

Is the VIOLENCE in the Lord of the Flies an example of toxic masculinity, as YOU list ("willing[ness] to violently defend one's pride") or is it not? If it is, then this article provides evidence against that being an inevitable conclusion. This whole post is addressing the perception of men as competitively violent, something which YOU, again, said was an example of toxic masculinity and something that feminists ROUTINELY USE against men as a defence for their own bigotry (see the recent poster…
/r/MensRights05/04/21 10:40 PM
3

People in this very thread incorrectly claim that women initiate DV 70% of the time, but as you stated, someone who probably actually looked at the data, that it's only 70% OF 24% of all couples, which is ~16.8% of all couples with a female perpetrator. "Ah yes" Well done on 'interpreting' that HARD data incorrectly. 😐 The guy above you also got it wrong. I don't want to correct a great analytical mind who's obviously read the whole study though, so I won't.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 10:02 PM
2

😐 I gave you a list above before his video. Can't wait for your analysis.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 09:23 PM
3

So a willingness "to violently defend one's pride" is not an example of toxic masculinity? Make up your mind.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 09:11 PM
1

A willingness "to violently defend one's pride" is a major part of Lord of the Flies regardless of what the whole story might be an allegory of. So that part is toxic masculinity, yeah? Women wouldn't do that.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 09:01 PM
4

What makes you think you could analyse this "HARD data" in less time than it takes to watch that video, redditor?
/r/MensRights05/04/21 08:35 PM
2

That's what this post is about. 😐
/r/MensRights05/04/21 08:21 PM
2

Care to cite any sources? There's research, sure: list of studies. Referring to statistics that might show it the other way round - would you agree that men are much more likely to not report it if they were the victim? Considering this is a topic about toxic masculinity and all.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 08:04 PM
2

Is the violence apparently expected from a group of marooned males a masculine, stereotypically masculine, feminine, or stereotypically feminine trait?
/r/MensRights05/04/21 07:44 PM
2

Wow! That's impressively incomprehensible!
/r/MensRights05/04/21 07:33 PM
2

Men’s rights in a nutshell I guess. Yeah, that's right. The impact on men is the main concern of Men's Rights. Duh.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 07:21 PM
5

"Kier" can start first. He's in the way.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 07:05 PM
0

I agree, hard work is a masculine trait.
/r/MensRights05/04/21 06:47 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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