TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Zepherite Archive

View 2 posts and 293 comments by Zepherite 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)
1464

Social IssuesZepherite/r/MensRights31/08/17 07:48 AM
20

Social IssuesZepherite/r/MensRights27/11/17 06:38 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_Inequality_Index Using the gender inequality index, a statistical measure of a country's inequalities (or lack thereof), none of the countries you've mentioned are even in the top 10. Of the the one's mentioned, the highest ranking is 24 (out of 162) high, but far from the, 'epitome of feminism.' Any theories on why? Because the 'someone' who pointed it out to you, picked 5 countries with high medal counts, claimed they were the epitome of feminism with lit…
/r/MensRights04/08/24 04:24 AM
2

Yeah, I did the same and it was fine to do jokes about women. ChatGPT definitely is programmed to be over sensitive at times, but this is not one of those times. Not sure what's going on with OP's.
/r/MensRights27/07/24 12:32 PM
10

No it didn't. It referred to 'these women' not women in general. As in, these specific women who show the behaviour oulined in the original post. The only person referring to all women in this chain is you.
/r/MensRights12/07/24 03:10 PM
11

Yes. Indeed your argument was a strawman. They said feminism not women*.
/r/MensRights12/07/24 02:41 PM
14

If men were out-performing women, you wouldn't have any hesitation blaming men. Yet when it's the other way round... I suppose if feminism didn't have double standards, it wouldn't have any.
/r/MensRights12/07/24 02:38 PM
13

Depending on the data they've gathered (if all the brains were the same age, then you tou'd need a new study) then you could categorise by age, then see if there was any difference in the relative success rate in identifying male and female brains as age changes. There's plenty of other things you could sort for, country of upbringing for example, but this is one example. If the success rate becomes higher as brains get older, it might suggest that socialisation is big factor. If the success rat…
/r/MensRights26/02/24 04:16 PM
20

I even lash out online which is on me.. I shouldn't do this I know. It's tough out there to stay honest and true You are self-aware and honest to yourself and others about your failings. That puts you a cut above most people and almost all Feminists.
/r/MensRights10/10/23 03:15 PM
12

Why rush to the defence of someone that will inevitably make this community look bad? It's not about defending anyone, that's a straw man, intentional or not. It's about reserving judgement until the evidence has been revealed, as opposed immediately believing he said, she said gossip. Otherwise you are saying, again intentional or not, that you are okay with dishonest people using accusations to destroy people's lives. The truth will hopefully out, and if brand is guilty of such a heinous crime…
/r/MensRights16/09/23 09:21 PM
5

Research and academic data shows it's the men being ignored in education. Women are given more attention, higher grades for the same work, more bursaries in higher education, and fewer punishments in early education. This is much more likely to be so if the teacher is female. The majority of the teachers most people have will be female. The only thing girls are 'socialised' to understand is that they will always be helped when they find things difficult. The boys are socialised to understand the…
/r/MensRights30/12/22 03:36 PM
3

That was not the response I expected on reddit. I salute your willingness to question things and go and try to learn more. Even if you keep your current opinion after looking into it and we still disagree, your response puts you a cut above most. Godspeed sir or madam.
/r/MensRights26/11/22 05:03 PM
8

Couple of questions about things that, to me, seem antithetical to what you've just put forward. 1) If societal pressures exist keeping women out of certain fields, why were women able to make in roads into medicine? Most trainee doctors are now women in the west, and in many countries, most doctors, despite the opposite initially where they were all men. What's different about medicine that allowed them to overcome this? Surely men would just keep them out of this lucrative field? 2) If it's tr…
/r/MensRights26/11/22 04:20 PM
2

I’m glad we agree that our experiences are not the average experience. No my experience just happens to align with what is statistically more common. Someone's has to. It's just not yours. As a nation passes more laws for equality, as women have more choice opened up to them, fewer women choose STEM in general. This is a result that has been found in several studies. Let me repeat that. We know, for certain, from scientific study, that the more women are supported the less likely they are to wan…
/r/MensRights09/11/22 09:07 AM
6

I am not making shit up. You are. Your experiences are not the average experience. They are yours alone and represent an exception to the norm. Do not inflate your singular experience to be representative of the many. It's misguided at best and self-indulgent at worst. The conversation about medicine is a red herring. No. It is not. It was dominated by men, now it is not. It's a science and requires academic rigour, just like the rest of STEM. It is the perfect comparison as so much is similar b…
/r/MensRights08/11/22 11:41 PM
9

No. Please don't make shit up. There just isn't wide scale bullying of women in STEM. I have been in STEM. My family work in STEM. People bend over backwards to have women. There is no widespread sexism. They just never turn up on the first place. They don't engage with STEM at school, or at university, or in work. They just aren't interested currently. This is across the whole western world and it gets MORE prevalent the more feminist a country is. You have also conveniently ignored how women h…
/r/MensRights08/11/22 08:17 PM
19

The field of medicine was dominated by men in the past however there are now more female doctors being trained in universities. No woman ever needed the academic requirements to be lowered. How did they manage here? Do you really believe medicine was filled with nice guys? No. It had the same predjudices inherent in any field. The only difference is women want to do it. The only reason there are fewer women in STEM is not because it's a boys club. It''s because they don't want to do it. Stop tre…
/r/MensRights08/11/22 03:49 PM
13

Most MRAs aren't homophobic. Why would they need to copy feminists when they didn't have the same problem in the first place?
/r/MensRights20/10/22 06:23 AM
4

It’s not a political issue. political: relating to the government or public affairs of a country. Abortion rights and child support are 100% public affairs and legislated by the government. Again it's just bizzare that you're stating stuff like this. An abortion absolves both parents of financial responsibility. Everyone knows this. What's your point? What you propose leaves the woman with 100% financial responsibility. No it doesn't. It just doesn't. This is so trivially wrong. You've just said…
/r/MensRights24/09/22 11:33 PM
14

It is not at all rare for a woman to not know about the pregnancy until she is way past the window of decison. It's less common certainly by far, and I don't think it's something we couldn't make an exception for in law. There are very few laws that are perfectly watertight anyway. That's why we have a convuluted legal process for sorting things out. Besides, in the majority of cases, what was proposed makes perfect sense. If you wait for a perfect solutions, instead of using a 'good enough' sol…
/r/MensRights24/09/22 08:40 PM
5

It’s called emancipation. It exists, but you can’t just abandon your child living for no reason. This has got very little to do with the conversation. What's the legal age that an already living child can leave home, or the process of social services removing an already living child from parents that are not fit to raise them got to do with men and/or women having the choice not to take on the responsibility of a child before it is born? I'm genuinely bewildered at why you're trying to draw an e…
/r/MensRights24/09/22 08:28 PM
18

If the child is born, there are ways parents can be freed of guardianship duties No. There is no way for a man to have control over his responsiblity for a child in most (all?) western countries. He is completely at the whims of the woman. but it’s not called abortion. Call it what you like. Names don't change men and women are not equal in their ability to refuse responsibility for children.
/r/MensRights24/09/22 07:11 PM
26

Equal opportunity. Either everyone has the opportunity to avoid parental responsibility for a child they don't want, or no one does. If abortion isn't freely accessible for women, they have no choice once they become pregnant, they must take responsibility for the child. If men can just duck out, they can avoid the responsibility, where women couldn't. That's not equal opportunity. Conversely, the way we have it now isn't good either. Women can freely obtain abortions in most western countries, …
/r/MensRights24/09/22 06:07 PM
2

https://www.rt.com/uk/417477-bbc-gender-pay-gap/ Far from the women being underpaid, the investigation into the bbc by pricewaterhousecooper found that, in fact, many of the men needed pay rises. And yet, people screached that women were unfairly treated, even though the facts showed the opposite. Perfect example of feels before reals.
/r/MensRights07/01/20 12:25 PM
2

Pretty sure most of the people in this sub need therapy Try some empathy and thought, rather than being an asshole. A real double standard has been identified, one that potentially ruins men's lives. You seem to have taken the original poster's explanation of that double standard as an endorsement of looking at people suggestively. That's you adding meaning where none was. How about you don’t objectify anyone by looking at them subjectively and you don’t get to choose how people react to you. If…
/r/MensRights11/06/19 06:50 AM
5

Absolutely this. Stay principled. Innocent until proven guilty should apply to women the same amount as we want it to apply to men.
/r/MensRights23/03/19 08:32 AM
3

I don't. When the world doesn't colapse, it's very clear to everyone that feminists have an overinflated idea of their own self importance.
/r/MensRights14/02/19 07:46 AM
1

I see posts saying men aren’t masculine enough Do you? I mean this post itself is pointing out that feminists should stop trying to enforce more 'feminine' traits and/or support masculine traits so that men can... be whoever you want to be OP is stepping up for an assumed lack of support for traditionally masculine traits in men in an attempt to balance the overwhelming support for feminine traits (and condemnation of masculine traits) in men. It's literally trying to create balance and say: mas…
/r/MensRights05/02/19 04:48 PM
1

Toxic masculinity can sometimes indeed be toxic, Usually when something is pointed out as toxic though, it's just damaging behaviour which anyone is capable of. It's the insidious use of masculinity to imply it's a male problem that gets most people's hackles up I feel. Take this article on toxic masculinity: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiFvZ6U_6TgAhUYAWMBHbG-D9oQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.co.uk%2Flife-style%2Ftoxic-masculinity-definition-what-is-…
/r/MensRights05/02/19 04:32 PM
1

Generalisations are only bad when they are used to draw conclusions about an individual, or do not define a trend that actaully exists within a group. Do people on this sub make these mistakes? Yes, but then, that's true of any sub. Does everyone, or even a majority of people, on this sub do this? I don't believe that to be true. However, the generalisation that a particular group of ideologically driven women assert that men should be more 'emotional,' but then contradict this by dating men who…
/r/MensRights05/02/19 03:56 PM
2

To be fair, I think the poster you are replying to is wrong when they say 'women,' because truthfully, it's #notallwomen. It's a select group of women who follow a very contradictory ideology who also happen to be very loud and outspoken about said contradictory ideology.
/r/MensRights05/02/19 03:41 PM
1

Any time there's a post on this sub where it does what this one did - take a feminist issue and switch the sides to show a hypocrisy - it always switches between women and rape and men and false rape accusations. Because a common theme of feminism is "listen and believe" and "why would a woman lie?" No one thinks rape is a good thing, so there is no argument to undermine, making the whole thing pointless. Feminists do think "listen and believe" is a good thing, so people undermine that, because …
/r/MensRights20/01/19 07:11 PM
2

Well that's a poor attempt at trolling and avoidi... https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ahgakk/maybe_its_make_believe/eegfil3?utm_source=reddit-android
/r/MensRights19/01/19 06:37 PM
3

Well that's a poor attempt at trolling and avoiding the argument. I've got better things to do than fling shit with morons. See ya.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 06:00 PM
1

Who's offended? It's your misunderstanding that criticising things means you're offended. lol It's progressives that deal in the currency of being offended. Strawman elsewhere. I see you've neatly avoided actually replying to what I said as well. Here's a hint: it's because you know you can't.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 05:50 PM
6

The most telling thing about this sub is when it thinks false rape accusations are a bigger problem than actual rape. Has one persom said that here? Maybe. Is it this the view of the majority of the sub? Citation needed, otherwise you've created a strawman. Saying that false accusations are a problem however is not untrue.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 05:49 PM
1

Which ones in particular? And have you balanced them against all the other comments? Or have you just found the one that offends you and triggered yourself into an intersectionaly offended orgasm? My guessnis you formed your opinion well before coming here.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 05:35 PM
1

No. This sub just refuses to be force fed ideology. Bullying and harassment are wrong but they are not a gendered issue. Playfighting is actually an important part of growing up for boys. http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/aggression/introduction/why-play-fighting-can-be-good-children Now, if you're here to discuss in good faith, fine. Otherwise, take your strawman elsewhere.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 05:33 PM
1

Okay. So... what? You should never spend more time criticising something than to takes to view it? And if you expect better from something you're butthurt? That seems needlessly limiting and rather defeatest. Good luck with that.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 05:20 PM
2

Literally sat for 5 minutes trying to figure out what that word was before realising you meant position. Fair enough, although your reply here came off as being a little abrasive making me think you were making an ad hominum. I've seen that all too often on reddit. I shall proof read my comment when I'm not on my mobile, how's that?
/r/MensRights19/01/19 12:28 PM
6

Add is addition, ad is advertisement I used the correct version just below. Let me introduce you to the typo: https://www.google.com/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/amp/english/typo You must be new to tye internet. You'll see typos a lot here. Literally sat for 5 minutes trying to figure out what that word was before realising you meant position. That's a terrible mental affliction you have there that it took you so long. My condolences. Now, are you going to address any arguments, or are you you…
/r/MensRights19/01/19 12:15 PM
8

Getting butt hurt about this ad is the same as feminists getting butt hurt about milo speaking at a university Feminists silence Milo (whom I'm not particularly keen of) as well as many others who 'offend them'. That's butt hurt. So offended that you try to remove others rights. This, with Gillette advert is criticism. You'll notice no one is being silenced, it's just people voicing things with justification. Your attempt at conflating the two is wrong.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 11:46 AM
6

women like myself got offended by this ad. I'm not surprised, underneath the "men are bad" rhetoric there was a definite undertone of "women can't fend off men and need other men to protect them" I was called easily triggered and a snowflake. LOL. You see, when they criticise, it's legitimate criticism. When their pet projects are critcised, everyone's a snowflake. Or at least that's what I keep being told.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 11:38 AM
17

In no particular order, but as the thoughts come to me: So, first of all, the add implies that play fighting is bad, when actually it's an important part of development. So there's that. I mean parts of the advert are just incredibly stupid advice. So we have objectively bad part already. http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/aggression/introduction/why-play-fighting-can-be-good-children Strike One Second, normally when you try to criticise (and this add is criticism) someone, you direct it at the p…
/r/MensRights19/01/19 09:10 AM
7

What you've got to realise is this number is showing relative equality between men and women. It's not a measure of how much oppression a gender faces. You could have two countries that both score 0, country A and country B let's say. Remember that 0 means that neither men or women are advantaged/disadvantaged relative to each other. Country A is fantastic, opportunity and freedom for everyone so very little oppresion for either gender giving it a value of 0. Country B is oppressive and treats e…
/r/MensRights08/01/19 07:31 AM
2

Without disputing anything in the article, I think there's still an open question on where 'we' draw the line on engaging with feminism... these movements are predisposed to tribalism and selecting only information that supports their narrative (this sub is equally vulnerable, without commenting on whether that vulnerability is handled better) True enough. But 'we're all guilty' is not an argument FOR listening to feminism, it's just the fair application of requiring evidence that is used in con…
/r/MensRights02/12/18 05:21 PM
8

Dismissing feminism as unworthy of study is intellectually weak. You see, I'd normally agree with you and assume that someone who dismissed a subject on the grounds it was 'unworthy' would be an excuse not to provide any intellectual reasoning to refute any arguments made by that field. However the shoe actually fits: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2018/10/dog-rape-and-mein-kampf-feminist-text-why-we-hoaxed-journals-terrible%3famp If feminism can't even kee…
/r/MensRights02/12/18 11:40 AM
7

In a perfect world we‘d just remove all the disadvantages by improving education for poor people, removing racism and stuff like that. But that’s not happening, at least not instantly. And yet, we have clearly made giant in improving the lives of everyone over the last hundred years by any metric and we did this partially by REMOVING things that discriminate by race and gender. Racism and sexism will always exist but we've done a bloody good job of reducing them whole lot. I'd rather not reverse…
/r/MensRights01/12/18 12:46 PM
13

I don’t see how affirmative action is a problem though. In some places there are just way too many whites or males, You've just demonstrated it why it's a problem in that sentence. What the fuck has being white and male got to do with anything? Being white and male does not make you privilaged. Being black and femalr does not make you disadvantaged. Being a privaleged individual makes you privaleged: having wealth, a stable family to grow up with, access to education etc. There are white males t…
/r/MensRights01/12/18 11:50 AM
22

I mean, the duluth model is a thing, so they're powerful enough to get their ideology into law enforcement for a start. What about affimative action being part of the employment process? This is more societal but what about #Metoo being twisted by feminists into getting people fired and ruining lives with just a few words? Whether or not they are 'in charge' is rather irrelevant; they don't need to be 'in charge' to have power, and that's all they need to enact 'meaningful' change. The wrong kin…
/r/MensRights01/12/18 10:31 AM
2

In and of itself no, but set against society as a whole, and other crimes like this, we have women getting smaller sentences, even for an equal or worse crime; men being seen as a nuisance when they can no longer provide, and yet another example of women being violent in a society that often thinks of men as being the sole perpertrators of violence. It's an example of how society sometimes mischaracterises women favourably and men badly, something that's all too common. It's an example of how so…
/r/MensRights21/11/18 12:53 PM
6

This is a summary of how your comment, and reactions to other peoples', appears: You: Hey guys, we need to focus on these minorities that I've picked because they are the ones suggested by the ideology I, and a minority of people, prescribe to. This Sub: No, those people need support, but so does everyone. We will fight for all of them. You: This is why people don't like you, you won't agree with the really loud, pushy ideology that constantly smears people, that these people that we chose are m…
/r/MensRights11/11/18 10:51 AM
1

Silly robot. You don't understand that typos can be done by accident.
/r/MensRights06/10/18 04:28 PM
0

You cannot claim women had a voice in the matter when women were not allowed the right to vote. I can because they did. Women have ruled, and have voted. For example, there is only a period of around 100 years in UK history where it was written into law that women couldn't vote although there are examples of them doing so still even then. During most of that time, most men didn't vote either. Women gained the franchise when all men gained it. This isn't a question of sex is a question of rule. A…
/r/MensRights06/10/18 04:25 PM
1

It's worth remembering much this conversation started. Someone made the claim women didn't deserve the right to vote, because only men went to war to die. They ignored the fact that men made the laws deciding who could go to war and that men were the only ones allowed to make laws. Somehow they view that as not being oppression against women, but not having a voice was a benefit for women. Again. This is not a balanced view. For example, there were women in the UK for example that actively campa…
/r/MensRights06/10/18 03:09 PM
2

Humanity didn't choose for men to protect women. Men chose that role. There's a reason why the Abrahamic religions treat women as being inferior beings. Right from the start, Christianity proclaimed Eve to come from Adam and basically be his servant. Sorry. Stop right there. This is why feminists are the minority. You've gotta be balanced. Men did not choose anything. Evolution chose. The best way for humans to survive turned out to be to have one half act as protectors and the other half be car…
/r/MensRights06/10/18 02:22 PM
1

I agree, although it's less what's going on here and more what the reaction would likely be if the genders were inverted. That, I think, is what OP is highlighting. Less pussypass and more 'all men are paedos'.
/r/PussyPass18/09/18 11:17 AM
4

Is it not a legitimate concern that men as a gender are being blamed for the choices some women make of their own volition? And is it not a legitimate concern that those who are making the accusations have huge influence in media, educational institutions, and government? As someone who believes that all people should be treated equally, regardless of race or gender, I feel these are absolutely legitimate concerns as there are people playing identity politics today who absolutely do not support …
/r/MensRights14/08/18 03:20 PM
3

Women didn't "make" their husbands and sons go off and die, and I'm 100% certain they would have preferred they not leave at all. While I don't completely agree with everything the redditor you are replying to is saying, they are not entirely wrong either: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_feather https://www.opendemocracy.net/5050/nicoletta-f-gullace/white-feather-girls-womens-militarism-in-uk We do tend to focus on the the things men inflict on women and themselves not vice versa.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 07:08 AM
1

Exact Meaning It's right there in front of you but you're to stupid or stubborn to see it. You can lead a horse to water... You have no idea what you're talking about and can't listen to reason. There is no point in anyone discussing anything with you.
/r/MensRights08/08/18 09:53 PM
1

And if you were writing a definition of what an American president was, you wouldn't mention they were typically white, because it's irrelevant. Thanks for proving my point!
/r/MensRights08/08/18 09:52 PM
1

You do not understand the purpose of definitions. Definition: what is meant by a word, text, concept, or action. Notice how typical usage is not included in that? Now a dictionary may and often does provide information in addition to the definition in which it is appropriate to add things like an example of it being used, it's pronunciation etc. but it is not appropriate to add information about typical usage whether it is true or not withon the definition itself when the full meaning can only b…
/r/MensRights08/08/18 03:36 PM
1

The word sexism on its own has no bias towards male or female. Implying otherwise is wrong. This is not a word like 'guys' which is often considered to refer to men but can be used more neutrally. You can only decide the target of the sexism from context. The word itself gives no information about this and therefore any implication that it does has no place in a dictionary whose purpose is to give an accurate definitions of the words. They said that the word is typically used to describe discrim…
/r/MensRights08/08/18 03:29 PM
1

The word sexism on its own has no bias towards male or female. Implying otherwise is wrong. This is not a word like 'guys' which is often considered to refer to men but can be used more neutrally. You can only decide the target of the sexism from context. The word itself gives no information about this and therefore any implication that it does has no place in a dictionary whose purpose is to give an accurate definitions of the words. If was used in an example sentence, fine, but in the definiti…
/r/MensRights08/08/18 03:25 PM
2

And here in lies your misunderstanding. Respectfully, you're so busy pushing the ideas that are important to you, you've forgotten to actually refute the argument I made. No one is saying 'women have never experienced sexism'. What I did argue is that sexism is not typically experienced by just women. Most women and men drew the short straw throughout history. So not only are the points frustratingly selective (for example, the whole picture for your 2nd point is: women couldn't go to war and ac…
/r/MensRights08/08/18 01:21 PM
2

It's ambiguous at best, which is pretty poor for a dictionary, something you rely on for an unambiguous definition of a word.
/r/MensRights08/08/18 11:49 AM
1

The definition given is demonstrably wrong. I would like to point out that drawing attention to the fact it is wrong does not necessarily mean you are offended.
/r/MensRights08/08/18 11:45 AM
1

You may be right, but that's more a symptom of society's biases rather than a reflection of the meaning of the word 'sexism' which is the point of the reddit thread. The direction of the sexism should be derived from the context within which it is seen or when the word 'sexism' is used, not determined by a dictionary author with questionable biases. Sexism has a meaning dependent on context and people shouldn't try to insert a specific context into the definition. This is how you cause confusion…
/r/MensRights08/08/18 11:42 AM
2

I didn’t say women are a minority or that they’re oppressed in modern day. But you did compare sexism with predjudice against minorities which was my issue. I didn't think it was a fair comparison. Their only similarity is that they are both bigotted. Otherwise, the idea that minorities typically experience more oppression is a historically documented phenomenon with a psychological basis. The same cannot be said of sexism no matter how much certain people might protest otherwise. I think every …
/r/MensRights08/08/18 08:26 AM
14

With respect, that's not a fair comparison. Almost every culture in the history of man has oppressed a minority that forms within it. It's a behaviour that emerges naturally due to the relative sizes of the two groups and the tribal nature of humans. Disclaimer that is sadly required nowadays: This is not a moral judgement or an assertion of what should happen, only a recognition that it does happen and that there are reasons that it happens. Women are not a minority though, so its just not self…
/r/MensRights08/08/18 05:05 AM
14

Exactly. "Typically to women" is an assumption which ironically reveals sexism on the part of the author of the entry.
/r/MensRights08/08/18 04:48 AM
4

No one directly. It's just a very weird thing to publicise. It makes her motives rather questionable and potentially damaging to herself and others. I don't know enough about psychology to say whether the 'treatment' was a good idea or not although I find it dubious, but to publicise it is, well, a bit weird to say the least. Why publicise? Why not publish the story of what she saw about the actual rape victims instead of what seems to be an attempt to make it about her? There are so many ways o…
/r/MensRights09/07/18 11:35 AM
2

And yet, here you are, still.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 04:11 PM
5

You arent saying anything. Its amazing, so much text and NO SUBSTANCE. I bullet-pointed it for you. It's like you read, but the words just wash over you. You're either so ideologically brainwashed that you refuse to think for yourself, or idiotic enough that you can't. Or both. Feminism's perfect, useful idiot. You have no point exept that my point is bullshit. Apart from the fact that it isn't my only point (I bullet pointed them for you to make it easy), your rebuttal being bullshit would then…
/r/MensRights03/06/18 03:41 PM
1

Haha. True, she is an absolutely awful third wave feminist. She's what feminism should have been. She is the epitome of 'women you can do it too so get out there and take responsibility' not the 'it's men's fault' of today's feminism.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 02:53 PM
3

Okay, so I had a look through your posts to see what point I could have left out. There was only one: Let me see some stats on how many women forced in to prostitution gets killed every year vs construction workers. Try to keep up. I didn't respond to it initially because I couldn't believe you really wanted to go down that route. It's a logical fallacy to use specific examples to try and disprove things about the common behaviours of a population. Subjective situations cannot disprove generalis…
/r/MensRights03/06/18 02:42 PM
6

Tell me WHY you disagree. Read. My. Comments. Are you illiterate? You talk about all women Nice try Cathy Newman. Stop. Just stop. You're trotting out the the old 'you talk about all women' argument. Nowhere have I said that. You. Are. Disingenuous. If I have to explain to you why generalising is useful for identifying behaviourial trends when considering a large group of people, half the population, you're in trouble. Did you read about the gender paradox? No. Because otherwise you would know t…
/r/MensRights03/06/18 01:03 PM
8

Wierd how none of the comments reflect this. Why would they? The other comments are responding to the article. I was responding to you and you did somethong to the effect of 'isn't the problem that there aren't women in these fields'. And I disagree. What I did say is that the other comments are scoffing at the idea that 'toxic masculinity'. That seems to have slipped you mind though. Keep up. Your comment has too much conjecture... I'm sure plenty of women.. Ah. Accuse someone of conjecture. Pr…
/r/MensRights03/06/18 12:17 PM
9

Not sure why this sub would defend toxic masculinity if it Erm, what? No one is defending 'toxic masculinity'. You just made that up. What people are doing is scoffing at feminists victim blaming. Men are dying, must be men's fault! Feminism's default is to roll its collective eyes from its desk jobs, tut and then pontificate, from its mountain of collective experience in dangerous fields, about how men bring this on themselves. I'm generalising of course, but it isn't far from the truth in the …
/r/MensRights03/06/18 11:07 AM
2

You changing your argument each time you reply. My argument has not changed. You can either follow it, or you are simple. Pick one. It is a wild stretch to compare the two things. Pure opinion. You just did not like the outcome. You mean how people 'don't like' the outcome of the immigration laws? I don't like the outcomes and neither do many others because it favours one group over another for reasons thay aren't justifiable, not for the child and not the parents involved. You can apply this bo…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 09:48 PM
1

Wow. It really did go over your head then.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 09:34 PM
2

And the courts sometimes fail as they have failed the immigrants. They sometimes make bad decisions based on ill thought out laws that favour a particular gender for reasons that are essentially sexism. What is so difficult for you to understand here? Was the law involved? Yes. But when those laws seperate a child and parent, or even indeed make them a weekend parent, you can't very well say that the law protected them. It didn't. It failed them. You're just lying and it is obvious. I don't know…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 09:28 PM
2

I mean, I thought this was about children getting seperated from their parents. Note the genderless parents that's missing from the tweet. What do you think this is about?
/r/MensRights29/05/18 09:15 PM
2

Getting a weekend schedule that you don't want does suck. If you've supported as many people as you say, you know what is decided in the courts is the tip of the iceberg. Those people have got to then libe within those arrangements and that doesn't always happen. Outside of the most egregious cases So it happens then. This is a lie. http://www.separateddads.co.uk/when-your-ex-emigrates-with-your-children.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/women/family/how-to-survive-your-ex-ta…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 09:13 PM
2

No, not in the same way at all Yes in the same way. Don't be naive. A parent that is seperated from their child is a parent that is seperated from their child. I don't give a shit how or why it happened, it's horrible in any circumstance. Being a weekend dad That's your misunderstanding of the current state of affairs. If you think that a seperation always results in the 'secondary carer' getting custody a couple of days a week, well I don't know what to tell you. There are plenty who never see …
/r/MensRights29/05/18 08:50 PM
2

I mean, they both involve the seperation of a parent and child for reasons that seem senseless. There's quite a lot that's similar as far as I can see Having experienced neither, I can only imagine how painful each situation is and I wouldn't like to trivialise either situation by pretending I knew which was 'worse'.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 08:27 PM
5

Woosh! That's the sound of things going over your head. Do you think those immigrant children aren't being seperated from their fathers too? It's only the fact it's affecting mothers that makes it worth tweeting about apparently. OP's post is pointing out the bias in the tweet. This is isn't an issue just for mothers, it's an issue for families. And do you think that there aren't plenty of mothers that take their kids from the father while not giving any means to contact? We have no problem as a…
/r/MensRights29/05/18 11:54 AM
3

A supposed 'cop-out' answered with what is 100% a cop-out answer. 'Capitalism? Ridiculous!' is not an argument. Here's some evidence to back up my assertion: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/s9516.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjDrMfFl9LaAhWiIMAKHbfZAHwQFjAFegQIABAB&usg=AOvVaw1bJaaa-GTPMSy35SeaBMaI Interesting data from this first study shows that women deem personal care and cosmetic products as more important to their daily life than men do. Almos…
/r/MensRights24/04/18 06:40 AM
7

Because women will pay for it. If women stopped buying it, the prices would plummet. Buy the male or more nuetral versions. This is not a conspiracy against women, it's a conspiracy for profit margins. Women will spend a heck of a lot more on these kinds of products. But complaining is easier than changing spending habits.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 09:04 PM
3

I don't know enough about the others, but Sargon identifies as a classical liberal, which is center left.
/r/MensRights19/04/18 03:30 PM
2

People just don't understand that: Social systems =/= Socialism Too many people have tried to tell me that because I support certain social systems I therefore support socialism (both left and right). Nope. I find socialism pretty dangerous.
/r/MensRights19/04/18 09:40 AM
2

Absolutely. If you have to add a word in front of justice, it isn't actually justice anymore.
/r/MensRights11/04/18 12:25 PM
2

And who enforces that the means of production being owned by the people? If you don't have a way of enforcing it, powerful people will take it. You would need a government enforcing it and by that point, what's the difference? The govt essentially owns the means of production because they protect it then 'give' it to the people. TL;DR You are technically correct but the real world consequences would bare no resemblance.
/r/MensRights11/04/18 12:23 PM
89

No downvotes from me, you are entitled to your personal opinion. However, how do you know you prefer it this way since you have never known anything different? That's one of the many reasons I think circumcision at birth is wrong; you were never given a chance to know what it was like to live with and were forced to live without.
/r/MensRights25/03/18 07:20 AM
1

No. The best way to hedge against discrimination (at least the bad kind; job interviews are built on discriminating by apptitude for the job) is by removing any immutable characteristics that are irrelevant to the position being applied for, from the decision making process. As much as is possible, anyway. By adding a quota, you guarantee discrimination will occur. People do not make life choices to fill quotas so you will necessarily have to discriminate based on gender, sex, ethnicity etc. to …
/r/MensRights16/03/18 12:48 PM
0

Considering intersectional feminism is the main 'brand' of feminism, he has a point about it being about gaining or retaining power.
/r/MensRights11/03/18 03:18 PM
3

Fair enough, but I would be very careful with taking this as gospel: Universities are not echo chambers here to begin with This has been proven to be utterly untrue in many cases. No idea where your university is but if it's a western one, chances are high that you're university is not the bastion of free speech and exchange of ideas it once was, even if they pay lip service to it. I've no idea about university outside the western sphere, so if that's you, well I've no idea if the following appl…
/r/MensRights09/03/18 07:19 AM
3

It's understandable as feminism is more complicated than a couple of sentences. It isn't understandable if Feminism is a force for good In fact it downright doesn't make sense. It tells you that people see feminism and find it wanting. People see the actions of feminism and turn away, even though feminism is supposedly for equality, which most people support. In other words, people see feminism contradicting its purported ideals. It really tells you everything you need to know when the demograph…
/r/MensRights08/03/18 11:03 PM
15

The majority of women support equality, but a minority identify as feminists. Don't you think that's an odd fact if what you say about feminism just being a movement to empower women is true? You can, and we do, discuss male health and roles. A huge topic on the sub is male circumcision, which is men's health. A large contigent of the MRM are men who desperately want to be good fathers to their children but are denied that. And yes, a significant portion of the sub is devoted to pointing out the…
/r/MensRights08/03/18 06:23 PM
5

Poor logic. Women who agree with us are not exactly the same group of women who contribute to society. That's a venn diagram that I'm sure has crossover, but isn't simply a circle. Your entire premise is based on the assumption that we only support women who agree with us, a premise you just invented and one you can't prove is the prevailing view on this sub. Either you're an ignoramus or a troll. Pick one.
/r/MensRights08/03/18 05:24 PM
17

It's cognative dissonance because many of you hate women... Evidence or GTFO. In before: disagreeing with feminists = woman hating ...you're making international women's day about women and men's rights and don't see the irony. There's nothing ironic in celebrating women who actually contribute to society. Women who dedicate their time to bettering the world rather than demonizing others.
/r/MensRights08/03/18 04:47 PM
42

Food for thought: Feminists =/= All Women If they disagree with feminists, but not women as a whole, how is this post a contradiction to that?
/r/MensRights08/03/18 04:41 PM
6

I prefer that to Google's: we just hate IMD. At least it's actually an egalitarian viewpoint.
/r/MensRights08/03/18 04:37 PM
32

It's the oppression pass. let me see what I can do for you, hmmm, it says here your sex is male... well it's not looking good for you sir... wait, you're transgender and black!? Why didn't you say so? Everything seems fine here. I wouldn't want to get you in trouble for risking someone's life deliberately and unnecessarily. That would be oppressive.
/r/PussyPass21/02/18 08:10 AM
23

It isn't immediately clear what this has to do with Men's rights however it absolutely does have everything to do with it. This is the method by which SJWs remove the rights of many groups, including men. SJWs cannot change things through reasoned arguments and logic, partly because they don't have any reasoned argument to make and partly because their ideology is rooted in postmodernism i.e. nothing is true so we can only rely on relative experiences. This flies in the face of logic and reason …
/r/MensRights19/02/18 06:17 PM
7

No one said that basing your attraction to someone solely on there appearance was a good idea, people just observed that it happens sometimes and, ironically, feminists are as complicit as any group. Having said that, to pretend that it should play no role is moronic. Take this strawman you've built, put it away and take a deep breath.
/r/MensRights30/01/18 07:28 PM
2

How can men try and discuss rights when feminists like this drown them out by screaming, "stop silencing me!" using their megaphones? Surely you can see the hypocrisy and understand why it should be pointed out?
/r/MensRights30/01/18 07:48 AM
3

on whole feminism tends to trend away from radicalization, rather than towards it and the opposite appears to hapoen in MRA spaces I have not seen any 'radicalised' MRA spaces. Ever. Source or it didn't happen. Incel, MGTOW, red pill etc. are not MRAs by the way. As for feminism though, the leftist media is quite literally an example of radicalised feminism with headlines such as 'why women really are the stronger sex' or 'the end of men' being dime a dozen. An entire PUBLIC entity that is seen …
/r/MensRights29/01/18 07:26 AM
2

Antiquated. Outdated. Unfortunately, and I say this as someone who doesn't like testing, it is still the best way to put a quantifiable and almost completely non-biased measure on someone's ability in a field. Until someone comes up with something that does this better than testing, it will always be an important component.
/r/PussyPass25/01/18 12:57 PM
3

Agreed. I don't think they understand how testing in STEM works either if they think it's all 'regurgitating.'
/r/PussyPass25/01/18 12:53 PM
2

Erm, No. It's called identity politics. Find something better to do than call people names on the internet.
/r/MensRights23/01/18 09:23 PM
1

As a guy, you've shown yourself to be utterly ignorant and of no use to anyone. If you think rolling over and allowing a ideological group to bully people is, 'grown up,' not only are you ridiculous for thinking discourse is immature, but you're weak willed too. These feminists we are criticising think it's ok to swan around crying patriarchy, tweeting #metoo that someone they don't like asked them on a date once and complaining about getting paid less even though they choose to do less hours in…
/r/MensRights23/01/18 06:11 PM
5

Textbook. How can I dismiss this without actually saying anything of any intellectual merit? I'll take the fact that you did not adress my argument in any fashion as an admission that you have no rebuttal and therefore realise you were wrong. Glad you now see that these feminists were pushing a flawed and hypocritical ideology that marches with placards saying that they are oppressed and then immediately displays their privelage using those same placards. If criticising a political movement that…
/r/MensRights23/01/18 12:51 PM
7

Yes, but the vast majority of garbage cleaners aren't. What's your point? OPs point still stands: A horde of feminists left a bunch of trash after pretending they were oh so virtuous and opressed. These privelaged princesses will then have their trash picked up for them, mostly by their supposed oppressors, men.
/r/MensRights23/01/18 06:45 AM
2

From what I understand, it's original intention was for it to be used to allow anyone to be heard. I wish it was still used that way. Like you say, it could have been used as a way to get men to speak up. While it's great that it's given some women the confidence to speak up, it's just become a way to brow beat people at the moment. I hope you're not being too optimistic.
/r/MensRights16/01/18 10:48 PM
10

If it were as simple as that, I would agree with you. The fact is, people DO try to set things up but there a two problems: 1) If something is set up for men, it is still more socially acceptable to donate to the equivalent women's cause. See the donations to breast cancer charities compared to prostate cancer charities for example. They kill at similar rates yet prostate cancer get significantly less donations. I have seen women (a minority admittedly) look in disgust if you don't wear a pink r…
/r/MensRights16/01/18 07:37 PM
1

Fair enough. I still see a lot of far left politics crossing over with or directly referencing communism though.
/r/MensRights04/01/18 11:16 AM
1

They support Corbyn (I deliberately said Corbyn not labour there) who is essentially a full blown communist who thinks Karl Marx knew what he was talking about. The guardian themselves have plenty of positive things to say about the man too. From what I have seen, Left-wing progressivism is communism. Edit: I am left-leaning by the way and I find it very sad that left-wing politics seems to be dominated by this shit nowadays.
/r/MensRights04/01/18 08:13 AM
2

This is what amazes me: it's in the freaking Guardian.
/r/MensRights04/01/18 08:01 AM
1

Nah. I just don't feel like gracing your sanctimonious shit with a response especially since I already covered everything. So have others. We're done here.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 01:34 PM
1

Your appeals to debate are empty when you refuse to engage with what myself and others present you. You write text next to what is said but don't actually address what was said. I presented logical counter arguments which you ignored and then claimed that I presented none. This is you trying to undermine me without presenting an actual argument. I do not wish to go in a circle explaining them to you again as it is likely you will not engage with them again. I do not wish to validate your dishone…
/r/MensRights02/01/18 10:34 AM
1

Your ad hominem attacks betray you. You have nothing intellectually valuable to contribute in a discussion and you do not address my points honestly while falling foul to your own accusations. Please be a better advocate for your movement because at the moment you are perpetuating the worst of its stereotypes.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 09:11 AM
8

I thought that too. It does say he got three months purely for 'disturbing the peace' though. That's 3 months more than the woman got.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 08:22 AM
1

I don't think they'd bitch about it, but you can be damn sure they'd do nothing to redress it and call you sexist if you tried to. They are consistent in their double standards, I'll give them that.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 08:14 AM
1

I never disputed that fact... Good. I'm glad you concede you're wrong. Saying that there was no law is disingenuous... You do not understand the meaning of disingenuous or intellectually dishonest. It is factually correct that there was no law stating women couldn't vote prior to that time. Not a single woman was known to have voted before it was made illegal for them to do so... The first ever election was in 1695. At that point we don't have records of who voted. Nobody officially knows if a w…
/r/MensRights02/01/18 08:09 AM
1

You are projecting Top argument. So much intellectual content and originality. Try again You are wrong by magnitude of hundreds of years. No. It is factually correct that men and women earned universal suffrage 10 years apart. This is indisputable fact. I provided a source you can read. You can lead a horse to water... It isn't about men and women. It's about power and land ownership. For example: ...a few women were able to vote in parliamentary elections through property... This is women votin…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 11:56 PM
2

You are willfully ignorant I'm afraid. Men gained full suffrage in the uk in 1918 and women in 1928. 10 years. You were only an order of magnitude out. There was no law prior to this saying that women specifically couldn't vote. depending on the time, it was based on class and wealth. http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/RP13-14 Those same female suffragettes you mention are many of the people who shamed men into going to foreign countries to get blown up while they st…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 09:45 PM
3

I see what you're saying but I respectfully disagree. It's that kind of behaviour that means a minority of people in western countries identify as feminists, despite agreeing equality is needed. They see the pettiness and unnecessary moral purity that has infected large parts of the movement and distance themselves from it. Similarly, It's why 'alt-right' politics has grown so much over the last few years; people are pushed away by some of the left's almost religious zealotry. I have no desire f…
/r/MensRights30/12/17 06:12 PM
8

Absolutely this. If we're not careful, and I'm worried the horse has already bolted on this one, we'll all be part of a society wide competition to call out as many 'problematic' things as possible. Everyone loses if this becomes the norm. Lets learn from feminism/social justice's mistakes not repeat them.
/r/MensRights30/12/17 03:59 PM
29

Most 'gender' problems are really people problems. You've hit the nail on the head. For some reason, people find treating everyone with the same respect you expect for yourself a difficult concept and this often goes doubly so for outspoken feminists. Unfortunately, there are pushes for what seems like some kind of moral purity (admittedly off the back of some horrid abuses of power) and the end result is everyone is going to lose out.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 12:20 PM
5

Absolutely, fairness is why most of us are here and I can see that from you. I'm sure I wouldn't agree with you on everything about that topic but I'm glad to have reasonable people around to discuss it with. Arguing, or should I say debate, is fantastic. A lot of people forget (myself included) that, for it to be useful, you have to be open to being persuaded. I can be an asshole too (can't everyone?) but the fact that you, as a self identified feminist, even entertain an idea that doesn't alig…
/r/MensRights20/12/17 08:17 AM
8

Women Feminists FTFY
/r/MensRights20/12/17 07:48 AM
2

Have you got a source for this stat? This could be a real eyeopener for many and I'd like to be able to back it up if I quote this elsewhere.
/r/MensRights20/12/17 07:42 AM
14

We need more feminists like you. Keep up the good work standing up for actual equality.
/r/MensRights20/12/17 07:39 AM
10

So when a police officer accepts money from a criminal as a bribe, it's because the criminal has the power. Right I get it! When in the prescence of someone more privilaged than you, you do bad things because their power absolves you of all self determination and so the choices you make will never have anything to do with your own personal interests. Got ya! I'm off to find someone more powerful than me and hang around them so I can do what the heck I want... I mean be controlled by their power.…
/r/MensRights15/12/17 03:49 PM
3

1st wave feminists fought for the vote for women (Good thing) and then spent the rest of their time shaming men into fighting a war for them (bad thing) for example. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_feather Feminism has unfortunately, never had full equality in mind. Until a version of feminism exists that isn't tarred by some push for inequality, myself and many others are never going to be able to take feminism seriously. The closest it's ever come is with equity feminism, it's ideals bei…
/r/MensRights10/12/17 06:55 AM
2

I'm not sure how expecting society to view a female groping a man, and a man groping a women, in the same way is 'doing the same thing' as feminism. If you can find one instance of an organised push by the men's rights movement to have rights above and beyond what women have, I'll change my mind. I've never seen it though.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 06:36 AM
4

And yet, more men die and earlier and they can't even die during child birth! For many western countries, they don't have this issue either but still the men die faster and earlier. Do you know why? It's got something to do with one of the sexes having a lot more money spent on them medically... So here's an idea: Lets spend money on medical issues for ALL people. Ah, but men's health isn't women's problem so we don't do that.
/r/MensRights07/12/17 07:09 AM
2

You are completely correct but I think this controlling of the narrative sets a dangerous precedent. Facebook and twitter have large audiences they can potentially influence by 'muting' ideas they don't like. Who gets to decide which ideas can spread and which can't?! The company are well within their rights but will ultimately biased. The only fair way to deal with it is to define what is harmful to others and police that but otherwise allow people their opinions. Otherwise, we start with what …
/r/MensRights04/12/17 07:49 PM
1

Yeah it's pretty weird. I don't think there's another teacher with a science background in the whole school (I teach primary). But then, I'm one of two male staff out of 30 odd so...
/r/MensRights28/11/17 08:25 PM
2

That would explain a lot haha. Teacher myself but I did a degree in physics then a degree in education which had a heavy emphasis on educational psychology and pedagogical theory.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 06:12 PM
2

You sound like you'd like the psychologist, Piaget. His theory of learning is essentially your first paragraph.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 04:04 PM
1

Thanks! I like getting the discussion going in class. We're a catholic school as well so I love stirring the pot with some religious discussion. I'd rather know they'd been critical of their beliefs as opposed to following them blindly.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 07:20 AM
2

I guess you're right it isn't surprising when you think about it. Now I've had time to think about it, I think it's the 'matter of factness' of how they said it that really surprised me. It wasn't a point of contention for them. I don't imagine the average person on the street finding this so obvious and bringing it up in conversation would raise some eyebrows and probably some heated responses.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 07:14 AM
2

It seems so inocuous on it's own but I'd imagine that message is pretty powerful when said to a child.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 07:06 AM
2

That's very sad to hear. The effect it can have on some kids is pretty devastating.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 07:04 AM
13

They certainly can be. I guess I'm just concerned that it took some kids for me to potentially realise how early discrimination can start to happen. I can certainly see how others can be fooled hook line and sinker by feminism.
/r/MensRights27/11/17 07:23 PM
2

But he didn't send kiddie porn. Someone acused him of doing it, which he hadn't. And he does target both sides. He finds the far right and the far left equally ridiculous. Are you deliberately miscontruing things or genuinely making the same mistake again?
/r/MensRights27/11/17 03:32 PM
3

As far as I am aware. No. He mostly comments on how ridiculous the far left and far right are. Edit: looked into it. He did send interacial gay porn to nazis/white nationalists from what I can tell. As you can see, he likes to berate the left as much as he likes to berate the right. If he left the the left alone, his twitter would likely still be intact. But the way twitter is, if you say anything bad about the left... There also appears to have been a smear campaign against him, by surprise, su…
/r/MensRights27/11/17 12:33 PM
2

It's worth it because although you will be safe, someone else won't be. She needs a taste of real equality for her good and the good of others.
/r/MensRights27/11/17 10:41 AM
4

Sargon of akkad is pretty darn centrist but they booted him off twitter. No, they uncheck anybody who expresses views to the right of far-left pretty much. Bearing just got kicked off twitter for 'harassment' with sexual insults for calling a feminist, who continually berates him, 'fisty'. This is a reference to the clenched fist symbol used by a lot of 'progressive' movements of which this feminist associated with and this was explained many times. Didn't matter, twitter was only too happy to o…
/r/MensRights27/11/17 07:12 AM
11

We have the same issue in the uk although it's with poor white families known 'affectionately' as chavs. It's exactly the same issue. Broken families raising broken children who then create their own broken families.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 05:11 PM
18

What in the world? I'm not actually sure if you're a troll or not but I'll bite. None of those things are caused by not taking the not taking birth control, so you're already off to a bad start by having things ass backwards. They happen naturally and taking birth control, in some cases, alleviates some or all of it. It is far from a guarantee though so I'm not sure why that's the hill you're dying on. Also, you're being disingenuous. Different women experience periods differently. Not all perio…
/r/MensRights22/11/17 10:04 PM
6

They could but I think many women genuinely enjoy it and therefore rightfully see it as a good use of their time. What I really don't get is how feminists can't see their own cognative dissonance. We are told by feminists, makeup is part of the impossible beauty standards imposed by the patriarchy. Now we are being told metaphorically 'taking off' make-up using this app is the patriarchy imposing its power on them. Let that sink in. The patriarchy makes women put make-up on to take it off again …
/r/MensRights19/11/17 10:15 AM
6

Is it hard work? Yes. Does it deserve respect? Yes. Is it the hardest? No Does it deserve more respect than other jobs? No And I say that as a teacher who has to look after 30 kids and a time and get them to learn. I feel I'm more qualified than most to comment. There was a survey (I'll see if I can find it and edit a link into the comment) and basically, stay at home mums report higher rates of happiness than women in the work place. I think that says a lot.
/r/MensRights18/11/17 07:20 PM
5

I think the fact you are questioning yourself is a good sign. You are entertaining the idea that you could be wrong about some things and that's not something everyone does. Play devils advocate with yourself. Can you see both sides? Then you'll be in a more informed position than most people.
/r/MensRights18/11/17 07:13 PM
1

And thats not really a right but an entitlement. Right (noun): a moral or legal entitlement to have or do something. It's called a synonym, numnuts. And the right to life a person's rights surrounding sex are very different. The right to life is an absolute right. I.e. it cannot (or shouldn't anyway) be taken away by a government under any circumstance. The same is not true of sex: see laws on consent, age of consent etc. I am 100% right on that. They are not comparable and that is why I did not…
/r/MensRights18/11/17 05:43 PM
1

Erm no. What end would that be moron? The protection of children? My God what a monster I am!You are the one with a selfish agenda: that of opening up young people to the abuses of predatory adults. Saying I created a strawman to create a strawman yourself. It's meta I'll give you that. You are the one conflating exactly as I said you would. Entitlement to live =/= entitlement to sex. Bringing up an entitlement to live is irrelevant to this discussion. So why mention it? What I said follows logi…
/r/MensRights18/11/17 03:01 PM
1

I told you. Stop the semantics because you're not very good at it. I can see where this is going. You're not going to conflate anything today buddy. Consenting adults have a right and cannot be denied sex but no single person is entitled to definitely have sex during their life time. There is no wiggle room here. Rights or civil liberties: a person's rights to be subject only to laws established for the good of the community. Or in other words, you do whatever shit you want until it starts to af…
/r/MensRights18/11/17 09:05 AM
1

Yeah, stop the semantics. You're not very good at it. The state can't intervene when two consenting adults decide to have sex, yes. That is not the same thing as being entitled to sex and you know it.
/r/MensRights18/11/17 08:22 AM
4

I'm hoping you forgot the /s haha
/r/MensRights17/11/17 04:02 PM
6

It's not a matter of entitlement; no one is 'entitled' to sex. it's a matter of being emotionally ready, a property that has no definitive measure. How do you say someone is definitively ready for sex? You can't. It's unquantifiable and qualitatively too complex to get an agreed definition. With that in mind, society uses the fact that people emotionally mature as they get older as a way to set an age at which everyone is ready. We know that teenagers go through many emotional changes during tho…
/r/MensRights17/11/17 03:52 PM
1

Fair enough. I can agree we certainly should try our best to prevent it where we can. For what it's worth, I think people hating your guts is part of the growing pains of activism. What is it that Ghandi apparantly said? First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. I feel like we're between stage 2 and 3 of this.
/r/MensRights14/11/17 10:12 PM
1

Any toxic perception was not caused by the actions of MRAs. You cannot find me any major examples or likely smaller examples of this past or present because they don't exist. Any asscociation with incels, MGTOW is next to none existant and overblown by those with an agenda. I do not agree that the MRM themselves are at fault for their image in any way other than being in opposition to a pervasive and cultish movement. Unfortunately, smear campaigns and witch hunts come with the territory when yo…
/r/MensRights14/11/17 09:46 PM
1

We've been labelled as a hate group because feminists feel threatened by us. Goodness knows why as we want equality just like they say they do. Regardless, the main reason a person thinks we're racist and sexist is because they've been ill informed by someone with an agenda not from the actions of MRAs. Have you seen the Red Pill? It has been ALL OVER media. It caused a shit storm over in Australia because feminists, who openly admitted they hadn't watched it, called it sexist and racist on live…
/r/MensRights14/11/17 09:00 PM
2

Personally, I think you're lying or at best embellishing things to fit your agenda. Regardless, factually the MRM as a group are not bigotted. There are sites such as a voice for men or the honey badgers that make it clear about the aims of the MRM. They are easy to find. There are gatherings and meetings of MRAs and this whole sub (which you ARE accessing) where MRAs discuss how to achieve equality of opportunity. Your ignorance and intellectual laziness is not an excuse for treating a whole gr…
/r/MensRights14/11/17 08:42 PM
3

But MGTOW and Incel are not the MRM. Even if there is some crossover there isn't as much as you think. There's quite a bit of bad blood between MRAs and red pillers, incels and MGTOWs because we DON'T see women as inferior, just different. We just see feminism as a flawed, cult like ideology that has less and less to do with equality. I'd like to point out that there are male feminists. But even then, we are talking about the MRM as a whole not the end fringe cases. There is NO organised MRM act…
/r/MensRights14/11/17 10:47 AM
3

Yeah, no one said anything against black people themselves. They pointed out that professional victims would be fine with the sub if it was identical other than being for black men, or trans men, or gay men (which this sub encompasses by the way). But good job, like other SJW/feminist types you took something which is inherently non-racist and added your own racist assumptions to it, likely because you're a bigot with a guilty conscience. Keep on projecting though, its standard SJW/feminist prac…
/r/MensRights14/11/17 06:46 AM
4

A group is defined by its actions. Feminists decided what they were when, like you, they attack MRAs with zero grounds to do so. They defined themselves when they oppose paternal rights. They defined themselves when they, like you, accuse MRAs of being women hating douchebags. Hell, feminists tried to shut down a FEMALE film maker because she interviewed MRAs and found them to be decent people. You can tell me what you think or feel feminism is till you're blue in the face but your thoughts and …
/r/MensRights13/11/17 11:20 PM
4

Fair enough. I'll except feminism has definately exarcerbated things in many cases.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 10:47 PM
6

Ignorance. MRAs do organise to support men and we talk about feminism as it is a sexist dogma that opposes us when we do organise to support men. YOU may not. YOU are not all of feminism. Feminism as movement in general DOES talk about is and they do their best to lie and smear.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 10:46 PM
4

I'm wondering why this is at all relevant. It's what the movement as a whole has done that matters here.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 10:44 PM
5

Feminism says 'break down the gender roles' then someone says 'man the fuck up'. Decide which it is because you are showing feminism to be utterly inconsistent.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 10:42 PM
3

What's it like to be so ignorant that you judge people you know nothing about? Angry and a little bit lonely I'd imagine.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 10:40 PM
4

I don't think feminism put it there, I think it's just feminists are quite happy with the status quo of men's rights as they have it quite cushy in many ways now.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 10:38 PM
10

We would. But feminists insist everything is the fault of the patriarchy and actively block MRAs. The ball is in their court in this one. It tells you a lot about the state of mind of feminists that they would try to smear and block a group that agrees with them on many points.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 10:36 PM
6

Feminism only seeks to deconstruct the parts that concern them. They are not interested in equal representation in bin men, sewer cleaners, power line maintenance or essentailly anything with a modicum of risk hence the 90 odd percent of workplace deaths being men. They don't care about male genital mutilation. They don't care about the stoicism expected of men that they contribute to, and that causes a lot of the male suicide (saying feminists want to break this down doesn't change that their a…
/r/MensRights13/11/17 09:21 PM
1

What exactly makes you say that? Genuinely interested.
/r/MensRights28/10/17 05:29 PM
2

I think it's the double standard that's disgusting. I have no problem with this. I do have a problem with the fact that, were the roles reversed, there would be plenty more people acting like OP.
/r/MensRights28/10/17 12:57 PM
15

Evidence would suggest otherwise. Taller, slimmer, attractive people earn more on average than the opposite. That would suggest they are given promotions more often i.e. they are taken seriously. Perhaps this is because people who put effort in to there appearanve are more likely to put in effort elsewhere. Regardless, it's very difficult to evidence the position attractive people aren't taken seriously.
/r/MensRights28/10/17 12:48 PM
11

Their account is 17 days old with 3 posts only in this post. Ignore it. It's a throwaway account.
/r/MensRights23/10/17 10:53 AM
2

I think there's a difference here between 'playing' the victim and actually being a victim. If someone smacks your ass it's not cool but you turn round and tell them you didn't like it and get om with your life instead of taking them to tribunal i.e. you don't 'play' the victim. One of the sexes has been socialised to play the victim though. If you were actually abused physically/sexually like your SO or your child then they are a victim, not playing one. The outrage there is absolutely justifie…
/r/MensRights23/10/17 07:48 AM
63

He is coming forward and telling us how he was sexually assaulted. Instead, you have demeaned him by assuming because he was an MRA, he must be making a joke. This is why men's rights activists are absolutely necessary. Because certain sick people assume the worst about men every time and ignore the issues they face.
/r/MensRights23/10/17 07:24 AM
22

It matters, because those children who have been told "it's shit for women when you get out of school" despite that not being true. This not only causes them to make life choices that detrimentally effect themselves and they then also assume that anything bad that happens to them is men's fault, leading to all sorts of accusations against men and initiatives to redress imbalances that never existed. TL;DR teaching young girls all their problems are caused by the patriarchy, strips them of their …
/r/MensRights22/10/17 02:56 PM
2

I can understand why that would be draining for you. Hopefully it will get better as things move forward. Just bare in mind that many MRAs were driven to find the movement by feminism. Sometimes because of the hypocrisy of many elements of feminism and othertimes because someone did something terrible to them under the guise or protection of feminism. There are MRAs that run the gamut from denied access to their kids to having been a male rape victim. These people especially, will have trouble a…
/r/MensRights19/10/17 05:53 AM
5

There are some 'good' feminists. While I disagree with some of what she says, Christina Hoff Summers is the gold standard when it comes to a feminist having her goals aligned with the MRM for the most part.
/r/MensRights17/10/17 02:35 PM
1

At one point in the comic it says something like "we need to demand that fathers have a greater involvement in the first few weeks of life. But at the moment it's only feminists that do this. It's time for men to take lead" and I think this really says everything. Feminists block fathers trying to have greater involvement at almost every turn when the men, who are already taking the lead (as they have to in almost every area in life because women generally won't), trying to get more paternity le…
/r/MensRights14/10/17 12:31 PM
8

There are crazies in here like anywhere else but I think the crazy to logical and rational thinker ratio is lower than most here I think. I'm incredibly happy that you're sticking around if you identify as feminist, even if you disagree with some of what we say. Having feminists like yourself contribute around here is incredibly important for a few reasons: -Dialogue is so important for any progress to be made for anyone. -Most feminists haven't a clue what the MRM is about because they are fed …
/r/MensRights11/10/17 07:23 PM
3

Are you only allowed to point out an inequality if you are going to do something about it now? What a silly thing to say...
/r/MensRights11/10/17 07:06 PM
1

It's confirmed: some women are narcissistic In a new piece of research showing men are more sensible with money, some women try to reframe it as them being selfless beings since having any negative thoughts about themselves creates incredible cognitive dissonance. We spoke to one clearly disturbed woman: "spending my husband's money on lunch out with my girlfriends shows I am a paragon of selflessness, REEEEEEEEE" Disclaimer: I don't believe all women are like this, far from it, just ones like t…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 05:55 AM
2

When I read an article from feminists that states that MRAs are mysogynist racists, I sometimes wonder if I'm missing something and maybe I'm in the wrong for my moral beliefs. This post and it's replies have strengthened my belief the MRM is a force for good. The prevailing opinion on OPs post seems to be 'it sucks for a man, so it sucks for a woman'. I don't see that kind of egalitarian thinking anywhere else really. I'm glad there are people out there like me who really believe everybody is o…
/r/MensRights09/10/17 06:55 PM
25

It's relevant as a counter-point to the prevailing 'common knowledge' that women are underpaid compared to men. I don't think anybody here thinks this is wrong. Modelling is a market place like any other and there is more demand for female models so that's where the money is. However were the roles of the men and women reversed there would be hell to pay. See the recent bbc wage gap shenanigans where the male presenters (who are in more demand) are paid more than the female ones. It highlights a…
/r/MensRights09/10/17 06:18 PM
1

Hi, an educator here. Here in the uk, we are having our schools aggresively privatised. Schools can choose to become academies or will be forced eventually. The schools that choose, were already great schools by and large and privatisation allowed them to continue being good schools i.e. no change. The failing schools that were forced to change become worse or magically have their results change. Unfortunately it's because the teachers are forced to work unhealthy hours doing the work for the st…
/r/MensRights06/10/17 07:25 AM
1

And society is only that way because we let it. We know it's that way in this sub. Many of us are here because of the laws you are speaking about. So what point are you making? That we should give up? No. If we removed the tools people have to 'weaponise' children, if we make it the norm for parents to work together for their children, societt will be better for it. Do you know what is the thinh that causes children with to involved parents to do better? It's not marriage. It's not that the pare…
/r/MensRights05/10/17 05:28 AM
2

Come off it. All evidence shows that children have the best upbringing when both parents are involved. That's the biological imperative. Anybody who works against that is working against the interests of the child. The emotional wellbeing of a child comes before the mother's feelings about breastfeeding. There are plenty of options to explore to allow shared parentage not least being adults and being in the same room as each other sometimes. Certain women could do with reminding they aren't play…
/r/MensRights04/10/17 08:01 PM
1

I thought this. Seems fortuitous although not impossible.
/r/MensRights04/10/17 04:55 PM
8

This is the way society may be but a heck of a lot of this is morally reprehensible. Why shouldn't a Father have the same rights as the mother? That's the whole point of the post. We should be striving for all children to have involvement from both parents where it isn't potentially harmful to the child. Marriage is irrelevant and not being married does not make you an asshole.
/r/MensRights04/10/17 09:52 AM
4

And I'm incredulous as to why that is your take away from this. Assuming he was 'failing on his end of the relationship' (I would not be surprised if such a clearly troubled person had unreasonable expectations to begin with) it is inconsequantial in light of infidelity and destruction of property. This is not a case of: well both sides made their mistakes. This is a case of one side showing utterly reprehensible behaviour which has a psychologically and economically damaging effect on an undese…
/r/MensRights03/10/17 04:02 PM
2

It's irrelevant in light of what happened. She used it as an excuse for cheating and damaging property. She is using a comparatively minor issue to excuse a morally reprehensible act and illegal behaviour. There are her clear mental issues to deal with long before getting onto taking people out to dinner. Or are you saying appeasing psychopaths is the most important thing to take away from this? Edit: Also 'childish'? 'Tantrum'? Understatement of the year. Try: 'illegal'; 'sociopath'
/r/MensRights03/10/17 03:33 PM
3

Dude. None of things mentioned justify anything the women did. I'm worried for your wellbeing if you think anythibg she did was justified because he wouldn't take her to dinner.
/r/MensRights03/10/17 03:05 PM
2

You are talking about give and take, something that is needed for a healthy relatuonship. It is very clear that this woman is only on the take and defending her actions makes you seem a little spineless. There is NO justification for cheating. You ALWAYS have the option to end a relationship before embarking on a new one and whoever does so is an ass and deserves to be called out. The rest of her actions just confirm this as each one is just another action of a selfish, thoughtless asshole. I me…
/r/MensRights03/10/17 03:00 PM
12

Discrimination: the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. Recognition and the understanding of the difference of one thing and another. The ability to recognise what is of high quality, good judgement or taste. Objectively, women only anything is discriminating by gender whether you feel it justified or not. It fits the definition. Subjectively, if two or more people feel it needs discussion, who's to say that it should…
/r/MensRights02/10/17 06:06 PM
6

Discrimination is not a crime. We discriminate all the time and for good reason. Children for example aren't allowed to drive cars (discriminating by age) and your average joe isn't allowed to fly a plane (discrimination by qualification/experience). These make sense though. If we didn't discriminate this way, we might be at best limiting the effectiveness of outcomes and at worst risking people's lives. Some things are protected though. Things that by and large have no effect on your ability to…
/r/MensRights02/10/17 05:44 PM
5

Yes there is a lot of anger here sometimes. It's directed at the wrong people too sometimes. Many leople are here because they are frustrated with the inequality with the justice system. Frustrated because an innocent young man's identity wasn't protected where a woman's would have been usually. Frustrated that the justice system is geared in a way that facilitates women acusing men 'for fun'. Frustrated that someone who does that recieves no consequence for their actions. Some people in this su…
/r/MensRights29/09/17 02:43 PM
3

This is a really important step in the right direction. Women now have to step-up and say they are ok with their husband/partner being at home whike they work. All studies into it show they don't like it that way though...
/r/MensRights27/09/17 05:51 PM
2

Spot on, it's worrying that supposedly intelligent people can't understand this.
/r/MensRights27/09/17 09:41 AM
1

Erm. Yes it is. It totally is. If you claim something, lets say there is a form of systematic oppression called the patriarchy, you are responsible for proving it. If you can't back it up, you can't claim it (not with any authority anyway). It's called the burden of proof. It's the foundation of the justice system, science, you know, real life. Come out of fantasy land for once. I've yet to see any evidence for the patriarchy, provided by anyone. Just various misinterpretations of statistics and…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 04:50 PM
2

I know. I disagree that this sub is just like all the others. There are people who try to shut down other opinions but for every person like that, three will tell them not to. As I said, you will never be banned from this sub for disagreeing. The same can not be said about many other subs. No, I can see many people in this sub having conversations and long may it continue. Many people in this sub tend to try and be self aware. The main thing I find that joins the people in this sub together is t…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 04:00 PM
2

We are having a conversations here, are we not? Disagreeing is not the same as not wanting a conversation. You would be banned in a feminist sub for disagreeing. Here we welcome differing opinions. We have no wish to be an echo chamber like some subs.
/r/MensRights25/09/17 03:03 PM
1

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/only-7-per-cent-of-britons-consider-themselves-feminists/amp/ http://thelala.com/believe-womens-equality-identify-as-feminist/ First two google searches I found. Interesting that 85% agree with equality but only 18% identify as feminist. It implies that in most people' minds feminism =/= equality. I agree. Patriarchy: a system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it. Many of the people…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 03:00 PM
6

Men seen as the caregivers. Are you kidding me? 'It' (it certainly isn't a patriarchy) doesn't preferentially treat MOST men. It preferentially treats a small group of powerful individuals who are men AND women who maintain that power by ensuring the subservience of its populous and having them, particularly men, punished more, die more, perform the dangerous jobs that others don't want to do. A relative few who use people, mostly men, is not a patriachy, it's an oligarchy. This is one reason wh…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 05:55 AM
8

Yeah, finding people who abuse children to be scumbags and expecting them to be punished equally regardless of gender is not hypocritical... You won't find people defending men who kill children here. Not sure why you bring up #NotAllMen as #NotAllWomen applies just the same here. We are under no illusions that these women represent all women. We are not interested in the gender of the abuser, just that they recieve the same punishment as everyone else regardless of what's between their legs. It…
/r/MensRights21/09/17 05:55 AM
1

No, because a 40-year high is a better headline than a 10-year increase. That's entirely opinion. A large increase in a relatively short period of time can be just as shocking as the highest amount for a long period of time. They really couldn't have used that, because it isn't true. Neither group has had a notable rate of change in that period. Yes there is a notable change. It's jump out, neon-sign-in-your-face clear to see on the graph. The increase over the last 10 years is the 40 year high.…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 04:39 PM
2

I disagree, the meaning is clarified in my opinion. But go on, continue to be antagonistic, continue writing in incomplete sentences, continue to write in a way that can be misunderstood and continue to be misunderstood. Whatever. It really doesn't though. It shows the media ignoring bad headlines in favour of good headlines. And why is it considered a 'good' headline? Oh because it makes it about women suffering not men or just people in general. That is a media bias. Or do you really believe t…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 03:50 PM
2

Media reports on change. This is not a full sentence in the first place and so you are expecting me to inference what words are missing in the first place. My apologies for misinterpreting although may I suggest that writing clearly in full sentences would be helpful if you feel you are being misunderstood. 'The media reports on change, amongst other things.' is one example of how you could make it clearer that change is but one thing that is reported on out of many things. I still fundamentally…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 03:26 PM
2

I'm sorry, but the media only reporting 'change' is rubbish. A large proportion of the time, the news reports on exactly the same stuff it did the day before. Change is NOT what makes something newsworthy. Unless you can point to something that proves me wrong I'm goin to go ahead and assume you pulled that out of nowhere. Newsworthy = gets clicks and ad revenue, nowadays. What makes something news worthy is something that grabs everyone's attention and the unfortunate truth is, the people who m…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 11:55 AM
3

Yes, and the average rate for men is several times higher than that of women and yet it doesn't seem important to you or the media. Just because it's 'average' for men does not make it ok. It makes it a travesty that nothing more is being done and it makes it inexcusable that the media only focuses on female suicide. Suicide is terrible for ANYONE but your average joe could be forgiven for thinking suicide is a thing only women really suffer from as that's who the media tend to report about. May…
/r/MensRights18/09/17 09:47 AM
12

Both sexes are experiencing an increase in the amount of suicides. I think that's more important than the length of time since the last high. But men and women are suffering (men more so) but men are ignored. That's bias.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 05:26 AM
10

While you are technically correct, BOTH sexes have had a fairly recent uptick in the amounts of suicides although it has always been higher than for men. To focus on one gender while the other suffers the same problems OR WORSE, well it dosen't make any sense and shows bias.
/r/MensRights18/09/17 05:24 AM
0

You're right it's worse. Smokers are frowned upon by society whereas menstruation is natural. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
/r/MensRights12/09/17 06:19 AM
4

I don't care whether they are a women, man or a transgender clown car. You own your actions by defending them or admitting you are wrong. Not this half way house, not really fully doing either nonsense. It's the standard I try to hold myself to so it's the standard I try to hold others to
/r/MensRights10/09/17 01:18 AM
4

Agreed. she should apologise sincerely. No ifs. No buts. Just I'm sorry. I fucked up. I've learned my lesson. I won't do again. The end. The lynch mob, i imagine, comes from the the 'but here are my excuses for my behaviour' which suggest she isn't actually sorry.
/r/MensRights10/09/17 12:41 AM
3

I get what you're saying however her apology is structured: I am sorry BUT.... I was told once by a person that I respect that if there is a 'but' when you apologise you are not truly sorry. It seems logical. The initial sorry is to disarm you, a way of pacifying you before getting onto the 'but' which is the point they really want to make.
/r/MensRights09/09/17 11:18 PM
4

Shall I tell you what does have a lot more 'scientific precedent' for happening? Feminists being sexist. Men can explain things to women because they think they won't know due to their gender. Women can explain things to men as they think they won't know due to their gender. Adults can explain things to children as they think they won't know due to their age. Gay people can explain things to straight people as they think they won't know due to their sexuality. Americans can explain things to Eur…
/r/MensRights08/09/17 06:04 AM
5

Those two things aren't mutually exclusive. It's actually both.
/r/MensRights08/09/17 05:48 AM
2

And I think that's why the term is so reviled. It is used almost exclusively by misandrists and so has become asscociated in the minds of many with misandry.
/r/MensRights06/09/17 06:40 AM
1

I think you're probably right. A lot of those statistics need breaking down further to really make sense of them. It says that men who report abuse are more likely to be arrested than the accused but how often is that because they actually deserved to be arrested? It may be none, it may be all or more likely a mix. You can't draw full conclusions until you know though. I'm certain it would still be pretty damning of our support structures for men if you looked into it furtber but it's fun playin…
/r/MensRights06/09/17 06:32 AM
5

While a lot of progress has been made in allowing women to be more fluid with role in society, close to zero progress has been made with men's. Society uses men in all the roles that require you to sacrifice your health, wealth and time to other people. It is partly because men are stronger. I am a great supporter of the best person for the job. It's an unfortunate truth that men will always make up the majority of soldiers that see direct combat as gender dimorphism makes them, on average, more…
/r/MensRights05/09/17 07:54 PM
1

No probs!
/r/MensRights31/08/17 10:37 PM
26

We've had baby changing rooms for a while and they are for all as well. This was the first time I'd seen one specifically for men in the men's toilets though (I presume the women's has the exact same. Strangely enough I didn't check). Usually it's either seperate from the toilets entirely or with the women's.
/r/MensRights31/08/17 09:43 AM
265

Was pleasently surprised to see this in a shopping centre just outside of York, UK. It's a baby changing/take your kid to the toilet room in the men's toilets. It was nice to see something that wasn't telling me I was a potential pedophile but actually that men might want to be fathers so I thought I'd share it. Makes a change from the posts you see of men's toilets being completely removed. Edit: spelling
/r/MensRights31/08/17 07:52 AM
1

What's amusing is, so many people fell for this when it originally happened. When your movement is indistiguishable from satire, you have a problem.
/r/MensRights30/08/17 01:44 PM
3

Nowadays more women than men go to university. Your whole idea about women being turned away is entirely irrelevant today because they don't they don't get turned away, the get a big pat on the back and sometimes a fat wad of cash. Men get little encouragement and no cash DESPITE BEING THE MINORITY IN UNIVERSITY! Just sit and think about it. There are less men at university. How can you even start to justify men not needing the support compared to women? What mental gymnastics had to go on to cp…
/r/MensRights30/08/17 09:25 AM
1

Glad to help and I'm glad you're considering multiple viewpoints. The reaction from many is simply to dismiss the MRA viewpoint as nonsense or imply you're sexist. The only way we'll reach true equality is by listening and considering everyone's concerns.
/r/MensRights27/08/17 01:04 PM
6

Well no, they aren't. A wage is the amount you are paid per unit of time be that per hour, per month, per year. Earnings are an absolute value of the money you have gained due to work. They are related but not synonymous. If two people work the same job, they might earn say £10 per hour. This is their wage. Now lets assume this job pays for overtime. One person might work 40 hours in a week, earning £400 and the other might do extra, say 50 hours and therefore earn £500. This is earnings. Now if…
/r/MensRights24/08/17 09:12 AM
9

I think this is important. Something the MRM has to make sure of is to not make the same mistakes as feminism. MRAs must not fall into the the trap of, 'we have problems therefore you don't/they aren't important.' Depending on the poll you look at, as little as 7% of the UK identifies as feminist even though most believe in equality. There is good reason for this - most people, to varying degrees, see feminism for the biased ideology it is. If the MRM doesn't want the same, it has to be better. …
/r/MensRights20/08/17 10:31 PM
1

The research I was doing was a literary review so I was essentially collating as much research from others as possible to build up a picture. There is a lot of data that shows it happens. By the beginning of secondary school the diffence in reported opinions about STEM subjects from boys a and girls is already significant. It just gets worse and worse, with fewer girls choosing seperate sciences, computing etc. for GCSE then fewer still taking STEM subjects at A-level until eventually it's a lan…
/r/MensRights18/08/17 04:03 AM
6

The generally accepted wisdom is that girls generally perform better when assessment is ongoing (like the way it was done before the reforms) and boys perform better when it's assessed all in one lump at the end (like the new/reused old system). At first glance this seems to confirm that, although you are absolutely right it needs thoroughly investigating and likely a more longitudinal study to really get to the bottom of it. There are other problems boys face besides this anyway like the fact t…
/r/MensRights17/08/17 04:52 PM
1

Here's a bit on women actually a being advantaged in the work place: http://m.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract While this next one can't be used as evidence (it's a subjective experience) it does give you a different individual viewpoint from a women compared to the viewpoints you've been given: https://huyenchip.com/2017/08/09/sexism-in-silicon-valley.html I'll stop now. I think I've found quite a bit on those three points I made. It's been interesting to research. I'd love to do a literar…
/r/MensRights16/08/17 11:07 AM
3

It has everything to do with equality. It's essentially saying lets not discriminate based on gender and let people be who they want to be even if that means we don't have a 50:50 split in every job. It has everything to do with what the MRM stands for. It has everything to do with equality.
/r/MensRights16/08/17 10:33 AM
1

Not a problem. The last stuff was mostly about the gender wage gap and a little about privilage in the work plave. Here's some about violence and rape culture. https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://new.mankind.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/30-Key-Facts-Male-Victims-Mar-2016.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwje7vKUi9vVAhUEAZoKHTT_CxUQFggnMAI&usg=AFQjCNF8MqU8wZzYbR67AYhDSl5_Hwz2HA These are self reported statistics so unless we dig deeper they cannot give us a complete picture. Twice as m…
/r/MensRights16/08/17 06:50 AM
1

https://pmc.gov.au/resource-centre/domestic-policy/going-blind-see-more-clearly-unconscious-bias-australian-public-services-shortlisting-processes This study shows that having a female name makes you more likely to be employed i.e. women are privilaged when it comes to being hired. http://www.aei.org/publication/highest-paying-college-majors-gender-composition-of-students-earning-degrees-in-those-fields-and-the-gender-pay-gap/ Women choose degrees that pay less of their own volition. Unsuprising…
/r/MensRights15/08/17 10:21 PM
1

And thank you for your reply as well. Large pools of data always trumps a handful of subjective experiences every time. This doesn't mean subjective experiences have no value: they have a lot of value to the individual. However when trying to get a picture of a group of people, a group which is as large and diverse as women, a handful of subjective experiences is not enough. You HAVE to have a large data set to see anything resembling a pattern. The stories women have told you may be at odds to …
/r/MensRights15/08/17 08:33 PM
2

Agreed, I'm sure that's part of the message behind the tweet. Also agreed about the, being a minority doesn't make you a victim. There are are pivilaged black females and disadvantaged white men and everything inbetween. Your colour and creed are often irrelevant to your individual position. I'm not a fan of pointing out differences between races, as I actually think it's part of the problem that feminism and the left fall into: drawing ro much attention to race and gender rather than the indivi…
/r/MensRights15/08/17 12:48 PM
8

'I am male, remember?' Good for you! Now back on topic. Sorry to hear about what happened with you parents. I wonder how much of that crap (and more if divorce courts are anytging to go by) a single dad would have to go through? You don't know though because you haven't experienced that. You just assumed what you saw was an exclusively female experience. It isn't. Point being, subjective experiences do not an argument make. I gave you examples of how women are NOT disadvantaged but in fact have …
/r/MensRights15/08/17 06:19 AM
32

Women make up what, 60% of university students but have far more in the way of afirmative action available to them. Why do the majority need affirmative action? It makes no sense. Women are, some knowingly and some unknowingly, advantaged in education and in the work place - a recent study found that you are more likely to be hired if you are female. It is NOT sexist to point this out. YOU are the problem when people bring up genuine problems and your reponse is a knee jerk 'that's sexist'.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 09:36 PM
1

Thanks. I'll keep that in mind.
/r/MensRights13/08/17 06:55 PM
1

Honest question: what is it that Paul Elam has done that has earned your ire? I've only recently found out about the men's rights movement and realised that there are others like me that realise feminism isn't everything it says it is. I don't know enough about Paul to make an informed opinion yet. I'd genuinely like to hear your negative opinion to him as he seems to come across fairly well on the red pill movie (which first got me searching about men's rights).
/r/MensRights11/08/17 08:15 PM
5

Ha, so most of the pay gap accounted for right there.
/r/MensRights11/08/17 06:11 PM
1

No one's saying push anyone into anything. It isn't a stigma - no one is saying women can only/should choose certain fields. Women, of their own volition, tend not to choose STEM fields. This starts all the way back in school and by the time we reach university level, there just aren't many women applying for STEM degrees, DESPITE there being more women going to unversity and them having much more affirmative action to encourage them into STEM. If there are less female programmers coming through…
/r/MensRights10/08/17 10:39 AM
1

Look, innocent until proven guilty is part of the foundation of western law and for good reason. If you don't understand that by now, there's not a lot I can do. Telling those you trust in a private way does not put you in an intolerable position. No one said cut of social connections. The only thing I said was not to broadcast that you believe x person is a criminal to your wider social circle/the world. I'm sorry but just because someone believes they are a victim does not make them a victim a…
/r/MensRights04/08/17 12:40 PM
2

So why do something that makes it worse? Making something more fucked because it's already fucked is a rather backward kind of logic. No one said anything about forcing, but there are laws against libel for good reason. I'm interested in your explaination about how you think refraining from publically shaming people victimizes the victims. As far as can see, refraining from publically shaming people victimizes nobody. One option has potential negative consequences the other doesn't. The decision…
/r/MensRights03/08/17 09:29 PM
2

But this creates an environment where liars can cause damage to others with little consequence. The only way you can ensure we are protecting ALL victims (victims of crime or victims of being falsely accused) is by saving ANY actions (be that jail time/publicly shaming) until AFTER judgement is passed. Unless it is done this way, innocent people WILL be harmed. This is exactly why it is illegal to be a vigilante. People can't have a license to dispense justice as they see fit.
/r/MensRights03/08/17 07:47 PM
1

This is exactly what I'm trying to say. Thanks for clarifying.
/r/MensRights03/08/17 07:40 PM
3

Because, really, it's something for the courts to decide. While in the case of someone who has actually raped someone, they deserve everything they get, there are also people who regret their decisions and then cry rape or literally make things up and cry rape. This can have lasting effects on an innocent person. Some people are truthful, some people are idiots, some people are vindictive so it isn't fair for one person on their own to decide who is guilty or not - they cannot be trusted to be i…
/r/MensRights03/08/17 05:36 PM
10

This is a MUCH more sensible way of doing quotas. Avoids the problem of hiring a candidate who is objectively worse just to meet a quota.
/r/MensRights03/08/17 04:53 PM
11

Both of those only provide positives to the baby like saving their life for example. Circumcision in most cases only provides negatives and in severe cases takes the baby's life. It's worrying you can't see that they are essentially opposites.
/r/MensRights03/08/17 04:50 PM
8

I see your point, but even consenting adults should be aware of the dangers of circumcision. Most people are clueless about it.
/r/MensRights03/08/17 04:48 PM
13

Exactly this. There is a lot of bogus knowledge about circumcision that makes people believe it is a positive thing when actually, in the majority of cases, it's a negative thing. So not only is it that a baby can't consent, it's just mutilation full stop in most cases.
/r/MensRights03/08/17 04:46 PM
2

So if you want change, help people like him to realise. It's like drug addicts and alcoholics: they need to be confronted with their problems before they can accept there is a problem with themselves. They may quite well react negatively at first but if it comes from a place of wanting to help, they are more likely to see who actually supports their best interests. If you belittle them and say they deserve to suffer, you will confirm everything they believe about MRAs.
/r/MensRights30/07/17 03:48 AM
3

So much this. If a guy really really wrote this article, then they are in need of our help. I have been disappointed to see many reply with disdain against this person. They are a victim of feminism and so need our support. Besides, I always thought it was feminism that belittled people with different view points and MRAs were better than that.
/r/MensRights30/07/17 03:38 AM
-1

No one who has been hood-winked by someone else's self-serving ideollogy (i.e. feminism in this case) deserves to suffer. If it really is a man that wrote this, they are a victim and a very vulnerable one at that: a victim who does not realise they are a victim. There is only one thing someone in this position deserves and that is help. Edit: punctuation
/r/MensRights30/07/17 03:30 AM
2

They will pivot and find a new angle. That's what always happens: how can we frame this new information as sexism?
/r/MensRights28/07/17 10:04 PM
1

Oh agreed, it's pretty slovenly behaviour. It comes from a rather thoughtless position where you don't care that you are inflicting little particles of your own shit on other people. To assert dominance though? GTFO
/r/MensRights27/07/17 02:27 PM
5

Maybe this is where I've been going wrong all my life. I'm just not assertive enough with my flatulence.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 11:22 AM
18

I...what?..is this really is a thing? Surely everybody would see how much of a farce this is. Normally, I can believe feminists say all sorts of ludicrous things. This however just seems above and beyond. I'm going to google this. Wish me luck. Edit - While it doesn't seem to have widely spread (I found more ridicule than support) I am depressed to find out that feminists have campaigned about this, although it seems to be a while ago now. https://thewaterpipe.wordpress.com/2013/12/22/can-a-fart…
/r/MensRights27/07/17 08:19 AM
2

Done!
/r/MensRights27/07/17 06:17 AM
1

This guy gets it.
/r/MensRights24/07/17 10:29 PM
1

You should care, otherwise you'll do more damage than good. You're sounding more and more like the male activist version of SCUM and that is not the kind of thing I want to associate with.
/r/MensRights24/07/17 07:39 PM
7

Dude, don't sink to a feminazi's level. Dismissing the opposite sex is what they do. Be better than that. Realise that most women (and men) are not crazy ass zealots worshiping at the shrine of feminism. It's a relative few (although sizeable enough to have a strong voice) that have seemed to weasel their way into media and positions of power enough to get their way. If people see feminism, with many feminists spouting bigotted views, and then see MRAs using reasoned arguments, feminsm will fall…
/r/MensRights24/07/17 06:15 PM
11

So much this. When the whole female only showing for wonder woman thing happened I made the point that while the sky wasn't falling because of it, it was unnecessary, backward thinking and segregated people without real reason. I was told I couldn't possibly understand how the women felt about this and therefore, essentially, my opinion on it was irrelevant.
/r/MensRights24/07/17 06:01 PM
5

No, they are not reflective of MRA opinions. These are clearly about gamergate. If you think gamergate and the men's rights movement are the same thing (which your links would imply) then I'm afraid you are the one who doesn't think at all. You are lumping all groups you disagree with into one.
/r/MensRights17/07/17 06:09 AM
6

In that situation, no women would be able to compete which of course would be labeled sexism. Feminists would complain until a solution was found The solution of course would be to have a women's league...
/r/MensRights16/07/17 07:51 PM
16

First four are so uncommon as to be fairly worthless justifications. The chances of those happening are orders of magnitude less than being hit by a car but we still allow cars. They are not justification for recommending circumcision for all babies. The last one has been debunked. The study is as bad as the 'vaccines cause autism' study. Apart from extreme cases where there is risk to health (almost never), circumcision is unecessary, abusive, and really fucking weird. I mean if this was any ot…
/r/MensRights02/07/17 09:08 PM
2

Thanks for the reasoned response. I agree. We ultimately need to aim for an entirely neutral view of abuse: it's wrong, full stop. I suppose I was preaching to the converted in a sense. It's just so very difficult to stay neutral when confronted with so many decidedly none neutral opinions in every day life.
/r/MensRights27/06/17 04:14 PM
2

You're right. However, in the context of a society that says: Men, don't rape; Men, don't abuse; Men, no means no; Men, you are privilaged; Men, you get paid more; Men, it's easier for you in the workplace... it's very easy to feel like (I would say justifiably so) everyone thinks women are infallible and women have all the issues. In which case, it seems reasonable to highlight specifically that women too, can be privilaged and can be guilty of wrong doing by virtue of its omission from discuss…
/r/MensRights27/06/17 11:54 AM
6

No. It's bad because it assumes all males are potential rapists just like assuming all blacks are potential thieves is bad. Liklihood is actually irrelevant. Not all blacks steal. Not all men rape. It's wrong.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 04:11 PM
7

The statistics aren't 'bullshit' but an important part of reading statistics, and a skill that seems to be lacking in the world, is to understand, really understand, what was actually recorded and the conext in which it was recorded. Those statistics are recording cases where people were convicted of rape. It does NOT record ALL cases of rape. In cases where people are convicted of rape, yes, it's usually a male. But that only tells you that more men are CONVICTED of rape. It doesn't actuallly s…
/r/MensRights22/06/17 04:08 PM
11

His premise is that telling men not to rape is as bad as telling black people not to steal. Jesus, your stupidity is showing...
/r/MensRights22/06/17 03:41 PM
1

This is possibly the most accurate summary of what happened I've seen. In fact it's the only time I've seen it in full without someone pretending the whole thing came purely from sexism. The sex scandal led to the media scandal which led to the cover up. No one was singled out for there sex, only their (amoral) actions. I stumbled across gamergate as it unfolded and watched with fascination. I mean it there was no arguing it. Here the incestuous relationship in the gaming media was undeniable, t…
/r/MensRights22/06/17 02:56 PM
2

I guess that's the million dollar question isn't it? How do you start a dialogue with someone who aggressively resists it? I'd imagine you're in an excellent position to start off with as you identify as a feminist. I would imagine most people would be more open to listening to 'one of their own'. I get the impression from some feminists that they assume an MRA talking to them is some kind of attack before dialogue has even begun. Having said that, I've seen feminists ostracised for daring to ex…
/r/MensRights16/06/17 12:01 PM
8

Contructive comments at there best right here guys. I welcome opposing opinion when it promotes critical thinking and discussion but there is nothing of value in your post.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 10:34 AM
1

This explanation needs more air time.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 10:26 AM
1

It isn't just that no. But that is certainly a lot of it. It's why this is seen as acceptable by so many when it wouldn't be were the roles reversed. It's ok to give a privelage to women but woe betide you if you do it to men. I'm guessing those ladies nights were more themed than anything else. That's fine. The fact that things exist that men don't tend to enjoy but women do is fine. You tend to only get females when you do something that only generally appeals to females. But that's not what t…
/r/MensRights14/06/17 09:04 AM
3

It's not about just this one occurance though. It's about what came before to lead to this and what will happen after as well. It is becoming publically acceptable to generalise men and say they are sexual predators, rapists, or at best just make women feel uncomfortable. This has led to the idea that if a women feels uncomfortable when men are around, it must be the man's fault, instead of the possibility that it's just that woman's predjudices. This is in turn leading to the idea that, well if…
/r/MensRights14/06/17 06:16 AM
12

As others have said, the MRM exists because inequalities exist and the ones affecting men won't be addressed by anyone else. I think men's rights is sometimes seen as a backlash because some of those inequalities are a direct result of feminism. Not all. Some, like men being seen as disposible people, lives to be thrown at problems like wars, are as old as humanity. But some came with the rise of feminism. Take education for example. When women performed worse in academia, steps were taken to ch…
/r/MensRights12/06/17 03:40 PM
11

This. They are buzz words to excuse not listening to others with a differing point of view.
/r/MensRights12/06/17 03:06 PM
2

Of course I didn't claim you were calm and impartial. I've been calling you out because you haven't been. I told you you'd let yourself down because of it. Nothing dishonest about that. So far the only string to your bow seems to have been using expletives, all the while arrogantly pretending you have some kind of moral and intellectual high ground. You're the dishonest one. Mostly to yourself. That's the only person who you're fooling. You say you wany reasoned conversation, then swear. You tel…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 08:45 PM
3

Boys' do not get away with it anymore than 'girls' do. This is not a gendered problem, it is an 'arrogant person' problem. Two wrongs don't make a right. You were still being hypocritical. And I think it would be dishonest of you to say your original post was reasoned as well. Resorting to calling the post 'a new low' is hardly constructive is it? Or do you think it's reasonable for you to speak to people in an insulting way, but the same isn't true in reverse? While I could certainly have phras…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 02:49 PM
8

We started this 'conversation' because you were a hypocrite and here you are again, 'boys in the boys club,' generalizing. Besides, if it's bad that the 'boys' do it, it's bad that you do it. It's no excuse. I replied in the hope you could be reasonable not because I don't like your attitude. It was you who said that you can't find people to have a reasoned conversation with and yet, presented with the option of doing so, you resort to insults.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 11:13 AM
6

I neither want nor need your respect. However you should respect yourself enough to care what your post says about yourself as it is revealing who you truly are. When people are typing anonymously online, when there are little consequences for showing negative behaviours, you see who they really are. You say I am using 'shit logic' and yet you are the one who is swearing and replying based on emotion. If you were to be honest with yourself, you'd realise you'd let yourself down. I hope you can g…
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:33 AM
8

Your post says more about you than it does about me.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:59 AM
10

Says 'you lot' and generalises a group of people. Proceeds to use generalising as an argument against the post. Face palm.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:00 AM
1

'The fact that men have an organ between their legs that makes it uncomfortable to close their legs is irrelevant because feminism. You are male therefore you are definately showing your male dominance by spreading your legs. And yes, the fact that I am being sexist, by immediately assuming anything a man does which I don't like is an act of oppression, does escape me.' A feminist, probably.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 11:22 AM
1

Yes. That is the whole point of the thread. We are laughing at the stupidity of the original post while slightly dying inside that anyone would be moronic enough to think that men as a sex generally find periods more disgusting than rape. But hey, feminists.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 09:42 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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