TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

afndale Archive

View 1 posts and 235 comments by afndale 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)
15

afndale/r/MensRights29/04/12 05:55 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Yeah, men are just like tanks with a woman controlling it. Get a hold of yourself, man! Men write their own desrinies, for better or worse.
/r/MensRights19/02/15 08:16 AM
4

Where the hell did you get feminists from?
/r/MensRights21/07/12 02:23 PM

Admittedly that's a really poorly written phrase, but Zimbabwe, abortion rights are restricted except in case of rape, incest, health risks to the mother, and disabilities in the child. So the author meant to say that abortion remains illegal outside of those exceptions.
/r/MensRights21/07/12 02:21 PM
1

The 'health choice' that I'm speaking of IS bodily autonomy. I'm stating that bodily autonomy is secondary as a motivation to, uh, I'm not sure what the short term is, "parental autonomy"? The ability for one's self to decide when the appropriate time to become a parent is, to decide for one's self when to take on the responsibilities of raising a child.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 03:10 PM
4

They told us that women should have no say in this as men have no say in abortion. If that's the case, then fathers shouldn't have any say because it's not their penis being circumcised.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 11:16 AM
1

what about the opposite situation? I have no idea. I know some states allow either parent to reclaim parenthood for a certain period of time, regardless of which one brought the baby in and what their current relationship is like, but I'm having trouble finding a concrete answer to your question. I'll keep on trying, and if I find one, I'll let you know.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 11:13 AM
1

Excuse me but isn't the abortion position already advertised as such as evident by the use of identifier pro-choice? Choice can mean more than one thing. I'm talking about a person's choice of whether or not to be a parent. Mainstream abortion supporters, though, tend to phrase it as a health choice. "Her body, her choice". Not as "Her life, her choice", which would appeal much more strongly to men's case.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 11:10 AM

What makes you say this? I should definitely specify that when I said 'always', I meant that in the time sense, not as in every single person who ever had an abortion did it for that reason. I would definitely posit that the majority of women probably have abortions because they're not ready to take on the responsibilities of parenthood, although I'll admit directly that I have no concrete evidence of this. My impression comes mainly from a book I read a couple of months ago that consisted of in…
/r/MensRights16/07/12 04:21 PM
8

Personally, I'd rather stop my politicians from making new laws relating to my girlfriend's vagina than ask them to make laws about my penis. This is more or less where I'm at. I feel like a lot of the hatred being tilted towards feminists on /MR really ignores the fact that traditionalists are far worse for men. Feminists may not be too happy about LPS, but traditionalists would just as soon advocate fucking abstinence instead of abortion.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 04:01 PM

The problem with getting this kind of institutional law passed is current social perception of the issue. If you look back at the feminist movement in the late 60's, when abortion was initially a really huge issue, you see that feminists were being squarely beaten by traditionalists. Traditionalists made the same argument they're still making, that it's murder of a defenseless person, and that argument held water for a good while. To combat this, however, feminists made it so that it wasn't a "f…
/r/MensRights16/07/12 10:37 AM
2

I just read the Brook's column in the morning paper today, so give it a few days to circulate and gather responses. I definitely think there's going to be some fireworks, particularly since it was a very reasonably written column. I liked the way that Brooks handled the "genetic" argument. He was coming at it from the perspective that it was a flaw in the education system, that the system couldn't deal with a certain type of person, and that that person was most likely a boy. He made sure to inc…
/r/MensRights10/07/12 01:03 PM
1

He's directly addressing radicalism, which adopts the fallacious argument you've attributed to him. He specifically says that that's not OK. He also goes on to say that not joining in relationships isn't a bad thing at all, to each their own, but that it's the process by which radicals are arriving at that conclusion (the statement you find objectionable) that's unacceptable.
/r/MensRights05/07/12 08:08 AM
1

Yes. I support age of consent laws taking this stuff into account only because 15 year olds are gonna fuck anyways and it's not worth the fight. It's a much bigger issue when one party is able to form informed consent and the other party isn't. That's where you have power imbalances that really work against the uninformed party.
/r/MensRights05/07/12 12:36 AM
1

This area severely depresses me. Me too. I can't even imagine the ways in which their opportunities to grow and prosper have been diminished, and to have had that burden put on them before they were able to really understand what they were getting into. If you're speaking generally, then yes, I agree that 15 is old enough to get the sexy-tingles in one's pants. If you're trying to say that this is some gender based characteristic, where only boys get those sexy-tingles at 15, then I disagree. It…
/r/MensRights04/07/12 07:16 AM
2

The thing is, it's probably completely fair to say that the 15 year old would be elated. I mean, there's little doubt that the 15 year old would be consenting in the typical sense of the term. But, a big motivator behind statutory rape laws is informed consent. That is, sure, he may want the sex, but sex isn't an act in a vacuum. What if she has a kid? Is he aware of what that means for him? What if he develops an STI after the fact? He doesn't know her or anything. What if, what if, etc., we as…
/r/MensRights04/07/12 06:42 AM
7

It doesn't carry any significant health benefits. The ones that are purported to belong to circumcision are irrelevant until well after adulthood, anyways, where the individual can make up their own mind.
/r/MensRights04/07/12 05:57 AM
7

I can't speak for it in Europe, being a place where routine circumcision of newborn males isn't regularly practiced. Protesting circumcision in America, though, definitely doesn't have an antisemitic feel. Maybe anti-Christian in some parts.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 04:44 PM
3

Before the late 19th century, automatic full custody of the children. This is just as much an obligation as it is a right. At-fault divorce where the wife had to prove that the husband either cheated or treated her cruelly. No frivolous divorces because the wife wasn't perfectly happy. And what if he has an issue with her, but she doesn't provide him with a fault capable of divorcing her? This is a two-way street, neither gender really moved ahead of one another on this one. Hell, if you believe…
/r/MensRights28/06/12 01:57 AM
5

What rights did men have under traditional marriage pre-feminism that they don't have now?
/r/MensRights28/06/12 01:28 AM

Right? As if traditional marriage wasn't a tool for extortion and legal bondage of men as well. It's not something good that was soured by feminism, it's something that was never good, except as a tool of shared oppression. Feminism may have raised the stakes for men, but men are free to reject marriage, and they are. Good, I say. EDIT: I would say it's like a rotting log that feminism is kicking in. It's definitely a painful process, but men (and women!) need to be acting in their own best inte…
/r/MensRights27/06/12 11:51 PM

The cats thing in and of itself isn't really important, it's the fact that men even could be judged on that that's relevant. Phone surveys on the radio always hand-select the more extreme views because they're better entertainment, and I doubt most women have issues with men who own cats. But even the fact that there's some minority of women out there who do, and who get radio time because of it, is enough to suggest there's a problem. The blogger is absolutely right when she says that most "mal…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 03:28 PM

Bingo. What she did was take advantage of her position of power to fuck an underage student. Oh, he made the advances? Who cares? She was old and mature enough to make the right choices - she didn't slip and fall on his dick. She is clearly guilty of statutory rape. Almost legal isn't legal.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 02:16 PM
3

that person must be delusional! I tend to follow rediquette when it comes to downvoting, but to address this, not everyone got proper circumcisions. There's many more people than you may realize who have dick problems as a result of botched circumcisions and have a lot of reason to be angry about it. What it really breaks down to is that it's a surgery and there's a risk of things going wrong. Every surgical procedure needs to justify that risk by an associated health benefit, and circumcision r…
/r/MensRights14/06/12 04:51 AM
4

i don't think it is as horrible as the people here make it out to be If it makes you feel any better, my circumcision is just as horrible as I make it out to be. Botched circumcisions are not very fun.
/r/MensRights14/06/12 04:47 AM
3

There are no objectively correct answers on things like this. Under what moral standards would circumcising a child be correct? Not even to mention, you're misusing the word objectively. Objectively doesn't mean "it's better in every case", objectively means "without bias". I'm obviously biased, being circumcised, but find it highly suspect that anyone could "objectively" justify circumcision.
/r/MensRights14/06/12 04:38 AM
10

I thought it was obvious that this was a tongue-in-cheek reply to the list. I think you really just got dinged by Poe's Law. There's certainly enough extremists on here that it seems reasonable to seriously mean that.
/r/MensRights11/06/12 02:43 AM
1

Sommers' article has problems, though. For example, the whole thing about university professors is really problematic, since that is, in fact, illegal under current law. Look up Corning Glass Works vs Brennan, market forces based directly on gender are considered to be, well, gender-based. The new act wouldn't change anything in regards to that, except make it easier for Social Works professors to find out that they're being discriminated against and then sue for back pay. That's not even to men…
/r/MensRights08/06/12 02:42 AM
1

Keep in mind that the article linked was written by an economist with strong conservative leanings and has removed the original article, which makes it rather difficult to criticize her logic. Nothing I've seen in the bill suggests that her attacks would be the case, but then, I can't even see what those attacks are outside of a brief excerpts. Also, quite a few of the links on that blog point directly back at the blog post itself. That's incredibly deceptive.
/r/MensRights07/06/12 02:20 AM
1

Truth be told, I think most dudes who are cut and claim to be perfectly content with it are just hiding how disappointed they are with the situation. There's a definite taboo amongst men when it comes to talking about their dicks, and there's twice the taboo about discussing imperfections therein. But I'm here for ya, dude.
/r/MensRights07/06/12 01:57 AM

I am definitely not going to vote Republican. Republicans have a long history of opposing abortion rights, and if anything, I think there should be more abortion rights as opposed to fewer. Republicans also tend to side against workplace safety regulation, which results in the wrongful, "accidental" deaths of thousands of men each year pushed into high-risk occupations in order to fulfill their socially-assigned obligations to support a wife and kids. I also will not vote Republican because the …
/r/MensRights06/06/12 01:58 AM
2

I'm in a similar boat. I haven't discussed it with my parents, and I'll probably take my reservations about it to my grave. My dad I don't talk to, my mom would likely experience far too much guilt if I told her how I really feel about the situation. Far in the past the topic came up and they decided to cut me because my dad was cut and that's just how things were done then. I really wish they had the courage to go against the tide of public opinion on that issue.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 01:41 AM
1

I personally am fine with the Lilly Ledbetter Equal Pay Act, though. Regardless of whether a gender wage gap exists or doesn't exist or whatever the scope is, I do have an issue with someone being paid more or less just because of their gender. However, I don't think the act will do much to fix the wage gap - there are already laws on the books stating thusly, and they aren't used very often to very much effect. I don't think changing the way the filing deadlines work will make the gap disappear…
/r/MensRights06/06/12 12:48 AM
1

Good point as well! I wonder if we would've heard about it if they just sued for lawyer fees and free cruise tickets.
/r/MensRights04/06/12 09:11 PM
8

value children's safety over adult pride. It's not about this. It is not about valuing children's safety. If you were going to design a system that protected children, would you demarcate areas specifically for children and then ban single people from entering them? No? Great, then this is not about children's safety. What this is about is children's perceived safety. This kind of bandying about doesn't do anything to make children safer, all that it does do is deny people's natural rights. adul…
/r/MensRights04/06/12 08:58 PM
3

Before we collectively get our panties in a bunch, can anyone say for sure that you're not a current B&N employee, or (at the very least) aren't just defending the company awkwardly.
/r/MensRights04/06/12 08:52 PM
2

I'm sure some cultures out there cut off men's testicles or penises I haven't heard of any... Regardless, the point is that you don't get to choose. That's what's so terrible about male circumcision, that it happens at birth and that it can be debilitating but nobody cares about it. In fact, that's not even discussing the fact that circumcision is a surgery and has a complication rate of about 2-10%. The exact rate is unknown, because nobody cares enough to try to find out. This is the whole "va…
/r/MensRights04/06/12 01:54 AM
6

I want to be circumcised. Great. I didn't and don't want to be circumcised. The differences in our situations are that you're doing it because you want to. I didn't do it, though. Rather, my parents did it, and the only reason I've ever heard is because my dad is circumcised so they thought I should be. That, right there, is all the reason needed to ban infant circumcision. If you want to get any bit of you cut off as an adult, I think that's great. But don't dare come out and say that there are…
/r/MensRights04/06/12 01:46 AM

You always set big numbers so that the companies will take you seriously. The judge never awards that much, that's understood. But you've gotta make investors go "100m!? Holy Cow!" to send a message.
/r/MensRights04/06/12 01:39 AM
5

OP, I see what you're trying to say, but you're creating a "what about the womenz" argument here. The problem is that you're trying to justify ending discrimination against men by the positive impact it will have on women - this is why your arguments are being received so poorly. What this really amounts to is little more than victim-blaming. "Well if shit sucks for you men, why don't you go become single fathers and encourage women to sleep around a bunch?" Dude, these solutions really dance ar…
/r/MensRights03/06/12 05:40 AM

Well I remember that one time I saw a rapist so I whipped out my penis and we had an epic "sword-fight" in which I won, vanquishing him forever. That's how I became Afndale, Holder Of The Seven Keys of Azgaloth. But on a serious note, penises aren't used to stop rape. Brains are. Unless they're trying to imply that men only think with their dicks...........
/r/MensRights29/05/12 03:51 AM

I must say, I think this is the best GirlWritesWhat video she's made so far. At least, it's the one that's spoken the most to me. Having it all laid out like that is pretty, uh, alarming, to say the least.
/r/MensRights29/05/12 03:47 AM
1

I wish that cab driver good luck in his suit. I can already hear it now - "If we award you these damages, it will discourage sexual assault victims from coming forward" - never mind the fact that NOT awarding the damages would encourage the perception that victims are making false accusations knowing they can get away with it.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 09:57 PM
1

There is a lot of variance in the genes. Just think of all the combinations and permutations of the a handful of genetic traits or to even dumb it down think of one gene that might affect the production of one brain chemical and all the implications that might have on somebody over their entire lifetime. Bingo. So even if you accept the genetic argument, there's room for a lot of variation. You making comments suggesting that men prefer traditional women because of genetic factors is misleading,…
/r/MensRights28/05/12 02:13 AM
1

Part of my argument was that I am aware of these ideas which I use to draw the line from one point, my personal preferences, to the other, the situation men find themselves in relation to women. You're not drawing much of a point, though. You state that you feel a certain way, then you say that deep inside all men feel the same way because of genetics. My point is, if it's genetics, then why is there so much variance in what men find attractive? Is there perhaps a little more importance on softw…
/r/MensRights28/05/12 01:25 AM

Personally, I do not find it attractive it should not be attractive on a genetic level. You're making quite a leap there, partner. From your own personal feelings to generalizing across all cismen? There's always been strong women and men attracted to them, perhaps the way they interacted was different than it may be now, speaking in a very, very general sense, but this is hardly anything new. The social conditioning which stemmed from the feminist movement goes against what men should, genetica…
/r/MensRights27/05/12 10:42 PM
12

If the parents believe their child will benefit from a circumcision Wait, so why are parents smarter than almost every major medical institution in the world? they feel they need for religious reasons to let their child have a circumcision then I don't think a change in law needs to occur Well, what if their child doesn't end up following that religion? Not like they're going to get their foreskin back. Don't worry, it's OK to force other people into unnecessary surgery just so long as YOU get t…
/r/MensRights24/05/12 09:01 PM
1

You can't change the fact someone that's willing to outwork you may reap the benefits of their hard work. You can change the meaning of 'outwork', though, to indicate that people can have lives too while working their asses off. I think that's what I'm really trying to get at - there's always going to be tryhards and they're always going to be rightly rewarded. Nonetheless, it's kind of goofy to look at the way Americans work (men and women) and think that this is how we would want society to be…
/r/MensRights24/05/12 02:34 AM
1

Hopefully the right things change, then!
/r/MensRights24/05/12 02:32 AM

Obviously this doesn't apply to all men, but there aren't any good statistics on the measure. Just in the last 10 years or so, some psychologists started preaching about the idea that men were massively underdiagnosed for depression. Like, clinical-level dope the fucker up kind of depression. The typical way that depressed people are seen is lazy, unmotivated, sleeps 18 hours a day and hardly eats anything but bottles of sleeping pills kind of thing. But now there's a growing realization that me…
/r/MensRights24/05/12 02:32 AM
7

Circumcision is surgery, straight up. As with all surgeries it has complications. Ask your wife: Is she OK with the fact that they might screw up the circumcision? Remind her that the son can always get it cut later if he decides to, there's no reason to force it on him now. Let her think about it. Google up circumcision horror stories - top hits for me are stories about babies with excessive bleeding leading to them having to cauterize the wound, which causes all sorts of crazy scars and proble…
/r/MensRights24/05/12 12:46 AM
7

Completely agree. Men are moving from a position of obligation towards holding out for mutual benefit. It looks ugly to have a significant portion of the popular appear to give up, but if you've rigged the game against them, how can you expect anything else?
/r/MensRights24/05/12 12:22 AM

Bingo. There's a real problem with men's role in society, and nobody wants to acknowledge it. It's gross. I'm all for women's rights and such, but the men problem is potentially catastrophic if things don't change.
/r/MensRights24/05/12 12:18 AM
2

And if they stop caring, they go under, and can't pay you anyway. Man, that doesn't sound like every business I've ever seen. Most of them already offer bereavement leave, maternity leave, vacation, leave of absence, and so on. It seems like businesses can survive a little adversity, particularly if they're well-run. If you run your business on a skeleton crew and put all of your profits into side projects like expansions and long-term investments, then you deserve to go under when one of your e…
/r/MensRights23/05/12 11:27 PM
1

it's just the way it is. With that attitude, that's how it will always be. There's a lot of solutions to the childcare problem, such as having a spouse or even outsourcing part of the raising your kid job to the community via a daycare or otherwise. Obviously if nothing changes then it's true that it's the way it is, but that's what I'm calling for: Change.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 11:22 PM
2

No matter how you word it or try to get around it, it's still a choice, and one people make knowing the consequences. This is the Aladdin problem. Do you steal to eat, or just die hungry? I feel like a lot of feminists really misunderstand the problem, this is really evident from the lack of productive solutions. The fact is, you're absolutely right, that you've gotta live with the consequences of choices, even the ones you didn't want to have to make. But this is a question of 'ought' more than…
/r/MensRights23/05/12 10:14 PM
1

Thanks. I'm not sure what evidence I would need to be persuaded of that idea. I'm with you on the hard, solid data aspect, but it's kind of a tough sentiment to unpack. I'm thinking that the nature of an unfair usage relationship would have to do with not only extracting value, but also denying benefits. So, for example, child support being demanded and visitation rights denied for fathers specifically desiring to fulfill their roles as fathers. But I'd want something grander than just focusing …
/r/MensRights23/05/12 09:39 PM
5

Let me phrase my point in a more lucid way. It's not business owners that are evil, they're just looking out for their business. It's not mothers that are evil, they're just looking out for their kids. It's not non-mother-employees who are evil, they just want to climb the ladder or whatever. The evil here is the situation that sets up the choice of job vs child, that's the issue. It's not that, when given The Choice, women should be exempted from it, it's moreso that The Choice shouldn't even b…
/r/MensRights23/05/12 05:17 PM
1

Why are social constraints supposed to automatically be called patriarchy? There wasn't really adequate vocabulary in use when the word patriarchy came around. At the time when it first entered use (60's), things certainly looked a lot more patriarchal, so it seemed fair. Since then, feminists have tended to realize that patriarchy isn't an international male conspiracy and is instead a set of social constraints (I like that word - constraints, better than the one I was using) that affects men, …
/r/MensRights23/05/12 05:08 PM
3

Very relevant. Thanks.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 04:45 PM
1

A patriarchy means the man is the leader of his family unit, and its representative in the larger social context. That's the anthropological definition, certainly. I won't deny that the term 'patriarchy' is a bit of a misnomer, but keep in mind that the term came into use when your stated situation was vastly more common and the term has evolved in meaning (at least in feminist theory) since. Not everyone has kept up with the evolution, which only adds to the confusion. I suggest that men being …
/r/MensRights23/05/12 04:44 PM
5

Sound confusing? That's because it is, and purposely so. It's really not a confusing concept, though. That's a confusing explanation, but the concept itself is pretty simple. I'd love to explain it to you if you'd like, but I see it as being tangential to the greater discussion. Any time you have more than one person, there is a need for hierarchy and leadership. This is a little bold, care to flesh that out a little more? Surely you can have two people exchanging leadership responsibilities equ…
/r/MensRights23/05/12 04:21 PM
4

In all fairness you can push for punitive damages based on the discriminatory practices.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 03:59 PM
5

You're not running a business, though. There's a different legal precedent. For example, in the US' civil rights act of 1964, title II specifically bans discrimination in private businesses based on race, color, religion, or national origin. It, however, specifically doesn't have anything to say about private clubs. A more precise definition of private club I'm not able to offer you, that's an ambiguously defined term and I'm a little behind on my supreme court readings.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 03:56 PM
1

That's an interesting, albeit tangential point. I never really thought of that, but then, I'm not a big fan of dealing with the concepts of rights, things get awfully abstract and morally ambiguous quickly. My take, though, is that rights are legal guarantees of person or behavior. A belief in equal rights, then, would certainly consider gay marriage to be a right rather than something else, at least so long as you agreed with the definition. Since I'm not educated terribly well in this subject,…
/r/MensRights23/05/12 03:47 PM

I'm curious about this, too. Embogenous please respond.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 03:35 PM
2

This might not be a popular opinion around here, but there is nothing wrong with having spaces dedicated to a particular group. Agree. RadFems definitely should be able to have their own space, but that doesn't mean anyone has to like it. RadFems are a group that I think digs it's own grave plenty well. It's the kind of movement that's attractive to women with a chip on their shoulder, and probably serves as some sort of bizarre catharsis. Ultimately, though, it doesn't hold up to logic or even …
/r/MensRights23/05/12 03:30 PM
3

I wish I had thought of this first. I like this idea! It would take hell and high water to get it passed in the current climate, but at my initial musings it definitely looks like the most fair way to go.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 03:23 PM

That's a vast oversimplification of the term. Men being in charge is a result of patriarchy, not the cause, at least by more modern gender theory. Either way, the writer was clearly trying to point the finger at the different gender roles present in the situation, which is really the appropriate response.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 03:15 PM
0

Secondly, the point of my question was to make you think. I can think all I like, but I don't exist in a vacuum and desire input from others to make conscious decisions. As far as a men's only gym, I just don't see the need, even after reading why women seem to want one. I feel like there's a lot of "us too" mentality on this subreddit, and a lot of the time it's given a pass when there isn't any real reasoning behind it. I'm all for improving things, but you can't fix what isn't broken, and doi…
/r/MensRights22/05/12 01:11 AM
1

There's been quite a few responses and you have yet to answer my question in a meaningful way. Why is that? First of all, I find that claiming your gender as an excuse to not know something to be insulting. Do you want me to just copy/paste off of the first search hit I find on google? I try to speak from personal experience and wisdom. I'm sure that I could study the subject and give you a detailed response, but I'm not just going to do a quick google search and tell you the first thing that co…
/r/MensRights21/05/12 10:50 PM

That article is complete trash. Look at this ridiculous statement: "In the United States, rates of circumcision are declining and are lowest among black and Hispanic patients, groups in whom rates of HIV, herpes, and cervical cancer are disproportionately high," Golden and Wasserheit note. Yeah, well, in Europe circumcision rates are dramatically lower, and HIV, herpes and cervical cancer are disproportionately low relative to the US. See? I can do it too! The difference between poverty-stricken…
/r/MensRights21/05/12 09:55 AM
-5

Truth be told, I've got no idea. The only thing I can think of is being potentially approached by unwanted suitors, but I'm going to have to cite male privilege here and say that I really honestly don't know what the benefits of segregated women's spaces are to women.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 08:15 AM
-8

You said working out at the gym because women are distracting. Thing is, that's not really a typically masculine activity, women work out too, and have been working out for some years. I'm really just curious about what a typically masculine activity is, and how the practice of it is restricted.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 01:56 AM
1

The point is to explain why feminism is more concerned with women's rights than it is men's rights. Whether or not is does a good job of it (it doesn't), villifying men isn't the point.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 01:54 AM
1

People who try to put guilt on you over privilege are wrongheaded. There is a role for recognizance of one's own privilege - namely, to influence how you interact with others. It shouldn't be a matter of guilt at all, and boo-hiss to those who try to make it so. The example of privilege that I use is height. Back when I was in high school and worked as a cashier, occasionally I was asked to go onto the sales floor and bring forward merchandise that was pushed back on high shelves. Customers who …
/r/MensRights21/05/12 12:52 AM

We don't have spaces to really kick back and relax and enjoy typically 'masculine' activities. What kind of masculine activities do you not have the space to enjoy, if you don't mind me asking?
/r/MensRights21/05/12 12:26 AM
2

The idea that you should create a male safe space in order to aggressively confront issues is kind of disgusting. I mean, ideally, a men's center would have that effect, on encouraging healthy views of all facets of society, but to sit down and establish that as the purpose of a men's center seems to completely miss the point.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 12:23 AM
3

Misandry is largely what fueled it, though. Homophobia may have been the motivation, but misandry infects family courts like a virus. Not to mention, you're also making the strange assumption that men themselves can't be misandric. That is definitely not the case.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 01:40 AM
2

Do you think they would have ran the article if it was a young girl doing the same thing? I'm a fan of gender reversing, but I doubt the controversy would be any different. Yes, it is sensationalist, but they did it at the expense of a 3 year old boy. There's not much of an expense here. Ok, so he risks getting made fun of when he starts school, by other kids who read Time magazine? I'm pretty sure fat-shaming leads to far more teasing than having a really hot mom and making it to the Time magaz…
/r/MensRights12/05/12 02:54 PM
3

For these reasons, if my partner offers to pay for dinner, I thank him, and make sure that next time, it's my turn. I have a female friend who I have this kind of relationship with. We're constantly treating one another to this or that. We work together, so whenever we're on break she'll offer to get me a soda, and then on lunch I'll pick up her meal, but then we'll go to the bar afterwards and she'll get me a beer when I'm in the bathroom. Taking turns like this makes it feel more like each par…
/r/MensRights11/05/12 08:17 PM
1

My kids' dicks are none of your business. Your kids' dicks are none of your business, either. Virtually everyone in the world thinks circumcision is a bad idea, even most Americans. Why do you think it's the case that nobody else realizes the sexual and health benefits? Let's see, we have a reduction in UTIs. That's great, because UTIs are easily treated with a single round of antibiotics and, furthermore, are less common than circumcision complications. There's less penile cancer, because there…
/r/MensRights11/05/12 08:01 PM
2

Rather than drawing an equivalence, I'm showing your logical pattern. If you're looking at an injustice and saying that you're OK with the subject of an injustice as it applies to you, that isn't a meaningful stance. The fact is, involuntary circumcision needs to stop now, there's no reason to continue doing it and it's harming people's lives. Even if you're fine with your circumcision, that doesn't mean everyone is.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 01:56 PM
2

Shut the hell up I don't want to be your friend, I require you to be my ally If you're fine with your circ, that's great. I'm not. A lot of dudes aren't. Virtually none of those dudes had the opportunity to decide that a circ was a bad idea for themselves. Most reliable studies peg complication rate for circumcisions between 1-2%. That means that you're part of the 99% for which you don't have severe lasting damage. That doesn't mean you shouldn't support the 1% who do have that damage. Your arg…
/r/MensRights11/05/12 02:52 AM
-8

Truly a traumatic experience And me, my two friends, and the two cops all joked with each other about it. Somehow, I'm inclined to think that this is completely made up. Get your car stolen at gunpoint while your friend gets beaten by at least three other guys? Hilarious!
/r/MensRights02/05/12 02:44 AM

So, as a guy, I'm not allowed to question a feminist's beliefs? I disagree that this follows from the quoted paragraph, and from the article linked in general. From what I see, she's saying that care must be taken when approaching a person about an emotionally sensitive topic, and that feminism is often a sensitive topic. I liken it to asking a mother about her son's suicide. Ideally she'll be over the grief and be able to talk about it eventually, but sometimes that process takes years. I total…
/r/MensRights01/05/12 02:03 AM
5

PE tends to be more psychological in nature than anything else. Circumcision (or lack thereof) isn't a very good predictor, traits like low confidence or previous sexual trauma tend to be much better predictors of PE.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 02:11 AM
3

You don't have to be against circumcision based on the effects of the actual surgery. You should, however, definitely be against involuntary circumcision of infants simply because it's a significant violation of that person's body autonomy. It would be different if circumcision were temporary, or had legitimate medical benefits, but it isn't and it doesn't. Getting circumcised is purely for form rather than function, and it really should be that individual's right to choose whether or not to get…
/r/MensRights30/04/12 02:05 AM
1

That's well and good and all, but go into more detail about what your plan is. Lots of people on /MR keep saying that someone should do something, and the realization I had is that we could plausibly raise $250k, which is enough money to start something. What that something is needs to be determined by the community. As far as coming up with a website, I think that's a great idea, and it's pretty cheap, too, in the grand scheme of things. Perhaps we should create a committee website, where you c…
/r/MensRights29/04/12 10:22 PM
1

What do you think we should be doing, though? What do you think is an important project?
/r/MensRights29/04/12 09:52 PM
1

What do you think we should be doing, though? What do you think is an important project?
/r/MensRights29/04/12 09:52 PM
2

Not sure what article you're responding to, but I do agree with the quote. As crummy as the term 'patriarchy' can be to describe the problem, there is undoubtedly an oppressive social system whose time has come.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 02:40 AM
3

Please read the FAQ on the right. There's lots of general information available to answer your question.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 02:29 AM

Kinda have to agree. Half of his points were pretty funny, but some of them were just facepalm-inducing, like the planned parenthood slam.
/r/MensRights24/04/12 02:05 AM
1

If I were you, I would definitely tell your family not to use the plastibell. That is, don't use the plastibell unless they can come up with an immediate and pressing medical need for it. Medicine has changed though The one thing that will never change about medicine is that you can't fix what's not broken. All you can ever do is make it worse or keep it the same. Based on the fact that you said you were glad, I imagine yours was OK. I'm not so lucky, and please remember me when the issue of cir…
/r/MensRights22/04/12 10:19 PM

This, sir, gets to the very heart of what the term 'privilege' means. Ok, so, you have a circumcision and you're fine so everybody should be fine, right? Not everybody has a good circumcision. Some men were born in a lousy hospital, dirty, maybe the surgeon was tired from working all day and prone to make mistakes, there's a hundred reasons why. Long story short, you get a circumcision before you can open your freakin eyes, and they fucked it up. Now you have to live with that for the rest of yo…
/r/MensRights22/04/12 04:05 PM
6

I don't want to discourage you, but you need to find a new set of arguments. For one thing, you're assuming a lot about a subject you don't have any first-hand experience with. (we see sex more emotional than society does) You assume it will be more emotional than society does. Isn't this a bit of a problem for you? They all had fun until each couple split up and every single one of them slipped into deep depression and anger Maybe they entered deep depression and anger because they don't know h…
/r/MensRights21/04/12 04:23 PM
5

Did you read the entire article? The researcher doing the blood-flow tests makes a huge point on the fact that women seem to have a disconnect between physical signs of arousal and actual desire. In fact, that's posed as one of the chief problems with studying female desire, is the fact that there aren't any objective, quantifiable variables that can be measured.
/r/MensRights21/04/12 04:17 PM
5

Feel free to engage it, but withdrawing does have an effect. It may not be as effective, but it's definitely on the table. How many more articles are you going to have to read saying "where have all the good men gone?" before you realize that men are going galt in greater numbers than is obvious at first glance? Certainly, the vast majority of men dropping out and tuning out probably aren't doing it out of some principled stance. Rather, you've got men who, just as an example, are facing the rea…
/r/MensRights21/04/12 05:37 AM
1

Well, according to this Times article, menstruation may help offset damage to the cardiovascular system that can cause heart attack/stroke. Men also tend to partake in harmful activities (excess smoking/drinking, etc.) than women, although I don't think the gap is as big as it used to be when that article was published. Pulling from the UK's Royal College of Psychiatrists, they specify that men tend to turn to substance abuse to deal with depression far more than women. This is a major men's iss…
/r/MensRights21/04/12 05:11 AM
2

I'm not saying this because I necessarily disagree with you, rather, I'm just being argumentative because that's how I learn best. By making you fully explain your position so I can understand it better. Consent to fatherhood is a sacred right, stronger than consent to sex. Can you hash this out in more depth for me? Obviously consent to fatherhood isn't legally respected in any society I'm aware of (see: no legal paternal surrender, child support ordered for raped young boys, etc.), so what mak…
/r/MensRights19/04/12 06:29 AM
1

My thoughts are that, from a teleological perspective, losing control over one's genetic material is only a bad thing if it causes harm to oneself, or society in general. From a deontological standpoint, however, we would have to analyze what makes genetic theft wrong and determine if this case qualifies. I would say it does, since biological lineage is something held as being extrinsically valuable, and consequently it can be considered theft. Whether you accept the teleological or deontologica…
/r/MensRights19/04/12 04:51 AM
2

not only is it inconsistent with any sense of logic/justice/fairness, Assuming no child support is to be paid, the ruling is consistent with teleological moral theories, which would determine that her bearing the kids won't demonstrate any substantive harm to the father. Of course, the law takes a much more deontological tack so there you have it. I'm sorry for being nitpicky, but I did want to get this point out. That being said, however, the child support issue makes this one extremely clean c…
/r/MensRights19/04/12 03:37 AM

You know, all things considered, I would consider this a reasonable ruling despite the right-to-not-procreate thing. I would consider it reasonable if he weren't financially on the hook. That's what kills it for me. So the girl "promised" that she wouldn't seek child support - are we supposed to believe that she'll feel that way for 18 long years?
/r/MensRights19/04/12 02:54 AM
2

I agree with the no good deed goes unpunished sentiment. At 18, the kid is legally an adult and can support himself. The intention of the law is to go after men who refuse to support the children they sired - this guy clearly went above and beyond his expectations as a sperm donor. He fucked himself in a legal sense for sure, but this clearly violates the intention of the law.
/r/MensRights15/04/12 06:26 AM
13

What is the concept of rape culture? To give a brief description, rape culture is a really poorly-named set of concepts. Generally, it describes a culture in which men are encouraged into hypersexuality (see: virgin-shaming) from a relatively young age, and are also filled with the idea that women are prizes, in the sense that a woman is something they get as a result of their actions (see: every popular depiction of romance). This ties in heavily to the MRA complaint that men are valued only fo…
/r/MensRights13/04/12 05:04 PM
0

You seem to know a lot about feminists for someone who can't detect sarcasm.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 12:02 AM
-1

No they don't
/r/MensRights10/04/12 01:24 PM

In /r/MensRights, feminists are guilty of things they didn't even say.
/r/MensRights09/04/12 11:55 PM

All-in-all, this "one way consent" idea is a bunch of feminist bullshit. Just stopping in to point out that it's more accurately characterized as a traditional concept (men always want sex, women always want love) that has been largely ignored by feminism. Feminists didn't create it, but I damn sure doubt they're gonna be the ones to take it out.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 02:46 PM
3

why doesn't the national organization for women speak out against women who kill their children, or commit violence against their partners, etc? I think understanding the difference between "Applied Feminism" and "Academic Feminism" will help relieve the dissonance here. Groups like NOW are female advocates, and they won't denounce child-killing mothers because NOW is more concerned with the situation that brought the mother to that brink of insanity. This is how practical feminism is - academic…
/r/MensRights07/04/12 01:26 AM
12

I love it when people prove me uninformed. Thanks!
/r/MensRights07/04/12 01:09 AM
2

it just presented an acceptable message in a way i have less preference for. Fair enough, I concede the point. I wonder if anyone has exposed him to the notion that men suffer as well?
/r/MensRights07/04/12 01:00 AM
2

When I was a teenager, I remember my father having a talk with me about what it means to be a man. The basic idea was that a man was someone who was completely self-sufficient, who needed support from no one but, rather, provided his own. I also remember during that lecture, he specifically said: "Help is something for others to offer you, not something for you to ask for." Honestly, that idea has been so hard for me to shake, and to this idea I can certainly say that I haven't. I just can't eve…
/r/MensRights07/04/12 12:56 AM
2

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Obama's "personal opinion is that women should be admitted" to the golf club. Carney said it was "up to the club to decide" but Obama told him he personally thinks women should be welcome. From the article that the Spearhead was responding to. Now let's see what the Spearhead has to say about it: What an outrage that this club can continue to exist! How dare women not be allowed in so as to drink mimosas and attract attention from wealthy golfers. I un…
/r/MensRights07/04/12 12:51 AM

Why do bigoted feminists and white knights call the Mens Rights Movements a "privileged straight white cis-mens rights" movement? Have you gone to read "The Manosphere"? /r/MensRights seems pretty damn reasonable compared to many of the writings out there. On reddit, blatant misogyny and calls to violence are shouted down, but shockingly many who claim to be MRAs are banefully traditional in their views. Not to mention, the MRAs in India aren't really strongly culturally connected to the ones in…
/r/MensRights07/04/12 12:43 AM
3

it's a little more white-knitey than i'd prefer How white-knighty is too much? A couple paragraphs on a blog isn't exactly a superbowl ad, in terms of exposure. EDIT: I do appreciate that you support him speaking up, though. Really, I do.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 12:27 AM

It's a problematic word because of the concept it deals with. It doesn't matter what word you're using it in, the concept is what's so offensive to people. People don't want to admit that they have advantages, and there is no way to discuss those advantages without making it seem like blame. If you can find a way to formulate the concept of advantages without making it seem like blame, then go for it, but until then, it's an absolutely vital concept when discussing oppression in any form.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 12:06 AM
10

No DV charges, no assault charges, no mutilation charges. Considering the way things are these days, Mr Pattinson is lucky he didn't end up in jail.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 11:49 PM
-3

Your comment was downvoted because it doesn't contribute to the conversation. Don't take it personally, everybody makes those comments from time to time.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 11:32 PM
5

In fact, a whore is a far better person than a feminist, because a whore will give you something for your money. You have gotta be a false flag. Nobody can be this stupid.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 05:03 PM
1

The problem is, I just don't see anyone alluding to that stereotype except for her. Maybe I'm reading the wrong news stories about this event. Most of them seem to blame her near-hit on her London roots, rather than her uterus.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 04:39 PM

Thanks. I don't mean to be too nit-picky, but linguistic ambiguities are easily turned against you, so we all gotta police each other's language to make sure we all mean what we say and vice versa.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 04:10 AM

It really just shows feminist unwillingness to work I think you left some words out. Like that part where you specified that you were simply upset at this one (group of) feminist, rather than having an experience with one (group) and then taking that as a stereotype for all feminists.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 04:05 AM

Victim-blaming much? Get a life.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 04:04 AM

If you ask me, the "Nice Guy" problem grows completely out of baneful male gender roles that assume hypersexuality. The assumption is that, when dudes at 13-17, they're so horny and trying to date around and all that that they learn then, and then spend the rest of their lives having casual sex and wearing dark sunglasses and all that. The reality is that for whatever reason (in my case, I was intensely religious up until around my 18th birthday), those social skills never develop, and nobody wi…
/r/MensRights06/04/12 04:02 AM

The difference is that /MR wasn't going out and trying to find this girl to lynch her or something like that. MR was mostly just trying to say that it's OK and give the troll some direction and hope for his future. There certainly should've been more healthy skepticism of the situation, but on the whole, I think the response was really pretty appropriate.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 03:43 AM

My first instinct was to argue against this, but C0CKPUNCHER is completely correct. That is blaming the victim. We should be wondering why nobody is willing to take any degree of responsibility for the mental health of men. The problem with mental health issues is that most mental health issues directly affect the sufferer's ability to recognize or recover from the issues. That's why it's important that people work together and help each other out. In a society where men can't be victims, though…
/r/MensRights05/04/12 03:23 PM
1

I could type a lot of words, but nothing will say it as elegantly as Norah Vincent herself. I found her book at a local public library, you can too. Self Made Man is the title, and it's a great read.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 03:15 PM
18

Oh, and don't forget, guys. Not All Feminists Are Like That!!!!
/r/MensRights05/04/12 05:41 AM

My favorite part is when she compares spermjacking to horseriding on the highway, saying that laws aren't needed for either since neither event happens often enough to warrant a law. Then Molecular linked to a page tracking the laws in most states pertaining to horseback riding on the highway. Girl got what she deserved with that one.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 05:37 AM

The depressing part here is she doesn't even see how she helped create the reality she's now complaining about. You know, I could argue for days about the little details here and there with your comment, but this conclusive sentence really gets to the heart and soul of the idea, and I completely agree with it. People need to realize that their actions have consequences, and they're not always intended. I can't hold it against her, personally, because I can see how the idea is attractive to her, …
/r/MensRights05/04/12 05:23 AM
7

Much better! Upvote everything!
/r/MensRights31/03/12 07:19 AM
15

Kinda gross. I don't like this ear piercing at six months old thing at all. Fuck, let the kid grow up a little bit before you start modifying it's body to suit your desires. By the time she's 5 she's probably gonna want pierced ears anyways, let her get old enough to understand it at least. Kinda telling that people think this is a bigger deal than cutting off part of a baby boy's dick, though. Circumcisions have dramatically higher rates of complications, and serve a much more vital role in the…
/r/MensRights31/03/12 05:56 AM

Message is clear: don't defend yourself. Sit there and take it. Yup. Only defend yourself if you have to. If she's gonna start choking him or something, obviously that's a different situation. But that is the message, and that's what people need to know. This is the one pedestal I'm fine putting women on, but only because the slant in the legal system is such that, as a man, it's unlikely you're going to receive a fair trial.
/r/MensRights31/03/12 05:46 AM
2

Women have better birth control because they are the ones who have to deal with the immediate consequences of pregnancy. Also because the female contraception is an easy-to-make hormone. Male biology is not so easy, hormonal treatments on men either don't stop the production of sperm or have vast side effects that are untenable. I could go on, but this is just fucking absurdity. Yes. Particularly the notion where he goes into how women manufactured their own oppression, and he goes on at length …
/r/MensRights31/03/12 05:41 AM
16

Its funny when a woman tries to hit a guy because men are naturally much, much stronger than women. Now that you've explained the joke it's suddenly so much funnier. Wow, my sides are splitting. It's hilarious when men get hit because they can hit harder. Just like how it's hilarious when men have long hair because women usually have long hair too, hahahahahaha. This guy is either A: A total pussy. or B: A total gentlemen for not hitting a woman. Or C: A person with two brain cells to rub togeth…
/r/MensRights31/03/12 05:14 AM
8

I'd like to think that everyone who sees that ad is going to shake their head in frustration like I did, but I'm rather embarrassed by the fact that there's probably a lot of people who are going to think it's hilarious. Maybe they had too much vodka when they made the ad, there was definitely poor judgment involved.
/r/MensRights31/03/12 03:23 AM

I'd like to think it's because people know better than to get involved. Raising your hand against a woman is a good way to get yourself arrested, even if you're released without charge because you didn't do anything wrong. Letting her act it out like a child until the police arrive and her criminality is obvious is the only appropriate way to act. I give that man props, he was easily twice her size and could've brutalized her if he wanted. But he took it, because he's smart and he knows that bec…
/r/MensRights31/03/12 03:14 AM
5

I don't identify as necessarily part of the MRM, although my personal beliefs do hold a huge intersection with the movement. Let me explain my view, perhaps it'll benefit in some way. Feminism has a weakness, that while it may be superficially oriented towards equality betwixt the genders, it is also framed in a historical context of women's liberation. This means that everything feminists stand for will, by and large, be viewed through a women's liberation lens. There is the honest desire for g…
/r/MensRights30/03/12 11:48 PM
16

This. I try as hard as I can to not label myself at all, and when forced to, I may mumble something about egalitarian something-something.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 05:41 PM
3

The trick is, a little financial calculus has shown that it would be generally cheaper for insurance to cover contraception than otherwise, and the beneficial effects would ripple through government and consequently the rest of the economy. Not like it's going to have a massive effect, but speaking strictly in terms of cost-benefit analysis, it's beneficial to you and everybody. The only real reason to oppose it is on a moral ground, that the government shouldn't be able to tell a business how t…
/r/MensRights30/03/12 04:54 AM
1

The comparison of humans to animals has always seemed really specious to me. Comparing human social organization to monkeys, as an example, really fails to capture the incredible distinction between humans and monkeys: Higher, rational thought. I don't question that instincts play a role, but christ, humans have done enough to demarcate ourselves from the rest of the animal kingdom. Just because a common result may be accomplish at some point hardly means there's a common reason for that result.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 04:48 AM
2

But why would working make women happier? It makes very few people happy I agree with this, but for different reasons. I think working does make you happier. But, working also gives you money, money that you earned and that belongs to you. This means that now, you not only have money, but more importantly, you have agency. You get to make decisions that matter to your life. Now you can get DirecTV. Now you can buy a double whopper with an extra large order of fries and a diet coke. Now you have …
/r/MensRights30/03/12 02:49 AM
1

Yes I believe this situation is a form of child abuse, no I don't know how to resolve it. I don't know if I necessarily would go so far as to say it's a form of child abuse, but I definitely do agree with you that a blatant privileging of mother-time over father-time is a rather bad thing. Unfortunately, it seems to be the direction society as a whole is moving in, since men are just such inept parents, according to sitcoms (so you know it's true).
/r/MensRights30/03/12 02:39 AM
5

This is a nightmare to a femenist. A femenist would say she was subserviant and acting like a slave Hmm, let's look a little closer to the situation. She does not do this because I make her do it, I am not opressing her in any way. This passes the feminist test. The problem that feminism set out to fix is the women who don't want to live like that, but are essentially forced to by social expectations. If that's what floats your wife's boat, great.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 02:34 AM
1

I'd consider it to be like a move from hell to purgatory. Better, but not good by any standards. I got the condescending feel pretty hard from it - regardless of how the qualities may have applied to me, it struck me as insulting. At least the basic message is well-intentioned, that individuals should be valued for their individual qualities.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 05:06 AM

Downvoted because it's not really a men's right's issue. The link you're trying to draw about them not making equivalent lists for male welfare is pretty irrelevant. They're trying to draw a picture about women's rights by state. If it was labeled "The best and worst states", period, and then only included information about women's rights, I could see this as a legitimate issue to point out.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 05:01 AM
8

Unbelievable, you say? My friend, Welcome to the USA, where fiction becomes fact!
/r/MensRights29/03/12 04:51 AM
2

If the movement is based on women's lib/gender equality or whatever, views on the moral positioning of the military is definitely outside of the defining features of the movement. That being said, however, I highly agree with this statement: Feminism's cognitive dissonance when it comes to the military is just symptomatic of their confused attraction to and repulsion of power. You really put your thumb on a feeling I couldn't articulate. Thanks.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 04:18 AM
2

An example of a poor statement written in that article is that men "start all the wars." I agree that it's poorly written, but that's a perfect example of the differences between an article written for lay people and one with a more exacting audience in mind. The reason this statement is made is explained in the article, where the author points out that men don't start wars because of some biological imperative, but rather because men have typically held positions of power. There've been dozens …
/r/MensRights26/03/12 09:12 PM
1

That may be the case for all modern societies, but that's not a sufficient argument for all possible societies. This seems like a uselessly academic argument until you consider that the author was trying to say that this is the root of why men are so violent. Men are biologically stronger, so in a social system founded on violence (as you point out), men can be expected to be more violent. My complaint is that I can't think of a compelling reason as to why society must, as a law, be founded on v…
/r/MensRights26/03/12 08:53 PM

The fact that this is currently the highest upvoted comment (more than twice the upvotes of the next highest one) demonstrates exactly why people have a problem with the MRM. Not even the opinion he espouses, just the literal content. What the fuck is this?
/r/MensRights26/03/12 03:05 AM
0

How many wars have there been throughout human history? OK, so maybe of the dozens of female rulers, a good portion of them started wars. Compare that to thousands of wars started by men. Just read the rest of the article, there's a lot of good stuff in it. For example, the author demonstrates that wars probably aren't because of some male battle instinct, but are probably caused by power imbalances.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 03:03 AM
1

Society is built on and held together by violence. Can you provide any evidence for this claim?
/r/MensRights26/03/12 02:59 AM
2

To reduce male violence, it is not sufficient to reform men, as the defenders of the male warrior hypothesis recommend ... Crucially, we must reduce the incentives for violence. You don't have to read the article, but don't post a comment as if you did. It will only confuse other people who didn't read the article either.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 02:58 AM
1

It makes for an unimpressive article because, to you, it's a given. To many, probably most people, it's assumed that men are more violent because of biological reasons. Testosterone. This is why people don't care when men are falsely accused, because he probably deserved it anyways because they just know that men are violent because of their biology. It's a significant article because it provides a well-thought out and well-reasoned approach to explaining how social forces have the ultimate powe…
/r/MensRights26/03/12 02:56 AM
2

From my perspective it seems like you are all just getting mad about it because, despite not mattering at all, it's one more way that you can attack feminists and say that men are oppressed. Not everyone who has a circumcision has a perfect circumcision. In fact, in some cases, the circumcision causes lots of problems later in life. When feminists talk about privilege, this is a great example. Treating a circumcision like it's a cosmetic issue comes from a position of privilege - one where a cir…
/r/MensRights25/03/12 04:51 AM

Completely agree. AVfM really could be a great site, but the over-reliance on stereotypes really just makes them look stupid. This article is complete negative dreck - it would be much better if it provided some context beyond throwing out stereotypes or maybe a sense of how to solve this problem or what. While I understand that not every piece has to be peppered with scientific studies and such, this is a pretty bold claim and needs SOME sort of logical backing.
/r/MensRights24/03/12 05:56 AM

Because nothing is EVER 50/50, unless discrimination FORCED it to be like that. I'd like to see the logic behind this statement.
/r/MensRights24/03/12 05:47 AM

Female porn stars are more notable than female scientists for the same reason that football players are more notable than male scientists. Let's be totally honest here, most of us could probably name a few male scientists off the top of our heads, as could most people. But I imagine most people could name at least 5-10 times more football players than scientists. It's not because, as a society, we think that football is more important than science, it has more to do with the fact that scientists…
/r/MensRights24/03/12 05:46 AM

Completely agree with you. Suicide is the ultimate refusal by an individual of society as a whole. People who commit suicide generally aren't driven there by one little thing, usually it's a proverbial straw on a camel's back. The profile of someone who kills themself is one pockmarked with rejection and failure. You can induce depression in anything with a brain by introducing pain into it's life that it doesn't have the power to stop. When one gender suicides vastly more often than the other g…
/r/MensRights24/03/12 05:40 AM
2

And then when people disagree you throw out subjective opinions as though they prove wrong the person who has a different opinion. Here's the trick about it: My post defended one concept: the concept that I, and I alone get to choose. Do you want to know why I say that? Funny thing about relativism, it's different for different people. What I'm advocating is that circumcision at birth is an irreversible process that takes away an individual's right to choose about whether or not that's OK. You'r…
/r/MensRights24/03/12 05:29 AM

Every argument for criminalizing abortion at its core pits low confidence future hypotheticals against present real concerns. Bingo. Whenever I hear the anti-choice speech about how the fetus could've turned into a great human being, or whatever, I always wonder if Hitler or Stalin or any of the great criminal masterminds of our time had a close call with an abortion in utero. The assertion that people = good, necessarily, is kinda silly when the possession of a soul isn't assumed. In fact, stri…
/r/MensRights24/03/12 04:15 AM

There is a middle ground, it's called personal choice. As in, you choose. Not someone else choosing for you. Liberty is really funny that way, people end up happier when they get to make their own choices instead of other people making choices for them. All I know is, in the entire western world men aren't lining up to get their foreskins removed by choice. That's all I need to know about how to feel about my circumcision.
/r/MensRights24/03/12 12:19 AM
0

Downvoted because it doesn't belong in this subreddit. It's a surprisingly good article, though, and that's coming from someone who dislikes the game community in general.
/r/MensRights23/03/12 04:23 AM

It's a ridiculous article. False rape accusations are problematic, but they're not epidemic to the point to where behavior should be restricted to that degree. You're probably more likely to be hit by a car leaving the private engagement than to be falsely accused as a result of it. While I do agree that reforms should be addressed for these kinds of situations, articles like this are alarmist and presumptive. I downvoted it because it does not contribute positively to /MR conversation. Rather, …
/r/MensRights21/03/12 11:36 PM
1

NORML is where I donate to. I see it's work as being the most important in terms of improving prison standards. Once prisons are less crowded, I can see a lot of things getting better.
/r/MensRights18/03/12 04:15 PM
7

Prison is highly male-gendered, and consequently it falls to the MRM to care about prison conditions. Right now, prison conditions are literally the worst in the developed world. Arguably worse than most developing nations, as well. When are people going to start caring?
/r/MensRights17/03/12 05:31 AM
4

Damn, that whole presentation was pretty good. Maybe too much storytime for my tastes, but I'm gonna be thinking about it all night. As far as what the man said to her to get her to start studying men - I can totally feel that. My ex asked me the question once: "Why aren't you more emotionally intimate with me?" I just couldn't think of an answer. I wanted to tell her that I didn't trust her, but I couldn't possibly say that. It didn't really get to the heart of what I wanted to say, anyways. I …
/r/MensRights17/03/12 05:25 AM
2

We do need to tackle the societal issue but we have no reason to let people get away with acting like shitty human beings. The thing is, you have to question your methods when the latter half of this phrase interferes with the former half. As an example, he could've taken her to task directly. He could've told her that he was hurt by the fact that she assumed he was up to no good. He could've pointed out that, for all she knew, he could've just been asking for directions. He could've pointed out…
/r/MensRights17/03/12 04:47 AM
3

isn't that essentially going to say to these people "treat us like shit, we'll take it"? Look at it from the woman's perspective. She's had all this press about rapists and creepers and shit shoved down her throat for the last decade or two. She's been hearing all her life about how men are sexual predators, about how we are incapable of thinking with anything other than our penis, etc. She knows it's not true so far as it applies to the men she intimately knows, but to men she doesn't, assumpti…
/r/MensRights17/03/12 03:55 AM
1

Honestly I wouldn't call the cops unless it was life and death, and even then I'd have to think about it. I'm also a reader of puppycide, though, so I'm somewhat biased.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 10:15 PM
4

Is it really such a sexist observation when young men as a group drive much riskier than young women? Yes, it is sexist. The whole point of sexism is that it snuffs out individual agency in favor of broad stereotyping. If literally every young man drove in a riskier way than literally every young woman, it would be OK, because then reality would necessitate it. The idea here is that I can drive perfectly safe, but I nonetheless get judged harshly because other people who happen to also have a Y …
/r/MensRights15/03/12 05:09 PM

I feel as if I just CAN'T care about these things, they seem so utterly unimportant. This is one of the central concepts. Men are socialized to be independent, to blame problems on themselves, and find solutions themselves. Women are socialized to look for others to help them. This is why, when you take your prenuptial to court, the judge will just tear it up because it's worthless. This is why your reputation depends on you not sharing anything important or meaningful with most of your friends.…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 04:47 PM
4

Bingo. The anger has got to be used effectively. Toxic variants of feminism and social conservatism, the chief enemies of men everywhere, thrive on the notion of victimhood. You hear it all the time - DV is a gendered problem, there's a war on Christmas, whatever. Keep your anger, let it drive you, but control it and don't give them opportunities to appropriate it for their own victimhood. We've already seen what groups like the SPLC will do with men like Breivek, attributing his actions to us a…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 04:40 PM
3

The whole point of insurance is to have groups of people pooling money together in order to spread the risk around. Everyone takes a little hit so that no one person has to take a big hit. The thing is, instead of "everyone takes a little hit", insurance companies come up with some very broad ideas on how little of a hit you can take. The thing is, the companies (up until very recently, and even now only to a small degree) don't really take into account how you actually drive. They're content to…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 04:35 PM
3

if you want to pretend it's actually insurance, you have to let businesses charge more for 'high risk' situations. This actually isn't true, just to let you know. I think I generally agree with your stance, but this is kind of a stupid point to make. Insurance could just as easily pass the costs on to everyone, rather than concentrate the costs on those perceived to be a higher risk. There are also methods where insurance companies can specifically target high-risk individuals, for example, dedu…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 03:41 PM
5

This is the correct way to deal with the police. Namely, don't. Getting the police involved in damn near anything is bound to make it worse, at least if you're a man.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 03:36 PM
2

While that's true, we're also speaking in a western context. Extremely long government-held detentions in western nations is generally a result of special circumstances, such as terrorism, and rarely apply to more than a small handful of unfortunate individuals. While this is definitely an issue, it's not the point of discussion here. What is the point of discussion is the steady creep of punishments related to laws that primarily affect men.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 12:36 AM
1

Right? That's totally the impression I got too. This Kyle guy doesn't seem to be particularly interested in getting to know the better part of the story.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 01:03 AM
3

I think you argued your point really well. I'd be surprised if anyone on /feminism bothered to go through and read the entire thing, but I did and I think you were the more reasonable. Particularly alarming was how Mars kept moving the goalposts on you.
/r/MensRights13/03/12 12:02 AM

Says Donkey_Schlong It's not about PC ideas, it's about phrasing things in a more positive, non-hateful way. It's about fighting for men's rights, not (as much) for tearing down women's. It's about loving other men, not about hating women. If this is a problem, please say so.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 06:02 PM
3

I can't disagree with much that you said, but I will say that pundits who rely on increasingly abusive dialogue to maintain listeners will eventually add the straw that breaks the camel's back. In a case like this, society in a general sense has disapproved of Rush for quite some time, but it never disapproved of him enough to do anything about it. Rush finally pushed the line a little too far, and he got a reaction. This is how free speech works, there are consequences to what you say and Rush …
/r/MensRights10/03/12 06:20 PM

I like how they question whether or not men would actually take it. Are you kidding me!? Male BC would go like gangbusters, this is a good opportunity for pharmaceutical companies to make some good profits. I can't even imagine how this could change society. The pill is at least partly responsible for the feminist revolution, what could the male pill do?
/r/MensRights10/03/12 05:36 PM

he did not incite violence or anything Says you. Rush is far more influential than you give him credit for. Here's a single example. Now consider that that is multiplied across millions of listeners - even if relatively few take his words to that point, they still have influence within their social circles. This is why negativity is generally a bad thing, it always comes with collateral damage. In this case, the damage is primarily to our culture and way of life.
/r/MensRights10/03/12 05:29 PM
0

GWW is pretty good, but her reliance on evopsych to make her case is disappointing. It's an unnecessary abstraction, when social cues are stronger and more relevant.
/r/MensRights10/03/12 05:22 PM
2

You're correct in that people who uphold the SPCL aren't likely to be empathetic, but you have to remember, the point isn't convincing your debate opponent. The point is to convince the judge, i.e., everyone else. Them being able to say "Oh look, your ideas happen to perfectly match a known hate group, as labeled by the SPCL" is going to be something that MRAs are likely to face in the future. That's the kind of comment that will shut down debate and make you look bad to any audience, no matter …
/r/MensRights09/03/12 06:26 AM
3

besides, he's accidentally pretty hilarious. He's really not, though. He's a perfect example of why the MRA has credibility problems. He only rarely makes an actual argument and turns to name calling to get his point across.
/r/MensRights09/03/12 06:22 AM
2

We could have that on Reddit. Bingo. This idea that reddit's "troll kingdom" atmosphere somehow makes it better in any way is farcical - reddit is successful in spite of trolls, not because of trolls. This idea that we should all just be fine with people spouting inane, hateful bullshit because that's part of "the culture" kinda ignores the fact that the only thing that's part of the culture is tolerating stupidity. I will admit that there's a scary slippery slope going into SRS territory, but t…
/r/MensRights09/03/12 06:18 AM

Jesus, I love you man. But honestly, I hate most of the "manosphere" as all of it basically ruins the message of the MRM. This. Every time I see a post by AVfM, I have to fight the urge to downvote on sight to actually try to partake in the content. AVfM is damn sure not representative of my voice, and I think it's depressing that the "manosphere" feels free to assume my support in the things they say. It's not a manosphere, it's a group that revolves around itself. I don't want their help, I'd …
/r/MensRights09/03/12 06:09 AM
4

Yup, if she can demonstrate that every "worthwhile" men's rights issue was a feminist idea first (tm), then she can say that MRAs are nothing more than woman-haters and get a lot more mileage out of the sentiment. The whole situation just makes me laugh. I remember getting into the question of "Can men be feminists?" and reading hundreds of pages suggesting that men should just go start our own movement, and now it's embattled and hated. Well, feminists, if you wanted to control men's voices you…
/r/MensRights08/03/12 06:01 PM
3

Pandering is one thing, but her getting the responses she got ("cunt") is definitely part of why she is trying to influence her audience to believe that MRAs are anti-woman. Strong does not mean hateful, and that's a point that needs to be well-remembered. If you call her a bigot, I think that's peachy, but call her a cunt, and I'll lose another shred of hope for humanity.
/r/MensRights08/03/12 05:50 PM
10

Sleep with a woman who has a left hand? I would never do such a thing! Chop it off! Even the wrist!
/r/MensRights06/03/12 10:44 PM
7

Completely agree. I just can't understand, why was she so dead-set on circumcision? Why did she have to go through all the trouble for it to happen? Just reading her idiotic ideas, one after another, made me spin with rage.
/r/MensRights06/03/12 10:40 PM
1

Harassed doesn't begin to cover it, though. Your right to not be harassed starts at a pretty high threshold - watching a TV show where a male virgin is being made fun of (and you, the hypothetical male virgin as well), is just as damning, and you've no right against that. Yet again, rights fail because they fail to include all social constructs. Your rights aren't violated when someone thinks less of you because your wife earns more than you do, but you can be sure that they are saying that from…
/r/MensRights05/03/12 04:59 AM
3

As much of a waste of time as you think it is, the concept of privilege underlies everything that MRAs fight for. MRAs just tend to use the term 'rights', but there's a problem with that word. The problem with rights is that it neglects an extralegal social construct. For example, women don't have a right to not sleep around and not be mocked and called gay. There is no such legal protection, and 'rights' just doesn't fit in well. Privilege is a much more inclusive concept, it allows you to disc…
/r/MensRights05/03/12 04:23 AM
1

Come on privilege is a silly concept as we all have advantages and disadvantages. It's not terribly silly. You could make the argument that it doesn't justify discrimination (either positive or negative) against a gender, and I'd say that you're generally correct. I tend to disagree with the feminist notion that, in modern day USA, men are more privileged than women, but I do still heartily acknowledge that there will always be a certain amount of privilege held by either gender that is biologic…
/r/MensRights05/03/12 03:49 AM
8

Privileges, by the feminist definition, are benefits distributed only to a certain class. They would consider strength to be a good example of male privilege. It's important to mind that privilege isn't necessarily bad or evil. In some cases it can be, but in general it's best to just keep that privilege in mind and try not to let it harm others. A good example of this is grocery store shelves. I used to work at a grocery store when I was a teenager, and my boss (5'0 tall woman) would, when we w…
/r/MensRights05/03/12 02:47 AM
3

Sometimes you just appreciate your dick so much. Reading that sent crawlies up and down my spine.
/r/MensRights05/03/12 02:33 AM

Maybe I would be more inclined to listen to that argument if it wasn't so absurd that that is the only feminists issue. Huh? It is the big new story, but it's a bit disingenuous to describe it as the only feminists issue. in reality it is merely some unelected politicians saying that the government should not need to pay for women's inessential drugs. Nobody wants the government to pay for it. Insurance companies should pay for it, and by extension, everybody with health insurance would be cover…
/r/MensRights04/03/12 06:09 PM
1

I think it's like cutting off a finger. I know a guy at work who's missing his left ring finger, never told me how he lost it. He can lift just fine without it. Some people would say "Oh then it's no big deal to lose that finger, so it's no big deal to cut off the foreskin." No, bitch, the point is that we don't just go cutting off people's fucking fingers just because God told us to or because we think it's more aesthetically pleasing or whatever. We recognize the right to bodily integrity when…
/r/MensRights26/02/12 05:36 AM
1

I just can't wait to be accused of commitment issues in the future. When it comes to marriage, MensRights has given me the words to use: nopenopenopenopenope
/r/MensRights26/02/12 04:42 AM
1

Right? The experience at Ross was hugely positive in a customer service sense, whereas Kohl's made me feel accused, even if no specific accusations came forward. Kohl's also probably has significantly higher rates of shoplifting due to their lack of changing-room personnel. Overall it struck me as a good example of how a business can adapt to the social climate and relieve the tension. Shame that the police don't have a vested interest in making sure that the citizens they police approve of thei…
/r/MensRights23/02/12 05:13 PM
1

I was just at Ross the other day with a female friend. They had a guy watching the changing rooms, he was very friendly and funny. Compare that to Kohl's, where my friend asked me to wait outside so she could ask me my opinion if desired, and then I'd just get a lot of funny looks. Ross wins.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 04:31 PM
1

First paragraph of the article: Swedish doctors say the circumcision of young boys for religious reasons should be banned in Sweden. Parent's religion is pretty much the definition of necessary, of course. How silly.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 06:33 AM
9

The point is that Masculism really has no reason for existing. This is really kind of a derail of the discussion that I'm trying to have with you, because even if that were the case, that still doesn't make SRS behavior appropriate. Just because the mods felt like they weren't winning against hate speech by being rational grants them no moral high ground in engendering their own hate speech, which is basically what I see out of SRS. This isn't even about the legitimacy of the issue, my beef is e…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 06:45 AM

How do you plan for this to do anything productive at all? How do you expect to come to any result other than creating a bitter feud? What, do you think making people pissed off and divisive is superior to frank, rational conversation? Look, the biggest problem with /MensRights, and hell, the MRM community in general is the fact that it tends to partisanship against feminism and as such will dismiss good ideas or concepts just because feminists support it. The two movements could do so much bett…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 06:27 AM
0

Agree. My personal definition of "fail" not only includes a lack of meaningful improvement in social and institutional structure, but also includes becoming co-opted by nonsensical extremists. Personal Sovereignty is the ultimate goal, and that's for both genders. That will never happen in the case of non-cooperating movements, it's far too easy for one or both to become co-opted and start fighting for rights beyond those required for personal sov.
/r/MensRights14/02/12 03:01 AM
6

My thoughts exactly. Violent video games are fantasy, but this is just.. very specific.
/r/MensRights14/02/12 02:36 AM
1

I'm eager to see if this has any impacts on troop effectiveness. At the moment I'm pleased to read this news, but I'm definitely going to keep my eye out to see if this changes anything. I suspect it'll be much like the DADT change - the effects of that policy switch-up were deafeningly absent.
/r/MensRights14/02/12 01:37 AM

This. Women are absolutely integral to the MRM, you've got to involve them if you're going to change anything. I completely agree with the idea of male safe spaces, but there's gotta be a conversation going between the genders, not just a circlejerk.
/r/MensRights14/02/12 01:20 AM
1

I like it. Civil, straightforward arguments are how you change people's minds! Of course, the most important part about being civil is the fact that many other people have likely read your comments, and associate your style of writing with the content of your writing (whether that's good form or not), and staying civil makes the message just so much stronger. Thank you, Whisper!
/r/MensRights14/02/12 12:57 AM
1

I'm with you on this one, actually. As repugnant as I find Kira Cochrane to generally be, this is actually one of her most reasonable articles. Aside from the misuse of statistics, there really isn't much here to disagree with at all.
/r/MensRights14/02/12 12:53 AM

Here's the thing: Who CARES about whether one is "worse" than the other? Both are bullshit, and both need to be stopped. This isn't some oppression olympics. The above poster was just venting his frustration about how circumcision as an issue isn't taken seriously, which is very legitimate and belongs in this forum.
/r/MensRights12/02/12 04:58 AM
3

I think the value from this article is that reproductive/parental rights aren't always so simple. There needs to be a legal clarification across the globe about what societies think a parent should be. The current system is a single idea from biblical times with centuries of layered legal precedents pushing the basic concepts to the back. That's how you get all the goofy stuff like sperm donors being sued for child support, the concepts involved in parenthood have lost relevance. The three paren…
/r/MensRights07/02/12 09:24 PM
2

I appreciate your dedication to truth and transparency. You're absolutely right about the fact that it isn't an accusation. It's sort of like going to CostCo or Sam's Club - both companies check your receipt at the door, and it's not an accusation of theft, it's simply a theft prevention measure. Both companies run on such slim margins that theft severely impacts their bottom line, much like how men operate with less knowledge than women in these matters so a lack of knowledge hurts their bottom…
/r/MensRights06/02/12 05:52 AM
34

Yup. I was watching the bowl with my dad, and we just sat in stunned silence after that commercial ended. After a moment he looked over at me and said "That yogurt commercial wasn't very good." I just looked him in the eye and said "What, you don't think domestic violence against men is hilarious? Get with the times, pops." I think that's one of the first things we've ever agreed on.
/r/MensRights06/02/12 05:21 AM
1

I didn't want to respond because of your ad hom attacks, I usually try to avoid discussion laced with it. I feel like it needs to be said, though, so I'll go with it. Social norms aren't passed on purpose. Well, sometimes they are, but that's beside the point. When I say "girls are taught to cooperate", that could be as simple as buying your daughter barbies and a tea set and buying your son a soccer ball and a racing videogame. None of these are particularly sinister, but the idea is that the m…
/r/MensRights06/02/12 04:09 AM
1

What always kills me about this is that pointing this out to one of the diehards of the movement inevitably leads to them saying "Well obviously not just men, but women too", yet they never seem to say it until you ask them to, then they make a big deal about it like you asked them for their firstborn child. Well, OK, the ones that I've pointed this out to have responded that way at least.
/r/MensRights06/02/12 03:58 AM
2

To me, this gets to the point of the difference between 'okay' and 'good'. I think it's OK to make offensive jokes, so long as you're not deliberately trying to provoke people, but it's not a good thing to do. Okay, in this sense, just means that it's a socially acceptable form of free expression. For example, college christians walking up to the freethinker's booth and trying to proselytize - it's a socially acceptable form of free expression. Neither situation is good, however, because the col…
/r/MensRights05/02/12 04:45 AM
1

Well, the point they're trying to make is that rape is marginalized, or it may be the case that I think my bro just raped a chick but I didn't really see it so I don't want to say anything, or maybe Ted just told me that he boned this bitch who was so drunk she passed out right after he started and I just laughed about it, or whatever. The thing that bothers me is the onus put on men about it. It's not like women (other than the victim) are blind, deaf, and dumb, they can speak up just as much. …
/r/MensRights05/02/12 04:37 AM
2

I don't hate feminism, but I think it (and the MRM) have huge bulks of their organization locked into a zero-sum mentality. I'm bored to tears with the statement "Men must stop rape", as it's the greatest sidestep of a potentially effective policy. What's needed at a time like this is honey, not vinegar, but it irritates the shit out of me when I go to a feminist blog and see a post on this subject that's mocking anyone who disagrees with them about the nature of the problem or the solution. If …
/r/MensRights04/02/12 04:50 PM
2

Please do not fuck thinking about the father. Men have few reproductive rights as it is - insistence that mandatory DNA testing is not about the father but about the kid will easily justify hiding the results from the assumed father. I'm all for tools that will benefit the children, but my axe to grind is with the disparity in knowledge experienced between mothers and fathers. What you're outlining is another excellent point in how this kind of policy is useful, but don't think this isn't at lea…
/r/MensRights04/02/12 04:27 PM
1

This is straying far outside of my field of knowledge, but from what I understand, parents can opt in to get genetic screening done. It's not like a paternity test, though, because it's directly testing the unborn fetus' DNA to look for abnormalities, such as a Trisomy. They don't include testing of the father's DNA to where they could easily evaluate paternity.
/r/MensRights04/02/12 05:24 AM
1

It's pretty low already. I understand that some Wal-Marts carry home DNA testing kits, even if the accuracy is dubious. It's the only argument I can think of that's not founded in a defensive emotional appeal, though, which is why I singled it out. I'm pretty sure that the cost of a mandatory DNA test right now, though, would be far eclipsed by other costs associated with a birth.
/r/MensRights04/02/12 05:09 AM
2

The problem I have is the attitude that it's OK if it doesn't obviously offend everybody. Another commenter on this post said that he's familiar with the sung verse, and said that it had just as many offensive comments about men in it, then implied that he wasn't offended so it wasn't a problem. The thing is, he may not have been offended, but perhaps some of the other guys were offended (or intimidated), but didn't want to become a social pariah so they didn't say anything. This is exactly what…
/r/MensRights04/02/12 04:23 AM

I'm a supporter of mandatory paternity testing. The fact is, truly knowing the identity of the parents is an example of female privilege. The idea that "it doesn't matter" is pretty bullshit, as well - human pleasure is heavily associated with essentialism. That is, this baseball is worth $3m because Mark McGuire hit it. It's not like the baseball is special in any way, but it has an essential property that no other baseball has, namely, a world-record setting home run. This is the generic langu…
/r/MensRights04/02/12 03:18 AM

Intellect and competition, you say, but intellect and a thirst for competition are developed. You're going back to square 1 here on the whole social norms thing, boys are taught to compete while girls are taught to cooperate. This is at least part of why studies tend to show that men are more aggressive while women aren't. Your values are influenced strongly by your surroundings, and how that affects you. The moral here is that the idea that women don't belong in STEM fields has yet to leave us.…
/r/MensRights04/02/12 02:38 AM
3

If the joke itself didn't offend you, then why would the callousness offend you? Are you offended when you tell an offensive joke and nobody is offended?
/r/MensRights04/02/12 02:00 AM
4

Do you find jokes about your dick being cut off vile? Hahahaha, I'm gonna chop your weiner and throw it in the garbage disposal. Hilarious. Surely you remember the Sharon Osborne debacle, don't you? There were quite a few men on here who were rather offended, maybe they just need to lighten up.
/r/MensRights04/02/12 01:38 AM
3

I find it a little disgusting. When I first read the article, I recoiled at the description of their crimes. Then I thought about the fact that that was simply what they were accused of - just as the boy could've been influenced by them, so too could the boy have been influenced by his parents or the police or who knows what. If I were present at the scene of the crime I would feel much more comfortable making a judgment, but the only thing I can say for sure is that I'm a little ashamed of assu…
/r/MensRights03/02/12 10:12 PM
7

You're a vindictive piece of shit. You're totally allowed to talk and call her out on her behavior. Not purposefully allow her to fuck her life up as well as someone else's. I'd be all for it if she cheated and tried to put it on you, but you're almost as out of line as she is, simply by the fact of your awareness.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 11:24 PM
2

I was tried for DWI in Dallas County. Luckily I didn't have to spend more than one night in a city jail there, but I ended up on a Labor Detail program. Instead of being in jail, I would instead come in and clean the visitation areas of the jails. Just from the outside looking in, I can tell that Lew Sterrett is not the kind of place where people become better people. The stories I heard about that place, man, shit. I wish I could do something for you, but fuck, man, my DWI has me bankrupted and…
/r/MensRights21/01/12 05:46 AM
2

I agree with you good sir. When I first read it, I agreed with the judge, but a moment of contemplation revealed to me that she feels harassed, so she goes to the meat market? I feel awful for her situation, but she acted like a violent child and she needs to be held accountable for her actions.
/r/MensRights17/01/12 04:00 AM
1

If you go under the assumption that every girl/woman is responsible for domestic duties, and then assume that domestic duties are equivalent to income duties, then you automatically get 50% of the total labor. Now, if half as many women as men are employed, you end up with 66%. I assume this is how you arrive at the 66% figure. As for whether those assumptions are valid, feel free to make up your own mind, /MensRights/
/r/MensRights20/12/11 03:37 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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