TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

anon781 Archive

View 0 posts and 246 comments by anon781 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

Yes, my full-time job is pretty terrible. After all, I have to sit on my ass in an air-conditioned office and think about shit. For 40 whole hours per week! I really don't know how I manage; it's pretty traumatic.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 12:00 PM
1

Yes, my full-time job is pretty terrible. After all, I have to sit on my ass in an air-conditioned office and think about shit. For 40 whole hours per week! I really don't know how I manage; it's pretty traumatic.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 11:59 AM
0

The point isn't "We've all got it rough; let's sit in a circle and talk about how awesome we are!" I actually think it's kind of the opposite. The point is that someone being in one marginalized group does not mean they can't be privileged in another way. Conversely, just because the commenter is in a privileged group with respect to race and class does not mean she can't be marginalized in another way, or that she loses her ability to call other people out on their privilege. She still might be…
/r/MensRights24/06/11 11:45 AM
4

Oppression Olympics much?
/r/MensRights24/06/11 01:44 AM
7

I'm pretty sure the feminist psychologists in this article were actually arguing exactly the opposite of this.
/r/MensRights15/06/11 11:43 AM
7

Well... in some instances it kind of is. Take the example from the article of 'helping a woman to choose the right computer'. (I'm female.) I'm a software engineer, I did tech support in college, and I drool over pics and specs of expensive gaming PCs on the internet. But I still get Best Buy employees who feel the need to explain to me in great detail what an Ethernet cord looks like or how to choose a power supply, and I don't see that happening to guys I've dated. Obviously, if a woman who do…
/r/MensRights15/06/11 11:42 AM
1

This didn't work, either.
/r/MensRights05/08/10 08:56 PM
2

I, too, enjoy making shit up about how TOTALLY AWESOME I am. Did you know I'm the president of SUPER MENSA? I also have three Ph.Ds from MIT and I had sex with your mother.
/r/MensRights02/08/10 01:52 PM
1

Ah, sorry. I thought you were talking about ad hominem the logical fallacy, not ad hominem the colloquialism used to insult your opponent's argumentative skill when you've run out of actual arguments. My bad. Edit: merriam webster also defines 'feminist' as the belief in equality between the sexes: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminist Good thing that's more reliable than Wikipedia.
/r/MensRights01/08/10 08:38 PM
2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem_attack He wasn't saying we shouldn't listen to jayhammers because he hates women. He was just saying that jayhammers hates women. See the difference?
/r/MensRights01/08/10 08:21 PM
2

He didn't say "jayhammers is a knuckle dragger; therefore his opinion is invalid". That would be ad hominem. He said that jayhammers put "women's rights" in quotes; therefore he is a knuckle dragger. This is not ad hominem, it's just a garden variety insult.
/r/MensRights01/08/10 07:27 PM
3

Hah, I know. I just like to pick on him sometimes, when it's a slow day at work.
/r/MensRights01/08/10 06:58 PM
6

Um, I think people should masturbate to whatever the fuck turns them on. Masturbation never hurt anyone.
/r/MensRights01/08/10 04:55 PM
1

I don't think she was talking about comments like "get back in the kitchen woman". I think she was talking about comments like "All feminists just hate men", or the comments that blame feminism for everything from circumcision to prison rape to divorce. Or, at least, those are the comments that bother me when I read this reddit. Bad things have been done in the name of feminism, there are feminists who genuinely hate men, and the feminists who argue that you MUST be a feminist or else you think …
/r/MensRights01/08/10 04:16 PM
3

How do downvotes make this forum "unsafe"?
/r/MensRights01/08/10 03:14 PM
12

Kloo, we're back to banning dissenters again?
/r/MensRights01/08/10 02:23 PM
4

FTA: A year after President Obama launched his "fatherhood initiative" to address the problems facing 23 million children in America living without their dads, one researcher thinks she can do the president one better with a controversial new plan. The researcher is a woman.
/r/MensRights31/07/10 01:59 AM
4

This happens.
/r/MensRights29/07/10 11:36 PM
1

Right. I think, in this case, we need to punish men less, rather than punishing this woman more. There are a lot of possible scenarios in which men and women are equal--perhaps anyone who sends an explicit picture to a minor could be burned alive. But, in my opinion, this policy would definitely be worse than the one we have now, even though the punishment for men and women would be equal.
/r/MensRights29/07/10 05:55 PM
2

I wasn't talking about the methodology of the study, I was wondering why the author was including these diagnoses in the article.
/r/MensRights29/07/10 01:33 AM
2

Yikes. My only point of contention: is the author trying to suggest that the men in the study somehow got ADHD, schizophrenia, or bipolar disorder from being abused by their female partners? Depression, anxiety disorders, those make sense. But ADHD?
/r/MensRights28/07/10 11:28 PM
1

Okay, make it a small irreversible change then. Say a cut that caused a tiny scar. My point still stands. I wasn't arguing that it wouldn't be better if the foot stomping or the pin prick didn't happen, or that stomping on feet or pin pricking shouldn't both be illegal. I was arguing that it's ridiculous to claim that we can't draw a distinction between foot stomping and foot amputation because both violate the same right. If one causes more harm than the other, then that one is worse.
/r/MensRights28/07/10 06:18 PM
1

If we have an agreement that any pregnancy will be aborted, she can void that agreement at any time without my consent, and then take half my income for a very long time. I think this is unfair. I'd definitely be in favor of men and women being able to make an agreement, pre-pregnancy, that any future pregnancy will be aborted or the man will not have to pay.
/r/MensRights28/07/10 02:57 AM
1

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1863#comic
/r/MensRights27/07/10 05:03 PM
1

Massachusetts.
/r/MensRights27/07/10 03:52 PM
1

The problem I see with this approach is it's likely to result in a lot more children. "Sure, I'll have another kid as long as it doesn't cost me anything!"
/r/MensRights27/07/10 03:38 PM
1

And the people have an interest in a government that does what they want. Your comment seems to be implying that the people have no control over the government's interests, which is, at least, not true where I live.
/r/MensRights27/07/10 03:32 PM
1

Hey, at least you're consistent. Have an upvote.
/r/MensRights27/07/10 03:30 PM
1

I'm not sure I understand your point... We're talking about women who won't abort, since if the woman were going to have an abortion, there would be no baby for the father to relinquish his rights and responsibilities to. So, if you have sex with a woman who will abort, there's no risk for either of you. If you're having sex with a woman who won't abort, there's a risk for both of you. This still isn't fair in that the woman is the only person who decides whether or not she will abort. But there…
/r/MensRights27/07/10 03:25 PM
1

Never ever, under any circumstances?
/r/MensRights27/07/10 03:14 PM
-2

Exactly. If the man who was 50% responsible for creating the baby doesn't pay his half, the government will likely have to do it instead. That's not more fair.
/r/MensRights26/07/10 07:35 PM
1

Which is why 'medical' circumcision and FGM are different and it doesn't make sense to compare them...
/r/MensRights26/07/10 07:23 PM
0

This argument leads to an absurd conclusion. If every violation of the "human right to bodily integrity" is as bad as any other and deserves equal consideration, stomping on someone else's foot is as bad as, and deserves equal consideration as, cutting off someone else's foot. Put another way, suppose there was a law that said the parents of a son had the choice either to circumcise him or to 'symbolically' circumcise him by using a needle to draw a drop of blood from his penis. According to you…
/r/MensRights26/07/10 07:21 PM
3

It doesn't say why the women serve less of their sentences than men. Maybe people generally get out earlier for certain types of crimes, and women commit those crimes more often than men do. Maybe the women's prisons are more overcrowded than the men's prisons are. Or maybe it's discrimination. But the article doesn't give us a reason to assume it's gender discrimination.
/r/MensRights13/07/10 05:53 PM
1

People who make outrageous claims should cite them. If you know something is true, it's generally pretty easy for you to find the place you learned it. So it makes a lot more sense for someone to say "citation needed" than "go look it up yourself".
/r/MensRights12/07/10 03:45 PM
1

Eh. The sexes are different, on average, in the way they learn, but they're definitely not "separate, homogeneous groups". For example, some girls have stereotypically male learning styles, and some boys have stereotypically female learning styles. So if the reforms they're criticizing actually are trying to treat all girls the same and all boys the same, they might have a point. Then again, there is this: The report, by academics at Roehampton University, blames gender stereotyping by parents a…
/r/MensRights06/07/10 03:36 PM
2

Indeed. His remains are not going to care what happens to them, and if the child is not his daughter, the DNA test will show that.
/r/MensRights06/07/10 01:31 PM
1

Eh. I'm a girl, and I'm a gamer. That makes grammatical sense. On the other hand, I could not be a "fireman". I think the issue is more that the overwhelming majority of gamers are male, and the overwhelming majority of games are made for an audience assumed to be male, so the "gamer" article applies mostly to them. The "Girl gamer" article is probably supposed to be about the minority of gamers that are women, and the games that are marketed specifically to them.
/r/MensRights01/07/10 01:02 AM
1

Duh, there's totally evidence. Some of these posters have similar opinions. What more evidence do you need?
/r/MensRights01/07/10 12:55 AM
1

You don't have to worry about ugly women though. Those are fine.
/r/MensRights30/06/10 11:34 PM
1

So everyone who disagrees with you is the same person?
/r/MensRights30/06/10 09:29 PM
1

lolwut
/r/MensRights30/06/10 08:49 PM
0

Guys, this is from 2007 and is only noteworthy because /b/ found out about it. If you're gonna be Anonymous, at least try and stay current.
/r/MensRights30/06/10 07:19 PM
-2

When I see a commenter make continuously moronic posts, I simply don't respond, downvote when they say something dumb, and upvote on the rare occasions when they say something worthwhile. I really don't see what making posts about their comments that you disagree with is accomplishing. If that happened to me, I would laugh and show everyone I knew. Probably not the response you're looking for.
/r/MensRights30/06/10 07:09 PM
1

The population of the world is already too much and is unsustainable. People should stop having kids. Because people have kids for the good of the species/planet, not because of a biological imperative.
/r/MensRights30/06/10 05:30 PM
1

This is why our court system is ridiculous. This was decided out of court: The divorce terms are being worked out privately and when everything is finished it will be filed in court, the first source said.
/r/MensRights30/06/10 05:29 PM
-2

There's a reason they call it "anecdata". Because it's not actually data. Your experience with your family and friends has nothing to do with which gender costs more to insure, or with whether that justifies charging that gender more for insurance. While driving history, and points on license can regulate the at-risk drivers, they should weight it more on your driving history and less on gender. The only "profit shift" would be for first time offenders of either gender. Agreed. Don't they alread…
/r/MensRights30/06/10 05:19 PM
1

My point was that I think it'll be harder to convince people not to get married than it would be to try to get unfair laws changed.
/r/MensRights29/06/10 01:23 AM
5

Every human society ever has had a form of marriage. Some are polygamous, some are monogamous, but men have always been "willing" to marry women. The feminist movement has not made the gains it has because someone managed to convince women to stop getting married or having sex with men. Men need to do what women did and do: advocate, vote, and SUE. Whether or not Republicans (or Democrats, for that matter) have, up until now, done anything to advance men's rights is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights28/06/10 03:12 PM
-2

I take it back. The "Who needs a man..." thing is pretty ridiculous.
/r/MensRights28/06/10 02:50 AM
5

The only thing I found disturbing about this was the "ages 3 and up". Where's the misandry?
/r/MensRights28/06/10 02:38 AM
4

I thought, upon first seeing that, that White Rights was a (lame) joke. Then I realized, with creeping horror, that they were serious...
/r/MensRights28/06/10 12:31 AM
1

I'm not trying to control anyone; I just think that in a group dedicated to resisting sexism against men, we should try not to be sexist against women, to avoid massive amounts of hypocrisy. Obviously, he is free to say whatever he wants, and I am free to disagree. That's not 'control'. Are you saying that his claim is not sexist?
/r/MensRights27/06/10 04:36 PM
2

If they're friends? Unless this is a really suggestive arm grab, I think most women would be fine with one of their friends (someone they don't have a problem touching) grabbing their arm.
/r/MensRights26/06/10 08:54 PM
1

OH wait, its one of atomicparrots 345 reddit accounts, user: anon781 Lol. you are a sad sad loser. What did I lose?
/r/MensRights26/06/10 07:06 PM
1

There was no information in this article...
/r/MensRights26/06/10 06:30 PM
5

I think you should be re-banned from commenting on /r/MensRights. You continue to add absolutely nothing of value. Following someone around and calling them a troll, OTOH, is a valuable contribution without which MR could not continue.
/r/MensRights26/06/10 05:40 PM
3

Do you think wikipedia is not a good source for basic facts like the definition of primary and secondary sex characteristics? This isn't rocket science...
/r/MensRights26/06/10 05:38 PM
4

Jezebel? I think it's more for teenage girls than for intelligent adults...
/r/MensRights26/06/10 05:20 PM
0

And here we have a display of good, old-fashioned sexism. You know, 100% of disagreements between women are REALLY about who is better looking! It's scientifically proven to be impossible for women to form opinions by reasoning. That's something only men like corpseflower can do.
/r/MensRights26/06/10 05:18 PM
2

You'd be pretty grossed out if you found out a foot fetishist was giving you a foot massage and enjoying it in a profoundly sexual way, would you not? I wasn't aware there was any other way to understand someone giving you a foot massage...
/r/MensRights26/06/10 05:07 PM
-2

One fundamental question of Male Studies is whether there are essential features of being male. Having a male body is clearly one of them. Does this look transphobic to anyone else?
/r/MensRights26/06/10 05:03 PM
1

Judge Brian Forster said: "In view of the fact that the defendant has no available assets I make a nominal finding in the sum of £1."
/r/MensRights25/06/10 06:59 PM
3

I'm pretty sure a 12-year-old could write a better article than this... According to The Truth About Cheating by M. Gary Neuman, the infidelity of men is rarely caused by sexual factors. In his research, which surveyed 100 men in 48 states, it was found that very few men actually engage in sexual activities the first time they meet the “other woman.” Only six percent start their relationship through sex, meaning the two individuals engaged in this forbidden relationship take the time to get to k…
/r/MensRights25/06/10 04:03 AM
3

I think it is well documented that women cheat more than men Citation needed. Not saying it's not true, but I also haven't heard that it is. a females desire to cheat is rooted in a si\ubconcious desire to bare a child with the most viable DNA, and sometimes that means going behind the back of the "provider" male. Perhaps. But then why wouldn't a male's desire to cheat be rooted in a subconscious desire to have more children?
/r/MensRights25/06/10 03:53 AM
1

Track down those sources; I'm interested.
/r/MensRights25/06/10 01:42 AM
1

Abusegate: a terrible term for a very real problem.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 06:46 PM
7

Charity Navigator is a good site.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 06:38 PM
2

My real point with that was allowing the woman a way to contest the adoption of the child by the father if she truly believed him to be an unfit parent. I also believe that men should have this right.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 06:16 PM
1

Because the choice isn't between her and him, it's between him and a person who is qualified. If there were a way to require all prospective parents to demonstrate that they are capable of raising children, I'd support that. My real point with that was allowing the woman a way to contest the adoption of the child by the father if she truly believed him to be an unfit parent. I also believe that men should have this right.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 05:41 PM
2

Just asking a question to clarify, not stating my beliefs. But okay: If the woman is giving the child up for adoption, I think the father should have the 'right of first refusal', as long as he can meet any legal qualifications for adoptive parents that exist where they live. However, I do think the woman should be able to abort without the consent of the father, since it's growing in her body. If there were a way to remove it and grow it elsewhere, causing the woman inconvenience comparable to …
/r/MensRights24/06/10 05:30 PM
2

The complaint that men have displaced women is a poor means of escaping the consequence of what they have asked for. AFAIK, there is no such complaint.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 05:00 PM
3

Do you mean that men should have the right to prevent a woman pregnant with their children from getting an abortion?
/r/MensRights24/06/10 04:56 PM
1

Petty, and not that funny.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 04:48 PM
3

As you can see, there have been a lot of serious, respected studies which clearly correlate fatherlessness to a wide range of problems with children. Right, but these are talking about single-parent homes versus homes with a mother and a father. The lesbian parents study is looking at homes with two female parents versus homes with a male and a female parent. And the results seem to be that two women aren't automatically worse parents than a man and a woman, just as I expect two men wouldn't aut…
/r/MensRights24/06/10 04:46 PM
3

That has been debunked pretty thoroughly. For example, the American Cancer Society does not consider abortion to be correlated with, or a risk factor for, breast cancer. However, opponents to abortion like to hang on to the idea anyway, reasoning that if telling women that they will get breast cancer stops them from murdering their children, it's the right thing to do.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 04:05 PM
2

I've read this about twenty times, and I still have no idea what you're saying. Other than that you disagree, I mean.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 04:01 AM
2

Hmm, I didn't think of that, thanks! It's not as if the women are complaining that men are taking womens' place though. Sounds more like "adhere to your stereotype!" Not that that makes it any better of course.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 03:53 AM
2

Wow! A rare admission. It'd be rarer if I were actually a feminist, rather than just some random redditor who happened to disagree with you :) When will feminists be content with agendas that help women without hurting men, such as your example? I'd guess the feminists who hate men wouldn't ever be, unless they formed a female separatist society, and the reasonable feminists already are. The reasonable ones will be offended that you're attacking them, and the man-hating ones won't listen to you …
/r/MensRights24/06/10 03:20 AM
3

Not completely, but I've also never seen a woman complain that men act like women, while I have seen men complain that women act like men. So I'm assuming the OP's goal was to talk about how 2X hates men or how women like to complain or how feminism is evil, all of which have been done more times than I care to remember. The 2X discussion did have some "stupid whiny men" stupidity, but there was also discussion of men's issues. I hardly think this is a call to discuss women's issues.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 02:53 AM
2

What does this have to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights24/06/10 02:22 AM
2

Some aspects of feminism harm men, but "feminism" also encompasses things that don't harm men, like ensuring women's access to birth control/abortions. Talking about how "feminism" is evil instead of specific issues just alienates people who associate feminism with its positive aspects. It also seems to make people think the critiquer of feminism is a right-wing Christian who thinks women should get back in the kitchen. At least it made the author of this blog think that...
/r/MensRights24/06/10 02:09 AM
0

I can't tell if you're serious or not... Edit: Also, I'd think inane more than insane. Is there any possible response to this thread OTHER than a circlejerk?
/r/MensRights24/06/10 01:45 AM
2

It's comments like this one that give blog posts like that their material. He was complaining that men's rights groups tend to focus on hating feminism more than they focus on actually helping men. Good job being part of the problem.
/r/MensRights24/06/10 12:59 AM
8

Yes, it would make sense that men who try to have sex more have more sex. I have no idea why they titled the article that way. It said nothing about why women are attracted to them, only that men with the "dark triad" are prone to have more brief affairs, and thus more partners, than men without. Also: these traits may have an innate, genetic component that explains why some men seem unable to stop themselves behaving badly. OH NOES IT'S MY GENES! Some men may have a stronger genetic predisposit…
/r/MensRights24/06/10 12:52 AM
4

I hate when people resort to explaining things through evolution. Ugh, I know! As if there could be a biological basis for human behavior....
/r/MensRights24/06/10 12:45 AM
4

I'm guessing this is a parody of a similar post in 2X? Anyway: Does anyone else think this is complete insanity? Yes. /thread
/r/MensRights24/06/10 12:43 AM
2

See the "other discussions" tab at the top?
/r/MensRights23/06/10 04:39 PM
2

I disagree, but I also lol'd. Downboat or upboat? So confused...
/r/MensRights22/06/10 03:04 PM
2

I think it's fine to have some critiques of feminism in MensRights, when they're applicable to a men's rights issue, but why not also have a place that's specifically for discussing the flaws of feminism? Different posters here have different views on feminism; some users consider themselves feminists, while others' favorite topic is why feminism is ruining society. Perhaps the latter would like a place to discuss that idea specifically? (Of course, they can still post here too.)
/r/MensRights22/06/10 02:57 PM
1

...what?
/r/MensRights22/06/10 12:36 AM
2

Aww, it's forbidden. I was hoping to generate some lulz, jayhammers style. But I'm guessing faster trolls got there first. Trolling aside, it would be nice to have a place to move all the antifeminism posts (like this one), so the people who actually want to discuss men's rights instead of Why Feminism is Bad could discuss that here, and the others could go there.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 09:49 PM
2

Haven't you ever wondered why you keep hearing conflicting information in an age that prizes the scientific method? How scientific inquiry can so easily result in polarized results? Different methods of different studies. Similar studies studying slightly different things. Social science studying things that don't exist at all. And yes, bias. common sense is a protective refuge I assume I'm just as biased, on average, as a scientist or organization funding science, and my pretheoretical intuitio…
/r/MensRights21/06/10 09:35 PM
2

I wrote out a beautiful response, but Firefox crashed :( Here's the less well-written Cliff's Notes version: The fact that economic models are notoriously bad for predicting the future does not disprove descriptive science. Even economics, which is not necessarily a science, can describe what's happening in the economy currently. You are using common sense to reason from a general societal model (the promotion of promiscuity) to the specific (false paternity rates). The study is simply looking a…
/r/MensRights21/06/10 09:22 PM
2

Common sense is a dangerous thing. It can be very, very wrong. For example, it was common sense that the earth was flat for a very, very long time. But let's go ahead and use common sense. Common sense tells me that a study done by social scientists and published in a science news magazine is more believable than an experiment done by a class of high school students. Common sense also tells me that study is more reliable than a handwavy explanation about society promoting promiscuity from some r…
/r/MensRights21/06/10 08:59 PM
2

Kloo? He does have a bit of a knee-jerk feminists-are-always-wrong mentality, but he cares about men's rights and he's willing to actually argue his points. There are a few people who seem to care way more about bashing women/feminism than they do about men's rights, but I wouldn't say Kloo is one of them.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 08:17 PM
1

It's mostly a few posters. You learn to identify and ignore them after awhile...
/r/MensRights21/06/10 08:06 PM
1

I read that article and couldn't understand why anyone would rape a baby, until it got to the part where it said there is a popular belief that sex with a virgin cures AIDS. Whoever started that rumor should die in some particularly painful way.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 06:50 PM
2

That study was an ethnography that aimed to "gain an understanding of the circumstances and contexts of violence in young people’s sexual relationships." It was not meant to generate representative statistics about rape. This study(PDF), which I believe is the study quoted in the article, asked men if they had raped "when a woman didn’t consent to sex, was forced or when she was too drunk to stop them." And 27.6% of the interviewed men said they had, according to this criterion.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 06:25 PM
2

My evidence was in the article. Your turn!
/r/MensRights21/06/10 06:01 PM
3

You're pointing out the flaws of unrelated studies done in a completely different country. If you think the survey quoted in the article is flawed, please read the survey and comment on its flaws, rather than assuming it must be wrong because it doesn't support your position.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 05:53 PM
2

Judges can't un-infect someone. Yes, this is imperfect, but if this does more good by protecting women from HIV than it does harm to men, I feel it's a good thing. If it ended up that a significant number of women were using this device to hurt men, I'd support restriction of the device or stronger punishments against women who do so. But this device is being used in South Africa, where rape and HIV rates are much higher than they are here.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 05:50 PM
4

The article quoted a women's advocate, but the stats themselves weren't from her. They were from the South African Medical Research Council, which doesn't seem to be an activist group.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 05:04 PM
2

In the case of rape, I would prefer the rapist experiences some pain than the victim gets HIV. It is interesting that the device was designed to cause pain, though. If that were to become a significant deterrent for rapists, it would probably be a good thing, but assuming it isn't, this is a downside of the device.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 04:56 PM
4

I was thinking of the Western first world, yes. Thanks for the correction.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 04:46 PM
7

She's definitely right that some people cry sexism to excuse incompetence. But I think she's partially missed the point of feminism: Do you really need backing from a large group to make your feelings valid. Too much of feminism today seems to be about validating women's feelings, but feminism is not necessarily just about that. Feminists helped get women the vote and secure access to birth control and abortions, to name two. And she definitely is talking about feminism in history, not just the …
/r/MensRights21/06/10 03:45 PM
1

A poster in the TwoX discussion of the CNN article made a good point: that the condom prevents the rapist from ejaculating inside the victim (the condom itself apparently does not draw blood), thus reducing her likelihood of getting HIV. In South Africa, where rape and HIV are both very common, this could be important for disease prevention.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 03:35 PM
2

Ahhh... thanks :)
/r/MensRights21/06/10 02:27 PM
2

It doesn't prove anything, just as the word of the woman doesn't (or, at least, shouldn't be able to) prove that rape occurred. It can, however, certainly be evidence, just as the woman's testimony can be evidence. The only situation I see in which an innocent man could end up being investigated for rape due to one of these is a situation in which a malicious woman tricked him into having consensual sex while wearing one. (If the woman just forgot she was wearing it, I'd assume she'd explain tha…
/r/MensRights21/06/10 02:26 PM
3

I'm glad someone else thought that too; I thought I might just be crazy. (Where did that 'p' come from?)
/r/MensRights21/06/10 02:16 PM
2

I agree with the criticism that it's unlikely to help rape victims--I imagine a rapist who was "incapacitated" by one of these devices would be likely to severely injure or kill his victim in anger--but I don't think "women could use it maliciously, so it shouldn't be legal" is a good argument. The same thing could be said about guns or pepper spray.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 01:17 PM
4

The 30% figure you're referencing apparently, from this article, was found by high school students; they compared their blood types to those of their parents. I don't think it's fair to compare this data with the data in the linked study.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 12:47 PM
4

Do you have a link?
/r/MensRights21/06/10 03:00 AM
13

More stupid reddit drama. The more everyone ignores it, the quicker it will go away.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 01:12 AM
8

Exactly how is this anti-men? Would an article that said that false paternity was higher than previously thought be pro-men?
/r/MensRights21/06/10 01:10 AM
3

I have a personal policy of downvoting every post that contains "I'm gonna get downvoted for this, but..." Just say it. Downvotes are not actually fatal. If people disagree with you, they'll either have terrible arguments and you'll laugh at them, or they'll have good arguments and you'll learn something.
/r/MensRights20/06/10 11:32 PM
1

I'm not a feminist, and I haven't seen a disney movie in years. It was my favorite when I was little.
/r/MensRights20/06/10 11:13 PM
5

I think there's sexism on both sides. A lot of these threads are started by "nice guys" themselves, or by women reporting their experiences with self-described nice guys. These guys tend to believe that all women are heartless bitches who want a hypermasculine man, just as the women tend to believe that all guys who get friend-zoned are manipulative assholes who only think about sex. What I find most disheartening is the amount of upvotes these threads get, even when it's the fifth one in a week…
/r/MensRights20/06/10 03:29 PM
4

To be fair, I do think s/he was misinterpreting the comic, which was a man who did not look at Medusa's face because she had nice boobs. It definitely wasn't saying the man was stupid. I think the highest rated reply to his/her comment is very fair. There definitely were some ridiculous replies to it though (like this one).
/r/MensRights20/06/10 03:22 PM
2

It doesn't have to be "the majority makes the decisions" either. In much of history, and still to some extent today, it's "the people with the most money make the decisions" or "the people with hereditary power make decisions" or "the people with the best weapons make decisions".
/r/MensRights20/06/10 03:13 PM
2

Reddit is, of course, a perfect model for the United States government.
/r/MensRights20/06/10 03:11 PM
1

What if the child had an expensive medical condition? Or what if there were multiple children? Or what if both parents agreed that the child should go to a very expensive school?
/r/MensRights20/06/10 04:15 AM
3

The process for amending the Constitution is quite a bit more complicated than the process for changing laws in ways not affected by the Constitution. Amendments are first proposed by a 2/3 majority in both houses of Congress, then ratified by 3/4 of the states. To date there have only been 17 ratified constitutional amendments since the Bill of Rights. So this requires more than just majority support. But my point was, as evidenced by the Bill of Rights, that America was partially founded on th…
/r/MensRights20/06/10 02:34 AM
3

I have never seen any evidence at all that any officials intend to make any changes whatsoever to the family law policies that have created this problem. What would the military do about this, exactly?
/r/MensRights20/06/10 02:15 AM
1

To each their own. Indeed.
/r/MensRights20/06/10 02:10 AM
3

but there's really not much you can do if the majority doesn't want the minority to be able to do anything Well, there's this thing called the Constitution, for starters. Even if the majority decided they didn't want, say, freedom of speech anymore, it would still be Constitutionally protected.
/r/MensRights20/06/10 02:08 AM
9

I'm not sure how I feel about number 7, as it applies to education. There is quite a bit of evidence that boys and girls learn differently and need different modes of instruction. I'm not sure if that's covered in what you meant, but I don't think education should necessarily be the same for boys and girls, especially in elementary school. As far as 5, why should a false accusation (of any crime) automatically be punished the same is the original crime? If a false accusation of murder, for examp…
/r/MensRights20/06/10 02:07 AM
1

I could imagine a situation in which it was. I don't have enough information from this article to know whether I think it is in this situation.
/r/MensRights20/06/10 12:44 AM
1

I don't know what the area she lives in is like, but I live in a 3-bedroom apartment in a working-class neighborhood and our rent is almost $2000/month. I guess it would be possible to take care of myself and 2 kids on $700/month, but I wouldn't guess she doesn't need to work.
/r/MensRights19/06/10 06:25 PM
-2

Do you also complain about the Disney movies that are sexist against women? (Example: The Jungle Book has Mowgli running around the forest with his animal friends, while the girl he sees at the end of the book lives with her parents and sings a song about taking care of the home while her husband is out working.) Otherwise, you sound just like the radfems who cry sexism about everything.
/r/MensRights19/06/10 02:28 PM
0

It might shock you, but not all men and women are as stereotypical as the ones you see on TV. There do exist passive-aggressive men. Saying that obviously the author is at fault because only women are passive-aggressive is a ridiculous argument.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 10:43 PM
6

I guess s/he could have called it Sexist (Against Women) Reddit. I do think there are more anti-female posts than anti-male posts on most of reddit (gender war zones notwithstanding), since most of reddit is male.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 08:32 PM
2

WTF? "How to invade your guy's privacy: Ten Easy Steps!"
/r/MensRights18/06/10 06:09 PM
1

I don't think it's always clingy to be best friends with your partner, but how much do you really know about a person you've only known for eight months? At least for me--maybe OP and his girlfriend are different--eight months is still the "infatuation phase", where I still think everything about my partner is wonderful and special and his farts smell like roses. So if someone told me, after 8 months, that I was his best friend, that would be a problem for me, since I would personally not be abl…
/r/MensRights18/06/10 04:25 PM
0

That would be awesome, actually. I love cats.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 04:00 PM
2

I want to say he got trolled, but sadly I'm inclined to believe it...
/r/MensRights18/06/10 03:26 PM
0

We're going on three years. It's the trolling that keeps us close...
/r/MensRights18/06/10 03:19 PM
-12

She is my best friend. After 8 months? I'd think a guy was pretty clingy if he told me that...
/r/MensRights18/06/10 03:02 PM
5

I disagree with him about the game--it's a game, people--but I love his analysis of Laurie Penny's article. I agree with her that strangers who tell you to smile are annoying and rude, but not homicidal-rage-worthy.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 02:25 PM
2

FWIW, it is quite annoying when people insist that we can't talk about FGM without talking about circumcision, or circumcision without FGM. But: This one is for all the hormonal little guys who need a place to hold hands and cry together. Hormonal? To me, this sounds like he's insulting men by comparing them to women (who of course are always crazy and hormonal). I'm pretty sure he offended everyone there.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 02:02 PM
2

what
/r/MensRights18/06/10 11:34 AM
1

Technically he's a spelling Nazi, I think.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 11:29 AM
0

I'm not sure how "a patriarchal society hurts men too" translates to "it's the MAN's fault because of his PENIS!" Please explain.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 03:04 AM
1

That's probably not relevant to the lawsuit :) If the telephone company did screw up, she has a right to sue. Even if she is a terrible person.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 02:35 AM
2

Here (PDF) is the doctor's paper.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 02:32 AM
3

Hypocrites exist. As do people who believe murder is more wrong than sexual immorality.
/r/MensRights17/06/10 03:59 AM
0

I disagree with your assumption that more equal is always more right. I agree that allowing 'male abortion' along with real abortion would, on the surface, be more equal (although, since many women are religiously opposed to abortion, the decision for a woman to abort her child would be very different from the decision of a man not to pay for it). But if allowing this equality hurt more people than it helped, how would it be more right? We like equality because it is generally helps the most peo…
/r/MensRights16/06/10 06:36 PM
9

New protocol: Don't ignore the old protocol.
/r/MensRights16/06/10 06:05 PM
5

If (you think) someone is a troll, please do not feed them.
/r/MensRights16/06/10 03:04 AM
1

Really? I can't find it...
/r/MensRights15/06/10 03:46 PM
3

Pretty sure talking about them counts...
/r/MensRights15/06/10 11:08 AM
4

Contribute to the discussion, or go away.
/r/MensRights15/06/10 10:53 AM
4

If this is true, (the citation in the post is the Daily Mail) it shouldn't be. But do I really need to read that obnoxious of a blog post to get that information?
/r/MensRights15/06/10 02:25 AM
6

About time. I got disillusioned with feminism (or at least the feminist group at my college) freshman year when I tried to bring up the stats on male DV victims to advertise for Take Back the Night. It didn't go over very well. It's sad that so many people assume DV is always perpetrated by a man against a woman.
/r/MensRights15/06/10 02:22 AM
2

I meant, I didn't think the media would portray it as "Moms aren't necessary". I have no doubt that, if they did, women would get angry.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 11:08 PM
7

I also upvoted because I thought people should see how silly alimony can be, and that it can affect people of both genders. No hypocrisy here, I don't think.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 11:07 PM
6

Uzomah was on probation at the time for an incident in Orange County, Calif., in which he eventually pleaded guilty to three misdemeanors, including assault, battery and carrying a switchblade knife after he attacked one of Seacrest's bodyguards outside an event. So he's a repeat offender who was on probation at the time. It makes sense he'd get a heavier sentence.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 10:47 PM
29

Yep. I don't think it's fair to oppose wealthy men paying alimony to their former stay-at-home wives and simultaneously call this a victory. Why should anyone get his/her former spouse's money just because that spouse provided support during the marriage? I can understand some support for a limited amount of time to allow the spouse time to find a job if s/he didn't work during the marriage. But I don't see why this guy should be entitled to continue living the lifestyle he had when he was marri…
/r/MensRights14/06/10 10:40 PM
1

Exactly. Community property scares the hell out of me--why would I want my SO, wonderful though he is, to have default rights to money that I earned and he didn't? My mother will probably never marry her fiance because he has debts that she does not want to be responsible for. Community property really doesn't make sense for couples where both people work.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 08:09 PM
3

Kids, THIS is a troll. Take note.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 08:00 PM
2

It pays well, but I don't like that the women are required to live at the clinic, or that they sign agreements written in English that they may not understand. But I do think these women have a right to do what they want with their bodies, and while it's sad that gestating a stranger's baby is the best way they can make money, taking this option away from them would not make conditions better. Other concerns raised include the “renting” of Indian women’s bodies by westerners... Somehow, I don't …
/r/MensRights14/06/10 06:44 PM
0

Really? I thought it was for being snarky :)
/r/MensRights14/06/10 05:50 PM
2

The general issue is that, as the article stated, it is those "fringe" Feminists who have the political power to cause problems for men. Eh, I think the article was misleading about exactly how powerful each of these women are. Gudrun Schyman is a former Swedish politician. Her "man tax" idea is crazy, but according to Wikipedia, her current political party has not managed to gain the 4% of the votes necessary for representation in Parliament. She may have previously been influential, but she do…
/r/MensRights14/06/10 01:56 PM
4

Yikes. I would like to know how old the son is. Section 2967 requires consent of the legal guardian/parent and consent of the minor unless the physician determines that the child is unable to provide consent. So it sounds like, assuming the son is as competent as the father thinks he is, the son agreed to the DNR too. I couldn't find any more information on this besides that story, but if the son is an older teen, I don't think his father's wishes should be able to override his own. (If his moth…
/r/MensRights14/06/10 01:35 PM
1

Sounds like it really sucks to be a surrogate.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 11:22 AM
3

The premise is that healthy children can be raised by two women instead of a man and a woman. I agree that the article was sensationalist and mean ("dads aren't necessary" instead of "lesbian couples can be good parents"), but comparing it to the Holocaust is ridiculous. Nowhere in the study did it suggest that men are the cause of all parenting problems ever and should therefore be removed from society. I think that kind of suggestion would warrant a Holocaust comparison, but the study itself d…
/r/MensRights14/06/10 11:11 AM
5

No. No it isn't. Correlation does not imply causation.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 11:02 AM
2

Um, this isn't the same study. The study in the link was published in February, while the 25-year lesbian parents vs. straight parents study wasn't accepted for publication until March.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 11:01 AM
8

The butthurt. It is palpable.
/r/MensRights13/06/10 11:18 PM
2

There is a "hide" link....
/r/MensRights13/06/10 10:54 PM
19

Lesbian families are always planned; straight families aren't. Did the study control for this? Otherwise it doesn't really mean much...
/r/MensRights13/06/10 10:52 PM
7

Sounds like both the first husband and the woman were idiots. But the poster seems to think that the woman dumped him because he didn't have enough money. Sounds more like she dumped him because she found him boring, and somehow only realized that after marriage... As I said: Idiots.
/r/MensRights13/06/10 04:49 PM
2

Citation needed.
/r/MensRights13/06/10 02:30 PM
3

Too much rhetoric; too few facts. Also, way too much "Feminists are..." I don't see how making a blanket statement like "Feminists are not good people" is any different from "MRAs are not good people" or "Animal rights activists are not good people" or "Republicans are not good people". Some are, some aren't. Let's see some actual data on harmful things supported by many feminists.
/r/MensRights13/06/10 02:24 PM
1

How do you know he is pretending? Maybe he actually disagrees with some of the people here...
/r/MensRights11/06/10 08:37 PM
5

I'd think this was a troll, but it's Yahoo, so probably not.
/r/MensRights11/06/10 08:33 PM
2

My boyfriend does too. Says they make him feel icky, but he's kind of a health nut.
/r/MensRights11/06/10 08:27 PM
1

Right, but I don't think this post qualifies for concern trolling.
/r/MensRights11/06/10 08:04 PM
2

Since the alternative is to simply hear about how false rape claims to ruin men's lives is okay I'm really wondering where the post on 2X is that says that.
/r/MensRights11/06/10 05:54 PM
1

I think the issue is more that every feminist defines the term a little differently. But cookies are good, and I've never heard anyone argue that cookies are feminist. So feminism is a subset of good.
/r/MensRights11/06/10 05:51 PM
1

I thought he had a good point. I'm not sure why we should expect women to be docile and men to be violent. I think you're only calling this post concern trolling because there's been so much drama about concern trolls lately...
/r/MensRights11/06/10 04:58 PM
5

People do that, a lot. Insecure is a pretty cross-gender insult...
/r/MensRights11/06/10 04:39 PM
-1

You need to read all the way to the end of the sentence to get the point :) I'm not debating the existence of feminists who hate men. I just don't think they have organized to convince other women to call themselves feminists so their man-hating has better PR. Looks like a simple indulgence in the "taking quotes out of context" fallacy. The less-vitriolic egalitarian feminists have nevertheless refused to open their eyes and see the damage their ideas are causing. I don't think all feminists bel…
/r/MensRights11/06/10 04:36 PM
-1

My point is that it's silly to say "feminists" are the enemy, because there are a lot of different people with different beliefs who identify as feminist, and they're not organized in any way. The Nazis were a political party. "Feminist" is a label people can choose to adopt if they wish. This article seems to imply that there is a secret society of man-hating radical feminists who trick innocent women into adopting the feminist label. That said, some radical feminists do say radical things and …
/r/MensRights11/06/10 04:06 PM
-1

This man legitimately believes that feminists are Nazis whose transition to power is not yet complete. That is all.
/r/MensRights11/06/10 03:38 AM
6

Parents may use their 390 days of paid leave however they want up to the child’s eighth birthday.
/r/MensRights11/06/10 03:17 AM
2

Eh. I don't see anything wrong with them advertising it. They want to get more people, and /r/MR is a good place to recruit them from. Who cares?
/r/MensRights10/06/10 11:56 PM
4

Wouldn't state-sponsored paternity leave allow the father to spend more quality time with his sons, though? It doesn't say the father must spend two months wearing an apron and prosthetic breasts. It's meant to allow both parents to spend time with their kids.
/r/MensRights10/06/10 11:45 PM
2

I would think you'd be fine hitting on them in bars or somewhere else they go to be hit on.
/r/MensRights10/06/10 11:37 PM
2

I'm gonna need some source on this. I believe you about people being offended by RapeLay, but have you actually seen anyone labeling Hey Baby as "empowering"?
/r/MensRights10/06/10 11:36 PM
1

and maybe we should all be a little offended when even a silly game treats innocent life as completely dispendable -- even when it has a penis. If you had said "BECAUSE it has a penis", I think you would have had much more of a case. But the majority of non-casual games treat innocent life as expendable. So do movies. I'm not sure why that is particularly offensive.
/r/MensRights10/06/10 11:34 PM
0

Why do you think that feminist women hate undesirable men who find them attractive? I'm a woman; I'm not sure if I would call myself a feminist, but I believe in equality between the genders. I would say that if a man I don't know finds me attractive and feels the need to tell me about it in an inappropriate way ("I want to lick you all over'), I would feel grossed out and angry, but not hate...
/r/MensRights10/06/10 11:25 PM
2

The graphics really are terrible. I'm really wondering who would want to play this game...
/r/MensRights10/06/10 11:19 PM
2

Seriously?
/r/MensRights10/06/10 04:31 PM
2

What does "spirited" mean? There's no distinctive and respected paternal role in the family but a merely unisex one based on the motherhood role. What is the paternal role in the family, then?
/r/MensRights10/06/10 04:23 PM
3

Liverotto, if women only want to have sex with you if you promise them "slavery", I would suggest going to prostitutes.
/r/MensRights10/06/10 04:12 PM
1

I'm guessing they would be tried for perjury, as would people who falsely reported any other crime.
/r/MensRights10/06/10 04:09 PM
7

I agree with your feelings about celebrities, but I do think this would get a lot more legitimate press if it was a male celebrity sexually harassing a female staff member.
/r/MensRights10/06/10 03:58 PM
1

That's possible, but couldn't the straight parents do the same thing? I assume both groups would want their parenting skills to come out looking "better" than the other group's. Edit: Assuming that the straight parents knew they were in a study comparing the outcome of children of straight parents to the outcome of children of lesbian parents, of course.
/r/MensRights08/06/10 01:23 PM
1

I think, since all groups in the study self reported, that part of the complaint is probably not an issue. It is disturbing that one of the authors of the study appears to consider male parents inferior to female parents though. I'd guess that the discrepancy in the study is because, since two women cannot get pregnant by accident, the lesbian couples were more prepared on average when they became parents than the straight couples were. I wonder if a similar study involving gay male couples with…
/r/MensRights08/06/10 01:09 PM
1

No, she was statutorily raped; though there is no mention of coercion. The reason statutory rape laws exist is to protect minors who don't have enough maturity to make decisions about having a sexual relationship with an adult. Basically, because of how young she was and how big the age difference was between them, there isn't really a difference between "statutorily raped" and "really raped".
/r/MensRights08/06/10 11:27 AM
3

I don't think this necessarily has terrible implications for men. It's not saying "children do better without fathers", it's saying: Adolescents who have been reared in lesbian-mother families since birth demonstrate healthy psychological adjustment. Just because children can do well with two moms doesn't mean they can't do well with a mom and a dad, or with two dads.
/r/MensRights08/06/10 11:15 AM
0

So you have no problem with defining rape as a man forcing a woman to have sex, right? Since most of the rapists are men and most of the rape victims are women?
/r/MensRights08/06/10 10:33 AM
4

She was a 13 year old who got pregnant with a 30-year-old's baby. I would think psychiatric care, and a look into her family situation--where were her parents when all this was happening?--should come before charging her with any crimes. I'd really like to know how far along the fetus was. If it was viable, I kind of understand charging the boyfriend with concealing the death of a child. But if not, this was a fetus, not a child.
/r/MensRights07/06/10 11:45 PM
0

Do you want only people who agree with you to comment in this subreddit?
/r/MensRights07/06/10 10:02 PM
3

It's more funny than threatening...
/r/MensRights07/06/10 03:33 PM
2

I got banned too! Want to form a club? We could call it Female Studies and only let people who have already been banned from Male Studies in! Then we could sit in a circle and stimulate each others' genitals!
/r/MensRights07/06/10 03:19 PM
1

Two wrongs... how many rights?
/r/MensRights07/06/10 02:57 PM
2

Or maybe--YOU DOWNVOTED IT YOURSELF WITH YOUR OTHER ACCOUNTS!!!! omg conspiracy
/r/MensRights07/06/10 02:56 PM
6

I really don't see why false rape accusers can't be charged with something. Obstruction of justice? Obviously, this should only happen in cases where it's pretty clear the accusation was false, and the accuser should have a fair trial. But given that false accusations hurt both the accused and people who have actually been raped, I don't think false accusers should be able to lie with impunity.
/r/MensRights07/06/10 02:28 PM
6

tomek77, I'm a woman who sometimes posts to MensRights. I do this because I think that the men's rights movement has some legitimate complaints, and there are often good discussions here. I don't know if I would label myself a feminist--I believe in equality between the sexes, and I don't identify with the radical feminist movement. So I have a question: Would you prefer if there were no women in MensRights?
/r/MensRights07/06/10 02:03 PM
5

Did you just respond to an accusation that you only post to call other people trolls by saying the accuser is a troll? You win at life.
/r/MensRights07/06/10 01:54 PM
1

Why do you think this is happening?
/r/MensRights07/06/10 01:51 PM
0

Ugh. While I agree with rape defendant anonymity, this article is extremely obnoxious: So what we have here is yet another state-delivered kick to the teeth of the male sex. Thanks to the gutless wonders in power, British women will retain their power to destroy a man’s life with a mere accusation, and even if the allegation turns out to be completely bogus the woman will still keep her reputation intact because no one will know that she is the lying scumbag in that particular case. If she does …
/r/MensRights07/06/10 01:46 PM
3

What did this story have to do with feminists?
/r/MensRights07/06/10 01:40 PM
2

If I had to guess, I'd say it's because the Daily Mail is a UK tabloid, so American redditors don't realize exactly how silly it is. The only solution is for the UK to export it to the United States and put racks of them next to the National Enquirer in grocery checkout lanes.
/r/MensRights02/06/10 09:26 PM
1

Getting drunk and driving is different from getting drunk and getting raped. If you get drunk and drive, that is a bad decision. If you get drunk and get raped, that isn't your decision, that's someone else taking advantage of you. I guess if what you mean is, if the guy hadn't been drinking, this wouldn't have happened, so his actions contributed to the rape, then that's true, but I don't think the fact that he was drinking makes the rapist less guilty. (I wouldn't consider a mugger in a poor n…
/r/MensRights02/06/10 09:22 PM
1

The problem I see with this is that it could lead to the child growing up in poverty. As the law stands, if a child is conceived, both the man and woman have financial responsibility for it, only the woman has an additional right to abortion since her body is supporting the child. I can't think of a way to give this right to men, short of forcing a woman to have/not have an abortion. Once the child is born, its welfare needs to be taken into consideration. I'd recommend that men insist on condom…
/r/MensRights28/05/10 02:09 PM
0

What? Why does that make sense?
/r/MensRights27/05/10 02:36 PM
1

DEATH TO REPOSTERS
/r/MensRights26/05/10 03:51 AM
4

I agree with many of the points this article is trying to make, but the article is obnoxious. All men are wage earners and all women are housewives, so divorced men should be entitled to "weekly cleaning, a hot meal 7 nights a week, and 'romantic companionship' services"?
/r/MensRights26/05/10 03:38 AM
6

The article didn't say anything had happened to the men. Nothing. No complaint was filed, they weren't kicked off their team. Betting was suspended on their team for the next match. Stop trying to create outrage.
/r/MensRights26/05/10 03:34 AM
2

It seems the power of CHILD RAPE PANIC to ruin people's lives is not confined to one sex.
/r/MensRights26/05/10 03:17 AM
1

Yeah, I've noticed that on other subreddits. I guess it looks less obnoxious on r/aww or r/lolcats, since there really are no bad lolcats.
/r/MensRights26/05/10 02:39 AM
3

If he is actually saying that rape is right, he's crazy and not worth listening to. If he's saying it as hyperbole, he's just a douchebag. Whether you agree with them or not, affirmative action programs and equal opportunity programs are not rape of white men.
/r/MensRights26/05/10 12:08 AM
4

I would say, for children, ADD/ADHD. According to Wikipedia, there are about four times as many boys as girls diagnosed with ADHD. I would guess that this is partially because the disorder is overdiagnosed, and children who are disruptive in a classroom setting are given medications in order to make them easier to manage. For whatever reason (I've heard many, but I'm not sure what to believe), boys are "more disruptive" to classrooms than girls are.
/r/MensRights25/05/10 11:25 PM
1

Daily Mail.
/r/MensRights25/05/10 11:18 PM
0

Stopped reading after "The Morally Superior Sex". Does every obnoxious blog post about a woman doing something bad have to get posted to MensRights?
/r/MensRights25/05/10 11:14 PM
1

Sorry, you're right, I should have said "people" who don't feel comfortable.
/r/MensRights22/05/10 06:06 AM
-1

So that women who don't feel comfortable having people know that they've been raped are able to press charges. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't individual police departments/media... units? choose not to release/report the names of people claiming to be rape victims? (As opposed to there being a law about it...)
/r/MensRights21/05/10 07:45 PM
1

Research. It was a study involving 109 reports of rape in a small town. This fact is cited in the article I linked...
/r/MensRights21/05/10 03:29 PM
1

I think the troll won.
/r/MensRights21/05/10 04:16 AM
-1

Actually, I think you can make a pretty good argument against this law based on freedom of the press...
/r/MensRights21/05/10 04:12 AM
2

What about the study cited in this article? (This study estimates 8-10%, but doesn't say how hat compares to the false report rate for other crimes.) I'm pretty sure the 40% figure came from one small study, as did the 2% figure. everyone has the right to presumption of innocence Yes. But not everyone has the right to prevent the release of their name to the media in connection with a criminal investigation. That's what we're discussing here.
/r/MensRights21/05/10 04:10 AM
2

I can guarantee you the number of false rape charges are substantially higher then false murder charges. If you can guarantee it, let's see the source :)
/r/MensRights20/05/10 11:41 PM
2

I would really like to know the proportion of rape accusations that are shown to be false to total accusations. If it is high compared to that of other crimes, I would support rape defendant anonymity, but if it's comparable or lower, the women quoted in the article have a point. Does anyone know of any research on this? It seems like there are a lot of advocates for men saying that there are lots of false rape accusations and a lot of advocates for women saying that false rape accusations are r…
/r/MensRights20/05/10 05:20 PM
1

Making fun of people on the internet is never futile.
/r/MensRights20/05/10 06:35 AM
1

Nothing... except you stated your unqualified assertion, and then he stated his, and then you stated yours again. I suppose if you want to do that and call it arguing, that's cool, but I just thought it seemed kind of silly.
/r/MensRights20/05/10 06:28 AM
3

Firstly I listed very specific items that I suspect women are more guilty of doing than men. But before that, I qualified it by stating that this is merely my opinion. I have insufficient facts to back it up. Do you expect people not to argue with you about this because "this is merely [your] opinion"? If it's just my opinion that black people are inferior to white people, or that all men are potential rapists, or, hell, that blue and yellow are the same color, should people refrain from debatin…
/r/MensRights20/05/10 06:03 AM
2

This article is a pretty good review of the current research on gossip. They discuss gender and gossip a little, but only to say that women were generally more interested in stories about women than men were in stories about men. This study found that (from the abstract) "no significant sex differences were uncovered regarding the derogatory tone of gossip".
/r/MensRights20/05/10 05:56 AM
1

Do you have this belief for a reason..?
/r/MensRights20/05/10 05:34 AM
6

I am confident in stating my belief that back-stabbing, betrayal, intentional social isolation and ostracising; and gossip with the aim of hurting someone's feelings is almost exclusively a female vocation. In my observations, at least concerning gossip, this is an unfounded stereotype. About six months ago, I decided to try to avoid listening to or spreading gossip--I think the majority of gossip is unethical. Since I started paying attention, I've noticed that the majority of both men and wome…
/r/MensRights20/05/10 05:03 AM
1

It still looks like a penis, not a work of art. But good for you.
/r/MensRights19/05/10 12:54 AM
5

I'm a girl, and I like uncircumcised ones better. Handjobs are easier. Also, this is just an observation, and it's by no means true of all circumcised guys, but the ones I've been with had a hard time comprehending that my genitals are sensitive, and some kinds of touch do not feel good.
/r/MensRights19/05/10 12:52 AM
4

I dated an uncut guy who had a few stray hairs on the base of his dick, so not all cases of penis hair are caused by circumcision. If that makes you feel any better.
/r/MensRights19/05/10 12:45 AM
1

How would a difference in mean IQ of five points account for a 90-10 disparity in number of science professors? Other factors are at work...
/r/MensRights02/05/10 11:56 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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