TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

apullin Archive

View 2 posts and 411 comments by apullin on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

There's also the effect of many of the women who "live" here only really "living" here part time, 1-2 months per year. The rest of the year, they are traveling the country and the world on an essentially perpetual vacation, bankrolled by their parents or by their many, many suitors. That is just how it goes here. Many women will have 3-10 partners, who they'll rotate through travel vacations with.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/07/17 06:05 AM
11

you should visit the SF bay area some time. The "being physically attractive" isn't even really required.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/07/17 05:42 AM
1

Once she's not convicted, it is only going to reinforce her complex.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/05/17 07:40 AM
2

Just propose a compriomise that involved both people: sure, men will agree to put the seat down when they are done, as long as women agree to put the seat up when they are done. I proposed this in a roommate situation once and the response was totally apoplectic because they figured out how they had made a one-sided demand.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 06:26 AM
2

Conspiracy to provide false information to the police. Possibly extortion.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/04/17 03:29 PM
3

She'll just get her friends to call it for her. And she will continue this behavior in other places in life.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/04/17 03:26 PM
0

The simple response from everyone will be: "This is not exclusion, this is not denial of any benefits, this is not discrimination."
/r/MensRights21/10/16 09:09 PM
12

Wow, an /r/MensRights post that reached the front page of /r/all without a mod deleting it? That is genuinely surprising.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 09:08 PM
1

If you asked them, they would say that they are setting feminism forward 100 years. Literally anything can be called "feminism", because words mean whatever the speaker wants them to mean. That Slate Star Codex article says it better than I ever could.
/r/MensRights09/09/16 02:02 PM
2

Make a vinyl sticker stencil. Apply to glass. Apply etchant (available at any good art&craft store) to glass. Allow to sit to 10 minutes, wipe off. Wear gloves! The message will then be added to the glass. Don't obscure the posters, just add to the message.
/r/MensRights24/08/16 03:25 AM
1

This comes up a lot. No, there should not. This breaks the concept of a system of fairness in a system of justice. However, they should be a significant penalty associated with knowingly and intentionally providing false information to the police of court. However, even in this case, it appears as thought the woman may have genuinely believed that this man raped her. The same issue came up with Crystal Magnum in the Duke Lacrosse case: supposedly, she genuinely believed that it happened, despite…
/r/MensRights16/07/16 05:52 AM
4

Now that everyone is included, it would only coalesce more opinion against foreign deployments requiring general conscription. There is still the rich/poor divide, but that's not anywhere near as unilateral as the men/women divide.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 06:06 AM
34

So, should women be forced to be read statements from people who were falsely accused (in cases where it is known with certainty)?
/r/MensRights09/06/16 10:04 PM
2

This woman is unhinged. She has all these really dicey interactions with people stemming from her public persona. There was that guy she tweeted with and excoriated for treating her like a sex object, when he was parroting the tone of her whole comedy act that he had just attended, and in a very mild way. Now this. The whole thing about her stealing jokes. Jesus.
/r/MensRights05/05/16 03:47 AM
2

There is a competing effect of increasing the scope, classification, and reporting of rapes and "rapes". I've unfortunately lost the writeup I had now, but in ~2006, RAINN had some stats about the number rapes in the US, which was cited in an article. Then, if you go and check their more modern version of the same page, the count was 5x higher in 2014.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 07:37 PM
2

One could make the same argument for surgical modification of female genitals: 3rd party aesthetics, fitting in with the general population, and relegating it to be a minor cosmetic issue in a life and world where much bigger issues exist. shitting on men In all the pictures and campaigns, there are even tons of mothers who contribute their voice. In the very first picture, a mother is in the ad show in the background, and yet "mother" is nowhere to be found in this article. So, erasure or just …
/r/MensRights25/01/16 11:30 PM
1

This is seriously way OKC is like in the SF bay area. Maybe there are male profiles that are equally shitty in the same way or their own ways, but I don't get exposed to male profiles, so I don't know. Yes, there is room for everyone to be horrible.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 06:24 PM
11

And yet if you proposed establishing an all-male college, you would be excoriated, and accused of supporting "segregation". And those lambasting you would then turn around, and support racially segregated programs and women's-only spaces.
/r/MensRights14/01/16 05:55 PM
16

There is a line in the Simpsons that perfectly encapsulates this, when Sideshow Bob is arguing to get paroled, and he said, "What is that anyway, attempted murder? I mean, do scientists get the Noble prize for attempted chemistry?" It is unfortunate that it is not on YouTube. I would be posting it on YourTube and Facebook 5x a day, now that the stupidity that it is mocking so effectively is now entirely common.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/01/16 07:09 AM
1

The law, at least in CA, is that it is impossible for anyone to give consent if they are influenced by alcohol, drugs, or prescription medication. An amount is not established.
/r/MensRights03/01/16 03:36 AM
2

According to the absolute letter of the law, there are likely > 1 billion rapes per year in the US. If the influence of alcohol or medication is present, sex is de facto disallowed by the law.
/r/MensRights03/01/16 03:28 AM
2

Right. Not all Muslims need to apologize for the horrible minority. Not all blacks need to apologize for the badness that comes from some blighted communities. As often as I do look at the demographics of crime, to hear a black people say, "I'm one of the good ones" just means that they have had fallacious collective shame levied against them to the point of damage. A real gender studies person would call that "intersectionality", I suppose.
/r/MensRights16/12/15 05:14 PM
15

Not just a box for all female character, but all women in the real world, too. This is what I call the "Barbie Expectation", although I sure some more competent people have written more cogently about it: The expectation that women are to lead lives that are free of any sort of negativity, woe, strife, limitation, failure, adversity, or such thing that a regular person might experience in their life. Instead, the state of being a woman is to be constantly in a bubble of crystalline perfection, l…
/r/MensRights15/12/15 06:08 AM
1

Shari Dworkin? I wonder if she is any relation to the extreme feminist Dworkin?
/r/MensRights14/12/15 10:24 PM
1

Under the strictest interpretation of the letter of the law of what "rape" is, where any alcohol or drugs or prescription drugs are present, there are probably 1 billion or more rapes per year in the US.
/r/MensRights07/12/15 06:24 PM
6

This is a mean-spirited comment and does not contribute anything to the topic. While I have not undergone it myself, military training has a long reputation of whipping people into shape and making them effective people.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 06:42 AM
39

They are just using emotional shaming as a weapon. If someone claims that emotional shaming is a problem for women, and that it should be ended, but is entirely willing to use emotional shaming against men for the purposes of ... whatever, likely to help their own self-esteem, then they are morally inconsistent.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 06:37 AM
1

Feminists don't challenge radical islam because they look up to them as role models. They have a different ethos to implement, but the ideology totalitarianism is what many feminists actually want.
/r/MensRights29/11/15 03:55 AM
1

Puritanism in full, full swing.
/r/MensRights28/11/15 03:08 AM
2

This was likely done with the expectation that she will file for child support payments. The bureau that assigned, oversees, and implemented child support payments takes a percentage of every payment, as an administrative fee. It is in their interest to see revenue maximized by enacting as many child support payments as possible.
/r/MensRights24/11/15 11:16 PM
0

No amount or objective measure is given.
/r/MensRights24/11/15 12:49 AM
1

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=261-269
/r/MensRights23/11/15 11:19 PM
2

Under the letter of the law, if anyone has imbibed any alcohol or taken any drugs, including prescription drugs, they are absolutely disallowed to engage in sexual activity, they cannot form consent. Any consent given is void since it is precluded by the law. Whatever context and history exists is irrelevant, married, in a relationship, previously consenting, or even contractual agreements for consent. By the letter of the law, there are probably > 1 billion rapes per year in the US.
/r/MensRights23/11/15 10:12 PM
1

I now just accept that the use of "woman" and "women" is an attempt to change the by-word for people away from the former default of "men" and "guys". I wouldn't even hesitate to respond to this, if I was in need. I will respond to any offer like this that I would like to participate in that is stated using she/women pronouns, unless it explicitly says "no men".
/r/MensRights18/11/15 01:57 AM
0

What they say is absolutely correct, in the strictest sense, and the law makes no bones about it: Any sexual interaction while any party has consumed any amount of alcohol or drugs, recreational or prescription, is banned, and is de facto illegal. Consent is outright impossible in this situation, no matter what. Context of relationship, previous sexual encounter, or any statements of consent before, during, or after, no matter how enthusiastic and constant, are all entirely void. Under the liter…
/r/MensRights16/11/15 11:41 PM
0

Oblique to this, but did that XOJane writer every respond to or apologize for that whole face/neck tattoo incident?
/r/MensRights16/11/15 11:38 PM
2

Identify as universally gendered. Apply.
/r/MensRights16/11/15 10:55 PM
1

Yep. I am one of them.
/r/MensRights16/11/15 05:26 PM
1

I don't now about that. There is something of a men's issue here vis a vis intersectionality of race and men's issues. Also, the football team that boycotted the game was all men. My guess is that the OP posted this due to the conceptual overlap with "privilege". Yes, that is a fine topic to talk about, and comes up all the time in men's issues circles, but this story in an of itself, appears to be at best peripheral. Some could write a nice post about the points I have outlined above, and the i…
/r/MensRights13/11/15 04:14 AM
0

This is very interesting, and worth being talked about, but is not really related to Men's Rights or Men's Issues, as far as I can tell.
/r/MensRights13/11/15 12:00 AM
1

You should visit the SF bay area, where the pickiness is entirely justified. There are many hundreds of thousands more men here than women. OKCupid profiles openly state that people who are < 6ft tall shouldn't even both responding. Women are all generally polyamorous because there are just so many men available.
/r/MensRights10/11/15 11:05 PM
2

drunk men ... drunk women The law already makes no bones about it: any alcohol or prescription drugs in your system, and you cannot legally participate in sex. 500 million or more rapes happen every year in the US, under this accounting.
/r/MensRights06/11/15 05:18 PM
1

There was a huge scandal about criminal malfeasance and managerial incompetence in the upper echelons of the VA 8-12 months ago, wasn't there? Weren't there congressional hearings, and talks of federal felony charges being files against people?
/r/MensRights28/10/15 04:47 AM
2

So, it is is worth thinking about a good response to comments like this, since they seem to come up all the time. My thought it something like this, if you were replying to that person: You are speaking from a position of having sexual desire, and a fantasy version of the encounter wherein you are you, not him, and are enthusiastic and consenting to the sex. That is, however, not what is described in the article; you are not the man in question, you do not decide what he wanted and didn't want, …
/r/MensRights28/10/15 04:44 AM
2

Black men / a black man is probably in a particularly good position to speak about this issue. It came up, and even made the front page of CNN, during the Baltimore crisis, that 1-in-6 black men were incarcerated.
/r/MensRights26/10/15 10:10 PM
1

There is likely some ulterior motive to this. Like a Hillary super PAC paid for it, or some group that is going to promote a controversial movie, or run a charity scam. I wonder how much it would cost to put up the same billboard, but with "women" on it?
/r/MensRights26/10/15 10:06 PM
3

Puritanism roars on in America.
/r/MensRights26/10/15 10:05 PM
1

This talks about the person issuing the challenges and the legal basis for it: http://news.yahoo.com/this-california-law-is-helping-men-213035804.html
/r/MensRights23/10/15 11:55 PM
5

Reserve as female patron. Pay on credit card. If they turn you away at the door, challenge the charge on your credit card. If this is in California, you can file a lawsuit over it.
/r/MensRights23/10/15 03:40 AM
5

I believe the concept of "accidental rape" stemmed from the Occidental rape case, wherein both students involved in the sexual were heavily intoxicated, but only the male was charged with rape, despite symmetry in the "duress", per the legal definition. I would say that is not an outlandish nor hateful nor ridiculous concept, but reducing it down to a sound byte will never do anyone any good. Under some views, an "accidental" rape could be entirely possible: two people thought they were giving c…
/r/MensRights22/10/15 06:46 PM
10

Puritanism is in full swing in America, apparently. It is not immoral to look for sexual partners using the internet. There is, from what I have read, no evidence that the 19 year old was seeking out underage sex partners. edit: CNN calls him a "man" in their reporting. It would be very interesting to compile statistics of how CNN refers to men, women, girls, boys, children, etc, and the actual age and gender of the person to whom they are referring. it might take 6 months or a year, but you cou…
/r/MensRights20/10/15 09:38 PM
1

This does not exist in a vacuum. By doing this, TED and TEDx are de facto implying that the default "change makers" of the world are men. This is exactly the way of thinking that The Second Sex talked about at length, and was seminal in the formation of feminism as a social movement. The extremes of feminism are now looping back around into creation and enforcement of gender roles.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:58 PM
2

I mention this topic, ectogenesis, a lot in feminist discussion. It is met with ire, like I just openly talked about bringing back eugenics and hanging troublesome black people, or something like that. I have rarely seem the anger ramp up that quickly. The other point that I mention quite often is: we've really turned a corner in society, where pregnancy is now considered a horrible affliction, and a disability, and a curse than women are wrought with from some cruel universe. And many laps on h…
/r/MensRights13/10/15 02:04 AM
25

And the site admins just allow that subreddit to continue to exist, even in flagrant violation of site rules are the usually very strictly enforced, even to the point where beloved people like Unidan (or whatever his name was) are banned?
/r/MensRights12/10/15 02:44 AM
2

From what I have read, it really seems like that this person is beset with rage and rancor in a way that is negatively affecting her life. This should concern everyone around her. Consider the sometimes used definition of an alcoholic: someone who understands the negative or destructive consequences of their habit, but continues with it anyway. That same pattern could be applied to the subject of this article, really.
/r/MensRights06/10/15 07:45 PM
1

Except that legislation already exist that prevents any FGM for religious or traditional reasons.
/r/MensRights04/10/15 07:44 AM
0

Thanks!
/r/MensRights02/10/15 07:46 PM
0

This is exactly why I challenge such content-less retorts: to expose them as content-less.
/r/MensRights02/10/15 07:17 PM
1

OK. You'll likely find agreement from most or all people that they are not literally the same thing. By construction, they are not the same, as the two are done to different anatomy. So, you still haven't stated a point, only the obvious.
/r/MensRights02/10/15 06:10 PM
1

I don't understand what the intent or implication of your comment is.
/r/MensRights02/10/15 05:31 PM
6

You should cite the law where it is federally banned for female genitalia: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/116
/r/MensRights02/10/15 06:18 AM
6

This is astonishing. Thanks for putting this together.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 04:10 PM
1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlsUg0sdAtE
/r/MensRights30/09/15 04:10 PM
2

The best that you can hope for is a disbarring of whatever district attorney oversaw the whole proceeding. It happened in Kern County, it happened with Duke LaCrosse, it may happen with UVa.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 03:23 PM
1

You should start identifying as universally gendered. Write a polite reply explaining that you understand how they could make that misinterpretation, but that you still qualify for the program.
/r/MensRights28/09/15 08:21 PM
11

There are lots of non-combat roles. Fitness for combat is another discussion. There can be tests, metrics, quotas, whatever else. In countries that have compulsory civil service, you can do it as a truck driver or nurse or something; it is not always combat-oriented.
/r/MensRights28/09/15 08:15 PM
3

Why don't you say which school it is?
/r/MensRights08/09/15 11:01 PM
2

The offices that oversee, implemented, and enforce child support take a percentage of every payment as an administrative fee. They have an incentive to always maximize the payment for as many years as possible.
/r/MensRights07/09/15 12:28 AM
7

And, the old gem of the paradox of, "You can't go by the dictionary definition, we're not beholden to that because definitions are not universal, but here is another definition, and everyone is beholden to that, because it is the definition, and definitions are universal." Slate Star Codex was a wonderful article about this: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/07/social-justice-and-words-words-words/ Words carrying meaning, insofar as shortening or representing a longer phrasing of a concept or id…
/r/MensRights31/08/15 12:34 AM
4

Does it really have to be left to someone claiming damages in a civil suit for there to be any action here? I can't quite draw a path to how to frame this as an issue of best-interests of the public to take any actions other than civil, though.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 07:57 PM
12

This has been done to death. It is such a political plaything: http://www.politifact.com/georgia/statements/2015/apr/22/viral-buzzfeed/viral-video-misfires-on-wage-gap/
/r/MensRights19/08/15 06:56 PM
2

That doesn't seem entirely sound. The husband must have some kind of implicit, explicit, or statutory contract with the mother over all sorts of issues involving the reproduction. If you are in a contract with a party, and information is misrepresented, then fraud is occurring. Conspiracy to commit fraud is also a chargeable offense.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 08:17 PM
1

Which definition? Definitions are both personal, and collective.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 04:45 AM
8

This is not a thing to enjoy. There is a moral imperative that we help those in society who need help, and to ensure they have their due liberties.
/r/MensRights17/08/15 09:59 PM
3

Surely we can discuss sexual ethics based on honesty without turning every lapse into a crime. Obama literally said, "Making distinctions between types of rape doesn't make any sense to me." And he was cheered for it.
/r/MensRights17/08/15 06:29 PM
76

The first paragraph is great. The second is hyperbolic and sarcastic. That's not an effective way of arguing a point. This does remind me, though, of what happened with Biden this year or last: he tweeted out that he "wouldn't rest until his daughters have every right that a man does in America", or something very close to that, implying that his daughters don't have rights because they are girls. There was a huge pushback on Twitter, and people writing some articles, telling him: Rest easy, Joe…
/r/MensRights17/08/15 06:27 PM
1

While I don't know the field of journalism, I get this inkling that going across the grain is where people etch their name of the edifice of time. You might find some excellent opportunities in exploring this community and it's issues, and its people. Without just copy-asting the Superman "They are a good people speech", there is some great stuff going on here. There is always a presence of less good stuff, anger, confusion, bladed morality, etc. I'm rambling. I'm pretty much trying to encourage…
/r/MensRights16/08/15 07:30 AM
17

Meh, when I sat in on an Intro the Women's Studies class here at Berkeley this past fall, I saw people pushing 1-in-5 to 1-in-2 all the time. I know I made comments on here about it ... too bad there isn't a searchable user comment history. You want to know what the next thing on the horizon is? The "wage gap" is going to be reformed under the "earnings gap". That will include all people who have no income whatsoever, and is just a measure of the total earnings by men to the total earnings by wo…
/r/MensRights15/08/15 08:52 PM
10

"Neckbeards" is code for "subhuman mongrel". This is a very specific reference.
/r/MensRights14/08/15 09:52 PM
1

I always put that preface in to get ahead of emotions. Ten thousand times in my life, I have heard the retort, "I don't have to do what you tell me to do!". A recommendation with good intent is not the same as a command, or an imperative, or shaming. I am making a recommendation, which is implicitly a prompt (which was responded to below), as to why the contributions of the comments have taken the form they have, claiming that something is known, but the responses right in front of them indicate…
/r/MensRights13/08/15 11:19 PM
2

The internet is a total flood, so information gets dilluted, mixed, etc. I am not telling you you have to do, or should or shouldn't do, but: If you know thing that you would like other people to know, you could include that in your replies, so that the information becomes visible and well-known.
/r/MensRights13/08/15 06:45 PM
4

People want a male-facing equivalent of "feminism". Word invention is huge, especially in the Twitter Age. So ... we should come up with something better? Masculism or something?
/r/MensRights13/08/15 06:23 PM
3

If this is real, you should considering approaching a blog with the information and getting to write a piece that outs the companies. (note: the company, not the person who replied to you) We do it for bakeries and their religious views. Of course, that company might start a Patreon or IndieGoGo, and end up better off in the long run, but still.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 06:32 PM
1

This is not how the law works. The law defines terms for their use. The meaning of "duress" is specifically defined in the text of the law. In the case of California, at least, I have only read the CA law.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 04:54 AM
1

a man and woman having sex both drunk and both consensual According to the government, this is outright impossible. All sex while intoxicated is absolutely illegal. There may not be a statutory compulsion to prosecute, but it is still illegal under the letter of the law. Yes, this does mean even if couples consent before, and after, the consent during is irrelevant, and the act is still illegal. Intoxicated sex is, by the letter of the law, banned. Yes, this does mean that some huge number of ra…
/r/MensRights11/08/15 08:57 PM
1

This is not a helpful or productive comment. I can understand if you are upset, but this contribution is nothing more than you lashing out.
/r/MensRights11/08/15 05:33 PM
1

self-intoxicated What does self-intoxicated mean? not under duress Duress is defined in the law as being under the influence of alcohol or other substances, or some of the other conditions that I mentioned.
/r/MensRights11/08/15 05:32 PM
3

Ex post facto modification of sexual consent in the absence of duress. It just needs to be tested by a higher court.
/r/MensRights11/08/15 07:08 AM
-3

This is not a good comparison. The extension of reasoning is flawed. Consent law does not say that a woman is not responsible for her actions while intoxicated. It only states that absolutely all sex with someone who is under "duress" is de facto illegal. This includes intoxication, or taking prescription medication, or fear of reprisal, and an number of other factors.
/r/MensRights11/08/15 07:07 AM
3

Seems like an OK place, except for all the strife, murders, and dysfunctional society! Nah, I think there are a bunch of expat communities there, things are loose enough that you could just walk in and settle.
/r/MensRights10/08/15 05:26 PM
3

hygenic, cleaning easier This is technically true. In the same way that removing your nose you result in having less boogers. The foreskin and the glans of the penis do trap oil and other minor fluids. As this doctor states here, while the increase in hygiene is associated with a decreased HIV transmission rate, this is purely a hygiene issue, and that access to soap and water reduce the transmission by the same amount. female genital mutilation being bad while circumcision being expected. Both …
/r/MensRights10/08/15 01:40 AM
3

Oh, weird, I was misreading things ... I thought the OP of this post copied his text into here ... but it looks like it was just someone else repeating what the person had originally posted. Shrug. Might be fabricated.
/r/MensRights10/08/15 01:17 AM
9

Reply to the OP, not to me ...
/r/MensRights09/08/15 11:54 PM
19

Leave the country and start again in South Africa.
/r/MensRights09/08/15 11:35 PM
1

Intersectionality for men.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 08:17 AM
1

Of course there is. There is space for gays, women, lesbians, transgendered folks of any sort. Diverse voices and experience fill out issues in a useful way. The great thing about embracing free expression is that it maximizes the likelihood that the truth will emerge.
/r/MensRights07/08/15 06:40 PM
3

This is called Neo-Puritanism. It comes and goes in political cycles.
/r/MensRights07/08/15 05:03 PM
1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlsUg0sdAtE
/r/MensRights06/08/15 06:09 PM
2

They won't ban this subreddit, but they keep flogging that term "new technology". It will likely be the case that the whole subreddit will have the equivalent of a shadowban, and only users who are subscribed will be able to see it at all. Even if there is a highly upvoted post, it will be invisible. If someone links to the subreddit, people won't be able to follow the link, or it will just be blanked out. archive.is links are going to be auto-blanked out some time in the near future, too, is my…
/r/MensRights06/08/15 06:01 PM
1

Isn't it easier to add layers than to remove them? I'm not saying that this isn't a problem, but it seems that there is so much rancor and emotion staked on this issue.
/r/MensRights05/08/15 07:12 PM
2

One of the great things about Australia is that their society totally accepts men wearing very short shorts. It's not seen as horrible.
/r/MensRights05/08/15 07:09 PM
2

If there was no major damage, charging her with something more realistic would be better. Proving attempted murder would be a stretch here. Retarget to something like assault and battery, attempt to commit grievous bodily harm, etc. Not everything has to be a 10/10, and it is often a better strategic choice to target achievable goals. This is exactly why Casey Anthony did not get a conviction for first-degree murder, because there was insufficient evidence. Even Zimmerman could have probably got…
/r/MensRights05/08/15 04:54 AM
1

Well, I did say there are problems, not that is was unacceptable. Perhaps I should have qualified it a little more, due to my personal opinion that the issue of the top article can be looked at critically, but (although I haven't read specifically that one), it's a fine sentiment. Celebratory, inclusive (male erasure is a big issue!), positive, flattering, but not invasive in an excessive or damaging or demeaning way. Really, for most people, I believe the issue is the lopsided wielding of super…
/r/MensRights04/08/15 05:16 PM
3

The second thing you highlight there should be the absolute strongest point of the whole thing: Stripping away qualifiers, this document says that harassment is acceptable. I hope you make that comment somewhere on the pull request.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 06:32 AM
88

This comparison might not hold up under scrutiny. Right in the abstract of the lower article, it says "while there's absolutely nothing wrong with beauty and sex appeal ...". The upper article has it's own problems, insofar and crossing boundaries of personal space and consent and harassment. Indeed, Sarkeesian would be infuriated with top article. One is sexualizing an object by giving it human attributes. They are female, and the argument is (likely) that it supports the gender role that femin…
/r/MensRights04/08/15 06:28 AM
0

Some people lead fairly comfortable lives. Using absolute dollars as a measure of that is a horrific callback to the dominance of capitalism, and reduces people down to just bank accounts. There are jobs that will net people an income for a comfortable life, but is not a 40-hour-a-week job, or 60 or 80 or 90.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 09:44 PM
2

This has hit the front page before in other subs. It will hit the front page again a few times. Nothing will happen, though. As sad at it is, this guy should move to Japan or the Netherlands or something and try and start afresh.
/r/MensRights01/08/15 04:45 PM
1

So, from what I understand, when she was saying that, she was speaking to a deeply religious group, in a country that is essentially 100% devoutly catholic. She was implicitly saying that the dead get to go up to heaven, while the women are victims because they have to stay behind, separate from their loved ones up in heaven. Also, read up on Moral Panics. These are becoming more common. It is possible that some group and figure out how to manifest them specifically. (I do not support this posit…
/r/MensRights30/07/15 09:13 PM
1

One could argue that this is the real oppression, to continue to treat women like Pokemon, to be captured to fight ideological battles for others. It sounds like these searchers described in the article are doing exactly what Simone de Beauvoir described in her book, which is considered to be a cornerstone of feminist theory. Does it really take me to recognize that, and make the connection?
/r/MensRights30/07/15 05:00 PM
3

Ha, I'm on the list! Of course. It's not hard to scrape reddit (or any wbesite) for usernames. And it was over a comment when I am supporting the message of 'Lean Out'!
/r/MensRights29/07/15 06:47 PM
13

This is quietly the message behind the "Lean Out" movement: I have a right to that level of pay, it's just that I don't have the training, or can't perform the work. But I went through the motions to get there, and that should be enough. As silly as that is, I definitely get the appeal. Heck, I feel the appeal myself ... I am really worried about being hirable on my skills after spending all this time getting a PhD ... but if I "lean out" and just claim that I can't make it in that world, but I …
/r/MensRights27/07/15 05:26 AM
1

Have a look at this book: 50 Dangerous Things You Should Let Your Children Do Also a good TED talk: http://www.ted.com/talks/gever_tulley_on_5_dangerous_things_for_kids?language=en These are parts of the brain that are left over from a long time ago, and our social build-up has outpaced the evolution away from them. It can be difficult for people if these little parts of the brain are left to go dark. Some of these activities will be "classically" masculine stuff; you yourself might feel out of …
/r/MensRights24/07/15 04:57 PM
2

It seems apparent from reading this that the writer is talking about a performance, rather than the actual act itself. Performativity of gender is a whole thing on which there is much written ... plenty of vapid noodling, but a good idea is there, and I think that is what the writer is actually trying to hit upon in the linked article. It's unfortunate that he only makes a cursory examination of the inclination to light and control fires. This is talked about in "50 Dangerous Things You Should L…
/r/MensRights23/07/15 07:10 PM
26

While it is almost definitely a hoax, and the entire point of it is to gather up responses to then write an article about those, modulo the ethics of the dishonesty, this is still a fine thinking experiment: There is commonly talk about dynamics of abusive relationships, wherein women are captive and have limited options. Even in cases where there is no physical abuse, there is "gaslighting", and emotional manipulation, and maybe even threats or fears of physical abuse. The story of the the cuck…
/r/MensRights23/07/15 07:02 PM
3

Wasn't this post at the center of a deletion controversy before? From /r/politics I think?
/r/MensRights23/07/15 06:57 PM
1

I know the owner of malelivesmatter dot org. I should lean on them to do something with it. Interestingly, it turns out that the black lives matter domain is for sale.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 06:57 PM
2

There is a Slate Star Codex post about exactly this. You can't argue with people's definitions.
/r/MensRights21/07/15 08:25 PM
8

This is not a good generalization. However, it is worth reflecting on what folks are trying to express by their choice of words. A fine example of this is Stephen Fry's reflection on the use of 'offended'. With 'creepy', people are describing a personal experience, not an objective measure. Some folks things gay people are 'creepy', some folks thing physically disabled people are 'creepy'. Even cross-cultural barriers of things like strangers picking up toddlers and all sorts of personal space a…
/r/MensRights18/07/15 05:11 PM
3

Don't judge people based on their sexual practices. However, if someone is being abused in a relationship in a way where they are being trapped or controlled, then this is serious and (maybe) services exist to help a partner escape a relationship in which they are not happy.
/r/MensRights16/07/15 05:03 PM
7

Monkey Dust is made up of recurring vignettes, one of them being the PedoFinder General. It is a hyperbolic satire of the moral panic around pedophilia that goes on. There's one in particular where there is a mob of people going through the streets with torches an pitchforks, yelling, "Kill the pedophiles! Burn the pedophiles!". They pick up some random dude on the street and hang him.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 08:40 PM
3

Holy crap, that Monkey Dust segment is literally true ...
/r/MensRights14/07/15 05:09 PM
3

What is the problem this this? It seems mostly fine. The "rape culture sucks" thing is a red herring, but it has so much momentum behind it, that it is the new "Red Menace". Other than that, this sounds like a fine event.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 08:28 PM
7

And it's offline, even with a DDoS protector.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 11:40 PM
0

I get out when I walk from lab to home and home to lab.... Anyway, the whole thing is too intricate, and too perfect a setup for her to write up an all-morality message against an invisible villain. I'm skeptical due to the convenience.
/r/MensRights09/07/15 01:57 AM
1

1) By "small", I think she means small in spirit and signifigance. 2) If anyone believe this is real or actually happened, they are fools. 3) There has been a shitstorm of these stories hitting the various sites and being shared all over facebook. We are witnessing the emergence of a new trend. These stories are unfalsifiable because there is no way to distinguish them from fiction. 4) There is a lengthy debate about height, wherein people offer justification that the immutability of height is w…
/r/MensRights08/07/15 06:32 PM
1

Is this real or fake? There are replies that indicate people have gone through the post history and determine that this is a guy posting about a fake story ... edit: interesting ... https://np.reddit.com/r/army/comments/358npp/hey_yall_what_are_some_of_the_weirdest_ncos_youve/cr22aur
/r/MensRights07/07/15 06:32 PM
1

As far as I have read from this story: his crime was a long time ago, he has gone through the court system, taken the label of a felon and offender, done time, demonstrated sufficient rehabilitation to be released back into society, where he has apparently flourished, leading a life including starting a family. As far as I've read, he has not committed more crimes. And the issue with the governing body of the game was not incited by him hurting or wronging anyone in the context of the game or th…
/r/MensRights04/07/15 05:32 PM
1

Even modulo feminist and men's interests, this is a smacks of the standard religion-of-the-self totalitarianism that has become a real way of life and way of thought for young Americans.
/r/MensRights04/07/15 05:25 PM
1

Yoko Ono has claimed that she had a lesbian relationship with Clinton in college. Clinton is likely just saying this to stick to the party line; remember that Obama and Biden got caught up in that a few years back, and had to flip some statements around.
/r/MensRights29/06/15 07:21 PM
2

I hear people talk about single-sex/gender labs, single-sex/gender schools, single-sex/gender businesses, housing, conferences, social services, etc all the time. It is considered a fine idea by camps of various *isms. Also, what horrific bullying. If someone has some darkness or damage inside then, is that the grounds to absolutely eviscerate and crucify them? Is that the society that we are designing and implementing, without absolutely zero elasticity? This is self-esteem building prop villai…
/r/MensRights27/06/15 05:47 PM
5

No. The government cannot and should not regulate fertility. Once you give them that power, then they simply need to decide who they want to have fertility and not. However, to use the exact reasoning behind the provision of birth-control-as-a-right to women: The cost should be made zero, so that there is a minimal or no barrier to entry to people getting the pill, or the injection and shutting off their fertility or to discontinue it and become fertile again. Remember that the reason the ACA in…
/r/MensRights23/06/15 09:04 PM
3

Er, I mean to imply something like, "in the inevitable result that it will be covered" ... which nods to the women-only ACA coverage. So, either a sarcasm, or a hopeful & progressive forecast.
/r/MensRights23/06/15 07:50 PM
7

It is fairly interesting that "feminism" has now been steered into being a cultural movement that is just another way to oppress women. "The Other Gender" effect is back in full force. This is also oddly reminiscent of the Two Minutes of Hate, where people are encouraged to focus all their rage in a coordinated way towards a prop villain.
/r/MensRights23/06/15 05:31 PM
10

Men aren't demanding it in huge numbers I doubt that. I think every man in America would go on it, especially when covered 100% by ACA and other health insurance plans.
/r/MensRights23/06/15 05:27 PM
1

This isn't that big a deal as long as the facility doesn't have a lock on it to shut out other users from a multi-user facility. If these are both single occupancy bathrooms, no one of any gender should hesitate to use either one.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 10:29 PM
5

I'm surprised that these authors are still trying to drum up someting out of the fabricated Mad Max boycott. If anyone, Mad Max actually embodied some really major concners from the men's issues world, hugely so. Empathy gap, male dispoability are major functional points of the story. Has no one really written a pro-MRM analysis of Fury Road?
/r/MensRights22/06/15 10:28 PM
2

Don't have him finish out the week at the school. Go on to school property and take him from campus in the middle of a lesson, and announce to the entire class that he was physically and sexually assaulted, and openly name the girl. If this is a school with an on-campus liaison officer, go to his post first, and tell him that you are taking your son out of school at that moment. Those officers are required to respond when you come to campus, so don't trifle with that.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 10:19 PM
1

Wow, there is even a comment in there that feminists and SJW's would be upset with, where someone invokes virginity shaming (on a phantom villain).
/r/MensRights21/06/15 07:02 AM
1

OK, he might have read and believed in the ethos from men's rights movements. Nothing in the MRM space encourages violence or murder. There is constant celebration of life, and a focus on people meeting their due rights to life and liberty, often shown through stories where they are taken away. Heck, I even see MRM folks actively practicing anti-racism in the form of bringing visibility to race-related issues, what is sometimes called "intersectionality". He might have believed in the truth of q…
/r/MensRights21/06/15 06:50 AM
1

Some of this article in nonsense, like the arguments that it should be gone because of gendering. That argument is looking at symptoms, rather than causes; it is really quite superficial. However: sewing is a useful skill that quickly involves people with the creative process, and has actually been one of the most significant technologies in the history of mankind (not just machine sewing). Students should be taught that. Under that banners, great. Also, cloth as an engineering material is a won…
/r/MensRights21/06/15 06:43 AM
1

What is interesting about this is that this particular issue has an inversion from the common view on other crimes, and really the way our entire legal system is designed. General, false negatives are vastly favored over false positives; people set evidenciary standards so that it is very unlikely for an innocent person to be convicted of, say, first degree murder. The standard are set so high that even people who possibly are guilty of that murder are not convicted, which would be a false negat…
/r/MensRights19/06/15 01:13 AM
3

Even that post on voat is [deleted] ... what the hell?
/r/MensRights18/06/15 01:22 AM
15

Sex offender lists need to have a major overhaul. Some states have various Tiers, and there needs to be a well-defined path to voiding the listing. Some states are just a single unified list, with lifetime inclusion. This is going to take a Supreme Court ruling on "cruel and unusual". I recall reading some article recently about how in some state, if someone is on the registry, failing to notify police of an address change will result in a charge for a sexual crime. Despite it just be an address…
/r/MensRights18/06/15 01:18 AM
1

Someone should just submit under a female pseudonym, or use a ghost writer. Even if they don't win, reveal afterwards.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 06:00 PM
7

I think you have to put a slash before it for the hash sign to show up: \#everydaysexism Should produce: #everydaysexism
/r/MensRights16/06/15 05:58 PM
11

We are insecure, and that's fine. People are insecure. It is part of the "human condition". But I think the author means it as a poke-in-the-eye, in a derogatory way. Of course we are insecure. Look at how much talk there is around here about the empathy gap, about not getting reasonable treatment in "family courts" and real courts, about imbalance in reproductive rights or even reproductive benefits that are granted by national legislation which has defined Obama's presidency. Many folks wieldi…
/r/MensRights16/06/15 06:27 AM
2

Wow, I didn't realize it had dropped as far as it had. Shrug.
/r/MensRights14/06/15 03:55 PM
-37

You know, I'm not sure if this is a feminism thing. It is a train that is running in the same direction, sure, but I have a feeling that this is actually due to something else. If anything, it might be due to the sort of social construction that certain feminist area really against: going backwards would mean brining the hammer down on a bunch of girls, and because society is set up for girls to be pure and protected, there will be no action on it. Certainly there are advocates that fall under f…
/r/MensRights14/06/15 05:34 AM
13

This doesn't make me sick. It is illustrative. The men aren't hugely phased by it. There's a lot to think about there. Is it because they are not subject to a frequent exposure of such remarks? Is there possibly even more of a contribution from an imbalance in attitudes towards bawdy exchanges and sexual advances. And so forth.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 04:38 PM
3

Men have essentially no reproductive rights. There is now law the protects underage boys from genital mutilation, while such a law does exist for women, outright barring any modifications, even if done as part of a cultural tradition.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 04:34 PM
1

Yes. I would bet yes.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 12:12 AM
4

The oddest thing about this is that they are saying that feminism is a single unified thing to which they say men's issues folks are oppose. Yet if you speak to anyone about feminism outside of this context, no one would ever dare say that there is one unified "feminism".
/r/MensRights08/06/15 05:18 PM
1

Oh ... I think I saw that someone else made the some comment in reply after one of the mega-posts. So I thought that is what the title was referencing ... whereas it sounds like it was just a copycat move.
/r/MensRights08/06/15 03:01 AM
1

It is an unavoidable result of any cross-subreddit happenings. Even with an np link, it still happens. Nor is it unique to /r/mensrights. I'm not sure if there is a way of preventing it at all.
/r/MensRights08/06/15 03:00 AM
9

Some of these points outright and directly support common agenda under the MRA banner, particularly the "Health Care" one. Some of them are also irrelevant non sequitur, like the pay gap an invocation of global issues. The pay gap is a domestic issue. It uses domestic data in a domestic context.
/r/MensRights08/06/15 12:31 AM
4

Wow. The comment to which you replied it now deleted; recall what it said? You must archive that stuff! There is a sort of paradox around information on the internet. Too short, and people pay it no heed. Too long, and people don't dead it.
/r/MensRights07/06/15 06:39 PM
9

There is a lot of anger in the comments. I am just replying to say that being a "pervert" is not, in an of itself, a bad thing, because so much could be meant to implied by your usage. Be mindful that you are using language to apply shame to her, based on a metric of morality. Now, "perversion" could entail that someone else's conduct, space, or liberty is being altered by you in a way that it should be protected against. That would be a problem. I am not hugely well acquainted with modern psych…
/r/MensRights05/06/15 06:50 AM
0

What is the r for? I mean to invoke the idea of learning about objective truths, rather than a post-filter representation of the world.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 11:30 PM
20

It's probably time that someone created a new TIL subreddit. TIL has been embroiled in a bunch of these, featured on subredditcancer and conspiracy, and is clearly part of the socially-steering-mod-broom. You just need a catchy name, like TodayIActuallyLearned, like /r/tial or something.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 08:03 PM
2

Astonishing. The point of riding nude is, I am guessing, to eschew bodily shame that pervades our society. This would be akin to kick out a woman for having a tampon string showing.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 08:01 PM
0

This isn't about the viewing of the child abuse or the crime, this is about the viewing of the assailant. The implicit motivation behind this tradition of holding women to different standard than other folks is just another form of oppression. Such treatment only further the construction of "The Other Gender", that there are people, who are subject to laws and trial, and then are women, who are a separate group.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 07:59 PM
6

I'm surprised she can't just self-fund this thing outright. She and Bill have been doing deep six figure speak engagements for 10+ years now. There was some hullabaloo about her speaking at a university, and being paid so much that it was enough to establish an indefinite full-scholarship (via interest on an endowment) for one or two students.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 05:59 AM
7

So, he mentions sexual harassment. Could not it be considered that committing slander and libel of someone on matters of sexual subjects be approach as a form of sexual harassment, in and of itself? The harassment of it is straightforward, but the harassers are indeed making this a sexual situation, insofar as invoking the sexuality the person they are targeting.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 05:41 AM
1

If anything, the only examples of this view I have seen enthusiastically shared and hoisted are from men's interest communities, the "I don't need feminism because..." kind of messages.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 05:34 AM
4

Has there been a writing that looked at the plethora of these cases from another perspective, that it is infantalizing of women, reductive and even oppressively so? To imply that their gender status has major implications for how laws apply to them, or that judgement against them are tempered from what others might get?
/r/MensRights04/06/15 01:41 AM
1

There is probably a selection bias in effect: the more tantalizing, confidential, and disgusting the story, the more likely it is going to capture the interest of more and more people, and therefore be likely to become "high profile" by getting media attention. Being raped by 7 guys on a bed covered in broken glass, for example. Then, when they become high profile, these stories will get much more scrutiny than other cases.
/r/MensRights03/06/15 05:36 PM
3

Isn't one of the biggest gripes in all of US society right now that justice is broken and certain groups aren't getting their due treatment, from the law and from the rest of society?
/r/MensRights02/06/15 05:48 PM
6

Pretty standard perverse incentive. They aren't doing it for the kids, they are doing it so they have more income, can pay high salaries and benefits and such.
/r/MensRights02/06/15 02:37 AM
5

I now own the domain name malelivesmatter dot org. Maybe I should send an email to Farrell or Elam or someone , offering to transfer the domain to them?
/r/MensRights01/06/15 01:03 AM
7

Politifact. Always link to politifact. It is is non-partisan, written intelligently, and gained huge popularity during the 2008 Obama campaign.
/r/MensRights31/05/15 05:17 AM
9

The link should be repeated here, if not submitted as its own post in the sub here, rather than an np.reddit crosslink. http://www.sascv.org/ijcjs/pdfs/carolettaijcjs2010vol5iss1.pdf
/r/MensRights30/05/15 06:33 PM
13

“Everybody is approved until we get a complaint against them" ... That it? That reminds me of a Married With Children joke, where in reference to Fox he says, "Yeah, some woman in Minnesota wrote in saying that she didn't like Monday Night Football, so that's gone now."
/r/MensRights30/05/15 05:44 PM
8

I recall reading something, probably linked from this subreddit, about how 40% of face-acid attacks in Pakistan were against men.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 07:00 PM
7

Pool acid is muriatic acid, HCL. It is a federal crime to use it against the labeling on the package. Sulfuric Acid, H2SO4, is used in lead acid batteries. West Marine commonly has it, and big RV dealerships, since in those applications, it isn't that uncommon to have serviceable lead-acid batteries. Various rust removers also commonly have quite caustic compounds in them.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 06:59 PM
1

If she did sexually assault or rape someone, she definitely deserves redress from the justice system. However, what I meant is: If this is fabulism, I am estimating that the intent of it is to get ink, to get attention and rancor from certain groups and of certain messages, and that is the goal. Draw the ire of groups that can be easily (in the common view) razzed.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 06:25 PM
1

Phew, that is a heavy read. I suppose what I really meant in the above comment loops back here: Why is it that it takes 21 pages of expert-in-the-field, PhD author redress for a claim that will just be parroted out ad infinitum, with no reproduction cost? That is the disparity that is stunning. I thought I had seen this article before, but now I'm unsure, and will definitely re-read this weekend. I recall there being a really excellent point therein about the definitions of DV, and exposed the f…
/r/MensRights29/05/15 08:53 AM
-2

Within a few days, this will be revealed to be a baiting story. (Schumer's story, that is)
/r/MensRights29/05/15 08:09 AM
2

The statistics over this issue are just so bizarre. They are sometimes somehow quotes as low as 4%, but then then there are plenty of examples of ~50%, too.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 06:29 PM
5

Fury Road was pretty clearly positioned to be just like WALL-E: represent both sides, so that there will be a complex clashing or mixing of interests. Does anyone remember that? In 2008, since an election was on, both political sides claimed that WALL-E championed their ethos. Really, Fury Road represented some major points from men's interest agendas. Nux is effectively the main character, and plays out the concepts of both the gendered empathy gap and male disposability. Someone could pretty e…
/r/MensRights25/05/15 07:42 PM
8

Foucault's idea of biopower is actually pretty damn interesting, and applies to things way bigger than just queer theory and gender politics.
/r/MensRights25/05/15 07:34 PM
3

No, she doesn't, at least insofar as that her tweet is not equivalent or even implying that she supports such a segregation. That is way too much of a reach, irresponsibly so even. Someone on KiA just replied to me with a clever and apt response: "Okay so when can we expect her to anecdotally say that she's read one of the numerous reports that debunk major feminist talking points or support men's rights issues?". As I said there, that should be exactly what the response to this contention is. H…
/r/MensRights24/05/15 04:15 AM
2

Is horrible Is forced to accept responsibility for being horrible claims life is ruined due to confronting responsibility claims someone else is at fault This is amazing. Apart of gender, height, or weight, that is just a shitty ethos.
/r/PussyPassDenied23/05/15 09:35 PM
1

grateful Gratitude can come from many places. He is compliant with, as he likely believes, the literal word of God the creator. He is made to be similar to all the men around him, perhaps grateful to be included in that similarity, or at least to not have the discomfort of being different. There may be gratitude in a coping manner, that this was done when he was an infant, so he has no memory or it, or that he was not confronted with the choice to have it done at an older age. Note that both of …
/r/MensRights22/05/15 08:24 PM
1

We know what this will come down to: " Cooper also announced that Mangum would not be prosecuted, stating that investigators and attorneys that had interviewed her thought 'she may actually believe the many different stories that she has been telling' and 'it's in the best interest of justice not to bring charges'. "
/r/MensRights22/05/15 08:18 PM
1

Because of, as I understand it, postmodernism, wherein a fundamental tenet is that there is a pre-existing 'wrong' or 'evil' that imprints upon everything that happens thereafter. So it's is very much so a "correct by construction" approach, insofar as that question of correctness is not with the subject or stance at hand, but rather the axiom of pre-existence.
/r/MensRights21/05/15 08:01 PM
3

There was a pretty interesting conflict over this in my building here at Berkeley. First, there was a cry for restrooms for trans* people. They said they would make the women's room gender neutral, but the women were unhappy that anyone, including men, could come in an use it. They proposed making the men's room neutral, but there were some trans* people who were unhappy that they would have the share the space with men. They proposed making both the restrooms neutral, but the above two concerns…
/r/MensRights21/05/15 07:58 PM
2

There might be room for a difference between the legal context meaning of a word, and the usages at large. As I understand it, in legalese, "slander" is exactly as you say, that it is loaded with intent and fore-knowledge that the statements are false. In the colloquial usage, it is closer to simply "smear" or "attack the character of". Of course, very much conflict happens over divisions of usage and definition exactly like the one above, e.g. "discrimination", "consent", etc.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 07:26 PM
3

Holy crap. There is going to be an apocalypse around this. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama comments on it. But didn't the school just finish its graduation proceedings? The timing is interesting.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 07:22 PM
-1

If you want to make a political stand for parity, other people around here have plenty of sound advice. If there is a cis-men's rest room next to it that isn't lacking in any way, fuck it, and don't worry about it.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 06:02 PM
2

Feminist often so generalize women as much as they generalize men. Perhaps not is as directly pointed and intentionally derogatory ways, but the manner in which the ideas of equality from some source branch of feminism have become warped into just another way of oppressing women is truly staggering to stand back and take in. Take the wage wage for example: other than the Ken-Ham-esque rejection of rational inquiry, even when it comes down to matters of negotiation and preference, the yardstick o…
/r/MensRights20/05/15 07:45 AM
1

That is an interesting counter, not one that I have a good answer to. I almost want to send this question off to the Freakonomics guys, now.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 09:27 PM
2

Contraceptive are not covered by the ACA based on a claimed right to reproductive determination, nor a right to sex, or anything like that, as Sandra Fluke argued. Contraceptives were included in the ACA as a capacity provision and cost saving measure. It was based on a recommended from the Institute of Medicine (an independent org of medical doctors) who estimated that with the huge influx of patients to the system, there simply would not be enough capacity to accommodate every single pregnancy…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 06:30 AM
3

So, the interesting part about this is: How does a plan cover an over-the-counter item? To get the condoms paid for, do you need to meet with a doctor and get a prescription, and then get them from a pharmacy pickup window?
/r/MensRights18/05/15 06:22 AM
3

This is an example of where notions of feminism have been warped so far, they have looped back around to being oppressive to women. Horseshoe theory, I've heard it called. The collective reaction is that there needs to be an absolute stone wall of defense against a comment that may be or even could be heard as anti-female. The subtext is: women need the defense, because they are women, not regular people. That kind of total protection is infantilizing and dehumanizing, even if it is motivated fr…
/r/MensRights13/05/15 08:52 PM
3

Probably because fighting back would make him even more hated, and you'd be well into the territory of "The ends justify the means justify the ends" circularity.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 10:49 PM
6

FWIF, every time this issue comes up, I simply propose that all bathrooms everywhere become unisex bathrooms, with the recommendation that dividers/blinders be put around urinals (there are a surprising number without).
/r/MensRights07/05/15 05:45 PM
1

Do people really still not understand that SPLC is an extortion racket?
/r/MensRights06/05/15 09:01 PM
9

Too bad the article didn't link to the absolute letter of the law on the circumcision thing. Someone linked me to it recently, and I was thankful and bookmarked it instantly; no more waving of hands, no more suppositions. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/116
/r/MensRights06/05/15 01:45 AM
-1

This really may reveal an endemic problem in the use of social ideologies as political ideologies, and the title would then be wrong: It may not be "feminist nutjobs" doing this, but rather "nutjobs" who have cherry-picked the ethos of feminism to use as a club.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 06:54 PM
9

The Vagina Monologues, insofar as the original scenes, really aren't too ridiculous. Really, the main theme is breaking taboos and taking the viewer into a realm of discomfort to demonstrate or teach them something; not that bad. Interestingly, they really show their age, too, so much so that much of modern feminism would have major ideological disagreements with the message where it coming out of different mouthpiece. Generally, when the show is performed, the cast will write 1 or two segments …
/r/MensRights04/05/15 11:39 PM
3

withholding sex This is a direct and unequivocal support of an entitlement to sex. All the time, I hear people railing against how there is no such thing as an "obligation to sex", yet this is literally the substantiation of such an obligation, where the failure to oblige is violence.
/r/MensRights04/05/15 07:53 PM
5

Has any major private US university lost a damages case where the contention was over their positive harm (doing wrong), rather than just their negative harm (negligence)?
/r/MensRights04/05/15 07:49 PM
1

The response to this is simply, "The man is part of a group that holds power in society, and thus the same metric does not apply to him or the group." I'm not well spoken enough to craft a response to that , all I can say right now is that it feels wrong. It just has the sense of being a contracted, shallow deflection.
/r/MensRights04/05/15 07:45 PM
8

Thanks for finding this and linking it. This is exceedingly useful to know about, and I'll be bookmarking it.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 10:45 PM
2

Do people really not know that SPLC is essentially an extortion racket?
/r/MensRights03/05/15 07:17 PM
9

I don't believe that there is any law, at least in the US, that mandates genital integrity for women. (SEE EDIT) Nor one that requires or excludes male circumcision. It exists in a gray area, implemented by the the medical industry. Someone please let me know if I am wrong, this is just AFAIK. edit: I am incorrect. Someone has replied below with a link to the absolute letter of the law. There is indeed a law on the books that outright protects the genital integrity of women, or rather, people wi…
/r/MensRights03/05/15 07:15 PM
3

There's a simple response that I use for this now: 76-cents/dollar is not the same thing as "Equal pay for equal work". They are two separate arguments with topical relation to each other.
/r/MensRights02/05/15 12:45 AM
2

Fine. Still, save your soul. Don't become wretched.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 06:36 PM
63

No need to be mean. "Killing with kindness" is a fine way to live, and doesn't poison your soul. After all, she has to live with herself.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 03:57 PM
1

I doubt that this will hold up. Are we close enough to the election that campaigns will take up these sticks to fight with?
/r/MensRights30/04/15 03:57 PM
12

Contractions will ruin us all. Equality of outcome, equality of position, equality of opportunity. My default responses nowadays when anyone uses an overloaded word is to point out the overloading and seek specification. The article is, at least, a clear and well written statement of ethos.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 05:45 PM
1

Mrs Lewis’s This is one person. It is not helpful or reasonable to make such a generalization, unless you genuinely are arguing this point with supporting materials.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 01:46 AM
3

They do this in GATTACA. Right when the child is born, they test it, and have results for likelihood of certain genetic diseases.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 05:32 PM
5

Isn't it the case that for a while, blood tests were considered as a required item to provide to get a marriage certificate? I'm really not sure, I remember hearing it in a bunch of older TV and movies. Perhaps it is time to make post-birth paternity tests a culturally standard thing?
/r/MensRights27/04/15 05:09 PM
1

Define what a robot is. Does it need to have actuators? Does it need to emulate a person, or part of a person? A fleshlight could be considered a robot. A dildo could be considered a robot. Under this theory, millions of rapes would be happening every day.
/r/MensRights16/04/15 07:55 PM
1

I don't see anything wrong with this, and I would defend that opinion. The ability to for all people to vote make sense in the lens of equality, even if there are still imbalances in civic obligations and responsibilities remaining after the granting of a right to vote. For example, the issue of Selective Service comes up on the topic of gender politics in voting. Individual liberty and civic responsibilities don't have to be entirely blocking of each other. An educated person could probably mak…
/r/MensRights14/04/15 08:29 PM
3

That's a terrible title. It will produce an emotional response in many people. I estimate that you intended it to be loaded exactly in that way.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 03:17 AM
1

She also works for the Clinton Foundation, which is something of a disaster. That's not uncommon for "charities", where donation money is spent improperly to support billionaire lifestyles for the board of trustees.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 03:16 AM
1

It's not really relevant if she gets fired or not. If she did, some other media group would hire her up in a cold second, since she would be such a lightning rod. Anything she publishes will have a "success through scandal" aspect to it. The only fallout from this is that by defending her, Rolling Stone had irreparably harmed its reputation. And they may lose a bunch of money to a lawsuit, but that it doubtful.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 04:24 PM
2

This seems astonishingly infantalizing and denigrating to women.
/r/MensRights06/04/15 11:48 PM
3

Oh, this will likely go the way of the Donald Sterling affair. She'll say she did it because of feminism, and on behalf of every rape victim out there, and that justice for all attacks was the real end goal. Everyone will collectively nod and agree, "Yes, the ends justifies absolutely any means, no matter what, without limits. Two wrongs make a right. In fast, any n-chain of contiguous wrongs ultimately makes a right, as long as the end goal is moral."
/r/MensRights06/04/15 01:55 AM
1

legitimate Oh, this isn't about legitimacy. I'm saying this as a purely tactical move, to deal with persons who have been trained against certain words and patterns.
/r/MensRights01/04/15 12:24 AM
1

Possibly rebranding away from the name "Men's Rights Activists". I am sure smarter people than me have already said plenty on this, and being anti-intellectually bullied away from a brand is a ridiculous concession. But there's such a standard response of dismissing that everyone has learned to parrot, something along the lines of, "Oh, this person things that men don't have rights." Meninism seems like an OK idea. Or Masculism. Or something like that.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 09:20 PM
17

It is worth considering the details of the statement you made. In the strictest sense, you are not wrong, going by the reports of the presented evidence and testimony. That is, a ski trip occurred at which there were no female attendees, and your statement is "an all male ski trip". However, the contention is not that the ski trip was in and of itself devoid of any women, it is whether or not women were explicitly disallowed from the trip. Reports are that at least one woman was invited, but dec…
/r/MensRights31/03/15 12:24 AM
1

Like I said, it is clear that she knowingly provided false information to the police. That is well understood now. There other aspects of the affair that haven't yet been entirely sorted out. We can speak ill of that willful manipulation, and of the school president's terrible policies and behavior, but this isn't entirely closed and locked up yet. It will be, eventually.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 11:24 PM
1

What where does that even come from? From the two viewpoints I present after "for a number of a factors".
/r/MensRights26/03/15 04:57 AM
2

It was just on a podcast, so I've no idea which source he was citing. That would make it so much easier. What I thought he said was that among the trans population, those who had undergone major reassignment surgery had suicides at a higher rate than those who had not. That is, that he was specifying this to be a comparison just among a trans population. Still, he could have made exactly the misinterpretation that you are underscoring ... or I may have misheard it.
/r/MensRights25/03/15 08:16 PM
1

by itself I believe it uses a unit like Larry Flynt had installed, where there is a hydrualic pump that has to be switched on. That probably doesn't fit what you mean with "by itself". And I believe I've heard or read somewhere that the average phalloplasty size is significantly larger than the national average.
/r/MensRights25/03/15 07:19 PM
1

I'm not sure what you mean. I believe they use other tissue from the same body, and route the urethra through it.
/r/MensRights25/03/15 07:10 PM
5

Trans* issues are quite complicated. What I will say here is a point of discussion that I have heard before, and is worth thinking about: Gender reassignment may be more accessible to men that it is to women, for a number of factors. If it really is the case that men run society, have all the power and resources and such, then a member of that group could be in a position to have much more "freedom", what perhaps what is sometimes mockingly called "first world problems". Similarly, it may be the…
/r/MensRights25/03/15 07:07 PM
1

I believe that they can do very good phalloplasties now. There have been implantable turgidity generators for a while, now. And penis transplants are now being talked about.
/r/MensRights25/03/15 07:00 PM
1

I thought the statement from the police was that no incident as described by the Rolling Stone article occured, but it has not yet determined if the person at the center of this was assault or raped in some manner.
/r/MensRights25/03/15 06:53 PM
-6

The investigation isn't concluded yet. It is "wrong" for the Senator to be weighing in on this yet until it is established if she if a victim or not. One could even say that is is "wrong" for people to point any fingers until all the dust has settled. However, it does appear (form what I've read, could be mistaken) that "Jackie", even if they were indeed the victim of some kind of attack, knowingly provided false information about this situation.
/r/MensRights25/03/15 06:51 PM
1

She made a few videos that applied basic critical theory to some video games at a level that is only slightly deeper than superficial. It was an interesting project, and her points have been hugely discussed, expanded upon, and yes, even refuted. She made a few videos on YouTube, and she's one of the most influential people in the internet? I think they actually mean that her name is influential, not her as a person?
/r/MensRights25/03/15 02:35 AM
1

Twitter is going down this year. They can't keep a CEO, their policies are starting to go into chaotic oscillations, an investors are going to bail.
/r/MensRights23/03/15 07:41 PM
1

was intended to give people who might find... Misleading title, as far as I can tell. Is this a women's specific issue or space?
/r/MensRights23/03/15 07:32 PM
-6

Thanks for sharing your experience. The "spirital cost" (what I called it, for lack of a better term) is a function of our collective and individual ethos, I guess, but it is entirely relevant here. By "spiritual" there, I really mean that it a form of intangible violation, for which there may not be a direct measure. The extreme version of the same thing would be assigning the damages "cost" of a human life, for torts or insurance or whatever. My experience has been that people do indeed put an…
/r/MensRights22/03/15 01:36 AM
3

That's a very insightful way of looking at it! Thanks for sharing that, I'm totally going to parrot that. (But I'll have to do it without attribution, since I can't say, "I heard that some some person on the internet." :\ )
/r/MensRights21/03/15 11:08 PM
1

You just need the right name for an "*ism", and then turn it into a political movement. However, do to this, you need to be very wary of 'intellectual capture'. This is a very effective tactic in political discourse. The premiere example, here, is if such a movement was named "Equalism", a feminist could say, "If you support equality, then you are actually a feminist, not an Equalist." But, overall, it sounds like a fine idea. People will reject "Meninism", "Mens's Rights", and other group-speci…
/r/MensRights21/03/15 09:51 PM
23

The reflection to make through all of this is: Do men have any "reproductive rights"? Insofar as how rights are generally framed in modern discussion (entitlements, selective freedoms, opt-in/out construction), there might not be.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 09:47 PM
1

I'm glad to see that the top comment is something that addresses the oblique interpretation of this issue in the title. A much better use of this link would be to mention: How other cultures have potentially gendered problems that Americans will never experience. Whether or not this problem is actually gendered. Look at what social structures, pressure, needs, or shortcomings result in that gendering. Compare that to America, to see if those same things exist here. Then compare that to the const…
/r/MensRights21/03/15 09:45 PM
5

"Muriatic Acid" is sold for use in pools. It is hydrochloric acid, HCl. I know that, for pool acid at least, it is a federal crime to use it against it's intended labeling. Other commenters have said that you can get it as concrete cleaner; I'm unsure if the same federal guildelines apply there.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 07:48 PM
-22

Rape is more than just about the existence of a hymen. Don't be too reductive, it will just make folks reading about these issues discounting and sour. But the issue is more than just physical damage. The physical damage from a rape is probably actually fairly low, I believe? I'm sure there's exception, but someone please comment if they know more. It's the emotional damage of trauma, of being attacked, a spiritual violation, where the comparison should be made.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 07:47 PM
3

The Dee Snider/Twisted Sister record label hearing speech should apply quite well here. Everyone has seen that, right? Al and Tipper Gore were throwing out judgements about how evil and horrible the content of music albums were, and Dee comes along and points out the blame for interpretation lies with the listener, and thus all the sadomasochism and such exists in the mind of Mrs. Gore herself. You can actually see Al Gore being visibly but silently enraged when he says it.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 02:21 AM
1

Oh, definitely. But I'm straining what you might mean by a "feminist". If that encompases all people who apply the label to themselves, then yes: I see people who cozy up with whatever moralized cause they can to get traction with others. Either straight-forward head nods and self-esteem boosts, or the more tactical use of it to get close to women. So, take up a point, make an emotional and time investment in it, and if the tactic doesn't play out, or the cost of trying to stick with it is too h…
/r/MensRights19/03/15 02:16 AM
7

Is this still going on? I thought the whole Spiderman cover / Maddox thing was such an embarrassment that everyone fled from trying to use comics as a foil for a gender agenda?
/r/MensRights18/03/15 10:19 PM
4

Hold on to your butts, because there's a new version of it being passed around. I've heard it on campus several times already now: The way it is counted and stated now is that there is an earning gap between men and women. It's not a per-person average or median. It's just the total earnings of one gender, as a portion of the total workforce earnings. The crowds haven't settled on a number yet, since this is just spinning up right now. I've heard number between 5% and 30%, mostly on the lower en…
/r/MensRights18/03/15 07:11 AM
3

Apart from Congress voting themselves backpay during the debt ceiling deadlock, I struggle to think of a more obvious and in the open agenda-cooking in recent memory. This is oddly reminiscent of how Indian people are counted here in the SF tech world. They are sometimes counted as "People of Color" and "minorities", but then also sometimes not, really just depending on what point someone is trying to substantiate.
/r/MensRights18/03/15 06:40 AM
6

Well, they should be good targets. High level college administrators often make $500K/year or more.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 07:10 PM
1

Well, now we have an example to point to, always and forever, in every discussion henceforth. I do some that someone more organized than me is compiling a super-list of all of these examples.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 07:08 PM
2

"Gendercide" is a commonly used catchword in the academic realm. Although, in most of the cases I've encountered, the same people will use "gender based violence" and "violence against women" interchangeably. (I don't have much transactions with those departments, so my experience could be a bad/biased sample)
/r/MensRights12/03/15 07:04 PM
2

There is a phrase for that, I think it's called "Intellectual pollution", or "idea capture", as a tactic.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 06:35 PM
9

This is something that has come and gone at a lot of private, technically focused schools in the US. In 2007, Caltech started enforcing a gender ratio quota in their admission. In the years previous, the intake ratio was generally between 3:1 to 4:1 (male:female). During this time, the acceptance rate was about the same between men and women. In 2007, the intake ratio was 1:1. The following year, many other schools followed suit and did exactly the same thing. Cornell, CMU, UPenn, to name a few.…
/r/MensRights09/03/15 12:31 AM
2

Essentially every mainstream exchange of communication. Essentially of that plane of interaction is non-intellectual enough that diversity of ideas in the service of maximizing the likelihood that the truth will emerge is not at all revered. In political context, where most things fall under binary classification, mention of any facet of this idea of a man's role in a reproductive exchange will simply put you onto the other side. Even in an academic context, if the idea was not affiliated with a…
/r/MensRights08/03/15 07:54 AM
7

This is a very difficult issue, and the biggest disservice to it is that it gets no discussion. Just like with the issue of legality of abortion, I listen to and can understand the motivations on both sides. I know plenty of answers here will be short quips, probably "yes", but I won't venture that myself. I will just say: this is a "banned" topic, and non-discussion is a true pathology to a democratic, equal society. What I was just considering recently: There is a lot of talk about "reproducti…
/r/MensRights07/03/15 06:12 PM
5

Nice graphic. Concise, clear. However, there is a whole bag of round-about tricks to defeat this. The common manifestation I see around campus circles is: That picture doesn't include trans people, thus you are committing trans erasure, thus this statement is flawed, thus we can discount the entirety of the content of it.
/r/MensRights27/02/15 08:26 AM
1

Isn't it a contract between the holder of the assets and the executor of their estate?
/r/MensRights27/02/15 01:23 AM
4

Good luck trying to get an edit to a controversial wikipedia article made. It could be the end of your career, unless you somehow have a perfectly clandestine and anonymous internet presence.
/r/MensRights27/02/15 12:48 AM
8

There is a gendered angle to this issue, I suppose. But I'd put that in the back seat. The outright legal woes of this issue are the really stunning part of it. I mean, with this precedent, couldn't we just say that any contract can be arbitrarily overridden by a judge?
/r/MensRights26/02/15 09:07 PM
4

I suspect that this is some sort of troll posts or robo-post. The issue you're mentioning is a real issue that is close to the hearts of many (all?) folks in this subreddit.
/r/MensRights26/02/15 06:24 PM
3

Ectogenesis should be possible, thus freeing men, women, and whatever-gender folks from the need to carry children.
/r/MensRights25/02/15 08:15 PM
3

Jesus, if even Marcotte is saying that, it's a nice validation of really how gaudy that attempt at morality was.
/r/MensRights25/02/15 04:57 AM
-4

There is no way this is going to stand up to scrutiny. The climate in the UK won't tolerate it. I mean, groups tried to extort the Prime Minister over not flying the "feminism" banner. Although, that was much more of a direct-money enterprise, insofar as selling tens of thousand more shirts at several thousand percent profit each.
/r/MensRights23/02/15 06:15 PM
1

Because society has largely been designed to be such that men bring women resources to win their favor, and there is a desire/supply/demand imbalance. Of course, it is crucial to understand that this is part of the same force that leads to women being controlled and commoditized. It's the same force that makes them "the other gender", rather than just regular people. These are both just symptoms of the ills of a non-egalitarian society. The way you state it is a little indelicate, and in these m…
/r/MensRights23/02/15 06:49 AM
1

It's really odd that only loose, nebulous information has surfaced on this. And now this site is down. This has either got to be faked, or the information is currently incomplete, and the schools and people involved are running campaigns to keep it all quiet.
/r/MensRights19/02/15 08:12 PM
2

This is paternalism. Both philosophical and literal, as in "patriarchy" gender slanted paternalism. This is the real issue (not specifically this incident) that feminists should be in an outrage over, and I'm always soft of surprised that more of them aren't: People are trying to control your sexual lives in a way that they shouldn't. This is very Leviathanesque, that to be powerful enough to control the population (prevent rapes), they have to be power enough to destroy the population (legislat…
/r/MensRights17/02/15 05:16 PM
2

So ... Reed college?
/r/MensRights17/02/15 05:43 AM
2

Of course it's likely a hoax. And the entire point of it will be to gather up reactions, and use that as the basis for an article. Cherry pick the worst of the responses, use those & the fallacy of composition to paint any picture you'd like. I think this came up many years ago when someone claimed that they did an "art project" where they got pregnant every month and had an abortion every month for a year. Although, without intending to inflame or deride anyone's personal beliefs or politics on…
/r/MensRights14/02/15 07:50 PM
1

In California, that is de facto the law. No amount of intoxication or amount of drinking is set, only to be influenced by alcohol. Also, any prescription medication. There's another lens people should look at this issue through, though, and not one of "rape"; it should be considered how much governmental intrusion or overreach this is. While we definitely want maintain people's freedom against attacks, sexual or not, the government has essentially retained the power to tell someone that they don…
/r/MensRights14/02/15 07:44 PM
1

Knowingly manipulating the police by providing them with false information, information that is known to be false, should be considered a fairly serious crime. But ... that gets us right back to the central discussion that it is at the heart of every discussion about modern society in America: belief. Was she acting based on something she internally believed, which is an unfalsifiable defense, etc.
/r/MensRights14/02/15 07:37 PM
3

No. This is just ramp up for the 2016 election.
/r/MensRights12/02/15 06:03 PM
2

This is going to end up being a hoax, and then the articles will flow that use the reactions as fuel, something like, "All these people think they get to determine what a woman does with her body", and so forth.
/r/MensRights12/02/15 06:01 PM
0

Charities are largely scams. Is this a new charity that is just try to make it in the charity marketplace? That would make perfect sense, if so, that they have to care out a little bit of the morality market that hasn't been done yet.
/r/MensRights12/02/15 05:58 PM
2

And is now a non-profit organizaiton. Many charities are legitimized scams, it's the classic way to do it.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 07:13 PM
0

Always be wary of survey results outside of a strict scientific context. It is oh-so-easy to bias the survey by design in a way that will be entirely hidden, unless people really deeply drill down into how the survey was run. People around here should be intensely aware of that, of course. "1-in-5" (now "1-in-4" in some circles) and the Whil Wheaton affair are absolutely shining examples.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 08:12 AM
1

"There are different degrees of sexual assault" Well, President Obama disagrees with that. Remeber, it was Obama that says that, "Making distinctions between types of rape does't make any sense to me".
/r/MensRights08/02/15 05:15 AM
2

Last semester, there was some sort of meeting about Sexual Assault policy for all of the UC system, here on the Berkeley campus. There are a couple of parts of it that I wish I had recorded, because one of the high level administrators of the school very openly said something to the effect of: "We have no interest in having any involvement with the police, except when they specifically come to us, in which case we will comply. Our only interest is to establish if someone is a victim and if someo…
/r/MensRights07/02/15 02:40 AM
1

Putting a directional condition on the new definition, as in "down a power gradient", is what makes the "reverse" part of "reverse racism" possible. Without that requirement of direction, then "reverse racism" doesn't make any sense, because it is a directionless thing: anyone can be racist against anyone else, irrespective of the race of which race the source or target is.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 07:26 PM
0

This could be friendly, jocular, and not mean-spirited. Unless we know more about the story, don't assume.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 07:27 AM
5

This doesn't seem too bad, really, considering the first thing there is the use of "myths". If anything, I'd attend and in person say that the notice email was toeing into territory of tonal bias, to which many people will react negatively.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 06:48 PM
2

So, if this whole thing isn't a joke: There is probably a "charity" organization behind like, much like Susan G Komen foundation. The charity exists to take in donations and run advocacy and awareness campaigns. That is their stated mission, and that is what the donations are for. Folks should understand that the vast majority of "charities" are total scams. The board of trustees live billionaire lifestyles, flying around the world and attending dinners to solicit more donations. And then drafti…
/r/MensRights04/02/15 06:46 PM
6

It's all about controlling female sexuality. Everyone wants to do it. Why? Because we have built a civilization around doing so, and female sexuality is a sort of fundamental currency of the entire plan. That's the actual oppression of women, and much of "feminism" and the current moral panic is only furthering. I can't draw a line between people who are doing it just out of social compulsion, in a 'true' panic of morals, where they believe it is the right thing to do, and the folks who are doin…
/r/MensRights02/02/15 07:09 PM
2

I hope the parents have the sense to pull the kid out of that school IMMEDIATELY. It's not clear if it's a public school or not? If it is, file a lawsuit against the school district, if not the city or county, requesting them covering costs associated with sending the kid to a private school, or another school.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 04:14 AM
2

This has been posted a lot in the past few days. And it popped up 6 months ago or so, too. The governor will issue a special order clearing the man of the debt and the paternity role, but every law, regulation, and piece of the system that resulted in this situation will remain untouched.
/r/MensRights01/02/15 02:26 AM
1

She posed it as a question, requesting feedback. It's a fine issue to discuss, as there are more details than simply "good" vs "bad".
/r/MensRights01/02/15 02:24 AM
2

Why not just make a snow penis and a snow vagina? Include everyone, represent everyone (except maybe intersex persons, but invite them to contribute, too). Then the real prudes will be exposed. Is the problem that genitals are modeled, or certain genitals?
/r/MensRights01/02/15 02:21 AM
2

What's really odd about this is: in the realm of alimony and child support, there is an assume proportionality. The larger the payer's income, the more they need to pay. Then at the low end, that gets a bit violated, where it goes out of proportion and transitions to an absolute amount (food, housing at market rates). Consider, then, fines and citations, like parking tickets. For those, they are not scaled by how much the person makes. It is only an absolute scale. Again, for the people on the l…
/r/MensRights01/02/15 02:18 AM
1

This must be a product of Poe's law.
/r/MensRights01/02/15 02:15 AM
1

Straightforward straw-man fallacy, or even reductio ad absurdum.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 08:31 AM
1

This interaction provides a good example of return talking points. And then providing that link to that source would be wonderful too. The title should be reformatted, though. If I was able to put together a nice rebuttal like that, I'd own it, and label it as a moment of advocating personal equality.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 08:28 AM
3

good and comfortable A related issue, which isn't directly about gender, but is now embroiled in gender issues, is the now-hot STEM/"tech" field. For whatever reason, these high-salary, high-tech workers are consider as more than just regulate citizens. They are seen as sort of Prime Citizens, or a holy elite class, rather than just a jobs sector. Correspondingly, people are demanding demographic representation from them, as if there is the same onus on them as there is on politicians and repres…
/r/MensRights29/01/15 08:23 AM
2

I sat in on an "Intro to Feminism" class here at Berkeley last semester. Granted they were young, but there was some sort of magic compulsive gullibility in that space like I have never, ever seen before. The "1 in 5" statistic was used essentially every day in the class. Around the middle of the semester, I cooked up a comment about "new research" and "refined interpretations" that set the new number at 1 in 2 women in college will be raped. At the end of the class, several people repeated the …
/r/MensRights29/01/15 08:16 AM
2

A former president of Harvard casually proposed the thesis that there may be a biological difference in intelligence, and that it should be tested. He even personally noted that he hoped the outcome was the null hypothesis, that there was no difference. He was met with a hellfire of criticism and was forced to resign. This comparison needs to be made every single time any "girls smarter than boys" or "boys smarter than girls" article, discussion, or paper comes up. Irrespective of what the scien…
/r/MensRights29/01/15 08:08 AM
1

I'm not black, and if there is one solid thing that I heave learned through this whole dance of social upheval and everything is that there is something to that "you can't understand the experience" thing, with respect to life as a black man. So, that being said, my only contribution here is: Please never say, "I'm one of the good ones." I've seen that happen to black men based on racial categorization before, and I expect that there will be cowing to get them to say it again, now based on gende…
/r/MensRights26/01/15 05:50 AM
0

Criticism is abuse, by new social metrics. There is going to be an intense backlash due to this. Intense. Expect to see site-wide domain bans of Wikipedia at universities all across America. Of course, I don't believe that should happen, that's just a prognostication of what I estimate will happen.
/r/MensRights25/01/15 07:47 AM
0

What I considered recently is: Emma Watson may just be a mouthpiece for an organization. That is, she might not be doing this out of actual person interest. It seems entirely possible that a group could simply pay her, or anyone, a giant amount of money to deliver a series of speeches, lend her likeness and support to a particular campaign.
/r/MensRights24/01/15 05:12 AM
1

As other comments say: It does not legally follow or "make sense" to treat a false accusation as a rape. Those two things are not equivalent. Still, charges commensurate with the damage of knowingly false rape claim must be brought. Slander, defamation, fraud, knowingly providing false information to police, etc.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 08:04 PM
1

This ethos is well substantiated by federal jurisprudence, from the Hobyb Lobby case: A party cannot be compelled to act against their beliefs. The accuser seemingly believes that she was raped, therefore she cannot be compelled to act against that. Carrying the mattress, making statements that go against the finding of other lawful process, and do forth.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 08:01 PM
2

It's not boredom, I don't think. It is the "mechanism of invalidation", as described in Dr. Jay Carter's book, Nasty People. The summary version is: people try to harm the self esteem of others in an attempt to increase their own self esteem. Everyone should buy that book. It's cheap, and a short, easy read. Every year, I buy 10 copies, and hand them out to people I know who have a real problem with "invalidation".
/r/MensRights22/01/15 07:53 PM
3

I read propositions over a recent case, out of Occidental, I think, where people were trying to put structure on the incident, and were asking: 1) Can two people mutually rape each other, based on the state disallowing them the ability/right/entitlement to consent based on their consumption? 2) Can there be a "rape by mistake"?
/r/MensRights22/01/15 12:29 AM
54

I remember commenting in that thread. I pointed out that what she was doing wasn't just being unfriendly or unfair, that it was a form of emotional abuse, and that she needed to acknowledge that she is an abuser. Not just a mean person.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 06:36 PM
5

This is the sort of thing that feminists really ought to vocally distance themselves from. This is the "toxic" direction that people were talking about after shirtGate.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 02:11 AM
1

I definitely agree that men suffer from social expectations of their social roles. Such problems exist for women, too. But this writer is making some really outlandish statements. re the Isla Vista killings: Although the most prominent voices in men’s rights moved quickly to distance themselves from Rodger, others see him as a hero, and his manifesto is filled with men’s rights language and concepts. This means that anyone can ruin an entire ethos by aligning themselves with it, and then doing s…
/r/MensRights17/01/15 02:21 AM
124

Jeez, this should be in /r/feminism, too. That's a pretty in-the-clear social expectation/role put right on top of women, based on gender. I mean, that's genuinely sexist, against women.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 02:12 AM
14

This needs to be on the front page of /r/all. It is much more than only a 'mens rights' issue. Unfortunately, being in this sub will preclude it from reaching the front page. I hope someone resubmits to to /r/medicine or /r/science or something.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 11:23 PM
5

There's more to be considered, there. The story that is recounted in the link is one of emotional abuse, possible even countable as "domestic abuse", under some systems. Possibly even close to "gaslighting", if incredulity is a common feature of the writer's claims. However, one reading of "happy wife, happy life" could be totally different, one that could contain a negative commentary about women in a domestic setting. In the interpretation, it could be seen the subject wife is more akin to a p…
/r/MensRights13/01/15 09:05 PM
10

So, what will the response be? There could be a deluge of anger against her, to the point where she'll have to cave, and apologize, like recently happened to that TV actress. Or, the more insidious thing to might be to start emitting messages like, "Bec is a feminist and agrees with feminism, and here's why...". Similar to that rhetorical capture that is often practiced, where you use a banner to forcefully encircle other ideologies, "If you believe xyz, then you believe in feminism, and are a f…
/r/MensRights13/01/15 08:58 PM
1

The killer should definitely get charged with premeditated murder. Should be a slam-dunk conviction. No death penalty in Alaska, so we can look forward to $50K/year for the next 40 years. That's $2mil in taxpayer money lost on this guy. Well, at least it does go into employing the prison guards and such. For the woman ... probably, conspiracy to commit murder, or negligence resulting in the death of a person.
/r/MensRights11/01/15 05:09 AM
1

There's a lot in that article that could really be derided. Efficiency of water, space, and time would preclude much of what she's saying, unless you're in the world of Harrison Bergeron. Still, there is an easy solution: Just make all bathrooms unisex. All of them. Hell, even if the men's restroom is turned into a unisex one, it hardly matters, as long as the urinals remain.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 11:19 PM
2

Well, that's the end of his career.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 11:42 PM
1

You're right that 'valor' is not the right metric here. A common metric would be average and median earning power after graduation, as well as total income earned over a lifetime. That, of course, immediately should lead us to another part of the discussion: Is "equality", rights, liberations, or empowerment really just being trivialized by capital accumulation? Consider the wage gap: If it is really is true that some people favor lower paying jobs that might have lower hours, higher personal sa…
/r/MensRights06/01/15 02:07 AM
2

People need to divest from Twitter. They are going to have an issue soon enough. I wonder how much stock I would need to buy to be able to communicate in some manner with other shareholders? Or just make a big bet in the market against them.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 09:35 PM
6

The same catch phrase still applies, though: "It's not about the truth."
/r/MensRights04/01/15 08:56 PM
3

That is never going to happen. "Never go backwards" is the motto of 2014. And into the near future, likely.
/r/MensRights31/12/14 08:56 PM
1

Speaking in platitudes means that the context isn't relevant to the reasoning being presented. The president may have made a gaffe, but maybe not. The "legitimate rape" issue was very poorly explored. It truly was a pilgrimage of Americans into anti-intellectualism, from every political camp.
/r/MensRights30/12/14 05:42 AM
1

On a talk show, Obama said "making distinctions between types of rape doesn't make any sense to me." That is one of the most worrying things I've heard Obama say, because it is really intensely reductive. Dangerously and irresponsibly so. The implication is sex that the state doesn't approve of, it will call "rape" by legislating that consent cannot be given. For example, certain age differences, or if one or either party has drank alcohol in any amount, taken any prescription medication, etc. A…
/r/MensRights26/12/14 03:32 AM
0

Eh, if you go by the letter of the law, there are millions of rapes every day in the US, probably ~1 billion per year. The law makes no bones about it: if either party has had anything to drink, or is on any prescription medication, they do not have the legal ability to consent, and thus illegal sex is occurring.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 08:10 AM
7

Could be effective for women, too. There are plenty of complaints about how 'hovering' is the known root cause of unusable bathrooms.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 07:57 AM
2

Has it entirely shaken out yet whether the claims were misrepresented and made into a fantastical tale in the RS article by the author, or if rather the complainant themselves was telling a tall tale? And in either case, has there been any disproof yet, or even a venue for that?
/r/MensRights10/12/14 07:49 AM
1

Look up sewing videos on youtube. Any time there is a "home" machine being used, it'll be a video starring a woman (and there are lots of excellent project videos like this). Then, look at any video of an industrial sewing machine being used. Walking foot, cylinder bed, or table mounted, and 9 out of 10 times, it'll be a guy in the video. I am not saying either of these is good or bad. It's just interesting that there is such an easily observable divide on this topic.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 12:41 AM
2

So, in the movie "Happiness", the 'badge of honor' theory is embodied in a character who wants gravitas as a controversial writer.
/r/MensRights06/12/14 01:29 AM
-5

You are hosting a bias. Be neutral until compelled otherwise.
/r/MensRights06/12/14 12:19 AM
-6

it was a lie There are doubts, which are increasing all the time. That is not conclusive. Something more conclusive will emerge, I'm sure.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 10:08 PM
11

Don't be too hasty. It's not clear that the alleged victim is a "liar". It may be an embellished story. Everyone should celebrate the victory of sense, reason, and rationality. We should all reflect on this is a clear sign that we are in the midst of a moral panic.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 09:01 PM
2

Do you want to know what the real answer is? This has been talked about a lot here in the EECS department at Berkeley. There are women who do not want their restrooms shared with transpeople or cismen. Positions will vary; some are OK with transmen (female-to-male), but not transwomen (male-to-female). Some are the other way around. Some are not OK either either. The issue is that because that can be positioned as a "safety" issue for the cis-women, there must always remain a nominally labeled W…
/r/MensRights05/12/14 09:31 AM
2

When people tried to do this at Berkeley, based on ethnic price disparity, they were resoundingly labeled as racist xenophobes.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 09:25 AM
7

We've reduced women back to Barbie's. The life role that has been designed and is being enforced with these sort of actions is that they are meant to live free of even any suggestion of negative incident again a woman. What I mean is: this is just another form of oppression of women, clothes in a very thing veil of "protecting" women.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 11:10 PM
1

The implication of this message is that women can't function in their workplace when they are menstruating. I am not offering support or criticism for that message. Only peeling back the veneer of this to reveal the actual ethos that this is putting forward. (although I would criticize it, and say that ethos is terrible)
/r/MensRights03/12/14 09:43 PM
3

Parity. You just require that all workforces must be at least 50% women.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 07:36 PM
1

I believe many dictionaries have taken up the new definition.
/r/MensRights19/11/14 07:52 AM
1

Say more about them, really. This was a sentiment that I commonly encountered around the city and especially around campus (UCB) at election time. The reasoning was that I must have wanted to vote non-Republican, and Obama was such a lovable bastion of celebrity that it wouldn't make sense that someone wouldn't want to vote for him ... unless there was a bias there. So, the conclusion was that I must have deflected to Nader simply because I hated black people. That was their estimation of my pol…
/r/MensRights16/11/14 08:23 PM
1

What do you mean?
/r/MensRights16/11/14 06:55 PM
1

Interesting. It's hard to stand on principal when you have people screaming in your face, though. In 2008, when I wore my Nader shirt around in Berkeley, people would stop me and inform me that I'm a racist, because I was simply avoiding voting for a black man. So ... be prepared. Or don't openly share your strategy come election time.
/r/MensRights16/11/14 06:54 PM
2

It won't be on the radar until 2024. Hillary Clinton is going to be the next president. The bulk of the political dialog is going to be about gender issues. She might be a fine president, and shouldn't be discounted because of her gender. My person politics don't align with hers, or her party's. Still, the moral panic over women and their role in society is going to be worse before it gets any better, and it is going the the defining issue of the 2016 election. There is going to be a lot of talk…
/r/MensRights16/11/14 06:49 AM
3

It occurs to me ... maybe a copy of that shirt should be made and widely distributed? Exact same color, script, etc, except replace "feminist" with an agreed upon term (which, I don't know if there is one). Masculist? Something like that.
/r/MensRights14/11/14 05:28 PM
1

When the catcalling video came out and everyone was commenting on it, I was doing laps with plenty of people right here on reddit about the potential conceptual problems of it being an edited video presentation (one-way conversation, selective editing, success through scandal, etc).
/r/MensRights14/11/14 05:26 PM
1

Young people are developing. For men, the male brain really changes up to age 25. This is a largely intractable theory, since people will take huge offense to it, but young people simply struggle with deep reasoning. Transitivity, conceptualization, operationalization, the nature of proof, disproof, fallacy, opinion, etc. For example, one thing that I encounter all the time here on reddit and around campus is that people can't handle figurative or conceptual comparisons, and can only deal in com…
/r/MensRights13/11/14 06:45 PM
2

Everyone seems to focus on the spreading-the-vagina story. Weren't there other parts where she clearly said that she masturbated in bed next to get 10 year old sister, when Lena was 17? That's quite significant. If she was 18 and the sister was 11, the state would probably have been compelled to act on that, statutorily.
/r/MensRights13/11/14 06:38 PM
2

This, this combination or reconciliation, is literally what the most famous and celebrated American stage play is about, The Death of a Salesman.
/r/MensRights12/11/14 08:41 PM
1

You should read that. It breaks down a tree of possibilities in a nice, straightforward way.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 09:41 PM
1

I'm glad I was able to find this in my comment history after 4 days. Here, you should read through this: https://medium.com/message/that-catcalling-video-and-why-research-methods-is-such-an-exciting-topic-really-32223ac9c9e8
/r/MensRights04/11/14 09:04 PM
1

the same would apply to men No, that' not necessarily the case. Although maybe I'm misreading you, you mean that part of a possible training of women to be sexually submissive would be the very same thing as training men to be sexually dominant? That does make sense. My point there, though, is that this may be entirely natural. There are cultures where women are much more dominant, and it's just the way they have organized.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 05:34 PM
1

Ah, yes, that would be the correct way to state the population wide average. Silly me.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 05:29 PM
1

This may simply be a reflection of how women are taught, co-erced, or incentivized to act. If the thesis is that women are somehow naturally (biologically?) more sexually submissive, this doesn't prove it. I can't think of a way to control against the social embedding of this behavior, other than eschewing statistics, and doing in depth philosophy based on psychological and historical interviews with people of varied sexual role identification.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 07:50 AM
2

Cherry picking examples is a flawed way to make any point. This is why people should be suspect of the original video, or of anything that is a story being told through a lens that is a 1-way conversation. Consider Michael Moore and unlocked Canadian front doors: He showed 4 being unlocked, whereas they may have test 100 and found 96 locked. Selective editing allows whatever story to be told. People should be suspect of it due to the potential racialized bias therein. Perverse incentives for "su…
/r/MensRights04/11/14 07:44 AM
1

In the strict sense of averages, that wouldn't be true. If 1% of the population "paid for sex" at $200 per encounter, and all people had sexual encounters, paid or unpaid, at the same rate, then the "average man" would pay $2. Also, if they mean to refer to all sex workers, then stripped and such would have to be included, which may change the average. Actually, someone with an English or rhetoric degree can probably sort out my interjection here. There's a lot of political and newsmedia capital…
/r/MensRights04/11/14 07:37 AM
2

I'd just use the women's only side all the time, and see where what office the issue lands in.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 07:22 AM
1

I read your message and am very impressed with your English. Above all as a 5th language. What others do you speak? 4 different dialects of bullshit and misrepresentation. It's almost like it's possible to influence people's opinions via willful representation on the part of the teller ... meta .... (but the rest of everything above is sincere and not sarcastic or hyperbolic)
/r/MensRights31/10/14 12:00 AM
0

I do think that even raising the possibility that it was edited in such a way is pointless. Why even raise the issue? Because it is a possibility that hugely affects interpretation. The reaction many viewers are having is, "The harassment in the video is mostly from blacks, therefore this is evidence that blacks commit more harassment, therefore blacks do commit more harassment." That chain of logic follows fine, but is based on the assumption that the video accurately represents reality. If tha…
/r/MensRights30/10/14 09:38 PM
0

Do you really believe yourself? Yes. That they were sat around thinking they should show less white men to support a "conditioned response." Are you disagreeing that this is a trope that exists? Casting this in terms of people who, by hook or by crook, have been and are stereo-typically imaged as more aggressive and less metered is a rational strategy. I haven't sought to prove that this was the motivation of the creators of the video, only that it is a rational possibility for why we see a bias…
/r/MensRights30/10/14 07:57 PM
1

us vs them There is an inexorable "us vs them" structure on this, though, as there is in any one-way conversation like this video. The video is produced and edited, and we watch it. There fundamentally isn't any discourse in that transaction. Nothing needs to be pondered about the message delivered I disagree, and that's what I'm trying to offer in my comment above. The "catcalling = bad" and the provided examples of it are one layer of the cake, but because the video may be going through select…
/r/MensRights30/10/14 07:49 PM
3

This should be a discussion about politicized and emotionalized tactics and rhetoric. I beleive it was said, as one quip in one sentence in one article, that it just so happened that the harassment happened in equal amounts, and the occurences of non-black, non-latino persons engaging the walker were largely unusable. Now, we have no way of know if that's true or not. It may be entirely true, and this is simply an unfortunate outcome. Consider the incentives in both directions. The racial issue …
/r/MensRights30/10/14 06:02 PM
2

Wow, I'm surprised that's talked openly about. Every time I've brought up that notion, it is treated with a very harsh response, and it categorized as oppression.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 09:00 PM
6

This probably wouldn't hold up in court, since it would be seen as a verbal contract, which requires the meeting of the minds. The question would be considered to be a verbal engagement of a contract or sexual contact to which the speaker is pre-agreed to.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 08:42 PM
7

Under the theories that cheating in a relationship is a form of non-consensual sexual abuse, isn't this women encouraging sexual abuse? Even if there is a disclaimer at the top, it's still a conspiracy (in the legal sense) to commit sexual abuse.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 08:38 PM
1

As far as I know, the subreddits have different intents. 2XC is just supposed to be a women's social club sort of atmosphere. There are plenty of posts about oppression, rape, politics, etc, but there are also plenty of other posts types there, too. Surely there must be some XY verison of 2XC? Still, the alleged (I think now proven?) fake PM-harassment issue really should prompt the closure of that subreddit, by the main sitewide reddit admins. Let it reform under another banner.
/r/MensRights30/08/14 11:02 PM
3

This is indicative of a moral panic.
/r/MensRights30/08/14 10:56 PM
2

It's the use of "subhuman" there that is the real problem, and it demonstrates what the poster's real problem is. That approach, that someone can be removed from the humanity pool, is a central feature of oppressive and discriminatory constructions the world over. It seems inexorably tied to a narcissists complex, too.
/r/MensRights30/08/14 10:46 PM
-2

These terse arguments that sprout out vast trees of follow-on reasoning are often really troublesome. This reminds me of the Sandra Fluke speech, which actually a little vague, insofar as it's intended political thesis. Yet, from that speech, people derived and declared huge arguments of rights and entitlements.
/r/MensRights30/08/14 10:37 PM
2

Probably federal / FAFSA student loans, right? Plenty of private colleges offer private student loans, I believe.
/r/MensRights27/08/14 10:18 PM
1

Does this ratio then not reflect the national ratio? It was my belief that it had been shown that men and women are victims of domestic violence at approximately equal rates.
/r/MensRights27/08/14 10:05 PM
3

As I understand it, if you are a permanent resident non-citizen of the US, you are also required to sign up for selective service, and if you do not, renewal of your green card (every 10 years) will be declined. That's what I was told by my parents when I had to renew my green card in 2004. I believe they had looked into it, too, because my mother did not want me to have to sign up for Selective Service.
/r/MensRights27/08/14 09:55 PM
2

This is fairly well known out here in the tech start-up ecosystem. Friends of mine are doing their own robotics start-up, and they getting significant mentoring, guidance, and advice from people who have already hit it big via the same path. It was told them in no uncertain terms that they should make their flagship publicity image be the robot being played with by girls, and that their fundraising campaign video should be narrated by a girl.
/r/MensRights27/08/14 09:47 PM
-3

This is the reason that I really dislike Oliver. And Stewart does exactly the same thing. It's a non-conversation, with faked consistency and reasoning established by editing. I don't mean because of their stance on this issue, or their generally Liberal party alignment, or "left leaning", or whatever banner it falls under. I dislike them because of their horrific rhetoric.
/r/MensRights26/08/14 01:48 AM
1

Well, look at the way it is phrased. They did say "more rights" as in number of rights. You may have highlighted some rights that women have that men don't, but they might still be seeing it as a numbers game. A different phrasing could produce a different result, of course. If the argument was that "There are no rights that a woman has that a man doesn't have", then that is easily disproven by the examples you give. Pretty standard logic.
/r/MensRights19/08/14 12:16 AM
1

No no, making false rape accusations contributes to the culture of silence surrounding rape.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 10:44 PM
5

This sounds like a prison-industrial complex problem way more than a gender dynamics problem.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 10:37 PM
11

Have you read Catherine Mackinnon? She goes into tirades dozens of pages long about how horrific pornography is, how it's existence is misogynistic, how viewing pornography is equivalent to rape, etc.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 04:01 PM
5

Tell him that if your wife somehow gets him to the doctor for the surgical appointment, he can leave the hospital "Against Medical Advice, AMA". That's the key phrase. If he states that he is leaving "AMA", they won't touch him. It would be up to the mother to keep him there, which would potentially generate an assault charge. But the hospital won't do the procedure. In that event, also consider having a notarized document that he'd carry in his pocket, saying "I (your son) do not consent to thi…
/r/MensRights17/07/14 04:00 PM
0

Infighting always finds a way. This is, as the author says, a negativity problem. Not a gender problem, but a horrible negativity problem. I suppose the best we (society, that is) we can do is recognize her issues, protect ourselves from any impact from them, and have sympathy or empathy for her situation.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 05:53 AM
3

You should get the office together and have both bathrooms converted to unisex. You have everything you need: history of a shortage problem, current existence of a shortage problem, limited resources, an existing imbalance in consumption of those resources. Get everyone in the office behind it. Both bathrooms should be unisex.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 06:48 PM
1

The "Male Victims Ignored" thing sets off a an interesting thought for me, here: Does this whole kerfuffle start to seem like it's treading towards being just another way to control female sexuality? That is, it's possible that the visibility and effort in this issue is due to a moral panic, or is possibly a runaway nightmare of government involvement in person lives. I even fully acknowledge that it could be rooting out a deeply ingrained flaw in our society, one that we haven't been able to so…
/r/MensRights10/07/14 06:37 PM
0

I believe this is actually fairly old, years or thereabouts, and was considered one of the greatest /r/subredditdrama highlights of all time.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 06:29 PM
1

That why I was sort of stunned at the GoldieBlox thing. To me, it's pretty clear that the female themeing and targeting there is purely a market tactic.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 10:40 PM
0

This image is current at the top of /r/TrollXChromosomes , and is still #4 on /r/MensRights . What a world! (I'm saying this is good, not bad)
/r/MensRights30/06/14 06:17 AM
6

Maybe it varies by state and county, but here in CA, it is definitely true that there is a financial interest over the oversight body in the child support payments.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 12:30 AM
18

The reason that they jail you for overpaying your child support is that for every child support payment, the bureau that administers, enforces, and oversees the payments take a percentage of each payment as an overhead administrative fee. If an amount larger than a legally mandated amount is paid, they cannot take a fee out of that extra amount.
/r/MensRights26/06/14 11:01 PM
1

I doubt that they'd not be able to drum up enough people. In the protest sphere, for any sort of a protest, the participation of one woman can cause the participation of 10 or more men. This is not over just gender issues, either, this is for all protests. Many men will participate with the hope of winning the favor of the girl, by demonstrating a shared ethos.
/r/MensRights26/06/14 10:59 PM
10

It would be a travesty if this case were to undermine the confidence and experiences of victims But it doesn't.
/r/MensRights26/06/14 10:50 PM
0

While I get the intent of her message, this still sounds a little hamfisted. I don't know if anyone has the right to "hit back", that is, to trade blow for blow. In my estimation, it would be much better to phrase this as a right to respond in defense with physical action.
/r/MensRights05/06/14 06:35 PM
1

Both the verbal and written contracts will mean absolutely nothing. Legally nothing. A contract cannot be made while someone is under "duress". A contract cannot be made to be assaulted. Someone cannot consent to be assaulted. I'm fairly sure that it's illegal to make a contract for sex. Verbal consent is known to not be substantive, even with eyewitnesses. And, again, if "duress" is present, literally any spoken consent carries no weight whatsoever. Keep this in mind: In California, and I belie…
/r/MensRights05/06/14 01:53 AM
5

But it's fairly easy to show that there are plenty of social, cultural, and legal constructions that favor women over men. And there are lots that favor men over women. Are you just using the word "oppressed" as a placeholder for "more oppressed than the other gender" ? It sounds like you are, but I don't want to put words into your mouth.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 01:26 AM
1

Thanks for the reference. Just from the wiki page summary, it does sound like Kanin showed an absolutely attention-worthy situation, but it is pointed out that his analysis was not systematic, and involved other factors of potential coercion. So, it's a pertinent pin in the map of this discussion, yes. But I would not take it as substantiation of a 41% figure.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 08:13 AM
0

Do you have a citation for this, or any sort of reasoning behind it?
/r/MensRights17/05/14 05:13 AM
1

the terrible scourge of false rape accusations I disagree with this. From what I had seen and read, there is not appear to be a "terrible scourge" of this phenomenon. It does exist. It does happen. The terrifying aspect of it is not that it happens in abundance, but rather, that it can happen. Much in the same way that we collectively are worried about a "false negative" for an allegation of rape (where someone is raped, and the system fails to convict or react). That is, the system responds wit…
/r/MensRights17/05/14 04:24 AM
1

I have a problem with anyone that states that feminism will solve men's problems From your summary above, it does not appear that any of these groups are making this statement. Certainly, if that position was taken at the same time as a female-specific approach was then, then there's a partial paradox that's worth pointing out. men should have the same right to representation. It does not sound like any of these groups are saying that they should not. Let's not get ahead of ourselves; I'm aware …
/r/MensRights17/05/14 12:02 AM
6

The above comment was unspecific, and the cleverness of the deflection is fun ... but I'll just offer my opinion that if folks want to find power in temperance, any such flippant remarks should be avoided. I'm not shunning you, just highlighting.
/r/MensRights16/05/14 11:31 PM
10

This is not a good answer. It reflects poorly on the group to say such things, even if you are jesting. Tensions are fairly high on this issue right now.
/r/MensRights16/05/14 11:25 PM
2

I don't neccesarily see a problem here, and folks must be careful to check where their anger is placed. None of the points above sound terribly flawed, except possible for ones that support specific pieces of legislation. I only potentially take an exception there, as it's not uncommon to we very misguided pieces of legislation, based on errors that are talked about in the MR groups often. So, it's not clear if there is an equivalence between "feminism" and "equalism". If we want to be literal a…
/r/MensRights16/05/14 11:12 PM
2

There appears to be a linguistic overloading of certain words. "Privilege", to many people, implies a whole thesis of statements, about an ongoing or institutional power structure, social conditioning, etc. There are good writing on this (and some horrendous ones), and it's a worthwhile idea to consider. One that, in summary, to this layperson, there is some truth to. However, if one interprets or uses "privileges" as a noun for individual contests, favors, losses, or comparisons, there will be …
/r/MensRights16/05/14 06:21 PM
1

People will abuse any system to help their self esteem. That seems to be ingrained into our human nature, unfortunately. Make sure your manager knows your side of the story. There might even be resources available for you. And I hope you have a good social support system (friends, parents, etc) that you can talk about with this. Talking with people and receiving empathy is very validating when you've been attacked like this.
/r/MensRights16/05/14 06:14 PM
2

'rape' It may be that they are actively trying to avoid slander/libel issues by calling it rape. In some states and countries, it is not legally possible for a woman to "rape" a man (just in terms of legal definitions that exist). An example of this would be how the FBI's definition of rape does not allow for a woman using duress to force someone to have sex with her to be classified as a rape. That may only be true when the victim is someone with a penis, since the FBI's definition is actually …
/r/MensRights12/04/14 11:51 PM
2

Interesting writing. One potential hole in one of their bullet-list of points is on the custody issue, where "17.4% of custodial parents were fathers". To be meaningful, this should be normalized against requests and claims for custody. That is, the requests from fathers are lower, you'd expect to see a lower custody rate from them.
/r/MensRights12/04/14 11:44 PM
2

Some people make horrible messages under the banner of anti-misandry and 'Mens Rights', therefore all anti-misandry and Mens Rights share these beliefs, and all of their speech is deplorable and can be dismissed without reason. /s I encounter that type of logic commonly. In adults, often with college degrees. And it doesn't happen over just misandry or gender issues, it happens for everything, pretty much any politicized debate.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 02:45 AM
1

Some people tried doing this at Berkeley, but along racial lines. People didn't "get it", and called for the event to now be allowed. The main complaint, however, was that they were oppressing the races that they were offering discounts to by including them in satire. Lastly, they mean "equality", not equality.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 06:22 AM
0

Hold on, though. Obama said that making distinctions between types of rape doesn't make any sense to him. Obama said that, to him, the two scenarios that this person is describing are exactly equal. Of course, maybe he said that just for the moral sentiment of it, and not really the meaning. The same sort of diversionary, disingenuous moral sentiment that this person here in the image is identifying and skewering pretty point-blank-edly. But if Obama was just trying to invoke the morality of the…
/r/MensRights22/09/13 07:47 AM
-4

MRM is a little odd insofar as that they tend to fall into exactly the same behavioral hole that some feminists do, and really, plenty of *ists, like the aggressive atheists. What you reference as angry hashtagging and discussion-chilling is just a common for dominance, moral relativism, and invalidation. (as defined here) Instead of MRM, or countering a mention of "feminism" with "misandry", I rather tend to try to use the word "masculism" or "masculinism", although apparently neither of those …
/r/MensRights11/09/13 10:56 PM
1

Both genders have fantastical body image "standards" commonly promoted. One group gripes about it way more, saying that it is oppressive, discriminatory. This comparison isn't so much about the existence of fantastical body image standard for both gender. It's about those genders' responses.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:55 PM
0

So, there's two issues going on here: 1) People ascribe discrimination to situations compulsively these days. Simple lack of critical thinking, either because the person is unable or unwilling, leads to a situation like this. 2) A lot of the people who are vocal about these issues (gender, rape, race, etc) don't actually care much about the issue at hand, but they are looking for a convenient moral stance, a position that is easy to take. One from which they can easily derive a simplistic hammer…
/r/MensRights29/07/13 05:23 PM
0

Interesting. Text on the left is good. Maybe just change it so it's two pictures, and the text below is, "Compare and contrast".
/r/MensRights22/07/13 07:49 PM
1

women cause men to commit suicide and vice versa, this also doesn't make any sense from the standpoint of Men's Rights I disagree, strongly. The point of Mens' Rights is not a tit-for-tat summing of cause and effect relationships between men and women. It is about how this particular group exists in society. 85% of homicide perpetrators are men That seems like a red herring. I don't think he's trying to assign blame for the situation, but rather highlight how there isn't exact parity there. This…
/r/MensRights21/07/13 03:24 AM
1

This is getting at the actuality of how these campaigns are, implicitly, misogynistic, in the true definition of the word, not the new definition. The subtext is, "Women need special protections."
/r/MensRights02/06/13 04:44 PM
0

The bar for TED talks is really low. There are some astonishing stinkers. Not to say that these gender-issues ones necessarily are stinkers, but everyone is just trying to co-opt it as a stage for their own version of intellectualism.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 08:27 PM
2

Well, the Violence Against Women act just passed, so this makes sense. The act defines that only men can commit crimes.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 07:05 PM
-2

"Pro Choice" : Women have full control over wether or not to continue the pregnancy. The father has no say in it. If the child is born, the father is required to pay child support, even if he wanted to terminate the pregnancy.
/r/MensRights06/01/13 09:49 PM
3

Note the "My Girlfriend" mention. That reveals what the actual purpose of the comment is, to let everyone know about it.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 04:41 AM
0

The things you've said seem true. But I don't really understand how they can be reconciled with the axiom that I hear all the time: men and women are exactly the same, there are no differences, and treating them differently in any capacity is sexist and discriminatory.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:00 AM
2

I wonder why they aren't any women in the NFL? Or men in the WNBA?
/r/MensRights18/12/12 04:29 AM
1

This is only going to get worse in the next 4 years. It's not Obama's "fault", but there is a certain marching sentiment. I've seen plenty of times now, "The end of white male society", etc.
/r/MensRights23/11/12 06:26 PM
1

There was also that whole movie, "Dear Zacahary...". Watch it, if you haven't.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 06:05 AM
-20

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Women are awful, awful people, and this is why we need to get rid of all of them. It seems that if you had an X-gene linked virus, and also a counter-virus that was Y-gene linked, we could do it in a series of two pandemic events ...
/r/MensRights01/03/12 07:00 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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