TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

asifnot Archive

View 1 post and 147 comments by asifnot on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
62

Action Op.asifnot/r/MensRights13/03/15 02:57 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

'Merica in a lot of states.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/03/21 09:12 PM
3

Can someone here intelligently explain how the "merit-based" approach amounted to a "pussy pass"? In Canada we have seen some ridiculous demands from women's groups to lower the standard of proof in sexual assault cases, and I totally agree how that kind of thing is utter garbage - but this article doesn't really explain an approach like that.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/03/21 09:10 PM
12

SAHM for two grown man-children. So no one in her family is going to be working in any way shape or form.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen20/11/17 03:28 PM
-1

Huh, one of those things was mentioned and was manifestly true, the other wasn't mentioned at all. TIL you may have some unresolved issues cropping up.
/r/PussyPass23/11/16 02:15 AM
11

Having her bestiality publicized has ruined her life of drug dealing and assaulting children?
/r/PussyPass23/11/16 02:11 AM
-2

no they are commenting on the events in a neighbouring country, events that will very likely impact us. They are being dramatic snowflakes for sure, but they aren't "acting like they are a citizen of the US." This sub is shit now, I'm out.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/16 02:05 PM
17

In Canada. We have Facebook in Canada.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/11/16 01:44 PM
-1

uh huh ok
/r/PussyPassDenied29/10/16 10:49 PM
-11

There is some crazy SJW shit out there, no doubt. But the language used in the anti father's day tweets they showed is just too silly. it's either satire or false flag shit IMHO. And Fox news is no sort of source for anything - the fact that they took it seriously actually seems like a reason not to.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/10/16 06:23 PM
-10

I can't believe these are real tweets - its making fun of radical feminism. Though I don't doubt some people don't get the joke and buy into it.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/10/16 05:49 PM
-43

I think this is Fox completely missing that this is satire TBH
/r/PussyPassDenied29/10/16 02:50 PM
-1

yeah, no one actually does that.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/10/16 10:33 PM
2

Lots of places even have a spot at the hospital where you can do this without repercussions.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/10/16 10:31 PM
9

I think the law of diminishing returns might apply there avTuesdayally
/r/MensRights23/05/15 03:42 PM
8

Well, she has the body and the look. I mean Anita works hard, but I think she will always struggle because at the end of the day, she is reasonably fuckable. Lena represents the kind of queasy sexuality that conforms to the feminist ideal
/r/MensRights23/05/15 01:51 PM
11

being bi is 2x awesome then?
/r/MensRights23/05/15 01:45 PM
12

ahh yes, his white cishet male privilege.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 04:13 AM
17

Why the fuck is this kid being held in custody in the first place?
/r/MensRights19/05/15 03:16 AM
3

This is from a UK website. I'm not sure about the law there, but here in Canada we don't use the word "rape" when it comes to criminal charges - it's called sexual assault whether there is penetration or not. It reads the same to us as rape. I would think it's the same in other commonwealth countries.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 08:02 PM
0

which law? I cannot even tell what you are talking about at this point. Stop trying to fix his mistake.
/r/MensRights06/05/15 01:25 AM
1

Your analogy doesn't hold even slightly, but I get your point. OP is still conflating issues though. His post doesn't support his contention.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 11:00 PM
1

Nope, two separate legal issues. There IS an obligation for a parent (or a person who stands in the place of a parent) to support a child after a divorce, even into the college years, in many jurisdictions (including where I live in British Columbia) but that has very little to do with what OP is ranting about. This whole sub has a bit of a problem with armchair lawyers conflating things like this.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 10:07 PM
1

The whole problem with OP's post is he is acting as if the fact that household income is looked at for qualifying for assistance is the same as a legal obligation to pay for the schooling.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 09:11 PM
0

As a family lawyer, reading this thread is giving me cancer. It's tough to be a men's rights advocate when so many of these guys will go on a tear about something like this. Damn right you have obligations to the kids you choose to act as a parent to.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 08:51 PM
1

You probably should have started that comment off with IANAL. The law in many many jurisdictions extends support obligations to young adults who are going to school.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 08:48 PM
1

Yes, that quote shows that u/Captain_Yid is exactly right.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 08:47 PM
2

Can someone with more energy than me put the caption text on the picture?
/r/MensRights01/05/15 04:11 AM
1

It's hard to say. I obtain POs ex parte for people semi-regularly, and you are always relying on your client's information, maybe some back up from relatives or the police. I would never knowingly advance one for "tactical" reasons, and I certainly don't think anywhere 90% of them that I'm involved in are made on spurious grounds or because of false information. But again, I know that it IS easier to do this with a female client. I can actually only think of one time I obtained a PO preventing a…
/r/MensRights26/04/15 11:49 PM
2

So I answered you twice, once affirming you sure can go to jail for failure to pay - but let me tell you something - I have never seen nor am I aware of a woman going to jail at a committal hearing. I'm not saying it hasn't happened, but I've never seen it. They definitely get more leeway. I HAVE seen men who have been completely unemployed for mental health reasons do 30 day stints for failure to pay on an order that should have been cancelled years before because they have no income.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 11:23 PM
1

That was me, responding to Foley's specific situation. This is me responding to the contention that there is no jail for railing to pay support.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 11:20 PM
3

Get ready to stand. IMAL in BC. If you are behind in support payments you may be ordered to face a committal hearing, where you may indeed face jail time. http://www.familylaw.lss.bc.ca/guides/mini/committalHearings/step2.php
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:44 PM
3

Canadian Family lawyer here. Yes I can comment. yes you can go to jail for failing to pay support. However, he is very likely exaggerating, a lot. You could conceivably be put in jail for contempt any time you wilfully disobey a court order, so what he is saying may be technically true in that sense, there is a legal mechanism by which it could. But more typically, he would have to be a fair bit late, and other enforcement methods (garnishment, attachment, seizing of assets, etc.) would probably…
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:44 PM
0

No it's a reason not to be foolish about it.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 01:16 PM
-3

you still aren't making sense.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 05:53 AM
-2

I'm supposed to feel bad now right? Only what you are saying made no sense. These guys dressed up in over the top costumes, with bloody fucking crotches. I'm sure you can imagine a number of less comical ways they might have gone to get their point across. Nobody is making a joke out of the pain and suffering, MATE, they are laughing at these guys silly execution. Get off your high horse
/r/MensRights21/04/15 05:35 AM
-3

Lacking a sense of humour isn't a virtue
/r/MensRights21/04/15 05:29 AM
3

Maybe so but you better be prepared for some mockery.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 05:29 AM
-6

I agree, I am one of the most vehemently anti-circumcision people you are going to meet, but these guys are over the top.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 03:39 AM
6

This guy is talking about women in their 30s. A lot more than 1 in 10 women in their 30s have great bodies.
/r/seduction21/04/15 03:03 AM
8

I really cannot understand why feminists wouldn't rush to attack women like this. It would be so much more credible to say "we don't condone false accusations" than to try do deny they exist. It does so much more damage to my opinion of feminism when they try to downplay or ignore things like this. This happens all the time, partially because twats like this one assume they can get away with it.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 06:15 PM
4

I'm just gonna come right out and distance myself from ultra-con crazies. I'd admit I didn't read much past the tea party banner at the top, but I do see a complete lack of citations for the claims here. Why muddle things up with a garbage post like this?
/r/MensRights20/04/15 03:54 PM
1

exactly the thing all these bullshit school awareness programs are saying men have to stop doing, even though I have never seen another man fail to step in where he saw man on woman abuse happening (nor have I failed to do so myself)
/r/MensRights15/04/15 07:44 PM
1

Pretty fucking scary how she seems to have sold even HIS friends on the idea that he deserves this abuse. Amazing level of victim blaming to justify this craziness.
/r/MensRights15/04/15 06:01 PM
7

Family Lawyer here (and Canadian). I'm not giving any legal advice, this is my personal opinion. These laws were originally devised in recognition of historical inequalities arising when the traditional breadwinner (the man) decided to leave a stay-at-home mom without any job prospects in the lurch, or for cases where guys got a woman "in trouble" and didn't want to take any responsibility for the resulting child, despite having heavily damaged that woman's chances of landing herself in a good m…
/r/MensRights10/04/15 07:48 PM
1

That used to be the case, but our ruling conservatives have started veering pretty far right lately. Check out the current controversy here with "Bill C-51", sort of our "Patriot Act"
/r/MensRights30/03/15 03:10 PM
2

lol @ your opinion of conservatives tho. To be fair though, I'm Canadian, we don't really have "tea party" types here
/r/MensRights30/03/15 03:09 AM
14

She's unapologetically rational. That probably makes her seem liberal to conservatives and conservative to liberals.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 02:48 AM
2

Then you and I are not on the same side sir. Your dystopian future sounds worse than mine.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 02:47 AM
20

It is sort of lame to refer to the extremely well know CHS as "Female university teacher" but I don't get the hate on her for being a conservative. Hey, liberal men AND women of North America - if you don't want a conservative to be the voice of reason then why don't you take the reigns? Anyone? anyone?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 08:16 PM
2

You mean we are going to try to take down the Ms.s' house using her tools?!
/r/MensRights29/03/15 08:14 PM
2

I stopped halfway through this. The way these questions are constructed is just garbage. First off, they are all questions about what men believe about men, but you clearly intend to measure something about men's beliefs about masculinity. You don't ever ask if we would say the same thing for women, or people on the whole. Second, it seems very concerned with how men view homosexuality as part of "masculinity". I think a lot of men are reticent to seek professional psychological services, myself…
/r/MensRights28/03/15 09:27 PM
1

I think she might have meant "I'm sorry that has happened to you at the hands of people calling themselves feminists" rather than "I'm sorry on behalf of all feminists"
/r/MensRights26/03/15 03:42 PM
3

sorry you are getting downvoted - the actual story here is common as fuck (I'm a divorce lawyer) - everything is going fine until buddy gets a new woman, then bam, the hormones kick in and the woman goes for the throat. And yes, she was definitely within her rights.
/r/MensRights24/03/15 06:46 PM
9

I found this very interesting: Consistent with the DOJ studies, in contrast to declining rates of male-to-female physical IPV, female-to-male physical IPV remained stable over the 17-year period that spans the time between the 1975 and 1992 surveys What this means is, talking about violence against women IS having an effect - its working. NOT talking about violence against men ISN'T working.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 05:36 PM
8

I'd love to see you make this argument about a story where the genders were reversed
/r/MensRights19/03/15 01:47 PM
1

Oh, looks like someone needs to educate themselves.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 12:10 AM
1

Why would you come to a men's rights forum? And come on, gender wage gap? That's been debunked over and over and over. Show me one example of an actual wage disparity. Stop with rhetorical tactics and get real. You cannot legitimately be mad at men for wanting equal treatment.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 12:09 AM
3

Redditor for 16 minutes. Did your bf dump you 18 minutes ago hon?
/r/MensRights16/03/15 12:05 AM
1

lol. I know you are trolling, but could you actually point to one arena in 2015 where men come out on top? Please use actual facts, not memes or regurgitated stats from your womyn's studies class.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 12:00 AM
1

Seriously, I run my own business and have two sons under 3 - I don't have time to do this sort of thing, but if you were going to do it, I would hope you would actually read the book you are tagging first, something I'm sure some people weren't doing for this book. I posted this because its interesting that in a tiny town like mine there is this strange little tag battle going on.
/r/MensRights13/03/15 03:15 PM
2

Nope, sorry, not me. I had to learn how to do a screenshot just to post this.
/r/MensRights13/03/15 03:10 PM
1

They definitely are user created. What do you want to bet the negative ones like "conservative paranoia" are not put there by people who have actually read the book?
/r/MensRights13/03/15 03:09 PM
7

Good muslims shouldn't have a problem with these times.
/r/MensRights05/03/15 07:52 PM
1

This is a common mantra on this sub, but its a slanted reading of the Charter. It does have the effect of allowing for "affirmative action" type schemes. I'm not aware of any case law that says it would extend to this situation.
/r/MensRights05/03/15 07:50 PM
1

I mean to illustrate the point. To me that is proper argument - the dogmatic literalism I encounter in some of these discussions is an indication of low intelligence in my opinion - I think your gf would get it. Honestly though, there are 3.5 billion women in the world - hope she's worth it.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 05:33 PM
1

Take it to it's logical conclusion - if only institutional racism or sexism counts, than anything you do as an individual doesn't. You can be as racist or sexist as you like (or not) and it doesn't matter - you are racist and sexist already as part of an institution, so there is no moral content to your own direct actions to another individual. I'd follow this up with "now go get me a sandwich".
/r/MensRights03/03/15 04:35 PM
4

I'm curious what jurisdiction you are in and whether you have received legal advice about the enforceability of your agreement there.
/r/MensRights25/02/15 07:04 PM
0

If I throw a dog a bone, I don't want to know if it tastes good or not. Why do dipshits like yourself always think you are owed an argument about your poor understanding of something? Is it because of this? http://www.openculture.com/2014/12/john-cleese-on-stupidity-and-a-cornell-study.html
/r/MensRights23/02/15 10:02 PM
0

lol. It's really entertaining at this point. Is it clear yet that I'm just going to continue to mock your reading comprehension levels? I'm really not going to try to explain a comment most people obviously understood to an asshole like yourself. You are still debating a position no one took. Please, the internet is full of other idiots who will have these weird and pointless strawman debates with you, go find one.
/r/MensRights23/02/15 08:35 AM
-3

I think you may have made the mistake of thinking you and I are having a debate. You failed to comprehend my original comment and started a debate against a position that you imagined yourself. Now you are trying to make a pathetic dig at one of the most digged at professions in existence? You'd have to be much much smarter to manage that my angry little friend.
/r/MensRights23/02/15 02:17 AM
-2

I bet you are a riot at parties.
/r/MensRights22/02/15 10:38 PM
0

What kind of schmuck replies to a comment that is above his reading comprehension level?
/r/MensRights22/02/15 10:08 PM
186

He was on probation and had violations sez one commenter - as a lawyer this was my first thought. Can't verify it but that would be a perfectly good reason for the discrepancy.
/r/MensRights22/02/15 06:15 PM
7

The mental gymnastics required to follow this are exhausting. No wonder ladies are always complaining they are tired and have a headache.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 02:34 AM
0

I don't think he'll die before Monday. You sound like a very dramatic young lady. I don't think I'll be quiet on your say so lil girl.
/r/MensRights16/02/15 12:22 AM
1

What on god's green earth are you babbling about?
/r/MensRights15/02/15 06:39 AM
0

an antifeminist should understand personal responsibility IMHO. Suck it up buttercup.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 02:33 AM
21

you say that like it was accidental
/r/MensRights14/02/15 03:56 AM
2

Perhaps initially, though it looks like there would be plenty of evidence to the contrary. And I wouldn't wait around for her lawyer to argue I was an abusive husband who caused the whole thing, get dragged through the mud in public anyway and then see her take a 2 year vacation in a psyche ward for battered women before being let out anyway.
/r/MensRights13/02/15 04:57 PM
4

If that was me there would have been another body.
/r/MensRights13/02/15 07:23 AM
0

wow ha ha eh? We all make mistakes. Your mom, for example, might have invested in a better brand of condoms for the gangbang. I'm happily married to an amazing, non-crazy lady now, thanks very much.
/r/MensRights11/02/15 05:24 AM
2

It didn't really hinder my education, but it probably left me with more debt in finishing it. A summer research project that would have paid a good bit more than my summer job came up during my last degree program. I won't bore you with the details, but I read the qualifications they were looking for and I fit the bill perfectly. Like, I had specific education and experience in a pretty narrow area. I applied for one of 2 positions, for which there were a total of 3 applicants. I got an intervie…
/r/MensRights11/02/15 05:12 AM
7

You should make a post with these links so everyone sees them.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 03:23 PM
-3

Hitchen's razor applies to the more extraordinary claim. Which in this case would be that women are given preferential treatment under the law, and even more extraordinary your apparent claim that people of both genders are not caught lying on a regular basis. Get to work or fuck off.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 12:12 AM
-6

LOL "I must be new here". No, I've been here long enough to have considered leaving the sub about 50 times over stupid posts like this one. This story is actually an example of how the system treats women, even famous ones, fairly - she lied and she got caught lying and will now be raked over the coals for it. You could look right now and find a few hundred examples of both men and women doing this. And you are confusing the law, the way it is applied and the way media reports on it.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 11:39 PM
-10

As much as the academics wish otherwise, I don't see the powers that be taking that sort of idea seriously. I work in family law and a woman's credibility is just as much at issue as a mans. Women get caught or called out on this stuff all the time - this is only news because she is famous, posting it here only helps bolster an argument no sensible person needs to have in the first place. edit: I should point out I'm in Canada, and not Toronto. Your mileage may vary in the "land of the free" or …
/r/MensRights04/02/15 06:36 PM
-14

This is a men's right issue why?
/r/MensRights04/02/15 04:15 PM
2

This sort of thing was actually addressed in my middle school sex ed classes, nearly 30 years ago. I hope it still is here. (Canadian here, I know the USA has more problems with this sort of education). That is where this sort of thing could really be effective - tweens may actually not know or have thought about the complexities of consent, etc. I feel like being able to talk with adults about that stuff was valuable then. Its the university setting, among adults, 99.99% of which already unders…
/r/MensRights04/02/15 04:06 PM
3

Its simple. Don't talk to the police. Talk to a lawyer. If the police need to know something you have to say, say it through your lawyer.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 10:01 PM
17

As a lawyer I would still be concerned about this policy - the police are being empowered to push forward with charges where a person chooses to exercise their right not to make a statement to the police. Any criminal lawyer will tell you the police interview is NOT the place to try to exonerate yourself. This can't help but result in more charges going forward in cases of false accusations.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 05:28 PM
5

relevant username!
/r/MensRights29/01/15 05:25 PM
3

Im with you on a lot of the posts and reactions on here. But I disagree on this one. I think the story is giving too much time to her defense.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 12:16 AM
5

I can't imagine CNN giving quite so much air time/paper to a male's statements blaming his wife for his violent actions. She is very clearly desperately trying to throw hubby under the bus to absolve herself and the media is lapping it up - I just don't see that happening with male violent offenders.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 08:47 PM
22

17 yr old girl thinks removing the magazine means the gun is unloaded = plausible story. Prosecutors will have to prove the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. manslaughter is the sensible charge here. Men get charged with manslaughter all the time where a murder charge is unlikely to be made out.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 01:42 AM
1

This will actually be a great decision to cite when some woman tries to make a HRT complaint against a pro-male campaign.
/r/MensRights27/01/15 11:52 PM
1

Seriously? You can't be so foolish that you don't realise Berta Lovejoy is the most popular and well known "Reddit Troll" account on Youtube. Please don't embarrass this sub.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 11:33 PM
9

Sad that it takes such an extreme case to hear that people should be treated equally. I'm hoping she got that black eye while resisting arrest.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 04:58 PM
3

More evidence that for feminists, this is not about facts, this is a zero-sum culture war, and men are the enemy
/r/MensRights20/01/15 02:16 AM
6

expand, not create. That's clearly already been accomplished here.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 06:35 PM
10

Not an American uni.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 06:31 PM
2

Dalhousie is a publicly assisted and accredited University and is subject to Canadian human rights legislation, so it may not be a constitutional issue but I don't think it would be in the clear with respect to discrimination.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 06:30 PM
22

My manstake I'm totally working this in the next time I argue with a "feminist".
/r/MensRights16/01/15 06:29 PM
3

Reading the comments made me sad.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 03:44 AM
75

unless you are going to pay the man's salary I think you have to allow that this is an option.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 05:55 PM
1

He did, you just aren't too swift.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 08:19 PM
8

*citation needed
/r/MensRights06/01/15 08:18 PM
89

This is the part that really blew my top off. Men are homeless because they left the army or got kicked out by their wives? That is preposterous speculation, not journalism. I've worked with and for the homeless at times and almost every single one (male or female) is there because of mental health/substance addiction problems, often rooted in childhood abuse/neglect. I'm not going to sugar coat it - the person who wrote this article is a piece of shit.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 07:13 PM
2

I sincerely hope you are right.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 04:06 PM
3

I don't think you've been paying attention to what the younger generation is doing.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 07:21 AM
18

invert the genders here and the argument is hilarious
/r/MensRights30/12/14 11:49 PM
0

Holy shit you are as thick as the other guy. My original statement was perfectly clear. It contained the entire argument, aside from needing to note for some reason that dictionary definitions are not a complete explication of semantic meaning. If you dont get it, I dont fucking care what you think. That s the beauty of being old and crotchedy. Your mistake is thinking that you and I are collectively anything.
/r/MensRights26/12/14 12:45 AM
0

You are a dipshit college student too I guess? I don't care if you listen to me, no I don't have any social obligation to you, that's your entitlement talking. When someone misses your point hard and then wants to argue semantics just because the want to be right, fuck em. edit: Merry Christmas
/r/MensRights25/12/14 09:11 PM
1

Yep I sure could, but I'm not under an obligation to continue with this. Its xmas - I have actual shit to do
/r/MensRights25/12/14 02:36 PM
0

Fuck you are dumb.
/r/MensRights25/12/14 06:57 AM
-1

You both miss my point and posting a bunch of dictionary definitions is the sort of rude shit feminists pull. My point was not that these lies don't fit some definition of the word "myth", but rather that we should stop using that word to describe deliberate propaganda. I'm not angry at the smug shit with the dictionary - I just think he's an idiot. Our culture has debased the function of myth. "The word myth has been debased and cheapened in modern usage; it’s often used to refer to something f…
/r/MensRights24/12/14 03:05 PM
-1

holy shit stay in school bud.
/r/MensRights24/12/14 02:51 PM
-1

You are not so fucking stupid that you don't understand words carry more meaning than their dictionary definition right?
/r/MensRights24/12/14 02:44 PM
1

I don't. I think that only benefits the liars. Call it out for what it is. "Myth" often implies there is some value in the narrative regardless of the truth (often what feminists are claiming when lies are proven, as with the reaction to the Rolling Stone debacle)
/r/MensRights24/12/14 07:31 AM
17

Reading this made me think, why are we calling propaganda like "pay inequality" and "rape culture" myths? These are not "myths", they are lies, told deliberately over and over again.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 11:44 PM
5

Why would a pedophile want to kidnap a child? They crave an object to assert their feminine powers over, and that object is a man.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 04:20 PM
2

Upvoted for the term "post-evidential methodology".
/r/MensRights18/12/14 05:53 PM
8

I'm not even going to get worked up about a loser like this. "bodyforwife.com" lol.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 05:16 AM
3

Feel good story of the day.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 07:21 PM
5

Let me google that for you. It's a pretty commonly cited study. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence
/r/MensRights13/12/14 03:35 PM
2

I think you may have just explained why psychology research is absolutely useless.
/r/MensRights08/12/14 04:00 PM
1

"Outside observer"? What are you? A psych student? Or even a psychologist (you want to talk about cheap and numerous?) No sir, if you were capable of reading, I was talking about sensibly and practically considering the issue of domestic violence with respect to what sort of actions should be considered worrisome, and disagreeing that you can look only at the abuser's intent or action without considering effect on a victim or even the context of the relationship. I don't need to know any more th…
/r/MensRights08/12/14 04:17 AM
0

Yeah I also have a JD in law, fuckwad. I'm not too concerned about comparing intelligence with you. You still don't appear to be able to use "affect" and "effect" properly. As for your actual point, I understand it just fine, and I wholeheartedly disagree. So does the law, by the way.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 10:55 PM
1

You have misunderstood me. (I have a BA in philosophy BTW). I said "sensibly", not "philosophically". Looking at actions and effects separately in this context is nonsensical. Ever been bit by an ant? Did you feel the need to start raising the issue of ant violence? Are you aware of the BDSM community? Context, including the effect of an action on the the "victim" is going to be a necessary part of the equation in looking at domestic violence. Relationships are a complex dynamic, the only reason…
/r/MensRights07/12/14 09:45 PM
1

That's too much "social science" for me. I don't see how you can sensibly separate those things.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 09:17 PM
12

I think you have to consider emotional impact as well. I have been punched in the face by another strong man, a few times - physical damage: black eye, contusions, headache, etc. emotional damage: little to none, maybe even the benefit of having "manned up" in the situation. On the other hand, I had a physically abusive girlfriend years ago - standing there taking a slap, a scratch, a kick, even though the physical damage is little or nothing, is hard to take emotionally from the person you love…
/r/MensRights07/12/14 08:25 PM
6

But she is not giving legal advice or trying to explain law. She's making a rhetorical argument that being a lawyer gives her no special authority for. The law in North America so far as I know does not support "guilty until proven innocent" which is what she is advocating for accused rapists. This is a purely feminist argument, not a legal one.
/r/MensRights06/12/14 10:52 PM
6

Probably like pretty much everyone in the world does. Everyone is guilty of holding a few beliefs that are at odds with each other, not many people introspect on all their opinions enough to see if they match.
/r/MensRights04/12/14 05:01 AM
2

You honestly think there was a time when women weren't sexualizing men?
/r/MensRights01/12/14 07:28 PM
1

I won't try to say that has never been the effect of the exemption of (2), but you are giving it a simplistic and unfair reading. Plenty of men have been able to take advantage of the protection of s.15.
/r/MensRights25/11/14 08:39 PM
1

Where do you see it say that in s.15?
/r/MensRights25/11/14 08:16 PM
7

How are you being serious? Or is this a troll? She's running for a representative on a student association he pays dues to. Your argument is tantamount to one that says women should not have the vote for any representatives concerned with male-dominated activities.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 11:06 PM
1

wat. example please?
/r/MensRights24/11/14 10:58 PM
1

Like any reasonably large sub, some of the posts and some of the conversations here are bound to be a bit over the top. These will of course be the ones detractors of the sub will point out to those who don't read it regularly.
/r/MensRights15/11/14 11:32 PM
1

With all the corrections in comments to the earlier posted story on this couple, how can someone yet again mistake property division for alimony? Or do you just not care about facts, like a typical radfem?
/r/MensRights14/11/14 08:42 PM
0

Sad but true
/r/MensRights14/11/14 08:27 PM
15

What does this have to do with Alimony?
/r/MensRights11/11/14 04:17 PM
1

... and judges do not, should not and cannot base decisions on petitions. This is a sad story but this will have no effect.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 08:00 PM
4

Oh lord thank you, I can't believe people couldn't figure that out.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 03:45 PM
2

This makes me so sad. I have a son and another on the way - its terrifying to think the way our society will devalue them as they grow up. How does one justify ignoring the murder of children because they are boys? I guess the so called expert doesn't consider the murder of males to be "violence" worth talking about.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 01:08 AM
27

Well that's my rage inducement for the day. I may have to stop reading this stuff for my own health's sake.
/r/MensRights29/10/14 09:16 PM
14

If you are going to fight 5 people, regardless of who they are, you better aim to put them each out of commission ASAP. I've seen examples come through the court system of 5 or 6 boys (Tweens sometimes) beating the shit out of grown men just by overwhelming them.
/r/PussyPass28/07/14 10:24 PM
2

The facts in this case pretty clearly support a manslaughter charge - no intent to kill, and in Canada 8 years for manslaughter is actually a pretty stiff sentence. We also have a law since 2012 that remand time does not count as double time, though there are sometimes arguments for this - this would have been determined at sentencing. Still, with a year in and statutory release she might only serve another 3-5 years.
/r/PussyPass24/06/14 11:06 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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