TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

atheist4thecause Archive

View 325 posts and 3,507 comments by atheist4thecause 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)
525

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/12/15 08:10 PM
417

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/02/16 08:20 AM
406

Progressatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/01/15 07:06 AM
348

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights21/10/15 06:20 PM
342

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/08/18 01:47 PM
320

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/05/16 04:02 PM
314

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/12/15 08:13 PM
272

Fathers/Custodyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights30/05/17 07:37 PM
238

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/10/16 03:35 PM
211

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/12/15 09:33 PM
210

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights28/10/16 02:54 AM
187

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/09/21 06:08 AM
181

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/12/15 03:49 PM
144

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/11/16 11:52 AM
141

Fathers/Custodyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/12/16 02:47 AM
138

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:55 PM
136

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights10/12/15 02:05 PM
131

Edu./Occu.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/09/21 01:30 AM
106

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights16/12/15 11:34 PM
105

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/11/16 12:20 AM
100

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights27/10/16 11:30 PM
94

Storyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights10/01/15 10:30 AM
91

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights23/11/17 12:24 PM
85

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/11/19 02:17 PM
82

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/05/20 02:08 AM
82

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights29/05/17 05:23 AM
78

Outrageatheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/02/15 11:07 PM
75

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/07/16 08:35 AM
75

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/12/14 04:14 PM
74

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/02/16 02:06 AM
73

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights27/12/15 05:19 AM
73

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/07/21 07:13 AM
72

Anti-MRMatheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/06/17 04:54 PM
72

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/10/18 07:04 PM
71

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/01/19 09:59 AM
70

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights31/03/16 01:29 PM
69

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/11/16 10:57 AM
68

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/10/18 11:58 PM
68

Outrageatheist4thecause/r/MensRights22/01/15 09:22 PM
66

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/08/19 07:10 AM
61

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/06/17 05:29 AM
60

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/05/16 04:43 AM
60

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights26/11/16 04:18 AM
59

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/12/15 03:51 PM
57

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/11/17 09:00 AM
54

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights26/05/16 04:04 PM
54

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/10/16 03:58 AM
52

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights13/02/16 08:55 AM
49

Progressatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/07/19 11:47 PM
49

Unconfirmedatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/11/17 01:43 AM
49

Fathers/Custodyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/01/17 04:11 PM
47

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/12/16 07:14 PM
46

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/05/17 02:20 AM
46

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/06/15 07:42 PM
45

Questionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights22/12/14 12:13 PM
45

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights21/06/18 06:55 AM
44

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights14/09/16 10:24 AM
43

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/05/19 06:06 PM
42

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights19/05/18 11:00 PM
40

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights23/09/19 10:16 PM
38

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights30/01/17 11:27 PM
37

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/12/14 10:03 PM
37

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/06/16 09:15 PM
36

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/01/17 03:22 PM
36

Progressatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/02/18 07:33 PM
35

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/02/17 12:59 PM
35

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/11/16 05:52 AM
33

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/05/22 09:13 AM
33

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/12/16 02:17 AM
33

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights09/02/17 11:20 AM
32

Progressatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/07/17 02:44 PM
32

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/12/16 02:54 PM
32

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/12/19 12:14 PM
31

Fathers/Custodyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights21/04/17 08:26 PM
30

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/07/15 05:09 AM
30

Newsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights14/01/15 09:55 PM
30

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/04/16 01:50 PM
29

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights31/10/18 01:45 PM
29

Edu./Occu.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/03/16 02:37 PM
29

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/07/17 05:02 PM
29

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/11/16 03:29 PM
28

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights04/12/14 01:51 AM
28

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/07/16 11:27 AM
27

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/11/18 10:06 PM
27

Edu./Occu.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/01/19 01:30 PM
27

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights28/08/16 07:04 AM
26

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/06/17 06:04 AM
26

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights22/02/17 07:28 PM
26

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/12/16 08:58 PM
25

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/05/17 06:52 AM
25

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights14/10/18 07:25 AM
25

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/02/17 05:44 PM
25

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/04/16 01:36 AM
25

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/12/16 11:09 PM
25

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/05/16 03:19 PM
25

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/12/15 12:38 AM
24

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/10/16 07:12 PM
23

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/12/18 06:07 PM
23

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/04/17 02:26 PM
23

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/10/18 07:46 AM
21

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/08/15 03:05 PM
20

Questionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/02/15 12:17 AM
20

Discussionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/03/15 03:06 AM
20

Progressatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/02/18 08:45 PM
20

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/10/18 07:10 PM
20

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights30/01/17 09:32 PM
20

Intactivismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/06/16 06:11 PM
20

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights31/12/16 02:40 PM
20

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/01/20 12:23 PM
20

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/06/15 05:58 AM
20

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights21/06/16 02:40 PM
19

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/02/16 03:06 PM
19

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights14/04/16 11:24 PM
19

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/06/19 09:37 PM
18

Progressatheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/07/17 08:02 PM
18

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights21/07/15 02:42 AM
18

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights30/03/16 05:28 AM
18

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/06/17 06:16 AM
18

Edu./Occu.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/12/15 01:39 PM
18

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights09/03/16 11:46 PM
17

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights04/12/14 05:24 PM
17

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights21/08/15 09:20 PM
17

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/06/16 06:06 PM
17

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights23/01/16 01:02 AM
17

WBBatheist4thecause/r/MensRights29/01/15 01:33 AM
17

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights09/03/16 07:14 PM
17

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/10/18 04:13 PM
16

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/07/17 04:37 PM
16

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/10/16 04:23 AM
16

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights10/11/16 12:49 AM
16

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/03/18 03:09 AM
16

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/06/15 04:11 AM
16

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/02/17 03:30 PM
16

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights26/04/17 12:25 PM
15

Anti-MRMatheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/12/18 10:30 PM
15

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/11/16 08:36 PM
14

Outrageatheist4thecause/r/MensRights09/02/15 04:42 PM
14

Newsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights09/02/15 03:02 PM
14

Discussionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights30/12/14 02:28 AM
14

Progressatheist4thecause/r/MensRights31/10/18 12:15 AM
14

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights19/07/17 01:28 PM
14

Discussionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/12/14 09:05 AM
14

Progressatheist4thecause/r/MensRights21/10/19 10:20 PM
13

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/05/16 11:18 AM
13

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/12/18 08:55 PM
13

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights26/07/19 06:13 PM
13

Questionsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights10/11/15 07:32 PM
13

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/06/17 02:06 AM
13

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights13/07/16 10:54 AM
12

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/11/15 07:10 AM
12

Anti-MRMatheist4thecause/r/MensRights23/04/18 09:43 PM
12

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights27/11/16 04:34 PM
12

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/02/17 09:47 PM
12

Edu./Occu.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/01/18 07:15 PM
12

Edu./Occu.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/06/17 02:54 AM
12

Blogs/Videoatheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/12/14 08:36 AM
11

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/06/16 10:35 PM
11

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/07/17 06:57 PM
11

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/07/16 03:37 AM
11

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights22/11/16 03:53 AM
11

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights30/12/15 04:17 AM
11

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights31/05/16 08:07 AM
10

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/11/16 01:56 AM
10

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights09/10/15 02:42 AM
10

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights14/12/15 11:34 PM
10

Crosspostatheist4thecause/r/MensRights16/02/15 08:53 AM
10

Newsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/01/15 02:04 PM
10

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/06/16 09:40 AM
10

Action Op.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/03/15 10:33 PM
10

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/10/16 08:02 AM
9

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/11/18 09:25 PM
9

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights28/06/17 03:26 PM
9

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/01/17 07:56 PM
9

Discussionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights10/12/14 02:16 AM
9

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/11/17 08:44 AM
9

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/12/16 09:12 AM
9

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/01/17 04:23 PM
9

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights29/03/16 10:40 AM
8

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights30/12/16 05:09 AM
8

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/12/15 01:11 AM
8

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:24 AM
8

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/05/16 09:17 PM
8

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights04/01/16 10:45 PM
8

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights13/06/16 01:39 AM
8

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/07/17 02:44 AM
8

Progressatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/02/18 09:00 PM
8

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights13/09/15 03:13 PM
8

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/01/17 01:48 AM
8

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/12/15 12:43 AM
8

Action Op.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/01/15 11:34 PM
7

Discussionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/12/14 10:38 PM
7

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights28/06/17 01:29 PM
7

Questionsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/07/15 04:51 AM
7

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/05/16 03:57 PM
7

Fathers/Custodyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/04/16 09:50 PM
7

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/10/15 09:19 AM
7

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights14/12/16 02:21 AM
7

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights14/03/16 04:32 AM
7

Storyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/01/15 10:03 AM
7

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights26/06/17 01:33 PM
7

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights04/10/16 02:53 AM
6

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/11/16 02:52 PM
6

Fathers/Custodyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/02/17 09:16 PM
6

Questionsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights23/12/16 09:16 PM
6

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/01/16 06:41 AM
6

Questionsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/06/16 09:09 AM
6

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/02/17 03:35 AM
6

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/06/15 08:42 PM
6

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights04/11/16 01:37 PM
6

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/07/17 03:50 PM
6

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/04/16 09:12 PM
6

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/04/16 09:51 PM
5

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights30/05/17 09:10 AM
5

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/11/16 12:55 AM
5

Raising Awarenessatheist4thecause/r/MensRights31/01/15 02:46 AM
5

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights19/04/15 10:09 PM
5

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/02/17 03:32 AM
5

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/04/16 08:34 AM
5

Storyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/01/15 06:38 PM
5

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/06/16 01:22 AM
5

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/01/16 11:21 PM
5

Action Op.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights22/01/15 08:39 PM
5

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights04/02/16 08:03 PM
5

Storyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/01/15 10:40 PM
4

Opinionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/01/15 08:22 PM
4

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights30/12/14 09:59 PM
4

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/12/16 08:03 PM
4

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/12/16 02:34 PM
4

Edu./Occu.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights02/11/18 04:15 PM
4

Marriage/Divorceatheist4thecause/r/MensRights16/04/16 08:19 AM
4

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/02/17 03:15 AM
4

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights13/01/16 08:56 PM
4

Storyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights04/02/15 05:37 PM
4

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/02/15 10:27 AM
4

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/11/16 03:52 PM
4

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights09/07/17 07:49 AM
3

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights27/03/19 10:37 AM
3

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/12/14 07:44 PM
3

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/10/16 09:15 AM
3

False Accusationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/07/17 12:30 AM
3

Activism/Supportatheist4thecause/r/MensRights09/01/16 08:39 PM
3

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights29/06/17 05:52 PM
3

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/09/16 05:05 PM
3

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/07/17 01:40 PM
2

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/06/16 10:20 PM
2

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights28/06/16 08:53 PM
2

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/06/17 10:10 PM
2

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights09/06/16 10:32 PM
2

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/12/14 08:40 PM
2

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/08/16 06:48 PM
2

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights23/06/16 09:02 PM
2

Edu./Occu.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/10/18 01:50 PM
2

Newsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/03/15 05:20 PM
2

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/06/17 07:05 PM
2

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights17/02/17 08:02 AM
2

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/06/16 10:52 PM
2

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/06/15 08:35 PM
2

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights27/08/15 04:46 AM
2

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/06/17 10:09 PM
2

Opinionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights10/02/15 04:55 PM
2

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/10/16 03:09 AM
1

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/01/15 08:53 PM
1

Anti-MRMatheist4thecause/r/MensRights28/06/17 09:24 PM
1

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/04/17 06:08 PM
1

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights31/01/15 12:57 AM
1

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights21/01/15 11:44 PM
1

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/03/17 06:29 PM
1

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/06/15 05:23 AM
1

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/12/14 11:38 PM
1

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights16/02/15 08:40 AM
1

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights27/06/17 11:46 PM
1

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights23/07/17 02:36 PM
1

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights27/12/15 04:40 AM
1

Newsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights30/01/15 12:09 PM
1

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights10/11/16 08:07 AM
1

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/12/15 02:34 PM
1

Anti-MRMatheist4thecause/r/MensRights23/04/18 09:01 PM
1

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/10/18 01:42 PM
1

Edu./Occu.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/10/18 01:40 PM
1

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/02/18 11:18 PM
1

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/12/14 03:41 AM
1

Questionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights13/01/15 06:46 PM
1

Anti-MRMatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/05/16 11:08 PM
1

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights13/02/17 11:39 PM
1

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights21/04/17 09:24 PM
1

Discussionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights12/12/14 06:16 AM
1

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights22/10/16 05:06 PM
1

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/06/16 09:08 PM
1

Generalatheist4thecause/r/MensRights06/06/17 09:11 PM
0

Discussionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights19/01/15 02:26 AM
0

Legal Rightsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights22/10/16 12:25 AM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/12/14 06:07 AM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/01/16 06:42 PM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights10/12/14 11:39 PM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/06/16 01:24 AM
0

Questionsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/06/15 12:15 AM
0

Feminismatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/11/16 07:38 PM
0

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/05/17 01:51 PM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights13/02/16 11:25 AM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights04/12/14 08:49 PM
0

Opinionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/01/15 05:43 AM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/06/15 06:37 PM
0

Anti-MRMatheist4thecause/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:23 AM
0

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights04/07/17 07:26 PM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights15/12/14 06:06 AM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/12/14 04:38 AM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights23/06/16 01:23 PM
0

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights18/02/17 03:38 AM
0

Storyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/01/15 08:37 PM
0

Anti-MRMatheist4thecause/r/MensRights26/07/17 11:58 AM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/12/14 07:04 AM
0

Discussionatheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/01/15 03:07 AM
0

Storyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights03/01/15 06:03 AM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/12/14 08:27 PM
0

Discriminationatheist4thecause/r/MensRights08/09/16 10:30 PM
0

Progressatheist4thecause/r/MensRights11/02/15 01:32 AM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights27/12/14 01:41 AM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights01/04/16 07:47 AM
0

Newsatheist4thecause/r/MensRights07/02/15 04:14 PM
0

Edu./Occu.atheist4thecause/r/MensRights20/12/15 11:21 AM
0

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights29/06/17 05:07 PM
0

Storyatheist4thecause/r/MensRights25/12/14 01:10 AM
0

Social Issuesatheist4thecause/r/MensRights05/05/17 05:45 PM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights24/12/14 12:26 PM
0

atheist4thecause/r/MensRights04/12/14 12:50 AM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 3,507 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

So when a parent decides to give their kid a vaccine, that's "stealing a healthy person's choice" of a baby that is a few days old? When a premature baby is born and needs feeding tubes and life support, are the doctors and parents stealing a healthy person's choice? Stop being a total moron.
/r/MensRights29/05/22 02:17 AM
1

So far they only took her out of the public eye. That's why I set the reminder. We'll see one the final movie hits the shelf. That's not true. They have actually already removed her from scenes, and rumors are they are trying to completely cut her out. Maybe before you try to get one over on me, be patient and see what happens. Your ignorance is not my problem. The information is already out there. Amber Heard herself confirmed this under oath. https://www.indiewire.com/2022/05/amber-heard-aquam…
/r/MensRights29/05/22 02:16 AM
1

Great, so you are on the harm argument! Good Job! Suddenly you're starting to see the choice argument is bad. It wasn't that hard, was it?
/r/MensRights14/05/22 06:57 AM
1

You're right, it's not the mega famous people that everybody remembers, it's the average person. That's why millionaires, celebrities, etc. can never get Congress to do anything, but if a McDonalds employee calls into their office they suddenly make sweeping changes. Oh wait, it's the opposite. Politicians listen to the rich and famous because those people have sway over the masses. So this is EXACTLY the kind of case that shifts public opinion, and here you are not caring about progress and bei…
/r/MensRights14/05/22 06:56 AM
1

Well, that aged poorly for you. Amber Heard cut from Aquaman 2 and blacklisted from much of Hollywood: https://poptopic.com.au/rumour/exclusive-amber-heard-fired-and-cut-out-from-aquaman-2/ If you want more info: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikNuO0RieUI
/r/MensRights14/05/22 06:50 AM
1

Denial of evidence isn't a lack of evidence. Again, a stupid response. Everybody knows that there can be complications. You've been claiming that circumcision itself harms the baby. That's what you need to show. Not that in some tiny portion of surgeries where things go wrong that there are complications that cause problems. You need to show that basically every surgery causes unnecessary harm with potential trauma long-term. Talking to you is like talking to a child. You are so emotional invest…
/r/MensRights12/05/22 07:46 PM
1

It is not a good strategy to refuse to see the obvious progress.
/r/MensRights12/05/22 07:41 PM
1

I think you underestimate the power of this case, but people on here will always be blinded by pessimism. I saw the same thing when everyone was saying that it was actually bad news that the "The Red Pill" was being created because it was just going to be a hit piece. Well, it wasn't a hit piece, it changed minds, and so will this case. Learn to accept wins.
/r/MensRights12/05/22 07:40 PM
1

Why are you pretending as if they stay in that state forever? With your logic why not arrange their marriage? I'm talking about the state they are in at the time of infant circumcision, since you know, that's what we are talking about. And you literally made the argument that an infant can choose at 2 weeks and rationalize the pros and cons. That type of intervention without consent is only medically & ethically valid if it's the least invasive method for a grave personal or public health threat…
/r/MensRights11/05/22 09:05 AM
-1

Correct, it's about harm, not choice. We don't say that infant girls don't shouldn't get FGM because they didn't choose it, we say that because it harms them. This is basic 101. If it didn't harm them then it would be the religious freedom of the parents.
/r/MensRights11/05/22 09:00 AM
1

It's rather dishonest to attempt to divorce choice from this issue No, it's rather dishonest to say that a 2 week-old baby should be making medical, religious, etc. decisions. competent people have the right to all decisions about their own medical care, A 2 week-old baby is not competent jfc. What has this sub come to that people are now arguing 2 week-old babies are competent decision makers? and what the risks and benefits of any specific course of treatment are. A 2 week-old baby sleeps 16-2…
/r/MensRights10/05/22 08:31 PM
1

Male infants aren't old enough to make that kind of decision, so it's stupid to make the argument based on choice rather than harm. I've been published in AV4M as well as helped "The Red Pill" get support early on when most people on this Sub were criticizing it as a hit piece. I have the receipts, you don't.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 08:23 PM
0

We've been talking about legality this entire time.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 08:21 PM
0

Now you are changing the argument from choice of the baby to harm of the baby, which is my point.
/r/MensRights10/05/22 08:20 PM
1

That's a much better argument than the argument of choice.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 03:35 PM
1

No, and that's illegal even if the son/daughter I don't have wishes it.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 03:34 PM
1

Should a baby be allowed to tell you that he wants his arm cut off as his choice? The reason that is illegal (even if the baby wishes it) is because of harm.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 03:34 PM
-1

As I said before, it's not a matter of choice for the female baby, it's a matter of harm.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 03:33 PM
1

Irrelevant to the argument at hand, which is that making the argument based on the idea that a baby needs to make a choice to have a medical operation is a dumb argument to make.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 01:06 PM
1

It's a good thing I didn't say that then, isn't it...
/r/MensRights04/05/22 01:04 PM
-1

You forgot your reasons.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 11:49 AM
-3

Or make a better argument. Do you want to make an argument of harm or an argument of choice?
/r/MensRights04/05/22 11:49 AM
-9

The FGM decision was based on harm, not choice. You're making an argument based on choice. Now absolutely it can be argued that some of the more mild "FGM" aka circumcision should be legalized, but that's a different topic. Nobody is saying that FGM of infants should be illegal because the female baby didn't choose to have it. And of course, there are issues with forcing people to wait because circumcision is more traumatic, painful, risky, memorable and breaks religious code of many religions, …
/r/MensRights04/05/22 11:49 AM
7

What? That would mean more people care because more people care about children than adult men.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 06:15 AM
-24

Because they aren't old enough to choose...I mean I'm as much of an MRA as anybody, but can we stop making stupid arguments?
/r/MensRights04/05/22 06:13 AM
1

Good job.
/r/MensRights20/10/21 03:07 PM
5

I helped Kickstart that documentary! Cassie did an amazing job, much better than I ever would've thought to expect. I remember the struggles when she came on this Subreddit. All people saw was a Feminist doing a documentary on MRA's with funding from places like The Daily Beast. She eventually lost that funding from being fair to MRA's, MRA's learned to trust her and let down their guard, and "The Red Pill" resulted. I hope the lesson was learned that while skepticism is good, we have to also be…
/r/MensRights12/10/21 02:34 PM
2

That's a good step in a country that has a long way to go fighting it's discrimination against men due to Feminism.
/r/MensRights04/10/21 12:34 PM
2

Congrats! I work in the restaurant industry and I always put out my hands when I walk by people so they don't back into me, but you never know who is going to get upset about being touched so I always keep my hand an inch or two behind them so if they back up they run into my hand/arm and I didn't technically reach out and touch them. The fact that we have to walk on eggshells like this is absolutely ridiculous. I'm glad things worked out for you. I think people have forgotten that something has…
/r/MensRights22/09/21 09:22 PM
1

Yeah, I can tell you're just never going to understand how USSF is leveraging the women against the men to pay the men less than they were getting paid previously, not to pay the men less than the women.
/r/MensRights21/09/21 07:15 PM
0

Not for a 4-year cycle. Men make way more. They didn't make the World Cup last cycle, so that obviously hurt their revenue a lot, but typically when the men do make the World Cup they make way more and it's not even close. I don't even know why all of you guys are so hung up on commentating what this post isn't even about. It's like everybody on here just regurgitates talking points these days and their brains have fallen out. Do you have no capability to think for yourself about how the men are…
/r/MensRights15/09/21 10:39 AM
-5

1) No, they didn't offer the same thing. 2) You are conflating "more money" to sometimes mean higher % revenue share and sometimes mean more gross money.
/r/MensRights15/09/21 10:37 AM
0

A lot of people when the women are the best team in the world and the men can't even make the World Cup. That's not really the point, though. The point is how the false wage gap argument impacts men in the real world.
/r/MensRights15/09/21 10:35 AM
0

It's like you aren't even reading what I'm saying. The judge found that the women get higher %, not more gross money. Men get more gross dollars and nobody disputes that. So now the USSF is saying that they want to pass the same CBA for both, but they want to do it in a way that doesn't pay women more but pays men less. They want to base revenue share based on total dollars the women brought in. Did you even read the article?
/r/MensRights15/09/21 09:50 AM
24

They get less overall money but a larger % of the revenue share.
/r/MensRights15/09/21 09:08 AM
54

Because the US Soccer Federation wants to pay players less so they make more profit and this is just yet another way to do it, and shows yet another way Feminism negatively harms society.
/r/MensRights15/09/21 06:34 AM
36

Yeah, but now the US Soccer Federation is trying to leverage the women's pay against the men to bring the men's pay down.
/r/MensRights15/09/21 06:19 AM
17

"The way they want to solve the women's problem is not by increasing the women's income fairly," the source said. "It's by cutting [the men's CBA] down to the [women's] 2017 to 2021 deal numbers."
/r/MensRights15/09/21 06:09 AM
2

We know that men and women are at about the same levels now, any "wage gap" is due to reasonable variables, and yet women's income growth is growing extensively and has been for 50 years while men's income growth has been stagnant. We have not seen cultural changes (such as women paying their fair share on dates) and we continue to see women getting the vast majority of support in society. Stop regurgitating old talking points. We can talk about income in more than just wage gap dollars.
/r/MensRights08/09/21 08:30 AM
0

The income growth would start at what the income growth is for both, so 100% for both, and then go up or down from there.
/r/MensRights08/09/21 03:33 AM
0

Why?
/r/MensRights07/09/21 07:29 PM
5

The point was to show severe stagnation of income for men for the last 40-50 years while women have had no stagnation, and in fact, their growth has increased in that time since pre-1970 drastically. Most people on here understand that there is no wage gap that exists, so beating that dead horse wasn't my intention here. If you have no gender pay gap and you have one group that has stagnated income growth for about 50 years and another group that has increased income growth for about 50 years, t…
/r/MensRights07/09/21 07:29 PM
5

Here's the full website: https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ Basically, around 1971 there was a massive change and hyperinflation occurred. I've read a lot of it had to do with oil, which makes sense because that's when Vietnam was going on and starting to wrap up. The median income growth for women continued, but for men it stagnated greatly.
/r/MensRights07/09/21 02:34 AM
2

Jesus...the culture of, "I'm upset with you so I'm going to throw acid on you" is one of the most toxic things that exists in the world.
/r/MensRights05/09/21 08:21 PM
2

This is basically a give-up tactic to try to get the sentence reduced because she knows she has no real chance of being found not guilty. It's quite the stretch to try to say that she was running a multi-billion dollar company that got into Walgreens, but somehow she wasn't in the right state of mind to run the company because of partner abuse? I hope they throw the book at her for this.
/r/MensRights02/09/21 02:43 AM
1

Honestly, I think this is kind of a toxic mentality. We don't need women to be self-flogging themselves, we need societal changes. For instance, allowing men in domestic violence shelters whether that be in the ones that exist or getting our own that women can't go into. But to answer what you personally can do on a day-to-day basis, avoid doing some of the harmful things. For instance, at work I noticed that women with kids use their kids as an excuse to get out of work at close earlier than ev…
/r/MensRights31/08/21 12:33 AM
1

Empathy merely means that you consider things from their perspective. If you stop considering things from their perspective then you will never understand if they are meaning to be rude to you or not. You're being a snowflake. Stop it.
/r/MensRights29/08/21 07:28 PM
1

You don't have to respect saying the hard r, but I think it's disgusting to go up to elderly people and laugh in their face every time you disagree with something they say and do.
/r/MensRights29/08/21 07:27 PM
1

Your grandma has done nothing to earn respect? I can see you have done a lot to earn respect. When you have kids are you going to treat them like trash because they didn't "earn the respect", too? You are one of those people that destroys families and then complains nobody is there to help you. You are a scumbag.
/r/MensRights29/08/21 07:26 PM
-3

You sound like a real winner being proud to disrespect the elderly people in your family. This is exactly what gives us a bad name. You have absolutely no empathy for what someone went through who was born in 1940. They are going to have their perspective of how times were like when they were young.
/r/MensRights29/08/21 11:34 AM
1

Family is usually not the best place to try to change society. Family doesn't have to agree on politics to get along. There are better avenues to talk about issues and change society. I mean, it makes sense to put out feelers but given how she's responding I wouldn't keep pushing it.
/r/MensRights29/08/21 11:28 AM
1

It's crazy what you find out when you look into the technicalities of the law. I had a similar reaction when I found out that in the USA, technically speaking, it's not criminal for a woman to falsely accuse a man of rape. They can get sued for defamation, but that is only monetary and damages have to be proved. The other thing is it is illegal to lie to an officer, so if they do that then they can get hit with a felony for lying, but even that's not really for the false accusation. A woman can …
/r/MensRights22/08/21 03:50 PM
3

Ridiculous.
/r/MensRights15/08/21 09:15 AM
1

Feminism is about special privileges, not equal rights. This is a great example.
/r/MensRights14/08/21 05:37 AM
2

It's pretty ironic that so many Feminists who claim to be against sexism are overtly sexist. They've been radicalized to a great extent, and this is what happens when society teaches that one sex is the problem and the other is the victim. We're seeing the same thing with race, too.
/r/MensRights10/08/21 03:05 AM
1

I'm sorry that happened to you and your grandson. It sounds like you two have an amazing relationship.
/r/MensRights03/08/21 02:31 PM
1

I think it has more do with the dynamics of relationships and how people operate. Women will tend to start networking or protecting their networks before the breakup and that can cause mutual friends to turn on the men, who tend to internalize more and don't want to be embarrassed by the breakup. Also, it's more the women at the top that have the options. The women considered to be ugly in society have it pretty tough.
/r/MensRights30/07/21 04:48 PM
2

Men tend to get much more isolated than women after a breakup.
/r/MensRights28/07/21 05:27 AM
7

Awesome! Domestic Abuse shelters should be one of the easiest things to get off the ground. I'm happy to see them opening somewhere.
/r/MensRights24/07/21 06:36 AM
5

It's actually amazing how big of a deal the Salem Witch Trials are made out to be when so few people actually died.
/r/MensRights14/07/21 06:16 PM
1

What is wrong with Canada.
/r/MensRights06/07/21 01:21 AM
1

The problem is that you care so much about changing the narrative that you don't actually care about facts and that is what will kill more men and boys. If you want to save their lives, be honest and open about what is going on.
/r/MensRights22/06/21 09:21 PM
1

Rather than list three issues, I'd rather bring up what I think is most important to focus on. The acceptance of attacking men for being men is the biggest issue. We need to tear that down. Men's Rights is truly a Civil Rights issue because society doesn't recognize it as one. When I took Sociology in college, my Professor stressed that the biggest Civil Rights issues won't be recognized as such. The more the issues are recognized as needing to be fixed, the less of an issue they actually are be…
/r/MensRights01/06/21 10:06 AM
2

Btw, my parents were divorced my entire life. I was far better off because they couldn't get along at all. I still saw both parents and that worked out well for me. So don't feel like divorce is bad for kids. It's usually better for them than anybody else.
/r/MensRights01/06/21 09:45 AM
2

I don't know what state/country you are in, but in some states in the USA it's legal to record without the knowledge or permission of the other person in the common areas (meaning not their bedroom or bathroom).
/r/MensRights01/06/21 09:43 AM
-1

I encourage you to read the statistics in this paper. It's not what the OP claims. It's only of middle-aged men, so I don't know if your ex's Dad would qualify under what I think is 45-65 years-old. But basically, the paper is counting people put in prison and things like that as people who received "front-line" help.
/r/MensRights01/06/21 09:35 AM
1

That's because people can generally just walk out. The issue is if we allow people to get put in mental health wards against their will then that can be abused. Freedom should never be taken away lightly.
/r/MensRights01/06/21 09:32 AM
-7

You are completely misrepresenting what is actually going on. First, the population you are referring to were specifically middle-aged men (and this is in the UK), not all males or all adult males. Secondly, that 91% figure isn't of people who willing went out and seeked help. For instance, 30% of that 91% who were in contact with "front-line services" (however they define that) were in contact with the justice system (meaning police, probation and prisons). Are you really trying to convince me …
/r/MensRights01/06/21 09:31 AM
3

The time should probably be extended longer than 15 minutes so that players have a reasonable amount of time to get changed, or don't do it by time but do it by readiness. The Naomi Osaka thing is completely different and I think the issue of athletes lacking privacy (which is not only a professional league issue but at many levels, especially when the athletes are minors) exists without needing to compare it to Osaka. Osaka allegedly had depression. She didn't just skip the post-match interview…
/r/MensRights01/06/21 09:04 AM
2

You do know why.
/r/MensRights04/05/20 07:08 AM
9

What the USWNT players do and those who support them do is they argue that say in 2019 the USWNT made more money than the USMNT. That's true, but that's because the World Cup was in 2011, 2015, 2019, etc. for the women, and for the USMNT their World Cup is in 2010, 2014, 2018, etc. It's an extremely misleading and disingenuous argument that a judge sees through quite easily, but most of the lawsuit was a political stunt anyways.
/r/MensRights02/05/20 02:27 AM
13

For those who don't know, the USMNT already subsidizes the USWNT, the USWNT is the #1 funded team in the world, the USMNT is severely underfunded compared to their top competition, and yet the USWNT players were still suing US Soccer alleging sexism due to unequal payment and workplace conditions. The simple fact is that women's sports could not exist if they had to pay women as much as men. Why? Because men draw more of a crowd and make more money. The only way any women's sports could exist wo…
/r/MensRights02/05/20 02:13 AM
1

You don't have to like her to recognize positive change. Would you rather the topic exclude men's issues or include men's issues?
/r/MensRights22/10/19 04:35 PM
1

Sexual assault is not about physical strength.
/r/MensRights19/08/19 10:20 AM
2

That's even a better reason to take action. Brad Pitt is in a position to stand up for all men and against all radical Feminist hypocrisy.
/r/MensRights03/08/19 09:24 AM
4

Tim Pool discusses a Yahoo article that praises Lena Dunham for her actions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERiBOZRkM4A
/r/MensRights02/08/19 07:11 AM
1

My understanding of Massachusetts law (admittedly far from being an expert and open to having my mind changed on this) is that flashing is a misdemeanor, and citizen arrests can only take place for a felony. This means that she falsely imprisoned him.
/r/MensRights27/07/19 07:14 PM
11

WE ARE WINNING!
/r/MensRights25/06/19 09:37 PM
0

Quit pretending like you read every title. I don't need to be karma whore, and you have no evidence that's what I am doing. You claim to be an MRA, yet you falsely accuse other men of being karma whores. Some MRA you are.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 03:40 AM
-24

Not this article. Reddit would've told me if it had been posted. Nice try.
/r/MensRights02/01/19 10:44 AM
1

The article I linked is the one I intended to link. It shows the prevalence of Tweets during the elections. The Huffington Post was right up there as one of the most shared media sites.
/r/MensRights19/12/18 01:28 PM
1

1) It's not the radical Feminist activists we are trying to reach. If you opt-out of the conversation, they will win. The average person still doesn't know how the gender gap is calculated. They have a totally false idea of what it actually means. 2) Another aspect of this is that the media was portraying this study, which shows the gender gap is due to choices, as being worse than we ever knew. We must combat that propaganda with education.
/r/MensRights11/12/18 04:53 PM
1

"Gender war" is kind of a funny term. Feminists are looking for power for women. That's where this comes from. I don't think limited characters explains why she said what she said. Based on how many times she has made these types of comments and policies she supports, she seems to be in favor of exactly what she said. She is unhappy if men outnumber women in a position of power, but she is quite happy when women outnumber men.
/r/MensRights07/12/18 04:36 AM
2

Frankly, you did a lot of rambling. I'm glad you now agree that it's wrong to say that men should shut the hell up. This is not something she simply said, though, this is culture and policy that she advocates for. There's a reason the Women's Rights PAC said she has a 100% Women's Rights record, and its' not because she's working to help men who need help.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 11:51 PM
2

However, calling me sexist isn't going to fly. Holding the opinion that men should shut the hell up is sexist. I don't care if that flies with you or not, it's the truth.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 09:48 PM
5

100 years from now you'll still be able to say that women weren't in politics way back when. In modern times, women are in politics in record numbers. Telling men to shut up is wrong. Complaining about the advocacy of silencing men as a group, which is misandry, is not being ultra-sensitive, it's being intelligent. No group should be silenced whether they are Jews, Blacks, Asians, Whites, Native Americans, Latinos, women, or men. You can continue to be sexist if you want, but all I have to say a…
/r/MensRights07/11/18 05:48 PM
2

I see it as a problem that she thinks men should shut the hell up so that women can speak. You don't see that as a problem. If we differ on that, there's really no point in going further in this conversation.
/r/MensRights06/11/18 07:36 PM
2

She thinks that men need to "shut the hell up" among many other horrible ideas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lxLFVB9_Y0
/r/MensRights06/11/18 09:07 AM
1

They were promoting an anti-MRM Discord. The politics channel has since been removed, but the anti-MRA mods remain, so you can decide where they currently stand.
/r/MensRights06/11/18 09:06 AM
1

Interesting article. I found it interesting that they called men of the recent past being in a privileged position, but never use that type of argument towards women of the present. If these companies want men to come back to the workplace in a hot labor market, entice them with higher wages. One thing I didn't like about the article is that it seemed to be putting everything on the labor pool, but it didn't look at the employers at all. As the labor pool shrinks (and it does when men opt-out of…
/r/MensRights05/11/18 09:55 PM
3

You're wrong. We absolutely need to get into the elections and politics. That's what activism and political movements are all about.
/r/MensRights05/11/18 09:37 PM
5

I'm not surprised, but I am thankful. We are winning. Trump is helping us win. We need to continue to win. The MRM is still a non-partisan movement, so it's okay to embrace these changes even if you disagree with Trump.
/r/MensRights02/11/18 04:22 PM
10

Ehh._ The immigration debate from MRA point of view is a lot more complex and nuanced than your straw man(no direspect intended). 1) This is not a strawman. I've literally seen people argue that women should all be accepted and men should be taken on a case-by-case scenario. That's pretty much verbatim what the argument was. 2) Of course the immigration debate is complex. I wasn't making a judgement on the entire immigration debate from an MRA perspective. I was making a point about one argument…
/r/MensRights31/10/18 06:07 PM
7

Better worded as, "Women are drug mules, too."
/r/MensRights31/10/18 05:52 PM
3

The good thing is people like Scott Adams can usually be won over on logic, reason, and evidence. And especially someone like Scott Adams is skeptical of narratives that slander people. I never get mad at people who have a negative view of MRA's; I just try to win them over.
/r/MensRights31/10/18 01:59 PM
1

No, but you can basically start from the start and stop when you want to because it's juicy right from the start.
/r/MensRights31/10/18 01:48 PM
2

Yes. I watch just about every Periscope of Scott Adams. Unfortunately, Scott Adams has said some extremely anti-MRA stuff in the past, but I sent him some information, and he seems to be more positive towards the MRM now. I'm not totally sure where he stands on the issue these days. He used to call MRA's whiners.
/r/MensRights31/10/18 01:46 PM
2

I'm certain the intention is to relight the false accusation bonfire to stir everyone up for the midterms. I don't think so. I think it's to hold people accountable for false accusations, which MRA's should be happy about. He already did the same thing to someone in September who claimed that Kavanaugh assaulted someone on a boat. Her claims looked dodgy and large numbers of classmates would have known about that sort of thing. Yeah, her interview with I think it was NBC did everything but admit…
/r/MensRights26/10/18 02:20 PM
1

Or like defamation of character.
/r/MensRights25/10/18 10:31 PM
3

If that's the case then we definitely need a false accusation statute.
/r/MensRights25/10/18 10:31 PM
3

What's the actual punishment called? What's the potential sentencing?
/r/MensRights25/10/18 07:22 PM
5

Forgot about that. Any update on those?
/r/MensRights25/10/18 07:20 PM
0

How is this different than what I posted? It seemed like you were trying to disagree but then everything you said I interpreted as being in agreement.
/r/MensRights06/10/18 11:53 PM
-1

If there's nothing one can do to be trusted by you then what does that say about you?
/r/MensRights05/10/18 05:03 AM
1

Wow, you are quite the conspiracy theorist.
/r/MensRights05/10/18 04:57 AM
1

I'm not sure how that statement makes sense then.
/r/MensRights05/10/18 04:54 AM
3

Men's Rights isn't a single issue. It's a collection of issues. You wouldn't call Women's Rights a single issue, would you? I mean, there's a reason the "Rights" is plural and that's because there are many, many issues. Everything from suicide rate to medical issues, military issues, false accusations, paternity rights, prison rates, discrimination in universities, homelessness, help for male victims of domestic violence, and on and on and on. Also, I'd say that most MRA's also care about other …
/r/MensRights03/10/18 09:27 PM
2

Are you calling Trump the boy or Kavanaugh?
/r/MensRights03/10/18 09:21 PM
0

Are we supposed to ignore positive change just because that change is coming from a President you don't like?
/r/MensRights03/10/18 09:20 PM
0

Trump's anti-political correctness and position on a whole host of issues were a great sign that Trump would stand up for at least some issues of men and boys. As a victim of false accusations himself, he understands the false accusation issue very well. Many MRA's who have been on the Left may not like Trump (and Kavanaugh) for other political reasons, but in terms of what Trump is actually speaking about and raising awareness about, men's rights really couldn't ask for a better President at th…
/r/MensRights03/10/18 09:19 PM
3

My position is that I just want the law applied the same for men and women. Here we have the ACLU suing on behalf of women when their complaint also happens to men on the same platform. The fact that the ACLU has gendered this issue and has not included any men in their lawsuit shows that the ACLU is being sexist, and expects the law to protect women more than men.
/r/MensRights03/10/18 05:35 AM
5

And I'm sure the ACLU is going after all kinds of other companies, especially related in the beauty industry, for ads that target hiring women, right?
/r/MensRights03/10/18 12:37 AM
1

You don't have to do something specifically only for men in order to help men. For instance, you don't have to volunteer at an all-men's homeless shelter, you could volunteer at any homeless shelter that allows men in. Another thing is that I disagree with the implication of the premise. Going to volunteer at a homeless shelter is great, but that's not going to solve the problem. There's nothing wrong with being focused on creating change in a way that will actually solve the problem. That's why…
/r/MensRights03/10/18 12:11 AM
1

After years of losing, some Feminists have started to see that some of these more egregious actions are not going to work out for them. MRA's and pro-MRA forces have been growing and gaining sympathies for many years now.
/r/MensRights02/10/18 11:57 PM
5

This isn't about getting the best people on the boards, it's about women power.
/r/MensRights01/10/18 10:30 PM
1

Well, you're making that up. You don't know that.
/r/MensRights19/08/18 02:20 AM
1

I didn't see the ones you are referring to exactly. They could be trolls or they could think the kid is lucky to have gotten $2.1M when many victims get nothing. Who knows...
/r/MensRights18/08/18 01:39 PM
1

As long as most people are heterosexual, then most sexual predators of men will be women. Not necessarily, because there is more than one factor that goes into someone molesting/raping another. For instance, the more taboo certain types of sexual relationships are (such as how being gay is taboo, less now than before), the more likely people desiring that sexual relationship are to molest/rape.
/r/MensRights18/08/18 01:38 PM
0

Throw enough at the wall and maybe one will stick, right?
/r/MensRights18/08/18 01:35 PM
-12

You seem to care more about the perpetrator than the male victim. And you call yourself a Men's Rights activist. That's what I find unbelievable...
/r/MensRights17/08/18 03:34 PM
1

The money was from the school system, too.
/r/MensRights17/08/18 03:30 PM
1

... um, what? The fact that I haven't said something means you can imply I believe it? That's not what I implied. Your wall of text after that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, so we'll cut out the chaff: Wall of text? We must have different definitions of what a wall of text is. We'll see if you actually address my point this time. Your entire post is a suggestion that pushes to hire women don't make sense because women and men are unemployed at the same rates and have been since the 1980s. Th…
/r/MensRights21/06/18 11:51 AM
1

Where did I say "some graph"? Excuse me, "a graph". Again, where did I say that? Exactly. In fact, I specifically pointed out that the skew of homeless men is unlikely to counterbalance the graph. You never called homeless men a skew, and in fact, you pushed back against me even bringing up homeless men, calling it "bizarre" that I would even bring them up, despite them generally being people without jobs who want jobs. On the other hand, you call stay-at-home moms a skew, even though they large…
/r/MensRights21/06/18 10:21 AM
1

What are you talking about "some graph"? This is from the BLS, you know, the ones that literally calculate unemployment rate. I love how you complain about me bringing up homeless men who are not counted but want a job AFTER you brought up stay-at-home moms who don't want a job and aren't looking. Interestingly, you don't call homeless men a skew, but you call the mothers who don't want work a skew. That's some messed up thinking right there.
/r/MensRights21/06/18 10:05 AM
6

They aren't supposed to. This is a graph of unemployment. That never considers people who aren't looking for work. People are considered to be not looking for work even if they are looking after about 2 years I think it is. That's controversial, but what isn't controversial is saying that people who aren't wanting a job don't count towards unemployment. So obviously, stay-at-home moms (and dads) shouldn't count towards the unemployment rate. Homeless people probably should, because they would te…
/r/MensRights21/06/18 08:32 AM
6

Neither are most homeless men, btw.
/r/MensRights21/06/18 08:07 AM
-6

Do you think that the Dad is not also a son?
/r/MensRights01/06/18 06:44 PM
2

I don't actually think TRP beliefs are held by childless men. Most of them have children and are either with someone or no longer with the woman they had a child with. I think that's completely true with Feminists, though, that many of them do not have children. This has to do with personal choice and choosing career/independence over kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/18 03:59 AM
0

romantic
/r/MensRights20/05/18 10:43 PM
0

Well, I haven't been as active lately because /r/MensRights allowed intactivists to come in and called everyone that disagreed with them child abusers and child rapists while brigading the entire Subreddit, so I lost my passion. But historically, Leftists try to deny that I'm part of the Left. The friends I went to college with tried telling me that I was being manipulated, and when I gave him books upon books worth of information and studies (books like "The Myth of Male Power"), he didn't have…
/r/MensRights19/05/18 10:53 PM
2

Lawsuits are how you change policy quickly.
/r/MensRights22/03/18 03:42 AM
1

They do nothing to help men get off the street. Wrong. I've personally seen a lot of men at shelters after I took a man off the street and got him into a shelter. Last winter was unusually cold, there was fear that the homeless would freeze to death, and there was not enough shelter space for all the homeless. It's certainly true that there isn't enough space, but that's a lot different than not helping men at all. Also, the problem with a shelter is that people don't feel it's a long-term fix. …
/r/MensRights19/03/18 06:57 PM
1

The bare minimum of help. So men do get help. So you weren't being a realist. I'm glad we have that nailed down.
/r/MensRights19/03/18 03:04 AM
1

So you don't observe the part of the present where millions of men are in homeless shelters? You have taken something that is true, which is that women get more help than men, and blown it way out of proportion, acting like women get all the help and men get no help. You can't call yourself a realist when you ignore the many men that are in homeless shelters currently getting help.
/r/MensRights18/03/18 02:58 PM
1

You tried to predict the future, which is not just observing reality. You effectively made the argument that people won't want to solve homelessness because it impacts men more, and while people do tend to help women more than men, you are going overboard. People still want to help men. People want to solve homelessness.
/r/MensRights17/03/18 06:37 PM
1

It's too bad you side with pessimism over realism.
/r/MensRights17/03/18 03:37 AM
1

Take your pessimism somewhere else. It doesn't make you cool, it makes you someone I'm not interested in listening to. You lose all credibility when you are pessimistic by nature.
/r/MensRights16/03/18 11:50 PM
1

Why are you so hung up on a plan? Where did my post say there is a plan? They did print a home in Texas that passed regulations, and they mention homelessness being a worldwide problem that needs to be tackled. They'll go where the money is so if the US government gave money for them to print homes here they'd be here in a heartbeat printing homes.
/r/MensRights16/03/18 04:26 PM
1

I'm not saying that it's a bad thing, but I think we need a better idea of the actual cost for a livable unit. It's not likely to make solving homelessness impossible, it's just a matter of how much financial commitment can be brought to the issue politically. I would think there would be valid concerns about sexual assault under such conditions with a mixed-set crowd and with no existing social standards around such communal functions as exist in Japan. I don't think that's a serious enough con…
/r/MensRights16/03/18 03:01 AM
1

I'm not sure if it includes the windows or not, but you aren't really bringing up any major contradiction to my OP. Sure, the total cost may end up being more, but the 3D home printer has the potential to end homelessness. As to public bathhouses and all of that, keep in mind that homeless people have lower standards than average homeowners or even renters. If you just put up a structure with no electric, plumbing, etc., that would still be a major upgrade from being homeless.
/r/MensRights15/03/18 11:46 PM
6

The article talks about how they have created a 3D home printer that reduces the costs from $6,500 to $4,000 (as well as speeding up printing time from 15 days to 12-24 hours), so that will help. As to where this money will all come from, that's still up in the air. Some possibilities are charities, crowdfunding, and the government. If we assume we need 3.5M homes in the USA, and each one costs $4,000, the total cost of solving homelessness in the USA would be about $14B. That sounds like a lot,…
/r/MensRights15/03/18 03:59 AM
2

Per usual, the headline put the stress on the verdict rather than the perpetrator. If she was a man, the headline would likely be very different.
/r/MensRights12/02/18 11:22 PM
0

I run a support service for men in my region. My guess is because of us there are as many men using counseling as there are women. You seem out-of-touch with reality, and you're giving yourself way too much credit. It's disturbing to me that the ones geared towards getting men therapy are so-out-of-touch with the problem of men not going the help they need. I don't believe that old saw about men feeling ashamed about seeking support. I think toughness and pride play bigger roles, but shame proba…
/r/MensRights05/02/18 03:30 PM
0

The Progress is electing a President who is openly not a Feminist, is willing to voice that out loud, and has battled against Feminists.
/r/MensRights05/02/18 03:20 PM
4

I would say men die from suicide more mainly because there is less help for men, or if there is help, they are less likely to take advantage of it for various reasons, one being stigmatized in society (or fear of).
/r/MensRights01/02/18 09:02 PM
0

If I'm here speaking where you are also and disagreeing with me, how am I in an echo-chamber? Most people on this Subreddit hate Trump, so how is being here talking about how Trump has helped men and MRM causes speaking to an echo-chamber? I'm literally doing the opposite. I'm glad you are done with me so I don't have to hear your delusional response.
/r/MensRights01/02/18 08:37 PM
1

The tax cuts I referenced were specifically disadvantageous to men Wrong. First, you failed to recognize any way in which the tax cuts will benefit men millions of men. Secondly, on alimony, only about 20% of alimony received was being claimed. That's why they moved it to the payer, to help against fraud. It's true that men who pay alimony will no longer be able to deduct that amount, but that's only going to impact the alimony payers who pay in, many whom make a significant amount. This cost wi…
/r/MensRights01/02/18 08:34 PM
1

Speaking of imagination, can you quote me where I said Trump or Feminism were your friend? I'd appreciate that.
/r/MensRights01/02/18 08:01 PM
0

I meant What's depressing is you thinking someone isn't an ally simply because they haven't solved every issue men face within a year. Talk about unrealistic. So: I'm not look for perfect fixes, but addressing the issues and taking some steps would be a nice start. Trump hasn't done any of that during his time as president from what I can see. You're complaining that every issue isn't fixed. Yes, some issues remain unsolved, but some issues have been solved, which you have admitted, and you have…
/r/MensRights01/02/18 07:50 PM
1

Your analogy is meaningless to me.
/r/MensRights01/02/18 07:37 PM
3

I wanted to add that every age group of men dropped their unemployment rate as well in 2017.
/r/MensRights01/02/18 07:36 PM
-1

Yeah, DaVos did away with the Dear Colleague letter, but that’s just one thing. Yeah, just one minor thing. You know, something this Subreddit had been talking about significantly for years, with very little hope that policy would be overturned. Yeah, just that little one. This is definitely something a non-ally would do. plenty of what he’s doing is actually harming men (e.g. the GOP tax plan making it so alimony payers have to pay taxes on the alimony they pay to their ex-spouses, championing …
/r/MensRights01/02/18 07:28 PM
0

What's depressing is you thinking someone isn't an ally simply because they haven't solved every issue men face within a year. Talk about unrealistic.
/r/MensRights01/02/18 07:20 PM
-1

He's also done nothing to address men's suicide rates, genital mutilation, the education gap, or the medical gap. I wanted to address these more closely. Trump has done a lot on men's suicide rates, and improving the economy is the best thing he could've done. Men feel valuable when they are making money, and the unemployment rate for all groups, including men, has gone down. Wages are increasing, the stock market is increasing, all the economic confidences have skyrocketed, tax cuts have put mo…
/r/MensRights01/02/18 06:41 PM
1

I've responded to everything you've said.
/r/MensRights01/02/18 05:57 PM
-1

Betsy Devos reversed the "Dear Colleague" letter, not Trump. Give me a break. He appointed her and supported the decision. To say that a President's cabinet member did something and not the President is possibly the stupidest argument you could make. Trump talked about divorce screwing dad's during the campaign to get votes. You are imagining that Trump doesn't actually believe what he's saying. He has only been in office a year. Just because he hasn't done something doesn't mean he's not an all…
/r/MensRights01/02/18 05:57 PM
1

And you don't see how the Dear Colleague letter reversal helps fight against false accusations in universities?
/r/MensRights01/02/18 05:44 PM
-2

You told me you hadn't heard of Trump talking about a single issue this sub regularly deals with. One of the most significant issues this sub has dealt with is false accusations based on the Dear Colleague guidance. Trump reversed that, brilliantly putting a conservative woman in the position disarming many attacks of sexism on this issue. The article I posted about was Trump saying he's not a Feminist, in this sub talks extensively about the problems Feminism causes for men. Trump is helping to…
/r/MensRights01/02/18 05:42 PM
1

If Hillary Clinton was elected, the main competitor to Donald Trump, there is no way that Dear Colleague letter gets reversed. Clinton campaigned on being Obama's term, and as the first female President as well as her long history of fighting specifically for women, she would have focused on women extensively while in office.
/r/MensRights01/02/18 05:32 PM
0

Feminism is the strongest force fighting against Men's Rights. To have a President openly stating he is not a Feminist is a big deal for changing culture, and that does make President Trump an ally. He may not be an MRA, but he is most definitely an MRA ally.
/r/MensRights01/02/18 05:30 PM
3

Oh, give me a break. And to say it's assault to get a man aroused and then not have sex with him is a bit ridiculous. Lets not go crazy off the deep end like the SJW's.
/r/MensRights17/01/18 01:13 PM
3

Blue balling is figure of speech that effectively means not to finish a man after getting him worked up. It has nothing to do with physical abuse. Basically being a tease.
/r/MensRights17/01/18 10:41 AM
1

When it impacts them or someone they know, suddenly the "believe the victim" goes out the window. Suddenly everything we've been saying the MRM is justified: Leave the scene, don't continue the encounter or have future encounters, go to the police, allow the accused a chance to voice their side, etc. Kinda funny how that works, now if only the people at CNN wouldn't have been fighting to condemn so many men merely because they were accused. Make no mistake Ashley Banfield and CNN: This is what y…
/r/MensRights17/01/18 10:40 AM
4

Talk about taking my words out of context. Screwed as in going to lose the lawsuit, not go bankrupt.
/r/MensRights10/01/18 04:20 AM
6

It seems to me that Google is screwed, although I say that cautiously as the law can be weird and the seemingly obvious not so obvious. But here, they were so open about their discrimination against Whites and males, especially White males, that I don't know how they could save face. And the Google employee is an intelligent guy that has money, so he may want to avoid settlement to reinforce national precedent. The problems came from upper management themselves, though, James Damore actually had…
/r/MensRights09/01/18 09:11 PM
-2

I'm worried that making names private will be harmful to Democracy. The UK can do what it wants, but in the USA, I prefer that both the names of the accused and accuser are public rather than neither.
/r/MensRights18/12/17 07:04 PM
1

Remind me of your answer: How do you know the rater is accurate?
/r/MensRights11/12/17 01:38 AM
1

So you are going to avoid the question again. Okay.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 06:27 PM
1

I didnt say the people who made the graph cant be trusted. Ah, okay. Silly me thought you were actually going to answer my question about how you know the creators of the graph are correct in their judgement...Care to answer that now?
/r/MensRights10/12/17 06:23 PM
3

Well no, its still a measure of reliability and bias. It's not an accurate measure. You said yourself that the people who made the graph can't be trusted. Furthermore, bias and reliability are not necessarily connected. If one outlet has a major slant but they are open about that slant, they are likely to be more reliable than an outlet that hides their slant and pretends to be in the middle when they really aren't. You can take nearly that entire graph and shift it Left.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 06:05 PM
3

That's awesome. I think the original article still holds the key principle, though, which is that a man cannot give up his parental rights through a contract. I'm glad he got a reasonable judge. The sticking point seems to be the government in regards to benefits. We need changes in law there. I can't really blame the woman for going after him if the government told her that's the only way she can get benefits, but the government shouldn't be saying that. They should be going after the other les…
/r/MensRights10/12/17 05:39 PM
2

How did he win the case?
/r/MensRights10/12/17 05:12 PM
1

He should fight for visitation rights or to gain full custody then.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 05:07 PM
3

Im not saying the people at the apex are bastions of truth, they are mostly corporate controlled western propaganda outlets Great, so we can throw out the graph.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 04:34 PM
3

1) That chart is not about credibility. 2) How do you know the chart is accurate?
/r/MensRights10/12/17 04:14 PM
7

Breitbart has a bad reputation to those on the Left. CNN and others like it have a bad reputation with those on the Right. There is no usable media outlet if you start playing these games.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 01:35 AM
1

Breitbart is absolutely reliable. They are forced to issue far fewer corrections than sites like CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, etc. People can always make arguments of bias, because if we only list Leftist MSM sites like you want us to then people can say we have Leftist bias. The way to be the most unbiased is to use sources on all sides. Yes, some of us, like me, love Trump. Some, like you, don't. That's what gives this Subreddit the ability to say that it's not just on one side of the political aisle o…
/r/MensRights10/12/17 01:32 AM
1

The Gateway Pundit is not just a single person, it's a group of people. Furthermore, there were 5 citations. On top of that, The Gateway Pundit often links to MSM sources, such as CNN, as this link does. Complaining about sources here is really pathetic. It's pretty well-known that Gloria Allred's client made up the statement and pretended Roy Moore wrote it. Are you seriously denying that?
/r/MensRights10/12/17 01:28 AM
8

It seems to me that Gloria Allred should be disbarred, but admittedly, I don't know how the process works. From a laymen's eyes, I saw a lawyer who consistently takes on high profile cases and then goes about trying to win them in the public. She was recently taken off a case for what her client felt was incompetence. Now this, where she seems to have either known or been extremely negligent with a key portion of her case, in a way that could possibly impact the outcome of an an election. This i…
/r/MensRights09/12/17 08:44 PM
1

This exposes Feminism well, and will make the public more sympathetic to the MRM.
/r/MensRights06/12/17 03:30 PM
1

So the image is saying that women should think men are scum internally. I would expect nothing less from The Daily Beast.
/r/MensRights04/12/17 08:22 PM
1

True. Sorry about that. I'll have to consider alternative ways my titles can be read more closely in the future. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 03:37 PM
1

I am intolerant of people who are ideologically driven I already asked you, what ideology are you accusing me of having? I honestly have no clue what you are talking about. You just made up all this stuff about ideology and religion. It's unhinged, really...
/r/MensRights24/11/17 05:22 PM
1

What do you have against religious people? You sound very intolerant.
/r/MensRights24/11/17 05:01 PM
1

Yet if you change jobs or stop working when you owe alimony you go to jail. Not if you make money in some other way. You don't have to work, you have to make payments. Yes. Stupid question. Okay, so if people who choose to work, choose where to work, and then go to work have bodily autonomy and people who are forced to carry a pregnancy lose bodily autonomy, how then is alimony a good counter-argument to abortion rights? Ok lets go back to the beginning since this obviously went to fast for you.…
/r/MensRights24/11/17 04:27 PM
2

So your argument is since some people dont have to work to make money, its ok to force people to work to make money. Well that's surely your opinion. It is horrible, but you knew that. It's my argument that there are other ways to make money than to work, shown by those who make money without working. No one is forced to work where I'm from. I dont live in a communist country. So perhaps thats our big disconnect. I'm from the us btw. So we agree? Yes... Yes... Okay, so if you choose where and if…
/r/MensRights24/11/17 02:44 PM
2

Irrelevant to the people who do. Which is irrelevant to the people who don't. Some people work and some people don't, which shows that making money does not necessarily force someone to put time into doing so. Furthermore, people get to choose where they work, and need to support themselves anyways. Does supporting ones self also force someone to lose bodily autonomy? No, because that's a choice. You choose where to live. You choose where to buy groceries. It's not a loss of bodily autonomy if y…
/r/MensRights24/11/17 01:07 PM
1

Forcing someone to preform labor under the penalty of jail is either right or wrong. If that labor is gestating a fetus or getting a job, I don't see how that changes things. One doesn't need to perform labor to generate revenue necessarily. Furthermore, extrapolating this out, paying for anything then becomes a loss of bodily autonomy, which is ridiculous. Pay your rent? You have no bodily autonomy! Yeah, that's convincing. Well considering you've yet to come up with a convincing counter argume…
/r/MensRights24/11/17 12:46 PM
1

I'm not trying to draw a similarity between abortion and alimony, except as it pertains to the right of an individual to choose what to do with their own body. Yeah, and while that may sound good, it's not going to be convincing to others. The ways in which Alimony and Abortion impact the body are completely different as well, and Alimony doesn't really impact the body, it impacts the wallet. In only using it to debunk the idea that that is a principle proponents of abortion hold. And it doesn't…
/r/MensRights24/11/17 07:50 AM
1

Intersectional Feminist Gloria Steinem talks about the beginning of Intersectional Feminism in her book "My Life on the Road" so check that out. Also look into her connections to the CIA, which sounds a bit conspiratorial, but it's actually true. Steinem was effectively propped up by the CIA.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 12:32 PM
14

The more money women make, the more Feminism is starting to fight against Alimony. Alimony is still a net gain for women, so Feminism isn't completely against Alimony yet, but you can find anti-Alimony articles written by Feminists. I don't think your response is a good one because you are completely changing the subject from abortion to Alimony, which aren't even close to similar issues.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 12:27 PM
1

I am not Scott. lol
/r/MensRights19/11/17 05:32 PM
1

You should really read "Win Bigly" because your comment is way off base. In American elections, candidates typically go through primaries. Trump went through the Republican primaries, and he had to beat out like 16 or 17 other candidates. He didn't merely have one opponent. Furthermore, he came in originally at under 5% and had to persuade a lot of people to win the nomination. He then had to further persuade an unfavorable electoral map for Republicans, and he did so by winning states Republica…
/r/MensRights18/11/17 11:50 PM
2

If their arguments weren't persuasive they wouldn't have so much support.
/r/MensRights18/11/17 11:45 PM
1

How much influence will the biology have, though? We overcome it every day. "Molding it" is just another phrase for reducing biology's influence.
/r/MensRights18/11/17 11:45 PM
7

My understanding is that it has a significant impact. This is an obstacle for getting people on board with men's rights. This doesn't mean we can't overcome this biology. There is also a nurture impact within our society that amplifies this. The more we get people to think about these issues consciously rather than subconsciously, the less impact biology and societal norms will have.
/r/MensRights18/11/17 10:14 AM
1

He's a Progressive reporter so he's trying to maintain his worldview that female accusers should be believed, but also that he should be believed in this situation.
/r/MensRights17/11/17 04:55 PM
6

Nice meme.
/r/MensRights17/11/17 02:01 AM
11

I think people who called Laci Green "red pilled" were speaking more on a scale of greys than of black and white. The mere fact that she recognizes many feminists are radicals is a sign that she has woken up to some extent. But I agree that she is far from being completely woken up.
/r/MensRights17/11/17 01:51 AM
1

Another common tactic here. Anybody who disagrees with the common set narrative is a troll. Thanks for reminding me why I'm leaving this cancerous Subreddit. And nobody will learn anything because you guys have no introspection ability and you're in an ingroup/outgroup mentality that doesn't allow you to critique the ingroup.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 05:30 AM
-6

Yup, you hit it right on the head. /s
/r/MensRights27/07/17 05:28 AM
1

I doubt that.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 04:11 AM
0

Whatever. Bye.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 04:10 AM
1

I think there's a difference between responding in my inbox and staying on the Men's Rights Subreddit. I'm not subscribed anymore and I'm not going to the Subreddit. I'm simply responding in my inbox.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 04:09 AM
0

Every time you respond you pop back up in my inbox.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 04:07 AM
-1

You're conflating two things: You use the term "it" which actually refers to the deletion of posts but then you are conflating that to me talking about the deletion of posts. You could have easily seen my complaints about what the mods had been doing. I did everything I could to wake this Subreddit up, but this Subreddit simply doesn't seem to care enough about boy victims of sexual abuse from pedophiles. Whatever. I'm out. Have a good one.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 04:06 AM
1

And you feel like telling me over and over and over. That's telling. It really shows what this Subreddit has come down to.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 04:03 AM
-1

Imagine that, you have not seen the deletion of posts. lol
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:59 AM
1

How many times are you going to say this?
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:59 AM
0

Don't worry, I already unsubscribed.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:58 AM
0

Why would I care about that? This Subreddit has become utter shit.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:56 AM
-2

Yeah, you made that clear with your last post.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:55 AM
-2

lol. You are an amazing compilation of what is wrong with this Subreddit.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:51 AM
-2

Keep protecting those pedophiles.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:48 AM
-5

No, it's you that you said you loved the dramatic exit.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:46 AM
-2

I'm not against rights for men, I'm against the corrupted men's rights movement.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:45 AM
0

I've been raising this concern for months. Suddenly you care? Nobody has cared for a long time.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:38 AM
-9

I'm glad you are happy to chase off MRA's. But don't worry, the mods will likely delete this in no time.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:36 AM
2

The mods have a long history of deleting my posts exposing boy victims of pedophilia. They've bounced between calling it an egalitarian issue that doesn't belong on men's rights and a "political issue" that doesn't belong on this Subreddit. I simply can't handle the corruption and low ethical standards of the mods any longer.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:35 AM
-2

It's amazing you guys are all still brigading every statement I make. Apparently, anything I say is worth downvotes from the 3 Intactivists talking in this conversation. But don't worry /u/mensmod, they aren't brigading together or anything.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 03:19 AM
-1

It's amazing the dots you try and connect. You're all over the place. Holy shit, dude.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 02:28 AM
-1

You make me laugh so hard.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 02:25 AM
0

Oh, wow. You totally added something I haven't heard a million times, Captain Obvious.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 01:25 AM
-1

You saying I have a victim complex as you create victims in the same message. lol
/r/MensRights27/07/17 01:24 AM
0

Ah. Well then they are the same.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 11:41 PM
-2

Children are property and not human beings. Understood. Children are not property, however, parents are legally responsible for their children. In fact, parents can be held responsible in court for the actions of their children. You also believe mothers should choose to cut their daughters. Because men and women are biological the same. The clit is the same thing as the penis. Illogical, or you're sexist. Or you are offering a false dilemma.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 11:16 PM
0

Thanks for informing me.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 11:15 PM
-2

I respect the father's right to choose, who is the only man in this situation.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 10:39 PM
0

Occam's Razor doesn't apply in the way that you are trying to use it. Just because an explanation is simple doesn't mean it's more likely to be true.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 10:38 PM
-1

Wanting mens rights to be honored is not propaganda. Lol. I can't think of a dumber statement than this. smh
/r/MensRights26/07/17 10:31 PM
0

Ah. Well, if it's simple it must be true.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 10:30 PM
-1

Have you ever stopped to think your logic is flawed? The reason you guys all have the same argument is because you all get your propaganda from the same place.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 09:41 PM
0

The mob continues! Funny how you don't realize you guys are defeating your own argument.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 09:41 PM
0

Because that's what I said. #Intactivism #DeepThinkers #Sarcasm #Propagandists
/r/MensRights26/07/17 09:39 PM
0

If you say so.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 09:38 PM
-1

I successfully poked a hole in the narrative so here comes the swarm with everybody saying the exact same thing! #Intactivism #Propaganda
/r/MensRights26/07/17 09:23 PM
-1

Everything is so black and white to you guys. lol And at what point is someone beyond recovery? These aren't obvious points, which is exactly why the loved ones choose and not the government.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 09:22 PM
-2

You guys all say the same bullshit. Yeah, because a wife can't pull the plug on her husband (or vice versa), right?
/r/MensRights26/07/17 08:26 PM
-1

lol
/r/MensRights26/07/17 07:55 PM
-2

You are a fucking liar, and your past comments show you are a fucking liar.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 07:47 PM
-1

lol
/r/MensRights26/07/17 07:21 PM
0

Read the title of the post. This post was never about a debate about having boys circumcised. Besides, read your comment. You are looking to "win" a debate. You're close-minded with your mind made up.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 07:15 PM
0

lol
/r/MensRights26/07/17 07:08 PM
0

I'm not going to go round and round on this. This post is not about arguing about the merits of Intactivism, it's about brigading of Intactivism. You can find my opinions and arguments on men's rights if you want to go look it up.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 06:47 PM
-1

The key here is that they are acting in the best interest of both. Their identity is Intactivism and they literally speak negatively of men's rights. Bodily integrity is a basic human right that is denied men. Human rights are not objective and can often conflict. Parental right to choose over the government is also a basic human right IMO. It is a men's rights issue. So are father's rights. Also, Intactivists want to ban 14 year-olds from choosing circumcisions. In fact, most want to ban 15-17 …
/r/MensRights26/07/17 06:24 PM
-2

What an analysis from an Intactivist. A very thoughtful, detailed response. Thanks!
/r/MensRights26/07/17 05:18 PM
-5

Some radical Feminists use real blood, but many do not. Sure, you disagree with the issue being fought for by Feminists, but the tactic is the same. I'll add that there's nothing more dangerous than authoritarians fighting on the behalf of others. That's what SJW's do and that's what Intactivists do. They trample individual rights, and they try to force policies onto the population from the top down.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 05:07 PM
-1

Some MRA's might. The key is that they are not acting in the best interest of men's rights, they are acting in the best interest of Intactivism. They will silence MRA's and attack the MRM if they need to in order to further their Intactivism agenda. They trample father's rights and there are many other issues in the details to deal with, not to mention that some MRA's don't agree that MIC is wrong at all.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 05:05 PM
-2

Oh, excuse me, only Intactivists are allowed to break the rules. Go fuck yourself you stupid cunt.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 02:50 PM
1

No. The fact is that there are multiple interests here. By banning parental choice, you take away the father's right to choose. The real problem here is that you are being an absolutist, and being an absolutist shows weakness in your argument, not strength. Then again, you aren't an MRA.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 01:30 PM
-1

To show the idiocy of your response.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 01:24 PM
1

My problem is brigading, which has not been accepted in the past, but is being accepted now by Intactivists who claim not to be MRA's, a part of the MRM, and do not even respect the MRM. These Intactivists do not have the interests of the MRM in mind, either, and this brigading silences MRA's who do have the best interest of the MRM in mind.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 01:20 PM
0

You can't be an MRA if you are against father's rights.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 01:18 PM
0

but I did specifically say I was a men's rights advocate No, you said "maybe" you could be considered a Men's Rights Advocate. I define MRA as Men's Rights Activists typically, and given that you were only a maybe for advocate and no for activist my response was not a misrepresentation of what you said.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 01:13 PM
1

None. But I have a problem with non-MRM Intactivists brigading dissenters, including me.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 01:11 PM
-15

Who said anything about feminists? Besides yourself. I never even mentioned the word. I brought up Feminists, and you claimed I was trying to associate, which I was not. If you weren't referring to me trying to associate Feminists and Intactivists, what groups was I allegedly trying to associate?
/r/MensRights26/07/17 12:59 PM
0

Sorry, I thought you were an Intactivist. I'll update the post accordingly, although I did not misrepresent you. You said specifically you were not a Men's Rights Activist.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 12:53 PM
0

No. In fact, that's what I'm arguing against. When Intactivists come here and brigade the heck out of dissenters, it can add up to a 10 minute delay. In fact, I'd argue there are very few issues where there is more of an echo chamber on this board than the Intactivism issue.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 12:51 PM
-2

On no other issue is there the kind of downvoting that happens like on Intactivism issues. And in fact, there are other angles about the rights of the patient to choose. For instance, should a 14 year-old be able to choose to be circumcised? Intactivists say no, they must be 18 years-old. Furthermore, there are fathers rights to discuss, and the religious rights of men and boys. There are discussions about cultural vs legislative strategies as well. So being pro-Intactivist's most common narrati…
/r/MensRights26/07/17 12:18 PM
0

Are you an MRA? I'm assuming so. So what problem do you have with me expressing my thoughts as an MRA on this issue?
/r/MensRights26/07/17 12:06 PM
-11

Are you an MRA?
/r/MensRights26/07/17 11:47 AM
-33

1) I didn't associate Intactivists to Feminists, but nice try. I pointed out a common principle accepted by one and not the other. 2) I think that Intactivism and Men's Rights are separate with overlap. 3) Intactivism has lots of money with literally the easiest case to make ever, and yet it has not been able to ban male infant circumcision, which is it's goal. Intactivists certainly do have a toolkit of bullshit propaganda, though.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 11:39 AM
-59

Yup, this method of putting images of blood on one's private parts is right out of the Feminist playbook that people have argued so adamantly against. But here comes the downvote brigade for dissenting. Intactivist tactics do a number on the reputation of MRA's. But let me guess intactivists, now I'm a rape apologist for saying this, right? These people can fuck off.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 10:24 AM
1

Watch the video. I go over it.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 01:47 AM
1

What do you mean? He admitted to it.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 01:46 AM
1

What do you mean? I talk to people. How do I spam? I couldn't think of a statement more factually inaccurate.
/r/MensRights25/07/17 03:29 PM
3

You didn't go back far enough. Go back further. I had all kinds of posts deleted.
/r/MensRights25/07/17 03:00 PM
3

You mean the links you guys deleted? Ask your moderator friends. They know all about it.
/r/MensRights25/07/17 02:35 PM
3

No, it's not just a simple question. You do this every fucking time I post about exposing sexual exploitation of boys. You do it with no other issue. You and other mods have a long history of censoring stories relating to sexual abuse of children. So no, I'm not going to settle down when your actions protect pedophiles and harm sexual abuse boy victims of pedophiles.
/r/MensRights25/07/17 02:31 PM
3

Yeah, you always say this. BECAUSE THERE ARE MALE VICTIMS. WHY IS IT THAT EVERY TIME I POST ABOUT CHILDREN BEING ABUSED YOU QUESTION HOW IT'S RELEVANT TO MEN'S RIGHTS? The moderators putting a special sort of restriction on exposing child abuse of boys absolutely disgust me.
/r/MensRights25/07/17 02:27 PM
2

I identify as female and therefore can't be drafted during wartime.
/r/MensRights25/07/17 01:44 PM
0

A key tell for cognitive dissonance is when you proclaim to know what someone else is thinking.
/r/MensRights23/07/17 01:51 PM
-7

She's talking specifically about a situation where a man was crying. lol Jesus, is this what the MRM is going to come down to? What ever happened to caring about real issues? This Subreddit is going downhill fast as men's rights becomes more mainstream. I can't say I'm proud of what is going on here anymore.
/r/MensRights23/07/17 01:31 PM
-3

I've heard men say this about women and have agreed with them. You know, those annoying women that cry at absolutely everything...
/r/MensRights23/07/17 01:29 PM
-2

Even if I grant you that, this only means she attempted to clear up her original comments. Wouldn't this be far more problematic if she doubled down? It seems to me like she tried to clear up misunderstandings. Is this original sin or something, where once something is said it can never be clarified?
/r/MensRights23/07/17 01:28 PM
-13

Ehh...I think you may be overreacting. She's obviously not being polite about it, but she does caveat her message by saying "it depends on the circumstances". She alludes to the idea that she's talking about men who cry about even the smallest of issues. It's also no surprise that a woman wants strength out of a man because women tend to try and get their security through men. I'd have to know more about how she drew her lines of what is worthwhile crying over and what isn't, but overall, I thin…
/r/MensRights23/07/17 12:38 PM
1

It's not that it's just the middle-aged and older-generation, but if you look at the % of people that believed the wage gap for the older generations compared to the youngest generation coming up, the tide has changed drastically.
/r/MensRights21/07/17 03:47 PM
2

Back when Feminists controlled the narrative completely, they pushed the wage gap myth. It was then mainstreamed into the Democratic Party. Feminism has fallen off quite a bit and fewer Feminist policies are being mainstreamed into the Democratic Party now, but the wage gap myth is a remnant of the path, so the Democrats are tied to it, and many of the older generation still buy into it.
/r/MensRights21/07/17 05:02 AM
2

Well, there are many ways to look at this. If your goal is to advance men's rights as in the Men's Rights Movement, you could support publishers friendly to men's rights such as A Voice For Men (just as an example), men's rights documentaries such as "The Red Pill" when that was on Kickstarter (just as another example), etc. But if you care about advancing a particular issue, then maybe there would be a non-profit pro-father law firm or something to that extent, or you could choose something lik…
/r/MensRights19/07/17 12:48 PM
4

If they are going to have strict speech rules, it's at least good that they applied their rules the other way this time. Unfortunately, when it comes to speech like misandry/misogyny, they still have a huge double standard.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 01:16 AM
1

Btw, some people may get confused. There are many different names for state legislatures. That's why you see House of Representatives in Florida and Texas and State Assembly in New York and California. These are all equivalent chambers, though. Also, Senators are fewer and tend to be elected for longer terms, so convincing a Senator would carry more weight than convincing a Representative. For more info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_legislature_(United_States)
/r/MensRights12/07/17 06:08 AM
0

1) This is absolutely a tribal argument. 2) This has nothing to do with my post, so the fact that it's being brought up is telling. Who cares how Carlson acts in regards to interviewing others? This is about the Feminist he is interviewing. 3) You claim an "easily observable fact" and then proceed to give me your opinion.
/r/MensRights10/07/17 04:12 AM
1

That's fine. I'll cover men's rights as long as the content is popular. If it's not popular, I'll be forced to move onto other subjects. Right now it's relatively popular.
/r/MensRights10/07/17 02:59 AM
1

You are an individual. You do not represent my entire audience. Again, if it annoys you then you can simply click the sourced video.
/r/MensRights09/07/17 11:19 PM
0

Because taking the information and just reposting it without creating new content is what is known as copyright infringement. But the less you guys are supportive the less I'm able to cover men's rights issues. The more supportive you guys are the more I can cover them. Also, I put all the sources in the description so if you don't want to hear me talking you can simply click the link to the source. lol
/r/MensRights09/07/17 07:01 PM
2

I don't care about your tribalism.
/r/MensRights09/07/17 04:50 PM
1

Well it would help if the mods didn't delete posts about child pedophile victims, especially relating to government, for being "political" and "not a men's rights issue" both victims are both male and female. Those moderator actions will forever be a stain on this Subreddit. To get to the main point of your post, though the reason is this: It takes people 5 seconds to read a meme. It takes them 5 minutes to read an article. More people see the meme, more people upvote the meme, and so memes get …
/r/MensRights07/07/17 09:44 PM
13

I'm sick of these types of stories being painted as the mother having fear of the father having custody. This is about control. The mother would rather her kids dead than the father get custody because of the control. They focus on the father in a negative fashion.
/r/MensRights07/07/17 12:45 AM
0

It's actually common for pedophiles to make pretend relationships with other adults to develop relationships with children. They will even go to the extent of marrying that adult, because it gives them open access. Consider this: You take your kids to a friend's house without a problem. The parent of the other child eventually starts a relationship and maybe gets married to the other person. You aren't going to think twice of that stepparent is watching your kids over at their friend's house, ar…
/r/MensRights06/07/17 11:43 PM
5

He's right.
/r/MensRights03/07/17 01:22 PM
7

Why, just today, I murdered 5 women, raped 22, and stabbed 41. Well, and the thing is you didn't do it for any particular reason other than you could, obviously.
/r/MensRights02/07/17 09:43 PM
1

You're just making stuff up now.
/r/MensRights02/07/17 12:38 PM
2

I can tell you didn't watch the video, because I do talk about how some areas will look to hold onto Obama Administration policies. The thing is that court precedent has already been set that these university kangaroo courts won't hold up and will open themselves to lawsuits over due process. As far as "looking at" the policy, that in itself is a shift. This is coming from the executive branch where nothing official has to be released. It's about how they will treat and go after certain cases, a…
/r/MensRights02/07/17 03:24 AM
0

When the OP's argument is that he can't collect because he's a man, comparing how this issue effects women becomes relevant. Now, if he took that part of it out and just mentioned that he had troubles getting child support from the mother, then I'd have no issue here and would not compare it to how tough mothers have it collecting child support.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 10:39 PM
-1

This post is about how men can't collect on child support because they are men, when in reality, this is a problem whether one is a man or a woman. You admit yourself the difference is "slight". I think it can be a men's rights issue that fathers have a tough time collecting on child support in the egalitarian sense, but it's not because they are fathers.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 09:22 PM
0

Ok, what elective cosmetic medical procedures are you not permitted to get until you're 21? Be specific. So you agree that a debate is worthwhile? Because that was my point. Sounds like the original rationale for universal circumcision in the US back in the day. Maybe, but that's not why boys are being circumcised today. I've heard this argument, and in Middle Africa it actually has some limited merit. Yes, many of the studies are done in Africa, but it's also recognized in the USA by medical pr…
/r/MensRights01/07/17 09:19 PM
0

Also stop referring to intactivists as one monolithic body. There are diverging opinions within the movement. #NotAllIntactivists #NotAllFeminists -- Intactivists, more than most groups, have similar views. Are there some divergent opinions? Sure. But I'm going off the majority of what has been explained to me, mainly on this Subreddit.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 08:39 PM
-1

Sure. What other permanent nonreversible elective cosmetic procedures are people allowed to get while under 18? Be specific. For the sake of argument, I argue people should not be able to get a circumcision until 21. You say 18. Is this not worthy of debate? Why are you arguing for it to be a younger age? Who's the pro-circumcision one now? You see my point? There will be people more and less strict than you, not just less strict. That's why we need debate for nuances. Regarding the ban vs cultu…
/r/MensRights01/07/17 08:23 PM
2

And as soon as we get another Democrat President, a similar or worse policy will be installed. That's unlikely given we have legal precedent showing what universities is not legal. Though, considering every useless Dem Senator will vote against such legislation, I'm not too optimistic. That's not really true. Bernie Sanders has bounced between being I and D, but he has basically always been a D (even as an I he caucuses with the D's). He has argued that sexual assault/rape accusations should be …
/r/MensRights01/07/17 08:12 PM
1

You're welcome. So where do you want to meet?
/r/MensRights01/07/17 08:07 PM
1

No, I'm not threatening you. You asked if I wanted a meet and greet. When I asked you if it was a threat, you implied that it wasn't. I then said yes, I will meet you, and asked where you want to meet. Now you don't seem to be willing to meet me.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 08:04 PM
0

You are showing yourself to be a coward. But sure, lets meet up. Where do you want to meet?
/r/MensRights01/07/17 07:58 PM
0

How is it paranoia? You literally said "meet and greet". What is the "greet" part of the "meet"?
/r/MensRights01/07/17 07:41 PM
0

You're trying to "validate" your "authenticity" by threatening to attack me in a "meet and greet"? How does that validate authenticity?
/r/MensRights01/07/17 07:38 PM
8

Because it shows that both men and women struggle to collect on child support.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 07:36 PM
0

Are you threatening me? Do I need to call the police?
/r/MensRights01/07/17 07:29 PM
-1

A ban is more effective. Cultural changes are slow and not certain Do you have evidence of this? There is a lot of evidence that bans don't actually achieve the desired result. Look at the ban on drugs, alcohol, abortions, etc. Convincing people that something is wrong so they voluntarily opt not to do something may be slower, but it's far more effective than forcing someone not to do something because it's against the law. You can say cultural changes are not certain, but you don't recognize th…
/r/MensRights01/07/17 07:28 PM
-1

You cannot make someone a victim of a crime you did not commit. I wasn't talking about a crime. It's not a crime to attack the potential mates of circumcised men for appreciating them, but it is harmful to circumcised men. I'm not sure where you got this idea that I was talking about a crime. It should be obvious that condoning circumcision in any way is a detriment to the cause, and is a very shallow-minded thing to do. Is it "condoning circumcision" to say that we should attack the problem on …
/r/MensRights01/07/17 07:21 PM
0

Is a ban more effective or is voluntary cultural change more effective? If a ban, what age should men be allowed to choose? Should men be able to choose at all? Should insurance cover adult circumcision, which is more expensive, and will raise premiums on the population? Things like that. The fact that you had to ask that question for examples of potential details to be debated is telling.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 06:51 PM
0

Are you threatening me?
/r/MensRights01/07/17 06:48 PM
-4

If talking about the human rights violation "also harms circumcised men," No, I said attacking women who accept and prefer circumcised men is re-victimizing circumcised men, because you are attacking their potential mates. Your "logic" sucks. I love how you completely change what I said and was talking about, and then you complain that my logic sucks. Well, maybe that's because you created a huge strawman.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 06:46 PM
-2

There's a lot to be debated about the details of how we should go about that, but Intactivists want to pretend like there's one easy and correct way to do it without having any sort of debate. Who gives a shit about details, right?
/r/MensRights01/07/17 06:42 PM
0

Okay. Fuck their preference. But who cares if that is their preference? Attacking the procedure is one thing, attacking women who prefer circumcised men is quite another. It also harms circumcised men, which are men you see as victims. So way to further hurt victims you claim to care about, you dishonest loser.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 04:41 PM
2

No True Scotsman Fallacy
/r/MensRights01/07/17 04:39 PM
-3

Well, you're also not challenging intactivists, so you wouldn't be as likely to see it.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 04:38 PM
0

Largely secular cultural reasons, and because people believe, as do American doctors, that circumcision prevents certain medical problems.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 03:13 PM
-3

It's completely logical. I just think that Intactivists should own that more and stop denying this fact.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 03:11 PM
1

I said proposal IDEA. You aren't advocating the banning of circumcision? I'm pretty sure you are. And you've state that you you would go as far as wanting death for those who circumcise, so you certainly would want the law to put people in prison for it, would you not? Amazing how you refuse to admit your ideas of a legislative ban would push people into prison after effectively already admitting this much.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 03:10 PM
-1

So now you are saying that under your legislation proposal idea, those involved in circumcision wouldn't go to prison, it's just that they should? Jesus, you guys need to make up your mind. You guys are all over the board on such a simple point.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 02:58 PM
-3

"Religious origins" does not mean that it's done today mainly for religious reasons. Why are you trying to put a square peg into a round hole so badly?
/r/MensRights01/07/17 02:51 PM
-4

My point is that I've been arguing this is a part of what Intactivist policy would be about, and Intactivists have a history of denying that to me. At least you are honest about it. I've been told no imprisonment would happen, only fines.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 02:48 PM
-3

KEK
/r/MensRights01/07/17 02:47 PM
1

It makes sense to limit an article to campuses because there is a very specific problem on campuses stemming from a very specific letter from the government threatening Title IX action defunding universities. There are false allegations off-campus, too, but those can be talked about in other articles.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 01:30 PM
-14

So some women have a sexual preference for a circumcised penis. So what? Jesus, this is like when Feminists complain that men have sexual preferences of women. Also, in the USA, circumcision is mainly done for purposes other than religion. It's amazing. Your comment is made filled with misinformation, but you towed the circumcision line, so hey, +27 and counting. I hate to see the MRM starting to get away from truth and onto propaganda. Kind of sad.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 12:52 PM
-4

"Mr. I'm-going-to-block-you" -- It seems I was right about you being a dishonest fuck as well.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 12:44 PM
-36

The truth comes out about the agenda of those who want circumcision banned. It would include imprisonment of those involved, such as doctors, not just fines. I feel a bit vindicated. Inc massive downvotes because intactivists can't handle truth bombs.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 02:27 AM
0

Judging by this, I made the right decision not to click.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 01:47 AM
1

I think you need to inform yourself on the definition of pedophile.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 03:20 PM
-1

I don't know what that link is and I'm not clicking, idiot.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 08:52 AM
0

Driven by the greater good for others in the same way that SJW's are. It's pathetic.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 08:52 AM
-1

Why don't you stop being obsessed with the penises of little boys of other people's children. It's absolutely disgusting.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 08:51 AM
0

LOL, dumbass.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 08:50 AM
2

FSM makes for an awesome avatar. Why not?
/r/MensRights29/06/17 10:26 PM
0

I'm so hurt that you blocked me. Thanks for doing me the favor.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 09:14 PM
1

I'm not sure why you concentrate so much on the Nordics/Scandavians. It's like me going to "Scandanavia" and telling them they should circumcise because Americans do it. lol Sounds like the intellect of a handicapped kangaroo, doesn't it?
/r/MensRights29/06/17 09:14 PM
1

Almost like insults don't make for very good arguments, right dumbass?
/r/MensRights29/06/17 05:09 PM
0

Is this how you sleep at night, asshole?
/r/MensRights29/06/17 05:08 PM
1

Ok... After this I'm one with your disingenuous bullshit. lul
/r/MensRights29/06/17 05:08 PM
1

It's pretty arbitrary in the context of when people can actually make decisions. But see, you don't care that you will take away the ability of people to get a circumcision that could potentially make a reasonable choice. In fact, you prefer it that way, because you want no circumcisions at all. That's your real goal. You're an idiot.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 04:34 PM
1

That's true then, right? No. You're dumb.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 04:32 PM
1

You have blood coming from your wherever you fucking idiot. Here's what you said: as it is only performed by ethnic minorities.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 04:13 PM
1

They don't, so the parents do. I mentioned a 15 year-old. Under your ban, you wouldn't allow a 15 year-old to choose. The age you allow circumcision is arbitrary. You're a moron.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 04:12 PM
1

"The majority You didn't say the majority you POS liar.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 03:13 PM
1

Ethics are certainly incorporated into the job of a doctor. Now you're attacking doctors and pretending like you have medical knowledge while attacking me for not being a doctor. Holy shit you are a fucking loser. I'm sure you are an expert in the US justice system as well. Holy fucking shit. as it is only performed by ethnic minorities. More lies.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 02:43 PM
1

But apparently you are not able to give me an example of when it is necessary We're not jumping to conclusions at all here, are we. xD The doctors in the USA have decided it's not abuse, we should defer to the experts on medical information rather than intactivists, and until that changes, parents should have the right to choose over the government. ;)
/r/MensRights29/06/17 02:24 PM
1

Firstly, how someone with your Username goes around calling people morons is beyond me. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL That's where I stop reading. Why even continue the post after that? God damn you are a stupid idiot retard kangaroo.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 02:21 PM
0

No, that would be your Government. You're trying to create a policy for all to abide by, and the vehicle you are using is the government. The government is an entity, but it has no mind. People within society come up with the ideas for laws, which you have come up with/support. So you want to have the government enforce your idea on the entire population. It would be a one-size-fits-all approach like no boy can be circumcised until they reach 18. But who decided that 18 was the right age? You di…
/r/MensRights29/06/17 02:19 PM
1

This comment gave me a good laugh. :)
/r/MensRights29/06/17 02:14 PM
1

By banning the child from making the choice. What a brilliant strategy! 15 and want a circumcision? You can't because /u/KDulius says no! Why? To give you your choice! lolololol
/r/MensRights29/06/17 01:11 PM
-1

You did a great job.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 01:10 PM
-1

Good one, loser.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 01:10 PM
1

LOOOOOOOOOOOL
/r/MensRights29/06/17 01:07 PM
1

If some forms of FGM are less bad than MGM than it's not fucking equivalent you dumb fucking idiot, is it?
/r/MensRights29/06/17 01:04 PM
0

I'm not a penis owner, but what in the world could circumcisions be 'necessary' for? That's not your determination to make unless it's your baby. What makes you think you should determine for all babies? Jesus Christ you are a power hungry monster.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 01:04 PM
0

almost all infant circumcisions are unnecessary - otherwise you'd see the same circumcision rates irrespective of which western country you are looking at. That you think this is a fact is hilarious to me. Thanks for making my morning retard.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 12:07 PM
0

Keep equating females and males as if they are biologically the same because you have the intellectual prowess of a handicapped kangaroo.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 12:03 PM
-1

"Unnecessary" by your determination you fucking psycho. I've never had "such a strong pro-circumcision stance". Stop making shit up you liar.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 11:56 AM
-4

Lets falsely equate males and females because we have the intellectual capacity of 2 year-old. Sorry for insulting you 2 year-olds.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 11:54 AM
1

Because you think you're the person that should determine for other people's children. What a sociopath.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 11:52 AM
-4

I defend parental rights. You defend imposing your decision on everybody else, banning any child from getting a circumcision. You don't even understand that infant circumcision is actually different than adult circumcision, but facts don't matter to propagandists like you.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 10:51 AM
-3

When he'll remember the operation, expenses go way up, complications go up, etc. Yeah fucking brilliant, dumbass.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 10:48 AM
-8

Psychopath
/r/MensRights29/06/17 09:56 AM
-29

Whatever you say, moron.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 07:39 AM
-20

This isn't anything changing you idiot, circumcision has been unpopular in the UK for awhile and always needs parental consent.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 06:34 AM
1

That's because legally it's not rape unless there is penetration. Being forced to penetrate isn't legally rape. The problem is the legal definition of rape, but honestly, the CDC isn't responsible for the definition of rape. Now, if they are speaking colloquially, they should call it rape.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 06:28 AM
-1

You're a fucking psychopath.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 10:19 PM
2

Well, you could ask a lawyer or maybe the police on who to contact. You could try to file a complaint with the FBI as well. Is there an FBI field office near you?
/r/MensRights28/06/17 08:23 PM
0

Sorry, I'm still not following. People want to ban circumcision of non-adults so that it is the parents' choice? A ban takes away the choice of the parents. They would also set an age limit that takes away the choice of the would-be patient, because they will set the age at 18 years old banning those who are 16 from choosing to have a circumcision, for instance.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 04:43 PM
0

Oh, yes. That's how the entire ban is justified to give the choice to the would-be patient.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 04:32 PM
3

I wasn't sure what flair to put it under, and I may have mis-flaired it. I put social issues because fathers would be ostracized for this kind of activity while mothers are praised. What flair would you suggest? I'd consider changing it. I could've gone with Feminism because of how these Feminist publications have a double standard, but I felt this was broader than that. I could have put discrimination, but that seemed too serious, and while technically accurate, might give people the wrong impr…
/r/MensRights28/06/17 02:24 PM
8

It's so bad I can't even comprehend stuff like this.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 12:34 PM
-7

Father's rights are as well, and the right for father to make decisions for his son over the government is one of those. Also, I've said it a million times, you are advocating preventing the child from choosing themselves.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 12:06 PM
1

Ok... He had an averse reaction to a sleeping pill they gave him because he probably asked for it as couldn't sleep. I doubt NK will just give out free drugs. Exactly! Their story makes no sense. I'm going to end it here because this is as far as I'll get with you.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 08:37 AM
1

We're not getting anywhere. You can't prove your point without a false equivocation that I'm not going to accept. Have a good day.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 08:18 AM
0

Thank you for proving my point.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 08:15 AM
-1

I'm not here to discuss FGM. Everything I've been telling you is that males and females are different making the procedures different, and we should not equate them.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 08:14 AM
1

I was under the impression that he fell into a coma due to complications from food poisoning. They claimed it was a sleeping pill that was tainted, not his food. No, I don't know why he went. Then stop saying he made a stupid decision because whether he made a stupid decision or not has something to do with why he went there. This means 1.5% of Americans who visited NK behaved suspiciously or illegally enough to be detained. What's your point? No, it means that 0.1875% of Americans who have gone…
/r/MensRights28/06/17 08:12 AM
0

Yes, some people who are circumcised (or mutilated) see themselves as crippled and others don't. I agree. What's your point? If there was a woman who had no problem with the procedure that happened to her, why in the world would you go up to her and say that there is actually something wrong with her? The only thing that will accomplish is damaging her. Most circumcised men don't feel "sexually crippled" (the term you are using) from being circumcised, but of those that do feel they are, their s…
/r/MensRights28/06/17 07:52 AM
2

You don't have to take them at their word. They provide links and citations. Now apply this logic to the other side, which you attack as biased. Bias alone is not a good attack. Warren Farrell has had a an enormous impact on the MRM. That makes the MRM biased to some extent. Does that bias make our information wrong? Of course not.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 07:43 AM
-1

Penis is X, Vagina is Y
/r/MensRights28/06/17 07:41 AM
-1

What is wrong is what was done to them (if they were children when it happened). Well this is a step in the right direction. Now if only most intactivists spoke like this. There is nothing wrong with you, lol...Stop trying to make it personal. This is about a broad policy, it's not about me or about you. That's the important point. Then make that case to the parents, and stop trying to think that you are a better decision maker for their children than they are.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 07:34 AM
1

They found no signs of torture on his body. If you can not provide proof that contradicts the NK version of events, I have no reason not to belive what I read from reputable European sources. The torture were the pills they gave him, which they themselves admit they gave him pills. So to be clear, you are buying the narrative that North Korea gave Otto Warmbier sleeping pills to help him sleep while incarcerated? I have a bridge to sell you. The punishment he received was not outside of law. 15 …
/r/MensRights28/06/17 07:32 AM
-10

Sorry, I'm talking about male infant circumcision, not FGM. Males and females are not biologically the same. The procedures are not the same. The issues should not be conflated, and should be debated on their own merits.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 05:50 AM
-1

So the Wikipedia article is biased, but INTACTWIKI isn't?
/r/MensRights28/06/17 05:45 AM
1

Yup, I can't tell you how many times I have stated there is nothing wrong with someone who is circumcised and and intactivist comes along to "correct me" to let me know that there is something wrong with that person. At first I thought that maybe they just didn't see the damage they are doing to many circumcised men, but now I realize that they simply don't care as long as it furthers their agenda.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 05:42 AM
-5

Perhaps calling us circumcised men "sexually crippled" isn't quite correct, it just helped to show the analogy. What you have admitted to here is pushing propaganda. This is the problem with intactivism today. The common strategy is to put out any information that intactivists think will win over others rather than pushing out the truth. Can't you see how this hurts the cause of intactivism?
/r/MensRights28/06/17 05:38 AM
-5

1) Stop pushing intactivism through extremism, such as calling people rapists, rape apologists, sexual abusers, etc. 2) Stop advocating for legislation that would ban the choice of the patient to choose until an age you deem fit while simultaneously claiming you are for the patient's choice. It's a clear contradiction. 3) Try to win people over culturally, by convincing parents that it's not in their child's best interest to have a circumcision. If intactivists used this strategy I bet the amoun…
/r/MensRights28/06/17 05:35 AM
0

That's not really true. They certainly don't accept Trump supporters for who they are, and they don't accept the religious for who they are. It's basically accept a certain political point of view that falls on the Far Left.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 05:09 AM
0

I couldn't agree more.
/r/MensRights28/06/17 05:04 AM
1

Was being tortured and subjected to drugs over and over part of the law in North Korea? Last I checked, it wasn't. He was supposed to have 15 years of hard labor, but instead they killed him with drug experimentation to try and find out if he was CIA. Your argument makes no sense. You are trying to say that it's wrong to use the words "he got what he deserved" but that he did actually deserve his punishment because he broke the law. Then you ignore that the "punishment" he received was outside o…
/r/MensRights27/06/17 07:08 PM
1

I'm sure if a NK citizen committed the same crime, they would do the same time. And that would be wrong if they did. And it would be wrong for professors to say that the NK citizen got what they deserved.
/r/MensRights27/06/17 03:44 PM
7

You said no one was using it No I didn't. I said that you were the only one to have used it on this post.
/r/MensRights27/06/17 06:58 AM
15

I disagree. She has mainstreamed a lot of information, but she doesn't come close to Warren Farrell IMO. I mean, just look at "The Myth of Male Power". It's most of what we talk about.
/r/MensRights26/06/17 08:07 PM
47

Nobody has had more impact on the substance within the Men's Rights Movement than Warren Farrell.
/r/MensRights26/06/17 02:47 PM
7

So one guy used the term "cuck", and you had to go outside of this topic to find it? I mean, I'm sure you could find a few others. It's far from prevalent on this Subreddit, and people can use the terms they like. I think the issue is more when people are trolling and not trying to engage in serious conversation, which I admit, these often overlap. Lets not eliminate words from the dictionary, though.
/r/MensRights26/06/17 01:36 PM
9

Interestingly, you are the only person on this page at this time that used that word.
/r/MensRights26/06/17 11:32 AM
5

1) The double standards have got to stop, especially in moderating. People on the right get kick and banned for being "extreme" but then when intactivists call me a "rape apologist", "child abuser" or even "pscyhopath" they aren't banned. All that happens to them is the thread gets locked, they get a talking to, and the victim of their attacks also gets a talking to as if the victim did something wrong. And why does this double standard exist? Because almost all of the mods fall on the Left and …
/r/MensRights26/06/17 11:26 AM
2

fair enough
/r/MensRights26/06/17 12:03 AM
2

You edited to say that you aren't blaming men for anything. I never accused you of that. You then went on to again mention that a woman can sit down on a toilet without looking when the seat is up, and my argument was that even if that's true, that's the woman's fault and she should change her actions to look at the seat before she sits down. It's less about you and more about how society expects men to lift a seat just in case rather than expecting a woman to simply look at if the seat is down …
/r/MensRights25/06/17 10:49 PM
2

and you don't look. And who would be at fault for not looking?
/r/MensRights25/06/17 09:48 PM
10

Obviously, the sign is stupid. But even if you consider whether the sign will actually help or not, it won't. Many men won't raise the seat if it starts down, meaning it will get pissed on far more than if it is up. So not only is it a stupid, discriminatory stance, but it will accomplish the exact opposite of what they want for women.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 09:47 PM
-1

Well, when in doubt, you should definitely be the person that decides over the parents for children, and if people don't listen to you then they government should definitely use guns to put those parents behind bars, leaving children without parents, creating delinquency, and harming the child long-term. Prohibition has been extremely successful in regards to alcohol, drugs, and abortions, too.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 09:29 PM
0

Yeah, but that video also wasn't scouring for the worst looking/sounding videos, either.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 09:23 PM
3

He was actually in the top of his. He won an award, in fact, that was only given out to the top 7% who were Freshman. Losing Otto Warmbier was actually quite a loss, because he was quite an intelligent person. Unfortunately, few will actually look into the facts to try and understand why he went there and all of that. My guess is you didn't even know he didn't go directly to North Korea, he went to Hong Kong, and then from there he went on a short tour in North Korea. There's a lot of confusion …
/r/MensRights25/06/17 05:38 PM
1

Oh, is it? So you aren't advocating banning, say a 15 year-old male from being able to choose a circumcision? I'm pretty sure you are. And are you advocating to ban the father from being able to make a decision for his child? I'm pretty sure you are. Laws don't grant rights, they take them away.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 05:28 PM
-5

Oh yeah, I forgot, the old argument where you claim you're fighting for a man's right by advocating the banning of the patient to choose circumcision until an age you choose, and you also advocate banning his father from making the choice for his son. But yeah, I'm the one advocating against men's rights here. /s
/r/MensRights25/06/17 01:43 PM
0

I do not self-identify as an intactivist.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 01:41 PM
1

He actually died by his family but he was put into a coma for a year before being given over to the family. I get your point, though.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 12:10 PM
0

Actually, there are anecdotes form people who are interning and watching as well. Many medical professionals get paid by salary and not by procedure. Also, it's not completely true that it's done without anesthetics because there is a method of using anesthetics, but the problem is that this raises risks from an alternative procedure which stops blood flow taking away most of the sensitivity if not all. It's less risky and equally unpainful (or even less painful).
/r/MensRights25/06/17 12:09 PM
-3

No we don't. We actually have evidence that the baby may well be in extreme pain. Empirical evidence strongly suggests that babies have lower pain thresholds than adults, so maybe the blood drawing is excruciatingly painful for the baby. Okay, so lets stop taking blood from babies as they are in extreme pain when getting blood drawn. #IntactivistsArentExtremists
/r/MensRights25/06/17 11:58 AM
-4

We'll just ignore the fact that I said the first baby stops crying and falls asleep before the last baby is strapped down, which happens before the procedure. But hey, when intactivists are speaking, your comment is a +3 and my comment is a -3.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 11:56 AM
9

His crime was that he tore down a political poster. You think that he deserves a 15-year hard labor punishment for that? Sure, he broke the law, but the punishment was unreasonable. And then he was put into a coma. And then an idiot professor said he deserved it, citing that he's a White male. You're defending that professor.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 08:20 AM
-11

I've known it is a painful procedure, but I had never seen it actually done until they showed it in that documentary The Red Pill. That short clip should be enough to make everyone against circumcision. You're conflating seeing a baby crying with seeing a baby in pain. They aren't exactly the same, and babies often cry while not in pain. Furthermore, you go to the extent to make the judgement of how much pain the baby is in. Maybe it causes pain, maybe it doesn't, but the scene in "The Red Pill"…
/r/MensRights25/06/17 08:03 AM
1

I'm extremely happy DeVos & Co. have decided to reverse the policy stemming from the letter sent out to universities threatening to defund them under the previous administration for the sexual assault issue. That was so damaging.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 04:04 AM
1

She's willing to "take the risk" of other people dying. Surprise, surprise. The non-stop advocating of killing men and assassination attempts and threats against Scalise, other Republicans (the shooter had a hit list), and Trump is absolutely ridiculous. There aren't just jokes going around, people are actually following through on a lot of these.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 03:28 AM
9

It's Feminist. It was made by a woman for women and that was pushed by the director extensively. They also took one of the actresses from the new Ghostbusters.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 03:01 AM
3

Yeah. As I explain in the video, the film's premise is a girl's night out where they kill a male stripper.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 03:00 AM
5

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that means "The Red Pill" has reached the #1 film on Youtube at some point in USA, Sweden, and Australia, right? Anywhere else?
/r/MensRights24/06/17 03:39 PM
4

Not to mention sex alone isn't cheating. There are plenty of people that have "open relationships" knowingly, and are okay with their partners being with other people. They have threesomes, foursomes, swing, etc. From what I've read, experts believe that swingers are about 2%-25% of the population. 2% sounds low, 25% sounds high, and I'd reckon it's somewhere around 10%-15%. If true, that makes up a huge portion of the around 20% of people who think sex isn't cheating on both sides.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 06:30 PM
1

Here's a little insight: http://www.annemariewaters.org/sharia-law-and-middle-class-feminism/
/r/MensRights21/06/17 03:48 PM
1

You said that last time.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 03:41 PM
1

Because all of those people that joined your Discord, right? Peace out. And remember, it's an intactivist server not a men's rights server. Stop lying about it.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 03:27 PM
1

You speak like "act like an asshole" is an objective statement. It's not. I was defending my position from attacks from like 6 people at once, all of who were repeatedly calling me names. NONE of them got banned. So that's how banning only works when you take a position the moderator doesn't hold. There's a reason my comment was upvoted multiple more times than it was downvoted. There's a reason your Discord isn't liked. You don't know how to run one. You shouldn't go banning people just because…
/r/MensRights20/06/17 03:12 PM
1

You mean by calling the people who were calling me child abusers and rape apologists idiots? And let me guess, all of the intactivists remained, right? So your selective enforcement was 100% ideologically driven. Don't pretend to be for men's rights when you're only for your specific version of men's rights. It's not much of a loss as the discord is utter garbage and you guys don't know how to run it, but it really shows your bias. And you banned me when I wasn't even around so I had no chance t…
/r/MensRights20/06/17 03:02 PM
2

The_Donald is not an Alt Right Subreddit. It's for Trump supporters in general, which I am. I also voted for Obama twice. How many Alt Righters voted Obama twice? I also don't hold Alt Right views. They believe in an ethno-state, I don't. They use IQ to an extensive extent to form their worldview, I don't. I mean, go right down the list and you can see I don't hold any of the major Alt-Right views. In fact, I've criticized the Alt-Right. Your interpretation is your interpretation, but I'm not to…
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:33 AM
2

So let me get this straight. Oh, this is going to be a treat. This was a coordinated attack on an Alt Right figurehead. Lol. It's just too funny that literally your first comment that you are accepting as fact is completely wrong. It was a coordinated attack on Baked Alaska's bodyguard, while the bodyguard was not around Baked Alaska, it had nothing to do with Baked Alaska, and it had nothing to do with being an Alt Right figurehead. I haven't read the rest yet, but I'm not looking forward to it…
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:14 AM
2

NO IT WASN'T. THIS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH BAKED ALASKA.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:05 AM
2

Ah, so he was simply being descriptive when he used the term "White boy" and "cracker". lol If he was a woman the chances are that he never would have been attacked.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:53 AM
1

The Trump Administration is actually going as far to change the entire civil rights policy, so it will very quickly have a widespread impact on universities. It's even better than a one-by-one dismantling, although the courts are overturning individual cases, which is also important.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:50 AM
2

Says the person who hasn't even looked into the story. So far you thought these things about the story: 1) That Baked Alaska was stabbed. 2) That the bodyguard was acting as Baked Alaska's bodyguard at the time of the stabbing. 3) That this was just some random attack on the street. Stop doubling down.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:48 AM
2

Well, male bodyguard assaults could easily be considered falling within men's rights, as violence against men obviously falls within men's rights, but even that doesn't fit the extent that this case fits men's rights. And you still don't seem to realize that the bodyguard was not acting as the bodyguard of Baked Alaska at the time of the attempted murder. But who cares about facts, right?
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:46 AM
5

Take your ideological garbage elsewhere. I'm not Alt-Right, but unlike you, I see ALL men as worthy of falling within men's rights. It's not a requirement to agree with my ideological leanings (which is a liberal Centrist) to be covered by men's rights. This man was targeted for being a White man. It's not just that he's a man, they literally called him a "White boy" during the attempted murder.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:44 AM
1

You read articles that are being covered on Youtube.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:42 AM
1

lol
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:42 AM
2

Okay, so you didn't read it. He wasn't even with Baked Alaska. Funny you have such strong opinions when you don't even watch the video or read the article. Baked Alaska wasn't stabbed. WTF are you talking about?
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:33 AM
3

If people are being targeted for being men then yes, by all means, post the attacks.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:32 AM
6

Of course he's not MRA, but what does that matter? His bodyguard is a man that was targeted for being a White male. How does that not fall within Men's Rights?
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:32 AM
1

Being stabbed for being a White man falls within the rights of men. lol Clearly you are allowing partisanship to blind you. You speak of the situation as if you know it, and you don't, so you just make up narratives that fit your stance.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:26 AM
2

Did you even read the situation? This man had a coordinated attack on him. They purposefully smashed his vehicle with another vehicle and then got out and proceeded to try and murder him because he was a White male. Yes, that is the cornerstone of men's rights. You know, that whole silly right to life issue.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:25 AM
9

She didn't endorse Phillip Davies at all. She said that he is a proponent of the idea that you achieve equality by treating everybody exactly the same, but the she went on to explain why that is a bad thing. She believes equality is brought about by treating groups of people differently.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 09:57 AM
7

This man was literally stabbed for being a "White boy". That's what they told him right before they stabbed him. I'm not Alt-Right, but I'm not 100% sure if this guy is Alt-Right or not, but even if he is, do men's rights not extend to cover men within the Alt-Right? Do men's rights discriminate based on political ideology? I don't think so, and any time a man is nearly killed for being a "White boy", I consider that to fall within men's rights. It's literally a hate crime. Do you have a good ex…
/r/MensRights20/06/17 09:46 AM
3

This is amazing.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 08:26 AM
3

1) On circumcision, I disagree that MIC is blatant attempt to control sexuality. That may be in some cases, but you really have to look at the reasoning behind circumcisions. For instance, if parents agree to have a child circumcised simply to have the boy "match" the father, that is not an attempt to control male sexuality, yet it is one of the leading reasons for circumcisions in the USA. 2) I think it's pretty obvious that lesbians have a history of being accepted more than gays. 3) When you …
/r/MensRights20/06/17 07:44 AM
1

I just gave you one.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 03:34 PM
1

The unfortunate thing about it is that many of these women are actually choosing Father's Day to attack the father. Maybe the father wasn't around in some instances, but does he really need to be attacked on Father's Day? It's pretty ridiculous, and yet, there would be outrage if a father congratulated himself on Mother's Day for being a single parent.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 10:15 PM
2

I do not think number of accusations is evidence of wrongdoing.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 12:46 PM
2

No, i am using accusations as a way of working out probability, which is perfectly valid No, it's not valid at all. If I accused Bill Cosby of raping me in the same ways, does that suddenly making it more likely that Bill Cosby raped someone? No, it doesn't. As for Ensler, are you sure you aren't refusing to answer the question because doing so would make you look hypocritical? I'm sure.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 10:16 AM
3

You are using accusations as evidence and that is faulty. I didn't answer your question about Ensler because it's an unrelated hypothetical.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 04:12 AM
10

I haven't paid attention to the case much recently, but from when the accusations were happening, there was basically a woman that accused Cosby of drugging and raping her. She claims she was given drugs, she became either paralyzed or unconscious, and then he took advantage of her. He claimed sex happened but was consensual IIRC. After one woman came out and it was publicized, many other women started coming out with similar stories. These aren't without their problems, however. For instance, I…
/r/MensRights18/06/17 03:24 AM
5

1) Many of them were related. 2) This was a high profile case, and it was mainly one person that came out in the news. After she came out, many other similar stories emerged. It happens all the time where copy cats come out after the fact to try and make money or for other reasons. Cosby may be guilty, maybe not, but at least afford the man a fair trial before you lynch him. Jesus fucking Christ. What are you even doing here if you are just going to assume the guilt of a man accused of sexual as…
/r/MensRights18/06/17 03:08 AM
5

MRA's assuming a man is guilty simply because he was accused. This is just fucking lovely. This movement really needs to get it's shit together. I'm so ashamed.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 03:05 AM
1

Why did you guys ban me /u/yotamnk?
/r/MensRights17/06/17 02:54 AM
1

It turns out that if you disagree with these people you get banned. Lets not support anti-free speech spaces like these. They banned me for giving arguments in favor of free speech, and they did so in a cowardly manner while I was offline.
/r/MensRights17/06/17 02:52 AM
3

I love how the mods stick this yet delete stuff I post as "politics". Because saying that Americans don't care for people in developing worlds isn't political, right mods? In fact, this is such an important point it deserves a sticky! But hey, talk about child abuse, pedophilia, etc. within the government and have it deleted because it's political! Disgusting. Take your American hate somewhere else.
/r/MensRights12/06/17 04:03 AM
1

The Conservative Party should be able to join forces with the DUP of Northern Ireland to form a government.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:02 AM
2

Yeah, apparently Philip's opponent said this was a win for women or something like that, and it created confusion with people thinking that Davies lost.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 09:00 AM
3

I would just say that there are very few candidates willing to take on a men's rights label, but there are definitely better and worse candidates. If a candidate takes on an issue like education as you mentioned, they may not be for men's rights, but they are still worth voting for. It's policies that matter, not the label.
/r/MensRights08/06/17 11:38 PM
1

lol -- take it how you want. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:50 AM
1

lol
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:49 AM
1

lol
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:41 AM
1

No thanks. Just stop.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:40 AM
1

Yes, the police know of the brawl; that doesn't mean they can arrest or charge her for it, because they didn't know who she assaulted. The only "evidence" they would have is her own testimony, and our wonderful fifth amendment means she doesn't have to testify against herself. This conversation is entering the realm of stupidity. You're right, it isn't; she was never found guilty and thus rightfully was not punished as such. Oh, and I tagged her because you, in a wonderful display of hypocrisy, …
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:39 AM
1

I never said that a kick to the groin can't kill you Lol...you only objected to my comment that kicking someone in the groin can kill someone. Too funny.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:36 AM
1

Having no opinion at the moment does not mean I don't care.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:36 AM
1

The trainer's face was bloodied, which is why they had to go to the other bar to try and get cleaned up. And why didn't they go to the police? Because they were also assaulting people. The police knew of the brawl or it never would've made it into the media articles. The trainer should've also had charges brought against him, but he wasn't involved in the attacks at the 2nd bar. Interesting, because I don't remember there being a guilty verdict handed down. Because the judge agreed to delay judg…
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:29 AM
1

Of course you are hoping I'm not referring to the line that directly contradicts you when you said that kicking someone in the testicles doesn't kill them. I claimed it can, and you objected to my statement that it can. But as you noticed, many other harmful effects can happen such as sterilization or even disability.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:21 AM
1

if you don't think it's too harsh, then why are you arguing against every person saying it isn't. I have no opinion and I'm trying to form an opinion. Unfortunately, this has not lead to a very good discussion, and people are pretty piss-poor at expressing their reasoning, so talking to people like you isn't really helping me. If you really don't care about this at all, Can you just stop with the straw men attacks already? I never said I don't care.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:18 AM
1

So now you're mad that she wasn't punished for crimes she wasn't charged with? I brought this up a long time ago. She was in a brawl in a street outside of another bar but wasn't charged with any assault charges for her participation. How convenient for her. What, the judge should have given her extra penalties? No, the prosecutor should've actually brought the charges forward on her that they could have. Imagine if only 3 charges were brought against War Machine. He would've gotten off a lot ea…
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:17 AM
1

It proves you wrong. Read it.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:08 AM
1

Why are you so set on saying that I am taking a position? It would be humorous if it wasn't so pathetic.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 04:39 AM
1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groin_attack
/r/MensRights07/06/17 04:36 AM
1

He got $2,300 fine and probation for one offense, she got many charges not even brought, a $2,000 bail, and her case dismissed after a year (as long as she stays out of trouble) for multiple unprovoked assaults. So even in your comparison, she got less. I do think she got off easy because she's a woman, as most people would at least be convicted.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 04:35 AM
1

What do you mean? That's essentially what he got. He got life with a chance of parole after like 36 years.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 04:31 AM
1

I said that low blows are banned because they are so dangerous. You don't actually watch MMA, do you? I say that because you clearly took your response right off of Wikipedia. Obviously some things are banned for different reasons, but kicking the groin is quite dangerous and can kill people.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 04:29 AM
1

He would've gotten less if he showed up with a gun, shot her, and she died.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 04:25 AM
1

you are so looking for an excuse for a pussy pass That's not true. i bet you support war machine, I'm not sure what you mean by "support". I think what he did was wrong. The only thing I'm questioning is the severity of the punishment, and that I have not made a decision on. 29 different felonies, 4 previous convictions for violently assaulting people, an established history of assault and battery, probation twice for crimes which i see he violated which turned the probation into a felony charge…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 06:22 PM
1

I wanted you to read this: Okay, so lets look at Julianna Pena's case. Her and her trainer got into a brawl in the street outside of a bar, and her trainer's face was bloody. They went to another bar to clean his face, and the bar owner and staff told them that they were closed. Pena proceeded to kick one of the staff members in the groin, and the owner in the groin twice. These other people were not physically confrontational up to this point. Pena didn't even get charged for the original brawl…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 04:11 PM
1

I wanted to add this to the discussion: Okay, so lets look at Julianna Pena's case. Her and her trainer got into a brawl in the street outside of a bar, and her trainer's face was bloody. They went to another bar to clean his face, and the bar owner and staff told them that they were closed. Pena proceeded to kick one of the staff members in the groin, and the owner in the groin twice. These other people were not physically confrontational up to this point. Pena didn't even get charged for the o…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 04:07 PM
1

Okay, so lets look at Julianna Pena's case. Her and her trainer got into a brawl in the street outside of a bar, and her trainer's face was bloody. They went to another bar to clean his face, and the bar owner and staff told them that they were closed. Pena proceeded to kick one of the staff members in the groin, and the owner in the groin twice. These other people were not physically confrontational up to this point. Pena didn't even get charged for the original brawl in the streets. She then f…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 04:07 PM
1

You realize that hoping he gets killed makes you a worse person, right?
/r/MensRights06/06/17 03:55 PM
1

But why?
/r/MensRights06/06/17 03:54 PM
6

I did a little research and it does seem there is a lot of hate for Jess Phillips, but she's up against the guy that lost to her last time, and a lot of people seem not to like him. We'll see what happens.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 05:28 AM
1

Why would I not ask other people for their opinion/reasoning if I don't have an opinion? The whole point is to help me form my opinion. The only thing you've gotten right about me is that I don't currently have an opinion.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 05:27 AM
8

This particular Feminist is particularly evil. She had a run-in with Sargon of Akkad, where he said he wouldn't even rape her and she tried to go onto the news and say he made a rape threat against her.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 04:33 AM
2

This is some pretty good stuff. I think it both attacks a Feminist politician and wakes people up to Feminism at the same time. That can lead to the growth of the MRM.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 04:32 AM
1

I told you I haven't made up my mind yet. There is a null position, you know...
/r/MensRights06/06/17 03:02 AM
1

I'm asking questions. Yes, people say he deserves it but people don't say why. They sight 29 charge convictions, but that really isn't enough to explain why he deserves life. Literally, someone who committed murder would get less time. But anyways, I'm moving on because you won't stop telling me I hold positions that I have told you I don't necessarily hold. I haven't made a decision yet. And it says a lot about the type of person you are to continue to try and tell me what my position is. You a…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:38 AM
2

I'm moving on because you won't stop forcing positions onto me that I literally don't even know if I hold myself. Have a good day.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:36 AM
1

Well, it's a point you brought up. You're using the fact that he said there is something wrong in his head. That is pretty clearly a statement of mental illness. And wasn't it his ex-gf, not his current gf? There's a huge difference in mental illness and no mental illness. He could get proper treatment in a mental institution even if he never gets out. It could improve the quality of his life greatly, instead of having him cause all kinds of problems in prison. Mental institutions are loaded wit…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:34 AM
2

I haven't ignored anything. You are just assuming I'm taking a position that I haven't actually taken and then assuming I'm ignoring all these factors I'm not ignoring. To be frank, I'm quite sick of what you are trying to do to me here.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:28 AM
1

I'm not staking my claim that men get tougher punishments on this case. That's known, and that fact doesn't need this case to support it. This is about the guilty man himself. Sometimes civil rights is about standing up for the worst types of people that nobody else will stand up. Sure, maybe he's a piece of shit. Sure, what he did was terrible. But that alone does not justify the punishment. The truth is I don't really know if the punishment was justified or not, but you clearly have a problem …
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:26 AM
-1

Okay. Well, I'm asking about the law and you won't give me anything but your vengeance argument.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:13 AM
1

You didn't give any justification why the punishment doesn't fit the crime. I'm not making that argument. I'm asking what other people think. There's your justification. That would speak to mental illness then.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:12 AM
2

Gender has little to do with it? There's a lot of evidence that gender means a lot. Men get 275% longer sentences, something like 67% longer sentences when adjusting for variables (the number may be wrong as I'm going off of memory, but you get the point). Do you think Ronda Rousey would've gotten the same?
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:11 AM
1

I'm aware that he was found guilty on 29 counts of crimes. But again, does that mean life in prison with 37 years or whatever it was before he can even get probation? Do you think a woman would get that much time? You call me an idiot, but I haven't even given my position as I'm just asking what others think, which says more about you than me IMO.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:08 AM
1

There's no question that he did it, but that doesn't mean that any punishment is justified just because someone is guilty of something. My frustration with people like you and others commenting is you're not giving any justification for your thinking outside of him being guilty so throw away the key.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 10:38 PM
0

That's a moral argument, though, not a legally consistent argument.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 10:36 PM
-3

I'm aware. I specifically said that it was a brutal beating. I saw the pictures when he was first arrested. But was the beating life-in-prison bad? Remember, he was not convicted on attempted murder charges.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 10:35 PM
-3

He is a piece of shit, and he should be in prison. He did beat his ex-gf pretty brutally, however, he was not convicted the attempted murder charges, so you really have to set that aside. Effectively, he got life in prison for kidnapping and assault charges, and he won't have any chance of parole for 36 years. Just because he committed a heinous crime does not mean that any amount of punishment is justified (at least not in the legal sense). Do you think a woman who did this would get the same a…
/r/MensRights05/06/17 10:16 PM
1

Lol. Nothing is being amputated. The phrase you bring up is intended to describe rights between strangers. Parents have additional rights over their children and also take on additional responsibilities. You would have to prove the procedure is detrimental to the health of the child over the long-term, and you can't do that. Keep in mind, it's you that wants to restrict rights for the parents and the child, not those who are pro-rights. You will say that an infant can't decide, therefore, no cir…
/r/MensRights05/06/17 06:40 PM
1

Read my comment again possibly? I'm not in favor of a legislative ban, because I support the parent's right to choose at this point. So the fact that circumcision isn't banned is protecting the rights of the parents to choose.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 04:04 PM
0

slow clap
/r/MensRights05/06/17 12:28 AM
0

Hmm...I wonder why it's not getting banned. Maybe because a ban limits rights, and in order to limit rights, you need to prove that the procedure is actually quite harmful, which hasn't been proven? Maybe most societies, especially in the West, value the right of the parents to choose what happens to their children over the government? Hmmm...Maybe protecting the father's right to choose over his child is to defend men's rights.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 12:25 AM
1

lol. Well I guess you win then, right? That's what you want to hear after all, right? xD There's no way you can believe the shit you are spewing at this point. About your stupid uncircumcision argument, I'm an atheist. This by no means takes the position that theism is the normal position. In fact, it's atheism that is the normal position as there is no belief in god when someone is born (that we know of). But please, keep these arguments up. xD
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:42 AM
1

Okay, so you aren't even referring to what I was referring to. Because circumcision does not cause long-term harm, you have to go to complications. And the alternative procedure you are advocating for (adult circumcision) is more dangerous. Brilliant.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:41 AM
-1

The term uncircumcised implies that circumcision is normal. Lol. No it doesn't. "Un-" quite literally means "not", so uncircumcised means "not circumcised". It does not mean circumcision is normal at all. But see, like your typical Feminist SJW, you are trying to change people's vocabulary as part of your propaganda.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:38 AM
0

You can just threaten me that I'm going to be "embarrassed" and can't tell me how I'm going to be embarrassed, right?
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:36 AM
1

"rape" What a great thinker you are.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:30 AM
0

You're the one that stated we can't proceed. Fine by me.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:29 AM
0

And why am I going to be embarrassed? And what is the long-term harm?
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:27 AM
1

Oh darn, you mean I can't talk to you anymore? What a loss.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:25 AM
1

I want to kill myself GO GET HELP. Stop talking to me, and go get help. You are clearly unstable.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:24 AM
-1

Lol...look at you acting like an SJW. Sorry, but I can use what terms I want to. There can be multiple words in the English language to describe the same thing. All you are doing here is attacking me so you don't have to deal with the argument. You call this a shitty, useless post, yet you don't explain why. You say that I used the wrong word. You do everything but take on the substance of my post, so all of my points still stand. What's next, are you going to get mad at me because I didn't ask …
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:23 AM
0

male infant circumcision, what some people call male genital mutilation
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:20 AM
1

Seriously, you're an unstable person. Go get psychological help. You told me you want to kill yourself because of people like me. That's not healthy.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:19 AM
1

Seriously it's people like you who are the reason I want to kill myself You're clearly a stable person. Go get some help. YOU ARE NOT PROCHOICE YOU ARE PROABORTION. Pro-abortion would mean that I advocate for abortion. That's not the truth. I'm for women being able to choose to have an abortion or not. My position is the same on circumcision. I'm not advocating that people actually go out and have their child circumcised, I'm not advocating that they don't, I'm simply advocating that the parents…
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:16 AM
-1

You must do this before we proceed any further. I guess we can't go further. Bye.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:15 AM
1

Really, they are pro-choice for the patient. So will they allow a 12 year-old to choose to have a circumcision? After all, it's their choice, right? It's your son's fucking dick, not yours. It's certainly not your dick, or the government's dick. When there is a time-sensitive procedure (which MIC is because risks go up with age), it's the parent's decision if the child is not old enough to make the decision. Most circumcisions are NOT medically necessary. This is a judgement call, and you're try…
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:12 AM
-4

What does it matter if we call it circumcision or genital humiliation? The procedure is the same either way, and the label does not change the serious discussion behind whether circumcision should be legal or not. It only changes how you try to present it to the public. And with your history of lying (such as saying you want to give the patient the choice when what you are advocating for is literally banning them from choosing until they are 18), it's propaganda.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:06 AM
1

Why do you push for the government having more say over someone's children than the parents themselves? Do you want the government forcing policies onto your children and taking away your choice when there is no proven long-term harm being done to the child that would disadvantage them in life?
/r/MensRights04/06/17 04:56 AM
-1

Male A is circumcised and Male B is uncircumcised. Male A gets 2 units of pleasure/min and Male B gets 3 units of pleasure/min. Male A can last 10 minutes do to reduced sensation, and Male B can last 2 minutes. Male A (circumcised) receives 20 units of pleasure per sexual encounter (2 units/min 10 min) while Male B (uncircumcised) gets 6 units of pleasure per sexual encounter (3 units/min 2 min).
/r/MensRights04/06/17 04:54 AM
-3

I could care less whether you call it genital mutilation or circumcision. That's just a term intended for propaganda, but whatever you call it, it's the same procedure. Get off your moral high-horse. You're not a more moral person than me. You think you can call something mutilation and end all discussions, and that shows exactly why people like you shouldn't be leading any sort of discussion on circumcision. You better not be against FGM It's certainly interesting to me how many people argue th…
/r/MensRights04/06/17 04:51 AM
1

In regards to MIC, I'm pro-parental-right-to-chose. Anti-MIC are not "pro-choice" for the patient, because they support a ban on that child choosing until a certain age (usually 18).
/r/MensRights04/06/17 04:47 AM
-6

Many studies show there is not reduced sensation, and if there is, it's very minimal. However, either way, it wouldn't bother me. You must not be aware of my counter-argument on this, where reduced sensation can lead to increased sexual pleasure.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 10:26 PM
1

Your response is completely tribal, anti-liberal, very scary to me, and the wrong path to take the MRM down. I'm not going to allow people like you to ruin the MRM based on your advocating of tribalism rather than advocating of what's best for men in society.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 10:26 PM
-4

Intactivists advocate for the banning of the choice of the child. Under legislation, 17 year-old teenage boys would be banned from deciding whether they want their body to be circumcised or not. You are being completely dishonest.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 10:23 PM
5

It's not rape. Shame on you.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 10:22 PM
-3

Have you considered that maybe it took 27 years for intactivists to brainwash you into thinking there was something wrong with you for being circumcised? There's nothing wrong with a circumcised man.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 10:10 PM
0

I defend circumcision, but I also question it. How does defending something mean that something isn't questioned?
/r/MensRights03/06/17 10:09 PM
-4

That's like me saying if you aren't for the freedom of fathers choosing whether to circumcise their children or not you aren't for men's rights. The comment is obviously stupid.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 10:08 PM
5

How dumb of the doctor.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 10:06 PM
2

I get the strategy, and normally I would agree that this strategy works, but I don't even think Feminists are going to want to touch this. It's way to toxic.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 09:38 PM
3

Oh really? I didn't know that. Are you referring to Gloria Allred or Lisa Bloom?
/r/MensRights03/06/17 09:36 PM
38

Kathy Griffin's strategy seems to be to try to get the Feminist engine behind her. Her lawyer is Lisa Bloom, who is the daughter of women's rights lawyer Gloria Allred. She's the one that created the situation, and now she's trying to play the victim pretending this is about her gender over her actions. She constantly references White men, which of course, is Intersectional Feminism. I talk about about this in some of my Kathy Griffin youtube videos if you want to check them out.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 04:35 PM
1

Equality for women. I don't disagree with the urge to call it "egalitarianism", especially in the West, but I think in many places in the world equality for women is specifically needed (I'm much more of a "third world" feminist as far as I'm a feminist). Of course you say you're for "equality for women". I'm not going to dissect your personal views, but the majority of Feminists claim to be for equality and advocate for additional rights. Good point. I don't get people harping on the wage gap t…
/r/MensRights03/06/17 04:01 AM
1

Most people I know are feminists and this simply isn't true. How do you define Feminism? Sort of but really it's more complex than that. They think patriarchy harms men as well. Sure it is. This isn't what Marxism is at all, nor Marxist Feminism. Oh, really? Marxism doesn't separate people by class (throwing some random terms out there like the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat) and then take the side of the class that has less power? Agree completely there. Well, at least we are agreeing that their o…
/r/MensRights02/06/17 10:23 PM
64

It's power politics. Feminists view any dollar that goes to help a man as a dollar that can't help a woman, first of all. Second of all, within Feminist ideology is the idea that there is a patriarchy that oppresses women and benefits men. Their ideology stems from Marxism as well, where you separate the population by groups (men, women; cis-, trans-; white, black, latino, asian, etc.) and then take the side of whatever groups are viewed as having the least power overall (so basically straight W…
/r/MensRights02/06/17 04:41 PM
2

This has obviously been a game changer.
/r/MensRights02/06/17 04:36 PM
3

Yeah, but Feminazi's are often wrong. I'm not going to use their logic just because the result would benefit men when I think it would cause a damaging policy for the country. In the long-run, staying away from equality of outcome is best for men anyways.
/r/MensRights02/06/17 12:11 PM
15

It doesn't bother me that women get more degrees than men, it's the special treatment they get that bothers me. I don't want special treatment to be given to groups no matter the disparity, but I certainly don't want special treatment given to a group in women that is already outperforming the counterpart in men. It makes no sense, and it's sexist.
/r/MensRights02/06/17 02:16 AM
3

Too bad they are anti-free speech and ban those they disagree with rather than encouraging conversation.
/r/MensRights01/06/17 04:20 PM
1

The more they blame MRA's for complaining, the more they will push the average person to become pro-MRA. There isn't much they could do to help us more than this to be honest.
/r/MensRights31/05/17 08:23 PM
1

Well, if you are prepared to risk the friendship, I would bring up specific policies. She mentions MRA's are rape apologists. An MRA position is that forced envelopment should be considered rape. Ask if she agrees with that. If she disagrees, she looks like the rape apologist. If she agrees, she gives validity to MRA arguments. You could also ask if she believes it possible for men to be raped, and if those raped men deserve help. You could also ask if she believes raped men face issues with get…
/r/MensRights31/05/17 05:10 PM
2

There originally was a picture of her face (which is shown in the avatar of this post), but they ended up changing out her picture for a video it seems. The video includes a picture of her face, though.
/r/MensRights31/05/17 08:30 AM
18

/r/MensRights has grown by about 50% just in the last 2 years. A video I made about 150,000 subs, recent history of the MRM, major events, growth rate, etc.: https://youtu.be/MuxEVfyCUcU
/r/MensRights29/05/17 02:43 AM
1

The importance of all of this that you can't grasp for some reason is that if the accusers are to be anonymous, then making the accused anonymous also makes sense. This would help prevent the falsely accused from being damaged. I'd rather neither be anonymous, but if one is anonymous, they both should be. Furthermore, you claimed we want to know whether the accused is a man or woman so we know who is being bullied, but we will know this even with anonymity because the authorities will still use …
/r/MensRights28/05/17 10:29 AM
7

I think the worst part of this is when she says it requires a more feminine touch. It shows her motive behind it. Sitting out seems like something that would actually disadvantage you as well. And really, was asking that big of a deal? If she didn't want to disturb the mother by asking, she should've just let you go in and if it became a problem you could've left. My question is this: If she thought it necessary that a male student sit out, does she believe that men don't belong being nurses in …
/r/MensRights27/05/17 09:59 PM
1

This is just one example. It's not just among Feminists. There is constant pessimism that the MRM can't accomplish things, isn't trending up, isn't going to succeed, etc. My point here is the pessimists were wrong, and they should reconsider their pessimism, because it can do a lot of harm.
/r/MensRights27/05/17 08:57 AM
2

The reason people weren't funding it was because they thought it was going to be a hit piece. You must not have been around for very long.
/r/MensRights27/05/17 05:09 AM
1

There are people of all types who advocate for men's rights. I don't understand where the assumption that it's just White men is coming from. There are plenty of women, and plenty of non-Whites. If you look at the first international conference of men's rights there were minority speakers.
/r/MensRights26/05/17 08:08 PM
2

It shows the pessimism that was being dealt with. But no, it's not necessarily up to the MRM to fund a documentary.
/r/MensRights26/05/17 08:06 PM
1

It's not that it's offensive to me, it's that you're looking at these groups in terms of power dynamics. So you are splitting the population (man and woman, Black and White, etc.), and then perceiving discrimination against the group you view to be less powerful. What is better IMO, is too look at people as individuals and forget judging groups for the most part. My whole point is that in order to advocate the equality of men you need to be seen as representative of all men, with the intention t…
/r/MensRights26/05/17 05:47 PM
1

I speak mainly in terms of the USA, but it usually applies to all (or at least most) Western civilizations. I have a few thoughts about what you said. First, parenting is not just about money. A father cannot be replaced simply by the government giving the mother money. Fathers tend to set boundaries in different ways, having two parents is key to growing up outside of poverty, and giving time & building a relationship is invaluable. The second thought I have is that allowing fathers to step awa…
/r/MensRights26/05/17 05:31 PM
1

Well basically, it goes both ways. You mention asking a Black man what it's like walking through a White neighborhood. Well, ask a White man what it's like walking through a White neighborhood. And keep in mind that when we say terms like "Black neighborhood" and "White neighborhood", there are actually people of many races that live in these neighborhoods. If you go to a "White neighborhood", you will find Black people living there. If you go to a "Black neighborhood", you will find White peopl…
/r/MensRights26/05/17 04:31 PM
1

Oh, I'm pro-choice, not pro-life. There's also something very different from having an abortion where the fetus is never born, and having the child where the father walks away. I don't like the term "legal abortion" at all, it's simply giving up one's rights, which aren't actually rights, but duties.
/r/MensRights26/05/17 04:20 PM
0

Skepticism is one thing, but many people actively assumed she was out to misrepresent the MRM, instead of trying to get down to the truth. And in the end, it was Milo's free speech followers that really funded the problem. MRA's did to some extent, but the funding came up well short on our end, which I think shows the pessimism did continue throughout. Even after she had won awards, people said the awards didn't mean anything. And even now many people claim that the MRM is in no better position …
/r/MensRights26/05/17 04:08 PM
7

I'm not saying that many MRA's are pessimistic because of a small few, I'm saying it because of the many comments within the group. Consider that Jaye had a very tough time getting support at first. And she's not the only one. There's no good way to quantify it, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
/r/MensRights26/05/17 02:50 PM
122

She certainly racked up the awards. The film was a huge success. I hope many MRA's that fall more on the pessimistic side realize that we have made huge strides in the media. I hope they also realize that Jaye initially had huge pushback from many MRA's that nearly killed her project entirely. Some pessimism can be healthy, but I think many MRA's tend to go overboard with it. We're in a much better position than we were 5 years ago, and the trend is looking straight up.
/r/MensRights26/05/17 01:00 PM
0

Say it as often as you'd like, I still don't agree, because you are trying to pretend to give freedoms to people, but as you've already admitted, you would ban the patient themselves from getting a circumcision until you deem fit.
/r/MensRights25/05/17 07:11 PM
3

I created this Youtube video explaining the US Selective Service System discrimination: https://youtu.be/PnR5daCBzr4
/r/MensRights25/05/17 12:34 PM
3

Well, you'd have to be actually prosecuted, which is unlikely. But if they did prosecute you, voting rights are actually restored for ex-felons: http://www.nonprofitvote.org/voting-in-your-state/special-circumstances/voting-as-an-ex-offender/
/r/MensRights25/05/17 11:32 AM
3

Yeah, financial aid asks if you have registered for selective service IIRC.
/r/MensRights25/05/17 10:27 AM
13

You missed a couple: https://www.sss.gov/Home/Men-26-and-OLDER federal job training under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (formerly Workforce Investment Act) federal jobs or security clearance as a contractor U.S. citizenship for immigrants This page made me chuckle is a disgusted way (read the "Reasons to Register" category): https://www.sss.gov/Registration/Why-Register Oh, and the best one yet: Men who have a disability and who live at home must register with Selective Service if…
/r/MensRights25/05/17 08:20 AM
3

You can get involved in the school system. I'm not exactly sure what it's like in Ireland, but there is usually some sort of Feminist propaganda to fight against, because Feminist propaganda by it's very nature hurts men and boys. Just discussing these issues with people is a great way, and you can do so in person or online. You could organize meetups that don't necessarily have to have a lot of people. There is a Humanist group that meets up every week by me (in the USA) despite only having abo…
/r/MensRights25/05/17 08:13 AM
0

Sounds like infant circumcision > adult circumcision to me.
/r/MensRights25/05/17 08:05 AM
0

The obvious age for circumcision is 18, but if you want you can make an argument for 17 or 16 or similar age and I will listen courteously and carefully. And if I want to make an argument for 12 years-old? I'm gonna grab some popcorn while you try to make some absurd rant about 6 year old's decision making ability. Ah, so the child can't decide. Who decides when the child can't? The parents do. Again, the fact is that you are pretending to give freedoms to people, but you are just being dishones…
/r/MensRights25/05/17 03:41 AM
0

The point is you are not for patients deciding, you are against circumcision, and that extends as far as taking the choice away from the patients themselves. A 16 year-old can drive, but they won't be able to choose to have a circumcision if you have it your way. As for tattoos, it depends on the state, so children do not necessarily have to wait until 18 to get a tattoo.
/r/MensRights25/05/17 03:41 AM
0

You won't answer: If a 6 year-old claims to want a circumcision, will you allow them to have one?
/r/MensRights25/05/17 02:37 AM
0

And lol when I ask you to substantiate your arguments all you can do is say 'childish, moving on'. Because I haven't been substantiating my arguments for how long now. Don't cut anyone else's genitals and we'll get along fine. Exactly my point. Here are your true colors. You don't want the child to choose, you want circumcision to stop. You want to be the decider for all children.
/r/MensRights25/05/17 01:11 AM
0

Lol, the patient told you they want an infant circumcision? I doubt that. No, but I'm not the one claiming that I'm giving the decision to the patient. I'm giving the decision to the patient's parents. You still have not answered for the men that did not want to be circumcised. And you have men that want to be circumcised as children. Where is their right to be circumcised as a child? You're just getting childish now, so I'm moving on.
/r/MensRights24/05/17 08:33 PM
0

Exactly the point. Wait until the patient can make their own decision. See, you are making the decision to wait, and you want the government to force that decision onto all parents. The procedure is time-sensitive. And we can expect fewer people will be getting circumcisions as adults, so the total number of complications can be expected to go down. How bout that. That sounds great for someone whose goal is to prevent circumcisions for the masses, and who has assumes circumcisions are bad. If we…
/r/MensRights24/05/17 06:58 AM
1

This one is probably closer: Propaganda - information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.
/r/MensRights24/05/17 06:35 AM
0

This procedure can reasonably be delayed until the patient can make their own decision. It really is that easy. Unless there is an actual medical reason to do it, it is unnecessary. It does not meet the requirement for preventative medicine. So here we have a disagreement. Why should you, or the government, decide for all children whether circumcision can reasonably be delayed, or if it's time-sensitive? It seems to me that the best people in position to make this decision are the parents. When …
/r/MensRights23/05/17 10:20 PM
0

Pulling out the fingernails of infants would cause long-term harm. And again, I wasn't making an argument for why someone should circumcise, I simply answered a question about why they do them.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 09:47 PM
-1

I'm not representing anybody. I'm making on a conclusion about a group. The fact that you deny this shows how out-of-touch you are, and what kind of fantasy land you live in.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 09:46 PM
-1

Yup, this is why intactivists always ask if someone is circumcised or not. If you are, then you are biased and trying to get over that you are mutiliated. If you aren't, then you don't know what it's like to be circumcised. Lol...You guys are funny.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 09:45 PM
1

Straw man.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 09:42 PM
0

Easily done: It is a unnecessary medical procedure that removes part of someone's genitals. For unnecessary procedures the patient is the one to make an informed decision when they are able to. There, that was easy. And because an infant can't make a decision for themselves, the decision is made by the parent. You don't seem to realize that we need laws to protect people. You don't seem to realize that laws take freedoms away. In this scenario if the benefits of the medical procedure can not jus…
/r/MensRights23/05/17 09:42 PM
1

No, because there is nothing untrue about it. It's advertising. I'm not going to keep doing this with you.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 09:26 PM
-1

Yawn. If your preferred religion/ culture said it was The Right Thing to throw infants off a cliff, would you do it? Would it result in long-term harm? If so, then no. This wasn't even about why I would circumcise a boy or not, if I would. It was about why people actually do. Sorry, but male infant circumcision is not equivalent to throwing a child off a cliff. Maintenance? MAINTENANCE?? Jesus, Mary and Joseph... Yes, one of many considerations that people think about. This is a surprise to you?
/r/MensRights23/05/17 11:48 AM
0

1) I didn't suggest a five-fold difference. I gave a HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE simply to illustrate a point. It was not intended to represent actual data. Jesus. 2) You are simultaneously holding the position that male infant circumcision cuts off nerves resulting in less immediate pleasure and results in premature ejaculation for the masses. I just want you to think about that for a bit.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 11:43 AM
-1

You're doing it wrong.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 09:14 AM
-2

Yes. And your comment about ejaculation is very narrow-minded. But yes, cut men can last longer. This is both a positive and negative. It can't lead to a higher climax, because higher climaxes come from longer sex without climaxing. And while a cut man may have less pleasure at any given time, they can have more pleasure over the long-term because they can last longer. I like to use a hypothetical example. Man A is cut and Man B is uncut. Man A has 2 units of pleasure/min. Man B has 3 units of p…
/r/MensRights23/05/17 08:00 AM
-2

Saying something is more attractive =/= argument for circumcising infant boys. There was also an opinion that uncut men have better sex as well.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 07:52 AM
0

Religious/cultural reasons and for perceived hygiene/medical/maintenance reasons (whether you agree with those reasons or not).
/r/MensRights23/05/17 06:29 AM
0

One of the reasons to change the law is that it can no longer justify itself. We don't need an outside reason to change it What law legalized male infant circumcision? You need to show reasons for making it illegal, because the default is no law, which means something is legal. The default is also the parents make decisions for children unless there is a reason to take that decision from the parents and give it to the government. So the inactivist side is the side with the burden of proof here. …
/r/MensRights23/05/17 06:28 AM
-3

That's more of an opinion, and a bunch of listed opinions of others, on what individual women themselves prefer. I wouldn't really call it propaganda. They aren't saying to circumcise boys in order to look better. This is lazy on your part.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 06:21 AM
-13

This is dumb propaganda. These acts are not largely done for attractiveness. But hey, you said the right thing so the intactivist echo-chamber will get behind you, and few in the MRM actually seem willing to question the repercussions of taking rights away from the father.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 03:24 AM
1

You seem incapable of understanding using a micro-example and making a macro-point at the same time. I would not be happy if the mods stopped stickying your stuff, and instead chose even worse things to sticky that spent money in an even worse fashion. Anyways, I don't think this is going anywhere. I'm going to move on. And btw, the way you have been acting lately by mocking me in your chat and everything, threatening to close down HBR and all that, it's really unprofessional and immature.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 08:40 PM
1

Calling it "your one little sticky" does not mean that I think you personally stickied it. You are better than this.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 08:32 PM
1

Yes, and?
/r/MensRights22/05/17 06:03 PM
1

It depends. Usually not, for security reasons.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 06:00 PM
1

I never said it was...
/r/MensRights22/05/17 06:00 PM
1

Do we accept all current laws to be valid and correct, just because they are current laws? I sure hope not. Until we have a reason to think otherwise. Once a law is set, we need a reason to revert the law. Should we accept the current marijuana prohibition as correct just because that's the current law? There have been great strides showing that marijuana has medicinal purposes, and that was one element of having it illegal. Marijuana is still not fully legal, but it's getting there, and that's …
/r/MensRights22/05/17 08:05 AM
2

I really don't care whether you call it mutilation or circumcision. That's semantics to me. Now on it being backwards to prove harm, it's not backwards, because male infant circumcision (or genital mutilation if you want to call it that) is already establish as legal in the USA. If male infant circumcision was already illegal, I would say that we need proof of benefit to make it legal.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 06:47 AM
1

Chopping a child's arm off does long-term damage. I'm not convinced that circumcision does long-term damage at this point. It is the parents' job to make decisions for the child about all kinds of things. You mention harm, but you have not convinced me long-term harm is done. If you want to close the circumcision "loophole", prove your case that it's harmful. It's not true that western doctors have given up the debate on circumcision. Just recently, the CDC gave a recommendation to have children…
/r/MensRights22/05/17 04:41 AM
1

I was talking to the mods about sticky policy, and an opinion I had on the matter. You are the one that came in and got all offended, when my opinion was about much more than your one little sticky.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 04:24 AM
1

Society doesn't get to make the decision IMO, parents do. And circumcisions later in life only get more dangerous. At a young age, when a child can't consent, the decision is the parents. Sure, if it's proven scientifically that there is long-term harm, I would change my stance a bit, but I haven't seen that proven yet, so I defer to the parents to decide. Having more circumcisions at a later age isn't exactly ideal, as it could very well lead to more operation mistakes. You say that there is no…
/r/MensRights22/05/17 02:39 AM
0

1) I said it's not a cost-effective move. I know that I can spend my money elsewhere, and I chose to. I also have the ability to speak my mind, which I chose to do. You guys keep trying to make this about me fundraising, but it's not about me at all. "Bitching about fundraisers" is doing something, btw. 2) I did say that it was like a vacation, however, I did not say it was profiteering, which is the straw man you guys are creating. And stand by my argument that it's "like a vacation" because yo…
/r/MensRights22/05/17 02:26 AM
1

I know you have, and as I've said, I actually like you. I want you to succeed. But I want the MRM to succeed as well, and I want spending to be sustainable. And pretending like something is growing when I pointed out with facts that it's declining is actually necessary for long-term health. I found my comments to be quite constructive, and I feel like you are responding as if I'm just being a hater. You don't seem to recognize that I want you to succeed.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 12:22 AM
1

Well, hopefully it works out for you.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 12:15 AM
1

One thing you need to change IMO, are all of these Feminist concepts. You have ideas like one cannot understand an issue if they are not a part of a certain group. That is not the case. In fact, women have their own perspective that is valuable to the conversation, and men have their perspective and "lived experiences", but they are also biased. Do women not have "lived experiences" about men's rights? I argue they do. If a mother's boy commits suicide, she has lived experiences of men's rights …
/r/MensRights21/05/17 11:50 PM
0

Reproductive Rights: By legal termination, do you mean where fathers give up rights to their children legally? I think this is the wrong way to go. Sure, it benefits men, but it damages the child. It gives an easy out to parents who made a decision. The 12-week mark seems arbitrary as well, because the father is not carrying the child. I do think the child should be prioritized over the father, because the father cannot harm the child like the mother can, and parenthood really shouldn't be seen …
/r/MensRights21/05/17 11:42 PM
1

She was definitely drunk, and everybody knew it. Many other commentators even said so. And that's fine that you guys wanna go and party it up, but I'd rather our MRM funds get directed towards more professionalism than people going to a premier that get drunk and talk about boobs. And that was just one example. There are lots of examples. It just feels like lots of money is being thrown at HBR and I don't think that money is being used very cost-effectively. And for as much money as you guys get…
/r/MensRights21/05/17 10:55 PM
3

From what I've read, there is some evidence that this would be beneficial, but I'm not a fan of separating the genders. I'd rather put competition back into the school system. I really want to put recesses back into the school system, all the way up into high school. In high school, kids aren't as likely to go run, but just the time off and outside can be very beneficial, especially to boys. I'd like to get feminism out of the schools as well, because I think that hurts boys, too. Get rid of the…
/r/MensRights21/05/17 10:36 PM
0

1) Once again, I never said you made profit on these trips. 2) As I said before, "vacation" referred to travelling the world, but as hung up as you guys are on this word, it was not even my main point, which you guys seem to have no response to. 3) You have all of these complaints. Why not save everybody the money, stay at home, and allow other MRA's to fill that position? I'd have no problem with that, and I think having the diversity of ideas would be a great thing for the MRM. I still don't s…
/r/MensRights21/05/17 10:32 PM
4

Well, it obviously depends on which men, but I'd go with the education issue. Boys are lagging behind, and a good education is key to a high quality-of-life. Boys are already behind girls in education, it seems designed to be that way, and the political push is to go further in the direction of helping girls. How bad will the situation get before society wakes up?
/r/MensRights21/05/17 02:00 PM
1

It makes you wonder why it's only 98.5% female.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 01:43 PM
1

By watching your live stream. Karen gave her interview. It was pretty obvious she was drunk as could be, and she admitted so (again, going off of memory, but I'm pretty sure she admitted she was drunk at the time).
/r/MensRights21/05/17 03:51 AM
1

Sure, and it's the mods' business to choose whether to sticky those posts or whether they should choose more cost-effective options to sticky. So what's the problem?
/r/MensRights21/05/17 02:07 AM
1

The vacation comment was more of the benefit of traveling the world, something a local MRA wouldn't get to do, but their voice would matter just as much for $9,000 less, and we would hear new ideas from more speakers. I'm not anti-HBR, I just don't think this is the best way to spend money. That $9,000 now can't be used towards something else. I stick to my argument, however, that I never brought up anything about personal profiteering. I actually prefer people in the MRM make money. It seems Ca…
/r/MensRights21/05/17 02:05 AM
1

Mainly Karen, and it was the preliminary showings I believe. IIRC, in New York. Brian was at home base connected through Skype asking questions, Cassie Jaye was interviewed at one point, Karen went out for a cigarette and brought a chair outside, which was a chair the establishment then asked to bring back inside. I'm pretty sure that was all the same event, but I am going off of memory.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 02:01 AM
1

I didn't accuse you of "profiteering". I accused you of spending money unwisely. $9,000 in flights could do a lot of good for a lot of people. Instead, it'll be going to getting the Honey Badgers to speak at an event some other MRA could've spoken at anyways. Interesting how you misrepresent my argument when speaking to someone else about the situation rather than speaking to me, and you didn't tag me, either. /u/theothermod EDIT: And btw, I don't even dislike you guys. I like what you do for th…
/r/MensRights20/05/17 09:26 PM
1

I'm okay with us not going to Australia; people vote with their wallets. It's nice to have the advantage of constant stickies, isn't it? Sorry what? I'm surprised you don't remember. It was quite embarrassing.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 08:53 PM
1

Then I'm happy their goal wasn't reached if their claim to fame is being women. I think we can do better in the MRM. But even going by your argument, why can't Australian women MRA's go speak? Is every year just going to hold the same speakers over and over? That would be quite disappointing.
/r/MensRights18/05/17 07:35 PM
1

Why them over other MRA's that wouldn't have to spend $9,000 in flight? What more do these 4 individuals offer that 4 other individuals couldn't offer?
/r/MensRights18/05/17 09:54 AM
2

Given that the MRM has no leaders, how is it justifiable to spend $13,500 to send you guys to Australia? This amount of money could go towards something much bigger and more influential, could it not? I mean, you guys have already spoken at many get-togethers, and many know what you have to say. Why not let MRA's from Australia and the surrounding areas to fill the Australian ICMI? Your flights alone for 4 of you will cost $9,000. I don't see how that type of spending is in the best interest of …
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:37 PM
1

I wouldn't say totally different issue. They were kicked out of the Comics Convention for displaying and supporting men's rights issues.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:31 PM
6

I like the Honey Badgers, but it seems to me that they are starting to get more support than maybe they deserve. We've seen lots of money thrown at them from a community that really doesn't have a whole lot of money to spend. When we gave money to Cassie Jaye to help fund a documentary, there was huge return on investment. I believe Dean Esmay even got money for a tooth, which would've improved the image of the MRM considerably at the time if he did indeed get his tooth fixed. But now all this m…
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:19 PM
5

Isn't this sexist by their own worldview to assume a woman doesn't have a penis? And I'm not trying to be facetious.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 09:55 PM
0

Careful, these mods ban people on the Right. It's a bit part of the reason I cut down on how much I am into Men's Rights. They also remove "political content" even though the MRM is basically completely political. They just use that excuse to remove anything that is pro-Trump.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 07:24 AM
2

Great, so now instead of just Feminists and Regressives going all ape shit with reports, MRA's are doing so, too. Lets all pat ourselves on the back for silencing others! This has no way to end badly, right?
/r/MensRights17/05/17 07:22 AM
1

I think you missed my point. My point was that even if the accused was also anonymous, we would still know if the accused is a man or a woman. You obviously misunderstood me.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 08:46 PM
2

They put in Jane or John Doe so you still do know the sex.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 04:39 PM
4

Who is "they"? Could you provide evidence of your claims about the specific individuals you are talking about?
/r/MensRights15/05/17 08:00 AM
3

Good job, you linked some links that have nothing to do with any of this. Want to make a relevant point?
/r/MensRights15/05/17 06:52 AM
10

As well as 2 of the Top 5 Miss USA 2017 pageants (Miss Illinois and Miss District of Columbia), right? Stop oppressing women with your Feminism ideology.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 04:23 AM
4

I found one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr0Qbrdiz8A
/r/MensRights15/05/17 02:38 AM
1

Keep an eye open on Youtube. It just ended, so there's nothing uploaded quite yet.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 02:31 AM
1

Why would we not write to Netflix? This makes me think there is more to the story.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 12:29 AM
9

You shouldn't judge MRM advancement by the Feminist fringes. Just a couple of years ago, /r/MensRights was at 100,000 subs. It's now nearly at 150,000. If you listen to Feminists argue, they almost always claim that men face legitimate issues as well (right before their but...). They do this because they have to admit men face some issues or they lose credibility. Many women come to the MRM after having boys. Many men are feeling more okay about speaking about discrimination they faced. Then the…
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:07 AM
2

Maybe you should go look at their Twitter and look at the constant sexist Tweets by them, or look at their constantly misandrist fundraising campaigns. Maybe you should look at the uneven medical coverage. Sure, they'll help you get STD testing because it benefits the woman.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 06:58 PM
1

There was a guy by the name of La'el Collins who was being talked to by police about the murder of his ex-gf, and it came out the day of the Draft. He ended up undrafted, but got onto a team and ended up starting. He lost a lot of money, but his career wasn't over, and that was a possible murder charge. But if you want to root for Gareon Conley, the 2017 NFL Draft starts tonight at 7:00 CT. If he doesn't get drafted then you can watch tomorrow at 6:00 CT for Day 2. If he still doesn't get drafte…
/r/MensRights27/04/17 05:04 PM
1

His career isn't over unless he's actually charged and convicted. A team will take a shot on him, but it could cost him millions if teams get scared away and it is a false accusation.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 11:29 PM
2

Two of the witnesses didn't even know Conley before that day, or at least that's my understanding. One was basically a friend of a friend and the other was a friend of a friend of a friend.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 09:34 PM
1

Sorry to hear that happened to you. Luckily, people have figured out who this woman is, but I still doubt there are any repercussions she can take.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 09:30 PM
4

This sounds like it is likely false, as no charges have been filed yet and three witnesses, two of which don't know Conley, say he was never alone with the alleged victim. There is an epidemic of false accusations against football players coming out for the NFL Draft.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 12:27 PM
1

I can't believe this got stickied tbh. I don't see this as the issue at all. The biggest thing that needs to change is the mods need to stop chasing off Right Wingers. Doing so has created an echo-chamber. I can't even mention how there is pedophile/child trafficking connected to the government without Leftists down-voting the crap out of me, no matter how well I argue the point and no matter how much evidence I use. People around here have started to put Leftist partisanship above men's rights,…
/r/MensRights26/04/17 10:02 AM
2

It depends on the audience. I'd try to find what they care about and go off of that. If your goal, however, is more to show that males can be victims, especially of rape/molestation, then I would point to how definitions exclude males in ways that almost nobody agrees with. For instance, almost everybody agrees that a woman who forces herself onto a male is raping him, but that's not how the law sees it. The law sees it as a sexual assault. You want to avoid getting into a male vs female dichoto…
/r/MensRights26/04/17 09:39 AM
0

If by "support" you mean I think he shouldn't lose his children then yes.
/r/MensRights23/04/17 01:36 AM
2

Because you know Jones so well. Give me a break.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 02:55 PM
0

Ad Hominem attack. Attacking the person. Please go on. No, an ad hominem isn't when you attack a person, it's when you say their argument is wrong because of who they are. So if I say you are wrong because you are a fucking lunatic, that's an ad hominem. If I say you are a fucking lunatic, I'm just stating a fact. You can see yourself out now. You lost credibility here. You are just completely detached from reality and you don't realize the damage done when children lose their parents.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 11:16 AM
3

Not exactly a reason to take his kids away.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 06:39 AM
3

You have no evidence that Alex Jones is causing harm to mental health, emotional health, or teaching children to be afraid of everything. And I'd argue that religious people within cults like Scientology and the Jehovas Witnesses are far worse than Alex Jones. Many Mormons as well. The Ahmish cause a lot of harm with their ideas about no technology. Those groups of people get to keep their children for the most part.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 06:04 AM
3

I said that it was against MRA principle to want to take the children away from Alex Jones simply because he disagrees with others politically. My stance is that Alex Jones does not put his children in danger. Think about it: We don't take the children away from Jehovas Witnesses, Scientologists, Mormons, Ahmish, etc., and they have some pretty out-there ideas. Alex Jones is far more moderate than many within those groups.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 05:40 AM
2

I never said the mother was evil, but nothing you explained is a good reason to take children away. There has to be some real and imminent danger to their lives. There's simply no evidence that Alex Jones is a danger to his children. We have no evidence that he is beating them or anything like that.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 05:36 AM
1

Doubtful.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 05:33 AM
0

Have you listened or watched his show? That is why his ex has a case against him. Yes, I have. It is not just his difference of opinions. He believes in Demons!! He has said so many times, Youtube has many videos of it. So, according to you, people who believe in demons are unfit to have their own children under their care, which over 50% of the country believes in demons. His wife is claiming that he is just like the persona he portrays. If that is the case I can not blame her for wanting to re…
/r/MensRights22/04/17 02:31 AM
1

Okay?
/r/MensRights22/04/17 02:20 AM
0

How so? You clearly don't understand the No True Scotsman fallacy very well.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 02:20 AM
-3

What makes him a danger to his children? A guy shouldn't lose his children because he has different opinions than you. You're a fucking lunatic, and you lack MRA principles.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:37 AM
-9

That just shows you are anti-men's rights that cares more about vengeance against Alex Jones and yourself than the welfare of your kids.
/r/MensRights21/04/17 09:56 PM
2

Ir'a not just the bag, look at her foot. When women cross their legs like that their foot tends to take up leg space of the other person or go into the aisle.
/r/MensRights20/04/17 07:25 PM
3

I think you handled it well, and the professor, at least by lip service, responded well. Now if she does it again I would interject in the middle and make an issue of it right away. But if the professor agrees to change and then does actually change, that's what we want, right? I'm glad you didn't pull a Feminist move and try to get her fired right off the bat.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 12:21 AM
1

It seems like a lot more of these articles are popping up. We're winning Big League! Gone are the days of pessimism.
/r/MensRights03/04/17 06:09 PM
1

How do you know what evidence is without perception and interpretation?
/r/MensRights02/04/17 03:15 PM
1

Perception and interpretation is a part of being rational. lol
/r/MensRights02/04/17 03:14 PM
1

No Darling the obligation os on you to provide the proof of your claims - not to tell other to go and beg for it from other people. Why do you keep calling me Darling? You're the one using the study and making claims about what it means and how to apply it, so the burden of proof is on you. You are such a Classic Netopathic Troll - you place the obligations for your proof onto others so you can claim your victimised when challenged. Yeah, yeah, okay. We disagree so I must be a troll. Anyone that…
/r/MensRights02/04/17 01:27 PM
1

Oh My! So you "SEE" them as false is the same as the feminists Feelz it's false. Yes, all one can do is have the perception and interpretation of an alleged fact. And no, I said nothing about the "Feminist Feels", I was talking about the alleged facts they also put out. In both cases we have a statistic that states a ridiculously high number (around half the population of high school/college kids). Sod you're seeing! Argue the stats and HOW THEY ARE USED not your seeing! I have an interpretation…
/r/MensRights02/04/17 01:22 PM
1

So when asked to provide proof we get trolling deflection again! That's not deflection, that's proof. They will tell you the topic is banned, and that will substantiate what I've been saying. Do you have a source for that claim - preferably from the FBI? The fact that you are asking for this tells me you know absolutely nothing about the subject, and that probably explains why you're so arrogant on the subject. Those who know very little about something often tend to act like they know it all. A…
/r/MensRights02/04/17 12:49 PM
1

What you're saying doesn't even makes sense for the situation. I'm an MRA fighting against statistics of male victims because I see them as false. While everybody has biases, that would conflict with my bias, as my bias would be to lean towards males are victims. You on the other hand, are talking exactly in line with male victimization which would fit perfectly along with an MRA ally's biases. So how in the world are you trying to argue that my biases are getting in the way here, but your biase…
/r/MensRights02/04/17 12:20 PM
1

Please provide proof of you claim ... or rather proof of the Conspiracy in this sub against you. Ask the mods, they will admit it. They have specifically censored it. Just because people ignore you I don't think you understand what censorship is. It doesn't mean people ignore you, it means that messages are literally removed. due to you well known bizarre and nut job ways, You don't know me. does not mean they support you just because you fail to mention Pizza Pizzagate, not pizza, although chee…
/r/MensRights02/04/17 12:11 PM
1

You seem to be so blinded by your internal biases you can't even read. What internal biases? I'm an MRA you fucking idiot.
/r/MensRights02/04/17 04:04 AM
1

Call BS All you like, but your screaming BS has far, far, far less value than a fully peer-reviewed academic publication from The American Psychological Association! Okay, so are we buying into the Feminist studies that say the same thing about women being raped? Please clean up after yourself as your BS is more toxic than most! P¬)) I've been in this movement for years. You're not going to shame me out of common sense. Get your emotions in check. Building a movement off of false statistics and …
/r/MensRights02/04/17 04:04 AM
1

Well if you want to say that the study is including any regret sex, fine, but then what does that have to do with sexual assault?
/r/MensRights02/04/17 03:58 AM
1

Sorry but this sub has no antipathy to Valid citizen investigative groups. There is a line in the sand which is not supportive or tolerant of Conspiracy Theory Nut Jobs. You're so convincing. One has to ask which side of that line you thrash about on! P¬)) I have investigated myself, and calling something a "conspiracy theory" does not make it wrong. In fact, every time I don't use the term "Pizzagate" this subreddit gets on board, but using the term "Pizzagate" and this Subreddit freaks out cal…
/r/MensRights02/04/17 03:55 AM
2

Ah, I see. So when Feminists come up with BS statistics like 50% of women will be raped in their lifetime or whatever they are using now, I'm supposed to call BS on it and laugh at how anybody could believe that. When there's a study about 50% of men getting raped, I should definitely just buy into it without questioning it. Makes sense. Sorry, but rape is not so rampant that 50% of the high school and college population is being raped. But hey, lets resort to ad hominem attacks because that mak…
/r/MensRights01/04/17 03:17 PM
-2

Yeah, I'm calling BS on this.
/r/MensRights01/04/17 01:21 PM
0

I think one of the great things that has been done by the citizen investigative movement is expose that men and boys are victims of sexual trafficking to a large extent. It's too bad this sub hates the movement, but you guys seem to be enjoying the fruits of the movement's labor.
/r/MensRights01/04/17 01:19 PM
7

I don't think this is mindset is going to win anybody over.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 10:56 AM
5

Think about how Feminists have their "facts". We wouldn't agree with them. We would question the sources. That's exactly what they would do. Now our facts are legitimate, but it's actually really hard to show that.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 10:55 AM
10

Going in with a bunch of stats is likely to create confrontation and not win anybody over. They will just question the sources and write off any sources listed. It's typically better just to keep the issues as more general unless talking to a neutral audience.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 05:25 AM
8

A lack of due process tends to expel more men than women from colleges, and women are earning more degrees from college than men. There are more scholarships exclusively for women than there are exclusively for men even though men have a tougher time than women. Also, the pressures of college leading to suicide impact men more than women. Those are some of the issues that could have been mentioned (although in a different way than I did here). Also, one point I have used effectively with people …
/r/MensRights24/03/17 05:18 AM
2

The times they are a changing. It's time for some optimism around these parts.
/r/MensRights09/03/17 01:49 PM
1

Men aren't going to read an article like that and change how they do life. And look at your reaction. You don't even care. So, by my estimation, the tone will only make their demographics think this is okay.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 11:24 PM
1

Oh yeah, who cares if someone pretends to care about another person, gains their trust, convinces others to buy them things they fake wanted to improve their quality of life, and just trample on those other people by doing it all to buy a house for themselves. Yeah, there's nothing wrong with that. And then to have an article writing it up with the tone of accomplishment, this definitely doesn't harm men at all, does it? After all, it's not like the pressure is on the men to provide for women. I…
/r/MensRights08/03/17 08:32 PM
1

Some would call it fraud, but whatever.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 07:09 PM
14

What bothers me is look how obvious the situation has to be for this guy to be taken seriously. I mean, allegedly, she did just about everything in the book wrong. The problem is that normally it isn't so clear, and a lot of times it's regret sex and the man can't prove himself innocent, so the kangaroo courts convict him. In any event, this case seems really solid. Hopefully the Trump Administration cuts funding to the school under Title IX violation.
/r/MensRights01/03/17 07:08 PM
1

Another post hits the front page and once again, it gets negatively flaired by the mods. This makes no sense.
/r/MensRights01/03/17 08:01 AM
1

Here's the problem: I'm sure you would love to sue, but are you really going to risk your job and ruffle the feathers over one day? It might be better just to document this so that when you stop working there some day or something happens, you can then go back and sue them over this.
/r/MensRights28/02/17 01:33 AM
3

Yup, women want to make as much as men do but they want to maintain the obligations under chivalry where men have to pay for them.
/r/MensRights26/02/17 05:42 AM
1

Bye.
/r/MensRights23/02/17 02:56 PM
1

No, I'm operating on incomplete information and giving the best advice I can. Oh, you've definitely jumped to conclusions. Now you're just being dishonest about it. I mean that on the one hand you are saying the mods have banned you and removed your posts and on the other we're having this conversation on this very subreddit. Yes, we're having a conversation in the comments section, which is different than what they have been removing. Again, you are implying that either I'm not being honest or …
/r/MensRights23/02/17 01:54 PM
1

You are jumping to conclusions. You don't know the posts that are deleted. You said this yourself, as you didn't even believe the posts were deleted. The sources were literally mainly just news organizations reporting on trafficking busts, typically at the local level. you come across like a crazed conspiracy theorist What do you mean by "conspiracy theorist"? I mean, by some definitions I would proudly take on that characterization, but by other definitions, it's just meant to undercut my credi…
/r/MensRights23/02/17 11:48 AM
1

At least with these three tests, I think Joe Mixon would have failed them all. I disagree. To think this is to see a woman as a weak child that can't injure anybody. For one, you can't hit someone back. You can only hit someone to prevent further injury or assault. He didn't hit her back in the sense that the assault was over and he just decked her. She was literally in the process of assaulting him. How you think it was a revenge punch is beyond me, as there was basically no time between the ti…
/r/MensRights23/02/17 07:39 AM
1

Lol. You are trying to so desperately to come up with anything other than the obvious, because for some reason, it's impossible for you to think that the mods could do something wrong. Seriously, presentation? lmfao I've been here years and posted all kinds of things on all kinds of topics, but suddenly on a certain topic, most of my stuff is getting censored, and I'm the problem. lol Thanks for trying to "teach" me.
/r/MensRights23/02/17 07:24 AM
4

The bottom line is he has hit someone in a public place Self-defense is legal. and is allegedly bigoted "allegedly" -- Lets talk about what we know and what other people are talking about, which is the fact that he would dare to hit a woman that is physically attacking him. She shouldn't have hit him, Absolutely, correct. And it wasn't just a hit. She started yelling at him, then she started pushing him, then she starting hitting him. It was an escalation of violence. But if he's followed them i…
/r/MensRights22/02/17 10:24 PM
1

I am telling you that I think it is your attitude that is the problem and if you change it your stuff will not get removed. Ah, so people's posts now get removed based on attitude rather than content? Stop making stuff up. Are you using dodgy sources? No. If not the only other thing is your attitude. See, you're just literally making stuff up. Am I using dodgy sources? If not, I must have a bad attitude! It couldn't possibly be that the mods do anything wrong because reasons! Because I can tell …
/r/MensRights22/02/17 10:14 PM
3

That part of it is just thrown out there, though. That's not what he admitted to. But you're just politicizing this. That is not the issue that people are bringing up in the NFL. They are bringing up the fact that he hit a woman, and it's never okay to hit a woman. I could really care less what you think about the situation to be honest. I care about what society's opinion is and why.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 10:11 PM
1

I've had like 4 articles removed. I did repost some of them and guess what? Still removed. See, you keep recommending things I've already done, and you're doing so sarcastically because you can't imagine that the mods would actually do anything wrong. Guess what? They are doing a lot wrong, and it's time you open your mind to the idea that they censoring things they should not be censoring, likely based on their political bias.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 09:22 PM
4

So he's an anti-gay bigot. I wish that were the reason they were keeping him out of the NFL. Actually, it sounds to me like he just said something he felt would hurt the other person to show them how it felt to be called a racial slur. Again, it seems, even from your own source (Wikipedia), that he was not the instigator. From the video, he followed her in there and said something to her. If those were "fighting words" then he's actually the instigator of the fight, even if she initiated physica…
/r/MensRights22/02/17 09:19 PM
1

I did, not that there's anything that I could say to convince someone like you because you think the mods can do no wrong. Remember, you didn't even believe me that this was being censored before. When a boy is a human and sexual trafficking victim as well as a sexual abuse victim, that child is having their rights stripped from them. That makes any victims of this issue, even if the boys are also trafficked with girls, to be a men's rights issue. That much is (or at least should be) clear.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 08:57 PM
1

Well first, those are from 1, 3, and 8 years ago. From a mod about my posts about the arrests and savings of human trafficking and sexual abuse, which had a lot to do with pedophilia: The point is, your post is a human rights issue. It's a criminal issue. It's a children's issue. There's no particular reason to focus on boys here. I offered you to provide such a reason in case it was simply something I missed. All you did was repeat that it affects boys. That does not constitute such a reason.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 08:13 PM
1

Argumentative so and so, aren't you? What? Ask the mods why your post on human trafficking was removed if you want to know. I know why. They believe that human and sex trafficking of boys is not a men's rights issue. That's literally what they told me. They see it as a human rights issue instead. I've talked to them. It's not a matter of a lack of knowledge of why, it's a matter of them having crazy ideas. The majority of people would say that boy victims of human and sexual trafficking and abus…
/r/MensRights22/02/17 05:53 PM
1

And yet here you are now. Yes, as I've explained, I am literally only here because I was unbanned after fighting hard to get unbanned. I was literally banned with the intention of that ban being permanent. Have you tried that on any of the feminist subs? Sigh So you even have others speaking out in your defence. Based on name recognition. What happens to all the non-trolls that haven't been here as long? They get permanently banned. This is a themed sub. If you want to talk about the invention o…
/r/MensRights22/02/17 03:59 PM
1

And RES tells me I have you at +7 What does this mean? which I assume must come from this subreddit so you've been here pretty freely. I was literally permanently banned when I first got to this Subreddit. Luckily, I was unbanned after making my case. More recently, a mod that didn't recognize me was threatening to ban me again for my "trolling" until others recognized that I had been here awhile. Had I been knew, I have no doubt I would've been banned again simply for constructively criticizing…
/r/MensRights22/02/17 02:24 PM
5

The mods here have been pretty openly anti-Right as well. I lean Left, but I've seen them unfairly push away many Conservatives and "traditionalists". I don't agree with a lot of the positions of a lot of those people, but I stand for their right to have a voice. Almost all of the mods here are Leftists. Part of the problem is that the big personalities within the MRM see self-criticism as "in-fighting", which they say as a threat to the MRM. It's amazing to me that they don't see the threat of …
/r/MensRights21/02/17 02:10 PM
1

Sure, when I first came here, I was permanently banned because I criticized the MRM and didn't have the "reputation" built up yet. That's literally what I was told when I complained, and I barely got unbanned. As of late, my stuff has been non-stop censored because apparently talking about boy victims of child and sex trafficking is either "political" (in which case they tell me to take it to /r/politics), a "conspiracy" (in which case they tell me to take it to /r/conspiracy because they have a…
/r/MensRights21/02/17 01:42 PM
-4

I'm kind of sick of people complaining about Feminist censorship to be honest. Yeah, they censor, but lets not pretend like the Men's Rights Movement "spaces", in particular this Subreddit, doesn't censor as well. We're nearly as bad as they are.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 01:29 PM
5

An MRA issue is one where it isn't about the victim, it's about the double-standard between a male perpetrator and a female perpetrator. And this isn't one of those. /u/sillymod, do you see what you have done? You have stupefied this Subreddit so much that people now believe Men's Rights is not about victims, only double standards between female and male perpetrators. I hope you think long and hard about the damage your censorship is doing.
/r/MensRights20/02/17 09:58 PM
1

You don't get it. The mods here censor it. They've deleted article after article that I've posted, especially the ones that start getting popular. I had one that had over 30 upvotes rising quickly within around an hour and they deleted it. I'd love to talk about human and sex trafficking of boys, but unfortunately, if I go further than this the mods will censor me.
/r/MensRights20/02/17 08:53 PM
0

Women's privacy/modesty is almost always valued more than men's. there are many medical blogs about it. And what is the privacy and modesty that is valued when girls are kidnapped, sold into sexual slavery, forced to perform satanic rituals, and even forced to eat their own stillbirths? Yeah, please tell me about how these issues only impact men and boys. The obvious answer is these impact both males and females, but that doesn't prevent this issue from being a men's rights issue. Nearly everybo…
/r/MensRights20/02/17 08:39 PM
6

Wow. You're actually going to make me defend this post. Okay. It's not about the perpetrator, it's about the victim.
/r/MensRights20/02/17 07:59 PM
3

You missed the point of my post. Don't you also think that the human and sexual trafficking of boys also deserves a place on this Subreddit? Because many of the mods here remove those posts calling them "human rights" issues and not "men's rights" issues. Also, I don't agree that privacy and modesty issues "would never happen to a girl". They are issues for some men and boys, but they also are issues for women and girls. These types of posts still beling here, just as the human and sexual traffi…
/r/MensRights20/02/17 07:58 PM
0

Maybe "the system" needs reform. So "women behaving badly" posts get to stay as "men's rights", but the human trafficking of boys is banned from the Subreddit? That makes no sense, man. This is a system that is broken and needs reform.
/r/MensRights20/02/17 07:54 PM
14

The only difference is that I was being sarcastic. But hey, it's not like a boy being stripped of his clothing in front of others to shame him is infringing upon on his rights, right? /s
/r/MensRights20/02/17 06:27 PM
10

/u/sillymod isn't this a human rights issue, not a men's rights issue? /s
/r/MensRights20/02/17 06:18 PM
1

See, thats the kind of thing that makes folks like me completely distrust you. Its not that you cant defend your positions. Its that none of you, not fucking one, ever even ATTEMPTS to defend your position. You don't understand. I literally can't. If I talk about it then this whole thing will get deleted and I'll possibly get banned...again. Sometimes you have to pick your battles. So...given all that...why shouldn't I just label you 'yet another SJW useful idiot lying about whatever he has to t…
/r/MensRights19/02/17 06:12 PM
1

I can't talk about it here. Sorry.
/r/MensRights19/02/17 02:03 AM
3

You probably haven't heard of it because the moderators are censoring sex trafficking of boys saying it's related to human rights, not men's rights. Something is seriously wrong with how this Subreddit is operating.
/r/MensRights19/02/17 02:02 AM
2

That is how I do it. Unfortunately, you and your fellow mods like to tell me that sexual trafficking and abuse of boys is not a men's rights issue. Mr Lynch said MAN was working with others to address the impact domestic abuse on men, women and children. The other mod specifically told me that any issue that impacts males and females is a human rights issue, not a men's rights issue, and human rights issues are not men's rights issues. If I had posted this you would've likely deleted it because …
/r/MensRights18/02/17 10:46 PM
3

Stop going to every post I make to spam and downvote it.
/r/MensRights18/02/17 04:44 AM
2

Why are you suddenly posting on like everything I've posted in the last few hours one right after another, downvoting most of them?
/r/MensRights18/02/17 04:34 AM
2

What?
/r/MensRights18/02/17 04:33 AM
7

Neither do many others - I do - But it would be worthwhile you stopping being such a self righteous Dick and educating people. How can I educate people when I'm censored nonstop on this Subreddit any time I post anything about sex trafficking or sex abuse of boys? You are the one doing a disservice to these kids when you are too lazy, lackadaisical and self importantly indignant to explain to the vast majority what is going on! What are you talking about? I linked to articles. I've explained ove…
/r/MensRights18/02/17 04:31 AM
6

1) I agree that these are not conspiracies, which is why the mods and others should stop calling them conspiracies, and should stop censoring posts about pedophilia, trafficking, etc. of boys. 2) I never said this was because of Trump, so don't put words in my mouth. I specifically mentioned that the first month of Trump Presidency is the TIME FRAME. 3) You say it's not a conspiracy, but then you tell me to take off my tinfoil hat. How does that make sense?
/r/MensRights18/02/17 04:26 AM
2

Hence the question mark. I'm sick of the mods and others calling this a conspiracy.
/r/MensRights18/02/17 03:49 AM
2

The numbers are from the first month of Trump's Presidency, so arrests before and after the first month are not counted.
/r/MensRights18/02/17 03:18 AM
1

Several of the suspects men met through a telephone service. Here talks among other things acted on so-called "snuff movies" where the victims - in this case children - raped to death.
/r/MensRights17/02/17 08:35 PM
1

"children" -- but yeah, go ahead and try to find any way you can to delete it because we all know what you're doing. Apparently now you delete things if it says "children" instead of "boys".
/r/MensRights17/02/17 04:03 PM
11

What did they mean by "gender equality" is the question. Is this more of an egalitarian or more of someone like Emma Watson with the #HeForShe type of Feminist "equality".
/r/MensRights17/02/17 09:51 AM
1

The answer is yes. What is stopping us from marching?
/r/MensRights16/02/17 02:24 PM
11

Harry Potter star admits she has a lot to learn and isn't an 'expert' on the subject Then why the fuck does she have a UN campaign?
/r/MensRights15/02/17 09:36 PM
1

Well, this could lead to skyrocketed wages for women at GE as well, and so if their female workers produce less and are paid more, this policy will really dig into GE's profits.
/r/MensRights15/02/17 02:35 PM
1

Oh, and also, Feldman is making an accusation. There is far less evidence for what he's saying than what I posted. He was making specific claims, and while I think there is something to them, the evidence simply isn't there for the standard that you have put my posts to. In fact, my posts have far more supporting evidence in their favor than Feldman's claims.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 11:02 AM
1

Btw, I just went back and looked for Sandusky in my #Pizzagate groups. There was an entire channel dedicated to a Franklin-Sandusky connection. I wasn't involved in this as much, but there were people investigating this arm of it. It's hard to say Sandusky's son isn't related to #Pizzagate when an arrest was predicted, he was arrested, Sandusky committed serious crimes against children and was arrested for it, and other #Pizzagate researchers not related to Seaman or his source was investigating…
/r/MensRights14/02/17 10:51 AM
1

This is about pedophilia, specifically targeting boys. It isn't trying to make any statement about politics or any other unsupported claim. This is directly from #Pizzagate, you realize that right? You use the term "political" really awkwardly. If I post this video, it's not political. If I post it with #PizzagateIsReal, then you call it political. Who do you think are the pedophiles? Powerful elites in the government. You don't seem to understand what "evidence" and "supported argument" is. You…
/r/MensRights14/02/17 10:43 AM
-1

This belongs in /r/Conspiracy, right /u/sillymod? Or does this #Pizzagate story become allowed because the term "#Pizzagate" wasn't used which you view as having a bad image?
/r/MensRights14/02/17 10:08 AM
1

Lol...if only you knew more about these companies. Fox News literally just had a massive walkout due to sexual harrassment allegations. The DC Police have been accused of covering up and/or igorning sexual abuse crimes. The NYT boss used to work for the BBC when he covered up a pedophile scandal. No, I'm not making that up.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 08:05 AM
1

You don't have to, because you don't get constantly censored. You are the tyrant doing the censoring. Have you ever had a single comment on here removed? But lets see, how is this related to #Pizzagate. Well, for one, #Pizzagate includes people outside of the government, too. Jerry Sandusky was a man who was in a position of power, and he abused boys for a long time at Penn State University. It was covered up by Penn State University. Now Jerry Sandusky's adopted son has been arrested on child s…
/r/MensRights14/02/17 07:36 AM
1

I ask you again, how is it a conspiracy? This man was fucking arrested by the police.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 07:26 AM
1

IT'S NOT A FUCKING CONSPIRACY. THIS MAN WAS FUCKING ARRESTED. HOW IS A MAN ARRESTED BY POLICE A CONSPIRACY?!?
/r/MensRights14/02/17 07:24 AM
1

Fuck off cunt.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 07:23 AM
1

I'd say you are downplaying the Norwegian ring quite a bit: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/norway-paedophile-ring-police-arrest-51-men-a7432441.html Yes, it included 2 politicians, as well as teachers, lawyers, and police. It included all ages, including infants. Children were tied up, penetrated, and forced to have sex with animals. Parents were abusing their own children, and one couple was talking about how they planned to abuse the child once the baby was born. 51 people in t…
/r/MensRights14/02/17 06:25 AM
1

You can't just declare something not real and expect people to take you seriously.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 06:19 AM
1

Yes, I've put over a hundred hours into investigating #Pizzagate. How much time did you put into it?
/r/MensRights14/02/17 06:18 AM
1

lol
/r/MensRights14/02/17 04:11 AM
1

I'm talking about people who were convicted of crimes. If they were convicted of crimes, how is it' a conspiracy theory?
/r/MensRights14/02/17 04:09 AM
1

And Feminism is about equality. The ability of the human brain to compartmentalize is quite amazing if you think about it.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 03:04 AM
3

I didn't mention Hillary Clinton OR John Podesta. You did. And you couldn't even accurately represent what #Pizzagate is, but you are quick to denigrate the movement.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 01:52 AM
1

That's actually not true. Defense lawyers defend pedophiles all the time, not because they are pedophiles, but because they believe in due process.
/r/MensRights13/02/17 10:40 PM
10

He would have his life destroyed and possibly be killed. But there is thought to be an active investigation in pizzagate. I'm not sure how much that extends into Hollywood, but it would definitely be targeting the government.
/r/MensRights13/02/17 01:08 PM
2

It's good to know there are friends among us. :) <3
/r/MensRights13/02/17 01:08 PM
19

You're leaving out quite a bit. A friend he worked with committed suicide, which many Hollywood people have said was due to sexual abuse he received in Hollywood. If you look around at many different celebrities, there are actually quite a few actors who have spilled some beans.
/r/MensRights13/02/17 12:14 PM
-1

Don't accuse people of being a pedophile out of spite. It doesn't help.
/r/MensRights13/02/17 11:53 AM
9

You know, Media Matters for America pays for comments like these. Why do something for free that people are willing to pay for?
/r/MensRights13/02/17 11:52 AM
6

#Pizzagate is supposed to be about to go down. Arrests were predicted to happen last week, but Jeff Sessions was delayed a few days. David Seaman said he will make his confidential source less confidential if there are not high level arrests this morning as promised. Corey Feldman was exposing the Hollywood rings. I've done a lot of citizen investigation and I primarily deal in Haiti. Basically, the plan was to illegally traffick children (were talking mainly infants and toddlers) to the Dominic…
/r/MensRights13/02/17 11:48 AM
2

There's another movement that may be interested in this. It may or may not have something to do with pizza.
/r/MensRights12/02/17 09:15 AM
2

Stop blaming the victims. It is not the fault of the people here that they censored us. They censored us because they disagree with us ideologically, plain and simple. They are doing this to all non-Far Left ideas. THEY are the problem. THEY are the radicals. Not us.
/r/MensRights09/02/17 12:08 PM
2

No surprise there. Even trying to follow their rules by not talking about certain subjects that impact many boys and men, /r/MensRights is still censored. You have to realize that this is based on ideology, not actions.
/r/MensRights09/02/17 12:04 PM
24

For as much as they hate men, some of them certainly want sex from men quite a bit.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:31 PM
2

My thoughts on what he said are pretty much the same. It's not relevant. What is relevant is influencing their platform whether we agree with them or not. In fact, whether we agree with Justice Democrats or not has nothing to do with my post. It's a completely different subject. I think a major part of the problem with people like you is that you seem to see men's rights as partisan, so you only want to influence the side you agree with most, when in reality men's rights is non-partisan and we c…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:41 AM
1

I mean Classical Liberals. People like me believe in "entitlement" programs such as welfare, disability, etc. We are the people who used to be strongly Democratic, but many of whom voted Trump largely because Progressives have Collectivist thinking. It's the Classical Liberals (which are unfortunately represented by Corporate Democrats) and Progressives that make up the majority of the Democratic Party, and that means that Social Democrats cannot succeed without the support of Classical Liberals…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:37 AM
1

Here's my thinking: They can't succeed without Classical Liberals, and Classical Liberals are completely against this anti-male bashing. They may be forced to give into men's rights to some extent to be palatable to enough Classical Liberals.
/r/MensRights05/02/17 09:31 PM
1

From my perspective, I see both groups growing simultaneously. Of course, because from your perspective, we are the same group.
/r/MensRights05/02/17 05:59 PM
1

All I see is a non-answer.
/r/MensRights05/02/17 05:57 PM
1

What does any of this have to do with my post?
/r/MensRights05/02/17 08:07 AM
2

Yes I do. I've (along with others) already influenced him to some extent when they criticized Bernie Sanders for using the wage gap in a misleading way. But again, this is really besides the point because the is no harm in trying. I sent them an email, it got passed onto others for consideration, and we'll see what happens. If others contact them as well, they might consider some policies. They want to be successful and so they need to create a platform that is inclusive to enough people to be s…
/r/MensRights04/02/17 07:05 PM
0

It's amazing to me that you can't comprehend that this not about putting a group into power. This is influencing a group that may some day get into power. If they never get into power then no damage done. If they do, we want them to be influence to take on men's rights. Seriously, what is so hard about this concept? Why do people keep making it about who will take over the Democratic Party? You don't have to agree with them to influence them. All of this other stuff about supporting a different …
/r/MensRights04/02/17 04:11 PM
2

Trump is not the most unpopular President in American history. In fact, according to Rasmussen, around 55% approve of Trump. Hillary Clinton certainly helped his case, but Trump probably would've beaten Bernie Sanders as well.
/r/MensRights04/02/17 03:59 PM
2

Of course they are, but would you rather them be into identity politics while completely ignoring men or be into identity politics while keeping men in mind? If we opt-out of any influence whatsoever, what happens when they get into power? Men get screwed is what happens. Now if we influence the platform then if they get into power it won't be quite as bad for men.
/r/MensRights04/02/17 09:01 AM
2

Yeah, they certainly lost me. I happily voted Trump, someone who is actually an individualist. Democrats will keep losing until they get back to individualism.
/r/MensRights04/02/17 07:58 AM
1

It's not about considering them, it's about influencing them. Why would you not be interested in telling them how you feel where maybe they become a little more reasonable on one or two issues? For instance, if we speak up, maybe they consider paternity leave. Maybe they consider specifically addressing family court issues. I know I've heard Cenk actually agree with these issues. In fact, Cenk and Ana both criticized Bernie Sanders for using a misleading wage gap statement about how women make 7…
/r/MensRights04/02/17 05:51 AM
1

Why wouldn't you just go to their website and read their platform? But yeah, the Progressives are behind it. Still, people like Cenk Uyger and Kyle Kulinsky are the less crazy Progressives. If we opt-out of any input, then they won't consider any men's rights.
/r/MensRights04/02/17 05:37 AM
9

Well they certainly aren't going to consider any men's rights issues without us fighting for those issues, so why not try? Also, paternity leave is something that some Feminists agree with because they rightfully believe it will help mothers.
/r/MensRights03/02/17 07:07 PM
3

That's what the sarcasm is for.
/r/MensRights02/02/17 10:59 PM
5

It's the hat on top.
/r/MensRights02/02/17 04:24 PM
1

There are two terms you are conflating: The Red Pill group and the term "red pilling" which refers to telling someone facts and arguments to help them see the truth. The film "The Red Pill" itself refers to the latter. What anti-woman arguments do you see in the MRM that also exist in TRP? In my eyes, you have an agenda to make these two different groups into one to make the MRM easier to attack, because the MRM actually is making changes and growing while TRP isn't.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 06:20 PM
1

Honestly, just email, Tweet, or Youtube comment to them. I think if everybody individually makes their own case that's best.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 06:40 PM
6

It was inappropriate. And as they say in the video, she's not allowed to campaign politically. That's exactly what she did.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 02:25 PM
2

The fact that you don't see a difference shows that you don't know what you are talking about.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 02:20 PM
4

The hat is supposed to be a vagina. It's what they wore at the Women's March. https://www.pussyhatproject.com/
/r/MensRights31/01/17 02:19 PM
1

Nope, I don't even like TYT.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 05:21 AM
1

Okay, but what does that have to do with this post? And it's Ana, btw.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 05:10 AM
1

OH! Okay, sorry.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 02:55 AM
2

Just go to the Justice Democrats page and use their email. You can also find him on Twitter, Youtube, and other social media sites. He goes by either Kyle Kulinski or Secular Talk.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 12:51 AM
3

The MRM is not centralized. Individuals within the MRM vary in political ideology a lot. So on support, I think it really depends on their political stance in general. On constructive advice/feedback, I agree 100%. I see no reason why MRA's would opt-out of giving constructive advice/feedback.
/r/MensRights30/01/17 11:18 PM
13

I don't think she's saying literally nobody. I think she's saying that there aren't enough fathers (and people in general) speaking out about it. That's true. That's why things haven't changed. A lot of fathers have suspicions of discrimination, but they don't speak out about it because they don't have the proof. The amount of people speaking out is growing, though. Also, when was this comment made? I don't actually know. More and more people are coming out every day, but again, more people need…
/r/MensRights30/01/17 11:15 PM
3

I'm not asking you to sign up, I'm asking you to try to raise awareness to them about how their platform harms men in a way that they might change their platform to be more reasonable to men. For instance, I asked them to add paternity leave (among other things), because they had paid maternity leave on their platform. Why would you say no to influencing their platform in a way that helps benefit men?
/r/MensRights30/01/17 11:04 PM
2

I'm not trying to turn this into a partisan politics thing. Lets be clear: They are Progressives. Progressives, even more than typical Democrats, have a long history of prioritizing women over men. Sure, they have some other policies that will help men indirectly, but that's really not the point of them. But either way, I think we should try to influence platforms where we can all along the spectrum. If there is a Conservative, Libertarian, or some other platform that is developing and open to i…
/r/MensRights30/01/17 11:02 PM
1

If you want to hear about the Justice Democrats on a Sargon of Akkad Livestream with Kyle Kulinski (one of the people behind Justice Democrats who runs Secular Talk) then here's the recording of the livestream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48BFEw4MSAs
/r/MensRights30/01/17 09:33 PM
71

She's just trying to empower fathers to speak out. She's supporting fathers, reassuing them that they have a legitimate beef worth fighting for, and telling them to stand up for themselves in order to empower them. I don't see the problem with this.
/r/MensRights30/01/17 08:08 PM
5

Classical Liberals, who tend to be very sympathetic to the Men's Rights Movement, are often against Feminism. These are also some of the most popular political Youtubers. Jon Tron was recently on Sargon of Akkad's Youtube (on his Sargon of Akkad Livestreams account), and that whole group is basically anti-Feminist with sympathetic MRA views. Spinosauraskin is actually an MRA. This should really be no surprise. EDIT: One thing I want to add is it tends to get pretty doom-and-gloom around here, bu…
/r/MensRights30/01/17 04:39 PM
2

You don't even know what you are talking about.
/r/MensRights28/01/17 09:20 PM
1

It's my understanding the adoptees didn't have the proper paperwork, either.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 03:43 PM
2

It's not baseless. It's actually a symbol released by the FBI. Don't call facts "baseless claims" out of your own ignorance.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 08:53 AM
1

I'm glad to hear it! Awards are never a bad thing. Great job!
/r/MensRights25/01/17 06:55 PM
2

Don't get tired of answering that question. The fact that people ask that question is what makes it a great title.
/r/MensRights25/01/17 06:49 PM
2

What do you dislike about the film?
/r/MensRights25/01/17 06:46 PM
2

Previous post: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5if1e1/father_has_child_stolen_from_him_due_to_mother/
/r/MensRights25/01/17 04:13 PM
1

Then make your position clear, because when I corrected who was calling it pedophilia, you said "well, hebephilia then, but you're just playing semantics now", e.g. that you think its just basically pedophilia. Even by that definition hebephiliia overlaps almost entirely with pedophilia, so just because something is hebephilia does not mean it's not pedophilia by that definition. But according to FBI Special Agent Kenneth V. Lanning, "child sexual abuse" is basically an age range of more than 5 …
/r/MensRights10/01/17 12:57 AM
1

I'll take this from a different angle: If Feminists achieved raising the age of consent to 18 then I agree with them. I don't define my own ideas by being against anything Feminists have done. So if they brought about this good reform I stand by their side on it.
/r/MensRights10/01/17 12:37 AM
1

because you originally thought that it meant strictly underage, Stop lying and making stuff up, especially about my positions.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 08:32 PM
1

If the meaning has changed due to the culture, this is semantics. No it's not. The meaning has changed over time due to a better understanding of mental health. It is not a fact that you are a child at 17 and then an adult at age 18, it is a truth, because it is arbitary, and by definition, semantic. It's not arbitrary. There are good reasons for choosing the ages we do. For instance, there is a difference between calling someone adult (in terms of consent) at 2, 12, or 82. That difference is no…
/r/MensRights09/01/17 08:31 PM
1

Ah, I see, now you're using the ad hominem and saying its all pedophilia. What ad hominem? But like I said, I don't care if you want to use the term pedophilia or hebephilia. In case you actually believe it, it was legal to go down to 13 until around 1910 It's not 1910 anymore is it? There were all kinds of messed up laws in the past. And yes, feminists did push age of consent up to 16-18. You have no concept of what pedophilia means. No, they didn't. And I've already given a definition of pedop…
/r/MensRights09/01/17 04:33 PM
1

It's not semantic because there is established law in the US for an age of consent. Sure, in 1275 and in other places they may have a different age, but this is far from semantic. You don't seem to know what semantic means to be honest. And when a country has a set age, such as 18, breaking that law means something.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 04:27 PM
0

You're talking about the act of circumcising, I'm talking about the state of being circumcised.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 04:22 PM
1

The semantic aspect is whether you use the term "pedophile" or "hebephile". But I understand, Milo was the predator, right? EDIT: And btw, Feminists didn't define adulthood. But when it comes down to it, the laws are on the books that it is quite illegal for a 35 year-old to have sex with a 14 year-old. You can defend this pedophile/hebephile until your little heart desires, though.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 07:09 AM
3

It depends on your definition. The dictionary defines pedophilia as "a person who is sexually attracted to children." Some definitions defined pedophilia as being attracted to those 13-and-under, but then there are other terms such as Hebephilia that include 11-to-14 year-olds, and at that point you're just playing a semantic word game. Call it whatever you want, but a 35 year-old having sex with a 14 year-old is extremely wrong, and that has nothing to do with Feminism.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 03:33 AM
3

In the name of the children, we're going to make sure they stay with their pedophile mother! That's some serious backwards thinking, although there are plenty of pedophiles in the government as well.
/r/MensRights08/01/17 08:37 PM
0

There's nothing wrong with being circumcised.
/r/MensRights08/01/17 03:33 PM
-3

When men become angry/depressed about MIC/MGM (w/e you want to call it), it's because they have been taught to be so. This is a taught victimization that I can't get on board with, and it's especially pushed by the Intactivist Movement. But for people that feel they would benefit, by all means. I think we need to be careful of indoctrinating males to feel like victims, because it harms them, not helps them. This is the same type of victimization that female Feminists and BLM Blacks tend to feel.
/r/MensRights08/01/17 08:59 AM
3

Lets hope she's not out in 4.
/r/MensRights08/01/17 04:44 AM
6

Those that break the law tend to break it again. I think what needs to happen is to have families of the victims post-early release start going after the government for negligence after releasing these stone cold female killers.
/r/MensRights08/01/17 12:54 AM
2

I think /r/mensrights should focus on sexual and human trafficking. Rings have been getting exposed at an alarming rate recently, and there is a history of the government not even looking for male victims in their research. (Of course, /r/mensrights should never become about one issue, though.)
/r/MensRights07/01/17 03:24 PM
3

I guess the U of Miami didn't get the memo that kangaroo courts are no longer cool.
/r/MensRights06/01/17 10:40 PM
6

I can't believe this misogyny I'm seeing. /s /u/Thinkmoreaboutit
/r/MensRights06/01/17 10:33 PM
1

/r/MensRights is inherently political and I posted this to express how women commit proxy violence. It's a great example. I even put that connection in the title.
/r/MensRights06/01/17 01:17 AM
5

Some of our high schools (and sadly middle schools) our infiltrated with SJW crap as well. We need to work on that, but if there are no programs at the university level to work to then the high schools will probably drop these classes. It's not like it's very useful for getting a job or anything like that.
/r/MensRights06/01/17 12:14 AM
7

As a voter who lives in Wisconsin, I sent Sen. Stephen Nass an appreciative message. UW-Madison has given into the Progressives way too much, but the situation is still salvageable, and there have been times where UW-Madison has shown signs of sanity.
/r/MensRights06/01/17 12:10 AM
1

I don't know the details of the case, but if she spoke mistruths saying that she was victimized in ways that she wasn't then she did make them up. That doesn't make her an evil, terrible person that was necessarily out to get this man. My issue would be more with a process that came to a faulty conclusion (yet again), and possibly over-emphasizing the testimony when there was no DNA evidence. These kinds of cases with faulty convictions are popping up all over.
/r/MensRights05/01/17 11:22 PM
2

This is shitting on the justice system.
/r/MensRights05/01/17 09:02 PM
0

She literally was telling the men in the video to shank the victim. This shows how violence is typically carried out: Men are committing the violence and the woman is committing the proxy violence. The woman is egging the men on to do more, which would get them (and possibly her) in more trouble.
/r/MensRights05/01/17 06:09 PM
0

UPDATE: The male victim was Special Needs: http://100percentfedup.com/blmkidnappingchicago-superintendent-calls-vicious-torture-scalping-of-white-special-needs-teen-by-4-black-thugs-a-prankchicago-commander-calls-it-stupid-mistaketw/
/r/MensRights05/01/17 11:13 AM
4

Because males are the most physically victimized and females often use proxy violence, which is illustrated here. It will be interesting to see if the female in this case gets more, less, or the same amount of jail time as the males.
/r/MensRights05/01/17 10:34 AM
4

I almost never go with the child argument. Women almost always get emotional and defensive about the issue. Suicide is a great issue to get people to acknowledge an issue that affect men, but I find that it doesn't actually garner much empathy. So then from there I try to include an issue that would garner more empathy, maybe like MGM. And once they accept a few issues like that, they are much more likely to accept that men get abused and there aren't enough resources for men. Also, conceding fe…
/r/MensRights05/01/17 03:12 AM
4

Feminists in the UK, Canada, and the USA get a lot of heat for their actions, but honestly, some of the most vile Feminists come from Australia. That is likely a large reason why some of the best MRA organization is also in Australia. EDIT: 40% of the respondents on that website either were happy or loved the article. If they are happy or love the threat, that is pathetic. In fairness, though, it could be that they are happy or love that an investigation took place.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 05:00 PM
2

But their sub, their rules, I guess. Look at their rules. The mods aren't following the rules of their own Subreddit.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 04:23 PM
3

That's literally the only comment, which I specified as a good comment, but there isn't much besides this. And this is more legal information rather than legal advice. There is much more information out there that could have been explained, and the post should not have been locked. So to answer your question directly, I want them to keep the post unlocked, which I don't think is asking too much.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 03:26 PM
5

A Reddit like /r/legaladvice seems like it should be largely judgement-free where they simply inform people about their rights. Saying that one has "no applicable rights" seems like it should always be an incorrect statement.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 12:19 AM
6

I agree 100% with this.
/r/MensRights02/01/17 11:59 PM
7

I'm going to send the moderators a message and see if maybe we can raise some awareness about the inequality here. Reading the rules, the users there are breaking the Subreddit and the moderators aren't removing the posts they should be removing. They do seem to have some anti-MRA sentiments. This is the only sub that post has been linked to and yet they locked the post saying this: Proper legal answers have been given. This thread is getting linked to subs with specific agendas. Locking it now …
/r/MensRights02/01/17 11:32 PM
3

So instead, men have to chase women around like they are some sort of celebrity with no time for a fan. I see.
/r/MensRights02/01/17 08:05 AM
3

If those are accurate, that is an absolutely massive difference among push-ups.
/r/MensRights02/01/17 06:57 AM
1

You've missed the point. I haven't. But also got the point at the same time. Not sure how you've quite managed that. It's almost as if I understood the point you were making from the beginning and simply disagree with you on what you think. Weird. But as a classical liberal wouldn't you also say that there need to be safeguards in place to prevent the tyranny of the majority? Yes, which is why we vote for representatives instead of voting on issues in direct democracy sort of way. It's also why …
/r/MensRights01/01/17 03:41 PM
1

Right, so women have less of a tendency to vote for the Nazis than men. I guess that means that men having the vote is a bad thing. Right? Of course, saying this is ridiculous, just as your comment is ridiculous. You can make all of these arguments about government spending, but government spending isn't necessarily a bad thing. Different people have different values and interests. A rich person likely doesn't value free health care as much as a poor person, for instance. This is why, and especi…
/r/MensRights01/01/17 02:29 PM
6

It's not fair to blame the ability of women to vote for the election of candidates that turned out to be bad leaders.
/r/MensRights01/01/17 12:37 PM
1

That definitely helps the situation. I would say just keep voicing your displeasure, and voice it seriously whether that be with tone, emotion, etc. Good luck.
/r/MensRights01/01/17 12:41 AM
1

Well, assuming the story is true, it sounds like the guy was being pretty dang logical to me. But I agree with others that the site looks shady. There's almost no information on it, there are tons of "404" pages, and there's almost no effort put into the website. There are certain to be many stories like this, so why not just post one with more credibility?
/r/MensRights31/12/16 03:33 PM
4

A lot of people will tell you to get out of the situation, which is obviously an option. But you love her, and if you want to try to work things out, I would say to give her instant conditioning. If she hits you, you have to react on the spot. You can't hide your reaction and then talk to her later about it. In fact, if you embarrass her in public or around her friends by making a big deal about it in public, that's beneficial IMO. But if even reacting negatively (such as crying) on the spot doe…
/r/MensRights31/12/16 03:12 PM
29

Remember when they refused to cover us? And remember when they would vilify us? Now they are pleading with us.
/r/MensRights31/12/16 03:03 PM
1

Oh, really? Because some ASMR really is that cringy.
/r/MensRights30/12/16 10:29 PM
1

Even if I grant you that one doesn't have to, he did. So what's the problem here?
/r/MensRights29/12/16 02:28 AM
3

It depends how they carry it out. This seems like a response to the Communist Drexel professor who said that he wished for White genocide for Christmas, and that the Whites killed in Haiti was a good thing. These types of comments shouldn't be allowed for professors IMO. Now obviously, there's a big difference between wishing for a genocide and being called a racist every time you slightly disagree with another group. I disagree with your idea that radical feminist misandrists are the majority. …
/r/MensRights29/12/16 12:30 AM
1

They stopped being MGTOW and started being MRA aka turned from MGTOW to MRA. I'm not sure how you don't understand that to be honest.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 11:03 PM
1

This isn't really about men's rights. It's about MGTOW. And sure, the tone is one of mockery, but it's not really a hit piece. They cover what MGTOW's actually believe for the most part. I find it funny that one of the MGTOW's they use has turned from MGTOW to MRA (Spinosauruskin).
/r/MensRights27/12/16 09:03 PM
3

I used to see this kind of thing a lot more, but I think we've won a lot of these types of people over, so there's not nearly as many as there used to be. Ana Kasparian of TYT actually said something along these lines when covering #ShirtGate. Basically, what they say is that men have real issues, there aren't enough people talking about these issues, but MRA's are a problem. They then also say that radical feminists are a problem. Of course, what they are doing is equating all MRA's to just the…
/r/MensRights26/12/16 07:18 PM
1

No. It has to do with testosterone variability throughout the day. So, from what I read, testosterone is highest in the morning and lowest in the night, so the best fathers have the widest range, but for mothers, apparently less of a range is better. I have some questions about the study. For instance, I don't know how they defined quality parenting. That seems quite subjective. EDIT: One thing that I find interesting about this is it shows that testosterone effects men and women differently, so…
/r/MensRights26/12/16 11:36 AM
13

She is just a terrible human being. Jess Phillips has a long history of this kind of behavior, and Philip Davies has a long history of taking on men's issues. The best against the worst right there.
/r/MensRights24/12/16 11:23 AM
2

Also, there's a small write-up of it here (and lots of articles): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Mixon One of the Wikipedia sources is continuing to update, as now she is trying to sue him (he got 1-year probation and 100 hours of community service in a plea deal maintaining innocence): http://newsok.com/ou-running-back-joe-mixon-sued/article/5511081
/r/MensRights23/12/16 09:58 PM
6

And as relevant now as ever.
/r/MensRights23/12/16 07:57 PM
1

I think you missed the point of what I was saying.
/r/MensRights22/12/16 08:35 PM
1

This would've actually been pretty good without that stupid "Downie" line which had nothing to do with anything.
/r/MensRights22/12/16 02:37 PM
1

Some rape is expected. Some false accusations is expected. No matter what society we have, these are going to exist. I believe false accusations are artificially high, and that is because it is encouraged by different laws, a lack of going after those who commit false accusations, and because false accusations are accepted in society to some extent.
/r/MensRights22/12/16 01:19 PM
11

Look at how men often act around women in an office-environment workplace. They often fear being accused of a sexual assault. And look at what's going on in universities. I know a lot of men avoid dating feminists due to false accusation fears. Yes, people on Reddit talk a lot about this stuff, moreso than offline. But people on Reddit also have a life offline to be informed on this subject. After all, you're on Reddit, and you seem to think you're informed on the issue. So sure, false accusatio…
/r/MensRights22/12/16 09:36 AM
2

Or allow violence against women as comedy in soaps.
/r/MensRights22/12/16 06:31 AM
19

The thing is that proving this stuff is very tough. How do you prove that they fired you because you sued a customer? There's almost never clear evidence of that. And what they can do is force you out by treating you like crap until you quit.
/r/MensRights22/12/16 02:29 AM
56

Well, that actually takes far more determination to sue someone than to falsely accuse someone. Also, he would've had troubles getting witnesses, and likely didn't know of the tape. His employer might even fire or punish him for suing a customer.
/r/MensRights21/12/16 11:09 PM
1

Classical liberalism is obviously the way to go...and still most popular in our society.
/r/MensRights21/12/16 09:36 PM
318

Women are weaponizing fraudulent sexual charges (or threats of them) at an alarming rate. It's becoming the go-to for many women to try to get what they want. And I say women, not because it's all women or anything like that, but because men simply don't do this nearly to the extent that women do. It's primarily perpetrated by women against men. This is a culturally issue, and it was emboldened by the government when the legislatively created special laws for sexual crimes, the executive branch …
/r/MensRights21/12/16 08:33 PM
11

Well, it looks like we need a new law to make selling these illegal. EDIT: You know what would be really disgusting? What if she (or another woman) held out being pregnant longer to sell these tests and make more money, and then abort later in pregnancy. That could be really immoral, devastating to the father, and possibly advance the pro-life cause.
/r/MensRights21/12/16 03:28 AM
2

That's not it at all. Fighting for change is one thing, but feeling like a victim is another. Having the mindset that you can overcome the bad is actually good for one's own personal mental health. I cite all kinds of Regressives whether they be of the Feminist type, BLM type, or some other version. Their feeling of victimization completely controls them, and they don't feel empowered to do anything about it.
/r/MensRights21/12/16 01:16 AM
-1

Well, the accusations of others do not define you. I don't know your situation well enough, but you just have to find a way to truck on. If your future plans are screwed, make some new ones. You may have some financial issues from this situation, but you can still live a fulfilling life. One thing to consider is they may not let you leave while you owe money. I don't know how that works.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 09:48 PM
2

What ASMR is supposed to be: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZTITdC9mlA To learn more about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_sensory_meridian_response I don't listen to the stuff, but basically it's supposed to give you a sort of tingling sensation on your skin, often times the back of your neck. Many people find this to be relaxing to fall asleep to. It has something to do with the pitch, which is why they are all whispering in videos. ASMR creators use props, too, as you can see i…
/r/MensRights20/12/16 08:24 PM
4

Not to mention "White" is a grey categorization. Are Jews White? Judging by success, they have been doing pretty well. Are Poles White? Are Italians White? Are the Irish White? Because at different points in history, all of these groups have been viewed as only pseudo-White or non-White altogether.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 08:03 PM
2

"Hey, fellow White guys" switches to a non-White man; switches to a non-White man; switches to a non-White, non-man; switches to a non-White, non-man and then starts repeating with a few others sprinkled in.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 07:58 PM
3

28,200+ upvotes (at the moment of me writing this comment)? Yeah, the Reddit community has been red pilled.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 08:54 PM
2

If you're thinking about further charges, you may want to talk to a lawyer. I don't know what the laws are in Northern Ireland, but is it possible the police infringed upon your rights by arresting you despite evidence that you were defending yourself? It could possibly be considered police harassment or something like that. I'm not sure. I'm not a lawyer. I'd say that whatever you do, don't worry about the perpetrator, just worry about yourself. Don't worry about their kids or anything like tha…
/r/MensRights19/12/16 08:34 AM
8

Just don't teach him that he's a victim. He will face inequalities in some areas, but he can rise up and still succeed. The UK has some men's rights groups and even a political party called the Justice for Men and Boys (and the Women Who Love Them) Party. #Brexit was a good sign for the way the political winds are blowing. In fact, a highly Feminist party called the Labor Party is on the verge of collapse and considers no seat safe. That's a very good sign for the future of men's rights.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 04:05 PM
4

It goes with the territory. I had a bunch of friends from college that I continued to talk to post-college via Facebook. Some of them removed me when I started posting about men's rights, not because I was talking politics, but specifically because it was about men's rights. Then others removed me when I voted Trump, with a large reasoning being he will do more for men's rights (or at least less to obstruct men's rights). Keep in mind that many of these people are going for their Ph.D.'s. They h…
/r/MensRights18/12/16 04:15 AM
1

It's actually about pretty much every interview I see. Here she's just trying to make a film, and every interview is about guys and gals drooling over her looks. I'm not going to name names, but it's tougher to find an interview that doesn't include something about her looks than one that does. My comment was about far more than just Louder With Crowder. And to add one more part, think about if I want to give one of these interviews to someone outside of the MRM that isn't yet on board. The firs…
/r/MensRights17/12/16 09:47 PM
2

Her job is to promote her film, not give her own views necessarily. Also, why would she deny going on Alex Jones, which is a HUGE media platform? That would be idiotic. Alex Jones has been right on some things as of late, and he's also getting away from a lot of the ridiculous conspiracy theories while keeping with some of the more reasonable ones that might actually be true.
/r/MensRights17/12/16 05:54 PM
1

Of course it does, but that doesn't mean just about every host has to bring up her looks. Everybody can see what she looks like. That doesn't need to be a stated part of the interview. In fact, I think that can de-legitimize her and the interviewer/interview to some people.
/r/MensRights17/12/16 04:59 PM
2

Not what I said.
/r/MensRights17/12/16 01:59 PM
8

Yeah, but when she goes on a radio/tv/internet show to talk about "The Red Pill", why do they bring up her looks? It's so unprofessional.
/r/MensRights17/12/16 09:22 AM
43

It really annoys me that everybody brings up her looks. Who cares what she looks like? What is important is what she is saying, the issues that she is bringing up, etc. She could look ugly as sin and it wouldn't change anything.
/r/MensRights17/12/16 07:58 AM
5

Good job! Remember, people here may help you, but it's still you that put it all together in the end. It's your success. One point I wanted to make is that you can use their laughter against them (which you did at the end). I was at a bar and people asked me about politics. I mentioned men's rights, and everybody started laughing. They asked why a men's rights movement needs to exist, and I told them because of their reaction of laughter. I told them they would never react that way when hearing …
/r/MensRights16/12/16 01:49 AM
2

The mother signed her rights to the child away while under opiates. Just think about that.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 01:43 AM
0

And I'm sure Feminists would call "big-girl" insults to be sexist.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 07:10 PM
0

Is there some logic in there other than a no true Scotsman fallacy? It's not a No True Scotsman Fallacy to say I'm not a part of a group you claim I am a part of, when i don't fit the definition of that group in any way. "I'm not alt-right because they're mostly christian" Casting aspersions based on that flawed logic is inept at best. Some would say that definitionally they are Christian, but that's fine if you don't see it that way. Don't forget about all the other things I objected to outside…
/r/MensRights14/12/16 07:30 AM
-1

Wouldn't I have to be a part of the alt-right to be an alt-right evangelist? Heck, shouldn't I at least be a part of the Right to be an alt-right evangelist? Most in the alt-right are Christian, are they not? You really screwed this one up.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 06:58 AM
-1

That's because I'm exposing their double think. lol
/r/MensRights14/12/16 05:18 AM
-1

Notice the Feminist tag. I'm exposing their double think.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 05:17 AM
1

"big-girl pants" is not a phrase.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 02:48 AM
1

"big-boy" -- It's like saying "act like a man". For Feminists who think calling women bossy is sexist, it's interesting that they allow things like this to be said, especially since they also claim to be advocating for equality. /u/Amrikaayi
/r/MensRights14/12/16 02:47 AM
1

I have no idea what you are trying to say.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 12:42 AM
4

Well, the MRM and MGTOW Movement tend not to get along and don't agree with each other. We're not the same movement. Having said that, #NotAll MGTOW's are bad. Some of them simply don't want to date women anymore.
/r/MensRights13/12/16 09:30 PM
1

I would recommend seeing a lawyer, and they can give you the best advice. They can tell you how to proceed, whether you should contact the police or not, etc.
/r/MensRights12/12/16 04:34 PM
6

I agree 100%, but I would add that this action can be an attempt to intimidate without actually having the intention of getting people sick.
/r/MensRights12/12/16 01:31 PM
5

Faulty logic. Both men and women get time off for injury, personal matters, etc., but women tend to use more. A person who takes more time off does, and should, get paid less than someone who takes less time off. Even a woman who takes less time off does, and should, get paid more than a woman who takes more time off.
/r/MensRights12/12/16 01:24 PM
1

This guy deserves millions for the hell he was put through by the government. I hope he gets it.
/r/MensRights10/12/16 10:14 AM
2

You literally said that my statement was dangerous and then went on to agree with it.
/r/MensRights09/12/16 04:27 PM
2

I agree that she didn't accuse him of rape, but I think this is an interesting line which deals with how Feminists want to define rape: I thought maybe I’d try him again one night at 3 a.m., when I was drunk enough to overlook his political views. But I couldn’t bring myself to do it. Drunken sex isn't rape (unless they are really, really drunk). In fact, alcohol can improve sex, and taking that away from people and calling it all rape like Mary Koss did in the 2010 NISVS (at least to women) is …
/r/MensRights09/12/16 10:38 AM
2

But ummm...No Shave November has NOTHING to do with activism. It has to do with deer hunting season...
/r/MensRights06/12/16 09:28 PM
4

I actually think they will push themselves largely out of the gene pool, and I'm not trying to be mean. They tend to be very career-oriented, and career-oriented people tend to see kids as an obstacle to their job. Rich people tend to have fewer kids than poor people. But then add that many of these people go out of their way to be sexually unattractive, or they become lesbians, so they literally are not breeding nearly the same amount as say your traditional family-oriented people. That's kind …
/r/MensRights06/12/16 08:23 PM
1

LOL
/r/MensRights06/12/16 08:18 PM
1

Bernie certainly would've been better than Clinton, especially from the MRA perspective. I don't agree that he was better than Trump overall, but that depends on your situation, it's a projection, etc. Bernie was my #2. From an MRA perspective, I really think Trump was the best. He's tearing down the PC culture that Feminists have abused to hold down the MRM. Those things wouldn't have changed under Bernie as he was a Progressive, and Progressives prioritize Feminism. He may have helped men thro…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 08:16 PM
1

But I assume it's just that you don't know the whole range of procedures that are called FGM. I do. I had previously stated that I would've rather the more moderate FGM procedure to be legal and culturally irrelevant, so yes, I was referring to the more extreme FGM procedures. Either way you look at it, I think that FGM and MGM are different and we shouldn't equivocate them. FGM includes, in both definition and statistics, benign procedures like a pin prick to the clit. A single pin prick, resul…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 05:17 PM
1

Yup. Apparently, this isn't /r/politics.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 03:57 PM
2

You don't agree people have the right to their whole body? They have a right to their whole body, but it's not private property. FGM and MGM are quite similar. No, they really aren't. So, ban MGM and it'll speed up the processs..... MGM isn't as harmful as FGM, and making it illegal harms father's rights. The government will encroach more and more. It started with FGM, now it's going to FGM, they are pushing to force vaccines, they have made tattoos illegal, piercings will probably be after that…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 02:08 PM
1

I agree with no authoritarian rules, but this breaks non violence and aggression factors. You're talking Libertarian principles I don't agree with. Kinda like banning female genital mutilation? Think that should be repealed then? False equivocation. The two circumcisions aren't equal, although I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with the more tolerable one being legal. I would've preferred it being made culturally irrelevant, but in that case it seems making it illegal sped up the process. It'…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 02:03 PM
3

I'd much rather a cultural change that continues to enable fathers rather than an authoritarian rule by the government that dictates to fathers how they should raise their children.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 01:55 PM
6

How much good are you doing now that you are banned?
/r/MensRights06/12/16 12:29 PM
6

The world is a better place than it was before this happened.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 12:04 PM
7

You can call it tactic policing all you want. The fact is that you have now been silenced because you act in a ridiculous manner that isn't suited for an actual conversation, and so you got reasonably banned. That kind of disruption is the intended purpose of a ban. Now if you were reasonable and had an actual conversation with people and still got banned then you would have a more reasonable complaint. But carry on failing and convincing the public about literally the easiest issue to convince …
/r/MensRights06/12/16 11:57 AM
8

It might have something to do with your tactics. Just saying. You're no victim.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 11:17 AM
1

Thank you. I try to address your point preemptively in the video about Trump not being the one that removed the books. Of course he didn't, and I actually wouldn't want him to. It's more about the movement behind him and the signal that electing Trump sent to businesses. Businesses are realizing that it's okay to get rid of a section like this, and it actually might even be more profitable for them to do so. The narrative would have been about gender and women's rights if Clinton was elected, so…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 11:11 AM
1

I find this hilarious how easily 6oodfella got her to counter her own argument. I've seen 6oodfella on Youtube and he does some good work.
/r/MensRights05/12/16 04:51 PM
1

1) It's her job to have this investigated when a whistleblower tells her something is wrong. She didn't. 2) It's her job to make sure this gets fixed. She didn't. 3) If this has nothing to do with her then why did she scapegoat a single person the last time something went wrong? If your argument is correct, there should be nothing she even could do as it has nothing to do with her, right? The firing of her staff member was supposed to be due to incompetence. 4) If Congress can't get involved the…
/r/MensRights05/12/16 05:24 AM
7

How does someone torture a 1 year-old to death and get 18 months in jail? My god. I hope the parents are investigated for giving their children over to a child killer and allowing them to leave the state.
/r/MensRights05/12/16 05:17 AM
1

It's not just one accusation. There was a whistleblower and then eventually an actual investigation that determined there was a "serious variance" between this hospital and others. On top of that, we have the actual evidence of the veteran dying from opiates. If you've never worked in a government office, it's harder than you'd think to fire someone, and it comes with risks. Yeah, yeah. I've heard this before. This is one of the situations where it's actually reasonable and possible to fire some…
/r/MensRights05/12/16 05:12 AM
1

There you go showing your ignorance yet again. You realize this didn't start with Info Wars, right? They picked it up, but this truly was a grassroots movement. There was no investigation at the time and basically a lawyer was talking about how some of what was in Podesta's emails sounds like code, and it sounded like pedophilia code. From there, it turned out he was right, all sorts of connections came out, etc. I'm the idiot, but you're the one who doesn't seem to understand the history of thi…
/r/MensRights04/12/16 11:00 AM
1

Depends on the questions. You, yourself, have you fucked any kiddies lately? Tortured any puppies? Gassed any Jews? Strung up any blacks? This is not what is going on at all. Also, just because some people may interpret there being an implication based on a question doesn't actually mean that there is. So in that case, you should take on the people who falsely assume that there is. You see, to most people, the asking of questions comes with the implication that i actually think you have done tho…
/r/MensRights04/12/16 05:23 AM
3

What my parents always did (and personally I think it worked out quite well) is that one of my parents would get my brother and I on Christmas Day and the other for Christmas Eve. You can alternate who gets Christmas Day or keep it the same every year.
/r/MensRights03/12/16 09:40 PM
1

Tammy Baldwin's office is responsible for watching over the VA. Her staff is incompetent. She ignored a whistleblower for months when this VA was over-prescribing opiates, and it literally led to the death of a veteran. She scapegoated one person instead of solving the problem, and she protected people by just moving them around. Fast forward to just recently, and we have this dentist issue. This may lead to the death of people if they were transmitted something like HIV. And what's happening? T…
/r/MensRights03/12/16 09:33 PM
0

First, you give no rebuttal to the idea that something cannot be both partly the same and exactly the same. This is silly semantics first of all, and second of all, yes I did. I stated it isn't exactly what the government released, but it's well understood that these signs fall within a variance. They can be slightly altered and still be the symbol, therefore, being partly the same on one level and exactly the same on another level. Second, i am well aware of the change in the logo, and why the …
/r/MensRights03/12/16 12:34 PM
2

Your best bet would be to try to get a campaign going to fund a showing at a theater. SkepTorr did that in Israel. Maybe find someone who is popular and talk to them about running a campaign if you don't have the platform.
/r/MensRights03/12/16 08:53 AM
3

Who said anything about not investigating? #PizzaGate is the investigation, something you've railed against extensively. It isn't actually having a set conspiracy theory. Different individuals have different theories, and sure there are common theories out there among a lot of the investigators, but the actual #PizzaGate refers to the investigation and the different connections found. I said PizzaGate is a conspiracy theory movement full of conspiracy nuts who have no standards for evidence, Thi…
/r/MensRights03/12/16 04:06 AM
2

Well, make up your mind! Is it exactly the same or is it for the most part the same? What's funny is I had an inkling you were going to say this, and I actually imagined it in my head word-for-word. This tells me you really haven't looked into this stuff much at all. If you had, you would've known that Besta Pizza changed their logo after #PizzaGate came out to try to distance themselves. Before the change, it's almost the same, but as what the FBI put out, but instead of being blue or pink, it'…
/r/MensRights03/12/16 03:58 AM
3

It's not some small resemblance. For instance, Besta Pizza's logo is for the most part exactly the same. You know what we MRAs call these things? We call them false accusations, and I can only hope that the stores involved sue the crap out of these guys. The MRM is not centralized, and it's not a single-issue movement. That means that there is no set narrative as much as you would like to pretend that your position is the set narrative. Also, it's not just that there is the exactly pedophilia si…
/r/MensRights03/12/16 01:35 AM
1

We can get her voted out. We can raise awareness about what she has done. There are over 125,000 subs on this reddit now. If we got a good portion of people together around her reelection time just talking and raising awareness on the issues, that would be a major force in a US Senate battle of a small-to-medium-sized state.
/r/MensRights03/12/16 01:25 AM
2

InfoWars picked it up, but InfoWars did not create it. The investigative movement was actually created after the Podesta emails came out by someone completely unrelated to InfoWars, and he wasn't even claiming anything, it was more of a question. Those questions turned into lots of connections, which created the grassroots investigative movement after the heads of the DoJ and FBI obstructed any investigation. To say this has nothing to do with Men's Rights is ridiculous. There are little boys in…
/r/MensRights03/12/16 01:22 AM
2

You keep saying "the claims of PizzaGate" as if it is centralized. So you've seen all this information and judged for yourself: Do you think that it's abnormal? If so, do you think that abnormality is worth further investigation? PizzaGate is not about a set narrative, it's about investigation of the truth, whatever that turns out to be. Nothing is going to come of PizzaGate without SOLID evidence, and you aren't doing yourself any favors by overhyping the flimsy, circumstantial evidence you cur…
/r/MensRights03/12/16 01:14 AM
1

Being a Centrist doesn't make you right. Have you actually judged the information, or have you judged based on character? Remember, the MRM has had it's character assassinated by the MSM, so why is it so hard to believe that they'd do the same to other movements?
/r/MensRights03/12/16 01:08 AM
1

No, I mean guys like David Seaman.
/r/MensRights03/12/16 01:07 AM
3

This is not some fringe nutjob conspiracy movement. There are journalists working on this, and many consider it to be bigger than Watergate. I'm not sure how you can even call it a conspiracy theory. Joe Epstein has already been caught. This is an extension of that. Tell me, why are toddlers being taped down to tables bondage style? There is a lot of evidence. Have you actually looked into it? It doesn't sound like it because you are giving the MSM talking points that usually go away quickly whe…
/r/MensRights02/12/16 06:55 PM
4

Actually, you're wrong on so many levels, but I understand that some people will never be able to get beyond the partisanship, and will pick partisanship over men's rights. Here's another article about this owner: http://www.riverfronttimes.com/newsblog/2016/04/07/breaking-dojo-pizzas-loren-copp-arrested-on-child-pornography-charges He was just arrested on April 7th of 2016. Finally, we've seen arrests recently in Canadian and Norwegian pedophile rings. The Canadian one was global, and the Norwe…
/r/MensRights02/12/16 06:29 PM
1

I think you've asked me this like 3 times now.
/r/MensRights02/12/16 04:32 PM
6

Think about what this would actually mean, and the entitlement of these long-standing major news outlets. They want the government to pick winners and losers, giving money to the largest news outlets to put the smaller up-and-comers out of business before they become large, because they are "fake news". That would be horrendous. To conservatives that hate Obama, these are the types of judgement that put me more in the middle on him.
/r/MensRights01/12/16 08:39 PM
11

I hope he counter-sued for court fees and possible suffering.
/r/MensRights30/11/16 01:30 PM
3

That's part of why some people argue affirmative action hurts the people it seeks to help. It artificially raises the wages of these groups, and so businesses will hire as many as they need to in order to meet a quota, but then they'll stop hiring them altogether because they are over priced help at that point.
/r/MensRights30/11/16 06:32 AM
4

I love Thomas Sowell, and he's an absolute nightmare for Feminists to deal with. He's a Black Republican conservative/libertarian economist that has destroyed Feminists for decades. I've read a lot of his books and posted a lot of his videos on here in the past. He has even worked in the White House with a big think tank/research team behind him, and he knows the radical Left well as he comes from major influence from guys like Marx and Pinker from when he was younger.
/r/MensRights30/11/16 02:56 AM
4

If there was a line for men only and another for women and men then Feminists would have a legitimate beef.
/r/MensRights27/11/16 05:33 AM
18

The method of snowplowing is sexist because roads are driven on by men more often and sidewalks are walked by women more often, and snowplowing prioritized the streets over the sidewalks. They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and diverted resources to plow the sidewalks while plowing the roads instead of prioritizing roads. This left the roads undriveable, and now a bunch of people are suing.
/r/MensRights26/11/16 06:56 AM
1

lol Whatever you say. I guess when you define every Leftist who disagrees with identity politics as a Centrist then you will end up only Conservatives and Centrists by definition. There is a thing called a liberal Democrat, which is what many of these people are.
/r/MensRights23/11/16 05:56 AM
1

I'm not sure all of these fall on the Left, but I know some of them do: Christina Hoff Sommers, John C. McAdams, Michael Rectenwald, Gad Saad, Jordan Peterson, Thomas Sowell and many others.
/r/MensRights22/11/16 10:32 PM
0

It usually turns out to be significantly both male and female perpetrators. For instance, priests are almost entirely male, but yeah, teachers tend to be more female.
/r/MensRights22/11/16 08:28 AM
2

Joe Epstein has already been found guilty and he has been directly connected to #PizzaGate, so no it's not. Maybe if you spent some time investigating you wouldn't say something so ridiculous.
/r/MensRights22/11/16 08:27 AM
1

He's not going to run in 2020. This was his chance. Trump will be the oldest President to take office and he's 70. Sanders is 75. Sanders will be 79 in 4 years. I just don't see it happening. In fact, Trump might not run for a second term. We'll see how this first term weighs on him.
/r/MensRights22/11/16 04:51 AM
0

So then Sanders could be the alternative voice in the administration. It would be his job to stick up for worker's rights, try to influence the policies, and then eventually carry out the policy. He's also 75 so he doesn't really have to worry too much about future elections. If Sanders doesn't get the job then maybe some "yes" person gets the job.
/r/MensRights22/11/16 04:24 AM
2

I think there's a lot of Progressives that are in the closet about identity politics. People like Bernie Sanders who likely feel it's gone way too far, but because of their position, speaking out before the time is right would be career suicide. Thankfully for Bernie, he's 75 and Trump just destroyed Hillary, so now is a perfect time for him to speak out. I wouldn't be surprised to see more people come out. Look at all the Leftist professors coming out against identity politics. On a side note, …
/r/MensRights22/11/16 04:01 AM
2

“The arrests included 40 schoolteachers, nine doctors and nurses, 32 people who volunteered with children, six law-enforcement personnel, nine pastors or priests and three foster parents,” said inspector Joanna Beavan-Desjardins. We always have to keep in mind that it's people in power and movements like these that can be abused for twisted individuals. How many times have we seen individuals within the Feminist Movement turn up as sex offenders? But while we can't be blind, we also can't be par…
/r/MensRights22/11/16 03:56 AM
5

Well, she plead guilty. We'll see what her sentencing is and how much of it she actually serves.
/r/MensRights20/11/16 02:23 PM
1

lol
/r/MensRights20/11/16 02:34 AM
12

How dare that 13 year-old boy perpetrator impregnate this 24 year-old female victim!
/r/MensRights20/11/16 02:34 AM
2

Between Google's Regressive agenda and being in bed with the government, I'd really like a legitimate alternative. I just don't see one right now.
/r/MensRights20/11/16 01:23 AM
1

Well, it's probably not worth removing the child from the home based just on this, but the investigation could send a message. If they mind more evidence of abusive behavior than by all means take this child away.
/r/MensRights17/11/16 05:31 PM
2

Success! Great job to whoever led the charge on this one.
/r/MensRights17/11/16 05:28 PM
2

You could watch "The Red Pill" by Cassie Jaye.
/r/MensRights15/11/16 12:58 PM
3

I've been trying to raise awareness about this guy to other professors that would be sympathetic, so I'm very happy to see that he got his job back. The fact that he was ever reprimanded at all is quite ridiculous. As I predicted, Trump's election has created a paradigm shift. Politics will never be the same, and to some extent, you could say that about our culture as well.
/r/MensRights15/11/16 11:23 AM
5

This is a witch hunt. This mansplaining issue is actually quite important, because they are trying to get women to ignore men. That's what it's about. When a woman explains something to a man, he's supposed to listen or he doesn't value her opinion and he's a sexist. If a man explains something to a woman, he's mansplaining and a sexist, and she should ignore (and now report) him.
/r/MensRights15/11/16 07:43 AM
26

I would actually be really interested to see the split between mothers with daughters and mothers with sons. Heck, you could do fathers with daughters and fathers with sons as well. Too bad that kind of information isn't collected.
/r/MensRights15/11/16 07:41 AM
2

Holy hell we are getting into dangerously evil territory.
/r/MensRights14/11/16 10:57 PM
2

It has been for some time.
/r/MensRights14/11/16 02:10 PM
-4

I used neither the slippery slope fallacy nor the ad hominem fallacy.
/r/MensRights13/11/16 07:35 PM
-5

Please learn about fallacies before you go throwing them around.
/r/MensRights13/11/16 07:03 PM
-13

All I can say is I told you so. I tried to get this through to you guys in the past, but most people dismissed the argument. If you talk about satisfaction in terms of units, lets say an uncircumcised man gets 2 units of satisfaction per minute to a circumcised man's 1 unit of satisfaction per minute, but then lets say that an average uncircumcised man lasts 4 minutes to an average circumcised man lasting 15 minutes. That would be 8 units of satisfaction per sexual interaction for uncircumcised …
/r/MensRights13/11/16 07:24 AM
1

What's the need for a ".com" before the ".au"?
/r/MensRights13/11/16 04:10 AM
1

It doesn't matter if that's what they self-identify as or not, it's an explanatory label that explains ideological stance.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 09:10 PM
1

Most Centrists don't describe themselves as such, which is probably why you never heard of one. A lot of Republican Conservative Centrists will have a few issues that they fall on the Left on, such as maybe being pro-gay rights, pro-choice, etc.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 08:53 PM
1

Yeah, but there's a difference between a Republican Conservative Centrist and a hardcore Conservative Republican.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 07:06 PM
1

I'm not sure. Sam Harris was also a Clinton supporter. That makes these guys long shots, but I'd like to see some Democrats advising as well, especially non-Progressive liberal Democrats.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 06:49 PM
1

Is this fake? I ask because it says ".com.au" and that makes it look like an Australian site trying to look like an American commercial site, which is typical of hoax sites.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 05:35 PM
5

Well, give him some ideas for left-leaning candidates. I suggested Warren Farrell and Sam Harris.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 05:15 PM
1

Go and let him know of the problem and offer your idea for change.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 04:58 PM
1

Let me ask you something: Are you from the UK?
/r/MensRights12/11/16 04:45 PM
1

Are you a strong supporter of a cause, party or person? You most definitely are. That's what makes you a partisan. You were saying the investigation is partisan, meaning that it's one-sided, but the truth is that it has bipartisan support (and actually multipartisan). And you didn't post this to help men or boys Don't tell me why I posted something. I told you why I did. It is to help save and protect children. you did it to take a poke at the Clinton campaign. That is absolutely not true. I can…
/r/MensRights12/11/16 04:08 PM
6

Great list! Did you know that Trump's sister is actually a high-level judge? She leans Left. I think his judge appointee will be very interesting. I have a feeling it's going to be a Centrist.
/r/MensRights12/11/16 06:54 AM
1

How is this partisan activity? Stop trying to prevent investigations that are trying to save little children from pedophiles. You are also using partisan wrongly, because that means it's only on one side of the aisle. It's actually on both, as Republicans and Democrats are both involved, but we found out through WikiLeaks and Anthony Weiner's emails, so naturally leads are taking us more towards Democratic leadership. I actually fall more on the left personally, although I now call myself a Cent…
/r/MensRights12/11/16 06:15 AM
1

The FBI and Department of Justice have been blocking the investigations as much as possible at the top. The NYPD, FBI field agents, and others are working independently on this already, but they don't have the support from James Comey or Loretta Lynch. That's because this possibly even goes to Presidential involvement, or at the very least to those in his close circle (such as John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chair), who is the boss of the heads of these investigative departments. Keep i…
/r/MensRights12/11/16 06:08 AM
6

/u/rMensRights /u/AloysiusC /u/sillymod Could we get a sticky on this?
/r/MensRights12/11/16 05:53 AM
1

This is WAY beyond Clinton. This is possibly including celebrities as well as Republicans. You clearly are completely unaware of the evidence.
/r/MensRights11/11/16 08:18 PM
0

"As a joke" even though they actually hired people to cause violence, admitted by them to an undercover journalist that led to people being fired.
/r/MensRights11/11/16 08:14 PM
1

Boys are potentially being sexually trafficked and you're asking me what this has to do with men's rights? Are you kidding me? We're talking about a ring potentially being protected by the Department of Justice, the Clinton machine, parts of the FBI, etc. Grassroots investigation is driving a lot of this because federal investigators are blocking the investigation at every turn. This is tied all the way back to Joe Epstein, and there is A LOT of evidence. When Epstein got caught, that was far fr…
/r/MensRights11/11/16 06:39 PM
1

Amen.
/r/MensRights11/11/16 06:26 PM
2

Yeah, the NFL's support among men is actually on the decline, but it's not being touted as alarming yet because support from women is growing faster than the decline of interest from men. One day they will wake up and realize their loyal fan base is gone, and they won't be able to get it back. The NFL is in big trouble.
/r/MensRights11/11/16 03:22 PM
1

It's not without evidence. There were witnesses.
/r/MensRights10/11/16 08:44 AM
3

Here's some ammo for you: http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37889032 The fact is that 42% of women voted for Donald Trump. Trump also got 29% of the Hispanic vote, 29% of the Asian vote, 8% of the Black vote, and 37% of the Other race vote. Those might not sound like large numbers, but they represent millions of Americans. To discount all of those non-male or non-White people who voted Trump is well...racist and sexist.
/r/MensRights10/11/16 02:40 AM
3

I was watching live as they were interviewing protesters. I didn't see the sexual assault, but the protesters were being aggressive. They might have tape of it if you ask them. It was Joe that was allegedly assaulted.
/r/MensRights10/11/16 01:38 AM
1

Ah, okay. That makes more sense. You're probably right.
/r/MensRights08/11/16 04:53 AM
1

It's not about her, it's about the woman she took a picture of.
/r/MensRights08/11/16 01:03 AM
1

No reasonable expectation of privacy in a locker room? I don't understand why this is here. A woman took a picture of another naked woman in a locker room, shared it with other people, and it was all without the consent of the person pictured. She should be in trouble. Am I missing something?
/r/MensRights07/11/16 07:47 PM
0

Like 3 of the accusers have already been discredited. I'm going to stand by him until I have reason not to. That is what civil rights protection is all about. It's very plausible that gathering a bunch of women to accuse Trump falsely was Hillary Clinton's campaign strategy. Have you considered that?
/r/MensRights06/11/16 10:04 PM
0

What you are saying is that we should not support Trump after being seemingly falsely accused because it's bad for our cause. I am not a fan of that line of thinking because it allows others, especially Regressives and Feminists, to discredit people in order to get us to abandon those people. It's often the worst people that need defending. How many innocent men and boys would be abandoned with your line of thinking?
/r/MensRights06/11/16 09:09 PM
1

Enjoy your echo chamber. If you refuse to listen then you have no right to have an opinion on whether I'm wrong or right.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 11:50 AM
2

I disagree, because the child could still be given up for adoption, but a father has more control over that. And it wouldn't be close to 100x more.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 11:05 PM
3

Actually, IIRC he even stood up against them before the false allegations came out publicly. But either way, he's standing up against them and exposing them.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 10:45 PM
3

Oh, really? So it doesn't help men if women can no longer abort their child with men having no say whatsoever? I mean, I'm pro-choice, but I certainly see how pro-life helps fathers, and I think it's pretty ridiculous to deny that fact.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 10:44 PM
3

He has some.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 09:49 PM
5

You have no idea what you are talking about. There are almost no Alt Righters here. I don't think you even know what they believe. then with Trump... Trump has no intentions toward helping men that are abused by their spouses, for blowing up the unequal pay myth, for helping good men who lose their children to scumbags in divorce, i mean the list goes on and on. yet i find myself safely assuming that most people here would support him. Your wording here is very strange. I'll say this: Trump will…
/r/MensRights04/11/16 09:49 PM
1

Say what you want, but Alex Jones covers a lot of good stuff in good ways.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 09:33 PM
2

That is fantastic, but I can't imagine she will get $7.5M.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 07:59 PM
4

I'm not sure if that's true or not, but that's not really relevant in this case. I really don't know anything about Billy Bush to be honest. What I do know is that has been information coming from WikiLeaks on this sex cult think, which gives it more credibility. There are emails discussing parties and on Youtube there is a video of it. Each theory has to be judged on it's merit separately.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 07:32 PM
1

I care.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 07:27 PM
2

Okay, well, I'm not interested in wasting my time with someone who just wants to argue and doesn't actually believe in what they're arguing. Have a good one.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 04:03 PM
3

Obviously, Alex Jones is full of conspiracy theories, but a lot of his election coverage has actually been really good.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 04:01 PM
1

Oh, so you didn't actually believe the position you were arguing from. Okay. But, if you did, then I think you would have been paranoid.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 03:37 PM
2

You can stop trying to insult me by saying I can't see the obvious or am pursuing a victim complex. I'm not interested in it, but thanks. It's not meant to be merely a personal insult. It's what this actually is. I even explained it. You have this victim complex that the world is out to get men. It happens to Feminists all the time. In fact, it happens to activists of many types. It completely ignores that while we have forces opposing us, there are many people who agree with us. And you're turn…
/r/MensRights04/11/16 03:33 PM
8

This is my problem with the message A Voice For Men has been putting out. It's an "Oh, the world is out to get us" type of message. It doesn't recognize that while some people are against us, others are on our side. You are making a statement about an entire industry saying that nobody will work with her in the future with no evidence. That is not a legitimate fear until there is some evidence that is happening. If she committed career suicide then why is her film actually in theaters? Why are t…
/r/MensRights04/11/16 03:11 PM
1

If a movie is a 7 then 1 is an outlier, not a 10. A 10 would be rather close to a 7. Now if the movie was overall a 4, then a 10 would be more of an outlier than a 1. It is unusual for a movie to be (near) perfect (10) You said this before, and I said I disagree. Stating it again is not going to make me agree with you. Yes, 10 may be a bit more likely than 1, but that doesn't take away that it's still not likely to be a 'valid', semi-objective score (just like '1' isn't a somewhat fair score for…
/r/MensRights04/11/16 03:06 PM
9

In case you haven't noticed, the MSM's popularity is going way downhill. The MRM is pretty popular on alternative media, which is the future. Also, there are non-Rightists who believe in men's rights, too. Men's rights does not just fall on one side of the aisle. There's also Trump who is about to become President, and he has been exposing the MSM big league. Brexit was the first crack in the armor for the globalists, which is who the MSM works for, and now Trump is going to help a lot. I was ju…
/r/MensRights04/11/16 02:50 PM
16

One of the greatest things holding back the men's rights movement is the type of paranoia pessimism you are expressing right now. Every time we make progress people like you start talking about how terrible things will be for the future. I mean, why are you even talking about this? What is this really built on? You have no clue what people in the film industry think.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 02:36 PM
3

The film has overall a good score, meaning that the 1's are the outlier. It's reasonable for me to concentrate on the outliers. You seem to be ignore this fact.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 01:47 PM
1

I'm not 100% sure how to feel about this. I posted it hear because it seems like an overreaction, and because there is very rarely any action taken against women in women sports.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 01:39 PM
10

Yes, but I think you miss my point. My point was about polarization on men's rights within young women. There are the Feminists, and then there are the non-Feminists that recognize men and boys face issues.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 01:18 PM
49

I disagree. This film is succeeding, and the more popular it is, the harder it is for people in power to paint it as evil. The propaganda tank is cracking, and the flood is about to let out. Cassie Jaye stands to be the beneficiary of that flood.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 01:02 PM
11

Notice the split on Females 18-29. 3 10's and 3 1's. The 3 1's seem like activism.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 12:54 PM
1

The other thing is that there are multiple types of birth control pills, patches, etc. for women. If one gives a woman significant side effects then they switch to one that gives them less. Men wouldn't have the option to switch as easily, and these extremely high rates mean that the researchers likely want to perfect it better to make it more profitable (and be able to pass FDA requirements).
/r/MensRights03/11/16 02:53 AM
1

Yeah, Time magazine was like lets make an article for the Men's Rights Subreddit to click on. smh I didn't archive it because Time also makes lots of good articles, such as Trump-friendly articles that will help us take down the Feminist establishment.
/r/MensRights02/11/16 06:19 AM
2

Well, this will help lead to skepticism about characters like Roosh V when Feminists label them MRA's and we explain they are not. To now throw Cassie Jaye in as an MRA that needs to be banned from Australia, that is going to start to raise questions. One thing I like about Cassie is that I'm confident she's an honest and good person. I think it comes off rather quickly to others as well that she's an honest and good person. So when Feminists try to attack her, it's not going to go over very eas…
/r/MensRights31/10/16 02:04 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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