TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

berserkerrage Archive

View 1 posts and 165 comments by berserkerrage 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)
1

Fathers/Custodyberserkerrage/r/MensRights13/12/16 07:09 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
102

I'll say this as a white man that had to fight for 2 years during the divorce and 8 more years of post divorce conflict that got 50/50. I spent $70k in lawyers fees before I stopped using them. I'd say 90% of the work needs to be done during the original proceedings. If you settle or don't fight tooth and nail that first go around, then you're going to work 10 times harder to get what you want later. I'd analogize the custody fight for fathers like this: When I was in college, I had two types of…
/r/MensRights26/05/21 07:49 PM
1

Oh completely agree, the way they calculate costs for a child is absolute bullshit. Like ok we take 1 kid involved in the custody dispute, why in the hell is the entire cost of a 2 bedroom place calculated as part of the cost of raising a child. It should be the marginal cost of having a kid vs. being on your own. So, lets say 1 bedroom place costs $500 and 2 bedroom place costs $700. Fuck that the kid actually costs $200/month not $700. You, as an adult, would still be paying $500 regardless of…
/r/MensRights12/04/19 12:02 AM
3

What's even more ridiculous is that the average cost of raising a child from birth to 18 is approximately $233,000. The father represented by OP is literally paying almost 65% of all the costs of raising that child despite having what is likely 0 contact. I'm not saying child support shouldn't be owed or paid or that we should let "deadbeat" parents off for their obligations to their children. It just seems rather ridiculous that the father should have to bear more of the costs of raising his ch…
/r/MensRights11/04/19 07:25 PM
2

We are also looking at in IL. Its been a piece-wise process. A couple years ago we got that "maximum involvement of both parents" included in the law, which was the compromise for not putting in the presumed 50/50 custody. I've been watching the status of the bill in our state congress. It really has a 50/50 support across the board. The only major opponents are domestic violence shelters, the state BAR, and NOW. I've been considering going to one of the subcommittee hearings to speak my voice a…
/r/MensRights25/02/19 03:51 PM
53

Can I protest female sex toys such as vibrators, because it reinforces the idea that I, as a man, have only one body part worth having?
/r/MensRights21/02/19 05:49 PM
1

Hell, he could tell the court she's paid nothing. Since most states, do not recognize payments that don't go through the system as child support.
/r/MensRights25/10/18 05:21 PM
3

If she's essentially not attending regular classes and simply working like any normal adult that has graduated school is concerned, then file a motion to terminate child support on that basis. Relatively easy and straightforward without the need of an attorney considering what you're explaining here. If its terminated, then use the money how you see fit (e.g. support your daughter going to college if that's what she wants). If not, then you have your answer pay the child support until you get an…
/r/MensRights17/10/18 10:32 PM
1

> I have no idea why a woman would do this. Because women like sex just as much as men do, they also have an intense internal desire to feel in control, which is why many women seek out a younger "man" > Age of consent is something that in my nation, is malleable depending on context, and in this context it would be considered acceptable I'm glad that Mexico finds this acceptable, but here in the US. We don't believe teachers should be consorting with their students for many reasons beyond the e…
/r/MensRights25/09/18 05:25 PM
2

1) He is the absolute definition of high and mighty ​ 2) He has insulted me and many others in this subreddit in far worse ways. This is not to mention he's such a douche that he's been permabanned from KotakuInAction. ​ 3) He's not going to change his mind based on 1. 4) He has several go to's such as "projection" and "strawman" or other shaming tactics representative of a feminist/SJW. ​ tl;dr: You're barking up the wrong tree brother.
/r/MensRights18/09/18 03:33 AM
7

Your belief that you are using logic and reason is your belief. You can continue with your delusions. They don't affect me.
/r/MensRights16/09/18 07:11 PM
9

Projection. When a majority of your comments contain this, you might be the actual issue brother.
/r/MensRights16/09/18 06:56 PM
1

When did I make the argument that men and women are the same? Complete waste indeed bro you just can't accept you're wrong. EDIT: I won't ignore that you ignored 90% of what I said and picked one statement to pick on here, because I have you in a corner at this point.
/r/MensRights16/09/18 06:39 PM
2

You are highly deranged so there is no point in going over this with you... again if you want to do the hardcore autistic thing of going over each state's laws word for word, I am down... but I have double checked and you are demonstrably wrong. Doesn't matter age of consent is 16 in all of the US. The victim here was 14. This is rape. Get over it. Stop justifying your BS. I don't "believe" that, that is the only logical position to hold. Anything else is pure nonsense. Men and women are not the…
/r/MensRights16/09/18 06:35 PM
1

Context was taken into consideration bro. You seem to believe we need to treat men and women differently after they are sentence for a similar crime. Get out here.
/r/MensRights16/09/18 06:28 PM
1

Please, this is rape. Stop trying to downplay it.
/r/MensRights16/09/18 06:25 PM
6

Yes you do if you were clear and not intentionally being vague. Most people would not interpret your words the way they do. Unless, you want to now go to everyone else just can't understand your words?
/r/MensRights16/09/18 06:23 PM
1

You're completely wrong here doesn't matter what you want to say here. 16 is the lowest age of consent in the US. This was a 14 year old. Get over it. You want to justify rape by women.
/r/MensRights16/09/18 06:22 PM
6

It's not a strawman when you imply something without clarity. Make a more concise argument or stop using the word totalitarianism in association with any argument of parents having laws that keep them in check from their own idiocy.
/r/MensRights16/09/18 06:17 PM
1

Except most, if not all, state's law make exceptions for situations of a person in a "position of power". I'm spectacularly right. You don't know shit here. Edit: Minimum age of consent in the US is 16 so your point is completely irrelevant. Just stop trying to justify rape by women you feminist/SJW.
/r/MensRights16/09/18 05:54 PM
1

Your argument is completely without merit as this is not the law. It is a definition only primarily used as a way of tracking crime statistics. However, your complete and utter ignorance is noted and dismissed as per usual
/r/MensRights16/09/18 05:48 PM
5

They don't really overlap at all. MGTOW's simply focus within and refuse to be a part of the very system that seeks to oppress them. Typically, they are very extreme in their views with incredibly black and white thinking that is simply problem focused. By associating themselves or being associated with MRA's, they have effectively held back any real change taking effect. Depending on how extreme one goes into it, one who identifies as MGTOW could be seen as completely paranoid, whiny, and simpl…
/r/MensRights11/09/18 06:26 PM
6

I'll call bullshit since you call almost anyone who disagrees with you a commie, including myself.
/r/MensRights05/09/18 01:03 AM
2

Based on a cursory read of Massachusetts law, she can't move them "too far within the commonwealth" nor "out of state" assuming this would impact your current relationship with them without grounds. File your objection today and force her to show how this is in your children's best interests.
/r/MensRights29/08/18 05:39 PM
2

Actually yes, but again you just assume others are stupid. You can try to play it off, but the fact is, you are just very very stupid. The true projection here and thank you for showing your true colors, little one. This is not the first time you've made a hilariously terrible argument, gg. Dismissed. More projection, gg. Dismissed.
/r/MensRights27/08/18 02:03 PM
2

Agreed brother. This is a joke, because this guy is being a complete asshole.
/r/MensRights27/08/18 01:30 PM
1

Projection. Only if its not true about you, which what I said is true. Your insecurity is not an argument. Ironically the point simultaneously went over your head; The point of my indicating that at 10 years old I could have refuted the argument is precisely BECAUSE the refutation is incredibly obvious. Your desperation is delicious. Yes, your insecurity is not an argument, but you didn't get my point. WOOSH! LOL????????????????????? LOL!?!?!?!?!?!? LOL x1,000,000. THAT IS LITERALLY THE STATED F…
/r/MensRights27/08/18 01:27 PM
6

Even when I was 10 years old I could have easily refuted your argument. I am shocked that an adult can present such a terrible premise. /r/aww A pretentious douche thinking they're smarter than anyone else. Who could have seen that coming out. .... do you know what a "judge" is and what one does? do you think these "judges" are a relevant aspect of jurisprudence? lol. I'm sorry pretentious douche. Its not a "judge's" job to interpret the law. It is to "enforce" the law. As in, they are supposed …
/r/MensRights27/08/18 04:26 AM
1

The above quoted is what delusional psychosis looks like. Fair enough, let's play armchair psychologist for a moment. This is a typical gas lighting/shaming technique used by SJW's/Feminists/Communists/Leftists/pretentious entitled douches/narcissistic/personality disordered individuals. You couldn't school a sack of potatoes, and your argument is entirely without merit... in your delusional mind, it is probably different though. You didn't make an argument to begin with so what drivel and bulls…
/r/MensRights26/08/18 05:51 AM
1

Thank you for proving me absolutely and completely right about you with this response. This "brain-addled simp",as you so eloquently put it, schooled you with absolutely zero effort. How does it feel?
/r/MensRights25/08/18 11:24 PM
22

no, it is not lost on me that Dr. Peterson himself does not present himself with the title often, I have 12 Rules for Life resting on a shelf not too far from where I am sitting right now and it says "Jordan B. Peterson" rather than "Dr. Jordan B. Peterson". Why this is, I have no idea, he is a clinical psychologist, university professor and holds a doctorate, he appears to have more than the necessary qualifications, by far. This is because Jordan Peterson is not a pretentious, entitled douche …
/r/MensRights25/08/18 07:52 PM
1

Yep
/r/MensRights25/08/18 02:51 PM
1

The ironing is delicious. This explains so much here.
/r/MensRights25/08/18 01:30 PM
1

Are you a Markov chain bot with the "smug" set to .99? Or are you a person who is so deeply, soul-crushingly stupid they think accusing anyone who ever disagrees with them of being a "leftist" is a withering put-down? I'd say its both depending on what personality you get that day.
/r/MensRights20/08/18 09:30 PM
3

I disagree with abortion entirely, but still you are completely ignoring her points and instead personally attacking her. You don't have to agree with abortion. I respect the belief, but to pretend that abolishing the laws that make it legal aren't subjugating personal interactions is silly. Also, this user has a long history of personally attacking and being dismissive of people who don't agree with them 100%. Plus I find it awfully ironic that you are acting like the victim despite your groups…
/r/MensRights17/08/18 04:28 PM
1

Because he a troll?
/r/MensRights17/08/18 04:25 AM
1

This is exactly what he's suggesting.....even if he won't admit it.
/r/MensRights17/08/18 04:23 AM
-15

Yep, you chose to abandon your kid.....as stated regardless of your ridiculous rationalization to the otherwise. Hard to get rights....maybe, but still what I stated is true.
/r/MensRights17/08/18 04:13 AM
6

Certainly, your choice and prerogative to block me. However, I find your post entirely utter drivel as well. Along with many of your responses to easily defensible and reasonable questions, but again carry on in your delusion. Simple fact is you can't sign a "contract" that gives someone control over your bodily autonomy. So, you are yet again subjugating others. Point being.....how do you expect this to work in all practicality?
/r/MensRights17/08/18 04:12 AM
7

HOWEVER, I contend that this should not be the case in marriage. I contend that if a wife is pregnant, whether planned or unplanned, the woman should have zero right to an abortion if the man does not explicitly agree. Her right should be the right to give the husband the child upon birth and then divorce him if she wants while surrendering her rights and obligations (whatever those may be) to the offspring. I mean I get that you're a communist, but really? How does that work in all actual pract…
/r/MensRights17/08/18 03:47 AM
-6

However, you want a son? Yet, you abandoned your child? I wish you could make up your mind. /facepalm pwnd kid
/r/MensRights17/08/18 03:41 AM
1

I agree. You are 0/10. Stop talking about yourself for once.
/r/MensRights16/08/18 09:59 PM
1

I agree. You are 0/10. Stop talking about yourself for once.
/r/MensRights16/08/18 09:57 PM
1

Project and strawman more brother pwnd
/r/MensRights16/08/18 07:10 PM
1

What is someone deliberately being obtuse to troll for 500 Alex.....
/r/MensRights16/08/18 06:53 PM
3

Yep. Keep pretending though as per your usual MO. Along with the projection because I'm just proving that you're a complete troll. Pwnd kid.
/r/MensRights16/08/18 01:09 AM
3

Nah, I asked an honest question. You took it out of context to attempt to make your own delusional point. You then project when called out on it. Feel free to keep pretending your child like notions aren't obvious little one. pwnd. EDIT: Except that all medical procedures and personnel are already regulated by government. Thus your argument faceplants completely. Since you edited your post in order to attempt to address this point without calling out the edit, my point still stands if you abolis…
/r/MensRights16/08/18 12:58 AM
2

As I am not a communist, I am uninterested in subjugating the personal interactions of others. I mean since you're clearly using strawman fallacy here. I'd say that wanting to outlaw abortion could definitely be seen being interested in subjugating the personal interactions of others. So, ironically you are actually a communist. What's your point? If you wear a T-shirt that says "fuck naggers" in Detroit, do you think something bad will happen? how can you expect to subjugate others if you can't…
/r/MensRights15/08/18 11:26 PM
2

How do you suggest social change or activism is possible when you can't even wear a t-shirt without fear of "making yourself a target"?
/r/MensRights15/08/18 05:41 PM
2

You seem to be projecting here. Fact is, I'm arguing the reality of the situation. You are arguing what you feel the reality should be with your feels. pwnd
/r/MensRights15/08/18 01:53 AM
0

Yes it is.....your feels do not trump facts.
/r/MensRights15/08/18 12:31 AM
1

I've done that with you before and you've stated its a blind link. Again, you're trying to redefine terms to fit your argument and strawman my own bro. Fact is abortion is not the killing of a child. I never state embryo or otherwise. You want to have a debate about when an embryo is considered a human/child that's a moral and philosophical debate. Yet again, your failed projection and SJW feels faceplants, gg. So, do you have a solution or are you just concern trolling here? Again, you refuse a…
/r/MensRights15/08/18 12:25 AM
1

An embryo is a human life. You feel its a human life bro. Get out of here with your Feminist/SJW shit. This is not to mention an embryo is not a "child" as defined in this argument. Try again. I'd like to see these so-called "peer reviewed papers" that indicate that an embryo is not a human life. Anything I'd link here would be called a "blind link" by you so you got called out. You're wrong. Get over it.
/r/MensRights14/08/18 11:17 PM
1

False. If that were true, the courts wouldn't award custody to clearly unfit mothers and abortions would be rightfully considered EXTREMELY illegal. Neither of these are true so your statement does not hold water. Prefacing this with most US states have what is considered "best interest" factors when deciding custody spelled out in their laws, so you can't be more wrong. Abortion doesn't come into this, because that's been debated to the end of time. No abortion is killing a "child" medically sp…
/r/MensRights14/08/18 10:52 PM
2

Don't take him seriously, I'd love to see that Mexico law would be quite alright with a dude fingering or having sex with an unconscious person, drunk or not. Not trying to be racist, but does Mexico really count as a "Western" country? I think what you clearly meant was first world, which does Mexico even count there with all due respect?
/r/MensRights14/08/18 04:02 AM
2

Ad hominem because I'm certainly not a "druggie". I do find it ironic the "Mexican" calling me one though, so yes definitely projection. Just because A goes to B does not mean C, you have given no evidence of C nor have you shown that your argument holds any more merit than the supposed "druggie" that proved you wrong in the first place. Try again. Carry on in your delusion that because I don't agree with you that makes me a "druggie". Holy shit.
/r/MensRights14/08/18 01:26 AM
1

Pay attention little druggie, is the above quoted what I said? or is it what you wish I had said? You are exactly the kind of garbage that I was referring to earlier. I have already explained that marijuana causes deteriotion in the human cardiovascular , and to a lesser extent , the cardiopulmonary systems. The No. 1 cause of death is heart disease. Projection and ad hominem.....proof that my argument is correct and you have no evidence and that your argument is complete and utter BS. Anyone wo…
/r/MensRights14/08/18 12:41 AM
3

Carry on benig a mangina white knght though, I won't stand in your way. The true projection...... Splitting hairs / bullshit. This is exactly what the law is based on my brother. Is it ok that I fuck you if you're unconscious or finger your butthole? This seems to be what you're advocating here? How about necrophilia? They're unconscious? How about drunk driving and killing people? Just because my statement is inconvenient to your rationalization does not make it bullshit. This is why you're bei…
/r/MensRights14/08/18 12:40 AM
0

Do you have an actual case of heart disease that is directly correlated to marijuana intake as the cause of death? If not, then your argument is BS.
/r/MensRights14/08/18 12:21 AM
3

Until you provide verification of your statements, yes you are making shit up. However, you can keep projecting and the ad hominem bs up though.
/r/MensRights14/08/18 12:11 AM
2

I mean considering the quality of life in general in Mexico compared to that in the US. I wouldn't be surprised that Mexico doesn't consider this rape. However, I don't buy your bullshit story here so come with some facts that it isn't rape law in Mexico then I'll believe you. Not just your word though because that's entirely worthless in a debate. As I only take statements on faith without any facts or truth to back them, just as you do. However, I'm still ok with being a "full retard" by someo…
/r/MensRights14/08/18 12:09 AM
3

Drinking does not excuse you from your actions only your inaction. You are the dishonest piece of shit here.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 11:57 PM
1

Let's make it even worse, because you're married and your wife at the time doesn't want you to do so.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 10:41 PM
5

I wouldn't worry about this guy. He doesn't understand the difference between "communism" and "socialism" when it comes to the interpretations of philosophy, politics, and economics respectively.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 07:17 PM
2

I'm having the same question about you at this point. Did you have an argument or are you just blowing smoke? It seems to be a simple question. How is communism an issue in the US? EDIT: Even more concerning what does communism or a debate on it have any place in this forum regarding this post? It just seems as if every conversation you take on inevitably takes on some debate about communism.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 06:37 PM
0

I'm still waiting for your argument in this case? In addition, when you say things like this: a much greater threat is the rising tide of commies across the U.S. , THAT is a real threat. It shows you have no actual argument and are simply trying to insert your politics into a debate that has zero to do with it. Though, I'd be incredibly interested where you have come up with that notion that communism is in any way taking hold within the US.
/r/MensRights11/08/18 06:03 PM
2

Exactly brother. I'm just not going to get sold on someone giving out outright wrong information and I'll call him on it every time. Its just obvious he's either trolling or just honestly so extreme in his views that he can't even accept that a differing point of view can exist in his deluded world. No beef with him on my part except to call out incorrect information.
/r/MensRights10/08/18 01:05 PM
0

For a simple fact based question, yes they would bro. I know a lot of academics and am one myself. So, you got proven wrong and have no counter argument just stop. TL;DR: Support your statements so there's something to discuss, then you're not a little one or a retard as I've proven over and over. If you're an actual academic, then you're a piss poor one. FYI, you can only claim appeal to authority fallacy if you provide a counter argument little one. IF you want to claim to be right, then why w…
/r/MensRights09/08/18 09:53 PM
1

Like I said....I'm right you're wrong....good to know.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 09:49 PM
2

Exactly, but this is only because he is being confronted with a point of view that doesn't exactly match his deluded point of view. I'm sorry, but you don't get to say my word trumps completely objective and academically accepted evidence of the contrary. Simply put, he's full of shit and he knows it. The cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias is high with this one.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 09:42 PM
0

Again, Brittanica is a commonly accepted source among academics and is used as a legitimate source everywhere. Your statements are just that your statements. You aren't making an argument. You're making a statement. Provide a source the supports your argument beyond just I said so, then we can talk.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 09:27 PM
1

Stop projecting. You made the initial hypothesis hence I responded to you. Stop playing dumb. Edit: This is basic debating skills 101. You gave a statement. I gave a contradiction with evidence. In other words, I have supported my null hypothesis. You have given no evidence as to why the initial hypothesis is correct. Try again. You don't understand basic logic/debate decorum nor do you understand how to support your assertions. You are on the clock bro.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 09:23 PM
1

Except you've been sourced ideas that completely contradict you. Where's your source? The only debate here is semantics potentially, which the common accepted beginning of feminism is 1848 with the suffragettes.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 08:26 PM
1

Already done based on Brittanica bro. This is a completely legitimate source and is used all around the world for academic papers. Epic Fail. Edit: You started the "hypothesis" by claiming that feminism began in the 1960s/70s. It is clearly therefore on you to prove that hypothesis based on basic logic bro. So far, you have presented no I'm right based on my word. This is not an argument or debate. This just makes you wrong no matter how you want to present it.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 08:17 PM
1

Based on what source little man? Edit: Please feel free to provide any background or source that supports your assertion of "knowing" that feminism starting in the 60s/70s with four specific women.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 08:11 PM
0

In other words, this is what is factually, logically, and reasonably seen as the definition of the timeline of feminism.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 07:54 PM
2

I like this explanation. Well thought out and clearly not intended to provide a revisionist history like others have done here.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 05:37 PM
0

Yep. You can continue your projection though. You're wrong try again.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 05:13 PM
0

and yet you're still wrong....try again
/r/MensRights09/08/18 05:10 PM
0

https://www.britannica.com/topic/feminism wrong again
/r/MensRights09/08/18 05:00 PM
2

In other words, women do have a sex drive. Thanks for clearing that up in your own words. EDIT: Just so its clear what logic/argument you're presenting here. The woman's biological imperative is to preserve hers and her offspring's life. However, you're ignoring that she has to have wanted said offspring in the first place. In order to do so, she has to have wanted sex even if it was to only have offspring. Therefore, women do have a sex drive according to your own logic. Again, I understand you…
/r/MensRights09/08/18 03:45 AM
2

While the "amount" of sex drive that exists might be different, a "medical expert" saying that women have no sex drive has got to be the most retarded thing I've ever heard anyone say in my life. Epic fail. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5f84/46340d4ed375007351539e7993fa44e2e31b.pdf Just in case you try to switch the goalposts to claim that psychology is not an actual science, which I suspect you will do now. https://www.btaa.org/docs/default-source/diversity/nsf-approved-fields-of-study.pdf?s…
/r/MensRights09/08/18 02:15 AM
1

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/994301/download I don't even know the bullshit you're trying sell here. However, you're full of complete and utter shit. You clearly have rights if you choose to exercise them. Is the system unfair? Yes. Is it going to make things convenient or think of you? No. Fact is you're a piece of shit that gave up on their kid, because it wasn't the easy route. I say this as someone who took that hard route. You're the reason my route was so fucking hard. You're the…
/r/MensRights08/08/18 07:58 PM
2

This won't be a popular opinion, but alimony should not be completely abolished. In situations where the disparity in income is at least an order of magnitude different and the length of the marriage was substantial, it should be considered for a certain period of time. Lifetime alimony is absolute bullshit though. In addition, we should consider the absolute maximum earning ability of the two people in question. (e.g. the max salary that Uma made vs. the max salary that Ethan Hawke made) Impute…
/r/MensRights07/08/18 07:47 PM
6

"Rape by etymological hard-lock definition means force and violence. A breach of age restrictive protocol does not qualify. The grossly misnamed "Statutory rape" is not actual rape unless the target is 12 or younger, in which case I will concede that point." Your claim. 1) If the hard rock definition of rape is violence and force, then you are claiming that is the only way a rape occurs. Those links clearly reference exceptions that have zero to do with violence and force. So, yes you either did…
/r/MensRights05/08/18 01:38 AM
1

Rape by etymological hard-lock definition means force and violence. A breach of age restrictive protocol does not qualify. The grossly misnamed "Statutory rape" is not actual rape unless the target is 12 or younger, in which case I will concede that point. Your claim. You clearly didn't read anything as those links completely disprove you. Statutory rape is rape and applies to kids over the age of 12 especially when you consider teacher/student relationships. Also, tabula rasa is not even in pla…
/r/MensRights05/08/18 01:30 AM
20

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rape https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/statutory%20rape I'll leave these here, because you literally can't be more wrong. Unless you're speaking about a country/state that has an age of consent of 12 years old, which doesn't exist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States By almost every definition available, this is rape. Regardless of the sex of the perpetrator, a case whe…
/r/MensRights04/08/18 10:27 PM
3

I would even go farther and point out that of the "falsely accused" does that include people who were jailed and then were released later due to being proven innocent due to lying, etc.? So, would it not be even more accurate to figure out what that rate is as well and subtract it from the jailed and add it to the falsely accused or create a subset within the jailed category for these folks? EDIT: I also can't help but notice that the info graphic is a representation of 1000 even though the sour…
/r/MensRights28/07/18 01:42 PM
1

And why should "child support" cover a full half of the cost?
/r/MensRights18/07/18 11:00 PM
2

So, can I ask what's your actual solution to the issue rather than just stating you're fucked as a man?
/r/MensRights01/07/18 10:21 PM
1

Please. You refuse to address the point and accuse me of speculation. You made the initial speculation. Address the point or admit you're wrong.
/r/MensRights18/05/18 11:59 PM
1

Yep the article says nothing about the number of homeless or how many are women. It is addressing the number of people without shelter and how a local mayor pledged to get more funding to eliminate the problem but was unable to do so. The graphic that is surrounded by the article's text does. It is made to seem as if it is part of the context of the article. This intentionally sends a message that homeless women are apparently the ones more in need even through they represent only 25% of the hom…
/r/MensRights18/05/18 10:31 PM
1

Interesting, if the article doesn't talk about women and isn't meant to push an agenda. Why include that graphic at all? It doesn't say "only 1 in 4 homeless are women" It says "1 in 4 women are homeless". You're being intentionally obtuse bud.
/r/MensRights18/05/18 07:32 PM
2

Obvious troll post is obvious
/r/MensRights18/05/18 05:35 PM
4

Fair enough. Personally, ex spouses don't need to be inside the home for any reason. I'd say any drama is on him for allowing her in there in the first place. However, boundaries are good and as long as he is allowing her to come to the residence no issues. There's very little context to work with in this situation that's all.
/r/MensRights20/03/18 02:23 AM
5

I'm very confused here. So, Tuesday nights have been your nights since the court order was established and yet the mother had them due to your willingness to let her? Also, does your court order establish a specific exchange place? If not, then are you offering an alternative and she's refusing that? If you're simply barring her from your home and refusing to provide an alternative for pick up/drop off, then it could be made to seem as if you are interfering with custody. Honestly, the context a…
/r/MensRights19/03/18 11:33 PM
2

While I can see your point, I want to address this as my intent was never to make mother's out to not be important to their children's lives. Part of the reason I hate the internet. It's easy to look into the intent behind the text being written and easily misinterpret what is being said in that text.
/r/MensRights07/10/17 07:22 PM
1

I agree, but its a point that many people use to demonstrate the "difference" in importance of mothers vs. fathers. I think it deserved emphasis as this is one of the main reasons used during custody battles over newborns as to why the father should have little to no time with a newborn.
/r/MensRights07/10/17 07:12 PM
12

Yeah, this was my point both parents are equally important.
/r/MensRights07/10/17 04:05 PM
6

Exclusive breastfeeding is only required/recommended for 3 months. After that, its completely optional and you should be weaning the baby away. This is assuming you avoid bottles completely and don't pump, which you shouldn't for times of sickness and non baby safe meds. tl;dr: Mothers are not more important at any point of a child's life. EDIT: I apologize I've seen sources reference anywhere from 3-6 months.
/r/MensRights07/10/17 02:52 PM
3

So, emotionally cheating is not as bad as physical cheating? I'd say a relationship where someone has a one off night has at least a chance to be fixed. However when you emotionally cheat, there's no ifs, ands, or buts about it. You clearly do not feel anything for the other person anymore. You can't fix that issue. I'm not condoning cheating either way, but to be damned if one has way more ability to damage a person than the other.
/r/MensRights04/10/17 04:21 PM
3

1) Just no. MRA's are not rape apologists. You keep repeating that lie in order to manipulate the narrative. We expect women to take accountability for the choices. You want more power yet want none of the responsibility. MRA's are pushing women to do more for themselves. Just don't do so at the expense of men's issues and rights. Seriously, I've never seen a MRA object to women being in the draft. 2) Yet, this is the truth and what you continue to prove with each comment. 3) Exactly. You know w…
/r/MensRights17/09/17 02:37 PM
2

Dude. Now you're just being a dishonest piece of shit. You defended all of those things and even went so far as to say feminists were helping men by doing so. VAWA might have to be state to be gender neutral. Let's be honest though, it's a money grab to give women the vast majority of resources when it comes to dangerous situations. Yet, I can't recall a single case of a woman's life being ruined by a false accusations in these college rape tribunals. The feminist movement literally gave Mattres…
/r/MensRights17/09/17 02:11 PM
2

1) No, its due to MRA's wanting women to challenge those gender roles and pushing them to take accountability and responsibility for their choices. 2) Where did I say that it should remain so? I said it was a set of choices. Stop trying to manipulate my words to take this back to men are at fault for all the world's problem kid. The status quo is evolutionary and biological in nature. Point is feminism needs to look internally at the real problem and not place blame on patriarchy (e.g. men). 3) …
/r/MensRights17/09/17 01:57 PM
2

I don't think that really is a true response to my point. If the amount of women in leadership roles is trending upwards, then that really makes discrimination a diminishing issue. At least, this is how any rational person would see things. Although, I understand wanting to see the job done. Gender roles are not something that men nor the patriarchy created initially nor have enforced going forward. This is biological and evolutionary. Again, this has as much to do with choices in how one handle…
/r/MensRights17/09/17 08:22 AM
2

It's a bad message towards men. I don't see how, as a man, you don't see what that really tells men. 1) You don't matter and you should never think of yourself only women. 2) The entirety of the world's problems are your fault. 3) Women are the only ones able to solve your problems. 4) Any problem you have as a man is only in your own head. I can tell you feminism has done nothing for me as a man. This message you're spreading as a representative of feminism only solidifies that feminism is abou…
/r/MensRights16/09/17 11:46 PM
2

I'm just going to say after reading the hundreds of comments you've made about feminism. I want you to realize the point you've managed to get across. 1) Men's issues aren't important as women will always have it worse in some way. 2) Any bias that goes in favor of women is really the fault of men. 3) If we just listened to feminism and let them have their way, then all of men's issues would be solved. In summary, we should let feminism tell men how to be men and trust the feminist movement to s…
/r/MensRights16/09/17 08:20 PM
3

Specifically, what factors stop women from being in powerful positions? Let's limit the list to your top three.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 09:08 PM
1

Isolated statements, which were vastly over exaggerated into something they were not at all. The very definition of quote mining.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 07:09 PM
1

1) Read the article you linked to. He was putting words in Elam's mouth as if he was Elam based on individual tweets in order to make a personal attack. It is quote mining. More denial from you, but keep going. 2) Seriously, are you trying to gaslight me now? It's your comments. Read your own stuff. You even said so.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 07:01 PM
1

1) Yes he does and denying it doesn't change that your link to him about Paul Elam is dead on proof of it. 2) No, you responded with feminist blogs and youtube videos by feminists. This is not empirical evidence by any definition. 3) It is exactly the case. Read your comments. It is so painfully obvious what you're doing. I'm not going to hold your hand. Denial is the proof of your weak argument.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:55 PM
1

1) It is so painfully obvious you wouldn't considering your attack on Paul Elam and the defense of quote mining by David Futrelle. Again, denial is what people who are wrong do best. 2) You present biased sources. You've been presented with empirical evidence. If you're going to say your evidence is more correct, then you're just being intellectually dishonest. 3) What exactly is it that I need to do? I've proven my point. You're just saying no no no no no. You're the one dismissing everyone els…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:17 PM
1

1) You were asked for evidence. If I linked you to A Voice For Men as evidence, would you find it credible? I'd wager you wouldn't even read it. The point being the sources you provide are clearly biased and presenting feminism in a way that isn't how it works from a practical life perspective. 2) They didn't as you've been shown and provided with several sources that show this isn't true. You have shouted down and dismissed all of those sources and said I'm right and you're wrong. The definitio…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:01 PM
1

1) You're linking to feminist blogs and articles. So as far as which one of us is the objective one. I think its incredibly fair to say I am far more objective about this than you. 2) Again, you've been shown evidence that shows the overwhelming majority of feminists and the loudest of your group do not support rape reform for men. Your own comments prove the motive is not at all about men. All I've done is point it out and here you are being completely dismissive and attacking me. In summary, y…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:46 PM
2

The feminist effort isn't supporting male victims bud. Read the link to the thread from two years ago. I see plenty of evidence to show that your statement is outright wrong in that very thread that is outright ignored and dismissed by your side. Let's play along though. Women are oppressed. Yet, in 4 years were able to accomplish something for men that men have been working for 30 years to accomplish? Yeah, the political oppression is real. Look, the reality is what I stated above. Your second …
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:30 PM
1

Isolating statements and adding your own narrative is quote mining that is exactly what David Futrelle is doing in the articles you link. Again, you're biased and unable to look at this objectively. Try again or be willing to admit that you're not looking at the statements objectively.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:15 PM
3

To a biased feminist (e.g. you), yes. To an objective observer, no. You asserted that feminism is helping male victims of rape. Many here continually link you to content that shows that the majority of feminists do not giving you examples of organizations within the feminist movement that represent hundreds of thousands of feminists. Your response to this is to state you've been involved with dozens of people here and there. You have, whether you accept this or not, proven your own statement wro…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:14 PM
1

If the definition doesn't mention it, then yes its excluded and can't be enforced by law enforcement agencies. This also influences what is reported as a rape and what is considered a false rape allegation. This influences the statistics about rape, which will and are going to be skewed in the favor of women. This increases funding to women's shelters and other help for abused and battered women.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 12:52 PM
1

For a guy that seems to dislike quote mining, your source is doing exactly that very thing. What's even more disconcerting is that you're wanting to say #killallmen was just a joke. You're dismissing a concern to men. Yet, you take this quote mining as bible? You seem incredibly intellectually dishonest. Yes, we are presented that way, because the solutions we present don't benefit women. We want women to be held to the same level of responsibility and accountability for their choices as the res…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 12:33 PM
3

So, the previous comment is correct. You are a part of dozens of people vs. the entire movement having millions of people. You are, in fact, the exception to the rule. Thank you for clearing that up.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 12:15 PM
6

First, anecdotal evidence is irrelevant. As a whole, the people speaking out most for the feminist movement do not recognize the issues men face when it comes to rape. This is obvious as you clearly are struggling to find any sources that show that the majority of the feminist movement truly does recognize males as rape victims. The article you referenced about "feminists" building shelters for men only. First, the article does not reference anything about feminists so not sure where you are get…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 01:04 AM
1

IANAL. I can say everything I google on this subject points me back to this being mediation and what I said before. If you don't have an attorney, this might be worth contacting someone to ask this question. They still have to remain neutral and it sounds like you're being coerced into an agreement that you're not comfortable with here. To suggest that you should lose custody because you're not willing to take phone calls is not even close to the best interest of the child. I could imagine that …
/r/MensRights07/09/17 01:28 PM
2

What state is this? I don't see how a forced schedule to communicate would be necessary in any post divorce situation. Also, I'm not entirely sure that a mediator can give custody recommendations to a judge. You either came to an agreement in the mediation sessions and that signed agreement is legally binding OR you don't and you go on to court for litigation purposes. The details of mediation aren't supposed to be shared with the judge.
/r/MensRights06/09/17 10:34 PM
2

Is this telephone schedule required between you and the mother? Or is this about a telephone schedule between the mother and your son?
/r/MensRights06/09/17 10:17 PM
1

I'm fine I just wanted to prove my point, which I did :)
/r/MensRights04/09/17 04:46 PM
1

Thanks for proving my point. Confirmed troll.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 04:27 PM
1

You keep saying this to everyone who questions you. At some point, you have to admit to yourself that maybe you did present that idea whether your intention was to do so or not. Maybe you could explain your point instead of expecting others to consistently explain themselves to you? It might help drive an actual constructive conversation. I see at least a half dozen people respond to you trying to have a constructive conversation. Yet, you refuse to address anything. Why even post this unless yo…
/r/MensRights04/09/17 03:21 PM
1

Uhhhh ok, you think way too highly of yourself. I could care less about you. I gave a point. You've chosen to argue with me for hours without giving any actual counterpoint. I'm ok with the circles, but you just seem childish to me. The denial of the issues also points to your being abusive.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 02:08 AM
1

What does this have to do with my original response? You're wrong get over it or continue trying to gas light up to you. The real question at this point is why are you still going and frankly if you cuss me out like this I can only begin to imagine the anger issues you have towards others in your life. I have to wonder if you aren't the true abuser in this situation.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 01:51 AM
1

You gave a nonsensical response. However, considering the translation is that you assume that I suggest you should get rid of the mother entirely. You would be wrong about that entirely. You made an assumption and have attempted to repeatedly insult and gas light me for hours now. You're an idiot.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 01:36 AM
1

I've already stated that.....but keep on the attempt to gas light me.
/r/MensRights04/09/17 01:18 AM
1

What answer are you looking for? I gave an honest answer to why the abuse is an issue and you not going for more than 50/50 could end up badly for your child. You chose to project onto me that it meant that I was suggesting that the mother should not be a part of your child's life. I responded that I suggested no such thing. You are guilty of confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance. I'm not sure how else to answer your question. You're the one being an asshole and sarcastic here. I've done no…
/r/MensRights04/09/17 01:12 AM
1

You're providing one example give me research that shows the success of men without lawyers as a whole. Actually, provide that in your actual post as an edit and you may get a better response.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 11:34 PM
1

A child seeing the abuse you took and are taking......they are likely to go along the path that I have pointed out. I am not suggesting getting rid of a mother as a result. I did not suggest that at any point. I only suggested that a child is at danger and at risk for the things I have pointed out at minimum as a result of your choice.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 11:31 PM
1

Given, the right set of circumstances. I fully agree with you. However, this does not hold true in the majority of cases. This could be an issue of time, energy, money, expertise, etc. Not everyone gets the trifecta of facts and circumstances that you ended up with in your case. This is the only point I have set to make this entire time. Feel free to have your thoughts, but be realistic and understand that it does not work in the majority of circumstances.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 11:29 PM
1

Nope, you're attempting to backpedal because I've proven you wrong. Every comment that you make in this thread regarding whether or not to have an attorney points to not having an attorney as you can do it on your own. Again, I enjoy the gas lighting BS you're trying to sell me on though.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 10:57 PM
1

Well, research shows my original statement is correct. So, your disagreement is wrong. However, carry on in your cognitive dissonance.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 10:55 PM
0

Yet, I'm right and you're wrong.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 10:25 PM
1

The title of your post. You are implying that by posting what you posted dude. You are trying to make a comparison that your own situation is the same as others.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 10:23 PM
1

Frankly, you come off as a know it all. You aren't......you found a way to make your situation work for you. I'm going to tell you that wouldn't have worked in most situations. 1) You were a stay at home dad and had established that you were the primary caretaker of your son. This is not the case most of the time. 2) You were homeless and actually had a place to stay. This is again not the case in most cases. 3) This situation established by 1 and 2 allowed you to have the time to research and d…
/r/MensRights03/09/17 10:08 PM
2

Because you essentially did.....
/r/MensRights03/09/17 08:13 PM
2

Exactly this.....the son sees the father being shit on by mom. Now, he sees that as a normal thing in any relationship. Now, he ends up in the same cycle of abuse as dad did....or even worse he becomes the abuser himself as he sees that as the normal way to treat others.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 08:13 PM
6

While I'm glad you got 50/50, your situation sounds like you got lucky. 1) She did not have her own attorney, which is not going to be the case most of the time. 2) You were documenting for your divorce for a full year before you went to court, which is not going to be the case most of the time. 3) Your GAL actually caring about the abuse towards you having any impact on the children. Unless it's happening in front of them, it really has no impact on your custody. Even then, it wasn't physical a…
/r/MensRights03/09/17 03:59 PM
3

What I find most interesting is that this targets "teenage" girls. I'm sorry age is not a factor in most of these behaviors. I've seen just as many older women do the very same things to their men in my lifetime.
/r/MensRights06/06/17 12:35 PM
1

Appreciate the reasonable response. I only gave my point of view, because I've had women essentially agree with your statement with the additional caveat that they never ask a guy out as a point of principle. Online dating is definitely a mixed bag. I just try to always go in with some realistic expectations.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 01:50 PM
1

Ok, you're both pursuing each other. This is a mutual interest so unless that's not true then both people should be walking into this willing to pay. Every relationship is give and take. We both have feelings and want to feel valued by the other person. So my only question is this: if the woman isn't willing to pay for a date, then what actions is she taking to show that she does value and have interest in me? I guess my point is this and this is my rule as someone currently in the dating market…
/r/MensRights26/01/17 08:41 PM
3

1) No he didn't fuck up. He took the concerns expressed by the children to the co-parent and discussed it directly with her. She agreed to the circumstances. It's not his job to consider his ex-wife's feelings and emotions in these decisions. It's his job to support his children over something that clearly concerns them. Why aren't these children expressing these concerns directly to mom without dad's intervention? Why did dad even need to intervene? 2) Ok, kids don't really like the idea of the…
/r/MensRights21/04/16 05:01 PM
2

I'll share my two cents as a father who has been divorced in IL and has an ex wife who has continued to create high conflict post divorce. I was divorced in 2012 and got 50/50 custody with no support ordered, which is incredibly rare in IL. In IL, you deal with two separate things Physical custody (visitation) and Legal custody (decision making over the items listed above). The big fight with many parents is over physical custody, because that's going to determine who pays child support. This la…
/r/MensRights01/02/16 09:39 PM
1

I've had my ex wife literally come in to a dr's office with video and several third party witnesses middle of the day, punch me in the face and then ran off with my daughter. She ran from the cops. When they caught up with her, she had pictures of the injuries I supposedly inflicted on her when I was attacking her instead. Guess what the state's attorney told me when I wanted to press charges? We don't criminalize mothers. This guy's an idiot. Video shows I never tried to hit back. Witnesses con…
/r/MensRights13/01/16 02:32 PM
1

How are you lying if you're telling your children the truth of what happens between you and your ex? It's been surprisingly effective at stopping my ex from alienating me from my daughter as a father in IL. People need to be more willing to accept that you can't protect the kids from your divorce. They have to grow up fast. All you've accomplished is allowed the ex to use the child as a weapon against you. You only have to live with your ex until the child is 18. The child has to deal with the e…
/r/MensRights04/08/15 07:41 PM
6

Not sure why you're being downvoted, but you're right. This isn't about fighting the BS or holding people responsible for their actions. It's about when you encounter the same or similar situation you treat people the same regardless if they're a man or a woman.
/r/MensRights01/07/15 01:47 PM
1

I'm not going to say the guy was wrong for doing what he did because I agree with it. It may have taken a couple punches to get her to let go over her hold on the thumb. My guess is the first punch made her bite down harder from the pain, then she let go after the second. However, I've argued with so many people that having training makes you more liable for your actions. Especially when it comes to a brawl at a party or a bar, you better have a reliable witness or know the cops or you're going …
/r/MensRights20/05/15 01:51 PM
2

Dear god, you're moving the goalposts now that I've backed you into a corner. The fact that you were recording and didn't report previous incidences shows that your state of mind wasn't to avoid conflict, but to invite it. The fact that you are looking to find a way to use words to get someone to hit you just so you can hit them back instead of just getting out of the relationship is the very definition of provocation. The fact that you consider talking about football or talk about another girl …
/r/MensRights19/05/15 02:24 AM
2

Welcome to how the US justice system works bud.... beatings? A single slap across the face is not a beating dude no court nor jury will buy that even if it is repeated. no provocation? Your original plan states outright you would purposefully be using words to incite violence towards you. You are using provocation. Here we have a video of a man being assaulted once by a slap the face leaving no mark (show police photo here). Who responded with a punch of inappropriate proportions (show woman wit…
/r/MensRights19/05/15 12:58 AM
2

Because you had witnesses who were more than likely your friends in a drunken brawl..... A domestic violence situation against a woman is a very different scenario. You're comparing applies and oranges. If you think its worth a criminal trial and paying a criminal defense attorney thousands that you won't get back even if you're innocent go ahead. At this point, we have established that you can't separate two different situations in the context of the law. Yes, the lawyer could say that and I wo…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 11:55 PM
3

I've been around martial artists and trained combatants for most of my life. You're just wrong on this the cops will hold you more liable if they learn of that fact, which they would in a domestic violence situation. One punch when you didn't need to throw the punch at all isn't proof of restraint. The recording with the lack of reporting previous incidences shows that you're just a bully wanting to prove your power over a defenseless woman. Heck I'm only attacking the criminal side of this issu…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 11:41 PM
3

I'm not being obtuse. You're being obtuse and now you're trying to gaslight and attack me instead of answering my questions. Let's say there's 6 separate incidents. Why would you go to the length of recording them instead of say going to the authorities once the 3rd incident occurred and having it documented with the authorities and ending it there if you weren't premeditating a physical conflict? You understand that knowing you have training as a boxer means you are more liable for your actions…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 11:23 PM
3

You do understand you're trying to play victim in a country that pretty much automatically throws men in jail regardless of injuries to the woman in a domestic violence situation. You understand that women have gotten restraining orders on nothing but their word even after a father has presented video evidence showing otherwise right? She claimed it was an isolated incident yet you put up recording devices anyway? Why didn't you report after the second time instead of putting up recording device…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 10:59 PM
3

Why didn't you call the cops and report it the first time? Why instead did you choose to put hidden cameras in your house to record 24/7 or record just prior to whatever exchange on your cell phone? If you have the forethought to do all that, then why are you so concerned about the abuse after letting it go 2-3 times? Why did you choose to go off now? Oh, you're a boxer so you are someone who can hurt someone greatly with a single punch and should be more careful with all of that strength. A wom…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 09:17 PM
3

I'll just agree to disagree at this point. Considering some of the language you have used at this point, I'm going to assume that you're not from the US. In the US, freedom of speech does not protect you from every word you say to another person. If you provoke someone into fighting you, then you are just as guilty as they are in that case. You start shit talking at a bar and I choose to take a swing. You do have a right to defend yourself. However, they won't charge me with crap because you pro…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 08:50 PM
3

In other words, you're a thug that believes they know better what is considered justice than others. You're allowed to say whatever you want to them and once they choose to do something about it. You get to hurt them happily and enjoy doing it? You've got anger issues and you're the violent bully that tries to game the system to get your jollies. Exactly, you want to scare the women not get their respect. They don't respect you they fear you. You do understand that key difference right? My point…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 05:58 PM
1

Do you say anything without insulting or trying to provoke another person? Now, I have to wonder what you did to provoke this supposed situation to get the guy to "tap" you in the chest.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 05:31 PM
5

Look, I'm no princess. I'm pointing out that maybe you got away with it once. The situation you describe sounds like you were dealing with a drunk asshole. Yeah they arrested the drunk guy over you. It wouldn't surprise me if you knew the staff there. Seriously, if you find giving someone a black eye, a bloody nose, then choking a dude out over a "tap" to the chest an appropriate level of force. You got anger issues that seriously need to be examined and I'd easily present you as a person that w…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 05:14 PM
5

1) Let guy who has hand to hand combat training hit me in the face for taking $1 multiple times, slapped him across the face multiple times, etc. 2) Let guy who has hand to hand combat training call the cops 3) Tell cops that I took $7 and slapped him across the face so he decided to lose control and knock me out using the extensive hand to hand combat training. 4) Take said report and sue that guy. 5) Profit
/r/MensRights18/05/15 03:07 PM
23

It definitely exposed their argument and made them rather upset with me. Ended up with me being told that mother's understand hairstyles and fashion better than fathers so it should always be their choice.
/r/MensRights01/04/15 08:31 PM
201

Try having a daughter. This issue becomes 10 times worse. I've even had mothers tell me over and over that it should be the mother's choice since she's a girl. Guess what is said when I tell them the father should be able to have the choice over their sons?
/r/MensRights01/04/15 03:24 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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