TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

bosh-head Archive

View 0 posts and 246 comments by bosh-head on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I've never heard "straight" used in a derogatory way, or even defined the way you describe (perhaps "straight-edged.") But it's still an apples and oranges comparison. Due to the relative size of the gay community, and the fact that gay people generally grow up facing some sort of adversity, being *gay* forms a part of a gay person's identity in a way that being *straight* just doesn't form a straight person's identity. Being straight for a straight person is like being a fish in water. Heterose…
/r/MensRights20/11/18 12:16 AM
1

Hrmm, I'm sure this has nothing to do with any gender gap in political party support. I wonder if this applies to other things. I mean, the whole media establishment was taken by shock by the Brexit vote, which got 51% IIRC. So maybe 51% of political journalists should have to be Brexit supporters? That would help remove a "cultural disconnect."
/r/MensRights19/09/17 10:13 PM
3

It took a social media backlash to get NPR to include the fact that the man "mattress girl" accused of rape was acquitted multiple times. They still didn't include the exculpatory evidence that led to his acquittal, and they still identified her as a "survivor." I am seeing somewhat of a change on the broader issue of these kangaroo courts in media, however. But on specific cases they are almost always trash and follow the "believe women" mantra.
/r/MensRights08/09/17 10:01 AM
2

You do realize that withholding the rod will spoil the child, right? And beating children is protected by the 1st amendment? /s You do realize that Islam says men should beat disobedient wives, right? And that laws against domestic violence when applied to Muslims are therefore a violation of the 1st amendment? /s
/r/MensRights22/08/17 10:18 PM
5

It appears this may not actually be true: http://thebackbencher.co.uk/boys-beating-girls-in-a-levels-err-no/
/r/MensRights18/08/17 06:54 AM
19

I wonder if someone accusing her of "womanhearing" any time she seemingly misunderstands something, or falsely believes that something is sexist, would be seen as a "joke."
/r/MensRights15/08/17 01:28 PM
1

I think trans people should be treated with dignity and respect and, for fuck sake, need to be able to use public restrooms. There are some issues that concern me, though: Sports: Trans men competing in male sports leagues doesn't seem to pose a problem. I would assume cismen would have an advantage, and if someone wants to voluntarily enter themselves into a sports league where they are presumed to have a disadvantage based on biology, that seems fine to me. And indeed, most professional sports…
/r/MensRights14/08/17 06:37 AM
1

The full memo, complete with charts and links is available here: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf One of the diagrams which shows how populations overlap with traits is really essential. People seem to have a hard time grasping this, but when you're talking about things that are, on average, more true of women than of men, you're also talking about a lot of men that have those traits. It's just that more women do. And vice-versa. This should…
/r/MensRights08/08/17 04:55 AM
34

Why it's time to stop worrying about first-world gender gaps: http://quillette.com/2017/07/15/time-stop-worrying-first-world-gender-gaps/ As to the pro-diversity document, that was the some of the most polite writing I've ever read on the subject. The hysterical reaction to it is quite concerning. Hope the guy survives and finds some other brave people in the company to support him, he's gonna need it. I've seen some tweets from some Google employees and things aren't looking great. (There's als…
/r/MensRights06/08/17 05:32 AM
2

There is a difference between "found to be false" or "provably false" and "false." What feminist and advocacy groups, along with their allies in the media, like to do is to confuse that issue. To these people, if a claim of rape is made but a prosecutor doesn't believe there's enough evidence to prosecute, that's still an allegation that is "true" to them, it's a failure of the justice system, in their eyes. If a man does go to trial, and is acquitted by a jury, again, that's still an allegation…
/r/MensRights05/08/17 03:52 PM
1

It's not "doxing" when you publish something with your real name attached. And yes, subjecting women to constant sexist humor is a bad thing.
/r/MensRights30/07/17 05:53 AM
–

Although it was stupid to travel to North Korea, there's no reason to believe he did what he was accused of doing. And please don't tell me that the confession proves it. Do you really think, if he did it, that it was to "harm the work ethic of" the north korean people? No... obviously those were not his words.
/r/MensRights23/06/17 04:28 PM
1

https://mediamatters.org/research/2017/01/25/22-times-jim-hoft-and-gateway-pundit-were-absurdly-wrong/215106
/r/MensRights05/04/17 06:01 PM
–

The Gateway Pundit is a hoax site.
/r/MensRights05/04/17 12:28 PM
3

Umm what's the alternative?
/r/MensRights12/03/17 07:11 PM
–

Done. Your turn. I don't think that's a question people should be asking, it's not a legitimate point of debate.
/r/MensRights12/03/17 05:32 AM
–

Err, she doesn't think women should be able to vote? Yeah, I'm gonna say I agree with keeping her off TV.
/r/MensRights12/03/17 03:26 AM
–

Well, first, feminism is not a single group or organization. Secondly, legally? Whose laws are we talking about? As far as I know, in the US there's official designation for hate groups. The media generally defers to the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) for hate group designations. Although this is an organization that used to do good work, they've unfortunately trashed their own reputation recently, declaring that a liberal Muslim reformer (Maajid Nawaz) is actually an "anti-Muslim extremist"…
/r/MensRights11/03/17 05:11 AM
–

Err, the article is talking about The Red Pill subreddit, which is actually a cesspool of disgusting misogyny. That has nothing to do with The Red Pill the documentary.
/r/MensRights10/03/17 11:22 PM
–

So you think your friend is just lying about her personal experience. What a great friend you are.
/r/MensRights10/03/17 11:19 PM
–

No facts, just her own experiences. Those are facts. Feeling unsafe isn't a fact. It is literally a fact about a person's own subjective experience.
/r/MensRights10/03/17 11:13 PM
–

Sure it's special treatment. For pregnant women, elderly, disabled. You know, the people who need special treatment when it comes to seating on public transit.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 05:15 PM
–

I'm a healthy 31 year old dude, I don't need anyone to give me their seat. Pregnancy is a condition which can make it hard to stand for long periods of time. There's nothing to make sense of your position other than a hostility towards women.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 03:01 AM
–

Why do you hate pregnant women?
/r/MensRights08/03/17 01:29 AM
–

Are you serious? It's not special treatment. You're supposed to give up your seat to pregnant women, elderly, and disabled. It's actually a policy on public transit. It's about people's needs.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 12:27 AM
4

Shit post. Nothing to do with MR.
/r/MensRights07/03/17 07:51 PM
2

A drop in the ocean compared to the number of females who try to use their charm to increase their grades, I would think. That has nothing to do with this.
/r/MensRights07/03/17 05:01 PM
–

Because SJWs are mostly a thing that exists on tumblr. Not that it doesn't spill over to real life some of the time but it's overblown. The ACLU is not some SJW organization...
/r/MensRights07/03/17 08:26 AM
–

You know actual harassment is a thing that exists? This is a hell of a lot of reports to all be false.
/r/MensRights07/03/17 08:04 AM
–

Child support is based on the idea that children have the right to be supported by both parents. Nah, it's about parental responsibility not child's rights.
/r/MensRights07/03/17 07:55 AM
–

You're nuts.
/r/MensRights07/03/17 01:01 AM
–

Not just one person, a movement. We have better information about sex/gender now and there's no reason to not respect people's self-identities.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 10:31 PM
–

She has female parts. A lot of people also have a sense of what gender they are in their head. And for a very small percentage of people, the gender they feel in their head isn't aligned with their sex organs. What if we took out your brain and put it in a woman's body? Would you start identifying as female then, without any issues? Would you just look down at your genitals and go "yup, guess I'm a woman now" and carry on the rest of your life? I doubt it, you'd probably still have a sense you w…
/r/MensRights06/03/17 10:27 PM
–

Misgendering someone is just being needlessly disrespectful. What exactly are you gaining by not respecting someone's wishes to called how they identify and appear? Before 18 use the womens restroom And after? Are you okay with him using the men's room then? I don't see what age should have to do with this.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 10:11 PM
–

If someone identifies as a male and presents themselves in appearance as a male, using the women's restroom seems inappropriate. This is a picture of a transgender man: http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/media/images/81638000/jpg/_81638795_trans1.jpg Forcing people to use restrooms that are opposite of their appearance subjects them to ridicule and assault. Just let people pee where they should. Do you really want him using the ladies' restroom?
/r/MensRights06/03/17 10:04 PM
–

Wow they didn't even try to lump it all together with that "manosphere" nonsense, they just straight up said that the MRA community is TheRedPill, lol. It doesn't help us that the best documentary on MRA issues is actually called "The Red Pill" though.... still cringing about that.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 05:27 PM
6

Actually, I do like the cock. What now?
/r/MensRights05/03/17 06:22 PM
6

Your post was deleted so I can't render a firm judgement. But I'm gonna say: Yes, you are probably are wrong to be pissed?
/r/MensRights05/03/17 06:20 PM
–

Well, it is.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 08:26 AM
–

Based on a video of the encounter, the county prosecutor refused to bring charges against any in September. Wow... so they basically expelled these guys because they didn't like their sexual behavior (a gangbang, I guess?), even if it was consensual.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 04:05 AM
1

Atheist before & after. All of the curses written in the Bible are again coming true. There's no such thing as curses.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 03:59 AM
5

Were they obligated to prosecute this alleged crime or something? An accusation about something 40 years ago with no evidence? Maybe it did happen, but it should have never gone to trial.
/r/MensRights04/03/17 03:35 AM
–

Meh. Some women may want to go to a bar and not be approached by men. I don't see why there should be a problem with a bar having such a rule. It probably won't be popular among men, and that's okay. Perhaps there could be a bar where men aren't allowed to buy drinks for women and they have to pay for their own. Although that bar probably wouldn't be attended by women :)
/r/MensRights02/03/17 05:33 PM
–

Atheists have heavily criticized the catholic church for their kiddy-fucking practices, I imagine that's what he meant. So rg57 apparently doesn't think kiddy-fucking is that bad. Oh, and news out today about that: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-pope-abuse-resignation-idUSKBN1684GI?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews Apparently the Vatican has decided the scandal has blown over and they're going to resume kiddy fucking.
/r/MensRights02/03/17 04:09 AM
–

Some people become atheist when they come face to face with injustice and suffering -- even though the Bible predicts these events. lulwut. Injustice and suffering are incompatible with the idea that a god exists that is both omnipotent and benevolent. See this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-i3mX0YRrjM Anyway I think MRAs may skew atheist because they skew young, and religion is falling out of favor in young people.
/r/MensRights01/03/17 09:18 PM
–

There's always a risk in speaking up if it goes against the culture where you work, so I don't know, hard to offer advice. Depends on what your employment opportunities are and if you'd have an easy time getting another job. I would tell him that he seems to be the only guy that can't seem to control himself since he goes around grabbing everyone by the ass.
/r/MensRights28/02/17 11:49 PM
–

He waved the shotgun at them. She didn't. He already had a criminal record.
/r/MensRights28/02/17 08:46 PM
–

Clearly, men should not have control over what a woman does with her body. I support financial abortion. This is treating a woman as a farm animal.
/r/MensRights28/02/17 12:29 AM
2

He wants to compete against males, he isn't allowed to.
/r/MensRights25/02/17 06:10 PM
–

I don't understand what's going on here.
/r/MensRights25/02/17 04:28 AM
–

Such a disgusting practice. But efforts to ban it get branded "anti-semitic" because you're allowed to do sick and dangerous things in the name of religion.
/r/MensRights25/02/17 01:14 AM
3

Every boy who was ever molested by a grown man was molested by a gay. This is not actually true. Most pedophiles do not have a discernible adult sexual orientation, and others are actually straight in their adult orientation (see Jerry Sandusky)
/r/MensRights24/02/17 06:29 PM
4

Specifically, I ask you this: how many of you truly believe that men are discriminated against more than women in Western societies? It's not necessary to engage in the oppression olympics in order to address men's (or women's) issues. I don't see how attempting to quantify such a thing is particularly helpful. It's best to focus on specific issues.
/r/MensRights24/02/17 06:20 AM
–

I was responding to the title of the post.
/r/MensRights24/02/17 06:14 AM
–

Uhm, no you shouldn't name the woman. It's an invasion of privacy for a plumber to be taking pictures of things in your home...
/r/MensRights24/02/17 05:28 AM
11

It was timestamped. 23:44
/r/MensRights23/02/17 11:46 PM
–

The best thing you can do to prevent this kind of abuse is to teach your children about their bodies and about appropriate and inappropriate touching. Predators don't want to get caught/reported. They rely on the innocence, naivety, and trusting nature of children who don't know what they're doing is wrong.
/r/MensRights23/02/17 10:49 PM
–

I think we need to put people under brain-imaging scans and see how gay men react to a shirtless guy vs how straight men react to a shirtless girl. As a gay man I find a shirtless guy to be quite an attractive sight, but I don't know how it compares to straight men seeing shirtless women.
/r/MensRights23/02/17 06:18 PM
10

training around things like rape mythology So they'll be learning that bogus statistic that only 2% of women lie about rape. What could possibly go wrong.
/r/MensRights23/02/17 05:07 PM
0

Not a day goes by without a story coming out showing how grossly unqualified Trump is to hold the office of the Presidency. The latest? Alex Jones is now an official advisor of Trump, the guy who thinks the Sandy Hook massacre that killed 20 school kids was a hoax. Then there's the story about how Trump's staff tries to keep him from throwing twitter tantrums: Apparently they sit him in front of positive news coverage of him, because if he doesn't get his daily dose of praise, he goes off the ra…
/r/MensRights23/02/17 04:57 PM
–

Any association between the MRM and Trump or conservatism is an image disaster for the MRM.
/r/MensRights23/02/17 04:37 PM
–

The kid was 12 was the sexual relationship started, FYI.
/r/MensRights23/02/17 12:42 AM
0

words do not mean you get to hit some one. I'm not sure that's legally true. Regardless, if you go up to someone and call them a slur, I have no sympathy if you get hit.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 11:19 PM
–

No, he merely contradicted himself there. 95% of what he said was that it was okay to bang 13 year olds. Then he said he hated the left for age of consent laws... THEN he said AoC is about right. I'm choosing to focus, quite reasonably, on the 95% of what he said.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 11:18 PM
–

That doesn't make him immune from criticism when he's wrong.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 09:57 PM
–

This is related to MR how?
/r/MensRights22/02/17 09:31 PM
–

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. Uh, no, that's not what it says at all. Yes, he may have used a homophobic slur only after a racial slur was used against him, but PRIOR to that it says that he was (allegedly) harassing this person's friend because of their sexual orientation.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 09:29 PM
–

I'm so confused about this story. How is it ambiguous whether a person is or is not awake? He "thought" she was awake? That's his defense? That's something you should know before having sex with someone.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 09:25 PM
–

I'm confused by your post because I didn't agree with the OP. I'm not sure what an "endorsement" of pedophilia would mean, I mean, he wasn't suggesting people should fuck 13 year olds. He was suggesting that if they do, maybe they shouldn't have their "life ruined." I think that's pretty bad. We should absolute protect 13-year-olds from the potential consequences of sex with adults, even if those same 13-year-olds would rather not have that protection. Just like we protect children in plenty of …
/r/MensRights22/02/17 09:16 PM
–

From wikipedia: According to Molitor, Mixon and some of his teammates were harassing Molitor and her friend because the friend is gay. Mixon then followed Molitor and her friend into the shop. The surveillance video of the incident showed Mixon and Molitor having a verbal argument, which was followed by Molitor pushing Mixon, him lunging at her, her slapping him, and him punching her. The punch caused her face to slam into a table. Mixon later told police that Molitor's friend had directed a rac…
/r/MensRights22/02/17 09:10 PM
–

He specifically lamented the fact that in a sexual relationship between a 13 year old boy and a 28 year old teacher, the teacher would have their "life ruined." And he said the boy in that situation is actually the "predator." So yeah, you're wrong. It is not necessary for all relationships between minors and adults to be harmful in order to ban them. We ban them because of the potential for them to be harmful and abusive, due to the imbalance of power that exists.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 09:03 PM
1

Did I see the video? Well, I briefly glanced at it and saw a partial transcript. It seemed to me that Milo let himself be drawn into a discussion where the is/ought distinction became ambiguous. He then goes on to defend Milo. After not seeing the video or reading the full transcript. Hint: He's wrong. Stopped reading.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 08:57 PM
27

Eh I'm not Swedish so it's not a high priority for me. Was just asking if someone already knew.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 07:58 PM
–

Anyone have any info/insight about the "progressive laws" against rape Sweden has and why they're a problem? I've heard this before but genuinely no idea.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 04:38 PM
15

I had no idea... and the audience's reaction too! Horrible.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 07:02 AM
3

Ugh. This is terrible.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 07:02 AM
–

There does need to be a sane conversation about age of consent. In California, our law is written such that it is technically illegal for two seventeen-year-olds to have sex with each other. That's right, it's illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to have sex... with anyone. Anyway I hear Canada's laws are sane, I'd look at them.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 06:44 AM
1

I don't care whether you want to call it "pedophilia" or not. He's advocating for sex with children 13 years of age. That's not okay.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 11:50 PM
1

Which church are we talking about here? In the case of the Church of England, it's a state church so in my view they shouldn't be allowed to discriminate. As far as private churches, there's a 3rd option: Marriage is both a secular and religious institution. The religious have control of their religious institution and can do whatever they want, and the state has control of its own institution and has a duty not to discriminate.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 10:46 PM
–

If you want context there's another post someone made: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5vdxxy/apparently_when_female_teachers_fuck_their/ It has the full context of his repugnant remarks. Go ahead, try and defend them.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 09:01 PM
–

Thank you for posting this. There's currently a highly upvoted post defending Milo and it's disgusting.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 08:58 PM
–

I have plenty of context. Nothing I said was incorrect. And it's all indefensible. What are you defending here?
/r/MensRights21/02/17 08:57 PM
–

The word "marriage" can refer to both a civil and a religious institution. having a secular registration of households that are all governed by the same laws, is beyond me. But that's exactly what marriage is. Although it's a bit complicated in the UK due to the Church of England.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 08:54 PM
–

Here is George Takai saying something similar about his experiences at 13 years old: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hDSOyuuSi4 This is not at all the same. A 13 year old that is molested is allowed to think whatever they want about their experience. But Milo was lamenting the fact that a teacher who has sex with a 13-year-old boy has their "life ruined."
/r/MensRights21/02/17 08:36 PM
–

And so the spin begins. Milo said that in a situation where a 13 year old boy has sex with a 28 year old female teacher, the 13 year old boy is actually the "predator." He lamented that in these situations the teacher has their "life ruined" and ends up having to "change schools." This goes directly against what I've always seen as the prevailing view in this subreddit, which is that female teachers are often given lenient sentences for crimes like this.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 08:35 PM
–

Civil partnerships were created because the government wanted to create a separate-and-unequal status for gay couples. But now that gay couples have legal equality, civil partnerships should simply be repealed, for everyone. Displeased but not surprised that the court had such an easy time deciding that discrimination against straight couples can't stand, but discrimination persisted for so long against gay couples. (Yes I know the court ruled against the couple, but it's temporary, they believe…
/r/MensRights21/02/17 08:08 PM
–

This needs a NSFW tag...
/r/MensRights19/02/17 06:27 PM
–

Shit post. Women are not obligated to make themselves look attractive to you. If you don't find someone attractive, keep moving. Don't need to be an ass.
/r/MensRights19/02/17 03:40 AM
–

"equal" and "identical" do not mean the same thing.
/r/MensRights19/02/17 02:08 AM
1

This is mensrights, not the red pill. Get lost.
/r/MensRights18/02/17 10:14 PM
1

I assumed before reading the article that he opposed this nonsense about the "pay gap" (which is a myth). But no, he literally just opposed paying women equally for the same job as a man, and thinks government shouldn't have enforce non-discrimination in pay. So, yeah, fuck that guy.
/r/MensRights18/02/17 09:29 PM
–

There's a difference between being intoxicated and being incapacitated, a difference that is often glossed over by a lot of people when talking about rape and sexual assault. A lot of students are actually taught that intoxicated sex is rape -- which is neither legally nor morally true. Drunk people are held responsible for crimes they commit while drunk (e.g. drunk driving). So if we want to actually make drunk sex illegal, fine, but then it should be illegal for both people. We could make cons…
/r/MensRights18/02/17 09:25 PM
–

Didn't really spar, Maher gave him a pass on pretty everything. Was disappointing.
/r/MensRights18/02/17 07:21 AM
–

There is no conspiracy, you clown.
/r/MensRights18/02/17 03:46 AM
4

why?
/r/MensRights18/02/17 01:49 AM
2

Since a man doesn't have a say in whether a child is birthed or not, I do not think it is right to conscript him into supporting a child he doesn't want. I don't think it should be "entirely voluntary" -- once a man is on the hook for child support, he should be on the hook until that child is 18. But I do support the idea of "financial abortion." I realize this is an undesirable outcome as the child won't be supported by 2 parents, and that's where the state should step in if necessary (and the…
/r/MensRights15/02/17 09:13 PM
–

You're accepting the fact that a pregnancy might result, and men should absolutely split the cost of an abortion 50/50. But it's not accepting that a child will result if you support abortion. Now you say: Well that's not the man's choice! Well, no, having an abortion isn't. That's a woman's choice because it's her body. But we can also make it a man's choice whether he wants to support a child that a woman wants to have -- when she has the option of not having it -- so why wouldn't we?
/r/MensRights15/02/17 08:08 PM
–

No, because not having a child is still an option (abortion).
/r/MensRights15/02/17 06:16 PM
1

I think you mean "bigly controlled."
/r/MensRights14/02/17 04:02 AM
2

Yes, a reliable source of information. It also references The New York Times, Fox News, and the DC Police Department.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 03:57 AM
3

No, that's literally what pizza gate is. Pizzagate is a debunked[2][3] conspiracy theory that emerged during the 2016 United States presidential election cycle alleging that John Podesta's emails, which were leaked by WikiLeaks, contain coded messages referring to human trafficking and connecting a number of restaurants in the United States and members of the Democratic Party with a fabricated child-sex ring. It has been extensively discussed in the media and discredited by a wide array of sourc…
/r/MensRights14/02/17 01:58 AM
3

sigh. Please stop with this nonsense. Hillary Clinton and John Podesta are not trafficking children out of a pizza parlor. For fuck sake you've lost your mind, don't try to take other people down with you.
/r/MensRights14/02/17 12:28 AM
3

Uhm, how about this: https://www.instagram.com/p/BPy4t4QAWtt/?hl=en He ate at a restaurant, $130 bill, didn't tip, and wrote 'god hates fags, sorry about it' on the receipt. He's just an asshole troll.
/r/MensRights10/02/17 02:34 AM
–

Brock Turner lynch mob??? Uhh, wasn't Brock Turner definitely guilty?
/r/MensRights24/10/16 07:48 PM
–

Because they're less likely to be terrorists...
/r/MensRights23/10/16 03:32 AM
2

Oh, I forgot to mention he did cheat on his girlfriend, so that does make him a slimeball.
/r/MensRights19/10/16 11:14 PM
0

Respect can't be forced, it has to be earned, and what level of respect is she demanding for women who show very little for them self? So a man engaged in a 3some is showing respect for himself and deserves not to be called a 'slimeball' -- but the woman he's having a 3some with is not similarly entitled? I suppose you subscribe to the double standard when it comes to sexual relations? Why?
/r/MensRights19/10/16 09:22 PM
2

Eh, could always be the first. The ACLU helps the KKK, so.... really I don't see why there'd be an issue. Doesn't hurt to ask.
/r/MensRights17/10/16 10:18 PM
–

There's a better law to apply: https://aclu-wa.org/sites/default/files/attachments/Equal%20Access%20Act%20FAQs.pdf The Federal Equal Access Act prohibits this kind of discrimination. Many Gay-Straight Alliances use it when the administration tries to prohibit them from forming. OP should re-try, and then contact the ACLU.
/r/MensRights16/10/16 08:14 PM
1

If this is a public school, look at the Federal Equal Access Act. You can't be denied from creating this club. And if you can't find an adviser, they have to assign one to you. Lots of GSAs (gay-straight alliances) have had to use this law in order to form.
/r/MensRights16/10/16 06:10 PM
–

Because Ken Starr investigated all the allegations against Bill Clinton and found them without merit.
/r/MensRights15/10/16 04:50 PM
2

Trump has admitted on tape to kissing women without their permission. He says "I don't even wait" and "They let you do anything." Defending him is absolutely absurd. Trump calls his accusers ugly and liars. He's a powerful man. There's a reason it's scary for women to come forward. Just like with the Roger Ailes case, it took Gretchen Carlson being courageous enough to come forward initially before other women came forward. So in the span of a week we had: 1) Trump admitting to his predatory beh…
/r/MensRights15/10/16 04:17 PM
1

I mean this is all very stupid, but it makes me wonder what, if anything, this guy has a history of doing that made the University want to investigate/harass him like this.
/r/MensRights14/10/16 09:53 AM
–

Let him get away with it is not the same as giving consent before-hand. And you're not grasping the fact that 12 women (12!) have come forward to say Trump did in fact assault them.
/r/MensRights14/10/16 02:12 AM
–

Defending Trump on this isn't a good look for this sub. He walked into women's locker rooms at beauty pageants, including Miss TEEN usa. On the tape he said he would just walk up to women and start kissing them, without asking for permission. And that's exactly what he's accused of doing in some cases.
/r/MensRights13/10/16 08:32 AM
–

Just because women don't press charges doesn't mean consent was obtained or they were okay with it. Again, several women have complained about Trump's actions towards them, and were not okay with him uninvitedly kissing them.
/r/MensRights09/10/16 05:41 PM
–

Consent needs to be given before. You can't go up and just kiss and woman without getting any prior indication she is receptive.
/r/MensRights09/10/16 05:04 PM
1

No, he talks about just going up to women and kissing them. Without asking permission. "Let you" is after the fact.
/r/MensRights09/10/16 04:14 PM
–

I'm tired of the vilification of male heterosexual sexual desire as much as anyone, but Trump's comments really seem to be more about assault than locker room banter. He talks about being able to get away with things because of his position of power, and women have complained about his treatment, saying he would just go up to them and kiss them (just like he brags about doing). One woman even says he grabbed her pussy without permission.
/r/MensRights09/10/16 03:54 PM
8

Emma Watson is quite clearly in favor of ending gender inequality for men as well, read her words: “I’ve seen my father’s role as a parent being valued less by society. I’ve seen young men suffering from illness, unable to ask for help for fear it will make them less of a man …. I’ve seen men fragile and insecure by what constitutes male success. Men don’t have the benefits of equality, either. We don’t want to talk about men being imprisoned by gender stereotypes but I can see that they are.” I…
/r/MensRights21/09/14 07:52 PM
2

I linked some stories on what can happen in another comment: http://thegrio.com/2011/10/20/why-amber-cole-video-is-a-cautionary-tale/ http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/15-year-old-throws-front-train-staten-island-article-1.1191808
/r/MensRights24/07/14 10:08 AM
-2

You can't fix this (relatively benign) Benign? http://thegrio.com/2011/10/20/why-amber-cole-video-is-a-cautionary-tale/ http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/15-year-old-throws-front-train-staten-island-article-1.1191808
/r/MensRights23/07/14 09:01 AM
4

K, let me know when a guy has to change schools because of a reputation for getting too much pussy.
/r/MensRights23/07/14 02:47 AM
-3

you really think spending 5 - 15 years in prison (with a greater chance of being raped) is comparable to getting a reputation? No, or I would have said that. Accusing someone of being a rapist does not mean they will spend 5 - 15 years in prison. As I said in my reply to someone else: No, they are both reputational damage that will cause other people to treat them differently. I'm not saying that putting a man in jail for 25 years is equivalent to calling a woman slut. I'm saying that the malice…
/r/MensRights22/07/14 10:09 PM
-5

You are comparing two incredibly different things No, they are both reputational damage that will cause other people to treat them differently. I'm not saying that putting a man in jail for 25 years is equivalent to calling a woman slut. I'm saying that the malice involved in the accusation is morally equivalent.
/r/MensRights22/07/14 09:59 PM
-10

I view slut-shaming and false rape allegations as more or less morally equivalent. If you believe that women are being robbed of something by engaging in casual sex with a strange man, then why should we not punish men for doing that robbing? The mindset of a man who slut-shames, and yet casually engages in sex with women (or would if they offered), seems to me to be close to that of a rapist. It seems to me he must be getting off on the fact that a woman is being violated, that something is hap…
/r/MensRights22/07/14 07:16 PM
3

If you don't like being called a slut, then stop fucking and sucking random dudes you meet in bars and parties. And if you don't like being falsely accused of rape, stop fucking and getting sucked by random women you meet in bars and parties, amirite? Oh wait, you don't like it when it's turned around? How about we stop vilifying both male and female sexuality? How about that?
/r/MensRights22/07/14 06:34 PM
1

For killing? Yes it does. You are imagining a lot. I didn't say killing. I said mistreatment. Obviously there have to be other beliefs operating for a person to believe killing people whom they feel superior to is justified. But those beliefs wouldn't have a chance to operate at all if they'd never felt superior in the first place. If a person smokes a pack a day for 20 years and gets cancer, we don't demand to know precisely which cigarette caused the cancer. It's sufficient to know that all th…
/r/MensRights25/05/14 12:29 AM
–

Feeling superior is not a crime. No, but feeling superior to someone else on account of their sex is morally wrong. And it doesn't take much imagination to see how such an attitude could lead to mistreatment of other people. People are not agency-free puppets. A person's environment is going to influence their behavior. This guy was apparently fed a steady diet of misogynistic bullshit. Are we to believe his decision to kill, and who to kill, was made without his professed beliefs about women ha…
/r/MensRights24/05/14 11:25 PM
–

No, but they advocate cultivating a feeling of superiority towards women, and feeling an entitlement to women's bodies and sex. Which is exactly what this guy felt.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 06:17 PM
-4

That's not the right angle to take to this issue. Why not? Isn't the lack of women CEOs indicative of a problem?
/r/MensRights21/10/13 06:36 PM
2

So are you for or against women being CEOs? Do you think a woman's gender should be held against her when considering for for a position of CEO? Do you think obstacles to women being CEOs should be removed, or should stay, or more should be put in place?
/r/MensRights21/10/13 05:08 PM
0

Telling people not to break the law really does work. The crime rate isn't the same everywhere. Unless you think people are destined to be criminals or upright citizens from birth, and nothing in their culture or environment will change that, you surely agree with this.
/r/MensRights20/10/13 04:00 AM
3

I'm sorry for what happened to you, thank you for sharing your experience and insight. The general point I'm trying to make is that, aside from the small percentage of people who are true sociopaths, we really do have ways of encouraging good in people and discouraging bad. I think it's very dangerous to say that "Well, there's just a certain percentage of rapists/murderers/muggers/etc out there and they'll always be with us." It's just not true. Culture matters. Values matter. Education matters…
/r/MensRights16/10/13 09:41 PM
2

I really disagree with this. The rape we're talking about isn't the drag-you-into-the-bushes kind of rape. The perpetrators of the kind of rape we're talking about don't feel like they're doing something wrong. There may be bystanders that don't feel like something wrong is happening, either. I think people can be educated about that. I remember during sex ed, the teacher said that if someone says 'no' or 'stop', you have to stop immediately. And one of the boys asked "Even if you've already sta…
/r/MensRights16/10/13 09:15 PM
7

So do you think rapists are just biologically determined from birth? That a person's upbringing, the culture, the messages they receive about sex, about men, about women, etc, have absolutely nothing at all to do with whether they will rape?
/r/MensRights16/10/13 07:51 PM
7

When it comes to rape, you're a bigger threat to your girlfriend than some random guy. The fact of the matter is that living one's life entails taking some risks. So unless your suggestion is that women should be locked in their father's home until they are married (to a woman), there's going to be risks that women are going to take whenever they go out. They shouldn't be shamed for taking those risks, that's just called living your life. I think people are already aware of things they do that m…
/r/MensRights15/10/13 02:54 AM
1

The responses here are unbelievable. Family is supposed to exist as a system of support. To help bring children up in a stable and nurturing environment and give them what they need to be productive members of society. If a guy is using his position as a father or step-father to groom a woman into a sexual partner for him, that's abusive. This kind of situation is precisely why we have laws against incest. There's billions of people you can have sex with that aren't your own family members. Fuck…
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:43 PM
–

Of course, "it's different when women do it!" No, that wasn't the reason I gave. Try again. If your definition of rape makes a significant percentage of the population into rapists without their knowledge, the definition is bogus. If your definition of rape allows someone to violate the bodily autonomy of another person and subject them to serious injury without their consent, then your definition is the problem.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 07:32 AM
–

Then a significant percentage of men have raped their girlfriends and wives Absolutely true. significant percentage of women have raped their husbands and boyfriends by waking them up with a blowjob. There is a good reason to distinguish that from penetrating someone while they are asleep, and I already gave the reason. Your views for what constitutes rape have no basis reality. My view is simply that consent is required. It's horrifying that people like yourself don't believe that. You should b…
/r/MensRights06/09/12 06:57 AM
–

Well, she also recounted how he would have sex with her while she was asleep, and she'd wake up to him already having sex with her. That's rape. Also, penetrating a woman who is not in a state of arousal can lead to serious damage. It shows a callous disregard for the well-being of your partner to be sticking your dick in them while they're asleep. It can obviously lead to injury.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 01:10 AM
3

Well, we know who the mother is when a child is born, but we cannot know who the father is, for a certainty. I could easily see MensRights complaining about the opposite situation, where a woman is just allowed to declare some random man the biological father because she filled it out on a form. Is that what you want instead?
/r/MensRights01/09/12 03:57 AM
–

OP has been proven to be a liar. All credit goes to this comment: http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/z5l5b/as_a_divorced_father_with_full_custody_this/c61pdtx The father section is actually on the 2nd page of the form, and OP just found this form on the internet, he doesn't even live in that state. Reproducing comment in full: Everyone put your pitchforks down... http://www.conneautschools.org/docs/Registration%20Form.pdf What has happened to Reddit where people are lying for Karma and no one…
/r/MensRights01/09/12 03:36 AM
1

So why am I the one who deserves compensation? You aren't. You're a family unit that the law recognizes. His income is your income. You're both doing work in the family unit. He is earning an income (for the family unit), you're doing domestic duties. That's at least how it should work. I don't think this choice was to my detriment, but even if it was, my detriment was something I agreed to. People may not realize the risks they are undertaking when they make certain choices, and there may be un…
/r/MensRights25/05/12 07:46 PM
1

How can you tell? Research. Because we did find out why that was-- women like babies-- and the goalposts got moved to, "Well, why do women like babies? Why don't men like babies? Are women who like babies being discriminated against?" Sounds like those are all legitimate questions to me. why should he compensate me for a choice I made? 1) It's a choice you made together 2) Because it's fair that you be compensated for your labor that you've agreed to do in service of your family 3) Because the a…
/r/MensRights25/05/12 06:45 PM
1

Are you going to say women must forego families they want for the sake of "equality?" No, I think it's fine that people make different choices in life. I just want them to be actual choices made on an individual level, and not influenced by any systemic sexism. Mostly, we just want feminists to stop whining about how women make less. Is there something wrong with saying: "Hmm, women are underrepresented in these higher-paying fields/positions. Let's see if we can find out why that is, and find o…
/r/MensRights25/05/12 05:50 PM
1

when we don't hear about women wanting to fight in gender segregated units I don't know what you mean by gender segregated units, but there are groups fighting to have women allowed in combat roles which they are currently barred. or have better access to being underground coal miners? Why would you think access is a problem there? I imagine if a lot of women wanted to go into that industry, and were for some reason being denied, that that is something that would be fought for... Men are treated…
/r/MensRights25/05/12 05:53 AM
–

We made up 98% of Iraq War Deaths It's quite disturbing that the solution you seem to be proposing to this problem is more dead women. Would that really make it better? It's similar to how you complain about workplace deaths... Now, I'm all for laws that would increase workplace safety, and and I'm all for creating better economic conditions for the average person such that people wouldn't feel the need to take dangerous jobs. But I don't see how having women die on the job would be an improveme…
/r/MensRights24/05/12 09:33 PM
–

No, no, no, no. And the child should be protected unless both parents agree on alternative options. The child must be protected, unless both parents agree that it shouldn't be? How does this make sense? If you want to treat the fetus as a human life that is morally equivalent to a person that has been born, then it doesn't make any sense to say that the combination of both of a mother and a father should get to override that (they wouldn't be able to override that after the child was born). You …
/r/MensRights22/05/12 03:34 PM
–

And if the father wants the baby and the mother doesn't, she can destroy it without giving the father a say. So? You think the father should have a say in that? It's her body. What you're proposing is turning women into breeding stock. That can be emotionally detrimental to the father who loses his child. That sucks. And he's allowed to feel that. But what you aren't allowed to do is violate the bodily autonomy of another person because of your feelings.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 02:57 PM
-4

OK - that's a bit strongly worded. He's off a bit. It isn't 80% It's a lie both in the stat quoted, and a "lie" in the really atrocious reasoning. "If single mothers have it so bad, why do women get divorced" -- what?? This makes no sense. First, "single mothers" is mostly a reference to women who got pregnant without being married, not a reference to women with kids after a divorce. Second, is the guy who wrote this actually disputing that it is harder to raise a child as a single parent? If he…
/r/MensRights22/05/12 02:41 PM
–

This is the "make so many claims that no one will bother to try and refute them" strategy. Most of these are vague and unsubstantiated. If you do make an effort to actually interpret them in a way that gives them substance, many of them have good refutations. Why do women complain about men that only want one thing, but men don't complain about women that want everything? The first part is referencing some men deceiving women into thinking they want more, when they only want sex. And since when …
/r/MensRights22/05/12 01:31 PM
-5

if there were a place where they only executed women (like that would ever happen, but bear with me), and i used your 'argument' with the genders reversed, i would be called a misogynist, and you know it. No, you're wrong. You wouldn't be called a misogynist in that case. But I will call you a misogynist for your current position. You'd rather have women put to death, than not put to death. That's some serious misogyny. You think putting women to death can solve what you think is an injustice ag…
/r/MensRights21/05/12 11:51 AM
–

If you oppose the death penalty then yes, it is. I suppose if you support the death penalty then you might want women to be executed as well. But looking at this from the perspective of gender equality is deranged.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 01:49 AM
–

The title should really be "In Mongolia, men can be sentenced to death." Unless stoning women to death also would appease your concern somehow. Is it really that only men can be sentenced to death that is bothering you? That doesn't bother me. If half the population is immunized from being barbarically murdered, I'd support that. I think the other half should also be immunized. But I'd never look at going from 50% immunization to 0% as some sort of progress. That's disgusting.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 12:21 AM
–

Bush was compared to a monkey because, frankly, he looked like one. It has nothing to do with race. ... This was my analogy to explain that comparing Bush to a monkey was not racist, but comparing Obama to a monkey was racist, because of the history of such comparisons being used to denigrate African-Americans. You didn't respond to the substance of my point. That is, by definition, the same joke - only with the genders reversed. No... only if you interpret it absence of any context, social, his…
/r/MensRights16/05/12 03:11 PM
–

not getting to complain about jokes targeted at you while making the exact same jokes about others. It's not the exact same joke though. And you even realize that. Because no one here seems to be offended by the Hallmark card. If you don't have a complaint to make then don't complain. And if an advocate for women were to complain about something where the gender roles were reversed, listen to why that complaint was made, and maybe you'll understand (as you intuitively seem to), that it's not the…
/r/MensRights16/05/12 02:51 PM
–

Well that's what I figured about this subreddit, thanks for putting it crystal clear like that (with comment that has 15 upvotes and no downvotes!) You guys don't really have any complaints about sexism against men, you're just complaining about things in order to trivialize the complaints that women's advocates make about sexism against women. Different groups of people may have different sensitivities based on how they've been historically treated and based on current cultural attitudes and st…
/r/MensRights16/05/12 02:13 PM
–

I'm generally sympathetic to these sorts of cases, but this particular case is a guy who exposed nude pictures of his girlfriend out of revenge because of the way their relationship ended. I don't think lumping all of these "sex offenses" into the same category is very helpful, and the punishment in this case may be extreme. But he did commit an offense which should be a crime, and is legitimately a sex offense of some kind. Don't send nude pictures of your ex-girlfriend (or ex-boyfriend) around…
/r/MensRights13/05/12 12:27 PM
2

So is this article pretending to make valid points about something? Or is the humor how stupid these points all are? If someone would like to defend a particular item, please do.
/r/MensRights13/05/12 01:10 AM
–

no, bit it is saying that if you respect women in the way that I, poster, describe, you are therefore a real man. I don't see what's wrong with appealing to people based on an identify of theirs, in order to more effectively reach them, and giving them a positive message (in this case, respecting women). Most men do want to consider themselves "men" or "real men." I'd rather have that identity include respecting women, than disrespecting women, wouldn't you? There are others giving an opposing m…
/r/MensRights12/05/12 12:33 PM
0

The town of Missoula (where the guy in the pic is apparently from) was recently featured in this article: http://jezebel.com/5908472/my-weekend-in-americas-so+called-rape-capital
/r/MensRights12/05/12 12:15 PM
–

No... it's not saying "Hey, you. You person that is reading this. You don't respect women" If we follow what you're saying, we can never tell people to behave well, because that would be assuming that they're behaving badly now! The horror! Except it assumes no such thing. We don't need to assume that everyone reading a particular message is behaving wrongly, but it might reach someone who is, and that would be a good thing.
/r/MensRights12/05/12 12:03 PM
–

If someone has a problem respecting women in particular, they are best addressed by exhorting them to respect women in particular, as this does. Oh, and something I noticed: A lot of snarky comments (including the title of the OP) about this guy saying to respect "all women" (because obviously not all women deserve respect), and yet when you say to "respect all human beings," no one criticizes you... Hrmm. Wonder why that is. Why is it that this subreddit is so hyper-critical of anything that su…
/r/MensRights12/05/12 11:04 AM
10

A presumption of innocence doesn't require you to believe that a person is actually innocent, only to treat them as such. If a woman claims to have been raped, you're not going to know whether it is true or not, but you should treat her as if she was. If a guy is accused of rape, you're not going to know whether he did it or not, but you should treat him as if he didn't. Until you have something other than the accusation itself to make a decision.
/r/MensRights12/05/12 10:50 AM
–

Well, you are... http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/rc63x/guy_got_his_gf_and_her_sister_pregnant_in_a_very/ In high school and college I want revenge date girls who were mean to my friends only to later embarrass them. I thought of myself as the Robin Hood of pussy more or less. This one chicken cried and slept outside my dorm in the quad for a nite b/c I told her to show me she cared. Payback for giving a friend the clap. She transfer mid semester. Dumb and heartless.
/r/MensRights09/05/12 04:59 AM
1

I did. And I addressed what it said, too.
/r/MensRights08/05/12 07:04 PM
1

So you're saying that the cause of the glass ceiling is the glass floor? Or that the glass ceiling is justified because there is a glass floor? but without having to take the same overall risks that men do that also lands a lot of men in poverty, homelessness, and causes so many to commit suicide and the like. So you're saying that someone who shoots for being a CEO, or other high-level executive, or some high-level political position, is making a gamble between wild success and poverty? That se…
/r/MensRights08/05/12 04:12 PM
2

I don't understand the purpose of the article. Would the author like to see more women dead or injured? Is this an argument that the 'glass ceiling' justified because there's supposedly a 'glass floor'? I don't see what these two things have to do with each other at all. if we only compare conditions for the average woman against conditions for the elite male, women will seem to be the powerless victims every time. Can someone give me an example of when those two things are compared? If we were …
/r/MensRights07/05/12 08:37 PM
2

And what does love mean?
/r/MensRights07/05/12 08:11 PM
–

The insurance company mandate isn't funded by tax dollars. and should be able to choose whether or not they want the fruits of their labor to go towards subsidizing it. Even if we were talking about a tax-funded program, you don't get to choose where your individual tax dollars go. Taxes only work because they're compulsory. Otherwise we'd all opt-out of funding the defense department (but we'd still get the benefit of having a military without having to pay our share of taxes for it, yay freeri…
/r/MensRights04/05/12 12:47 PM
2

Maddow did a 20 minute segment on the wage gap on her show yesterday: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/47240047#47240047
/r/MensRights01/05/12 08:41 PM
–

You are completely correct that most of the people perpetrating female circumcision (I refuse to call it 'FGM' unless it's male variant is also called 'MGM') How about you call things what you think they are, instead of essentially excusing the practice of FGM because you don't think MGM is treated harshly enough? It's a good thing that FGM is recognized as being such a barbaric practice. Think about who you're punishing by downplaying what FGM really is.
/r/MensRights24/04/12 02:43 AM
–

Seems like they have some legitimate complaints. This is the 21st century. Women work now. They should be shown doing other things than traditional homemaker roles. And yes, it's a problem when you make the female legos all prettified but the male legos are just plain blocks -- it really does send a message that the primary value of women is their looks. What I'm really wondering about though is why you all are complaining about this? If LEGO changed their offerings to comply with the complaints…
/r/MensRights24/04/12 02:33 AM
1

Men and women are both stripped of agency when drunk. You can't sign a legal contract when drunk, for example. The law does recognize that people have a diminished capacity when drunk. It seems you've already agreed that to take advantage of someone in a diminished capacity to try and get them to throw themselves off a roof is immoral -- especially when you are responsible for causing that diminished capacity. So I don't know why you'd make an exception for rape.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 10:57 AM
1

far, far worse than allowing subjective immorality to continue. subjective immorality Is that what the kids are calling rape these days?
/r/MensRights19/04/12 10:47 AM
1

If you and I were friends and you trusted me, and we were drinking together... and then I started encouraging you to drink more and more. All with the intention of lowering your inhibitions sufficiently so that I could convince you it was a good idea to jump off the roof, do you think that would be a moral or immoral act for me to do?
/r/MensRights19/04/12 08:01 AM
-3

You're the one that started by playing that game as shown above. No. Saying that there is "a problem with male attitudes towards women and towards rape in that country" isn't actually putting the blame for that on any group of people. I'm just stating a fact that there's obviously a problem with male attitudes towards women in a country where 25% of them have admitted to committing rape. I didn't put the blame on any group of people for that situation, I only noted it as a problem -- I didn't cl…
/r/MensRights19/04/12 04:11 AM
-2

Well thank you for issuing a correction to what you originally wrote which was: 30% of the boys who admitted to being raped admitted to being raped by a woman. But this still doesn't help us to determine, except by making wild interferences, how many women are raping boys. the original alarmist statement that there is a 'male culture of sexual violence that causes 1 in 4 South African men to think it's okay to rape women.' How the hell is that alarmist? You don't find it alarming that over 25% o…
/r/MensRights19/04/12 03:59 AM
–

30% of 40% is 12%. So 12% of the boys in South Africa have said they were raped by a woman. Therefore, what you said earlier: that means it's entirely likely that 1 out of 4 South African women think it's okay to rape men and boys. Is actually impossible. There can be, at the very most, about 12% of women who are raping boys. That would mean one perpetrator for every victim. Assuming that each woman-rapist raped an average of 2 boys, that would make it only 6% of women who were raping boys. This…
/r/MensRights19/04/12 03:35 AM
-5

Apple, meet orange. One person can commit a lot of crimes. But if you were to put that one person in jail, you'd end the crime spree. Now if a lot of people are committing a lot of crimes, then yes, that's actually more horrifying. Because what the hell are you supposed to do with that 25% of the population? They are an active danger to other people. 25% of the population, more than that, are an active danger, a very serious dangerous, to other people.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 03:25 AM
-6

Unless you assume incredible amounts of serial rape I am assuming that, minus the "incredible" part. Yes, but... from the study, 30% of South African boys have been raped by a woman. I thought it was 40% that reported being raped, most of whom were raped by women, with being raped by other boys following closely behind. That suggests to me that the number of boys raped by women is around 20% (admittedly a bit of a guess).
/r/MensRights19/04/12 03:15 AM
-5

It is, certainly. But imagine being a woman and walking around and realizing that at least 1 out of every 4 men you pass by thinks it's okay to rape you. When I say it's "truly horrifying" I'm despairing at the state of humanity where over 25% of people could be capable of committing such a barbaric crime...
/r/MensRights19/04/12 02:00 AM
-8

It can’t possibly be something wrong with how boys are treated; it has to be something wrong with boys. Regardless of the cause, there's clearly something wrong with boys/men and male culture in that country.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 01:50 AM
-3

Possibly, but it would be more helpful to know how many women were perpetrators. More than 25% of men being rapists is truly horrifying...
/r/MensRights19/04/12 01:33 AM
–

More than a quarter of men in South Africa have admitted to raping women. So, they are. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17764359 There is definitely a problem with male attitudes towards women and towards rape in that country.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 01:01 AM
–

The quote is referring to the culture in South Africa, not men in general. More than a quarter of males in South Africa have admitted to raping a woman. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17764359
/r/MensRights19/04/12 12:22 AM
-6

Don't you know? This is a subreddit that celebrates bad things happening to women, attempts to encourage more bad things happening to women, and discourages any efforts at preventing bad things that happen to women.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 05:44 PM
-5

I'll assume that I'm being downvoted because you guys want to make it easier to get away with rape, either for yourselves or your rapist friends.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 01:30 AM
–

You're confused. You could perform a very thorough investigation and have different standards of evidence required for conviction, from preponderance of evidence, to clear and convincing evidence, to beyond a reasonable doubt. The thoroughness of an investigation and the standard of evidence needed to convict are two different things that can vary independently. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof
/r/MensRights17/04/12 01:17 AM
–

A standard of evidence has nothing to do with the thoroughness of the investigation. Obviously there should be an exhaustive investigation -- that's not what is under discussion here.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 12:25 AM
-3

They should use the same standards because rape and sexual assault is a CRIMINAL OFFENSE. They are criminal offenses, but they're not facing criminal punishment from the university. A person can sue for destruction of their property, but it doesn't follow that the standard of proof should be "beyond a reasonable doubt" just because it's also a criminal offense that they are suing you for. There are different standards of proof for taking away a person's freedom (imprisoning them) versus doing ot…
/r/MensRights17/04/12 12:11 AM
-5

The reason that's an appropriate standard for civil courts is because it's entirely about money. Uh huh. With university sanctions, somebody's education and future can be destroyed. Well, that's ultimately about money, too.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 12:00 AM
-7

"Beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard that is used in criminal trials. It's not the standard that is used for civil trials. Instead, preponderance of evidence is used there as well. So why should a University, for their own disciplinary proceedings, use the same standard as we use for criminal trials? Doesn't make sense to me. Complaining about the lower burden of proof seems to be an overreaction. There still needs to be evidence of wrongdoing. The difference is, it only needs to be the a…
/r/MensRights16/04/12 10:48 PM
1

Ok, I'll bite, why not? Well, we've been over that already. I said: You're suggesting that men need to get something in return in exchange for the fact that women get to control their own bodies. And then you said: I don't think men should get anything in "exchange" for anything. If women inherently have the right to control their own bodies, then you don't, as a man, get to demand something because women can do that. Why should you get to do something else, just because women get a right to con…
/r/MensRights05/04/12 05:41 PM
1

It's taken us that long to figure out a male contraceptive that isn't a fallible latex penis-sock or an irreversible surgical technique? Meanwhile, women have the pill, a vagina-sock, IUD's, the Depo-Provera shot, and still more that I've probably missed - each with close to 100% effectiveness and many requiring infrequent attention. Well because women aren't fertile most of the time anyway. There's only a few day window when they can actually get pregnant, their body already regulates this with…
/r/MensRights05/04/12 05:27 PM
1

So if I was only one cell and you destroyed it then yes you would be killing me But why doesn't this apply to destroying sperm? You're killing millions(?) of potential humans every time you ejaculate. They haven't joined with an egg to make a zygote yet, but unless you believe in souls and that that's the time the soul enters someone, I don't see why you're attributing so much moral signifcance to that point in time. The problem is that in order to attach some moral significance to these definit…
/r/MensRights05/04/12 04:50 PM
1

In another comment, you said that a man could just as equally take a woman to task for child support. That is a bald-faced lie. No, it's not. The laws about child support are, as far as I'm aware, gender neutral. Women have a financial obligation to their biological children just as men do. Now it happens to be the case that men pay child support much more than women because women are usually the ones to raise the child (and I don't doubt that there is bias in child custody cases in favor of wom…
/r/MensRights05/04/12 04:33 PM
1

The only thing men "deserve" is the right to choose when they want to be fathers. No more or less than a woman. Women don't have that right though. Again, if the child is born, then the woman who gave birth is the biological mother of that child, and that carries legal obligations. If a child is born, then the man who impregnated the woman is the child's biological father, and that carries legal obligations. Everything is equal. Women get to decide whether the child is in fact going to be born o…
/r/MensRights05/04/12 04:22 PM
1

I don't think anyone's debating that. You are. You're suggesting that men need to get something in return in exchange for the fact that women get to control their own bodies. The common argument being made here is "Well, women get to do this thing, therefore men should get to do this (allegedly similar) thing". But women only get to do that thing (abortion) because they're the ones who actually get pregnant, because it's an issue of their body and their bodily autonomy. That reasoning obviously …
/r/MensRights04/04/12 06:00 AM
1

So we can't talk about biology without you menacing rape? Also, let's not forget women have the ability to control when the have children, but men can't control when women have children. I'm not forgetting that. But that's the biological reality. Women are the ones who get pregnant, it's their bodies. That's why they get to decide whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 04:14 AM
1

I can't understand what the basis of your comment was unless you wanted to threaten rape. When I said "that's the biological reality" I was referring to the fact that women are the ones who get pregnant. That doesn't change with civilization.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 03:47 AM
1

but i can't harm cells on anyone else without their consent. So when did the fetus get consent of the mother to harm her body? Shouldn't she have a right to prevent that harm? but i can't harm cells on anyone else without their consent. If I were to scratch you I'd be killing millions of cells on your body, would that be equivalent to committing mass murder? There is adult stem cell research. And there's embryonic. Denying ourselves the potential promises that that research holds, to save and im…
/r/MensRights03/04/12 08:52 PM
1

None of us risk all of a sudden becoming 1 years old again either. Yes, but that's quite a bit more arbitrary than drawing the line at birth. You'd need some reason to pick 12 months, instead of 13 months, or 11 months... I can't imagine what that would be. And there's a threat to human dignity precisely because there's probably no good reason anyone could come up with for drawing the line at 12 months instead of 13.. or 14, instead of 13, etc... Birth is a defining moment in time. The fetus is …
/r/MensRights03/04/12 03:49 PM
1

Well we have to have some point where we bestow human dignity on it... and birth seems like the most sensible and easiest to defend place to do it. Drawing that line any earlier just seems to make a mess, morally speaking. And I don't see any problem with drawing the line at birth. As fellow humans, it's in our self-interest to preserve human dignity. None of us risk all of a sudden becoming pre-born, so... drawing the line at birth isn't going to pose any sort of slippery slope problem for us h…
/r/MensRights03/04/12 03:17 PM
1

Really? Is that where you're gonna go with this? No one would say a baby delivered through C-Section wasn't "born." No one would say that.
/r/MensRights03/04/12 05:53 AM
1

Well, it's really the birthing process not the location per se. If you were to shove a baby back inside a vagina, or an adult man for that matter, it wouldn't become a fetus and you wouldn't have the right to kill it just because of the location.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 11:17 PM
2

Yes.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 08:01 PM
-1

The inequality that is the woman's choice to enslave a man financially for 18 years or not. See my reply to that line of thinking here: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/rp940/should_men_be_able_to_waive_their_rights_and/c47ojxo It's not unequal. On a side note may I ask what is the difference for you between a fetus and a baby? A fetus hasn't been born yet, a baby has.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 07:32 PM
-3

Why should women be able to say "No, I'm not ready for this, take this living breathin child that is half my DNA away from me, I don't want the responsibility." And men can't? Women can't do that. They can't. Biological fathers have rights over their children, and if she wants to give the child up for adoption, and the father doesn't want to, then it ain't happening. She can be compelled to pay child support just like a man can be. Women can't do that. You're trying to balance out a right that d…
/r/MensRights02/04/12 07:17 PM
0

Ok, so a woman that is physically drained by a fetus is at a loss of bodily autonomy, yet a man that is physically drained by 18-23 years of overtime to pay still has his bodily autonomy? I don't think anyone is forced (legally) to work overtime to pay child support. And at any rate, yes, that's correct. Financial obligations don't remove your bodily autonomy. Bodily autonomy is about choosing what you do with your own body. You're not actually being forced to work. But if you do collect a paych…
/r/MensRights02/04/12 07:06 PM
-1

And no it is not just a biological thing. biologically I am probably taller then you (6'3") Does this mean I get to go and push you out of the way because biologically I need more room than you? No. What would make you think you would? Nothing I've said... You are trying to say there is only one way of doing something and nothing else can even be considered. Never said that. what is being discussed is the gross inequality that is reproduction. I'm not aware of any inequality, other than those im…
/r/MensRights02/04/12 06:54 PM
-3

Your analysis is entirely adverserial, you look at what men and women are able to do like some sort of scoreboard and you're trying to even it out. Only you don't get to even out the fact that women can have an abortion, just like you can't even out the fact that they are the ones who get pregnant in the first place.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 06:23 PM
0

Well the argument is that certain decisions should create legal obligations for the benefit of society (and, most directly, the children). It's not a men's rights vs women's rights thing, it's about what is best for children and what is good public policy.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 06:07 PM
-2

Why don't we acknowledge a man's bodily autonomy by not working him for 18-23 years, at threat of prison, for a kid he didn't want? That's not what bodily autonomy means.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 05:48 PM
1

I think far less than 50% of the safe haven drops would survive if safe haven wasn't there. I don't understand what you mean here. It's mostly used to skirt responsibility, because it's harder work having to wait for an adoption to go through. Ok, even so, if someone is so irresponsible that they can't wait for an adoption to go through, perhaps it's a good idea to expedite that process (by allowing for safe havens). So abortion isn't a form of prevention? So then, by your definition, women are …
/r/MensRights02/04/12 05:27 PM
-1

Well that's the biological reality. Women get to decide whether to abort or not because it is their body. You don't get to balance that in some equation about "rights". Complaining that women can opt-out of parental responsibility because they can get an abortion (and you can't), is like complaining that women can get pregnant and you can't. That's just the way it has to be.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 05:07 PM
-1

Huh? There's a difference between preventing the consequences (pregnancy and STDs), and legally taking away the consequences (aka responsibilities).
/r/MensRights02/04/12 04:53 PM
0

And the crucial point here, is that when children are involved, they should be considered first Sure... both parents should put the kids first. But getting the kids out of a situation where the father is abusing the mother is a good thing. I do not believe for one second that men are the problem in most marriages. Well then why do you say things like this: That your wife had not suitably screened and picked the right man in the first place You seemed to imply there that if a woman wanted to leav…
/r/MensRights02/04/12 03:16 PM
–

Yes women can and do not notify the father and give a child up for adoption. Okay. What does that have to do with anything though? In the case of a planned adoption I think that's obviously wrong, but the point of safe haven laws is different -- it's to save the lives of babies. Requiring women to notify the father in that case would defeat the purpose of the safe haven law. In the case of planned adoptions, a woman could always say she doesn't know who the father is, so I don't see how there ca…
/r/MensRights02/04/12 02:56 PM
–

That your wife had not suitably screened and picked the right man in the first place, worked hard to keep him happy, is an example of what Im talking about. So women should be slaves to men is what you're saying? Hey, why not blame the man for failing to keep his wife happy, and the fact that she left him? Oh, right, because you're a misogynist and you only blame women.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 11:16 AM
–

Women can't unilaterally give a child up for adoption if the father is in the picture. And safe haven laws are designed to prevent teenage girls from tossing their just-birthed baby into a dumpster. (And the father would be able to assert legal rights in that situation too). Men and women both have the same legal obligations and rights after a child is born. And I don't think it would be good to remove any responsiblity for the consequences of sex from men. I haven't seen any argument for why th…
/r/MensRights02/04/12 11:00 AM
1

I'm not going to reply to you when you continue to distort her testimony after I gave you a link to it already. It had nothing to do with sex. I may call her a slut What makes someone a slut? Why is having casual sex wrong? And is it only wrong for women, or do you think it's wrong for men too?
/r/MensRights20/03/12 11:43 PM
1

Yes, well, something like 50% of women are against abortion right? So shouldn't men think about that too, before they have sex? Also note that if he doesn't believe in abortion and she does, he doesn't have any recourse whatsoever-- in his mind, his child was just murdered. Noted, but of what significance is this? If women want all the choices, they should take all the responsibility. Women have the choices (with regard to carrying a fetus to full term or not) because it's their own body. They h…
/r/MensRights20/03/12 11:32 PM
-7

Part of the risk of sex.
/r/MensRights20/03/12 12:58 AM
-3

If a woman wants to bring a child into this world, she should be aware that someone is going to need to raise and pay for that child. If the man is able to withdraw all claim to the child in exchange for not being held financially liable, said woman might be less inclined to have that child. Well you're acting like she has a choice in the matter. If she doesn't see a moral issue with abortion, she does in fact have a choice. But a lot of women (and men), don't believe that abortion is is accepta…
/r/MensRights20/03/12 12:43 AM
1

Have you actually read her testimony? Here it is: http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/what-did-sandra-fluke-really-say/408191 The government already regulates what services insurance companies are supposed to provide, and she was testifying on the benefits and needs of birth control. Birth control is a health issue for women. It's used to prevent or treat major medical ailments, to making the monthly cycle more tolerable and less life-impacting. And even if we'r…
/r/MensRights20/03/12 12:31 AM
–

Well, I'm actually not okay with anyone raising a child who doesn't have the means to (both time and financial resources). That said, I do see your point that we sever the obligation that fathers typically have to their biological offspring if they are a sperm donor. But I think that would correspond to a situation in which a woman gets impregnated by a man using deception (takes sperm out of a condom, lies about being on birth control, etc). If such deception were provable, I'd agree a man shou…
/r/MensRights20/03/12 12:21 AM
–

How else should it work? Should a woman be forced to carry a fetus to term, in contravention to her own wishes, because the man who impregnated her demands it? Should a child suffer without the financial benefit of two parents because the father doesn't want to provide for him/her?
/r/MensRights19/03/12 11:37 PM
–

The "war on women" is referring to the recent spate of legislation that would require women to be forcibly probed if they want an abortion, and the legislation in Texas that cut off funding to Planned Parenthood, and the legislation in Arizona that would allow an employer to demand a woman provide a medical non-contraceptive reason for why she is using birth control (a total violation of medical privacy), and allow the employer to fire her for using birth control as a contraception. Just because…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 11:23 PM
1

Do you think if a male has testified about the medical benefits of birth control, that he would have been personally maligned for doing so? Would he have been called a slut or a prostitute? What are these names that white heterosexual males get called that demean them for being white heterosexual males? There is a difference between calling an individual bad names, and using sexist/racist/homophobic slurs.
/r/MensRights19/03/12 10:54 PM
–

Clearly I don't, or I wouldn't have accused him (rightfully) of demeaning women. But to my claim that he demeaned women in his opening paragraph, you first said: Yep. So what? And now you're saying he is not demeaning women? Can you just spit out the point you're trying to make already instead of making me guess at it? Because right now you seem to be occupying two mutually exclusive positions. He is saying that women are incapable of writing with logic rather than emotion, perhaps in general bu…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 10:43 PM
0

1) His characterization of her piece is not fair and untrue, and accusing women of being too "emotional" is a common tactic among misogynists. There's no more emotion in Noonan's piece than there is in his. 2) Read the damn sentence again. As one would expect of yet another article about the difficulty of women’s lives written by a woman it is long on emotion and short on logic. As one would expect written by a woman it is long on emotion and short on logic He's saying that one would expect that…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 07:53 PM
1

I don't see how anything that you said is a rebuttal to the criticism that I made. Again, my criticism is that the article is literally blaming women for their own beatings, if they stay with an abusive person (or at least saying that they share the blame). You know you don't need to rebut the criticism I made, you could just admit that it was a messed up thing to say.
/r/MensRights19/03/12 03:48 PM
–

A few things: The SCUM manifesto is widely regarded to be satirical. The existence of misandry in mainstream feminism doesn't justify the existence of misogyny within mainstream MRA communities. Speaking of misogyny in MRA communities, here's a disgusting line from the same site where this article is from: "All domestic abuse in which the provisional victim does not leave after the first incident of violence means that two people, and not just one person, are responsible for the continuation and…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 03:26 PM
0

No, that's definitely not the point that the linked article is making. the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which was named in a manner so as to gain the support of white knighting social conservatives. Read that carefully. "white knighting" -- a term of disparagement, used to describe people who would be inclined to support an act called "The Violence Against Women Act." Let's put on our thinking hats here... what does that tell us about the author's thoughts about violence against women? The…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 02:50 PM
–

Help me out, I've read it as carefully as I can.
/r/MensRights19/03/12 02:39 PM
-5

I can, actually. Because I quoted the part I complained about. He substantiates the point that Noonan was making in his first paragraph, with apparently no awareness of that (because demeaning women was just too tempting for him). Anyway, I did read the rest of it anyway, and it was nothing but senseless rambling.
/r/MensRights19/03/12 09:45 AM
–

The first paragraph: Peggy Noonan complains about the coarsening of societal discourse, and in particular, the publicly demeaning and diminishing of women based on the fact that they are women, in her article titled “America’s Real War on Women.” As one would expect of yet another article about the difficulty of women’s lives written by a woman, it is long on emotion and short on logic. So Noonan complains about women being demeaned for no other reason than being women, and this asshat then deme…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 09:26 AM
-2

You didn't actually show me proof of the thing that was claimed. New provisions inserted into VAWA include...and funding to force male college students to cross-dress as part of a political indoctrination program. To prove your claim, you should quote the section of the law that is funding a program to force male college students to cross-dress. The fact that a particular school has done something untoward with the money provided to them under this law, does not impugn the law itself. You astoni…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 08:40 AM
–

I'd like to know more specifics about that and what the particular requirements are. But people who are reporting crimes against themselves certainly shouldn't be subject to deportation (as a result of finding out about their existence because they reported a crime).
/r/MensRights19/03/12 05:45 AM
–

Really? Okay, find me a quote from a prominent and well-regarded Swedish feminist that says: Feminists often say, to back up their claim that they're an equality movement, that women have too many problems, and they simply don't have "time" for men's issues. Next, tell me what issues men in Sweden are facing that are in need of remedy, and be sure that it's an issue that feminists in Sweden are not actually doing something about.
/r/MensRights19/03/12 05:19 AM
-7

Well, then you are wrong: Nope, I'm right. That particular school did do something wrong, but that's not the law itself. The law doesn't fund any program to require male college students to cross-dress, and that was the claim.
/r/MensRights19/03/12 05:14 AM
-8

New provisions inserted into VAWA include, among other things, expedited visas for immigrants who claim abuse, an extension of domestic violence to include stalking, What's wrong with those things? funding to force male college students to cross-dress as part of a political indoctrination program I don't believe this one. But the headline is "Feminists Losing Bipartisan Support" -- so the complaint can't be about what has been added to the bill. Because the author is saying that they've lost sup…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 03:27 AM
–

I didn't see a single reason in that blog post for why one should oppose the Violence against Women Act, so I'm just going to assume that the author supports violence against women.
/r/MensRights19/03/12 02:16 AM
–

It's not valid when that's in Sweden and you're making claims about feminists in general, including presumably American feminists.
/r/MensRights19/03/12 02:12 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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