TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

breakwater Archive

View 4 posts and 158 comments by breakwater on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
5

When one side is perceived as sending out hostility, neutrality, kindness or even nonsense still feel like marked improvements. You hope that given the other options they do not pick nonsense, but that doesn't absolve any party from trying to do better than they are now.
/r/MensRights11/11/25 08:14 AM
4

There are differences in men's and women's psychology. It isn't a judgment, but it doesn't surprise me that they tend to cause men to gravitate to the right more often and women to the left. A lot of that also has to do with where they are in life, whether they are religious, married, etc.
/r/MensRights18/10/25 11:57 PM
3

"You guys call each other gay and retarded a lot. Do you talk about anything else?" Umm, we laugh at fudds, because they are gay and retarded "That's the same thing" Believe me babe, it's totally different
/r/MensRights05/01/25 09:11 PM
9

What's wrong with you?
/r/MensRights02/08/24 12:55 AM
1

Yup. It's fine to disagree with all three of these things without coming off the way OP did
/r/MensRights28/07/24 12:51 AM
7

Some gyms allow filming and it is ok in some circumstances. If someone films themselves to watch form, count reps and weight, and track general gym functions, I see no problem with it. Nobody should be subject to recording without permission and they absolutely should not be subject to other people making content for their socials or onlyfans. That should get a warning the first time, being politely asked to leave after a second and a gym membership revoked the third.
/r/MensRights25/02/24 05:22 AM
8

Anything not overtly left wing is called right wing. Any sub that is overtly left wing is called too moderate to be truly left wing. Reddit has the politics of children
/r/MensRights21/11/23 02:55 PM
10

I remember going with some friends for a bachelor's party in Reno. Small affair, laid back on the lake spent the nights in the club. We had one guy who was a bit of an introvert and shy but he was game for everything. Out of nowhere at one club a girl walked up to him, made fun of his shirt to his face and walked away, completely unprovoked. He felt like shit for the rest of the night. I don't know why that particular memory comes to mind except, he was an average looking guy, his outfit was fin…
/r/MensRights20/11/23 04:59 AM
7

Bunch hater men prevented this movie from succeeding. Which is also why Barbie tanked so hard right?
/r/MensRights14/11/23 05:38 AM
2

I have no idea. The story about their fake engagement was years ago. Shitty behavior from a shitty website
/r/MensRights08/11/23 06:29 AM
56

It's almost as bad as Ashley Madison having fake engagement so that men would buy credits. These websites should be under investigation by state agencies but never get called out for something tantamount to fraud.
/r/MensRights07/11/23 11:07 PM
19

"teach men not to rape" 'okay, I will devote time to making them better people' "Not like that!"
/r/MensRights17/09/23 02:34 PM
1

Neither bithers me. But I responded to the actual question in good faith, so people are downvoting because they don't want answers, they want to be mad.
/r/MensRights10/04/22 08:14 PM
-3

Woman also works. If you can see how calling women period havers and baby carriers (and all the othersilly permutations) is reductive, maybe some people see reducing women to their genetic expression sounds weak. Others might find it sterile sounding. I never found it bothersome in the slightest, but I can see why people can find it less than optimal
/r/MensRights10/04/22 03:56 PM
1

It was always three felonies. Amended in 2012 by proposition. Also requires third strike to be a serious or violent felony. I think there is also something about the timing of the strikes with respect to conviction, but I moved out of the state since then and stopped following.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 02:50 AM
2

California required felonies (it has been amended that 3rd strikes require certain more severe classes of felonies since being enacted) but there was a misperception because of media reporting and defendants that get long lists of charges. A judge I interned for had a story written about him upholding a third strike for stealing a cookie, go beyond the outrageous headline and he was sentenced because he broke into a bakery to rob it.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 02:13 AM
2

Not graphic, explicit.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 05:53 PM
1

The Claremint schools also libelled Harry Jaffa attributing false statements and positions whule he was over there. They were also home to fake hate crimes.
/r/MensRights15/11/16 02:13 AM
5

IIRC GB had at least its own opening weekend and the following weekend basically unopposed. (edit spelling)
/r/MensRights30/09/16 05:54 PM
36

It was a tent pole release with other studios giving it a wide berth. Nothing major released the week before or for several weeks after. So it had a huge marketplace advantage.
/r/MensRights30/09/16 01:58 PM
7

Do you guys not understand that the universally accepted academic definition of sexism (and all -isms) is the combination of power and discrimination? No, it isn't. Saying that it is the new standard a) doesn't make it so and b) doesn't have anything to back it up and is merely a fiat claim without any logic to support it.
/r/MensRights24/06/16 07:15 PM
14

The laws were overturned in Lawrence vs Texas. It doesn't really matter if they still exist on the books. There are areas that still have Jim Crow ordinances, they just adapted to the changes in Con Law and moved on.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 02:08 AM
4

Don't worry, they'll fall in line after she is nominated.
/r/MensRights02/12/15 07:25 PM
7

It's goofy and ham handed but worth the watch. South Park did a homage to one of its fight scenes in the episode Cripple Fight.
/r/MensRights20/11/15 03:25 PM
0

Surprisingly, Trump is the only Republican in the field who didn't beat her in a quinnipiac poll facing the field against Hillary.
/r/MensRights16/11/15 02:45 AM
2

I'd pay her to stay 50 yards from me at all times.
/r/MensRights24/07/15 04:52 AM
1

That argument would have no traction.
/r/MensRights16/07/15 07:59 PM
1

Look up Damnum absque injuria. Yes she was denied something. But who covets draft status? I could legally deny you a potential kick in the stomach on the basis of gender. Are you injured by not being kicked? Of course not. So yes, you were denied, but not injured. The law does not provide a non statutory remedy for this in most cases.
/r/MensRights16/07/15 05:09 AM
2

Simply stated, no. As a matter of law, you need a cognizable injury to the party bringing a claim for relief. If you don't have that, there is a basis to file a demurrer (french for "yeah, so?") or a motion for nonsuit depending on the state. There is no "general standing" based on a belief that a government action is wrong. The closest thing is "tax payer standing", which is only permitted in the instance of violations the establishment clause, but that is highly limited carve out. In addition,…
/r/MensRights16/07/15 05:07 AM
2

'How many times can they destroy buildings?' If you see the trailer, that is kind of the point.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 02:28 AM
-4

Also people quoting the stand your ground law as if it even remotely applies here. Hint, it doesn't.
/r/MensRights08/07/15 03:34 PM
-4

Nice try SJP, we all know you are a horse.
/r/MensRights07/07/15 06:25 PM
4

Great explanation! But really, everyone else is named, So you agree this is doxxing then? Because everything you say here is essentially "sure it's doxxing, but we really like it in this case". we have rights to confront our accusers. Is he accusing you? No. The person who was accused was afforded that right did so and prevailed. You don't get that right by proxy. He was an accuser that started a movement against thousands of innocent men. No he wasn't. He was a private individual, who accused a…
/r/MensRights23/05/15 06:05 PM
4

It does in my opinion.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 03:14 PM
13

They aren't cowards, they are partisan leftists. They boldly attack that which they can attack without undermining their "side"
/r/MensRights23/05/15 06:00 AM
17

Kennedy beat Nixon because of massive voter fraud in Illinois.
/r/MensRights04/05/15 02:13 PM
1

That's not what I said. I never said he can't sue because he's a limited public figure.Whether a person is a limited public figure only impacts which standard applies, malice or negligence. Now, if we are talking about his first accuser, no, he wouldn't be a limited public figure because he wasn't yet a public figure. But if, through the result of the accusations, he became well known, other people publishing defamatory statements would be dealing with a different standard. It really isn't that …
/r/MensRights25/04/15 05:07 AM
3

That is the exact situation where the "limited public figure" term applies. It seems like a bit of boot strapping, but it's true.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 06:16 PM
1

No religion fits the modern, sensible and civil world if you go by the book's text word by word. Christianity, Islam and Judaism are almost identical. But that's her point. Judaism and Christianity reformed, multiple times over the last several centuries. Islam has not. Judaism and Christianity have opened their texts to reinterpretation through a modern lense. Islam insists that the Koran is the word of Allah and to change it would be blasphemy. I've seen her view of Muslims is black and white,…
/r/MensRights24/04/15 02:21 PM
23

Agreed. Title 9 is pretty easy to bring suit under and includes subjective matters like "feeling unsafe" which under the circumstances should not be difficult to prove up. Defamation is much more difficult. There is a pretty good chance he would qualify as a "limited public figure" for purposes of the suit, meaning Gillibrand would be subject to the constitutional malice standard rather than the negligence standard which is usually applied to private persons. Also, there is a question as to whet…
/r/MensRights24/04/15 02:12 PM
1

However, if it were not accurate, I think they would have taken the opportunity to comment and correct it, so I see little doubt that it's a legitimate response. Silence is not assent. They probably, very rightly, perceive that any response will be treated as a lie or picked apart by the internet lynch mob and twisted into something it isn't. Better to let this idiocy pass and be glad they have to deal with 1 week of consequences from meeting this woman rather than however long it would take for…
/r/MensRights17/04/15 07:21 PM
1

That's assuming that the employer told her that. They haven't commented. It would be rather unusual to provide a statement at all, let alone one like that.
/r/MensRights17/04/15 06:29 PM
1

Hell, at my last office, you'd be out if you were caught buttoning the bottom button on a three button suit. Knowing how to present yourself matters a great deal.
/r/MensRights17/04/15 06:20 PM
2

Ellen Pao is a fraudulent hack. I have gifted gold. I have received gold. I will never contribute another dollar to reddit until she is gone.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 05:09 AM
16

It prevents groping on trains, which is an actual problem in some locations.
/r/MensRights28/02/15 04:30 PM
2

Although I don't think it is fully analogous, I thought the comparison to "the beautiful ones" to be thought provoking. Basically, it was a rat experiment where the subjects eventually withdrew from social and sexual interaction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Calhoun
/r/MensRights30/12/14 07:40 PM
26

I think ace of spades said it best, rape is the big important thing that holds feminism together as a movement. Without it, feminism is largely comprised of unserious issues (man spreading on a subway) and complex issues that don't easily go their way (pay gap). Remove rape from the equation and many feminists will be seen for what they are, upper to middle class white women complaining about inconvenience under the veneer of women's issues. Now, I will give credit that there are a great many wh…
/r/MensRights25/12/14 02:40 AM
1

I thought it was children of the corn.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 12:27 AM
138

Many is reporter code for "I want to attribute my position to something without having to prove that it is true"
/r/MensRights14/11/14 08:53 PM
1

You are arguing from a position of bad faith. This sort of reasoning poisons the serious discussion. It would be as if I were to conclude that by saying you were against forcible rape and nothing else, you are in favor of murder. It is a shameful tactic and not worthy of being part of the discussion. Unless you have a single scintilla of evidence to support the notion that the author is in favor of rape, please do us all a favor and kindly fuck off. The 1 in 5 statistic is about increasing the s…
/r/MensRights26/09/14 03:55 AM
163

Feminists: "teach men not to rape" Author "Hey guys, don't take drunk girls back to your room for sex, even if they seem to be into it, it could get you in trouble. In fact, don't let girls get drunk at your parties or put them at risk of getting drunk and hurt on your watch" Feminists: "Fire the shiatlord for doing what we want but not phrasing it the way we want"
/r/MensRights25/09/14 07:47 PM
2

The headline starts with a basic assumption that these pics exist. The article doesn't even touch on the issue because it is too stupid a question to even ask. Though it is telling that somebody at time believes it would be better if more people suffered. What happened is horrible and is a violation. It shouldn't be cheered on based on the gender of the victim.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 05:04 PM
19

Because laws vary from state to state and town to town. Its not like you are given free legal services to assist in compliance
/r/MensRights18/07/14 01:11 AM
0

It goes beyond that, feminists have a history of advocating against whatever is outside of their tiny cluster of interest. Hell, NOW was co-founded by Ivy Bottini and they kicked her out for being a lesbians.
/r/MensRights02/07/14 02:57 PM
3

You are exactly right about the loss of innocence. There is a reason Adam and eve became aware of their nakedness when they gained knowledge. Sex is a big thing children don't get and are neither physically emotionally or intellectually equipped to understand. Edit: I don't get the downvotes here. I'm not trying to suggest that you take this as literal truth. I'm suggesting that as a culture, people have understood for many, many years that sexual knowledge is a big deal as it relates to a perso…
/r/MensRights27/06/14 11:56 PM
11

High heels are no joke. A Houston woman was just convicted of murder for stabbing a man to death with her heel.
/r/MensRights16/06/14 10:37 PM
2

Even if the quote were real, it is rather revealing that we are talking about an anon quote. If you are talking about the comment of a random jerk on any topic, I don't think you are being fair. It's not as if you can't find this in any group. This wouldn't even be an example of a no-true Scottsman fallacy.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:20 PM
1

It's a fine musical too. Tricking children into falling in love with each other by forbidding them from dating is such a great premise.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 04:12 PM
0

Those beat out the fantastics? Guess I lost track of time on those.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 12:57 AM
2

now that Obama is drawing closer to the end of his presidency, reporters for the major news networks are probably less worried about pissing off their sources in the White House. I would hope so, but remain doubtful. They have been cowed by this administration for 6 years, I doubt they will find their courage in the next 2. Besides, the number of people from the news media currently working in the White House and White House people in the media is staggering. They don't challenge the administrat…
/r/MensRights17/04/14 10:16 PM
2

If I had said that about liberals I would be downvoted to hell, but this "bipartisan" subreddit chooses to up-vote his asshole comment simply because its directed at "right wingers." I think you missed it, submitter says this is a right leaning sub. Yet here we are, upvoting somebody for calling Republicans names. It must be because we are so dumb. That or the central premise is flawed.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 04:49 PM
-1

I'm pretty tired of the disinformation I see on virtually every thread. Oh, look someone open to an interesting discussion Not everything is from the red menace coming to get you. Nevermind.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 04:46 PM
3

That was a well thought out piece.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 03:28 PM
0

Christ like.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 04:04 AM
-2

An uncle tom according to people who never read uncle toms cabin and have no idea what uncle tom was like. Hint, not a race traitor.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 03:34 AM
7

Careful, pointing out glaringly obvious facts might get you labelled as an MRA.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 04:47 PM
3

FYI: I don't know who downvoted you, it wasn't me. I think it's perfectly reasonable to come to a different conclusion. That's the point. People should be called upon to render their own independent judgment instead of saying "always believe her".
/r/MensRights07/02/14 05:09 PM
9

One could only imagine how rape accusations would skyrocket if the standard became "If you say it, we will believe it". There are some crazy, fame hungry people out there. This would be like handing matches to a pyromaniac.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 04:28 PM
1

I think Dylan is telling the truth. Woody Allen is probably a creep or worse. I certainly won't give him my financial support based on what I've read and what I believe. But that doesn't mean he should be denied any due process.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 04:25 PM
10

That's so overly broad it can apply to anything. By that logic, we have a mail culture. We know what mail is, there are jokes about the post office, there are depictions of mail in popular culture, laws against tampering with the mail. Go ahead, stick in nearly any word and it will fit.
/r/MensRights05/02/14 05:23 PM
1

Once again. Not the point. As the rationales you present on behalf of the White House are flatly ignored in other contexts.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 10:47 PM
5

I'm sure your factors largely play into it. That is besides the point. If the White House insists on using crude averages, then they are contributing to the problem of income inequality inside their very doors.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 05:43 PM
3

It is well documented that the White House pays female employees less than the men. Maybe if he cares about equality he can begin at home.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 04:38 PM
6

Did anyone with even the slightest knowledge of Texas politics think she had a chance?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 10:30 PM
1

It's probably good to be aware of the procedures, especially at schools that use unfair standards (reducing the burden of proof from "clear and convincing" to "preponderance of the evidence" for example.) However, I think that the use of informal administrative procedures are usually a good thing. You don't want to saddle students with the need to fund thousands of dollars in legal expenses.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 09:51 PM
1

It's relatively common to use Administrative procedures to avoid court. That's what happens at universities as well. Students don't get to go to civil court unless very specific prerequisites are met and (usually) all administrative remedies have been exhausted.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 07:26 PM
1

Because it was the rule of the proceeding. Hospitals have bylaws which set out what sort of deliberative process the doctors are entitled to. The doctors agree to those terms as part of obtaining privileges. No, these aren't criminal proceedings. They are administrative proceedings. Though it is possible for these to result in a criminal investigation. For example, a doctor who aggressively offers sedation to a terminal patient that results in death could eventually face homicide charges.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 04:45 PM
1

Multiple hospital review boards attempting to reduce or alter a doctor's privileges at the hospital due to allegatoins of negligence. We were hired to consult the doctor and prep them in how to handle the hearing. On some occasions we are allowed to sit outside the hearing room to dispense advice. In others, we were not.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 04:28 PM
1

A right to an attorney is universal. It's not true. I worked in administrative law for a number of years. There are plenty of circumstances where you have no right to an attorney or where your attorney may not be present at the hearing. It's incredibly common and puts the accused at a severe disadvantage.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 03:45 PM
8

I don't know if this is true. Would you guys mind fronting me a few grand to do a video on it? I figure 50k will cover buying me enough games so that I can thoroughly look into this. I'm sure that it will be really educational.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 02:32 AM
3

I think it relates to the strong beliefs some MRM folks have regarding circumcision.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 06:56 PM
3

Ahem, bogeyperson. CYP.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 05:05 PM
2

Don't worry, I've been assured by SRS this never happens in real life. You must be one of those Straw Men I keep hearing about. Everybody knows women can't get impregnated by straw.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 03:40 PM
5

I won't get into the debate about feminism here, but I will highly recommend Ayaan's first book. It's a fascinating account of what one person can endure in the face of great personal oppression. It is sad in so many ways. Made even worse when the so called "civilized" society shunned her because she was too much of a liability for speaking honestly.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 06:23 AM
364

Or in the case of SRS, the first, last and only.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 11:27 PM
7

I don't think the cartoonist got it. But the man was hugging the one thing he saw standing between his child and safety.
/r/MensRights28/12/12 06:30 AM
4

I think you just described 90 percent of reddit and SRS
/r/MensRights21/12/12 02:23 AM
10

I think you have confused equal rights with identical makeup. We are due equal respect in personal dignity. We are due equal respect in the eyes of the law. But men and women are not the same. I never claimed anything to the contrary.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 06:14 AM
-10

I respectfully disagree. I think it boils down to something along the lines of "Men and women are physically different, each is due respect and dignity. But women are more physically vulnerable." Nobody should be hit. But it's unfair to say the damage is equivelant. Just like MR went off on the physical differences between girls and boys in a recent sports thread (Wheaties girl), we need to acknowledge that basic fact. Both are crimes in terms of moral culpability. But the measurement of degree …
/r/MensRights20/12/12 05:47 AM
56

You can tell. It's an unsourced "conversation" that only works to fit an exact worldview that supports MR beliefs. It should be treated with extreme skepticism. That does nothing to undermine what MR believes, but it sure as hell helps our credibility.
/r/MensRights09/12/12 06:19 PM
1

If Helen is referencing a Glenn, it's probably her husband, Glenn Reynolds.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 09:09 AM
2

Dr. Helen is fantastic. She isn't a great interviewer if you watch her videos, but she is smart, practical and most importantly reasonable. Among the various female advocates for men's rights, she comes off as the least ideologically driven. That's no attack on the others, but Dr. Helen is a stand out in that regard.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:27 AM
1

What I don't understand is why there isn't just more masturbation. Prison should have a spank room with ample access to materials to assist in manual release. While it wouldn't solve the problem entirely, I'd think it would help.
/r/MensRights02/09/12 03:54 AM
8

Your assumption ignores the history of SRS. They come into this subreddit and post misogynist comments, they will make posts with content about a tale of woe, wait for sympathetic replies and then edit their material so that it looks like /r/mensrights is saying things sympathetic towards a rapist or an abuser of women. SRS is unequivocally anti men's rights because they believe that pro men's rights is being pro misogyny.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 05:13 PM
10

Common law marriage exists in a few places. Common law is a misnomer though because it is, like all law in the Western world, codified. Even though it usually involves taking the old common law rule and making a statutory version that mirrors word for word.
/r/MensRights01/07/12 05:26 PM
6

There was a time when a classic book was: Red badge of courage, Huck Finn, Tom Sawyer, etc. Now? ZOMG, did you read the last Twighlight book? Boys need different literature than girls. Old classics failed to reach one demographic, current trends ignore another. There is less of an excuse for that now.
/r/MensRights30/06/12 05:28 AM
3

The court is deciding upon multiple issues. 1) Is the individual mandate constitutional under the commerce clause 2) Are the state Medicare provisions constitutional exercises of federal authority. 3) Is the individual mandate a tax or a penalty If the court finds that any of 1 through 3 to be unconstitutional the next question must be asked: 1) Does the Affordable Care Act provide for it's own survival in the even that it is in whole or in part struck down on legal grounds. Normally, bills have…
/r/MensRights28/06/12 05:59 AM
3

The ACA did not have a severability clause. One of the key questions is whether the failure of the Individual Mandate (or the lesser discussed Medicare/federalism problem) means the death of the whole bill. So yes. There is a very real possibility that that stuff will no longer exist if the individual mandate is found unconstitutional.
/r/MensRights28/06/12 04:49 AM
1

The 70 cents on the dollar line is a tired old lie. The dishonesty is best put on display when a politician tries to play it both ways. Obama claims that he fixed gender pay disparity with the Ledbetter act, except when he needs it to not be true. Then he claims that women are still getting the shaft. If the victims don't exist, one might as well invent them I guess.
/r/MensRights23/06/12 05:39 AM
9

you left off Alternate step: Create a new account and post horrible things in other subreddits to "prove" how evil they can be. One only needs to check this thread to see a 2 hour old account taking part in this time honored SRS tradition.
/r/MensRights07/06/12 05:32 PM
13

Except you don't understand, you are forced to be aware all the time because of other evil men. (I'm not saying this in seriousness, but that's the predicable response, probably followed with "if you were a real man, you'd be ready to take on whatever threat appears.) It reminds me an occasion that I was out with a woman late at night and a homeless drunk guy said something inappropriate to her. She got mad that I didn't "do something about it." What she didn't get is that is exactly what he wan…
/r/MensRights25/05/12 06:38 PM
6

Because money that's why. The SLPC is about raising money and feminists are an emerging market. Apparently they can't get enough cash from the race hustling and tea party fearing industries. Non-profit organizations like the SLPC operate to scare old people into donating their estates after death. They profit off of fear and in true Orwellian fashion, they hate in the name of anti-hate. Screw them.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 01:40 PM
4

omg. I just realized. SRS leadership approves of gang rape of southern poor people. We must inform the southern poverty law center this is an obvious hate group. They only banned me because I am against murder and rape. I wonder what they do to the poor women disagree with them.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 04:51 AM
4

I must add that I just found this in my inbox: you have been banned from posting to /r/ShitRedditSays: Humor escapes you.. Maybe humor escapes me. But that's divine comedy. Also, he failed to condemn rape, murder and jaywalking in his message. That mod must love all of those things.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 04:41 AM
5

Remember, a failure to condemn is approval in SRS land. They fail to condemn murder in another thread I saw. They must approve of murder. They failed to say they were against rape. They must be for rape. They failed to condemn violence, they even pretend to participate in violence. They therefore must approve of it.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 09:29 PM
2

We're in no need as a species to quickly populate, so really the default action should be do not get pregnant/do not come to term. Not true. Much of the modern world is threatened with a demographic bomb. Japan and Europe are lagging far behind in child birth rates sufficient to support their aging population. It's not just that many European nations aren't even near the replacement rate for births, its that there aren't people to economically or physically support their aging populace. The long…
/r/MensRights24/03/12 04:39 AM
6

Welcome. We are glad for all reasonable types here. MR isn't looking for a cheering team. We are looking for people who are willing to listen and engage in fair debate. If you come with an open mind, we are glad to take you in with open arms.
/r/MensRights10/03/12 07:19 AM
2

PJ media just asked that question too. The pushback is beginning in the right side of the blogosphere.
/r/MensRights10/03/12 06:03 AM
6

Stop trying so hard, you might hurt yourself.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 04:59 AM
7

Because anybody cares what a SRS troll thinks. :yawns:
/r/MensRights22/02/12 04:46 AM
2

corporations like people who make them more money. That's an anecdote? I guess you misreplied and meant to get the poster who had 'all those friends the corporate world who were held back because of sexism.'
/r/MensRights22/02/12 01:37 AM
6

There is some truth to it. If you do a good job, you are more likely to stand out compared to a male coworker. Corporations also have diversity initiatives to improve minority and female representation. You still have to do a good job to get ahead, but being a woman in corporate today means something far different than it did even a decade ago.
/r/MensRights21/02/12 09:53 PM
19

Well, all she did was make coffee and look pretty. They only referred to her as sweetie or sugar and constantly slapped her on the butt. That's what the evil men in corporate offices do all the time right? Edit. In case you missed it, I was joking. She actually handled finance and dealt with projects that cost millions of dollars.
/r/MensRights21/02/12 09:10 PM
51

And I have a spouse who did quite well in her corporate offices because ... corporations like people who make them more money.
/r/MensRights21/02/12 07:56 PM
6

Fine, let's call it a denial of due process, denial of the right to confront one's accuser and probation for an unnamed act of malfeasance. How is that better? Regardless of how you frame it, he is worse off than he was before for reasons that he were not articulated nor fairly adjudicated. Call it sensationalist if you want, but Yale just got through ruining a young man's life by allowing slanders equally unclear facts to reach the pages of the New York times. There is an abuse of process going…
/r/MensRights09/02/12 04:57 AM
1

Yes. PP does a lot of abortions. But comparing the absolute number of abortions to provided against the relative number of other services provided is intellectually disingenuous. Oh look, we gave out 100 condoms. That's 100 services provided. We also gave 4 abortions. That's less but that's also apples and oranges. Even if your numbers held up. I don't know how you justify criminal activity such as hacking as something the "Korman foundation deserved."
/r/MensRights05/02/12 06:26 AM
1

they should not be taking any position on abortion. Funny, I'm pretty sure that the entirety of the backlash is because they chose the "wrong" position on abortion, instead of not choosing one at all. Supporting an organization that performs abortions is a position. I love how people say that they "turned" into a political organization by making this change. All organizations of that magnitude are political in some way, especially when choosing to partner with organizations that are among the mo…
/r/MensRights05/02/12 06:07 AM
1

I don't hate feminism. But aside from the many many good points already made, I'll add in that there is a certain meanness that exists within the movement now. If you don't fit their demands exactly, they have no use for you. Go against them and they will try to destroy you. A perfect example happened this week. The Susan Koman foundation decided to stop donating to Planned Parenthood. Why? PP does a lot of abortions and it the Koman foundation was being told by potential donors that they did no…
/r/MensRights04/02/12 06:40 PM
5

So why do most of my peers and elders believe that a false rape accusation is the easiest way for a young woman to torpedo the aspirations of a successful young man? Can you think of a better one? Seriously, if I wanted to ruin a man's life, shy of physical violence, I cannot think of a single better way than to falsely accuse him of rape.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 10:30 PM
2

Q.E.D.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 02:16 PM
6

The best part of that article is the focus on equity. It's the phrase we should be using. Equality will never happen, it's impossible. That's why abusive feminists love it. It's a cudgel. No matter how good things are, they can find at least one area where things aren't "equal". Equity is basic fairness. It accounts for the reality that distinguish our genders and the fact that sometimes different is good. It's a term the MR community should embrace and use far more often.
/r/MensRights21/01/12 06:20 PM
1

I agree with you that it can be toxic, there is no easy answer here. The old fashioned practice of voting and commenting will work too of course. The best way to promote a good community is to be an active and positive force right?
/r/MensRights28/12/11 05:41 PM
2

Equity is not equality, it is a principle grounded in reality and fairness. It most certainly exists, but it is a difficult thing to reach in even the most ideal circumstances.
/r/MensRights28/12/11 05:39 PM
1

Let me tell you something about men. They take a stand. Have principles and stick to them. That doesn't mean that you have to be closed minded, but if you create reasonable guidelines, they should be adhered to. If you promote a group that is too accepting you must understand that the consequence is that you will be responsible for letting the minority misrepresent the whole. I'd much rather a culture that is introspective. Hell, if you ask me what a major problem is with feminism, it is that it…
/r/MensRights28/12/11 06:16 AM
5

How is she different from being a whore? Whores give out what they advertise. She is a thief who uses her body as bait. Far more pathetic and loathsome in my estimation.
/r/MensRights09/12/11 06:58 AM
4

It's an important distinction to note, there aren't charges, a term attached to criminal proceedings. It's a "claim" or a "complaint". We are talking civil claims. High expense, lower burden of proof. This matters because it reflects on why these suits were disposed of for nuisance suit sums (one reportedly settled for 35k, which would have been far less than the cost of a successful defense, which is to say nothing of the PR damage even false claims bring.)
/r/MensRights02/11/11 09:45 PM
2

Look for your local law schools. Some have low or free legal clinics. It's worth checking.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 04:48 AM
21

I disagree. A women's blog pushed this story hard because he was a guy. Could you imagine the uproar if the internet mob were called down on a woman for this? That very same blog would be claiming that this was a call for violence against this woman and that by posting her place of work we were risking her being assaulted and raped. This story illustrates the double standard for treatment. A man is rude, the result is that thousands try to ruin his life. If a woman did this, nobody would even pi…
/r/MensRights16/10/11 04:03 PM
3

Simple. There is no basis in law to prevent this. I have no problem with female only floors. But that's because I believe that businesses should feel free to operate to make clients happy if it's within the bounds of the law. I'd have no problems with male only floors either. If women want to have the floor let them, maybe we can get them to do the windows next (kidding!)
/r/MensRights15/10/11 06:14 AM
4

The insistence upon a condom is interesting. Well, if getting things dirty isn't a concern, how about we switch to anal for a while? I mean, we have some latex going on, you don't have to touch it, taste it, or look at it right? Who cares if one party doesn't enjoy it as much or is turned off by the proposition?
/r/MensRights03/10/11 04:51 AM
1

So where do you go to get the shots? I've been seriously considering this for a while now. It's an easily spread virus and it is associated with oral cancers.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 05:25 PM
2

In a world where women go to war—and play hockey—men who believe that true manliness lies in doing what women can't are forced to create ever more-violent activities from which females can still be excluded. (This explains the rising popularity of the most violent video games, as well as MMA.) That's so stupid. Really? I thought I liked watching MMA because the fights were exciting. But apparently not. I'm just sticking it to women. The author thinks women can't participate, having never heard o…
/r/MensRights27/08/11 07:40 PM
7

Susanna Breslin is a blogger. This article won't grace the pages of Forbes' print edition. Still, she is a good writer and I'm glad she made her way onto this subject.
/r/MensRights12/08/11 04:27 PM
2

Wow that is a lot to read into the simple fact that I gave a response to your question.
/r/MensRights08/08/11 05:17 PM
10

the mythical man-trapping girlfriend I stopped reading right there. If that's a myth, I've got news for you, I've met 2 of those freaking unicorns in my dating life. The first time was when I was 19 and a girl was trying to get me on the hook for a pregnancy from her recent ex. The second time was when a good friend decided she would stop taking the pill so her then boyfriend would become more serious and marry her. There's nothing mythical about that. I know it's just the typical drivel of pand…
/r/MensRights08/08/11 04:06 PM
6

Condom, vasectomy, how is that fewer choices than women? they have pill, tubes tied... what else do they have? IUDs, Diaphragms, dermal implants, and shots come to mind.
/r/MensRights08/08/11 04:01 PM
8

and yet the US decided to double down on the insurance model.
/r/MensRights27/07/11 09:45 PM
10

The only difference is that women can read their porn in public without social disapproval.
/r/MensRights07/07/11 03:24 PM
128

I was on an elevator with a black man. He was polite and talkative but I was uncomfortable because it was a potential mugging. Imagine if that was the post instead. Those same people would rightly view that as bigoted.
/r/MensRights07/07/11 02:18 AM
16

When a woman gets blind drunk among strangers and has sex she later regrets feminists shout, "She was raped, do not blame the victim!" When a man has consensual sex and is later falsely accused of rape feminists shout "It's all his fault. He was asking for it." Disgusting but it reveals the pathology of faux feminism in so many ways.
/r/MensRights03/07/11 09:53 PM
2

It isn't true that we only survive because of the state. But it is true that what we have, we have at the pleasure of the state. We have governments empowered to take everything from you through abusive laws and regulations. God help you if you get caught in the sights of somebody powerful, it is impossible to live without running afoul of some rule (see the book Three Felonies a Day).
/r/MensRights03/07/11 09:28 PM
21

Complain to the staff. Be polite. Be respectful. But be confident. Explain your reasoning. Most importantly, hand over a stack of other items and tell them that their products are no longer appropriate for your family. Somewhere, out there, are some people who eat these crappy mysandrist slogans up. You need to sent the message that it will cost money in the long run. The moral issue matters, but much much less than the financial one.
/r/MensRights20/06/11 07:19 AM
8

My advice isn't to say dump her but to say "dump her if you can't change her mind." This is a very basic issue that defines where you stand in terms of mutual respect and authority. If she maintains her view, she will always view herself as the aggrieved and you as the oppressor. That is unhealthy for you and for her.
/r/MensRights15/06/11 04:59 AM
0

Comments like yours are posted in every submission like this, so the FAQ now addresses your question. Oh, well if it's in a FAQ is see my opinion is no longer needed. Keep in mind, that for every comment like mine, it has to be prefaced by a submission that a sizable group of MR readers find counterproductive and semi-offtopic. Also, keep in mind this is a subreddit. Submitting this information to other /MR readers is preaching to the choir.
/r/MensRights31/05/11 11:39 PM
0

I hate to complain, but is this really an issue for "Men's rights"? The only issue I see that is germane is that a Psychologist is quoted who blames the women's behavior on the men that they dated. I enjoy this subreddit, but don't want it to be accused of being home of simple female bashing. There are plenty of stories of women committing various crimes but that does not mean that it necessarily impacts Men's rights.
/r/MensRights31/05/11 09:04 PM
2

Why is it that whenever I read a statement like "I'm a feminist and I just wanted to say" my mind plays it out in the form of a bad 80's rap?
/r/MensRights28/04/11 08:10 PM
1

If that's what you can manage, go for it. When you get in the habit, you may find it easier to write quicky posts just to keep readers happy. But that's an ideal, not necessarily what everybody can do when dealing with the rest of life. Don't get discouraged along the way, a wise member of the Mythbusters once said "failure is always an option." Stuff will get hard, you will get distracted, sometimes the words just won't come. That's fine, it's all part of the process. No matter what, I hope wha…
/r/MensRights16/04/11 07:00 AM
2

It's a great idea. Look to other Men's rights oriented blogs written by women. Dr. Helen is a good example. Amy Alkon delves into the subject occasionally. I'm sure there are others. But get an idea of what is being written and what your strengths are. Also, if you blog. Set a goal of doing at least one post a day. It doesn't have to be brilliant, but it will help you improve and generate a reader base.
/r/MensRights16/04/11 06:16 AM
4

That is technically incorrect. The premarital estate is still separate property for the wife. If you marry a woman with debt, never assume that debt through marriage and then divorce, it goes back to being her debt. The problem comes when a) you somehow assume her debt through words or action (let's say you start paying off her bills and even after separation pay those bills.) and b) through the basic reality that while married you have to pay those debts. My best advice is to talk to a lawyer b…
/r/MensRights21/03/11 05:52 AM
1

Great job. A good response on your part. The fact that the paper had to tell people what to think about your letter without factual support shows exactly how weak their position is.
/r/MensRights16/03/11 08:42 AM
1

Everybody has an expectation of some sort. I certainly have an expectation of what a woman should be. The question is whether these expectations are fair, not whether they should or should not exist.
/r/MensRights18/02/11 07:54 PM
5

I for one am shocked that a woman who would illegally tape a man and digitally alter the contents of the conversation might do something extortionary. Gibson may have come out poorly in the release of those tapes, but only an idiot would miss out on how cruelly manipulative and dishonest she must have been. Makes me wonder how long she had been playing him. Possibly from the start.
/r/MensRights17/02/11 05:05 PM
1

Just remember this. If I want to know the number of homicide victims in the US, I can give you updated statistics, year over year, showing the rate and the general rate of decline or rise. I can do the same for robbery, larceny, jaywalking and every crime. The Federal government tracks actual cases and suspected cases in many categories of crime. Each crime, updated statistics, on a monthly and yearly basis. When it comes to campus rape. There is only one immutable statistic. One in four. Decade…
/r/MensRights14/02/11 08:19 AM
2

http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_1_campus_rape.html necessary and valuable reading. take the time, the whole article is worth it.
/r/MensRights14/02/11 07:49 AM
2

Yeah, I don't know where he was going with that. Before then, he made an excellent point when he stated: With a genuine moment of reflection consider the message offered to a child when you say these words: "never hit a girl!" What you have just told that child is that you expect them to hit, that violence is OK, but that violence is conditional. Instead of the natural follow up, he goes off on sports. The more important point is that saying "never hit a girl" creates a conditional scenario wher…
/r/MensRights12/02/11 09:30 PM
1

Anybody else distracted by the subheader "Important tips from Australian man?"
/r/MensRights01/02/11 08:56 PM
7

Post a reply on Youtube. Let her know that her writing is inappropriate. It's one thing to post on the /mensrights group, but that's preaching to the choir. Let the writers know. Be civil be smart but be active.
/r/MensRights31/01/11 07:24 PM
7

It is an ex post facto determination, remember, that merely means "after the fact." Even if this man did something horrible, it was in line with the laws of the time. Anybody know what the statute of limitations is for rape in the jurisdiction? The article doesn't directly say what it is.
/r/MensRights19/01/11 09:28 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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