TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

c0mputar Archive

View 52 posts and 1,143 comments by c0mputar 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)
289

c0mputar/r/MensRights11/09/13 06:18 AM
278

c0mputar/r/MensRights27/02/14 09:22 AM
238

c0mputar/r/MensRights18/12/14 08:10 PM
177

c0mputar/r/MensRights08/10/11 10:51 AM
115

Raising Awarenessc0mputar/r/MensRights02/03/15 01:59 AM
115

Crosspostc0mputar/r/MensRights15/02/15 03:55 PM
113

False Accusationsc0mputar/r/MensRights19/12/14 06:07 PM
108

c0mputar/r/MensRights17/12/11 05:41 PM
80

c0mputar/r/MensRights31/10/13 11:54 PM
63

c0mputar/r/MensRights17/05/13 04:55 PM
52

Eastern Culturec0mputar/r/MensRights29/04/15 09:16 PM
43

c0mputar/r/MensRights06/12/13 08:34 PM
42

c0mputar/r/MensRights18/11/13 03:49 PM
42

Discussionc0mputar/r/MensRights08/05/14 08:18 AM
38

c0mputar/r/MensRights15/06/12 04:39 PM
38

c0mputar/r/MensRights12/03/13 09:13 PM
38

Reverse Gendersc0mputar/r/MensRights10/07/14 08:59 PM
35

c0mputar/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:17 PM
34

c0mputar/r/MensRights15/12/11 05:37 PM
33

Discriminationc0mputar/r/MensRights25/03/15 07:35 PM
33

c0mputar/r/MensRights06/07/14 03:15 AM
33

c0mputar/r/MensRights15/03/13 06:27 PM
33

c0mputar/r/MensRights23/11/13 03:40 AM
28

Generalc0mputar/r/MensRights11/06/15 05:55 AM
25

c0mputar/r/MensRights18/11/13 03:14 PM
24

c0mputar/r/MensRights09/07/11 12:22 PM
24

c0mputar/r/MensRights17/01/12 02:14 AM
19

c0mputar/r/MensRights16/12/11 04:01 PM
19

c0mputar/r/MensRights27/05/14 11:06 PM
18

Generalc0mputar/r/MensRights12/06/15 09:21 PM
18

c0mputar/r/MensRights06/11/11 07:41 AM
16

Discussionc0mputar/r/MensRights12/08/14 09:15 PM
16

c0mputar/r/MensRights02/12/13 12:51 AM
12

c0mputar/r/MensRights29/07/11 12:09 AM
12

c0mputar/r/MensRights25/09/11 11:46 AM
11

c0mputar/r/MensRights16/06/14 11:33 PM
11

c0mputar/r/MensRights12/09/11 12:08 AM
10

c0mputar/r/MensRights08/07/11 05:54 AM
9

c0mputar/r/MensRights15/03/13 11:04 AM
8

c0mputar/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:01 AM
8

c0mputar/r/MensRights15/10/11 02:58 AM
7

c0mputar/r/MensRights15/10/11 06:47 PM
6

c0mputar/r/MensRights09/07/11 01:43 AM
6

c0mputar/r/MensRights29/05/14 10:04 PM
6

c0mputar/r/MensRights01/11/13 09:02 PM
6

c0mputar/r/MensRights11/07/11 03:28 AM
6

c0mputar/r/MensRights04/10/11 03:20 AM
4

c0mputar/r/MensRights14/12/11 08:33 AM
3

c0mputar/r/MensRights26/10/11 03:05 AM
1

c0mputar/r/MensRights09/01/12 10:34 PM
0

c0mputar/r/MensRights12/03/12 09:06 AM
0

c0mputar/r/MensRights11/08/11 10:19 PM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,143 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I believe nothing. I'm not in that room.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 09:59 PM
14

For those of you who aren't Canadian... Marie Henein is likely the highest profile criminal defense lawyer in the country. Ghomeshi is likely going to dish out over a half million just in trial costs. She was probably giddy when she saw how easy the cross examination was going to be for her. If all there is for Marie is just 1 credible witness left standing, I'm skeptical that Marie won't be able to successfully drape the unreliability of the other defendants over the whole case. Sex crimes are …
/r/MensRights06/02/16 09:51 AM
3

The 2% figure is like saying only 4% of accused men were actually the rapist.
/r/MensRights25/07/15 06:13 PM
0

FPH mods enforced np link standard & brigading/harassment site rules. No presented evidence so-far shows the FPH sub uniquely violating any rules, unless 90% of subreddits are also in violation. Meanwhile, SRS permits non-np links, which is an ACTION that has been used to partly justify FPH's ban. No evidence so far has been presented that shows non-np reddit links being permitted in FPH, and no evidence that the mods permitted the release of personal information. What I mean by not permitted is…
/r/MensRights12/06/15 09:02 PM
1

I've never really looked at TRP, and I don't intend to anytime soon. I'm subscribed to enough already. I got no idea what goes on over there. The problem is that the last thing MRAs and the MR sub needs is an association with TRP because TRP, like MRs, has been thoroughly slandered by the media, justifiably so or not. We have enough trouble trying to keep the MRs image clean, and so we'd rather not make the job even more difficult. If this sub gets banned, the uproar will be deafening and the al…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 10:24 PM
2

Cease contact with her, admit nothing to her or in the public sphere. You might have already shot yourself in the foot by acknowledging certain facts during any concrete communications. Just admitting enough to corroborate a couple insignificant facts in her story may be enough to escalate things criminally. Consult a lawyer, too. There may be nothing you can do beyond that in the meantime, and hopefully you can weather the public storm and move on with your life. Defending yourself in any way m…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 09:31 PM
2

You'd probably have to prove malicious intent I bet.
/r/MensRights09/05/15 05:42 PM
1

Yea... completely wrong. It is the case that an officer can assume the public is at risk in such a scenario, and kill the suspect if they try to flee.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 06:19 PM
1

No. He was already running away with his back turned when the officer took his first shot. That is meaningless. Here, I'll take an extreme example. Imagine a suspect knifes the officer and ran away. His back was turned and the officer took his first shot. The shooting was justified. The circumstances leading up to the shooting matter. A fleeing suspect can be shot in the back, that fact is utterly meaningless on its own.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 03:14 PM
1

Study wasn't long enough, not enough questions, and didn't include young enough respondents. Those are some of the reasons why the results of this study are completely wrong. Trust us to just tell you that there is a positive correlation between video game usage and misogyny. Don't ask us for any data though. We aren't going to spend any money or effort actually proving that the problem exists, since we already know that it does. Providing statistical evidence, or any evidence, to show that ther…
/r/MensRights08/04/15 10:59 PM
0

If there is reasonable doubt that the police officer, from their own perspective, didn't have reasonable grounds to believe the suspect had committed a sufficiently severe enough felony, like assaulting a police officer to a sufficient degree or verbalizing a deadly threat, then he won't be convicted for murder. From what little we can see and hear in the video, with regards to what led up to the officer to decide to use lethal force, I can think up all sorts of scenarios that would give the off…
/r/MensRights08/04/15 07:59 AM
2

K, on second thought, I think that because the official made it an absolute, it crossed the line into victim blaming because it leaves no room to actually assign responsibility to anyone else (like the assailant). The key thing would be to mention "risk" or "reducing risk" in some manner, but sometimes the context of a statement does provide that kind of implication if a statement, on its own, looks damning. I'll concede that the official was probably in the realm of victim blaming. I probably g…
/r/MensRights09/03/15 05:37 PM
1

If people want their own cute set of rules for how we talk about managing risk, regarding sex crimes (not possible with being a "victim blamer" by your criminally broad definition of the term), separate from every other possible way one can be victimized or harmed, then have at it. The bottom line is that the official never said victims were partly or completely responsible for their own victimization, nor said they deserved it. You walk up to any random person on the street, or even read the de…
/r/MensRights09/03/15 05:18 PM
6

There is a difference between telling someone they deserved victimization, and telling them how to manage risk. It isn't a subtle difference either. Of course I wouldn't care about the distinction if victim blaming wasn't a negative term, but it is, and so I oppose including risk management within the concept of victim blaming.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 04:59 PM
0

That quote is pretty fucking harmless. If I leave my door unlocked and I get robbed, people can tell me I should lock the door to avoid being robbed. I suppose the officer could have been a bit more nuanced in their statement by saying "reducing the odds", and not make an absolute, but the reaction to the statement is simply the usual shit of confusing victim blaming with risk management. Not once does the officer say the victim DESERVES to be victimized, which is the essence of victim blaming.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 04:48 PM
1

Wiki is like that everywhere to prevent its own commentary on facts.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 08:56 PM
10

Saw the submission a couple days back about the page being up for deletion and thought the absence of male massacres was particularly unforgivable under a topic about violence against men. Edit: About 80% of it just got axed by wikipedia, but some of it squeaked through. I don't care enough to fight a battle with editors, it's virtually impossible to win. I voice my discontent here, but I'm not going to subject myself to a week-long battle trying to get much of the meat of my original addition b…
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:00 AM
1

How does the violence against men have so little about the routine massacre of only men around the world in conflict zones? I'm going to consider contributing a new topic on that page that looks at the massacre of men in conflict zones. The Pakistan-Bangladesh conflict is certainly noteworthy. Even then, men are the overwhelming majority of victims of violent crime already... Edit: Done here.
/r/MensRights01/03/15 11:14 PM
1

It was purely about claiming "__% of rapists are women" when it should be about what victims claimed who they were perpetrated by during a particular year. Technically, a rapist could account for multiple crimes, and yearly perpetration rates could fluctuate. While the serial offenders do undermine the incorrect quoted statement earlier, the lifetime rate critique is on very shaky ground. There is no reason why victimization by women rates should fluctuate so wildly, nevertheless, who cares? ~40…
/r/MensRights01/03/15 10:24 PM
4

Technicality. The CDC is really reaching in disproving the observation of those who say "40% of rapists are women" by saying that "40% of rapes are perpetrated by women during the last year". The CDC is being accurate, but it is a strawman argument against those who don't make the mistake of the former statement. There is a difference. The impact of either statement is the same, but they are technically different figures.
/r/MensRights01/03/15 09:45 PM
3

Males are less likely to remember such abuse long term Or less likely to view it as abuse. On the contrary, underage female rape might be over-reported instead.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 02:08 AM
3

Lost brain cells. Put up a warning up next time OP. Edit: Missed the Feminism flair, oops.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 02:03 AM
18

That 70% figure has been debunked more times than I care to count. Here is one. Feminists are notorious for misusing or manipulating statistics. If they ever cite one, then look into it, because it is probably bullshit. Edit: I didn't even look into the other figures, because I just don't give a fuck when they already peddle a complete fabrication that is the 70% figure. If a stat is presented by a feminist showing bias against women in the legal or criminal framework, then don't blindly accept …
/r/MensRights17/02/15 12:29 AM
3

"Can be" is not absolute, nor does this poll suggest that they presented answers on a range from 0-10 or anything like that. Either they agree it is never justified, or it can be justified, not that it is always justified. I think you are being too much of a pedant.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 09:21 PM
7

I'm a bit confused.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 05:21 PM
1

Having sex in public like that... Levels of nudity hardly the issue.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 03:53 PM
3

I thought he was making fun of SJWs.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 07:29 AM
2

I think it is pretty absurd they didn't get accelerated approval, as far as I knew there was pretty compelling evidence of efficacy. Post-approval studies can happen, and I think DMD is a serious enough illness to warrant consideration. Been awhile since I understood the going-ons between the FDA and SRPT and why it didn't qualify for accelerated approval. Must have been surrogate endpoint related issues and the FDA being particularly anal about what kind of data they'll accept, especially for A…
/r/MensRights14/02/15 10:25 AM
3

SRPT has been on quite a regulatory rollarcoaster. Hope it gets to the market sooner than later so more kids can get access.
/r/MensRights14/02/15 09:56 AM
40

Those texts are pretty damning.
/r/MensRights03/02/15 09:56 PM
1

Ask a Girls fan about the whole rape thing? They won't know wtf you are talking about. This article is really reaching.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 05:55 PM
2

I'd love to know what was said.
/r/MensRights10/01/15 05:24 AM
3

History is about war and powerful people.
/r/MensRights09/01/15 01:06 AM
15

In before reddit mods shut this thread down under the guise of some twisted interpretation of doxxing or... JK, they already prohibit subs from appealing to sponsors.
/r/MensRights09/01/15 12:30 AM
2

There is a huge double standard when it comes to talking or permitting violence/sexism against/about men. Doesn't mean those students are somehow innocent are free from the consequences of their actions. The internet is a place where posted things remain online permanently. There is no such thing as an expectation of privacy online. Further, and this is something that people routinely fail to understand with respect to online activities like emailing, context and tone are very easily missed in w…
/r/MensRights05/01/15 09:08 PM
1

Damn the shit said is toeing the line even in a private environment filled with drunk bros bantering about girls and shit. On facebook? Jesus christ, how fucking stupid can you be, I guess that is why they didn't get into med school.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 05:10 PM
2

Trust me, if it was a guy no one would give a shit that it was self defense. It would be on top of justiceporn and video with people applauding the "bullied" for standing up for himself. That said, the guy has no obvious legal foot to stand on, in terms of self defense, but it could be said that the boyfriend was in fact restraining her from attacking the guy again, and the guy obviously had reasonable grounds to assume he would be attacked again... Thus there could be reasonable doubt to any cl…
/r/MensRights05/01/15 04:57 PM
25

The best criminal lawyers in the business will inevitably find more and more high profile and scandalous cases because that is where the big bucks are for criminal defense lawyers. The profession is not a cash cow for 99% of criminal defense lawyers. That said, I agree that Alan can be pretty dishonest in his debates and no doubt extremely capable of being manipulative and unethical in court to best serve his clients... This guy has made a name for himself defending high profile individuals in c…
/r/MensRights05/01/15 04:12 PM
3

How can her name be censored?
/r/MensRights04/01/15 08:11 PM
1

Your issue with it is completely sound, but it's the best we can get. To be honest it is better to simply say that 85% are unknown, but that doesn't sound interesting. The way I see it is that the higher standard for conviction is offset by the fact that the entire system is built around trying to get a conviction. All that means is that: If evidence suggests innocence, the case will more likely go nowhere. This means that the ~5% number should be higher if the police investigated every case tho…
/r/MensRights02/01/15 10:29 PM
1

A misunderstanding of statistics. Taking the most conservative range of 2-8% prevalence of false rape accusations sounds small to people. Personally, the percentage doesn't mean shit to me because every accused is innocent until proven guilty and every case is independent of eachother. However, the conviction rate for all reported cases is about 10%. This means that about 33% of all reported cases of rape, that have been investigated thoroughly enough to determine whether or not the accused is i…
/r/MensRights02/01/15 12:39 AM
9

Women can float easier than men.
/r/MensRights29/12/14 10:52 PM
6

Understand that these are "proven" false. Not all remaining >90% were "proven" true.
/r/MensRights26/12/14 03:55 PM
2

If this guy was such a violent criminal you would think they would go to the police.
/r/MensRights24/12/14 07:40 AM
4

Maybe link an article or video report that highlights the double standard.
/r/MensRights19/12/14 11:57 PM
2

The 2-8% figure is definitely awash in uncertainty because different districts have different standards for categorizing an accusation as false. A great deal of those categorized as false were confessions from the accuser, which is certainly very strong evidence that maliciousness took place. For the police to even take the step of saying the accuser is lying is to take a big step in my opinion, and so I do not think some people's interpretation of "substantial evidence" will do the figure justi…
/r/MensRights19/12/14 08:34 PM
19

This is not really an analysis. It is just an exercise in logic. Feminists often cast all accusations that are not proven to be false as likely to be true, even though it would be equally invalid to cast all accusations that are not proven to be true as likely to be false. That is all I'm getting at here.
/r/MensRights19/12/14 06:18 PM
12

The false rape rate factoid that always gets thrown around during discussions about a rape cases or false rape accusations is so misused. The common rate mentioned is that 2-8% of false rape accusations are shown to be false to a reasonably high degree of certainty. That figure is the most conservative range offered by the literature, and is the range that feminists often refer to. Feminists then take that statistic and say that it means 92-98% of rape accusations are likely true. When they don'…
/r/MensRights19/12/14 04:45 PM
18

The answer was briefly reported indirectly by CNN, but not by other outlets like theguardian or UPI. /r/worldnews wasn't too happy to see me point out the double standard here (for 6 hours anyways). Male disposability has been getting a lot of confirming evidence this week.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 08:13 PM
19

One mention, buried in the report. I like to think of how this story would get presented if they were all girls. You wouldn't even make it to the first line. The title would be all caps and it would mention the gender, how many died, misogyny, and maybe all of it quoted by Malala. Bless her, but I would trust the media to use her to spin their own narrative about such a tragedy.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 04:50 PM
22

That is definitely not true. If it were a girls' school targeted, the response would be 10x bigger. There would be like a international day of mourning and world leaders would be lining up to talk about violence against women. We even got a taste of this reality in Nigeria. Look at how much press the kidnapped girls got, compare that to the coverage that the mass killing and kidnapping of boys for months and, even years. The latter might have got coverage under the guise of "students", or some o…
/r/MensRights16/12/14 04:29 PM
35

I need a link. I saw pictures of some girls walking around so I couldn't be sure. My gut said that it was likely boys that were targeted, that is generally the reality of these situations even if the world refuses to acknowledge it. The hint was the lack of mentioning any girl victims. The thing is that every single report I've ever read of mass killings in the Middle East or Africa that doesn't mention the gender of the victims have always meant that all of the victims were male. I don't think …
/r/MensRights16/12/14 03:50 PM
2

If the Judge awarded custody of 1 child to the fathers, then that is less child support paid to the mothers which will worsen the conditions for the remaining child. The financials are more important than the safety of the children. Better the children be put at risk than for the mothers to get only half their potential child support. We know there was no way the fathers were getting child support, they are men and also had the means to take legal action.
/r/MensRights05/11/14 12:16 AM
1

I don't know much about John but I do agree that Paul is shit.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 03:13 AM
1

Even wikipedia isn't touching the scandal.
/r/MensRights26/08/14 02:05 AM
12

What concerns me is the double standard and hypocrisy being displayed by the media when talking about the character and/or sexual-related issues involving a male dev/tech/and in this case, boyfriend. It is all very symptomatic of a SJW infestation in much of the gaming journalism world. Seems like the gaming world has the same problem as the atheist world. The SJW movement online is a very formidable force for those who make a living on the internet. For example, it appears they even managed to …
/r/MensRights25/08/14 07:02 AM
0

I had a suspicion you were new to this topic. I'm about to head out but tonight I'll fill you in.
/r/MensRights12/08/14 11:48 PM
5

Except that readers do not assume all the victims of a massacre are men. People would be shocked to realize just how prolific lethal violence against just men is throughout the world. Pretty much every conflict zone, currently and in the past, in the developing world is filled with mass graves of just men and boys. The Violence against Women in conflict zones is well known and understood, and focuses primarily on sexual violence or kidnappings. They get all these services, exclusively, despite t…
/r/MensRights12/08/14 11:14 PM
1

Touche.
/r/MensRights12/08/14 09:43 PM
2

Yes. 1 2 to name a couple sources.
/r/MensRights11/07/14 02:13 AM
1

Pretty entertaining. Thought he came a little too strongly on women and child abuse and should have tailored his argument to be a bit more about including women in the discussion about violence. Men are just as involved in the cycle of violence as women. He's telling just women to stop hitting their kids (and their fathers), when men are committing the same offenses. If we're to break the cycle of violence, we have to change both men and women, with regards to how they treat their kids. Pinning …
/r/MensRights08/07/14 11:38 PM
3

I've blacked out and people didn't notice anything other than the fact I was drunker than usual. I've had sex in this state but I sure as hell am not going to blame the other party since they were likely drunk, too, or believed they had my consent. Incapacitation goes further, it's when you've passed out and you literally cannot wake up even when people are poking you and drawing on your face. The OP contains so much conflation of intoxication, drunkenness, and incapacitation it hurts the brain.…
/r/MensRights08/07/14 11:21 PM
12

Because there has been no collateral damage and these gangsters were raised in calm dual parent suburban households. No one should care about the victims of gang violence, let alone care about the causes of this violence. Maybe we're not all assholes. This startling lack of empathy is part of the problem.
/r/MensRights08/07/14 03:24 AM
1

Nice catch, surprised I missed it. It's not definitively stated where or when the interviews were done from online sources. I wish I could get my hands on the full paper because I want to know if the interview process impacted the final results shown. 12.2% false-negative is a large number when we're talking about 6.4%. If the groups studied are the same in both: How many of those rapists were convinced by an impartial researcher, who considers attempted rapists and rapists one and the same? Wis…
/r/MensRights08/07/14 12:58 AM
1

I'm not entirely sure. I think the data has been taken from another publication altogether. Lisak was involved in the 12.2% false-negative rate finding, which might have actually used the data used in this particular study of rape and attempted rapes. It's not online.
/r/MensRights07/07/14 05:49 AM
1

Figure 1 means there were no respondents who were solely attempted rapists... That is a huge red flag to me that something weird is going on.
/r/MensRights07/07/14 03:16 AM
1

I see but I remain skeptical til I find it. Well figure 1 from the paper is too shady. Even if there is no 5th question, the researchers' percentage breakdown can be very misleading if they used different subsets other than the 120 figure for calculating.
/r/MensRights07/07/14 12:43 AM
1

How do you know it's given explicitly?
/r/MensRights07/07/14 12:35 AM
1

Disregard the 287 figure. It doesn't include offenders that did not rape or attempt rape. Also, consistent with the poor clarity in the writing in the rest of the study, the 12.2% false-negative rate was actually referring to an entirely different study.
/r/MensRights06/07/14 09:02 AM
1

No this study only looks at perpetrators.
/r/MensRights06/07/14 08:45 AM
1

Still does not explain why figure 1 leaves no room for those 1.1% you pointed out that may not have answer affirmatively to completed sexual intercourse or oral sex. We might be wrongly assuming that those 4 figures are using 6.4% as the measurement, when the attempts and completed offenses may have gotten their percentages from different subsets of 6.4%. Considering how wrong figure 1 has to be, and the omitted #5 question, there are 2 big red flags that seriously undermine the researchers' per…
/r/MensRights06/07/14 08:41 AM
3

Considering there is a 5th question that could be related to attempted rapes and intoxication, I find it quite relevant. Participants in intoxicated sex are generally both intoxicated. There is a huge difference between saying 1% of men are rapists (the vast majority falling under intoxication rape, of which the male offender may have been intoxicated as well) and saying 5.4-6.4% of men are rapists (and leaving it undistinguished between intoxication related rapes and threat/use of physical forc…
/r/MensRights06/07/14 05:14 AM
1

I agree, just want people to exercise caution with their interpretation. It does an excellent job showing people how to look at the question objectively though.
/r/MensRights06/07/14 04:31 AM
2

Nice attempt, obviously missing a lot of variables though.
/r/MensRights06/07/14 03:57 AM
1

Elam is not even remotely close to being witty enough to do satire. I'm quite frankly not convinced of it, I think that excuse is simply him backpedaling. As it stands, he simply gives feminists and the mainstream media a shitload of ammo to which they can paint us as misogynists and degrade the movement. Fuck, if he's pulling in people into our movement with his kind of rhetoric, what kind of people are they? I don't want them.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 02:36 PM
8

Well she is right about about Elam and those who don't mind Elam's tactic. They need to go. Fortunately, the MRM is far bigger than his blogsite. But I noticed a change in tactic. Instead of attacking the message, attack the messengers. Actually, she did tackle some of the points made at the conference, just poorly. Trying to refute the iron-hold women have over politics with seat demographics when women are the majority vote and virtually every political gender issue is about women or for women…
/r/MensRights03/07/14 05:45 AM
1

1 in 33 figure from the CDC doesn't include MTP, go figure.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 02:34 AM
21

The statement may be completely accurate, if you take into account that "custody" means joint legal custody in the study, which can be as simple as visitation rights, assuming the father requests it and can get it (no restraining orders). I'd wager that the vast majority of those decisions won by fathers were merely joint legal custody for visitation rights, and not 50/50 physical rights. Of that 70% "won", almost 50% were joint legal custody. Contrast that with 74% of the mothers who get sole l…
/r/MensRights03/07/14 02:23 AM
5

Guess what? One can get their criminal wiped clean, but not their academic record. Even if one can't get more severe offenses cleaned off their record, most people would probably prefer a criminal record rather than their academic record permanently scarred. A learning experience that has life-long consequences for the accused? Get the fuck out of here.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 02:11 AM
2

If we assume girls are targeted 3x more than boys, but men and women are targeted at equal rates contrary to popular belief, then sure. Could be a case of men marginalizing their past victimization, and women trying to fit within the "rape culture", but what do we know? They barely published the data.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 08:32 PM
20

Online forensics by armchair specialists are typically bullshit. Too many variables and they have zero expertise or framework that assures us that their conclusions are accurate. Regardless, if someone was physically assaulted and the first thing they do is post about it online with all the physical evidence and not go to the police, well, that's all I need to know. If her case isn't good enough for at least a police report, well why should I believe it? I'm not saying she lied, or that she's te…
/r/MensRights27/06/14 11:00 PM
7

Looking just at this event, it may not look like a men's rights issue because they were soldiers who were executed. Women are not soldiers. However, the broad theme regarding this kind of issue still merits mentioning instances of male massacres. Typically, when massacres happen in conflict zones when civilians were targeted, not soldiers, the victims are overwhelmingly, or entirely, men and boys. Women and girls are typically spared or kidnapped. Now, the ISIS mass murders that have gained a lo…
/r/MensRights27/06/14 03:04 PM
14

What I don't understand is how do these critics think they determine it was a false rape allegation? By investigating the allegations against the accused. So, by refusing to put resources towards uncovering false rape allegations, one would also be pulling resources away from rape allegations in general.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 12:30 AM
9

Lot of dead people from that raid, too. I wonder...
/r/MensRights17/06/14 02:40 PM
28

I never heard any of them tell me it was less pleasurable because they didn’t have a foreskin. If someone can't recognize the stupidity contained within this statement, they shouldn't have a blog.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 08:33 PM
4

30 years? Was he pinned down and forcibly raped? 30 years is too excessive, even if he was violently raped. That's regardless of the gender of the victim. Statutory rape isn't worse than murder.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 06:44 AM
1

She didn't try to murder the police officer, at least not beyond all reasonable doubt.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 04:56 AM
2

Studies have been done that have shown known male victims of child molestation, with respect to female victims, to under-report their victimization years later.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 04:55 AM
20

Women have no agency. That seems to be everything modern feminism is about. Women can't express their thoughts without having men force it out of them periodically. Men have to remind women whether or not they are still enjoying themselves during the sexual experience. Women who have been drinking are untouchable because they simply have no control and are not responsible for their actions. Women who are not enjoying the sex are being raped no matter what she implies or says, because no woman ca…
/r/MensRights13/06/14 11:19 PM
1

Pretty deliberate irony if you ask me. The only biological parental saints on the TV show are Ned and Cat.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 10:46 PM
1

Please upvote this so people can see how absurd Elam is. I'm a full supporter of the MRM but Elam is a joke.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 10:36 PM
3

Like making it a war crime, if it isn't already, is somehow going to deter the perpetrators from committing those crimes. How laughably naive. Men and boys are massacred in these conflict zones, a war crime, and no one gives a shit.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 07:36 PM
1

Wasn't suggesting for it to happen in real-life anyways. Don't try to coax a confession out of them. Just give them a heart-felt message, mail or email, of what happened to you and the consequences of what the court imposed on you. Don't blame them, don't give them a reason to be defensive. However, now that you mention being on probation, I'd be very careful that such a message doesn't breach any conditions. Regardless, I doubt a single message simply outlining your plight is going to have any …
/r/MensRights12/06/14 09:05 AM
3

Unless you get them on the record, somehow, confessing, there is pretty much nothing you can do. Guilt them into it with their conscience, which to this day, assuming they aren't psycho, is eating away at them. Don't let them forget. You practically confessed, and so it's going to take an equally compelling piece of evidence for a successful appeal. IANAL
/r/MensRights12/06/14 08:52 AM
8

First off, you're right with regards to this particular case. It's possible every media story about this has with-held key facts of the case. Secondly, of all reported cases of crime, the number that get prosecuted and the number of those that end up in a conviction are both relatively low. This isn't all that unique to domestic abuse. Sexual and domestic abuse may end up with convictions too infrequently, but that is simply a reality of the offense. There really isn't a solution to this except …
/r/MensRights12/06/14 05:17 AM
4

http://www.breakingthescience.org/SJC_GBC_analysis_intro.php Is just one of many debunking sources.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 04:35 AM
3

Google the stat, top link is a debunk.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 04:19 AM
58

Beyond all reasonable doubt. I never understood how cases that do not contain either physical evidence, and/or a corroborating witness, can ever pass the threshold for a guilty verdict. How can a case that relies on just one believable witness/complainant's testimony, contrary to the defendant's testimony, ever meet such a high standard? It simply does not make sense. The judicial system is, quite frankly, unconstitutionally applied against defendants in domestic and sexual assault cases.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 11:37 PM
1

"Women are responsible for every single problem in the world." Please kindly point out where MRAs say this that doesn't come from some kind of redpill forum. In fact I'm sure an MRA has said this at one point or another, but it's probably hidden after getting -20 points. Furthermore, the "patriarchy" is loosely defined by feminists, and has never actually be shown to exist. Academic feminists constructed a theory to explain female grievances as being a product of some kind of oppressive authorit…
/r/MensRights11/06/14 10:17 PM
2

From the cases I know, the hospital. Cases have been won that aren't even related to medical malpractice either, but rather consent laws. The bar is pretty low.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 07:33 PM
6

He should sue. Plenty of cases have been won regarding this. Statue of limitations generally only begins at adulthood, and even later if that's when the victim actually learns that they were operated on incorrectly. For medical malpractice, it's 10 years from that point.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 07:24 PM
-2

I have a decent understanding of the judicial system, can't say the same for society.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 05:01 AM
2

Regardless, short and medium term statistical trends are far more reliable indicators than lifetime data.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 04:40 AM
-18

I think it was actually the right decision. She was an idiot but, as far as the reasonable doubt standard goes, the not guilty verdict makes sense. The video does support her defense sufficiently enough to cast reasonable doubt that there was an attempt at murder. Too often the charges for an offense against an officer are bloated. But in this case, I think the charges picked were simply not appropriate, that's all. She would have been found guilty of lesser charges, and/or in fact even that sec…
/r/MensRights11/06/14 04:32 AM
11

No women, no action.
/r/MensRights10/06/14 05:54 PM
37

He said the issue was often ignored at the end of wars and cited the estimated 50,000 women who were raped in Bosnia two decades ago, virtually none of whom have received justice. The audacity to talk about gender violence with regards to Bosnia is pretty fucking rich considering all the men and boys who were targeted for massacres throughout that conflict.
/r/MensRights10/06/14 04:08 AM
3

Well the title was enough to deter me from reading the ensuing inevitable garbage. "... are they internet trolls or are they internet trolls with legitimate concerns?"
/r/MensRights10/06/14 12:01 AM
1

That's not coercion, nor is there likely to be repercussions. Regardless, I completely agree that it should be prevented and discouraged heavily with sanctions, but calling it rape is far too strong.
/r/MensRights09/06/14 06:58 AM
-1

I'm sorry but I do not consider these kinds of incidences "rape". That goes for teenage girls too. Obviously if the boy or girl were actually coerced into the act, etc... That's rape. Obviously the coach should lose her job, etc... I get why we as a society condemn relations between students and those with "authority" over them, but that's really the extent of it. However, even the OP who submitted this knows why it's an MRM issue. If we reverse the genders, generally the male perpetrator gets m…
/r/MensRights09/06/14 06:03 AM
7

He came a bit strong condemning feminism at the start, but he was very well composed regardless. Clearly this wasn't supposed to be a debate format, neither of them actually countered any of the opposing issues, and so this really only acted like an advertisement for the MRM.
/r/MensRights09/06/14 12:14 AM
7

Girls can dress how they want, but boys will show increased levels of attraction towards them. That is not the same thing as disrespect. It's fucking disgusting how fringe feminists have managed to warp the debate into one that shames male sexuality. In this case it may have been used more appropriately but why should boys only be taught to respect girls? Boys are far more likely to disrespect other boys in some way. The problem is the language. Respect is too obtuse of a word if you're trying t…
/r/MensRights08/06/14 06:16 PM
4

How much was he making as a driver after taxes and child support I wonder? Regardless, it was the FRO that acted not on the behalf of the ex-wife's bidding.
/r/MensRights08/06/14 05:45 PM
1

Wtf?
/r/MensRights08/06/14 07:12 AM
5

My response to it is here.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 11:51 PM
1

SJWs are the most active social media group on the internet. That's all this is.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 11:09 PM
2

Behave like a devil's advocate.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 11:08 PM
2

Got a headache trying to understand the writing, gave up.
/r/MensRights06/06/14 11:47 PM
4

Donate money to women's shelters while men settle with next to nothing? Donate to breast cancer, the most popular destination for cancer funding already? You'll find that there are few issues that women face in the West where men don't have it as bad or worse. However, there are some primarily feminist issues that do negatively affect men and women. Abortion rights is an obvious one. I agree that maybe the MRM can do more to achieve those gender-neutral benefits, even if feminists are doing all …
/r/MensRights06/06/14 11:35 PM
13

I've been following reports of massacres in Nigeria since the kidnappings (and before) and I was under the impression that gender-biased massacres were no longer fashionable among the Boko Haram. Even most of the initial reports about this particular massacre were reported in gender neutral terms. I thought to myself that perhaps the MRA uproar, over how much more attention kidnapped girls got, taught reporters not to cover up male massacres. I was mistaken. Even in this report that actually mak…
/r/MensRights06/06/14 09:11 PM
26

If I were a Nigerian male, I would hope I was a "commodity".
/r/MensRights06/06/14 09:07 PM
2

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=nvat Custom Table. You can find the numbers there. Those are annual victimization rates for rape, attempted rape, and sexual assaults. (actually it might be 6-month rates, you can check the survey itself) The data is not well defined but the numbers are presented nonetheless.
/r/MensRights06/06/14 03:17 AM
7

http://convertedinvader.tumblr.com/post/40300803608/false-rape-accusations-from-propaganda-to-reality
/r/MensRights06/06/14 03:07 AM
2

I, too, can bury my head into the sand and ignore reality.
/r/MensRights05/06/14 10:12 PM
1

Not just on campus but your criticism is still more or less on point.
/r/MensRights05/06/14 08:38 PM
2

A lot of feminists are hypocrites? I'm SHOCKED I tell you, SHOCKED!
/r/MensRights05/06/14 08:23 PM
39

In our politically correct and SJW monitored tech domain, that joke was obviously a dumb thing to present. However, it was really fucking harmless considering it was referencing the girlfriend, and not women in general. We're not allowed to complain or joke about individuals we care about if they happen to be part of some kind of protected class? Even the NPR has to actively make it a sexist issue by prefacing the quotes "complains a lot" with "women", because the presenter never actually genera…
/r/MensRights05/06/14 08:04 PM
1

What many believe and what they do are not consistent in the eyes of an outside observer. For instance, they are certainly for gender equality, but many undergo puzzling acts to achieve it.
/r/MensRights05/06/14 02:43 PM
5

I agree that many feminists have a far too liberal of a threshold for incapacitation or too drunk to consent. The vast majority of people who want to claim they were raped when they had drunken sex just want to be a victim for the sake of being a victim. There is this craving to be a victim that feels so trendy for some people. Most people who have drunken sex that regret the experience realize it was nothing more than a mistake and to cut back on drinking. A small number think everyone else has…
/r/MensRights05/06/14 12:49 AM
2

Thank you.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:53 AM
1

I wrote: Obviously we don't intend for the defendant to be able to question the complainant directly. That is for the lawyer to do, which is the intended meaning of the statement. The statement being: "strongly discourages” male students being given the right to question their accuser." 4 hours before you wrote this: Say the stress from being questioned by the person who just fucking raped you, cross-examining you in front of the court, while you're still dealing with the trauma of the incident,…
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:35 AM
-1

Except we have won over influential feminists. Some of our most influential MRA journalists and leaders were once feminists, and popular ones at that.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:16 AM
3

I simply disagree with the course of action. You're going to win the "debate" by winning over those sitting on the fence. By far and large, those sitting on the fence already support women's rights, and by extension feminists, even if they won't call themselves feminists. Demonizing feminists may alienate those sitting on the fence.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:14 AM
1

That's a fair opinion. I think I took that position because some people who are hung up on the idea that this was mostly a misogynist event, and Elliot was a misogynist, may see the male victims as incidental. Obviously an objective view of the series of killings would dispel that notion, but clearly it hasn't for a lot of people. I suppose I'm trying to actually show Elliot's intent, which are expressed in his writings and videos. The intent was definitely to kill the men.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:12 AM
1

Certainly, his mental illness was definitely the causal factor for his violent tendencies.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:10 AM
1

I actually like to disconnect feminism and feminists. I feel that the definition of feminism is a fair bit different than the definition of a feminist these days, at least that's my interpretation. Feminism has gone through so many stages, while feminist has remained constant.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:09 AM
1

That video is certainly unfortunate. However, there has been a spike in traffic to this sub so, regardless, plenty of new people are investigating at the right places.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:07 AM
1

Those SJWs are not representative of those who support women's rights. The vast majority of people still consider supporting women's rights to be encapsulated by the definition of feminist. Trying to alienate feminists may backfire on our ability to find more support for the MRM. This is especially true among the more influential feminists, winning any of them over is huge because they wield so much political power in the gender paradigm.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:04 AM
4

I completely agree with you. Mental illness or temporary insanity is more or less the common thread between rampage killers.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:02 AM
3

Read the manifesto. His hatred of others was not molded by anything other than his own personality. It's self-evident. Regardless, "could" is not certainty.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 06:58 AM
3

Well you misinterpreted me.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 12:58 AM
7

Not sure what I got wrong, but I agree with what you said so we got that going for us.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 12:22 AM
6

Touche.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 11:46 PM
4

Lowering the burden of proof because it's hard to prove someone is guilty of raping beyond all reasonable doubt undermines the integrity of the judicial system. People already have a hard time discerning what the threshold of all reasonable doubt means. If you eliminate beyond all reasonable doubt, the already too high exoneration rate of convicted felons (or just innocent people) will multiply many times over. You might think, how can it multiply many times if a third of rape charges end in con…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 11:32 PM
15

I like to think the majority of those people are having issue grasping the idea that someone can be more than one thing. "He wasn't a misogynist, he was this + this + this". I almost make the same mistake but I'm careful to say "He wasn't just a misogynist, he was this + this + this as well". A word makes a huge difference. A word in front of "feminist" makes a huge difference so that we don't address or attack people who shouldn't be targeted. The people on the other side of the aisle who are s…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 10:58 PM
1

How can someone write an article about Elliot Rodger and not mention the word mental?
/r/MensRights30/05/14 10:36 PM
1

I said modern feminism? Stop putting words in my mouth.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 10:15 PM
8

I'm just saying that it would be more effective to channel your criticism to many feminists prominent feminists media feminists some feminists influential feminists academic feminists SJWs I don't have any idea why you're so eager to call a bunch of innocent bystanders (who happen to either support feminists' equality goals, or call themselves feminists for the purest of reasons) bigots and sexists, etc...
/r/MensRights30/05/14 10:11 PM
0

I have no issue with this. I'm simply saying don't call all 15-20% of the American people bigots. Channel the criticism to those who actually deserve it.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 10:07 PM
-4

MRM is not a branch of feminism, it's just feminism for men's issues. You also won't find many MRAs who think the patriarchy isn't* an intellectually bankrupt theory, especially in western culture.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 10:05 PM
-3

15-20% of Americans self-identify as feminist. How many Americans believe in equality for women? Whether you like it or not, Americans who don't self-identify as feminist may still, largely, believe that feminists' goals are virtuous. Demonizing them does alienate us from those who seek to support women's rights. I don't see many MRAs advocating for women's rights, etc... We leave that to, guess what, feminists to work on. Nothing wrong with that.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 09:57 PM
16

Fuck, that. That kind of divisive behavior is why social and political issues are so toxic in the US. True change requires at least convincing the other side they are wrong. Feminists may make up only 15-20% of the population, but they dictate 100% of the left-wing power when it comes to gender issues. Just because people don't call themselves feminist doesn't mean they don't end up finding themselves in agreement when a feminist says MRM are the scum of the earth. We should try to be inclusive,…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 09:30 PM
1

Source? I'm just getting the rape/attempted rape figures from the CDC NISVS study. Different studies, different methodologies, different criteria for counting, etc... all result in different numbers. I find that, as far as self-reported surveys go, CDC has been the best so far, even if it has its flaws.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 09:14 PM
17

Probably the case, apply to get the suspension lifted. It should be.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 08:25 PM
238

I disagree that the number of male victims is proof that he hated men just as much, and/or more than women. That's not proof. If you want proof of his intentions, read his manifesto. The man clearly hated women. He wanted to kill them all. He was very much a misogynist. The mistake that prominent feminists are making begins with their lacking interest to actually read his manifesto. Instead they take their directive from other like-minded journalists and ideologues. If they read his manifesto it…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 08:07 PM
1

What studies?
/r/MensRights30/05/14 07:56 PM
3

No I think you should leave it as it is.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 07:54 PM
1

There is only decent data regarding the gender of the perpetrators of self-reported events by the apparent victims. The most comprehensive was certainly the CDC NISVS 2011 (or 2010) study that asked both men and women some decent, and some overly broad, questions about being sexually assaulted, sexually harrassed, raped, or almost raped. The researchers of this gender study, predictably feminists, excluded men who were made to penetrate from being considered victims of rape, but instead grouped …
/r/MensRights30/05/14 07:48 PM
2

People are not going to vote what they think MRM is about, but instead what they think MRM should be about. Results should be similar for the most part, with the PUA stuff getting heavily buried regardless, but I suspect any common MRM topics that many MRAs don't fully agree with will get downvoted. For instance, ending alimony is not going to fare well, but if it were rephrased to "re-evaluating alimony" or some variation of that, it would do a lot better.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 07:39 PM
25

Apparently every man is invincible and has never felt fear about being victimized in their lives. TIL We're psychopaths. Correction: Men are overwhelmingly more likely to be murdered, brutally assaulted, assaulted, bullied, and robbed. In fact, according to the CDC NISVS 2011, we are just as likely to be raped or experience attempted rape each year as well. So, we also get concerned when walking alone at night, or at least we have more reason to be concerned. My perspective? Getting victimized i…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 07:28 PM
10

The problem is not all feminists are guilty of intellectual misconduct, and/or malicious. Alienating them only serves to widen the divide between men's issues and women's issues. I think a feminist who is also an MRA can cause tremendous confusion to the uninformed. It forces them to evaluate what feminists and MRAs are supposed to be. If people dislike some feminists so much that they feel that the word has been dirtied beyond all recognition, and they generalize all feminists as being in cahoo…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 07:17 PM
3

Play as the devil's advocate. Announcing a label that they might find offensive will only serve to alienate your ideas from an open mind.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:19 PM
36

It can be very tedious to not indict all feminists when typing up a post. I do my best to deliberately make sure that I preface any mention of the word feminists with "media", "prominent", "many", "some", "radicals".... Or just refer to the target group as SJWs. I definitely agree that contributors to this sub should do their best to not encompass all feminists when they are being critical. I consider myself to be a feminist in conjunction with being an MRA, so I know what people actually intend…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:14 PM
1

Not everyone who died was shot. Mental illness remains the #1 reason for these tragedies. That is the most common causal link between all rampage and serial killers. It's not guns, and it's not some beliefs that happened to be shared by healthy minds, but, rather, mental illness is the most common shared characteristic. Anyone who actually reads the manifesto, or at least watch the relevant amazing atheist video about it, can clearly see how delusional he was. It's shocking, really. Society's va…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 05:22 PM
6

Excellent idea, get a mod to tag a fundraiser.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 05:10 PM
15

The problem with the demonizing of the MRM is that people are always curious about "dangerous" entities. People are so eager to know why Elliot shot all those people that they'll come to this sub and find... Nothing. They'll investigate these alleged misogynist hot-spots and see the reality for themselves. Mainstream feminism is shooting themselves in the foot for drawing so much attention to us. Tumblr and twitter feminists may celebrate over this, but they are only driving more traffic to the …
/r/MensRights30/05/14 05:02 PM
3

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/227sr9/fbi_confirms_that_rape_definition_includes/ It does include envelopment but the FBI has done a poor job communicating that to reporting agents.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 02:30 PM
2

He bashes feminism incessantly, but never MRA. He's just posturing.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 02:40 AM
5

37 men who aren't MRAs represent real MRAs? The logic in the title is as vacuous as their arguments.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 10:38 PM
3

AA may distance himself from the MRM and feminism, and I don't hold that against him, I get it, but this video was very thorough and logical. I encourage people who haven't read the manifesto to either do so, or at least listen to this video. He clearly lays out the case of who Elliot was, and bashes media feminists for trying to blame the MRM for the massacre.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 10:07 PM
4

I tried to think of how this is relevant to any men's issues, came up blank.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 09:30 PM
1

Fuck off troll. Plenty of other things in the manifesto was misandrist. Don't take such an obvious misogynist statement and try to coax some idiots into making this sub look bad.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 09:28 PM
14

I'll address one point, the perceived notion, rightfully or not, that MRAs are obsessed with feminism. This has to do with why the MRM came to be in the first place. Decades ago, many feminists started wanting to include men's issues into the gender debate. People like Erin Pizzey and Warren Farrell were prominent feminists of their day. Erin Pizzey is famous for opening some of the earliest women's shelters in the world, but was ostracized and threatened by many feminists, often prominent, for …
/r/MensRights29/05/14 08:51 PM
6

The problem with your questions is that they are so numerous it encourages blanket and 2-dimensional answers.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 08:12 PM
3

Now, lest hysterics take over, that’s not to suggest Google or other Silicon Valley tech companies create affirmative action programs to ensure proportional white representation — just that quick glances at ethnic pie charts don’t give you the big picture. But affirmative action programs to ensure some other proportional representation isn't hysterics? It's only hysterics when it's white men who are impacted negatively? Sounds about right. Surprising women make up 30% of Google, considering they…
/r/MensRights29/05/14 07:46 PM
8

For anyone wondering why this is an MRM issue... Telling a man to "man up" is to shame them into a traditional gender role.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 06:56 PM
1

Frogman seems like a male feminist. I want to preface my next few comments with the acknowledgement that I have no fucking idea who he is beyond that. So his allies turned on him when he, by their too overly broad definition of victim blaming (which is horrible and offensive from their perspective), victim blamed the guy. If it were just MRAs flaming him, it would be business as usual, but he accidentally flashed MRA tendencies when he pointed out an objective solution to the victim. Risk mitiga…
/r/MensRights29/05/14 06:53 PM
3

Even she knows how toxic it is to defend the MRM from all the unfair slandering it has received lately, so she avoids the topic altogether. Otherwise, it was a very balanced and reasoned article.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 06:36 PM
27

Most feminists view MRAs much like the mainstream media views MRAs the past few days since the shooting. MRAs are terrorists, misogynists, and just all around horrible people. Sharing similar beliefs to MRAs is akin to aiding and abetting crimes and sexism against women.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 06:21 PM
2

Thanks, it helps me understand the MRM and my own position, as much as it helps others.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 06:15 PM
63

Now you know how many MRAs are created. It didn't help your case that you have such a short history on reddit, but the presumption is that you're a covert MRA because you are an MRA sympathizer.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 06:11 PM
1

If you ask for sources about their claims regarding Warren, you'll obviously get none, because it's not true.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 05:48 PM
19

Women will judge you. Some will judge you based on your appearance, your height, your width, you genitalia, your wealth, your car, your clothes, your acne. In other words, they will judge you the exact same way you judge them. Except men aren't allowed to judge women like this, but women are allowed to do it to men. Aside from that, the number of fallacies and inaccuracies in that article are too numerous to count.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 05:47 PM
1

To start with, don't call yourself an MRA. The uninformed person reads MRA and immediately assume you're a wife beating PUA misogynist. Approach any discussion with her from a devil's advocate perspective. Don't say "this is how it is", but rather "what about?".
/r/MensRights29/05/14 05:44 PM
89

Because any MRA contributor on a feminist subreddit gets banned. This is common knowledge. Most feminist forums do not tolerate an MRA perspective.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 05:43 PM
8

Next, I came here, which is why I’m addressing all of you now. Elliot Rodger had a sick agenda and I know it's not the same agenda that you have. But he also stated that he wanted to strike fear into the hearts of women everywhere. It worked. I’m scared, and I’m not scared because I think all men are bad. I’m not scared of men. But I am scared of some men. It's an unrealistic fear. The number of misogynist rampage killers over the past 3 decades in the US and Canada can be numbered at 1, and he …
/r/MensRights29/05/14 05:15 PM
7

Downvoted to shit or not, I really want to hear what you have to say. I’ve spent quite a bit of time in this sub, reading your various posts and comments, in light of the Isla Vista shootings. I’ve been doing this because I’m trying to get a better handle on what the Men’s Rights Movement actually means to the people who believe in it. As a feminist, both you and I, imagine how you feel about feminism. How MRAs feel about the MRM is identical. But before I get to my main point, I’d like to point…
/r/MensRights29/05/14 05:14 PM
2

Just want to point out that talking to anyone without a lawyer is foolish. The police may have come to the same conclusion without your given testimony prior to lawyer consultation, and had that video not been found you would have admitted to a sexual relationship with the accuser and had nothing to back up your alibi. You have everything to gain by waiting. As for the school's conduct, little you can do except sue them. Schools do not beholden themselves to the judicial process, which makes it …
/r/MensRights29/05/14 04:41 AM
2

I could try to explain it for you more thoroughly but this is the only accurate graph there is using the data the authors provided. Different sources provide different numbers, but we will play using their provided numbers. They use the 2% false allegation rate which is taken from a range between 2-8%, so let's take 5% as an average. Using just the lowest estimate is disingenuous. Graph 10% of cases are conclusively true. 5% of cases are conclusively false. And any amount of the remaining 85% co…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 10:54 PM
6

Inside the ‘manosphere’ that inspired Santa Barbara shooter Elliot Rodger ...doesn't suggest "the manosphere is somehow to blame for Rodger’s killing spree"? What a turd, lol.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 09:21 PM
1

Very thorough and well written. I'm as left wing as they come but if people are downvoting this because of the title or "conservative" origin, too bad :/ Smart people are not only found on one end of the political spectrum.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 08:44 PM
1

Too stupid to be allowed to go on air.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 08:38 PM
1

We can't sanitize our culture just so that there is absolutely nothing a mentally ill person could interpret into being deadly justification for violence. Mental illness should come first when we're talking about Elliot. However, people are too irrational with respect to talking about the circumstances surrounding the perpetrator of heinous crimes, so it's best we avoid coming to any apparent defense of Elliot. MRAs already have a hard time convincing people their intentions are righteous, let's…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 07:56 PM
3

Obviously he has no source, because it's fiction.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 07:41 PM
3

Hitmen are rare. But gang related mass shootings are quite common. The distinction is that gang related violence is contained in the inner city, while the other categories can impact "everyday" folk ( or people that matter).
/r/MensRights28/05/14 01:04 AM
9

PhillyD is very careful, I can tell. A little bit more about men's issues and there would be a #cancelphillyd trend happening.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 09:07 PM
2

Sounds like some creative statistical work came up with those figures.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 05:32 PM
9

Patriarchy is such a wonderful concept for feminists. It allows them to absolve any and all responsibilities from a woman's decision. Woman kills children? Patriarchy. Woman slut shames another woman? Patriarchy. Woman hates men? Patriarchy. Woman chooses to give up hours for family? Patriarchy. They don't even have to prove it exists. They just choose to believe that all their perceived, real or not, inequalities in the world are due to a concept that can never be shown to exist ever, let alone…
/r/MensRights27/05/14 04:05 PM
0

I am convinced this is satire. No one is that stupid.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 03:58 PM
1

I like how being anti creep shaming connects Elliot and the MRM, and therefore the MRM influenced Elliot to kill. Clearly, anti creep shaming is a violent and controversial position to take. I hear Elliot agrees that bullying is bad... That he drank milk.... Spoke english and loved being American... (Don't know if any or all are true but I'm illustrating a point) When someone becomes a murderer, it is not the case that all their beliefs and opinions are murderous. Fucking idiots who argue this p…
/r/MensRights27/05/14 02:59 PM
2

The guy hated everyone but he hated women more... It would be a tad bizarre if he hated men as strongly as women considering he himself is a man.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 01:42 AM
1

Not sure what you mean... Elliot suffers from this cognitive bias? Probably. He suffers from a lot more than just that though.
/r/MensRights25/05/14 10:19 PM
2

This may seem off-topic, but this topic and the massacre seems to be connected in my mind. Reading Elliot's misogynistic posts (and not just misogynistic, he was pretty hateful of anyone different or "inferior" to himself) makes me think a subset of trolls are actually oblivious to their own nature. A large portion of the public is narcissistic, or suffering from some other type of mental illness. It didn't help that Elliot was also on the autism spectrum, which exasperated his sense of being vi…
/r/MensRights25/05/14 07:21 PM
3

The same people who get pissed off that the media ignores mental health issues in the aftermath of these shootings, in favor of gun issues, make the same mistake. Whenever a political issue that is dear to commentators can be injected into a tragedy, the root cause, mental health, gets ignored. Even gun issues got ignored by feminist leaning commentators, that is how important smearing MRM is to them. The guy had mental health problems, was in a social health housing, reported to police weeks ag…
/r/MensRights24/05/14 09:06 PM
2

GGW should work on rambling less when given open-ended questions, although I suppose the format of this video kind of encourages it.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 06:28 PM
4

The show isn't subtle about it. "Our little secret..." was as clear a reference to child molestation as any. But since it's a woman saying it, feminists aren't outraged. I don't give a fuck what gets depicted, it's a TV show... But feminists do get outraged at selective offenses, ignoring male victims absolutely.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 11:58 PM
2

The number of annual male victims was like 50%, or maybe it was that 50% of all offenses were perpetrated on men. Whatever, semantics. But since men make up a higher proportion of the perpetrators among women victims than women perpetrators among men, it slides down to 38% on that metric. People incorrectly stated 38% of rapists are women, which is probably pretty accurate regardless. It's actually 38% of all rape offenses during 2010 were perpetrated by women. This includes F on F and F on M.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 08:09 PM
11

CDC NISVS 2011 I think. She misapplied the 38% figure I think, unless it's a coincidence. 38% of all incidences of rape were perpetrated by a woman during the year.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 06:21 AM
10

Feminism, striving for equality by holding both sexes to different standards.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 06:16 AM
0

The CDC 1 in 6 number includes attempts, so there's that to consider as well. But if the CDC number is so popular, despite being incorrectly framed as 1 in 5 (closer to 1 in 6), then they should also know that the same report found that men and women were raped/made-to-penetrate at similar rates during the previous year. How that's possible despite the women's lifetime rate taking a dramatic increase from the 12-month rate and the men's didn't? No investigation by the CDC of course.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 08:34 PM
2

Both got fined $500. Naturally nothing done about getting the woman some more substantial attention from the police or mental services. Maybe now with the video public something will be done. http://globalnews.ca/news/1322164/edmonton-ets-train-attack-caught-on-video/
/r/MensRights10/05/14 07:26 AM
3

Please fuck off. I see you contribute to discussions in this sub. Please refrain and just leave.
/r/MensRights08/05/14 09:20 PM
15

US sending in troops. They call them by a less benign name so not to evoke the ire of pacifists, but rest assured special forces are on the way.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 02:03 PM
211

I try to point out to people that Boko massacres boys but there are simply too many submissions about the abducted girls. Granted, it's a horrible event, but when the inevitable intervention comes in the form of aid, shelter, food, etc... I expect it to be earmarked for girls. Dead boys don't need help. Then when the conflict is covered by teachers or the media in the future, it'll be about the violence against women. The dead boys will be wiped from history, as they so often are.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 01:10 PM
8

Just because they are adults or parents doesn't mean they are reasonable. It's not like he has to apologize for circumcising you if he decides to show you that he is fine with you not doing it to your kid. A mature person would at least come around and let you have your choice. His irrationality stems from the fact that he may be embarrassed about what he did and thus cannot, at the very least, see the neutral path forward. He's too hung up on what he thinks may have been a mistake. Or he's just…
/r/MensRights03/05/14 12:19 AM
1

That guy is a big a problem as the people he criticizes.
/r/MensRights03/05/14 12:12 AM
2

Keep it up. You do the good work 1000s of us don't do.
/r/MensRights02/05/14 09:17 PM
-1

I'm cynical because I've seen the same routine played out too many times.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 10:37 PM
-1

Almost sounds like these professional victims relish the threats because it validates their agenda. They know it's bullshit, and not an actual threat. They understand that anonymity or the internet empowers trolls. What they don't seem to understand is that feeding trolls breeds more trolls. Responding to them and talking about it will only make them targeted more. If they actually wanted to solve the problem, they would report serious threats to the police. Instead they simply give them the att…
/r/MensRights27/04/14 05:52 AM
1

Anti-feminism, the MRM probably is... Anti-feminist, no.
/r/MensRights12/04/14 10:28 PM
1

It's a troll post. Over 50 women? Pretty please.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 10:35 AM
12

Good job keeping it civil. She couldn't, probably because she is a tremendous idiot. Just another case that proves to me a PHD means shit when it comes to critical thinking.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 06:13 AM
1

Well in conflict zones, it'll be civilian men and boys who are rounded up and massacred. Women are spared quite regularly. Few seem to question why refugees are overwhelmingly female or old men. Western media will report that "people and children" were massacred or something, but if women were involved, they'll make a note of it. Next time you read a casualty report in the press, take note if they mention women were killed or injured.... If not, they were probably all male. The targeting of civi…
/r/MensRights10/04/14 02:34 AM
3

That's why we censor names. Trolls are in every community.
/r/MensRights10/04/14 02:31 AM
3

2-5 were counted as yes. So obviously the results are heavily skewed.
/r/MensRights05/04/14 12:20 AM
7

No linking to his website please.
/r/MensRights05/04/14 12:18 AM
-10

Fortunately the law is clear and concise. So if you just point me to where "dropping your hands" is a reasonable perception of threat that merits immediate lethal action... Right, it doesn't exist.
/r/MensRights04/04/14 03:19 AM
-6

Anyone you fight could have a concealed weapon. Doesn't give people the right to shoot anyone dead they are in a conflict with because they make some sudden move. The keyword is reasonable in your earlier sentence.
/r/MensRights04/04/14 02:26 AM
-10

That logic requires the presence of a knife.
/r/MensRights04/04/14 02:09 AM
4

You'd have to be a SJW to have donated anything to Stollznow. A skeptic would stay on the side-lines until the facts bear out in the court. However, SJWs within the skeptics community do not exercise critical thinking when an issue creeps into the realm of their brand of social justice. Well, Radford got all his evidence independently verified by lawyers, already... The fact that we can actually see, for ourselves, that Stollznow committed fraud and changed the dates on e-mails to defame Radford…
/r/MensRights04/04/14 12:52 AM
3

He will win quite handedly. Whatever is left of her legal fund after Radford wins will be delivered to him to pay for damages. To think the SJWs will have given money to someone arrested for DV, probably has borderline personality disorder, committed fraud, switched dates on e-mails that may have been submitted in any filings (oh, this will hurt big time if she did), and made false allegations on e-mails during her on-going defamation attacks against Radford.... It tastes so sweet. And if she sp…
/r/MensRights04/04/14 12:15 AM
3

Holy fuck this is convincing information. Independently authenticated and everything. Wow, poor Ben, jesus christ. To think Stollznow swindled the SJWs community out of $10,000s is kind of hilarious. You reap what you sow.
/r/MensRights04/04/14 12:02 AM
-7

What conversation? You quote 1 word, and fire off an irrelevant question. I can't read your mind.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 11:29 PM
-6

Doesn't matter. All claims are allegedly made.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 11:04 PM
-4

Allegedly that was the father's opinion. We will see if the daughter folds on that ridiculous story when she starts feeling pressure from the prosecution. Regardless, dropping one's hand wouldn't be grounds to shoot an intruder dead in most Western countries. He'd definitely be facing charges.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 10:54 PM
-15

An equally aged teenage boy and girl that are probably engaging in activities some conservative gun-loving American frowns upon. No "assailing" going on. Not even remotely close to the image one gets from your description. Don't let the father off the hook so easily, people, even gun owners aren't that obtuse. He obviously over-reacted. 10 times out of 10. That trigger was only pressed because the gun culture is such that if the law permits someone to use their gun in a given circumstance, they …
/r/MensRights03/04/14 10:49 PM
3

I don't know about the girl. The fact the father isn't even being considered for charges is goes to show you how ass backwards USA's gun and self-defense laws are. I can't name any Western country in the world where you can shoot an intruder dead without reasonable perception of force against yourself (dropping hands is not a perception of force, let alone a reasonable one), a defensive purpose for any self-defense acts (let's say the kid charged the father, then shooting him would be defensive)…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 10:34 PM
2

Not at all. I completely understand the perspective.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 08:51 PM
5

I'm both. The actions of academic feminists who believe in feminism has next to no impact on the widely accepted definition for feminists.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 03:58 PM
-1

That's asking too much. But it's not unreasonable to have feminism and feminists not mean the exact same thing. There are plenty of examples where the "ist" of an "ism" does not require the "ist" person to believe all of the "ism" beliefs/theories. But just being an egalitarian is appropriate too.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 09:40 AM
-1

I'm actually a feminist, too. I'm not going to let a bunch of academic feminists (those who believe in the tenants of academic feminism) dictate whether or not I support women's rights, etc... That's what feminist means. The feminism term has certainly been dirtied by the beliefs and actions of academic feminists, but just because the academics are wrong doesn't mean I have to be by not being a feminist. This is no different than agnostics choosing not to be atheists despite lacking faith in the…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 06:29 AM
0

Like I'm going to trust a heavily edited video...
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:11 AM
0

Is that how art course books are written? I've seen more mature writings from school children.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 01:53 AM
8

If the court wants to elevate pregnancy to the level of an assault, then at least we can take comfort that, for now, Indian-level of insanity won't end up with men going to jail because they lied about things in order to have sex. Perhaps, Townsend needs to reframe his legal argument more along the lines of fraud or something. However, you risk opening up a can of worms if deception, that doesn't necessarily aim to create a pregnancy, in order to have sex or have kids can merit criminal charges.
/r/MensRights01/04/14 11:06 AM
2

So the politicians deliberately wrote a shitty law so that they could collect brownie points but also not impact anything. This law won't be enforced or Belgium will have to build a lot of prisons. Also, the only source for this story has been the daily mail. Any actual sources available?
/r/MensRights29/03/14 09:33 PM
1

Even in the face of undeniable evidence that she was assaulted you guys persist? She broke her nose, perhaps that's what the bruising is from? I don't know, but who cares? It happened.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 08:23 PM
0

Maybe he should notify the police.
/r/MensRights28/03/14 11:40 PM
13

I prefer he does take legal action. At least to teach people that seeking justice by publicly shaming individuals without the full authrntic story is not how you fix a problem. Lawsuits after lawsuits against feminists seem to be the sign of the times. We aren't going to sink to their level, but instead seek out the authorities.
/r/MensRights28/03/14 09:25 PM
1

Pfft, no. You can chip your tooth 100 different ways and not get punched on the lip.
/r/MensRights28/03/14 09:11 PM
2

That happened for real actually. People think they can diagnose injuries over a shitty picture, but they are wrong.
/r/MensRights28/03/14 09:10 PM
1

Old and I believe it actually happened. Unlike those other subreddits that like to circlejerk to the hivemind, we do our research here. Did it happen as she said it did and did she later apply a fake black eye to herself? Was the tumblr account the same person? I don't care.
/r/MensRights28/03/14 08:55 AM
7

Omitting the reason for the gap is just as disingenuous.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 12:51 AM
1

Best part of the story, no charges for the woman.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 11:53 PM
0

Yup, this happened people. Take out the pitchforks, direct your anger at the school and girls. Notify the local press. Wait, where?
/r/MensRights18/03/14 11:50 PM
1

And this has to do with men's rights how?
/r/MensRights17/03/14 03:44 AM
0

Sounds like psychology for both, pffft. My point stands.
/r/MensRights16/03/14 04:32 AM
27

Gender research reports by non-scientists are typically bullshit.
/r/MensRights16/03/14 02:12 AM
0

They are both adult women.
/r/MensRights14/03/14 01:00 AM
2

The girl was an adult.
/r/MensRights14/03/14 12:52 AM
27

Well that's quite relevant, depending on how long he has been around.
/r/MensRights13/03/14 08:54 PM
176

He could have a criminal history, or the judge felt like he was more central to the misfortune of the family situation. Without the facts of the case, your answers cannot definitively be that the judge was anti-men.
/r/MensRights13/03/14 07:37 PM
2

You could debunk that figure with American women alone.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 04:03 AM
0

Good find Goebbels.
/r/MensRights05/03/14 04:37 PM
4

The world eagerly awaits the theatre camera footage that will show how things unfolded prior to the current public footage.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 03:34 AM
5

The whole purpose of marriage was to make a man and a woman commit to eachother. Back in the day, and even to this day but not nearly to the same degree, towns and cities filled with family units were a hell of a lot more productive and stable. It was the winning formula that decided which cities would become the capital of empires, central trading posts, etc... If a woman did not have a man, how is she to feed and shelter herself and her kids while raising/child-rearing the kids? Kids were inev…
/r/MensRights01/03/14 02:05 AM
1

Ever since the young Turks took a video of sailors scrubbing soap on the deck of a carrier and called it radioactive snow, I've taken to be very skeptical of the things they say.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 01:38 AM
-3

Um, no.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 11:16 PM
2

Can't help it. Recently discovered her quote and it blew my mind.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 07:07 PM
4

This is the stupidest page I've seen on the internet. That's an impressive feat.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 06:21 PM
4

There is a reason why I specified "real victim". I was alluding to Hillary Clinton's comment. If I simply said "victim" your critique would make more sense.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 05:20 PM
2

When you mentioned Chomsky I knew you knew what you were talking about but I wanted to elaborate on the discussion for readers :) Good job on the active campaigning, thank you.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 04:45 PM
18

Putting 5 people on someone's back and staying there for an extended period of time is a lethal action. You cannot breathe. Resisting arrest does not call for lethal action. Chances are he pulled away once and then they dog piled him, which is typical.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 04:14 PM
33

Of course it's never too soon. But she lost her husband, she's the real victim here! - Hillary Clinton
/r/MensRights28/02/14 03:41 PM
41

Normal procedure to put the weight of 5 men on the back of someone? I'm surprised more people haven't been murdered.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 02:27 PM
1

Lol then you missed the entire point of the submission, which was to highlight how the media routinely whitewashes stories about males being massacred and women spared into a more politically correct article. That is on you.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 06:18 AM
4

The key thing to remember is that all those articles will avoid or barely mention the details of the attack. By just stating boys were killed, uninformed readers will not identify the discriminatory nature of the attack. They may assume it was only an all-boy dorm or school targeted, etc... And so they assume the motive for the attack was primarily anti-education. The few that mention girls were spared will spend no more than a sentence on that aspect of the issue. They don't elaborate and expla…
/r/MensRights28/02/14 03:55 AM
1

I can't link 2 articles, and there was still a relevant article on the sub frontpage that had the details. You're right that maybe I should have commented a 2nd link for those not up to speed but your mistake was to remain ignorant until someone spoonfed you the details. I'm not writing an article, so educate yourself. Tamen had commented the details soon after I posted so even had I commented it would have been redundant.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 02:00 AM
3

Gendercide website has some good analysis on the issue. Although googling "serbia (or kosovo) men gendercide" should bring up some stuff about how little coverage male victims got.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 01:56 AM
12

It's the age old swapping of hostile sexism against men with benevolent sexism against women. Every instance of sexism or discrimination against men can be manipulated into something positive for men and negative for women. That's the beauty of their paradigm, it allows them to remain blind to men's issues.
/r/MensRights27/02/14 02:07 PM
19

Except that this didn't happen. Men and boys are massacred, raped, or kidnapped into the army. Women are raped or kidnapped. Media focuses on gender violence against women in conflict zones despite the fact that men and boys make up the vast majority of all the victims. The people who created an artificial gender issue were the feminists. They are the ones who looked at these conflicts and only see discriminatory violence against women. The only discrimination I see is that women aren't being ma…
/r/MensRights27/02/14 02:04 PM
28

So far, from information I have received from Izghe, 106 people, including an old woman, have been killed by the attackers, suspected to be Boko Haram gunmen”, Ndume said. There is no shame with these authors.
/r/MensRights27/02/14 02:01 PM
16

I wish I was a "commodity". I guess Hillary was right, women survived this ordeal, they are the primary victims. More should be done to understand why women are victimized in this way. /s
/r/MensRights27/02/14 01:11 PM
8

Nope. Although girls have been abducted in other acts of violence, so are boys... and some organization in Uganda has nothing to do with it.
/r/MensRights27/02/14 01:11 PM
17

What bothers me further about the few reports that do elaborate on the details of the attack is that there is practically no examination into why the boys were massacred and the girls were not. As far as I'm concerned, all the press reports I've seen have failed in their duty to inform their readers about the motivations behind the terrorists' actions. This is true for 99% of reports of male massacres in any conflict that actually do get published. There is very little examination into the reaso…
/r/MensRights27/02/14 01:00 PM
1

I already made a comment about the omission.
/r/MensRights27/02/14 12:44 PM
1

Talking about a different article getting frontpage on worldnews.
/r/MensRights27/02/14 12:31 PM
14

I get a bunch of sources when I google "nigeria boys boko haram". From the few that do mention that all the victims were boys, even fewer reports actually elaborated on the details of the attack. This inevitably causes a lot of people to either assume the school is all-boys, or that the attack took place on just the boy's dormitory by random chance. What actually took place was more deliberate, and very few, I could only find 2 or 3 sources that actually quote the primary source, actually explai…
/r/MensRights27/02/14 12:31 PM
2

Hillary Clinton
/r/MensRights27/02/14 09:25 AM
1

It became front page news! It just doesn't mention that boys were targeted at all... -.-
/r/MensRights27/02/14 09:24 AM
4

If the girls were targeted it would be front-page news. A girl school was on fire for a few minutes in some Middle Eastern country, forget which, and 2 Islamic officials may have impeded the escape of girls for a very short period, well after the fire was extinguished, and after the stampede and stair collapse had already killed everyone who died in the incident, but it still became an international gender-focused story. Violence against boys and men in war-torn areas is rarely reported because …
/r/MensRights26/02/14 03:43 PM
1

"lifelong opponent of evil men who abuse children" SO BRAVE, SO BRAVE!
/r/MensRights25/02/14 01:54 AM
6

That's definitely not a good assumption for anyone to make. At least in my experience, it continues to go both ways even when drinking is involved.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 05:54 PM
3

Men are certainly not always the initiator. Since that's settled, it can't be assumed that men are the initiator, and so their point is moot. Of course lots of the more hard-line feminists have done their hardest to paint sex between men and women as some kind of power struggle between the oppressor and the oppressed. Or because women are being penetrated they are always acted upon by an initiator... Obscure shit. In the end, the way a lot of feminists try to dictate how sex should be initiated …
/r/MensRights19/02/14 05:19 PM
5

Fair enough. Not really arguing, just expanding the picture to reflect a little bit more of reality. I also want to add that there is always the lack of mentioning whether or not the man consented to the same degree SJWs expect men to extract from women before sex. Just another double standard I've noticed.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 05:10 PM
5

You know what also happens in the real world? Most people don't verbally consent all the time, they just act into the act. A lot of people who think verbal consent is always required are hugely hypocritical because they themselves don't practice what they preach. Edit for clarity.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 05:05 PM
15

James Taranto is either brave and/or naive for writing that article, but at least he is making public the hypocrisy of feminism's approach to sexual assaults. How people can read that article and think James was talking about a situation other than 2 equally drunk individuals engaging in sex is precisely illustrates how far the pendulum has shifted with regards to colleges' approach to dealing with sexual assault accusations.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 01:17 PM
2

I'm surprised the sensitivity of the head is the same for both. However, I can see how that might be the reality given that I can't finish just rubbing the head, or doing anything just to it really, it's not a clit... Got to work the shaft. It's bang on about the red section too.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 12:30 AM
10

A divorce lawyer who observes that the majority of custodial parents (that she deals with, presumably) are women and wonders why fathers are absent? What a narrow view of the situation. The family court is why fathers are kicked out of the lives of their children to begin with. Most people cannot afford to buy access to their children, and that apparently is evidence that fathers are abandoning their children. What a joke.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 07:02 PM
-4

If you can find me a case where people wanted the accuser to be punished when the police didn't publicly admit that no rape occurred, please do. Quite frankly your message doesn't even make sense.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 01:12 PM
1

Still isn't concrete protection against the kind of behavior exhibited by the accuser, assuming she's lying. She may very well be telling the truth, but it sounds like her testimony is the only piece of evidence.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 10:46 AM
1

What's the point? They'll ignore it. Even the 1 in 5 women will be raped thing continues to live despite being debunked repeatedly for 2 decades now.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 04:53 AM
17

Retards are retards, more news at 11.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 04:42 AM
1

Just a mistake, meant to say hotter. Now, the implication from the larger hypothalamus comes from a neuroscientist, not me. As for whether or not women might have an advantage when dealing with the cold, well the rhinovirus likes to replicate in temperatures <95 celsius, and those temperatures are more easily found in the upper respiratory system of men. Regardless, I consider this claim to be the weakest since this would be an easy thing to confirm in a study and it has never been shown to be t…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 11:00 PM
1

The hypothalamus is larger in men, and women are hotter than men. Those are facts.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 10:39 PM
1

Women go in for smears already, might aswell add 5 seconds to their visit and assess the boobs...
/r/MensRights13/02/14 08:59 AM
3

It's about the woman vote, and trust me, the vast majority of voters are and will remain clueless about the truth, while being swayed by the pandering dems.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 08:58 AM
1

Except on planes, damn.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 08:56 AM
2

Plenty of tall women out there, and you literally have a monopoly on them because they too want taller men.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 08:56 AM
15

This is why so many people hate MRAs. It's like the Colbert Report with the hapless conservatives who used to go on his program.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 08:50 AM
2

I have heard that the fever aspect of the cold may actually be felt worse in men because they have a larger brain with more nerve endings to experience the heat. Further, since a man's body temperature is lower than a woman's, the cold virus has an easier time replicating, and men have to increase their temperature to a degree farther out of their usual levels. So even if, objectively, men and women feel the same symptoms, men should feel them worse with respect to the fever. Curiously, despite …
/r/MensRights13/02/14 08:43 AM
1

You're the moron who keeps conflating mothers and women into the same category. In actuality, there is actually 46% more maltreatment perpetration in cases involving mothers compared to cases involving fathers. Until you can read basic english and do basic math, I see no point in pursuing this conversation any further.
/r/MensRights12/02/14 02:13 AM
1

I did properly adjust the rates, and this is evidenced by the fact that you haven't bothered to try to come up with anything different. If you want to use the technical reasons for why mothers get primary custody defaulted to them, it's because they are considered the primary parent even if both parents are working. If the father was a stay-at-home parent, he'd more likely get primary custody. This is compounded by the tender years doctrine. Never said it was the mother's fault. I was explaining…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 01:59 AM
1

You have an extreme lack of understanding what "adjusted" rates are. Further, you, for some reason, keep pounding your fist down on the 53/45 despite the fact that the rates for mothers and fathers are written right in the article, and we can adjust those rates for the realities that children are 20% more likely to be raised by a household involving their mother. The numbers are right there, and they clearly spell out that mothers are 1.2 times more likely to maltreat their children than fathers…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 01:39 AM
1

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1xihfq/the_majority_of_child_abuse_is_committed_by_women/cfd16ps
/r/MensRights12/02/14 12:57 AM
1

Oh please. It's just a more recent study. The only thing that has changed is that the prevalence rate for maltreatment and fatalities has dramatically reduced for sole perpetrators. This is going to even the rates, but at the time of that last post, the report of '08 suggested exactly what I had concluded. Page 68 has nothing to do with mothers or fathers. From other parts of the study: "Nearly two-fifths (36.6%) of victims were maltreated by their mother acting alone. One-fifth (18.7%) of victi…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 12:57 AM
1

Women do not have sole custody over 80% of all children. You have no idea what you're talking about. The 1.45 figure is the adjusted figure.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 11:43 PM
1

Did you not read my post or just the conclusion? The entire purpose of it was to adjust it DOWN to 1.45. That is the adjusted figure.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 11:30 PM
1

Stop pretending you know how this study was conducted. Further, fatalities and instances of abuse are not counted together.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 10:25 PM
1

The problem with differentiation is that the prosecution routinely downgrades offenses involving female perpetrators. Even if you adjust for single-parent households, we can see that mothers still victimize and kill their children more. You can't downgrade murder.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 10:23 PM
1

I tried to adjust the figures a bit to reflect single-parent households. See it here.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 10:22 PM
0

Comments are idiotic. Woody Allen is innocent for all intents and purposes.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 08:56 AM
3

Agreed.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 01:21 PM
15

Just selfishness. Most kids lack moral integrity. I don't even know why a child's testimony can be admissable without at least some corroborating evidence.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 06:18 AM
3

The RSU must realize that the security fee implementation is a result of their unethical actions in the past.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 06:15 AM
1

Thought you were referring to allegations of abuse. Your post was unclear.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 02:25 AM
1

If only the show were true.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 12:03 AM
3

Wish the lawyer mentioned cases were boys were ordered to pay up to their rapists. Not only does the rapist get to keep full custody, but she gets financial aid from her victim! Classic family court.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 11:57 PM
1

I think the investigator got some of the meatier charges with regards to the spying, so tax evasion is probably more serious than conspiracy.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 11:48 PM
1

I'm confused. If we know she lied why didn't she stay in jail? I don't know facts of case but this inconsistency in your informative post begs inquiry.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 11:38 PM
1

You'd be surprised how easily kids will come up with shit and believe it if a specific set of circumstances arises + stress + serious question asked. Farrow could be just as innocent as Allen. It could be that during the ensuing family disputes the child overheard the lawyer ask Farrow about child abuse and how allegations of it can help them. Ta da! I once lied about being propositioned by a guy in a car while walking home from school just because my parents were talking about that topic among …
/r/MensRights06/02/14 11:23 PM
2

The police absolutely want to have their cases moved into charges and convictions. Those statistics reflect positively for them. However, if the CPS decides to guide for stronger cases, the police is going to have to deal with it. The number of referred cases go down, certainly. Why has the number of charges gone down 14% since 2011? 3 years and it's gone down 14%? I don't find that too compelling considering the number of referrals declined by 30-40%. What's also missing in the article is the c…
/r/MensRights04/02/14 06:20 AM
2

If that's your objective, it's fine. People will get the wrong idea that you're trying to test them without doing the work yourself, so expect pushback.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 01:05 AM
3

That is going to require a fundamental change to how this sub is run, and that isn't going to happen.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 01:02 AM
1

If you want people to cite you these documents every time a relevant topic comes up, you're expecting way too much from this sub. No one should have to appease your ridiculously anal standards. Do your own research. You can google "mother and fathers in family court" and come up with a billion studies on the trends that come out of the family court. We've already had submissions about these trends, they come every month.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 12:52 AM
9

What a shitty article. They don't even explain what the changes were to the guideline. What the moronic press doesn't realize is that these cases, that are now not being referred to the CPS, would not likely end up with a conviction if the prosecution moved ahead with charges or sanctions. The CPS is just removing that burden from their office. If you don't want this to happen, increase the CPS budget and they'll gladly come to the same conclusion as the police and not charge/sanction anyone. I …
/r/MensRights04/02/14 12:14 AM
2

It's true it can be difficult to know if each specific case involved a softer treatment of women with respect to a man in a similar situation, but it's well documented that women can get away with a lot in the family court. Since the presumption is to keep the children with the mother, there is a burden that the system has to overcome in order to remove the children from her custody. A father does not have that protection, so if there is a possibility (an accusation) of child abuse/neglect, he w…
/r/MensRights04/02/14 12:03 AM
6

That article is so retarded I wanted to stab myself repeatedly in the eye. Presumption of innocence is always afforded to defendants. That doesn't mean we presume the complainant to be guilty of lying. How fucking retarded can these people be? Black and white thinking is the product of a simple-mind.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 11:58 PM
1

If people with BDSM were killing eachother, the murder rate would more than triple. In this case it'll be used as an excuse to get her a sentence appropriate for a juvenile.
/r/MensRights03/02/14 11:50 PM
1

If that's the case, he was on probation, then that's why he got the 13 months. Still, it is a bizarre disparity.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 03:42 AM
3

"A recorded crime can be 'no-crimed' where additional verifiable information determines that no crime has been committed, or for administrative reasons (i.e. it is a duplicate crime for one already recorded)." The social justice groups are howling in despair because the police is failing to forward all recorded cases of rape to the prosecution, regardless of the evidence or lack thereof. In reality, the cases that don't get no crimed still have to meet a threshold for it to be prosecuted. Cases …
/r/MensRights01/02/14 09:50 AM
3

Pleading guilty doesn't necessarily mean you don't apologize, etc...
/r/MensRights01/02/14 07:55 AM
48

The guy didn't cry on the stand, he is clearly without remorse, so throw him into the slammer.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 06:53 AM
22

He's right and wrong. A lot of feminists are completely blind to hostile sexism against men, instead they see them all only as benevolent sexism against women. It's the most retarded thing ever, because you can twist any instance of sexism around, thereby allowing you to continue not giving 2 shits about men's issues.
/r/MensRights31/01/14 10:18 PM
1

If this is going through the university, you're pretty much screwed unless you have an alibi or texts that indicate consensual behavior. Otherwise, their testimony will generally be sufficient to push their case to 50.1%. So as you can see, in that scenario, you have to prove your innocence. As for the courts, best thing to do is to not talk to anyone but your lawyer, and you must have a lawyer. Walk around with a recording device, and record all interactions. Keep track of all conversations and…
/r/MensRights30/01/14 11:23 PM
1

The thought did cross my mind, but if you're going to be deceitful like that, why bother having the survey anyways unless you were going to specifically target this sub, in which case the authors would come off looking really fucking stupid.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 05:49 AM
1

It would be so nuts if someone wrote a similar article attacking women... Wouldn't happen, the author would be chased out of the profession. Imagine someone writing an article telling girls not to look up to female athletes, but to their mother. God, it would enrage the feminists to no end.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 03:53 AM
3

There were a lot of missing options. The survey is going to be absolutely useless for any type of extensive interpretations. They should have got input from the sub about the kinds of answers to include for each question, and for additional questions. I picked the closest answer for many of them. In the end, the survey is too simple for any analysis into the ideology of the movement, but it may give a very very rough idea of who MRAs are (ones that actually sub here and willing to fill out a sur…
/r/MensRights30/01/14 03:52 AM
2

I did it. Some of the answers provided were a bit too leading but were close enough to the real answers that I picked them. You can't actually make any decent conclusions based off a survey like this. Anyone who tries knows jack shit about conducting a proper survey. All you can get from it is a rough idea of who are the MR lurkers that are willing to fill out a survey. You cannot make any conclusions or assumptions from it given the simple questions asked.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 03:49 AM
1

I want to add that in the history of mankind, men had the right to vote for about 40 years longer than women. Not completely unthinkable given that one of the top reasons for why men were given the right to vote is so that they would fight for the country. The Civil War, WW1, WW2, etc... weren't cakewalks.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 03:41 AM
1

There you go :D
/r/MensRights30/01/14 12:40 AM
1

I was making fun of the right's hilarious misuse of political ideologies to try and demonize left wing ideas.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 12:12 AM
1

What exactly are you responding to?
/r/MensRights29/01/14 03:43 PM
2

You expect social scientists to be able to conduct a rigorous statistical study? Have you not been paying attention to decades worth of feminist research? A rigorous statistical study leaves a paper trail behind, making it a lot harder to cover up any unpleasant facts that may come out. It's much easier to half-ass a research report that verifies their own confirmation bias.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 03:27 PM
11

Honestly, I wouldn't care as much if all insurance worked blindly. But to see it only put blindly only when it suits women does bother me. In the case of health care, I'm some boring Canadian who has this socialist marxist fascist idea that everyone should have health care and the rich should pay for more of it via higher taxes. As for driving, every driver should pay equally.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 02:01 PM
8

Every voter is generally a woman, with a woman, or cares about a woman. Not the case with immigrants and minorities, and both those demographics may scare some Republican voters away from the Dems if Obama mentions giving them pay increases.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 01:58 PM
4

Can we avoid using femsplaining. I'd do anything to stop the use of mansplaining, which is often abused and used wrongly in order to quash dissent.
/r/MensRights26/01/14 03:34 PM
1

In Canada it's not legal for the prosecution, to some degree, to get involved in or guide the testimony of the complainant. I don't know about the States. Does this scenario follow under the category? Possibly, and could be an avenue for a re-trial based off such a technicality.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 09:54 PM
2

Women may not go as far as cutting the clit off but plenty do get plastic surgery down there... So no, it's not entirely banned. My point was that I don't care if adult men choose to get circumcised.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 03:16 AM
2

The whole report is garbage. As for the 7%, the majority were intoxication related, which allows for the distinct possibility that we would see similar perpetration rates from college women. After all, guys are getting just as drunk, if not drunker, than girls. Of course no women were interviewed, can't have that now can we? I can say that rates are likely to be similar because of the rare studies that do ask both genders the tough questions, we do find similarities. Most studies deliberately ig…
/r/MensRights24/01/14 02:31 PM
2

The numbers are still low enough that the rate for female perpetrators wouldn't be much different. Of course no women were interviewed.
/r/MensRights24/01/14 02:27 PM
11

"...on boys." The distinction matters.
/r/MensRights24/01/14 02:17 PM
1

If you simply cannot use condom or don't trust it completely (understandable for professional athletes who sleep with professionals at trying to get pregnant), then use the heat-based method. It's not 100% effective but it goes a long way for the time being.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 06:52 AM
2

God damn who wrote that article about the women? Talk about painting the villain as the victim. She must have slept with so many guys over those 10 or so years. It's true that HIV is hard to transmit if you're being treated, and so infecting someone suggests she probably slept around a lot. Probation, fucking hilarious. Female privilege all the way.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 06:50 AM
3

Assuming this isn't satire, this is just an attempt to re-frame the privilege weapon.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 06:44 AM
14

There is no way any funding has ever been reduced for battered women because some money had to be redirected towards funding for battered men. But as you point out, 10k shelters for women, a handful for men... I guess if you shut down a few shelters for women to double the number of shelters for men, it's misogyny.
/r/MensRights16/01/14 03:45 PM
6

As long as GWW doesn't get defensive, she'll be fine. She's got facts on her side. Just focus on how men's rights compliment gender equality. There really isn't any need to attack feminism. If people come to agree that men have grievances that should be tackled along side women's issues, then they'll come to the same conclusions about the biased feminist agendas.
/r/MensRights14/01/14 08:12 AM
3

The $150k limit is just to prevent alimony and child support from being mixed up. If someone deserves alimony because they put their life on hold to raise 4 kids and live in San Francisco or something, I get that. However that pay is set can be debated. But it should never be the case that child support be more than half the living expenses of the child (this incl's cost of an additional room, etc...), unless the secondary parent has relinquished all visitation and custody rights. If you have an…
/r/MensRights13/01/14 11:23 PM
4

Yes... If they were reasonable they wouldn't think those fighting for men's rights were misogynists.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 11:36 PM
1

I figured that's all it was. My msg wasn't clear.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 03:40 AM
4

I think it bears some consideration. Victimization of white guys gets plenty of coverage in this sub. Nevermind that most of the more severe grievances against men are quite a bit worse for black men. I was just pointing out that white guys should still be relieved to be white. Nothing racist about that or anything.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 03:37 AM
-6

At least I'm not black. I'll take pedo stereotypes anyday of the week. Edit: why the butt hurt? The amount of shit black guys put up with is crazy.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 02:46 AM
16

Wrong. He got 180 day sentence before he stormed out. Even the contempt charge was SPECIFICALLY based on the child support, nothing to do with walking out. "Judge Millard tells Fox 26 after she found Hall in contempt he walked out of the courtroom which she says is a big no no." "News accounts are still murky about which of these factors was the basis for the sentence, but a court document briefly glimpsed in the Houston television news report about the case shown above displays a header indicat…
/r/MensRights11/01/14 09:15 PM
6

Don't care, but unless you had the surgery a long time ago it's not likely you'll experience less sensitivity. That comes with time when it wears down. Further, some girls do not have "tough" vaginas, so they'll experience more abrasions since there is no foreskin to "lubricate" the action, so to speak.
/r/MensRights11/01/14 03:01 AM
10

They really went out of their way not to called the mother the murderer.
/r/MensRights11/01/14 02:42 AM
0

Your pot wasn't the issue, lol. It was you being a bum, smoking weed was just something you did while you were doing nothing. Being an alcoholic is an entirely different ballgame, and people are going to the completely wrong impression of your situation if you don't make that clear. You used "sober" in your post, too, seesh. Pot smoking doesn't victimize anyone, not even yourself. Regardless, now that you aren't a bum, there should be nothing holding you back from seeing your kid. It has nothing…
/r/MensRights10/01/14 09:23 PM
2

The parent with primary custody wins all the time in the family court. Thought I'd make that one correction in an otherwise spot-on review of how fucked up divorce is.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 10:43 AM
6

Your life can be turned into a living hell long before any conviction, even if there is no chance of one. That's true of any accusation for most crimes. However, in the case of domestic disputes, the stakes are far higher. Restraining orders and child custody arrangements are constantly determined based on allegations that never need to be proven. In order to lift such orders or alter arrangements that were influenced by such allegations, one needs to fight through the system set up to protect t…
/r/MensRights07/01/14 03:51 AM
1

Stoning is not the only way people are executed in the middle east. If you include all forms, not just stoning, men make up >90% of those executed.
/r/MensRights02/01/14 11:27 AM
1

The key here is that females executed in the Middle East were usually stoned. However, the vast majority of those executed in the Middle East are men. Thus, one only needs to focus on stoning victims to frame the debate around women who are executed. Are the majority of stoning victims women? I doubt anyone actually has facts, but since stoning is generally done in response to adulterous behavior, it's likely that stoning is done rather equitably against both genders. But if one includes hanging…
/r/MensRights02/01/14 11:24 AM
1

I lost brain cells.
/r/MensRights28/12/13 01:33 AM
1

No linking to troll websites.
/r/MensRights28/12/13 01:29 AM
36

What gender are the civilians (>90%) who gets massacred during conflicts? Recent CAR news out of Africa has the answer. Misandry kills.
/r/MensRights25/12/13 06:45 PM
3

I don't understand wtf they are talking about, lol. It sounded like they are measuring pleasure objectively, which is pseudo-science as far as I'm concerned. Base-line? Makes no sense here unless both groups start uncircumcised...
/r/MensRights18/12/13 04:59 AM
2

I downvote this trash out of principle. The less I hear about that idiot, the happier I'll be.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 08:45 PM
0

You both are being too hostile and stupid.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 02:33 AM
3

Keep stretching it. There are surgical options, go for it if your own therapy fails. Circumcision is definitely the most invasive option though. If your foreskin can't slide up and down the glans easily during a handjob, that certainly means it's too tight. The same issue causes phimosis, except in your case the foreskin is not as tight. I'm pretty sure I had phimosis, but stretching it back and forth during masturbation got rid of it (to be clear, pulling it back initially was a very gradual pr…
/r/MensRights12/12/13 01:32 AM
1

I guess the confusion comes from how some surveys classify illegal oral sex as being rape.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 09:35 PM
8

I like how she pretends she's above using mansplaining and then uses it. It doesn't matter if you present facts to the kind of people who use that term. Here's what you guys need to realize. Anyone who uses the gender of the arguer as a counter-argument cannot be persuaded. It's fucking hopeless. No matter what you say or do, if you are a man and you aren't towing the line, then you are using your privilege or mansplaining and thus your argument can be dismissed. You bring facts and studies to t…
/r/MensRights10/12/13 04:19 AM
2

I think it's also important to note that the prosecutor could have been fishing for evidence to use in their own case against the defendant.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 09:04 PM
3

It really was a great article, well done James. He was asked to testify at the university at the same time a criminal investigation was underway and he gasps chose to remain silent so as to not harm his case in the real court? Unthinkable! Why else do you think the real prosecutor chose to reside in this kangaroo court? To get dirt to use in their own case.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 08:14 PM
25

I'm sure if you combined men and children, they too would be significantly more likely to die compared to women. Even in a perfect utopia, women are more likely to die for purely biological reasons. Regardless, the UN will still cherry pick for 1 disaster (in this case, Bangladesh) for the results they need.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 04:08 PM
6

That's fucked up. But the mother wanted money from the adopting parents, won't anyone think of the mothers?!?!
/r/MensRights09/12/13 02:59 AM
5

Not only are male victims of rape ignored, but when massacres are reported during these conflicts in Africa, they usually leave out that the majority of the victims were men and boys. The gendercide is rarely reported. When the UN come across a mass grave, it's generally the case that >90% of the bodies are male. But, for the most part, the general public only know that in these conflicts civilians are being massacred, and women are being systematically raped. Congo, Serbia, Darfur... Lots of pr…
/r/MensRights08/12/13 08:48 PM
1

We have practically zero facts about the case.
/r/MensRights08/12/13 08:38 PM
6

I'm going to guess it's a condition of their license that they be responsible with who and how they sell liquor.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 04:30 AM
1

I've tried looking for this so-called admission in his book, can't find it. http://archive.org/stream/LongWalkToFreedom/PBI3231_djvu.txt I do know he refused to renounce violence, but as for the Church Street bombings while he was in jail, I'm a bit skeptical of ALL of the sources that quote "signed off" or "personally signed off", etc... about the Church street bombing, none of which appears in the book. "AT POLLSMOOR, we were more connected to outside events. We were aware that the struggle wa…
/r/MensRights06/12/13 10:03 PM
1

I agree that he was human like the rest of us, but I'd like to know what attacks he was responsible for or took part in.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 09:08 PM
1

What attacks were he involved in that killed people? Even if some innocent people died, does that refute his just cause against apartheid? Innocent black people were dying everyday. Change rarely happens non-violently. Men sometimes have to take up arms.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 08:57 PM
1

Inner city kids in the States get the short end of the stick eveytime.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 08:53 PM
1

Needs structure, you're all over the place. Here are some ideas. Family Courts (child custody decisions [how easy it is to make DV allegations, get restraining orders, etc... forcing father out of the house with no evidence prior to a divorce], child support payments being too high, paternity fraud, complete lack of rights with regards to choosing to being a father[if you mention this point, be clear not to say that men should have a say in abortion, but, rather, men should have a say whether or…
/r/MensRights06/12/13 07:35 PM
1

God damn CDC. I give up!
/r/MensRights06/12/13 04:22 AM
1

It's debatable if you can claim women make up x% of rapists from a figure that cannot determine whether a single women accounted for multiple offenses. The study is not very clear. Nevertheless, my previous statement is not somehow less offensive than the clearer and broader statement anyways. Regardless, I agree completely that lifetime victimization rates for men are likely significantly under-reported. There was no investigation into why lifetime rates for women were orders of magnitude highe…
/r/MensRights06/12/13 12:03 AM
1

I'm reluctant to interpret legal docs. Until I see an actual case of a woman getting charged with raping a man with envelopment, I'm going to with-hold my final judgement.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 09:12 PM
1

Doubtful. Even the FBI's new definition continues to exclude MTP victims. The change simply allowed men to be raped by women if the man is penetrated by her.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 08:32 PM
1

Stick with facts and charts. Let the powerpoint do most of the talking for you. I'm going to imagine you're in high school. Quite frankly, I'd be surprised if you have the maturity to talk about this politically sensitive topic without coming off really badly. People are used to swallowing the feminist bullshit so it doesn't look as cringey, but for men's rights issues you are fighting an uphill battle. Things like "2 drunk people having sex, only the man is charged" may be common knowledge arou…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 08:26 PM
2

Legally speaking, there is some justification that they should be separate. Many places do not consider MTP to be rape. They also might want to use consistent definition with prior studies, hence "attempts" are included with "completed" rapes.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 08:14 PM
2

I don't know how the study dealt with multiple offenses to be honest.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 08:05 PM
2

Well if you read the post you'd know that the story didn't end there.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:50 PM
4

I thought it was manboobz, last I heard about this. It could be from the NISVS, nevertheless these statements remain true (if you combine MTP and rape): Men and women were raped during 2010 at similar rates. ~40% of the rapes committed during 2010 were perpetrated by women. The e-mail is simply poking holes in some MRA's misclassification of the stats with the following statement: 40% of rapists are women. Technically the retort is accurate in that regard, minus the separation of rape and MTP, b…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:46 PM
3

It is technically a valid objection. The accurate way of phrasing the conclusions is that "~40% of rapes committed during 2010 were perpetrated by women". Further, they didn't debunk the 50/50 victimization rate during 2010, only that they disagreed with MTP and rape being combined.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:43 PM
1

It's a dumb fucking retort. If you consider MTP to be rape, the following 2 statements are accurate: Men and women were raped at relatively equal rates during 2010. 37% of rapes during 2010 were perpetrated by women. Those 2 statements are factually accurate. That e-mail doesn't debunk those 2 statements. Instead, it creates straw mans and debunks inaccurately written conclusions from some methods for calculating the results. Technically, you cannot say that "40% of rapists are women" from the s…
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:42 PM
2

Next time go to the police. The media will do the rest for you.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:30 PM
1

Even if you consider it adultery or a sin, if your spouse is fine with it, then who cares? I would never date someone who were so insecure though. It's fucking hilarious how ashamed people are of their own sexual desires... Pathetic.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 09:53 PM
5

That 60% figure just won't die.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 07:23 PM
4

Why is the title misleading?
/r/MensRights04/12/13 07:19 PM
2

What enrages me just as much is how little attention is given to the prosecutors involved that knew what was going on, and participated in it. Thousands of cases are going to be overturned regardless of how strong the cases were. If evidence that the chemist may have had access to were admitted by the prosecution, it's toast. I don't think this is a men's rights issue though. I just think that white color crimes in general have low sentences.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 02:53 AM
2

If population of country A is 200M, 20% is rural, and rural victimization rate is 20% while urban rate is 5%, then we can extrapolate the figure for country-rate to be: (200M * 20% * 20%) + (200M * 80% * 5%) = 16M 16M / 200M = 8% The victimization rate for offense X in country A is 8%. HDI is human development index. I stratified the few countries studied in the survey in 2 groups, those high to very high, and those medium or lower. For every woman who reads this UN report, 99% of them are proba…
/r/MensRights03/12/13 06:43 PM
1

What you mean? That's not the point. When the case goes to court and the text messages are presented, the prosecution's case is toasted. Unless they actually have evidence that it wasn't the accuser that sent the texts (how?), no amount of persuasive testimony on the part of the accuser is going to overturn the physical evidence that is the text messages. Until the courts finally decide that an IP isn't a person, which isn't going to happen in a million years, those text messages are iron-clad. …
/r/MensRights03/12/13 06:34 PM
1

Sexual experience is referring to intercourse, and it's pretty clear cut that is means forced. Now, further dissection of the results suggest 30% is grossly over exaggerating the prevalence. When we adjust each sample group to their respective population sizes: When we isolate high to very high HDI countries, the rate drops to 2.7%. There really wasn't enough very high HDI countries in the survey to get anything significant (but the rate would drop another 10-fold probably). If we isolate urban …
/r/MensRights03/12/13 06:21 PM
5

rural Tanzania, rural Peru, and rual Bangladesh... Pick the highest rate, and that'll be the global representative sample! It's too high nonetheless, but I don't have the actual study to look at. I don't trust gendered research whatsoever. Hypothetically, they may have defined "forced" to include having sex with an older male when underaged. That may technically be statutory rape, but it shouldn't be misinterpreted by readers as being forced. However, what one needs to keep in mind is that they …
/r/MensRights03/12/13 05:02 PM
1

Seesh that top comment wants to have text messages thrown out. I completely understand their point, it is very easy to hijack someone's identity over the internet... But text messages are actually physical evidence that supports the defense's claim of consensual sex. It's not proof, it's just evidence. On the other hand, the accuser's testimony is worth far less in the eyes of the court with respect to physical evidence. Text messages will win in court every time, because all the defense needs i…
/r/MensRights03/12/13 04:54 PM
7

Often comes from lesbians.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 05:34 AM
1

Well, aside from the bullshit 60% statistics, I am kind of relieved that they are no longer resorting to surgical circumcision. The problem with cutting off the foreskin is that sexually active adults will be, for a short-while, very susceptible to picking up STDs due to the incision.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 07:26 AM
1

No.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 07:21 AM
2

The lifetime rate in that study is still quite peculiar. I wish I had an objective rationale for why the ratio from lifetime:12-month was so much bigger for women. Regardless, even if we assume it's accurate (not likely), men still make up 25% of all lifetime rape/attempted rape victims when you exclude the prison population. (p. 95) That is significant enough to not have male victims, female perpetrators, and sexist rape definitions continously ignored by feminist researchers... but still they …
/r/MensRights02/12/13 05:50 AM
1

ty for pointing it out
/r/MensRights02/12/13 12:52 AM
1

Copied wrong link, resubmitting.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 12:49 AM
0

Education has clearly failed to elevate your reading comprehension to an adult level. There are certainly victims of attempted rape, but they are not victims of rape. Secondly, one cannot be a rapist until they have actually raped. It is still a crime to try to rape someone nonetheless. This will be the last time I respond to your bizarre paradigm.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 12:25 AM
0

Um, no, they are not. Someone who experienced attempted burglary was not robbed. Someone who experienced attempted murder is not dead. Someone who experienced attempted rape was not raped.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 12:16 AM
0

You totally missed the point. The article references 85,000 victims of rape. The reference is clear that the 85,000 is the upper boundary for rape and attempted rapes.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 12:11 AM
0

(including attempted rape) This is why rape surveys combine completed and attempted rapes under one rate, because dumb articles like this one will report them ALL as completed rapes. Further, those results are being taken from this study. In this study, a man cannot be raped by a woman unless she penetrates his ass with her finger or object. p 237
/r/MensRights01/12/13 11:57 PM
10

Seems like she'll get off with a slap on the wrist if that's the mentality they have as they build the case against her.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 11:51 PM
1

It certainly does inflate the issue. You go from 1 in 4 (what most people think) to 1 in 8. You'd think twice as many people were being raped. That's where the 90% under-reported rate comes from. I didn't derail the conversation, the conversation was about numbers, that was it. You're the one going on a tangent about what my intentions are, that I don't care about rape victims. This conversation isn't about how bad rape is, or whether or not attempted rapes matter. I've done a bunch of statistic…
/r/MensRights29/11/13 08:06 PM
1

I agree that attempts should definitely be counted, but far too often the conclusions of a study comes with 1 in X for rape and attempted rapes, and it then gets reported or used on rape awareness posters as 1 in X are raped. I agree that it's a reasonable question, that particular incapacitation question. But often times people joke that they must have been raped because they had sex drunk, even though it was completely consensual. Most people don't suddenly lose their free will, etc... from a …
/r/MensRights29/11/13 03:41 PM
1

A 60 year old man commenting about young women/girls' bodies and remarking that they feel like a pedophile? Consider that... All it needs is some repetition and it's a done deal (I did say if). It would still be considered sexual harassment, regardless of company liabilities. OP hasn't suggested that they intend to seek damages or anything, but rather to know what constitutes sexual harassment in the workplace, and all he may be lacking right now in his situation is repetition. However, the sole…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 09:27 PM
-1

Wrong, if it's repetitive and in the workplace, it's an open and shut case of sexual harassment. You do not need to be the target, only that your gender is. Personally, I think it's stupid but some people are insecure.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 08:39 PM
12

That was sexual harassment? Lol, so fucking clueless. At most it might be harassment, depending on the post-incident internet communications, but that's it. He was attracted, tried to show his interest, was drunk and came off like a dumbass, and was turned down. What happened later is typical misinterpretation of prior events spilling onto the internet where people don't filter all that well. Sounds like a lot of dating encounters for both men and women. But to get that called harassment require…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 07:54 PM
1

Well you split hairs over the definition of maturity all you want, but I think people understand what I mean. Regardless, girls are simply more mature than boys at a younger age. So what?
/r/MensRights26/11/13 07:31 PM
7

It's not like people need to spread nude photos of eachother and blackmail in order to be liable, which is typical of these stories and why we often find bullies prosecuted. But if these girls were spreading lies, in a country like the UK, I can assure you that there would be plenty of things to charge them with. They even got to keep their names protected. What a joke.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 07:11 PM
5

Not once do they mention anything about wrongful diagnosis. How younger kids in the class are statistically more likely to be diagnosed. No mention of any harmful side effects of over medicating children. The criteria for diagnosing ADHD has repeatedly been shown to be quite lacking. Children who do not mature as quick in their early years are getting pumped with drugs for no medically justifiable reason. When you have boys and girls in the same class at a younger age (while nothing is wrong wit…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 06:51 PM
2

There would be fewer convictions. A public registry is very debilitating and judges have a lot of discretion. Domestic violence allegations very rarely come before a jury, with respect to the number of allegations that get made. I think this sub is well read in that subject matter. Nevertheless, those who do end up on the registry, once again, do not get substantial details put up because it would infringe on the privacy of the victims. So, as a result, and as is the case with the sex offender l…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 05:38 PM
3

Interesting twist. It comes down to what people find to be desirable or undesirable stereotypes. It's no surprise that most movies universally follow generic formulas. The traditional Bechdel test universally ignores any perceived negative male stereotypes, and only looks at one perceived negative female stereotype.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 05:13 PM
18

I don't think this OP title is appropriate. Maybe that's the implication but readers of this sub will misinterpret the meaning of the article if they go in with preconceived notions. Quite frankly the movie is tame, it does not shame traditional masculinity whatsoever. Take the typical gender stereotypes seen in action movies, flip the gender of the 2 main characters, and you have the Hunger Games. Nothing shocking about it, nothing for MRAs to be offended by, it's just a standard story written …
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:02 PM
1

It really sucks to be a black man in the West... seesh.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 01:54 PM
4

The guy is incredibly insecure. That's not your problem and quite frankly it sounds like an unhealthy relationship. If the guy has a problem with not being the breadwinner or being the financially stable one in the relationship, that's his problem, not yours. Don't stoop down to make him feel better, fuck that. Plenty of guys out there who have nothing but respect for an independent woman. Maybe he gets shit for being the poorer one in the relationship from people he's around and it's getting st…
/r/MensRights23/11/13 06:12 AM
6

Which is why I'm leaning towards the 43%. I think 18% is laughably low when you consider the obvious conditions of these marriages.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 06:08 AM
1

It's a spectrum. Flight risk, risk to commit further crimes while not in custody, and age. The girls are not flight risks, under-aged, and have a non-violent criminal history. Same conditions allowed the other minor involved, a boy, to be granted bail as well. The adults involved in the situation were denied bail, one of which was the actual rapist and has a lengthy violent criminal history, even at 19.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 06:02 AM
2

She might have been 16, but no more than 17, when she got pregnant with the 13 year old. Just referring to the first incident, but it you're going to refer to the 13 year old incident, she wasn't an adult.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 05:38 AM
-7

I don't trust Elam to do a good job.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 01:18 AM
1

Unless the accused is a complete loner, there will likely be those who come to the defense of the accused. This is more likely the more popular the accused.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 10:32 AM
1

Shaming will not cease unless the shaming of the accused also ceases.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 08:22 AM
5

It's difficult to explain but some hold a fundamental belief that all who aren't male and white are being oppressed by white men (or the Patriarchy). In such a system, it isn't possible to be racist or sexist against white men. I'd elaborate if I could, but that's pretty much the crux of the issue. Is the premise, conclusion, and/or the connection between the two statements real? No.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 07:25 AM
2

This is a dumb title. Winston should be considered innocent until proven guilty. He should remain anonymous, and that helps protect both him and the accuser. The accuser shouldn't feel threatened by the town, nor should she be discouraged by the police department from reporting any alleged crime. If the accused remained anonymous as well, it would go along way with helping legitimate rape victims come forward, and also go along way towards protecting the accused. Assuming the allegations are fal…
/r/MensRights22/11/13 06:24 AM
8

I noticed that too, I bet the author thinks double the sentencing severity and way more than double the incarceration rate is evidence of the patriarchy!
/r/MensRights19/11/13 07:52 AM
3

I see, you've made it clear. Can we agree on this one: 25% of all primary suspects for an alleged rape were found to have DNA that didn't match those found at the scene of the crime. I think that's a fair summary?
/r/MensRights19/11/13 07:14 AM
9

Oh god, I just lost an eye. I was murderously compelled to rip out my own eye and throw it out the window for no fucking reason after reading that article.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 07:00 AM
16

What does she pay you?
/r/MensRights19/11/13 06:31 AM
0

They include false claims. Either way, the distinction is irrelevant. Malicious, or not, intent of the accuser has no bearing on the 1 in 4 figure. Further, it is not always conclusively known if rape did happen. Finally, a positive match is also not proof of rape either.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 06:02 AM
0

Sex may have occurred, but not with the primary suspect of course. However, this rate doesn't take into account consensual sex. This means that the 1 in 4 rate is being quite conservative.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 05:37 AM
1

You bring up a valid point. It is nevertheless inappropriate for the media to do what they do when it comes war-time massacres. When it comes to Kosovo or any war, there are no civilian survivors of a massacre due to the unarmed civilian(s) physically overpowering their assailants. When a bunch of armed soldiers have herded a bunch of civilians, the only way one survives is if they run out of bullets. The strength and speed of the survivors were inconsequential.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 12:33 AM
2

The section did a good job extrapolating the totals from the rates found in the research report, which can be found at http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/rapidsurveys/lancet355(9222)_2204_9_2000.pdf.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 08:46 PM
4

It is impressive that someone can get burns on their upper back when a pot is flipped by accident at waist level. The fact that there were burns on her wrist, and not her fingers, supports the claim that she threw the water at him, and discredits her claim that she accidentally put her fingers in the pot. Go now, pick up a pot of water, and throw the water at a target. Guess where some of the water lands? Your wrist. She may have got off on a technicality with respect to reasonable doubt, but th…
/r/MensRights18/11/13 06:25 PM
3

His argument boils down to that women are bigger victims than men, therefore male concerns are a waste of time. It's as stupid as it sounds. The former half of the previous statement has no bearing whatsoever on the latter half.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 05:36 PM
4

Kosovo?
/r/MensRights18/11/13 04:01 PM
50

On the front-page, check Makes light of judicial bias favoring female offenders, check Suggests that men under-report victimization more-so than women, check Excellent read. Would read again. 10/10.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 03:59 PM
2

Sexual assault surveys that come up with 1 in 3-5 women have been sexually assaulted. Typically the conclusions from those surveys are vastly overstated from their own data. For instance, the CSA and NISVS studies determined that between 1 in 4 (CSA) or 6 women have been sexually assaulted or raped (NISVS). What they don't say is that those figures include attempts. Removing attempts and the figures are increased to 1 in 8. The second issue with those surveys is that they invariably leave it up …
/r/MensRights18/11/13 03:11 PM
3

Conspiracy. Prly got off with a deal.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 09:28 PM
1

Probably a Chrstina Hoff Sommers article.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 10:55 PM
-7

:/
/r/MensRights13/11/13 10:35 PM
10

That includes neglect.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 10:13 PM
2

Author just bullshitting. Lots of rape jokes, not kidding, lol.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:22 PM
6

He's absurd. However, some feminists don't think women can rape men. That whole Futrelle thing and how the CDC/CSA surveys classifies male as victims confirms their wide spread existence.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:21 PM
1

Just don't vote.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:15 PM
21

There are quite a few rape and child sexual abuse jokes in the game actually, with more in the extended packages. It's all online. The author is full of shit, just pandering to the social justice circle jerk. Heaven forbid the movement stop drinking the kool aid and come down on CaH, so I don't blame the authors for pulling out bullshit stats and lies about no rape jokes... Money rules.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:49 PM
-2

The wording of the question permits people who had or hadn't provided verbal consent, to still say that they had been raped due to the fact that they were technically unable to give consent due to intoxication. I don't think there is some threshold for intoxication. Intoxication is black and white when it comes to how sexual consent is judged in sexual assault cases. If she says she was intoxicated, the criteria is met.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 11:02 AM
0

Actually it was closer to 60% with respect to those who actually reported being raped with respect to this study. Regardless, that argument is not going to sound very persuasive to people. We could probably find consensus that the study overestimates the prevalence of victimization, but by how much? No one really knows. edit Upon further reflection, the argument does sound persuasive in the context of the intoxicated/incapacitated questions. Those who understand the letter of the law will unders…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 09:30 AM
1

Well that's a specific disaster. I don't think that's the source for the 14x figure. Further, those number don't add up to the claim that 90% of the ~140k deaths from the 1991 cyclone were women. I don't know what to believe, but these researchers do a good job keeping the source for these numbers hidden.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:25 AM
2

OP the lie is written right there, but people simply misinterpret it. They took all women and children deaths in the highly affected areas, generally they will have higher incidences of schools. They took that number and divided it by the pre-disaster population of those demographics. They then compared it to the rate for men to come up with 14x. In other words, if they had combined men with children, it would be something like men and children are 10x more likely to die.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:29 AM
2

It's an old figure, been debunked time and time again. The reality is staring you right in the face. They took all women, boys, and girls, and compared them to men. It isn't even a per-rate comparison for each group, but a lump sum comparison of the total deaths per group. How else can they possibly make the claim for each of those groups at a specific rate? Group A, in this case, are women and children. Group B is just men. Obviously the mortality rate in highly-affected areas are definitely di…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:25 AM
1

Understand that the 14x quote references figures that bundled women, boys, and girls, together, and compared them to men.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:19 AM
1

Not 1 in 5. It was 1 in 7-8 women were sexually assaulted during their college years. Sexual assault encompasses rape and other sexual offenses.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 06:41 AM
1

Why shouldn't women have access to VA services? Dumb. This title makes it sound like men are being marginalized... All it's talking about is to make something available for women, not prioritizing everything for women.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 04:25 AM
1

I don't think so. Maybe people are stupid enough to consider that a forced touch that is sexual in nature, but I hope not. That's closer to assault, and you'd be hard pressed to find any prosecutor willing to try it as sexual. Regardless, what was considered rape (hand holding wouldn't apply) still made up the vast majority of the sexual assaults counted in this survey for women.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 04:19 AM
3

Old news.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 10:35 PM
5

I love how the article disconnects the quotes about the children self-harming, etc... from the source. The mother. Can't have their readers thinking those allegations are biased.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 10:32 PM
1

Private education is even more anal about this sort of thing. You're out of luck.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 10:29 PM
-1

It was just a poor choice of words imo. If anyone in this sub thinks a rape victim should feel shame for not reducing their risk, they can go fuck themselves.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 10:14 PM
27

I don't deny the existence of idiots who frequent this sub, but attacking feminism is a legitimate course of action. Feminist propaganda has done a lot of harm to men, that is undeniable. They conduct studies that are deliberately designed to exclude male rape victims and female rape perpetrators. They get outraged when MRAs try to bring equality into the family courts, calling them pedophiles and such for incidentally advocating for shared custody when it involves the unproven allegations that …
/r/MensRights04/11/13 11:38 PM
1

We have no idea who got arrested.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 10:44 PM
9

Just like those sexual assault videos on men that get uploaded to liveleak. Find me a woman victim on that site.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 10:42 PM
20

If this were in an open area, he could have walked away. It's not like she launched at him with fists flying and he couldn't run away. However, he's inside a store, presumably does not know of any other safe exits, and there is a rowdy crowd outside delivering unprovoked physical attacks. If he were to stand down and let them inside, the situation would have escalated for the worst because now the confrontation isn't limited to a chokepoint where 1 side can still leave easily... Instead they'd a…
/r/MensRights03/11/13 11:48 PM
2

Fuck that, you should have at least regular access to the kid, at minimum, every 2nd weekend, but preferably 50/50 if you'd want that. If you don't even get anything, you should not be obligated to pay child support. Are you doing the child support optionally or are you required? That would be seriously fucked up if you were required and then unable to have custody over him every 2nd weekend, at least. If possible, stop paying child support (esp if it's not required), because it will only be use…
/r/MensRights01/11/13 10:04 PM
4

From the perspective of the uninitiated, feminism is a good thing. The way most people perceive feminism is similar to how a teacher may ask their kids if they are feminists: "Do you believe in equal rights and opportunities between men and women?" However, what's taught in gender studies to future professional victims and feminists is nothing like what that previous question suggests. It is quite biased, it demonizes men routinely, and does not bother dealing with any men's issues. It is certai…
/r/MensRights01/11/13 09:25 PM
16

Reminds me when I was in elementary school. Teachers ask this question when the brain is still mush, just to get everyone on their side at a young age. Too bad it's a giant lie, mainstream feminism never focuses on men's issues. You'd think circumcision would be one of their top priorities given the supposed agenda highlighted in OP... Nope.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 09:11 PM
16

Not even liveleak would post a sexual assault video if the victim were a women. They'll post if the victim is a man (or a boy, recall the subway scene), because it's "funny", or he "should have enjoyed it". I had previously posted this video but it was too disturbing. In retrospect, it does show a glaring double standard in our society on even the more vulgar sites.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 09:07 PM
10

Which is precisely why feminism is for women, by women. Not equality.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 04:58 AM
2

He's not exactly going to be entirely free. He's still going to be monitored. Further, it wasn't as if he finished his original sentence and now he's being let out. He was subsequently confined to a hospital until he was deemed unlikely to re-offend by the psychologists. This is how the system generally works with people considered mentally ill and likely to re-offend. The only time this doesn't happen is generally when the convicted person's mental state was never put forward as an issue during…
/r/MensRights01/11/13 01:22 AM
2

This made me chuckle. Most equal society in tertiary education has 5:1 female advantage. lmao
/r/MensRights31/10/13 10:24 PM
3

You should be, but not for the reasons you think. All the rates posted include attempts, and not just completed offenses. The rates are understated by at least 33% for that reason alone. You end up increasing the 1 in 6 rate to 1 in 8 women were raped. A lot lower than the historical 1 in 4 figure. Honestly, I avoid the rates because I'm convinced the estimates are over-inflated due to the methodology and questions used. Best to stick with proportions like men and women were raped at equal rates…
/r/MensRights31/10/13 09:03 PM
3

So what? It isn't the victimization Olympics. Feminists would have you believe men make up <10% of victims and >99% of perpetrators. Indeed, like Manboobz, they want you to think women cannot rape men. Further, it's actually 1 in 6 for women (incl rape and attempted rape), and the author didn't attempt to put up the 12 month rates which put victims at parity between men and women.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 08:53 PM
1

He repeatedly said MTP wasn't rape in the thread mate.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 08:38 PM
2

More important than any statistical conclusions from the CDC is the continuing dismissal of the majority of male rape victims. "They aren't rape victims." Seriously, this is WHY we dig through shitty feminist surveys trying to figure out the prevalence of the problem, because that is apparently the only way we can convince people that men can be raped by women. Feminists being rape apologists, the irony... Doesn't surprise me in the least though, because it is imperative that feminists maintain …
/r/MensRights31/10/13 08:26 PM
1

Indeed you're right. I actually knew the distinction but I got lazy in this post. Still, splitting hairs a little too much there :P On the man boobz website I actually made the proper distinction. http://manboobz.com/2013/10/29/cdc-mra-claims-that-40-of-rapists-are-women-are-based-on-bad-math-and-misuse-of-our-data/comment-page-4/#comment-369301
/r/MensRights30/10/13 01:37 PM
7

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1piue5/manboobz_david_futrelle_explicitly_states_that/cd2rudd
/r/MensRights30/10/13 07:33 AM
14

I'll take some credit for this counter-piece, since I wrote about the NISVS finding at least a year ago. My latest update was here: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1eiz9l/according_to_that_infamous_nisvs_study_during/ The CDC response is as stupid as their original report, no surprise. Here is the I calculation used, and may be the source of Manboobz criticism: 0.019 * 1270000 = 24.1k women raped by women 0.067 * unknown 12 month rape rate = 0.067 * (1/5) * 1581000 = 21.2k men raped …
/r/MensRights30/10/13 07:10 AM
2

AVfM is more "radical" than this sub. Take from that what you will.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 03:32 PM
0

Imagine RW laughing about being called a whore.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 09:38 PM
4

Such a dumb fucking report. You know places that have women politicians are more developed than those that don't. It's well known that less developed areas have more corruption. Thus, female politicians (disproportionately represented in better places) are being compared to male politicians. No shit they find that women are less corrupt, they don't even know how to conduct a statistical study (when do social scientists ever?).
/r/MensRights28/09/13 01:24 AM
1

Don't know case, but leniancy in court for women by judges well documented. They do the sentencings too.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 10:35 PM
1

This is her story: Going 80-90km/h, reasonable speed for the area. She approaches an intersection, sees a bunch of stopped cars, and noticed a right lane was open. She moves into the right lane while ignoring the stopped cars at the intersection. She notices all these cars while ignoring that the intersection these cars were STOPPED at was red. She randomly loses control of the car in the intersection (either to avoid cars or pedestrians that were crossing the intersection, I don't know). Kills …
/r/MensRights26/09/13 02:19 PM
1

The thing to remember is that she claimed she was going no more than 90km/h. The expert and prosecution allege 110-130km/h. It was a red light and had blinking yellow lights earlier. She alleges that she approached the intersection, saw a bunch of cars stopped at the intersection, saw no cars in the right lane (which was a right-hand turn only lane), and sped on right through past all the stopped cars. Then lost control, hit the median to her left, flipped over and killed 2 people. It was reckle…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 02:03 PM
6

The warped logic used to get that women off would apply to any crime. Murdering someone is a departure of normal activity. Raping someone is a departure of normal activity. Running a stop sign and killing an entire group of kids is a departure of normal activity. Now I don't know the details of the case and what she was charged with, but it could be that she was charged with a crime that required intent to harm, rather than with something along the lines of manslaughter or negligence. Regardless…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 04:54 AM
1

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/amanda-hutton-trial-starved-boy-2296171
/r/MensRights26/09/13 12:45 AM
6

I don't know about RAINN, but defining rape in such a way as to exclude counting male victims of rape in many studies is pretty much the same thing as saying men can't be raped. Just look at the NISVS 2010 study, they eliminated well over half of the male victims of rape from their study and lumped them into the made-to-penetrate category.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 09:57 AM
5

I went into this awhile back, here's my take on the studies. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/l50yf/a_mother_is_145_times_more_likely_than_the_father/
/r/MensRights21/09/13 07:40 AM
2

Haha that made my night, brilliant twist.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 04:12 AM
31

This went front-page, yet no one gave notice to the longer suspended sentence for the man involved. Sentencing disparity, a classic men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 08:26 PM
4

You'll get more upvotes if you remove the link in your comment, that's all.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 06:42 PM
3

Why would I click that link?
/r/MensRights20/09/13 06:36 PM
5

Pretty balanced response to the shit study. Author clearly saw through the smokescreen. I did a tiny bit of analysis of the report myself and came to the same conclusion. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1m5s9o/1_in_4_asian_men_have_raped_women_bullshit_heres/
/r/MensRights20/09/13 06:07 PM
2

It would have been none of the first 3. The next 2 seem possible, or the messages may also refute her alibi. The only other alternative is if she was above the age of consent, which I highly doubt, in which case she may have made comments about the alleged incidences that indicated it was consensual (so you're #3 may be close to the mark).
/r/MensRights13/09/13 08:55 PM
1

It's from my post, bold section, go through it. At least I'll admit my judgment is probably clouded, which is why I wouldn't conduct a study in the manner that these researchers do.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 06:31 AM
1

These studies are commissioned to solve problems. A lot of questions were asked with regards to why men victimized women. However, much of the violence in the world is reciprocal or self-defense, and yet that is not investigated whatsoever. Changing that phrase may reduce the number of reported rapes, that doesn't change the fact that it will likely result in an over-estimate of the actual rape rate due to differing interpretations of the question. By making the questions so simple and dependent…
/r/MensRights12/09/13 05:31 AM
1

What if by the same criteria that netted 1 in 10 men in Bangladesh as being rapists would also net 1 in 10 women in Bangladesh? We don't know, and yet targeting just men may be ignoring a crucial piece of the puzzle. Further, I don't make any conclusions of what they rates may actually be, only that I'm pointing out how the survey can easily result in inflated results given the ambiguous definition of the questions, language-barriers, over-representation of rural, etc... The 1 in 10 Bangladesh r…
/r/MensRights12/09/13 04:27 AM
1

One piece of evidence for my concern about language and interpretation is the wildly varying responses by different regions. We had rape rates increase by a factor of 6 or so depending where you look. When you have such varying rates, you need to weigh the different rates depending on the population sizes of the sampled populations... The report actually specifically said they did not attribute any weights to their analysis, lol. The disparity cannot all be attributed to the history and geograph…
/r/MensRights12/09/13 02:49 AM
2

Civilized is just another way of saying more developed. If you want to interpret that solely as if I'm suggesting those respondents are more barbaric, then that's on you. Further, I don't trust any gender studies due to my own history dissecting past surveys. I encourage you to read that bold link in this submission, follow it to the source of the data, and read how you cannot find any of my conclusions or results in their own paper despite the data being right there. There is a long history of …
/r/MensRights12/09/13 02:35 AM
0

I agree, except that's not what is in the report whatsoever. That threatening aspect I'm referring to in your quoted section of my post actually has nothing to do with rape.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 10:48 PM
2

That is definitely another red flag, the variations from country to country.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 03:28 PM
1

You know how they account for hours worked? If someone works an additional 10% with respect to hours, then they that 10% will be account for by either removing or adding 9-10% of income, depending who you want to equalize. Guess what, that doesn't account for OT, or the fact that putting in an additional 10% in a job doesn't actually mean 10% more money, even if OT pay was the same as regular pay... Working extra hours gets you promoted more, allows you to negotiate for better wage, etc... Just …
/r/MensRights08/09/13 09:29 AM
5

What the fuck? Don't let feminists' degradation of the rape word into this sub, thanks.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 08:10 AM
1

Boys are rowdy. It's normal. Too bad psychiatrists, at the behest of lazy female teachers and parents, can't help but prescribe them ADHD medicine to the detriment of boys who didn't actually need it. Nothing more inspiring for a kid to hear than to learn that they are disadvantaged.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 08:07 AM
13

Plenty of small women have physically tormented their boyfriends without facing any consequence. The concept that men cannot touch women enables female abusers. I understand that in this isolated instance it is entirely up to Papis. However, he could have pushed her away, a relatively defensive move that would've been completely appropriate. Just a light slap would have been within acceptable boundaries and sends a clear message that hitting people out of the blue is wrong. Decking her would be …
/r/MensRights05/09/13 05:10 AM
2

Must be such a thrill for feminists to hear that the wage gap, something that the not entirely close-minded knew was bullshit for years, may have a biological reason. It isn't their life choices that hinders their financial earning capability, but their biology! I love how when they finally start putting in controls for the wage gap study, it's always never to the extent that it would hurt their ideology. PZ Myers should be banned from this sub, at least any link to his blogs, he is so fundament…
/r/MensRights05/09/13 05:00 AM
10

But even in non-salaried jobs, going that extra mile can result in hourly wage increase since you'll stand out above those who work the regular hours, etc... Further, non-salaried job pay can be significantly impacted by overtime hours. I'd wager that about a third of my brother's hours are overtime. He isn't getting just 50% more money/wk from doing overtime due to working 50% more... He's getting a lot more than that.
/r/MensRights03/09/13 08:58 PM
8

Why do people think that additional hours worked will linearly contribute to salary?
/r/MensRights03/09/13 07:55 PM
490

Stupid post. If the child is being neglected, that's one thing, but we don't know that. Quite frankly she could be spending plenty on her child, neglecting herself. She "finally" got child support meaning it might not be a regular occurrence... Therefore she is treating it like a bonus. Not going to get into a debate about child support and all that shit, it's mostly fucked up, but this witch hunt is misguided without more details.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 12:35 PM
2

This may help your case. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1eiz9l/according_to_that_infamous_nisvs_study_during/
/r/MensRights21/08/13 09:14 AM
1

I did get that vibe from them both, as a way of sort of balancing out their rhetoric about the wage gap myth. It's clever, but was pretty transparent.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 04:52 AM
2

Imagine if Warren or Stossel jokingly said women were stupid repeatedly.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 02:53 AM
3

Why don't lunch ladies apply for janitorial positions? Thought so. That idiot even realize that she was comparing night shift with easy static day-time hours? That one provided a social atmosphere, the other isolation?
/r/MensRights21/08/13 02:22 AM
8

That is bullshit argument and is a strawman. The plain fact is that the allegations didn't get disputed by the prosecution, period. You cannot construe from the prosecution's fuckup that the allegations were true. This is ancient history but it had to do with the prosecution's choice for charges and belief that the battered woman defense could not be applied... And as it turned out, the prosecution was right but the presiding judge fucked up and accepted the defense, she got off, and then the pr…
/r/MensRights20/08/13 12:27 AM
11

Those allegations about lacking police response were never actually disputed in court. It was almost entirely bullshit... There may have been calls to the police, but I don't think there were ever instances that were related to the man abusing her... She was and still is just crazy. The Supreme Court is only allowed to review the case presented in the lower courts, that's why they reiterated the crap about the abuse and lacking police response. The fact is that the prosecution fucked up everywhe…
/r/MensRights20/08/13 12:16 AM
-1

I have been a contributor to this subreddit for 4 years. I also don't make a dime for doing it. Who was the first person to statistically analyze the NISVS study to show that more men than women were raped in '10? I think I've been carrying my weight. I also did the same shit for child abuse to show that mothers victimized their children more than fathers.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 03:04 AM
-1

It's a fucking retarded comment. If I don't run for public office that means I can't critique Obama? Fuck him, lol.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 01:05 AM
-3

wtf? Lol
/r/MensRights11/08/13 11:46 PM
-3

Quite frankly I do not like how Elam is a leader of the movement. His heart is in the right place but he is too emotional and routinely spreads falsehoods.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 05:57 PM
1

His fraud only worked because feminists so desperately wanted a male feminist spokesperson who towed the line diligently. Guess what feminists, this is what it takes to be a man hating feminist.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 07:33 AM
12

Marriage is still a crux issue with a lot of voters. I'm sure those politicians would like to stand in-front of the cameras by themselves, but the media would dismiss any apology or admission if the wife wasn't there supporting him. Also, those wives don't have to subject themselves to the public spectacle. They chose to either forgive and/or go along with the media spectacle for their own benefit as well. That isn't abuse, that's paying the price for sticking with a cheater.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 03:06 AM
3

When this story broke I remarked about how Canada won't do anything like it did with Brown (incident took place in Canada fyi). It is a double standard. A bloody nose caused by a punch from that skinny girl? That was quite a forceful blow for someone like her, not a slap to the cheek. How she is not charged is sickening. Imagine how fucked that guy would be if circumstances were reversed.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 11:10 PM
12

The first post was full of shit.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:46 PM
1

I was just speaking absurd.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 12:15 PM
7

Are we ever going to run Emma Roberts out of the country like we did Chris Brown? Nope.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 11:52 AM
7

Seems obvious to get rid of death penalty. What rapist would risk letting their victims live? OP has to be fake.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 11:45 AM
23

Anyone who actually works in the criminal legal profession understands at least these 3 particular things that aren't quite known amongst the public. False sexual accusations are rampant. False domestic violence accusations are rampant. Cops lie all the time on the stand. These, amongst other things, are like fundamental truths for those who work defense. No one speaks out about it because it's simply bad for their own career. Just sit in a court-room all day long and you'll see perjury being co…
/r/MensRights10/07/13 10:55 AM
5

Imagine such a device for FGM. If someone in the West invented such a device they would be ostracized.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 01:56 PM
3

Well, on feminist boards, you would think it was an epidemic that afflicts every man on the planet.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 10:43 PM
4

This isn't rape. Please don't degrade the word. When rape surveys come out saying half the population has been raped, it misleads readers into thinking there is an actual rape epidemic. It's sexual assault.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 10:27 PM
1

No, it exists. However, it's horrifically abused to suppress dissent in the skeptics community. Especially by misogynists, which, like misandrists, do exist in large numbers out there.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 10:25 PM
7

Uncap is right in that it's now used to shut down dissenting voices, much like the privilege trope. But, by definition, it's a man explaining a topic to a woman, and, from the perspective of the woman, when it sounded condescending. But if you waddle over to the A+ forums, if you are known to be a man, then anytime you get into a disagreement with someone they throw mansplaining and privilege crap at you. The reason why choco is being downvoted is because his response is kind of irrelevant to wh…
/r/MensRights19/06/13 10:24 PM
2

Maybe it was Paul's attempt at trying to pull fans of that type of behavior into the MRM. Why he would do so is a mystery, but he is trying to run a business.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 02:11 AM
67

Non-white, lol. That's how you know she didn't want to actually identify anyone specifically for her accusation.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 11:10 PM
4

So? I see this type of attitude all the time. Why does it matter?
/r/MensRights27/05/13 06:26 AM
1

Why is Dawkin poking the beast again. It didn't work out well for him in the past, what's going to change?
/r/MensRights25/05/13 08:28 AM
9

You're also more likely diagnosed if you're in the younger half of the class, and a boy (and thus more immature than girls). Younger boys don't have a damn chance, and they are just being normal. Then they build a dependence/tolerance to the drugs and then it becomes a necessity.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 03:20 PM
44

This isn't the oppression Olympics. The fact that the majority of military rape victims are men and yet all the focus is about female rape victims is the story. In fact, I'm having this epicly long debate in another thread that has somewhat made abundantly clear that people do not care about male rape victims simply because they believe female rapists make up maybe ~1% of all rapists. If men are doing all the raping, who cares about male victims? That's the attitude. Please don't be a voting bri…
/r/MensRights17/05/13 01:28 PM
1

Was too swift? It literally takes 10 sec for facebook to respond to a police request for id of posters. They saw it was same ip as "victim", got warrant, and that was it.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 01:58 AM
2

As usual, I enjoy your response! :)
/r/MensRights23/03/13 11:57 PM
3

Beautifully illustrates why objectivity and feminist statistics go together like Superman and kryptonite.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:51 PM
1

I always thought this was a bizarre comparison, it makes it sound like rape is worse than death.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 10:29 AM
2

I see you are new to feminism since your view is so idealist. For instance, you say against domestic violence, and, not the reality of their position, domestic violence against women. Don't put the blinders on too tightly or you will miss that these so-called anarchists are the leaders of feminism.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 03:30 PM
4

That spanish politician which voice concerns for men, just the other day? The 2 protests and surrounding villification of the speakers at Toronto? The poster tear down extravaganza? Richard Dawkins? Simply too many public figures have been systematically attacked to name them all. University policies requiring just 50.1% probability that the accuser is truthful? The current mechanisms governing family and divorce courts that were some of the work of early feminism? Suppression of male sexuality?…
/r/MensRights16/03/13 02:35 AM
8

Just addressing your final point. How is feminism not relevant to MRM when they actively try to shut it down? They wage campaigns against public figures who show concern for men's issues. I think feminism is actually a significant arbiter for male inequalities in our modern world. Working to counteract their influence by eroding their ideology does benefit the MRM because it removes the primary force of opposition. MRM's ability to create change in our society has been hindered for decades becau…
/r/MensRights16/03/13 01:51 AM
1

You are right about that first point, I did make a contradiction, I'll get on that. Thanks for your input, it was quite educational... I was not that familiar with early internet history wrt to feminism. What a blunderous post, I should nap
/r/MensRights15/03/13 08:29 PM
2

Your numbers for chronic homelessness are off then. If you really want to get into the apex discussion, then understand that there isn't anything restricting women from attaining those positions except for their own choices. Plenty of women made it to the top. If you can present some sort of evidence of institutional or employment regulations that hinder women's upward mobility, do share. Those below the poverty line did not get there due to inequality due to gender. Further, no matter what happ…
/r/MensRights15/03/13 08:03 PM
1

Actually your first point isn't contradictory. Being below the poverty line does not mean you were a second class citizen, nor does it make you one.... unless of course you define second class citizen to be below the poverty line. You are actually off by a factor of 10 wrt to the homeless population, it's 0.4% according to your own numbers. Sure the apex is mostly men, but so are the sewers, I'd wager that there are more men in the gutter than men on the apex. She didn't say that all the battles…
/r/MensRights15/03/13 07:38 PM
1

Indeed, equal responsibilities is an elusive topic in the feminism ideology. I think I'll try and rephrase that part of my post then.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 07:19 PM
2

A good read, but, with respect to your response here, all you did was state that feminism was never an equality movement. Feminism has little to do with equal rights anymore. It's simply an affirmative action machine trying to accumulate additional rights for women, regardless of the equality. If there is an apparent injustice against women, fix it, regardless of the consequences to men. I agree with you on that much. However, the regardless is the key feature that distinguishes early feminism a…
/r/MensRights15/03/13 07:06 PM
1

I don't know if I can agree with some of the statistics mentioned, but I find the over-all message to be quite reasonable.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 11:15 AM
2

Not only sexist, but very ageist as well.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 04:18 AM
1

I don't think anyone should have any issues with any perceived problems with women characters in gaming, but to completely ignore the possibility that men don't get characterized badly is a hallmark of some versions of modern feminism. I should add that this video does a good job poking holes in the so-called issues that Anita does bring up. Go ahead and debate whether or not Anita's concerns have merit, meanwhile the value of a man's life in a game environment is still worth next to nothing, lo…
/r/MensRights15/03/13 12:57 AM
2

If I were one of the feminists from A+, I would tell you that you are most likely a man since you are critical of feminism, and thus you are privileged. You need to check your privilege before you talk about these issues, you couldn't possibly understand otherwise. Until you come to an agreement with our ideology and tactics, you haven't checked your privilege and all your critical arguments shall be ignored. A+ circlejerk (This is similar to how PZ Myers states that anyone who disagrees with hi…
/r/MensRights15/03/13 12:22 AM
2

I find it incredible that children can be put up for adoption without the consent of both parents. The reason why Veronica's mother ceased contact during the adoption process is because she didn't want a family with the father, wed or unwed. She says he didn't want to provide support, meaning the father was not ok with paying child support in an unwed scenario. So rather than force him to pay child support, which she would have been legally permitted to do, she would rather adopt the child out s…
/r/MensRights14/03/13 11:22 PM
23

You should repost this in a more timely period of the day. I think it's one of the more important stories that should get highlighted above the usual drivel, like what I might post. edit: Well it may not matter at this rate once the east starts to wake up :)
/r/MensRights14/03/13 09:53 AM
1

Sounds like a utopia for those over on FtB and A+.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 06:23 AM
2

Very thoughtful critique of what mainstream feminism has become (at least those championed by A+, FtB, etc...). You can go pick any random person on the street and ask them if they are for gender equality, they are going to say yes, but that doesn't make them a feminist. It may have at one point or another, depending where you were in the world, back when the lacking global communication network didn't have the capacity to enforce uniformity in a movement. By now, the leadership figures of femin…
/r/MensRights14/03/13 06:12 AM
19

Regardless, male victims of sexual assault should not be completely ignored by the media and support services. Given the amount of coverage given to female victims, and all the increasing awareness of their victimization, it's no wonder why males are more inclined to not report wrt to females.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 03:16 AM
1

I'm just going to expand on this post. The reality is that the police are only going to forward investigations in the middle group that they think a charge of perverting justice, or wasting time, could be made. That requires more than just evidence that the rape accusation was baseless, due to a concrete alibi or something, but also evidence that the accuser intentionally misled the police. The vast majority of false rape cases prosecuted involve recantations. In fact, I'm trying to think of an …
/r/MensRights13/03/13 11:06 PM
24

People have the right to feel the way they want to feel. Where this poster gets it wrong is by assuming rape incidences are all like the one she experienced, and also that people have the same feelings with regards to it as she does. It's the same when circumcised guys come here to make a point that circumcision is not such a big deal. It's especially hilarious when the poster linked here, and when circumcised guys, tell other victims of the same crime how they should feel as if they don't exist…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:01 PM
1

The introduction illustrates perfectly why it should be required that people with a cursory understanding of the null hypothesis should be the ones conducting statistical studies. I'll look into the numbers more later today, I'm busy. But before I go, I want to quickly point out that the figures rely on the police actually deciding to go forward to investigate and potentially prosecute false rape accusers, and then notify the other parties conducting this study. We know the police do not always …
/r/MensRights13/03/13 07:52 PM
1

DNA evidence itself is not conclusive evidence that rape occurred. Plenty of innocent people were not later exonerated because their DNA matched. Furthermore, the presence of DNA testing in the modern courtroom might have increased the wrongful conviction rate because it places the defendant at the scene. Cases are built around the testimony of the victim, and the DNA is used to place the defendant with the victim or at the scene.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 01:55 AM
4

No worries. I had the advantage of knowing the video got featured by girlswritewhat. That probably aided me towards seeing the satire.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 09:41 PM
13

The purpose of the video was simply to highlight how a feminist only advocates for further benefits to women. All the issues listed in the video are made by people that feminists would "maliciously" label as MRAs, despite being obvious concerns for gender equality. If women are more advantaged than men in some instance, it is simply not a concern for the mainstream feminist agenda. In the minority of cases, some feminists may even argue that it's fair when men are disadvantaged, with respect to …
/r/MensRights12/03/13 09:39 PM
15

None of those comments were made by feminists.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 09:29 PM
14

lol you completely missed it.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 09:28 PM
9

credit to girlwriteswhat for bringing this to my attention. I also want to add that people should follow integralmath, he doesn't get nearly enough attention.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 09:17 PM
3

I wrote a piece analyzing that study, it's really quite incredible that the lifetime rate is ~18x larger than the 12-month rate for women, while it's only ~5x times for men. Any statistician worth the salt on their skin would have been paused by such a glaring discrepancy. I would absolutely love to hear a devout victimhood-craving feminist try to explain why a big government professional study like that one could so easily lump male rape victims from the made-to-penetrate category outside of th…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 07:21 PM
2

The prosecution dropped the ball with this case. Judgements are made in the court based upon the facts that are actually presented. In this case the Judge accepted the defense's claim of duress, which surprised the prosecution. The prosecution could have actually presented substantial evidence to the contrary but thought it wasn't necessary. The decision got appealed to the Supreme Court and they ended up saying that the previous Judges fucked up (the prosecution was right to begin with), and so…
/r/MensRights08/02/13 04:12 AM
7

When I was in high school I knew a couple girls who were faster than everyone else except for a handful of guys. The faster (and older) guys and the girls were all trained sprinters of course, but the point is, it's not until later teenage years that women, no matter how hard they train, are unable to compete physically with trained men. I'd imagine those girls would have kicked ass at running balls down the field in the more junior years amongst a team of your average high school guys, easily. …
/r/MensRights05/02/13 06:52 AM
1

Mental illness and guns don't mix. Mental illness continues to be neglected in the on-going debate about these shootings. It's mentioned for awhile, but eventually it becomes a gun debate, and then nothing is ever done about mental health. What's new recently? 24/7 media coverage of the shootings. Once there are some sensationalized female mass shooters, which do exist, you'll see the rate increase. But mental health for men is more neglected by society, so there will always be a discrepancy.
/r/MensRights19/01/13 05:36 AM
4

Few view men as the enemy... It's more like they only care about those 3 issues when it's against women. That's a far more prevalent issue. Women have the right to have a movement with their interests at heart, but too often the solutions implemented to solve the problem actually create discrimination against men. This is inevitable because they are only looking out for themselves, and sometimes they think an imbalance is justified. This problem is further compounded when they ridicule those who…
/r/MensRights27/10/12 08:21 PM
-4

Zero bad in the same way gum is. He did not completely disregard the creep factor, only the supposed misogyny.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 03:14 AM
15

She seemed to miss the whole part of history where she slammed Stef for arguing that misogyny/sexism/sexual harassment did not take place in the elevator... Thereby making her own case that misogyny/sexism/sexual harassment took place in the elevator. It was this pivotal exchange that shaped the discussion that went viral on the blogosphere. Dawkins didn't critique her position that it was creepy. He critiqued her position that misogyny/sexism/sexual harassment took place in the elevator. Anyone…
/r/MensRights24/10/12 09:40 PM
1

Author was actually a douche.
/r/MensRights24/10/12 02:16 AM
16

Actually, the question was worded accurately, the figure is factually accurate to how the question was asked. The question is notoriously nonrestrictive in the definitions. However, it's the misinterpretation of the facts by the public that make people think that the gap is due to discrimination, and not a host of other relevant factors. Obviously neither candidate is going to call bullshit, that could cost them the election.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 06:20 AM
3

Misogyny is terrible. But I'm tired of the word being used when the appropriate word is sexism.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 03:26 AM
7

This point needs to be expanded upon. The States define potential militants or militants to be any male old enough to be an insurgent. Their death may or may not be included in a civilian tally with such a designation. I still find it debatable that in most wars, at least historically, female civilians were killed more than male civilians... Generally, the men are killed while the women are subjugated.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 06:05 AM
2

In terms of writing, what the author did was suggest that those who are activists in the men's rights movement are the same people who sexualize underage teenagers. You could try to interpret it as the author illustrating the spectrum in the interests that redditors have, but in this instances it was not an accident. Further, while reddit is probably a boy's club in terms of front-page material and big subreddits, there are plenty of women on this website too.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 01:59 AM
2

We can barely see anything that led up to the upper cut. Maybe she was wacking him for a couple minutes before the video, or she delivered a heavy hit to him when we couldn't see her... Or maybe he blew it way out of proportion. Who the fuck knows.
/r/MensRights13/10/12 04:53 AM
2

I'm not going to go too much into the specifics of the case but why are people calling it rape? And further, why do you people want lie-detector tests to be admissible? Don't be ridiculous. There was at least 1 other witness that testified with details that corroborated with the story from the victims. Lastly, no mention of anyone seeing Williams anywhere else during the events, or any conflicting testimonies other than from Williams? Of course it doesn't look good, considering how many people w…
/r/MensRights13/10/12 04:38 AM
8

In some areas, people will argue that they can "justifiably" be racist against black men. It's still racist. I would make a point and stop introducing them to your guy friends, or do not go see them when they are alone. For crying out loud, rape amongst friends is far more common than stranger rape. Be overly cautious around them and when they ask what's going on, just say that you're a potential threat to them because you're a man. Or you could say that it makes you feel uncomfortable that anyt…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 03:01 AM
13

Well I hope you eventually point out how incredibly offensive and sexist that was. Just because they think it's justifiable does not absolve them of their sinful attitude. We can do the same shit for any number of things, but in those cases it's rightfully pointed out to be racist, sexist, bigoted, etc... But, for some reason, when it comes to men, it's more likely to be accepted.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 02:26 AM
1

More on that particular report: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ngh8i/more_men_than_women_were_raped_last_year/
/r/MensRights09/10/12 01:31 AM
0

I think the accuser should remain anonymous, I would just add that I think the accused should be anonymous as well.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 12:54 AM
2

There is no good information because any polls done are conducted by those who want to find comparatively high victimization rates amongst women. Go google a study and I'll show you the flaws, I've seen them all. Broad rape definitions, restricting definitions to being penetrated, methodology used to encourage skewed results, etc... For example, here is my debunking of a recent CDC study showing how had the authors of the study not been so biased against male victims, the numbers would have show…
/r/MensRights01/10/12 10:52 AM
2

When you allow the wage gap myth to go unchecked, grand social theories are constructed out of unrelated facts with ease.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 01:49 AM
9

Those who throw around that term don't realize it violates the apex fallacy. Sure, Patriarchy may have existed predominantly around the world, if it refers to the small number of people, mostly men, who had power. But that doesn't mean men, in general, are better off in this system. Let's look back in the 1910s, women were marginalized in society, but at least they weren't forced into running at a line of machine guns. Historical society sucked for both parties... Only the rich and powerful wiel…
/r/MensRights01/10/12 01:47 AM
1

I was checking up on the blogosphere with regards to this story and I hope you aren't letting the sheep over at phawhateveritiscalledforum get you down. They are a vile bunch of people who are so caught up in their own superiority that they think any generalization they make is gospel. They are blinded by their own preconcieved notions. You may not actually know just how much they hate MRAs on that forum, but being associated with MRs or being called an MRA is the most hateful insult you can end…
/r/MensRights29/09/12 04:49 AM
6

Do you think he would have said that the guy "does nothing" if he was a woman in this story? Think about it, plenty of female breadwinners out there and Myers is telling them they do "nothing". So it's either nothing or child-rearing. Lose-lose situation for women who see child-rearing as nothing? Nah, the reality is that Myers see men who work full time as doing nothing, those who child-rear as deadbeats. He then see women who work full time as successful independent professionals, and those wh…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:10 AM
2

That's the funny part. I can guaranteed if the roles were reversed, Myers would still be blasting the man in the story. He's the perfect representation of the white knight.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 09:47 AM
7

PZ probably had an orgasm when something came along on his radar that would give him an excuse to write what he did.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 09:41 AM
3

I wonder if this took place in Sweden, would it be considered rape?
/r/MensRights15/09/12 08:55 PM
2

Their punishment will be a pittance in comparison to what a group of guys would face, why would you take the arrest seriously?
/r/MensRights31/07/12 02:13 AM
2

You could be right, it could be bullshit statistics, that's common, but to cause the death of any number of children exercising a procedure with benefits that may or may not outweigh the harms? Stupid. Regardless of the statistical and scientific arguments behind the medical benefits/harms and sexual benefits/harms, the vast majority of circumcisions performed in the West are done so for cosmetic reasons. There are baby boys dying for no reason except that their parents preferred a circumcised c…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 12:37 AM
3

Not strictly true, it kills (117) neonatal babies each year. That doesn't take into account that infants cover a broader spectrum of ages. Because circumcision is done very early on, it's unlikely the figure will increase more than a few percentiles, but as we can see from the top commentator, people can't read the article, so try and at least be clear with the title.
/r/MensRights10/07/12 09:14 PM
2

-.- It kills more male babies in the first month than anything else. http://www.readperiodicals.com/201004/2026622071.html
/r/MensRights10/07/12 09:10 PM
5

http://www.readperiodicals.com/201004/2026622071.html Googling is just too hard for you people is it?
/r/MensRights10/07/12 09:10 PM
1

neonatal != <1 year FAIL Maybe this heavily referenced article will be good enough: http://www.readperiodicals.com/201004/2026622071.html It still won't make much sense to you if you continue to skip over the word neonatal though.
/r/MensRights10/07/12 09:09 PM
5

Whats the point of this service? Anyone who hires the service is already in a relationship not worth saving. No guy would stay in the relationship if they knew this happened. So, as long as the guy doesn't know it happened, it's ok? Well guess what happens when the guy shows any sort of interest: Divorce and meticulous details of your alleged potential for infidelity. This service is a failure as far as I'm concerned. It just provides ammunition for a divorce if the guy fails the test, and does …
/r/MensRights26/06/12 02:14 AM
1

The reptilians!
/r/MensRights15/06/12 10:51 PM
3

She did all that, which is why the police didn't give her protection. As to whether or not there was any documented cases or evidence of abuse, I don't know.
/r/MensRights15/06/12 07:50 PM
2

It had as much to do with him being black as anything else.
/r/MensRights01/06/12 01:30 AM
1

Being insured is the law.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 10:19 PM
0

Considering that most places make it the law to have insurance, your free business perspective is not helping.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 10:18 PM
7

Gender is not like the others...
/r/MensRights26/05/12 09:04 PM
1

Uh what? It IS sexism. You are hopelessly deluded. Just because someone is Jewish does not mean they should automatically be put in a higher tax bracket... Get it now?
/r/MensRights26/05/12 09:03 PM
2

No matter how you cut it, it is still discrimination. You are being treated for no individual reason.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 09:00 PM
42

Women lose because they won't date downwards.
/r/MensRights25/04/12 08:42 PM
4

I highly doubt that waiver could stand up in court if someone with the resources fought it. What you going to do? Not sign it and not go to jail?
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:06 AM
4

Just ask whats her face that opened the first domestic abuse shelter. Involuntarily exiled by feminists from the UK for stating that men can be abused too.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 02:00 AM
3

There are 2 sources from the the 60s and 70s. Enough said.
/r/MensRights20/03/12 07:41 PM
6

And that matters how? He doesn't look legal, nor do you actually know that he is 18. That's all that matters to the admins when it's a chick involved.
/r/MensRights12/03/12 09:09 AM
11

Meh those are children. I'd let that slide.
/r/MensRights12/03/12 06:21 AM
2

Surprisingly good article. I'm sure the historical analysis is a little too generalized but it looks quite good nonetheless. My only real criticism of the debate is the easy use of the word oppression, not that I blame this author for using it so flippantly, it's just that the word is terribly overused because many feminists have stretched the definition so significantly.
/r/MensRights07/02/12 01:07 PM
2

You're confusing the issue. I say, go for it, protest for some protections against the issue that afflicts the OP. But until then, sticking it to the man by fighting for it when you're the one who could end up in the OP's position? Too little too late.
/r/MensRights05/02/12 04:22 AM
1

Tell the court that. Let us know how well that works out for you.
/r/MensRights05/02/12 03:21 AM
1

Significant amount of misinformation about male victim rates on that page, couldn't will myself to finish the article.
/r/MensRights05/02/12 03:20 AM
2

You are getting an agreement such that even though they are in Indonesia, she has to give you kids for the allocated time? God damn if that sounds like it should be unenforcable, but if you work in the legal business I guess you know what you are doing.
/r/MensRights04/02/12 01:19 AM
2

It's about time, you wouldn't believe the number of people who are opposed to this because apparently it jeopardizes the safety of children... Totally ignoring the reality that mothers perpetrate child maltreatment at least as often (and upto ~1.5 times more) as men on an individual basis. In the end, the safety argument is retarded, because maltreatment is so infrequent, but it shouldn't be a pissing contest anyways. Default shared custody should be the standard in cases where maltreatment is n…
/r/MensRights03/02/12 01:43 PM
4

I think my first reaction was that the pliers would have been inserted in the dick at some point... The wording is actually sort of ambiguous as to how it was twisted. Aside from that... As long as damaging the exterior of the vagina or ass is not considered rape, as long as no penetration occurred, I guess the law is gender consistent. I find that to be a stretch though. In any case, it would be unusual if the sisters did not, at any time, at least grab the dick with their hand (therefore at le…
/r/MensRights01/02/12 04:59 AM
2

I'm just adding onto the discussion, not that I agree with what you said, or I may agree to all of it. The more laws there are protecting pregnant women, the less likely women who are not pregnant will be hired. Not saying that's a good thing, but in the capitalist America, that's reality. They will find someone who can do the job. Those who are hired, don't get pregnant nor are pregnant (and if they do, it's effect on performance is negligible which would be a minor miracle and would require a …
/r/MensRights01/02/12 04:45 AM
1

Without your other submission, this article lacks the basis for it to be used in an argument.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 02:52 AM
3

Damningly thorough.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 02:50 AM
7

How is this not rape?
/r/MensRights01/02/12 02:41 AM
9

One more thing, there have been plenty, and still are plenty, of cases where women belonged in that narrow subset of rich and powerful people. In fact, I think you grossly underestimate their presence... In any case, that's besides the point... My point is that women have been just as capable as men to exert their power and influence over their subjects when afforded the opportunity. Also, there's a name for what you are talking about. The Apex Fallacy.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 02:20 AM
5

That other post was loaded with contradictions.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 02:18 AM
-2

Switch the circumstances with a women who had her pussy mutilated in some way and everyone would pity her. Well, I pity that guy and his cognitive dissonance and deprived sexual pleasure.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 12:46 AM
2

Just pull it back more and more over time, it'll stretch.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 10:48 PM
0

Sensational headline much? The top post was talking about why it's the case, not that it should be that way.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 10:47 PM
7

170k in legal fees? The family court is working as intended.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 02:43 PM
2

The context this comment is based on is utterly stupid. She was black out drunk, yet remembers every detail. I stopped reading at that point. The only thing I find ridiculous about this linked comment, given the context, is that it's only conceivable that he was the rapist. I guess that makes sense if we assume the impossible premise that she was black out drunk and knew the guy's intentions were malicious. Technically, since they were both drunk, they were both raped, by definition.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 12:05 AM
2

Your post actually contradicts mine.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 07:49 PM
2

It's common for feminists to deride the usage of women in such articles as making women look vulnerable, weak, and/or deserving of the considerations of a child... What they always forget to mention is that, on the other side of the same coin, it dismisses the sacrifice or deaths of men.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 05:18 PM
11

The actual organs involved and the results of the procedure should play almost no role in the debate. It's a human rights issue, because of the absence of a scientific consensus that genital mutilation is a health benefit. Just because some obscure African studies find it beneficial does not mean there is a consensus. If there was any veracity to the claim of health benefits, you should expect to find a scientific consensus... You cannot. Lastly, he didn't refer to the similarities in a medical …
/r/MensRights26/01/12 05:06 AM
46

Pros: No double standard Cons: Daily mail, excessive sentence
/r/MensRights25/01/12 03:11 AM
13

Lol @ Patriarchy. What a joke.
/r/MensRights25/01/12 01:08 AM
5

You're screwed quite frankly, get a steady job before you start falling behind on your inevitable child support payment and say good bye to any chance of financial relief until your daughter is 18. It doesn't matter how mentally unstable the mother is, unless your criminal record was clean, you had a good stable job that has had you employed for a long time, a house far more accommodating than the mother's, and a mother who doesn't want full custody of your daughter, your chances of custody are …
/r/MensRights24/01/12 10:38 PM
2

An entire article about trying to raise awareness about male victims of rape, and it had the audacity to keep made to penetrate victims separate from rape victims? The damn study referenced does NOT consider female on male a rape incident, nor does it consider the male victims of such an encounter as rape victims. Talk about a wasted opportunity to make an example of the marginalization of male victims of rape Are journalists so pressed for time they can't even acknowledge that the study referen…
/r/MensRights24/01/12 09:43 PM
3

When are you going to get around to admitting you can't read? Seriously, you go this many posts in without realizing you were wrong, that more men than women, according to this study, were raped during 2010. One concern I have with regards to the claim that more men than women were raped is that the study is a fucking piece of shit... My bigger concern is that in all of the MSM articles covering the study, NONE of them actually point out that 80-90% of male victims of female rape are not conside…
/r/MensRights24/01/12 05:22 PM
3

Lol you are so lost I want to ship you a compass. You did catch me on one mistake though, it was 2010. Regardless, here it is for you, cited clearly: From Table 2.1 1.27 million women were raped over a 12-month period. 0 million women were made to penetrate over a 12-month period. From Table 2.2 1.27 million men were made to penetrate over a 12-month period. Some fraction of 1.5 million men were raped over a 12-month period. (If the ratio between lifetime victimization and 12-month victimization…
/r/MensRights24/01/12 05:02 PM
1

You asked for the 2011 rape/made to penetrate for men and women. The made to penetrate and 12 month rate are indicated separately. You're clearly looking at the wrong numbers. As for your other questions, I can't be bothered, it's simple reading comphrehension.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 03:46 PM
1

The study itself? http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf Page 18-19. Tally up rape + made to penetrate for both men and women. Assuming relatively equal proportions of attempts and intoxicated rates between men and women, we should see consistency in that more men were victimized by competed rape/made to penetrate in 2011 than women. Of course assumptions are stupid, along with this study. Don't ask me how in god's name they can perpetuate statistics that have female li…
/r/MensRights24/01/12 02:18 PM
3

Fucking LOL! An entire article about trying to raise awareness about male victims of rape, and it had the audacity to keep made to penetrate victims separate from rape victims? The damn study referenced does NOT consider female on male a rape incident, nor that the male victims of such an encounter as rape victims. Talk about an opportune moment to make an excellent example of the marginalization of male victims of rape wasted. Are journalists so pressed for time they can't even acknowledge that…
/r/MensRights24/01/12 11:39 AM
24

I don't know the facts of the case, but apparently the prosecutor couldn't make the case for murder. She was still found guilty of manslaughter. I really don't know how pouring petrol all along someone's back is not intent to kill someone. Regardless, I was under the impression that if you intend to harm someone and they die, it seems pretty clear that it's murder, no? Are we really going to allow people to use the defense that they only wanted to grievously harm someone? So a murderer can get a…
/r/MensRights24/01/12 10:03 AM
4

I couldn't even pull it over to the half way mark and it's fine now, stretch it more and more over time.
/r/MensRights18/01/12 04:25 AM
7

dailyfail
/r/MensRights17/01/12 10:00 PM
1

Still, men have no choice... They are discriminated because they were born men. Therefore they must wait for everyone else to board the lifeboats, they are forced or encouraged to participate in war, they must be the laborer and breadwinner of the family (often riskier and dangerous jobs like mining, hunting, farming machinery, etc...), etc... All of these required men to disregard some level of self-preservation for the benefit of women. I'm not denying that benevolent sexism can exist for dece…
/r/MensRights17/01/12 09:45 PM
3

I'm pretty sure that, depending on the definition of sexual harassment used in the survey, the rates should be vastly higher for both genders. ^
/r/MensRights17/01/12 09:20 PM
1

I understand how people can see that benevolent sexism is a negative for women, but how is it also not also a negative for men? There has to be a hostile sexism component to every benevolent sexist case. With the "women-first" thing, men are seen as more expendable then women.
/r/MensRights17/01/12 08:37 PM
1

We can define Patriarchy however way we want it to be consistent, I really don't think our views are that different, you're just more accurate with semantics... It's just not how Patriarchy is officially defined. In any case, I disagree % (not necessarily with you) that there can be consistency with how feminism (not you) defines the Patriarchy, and the existence of benevolent sexism of women which inevitably comes with hostile sexism of men. A Patriarchy, as defined by feminism, cannot impose h…
/r/MensRights17/01/12 08:00 PM
1

"Net effect" is dependent upon how you value certain things. If we look at a live expectancy stand point, the "Patriarchy" obviously disadvantages men. If we look at freedom to participate in wars, it disadvantages women, etc... A summary of different values and we find that really, the "Patriarchy" is oppressive to both men and women... And the "Patriarchs" are really just the upper or influential class. It is clear that the common definition is NOT explicit about it being some "net effect" of …
/r/MensRights17/01/12 07:28 PM
1

Why we giving them page views?
/r/MensRights17/01/12 06:49 PM
10

4chan, the gospel of truth.
/r/MensRights17/01/12 06:49 PM
2

This reeks of bad statistics, only because it seems like a logical study with a feel good conclusion... but that also means it's heavily susceptible to confirmation bias. Too bad I don't have the patience to read the actual study on my phone. It's just as likely that the cause is the suggested result, and vice versa. Instead of gender quotas being the motivator, it was just an equality of opportunity, higher standards of living, and education. A town that would put forth gender quotas in politic…
/r/MensRights17/01/12 03:16 PM
2

/lol I know that you can be serious in many instances, just funny how you've applied it here.
/r/MensRights17/01/12 09:14 AM
2

I think, with respect to the average man and women, excluding the class aspect, it is purely advantages vs disadvantages. Historically, the average man was not oppressing the average women, and vice versa. They both had disadvantages and advantages in their role in society and the family. If we involve the upper class when discussing gender roles, then we can introduce oppression... Like the draft or male-only wars, etc... Much like how being Black was during the pre-Civil Rights era for the pre…
/r/MensRights17/01/12 09:05 AM
3

Children are not oppressed. Oppression is something we'd describe the treatment of Jews in the 30s and 40s (and, well, most of history) or Blacks prior the Civil Rights era. The average women has never been oppressed when the average men weren't getting oppressed in some other way also. Like seriously, your example was that children was oppressed? That's what makes my definition of Patriarchy (which really should be named something else altogether) stupid? Please enlighten me with something usef…
/r/MensRights17/01/12 08:48 AM
3

I don't even know what we're discussing anymore. While you may argue the average woman is treated like children, there are clear advantages to that, and clear disadvantages for the average man. If being treated like children is only a negative, then we're obviously at a disagreement. I don't care how much benevolent sexism is used against women, from such sexism inevitably follows hostile sexism against men. The idea that only women and/or children were oppressed is wrong, and the only power hel…
/r/MensRights17/01/12 06:37 AM
6

Women were not treated like children, only if you value just the attributes men contribute to society... Which you shouldn't and anyone who does clearly thinks a women oppressing society existed and still does... Because they completely discount the importance of women in such societies. Secondly, for the good of a historical societal system, sure benevolent sexism and my definition of the Patriarchy makes sense, but even then it is still hostile to men. Men are not synonymous with society.
/r/MensRights17/01/12 05:17 AM
1

Negative, in a time critical scenario, it should be first come first serve. There isn't enough time to go hunting for the priorities. Bottle necks kill people.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 10:45 PM
4

You speak as if you know what was happening? Maybe they are pushing ahead of people to stay with their own family that got torn away from them? There is enough lifeboats for everyone, the moment they began a line process of splitting people up, the moment hell broke loose because that rule is fucking retarded.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 10:42 PM
1

If biological problems are that much of an issue for a woman, one who can't afford to be very careful and maybe even have the fetus checked for abnormalities occasionally, then I guess men will continue to be older than their wives. However, I think, over time, technological advances will permit safe pregnancies into one's thirties, and I think that's already happening for those with the means to be safe.
/r/MensRights15/01/12 11:11 PM
2

What a retarded lawyer. If they had DNA they wouldn't fucking bother asking for a guilty plea. Poor guy.
/r/MensRights15/01/12 12:58 PM
12

What a dumb fucking article. Sex rates are up, therefore all the values most women like in men are down... Getting married, making more money than the women, settling down, etc... Has it occurred to any of them that men do less of those things because it's not in their best interest? Men care less about marriage, settling down, and making more money than women... As a result, sex rates go up. It works both ways, and I think it makes more sense that there was a cause, and not that men just got ho…
/r/MensRights15/01/12 12:50 PM
2

Not only is the guy not a pedophile, it's debatable that he is even an ephebophile. Even if he was either, as long as he doesn't act on it, then he shouldn't be thrown into jail or a mental institute either... But stop linking to SRS. I downvote before they link this thread.
/r/MensRights14/01/12 03:31 AM
6

Generalization much?
/r/MensRights14/01/12 03:22 AM
11

... handle violent women.* You're speaking from a mindset that appears misogynist to people who are pre-disposed into thinking it's misogynist. Be clear about who you are referring to.
/r/MensRights14/01/12 03:22 AM
1

I don't quite remember but I remember the questions used to determine whether an attempt to rape occurred are quite lacking... And attempted rape was then considered as a subset of rape. Because not being raped is rape right?
/r/MensRights13/01/12 11:21 PM
1

I agree with that, I just think that even if we come to a consensus with the opposition that men and women are victimized and victimizing at relatively equal rates, the uninformed populace are still perceiving the definition of rape as violent physical sexual offenses... and not what these surveys allow which, with respect to the CDC, permits sexual harassment to be classified as rape.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 11:15 PM
1

Nothing, but you should mention in your post that the study significantly overestimates rates in general, and especially with the lifetime rates for women with respect to men. Unless of course we agree with their significantly broad definition of rape as indicated by their explicit definition and the questions used to find victims.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 11:07 PM
2

wtf
/r/MensRights13/01/12 05:09 PM
1

That's a matter of opinion really... The "bad" ones as you would say, still influence policy.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 10:48 PM
2

Great talk, but she did miss one crucial point IMO, she didn't mention that "attempted rape" was considered "rape". Emphasized because the definitions of those words in this study are highly esoteric and misleading.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 10:41 AM
7

They want affirmative action at the top of the financial and political food chain. They think there is an impedance (a ceiling) for women to move to the top for no other reason than the fact that they are a woman... The evidence of this oppressive impedance is the lack of women /circle... -.- Many feminists advocate an equality of results approach to perceived discrimination against only women... but only where is benefits them. Affirmative action is a cute thought, for a short term fix (despite…
/r/MensRights12/01/12 10:26 AM
2

Although I'm sure it's annoying that in most FGM post there are plenty of MGM comments, there are plenty of comments saying that MGM isn't as bad so people should shut up and stay on topic with FGM. I don't know which fallacy that is but I'm sure it's one. I do however sympathize with their annoyance a little bit, but how difficult is it to interject one sentence into an FGM article that, more or less, says that the same could be said for MGM. PZ has spoken out against MGM, but not nearly as muc…
/r/MensRights11/01/12 09:43 PM
2

The only controls was "full-time" (lol), without self-employment or part-time (in another job or job title), and whether or not they were periods where they were no longer employed due to a variety of reasons including family. You can still be employed if you are on paternity/maternity/week vacation/etc... And full-time? They don't even bother to differentiate between the 40 hour worker and the 80 hour worker? If the general population of workers is any indication of how it is with MBAs, the men…
/r/MensRights11/01/12 07:38 PM
0

Actually no, but that paragraph was more of a criticism of the article and the title, not the study. However, you are being a little disingenuous if you think frequency of asking for a raise is the only factor being considered by management. It is entirely possible that men and women are far more equal than this study shows, and that discrimination is taking place, but this study fails to make the case.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 07:25 PM
3

There is a distinction, he just worded it awkwardly. Even then, for the most part, victim blaming usually carries a component of the victim deserving to be offended or attacked. Offering advice to reduce one's risk is no where close to victim blaming.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 07:20 PM
2

Lol that poor Indian guy. I could see that look in his eyes... I could DESTROY you for attacking me with that purse.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 07:18 PM
0

No, this research doesn't prove that, nor does it prove it for men either. This study takes a select group of highly educated individuals. So academically charged women are assumed to be just as assertive as men in an interview? There is a LOT more to it then that when it comes to deciding whether or not someone deserves a raise or promotion. This study only shows one thing, and one thing ONLY, that relatively similar female and male MBAs ask for raises and promotions equally. That is not indica…
/r/MensRights11/01/12 06:34 PM
2

That first link, at a cursory glance, looks absolutely fantastic. However, this may change completely on further inspection.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 06:27 PM
2

IMO, the only standard we need are facts. People believe in "truth", especially misogynists/misandrists. They feel that because they know it to be "true", it can't be bigoted. We need facts, not tell people what is "true". I know I'm dealing with varying definitions and petty semantics... But bigots are completely unable to see their own bigotry if they believe they know the truth. They are unable to see the fallacy of their own arguments if they feel their side is "true"... Any possible infring…
/r/MensRights11/01/12 08:13 AM
1

Good for you. I'm a guy, I love being a guy too.
/r/MensRights10/01/12 07:31 PM
1

Not only that, but what if the non-biological father is in cahoots with the biological mother...
/r/MensRights09/01/12 08:09 PM
2

But only men can stop domestic violence... /s The number 1 cause of domestic violence is domestic violence.
/r/MensRights08/01/12 08:50 PM
1

DNA is so terribly misused by prosecutors. Sometimes the only DNA available at the scene of a crime would match 1 in a million, or 1 in 100,000, or 1 in 10 million, etc... The investigators run a trace on their databases containing millions of people. They may get 1, 2, maybe 4 or so positive matches. They look at the matches and determine which one they could build the most convincing case. If one of them lives in the same State and has a similar prior conviction, they'll charge them. Then when…
/r/MensRights08/01/12 08:47 PM
1

No...
/r/MensRights08/01/12 08:40 PM
3

Yes... Flight 1549. Many feminists have no problem with it, they think it's the patriarchy.
/r/MensRights08/01/12 08:36 PM
3

I guess the point that's missing here is... are they splitting up, or is she going to split up with him if he doesn't move out with her? I can't imagine she's just moving out and they are staying together.
/r/MensRights07/01/12 06:37 AM
3

Yup he's pretty fucked. Get a lawyer, but a guy who lives at home (presumably doesn't make much money?) isn't going to fare well in court when he's trying to argue for shared custody. He should try to move out with her or he'll probably end up paying child support if she decides she needs more money, more money than your cousin will be able to afford likely. He's not getting primary custody. That all said, if he is even thinking of not moving in with her, he should at least consult a lawyer.
/r/MensRights07/01/12 04:31 AM
2

Except when women rape men in ways other than shoving up their hand and object up the man's ass... Rape by envelopment only makes up the significant majority of male rape. No need to multiply the statistics, otherwise the government may gasp have to do something about it rather than blame men for everything and shove millions into women's assistance programs.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 08:31 PM
2

A piece of shit. The definition of rape excludes the vast majority male victims of rape... Instead it lumps them under another category altogether. It has the courtesy to include attempted rape within the definition of rape but not male victims... In summary, the questions asked to indicate whether or not someone was raped includes incidences as shallow as a sexual harassment (for the perceived purpose of achieving intercourse), and having sex when one could not technically grant consent (but th…
/r/MensRights06/01/12 08:21 PM
2

In fact, when we lump together rape and made to penetrate, men were raped more than women in 2010. The study is still a piece of shit anyways.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 07:47 PM
1

They don't even post the new definition (wonder why), but if it's the same one as the new one from a couple months ago, I'm still quite suspicious that male victims of female rapists are still ignored (unless the women penetrates the guy's ass with something).
/r/MensRights06/01/12 04:48 PM
7

They don't even post the new definition, but if it's the same one as the new one from a couple months ago, I'm still quite suspicious that male victims of female rapists are still ignored.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 04:46 PM
-5

Is it related to demographics? Fuck off you troll.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 06:51 AM
-5

It makes me a minority in here but I downvote anything that generalizes demographics.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 05:43 AM
1

The registry is fucking terrible.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 05:07 AM
1

How is this negative, lol. People hate you Jeremiah, not that I can blame them. This is the proof of exactly why women, in general, initiate the vast majority of divorces. It isn't just that the family court makes the process easy for them and defaults custody and payments to them, etc... but the end result of any divorce will invariably increase the standard of living of the parent with primary custody (the one who it often gets defaulted to, the mother) if that parent is not willing to increas…
/r/MensRights05/01/12 11:13 PM
1

No matter how good things may get for women by expanding government (if), women still run for officer far less often. Thus men will still make up the vast majority of the seats and power... Ergo, ignoring apex fallacy, men control everything... Ergo, ignoring misandry and circular logic, women are oppressed either maliciously or benevolently. This post isn't directed at women or feminism, just some feminists who blindly believe in the patriarchy and their unending victimization regardless of evi…
/r/MensRights05/01/12 10:59 PM
1

I doubt most people who think feminism used to be good know wtf they are talking about. It may be true but they don't actually know.
/r/MensRights05/01/12 10:11 PM
-12

Sex registry for this crime is far too severe.
/r/MensRights05/01/12 10:08 PM
3

Frame of mind is a funny thing... Someone who calls themselves a feminist will associate themselves with "you". And feminists can be egalitarians or, on the other end, eternally victimized by the patriarchy.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 08:27 PM
3

Stop lumping feminists together. It only serves to alienate feminists who are not bigots. Feminism is an uncomfortably huge ideology.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 08:19 PM
4

You might want to be specific in your last sentence that you were speaking to the author.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 08:18 PM
17

Sensationalist title. wtf is up with lumping together whole subreddits and calling slightly fewer upvotes evidence of downvotes. It's fucking annoying when it's used against us, so why use it against them? Be the smarter person.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 08:06 PM
3

I agree with both of your criticisms. We do not even know how they define the words either, but the idea that childhood trauma can inspire children to grow up to be like their abusers is not a new concept in restorative justice. With the current rape statistics available to us, it would be nothing short of miraculous if women did not make up a good portion of perpetrators of child rape/molestation cases. That isn't good inductive reasoning in any case, but it should be more than enough to put th…
/r/MensRights04/01/12 06:41 PM
4

I like how one comment blames the father... Because it's not like the father could have been forced out of the lives of his kids because of a divorce, or is forced to work far harder to pay his huge child support sum.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 02:56 AM
5

This isn't a domestic abuse campaign. You can find perfectly shitty but heavily mainstream studies that show rape rates for both genders of perpetrators are the same. They just don't report the whole female perpetrator thing.
/r/MensRights04/01/12 02:52 AM
1

People use misogyny and sexism terms without any care for the definitions. They use it when they feel it makes people uncomfortable and it's related to genders. Some feminists are repulsed by the idea that women want to stay home... Those feminists are not for equality, or freedom for that matter. There is nothing wrong with any gender wanting to stay home, only that no one should be expected to stay home. It's ironic that feminists, who should be anti gender roles, are so inconsistent in applyi…
/r/MensRights03/01/12 10:32 PM
2

He comes up with good content from time to time but the pseudo-outrage is getting old and isn't needed in this subreddit. This subreddit doesn't necessarily mind if something like this happens, only that, had there been no consent and had been random, it's likely there would be a slight double standard invoked. Even in the event that it was random, people need to lighten the fuck up.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 10:28 PM
-1

Paternity is about to get really fucking complicated, lol. Besides, who gives a shit about this? This is the future.
/r/MensRights02/01/12 07:25 PM
1

Feminism does try to tag itself onto other equality movements.... but to tag itself after men's issues defies their paradigm. At least the paradigm of the mainstream feminist movement... I'm sure there are plenty of feminists who define themselves differently and are quite egalitarian. But that's a problem with feminism that feminists quite simply have failed to keep in check... We have feminists who are more like egalitarians, and feminists who are victims of a patriarchy and there is no issue …
/r/MensRights01/01/12 11:06 PM
3

You know that males are also stoned, or sent to prison for adultery in middle-eastern countries? Because your post sounds asthough its only women that face problems. Its no picnic being a male in those countries if you behave badly, and sometimes just because 'you're there'. There are strict codes for both males and females, and its to ensure the survival of their society. Unlike the west, the middle-east still understands what happens when you allow complete freedom to the people (especially fe…
/r/MensRights30/12/11 09:15 AM
1

Because people upvote discussion? Or don't read every sentence, but get the message none-the-less, which wasn't that women cause most problems in society. This is an open forum, and no one really gives a shit that there are extremists because they don't actually do anything, nor are they endorsed by people who do things for the movement. The only audience those sort of people have are a few dozen individuals on the sparsely populated MRA forums here and there. There are idiots in every movement.…
/r/MensRights30/12/11 09:01 AM
1

Quite frankly,in any argument I dismiss any mentioned statistical study based on the social sciences... Because not even 1% of them are reliable.
/r/MensRights29/12/11 05:53 PM
2

And people wonder why the majority of the divorce epidemic is initiated by women, lol.
/r/MensRights24/12/11 09:00 PM
-14

Except we're talking about child support... That horrific monstrosity. What happened to trying to arrange things amicably? And we all wonder why the divorce rate is so high and the vast majority are initiated by women.
/r/MensRights24/12/11 08:44 PM
2

And male victims of female rapists are downplayed significantly due to the definition of rape used. If we adjust the definition of rape to include those male victims, we find that more men than women were raped last year. Why the lifetime victimization rate for women is scaled so significantly higher (5-fold) than men with respect to their 12 month rate is unexplained in the study, but deserves a second look.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 11:15 PM
2

This is a little old, and is also a piece of shit. Looking at the Sexual Violence stuff only (I didn't bother looking into the rest of the study after I saw the flaws of this section): http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ngh8i/more_men_than_women_were_raped_last_year/ http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/nf9ge/what_the_cdc_report_actually_shows_with_respect/ http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ndzrf/debunking_the_recently_released_nisvs_report_that/
/r/MensRights23/12/11 08:08 PM
3

That Trish is such a blowhard. Demanding evidence while providing none themselves. The poster thought they were winning by just asking for evidence, as if the default position was theirs. I commend a lot of the people who tried to put up with the feminists in that thread. In all the pages I looked at, not a single feminist actually refuted any of the factual claims made by the opposition... I just wish the opposition would try to cite their sources, but why go through the effort if the feminists…
/r/MensRights22/12/11 04:17 PM
3

It may not just be that they make it up. It's a combination of inept statistics and warped definitions... I guess that's the same thing as making it up.
/r/MensRights19/12/11 12:31 PM
0

Police? That's your anecdotal evidence? Lol
/r/MensRights18/12/11 07:02 PM
1

Here's the thing, such a broad study would find similar rates of rape for both men and women... The studies have had to be tailored in such a way to come up with massive rape rates for women, and the smallest rate for men. How does this study do it? They define rape as requiring the victim to be penetrated, have female interviewers, and grossly overestimate the 12 month rape rate for men with respect to women (or grossly underestimate the lifetime rate with respect to women [more likely]).
/r/MensRights18/12/11 02:42 PM
2

Not only that, but men cannot be raped unless penetrated. That's additional extremist feminist ideology being touted by mainstream feminists. In the end, the study actually shows that more men than women are raped every year, and that men significantly under-report (or the study significantly underestimates) lifetime victimization rates with respect to the 12 month rate by a factor of at least 5 with respect to women. The kicker though, even with the huge flaws, this study thoroughly disproves a…
/r/MensRights18/12/11 02:38 PM
5

Nevertheless, the comparison of both full tallies had men edging out women as victims. I'm going to revisit the questions to see if your post has merit (probably does, but I'm on a phone). fixed. You were right, I missed the question in the attempt section relevant to made to penetrate. It isn't easy to figure out which question applies to which gender and category of rape and made to penetrate without making a mistake. You spot the mistake :P
/r/MensRights17/12/11 08:32 PM
2

Well, in the end, such definitions are perceived as being violent physical rapes by the populace... So when such studies come out, everyone thinks there is a violent rape epidemic. Violent physical rapes make up probably 1% or less than the number of "rapes" these surveys come up with.
/r/MensRights17/12/11 07:29 PM
3

And the law is fucking broad as hell too, so that women are "protected" and can get away with being able to rescind consent after-the-fact, and be able to get a guilty verdict without any corroborating evidence to her testimony. In any case, the law's definition is not as broad, and is still upheld to far stricter guidelines of proof than the definition and methodology used to conduct these surveys.
/r/MensRights17/12/11 07:19 PM
8

I still think most sex studies are retarded, but I would say in the Western world, the expectation of men to not reject sex is a huge factor [in much the same way that feminists argued women were expected not to reject sex historically]. That said, who hasn't initiated sexual contact while the other was impaired (usually they are themselves too)? Furthermore, the wording of questions can be ambiguous such that the use of physical force may have actually been foreplay. Sexual coercion is a hugely…
/r/MensRights17/12/11 07:12 PM
2

Not only that, but, according to this survey, more men than women were raped last year. Of course you don't see that written ANYWHERE in the MSM.
/r/MensRights17/12/11 05:24 PM
1

Yes, except the question explicitly says penetration does not occur.
/r/MensRights17/12/11 03:48 AM
1

The question is used to gauge the rate in which men are made to penetrate, but they are not considered rape victims. That was the question word for word asked to both men and women.
/r/MensRights16/12/11 02:15 AM
2

The 99% figure may be possible depending on the definition of rape. Extreme feminist dogma dictates that only women can be raped, unless a women takes their hand or object and shoves it up the guys ass (and/or vagina in the case of women on women)... But often times both, or only one of those possible scenarios for only one or both sexes get asked. In the case of your first link, only objects for both sexes are accounted for. Regardless, blunt instrument rape is probably a significant minority o…
/r/MensRights16/12/11 02:00 AM
1

Furthermore, there question to find attempted rape is highly subjective and is not restricted to attempted rape, even though it would count as one in the study.
/r/MensRights15/12/11 09:25 PM
1

Precisely why the word rape cannot be found anywhere in the interview process, nor are men conditioned starting at a young age that they are victims of a culture that is rampant with female rape.... Thus men and women try to conform with this apparent reality.
/r/MensRights15/12/11 06:09 PM
1

lol
/r/MensRights15/12/11 05:39 PM
2

32.9% when they include all forms of physical violence. The number is reduced to ~25% according to this article when we exclude milder forms of violence. In the case of male victims of all forms of physical violence, 28.2% of men. The article is completely wrong about 1 in 10.
/r/MensRights15/12/11 12:12 PM
1

This is all hogwash, the law of the land has made it clear that social norms is no excuse for men to not get clear verbal consent. It doesn't matter if a women says no directly or indirectly. Quite frankly, a very small percentage of the population are not rapists, as according to the technical definition of rape and consent. So what's the purpose of this study, really? Cherry picked data from a few retarded jokers or seriously ill-minded guys, and extrapolating it all as representative of the e…
/r/MensRights14/12/11 03:05 PM
7

Comments are eviscerating the article at least.
/r/MensRights14/12/11 11:41 AM
3

It isn't gender specific, it's just trying to win more support by pandering to women.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 03:13 AM
-2

I see this counter-argument all the time, that increased opportunity in dual-parent households is correlated, much less causally related to increased victimization rates. There has been zero study to corroborate this common misconception. Furthermore, the neglect included in these studies only include active neglect, not passive neglect. They have the means to provide or not neglect in some way, but don't. Being unable to provide or not neglect your children physically, emotionally, etc... is no…
/r/MensRights10/12/11 10:43 PM
3

5:1 odds of it happening.
/r/MensRights09/12/11 04:31 PM
4

The OP gets posted every month, and so does the primary caretaker argument. I've never seen any study verify the common argument that opportunity is correlated, or even has a causal relationship with increased victimization rates. There has simply been no study to verify this common idea. The reality could be completely backwards. Maybe in the extreme when one spouse is utterly missing, to the point of it being categorically a single-parent household, in which case the opportunity argument is mo…
/r/MensRights09/12/11 04:11 PM
4

It really doesn't change the function of the pussy if they remove the clit, trim the floppy skin, or just prick it a bit either (and anything in between those outlying extremes)... Would you be ok with ANY of it? No. Hypocrite.
/r/MensRights07/12/11 01:22 AM
3

Google some debunking articles.
/r/MensRights07/12/11 01:13 AM
5

I can't believe this is the Sun News network.
/r/MensRights06/12/11 09:11 AM
7

WHAT THE FUCK? And that isn't dictated towards the content of the article... That's dictated towards linking to Jezebel. Fuck you for legitimizing their content. Here is how you do it: The Horrifying World Of Internet Snuff Sites Some men get erotic thrills from seeing nude young women shot, stabbed, pierced by spears and arrows, or killed in a variety of other ways. And a remarkably large Internet industry has arisen to serve this craving. Scores of websites feature thousands of professional-gr…
/r/MensRights02/12/11 01:35 PM
3

I guess that's more reasonable.
/r/MensRights29/11/11 11:10 PM
3

There are plenty of people, women included, who will never want children. As for the costs associated with staying on birth control, you have a good point there. In the end, they are both retarded and the relationship was dysfunctional from the start, but I think she's still more in the wrong.
/r/MensRights29/11/11 10:54 PM
11

I don't see why the husband has to disclose their vasectomy if he makes it abundantly clear he does not want kids, ever. Even more so when both partners make it abundantly clear they do not want to have kids. With respect to this article, I can't really say what went on, but if she actually asked him whether or not he would help raise the child if she accidentally got pregnant and he said yes, that is being sort of dishonest... but since the man was not expecting her to want to have kids then wh…
/r/MensRights29/11/11 10:13 PM
10

Gender switched, and he would be saying good bye to most of his fortune and freedom. There is absolutely no doubt of that.
/r/MensRights29/11/11 09:59 PM
11

When people think correlation equals causation.
/r/MensRights29/11/11 09:56 PM
4

Twilight is filled with flawed characters that make poor role models, the end.
/r/MensRights28/11/11 11:19 PM
1

Next time just kill the girl. /s
/r/MensRights26/11/11 02:36 AM
11

Downvoted for directing traffic to misandrist website.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 02:35 AM
1

Damn men can get that? pee moar ftw
/r/MensRights25/11/11 07:15 PM
0

Those HIV studies are all correlative studies done in Africa or other at-risk groups. In other words, worthless. The arguments for circumcision that arise out of those studies are all susceptible to confirmation bias and, well, bias in general because they are based on correlative data. The same method would determine FGM as being a healthy choice, too.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 10:51 AM
1

Victim blaming is unsurprisingly common amongst the immature.
/r/MensRights22/11/11 05:29 PM
1

It's a travesty that society has deemed sluts a derogatory term.
/r/MensRights20/11/11 10:16 PM
1

I never understood the battered defense. If that was happening at the time when she killed him, then it's self defense. Otherwise, it's just calculated murder and in no other crime do we tolerate that sort of behavior... And since the only corroborating evidence that she was battered was from the testimony of herself and the kids, then that's sort of ROFL, especially with respect to the life insurance claim. The vast majority of battered women defenses have been used in cases of cold calculated …
/r/MensRights14/11/11 12:30 PM
1

Meh, when the topic was FGM, he would tell MGM people to STFU since men don't have it as bad. Sounds like a fallacy no? He's just a huge hypocrite.
/r/MensRights14/11/11 12:27 PM
4

Just further elaboration... You actually don't really have any rights as a father... You can be raped and still be liable for child support. You can be lied to with regards to women lying about taking birth control, so it's not like you any precautions you may have taken can be used as an excuse to absolve one's legal responsibilities. Furthermore, having sex is not when people decide to have kids. The choice to have kids is made irrespective of the act. Either both parties want to have kids and…
/r/MensRights14/11/11 12:20 PM
2

Who knows...
/r/MensRights10/11/11 08:08 PM
3

Are we actually comparing single instances of a female child being raped by male(s), and repeated instances of male children being raped by a man? Fucking warped logic right there, par for the course I suppose. If this guy had abused young girls over 10 years, there would be a lynch mob out for him, period.
/r/MensRights10/11/11 07:38 PM
6

If fathers could get a salary, sure, but this is not going to "liberate" women... It's only going to make the transition for "liberating" women harder once technology catches up. Giving women incentives not to work will only perpetuate the gender roles found in these places, which are largely agricultural and hunting. Furthermore, it gives women incentives to have multiple kids, with multiple fathers... That's the last thing Africa needs.
/r/MensRights10/11/11 07:29 PM
2

Comments are reassuring.
/r/MensRights10/11/11 07:26 PM
1

Wait, your previous comment was misogynist? Lastly, I didn't say all, I said most. And calling someone fat, ugly, and a disgusting cunt who should be raped isn't misoygnist. I've been called a cunt, and someone who should have gotten raped, by women who knew I was a guy. It wasn't misogynist, it's just inconsiderate. There is nothing in the comment that highlights women, only that the recipient was women.
/r/MensRights10/11/11 02:56 AM
1

What was the pay distribution before the 13 years and for how long? And was any work done on the house that increased the value and who paid for it? Dumb article depriving their readers of the facts... All you can get from that is she paid all of the mortgage for 13 years and he got 10%? ZOMG!
/r/MensRights10/11/11 12:21 AM
2

No shit? Lol, what do you think I said?
/r/MensRights09/11/11 10:42 PM
4

This happens to every group. Dawkins gets suitcases full of hate every day. MRAs are pretty discreet still, but if the VoM guys don't get hate mail, that would be surprising. Every demographic gets shit on youtube comments. This is just the nature of the internet. But as you pointed out, trolls are attracted towards those who respond most visibly to their work, and it'll often be the work of a single individual... Because feminists often see themselves as a victim of pandemic sexism, they make a…
/r/MensRights08/11/11 07:57 PM
6

The reality is that most of the "misogyny" they face is just criticism to their feminist viewpoints. I see this a lot when I confront feminists arguments, present my arguments, and get called a misogynist, amongst other things characterized by misandry. It happens on both sides, where people feel that they can be sexist if they feel the other person is sexist... even when that other person is absolutely certain they were not sexist but just critical, skeptical or countering. We don't call religi…
/r/MensRights08/11/11 07:10 PM
1

Man I'm a doofus... Totally missed that important part with respect to the ass comment. It was a one time thing... So even if it was sexual, it happened once. So it seems like Herman is being fucked. As much as I hate the guy...
/r/MensRights08/11/11 05:12 AM
-1

It was more of an analysis of how this subreddit is appalled that no one gives a shit about men suffering in the recession, while arguing against any discrimination in the wage gap. The two are related.
/r/MensRights07/11/11 10:44 PM
-3

The reality is that a great deal of men opt out of any type of education in order to pursue what is perceived as a more lucrative route (for them) in labor. When times are good, labor is booming, but when times are bad, they are the first ones to get hit. They can choose to pursue jobs dominated by women, but they are dominated by women for a reason, it's cushier (pays less though but is more stable). Men in labor just need to realize how volatile their profession is, and be smart with their mon…
/r/MensRights07/11/11 09:46 PM
3

The way child support payments are created is fucking diabolical. It's ailmony, plain and simple. No way should Terrel and (possibly) Bieber be dishing out 10000-250000s/month for someone to raise a child. What the FUCK?
/r/MensRights07/11/11 09:38 PM
-6

You bore me. This subreddit tries to have it both ways, that's all.
/r/MensRights07/11/11 09:32 PM
0

KOSS is something decades out of date that was made for COSMO magazine or something... So, self-selected out of this world, strike 1. The questions were sort of ambiguous, they are subject to the bias of regret, the method was unprofessional (inconsistent definitions given for one) but the conclusion was grossly misleading. As I said before, attempted sexual assaults were factored into the 1 in 4 figure. I don't know the actual numbers but you can imagine that the vast majority of the 1 in 4 wer…
/r/MensRights07/11/11 09:30 PM
4

The only thing that bothers me with sexual harassment is that when the studies are done, it's often regarded as sexual assault [or, more commonly, attempted sexual assault, which is further skewed into the sexual assault statistics and somewhere along the line gets interpreted as a sexual assault] and thus statistical figures are greatly skewed... What is exactly sexual harassment? There is no clear definition, it's just whenever a women feels uncomfortable really. Furthermore, there was a post …
/r/MensRights07/11/11 09:05 PM
1

The 2 big ones are: Self selection Broad definition for sexual assault, rape, attempted sexual assault, and attempted rape Articles conclude from the studies that there is a violent epidemic, when the reality is that the studies have lumped multiple rapes along with an attempt at a single instance of verbal harassment. A study would further conclude that 1 in 4 women will undergo attempted or successful sexual assault (infamous KOSS study)... And the paradigm has created readers to visualize sex…
/r/MensRights07/11/11 08:52 PM
1

Well I hope it's more unique than a Jewish nose.
/r/MensRights07/11/11 06:41 PM
9

Right, because the matter isn't impacted by your subjective bias whatsoever. The relationship is already shit, what's a paternity test going to do?
/r/MensRights07/11/11 06:37 PM
-13

In my opinion, in many cases where men suffer during a recession, it's slightly hypocritical to complain without acknowledging the reality that these men picked professions with high turnover rates... and that they do pay better for it... Unless the case is just a response to an outcry over women suffering without acknowledging the men suffering as well. The same could be said about hazard pay, even though some studies suggest hazard pay doesn't make up for the fact that those jobs already pay p…
/r/MensRights07/11/11 05:41 PM
2

Interesting, a lot of facts seem to be myths, and a lot of statistics seem to be "facts". Plus they leave out anything that challenges their worldview. Curious that most of the 10% of sexual assaults suffered by men are the result of male attackers... Since they are actually including male on male, the number should actually be well over 50% of all assaults when we include prisons... Just saying, the numbers make zero sense.
/r/MensRights07/11/11 02:38 PM
2

Stop conjecturing or assuming anything. You have no idea if it has any impact, period. The only reason why people give a shit that women make up the vast majority of abuse, and the majority of unique abusers, is because women are given custody by default, the courts do not do as much to remove children from the custody of abusive women, and men are the defacto abuser of children. It should be done case-by-case, and I'll further reiterate again in this post since you keep missing the point, you h…
/r/MensRights05/11/11 11:55 PM
3

lmfao what pieces of shit. 60 UPVOTES? The masses of 2xc are quite reasonable, or were. Generally a comment like that gets jumped on early by MRAs and find itself getting condemned by the masses of both subreddits and ends up at -50... But seems like they totally missed the fact that this is a false sexual harrassment claim which destroys men left, right, and center, and because he's an asshole, it's justified.
/r/MensRights05/11/11 04:16 AM
1

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/m0gtw/the_majority_of_child_abuse_is_perpetrated_by/c2x5za5
/r/MensRights05/11/11 02:01 AM
2

I think I addressed this earlier in the thread or something, but if you can find me a study that can even correlate, much less show causation, that more child care hours leads to more violence, then by all means present it. You're trying to negate the statistics by pointing out that mothers have a majority of the child care hours without actually proving that child care hours is a relevant factor. Furthermore, if we pick either genders or parents as the focus of the study, women and mothers stil…
/r/MensRights05/11/11 01:55 AM
3

Pretty sure it says somewhere that women are still the majority abuser of unique victims. Not that I give a damn. If abusive mothers are more likely to abuse many times, then it's clear that the courts are bias against fathers and refuse to do as much with regards to abusive mothers... which was the purpose of my original assessment. I could hardly give a damn if the facts indicated that men, on an individual basis, were more likely to be abusers and to be serial abusers... It should always be d…
/r/MensRights05/11/11 12:28 AM
1

My assessment gives single-mother families 0% child care by fathers, and single-father families 0% child care by mothers. Quite frankly, I would hope my assessment actually overestimates the proportions, giving mothers too much time. Regardless, I have never seen a study that showed maltreatment to be affected by time. The same argument can be made that those who spend more time with their victimized demographic know them better thus are less likely to maltreat them. Quite frankly, time affectin…
/r/MensRights04/11/11 11:02 PM
4

Fair enough :P
/r/MensRights04/11/11 10:14 PM
2

As long as women are the victims, men will resent them for generalizing them and removing their own victim card, and progress will never be made to eliminate those who are actually sexist amongst men and women.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 10:13 PM
8

I don't think anyone in this subreddit didn't see this coming. Bieber is on the hook for child support in the millions because it's very likely the child will remain in the custody of the rapist. In a way I'm glad this issue is going to be brought to the forefront of public discussion.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 10:10 PM
4

He's a troll. Ignore him.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 10:09 PM
2

More like their interrogation techniques should be illegal.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 10:04 PM
6

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/l50yf/a_mother_is_145_times_more_likely_than_the_father/ Mothers are still maltreating and killing their children more than fathers with primary custody estimated.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 10:01 PM
13

Bet nothing happened to the prosecutors and police...
/r/MensRights04/11/11 11:20 AM
0

You disgust me.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 11:20 AM
7

Because you know, circumcised men don't clean their dicks? What's your point? The "science" behind increased protection hinges on correlative statistical studies... In other words, there isn't actually proven to do anything. If you are sexually active and you aren't cleaning your dick, it doesn't matter if you are cut or not. And the only real concern is AIDs... So even if circumcision was shown to reduce risk, is it even a reasonable concern for Americans? Regardless, clipping clits of women ha…
/r/MensRights04/11/11 06:56 AM
10

I'm not circumcised and my dick is awesome, and it didn't lose a bunch of nerve endings thus, biologically, my dick provides more pleasure. You cannot possibly know if your dick is as sensitive as it would have been either. I guess it's ok for women's cosmetic preference in some parts of the USA to triumph the human rights of infants. /s
/r/MensRights04/11/11 03:54 AM
1

I don't think parents should have a right to see their kid, but we do not live in a society that treats fathers and mothers as equals. As a result, we are left fighting for rights to correct the bias, but those rights do have unintended consequences.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 08:29 AM
3

That was pretty funny... I guess daytime shows catered to women have no concept of trolls.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 07:38 AM
27

"Southey’s lawyer, Jacqueline Mills, said Foley also owes arrears for private schools, mortgage payments, health care and tutoring, although she added a precise figure for those expenses did not exist. " What a scumbag. The ex-wife is a bitch too.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 07:32 AM
21

Try not being a bigoted asshole after you get your head bashed in by someone spewing bigoted shit. It may not be as easy as you think. This story is relevant to the subreddit because she filed sexual assault charges... If it weren't for the video, the weight that charge holds would have probably ended up with him in jail regardless of witnesses.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 10:12 PM
2

The courts are supposed to be blind... It isn't the case that the courts care as much if a man is psychologically damaged (unless they are fully blown mentally retarded in which case they often still get executed anyways). Women disproportionately benefit from the societal expectation that they are not mentally capable of dealing with a stressful environment, and thus there responsibilities should be absolved. One thing you'll note in this subreddit is that we often argue for the increased punis…
/r/MensRights02/11/11 08:01 PM
1

If it's true, she should be charged for statutory rape but he'll end up paying a very lucrative child support amount.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 04:34 PM
4

"Men actually do take abuse somewhat better than women." Remove this and the post is acceptable. But we're making assumptions on the circumstances even from what the daughter said. The mother had full adult mental capacity to cease the abuse if she chose to.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 04:30 PM
3

I'm on that convicted MRA list and I've had the same girlfriend for years.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 04:09 PM
1

fuck yea
/r/MensRights02/11/11 04:17 AM
1

In societies like the one this guy is talking about, there is little to nothing you can do to eliminate gender roles. As you pointed out, there is no land available, so a woman could not be competitive enough to afford it. They need technological advances that open up profitable job opportunities that aren't dependent upon physical strength. Until then, unless the society wants to collapse due to infertility, women have to bear children if they want men to bother subsidizing their living. A nurs…
/r/MensRights01/11/11 10:05 PM
2

Well considering you didn't send the message, I'm guessing you wrote "we need to talk".... so why do you need to talk?
/r/MensRights01/11/11 09:53 PM
1

Moderately using weed, tobacco, alcohol, is fine by me... The actual health implications of the fetus are subject to some serious political bias. Considering the studies are going to be subject to selective sampling, such that those not as concerned for even their own health may smoke more, and those who smoke moderately are lumped into the same category as chain smokers, the studies I have seen are completely inadequate for addressing moderate users of any substance. Unless I see some rigid sta…
/r/MensRights01/11/11 04:32 PM
1

Some circumcision procedures utilize cauterization, so no.
/r/MensRights01/11/11 03:09 PM
1

So fucking close.
/r/MensRights01/11/11 03:08 PM
1

It's not just the financial implications that worry men, but the fact that, with regards to their children, 2 days out of 14 is considered 50/50 custody, and they have to pay child support far exceeding the actual costs. If child support takes into account that the mother is suffering financially in order to raise the children, then maybe it really isn't 50/50 custody then now is it? It's more like, get divorce and pay for half of the expenses of some other family. The Wire illustrates this nice…
/r/MensRights31/10/11 06:29 PM
17

I know this neighborhood, there is a store called Womyn near it I believe... You can be assured that Commercial Street is frequented heavily by 20-something dreadlock anarchists and extremist feminists. They had a protest a few months back for months trying to prevent a shitty drug dealing park from being turned into something that would discourage the shitty crowd from hanging out there.
/r/MensRights31/10/11 06:16 PM
1

Horrible response.
/r/MensRights29/10/11 09:17 AM
6

Oh, a heavily cited article talking about universal administrative bias towards accepting women to counter the heavily touted citeless Hugo article that argues a universal administrative bias towards accepting men? I wonder which one is closer to the truth -.-
/r/MensRights29/10/11 09:13 AM
5

and the first comment -.-
/r/MensRights29/10/11 01:07 AM
2

I wrote my piece, then I read some others. What I read reminded me of something that is prevalent in religious debate... A lack of a definition for the topic at hand. What is the patriarchy? I've noticed in the responses people aren't actually addressing a specific definition for patriarchy. From wikipedia: "Patriarchy is a social system in which the role of the male as the primary authority figure is central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, children, and prop…
/r/MensRights28/10/11 08:46 PM
-1

I'd like to talk about when a so-called patriarchy may have existed. I'd say it began around the period when effective birth control became widely available and all men got the right to vote, and ended with the women's movement and their right to vote. So we're dealing with a very small period of time. Prior to the introduction of birth control, women got pregnant, a lot. Birth control more or less came about alongside advances in medication too... With that came a sharp decrease in infant morta…
/r/MensRights28/10/11 06:14 PM
1

As for voting, it wasn't necessarily that women couldn't vote, but the poor couldn't vote. Men only had the right to vote for a few decades prior to women in the States... and that was largely because men were sick of dying all around the world for a country they couldn't participate politically in.
/r/MensRights28/10/11 05:51 PM
8

The point being that it is often the real justification used by parents to circumcise, the religious and medical reasons [false ones] are just a cover. If they would just be honest with themselves that they are bullshitting themselves, and see that it really was an aesthetic related choice, they might see how perverse circumcision is.
/r/MensRights28/10/11 03:55 AM
2

So it doesn't actually compare it to policies that benefit women? I'm sure we all know which demographic gets more favorable policies. We need to ban Hugo's articles from this subreddit, he's a fucking troll. There should be like a disclaimer before submissions that requests submissions from a particular author or website to be worthy of a ban for the submitter... and that such submissions need to be text-only. Giving them a bump in pageviews only justifies their work in the eyes of their bosses…
/r/MensRights27/10/11 08:53 PM
1

Hypocrisy is rampant in feminism, but you and girlwriteswhat just added a couple more on that list for me. Good spot.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 10:01 PM
9

I hate anecdotes but for the ones you provided, you're really comparing apples and oranges. First case involved the convict already serving 6 months. Second case involved a ~20 year old and ~15 year old [the closest of the ages in OP]. Third involved what was initially an 18 year old and 14 year old [closer in ages than OP], and has supervision required. There was no indication of drug abuse of the victims in any of these cases, and several indications of a relationship, even long term. This par…
/r/MensRights26/10/11 07:42 AM
1

For the NIS 4 study, it seems like it may get thrown under emotional abuse and/or all of neglect because there is a complete absence of any notion of passive neglect being figured in at all. For the other study it was pretty explicit in that it only looking at active neglect, however there is an absence of data on the gender of perpetrators for different types of maltreatment. I didn't see this before because when I initially searched for the distinction I was looking for the active mention of p…
/r/MensRights26/10/11 01:41 AM
3

I don't doubt it, but I haven't seen such reports being used to make that distinction in the studies. The distinction isn't made in my linked post's sources, or I'm missing it. If you can find such information, that would be hugely helpful.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 12:55 AM
5

I'm sure that is one kind of neglect... but that distinction isn't made in the reports. I would hope that such neglect would be regarded as abuse, and not neglect... If that isn't the case the truth is even muddier than I thought.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 12:17 AM
1

Abuse or maltreatment?
/r/MensRights25/10/11 10:22 PM
3

In terms of abuse, which is probably more commonly associated with a conscious decision, the rates are 50/50 for physical, 80/20 for sexual, and there was one other category I think but it was more or less 60/40. Now results are always going to be skewed which reduces prevalence of male victims and female perpetrators in any case, but more so for abuse incidents, and is VERY MUCH prevalent in sexual cases. Neglect is not going to be as commonly associated with a conscious decision, thus time wou…
/r/MensRights25/10/11 10:14 PM
0

Nice nice. Instinctively, I like the conclusion, but the study itself is meh. I rewrote my post to reflect my opinion on the matter. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/lnjze/circumcised_men_have_a_45_times_greater_chance_of/c2udnbb
/r/MensRights25/10/11 09:57 PM
2

It's more like, only 1 in X people recall being groped. I've been groped, but am I going to answer yes to a question asking if you've been sexually harassed in a physical way? Some do, some don't.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 09:11 PM
1

"This preliminary study investigates what role early trauma might have in alexithymia acquisition for adults by controlling for male circumcision. Three hundred self-selected men were administered the Toronto Twenty-Item Alexithymia Scale checklist and a personal history questionnaire. The circumcised men had age-adjusted alexithymia scores 19.9 percent higher than the intact men; were 1.57 times more likely to have high alexithymia scores; were 2.30 times less likely to have low alexithymia sco…
/r/MensRights25/10/11 07:14 PM
2

You spent $15?
/r/MensRights25/10/11 06:34 PM
5

No source for the figures and, in the context of the article, makes it sound like sexual assaults are defined within the terms of a violent physical sexual attack, when it can actually include groping, verbal sexual harassment of any degree, or, and is the case for most of these statistics, includes "attempted" "sexual assaults". I know for the original 1 in 4 figure, it includes "attempted" rape, so 1 in 4 women are not actually going to be sexually assaulted, according to that shoddy study. Re…
/r/MensRights25/10/11 06:27 PM
2

I disagree with any sort of affirmative action for anyone. For the time being, women may have their own affirmative action which makes it unfair for men, but I'd father focus on dismantling affirmative actions than adding more to counteract eachother.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 06:22 PM
6

Well for one, they are going to be unable to do as much of the work as the women at this work place... thereby reducing the chance that men in the future are hired.
/r/MensRights20/10/11 03:35 AM
20

And you wonder why fewer and fewer men become teachers, thereby increasing the feminizing of schools, making it more and more hostile or unaccommodating to boys. I bet the guy in this story feels like a fucking piece of shit, and why? Because he had the audacity to wipe shit off the asses of little children. And here this mother feels like a hero for doing that... Disgusting.
/r/MensRights20/10/11 03:18 AM
3

No, but someone has got to lose their last name or else last names will get out of control.
/r/MensRights19/10/11 10:16 PM
3

Equality of results is stupid. Equality of opportunity will invariably end up with 50/50 responsibility, but if it doesn't then that just means that, in general, men are different then women. Heck, we may see men someday overtake women under this scenario. Who cares? So why implement discriminatory gender policies? Depending who you talk to, people will argue women are better off, men are better off, the kids are better off, the poor are better off, because of this change. The government [and so…
/r/MensRights18/10/11 08:00 PM
11

Considering it's one of the most common and profitable procedures done in hospitals, doctors love to do it.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 07:17 PM
3

How did this get published? One of the worst researched articles published I've seen lately.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 05:09 PM
3

Google mommy salary reddit, it's really that simple.
/r/MensRights16/10/11 02:18 AM
7

She argues that it's the lack of available jobs for men that are financially rewarding, because women are taking them too. I'm arguing a lack of motivation to get those financially rewarding jobs. I would say the latter is a far more significant factor in the majority of comparisons. By encouraging women to take on their financial responsibilities, you reduce the pool of suitable prospects for a women because there is simply a reduced ratio of male dominance in the more higher paying fields. So …
/r/MensRights15/10/11 07:00 PM
1

Probably the only time you'll ever spend any sustaining moment with another person is in an elevator.
/r/MensRights15/10/11 04:24 PM
3

So let's just relinquish all the protection from women who get that service then shall we? /s
/r/MensRights15/10/11 04:22 PM
5

I think everyone knows that, even those not educated in the manner. It makes the comic more hilarious when it's a guy though.
/r/MensRights15/10/11 04:20 PM
28

I read that entire article, but there is no decline of men. Only a decline in suitable prospects for an aging single women population who still uphold traditional standards. In summary: Men are to be more financially successful, and be a family men. Funny how that expectation is sustained by women despite the fact that feminism in schools try to teach the contrary. Well, back when society expected men to work and women to stay at home, we both dealt with it... But now, men are not off-handedly d…
/r/MensRights15/10/11 04:17 PM
14

Why are feminists so determined to reinforce gender roles? Isn't that counterproductive? Wouldn't a movement focused on achieving equality for women want to eliminate sexist policies that discourage financial independence? A mother can choose to either raise her family and get 0% allowance rather than work, or raise her family and get a 10% allowance rather than work. The former scenario will result in more women choosing to work, and the latter scenario will result in more women choose to stay …
/r/MensRights14/10/11 08:46 PM
5

Decent article, sort of got carried away by the personal touch. However, there was simply a complete and utter lack of understanding of why men have drifted away from their traditional gender role. Women are motivated all the way through school to be financially independent, while it's suppose to just come automatically for men or something, and then they want to start a family with an even more successful man. Well, guess what ladies, guys don't want to be the breadwinner, carry his wife throug…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 03:25 AM
2

Actually, the death penalty is extremely relevant to men's rights. Women, on an individual basis with respect to men, are 5 times less likely to be sentenced to the death penalty, 10 times less likely to be executed, and 12 times more likely to receive clemency.
/r/MensRights09/10/11 12:41 AM
3

Then we're back to square 1... What Joeboy and others have failed to notice is that time is taken into account. The assumption made in this report is that those in the custody of the mother do not have any contact with the father, which is a significant under-estimation considering the percentage of single-parent families that are women-led. I think the time differences are more than adequately accounted for.
/r/MensRights09/10/11 12:28 AM
2

Considering it's under-reported by at least 90% in each category, female perpetrators are under-reported, and boy victims are under-reported, I'd say the numbers are far from statistically significant.
/r/MensRights08/10/11 10:54 PM
1

Not really a concern for me, this is about custody battles. You can figure it out from my references and following the mathematical procedure outlined in my post.
/r/MensRights08/10/11 10:53 PM
3

The discrepancy in who is involved in the child's life is actually accounted for... That was the purpose of the post.
/r/MensRights08/10/11 10:52 PM
6

Try reading something more than just the title... "So, in conclusion, why the courts continue to feel compelled to reward custody to the mothers 5 times more often than it does for the fathers remains unanswered. This report isn't supposed to be a dick measuring contest. The purpose is so that we have something against the unjustified judicial policy of granting custody to the mother by default. It should be done on a case-by-case basis, which it clearly isn't in the significant majority."
/r/MensRights08/10/11 10:45 PM
2

As I pointed out in the bottom of the post, the legal system is predisposed to convicting fathers as the primary arbiter of domestic [untrue as well] and sexual abuse. Meaning an involved mother is more likely going to be charged with child neglect. Often times, the prosecution will assume the mother is a victim as well [and cut a deal with them], further skewing the results against fathers. Lastly, this was about custody issues... The ratio is more balanced amongst biological parents. In fact, …
/r/MensRights08/10/11 10:43 PM
6

As much as it looks like it, it isn't supposed to be a dick measuring contest. In a world where mothers maltreat their children far more often than fathers, and are individually far more likely as well, you would think that there would be some equality in the family court. 83% of single-parent families are women-led. This is mostly because society and judges view men as lacking caregivers and are more dangerous to the child's well being. Even if the numbers showed they were both just as likely t…
/r/MensRights08/10/11 08:44 PM
2

I appreciate research, however I could not find the source of those statistics, although I'm sure they exist. I question the conclusion of those statistics since they do not correspond to my research and math... So I'm going to go on a limb here and say the math is wrong in that article. I cannot do the math myself since the source is nowhere to be found. Here is my work: The US Government's statistics: Child Abuse & Neglect Research: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/ Consistent…
/r/MensRights08/10/11 03:11 AM
4

There are more than just MRAs that read this subreddit... Why add more fuel to the misogynist accusations? I suppose the purpose of my sarcasm was to point out that is actually how the law treats women. Less time, lower conviction rate (once charged), lesser crimes specific to women (infanticide can only be charged against women), etc... Just like how children are treated. [but you don't see feminists protesting this do you?]
/r/MensRights07/10/11 09:23 PM
5

How many single mother families do you think there are in the country? Seriously... And if you really think there is a societal consensus that mothers are the primary abusers in the country, you're delusional.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 09:22 PM
7

Well considering mothers are twice as likely to be the one abusing the child, and the only mainstream focus is on male perpetrators of child abuse, I would say it's relevant to men's rights.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 09:03 PM
8

It's because women aren't considered as responsible for their actions. They are like children you know? /s
/r/MensRights07/10/11 08:53 PM
8

Another women granted clemency for no other reason other than compassion? No surprises here. Our society treats women like children, with respect to men, unable to be as responsible for their actions.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 04:52 PM
3

There was a brief mention that they scaled the results to deal with the obvious lopsided ratio between fatherless and motherless homes. But you're 100% right that further investigation is warranted with regards to those xx times more figures because of how easily it can be manipulated to give a false impression.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 03:09 PM
2

Does no one know the law? It is a crime. This should be posted in men's rights for no other reason than the fact that if the genders were reversed, the prosecution would be going for at least 2nd degree murder if they could. Not contemplating whether or not to charge at all.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 02:46 AM
2

Youtube Maher feminism.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 10:07 PM
3

I get your point. it's just that if you want to get picky enough you could resolve the responsibilities of any women involved in a war. I think it's still a rebuttal because it shows that a woman was unable to resolve territorial issues non-violently, which, in the vast majority of wars, is the underlining cause of any war. This particular incident shows that women, too, will launch a counterattack across the world if a colony gets invaded because neither side was able to compromise. Sounds like…
/r/MensRights04/10/11 04:32 PM
2

Wasn't Germany involved in some stuff lately? Furthermore, did this not get contested by Maher? I'm pretty sure he spoke exactly about this during a standup, lol.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 04:08 PM
4

It becomes a war when another party gets involved.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 04:06 PM
2

Well unless the BF admitted to choking her, his charges will probably be dropped. As for the stepdaughter, she'll be convicted, physical evidence is pretty strong from what I see, which isn't much. But again, this is just another incident that highlights the double standard. Imagine the women lying on the yard unconscious with blood everywhere, you think she'd be charged with anything? Not a fucking chance, lol.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 03:34 AM
2

It's widely known that suicide rates amongst men are far higher than woman's, in any demographic, not that it's a concern for any politician. If it were women with that issue, we'd be pelted by constant campaigns trying to fix it.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 03:25 AM
0

what does your title have to do with the article?
/r/MensRights03/10/11 06:59 PM
-1

It's because women are superior, derp.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 05:39 PM
-5

Excellent point regarding women, both low and high achievers, are still seeking even higher achieving men... As a result, those who would have made respectable salaries that would push against the myth that women are paid less, are in fact choosing to find a male breadwinner for themselves. It's as if women seek a high education for the purpose of finding viable husbands, even if they would be viable breadwinners themselves.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 05:32 PM
1

They don't. There will probably be higher casualties amongst men. This is no different then allowing for firefighter women. It increases the risk amongst men in a group because there are fewer of them than before. As long as the standard isn't lowered, and women still have to pass the same physical and mental test as the men, I guess it can work out, but expect that number to be far smaller than the current female army population, which is already insignificantly sized. But, as repugnant as this…
/r/MensRights30/09/11 04:29 PM
0

The real question is, why weren't they both charged?
/r/MensRights30/09/11 04:19 PM
3

I wasn't saying there isn't a double standard. The purpose of my post was just saying that pleading insanity isn't a light penalty... Unless they are arguing temporary insanity, which they aren't. This type of defense will end with her in a psychiatric ward for, potentially, life. As for whether or not men have an equal chance of using the insanity defense, I don't know. I know how things benefit women when comparing sane individuals, in the court of law, but insane individuals gets their fate h…
/r/MensRights30/09/11 03:08 AM
5

Agreed. She isn't getting a light sentence, she isn't getting a sentence at all. She will be getting a conditional sentence... That she doesn't get out until she is sane... Which is probably never. But let's say she does recover... Should she rot in jail over it? No... She was insane.
/r/MensRights30/09/11 12:40 AM
3

We don't know because who the fuck can find it? I bet the journalist doesn't even know. edit: http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/violent_crime/forcible_rape.html So men cannot be raped and that is of no concern.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 04:54 AM
7

Whoopee for Woopie!
/r/MensRights28/09/11 10:11 PM
3

How do such shitty articles get published? They don't even provide a link of full quote of the definitions so we can compare for ourselves.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 08:10 PM
2

Even if it's 2 second? That's not rape, that's nothing. 2 fucking seconds, give me a break. We're only taking her word on it that it was 15 seconds. And even then, how does one prove that outside of verbal testimony? You can't... He should have been found not guilty on the basis that there was no physical evidence. So where's the line? Is it 0.01 seconds? Are you fucking kidding me? Was he guilty for admitting to 2 seconds, was the 15 seconds irrelevant? Even then, a lawyer could argue he was no…
/r/MensRights28/09/11 06:42 PM
2

This is why you don't say anything. That kid should have waited for a lawyer, if he didn't, then should have said he stopped immediately. How the fuck one can be charged for rape for not stopping soon enough baffles me. How the fuck someone can be sentenced for 15 years for doing that baffles me. I bet this guy regrets not killing her, because he'd be going away for the same amount of time...
/r/MensRights28/09/11 06:39 PM
2

60%? Good lord, how did this article get published?
/r/MensRights28/09/11 06:05 AM
8

So, it takes a poor mentally ill women for legislation to be amended. I wonder how many mentally ill men are on the streets because they couldn't pay their child support.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 10:15 PM
4

Well, an educated and financially well-off women is more likely to pursue this than any other demographic. The poor cannot afford to, and the rich men don't desire it enough to make themselves look like "less of a man".
/r/MensRights27/09/11 09:56 PM
2

It's solutions like the ones mentioned in this article that contribute to the disparity in pay that women benefit from when compared to an identical male individual. We have employers giving women more than they would have just because they perceive themselves as being male-bias. Furthermore, if employers are taught that women are poor negotiators or something, then women can continue to not achieve the same level of assertiveness as their male colleagues because employers will treat them as inf…
/r/MensRights27/09/11 09:52 PM
2

Why do we link his articles here? Take a picture or something... Nonstop rubbish, stop validating their work with traffic. EDIT: I thought it was a Hugo article, my bad :P
/r/MensRights27/09/11 09:41 PM
2

Furthermore, as you pointed out, women want men who are as good or better financially than themselves. So the high achieving, intelligent, driven women are being put off to the side by their more ambitious husband and taking on a more family-focused lifestyle... There isn't like there is a massive shortage of smart women, or smart women are unable to move up, they have continued to seek out even smarter (or more ambitious) men.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 08:41 PM
1

Weird. So one can be a misandrist and advocate against equality of results? I suppose it's possible, but that's some warped philosophy.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 08:39 PM
4

Oh I see, what a shitty way to go about it, lol. That literally did not register with me at all, I definitely thought they meant to say 32% of managers are women. The way they wrote it is fucking retarded, good spot/argument.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 08:37 PM
0

You're critique is sound except that in this article, it's actually 32%... There can't be a gender neutral manager, there's not that many hermaphrodites.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 08:27 PM
8

Comments are eviscerating her.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 05:20 PM
6

I guess I don't watch TV enough.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 12:57 AM
3

I have a hard time understanding the kid... Does the dialogue explicitly call out men? I mean, perhaps if this commercial was airing all the god damn time, then maybe there's some basis to the complaint... It was a boy victim after all. I don't see any other commercials being used in the campaign, but if there are and the abusers are men, then perhaps there's some basis. Quite frankly, while I think this fiasco will raise awareness that women can be abusers too, which is a good thing, I think th…
/r/MensRights27/09/11 12:26 AM
4

There was an absence of evidence that the men committed rape. And, if this article isn't completely bias, there was also an absence of evidence that the woman was lying. However, considering the prosecution went on their own to file the charges, I'm guessing they felt pretty confident about a conviction... So I'm guessing there was something more than inconsistencies in her story, but then again inconsistencies may be sufficient depending how blatant they are. Just as the accused must stfu and s…
/r/MensRights26/09/11 09:56 AM
2

Circumcision related deaths should be restricted to under 1 month... That was made clear in the article... Circumcision is done within 2 weeks of birth.
/r/MensRights25/09/11 11:23 PM
1

He said, she dreamed... lol
/r/MensRights24/09/11 01:44 AM
1

Letting women vote is pretty much equality of opportunity... Other examples of such is when women were simply allowed to do things they couldn't before. I'm not a historian so I don't know any examples, but I'm sure there are some. However, most of their agendas, especially of the past decades, have been about an equality of results when it suits women. Feminists want at least 50% representation in governments, engineering faculties, and boardrooms. Do they want 50% representation in the army, m…
/r/MensRights23/09/11 01:08 PM
2

What does that even mean? jw
/r/MensRights23/09/11 12:51 PM
2

TLDR - Jury was instructed to disregard the defendant's lack of intent to commit rape and only consider the accuser's lack of consent. In California, a lack of intent to commit rape is a defense. So the title is quite accurate in this case, a lack of consent does not necessarily equal rape. This actually strikes a serious blow to most rape statistic which have the only necessary condition for rape being a lack of consent. A legitimate survey will now require that there be reasonable grounds that…
/r/MensRights23/09/11 12:48 PM
3

I hate FRA as much as the next person, but your title is clearly misleading. /downvote
/r/MensRights23/09/11 11:59 AM
2

Quite frankly, I'm pretty sure the statistics for both women and men are gross over-exaggerations that utilize the feminist definition of rape or sexual assault... With the feminist definitions, I suspect 1 in 4 men have been raped too. There isn't a rape epidemic in the country, just a bunch of drunken experiences that later turn into regret... or people without an ounce of integrity unable to communicate their intentions. I know people shouldn't assume consent, but no one expects even one, muc…
/r/MensRights23/09/11 06:56 AM
3

Equality of opportunity is good... It isn't what feminist advocate for though.
/r/MensRights22/09/11 12:46 PM
1

Oh that's something I hadn't considered... In that case, then, quite frankly, I take it all back.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 11:06 AM
4

As you point out, because they lumped all managers together, it dismisses the reality that perhaps there are far more female managers in less lucrative industries. Of course in a less lucrative industry, you'd expect to find less education, younger women, etc... Furthermore, this explains why female managers, like the general population, continue to earn less money than males.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 10:20 AM
1

Generally men receive higher payouts on an annual basis because they put more in... I'd imagine the calculators take into account a woman's longer retirement life and that may contribute to the gap. If average length of retirement life is factored, who really gives a shit? Making them work longer just increases the size of the pension fund, which is what's hurting now that people are living longer... That's the real intention. Britain knows that in our egalitarian society, it should be raised to…
/r/MensRights21/09/11 10:11 AM
0

That's a good perspective, and perhaps it's my feminist upbringing that makes me sympathetic, but I just think that senior women, and seniors in general, need some slack... It's not like women are going to magically start receiving the same larger annual payout as the average man, not that I'm suggesting they should if they didn't contribute as much. Given our modern age, the retirement age is too young, many of retirees are going to have to go back to work when they realize they are going to li…
/r/MensRights21/09/11 09:53 AM
16

There should be a transitional arrangement for a few years for those who were literally on the precipice of retirement... When you expect to retire at 60, you make plans based on that. If suddenly you aren't going to get pension payments for another 5 years, you're suddenly making a lot less money during those 5 year than you had planned. edit- Apparently, this has been known for quite some time... like a decade... so I take back this entire paragraph. It should be equal, despite the fact that w…
/r/MensRights21/09/11 01:44 AM
3

As a Canadian, no. As a hearing impaired person with 2x $1500 hearing aids, I still don't see how that justifies $200 a week either. I think you completely missed the point I was making when I was remarking about needing glasses or an in-class note-taker... The spectrum of special needs goes from ADHD to extreme retardation.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:59 PM
3

Because jailing him is really going to get you your money. But really, how does someone who isn't paying for their own rent and basic utilities need $200 a month? Unless the girl is actually disabled, and not like needing glasses or some in-class note-taker, and requires expensive treatment or services, I don't see how it costs $200... Maybe in the child-rearing years (assuming they were never together) which may have impacted her financially, that is hardly the case anymore. In the end, impriso…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 06:31 PM
4

I agree, there is a fine line between what's racist/sexist and what's just common sense. Let us say a guy has been following you, a girl, for 3 blocks and into a random alleyway that you know has a dead-end... So while guys are more likely to be muggers, it's not the fact that the person is a guy that makes the situation threatening, but that they followed you so intently. Coming out and saying that you assumed he was a potential mugger because of the circumstances and that he was a guy is sligh…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 06:00 PM
4

Well this is what happens when you strive for equality of results... Natural disparities, like men being more physically active, are eliminated and that will impact men negatively. I say this without an ounce of credibility but men being more physically active isn't just a choice, but a need... When you prevent that need in order to fulfill gender quotas, the harm against men is even more pronounced because they can no longer do something they need to do. Another problem with equality of results…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 08:59 AM
4

Both sound like unsubstantiated theories trying to answer a question that might not actually have any answer, or so many answers that a psychological theory would be severely lacking.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 08:51 AM
2

You should read some of those comments.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 08:45 AM
16

Does that make it any less racist or sexist? Everyone is a potential thief or rapist... It becomes racism or sexism when you attribute it to a specific demographic.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 08:41 AM
8

A gender study but: Girls now outnumber boys in secondary schools in 45 developing countries (Ch 3) That isn't seen as a bad thing for boys but a good thing for girls? It's hilarious how misandrist they are. They don't mention how many men go missing, I bet it's comparable. How can women have anywhere close to the pay men receive in developing countries where physical labour is far more essential? How can a gender study exclude just about every issue that face men? How about how boys make up at …
/r/MensRights20/09/11 06:43 AM
2

Blaming the problems of the world on man dismisses the reality of society over the past 10s of thousands of years.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 02:19 AM
3

Good observation. Women are allowed to assume that men are being sexual, while men aren't allowed to assume a women are being sexual... While I agree with the later, especially when it involves rape, it seems perfectly acceptable by the same group that women are allowed to judge a man's intentions. Whenever a man takes advantage of a woman in cases where the victim blamers put some of the fault at the feet of the victim, feminists then, rightfully, take up arms against victim blamers for suggest…
/r/MensRights15/09/11 11:34 AM
8

People who blame the victim of a crime are thoroughly retarded. The retardation that bothers me in that thread was when the victim blaming included risk management. Giving others advice on how to reduce their exposure to risky situations is not the same thing as telling victims that they deserved what they got because of their lack of judgment. It's frustrating how retarded people are.
/r/MensRights15/09/11 08:35 AM
2

And how, at least in the West, the majority of voters are women... Usually because voting days are not on holidays.
/r/MensRights15/09/11 02:38 AM
2

I like how many times they mention the word parents... Do mothers have this problem? Pfft.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 12:07 PM
3

You'd be surprised how difficult concepts #1 and #2 are for people. I've smashed my head repeatedly upon the keyboard over it many many times.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 05:51 AM
1

So what? You think that makes ANY difference towards the uselessness of the data? Pfft, it's one factor that sometimes gets overlooked by these studies, but it's nice to see it get considered this time around... In the end, it doesn't look at pay differences between 2 identical individuals minus gender. It takes the median pay of all working women of a particular domination or class, and compares it to men of the same domination or class. So you got women who work less [when compared to men who …
/r/MensRights14/09/11 05:37 AM
4

I don't get how 65% of what the median male makes is relevant. I bet you 1000 karma that the study looks at the general population, no restrictions... So no shit women only make 65% of what the median male makes... More men actually work, work longer, etc...
/r/MensRights13/09/11 08:44 PM
5

facepalm
/r/MensRights13/09/11 05:07 PM
-1

You should see how they define sexual assault. You're title makes the claim that they claim that 1 in 3 are raped, which some probably do. It later gets diluted to 1 in 3 are raped or experience attempted rape. So what is attempted rape? So subjective... A guy gave you a drink could be attempted rape. But feminists already backpedaled from 1 in 3 were raped, so really their original study is probably bogus. In the end, most studies are conducted improperly or come up with conclusions that define…
/r/MensRights13/09/11 04:42 PM
10

It's not like a fire ladder is going to hire more people to accomodate women. The standard gets lowered, and instead of 10 men, it's 9 men and 1 women. Now instead of 10 men sharing the risk of a dangerous situation, it's 9. So the more women there are in a group, the higher risk men take... And I bet they all get paid the same too, when the men should actually be receiving a raise. This wouldn't be an issue if the standard wasn't lowered.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 01:56 PM
4

Only women can be charged with infanticide, it's fucked.
/r/MensRights11/09/11 03:39 AM
1

Not my intention... but it appeared to me that you don't understand that the quotes leaves a lot up for interpretation. You can interpret my way, or your way, that's the point... In the end, neither of us are right... I'm just making a point that his belief could be similar to what I outlined, and it isn't anything what the article tries to make it out to be.
/r/MensRights10/09/11 09:39 PM
1

Unlike myself, you actually claim to know what he believes... dumbass.
/r/MensRights10/09/11 08:55 PM
1

The article does a shitty job quoting him, that's for sure. Let's see if I can make sense of it. Historical oppression depends on definitions and context. Is the context the American 18th century and oppression is defined as not having the right to vote? Or is the context involve all women in Europe and North America from the 17th-20th century and oppression is defined when all men participated in a systematic effort to keep women their slaves (like how African-Americans were kept down)? Even if…
/r/MensRights10/09/11 12:30 PM
7

Even the reasons provided for by the wife was that she wanted to burn the tip of his dick off for "cheating" on him. Her actions were in no way spurred by an act domestic violence, as if she became enraged that she was assaulted or something. So to think that she was able to get away with the battered women defense is laughable. This is, of course, assuming that cheating on your spouse is not an act of domestic violence... But we all know how much extreme feminists have deluded the term. The fac…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 08:59 AM
1

This says it all: "White people often make the same argument around race saying, ‘oh I don’t see colour, aren’t we beyond all that’? But of course, the only person who would be so privileged to so as to ‘not see colour’ would be someone that didn’t have to see it, i.e. a white person. Humans aren’t equal. Oppression comes in many different forms and is deeply ingrained in our social structures. Feminism isn’t about being ‘equal’ to men as feminists do not believe men to be the end all be all in …
/r/MensRights13/08/11 09:12 PM
1

Here's the thing. One requires someone to intentionally make themselves vulnerable. When people say someone is victim blaming, it's when they said "she dressed like a skank, so she asked for it", etc.. The other is just a lack of intent.
/r/MensRights12/08/11 04:10 AM
0

I was under the impression victim blaming is when you fault the victim for being victimized. I fail to see how acknowledging that certain factors can play a role increasing risk is blaming the victim is a bad thing. For example, you said scenarios(how conveniently ambiguous) unlike clothing, play a role. Is acknowledging that putting yourself in a more defenseless position, like walking alone at night, make you a victim blamer? No. Your talking about how there are other more important factors th…
/r/MensRights12/08/11 02:11 AM
5

I understand that they are in the same weight class but is it even physically possible for women to achieve the same muscle-fat ratio as men? (without drugs) Just curious.
/r/MensRights06/08/11 09:58 AM
3

Equality of results is the dumbest infection to hit academia. Anyone who advocates for it in a broad sense, in the name of equality, should be laughed at. I can understand trying to equalize payments to 2 workers who are identical in every way minus gender... but to force payments to be equal in the case that the individuals are not identical will create institutionalized discrimination. The same can be said for gender quotas. I can't think of an example where using equality of results for gende…
/r/MensRights03/08/11 10:57 PM
4

How are sexual assaults avoided by telling men to avoid women who are alone? What? Did I have a brain fart or is that hilariously warped?
/r/MensRights03/08/11 01:09 AM
3

Another reason why men make more money is because they choose profitable jobs which often have high turnover rates. Example: Labor contracts.
/r/MensRights02/08/11 04:16 AM
1

I don't understand why so-called equalists treat men and women differently... Not saying you were or are. I'm just shedding light on a reality that one group is treated differently when they shouldn't be, and not only that, but they are clearly treated preferentially.
/r/MensRights31/07/11 10:44 AM
2

There is going to be an education gap. Yes, it's hypocritical for feminists who argue or think that it's that way because women are superior or something, but the result is inevitable... Equality in results is fucking retarded, because you're just discriminating again, and it may even be highly debatable that there was any discrimination on the part of many schools prior to this feminist movement... Heck, there's some studies that suggest affirmative action was underway before it was even put in…
/r/MensRights30/07/11 06:34 PM
1

Attempted suicide rates are over-exaggerated in the sense that there was an actual attempt at suicide.
/r/MensRights30/07/11 02:02 AM
3

The article nor the statistics indicates any rise in the number of injuries per job. Total injuries were bound to increase with a growing labor force, the question is whether or not it actually has increased due to better safety protocols, etc... Regardless, the answer is probably in the math somewhere but that is not the purpose of this submission. The reason why it isn't bad that more women are injured is because that means they are actually putting themselves in risky positions as equals amon…
/r/MensRights29/07/11 09:17 AM
3

That's what I noticed too. Seems like much of this increase could be accounted for by an expansion in the injury definition.
/r/MensRights29/07/11 04:21 AM
-1

Study from here. A whole section on women... who cares about the men?
/r/MensRights29/07/11 12:11 AM
3

We don't have any facts pertaining to the case except what the defense is arguing. Historically though, the prosecution could pursue this case even though they were both the same age and it will come down to testimonies since there is probably zero physical evidence. This is why you shut the fuck up and don't admit you did ANYTHING with someone if you're asked unless your lawyer says it can help you. This isn't to help rapists, but to help innocent men who get caught in this misandrist justice s…
/r/MensRights26/07/11 12:20 AM
2

From the women who argued EG was a misogynist? No thanks, I'm not even going to click her pos blog.
/r/MensRights24/07/11 09:22 PM
2

18 year olds who attack 15 year olds are going to be castrated? What an ingenious piece of legislation. Does anyone have the texts because I find it hard to believe.
/r/MensRights24/07/11 09:20 PM
3

So they are going to switch "female" to "person"? If that's all I don't see what the problem is. I don't know why they'd even use that definition if that's true. There seems to be some concern that they want to do away with forcibly and broaden the scope of rape. Now whatever that means is what intrigues me. This is why I'd like to see what they propose.
/r/MensRights24/07/11 07:51 AM
3

What is the definition and what do they want to change it to?
/r/MensRights24/07/11 04:44 AM
1

What they did was fucking horrible, but I think we can all agree a 14 year old going to jail gets us no where. It's like the girls who stripped that boy, what good is there in jailing minors? None whatsoever. But, to address your post, I don't think the sex offenders list should exist. Especially not for a 14 year old.
/r/MensRights22/07/11 09:59 AM
4

Can you rephrase your post? I'm trying to figure it out. Maybe I'm sleep deprived but I read your post, and lat48's and I'm fucking clueless. To me, your response to the OP makes no sense.
/r/MensRights22/07/11 09:51 AM
21

The whole point of the ban is to prevent the civil liberties of male babies from being violated. Woosh By preventing the legislation from being voted upon or enacted, they are against the defense for the bodily integrity of male babies. There are no options. Giving parents the freedom to choose whether or not they can violate the human rights of male babies is the unethical option.
/r/MensRights20/07/11 11:46 PM
2

Affirmative action is absolutely retarded. Consider firefighters. A group of firefighters were usually all men. Affirmative action mandates (random bogus figure) at least 1 women to be in this group. What happens? In general, the requirements are loosened and a weaker individual is hired over a stronger individual. When there is a particularly dangerous situation, those remaining men have to shoulder more of the physical work and risk then they would have before when there were all men. Not only…
/r/MensRights20/07/11 10:56 PM
1

My post was unspecific. I was implying Africa immigrants that were educated domestically. Your analysis points to an undervaluation of foreign education or blatant discrimination against immigrating foreign workers (not students). There's nothing in those articles that indicate a discrimination against immigrants who attained their degrees domestically. I'd like to add that those studies suffer from the same flaws as the gender wage gap.
/r/MensRights20/07/11 10:51 PM
1

The highest academically achieving demographic in the west are African immigrants. With respect to those individuals, I'd imagine they are the most highly paid demographic.
/r/MensRights20/07/11 10:16 PM
30

37 minutes ago and it's already back up. Good sources though, but I'm doubting there was censorship. Interesting that boys and girls suffer roughly equally (girls about 10% more), and mothers are more than twice as likely as fathers to be the perpetrator of that suffering. Even if all of the non-parental and unknown cases were caused by men, women would still account for more suffering... and somehow men are seen as the more dangerous demographic to children, and girls are seen as being victims …
/r/MensRights20/07/11 09:45 AM
1

My point exactly. Rebecca may not have originally blown her incident out of proportion(although being "sexualized" is an act of misogyny to many feminists, probably including Rebecca) but her rebuttal to Stef certainly did just that.
/r/MensRights18/07/11 10:46 PM
1

You don't have to admit anything. You just don't say anything. Some school boards in some states will listen to the testimony of the accuser, and if they find it, at least, 50% plausible, you'll be expelled. How they come to 50% is beyond me. Testimony + emotional + possible (no contradicting alibi or something?) = 50%? It's dumb.
/r/MensRights18/07/11 08:35 PM
2

It's probably been said 10 times already, but do not speak to anyone except a lawyer. If you admit you even know her, much less had consensual sex with her, you are amplifying the possibility of it even going to court. Without even reading your story, I could tell you she probably doesn't even have physical evidence that sex even occurred. So not only would the prosecution have to try and convince the court that a rape occurred, they'd have to also convince the court that any physical contact oc…
/r/MensRights18/07/11 07:04 AM
2

Yes I don't.
/r/MensRights14/07/11 05:23 AM
17

Nice to see some equal justice under the law, but I still think the law is stupid.
/r/MensRights13/07/11 11:41 PM
2

If she had only argued she felt harassed I probably wouldn't care. But as usual, she argued it a case of misogyny. You'd be surprised to see how many people define misogyny to be "when a guy asks to talk to you politely, but the circumstances around the encounter were not to your preference".
/r/MensRights13/07/11 03:10 AM
2

No surprise really. The desire for men to go into the technical fields is one reason why the myth that there is gender discrimination will persist. Once I get my computer engineering degree and get paid twice as much as a female friend who went through arts, it's because she is being discriminated. /s
/r/MensRights12/07/11 10:37 PM
3

I would not want to actually go through the statistical nightmare of figuring out if women, on average, get paid less than men if they work the same job at the same company and have equal credentials, productivity and seniority. All I know is that, with respect to most figures paraded around by feminists, the current methods are wholly insufficient or intentionally misleading. It's like how mainstream sexual assault statistics count drunken sex or sex-without-clear-verbal-consent as sexual assau…
/r/MensRights12/07/11 10:26 PM
2

Oh I like how my confusion is a topic point :D And it should be! People are being labeled every bad thing under the sun because they don't ascribe to a broader definition of misogyny! I can't even trust the dictionary anymore :(
/r/MensRights11/07/11 08:57 PM
4

In addition, it isn't benevolent sexism on the part of men to think that women are weak and need protection. /s
/r/MensRights11/07/11 08:52 PM
6

I wish some people on the PZ website would feel the same way. I think I got called a misogynist, idiot, fuckhead, MRA parrot, fucker, etc... 10 times each... because I expressed skepticism or resilience to their broadened definition of misogyny. Feminist community is not very mature. I already knew that but this epic international debate has certainly revealed it to far more people.
/r/MensRights11/07/11 08:40 PM
-3

If that's true, then damn the debate has certainly desensitized my definition of misogynist. I'm trying not to water down the definition as much as others have. Quite frankly, I ain't even going to argue the point because I don't want to get in another epic debate about whether or not something is misogynist. Just note that I am trying to keep a strict definition.
/r/MensRights11/07/11 07:04 PM
7

It wasn't rape because she wasn't trying to dominate or humiliate him. She was in a vulnerable position where her species was at risk of extinction and needed to get pregnant. And plus, he like, love hers. I'm just kidding, but the only thing to note is that most people who watched it probably didn't think it was as heinous as when the black chick was raped. They might even think that men still can't be raped.
/r/MensRights11/07/11 07:01 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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