cahpahkah Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
1	Amnesty International wages war on Gender Violence for 16 days. Defines Gender violence as violence against women (Ignores the fact that men overwhelmingly suffer more violence). No, gendered approaches to reducing violence for a specific subset of people are perfectly fine -- in fact, they're probably more effective than broadside efforts. You're the one who's been arguing against them -- not me. And it's not impossible to reduce violence across the board through untargeted approaches, it's just never been successfully done. Go for it. The world will be better if you pull it off.	/r/MensRights	05/12/12 03:11 PM
1	Amnesty International wages war on Gender Violence for 16 days. Defines Gender violence as violence against women (Ignores the fact that men overwhelmingly suffer more violence). ...but I thought your point was that there shouldn't be gender specific approaches in the first place, right?	/r/MensRights	04/12/12 11:33 PM
1	Amnesty International wages war on Gender Violence for 16 days. Defines Gender violence as violence against women (Ignores the fact that men overwhelmingly suffer more violence). Have you noticed anyone, anywhere achieving it?	/r/MensRights	04/12/12 06:36 PM
1	Amnesty International wages war on Gender Violence for 16 days. Defines Gender violence as violence against women (Ignores the fact that men overwhelmingly suffer more violence). Yes, making small gains against violence is preferable to failing to make large ones. If you know how to eliminate all violence against all people in one fell swoop, please let us know so that the people of earth can bask in your wisdom.	/r/MensRights	04/12/12 04:33 PM
0	Amnesty International wages war on Gender Violence for 16 days. Defines Gender violence as violence against women (Ignores the fact that men overwhelmingly suffer more violence). I don't think that anyone believes that victims of domestic violence should be ignored because of their gender. But there is a substantial gap in domestic violence resulting in injury, and in sexual assault, which has led the Justice Department, among others, to discount symmetry studies which rely upon the Conflict Tactics Scale (i.e., most of the ones Fiebert surveys), which measures incidents of domestic violence, but does not account for their severity. If you honestly look at the issue and …	/r/MensRights	04/12/12 05:19 AM
-2	Amnesty International wages war on Gender Violence for 16 days. Defines Gender violence as violence against women (Ignores the fact that men overwhelmingly suffer more violence). Conflating all violence as uncategorizable is reductive, simplistic, and unhelpful. Yes, more men than women are victims of violence. And more women than men are victims of violence perpetrated by a member of one group against a member of another group. That second type -- the kind that refers to a specific subset of people -- is gender violence, which is what we're talking about. This isn't the complicated part. You can certainly believe that approaches that target specific slices of the violen…	/r/MensRights	04/12/12 02:44 AM
1	Amnesty International wages war on Gender Violence for 16 days. Defines Gender violence as violence against women (Ignores the fact that men overwhelmingly suffer more violence). it has been documented that over 70% of DV are instigated by the woman I'd be curious to read where you're getting that number. Every real study that I've ever seen has suggested the opposite is true. Care to provide a link?	/r/MensRights	04/12/12 02:33 AM
0	Amnesty International wages war on Gender Violence for 16 days. Defines Gender violence as violence against women (Ignores the fact that men overwhelmingly suffer more violence). If you're talking about men murdering other men, then only if you reject the notion of the existence of gender violence in the first place, which some here do. I'm not one of them. A member of a group committing a crime against another member of the same group generally doesn't qualify as a hate crime, but some feel otherwise.	/r/MensRights	04/12/12 02:23 AM
-1	The Patriarchy. What? Some things from your list to think about: Given every educational opportunity men are In the United States, college enrollment is actually around 57%/43% in favor of women. Can do any job a man does Yes, and they receive an average of 7% less for doing them. CEOs of major Fortune 500 companies The breakdown is 20 women and 480 men. Not remotely close. in positions of power in the government, including being heads of state in some countries This is true, but highly selective. In the US Senate, f…	/r/MensRights	03/12/12 10:43 PM
-2	Amnesty International wages war on Gender Violence for 16 days. Defines Gender violence as violence against women (Ignores the fact that men overwhelmingly suffer more violence). How hard would it be to create an initiative to stop domestic violence that wasn't specifically targeted at one gender? Well, seeing as no civilization in history has ever achieved such a thing, I suppose it's pretty hard. Yes, it would be far better to end all violence than simply end violence against a specific subset of people. Nobody knows how to do this. Until somebody magically figures that out, it is reasonable -- though imperfect -- to target disproportionally affected groups and attempt…	/r/MensRights	03/12/12 10:14 PM
1	My rant about equal rights. Professors are grading men harder then woman when it comes to things like English because of feminism. FYI, if that's the level of argument you're making in your papers, your grades aren't going to be too impressive.	/r/MensRights	03/12/12 10:04 PM
-2	Amnesty International wages war on Gender Violence for 16 days. Defines Gender violence as violence against women (Ignores the fact that men overwhelmingly suffer more violence). I'd agree that you're not beating your girlfriend because she is female, but domestic violence is still considered gender based because it disproportionally affects women. (Yes, men are victims of domestic violence too, but more women are.)	/r/MensRights	03/12/12 09:47 PM
1	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent I didn't say it was bad for you to be illiterate -- it's just a statement of fact. Because if you actually were able to read what I wrote about the nature of consent and still extrapolated anything at all about the capabilities of women, then you'd have to be cripplingly fucking stupid. So I was actually giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you have difficulty reading. I apologize if I was mistaken, and it's just the stupidity that's holding you down.	/r/MensRights	31/08/12 07:27 PM
0	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent And you're apparently illiterate. Enjoy your hate-fueled circle jerk. I'm done with this fucked up place.	/r/MensRights	31/08/12 03:28 PM
-3	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent I don't think you understand the word rapist if you're using it that way. Neither of the people in the original example expressed verbal consent to the other for what occurred, that is absolutely true. It is also true that the woman did not want to have sex. We don't know if man wanted a blowjob -- it's not in the example. So, sure. The reason I got involved in this thread, though, is because there is some bullshit being spouted about silence being equivalent to consent. And that is simply fucke…	/r/MensRights	28/08/12 12:56 PM
-18	"If men are the only group one can joke about exterminating, ... perhaps it means that antimale bigotry, especially among the narrow elite, has reached potentially dangerous levels." James Taranto Or, you know, maybe it was an honest acknowledgment of the other half of a complicated issue...nah, that's just crazy talk, right?	/r/MensRights	28/08/12 04:09 AM
-1	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent You do seem to be awfully agreeable, so maybe that does count as a "yes".	/r/MensRights	28/08/12 03:54 AM
-21	"If men are the only group one can joke about exterminating, ... perhaps it means that antimale bigotry, especially among the narrow elite, has reached potentially dangerous levels." James Taranto I especially liked how you had to slice up the quote in order to get to your circle-jerk incendiary headline... "If men are the only group one can joke about exterminating, perhaps it means that we really do live in a male-dominated culture--one in which men are the only group about which such a joke runs no risk of being taken seriously. Or perhaps it means that antimale bigotry, especially among the narrow elite, has reached potentially dangerous levels." Nice job, that.	/r/MensRights	28/08/12 03:44 AM
2	Ann Coulter On Female Vote: ‘Single Women Look For Gov’t To Be Their Husbands’ Also: Ann Coulter is a single woman.	/r/MensRights	28/08/12 03:30 AM
-5	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent Lol. Obvious troll is obvious. Try harder next time.	/r/MensRights	28/08/12 03:18 AM
-4	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent I don't think you have a very firm grasp on the conversation. This is a B- trolling effort, at best.	/r/MensRights	28/08/12 03:04 AM
-6	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent It's not simply about sex -- no one can obligate anybody else to respond to anything. You're assuming that Person A has a right to demand an answer to a question from Person B (in this case, "Do you want to have sex?"). And that if Person B declines to answer the question, Person A can deem Person B to have consented to whatever answer Person A had been hoping for. That is just insane. Responsibility for getting an affirmative answer rests entirely with the one asking the question. The other par…	/r/MensRights	28/08/12 01:20 AM
-5	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent No, not women -- people shouldn't have to do anything they don't want to (even if that thing is say "I don't want to have sex with you"). And anyone who's looking to change their relationship to someone else should acquire explicit consent from the other person. You're the one making this gendered and throwing around wild suppositions, not me. I'm a big fan of personal responsibility, which is why I think the initiator in these situations is responsible for making sure that his or her assumption…	/r/MensRights	28/08/12 12:47 AM
4	My second r/mensrights advertising campaign has gone live! I'm just curious: why are you advertising? I'm one of those who saw your ad, and from what I've seen, it doesn't seem like this subreddit is particularly interested in opposing viewpoints (which is fine). So why seek them out? Or are you just looking to find more redditors who already agree with you? I don't have a problem with that, either -- just curious as to what your goal is here.	/r/MensRights	28/08/12 12:37 AM
-5	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent No one can read minds. Absolutely! Which is why making assumptions about other people's desires is a bad idea, and you're much better off just asking directly and getting an answer. Glad we agree.	/r/MensRights	27/08/12 11:59 PM
-4	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent No, I'm not saying that at all. Because that is stupid. What I'm saying is that in the absence of explicit consent your rely upon assumptions and you run the risks of your assumptions being wrong. The better you know someone, the better chance you have of being right, but without explicit verbal consent, there's always a chance. Everyone can make their own decisions about how to manage that risk, and you can get it right 99 times out of a hundred. But the one time you get it wrong, it might just…	/r/MensRights	27/08/12 11:49 PM
-3	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent No, you should assume that you don't know, because they didn't answer the question.	/r/MensRights	27/08/12 11:27 PM
-6	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent you think women are incapable of saying "no" No, I think they aren't required to -- the burden of obtaining the other person's consent rests upon whichever party, regardless of gender, wants to change the dynamic between them. And to use your own example, yes, that person did in fact steal your gumball, because they did not have your permission to take it. You may be fine with them taking your gumball, you may have wanted them to take it. You may be flattered that anybody desired your gumball in…	/r/MensRights	27/08/12 10:16 PM
-8	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent Sure, there's a grey area. And grey area defaults to "no" rather than "yes" where any form of permission is involved -- that's just the nature of consent: it's the thing that's needed to resolve ambiguity, and silence is not the same thing. You might think that you're free to initiate any behavior towards another person, and that that behavior is acceptable and consented to unless the other person takes action to stop you. I don't think that. I think that when there is grey area, you're much bet…	/r/MensRights	27/08/12 10:04 PM
-11	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent Sorry, no; your analogy is bad and you should feel bad. Not exercising your "right to not consent" is IN NO WAY consenting. They are unrelated ideas. Much like if I post "Demonspawn should be banned from Reddit for propagating idiocy." and the majority of Redditors do not exercise their right to not consent by responding to my post, it does not mean that the majority of Redditors consent to your banning. It just means that they didn't say anything about it. See how words work? Silence is categor…	/r/MensRights	27/08/12 09:34 PM
1	Just a Little Comparison That Needed to be Done Dude..."is with a harder time getting welgare" Context matters.	/r/MensRights	27/08/12 09:12 PM
-6	According to my University's mandatory rape training, women do not require consent 1) She is not exercising her right to not consent (i.e. she is consenting). This is completely tortured reasoning. "Not saying no" does not equal "saying yes" -- it's actually just not saying anything at all.	/r/MensRights	27/08/12 09:08 PM