TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

catlebrity Archive

View 8 posts and 741 comments by catlebrity on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-7

New improved quote: Here's a man who lives in one of the most affluent, privileged nations in the world. Without knowing him personally, my guess is that he enjoys better health (emotional health excepted), a better education, a better standard of living, eats better, has greater freedom, etc. than something like 95% of the world. And he's the one who wants us to believe that he's oppressed to the point of whining about it on the internet by a video game in which you can kill dudes.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 06:48 PM
1

Exactly. I'm constantly being labeled all of those things; the only one that's accurate is the feminist one. It's interesting that "woman" tends to get used as a pejorative in roughly the same way as "troll" or "misandrist" -- a reason to discount whatever is being said.
/r/MensRights12/06/10 08:09 AM
5

kanuk878 doesn't realize that he's the MRA version of a lesbian separatist.
/r/MensRights12/06/10 07:11 AM
1

Well, I am a feminist, but I wouldn't exactly call myself a sister. Though sometimes I say "you go, girl" to myself.
/r/MensRights12/06/10 07:09 AM
1

All men's rights activists are seen as hostile to women. Well, if they say things hostile to women, they are.
/r/MensRights12/06/10 07:07 AM
1

Whine all you want sister For anyone who wonders why this subreddit is seen as hostile to women, here you go. (And I'm not even a woman.)
/r/MensRights11/06/10 11:22 PM
1

Not much enlightenment going on in this subreddit, alas.
/r/MensRights11/06/10 10:45 PM
5

Yes, there's a very lively discussion going on there.
/r/MensRights11/06/10 10:41 PM
2

What an obnoxious and largely substance-free attack. Oh, and bigoted: you really think the best way to discredit someone is to note that they're a "tranny?" This isn't the first time you've posted obnoxious transphobic crap. What's your fucking problem? Let's see what else you've got. You dismiss Michael Kimmel, the author of a number of important books, including Manhood in America: A Cultural History, because he ... well, I have no idea why you attacked him, because the letter you got from him…
/r/MensRights11/06/10 08:41 PM
0

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/cd91m/oj_simpsons_murder_of_nicole_brown_simpson/
/r/MensRights10/06/10 03:00 AM
8

I think murder pretty much trumps DV, no matter who commits it.
/r/MensRights10/06/10 12:16 AM
-3

Huh. I thought on this subreddit all accusers of sexual harassment were assumed to be liars and the accused were always innocent. So why isn't everyone defending Britney?
/r/MensRights10/06/10 12:11 AM
1

Well, yeah, I imagine life expectancy will be higher a century from now. I don't expect it to double every century forever, though. Will it be 480 in 2300? 960 in 2400? If you could just extrapolate every trend according to a simple formula, the future would be lot less mysterious. But trends change and reverse. History is complicated. Heck, global warming or some crazy pandemic could wipe out humans altogether by 2100. FWIW, the number I used was global, not just for the west.
/r/MensRights09/06/10 09:57 PM
1

Marriage all but disappeared in Ancient Rome after no-fault divorce was established. Do people marry in Rome today? Well, yes they do. Marriage rates go up, they go down. History is not linear.
/r/MensRights09/06/10 09:52 PM
2

Uh, you can't just predict future rates by extrapolating. Average life expectancy more than doubled from 30 years in 1900 to 64 in 2000. That doesn't mean it will be 120 in 2100, and 240 in 2200.
/r/MensRights09/06/10 09:11 PM
5

In my office, the men wear shorts and dirty t-shirts, and the women wear nothing. Of course, I work at home and by "women" I mean my cat.
/r/MensRights09/06/10 08:03 PM
4

according to my calculations children born today have only a 10% chance of getting married during their lifetime Uh, let's see those calculations.
/r/MensRights09/06/10 08:00 PM
7

Wait, what? I think this post reaches a new low in the endless hunt for imaginary oppression.
/r/MensRights09/06/10 07:59 PM
1

Dude, the pair I show off is covered with chest hair. I still put glitter on them though.
/r/MensRights08/06/10 09:36 PM
0

Q: How many MRAs does it take to screw in a lightbulb? A: That's not funny!!!!
/r/MensRights08/06/10 09:06 PM
-3

Upon close review I have concluded that her long hair is partially covering one of the boobies.
/r/MensRights08/06/10 07:40 PM
-9

Yes, it bothers me terribly that women in the summer wear revealing clothing. Cleavage burns my eyes!!
/r/MensRights08/06/10 07:36 PM
1

So you're going to dismiss her research because two publications that interviewed her gave titles to those interviews that you have chosen to interpret in the most sensational way? Have you actually read either interview? (I'm guessing not, since neither is online.) She may have simply been saying: hey, two women together can make good parents. I imagine she would also say: hey, two men together can make good parents. ("A father can be an ideal mother.") Do you actually have evidence that she's …
/r/MensRights08/06/10 07:30 PM
-1

Lesbians raising well-adjusted children is a plot against men!
/r/MensRights08/06/10 10:00 AM
6

He banned me too! How will I live?
/r/MensRights07/06/10 08:17 AM
13

Feel free to believe what you like, but you did not actually respond to the study I mentioned, which shows pretty clearly that the other studies you refer to are methodologically flawed. Instead, you misrepresented it (as you continue to do here with your comment about the cases being "hand picked"); dismissed it using ad hominem (because it was written by a feminist); and then called me a "man hater."
/r/MensRights07/06/10 02:59 AM
2

Spoken like a true hermaphrodite.
/r/MensRights07/06/10 02:52 AM
9

Well, given that the OP has recently called me a "troll" and a "man-hater," I'd suggest that he is talking about me. And, again, I am male. Why exactly do you think I'm female, despite the fact that I've stated very clearly on numerous occasions that I am not? Indeed, if you look through my comment history I believe I have referred more than once to my balls. Why would it matter if I were female?
/r/MensRights06/06/10 07:07 PM
5

The last time I debated with you, you suggested I was a man hater. Please provide an example of me saying something that is man-hating.
/r/MensRights06/06/10 06:41 PM
5

You always call me a misandrist. Please find a post of mine in which I actually say something misandrist.
/r/MensRights06/06/10 06:39 PM
3

I'm always being accused of "man-hating" here, which is sort of silly because, among other things, I am a man. If you think I'm an example of a man-hater, please provide a link to a comment in which I say anything man-hating.
/r/MensRights06/06/10 06:38 PM
15

In the last "discussion" I had with you, I provided links to a study that backed up my points. You simply dismissed it without reading any of it (apparently you only read the one-paragraph summary of it), suggested that no feminist could do honest research, then called me a "man hater."
/r/MensRights06/06/10 06:32 PM
2

I'm a misandrist for suggesting that he talk to the EEOC about his concerns?
/r/MensRights06/06/10 06:27 PM
2

I know; I was just saying that I'd already suggested you talk to someone about it, that I didn't dismiss it b/c you're male and she' female. I don't know if there's enough there to make a federal case out of it (litarally) but if it makes you uncomfortable, call the EEOC.
/r/MensRights06/06/10 04:58 AM
2

Well, if your company had an HR department, I'd suggest (as I originally did) that you talk to them about it. If it makes you uncomfortable, give the EEOC a call. If i was female, and my boss male, would you really feel right in saying that? In fact, I've seen male co-workers make leering, unwanted, sexual remarks to female co-workers, and, no I didn't suggest they file harassment complaints; it was boorish behavior, but it didn't really add up to a hostile work environment. More on the legal de…
/r/MensRights06/06/10 04:43 AM
2

You said she started there two months ago. Who hired her? In any case, if the problem persists, you may want to contact the EEOC. https://eeoc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/eeoc.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=305&p_created=1106333666&p_sid=Hn2GuJ1k&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_lva=334&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9MywzJnBfcHJvZHM9MCZwX2NhdHM9JnBfcHY9JnBfY3Y9JnBfc2VhcmNoX3R5cGU9YW5zd2Vycy5zZWFyY2hfbmwmcF9wYWdlPTEmcF9zZWFyY2hfdGV4dD1oYXJhc3NtZW50&p_li=&p_topview=1 Hon…
/r/MensRights06/06/10 04:03 AM
1

You weren't in debate club in high school, were you?
/r/MensRights05/06/10 11:14 PM
7

studies done on thousands of cases all find a very significant female sentencing discount. Yes, and this study argues pretty convincingly that their methodology, and thus their conclusions, are incorrect. EDIT: If what she is saying is true, then the case-by-case differences should even out on a large enough sample. Uh, this suggests you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. There is absolutely no reason to conclude this. EDIT: In response to the second paragraph you added: if you h…
/r/MensRights05/06/10 10:56 PM
4

Boy, there's some selective quotation going on. The rest of the sentence reads: her close comparison of the matched pairs indicates that gender differences are negligible when the details of the cases are taken into consideration. Obviously you did not even glance at the study itself before jumping to a completely incorrect conclusion. She did not "pick" 40 cases. She examined 40 cases selected randomly from a larger sample. She explains her methodology in detail in the book; you can read all ab…
/r/MensRights05/06/10 10:50 PM
7

women's sentencing discount is the largest factor in determining a sentence for otherwise equal crimes and equal criminal backgrounds, before race and income. Actually, that's not true. This book looked at the sentencing of men and women for what were statistically classified as "equal crimes" and found that the (on average) longer sentences given to men in fact reflected significant differences in circumstances -- such as the men having longer ciminal records, or being the primary instigators o…
/r/MensRights05/06/10 10:37 PM
0

Who's defending the song? I'll defend the first amendment, but the song is idiotic and obnoxious.
/r/MensRights05/06/10 09:23 PM
10

The point of this post is to show yet another example of women getting away with killing their husbands It seems sometimes like half the posts in this subreddit are about men being falsely accused of rape -- and how unfair it is to assume men are guilty (however many suspicious circumstances there are) unless they've been convicted of it, and sometimes not even then. And here you are saying a woman is guilty of murder -- clearly you've convicted her in your head -- on the basis of a few suspicio…
/r/MensRights05/06/10 08:39 PM
1

Yep. This is one of the reasons companies have HR departments.
/r/MensRights05/06/10 06:58 PM
3

Are you equating a song by a completely obscure crazy person with something that matters? Yes, yes you are!
/r/MensRights02/06/10 11:34 PM
4

What is interesting, if you will start listening, is that men frequently call women bitches, but they are the ones who have the ultimate choice of the women they date. Thus, logically, when a man calls a past girlfriend a bitch, he is calling himself an idiot. But he's an idiot, so he has no idea.
/r/MensRights02/06/10 08:42 PM
2

How about this. The Beatles -- the motherfucking BEATLES -- have a song about killing a woman out of jealousy: http://www.mp3lyrics.org/b/beatles/run-for-your-life/
/r/MensRights02/06/10 08:38 PM
9

You really don't know much about popular culture, do you?
/r/MensRights02/06/10 07:02 AM
5

Yeah, it's not like anyone has ever heard of Dr. Dre or Eminem or Lil Wayne.
/r/MensRights02/06/10 12:49 AM
1

The BBC isn't msm?
/r/MensRights01/06/10 06:30 PM
5

Yeah, it's not like lyrics are ever disrespectful of women: http://www.metrolyrics.com/aint-nothing-lyrics-silkk-the-shocker.html http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/drdre/bitchesaintshit.html http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/y/ying_yang_twins/hoes.html http://www.lyriczz.com/lyrics/lil-wayne/53137-ask-them-hoes/ http://www.lyrics007.com/Eminem%20Lyrics/Superman%20Lyrics.html http://www.lyricsfreak.com/r/rolling+stones/under+my+thumb_20117884.html This one actually isn't disrespectful, but it does ta…
/r/MensRights01/06/10 06:19 PM
-3

The woman on post secret didn't call it rape; she called it "semi-rape."
/r/MensRights30/05/10 06:03 PM
-2

The men who post here are not exactly a representative sample.
/r/MensRights30/05/10 06:00 PM
1

What the fuck are you even talking about?
/r/MensRights26/05/10 06:18 AM
2

Where did I say that? I simply said no single study is definitive.
/r/MensRights26/05/10 06:17 AM
-1

Different studies have had different results, depending on a lot of variables. This particular study, for example, was of younger adults (surveyed in high school and then ten years later), and had an assortment of other limitations as discussed in the study itself. As you know, all studies have limitations, so you can't really take any single study as the definitive word. (FWIW, it also found that "men were more likely to inflict injury than were women.")
/r/MensRights25/05/10 09:10 PM
3

I suppose that depends on your definition of "aggressive." In terms of who is the aggressor, it seems to be about even. But I'd say hitting someone hard enough to kill them (even if they are "fragile") is a bit more aggressive than slapping or hitting someone bigger than you when you know it won't do much damage. I hasten to add that, yes, there are women who are very violent and/or bigger than their partners who do a lot of damage, but the overall evidence as you acknowledge is that men -- over…
/r/MensRights25/05/10 08:13 PM
2

Uh, I think the "angle" here is a rather important one -- we're talking about the actual consequences of the DV. And pointing out what I pointed out is not the same as saying that women are the only victims; I don't believe that and I didn't say that, and you know that.
/r/MensRights25/05/10 08:04 PM
-5

In terms of who does the violence, yes, some studies do suggest that. But the vast majority of studies, including some of those that suggest men and women both do violence in the same amount, suggest that women tend to be injured far more often and more severely by DV than men.
/r/MensRights25/05/10 06:55 PM
0

how can you REBUT a scientific study? You really don't know how science works, do you?
/r/MensRights24/05/10 07:53 PM
1

That really is a terrible headline. What does this story have to do with anything?
/r/MensRights24/05/10 05:14 AM
-7

So you would have preferred that we never knew that OJ SImpson was accused of murder? Given that he was acquitted, we never would have even heard about the case.
/r/MensRights21/05/10 08:58 AM
2

Actually, the term "snapped" is used in the media all the time in relation to male murderers: http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=Rra&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=%22man+snapped%22+murder&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= And in this case in England a male teacher was acquitted of attempted murder after being caught on tape beating a student with a dumbbell while shouting "die die die"-- because the jury and judge thought he was a decent guy who had just ...…
/r/MensRights21/05/10 12:00 AM
3

Once again, there is NO GENDER ISSUE HERE. It is difficult to prove intent n court. Lots of people who stab other people do not get changed with attempted murder. For example, these cases, all involving male perps: http://westseattleblog.com/2010/04/high-point-stabbing-suspect-charged-with-first-degree-assault http://www.annarbor.com/neighborhoods/downtown/man-arraigned-on-felony-assault-charges-in-early-morning-stabbing-in-ann-arbor/ http://wcexaminer.com/sections/news/archive/2009/12/31/breaki…
/r/MensRights20/05/10 10:30 PM
0

It's really quite amazing you can operate a computer at all. EDIT: And just so you know, the guilty woman has been officially fired from her job. The firing was announced by Rebecca Filip, executive director of AWARE. I believe we can safely infer that Rebecca is probably a woman. http://www.mlive.com/news/jackson/index.ssf/2010/05/ladonna_glenn_fired_from_her_p.html My shoe eating offer still stands. Also, try the image search again with safe search off. I believe it might be easier to tell whi…
/r/MensRights20/05/10 09:41 PM
1

The study looked at two things: the frequency of violence and the frequency of injury. The title of the OP simply quoted the first half of the study's abstract, leaving out the part about the frequency of injury. If anything, the OP was cherrypicking, not me. If you want to deal with DV in the real world, you need to pay attention to not only who does it but who bears the brunt of the damage from it. If you want to live in an imaginary r/mensrights world where quoting the actual study under disc…
/r/MensRights19/05/10 11:47 PM
-1

How exactly is what I said an argument against men's rights?
/r/MensRights19/05/10 10:45 PM
-1

You found one guy whose name is Breehn? Jesus fucking Christ, just admit that you didn't read the article very carefully. Is it really that hard to just admit that you missed the name? Anyway, find anyone who calls themselves a feminist who is defending this woman (besides herself and/or her lawyer, that is), even some crazy person with a blog, and I'll eat my shoe. And when you're done with that, take a look here and tell me that any of these people look like dudes: http://www.google.com/images…
/r/MensRights19/05/10 10:44 PM
-3

As you'll note if you read the first fucking paragraph of the story, the board president's name is Bree. Know any guys named Bree? You're the one who said "leading feminist voices," so presumably you know who they are. Heck, find me any feminist defending her.
/r/MensRights19/05/10 10:15 PM
-5

leading feminist voices will help with the appeal! Yeah, that's why the (female, and presumably feminist) president of the AWARE board just shitcanned her: http://www.mlive.com/news/jackson/index.ssf/2010/05/award_board_president_if_domes.html If even a single "leading feminist voice" defends her in any way, I will eat my shoe.
/r/MensRights19/05/10 07:56 PM
-3

I'm sorry. If you're twice the size as your partner, and your partner hits you, you don't hit back. (Whatever the genders involved are.) Regardless of size, you don't hit back. If your partner regularly hits you and you hit back, it's likely to escalate the problem. Instead, you get out of the relationship. Nowhere did I suggest that the minority should be ignored. I'm just troubled that people in the subreddit seem to think that studies like this show that men are the primary victims of DV, in …
/r/MensRights19/05/10 07:48 PM
2

A couple things to note: Regarding injury, men were more likely to inflict injury than were women and The 3 questions included in the Add Health study do not capture all forms of violence that occur between relationship partners, including many of the more severe forms of partner violence on the Conflict Tactics Scale (e.g., used a knife or gun, choked, or burned). ... Similarly, only a single item assessed injury to victims and it focused on injury frequency and excluded injury severity and whe…
/r/MensRights19/05/10 07:04 PM
3

How often do we need to read these stories? Seriously, constantly posting stories about women committing crimes makes this subreddit look a lot like this: http://www.vnnforum.com/tags.php?tag=nigger+crime With "woman" replacing ... you know. I mean, seriously, it's not hard in a world of 6 billion people to find endless examples of individual men, women and children behaving very very badly. For example, here's another news story from today: Man pleads guilty to killing 2 sons by setting them on…
/r/MensRights18/05/10 10:39 PM
2

Slavering hordes. cartooncorpse, I am disappointed in you.
/r/MensRights18/05/10 10:31 PM
3

Sometimes this subreddit reminds me of this: http://www.vnnforum.com/tags.php?tag=nigger+crime With "woman" instead of .. you know.
/r/MensRights18/05/10 06:06 AM
1

You couldn't find even one post, could you? EDIT: Also, I said I sometimes posted "irritated" comments, not "irritating."
/r/MensRights17/05/10 08:11 PM
3

No.
/r/MensRights17/05/10 06:15 AM
9

Also: Who has a problem with both partners using birth control? No form of birth control is 100% effective, but with both partners using something you get about as close to 100% as you're going to get.
/r/MensRights17/05/10 06:15 AM
2

you who blame men for everything [citation needed]
/r/MensRights17/05/10 04:48 AM
-3

Try writing clearly for a change.
/r/MensRights16/05/10 09:13 PM
3

Did you miss this part? I am not excusing it by any means... women need to take responsibility for their actions. But I could see how it could be tempting to accuse the man of rape rather than admit "you're a whore" by societies standards. And you actually thought for a moment about banning it? I didn't realize that "feminist meta-narrative" -- whatever that is -- was a possibly bannable offense in a subreddit that claims to be open to diverging viewpoints.
/r/MensRights16/05/10 08:29 PM
1

She didn't stage an elaborate hoax, she simply disappeared for a time to avoid her parents, and only made up the kidnapping thing when she reappeared, and then quickly admitted it wasn't true. Not great behavior, but I don't know what you could charge her for for disappearing. She still could be charged with filing a false report for the kidnapping claim. There was a young couple from Chicago that disappeared some years back; there was massive media coverage and a gigantic, expensive multi-state…
/r/MensRights16/05/10 08:24 PM
6

Congrats on a long and incoherent post that manages to blame women for everything and completely miss the point of this discussion.
/r/MensRights16/05/10 08:09 PM
4

You are not crazy.That is absolutely part of it.
/r/MensRights16/05/10 08:05 PM
-1

Women are also able to protect themselves from rape, by carrying protection, traveling in groups, etc. Are you actually suggesting that if women get raped it's their own fault for not, say, traveling in a group? Men could probably protect themselves better from murder if they traveled in groups too, but no one blames them for getting murdered. But I will never, ever believe that fear of rape justifies any kind of perversion of justice and basic rights and freedoms of individuals. Did I suggest p…
/r/MensRights16/05/10 07:59 PM
-4

I really have no idea what your point is. The question becomes whether that fear is justified or not. Whose fear do you mean? Certainly there is ample justification for women to be worried about being raped. As a man I spend very little time worried about being falsely accused of rape. also by the rest of the population that punishes him and incarcerates him without due process. What does this even mean? That people assume he's guilty? Yeah, some do, and some assume the accuser is lying. "The re…
/r/MensRights16/05/10 08:47 AM
0

I didn't realize that feminists ran the judicial system and were responsible for law enforcement on this particular issue. So what do you propose, making rape legal?
/r/MensRights16/05/10 08:21 AM
1

Well, here's a case where a male teacher nearly beat a student to death with a dumbbell while shouting "die! die! die!" and walked free: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1270063/Peter-Harvey-Moment-science-teacher-attacked-pupil-dumbbell.html Oh no! Penis pass? Well, no. Lots of things affect what happens to the perps in cases like these; assuming that women will somehow not end up getting punished because of their gender and that men always will is foolish, and not supported by the evide…
/r/MensRights16/05/10 05:32 AM
-1

What a foolish mistake on the part of that person! In order to fit in on this subreddit you are supposed to describe WOMEN as savages, not black people!
/r/MensRights16/05/10 05:29 AM
1

Same culture, same country, same nation. (You are aware that "country" and "nation" are the same thing, right?): http://mnsun.com/articles/2010/04/29/breaking_news/93fr29dendzuck.txt Also: Similar culture, different country: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1270063/Peter-Harvey-Moment-science-teacher-attacked-pupil-dumbbell.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1269833/Dumbbell-attack-teacher-Peter-Harvey-cleared-attempted-murder.html?ITO=1708&referrer=yahoo#ixzz0mW4EDYiE HERP DERP…
/r/MensRights16/05/10 05:16 AM
-1

Hey, it's everyone's favorite douchebag misogynist pedophile!
/r/MensRights16/05/10 12:19 AM
-1

If a random teacher in Houston is relevant, so are they.
/r/MensRights15/05/10 09:40 PM
-1

And every single woman in the world is afraid for themselves in the case that some random guy rapes them and this results in the destruction and unraveling of her life. [Female] Solidarity comes from a place of fear - fear for ourselves, and fear for our society.
/r/MensRights15/05/10 07:09 PM
-7

Yes, let's post about this story here again. It's not like male teachers are ever caught on video doing anything wrong. Oh, wait: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/11/117_33797.html This one is lovely too: http://www.chinasmack.com/2008/videos/young-schoolgirl-beaten-thrown-to-death-by-teacher.html
/r/MensRights15/05/10 07:04 PM
3

Of course men are sometimes falsely accused of rape, and I was fully prepared to believe this account, except that every time I asked for a little more information about what happened his story got stranger and stranger, and then he simply told me to fuck off. Also, for a little irony, please reread OP's post again.
/r/MensRights15/05/10 06:47 PM
2

Because I think posting random news stories about individual women behaving badly has nothing to do with Men's Rights. So when someone posts one, I spend a minute or two on google finding a similar story with the genders reversed. My point is: yes, women and men are both capable of terrible things, as everyone reading this subreddit knows, but it makes no sense to pluck out random news stories about these things and pretend they tell us something about the rights of either gender. Honestly, when…
/r/MensRights15/05/10 06:43 PM
-3

Another case of injustice: This guy is in jail for killing his wife and five kids, but it was really his mother-in-law's evil spirit who did it!
/r/MensRights14/05/10 10:00 PM
6

I'm not so much offended as flabbergasted by your massive idiocy. Also, I'm a dude. Sometimes I round numbers off and sometimes I use the exact numbers. I still have no idea why saying "6:30" instead of 6:29 is lying, not rounding, or saying that a movie is two hours long when it is two hours and 3 minutes is lying. I've never noticed any particular differences in how men or women deal with this.
/r/MensRights14/05/10 08:28 PM
2

Yeah, the 16 female CEOS out of 500 in the top 500 firms. EDIT: You're downvoting me for mentioning a relevant fact? Damn those 16 evil women for oppressing the 484 male CEOs of the S&P 500!
/r/MensRights14/05/10 08:13 PM
-1

Meanwhile, in Thailand: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=8637337
/r/MensRights14/05/10 08:12 PM
2

Why don't you explain why you think rounding numbers up or down is lying rather than, you know, rounding numbers up or down? I bought some takeout food yesterday that cost $9.91 and paid with a ten dollar bill; the guy behind the counter gave me a dime in change rather than nine cents. Was he practicing lying? Oh no, men are all liars!
/r/MensRights14/05/10 07:57 PM
4

Well, I asked him to clarify what was going on, and he refused.
/r/MensRights14/05/10 07:52 PM
6

And when it's 16 out of 500 you think, hmm, how much better than the typical male CEO would these 15 women have to be to get these jobs in the first place.
/r/MensRights14/05/10 08:00 AM
3

This makes less and less sense the more you explain it. So now you're saying that he wasn't actually convicted of rape but some "completely different" charge? Any idea what that might have been? This guy is a friend of yours but you don't know what he was (wrongly) convicted of? You've paid close enough attention to the trial to have "seen the paperwork he got from his lawyer" but you forgot that he wasn't actually convicted of rape? And I'm completley confused as to what was even being alleged …
/r/MensRights14/05/10 05:44 AM
3

Your friend is in jail for a crime he didn't commit and he doesn't want anyone to know about his case? That doesn't make any sense at all to me. If I were in jail for a crime I didn't commit I'd be trying to get all the attention I could. But whatever. I don't need any personal info. I just wanted to know why, say, the other guys weren't convicted and your friend was. What sort of evidence was there?
/r/MensRights14/05/10 02:34 AM
0

I think this story should be posted another five or ten times to r/mr.
/r/MensRights14/05/10 01:51 AM
0

Uh, more details please? Maybe a newspaper article?
/r/MensRights14/05/10 01:50 AM
10

Wait, so when a woman says "it's 6:30" when it's really 6:29, it's because she's PRACTICING SO SHE CAN LIE BETTER ABOUT RAPE???
/r/MensRights14/05/10 01:45 AM
3

So, in other words, no. You're just going to use a very specific number even though you don't have a source for that number.
/r/MensRights14/05/10 12:17 AM
1

[citation still needed] None of these sources actually support the 56% figure. Do you have a source specifically for that?
/r/MensRights13/05/10 10:49 PM
3

This is not a citation. It is another person making assertions without citing specific sources.
/r/MensRights13/05/10 10:31 PM
2

I am the person you were discussing with yesterday, but I am not a rape apologist, nor did I say he was not a victim of attempted rape. I don't know if he was or not. It seems clear he was a victim of the stabbing, but beyond that the badly written stories I have seen on the case don't give enough info for either you or I to know for sure what happened. And it appears you still don't understand how plea bargains work or why prosecutors offer them.
/r/MensRights13/05/10 01:22 AM
7

I upvoted the submission, even though I don't think this is so much a men's rights issue as a general human rights issue, and even though I'm not exactly a fan of the submitter. (I downvoted your obnoxious namecalling comments here, and upvoted the one that wasn't obnoxious.) As it stands now, this submission has 54 more upvotes than downvotes, which is much better than most stuff that gets posted on reddit. Great submissions get downvoted all the time on reddit. Like this one, for example. (NSF…
/r/MensRights12/05/10 10:26 PM
-3

Well, yeah. I imagine that's why she pled guilty to "perverting the course of justice." You don't really understand plea agreements, do you? Having evidence of something is different than proving a case in court. People sometimes walk free even when there is ample evidence that they are guilty. (You may remember a guy named OJ.) A plea agreement is a sure thing for prosecutors.
/r/MensRights11/05/10 10:18 PM
-4

I didn't say that attempted rape can't happen if the victim has clothes on, just that it would be almost impossible to prove in court. Also, somehow I don't think she would have admitted anything without a plea bargains. That's why prosecutors make plea agreements, you know. To get people to, you know, plead guilty. That's why they call them plea bargains.
/r/MensRights11/05/10 09:47 PM
-5

Yes, that's right. I'm a rape apologist. Rape for everyone! EDIT: Actually, it looks like she made a plea deal, pleading guilty to "unlawfully wounding Mr Morais, possessing an offensive weapon and perverting the course of justice," but not attempted rape, which in this case would have been pretty impossible to prove given that he still had his clothes on, Generally in plea deals prosecutors reduce the charges in order to avoid a trial and the prospect that the perp walks free. http://www.dailym…
/r/MensRights11/05/10 08:36 PM
-5

Here's a guy who got only 2-6 years for stabbing his ex-girlfriend. Penis pass? http://www.mcall.com/news/local/all-mc-bethlehem-birthdayfight.7269372may11,0,473867.story
/r/MensRights11/05/10 08:27 PM
2

This is a crazy story; that's why it's being reported, not because he's a guy. Also, not much exciting happens in Des Moines.
/r/MensRights11/05/10 08:11 PM
7

Custody disputes bring out the worst in everyone. Here is case in which a man shot and killed his wife and himself during a custody exchange of their daughter: http://www.stopfamilyviolence.org/info/custody-abuse/custody-news/family-of-man-who-killed-wife-self-gets-custody Remarkably, the parents of the murderer have been given primary custody of the kid.
/r/MensRights11/05/10 01:43 AM
1

Yeah, he didn't expect the slap. That's why they cut away from the woman to an anonymous hand slapping him. These things are filmed with one camera, so that means if this was a real slap the woman waited patiently for the camera to set up another shot that for some reason didn't show anything but her arm, and then slapped him. Obviously this was staged.
/r/MensRights10/05/10 08:25 PM
1

Is it "post random stories about men and women abandoning children day"? If so, I've got one too! http://tribune-democrat.com/local/x563633191/Father-abandons-kids-after-drunken-driving-crash-police-say Do I win a prize? My guy abandoned 3 kids, and your gal only abandoned 2.
/r/MensRights10/05/10 05:38 AM
1

Well, the Daily Show did once run a segment in which Samantha Bee pretended that Alan Greenspan had assaulted her and carved a backwards "G" on her cheek.
/r/MensRights09/05/10 07:46 PM
1

Uh, these statistics don't show anything. They're from one center, and we don't know the circumstances of the cases -- they are only useful as a direct comparison if children, on average, are spending an equal amount of time living with their mothers and fathers. If fathers have custody much less than half of the time, these stats if anything suggest the opposite. Also, these stats also would suggest that kids are safer with women than with men. (Add up the numbers yourself if you want.) But, ag…
/r/MensRights09/05/10 07:44 PM
1

The slap was STAGED. It was a comedy bit. Calm down.
/r/MensRights09/05/10 09:40 AM
0

[citation needed]
/r/MensRights09/05/10 08:29 AM
3

You really need a citation? 70 percent of women in dual-earner couples report taking greater responsibility for routine child care than their male partners in 2002. 70 percent of women also report responsibility for taking time off work because of children.s needs, in comparison with 30 percent of men (Families and Work Institute). http://www.newamerica.net/publications/policy/the_way_women_work Daily Time With Children. Children generally spend more time with their mothers than their fathers on…
/r/MensRights09/05/10 08:17 AM
1

Uh, where exactly did I say we should ignore female abusers? Or that they should "get out of jail free"? You're having an argument with an imaginary person, not me.
/r/MensRights09/05/10 03:25 AM
1

Which one is Pink?
/r/MensRights09/05/10 01:59 AM
4

This is not surprising, since women are more often the primary caregivers in our society and thus spend more time with children.
/r/MensRights08/05/10 08:27 PM
3

Our obsession with sexual child abuse stems from the fact that our society freaks out more about sex than about violence or more subtle forms of abuse.
/r/MensRights08/05/10 08:22 PM
2

I looked back through your history and didn't see it.
/r/MensRights05/05/10 10:32 AM
2

Looks like Danoob3 is jered2343.
/r/MensRights04/05/10 12:09 AM
4

This pretty much sums up my feelings about Campbell. Brilliant man, but also a bit old-fashioned when it came to gender. Not all that surprising for someone who was born in 1904, and whose basic arguments on most of the stuff he wrote about were pretty much set by the time he wrote Hero With a Thousand Faces in 1949. Just something to take into account when reading him.
/r/MensRights03/05/10 11:58 PM
6

Should experts also be called into court at every murder trial to explain that some people lie about murder?
/r/MensRights03/05/10 11:49 PM
0

Yes, it's outrageous that someone somewhere on Reddit made a ridiculous post that's been massively downvoted because everyone sees it as ridiculous. There is one white supremacist who posts here from time to time, but he's so unsubtle about his racism that he tends to get downvoted: http://www.reddit.com/user/RobeAndWizardHood
/r/MensRights02/05/10 08:53 PM
1

In some ways that seems even more obnoxious then. If you didn't believe it, what was the point of posting an incredibly stupid fictional story that made a girl out to be an evil, stupid malevolent being? Whenever a commercial portrays a man as anything less than a genius, you guys here are up in arms about its "misandry." If that's misandry, surely this story and the reaction of many people to it here would have to be misogyny then, wouldn't you agree?
/r/MensRights02/05/10 08:21 PM
1

This guy seemed to think it was real: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/bxzmq/the_only_time_false_accusations_can_be_fucking/c0p4be4
/r/MensRights02/05/10 07:53 AM
-1

My best friend is an ex, but I'm not friends with any of my other exes; in most cases that would be a nightmare.
/r/MensRights30/04/10 11:32 PM
-1

Well, that was incredibly stupid.
/r/MensRights30/04/10 11:30 PM
3

I really hope you're being sarcastic.
/r/MensRights30/04/10 11:28 PM
4

You really think that's the case here? Give me a break.
/r/MensRights30/04/10 08:07 PM
18

... is when they're completely and obviously imaginary stories posted to 4chan, which are nevertheless posted to r/mr as true and believed by credulous MRers who like to read things that make women and girls look like evil, stupid malevolent beings?
/r/MensRights29/04/10 09:56 PM
3

If they ever found out he made up a completely ridiculous story that didn't happen and posted it to 4chan?
/r/MensRights29/04/10 09:54 PM
4

I think you've confused "feminism" with "the idiotic behavior of two random obnoxious women."
/r/MensRights28/04/10 10:21 AM
-1

Did you miss the part of the original story in which it said: "Ricks' husband suffered minor injuries in the May 2007 attack."
/r/MensRights28/04/10 05:24 AM
-1

All right then, the US. Does a stabbing count? http://www.herald-mail.com/?story_id=240462&cmd=displaystory
/r/MensRights27/04/10 12:12 AM
0

2)Women often get much lighter sentences than men for the same crimes. It's not quite that simple. While stats that look at supposedly "matched cases" of men and women charged with the same crime reveal somewhat longer sentences for men, looking at the details of the cases reveals that the men are getting longer sentences not because they are men but largely because of other factors -- they have longer criminal records, they were the instigators of the crime, things like that that judges take in…
/r/MensRights26/04/10 09:28 PM
-1

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/father-and-sons-walk-free-after-attack-on-woman-with-batons-and-a-hammer-105528.html
/r/MensRights26/04/10 09:16 PM
0

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/father-and-sons-walk-free-after-attack-on-woman-with-batons-and-a-hammer-105528.html
/r/MensRights26/04/10 09:16 PM
1

Well, no, but I can imagine the punishment for four men: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/father-and-sons-walk-free-after-attack-on-woman-with-batons-and-a-hammer-105528.html Hint: Neither case actually says much about gender or men's rights.
/r/MensRights26/04/10 09:16 PM
5

And this calls on us at the very least to question the objectivity of her work, as well as the motivations behind it. Is it possible that an individual so hated the sex they were born with that it sparked a life long academic quest to deconstruct it into something that did not disgust them? How is that not transphobia? Trans people don't hate the gender they're born into; they feel that they don't fit within it. Your "argument" is like concluding that men who like being men hate women, or that w…
/r/MensRights23/04/10 10:11 PM
3

This story is on counterfeminism.org, yet somehow I suspect the lesbian-bashers weren't actually feminists.
/r/MensRights23/04/10 10:01 PM
3

Did you actually read the story you posted? He didn't have the opportunity, because he had already been knocked out by a dude before the girls attacked him: Joel Alexander, 19, had punched him to the ground, knocking him unconscious, the Old Bailey was told. This is from the second paragraph of the story. I really don't see how on earth this story belongs in r/mensrights. We know that women commit crimes.
/r/MensRights22/04/10 06:48 PM
15

Also: If you fart in a dude's face while he's rimming you, apologize nicely.
/r/MensRights21/04/10 06:44 PM
2

Dude, if you've never heard of sex-positive feminism before, you don't know shit abut feminism. Going around talking about Dworkin as is she were the (dead) queen of feminism today is ridiculous, and suggests that your distorted caricature of feminism is at least a decade and a half -- really more like 3 decades -- out of date. It's as if I went around talking about Robert Bly and drum circles and claimed that this represented the men's rights movement today. What arguments did you or gprime act…
/r/MensRights21/04/10 01:24 AM
0

The reason for this is largely because in DV cases the damage done by women is on average far less than the damage done by men, as numerous studies have indicated. That is men put women in the hospital far more often than the other way around, and because the results of the violence are worse, the male attackers get jailed more often. Here, for example, is one of the studies that finds similar levels of violence on the parts of both men and women -- women slightly more violent. But when it comes…
/r/MensRights21/04/10 01:04 AM
2

Well, not exactly. They become the all-knowing wise woman when it comes to cooking and cleaning. These ads are as sexist towards women as they are towards men.
/r/MensRights20/04/10 07:18 PM
7

Then I guess this proves that violence against women isn't taken seriously: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/father-and-sons-walk-free-after-attack-on-woman-with-batons-and-a-hammer-105528.html
/r/MensRights20/04/10 09:25 AM
4

Furthermore, I haven't seen feminists come out against Dworkin except when it's convenient to distance yourselves from her, like now. Maybe that's because you don't actually know anything about feminism. EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-positive_feminism http://susiebright.blogs.com/Old_Static_Site_Files/Prime_Of_Kitty_MacKinnon.pdf http://www.anarkhos.org/individualistanarchism/feministdefenseofpornography.html
/r/MensRights20/04/10 07:13 AM
-1

Well, I guess I was wrong on that. But the plain fact is you don't know what really happened any more than I do.
/r/MensRights20/04/10 03:49 AM
0

What exactly is wrong with my thinking here? I read about this case, and based on what I read I decided that the accusations against him might have some merit. But I don't know for sure, and frankly neither do you. Of course, I don't claim to know what really happened. Do you? More broadly: Am I obliged to assume that every single man accused of rape is innocent? And if I ever assume otherwise I am a destroyer of lives?
/r/MensRights20/04/10 03:48 AM
-1

I'm not hanging anyone, just stating my gut opinion. I don't claim to know what happened.
/r/MensRights20/04/10 12:15 AM
-3

In court, absolutely; it's essential. Outside of court, there is no standard of "reasonable doubt." In the case of Roethlisberger, we simply don't know. My gut feeling is that he probably did it, but there's no definitive proof for this, nor is there definitive proof of his innocence.
/r/MensRights19/04/10 10:29 PM
1

At the very least, you don't know much about feminist history. Most feminists these days think that Dworkin (who has been dead for 5 years, in case you didn't know that) was wrong about almost everything; there was a giant debate among feminists over the ideas of Dworkin and her ally Catherine MacKinnon in the 1990s, and the anti-Dworkin side won. The ideas of Dworkin and MacKinnon have less influence over feminism today than they ever did.
/r/MensRights19/04/10 07:43 PM
-4

You do realize that you yourself are drawing your own conclusions based on the very same press conference and other press coverage; you don't know all the facts of the case either.
/r/MensRights19/04/10 07:30 PM
-1

Do you have any statistical evidence for this? The date on the page linked below, while not completely up to date, notes that people tend to get married later in life than they used to, but that the overwhelming majority do marry (the percentage is no lower than it was a century ago), and divorce rates are lower than their peak around 1980: http://social.jrank.org/pages/886/Family-Marriage-in-20th-Century.html In other words, marriage is not going away any time soon.
/r/MensRights17/04/10 10:56 PM
-1

People need to read the articles before blindly voting them up. The piece doesn't blame men for "ladette" culture. You misread the article. After discussing the topic of "ladettes" and blaming things like "victim mentality" for that -- not blaming men --the piece moves on to a second issue: Australia's Sex Discrimination commissioner Elizabeth Broderick has come up with her own novel - although "depressing" - idea for dealing with another gender issue. According to our report today, only by "men…
/r/MensRights17/04/10 10:34 PM
3

Rereading the New York Times article, I actually don't see much "hatred" in it. Indeed: Mrs. Mansel said the new woman “would rather be without exceptional treatment.” Mrs. Cecil Chapman declared that a suffragist would have preferred to meet her fate alongside her husband. She added, “I would a thousand times rather go down with the ship under similar circumstances.” the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies deemed it incumbent to issue a notice profoundly regretting that certain Suffrag…
/r/MensRights16/04/10 11:57 PM
4

You're right. This is a complicated issue; not sure what the best way to handle it is.
/r/MensRights16/04/10 11:42 PM
2

That is a better comparison, though the number of deaths from that, while considerable, is still far less than deaths from breast cancer. (27,000: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/types/prostate ) The broader point of course -- to go back to avoiceformen's post and some of the other stuff that tends to get posted here -- is that it's good to have money spent on breast cancer awareness and treatment and research, and it's good to have money spent on testicular and prostate cancer awareness and …
/r/MensRights16/04/10 09:03 PM
12

So Obama does something progressive that will have a positive effect on the lives of both men and women. And the response here is: well, that sucks because he didn't do this other progressive thing that would help both men and women but mostly men. Instead of churlishly complaining about that, why not organize to push for him to lift the ban on non-custodial parents? If you notice, the reason Obama did this is because gay actvists lobbied for it behind the scenes. That's one of the most frustrat…
/r/MensRights16/04/10 07:46 PM
2

OMG! Some women a century ago said some questionable things! BREAKING NEWS! Some men a century ago said stupid things about women! http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F03E3D7163EE033A25755C2A9639C946697D6CF How dare you women-haters say that a woman's place is at the fireside, her duty to cook and mend! How dare you say that women are inferior to men and should be put in their proper place! Oh, wait, that wasn't any of you. That was some dudes in 1907.
/r/MensRights16/04/10 07:36 PM
3

Well, here we go again. Lots of quotes from Dworkin and MacKinnon. Lots of quotes from the 70s, 80s, and early 90s. Nothing from the past decade. Quotes from obscure women I've never heard of and who may not even be feminists -- I guess I have to take your word on that. (Who the hell is Pat Poole?) Quotes taken out of context so we can't really know what the author was really saying (I'd be interested in seeing the rest of Ehrenreich's article, for example, as she is generally a smart and sensib…
/r/MensRights16/04/10 07:20 PM
2

the lions share of protective resources to women when men need them more in many cases. A good example is the fact that we have well established offices on women's health, Most of the biggest health issues faced by men are the same as those faced by women -- high blood pressure, for example, isn't really a gender issue -- and it is on things like these that the "lion's share"of govt resources go. You don't need special men's health offices to treat men for the same things as women. Women do of c…
/r/MensRights16/04/10 09:44 AM
2

But I am guessing it is Schop since someone else brought the name up. If I am mistaken, forgive me. That is correct; the post was originally under his name, as were all the posts from [deleted] in the thread at the moment. Evidently he's deleted his account. EDIT: If you click on "permalink" for the posts by [deleted] it should identify him as the author. I thought the one in which he suggested the age of consent be lowered to 13 or 14 was particularly memorable.
/r/MensRights16/04/10 08:41 AM
6

Gosh, the suffragettes -- who are not actually the same as feminists today -- discussed the tragedy using the discourse of the times, that is, of 1912. To hold feminists today responsible for everything that suffragettes said 98 years ago seems rather idiotic. I could certainly dig up some horribly offensive and/or ridiculous quotes from anti-suffragettes, and hold you responsible for them, but that would be kind of silly now wouldn't it? Wait a minute. I think I'll do just that: http://query.ny…
/r/MensRights16/04/10 08:19 AM
5

Huh? Why do the buses have to wait while someone uses a restroom? I have never heard of such a thing. Where I live you're lucky if the bus driver waits a couple of seconds if you're running after it.
/r/MensRights16/04/10 02:08 AM
3

?!
/r/MensRights16/04/10 01:56 AM
2

13 or 14. Vile. Just for the record, Polanski was given an extremely lenient plea deal and pled guilty in court to statutory rape before fleeing the country. Since there was no full trial we don't know for sure if he drugged and sodomized her as well, as the girl testified he did.
/r/MensRights16/04/10 12:00 AM
3

You're going to have to explain this insult to me, as it makes no fucking sense at all. You should probably stick to more straightforward insults, like calling me "catslut."
/r/MensRights15/04/10 09:57 PM
1

The sinking of the Titanic happened a long time ago, before feminism and before women even had the right to vote, so it's hard to blame the evil feminazis for this one. But that's what this post and the petition do: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/titanic/ It is a day of reflection and contemplation for men who reject the tenets of chivalry, feminism and all other forms of male indentured servitude. It's little more than an attempt to hijack an ancient tragedy to push a present day antifemini…
/r/MensRights15/04/10 07:51 PM
3

My post in this thread simply quotes from things Schopenbecq has said on his blog. I find these things disturbing. Do they not bother you?
/r/MensRights15/04/10 07:43 PM
5

My women have women-only periods.
/r/MensRights15/04/10 07:39 PM
1

If you're concerned about cases like this, take a look at this organization, an advocacy group for those falsely accused: http://ncrj.org/
/r/MensRights15/04/10 06:37 PM
4

I'm pretty sure they're not. But they're equally charming.
/r/MensRights15/04/10 09:58 AM
3

For what it's worth, jayhammers' pal Schopenbecq seems to have a similar obsession with the age of consent, and underage girls. From his blog, in a post on Roman Polanski's rape of a 13-year-old girl: A girl weeks away from her 14th birthday is rarely still a ‘little girl’. And every heterosexual man without a cougar complex would indeed like to fuck beautiful young (i.e. teenage) girls – leaving aside moral, social and legal restraints. Perhaps if as a society we didn’t scream ‘castrate the ped…
/r/MensRights15/04/10 04:51 AM
5

I. DID. NOT. PUT. ANYTHING. ON. YOUR. IDIOTIC. PETITION.
/r/MensRights14/04/10 07:37 PM
-1

Uh, I didn't say it didn't happen, merely that because he never called police, etc, that he did not have enough evidence to prove abuse in court.
/r/MensRights14/04/10 07:19 PM
2

I went back and reread what I'd read and you are correct that he has not stated outright that he believes with certainty that she was raped. But it seems clear that he still thinks that something bad happened to her, which would make her still a victim, and that Roethlisberger behaved badly. Here are some quotes from him: "I still feel we did not have enough to prove him guilty, at least of the charge of rape," Bright said. "We are not condoning Mr. Roethlisberger's actions that night," Bright s…
/r/MensRights14/04/10 07:17 PM
-2

The DA still believes Roethlisberger raped her; he dropped the case because he did not feel he had enough evidence to prove the case to a jury and because she did not want to proceed. I'm allowed to call OJ a murderer even though he was found not guilty.
/r/MensRights14/04/10 06:28 PM
0

Here's the thing: the guy did not call the police, he apparently had no injuries serious enough to go to the hospital. Because of that he had no evidence beyond what he and his daughters said. Because of that the judge did not have enough to find the wife responsible for abuse. Had he called the police, gone to a hospital, etc, there would be a record of this and the judge would have had evidence enough to find in his favor on this point. That is all I am saying. The guy's lawyer said as much in…
/r/MensRights14/04/10 06:23 PM
0

The judge did not consider this enough proof under the law. Take it up with him.
/r/MensRights14/04/10 06:16 PM
3

Dude, I didn't do it. You can believe whatever you like. Good luck with all your very important work.
/r/MensRights14/04/10 06:15 PM
-1

No, I'm simply citing the reasons the judge ruled as he did.
/r/MensRights14/04/10 04:11 AM
3

That's what passes for news reporting? On Fox News, yeah.
/r/MensRights14/04/10 02:26 AM
-2

I'm not defending it. Nor have I said anything that would in any way suggest that. I'm saying that in this case there was not sufficient evidence for the judge to find her guilty of "cruel and inhuman treatment."
/r/MensRights14/04/10 12:14 AM
-3

You weight their testimony against the fact that there were no police reports, no injuries reported, no trips to hospitals, no restraining orders, etc. Even if on a gut level you might say, sounds like he was abused, why would they lie, that is different than meeting the legal burden of proof. There was clear proof of abandonment, and he was granted a divorce on the basis of that. Even his lawyer says the issue was one of the burden of proof.
/r/MensRights13/04/10 10:53 PM
3

Again, I didn't "despoil" anything. I asked what the point of it was. You're really deluding yourself if you consider this goofy exercise in feminist-bashing in any way "important."
/r/MensRights13/04/10 10:32 PM
4

You're "helping" me by demanding repeatedly that I be banned, accusing me of something I didn't do, then hinting ominously "You really don't want to make an enemy of the entire men's rights movement. Believe me." What exactly do you mean by this last comment? I don't see how anyone could read it as anything but threatening.
/r/MensRights13/04/10 08:46 PM
2

If someone wants to dissolve a marriage, they should be able to for any reason. I agree completely.
/r/MensRights13/04/10 08:24 PM
4

I did nothing other than read the damn thing. Are you threatening me?
/r/MensRights13/04/10 08:19 PM
-5

You know, I went ahead and googled it an yes, you're right, in some rare cases men have been convicted on nothing but the word of an accuser. That's crazy. Of course, a number of the stories that came up were stories of men getting out of prison after their case was reexamined. And there were also numerous cases of women being convicted on nothing but the word of an accuser, like this woman, in prison for 15 years before being eventually exonerated by DNA evidence: http://truthinjustice.org/deja…
/r/MensRights13/04/10 08:17 PM
-3

See that little blurb on the right side of the page? "Diverging viewpoints are welcome."
/r/MensRights13/04/10 07:58 PM
-8

The Duke case was a travesty, but the accused WERE NOT CONVICTED. Find me an example where a man has been CONVICTED based on nothing but the woman's word -- no other evidence.
/r/MensRights13/04/10 07:55 PM
-6

Dude, you know full well that only a small portion of the subscribers on any given subreddit actually read or vote on the stories on it. The highest number of net upvotes any story has on the front page of this subreddit is 82.
/r/MensRights13/04/10 07:48 PM
-6

I'm merely asking you to back up a point with evidence. How is that trolling?
/r/MensRights13/04/10 07:41 PM
4

Uh, what's wrong with my comment? I'm baffled by this petition. Who is sponsoring this? Why is it called Titanic Day? What on earth are you trying to accomplish other than sounding like a dick? What do you mean by "indentured servitude"?
/r/MensRights13/04/10 07:37 PM
1

Huh?
/r/MensRights13/04/10 07:32 PM
-5

Find some examples.
/r/MensRights13/04/10 07:31 PM
-7

The false rape cases everyone is crying foul about are those that the accuser has been shown to be lying. That's not always true. There's no evidence showing that the accuser in the Roethlisberger case is lying; the DA dropped the case b/c he didn't think he could prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and because the accuser said she didn't want to prosecute it. And in this case there actually was some physical evidence that suggests she might have been raped: A doctor who examined her at a nearby…
/r/MensRights13/04/10 06:56 PM
-2

See http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/bq8i8/court_says_wifes_attack_on_husband_with_samurai/c0o1nnh
/r/MensRights13/04/10 06:21 PM
-6

OK, here's a bit more on the case which sheds some light on the issue: there was actually no evidence that abuse had taken place, simply the word of the man and the daughter. He may well have been abused, but he failed to prove that case legally in court. http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202447747480 Some key points from the story: "The testimony was that no one sustained any physical injuries, neither party was seen at a hospital or by any doctor," noting the husband never contacted polic…
/r/MensRights13/04/10 06:14 PM
3

you can't get near him unless you want to and unless he wants you to. Uh, what difference does this make?
/r/MensRights13/04/10 05:57 PM
-9

This is pretty fucked up, but, as the article points out, the sword was not sharp. Coming at someone with a butter knife is a very different thing than coming at someone with a steak knife. The sword in this case was essentially an overgrown butter knife. EDIT: Reading more about this case -- see my post elsewhere -- it seems clear there was no evidence to back up the charges of abuse. Given that, there was no way for the judge to rule other than he did.
/r/MensRights13/04/10 05:54 PM
6

This seems a bit petty when we're talking about guys who spent 8 years behind bars for a crime they didn't commit.
/r/MensRights12/04/10 08:01 PM
6

More good work by the Innocence Project.
/r/MensRights12/04/10 08:36 AM
4

Looks like she got hit by a downvote brigade. Funny, as I thought the people here were opposed to such things.
/r/MensRights12/04/10 08:34 AM
4

Uh, what exactly did you like about Schopenbecq's post on TheAntiFeminist? Him calling feminists "whores" and "trojan whorses," and men who disagree with him "manginas?" His transphobic attack on cryptogirl? His strange rant on statutory rape laws? (He apparently thinks 16 year old girls are "sluts" for having sex with boys their own age, but thinks it's great for 25 year old guys who are "perhaps a little emotionally immature and ... attracted to younger girls" to have sex with 16-year-olds.)
/r/MensRights12/04/10 08:32 AM
1

You're doing it wrong. If you want to promote the site you should post here from a dozen different accounts, cutting and pasting a few messages over and over again, while making heavy use of the word "cunt."
/r/MensRights11/04/10 08:11 PM
0

The only real problem with this is that none of the names are as funny as Lionel Tiger.
/r/MensRights11/04/10 08:05 PM
0

As I point out every time this is posted: You're not necessarily going to get to point 4.
/r/MensRights11/04/10 08:02 PM
1

Reposting what I posted in the other thread on this topic: One of the many problems with this "new" discipline is that it's starting out in a deceptive way -- by pretending there isn't already a discipline that deals with the exact same things they say they want to deal with. Here's its FAQ on the subject: http://www.malestudies.org/faq2.htm Why “Male Studies” and not “Men’s Studies”? Male Studies refers to the multidisciplinary study of the male human being, boys and men. Men Studies, by defini…
/r/MensRights11/04/10 08:00 PM
-2

One of the many problems with this "new" discipline is that it's starting out in a deceptive way -- by pretending there isn't already a discipline that deals with the exact same things they say they want to deal with. Here's its FAQ on the subject: http://www.malestudies.org/faq2.htm Why “Male Studies” and not “Men’s Studies”? Male Studies refers to the multidisciplinary study of the male human being, boys and men. Men Studies, by definition, has focused on fully grown men. Male studies will be …
/r/MensRights11/04/10 07:50 PM
2

I got hired at a grocery store once a long time ago because the job required a lot of heavy lifting to restock a freezer and I was a big guy. As it turned out the woman there who usually did the job was about three times faster at it than I was.
/r/MensRights08/04/10 11:16 PM
-1

And because they're men, this story is getting NO media attention! Oh, wait.
/r/MensRights08/04/10 11:13 PM
-1

Even according to the study you posted there is an "adjusted" wage gap between women and men, though it is not as large as the "unadjusted" one. Part of the "unadjusted" gap comes from women working more at part time jobs. The gap doesn't come from the fact that they work fewer hours -- ie, less hard -- it comes from the fact that they are paid less per hour because part time jobs tend to pay less. In other words they are paid lower rates. Unless you have a statistic saying that part-time jobs i…
/r/MensRights08/04/10 09:26 PM
3

The difficulty in both cases is that it would be nearly impossible to prove in court. Or maybe just impossible. How would you go about proving either one? Pregnancy wouldn't be proof, since birth control isn't 100% effective.
/r/MensRights07/04/10 08:34 PM
4

Indeed, here's a book by a feminist on the subject: http://books.google.com/books?id=iPK9kak4G0EC&printsec=frontcover&dq=tanenbaum+catfight&source=bl&ots=HEHR0_6L0x&sig=PH1CHMdO7emv1CaJWnZYP8FeVE0&hl=en&ei=nOq8S4OCA4PRngftt-CrCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
/r/MensRights07/04/10 08:28 PM
6

This case should get more attention. But I think in the case of the two female journalists, part of the reason their cases got so much attention is that one of the women was the sister of Lisa Ling, a rather high profile TV journalist who worked very publicly to try to get her sister released.
/r/MensRights07/04/10 08:08 PM
0

I think this is great. More options for men and women.
/r/MensRights07/04/10 07:58 PM
2

That is one of the findings of the study the article mentions. But equally worth noting is this: domestic abuse within intimate relationships poses a greater threat to women than to men. Women suffer close to two thirds of the injuries, largely because men are stronger on average than women. In addition, women and men differ in the severity of their actions; women are more likely to scratch or slap their partners, and men more commonly punch or choke their partners. My own experience bears this …
/r/MensRights06/04/10 10:47 PM
3

The subreddit seems to be a one-man show, that one man being violentacrerz, an untiring proponent of a very strange combination of fetishes, some of them quite disturbing.
/r/MensRights06/04/10 03:46 AM
0

People are downvoting this comment because nagster5 is engaged??
/r/MensRights05/04/10 09:02 PM
6

We don't yet know who is telling the truth here. If he indeed owes the money and has been avoiding the responsibility for years, what's wrong with trying to get him to pay what he owes?
/r/MensRights05/04/10 08:59 PM
2

This is some seriously creepy and fucked-up stuff. There have been a lot of good books on this. Two of the best, showing just how insidious and destructive false memories can be: Lawrence Wright's "Remembering Satan" Debbie Nathan and Michael Snedeker's "Satan’s Silence: Ritual Abuse and the Making of a Modern American Witch Hunt" Also check out this organization: http://ncrj.org/ Just be prepared for a few shocks. Debbie Nathan, one of the first to write about the dangers of false memories, bac…
/r/MensRights05/04/10 08:55 PM
0

I still do not see why this might justify hiring more women than men rather than treating all candidates equally. Well, the standard reason is to make up for past discrimination; once more women are in the field there would be no need for this. But my experience in the field suggests that while overt discrimination may not be such an issue any more, more subtle forms of discrimination remain, which actually make it possible for less qualified me to get further in the field than women because the…
/r/MensRights05/04/10 08:07 PM
1

I would love to have a "dwindling" $40 million net worth. Even if I spent many times what I spend today, it would take many lifetimes for me to run out of that money.
/r/MensRights05/04/10 07:57 PM
0

There are other issues beyond child care that matter, like the fact that the field is overwhelmingly dominated by men. I don't see how anyone could think this doesn't make it harder for women to stay in the field if the vast majority of their colleagues are male. As a man, I've never worked in a field that is 80% female, and I imagine if I did I would have a harder time of it than my female colleagues. When I was in grad school, the department I was in had a decided (white) "boys club" atmospher…
/r/MensRights05/04/10 03:25 AM
0

I like that you left this out, from right before the bit you quoted: Universities and research institutions must offer affordable child care and flexible working hours so that women who choose to have families can continue to do high-level research while they raise children. And from the press release about the study linked to there (I put some of the especially relevant passages in bold): "Family considerations are a major, but not the only, deterrent to pursing an academic career," said Orna C…
/r/MensRights05/04/10 01:09 AM
0

But somehow many (most?) men have it in their head that women are angelic pedestal-dwellers with few if any mortal faults. I have never met a man who thinks this, and I suspect there are zero amongst the regular readers of this subreddit. EDIT: To clarify, I have never met a man who thinks that women are angelic pedestal-dwellers with few if any mortal faults.
/r/MensRights04/04/10 05:57 PM
2

Brings back memories of this: http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,550063,00.html Both women and men are capable of horrible crimes. The fact that a woman somewhere in the world does something awful is not in itself a men's rights issue. Why do you think this particular case is?
/r/MensRights04/04/10 05:18 PM
0

It's not enough to claim bias. What proof do you have of this bias? And if there is bias, how much of an effect does it have on the stats? Let's say we focus on this part of the stats: Males were 83% of spouse murderers and 75% of dating partner murderers Is this enormous disparity all the result of bias? Are women committing the same amount of spouse/dating partner murder as men but somehow hiding the bodies and getting away with it the vast majority of times? And let's see some of these sociol…
/r/MensRights04/04/10 05:14 PM
1

I'm not allowed to make fun of people who think Obama has been a secret CIA agent all his life? EDIT: Also, you used the word "mangina" in your first post here, Mr. They Are Real People. EDIT: I do care about men's rights, and women;s rights. I think much of what is discussed in this subreddit is bad for both men and women. That's why I post here. Sometimes I'm sarcastic. That's not a crime, nor does it make me a troll.
/r/MensRights04/04/10 08:03 AM
1

1) Lveretto's comment made no sense to me. I simply had no idea what he meant. Do you know what he meant? If so, let me know. 2) Slicknasty wasn't reading my replies, and was distorting what I said. I got a little annoyed. 3) Annarchist was doing a lot of ALL CAPS stuff, which on the internet tends to mean that you're angry. I wasn't taunting, and he didn't take it as such. 4) That was a poor choice of words on my part, and I said so in a subsequent post. 5) schopenbecq had just denounced people…
/r/MensRights04/04/10 07:03 AM
8

Can you try that again, coherently this time?
/r/MensRights03/04/10 11:45 PM
0

Did you not read my post? I am well aware that Sacks didn't write the study; I pointed out that he had referenced it and done so misleadingly. The study only proves your point if you think that the consequences of the violence don't count at all. tends to back my suggestion that the system is biased agasint men. Well, that's a convenient way to dismiss any study that doesn't show what you want it to show.
/r/MensRights03/04/10 11:35 PM
1

Huh. I always assumed those signs in museums meant I shouldn't touch my penis. It doesn't? Museum going is going to be a lot more interesting for me now.
/r/MensRights03/04/10 09:34 PM
-1

I'm not sure that a Washington Times op-ed coauthored by Glen Sacks can be said to be free of an agenda. And in fact his summary of the Harvard study -- the actual study can be found here -- is highly and I would say most likely deliberately misleading. Yes, the study did find that "both men and women reported a larger proportion of nonreciprocal violence perpetrated by women than by men." But it also found that "perpetrators who were men were more likely to inflict an injury on a partner than w…
/r/MensRights03/04/10 09:15 PM
0

this isn't supposed to be a women-friendly place. Are you really sayibg what it looks like you're saying, that this subreddit is supposed to be a woman-unfriendly place? I certainly hope not, though obviously there are some posters here who are. The description of the subreddit says "diverging viewpoints are welcome," and I'd like to think I can take that at face value. I'd also like to think that these diverging viewpoints would be welcome or at least tolerated regardless of whether they are es…
/r/MensRights03/04/10 08:53 PM
3

Is this by any chance ironic? YES YES YES YES YES. EDIT: Wait, someone is downvoting me for clarifying a previous remark? You guys are hilarious sometimes.
/r/MensRights03/04/10 08:00 PM
2

oops. Thanks.
/r/MensRights03/04/10 07:45 PM
1

Sort of. Let's flip the picture, though: We would not even be talking about DV against men had feminists not raised consciousness about DV towards women in the first place. which is why I think the endless feminist-baiting and blaming that goes on in this subreddit is counterproductive. Laws on DV, which would not now be in place had it not been for feminists, serve to protect men as well as women. And I think people in general are much more aware of DV against men than they used to be. One baro…
/r/MensRights03/04/10 07:35 PM
1

Citation please? These studies suggest that women are far more extensively victimized, in terms of amount and severity: http://new.abanet.org/domesticviolence/Pages/Statistics.aspx
/r/MensRights03/04/10 07:17 PM
4

Please post examples of people in this subreddit arguing either of the two points you mention.
/r/MensRights03/04/10 06:33 PM
-2

There is a certain irony to all the talk about "shaming language" here, to put it mildly, given that people like me who disagree with a lot of the conventional wisdom here routinely get told pretty directly to shut up and go away. (You basically suggested as much not long ago.) I've got one dude here who follows me around making remarks like this: catlebrity is a known misandrist, man-hater, feminist apologist. Named and shamed. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/biulu/mensrightslinks_u…
/r/MensRights03/04/10 06:22 PM
1

You do realize that the vast majority of professors at universities are men; in the UK, for example, only 17.5% are women. http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/feb/28/educationsgendergap.gender
/r/MensRights03/04/10 07:47 AM
6

now there are more women commenting on any given thread then men. Obviously not true, but I think you might think that because every time someone disagrees with you you assume they're an evil man-hating woman and your brain explodes. I post here because I'm a dude and I think attitudes like yours are bad for men, women, dogs, cats, the world in general.
/r/MensRights03/04/10 07:43 AM
1

Thanks for bringing back memories of the old days!
/r/MensRights03/04/10 05:20 AM
-3

I think it's about 10% gender and 90% Palin.
/r/MensRights03/04/10 05:18 AM
-6

Somehow I knew this story would be linked here, with the point of it being totally missed: that being a rich and powerful political figure using her influence to her kid, in this case a girl, out of trouble. As atomicparrot pointed out, getting downvoted for it, Mike Huckabee did the same for his son when his son was involved in a pretty horrifying case of animal abuse: http://crooksandliars.com/2007/12/16/huckabee-squashed-charges-against-his-son-for-stoning-hanging-dog You don't think Palin wo…
/r/MensRights03/04/10 03:31 AM
4

Yes, Willow Palin and her feminazi pals are trying to castrate the American male.
/r/MensRights03/04/10 03:26 AM
8

Lord knows I have issues with a lot of the stuff that is submitted and said in this subreddit, not to mention the sometimes-reflexive downvoting of perfectly appropriate comments that challenge the conventional wisdom here, but I actually agree that the general tone here has gotten better. And there seem to be fewer "individual women behaving badly" posts than before.
/r/MensRights01/04/10 05:01 PM
1

I don't think he specified that he meant he was a role model only with regard to golf. Also: Asked in the interview "family first and golf second ... always been that way?" Woods replied: "Always. Always." He goes on to say that having a family - he has two young children with wife Elin Nordegren - "has been great, actually, the best thing that ever happened." http://www.golf.com/golf/tours_news/article/0,28136,1947725,00.html#ixzz0jmqmbwHJ Edit: Admittedly, the interviewer didn't include "const…
/r/MensRights31/03/10 08:12 PM
3

“I think it's an honor to be a role model to one person or maybe more than that. If you are given a chance to be a role model, I think you should always take it because you can influence a person's life in a positive light, and that's what I want to do. That's what it's all about.” http://thinkexist.com/quotes/tiger_woods/
/r/MensRights31/03/10 04:14 PM
1

This is pointless, but to clarify, no I don't think that people who are against affirmative action are necessarily racist. I worded that comment poorly. I do think that some of them are, but that wasn't really my point. Obviously I do think that affirmative action type programs can be a useful if limited and imperfect corrective to past and/or current injustices. You don't, and I'm not interested in a pointless debate on that topic with someone who doesn't really listen to my answers, distorts w…
/r/MensRights31/03/10 03:56 PM
0

It's a little hard to discuss something with someone who who unwilling to actually read what I write. For example: You really haven't mentioned men having a hard time if they want kids, Actually, I mentioned this several times. The proposal that we're ostensibly discussing here would in fact set aside a portion of scientific grants for women and for men who are primary caregivers. You mentioned equal paternity leave. I agreed with you on that, and when you brought it up again I reiterated the po…
/r/MensRights31/03/10 06:25 AM
-1

Best of luck with that ridiculous sexism where you don't give a shit if men have a harder time having children and a scientific career. The reason I've stopped arguing is that you're just making a bunch of assertions, and then just making shit up about what I believe. What on earth are you talking about? I think it would be great if things changed so that men were better able to balance scientific work and raising kids so they could spend more time with their kids.
/r/MensRights31/03/10 05:16 AM
3

It might be considered provocative at least in part because it shows a naked guy with his bits blurred out.
/r/MensRights31/03/10 03:20 AM
-1

Best of luck saving the world of science from those horribly inefficient baby-having ladies.
/r/MensRights31/03/10 03:06 AM
-3

I do think that paternity leave should more or less the same as maternity leave. (Though women might deserve a little more because they are the ones physically giving birth and recovering from that.) I don't know what the fuck you're talking about with the baby stealing stuff, which bears absolutely no resemblance to anything anyone has ever proposed in the real world and doesn't even make sense as a reductio ad absurdum analogy. Many professions that are as important and as competitive as scien…
/r/MensRights31/03/10 12:23 AM
4

Actually, I did post something by him here once, and everyone said "you can't post this here because he's crazy and you're disrupting the subreddit." Not long afterwards, as a result of that post, several links to feminist critiques of men's rights, and some mild sarcasm towards several people, I was banned from posting here.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 11:53 PM
-2

An actual equivalent would be some sort of scholarship for, say, a member of an ethnic group that has been discriminated against. Though I suspect these sorts of things probably get the white men here pig-biting mad too. You're looking for hypocrisy that does not exist. I forgot. There is never any hypocrisy on the mensrights subreddit. EDIT: added a bunch of stuff
/r/MensRights30/03/10 11:45 PM
-3

As I pointed out in various posts in that topic, citing specific evidence, women entering into the science and technology fields are in fact as qualified as the men in the field, and in fact in their early years in the profession women actually get better evaluations than men. The problem is that these equally qualified women are driven from the field later because in our society an unequal burden of child care falls upon them. The point of the proposal I was talking about was to try in some sma…
/r/MensRights30/03/10 11:33 PM
-2

Actually, the proposed program I was talking about did not set quotas for women in the profession; it set aside a portion of scientific grants for women and for men who were primary caregivers.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 11:25 PM
-6

Huh, would that mean programs to specifically help boys? I seem to remember people on this subreddit not that long ago telling me angrily that any program designed to help people of a particular sex is "sexist" and "discriminatory" and even "unethhical." I got massive dpwnvotes for arguing otherwise. So presumably you would all be very opposed to a program designed to help boys in school.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 07:33 PM
8

Of course it is. These are the things people tell women to do to avoid being raped. The point of the sign is, I'm assuming, to cause men to think about what it would be like to be a woman, and to have to avoid doing these things because there is a rapist in the area.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 07:19 PM
5

Henry Makow is a famous antifeminist/men's rights activist, the author of several antifeminist books, and has a popular website filled with antifeminist articles. He's also completely insane: http://www.savethemales.ca/001904.html http://www.henrymakow.com/001421.html http://www.savethemales.ca/211002.html Should I start posting things by him here every deay to remind you that some antifeminists are crazy too? Or can we accept that each side has some crazy people and move on from there?
/r/MensRights30/03/10 06:51 PM
4

Although children were nearby, no one filed a complaint against Badu after the March 17 incident, Dallas Police Senior Cpl. Janice Crowther said. "But if we had had a call and would have caught Ms. Badu in the act of walking down the street taking her clothes off, she would have been charge with a Class B misdemeanor," she said. Also: Did you ever see the show Jackass? Those guys got naked in public all the time and never were arrested. And you may recall a scene in Borat involving "Borat" and h…
/r/MensRights30/03/10 03:29 PM
6

When I was younger I didn't use health services much because I had no insurance and couldn't afford it. (Lucky for me my appendicitis happened while I was still on my university's health plan.) Now that I'm self-employed again, I'm in the same boat, and will be until health reform actually kicks in. It's horrible that young people will get partially subsidized health insurance, and those with preexisting conditions will actually be able to get coverage. What a disaster for them and for America!
/r/MensRights30/03/10 02:52 PM
0

Hey I found a sign too!
/r/MensRights30/03/10 02:44 PM
4

I'm not condoning the vandalism, but Knepper is an obnoxious twit.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 12:04 AM
2

You're absolutely right. And in fact stories of individual men behaving badly/committing crimes, etc are rarely posted to r/feminisms, r/women, or r/twox. Indeed, there are zero on the front pages of all three of those subreddits, and 3 "woman behaving badly" on the front page of this one. (4 if you count the Jamie McCourt one.)
/r/MensRights29/03/10 10:11 PM
3

In this subreddit, if anything bad ever happens to an individual man, it means that all men are oppressed. If any individual woman does anything bad, it means that all women are bad. And if any government policy ever harms an individual man, it means that the government is run by man-hating feminazis.
/r/MensRights29/03/10 12:27 AM
0

You can believe I'm not a dude if you want. That belief will fit in well with your other delusions. What an idiot you are.
/r/MensRights28/03/10 07:32 PM
-1

I'm a dude.
/r/MensRights28/03/10 07:48 AM
0

You're free to bash ladies all you want, wherever you want. It's just a sad little hobby, is all.
/r/MensRights28/03/10 03:23 AM
-1

Evidently you didn't read any of my links. There were several other studies mentioned, aside from the one you're simply dismissing (apparently because the author is an expert on women and work?!), and assorted anecdotal evidence of sexism. Feel free to offer your own evidence. Or to explain why the fact that Hewlett studies women and work somehow makes her unqualified to talk about ... women and work.
/r/MensRights28/03/10 03:21 AM
1

They probably shouldn't listen to this guy: http://www.reddit.com/r/BashLadies/comments/abi5y/now_i_understand_why_men_beat_women_pic/c0gqz6b
/r/MensRights28/03/10 01:02 AM
-1

I know, citing actual evidence to back up your points is just so much fluff.
/r/MensRights28/03/10 01:01 AM
-1

http://www.reddit.com/r/BashLadies/comments/abi5y/now_i_understand_why_men_beat_women_pic/c0gqz6b http://www.reddit.com/r/BashLadies/comments/auwjv/wild_animals_dont_belong_behind_bars/c0jijap http://www.reddit.com/r/BashLadies/comments/a91no/women_are_the_biggest_cheats_and_theyre_better_at/c0gepgs http://www.reddit.com/r/BashLadies/comments/bf80k/what_men_know_that_women_dont_video/c0mh19f http://www.reddit.com/r/BashLadies/comments/au48r/30_of_women/c0jek1g You're a sad hateful little man, an…
/r/MensRights28/03/10 12:56 AM
0

No one is required to agree with the general, er, wisdom of a subreddit in order to read it and post there. If you look over my posts you will see that I make numerous substantive posts in this subreddit, and post numerous useful links. I make jokes and/or irritated comments too, but that's not forbidden on reddit. Examples: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/bgxcq/after_the_stabbing_hyde_who_was_17_at_the_time/c0mq70n http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/bg7a1/quotas_for_women_s…
/r/MensRights27/03/10 08:37 PM
5

You forgot "mangina."
/r/MensRights27/03/10 07:36 PM
2

Uh, you do realize that the whole whistle thing is an exaggeration to make a point; it is not a serious suggestion. I do think it's a weird and not very helpful way to frame the debate. I think we might have run into each other in r/atheism a long time ago.
/r/MensRights27/03/10 07:34 PM
2

Boy, somebody really can't handle open debate, huh?
/r/MensRights27/03/10 07:12 PM
-1

New excuse: He's a great director, so drugging and raping a 13-year old was ok. http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet/feature/2009/09/28/polanski_arrest This isn't to say that the excuse in the case that kloo2you linked to isn't ridiculous, but somehow I suspect it won't fly with a jury. Meanwhile Roman Polanski is being defended as a poor suffering victim by half of Hollywood. EDIT: The reason I post these things is that I think it's unhelpful for people to post random articles about women behav…
/r/MensRights27/03/10 07:05 PM
-4

Yeah, it's just terrible to tell your son not to hit girls.
/r/MensRights27/03/10 06:53 PM
1

Complete fail. None of those examples even remotely suggest that "that men should be confined to enclaves, to protect women."
/r/MensRights27/03/10 06:51 PM
1

Why? Because that would mean I'd have to find evidence for a ridiculous assertion that isn't true. Fixed that for you.
/r/MensRights27/03/10 06:10 PM
-1

You know, I don't think they're shedding any tears over that.
/r/MensRights27/03/10 04:34 AM
4

Wait, where exactly is the "shaming language" here??
/r/MensRights27/03/10 12:13 AM
1

From the article: The court filing also contends that Hopper's finances have dwindled with his illness. Dwindled by how much? This site, for what it's worth, says his net worth is $40 million. http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/actors/dennis-hopper-net-worth/ The article makes it seems as if he is living off his income, which is clearly ludicrous. It would take an awful lot of dwindling of his $40 million (or however many millions it is) for this to be the case. EDIT: And of co…
/r/MensRights26/03/10 08:20 PM
0

The reasons for the decline in marriage have to do with an assortment of cultural and demographic trends. It's ridiculous to describe it as a "strike" or to suggest that "the impediments to a commitment for marriage stem largely from "lifetime alimony." "
/r/MensRights26/03/10 05:50 PM
3

It's sad he's in the state he's in, but there's a lot in that article I find hard to believe, including: An affidavit from his accountant said the cost of his cancer treatments exceed his income, which is $58,000 in annual residual payments from his TV and movie roles. His last acting job was last year when he completed the television series "Crash." Look at his imdb page: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000454/ He's been working in the business continually since 1955. He's in two films that are com…
/r/MensRights26/03/10 05:41 PM
1

Oh those evil nannies! One even turned Jude Law into an adulterer.
/r/MensRights26/03/10 05:28 PM
-2

Men's Studies has existed as a discipline for about 30 years; it was inspired by feminism, and many, probably the overwhelming majority, of those in the discipline are feminist. This conference looks to be an attempt by conservative and anti-feminist academics to essentially start their own competing discipline.
/r/MensRights26/03/10 05:25 PM
5

Uh, why don't you just find an actual post that suggests this.
/r/MensRights26/03/10 08:31 AM
-1

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20021001/article_main.php?sid=20021001/0122201
/r/MensRights26/03/10 08:26 AM
1

This counselor found that many women had subtle, often unconscious ways of silencing men, disqualifying their feelings, and generally shaming the men. Meanwhile, some men have not-very-subtle ways of trying to silence other men -- for example, by telling them to fuck off.
/r/MensRights25/03/10 06:37 AM
3

Uh, you guys do realize that Samuel Johnson was British, and has been dead for more than 200 years, right?
/r/MensRights24/03/10 04:18 AM
2

Why on earth do you assume a misandrist posted it?
/r/MensRights24/03/10 04:17 AM
3

She's a quite an, er, character, but Jim Goad is quite a character too: http://www.nypress.com/article-6057-jim-goad-is-a-bad-man.html Probably not a good idea to get into a relationship with either one of them. EDIT: Downvotes again? Read the article; it's fascinating. Jim Goad is a world-class crazy motherfucker.
/r/MensRights23/03/10 08:01 PM
3

The two men were described as "ringleader" and "accomplice";it's not clear what role the women had in the kidnapping. Generally speaking ringleaders get more severe sentences than followers. Also, everyone involved was quite old. I don't think this article gives us enough information to judge whether the sentences were appropriate or to conclude the women got off easy because they were women.
/r/MensRights23/03/10 07:28 PM
4

huh? EDIT: Ok, downvoters, how is a list of misogynist quotes about women evidence that misandrists are here?
/r/MensRights23/03/10 06:40 PM
0

So basically, Women can stab us at any time and get away with it?? Uh, no: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/bgxao/woman_stabs_masturbating_boyfriend/c0mq6hp
/r/MensRights23/03/10 10:24 AM
-2

Hmm. Too bad there's only one page of that Martin Fiebert paper you link to available in the free preview. This paper of his, though, is available in full. It's a little, well, odd. http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/cosmic.pdf
/r/MensRights23/03/10 10:04 AM
1

Really? She was 17. She got 9 years to life. Here's a case in which an 18 year old boy got ten years for murder: http://www.skyvalleychronicle.com/SULTAN/ANOTHER-TEEN-SENTENCED-IN-MURDER-OF-BOY-IN-SULTAN Here's a 17-year-old boy who got 20 years but -- oh! -- the sentenced was suspended. He'll spend time in Juvie then serve a 5-year sentence: http://hamptonroads.com/2008/07/17yearold-sentenced-2005-norfolk-murder And here's a case in which a 17-year-old girl got life: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/to…
/r/MensRights23/03/10 09:51 AM
0

The charge seems absurdly light in this case, but it's hardly typical. All these women got charged with attempted murder: http://www.fox5sandiego.com/news/la-mesa-drunken-stabbing,0,5429246.story http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294230,00.html http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/entertainment/florida-woman-stabs-boyfriend-over-american-idol_100312689.html http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/crime/woman-charged-with-attempted-murder-after-stabbing-boyfriend-98083.html http://www.fooqu.com/freepo…
/r/MensRights23/03/10 09:29 AM
1

From last summer; I am sure this has been discussed here before.
/r/MensRights23/03/10 09:00 AM
1

I'm just concerned that this will be warped into some crazy feminist psychological study that claims that good fathers are abusing the mothers of their children, by taking the kids to the park once too often. So you're blaming feminists for an absurd hypothetical study that doesn't exist? Looking at the actual study, instead of an imaginary one, the women surveyed rated their husbands' parenting skills quite highly, giving them scores of 21 out of 28. In other words, the majority are quite happy…
/r/MensRights23/03/10 12:28 AM
2

I think I misread you. Yeah, they're doing that.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 09:34 PM
1

Uh, no.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 08:45 PM
6

I can't believe I just upvoted this comment.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 08:44 PM
1

it is painfully obvious that it is the same person. Yeah, it's sort of obvious when four different accounts post the exact same screed.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 08:39 PM
3

So, she's gone through the trouble of making a site designed to discredit the MR's movement, and now she's posting in this reddit to make us look bad. Obviously smithea/KellyHarp7/etc is a multi-account-using spammer, and probably a troll, but this is a ridiculous theory. The site is real.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 08:33 PM
3

In Roadrunner cartoons Wile E. Coyote repeatedly tries to blow up, drop anvils on, or otherwise harm the Roadrunner. That does not make the show anti-roadrunnerite.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 08:30 PM
0

There are some more details in the article I linked to, if you haven't read it yet. The report it is based upon unfortunately costs a great deal of money to get, but here are some articles that give more details from it and other information on the subject: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article3908362.ece http://www.forbes.com/2008/05/10/science-women-careers-lead-cx_tw_0512athenastudy.html http://jezebel.com/390144/why-are-there-so-few-female-scientists http://www.nytimes.com/20…
/r/MensRights22/03/10 08:07 PM
-1

It's mensrights. That's how they play.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 06:55 PM
1

Well, you get points for consistency then.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 04:10 AM
0

This was a one-time conference. Men were debating all aspects of the health care bills for months. There have been many examples of all-male congressional committees -- not one-time conferences, but longstanding working bodies. Here's just one recent example of one: http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/11/no-women-stimulus/
/r/MensRights22/03/10 04:02 AM
0

Well, I guess you're opposed to all athletic scholarships then.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 03:56 AM
-2

The notion that men aren't suited to raise children, and women are, isn't a feminist notion. It's an old, sexist, antifeminist notion. On this other issue, which yes I have seen discussed here endlessly: Sitcoms and the like that portray "bumbling" husbands tend to be old-fashioned relics, a weird mixture old-fashioned sexism and ersatz "feminism"; the shows with more modern sensibilities, and frankly more feminist attitudes, tend to portray women and men more similarly. The female characters in…
/r/MensRights22/03/10 03:55 AM
1

Uh, you really think no men have been involved in this discussion? 441 members of Congress are male (83%) and 92 are female (17%) (from wikipedia)
/r/MensRights22/03/10 02:31 AM
-1

You happen to work in the one area in which women dominate, at least on the lower rungs of the profession: And, women enter science engineering and technology (known as the SET professions) in sizable numbers. In fact, 41 percent of workers on the earliest rungs of SET career ladder are women, the study found, with the highest representation in scientific and medical research (66 percent) and the lowest in engineering (21 percent). They also do well at the start, with 75 percent of women age 25 …
/r/MensRights22/03/10 02:20 AM
0

A point that is not germane to a discussion on the way things are now And why do you bring this up? While it's silly to pretend the past is irrelevant, this was just a passing observation on my part; the rest of my post addressed the present. EDIT: Also, if research is such a terrible life choice, why are so many people here so angry at the notion of women getting ahead in it? Surely anyone interested in men's rights would want to get men out of this horrible profession as quickly as possible. E…
/r/MensRights22/03/10 02:15 AM
-2

how many times have you heard men in general being called incapable of caring for a child? Honestly I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that, and certainly never from a feminist. I've seen (or seen the ads for) some dumb movies that suggest that men are kind of bumbling around the house, and some dumb ads that suggest the same, but generally speaking they tend to reflect some rather old-fashioned sexist attitudes towards both women and men, like the still-pervasive ads that depict women hap…
/r/MensRights22/03/10 02:06 AM
-1

So male scientists with kids move forward in the profession with no troubles, because they're not expected to devote much time to care for their kids, while equally able and qualified women drop out of the profession because of the unequal burden of child care. And no one here gives a shit about that. That pretty much sums up this subreddit in a nutshell. EDIT: Your position is not only an affront to women, but to men who actually want to be good dads and devote as much time as their wives to th…
/r/MensRights22/03/10 12:52 AM
-1

... at least at the level of graduate school. And there's the rub. You're looking at only one part of the picture, and ignoring the larger pattern of discrimination. Yes, these days women get science/engineering degrees at nearly the same rate as men; that's true, and that's good -- it wasn't always this way. But that relatively egalitarian state doesn't last when you start tracking the sexes after graduation: ... women enter science engineering and technology (known as the SET professions) in s…
/r/MensRights22/03/10 12:45 AM
-3

You realize, or perhaps you don't, that the reason women complain about 12 hour days isn't because they are lazy, but because women are still expected to do the majority of child care; were male scientists involved in child care to the extent of their women counterparts, they would certainly care about this issue too.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 12:36 AM
6

Uh, how ARE feminists SUPPOSED to debate ON a FORUM with rules LIKE this? (SOMETIMES I like to capitalize random WORDS TOO.) we made this forum primarily for MEN. the content is designed to teach men how to regain their manhood. some of the posts may be humorous, some of the posts may be abstract, but we try to make sure all the posts fit the goal. if your post has been deleted or moved to the "Poopy Posts" section, it's not always because it's a bad post. it may just not fit with the goal of th…
/r/MensRights21/03/10 10:23 PM
1

See above.
/r/MensRights21/03/10 08:47 PM
0

Women scientists this weekend called for government funding to be ring-fenced for projects headed by women, and men who are principal child carers, to help them get ahead in what remains a male-dominated profession. I'm guessing that most of those child-caring men don't have vaginas. And this still doesn't say exactly what the proposal is.
/r/MensRights21/03/10 08:46 PM
-8

Men are vastly overrepresented in science, and the profession is rife with sexism. Despite the misleading headline, this doesn't seem to be about quotas at all, merely an attempt to direct some grant money to women. As far as I can tell from the vague wording of the article; does anyone have a link to what specific proposals she's actually talking about? edit: useful link on sexism in science: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article3908362.ece
/r/MensRights21/03/10 07:42 PM
-1

You see, this right here, is a subtle form of silencing. Give me a damn break. People on this subreddit throw around words like "bitch" and "cunt" and "mangina" and if anyone calls them on it that's a "subtle form of silencing"? Fuck off catlebrity. You see, this right here, is a not-very-subtle form of silencing.
/r/MensRights21/03/10 06:22 AM
0

You don't think the rights of boys are a men's rights issue? Most feminists consider the rights of girls to be an important part of feminism.
/r/MensRights20/03/10 10:59 PM
-1

when I talk of genuine equality with most people, they think I'm crazy or a woman hater. Well, to be fair, you did recently suggest that bitching bitterly about women "is an important part of group therapy." "http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/bfapb/is_it_an_issue_that_men_face_then_its_a_mens/c0mhke2
/r/MensRights20/03/10 10:50 PM
1

That's true, but r/feminisms is also considerably less bitter than r/mensrights. Very few posts, say, about random men committing horrible crimes, etc.
/r/MensRights20/03/10 10:44 PM
1

So how many of the people here who complain so much about feminist downvote brigades just went and downvoted the comment linked to here? I'm guessing, oh, about 146 of you.
/r/MensRights20/03/10 10:40 PM
1

Here is the post you deleted: Do you not know how to use The Google or are you being deliberately obtuse? Two of the first three hits for women are more likely to use weapons are academic studies. I'm glad you have finally provided a citation; that's all I aked for in the first place, a citation to back up your assertion. Nevertheless, while I have not read the whole thing yet, I read the section on severity of violence and note that it does not in fact support your contention that women use wea…
/r/MensRights20/03/10 08:18 PM
0

General craziness, excessive farting, you name it.
/r/MensRights20/03/10 02:36 AM
-6

No, trust me, it wasn't. But you know what physical abuse did fuck me up, both physically and emotionally? Getting beat up by (male) bullies when I was in grade school. Why isn't that sort of thing talked about more on this subreddit? Perhaps because the villains in these cases are invariably other boys? (At least in the cases where boys are victims. Girls can be pretty vicious, but mostly towards other girls.)
/r/MensRights19/03/10 10:24 PM
-7

citation? EDIT: BitterDivorcedDad posted then deleted a comment suggesting that I was an idiot and that I should google the phrase "women are more likely to use weapons." Then evidently he actually read some of the results that popped up and thought better of the comment. The first result says: that women were more likely to use a weapon to protect themselves The same study also found that: Men are responsible for most cases of domestic violence, but women are three times more likely to be arres…
/r/MensRights19/03/10 09:07 PM
-6

Often true, but in her case it couldnt' have grown very far; she simply wasn't very powerful.
/r/MensRights19/03/10 08:38 PM
1

citation?
/r/MensRights19/03/10 08:36 PM
-9

Well, it has to do with the study it's citing, which gets mentioned here all the time.
/r/MensRights19/03/10 08:12 PM
-14

Women obviously can be abusers, but I honestly question how much of the 70% of domestic violence this study says is done by women is really comparable to the violence done by men towards women. Women are, on average, considerably smaller than men. I had a girlfriend a long time ago who hit me on several occasions. She did no damage whatsoever; she was much smaller than me, and I quickly grabbed her wrists and stopped her. I broke up with her shortly afterwards, but her hitting me was about item …
/r/MensRights19/03/10 07:54 PM
17

OMG a crazy person on the internet!
/r/MensRights19/03/10 07:30 PM
-5

Reading comprehension doesn't see to be your strength. Nothing she said even remotely suggested she thinks anything like that. Also: in the end, she basically agreed with the guy.
/r/MensRights19/03/10 07:23 PM
0

Uh, yes, but the first source was the one that specifically related the issue of "brainwashing" to domestic abuse. Without that specific connection to the issue of abuse, the rest of the article would have been simply speculation. Lipton's decades-old research on the issue of "brainwashing" is actually quite controversial these days, but that's a whole other kettle of fish.
/r/MensRights19/03/10 03:49 PM
0

FWIW, the article cited as evidence for this piece actually deals primarily with abused women, not men. I imagine the situation is similar with gender roles reversed, but that's a misleading way to cite the source.
/r/MensRights19/03/10 07:03 AM
4

Yeah, I don't think that was why you were downvoted.
/r/MensRights19/03/10 02:24 AM
-1

Give me a damn break. It's funny. Are you really this oversensitive or are you just pretending to be so you have something to be outraged about? EDIT: Someone (who will remain nameless here to protect the guilty) posted this reply to my comment, then apparently realized how dumb it was, and deleted it: This space reserved for "get back to kitchen" joke. You guys are so wonderfully predictable sometimes.
/r/MensRights16/03/10 11:13 PM
1

I don't believe that map of Australia is accurate.
/r/MensRights15/03/10 06:23 PM
1

How exactly does Parental Alienation meet the criteria for a mental disorder?
/r/MensRights14/03/10 08:12 PM
2

Uh, that is fairly standard in such cases, regardless of gender. See some of my links posted earlier here.
/r/MensRights13/03/10 11:13 PM
1

Well, here's another post of his, so, no I don't think it's a coincidence: http://www.reddit.com/r/WhiteRights/comments/bcqo1/blacks_killed_420692_americans_from_1950_to_2000/
/r/MensRights13/03/10 08:48 PM
1

There's more going on here than stares, and the teacher actually admits one of the accusations is true: A report noted Reedy had previously been disciplined three times: a verbal reprimand for inappropriate comments made to a teacher; written reprimand for unwelcome behavior toward an intern; and a five-day unpaid suspension for comments made to a bus driver. During the recent investigation, one teacher told Cohen that Reedy came up from behind, put his body uncomfortably close to hers and “whis…
/r/MensRights13/03/10 08:43 PM
-1

And your point is what exactly? http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/02/18/1256375/cmpd-officer-arrested-on-domestic.html http://www.htrnews.com/article/20100225/MAN0101/100225096/1984/MANBusiness/Manitowoc-police-officer-arrested http://www.allbusiness.com/crime-law/criminal-offenses-crimes-against/13722864-1.html http://www.vancouverite.com/2009/12/18/hamilton-cop-charged-with-domestic-violence/ http://arklatexhomepage.com/content/fulltext/?cid=97891 And many more: http://www.google.com/searc…
/r/MensRights13/03/10 08:34 PM
1

Uh, did you read the article? ANALYSIS Peter Wilson, Midlands Today Home Affairs correspondent Junaid Abuhamza has schizophrenia and although he was fit to appear in court it was agreed by three psychiatrists that he will require lifelong support and monitoring. It is also agreed he could suffer a relapse in the future which would mean he would pose a risk to the public. It was because of this risk that an indeterminate sentence, called Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP), was imposed. This…
/r/MensRights13/03/10 07:32 AM
1

Well, that make sense. I could believe that this completely fictional story took place in a completely fictional town.
/r/MensRights12/03/10 11:17 PM
-1

A similar thing happened to me this morning involving monkeys that flew out of my ass.
/r/MensRights12/03/10 11:07 PM
0

This may be the silliest case of manufactured outrage I've seen in this subreddit so far. The story is a brief recap of what happened one day in court. When defendents weep in court, it is often mentioned, and often mentioned in the headlines: http://www.google.com/search?q=defendant+weeps&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a And the article does in fact mention what she did. Here's an article about a man who allegedly murdered his wife and daughter. He wept in …
/r/MensRights12/03/10 07:55 PM
1

Um, they were reporting a notable moment from what had happened iin court that day. Defendants often weep in courts, and this often makes the headlines. No gender issue here: http://www.google.com/search?q=defendant+weeps&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
/r/MensRights12/03/10 10:46 AM
-1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtroom_sketch
/r/MensRights12/03/10 10:44 AM
1

From this article, it looks like the typical "to catch a predator" guys get much less than 4 years. The story looks at the predators caught on one of the episodes, and the sentences are all over the place, from as much as 5 years to as little as 180 days, plus one case dismissed. EDIT: I'm being downvoted for providing information? If you've got better information on how the "catch a predator" guys have been treated, that suggests what was reported in this article was misleading, post it.
/r/MensRights10/03/10 11:13 PM
2

I think you mean most sexiest!
/r/MensRights09/03/10 08:07 PM
3

Not a lot of digging. The case was featured on a show on Tru TV which I happened to see. As for "the norm," see my other comments in this thread.
/r/MensRights08/03/10 08:23 PM
1

him it was a first time offense while she had a criminal record ... It's also believed that she was the instigator of the whole thing. Something similar accounts for much of the supposed inequality in sentencing between men and women. If you just look at the statistics, it looks like women get sentenced more leniently than men for the smae offenses, but when you look beyond the statistics, it turns out men get sentenced to longer terms than women in seemingly "identical" cases because of things …
/r/MensRights08/03/10 12:38 AM
3

Wow! Someone actually read the article. This was featured in a recent true-crime documentary on TruTV, so I looked up the news coverage of the case. There's also a book about it, though I haven't read it.
/r/MensRights08/03/10 12:15 AM
0

Here's more on the case: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/30/navy.captain.fired/index.html http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2010/feb/03/navy-captain-relieved-of-duty/ http://www.starbulletin.com/news/bulletin/20090209_Navy_captain_relieved_of_command.html http://articles.latimes.com/2001/dec/11/local/me-13767 Oh, wait.
/r/MensRights07/03/10 04:56 AM
1

What about Funkadelic?
/r/MensRights05/03/10 08:23 PM
6

It does seem to be a completely fly-by-night group. Here's its not-very-impressive website: http://www.nddvo.info/Home_Page.html
/r/MensRights04/03/10 06:44 AM
2

citations please?
/r/MensRights27/02/10 11:35 PM
1

Well, it was more like a murder-suicide, in that not everyone went willingly -- including of course all the children. Is that what you mean?
/r/MensRights26/02/10 11:00 PM
12

I love that this is still (at the moment) the top link in MR despite the fact that the headline is completely misleading and that there is no gender issue here at all (her male partner was also cleared of murder charges due to his mental health, and both have pleaded guilty to manslaughter).
/r/MensRights25/02/10 10:15 PM
-5

I love that this completely sane, reasonable post has been downvoted.
/r/MensRights25/02/10 08:41 PM
-10

It's the end of the world!
/r/MensRights25/02/10 08:25 PM
1

She may well be lying. I don't know. My point was was that her lawyer wasn't offering up an abuse excuse -- that she was abused so she had the right to kill her husband -- but rather the lawyer was saying she killed her husband in self defense.
/r/MensRights24/02/10 04:26 AM
2

Male cult leader kills over 900 followers
/r/MensRights23/02/10 10:34 PM
0

A California man accused of selling his 14-year-old daughter into marriage for $16,000, beer and meat has pleaded no contest to felony child endangerment.
/r/MensRights23/02/10 10:32 PM
0

No such spin in this article, though the quote from his agent is bizarre.
/r/MensRights23/02/10 10:20 PM
1

She says he came after her and their kid with a gun. If true, that's not really the best time to bring up the issue of divorce.
/r/MensRights23/02/10 06:25 AM
1

I'm not actually advocating murder here, but if you felt you were in imminent danger of being killed by him, and that the only way to protect yourself was to kill him, and you did, I imagine your lawyer would be arguing that you killed him in self-defense, just like the wife's lawyer is arguing in her case. I don't know if you're telling the truth, and I don't know if she is telling the truth, but you would both be entitled to make your case in court.
/r/MensRights23/02/10 06:22 AM
0

That too.
/r/MensRights23/02/10 02:36 AM
4

I could have a room full of people testify against the sanity of some woman I was in a relationship with after offing her but that wouldn't have a bearing on the fact that a judge would have a field day and throw me in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison. If she came after you with a gun and you legitimately felt your life threatened, and could prove it in court, you wouldn't go to jail. The wife in this case has to prove the same thing in court, or she will go to prison too. There are plenty of …
/r/MensRights23/02/10 01:51 AM
2

Well, no. Did you read the story? She's not merely claiming abuse; says that she killed in self defense, after her allegedly abusive husband picked up a gun and threatened to kill her and their son. This may or may not be true -- I guess we'll see how it plays out in court -- but unless your brother seriously threatened you at gunpoint there isn't exactly a parallel here.
/r/MensRights23/02/10 01:47 AM
1

If you actually feel oppressed by Two and a Half Men, you need to get a grip on yourself.
/r/MensRights23/02/10 01:34 AM
2

You really have odd ideas about what counts as a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights21/02/10 10:11 PM
1

These days, it's mostly the bible bashers. Many feminists have supported legalization/decriminalization of sex work for years, if not decades. I've met very few feminists who are actually Dworkin/McKinnonites.
/r/MensRights21/02/10 08:09 PM
1

What a strange and revealing comment. I'm not quite sure how you've determined that your hypothetical rasta is equally or more oppressed than a 17 year old thai prostitute. Do you have some sort of mathamatical oppression formula? And I'm not sure why you've decided to minimize the evil of underage prostitution by talking about a hypothetical 17 year old who has chosen this life. As I assume you're well aware, many of those dragged into this world are kids who are 12, 13, 14, sometimes younger. …
/r/MensRights21/02/10 08:18 AM
8

The reason why feminism has half the subscribers that men's rights does is clearly because 'feminism' is largely irrelavant Uh, no. It's because the user base of reddit is mostly male.
/r/MensRights20/02/10 10:15 PM
2

I read the original NYT articles when they appeared in 2006 and was horrified. (Not sure why boing boing is posting about them now, but the articles are worth reading in any case.) This isn't really a mr issue, more a WTF how is this possible in a civilized society issue.
/r/MensRights20/02/10 10:13 PM
-2

Sex tourism is sort of creepy in general, regardless of gender. Sex tourism involving underage prostitutes/sex slaves is what is really really evil, and that's what most people objecting to sex tourism are concerned about.
/r/MensRights20/02/10 10:10 PM
1

Yep, you've gotten yourself mentioned in a list of crazy extremists trying to use this case to push their agenda. Congrats!
/r/MensRights19/02/10 09:30 PM
4

Nice try, editor of the Daily Mail.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 09:26 PM
3

A lot of crazy accusations, no proof. Reminds me of the "satanic panic" cases in the US in the 80s and 90s that led to a lot of innocent people, male and female, being imprisoned for child abuse, despite a total lack of physical evidence for it.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 09:24 PM
-1

Huh? In the US you don't. Sorry, I can't buy the book for you.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 09:16 PM
-2

jayhammers prefers namecalling to actually making arguments, nothing to see here.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 04:03 AM
-1

well established fact that, statistically, men are sentenced more harshly than women for the same crimes. Uh, again, the book does not dispute that. It suggests that a simple statistical look at the issue is in fact misleading.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 02:45 AM
-1

Sorry for posting about someone who was only an attempted murderer. Would this guy be a better example? I could google all night but I have actual work to do. In any case, I was originally responding to this statement: In our society, I guess we should be glad that she was charged at all. This was a reference to her being charged with attempted murder.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 02:41 AM
-3

Oy very. So we shouldn't take prior records into account when sentencing? No, I haven't read the whole book. But I've at least read portions of it. You glance at a page, come up with bullshit reasons for dismissing it, and then decide it's worthless. I've enjoyed this thoughtful debate with you.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 02:30 AM
-1

She discusses all this in detail in the book, which you can find here: http://books.google.com/books?id=c_gPDQOBZjAC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false
/r/MensRights19/02/10 01:44 AM
-2

Yeah, male murderers are never sent to mental hospitals in the US.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 01:29 AM
-1

She did not "cherry pick" the cases she looked at. Much of the book is available online., and if you look in the appendix, starting on page 273, you can see how she selected the cases she looked at in detail. I know I erred in citing a study that won an award from the American Society of Criminology. I realize that mensrights generally likes to get its information from random blogs and the Daily Mail.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 01:25 AM
-3

Yeah, or like this woman, also sent to a mental hospital for child murder. Oh, wait, that's a dude.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 12:09 AM
2

This is, of course, appalling. I actually support the death penalty, in theory, but in practice, I can't.
/r/MensRights18/02/10 10:30 PM
-5

Much of the time they are sent to therapy because they have post-partum depression. Yeah, like Susan Smith. Oh wait, she was sentenced to life in prison.
/r/MensRights18/02/10 10:24 PM
-7

There is a statistical discrepancy in sentencing. But, according to this study, when you actually look at the details of the cases in question, it's quite a different story: By providing both numerical and narrative descriptions of crime and punishment, Daly shows the inadequacies of quantitative analysis: although her statistics, like those of other studies, suggest that women are favored, her close comparison of the matched pairs indicates that gender differences are negligible when the detail…
/r/MensRights18/02/10 10:21 PM
-11

I guess we should be glad that she was charged at all. Yes, because women trying to kill small children are usually given awards.
/r/MensRights18/02/10 09:40 PM
4

Wow. A story about a crime by a man posted in r/mensrights. But not a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights18/02/10 09:38 PM
4

Dude, I'm not defending her. She is a murderer. The case should be reopened. My gut feeling is that in addition to the recent killings she did murder her brother and that she probably was responsible for the pipe bomb too. What I'm saying is that there is no evidence that she escaped prosecution in the older cases because she's female. In the case of the pipe bomb, my understanding is that she was questioned but they simply had no evidence linking her to the crime.
/r/MensRights15/02/10 11:05 PM
5

Well, you can believe that if you want, but plenty of men aren't charged with anything because they claim to have accidentally shot someone, and the police believe them. Dick Cheney shot a dude in the face a couple of years ago; not only was he not charged with anything, but the guy publicly apologized to Cheney for getting shot in the face. Dick pass!
/r/MensRights15/02/10 09:45 PM
2

No.
/r/MensRights15/02/10 09:38 PM
4

We simply do not know what happened. This CNN report is based entirely on possibly unreliable memories of events that happened more than two decades ago. She may have gotten away with murder, or she might have shot the guy accidentally. But there is absolutely no evidence that her gender had anything to do with how she was treated.
/r/MensRights15/02/10 09:36 PM
3

Damn! Men are never involved in financial crimes!
/r/MensRights15/02/10 09:30 PM
1

the bastardisation of skinarian psychology feminists have been parroting for decades. You don't really know much about feminism, do you?
/r/MensRights15/02/10 09:10 PM
2

Well that makes a lot more sense.
/r/MensRights15/02/10 03:45 AM
2

If you want a real "disorder" how about the assumption that you have any 'rights' Huh? I'm a little confused here. Are you actually suggesting that women don't have rights?
/r/MensRights15/02/10 12:29 AM
0

Absolutely. Evolutionary psychology is mostly just speculation at this point; it's provocative and interesting but it's far from a science. It tends to be popular with some men's rights types because it seems to provide "scientific" support to some rather retrograde assumptions about men and women.
/r/MensRights15/02/10 12:26 AM
2

all this shows is that saying you were abused is an easy way out of serious consequences. No it doesn't. She's being held in jail on a $3 million bail. We have no idea what the facts of this case really are, or how any of this will play out in the trial. The fact that a lawyer can say "Oh, but she was abused" as an excuse is sad. The lawyer is not saying that. He's saying she killed her husband in self defense. That may or may not be true, but it's a common defense in murder cases, in cases wher…
/r/MensRights15/02/10 12:18 AM
-1

given far more credence than they should. There's no evidence that's true here. But feel free to discuss the imagined injustice in this case all you want. EDIT: And she's not saying she killed the guy because of abuse, but that she killed him in self-defense. That may be bullshit, but there's really no men's rights issue here.
/r/MensRights15/02/10 12:10 AM
0

You do realize that most people charged with a crime say that they are innocent.
/r/MensRights14/02/10 08:52 PM
-1

Man With an Ax Kills Child, Critically Injures 2 Females Yep, both men and women commit horrific crimes. Who knew?
/r/MensRights13/02/10 11:22 PM
2

Frazier said he was basing his statements on the memories of one of his officers who was on the department at the time The story seems weird enough, and certainly warrants an investigation, but maybe you should wait until we have some actual facts rather than vague memories before jumping to conclusions.
/r/MensRights13/02/10 11:19 PM
8

Uh, you do realize there are I don't know how many websites out there that specialize in ex-girlfriend pics. Edit: removed link
/r/MensRights13/02/10 04:14 AM
5

Because I think most of what is said here is wrongheaded and bad for men and women both, and so I come here to challenge it.
/r/MensRights12/02/10 04:31 AM
1

Here's a similar case.
/r/MensRights10/02/10 11:25 PM
2

Ah yes. I assume you mean rational and well-thought out responses" like this, or this.
/r/MensRights09/02/10 07:04 AM
-1

You reap what you sew, Er, that should be "reap what you sow." You're welcome!
/r/MensRights09/02/10 02:51 AM
6

I read a few of those links and quickly realized you were either misreading or misrepresenting the actual comments in question. The comment you label "While arguing that the alpha male archetype is twelve kinds of evil" does not in fact do that at all; the "Being proudly masculine is "mad creepy"" comment is simply challenging the idea that dividing men into "alphas" and "betas", based on a rough analogy with the behavior of wolves, makes sense. The comment you linked to with the somewhat inaccu…
/r/MensRights08/02/10 08:28 PM
3

The kitty halftime show?
/r/MensRights08/02/10 06:23 AM
9

If a slightly sarcastic comment like the one I posted gets you so upset you start a topic about the possibility of banning people, you might just want to develop a slightly tougher hide. I was banned once from mensrights after posting a similarly sarcastic comment; the moderator (previous to the current one) eventually unbanned me. As for "double standards," well, I don't spend a lot of time in 2X, but generally speaking people have been banned from the various feminist subreddits only after pos…
/r/MensRights08/02/10 06:17 AM
4

I'm curious as to who exactly you wanted to ban.
/r/MensRights08/02/10 05:39 AM
3

Uh, if you read he comments over on feministing you'd notice that pretty much everyone there thinks it's a very stupid idea.
/r/MensRights08/02/10 05:32 AM
-2

Just so you know, the people who post on community.feministing.com aren't official feministing bloggers. This is basically just the feministing equivalent of some random dude posting, say, here. (EDIT: And if you read the comments over on feministing, you'd see that most of the people there, most of them presumably feminists, thought this post was really, really stupid.) So in other words, by making a big deal out of this post you're sort of doing basically what r/ladybashing does.
/r/MensRights08/02/10 05:31 AM
-1

When I manage to actually make an educated point, or god forbid, win an argument they look at me as if I was a dog that managed to do algebra. This may not be a reflection on your gender but a reflection on you. Were you to win an argument here I would have a similar reaction.
/r/MensRights07/02/10 08:53 PM
1

Brilliant logic. Again, the study I mentioned WAS THE STUDY YOU POSTED. Also: I'm not a woman. But thanks for proving that you like to jump to conclusions without evidence.
/r/MensRights07/02/10 08:44 PM
0

others have posted stats that refute your information. Uh, the study I mentioned was ONE THAT YOU POSTED. It was one of the two on the page you linked to that mentioned murder. It found that husbands murdered wives more than vice versa. This was a study of theUS over many years. The other study that mentioned murder found the opposite, but it was a study of one city.
/r/MensRights07/02/10 08:39 PM
0

That article is about one case and it seems to have been written by a crazy person.
/r/MensRights07/02/10 08:34 PM
1

That is interesting but it is only a study of one city.
/r/MensRights07/02/10 08:31 PM
-2

All the article is saying is that since women outnumber men on campus, men have a bit of an edge romantically. Women on gender-imbalanced campuses are paying a social price for success and, to a degree, are being victimized by men precisely because they have outperformed them, Professor Campbell said. In this way, some colleges mirror retirement communities, where women often find that the reward for outliving their husbands is competing with other widows for the attentions of the few surviving …
/r/MensRights07/02/10 07:09 AM
0

So cite the studies. This study says that in the US men murder their wives more often than vice versa: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/79/5/595 The risk of being killed by one's spouse was 1.3 times greater for wives than for husbands.
/r/MensRights07/02/10 07:03 AM
1

Is anyone here suggesting otherwise?
/r/MensRights07/02/10 07:00 AM
1

I guess I misread you, then. And yes, the paper says that black men are more likely to be killed by their wives than vice versa. But if you look at the whole population, wives in general were more likely to be killed by husbands than vice versa. For anyone who doesn't want to sort through the paper itself, here is the relevant passage: The spouse homicide rate for this 10-year period was 1.6 per 100,000 married persons, with wives being at 1.3 times the risk of husbands (Table 2). Blacks account…
/r/MensRights07/02/10 06:57 AM
2

Both girls and boys are kidnapped: http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009/08/24/kidnapped-marriage
/r/MensRights07/02/10 04:01 AM
0

Uh, you're misreading that first one: "higher murder rates of wives" means that the wives are more likely to be killed. Also, see the abstract of the article here: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/79/5/595 The risk of being killed by one's spouse was 1.3 times greater for wives than for husbands.
/r/MensRights07/02/10 03:50 AM
-4

So nine of ten female murderers go free?
/r/MensRights07/02/10 01:19 AM
2

Because the murderers' mothers didn't kill them when they were babies?
/r/MensRights07/02/10 01:17 AM
10

But don't worry, guys! We're still way ahead when it comes to murder overall!! In 2004, males were almost 10 times more likely than females to commit murder. We're number one! We're number one!
/r/MensRights06/02/10 11:42 PM
2

More examples of the vagina discount in action: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/04/girl-buried-alive-turkey http://newsblaze.com/story/20100202162339reye.nb/topstory.html
/r/MensRights04/02/10 10:02 PM
1

Samantha Bee is not a dude, dude.
/r/MensRights04/02/10 10:24 AM
9

One sign that you may have become an ideologue is that you find segments on the Daily Show extremely offensive.
/r/MensRights04/02/10 10:24 AM
1

Once again, someone is downvoted for telling the truth here. There are some people on this subreddit who are absolutely obsessed with Solanas.
/r/MensRights03/02/10 11:09 PM
4

Andrea Dworkin, for example, is jsut a crazy lady who was bitter at the lack of men in her life. Look, I was never a fan of Dworkin, and these days very few feminists are, but when you say things like this you sound like an idiot. Among other things, Dworkin was a lesbian; despite this she had a very loyal male companion who stuck with her for many years up until her death, even when in the last days of her life she did in fact seem to go actually crazy (delusions, etc ).
/r/MensRights03/02/10 11:01 PM
2

I love that the guys here downvoted you for correcting someone's error.
/r/MensRights02/02/10 09:21 PM
0

Gosh, who would ever imagine that Planned Parenthood might be interested in reproductive issues???
/r/MensRights02/02/10 08:27 AM
-1

Well, in that case, I'd like to suggest that you toss yourself into some boiling water.
/r/MensRights28/01/10 03:11 AM
-3

You really are remarkable. Elsewhere in this discussion, KoNP said to me "Somebody should take a cheese grater to your face. I'd fucking laugh my arse off, you piece of shit." If someone were to actually do that, would KoNP be "as guilty" as the person who did it? No, because, however vile what he said was, he was JUST SAYING CRAZY SHIT ON THE INTERNET.
/r/MensRights28/01/10 01:16 AM
-5

Yes, because someone who says something crazy in the middle of an argument is as guilty as someone WHO THROWS A BABY INTO BOILING WATER.
/r/MensRights28/01/10 12:51 AM
2

I imagine they didn't mention the guy's name because the family hadn't been notified yet, or something along those lines.
/r/MensRights27/01/10 11:01 PM
3

With a tiny bit more googling, you might have discovered that other scholarship challenges the assumption that women have it easy when it comes to sentencing: "By providing both numerical and narrative descriptions of crime and punishment, Daly shows the inadequacies of quantitative analysis: although her statistics, like those of other studies, suggest that women are favored, her close comparison of the matched pairs indicates that gender differences are negligible when the details of the cases…
/r/MensRights27/01/10 11:07 AM
-7

Perhaps the BBC should have gone with a different headline as well.
/r/MensRights27/01/10 11:00 AM
18

Uh, link please?
/r/MensRights27/01/10 10:57 AM
-5

Perhaps the headline should have mentioned that then, huh?
/r/MensRights27/01/10 10:56 AM
-2

Yeah, men released from prison never commit crimes ever again. Nope, never From the second link: "Recidivism rates were higher among men, blacks, Hispanics, and persons who had not completed high school than among women, whites, non-Hispanics, and high school graduates." EDIT: Fixed second link, added quote.
/r/MensRights27/01/10 10:41 AM
-10

Sorry, I thought it was some sort of contest to see which which gender was the worst, determined by randomly posting news articles about awful behavior of individual terrible people.
/r/MensRights27/01/10 10:35 AM
-9

Father Throws 10 Month-Old in Boiling Water on a Dare
/r/MensRights27/01/10 05:07 AM
2

Sorry. I was responding to your headline, which reads like an open invitation to use those words, and to those in this subreddit who think it is appropriate to use them. Still, I did think of this subreddit when I first saw that video I linked to above.
/r/MensRights26/01/10 03:02 AM
-4

The topic of calling women "cunts?" Yes, don't.
/r/MensRights25/01/10 11:14 AM
-3

You guys are such charmers! When I saw this I couldn't help but think of this little subreddit. Except that those guys, mercifully, don't talk much, and they have excellent taste in music.
/r/MensRights25/01/10 02:17 AM
0

I am sorry for not truly appreciating your brilliance in watching a tv show, completely misunderstanding it, and then making up some bizarre fantasy about what it all means.
/r/MensRights24/01/10 09:10 AM
2

This woman is sick and crazy and evil, but this is hardly a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights24/01/10 03:51 AM
2

So you're criticizing her for (finally) telling the truth?
/r/MensRights24/01/10 03:49 AM
-6

Wonderfully mature of you.
/r/MensRights24/01/10 03:47 AM
-2

Uh, the show doesn't depict her actions as being a good thing.
/r/MensRights24/01/10 03:43 AM
2

Well, those are indeed citations, which makes your comment far more valuable than the original submission. Of course, the issue might not be as simple as you think. Others have suggested that the seeming sentencing disparities disappear if you actually look at cases in detail rather than simply looking at the stats: http://yalepress.yale.edu/Yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300068665 By providing both numerical and narrative descriptions of crime and punishment, Daly shows the inadequacies of quantita…
/r/MensRights23/01/10 11:04 AM
3

[citations please]
/r/MensRights23/01/10 04:27 AM
4

True. I mean, all the guy in the second case did was run over two kids, killing one of them, while driving recklessly on a suspended license, after which he drove off without checking to see who or what he hit, washed the blood off his car and tried to pound out the dents to cover up his crime. I'm not even sure why they took him to court. They should have given him a medal or something.
/r/MensRights23/01/10 04:22 AM
2

You've completely missed the point. What she did was criminal, yes. But she did not intentionally cause the death. That's why it was involuntary manslaughter, not murder. Depending on the circumstances, people convicted of involuntary manslaughter can get a variety of sentences for their crimes, ranging from almost nothing to several years in prison; both men and women have sometimes gotten very light sentences for involuntary manslaughter. I don't know enough about the case to judge whether her…
/r/MensRights23/01/10 02:38 AM
-4

Yeah, I feel totally sorry for the guys trying to take advantage of the poverty and desperation of foreign women so they can buy themselves a hot wife.
/r/MensRights23/01/10 12:06 AM
2

The fact that it was accidental means nothing to you?
/r/MensRights23/01/10 12:02 AM
1

Uh, you actually think he was sent to prison without a trial? If he's in jail, it's either because he was convicted or is waiting for a trial. The woman in this case spent time in jail waiting for her trial as well.
/r/MensRights23/01/10 12:01 AM
2

Note the word "allegedly". No proof is needed to send him to prison. Uh, you actually think he was sent to prison without a trial? If he's in jail, it's either because he was convicted or is waiting for a trial. The woman in this case spent time in jail waiting for her trial as well. As if it would have been perfectly ok for her to stab him had he not been holding the baby. He had apparently just stabbed her in the hand with a skewer. The judge after hearing the evidence found her version of the…
/r/MensRights23/01/10 12:01 AM
1

The death was accidental. There have been numerous cases in which men have received little punishment after being convicted of or pleading to involuntary manslaughter, like her. Man gets 14-day jail sentence for involuntary manslaughter Man Sentenced to 15 Days in Jail for Fatal Hit-and-Run
/r/MensRights22/01/10 11:52 PM
-2

Ah, yes. The John Birch Society magazine. Always a reliable source of unbiased information and analysis.
/r/MensRights21/01/10 12:22 PM
0

And OJ Simpson got away with double murder. Should I conclude from that that there's some sort of sexist double standard that allows men who murder their exes (and any of their boyfriends who happen to be nearby) to get away with it? No. Cases are decided on a, yep, case-by-case basis, and sometimes judges and/or juries do dumb things. Citing two cases to prove something about gender is pointless and rather silly.
/r/MensRights21/01/10 12:17 PM
10

Unless Men's Rights include having health care. Coakley is a horrible person, but I would have voted for her just to save health care reform.
/r/MensRights20/01/10 11:07 PM
0

Generally speaking, feminism is only hostile to men who are complete douchenozzles.
/r/MensRights16/01/10 06:15 AM
1

Well, no. I'm just saying that this conference has an agenda behind it, and that feminists bugged by this conference aren't inherently against Men's Studies as a discipline, as the title of this submission seems to suggest.
/r/MensRights16/01/10 05:34 AM
3

This one only. I'm too lazy to sign in and out in order to comment. Well, ok, once I set up a completely ridiculous novelty account and made, I think, 2 posts with it before I decided it wasn't very funny and stopped.
/r/MensRights16/01/10 05:29 AM
1

Uh, I was trying to make fun of you.
/r/MensRights16/01/10 05:27 AM
1

Uh, "Men's Studies" has existed as a discipline for three decades. The conference you're objecting to, ironically, is one set up by conservative scholars who are actually hostile to feminism, and who want to downplay the fact that the discipline they're claiming to invent already exists.
/r/MensRights16/01/10 03:45 AM
1

Uh, it's called "Male Studies" because "Men's Studies" has existed as a discipline for three decades. As a discipline it was inspired by feminism and women's studies. This conference isn't an attempt to start a new discipline from scratch. Rather, it seems to be an attempt to ignore and obscure the history of Men's Studies and reboot the discipline, with a slight change in terminology, as one hostile to feminism.
/r/MensRights16/01/10 03:43 AM
2

stories like this prove that there's little difference between the sexes. No they don't. They prove that some women are capable of enormous evil, which isn't something that really needs proving; everyone in the world is aware of this. Beyond that, anecdotal evidence really doesn't prove much of anything except that people can be endlessly inventive in the evil things they do. Virtually any "woman behaving badly" story you post here can be matched with an equally awful "man behaving badly" story.…
/r/MensRights16/01/10 03:39 AM
3

Maybe because I don't think saying "oh noes" is racist, any more than I think putting an ungrammatical caption on a picture of a cat is racist. Lolspeak is basically a parody of the weird and illiterate comments we all run into online, mixed with various online memes. Here is one attempt to figure out the etymology of the phrase "oh noes." The most convicing one suggests that it seems to be a slightly mutated version of Mr Bill's "oh nooooo!" from SNL in the 70s.
/r/MensRights16/01/10 03:29 AM
3

She's not objecting to Men's Studies; she's objecting to this particular conference, particularly Lionel Tiger's involvement in it.
/r/MensRights16/01/10 02:51 AM
0

Men's Studies has existed as an academic discipline for nearly 30 years. As a discipline it was inspired by feminism and women's studies. This pro-feminist Men's Studies organization was founded in 1982. This conference isn't an attempt to start a new discipline from scratch. Rather, it seems to be an attempt to ignore and obscure the history of Men's Studies and reboot the discipline, with a slight change in terminology, as one hostile to feminism. As Saydrah points out below, Lionel Tiger is h…
/r/MensRights16/01/10 02:49 AM
1

To prove to whom? Who doesn't know this?
/r/MensRights16/01/10 02:22 AM
7

Well, you'd better track down the other 833,000 people who've used the phrase online then, and let them know. Then you'd better get on the case of the lolcats crowd. EDIT: And from now on I promise to only imitate Scarlett O'Hara, a white woman. As in "Oh my goodness gracious! Some inventor wants to make all the menfolk pee kneeling down! Whateveh can we do?"
/r/MensRights15/01/10 11:28 PM
15

Oh noes! I'm being oppressed by some goofy invention that got mentioned by a blog!!!!!
/r/MensRights15/01/10 10:22 PM
-3

Clearly all women are responsible for the action of this one.
/r/MensRights15/01/10 10:19 PM
6

Father Sells 14-Year-Old Daughter Into Marriage for $16,000, Beer and Meat And what does this prove? Both men and women do horrible, horrible things. This is not a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights14/01/10 10:10 PM
1

Wait --those commercials offended you? Seriously? They're about as innocuous as they come. The guys isn't even portrayed as stupid, just a bit befuddled.
/r/MensRights14/01/10 05:10 AM
1

... and in the US hookers are arrested more often than johns.
/r/MensRights14/01/10 04:33 AM
1

Really? These are funny. If you want a commercial that's truly insulting to both sexes, try those "every kiss begins with kay" ones.
/r/MensRights13/01/10 08:29 AM
6

These are hilarious. Lighten the fuck up.
/r/MensRights13/01/10 04:52 AM
1

Your doctors literally told you you were a chump or a pussy for going in for a regular checkup? That's bizarre and unbelievable. Were they also recommending that you smoke more and jump in front of cars?
/r/MensRights13/01/10 04:49 AM
1

How did you know that about my daddy?
/r/MensRights13/01/10 12:08 AM
1

Uh, who exactly is telling you that you're a chump for getting regular checkups?
/r/MensRights13/01/10 12:07 AM
-9

Like a moth to a lamp, or a fly to shit, I am inextricably drawn to small groups of ideologues with delusions of importance and overdeveloped senses of victimhood. So, yes, I stop by Men's Rights and Conspiracy when I visit Reddit. I used to also visit Atheism, but I got bored. Interestingly enough, the conspiracy folks are the only ones with a sense of humor.
/r/MensRights12/01/10 02:05 AM
-1

At least that stuff has entertainment value.
/r/MensRights12/01/10 01:26 AM
-5

Yes, you convinced me. As a male I am outraged that there is no Institute for the Study of Getting Kicked in the Nuts.
/r/MensRights12/01/10 12:40 AM
2

Especially if it comes from here.
/r/MensRights12/01/10 12:24 AM
1

They are ingenious, these men's rightsers, you have to give them that.
/r/MensRights12/01/10 12:23 AM
-8

Seriously, if you devote your life to seeking out completely insignificant shit like this, and working yourself into a lather about it, you really, really need to get a better hobby.
/r/MensRights11/01/10 11:49 PM
1

For added enjoyment, print out a couple of COPS bingo cards the next time you play.
/r/MensRights11/01/10 12:37 AM
3

After the whole kerfuffle here over that 3-year-old Mexican law that did not, in fact, make it a crime for men to refuse to have sex with their wives, you guys should probably do a little bit more fact checking before believing a blog's claims on alleged misandrist foreign laws. Here's a better account of the (proposed) law, not from the tabloid daily mail filtered through a biased blog: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122362876&ps=cprs The law would apply to men and women b…
/r/MensRights10/01/10 12:48 PM
3

If you watch COPS a lot you'll see plenty of women arrested for domestic abuse. Probably not quite as often as men, but generally speaking what determines who gets arrested is not the gender but things like who has the most obvious injuries, if there were any witnesses, whether or not the abuser is still running around like a crazy person with a weapon, etc. Arrest in such cases is generally mandatory, even if the victim tries to cover for the abuser and says nothing happened (despite witnesses …
/r/MensRights10/01/10 12:38 PM
4

I watch a lot of COPS and it is not in fact the default to simply arrest the man. They arrest women all the time for domestic abuse; sometimes they take them both. They generally base it on who has the most obvious injuries or whose explanation makes the most sense. EDIT: Ah, downvoted for providing relevant information. I love this subreddit.
/r/MensRights10/01/10 12:32 PM
1

I imagine he would, and probably has. His advice is pretty consistent regardless of gender. It's a bit silly to consider this a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights09/01/10 09:40 PM
4

Oh noes we're being oppressed by bra colors!
/r/MensRights09/01/10 12:44 AM
1

Please take this in the spirit in which it is meant: When you see something on the internet that seems too weird to be true, maybe you should actually make a tiny bit of an effort to see if it is in fact true. Also: I am not a55hole.
/r/MensRights07/01/10 11:33 PM
1

Here's the law: http://www.sre.gob.mx/derechoshumanos/images/igualdadgenero/docs2/generallawwomenlifefree.pdf As Wandee (who dug this up) noted in equality, the legislation does not in fact list "not having sex with your wife" as a crime. Also, this article is 3 years old, and no one in Mexico has been arrested for not having sex with his wife. And no one ever will be. But I suppose you can just ignore this and continue to fulminate about imaginary anti-male conspiracies all you want. There's no…
/r/MensRights07/01/10 12:44 PM
1

You could just read the thing. The legislation does not in fact list "not having sex with your wife" as a crime.
/r/MensRights07/01/10 12:43 PM
1

Here's the law: http://www.sre.gob.mx/derechoshumanos/images/igualdadgenero/docs2/generallawwomenlifefree.pdf As Wandee (who dug this up) noted in equality, the legislation does not in fact list "not having sex with your wife" as a crime. Also, this article is 3 years old, and no one in Mexico has been arrested for not having sex with his wife. And no one ever will be. But I suppose you can just ignore this and continue to fulminate about imaginary anti-male conspiracies all you want. There's no…
/r/MensRights07/01/10 12:42 PM
2

According to this article she did in fact have a felony kidnapping warrant.
/r/MensRights03/01/10 11:43 PM
-1

The comparison may not be perfect, but the point is that you guys spend a lot of time acting like damsels in distress, with an exaggerated and often comic sense of victimhood, but you get quite indignant when anyone points this out. This whole subreddit is little more than an excuse for you guys to play the victim, whether it's warranted (very very rarely) or not. I mean, some of you get all worked up about the fact that Marge Simpson is portrayed as being slightly more sensible and intelligent …
/r/MensRights03/01/10 10:04 PM
-5

This critique of the feminism movement, then, in no way applies to us. Yep, you just keep telling yourself that.
/r/MensRights03/01/10 12:46 PM
-13

Gosh, what other group of activists does that remind me of? Hmm. I think they have their own little subreddit and everything.
/r/MensRights02/01/10 11:26 PM
1

Uh, you can't take her stuff any more than I can take your stuff. It's her stuff, even if you bought it for her.
/r/MensRights28/12/09 07:32 AM
3

I look back fondly on my time as a fetus, happily immersed in goo, getting fed through a tube in my tummy. Birth was pretty traumatic, though. Then some creepy dude in a mask spanked me. They should probably ban that shit.
/r/MensRights24/12/09 10:27 PM
2

Here's agroup that fights against such injustices: http://ncrj.org/
/r/MensRights10/12/09 11:56 PM
1

Research doesn't "show" this. One study, in one city (out of the 3 new studies mentioned) found that male businesses did better. And these are basically preliminary results; we don't know yet how much or how little a success microfinance will be in the long run.
/r/MensRights07/12/09 10:42 PM
2

And rightly so. She was railroaded, as was her boyfriend. See here for more: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/02/amanda-knox-revisited/
/r/MensRights07/12/09 10:35 PM
1

Not with my fridge you won't. The whole thing would have to be filled top to bottom with baking soda.
/r/MensRights29/11/09 11:32 PM
4

Uh, that's after she says: Well, in terms of social impact and the views of the public, it's not. But that's something we should be working to change, not changing the laws to reflect the current gender bias of the general public. In other words, the law shouldn't reflect the widespread notion that abuse is worse for girls than for boys, and people should be working to change the attitudes that lead "a girl to be shamed as a slut if she had sex with a male teacher--even if she was coerced--while…
/r/MensRights29/11/09 11:31 PM
2

Um, where are the people defending her? What I see is a bunch of people making fairly obvious jokes and comments about child support and vasectomies.
/r/MensRights29/11/09 11:25 PM
5

I think you're misreading her comment.
/r/MensRights29/11/09 11:13 PM
3

Well, sure. The MR reddit crowd complains about alleged feminist downvote brigades in similar situations all the time, so I thought I'd return the favor.
/r/MensRights29/11/09 11:10 PM
3

FWIW, TMZ isn't saying she attacked him with the golf club; the claim is that she scratched him and as he was driving off she hit his SUV with the golf club.
/r/MensRights29/11/09 11:07 PM
2

Ah. So I guess the commenter was the victim of the MR downvote brigade.
/r/MensRights29/11/09 10:54 PM
0

You get 100+ upvotes for your comment, and then complain about one commenter that gets downvotes?
/r/MensRights29/11/09 03:19 AM
1

Not sure why this is in Men's Rights, but anyone who has followed this case is aware there's are very good reasons to think she is innocent, and being framed for this. EDIT: some links: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/an-innocent-abroad/ http://www.seattlepi.com/local/405052_knox10.html
/r/MensRights22/11/09 03:26 AM
2

Go for the argument? There's not much of an argument for me to rebut. The OP sets forth the bare bones of a hypothesis, based entirely on his own personal observations of a small number of kids in a play. Are the girls really haughty or is that just his perception? Are the boys really socially awkward or is that his perception? Is what's going on confined to kids in drama classes and/or plays or is it a broader pattern? If it is, then he's got to explain how, of all the influences young boys fac…
/r/MensRights20/11/09 11:58 PM
0

Honestly, I don't know why boys are socially awkward at that age. When I was a boy that age, I was socially awkward, but I can't imagine that had any connection with the alleged "haughtiness" of girls. At that age, I was far more traumatized by boy bullies than by anything any girl ever did. It's clear from reading the posts here that a lot of you guys have a lot of anger towards women, and that in this topic you're projecting or simply redirecting this anger onto grade-school girls. I mean, loo…
/r/MensRights20/11/09 09:44 PM
3

The person who wrote the post has a major role in the feminist community, I would say. No she doesn't. She's not a staffer or official contributor to feministing. The post was on Feministing's "community" blog, where apparently anyone can post. She has about as much of a "major role" in the feminist community as any random poster in this subreddit has in the men's rights community.
/r/MensRights20/11/09 09:32 PM
-2

You notice that little boys are socially awkward and decide the problem is ... little girls? What evidence do you have for this except your perception that most of the girls act "haughty"? If the girls really are acting "arrogant," do the boys even notice this? Could it be, might it be, possibly, just perhaps, that the boys are socially awkward because, uh, you know, they're little kids?
/r/MensRights19/11/09 10:40 PM
-4

... and the feminists who read the blog post replies saying they think the manifesto is "hateful and offensive" or possibly OK only if it's some sort of Swiftian satire. So, really, all you've discovered here is one blogger who's a bit of a nut. Not exactly an indictment of feminism at large.
/r/MensRights19/11/09 10:23 PM
0

Man rapes daughter, dogs, horse Oh, wait. It wasn't in Florida. Never mind.
/r/MensRights19/11/09 08:43 AM
0

This is what gets you outraged?
/r/MensRights19/11/09 07:02 AM
2

Florida: Father Kills Wife, 2 Sons, Himself Florida: Husband Kills Kids And Himself While Wife Is In Shower Florida: Husband kills wife as children watch Oh,wait, this isn't the people-doing-horrible-shit-to-spouses-in-florida subreddit. This is the men's rights subreddit. Oops! Feel free to ignore these links, as they don't all depict women doing bad things to men.
/r/MensRights19/11/09 06:57 AM
0

While she's in prison. Right.
/r/MensRights19/11/09 06:48 AM
1

If that's an urban legend I guess this must be as well.
/r/MensRights19/11/09 02:25 AM
0

Huh. A couple of days ago this subreddit was discussing a top-ten book list that didn't contain any female authors; the general consensus was that that it was silly to claim sexism was responsible for the all-male list -- it was just that the top ten best books happened to all be written by men. (Heck, a couple of commentors suggested that women simply were incapable of writing great books.) But the fact that 2/3 of college students enrolled in Poland this year are women somehow is the result of…
/r/MensRights19/11/09 02:00 AM
1

You've got no proof of preferential treatment. Meanwhile, here's a recent example of a women being fired for doing something similar. Well, actually, for doing something much less controversial: http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/111409/new_516320164.shtml Both of these cases are just that -- individual cases. They don't prove anything with regard to gender.
/r/MensRights19/11/09 01:52 AM
3

That's where it is now.
/r/MensRights19/11/09 01:18 AM
1

Also, a guy pretended he was gay so he could share an apartment with two hot women. He was later arrested at the Regal Beagle.
/r/MensRights08/11/09 07:57 PM
-2

Sounds a lot like this story.
/r/MensRights07/11/09 10:20 AM
1

I play Scrabble; knowing all the playable two-letter words is everything. So that's all I really ever look for in a partner -- playable two-letter words.
/r/MensRights05/11/09 08:27 PM
-1

My post wasn't really directed at RAff001 as much as it was directed to this subreddit at large. And it has nothing to do with "resources"; that's a strange assumption for you to make. I just can't imagine why any woman would want to marry any man with the level of bitterness towards and sometimes hatred for women that's regularly shown in this subreddit.
/r/MensRights05/11/09 08:01 PM
0

You are aware that there is a male contraceptive option called "the condom," right?
/r/MensRights05/11/09 09:36 AM
-10

Somehow I doubt this is a great loss for the women of the world.
/r/MensRights05/11/09 09:34 AM
1

Better start a hunger strike or something.
/r/MensRights04/11/09 07:59 PM
0

It may just be that you guys are hilarious.
/r/MensRights02/11/09 08:24 PM
2

That makes more sense. Judging by intent makes more sense than judging by how successful the false allegations are. pn6 apparently believes his own accusations. But on the question of whether or not an arrest is made, that makes no sense, and it's not a standard that MR redditors generally go by when it comes to female false accusers -- remember the hubbub in here some months back about the woman who made ludicrous allegations against a cabbie?
/r/MensRights29/10/09 08:40 PM
3

You didn't answer my question. Pn6 tried to ruin the lives of the women in question; he failed. From a moral standpoint, there is no difference between what he did and what this false accuser did.
/r/MensRights29/10/09 08:22 PM
4

His behavior was identical to that of the false accusers you think should be killed. The only difference is that the police didn't believe him. You're letting him off the hook only because his false rape allegations failed to result in arrests? Tawana Brawley's false rape allegations didn't result in anyone being arrested. Somehow I doubt you're as sympathetic to her as you are to pn6. People who try to kill other people get sent to prison for attempted murder. If false rape charges that result …
/r/MensRights29/10/09 08:13 PM
2

He did tell the police: http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/6agjq/campus_rape_ideology_holds_that_inebriation/c04t74c
/r/MensRights29/10/09 07:50 PM
3

You do remember that the founder of this subreddit made some highly dubious -- and almost certainly false -- accusations of rape against four women; he posted their names on Reddit. If these allegations were to be proven false, would you feel that a death sentence was appropriate for him?
/r/MensRights29/10/09 07:07 AM
1

Here's one possibility.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 09:29 PM
1

You're a judge and you can't use "its" properly?
/r/MensRights26/10/09 08:13 PM
3

Everyone here back then knew that pn6 had issues. I'm sure the same can be said of many female false accusers. if a woman told the same story, there would be pitchforks and torches at doors of the accused men Similar allegations in the past have led to the arrest and conviction of both men and women. See here for a some examples: http://www.witchhuntmovie.com/exonerated.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kern_County_child_abuse_cases http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial I like to…
/r/MensRights25/10/09 09:40 PM
1

If you really feel this way, you should track down the founder of this subreddit. He accused -- by name, here on Reddit and perhaps elsewhere -- 3 women of repeatedly raping him in his teenage and college years. There was, he admitted, no evidence to prove any of this, and his explanation for what he says happened is literally unbelievable: he claims they were somehow able to instantly put him into a trance whenever he saw them and this allowed them to rape him. (At least I think that's what he …
/r/MensRights24/10/09 09:35 PM
1

Why is this in MR? This is about a miscarriage of justice.
/r/MensRights24/10/09 10:27 AM
2

Well, yeah, but she's under house arrest (at her mother's house) awaiting trial for that. Seems rather likely she'll be convicted. Here's a clearer story I found on what's going on: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2009/10/08/a1b_binocol_1009.html I suspect that her parents and her lawyer are the only people in the world on her side in all of this.
/r/MensRights09/10/09 02:51 PM
1

What's your point? As far as I can tell from this badly written story, he's in the house now, which he bought before the marriage, and he's going to stay. Her lawyer is trying to do something or other to delay the resolution on who gets the house because, well, that's the sort of thing lawyers do. Given the circumstances, it seems highly unlikely (to put it mildly) that she's going to actually get the house.
/r/MensRights09/10/09 02:31 AM
2

Again, I don't know if their shooting of him was justified, but I'm trying to understand what exactly you think happened here. The RCMP decided to go to the guy's house for no reason and shoot him, then got together with his wife and concocted the story about him chasing her and shooting out the tires of her van? Then snuck over to where the woman was and actually shot out the van's tires with the guy's gun to frame him? What do you actually think happened?
/r/MensRights02/10/09 08:50 PM
1

I forgot. This is the Mensrights subreddit. Men are always innocent, and women are always liars.
/r/MensRights02/10/09 07:03 PM
1

I have no idea if the police were justified in shooting him. But unless the police simply made up the part about him pursuing his wife and kids and shooting out the tires of their van, he wasn't exactly an innocent man.
/r/MensRights01/10/09 09:23 PM
2

Against Kanye West.
/r/MensRights15/09/09 04:52 AM
2

You don't think that in a fight it's remotely plausible that the smaller of the two people might grab a weapon? In any case, they (I think obviously correctly) judged that his version of events was more plausible than hers since they arrested her, not him. But the fact is that even his version of events doesn't suggest attempted murder. According to him, after stabbing and slashing at him several times, she let him walk by her (while she still held the knife) and get out of the house. http://www…
/r/MensRights17/07/09 08:51 PM
-6

Possibly because her version of events (that she picked up the knife to defend herself) was at least plausible and b/c her boyfriend wouldn't testify against her? Speculation on my part here, but given that there were no witnesses it would be pretty much impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was attempting to kill him.
/r/MensRights17/07/09 05:50 PM
0

If any jobs open up in the ideological ax-grinding industry, you will be well-qualified.
/r/MensRights24/06/09 08:29 AM
1

I take it that no one here, including you (and perhaps not even the author of the blog post) actually read the article in the Times, which despite its oddball headline is actually an excellent investigation of what is going on with this recession written with no ideological axe to grind.
/r/MensRights24/06/09 03:33 AM
-3

Isn't the equality movement awesome? Returning to segregation? You know, I think the reason for this isn't so much the "equality movement" as it is the guys groping women on trains. No groping, no segregation.
/r/MensRights19/06/09 09:19 PM
-2

"The reality is that we have few requests from Seibu Railway users for setting up male-only carriages," the board said in its reply to the shareholder request.
/r/MensRights19/06/09 01:18 AM
-3

In Green Card, Andie MacDowell agrees to a fake marriage with Gerard Depardieu (who needs a green card) in order to be able to rent an apartment "for couples only." In The Proposal, Ryan Reynolds agrees to a fake marriage with Sandra Bullock (who needs a green card) to get a promotion. No matter how you slice it, a fake marriage to Gérard Depardieu is far more horrifying than a fake marriage to Sandra Bullock. And how exactly does I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry fit into your theory of male …
/r/MensRights17/06/09 03:37 PM
-3

You're getting worked up because some random person made a comment you don't like about a movie that's basically a remake of Green Card??
/r/MensRights16/06/09 11:45 PM
3

I'm not defending the study. Like a lot of psychology studies, alas, it seems to have been pretty poorly thought out and to not really prove much of anything. This isn't a problem confined to gender studies; there are lots of badly designed studies in the social sciences, and lots of them are reported fairly uncritically in the media. And it's certainly well within the scope of this subreddit. What I don't see is how this study could "possibly form a justification for legislation that is targete…
/r/MensRights14/06/09 12:09 AM
2

Please explain how men's preference for 'natural women' speaks to the image of men as pron loving potential rapists.
/r/MensRights13/06/09 11:25 PM
1

Please explain how this study could possibly form a justification for legislation that is targeted against men. EDIT: It's a serious question. How could a study like this lead to bad laws against men? If you're trying to make an argument, it actually helps if you make an argument instead of making an assertion and then downvoting those who question that assertion.
/r/MensRights13/06/09 08:43 PM
0

Men don't report domestic violence because if they go to the hospital hours later drunk and in a wheelchair there's a tiny chance some psychotic police officer will beat them?
/r/MensRights12/06/09 07:08 PM
-1

I believe you. Carry on.
/r/MensRights11/06/09 03:25 AM
0

Someone wants to be unbanned from Equality! (I think they should unban you, actually.)
/r/MensRights11/06/09 01:13 AM
-2

PN6 would usually say why though. what post got her banned? I don't thing it was for a post; I think it was after the whole taking-down-r/Equality thing.
/r/MensRights11/06/09 01:12 AM
0

You are a true humanitarian.
/r/MensRights10/06/09 06:26 PM
9

Boy, this story makes a lot of important points about Men's Rights.
/r/MensRights10/06/09 06:20 PM
-2

You know those cars you see out there, with the word "police" written on the side, and the little lights on top? I've heard rumors that some of the people in those cars might actually spend some of their time trying to arrest the people responsible for killing men. I believe there might actually be a television show or two about this even.
/r/MensRights09/06/09 09:09 AM
1

When challenged about a dubious assertion, you resort to insults and run. Classy.
/r/MensRights04/06/09 10:39 PM
1

Most insults are "metaphorical." If I call someone an "asshole" I'm not saying that they're literally an asshole, merely that they have undesirable characteristics like an asshole does. How exactly is calling someone a "mangina" a step above calling them an "asshole" or a "cunt?"
/r/MensRights04/06/09 09:55 PM
1

I have a suggestion for you. Go to the nearest biker bar. Find the biggest, meanest dude there. Go up to him and call him a "mangina." Then (quickly) explain to him that you were using the term in a "highly specific and metaphorical way." See what happens.
/r/MensRights04/06/09 08:30 PM
0

A complaint about personal attacks from the same guy who called people he disagreed with "manginas."
/r/MensRights04/06/09 07:52 PM
0

Nope!
/r/MensRights04/06/09 04:00 AM
1

Just say a few things. I'm sure there will be an example in there somewhere.
/r/MensRights04/06/09 03:28 AM
0

When police arrested him, she was tied up and said he had kidnapped her. What on earth were they supposed to do? Not arrest him because sometime in the future they would find out she'd lied about assault cases in the past? Also: the fact that someone has lied about assault in the past doesn't mean that they can't be assaulted in the future. Otherwise anyone could do anything they wanted to this woman short of killing her and get away with it. IF there's no other compelling evidence that the poli…
/r/MensRights03/06/09 11:48 PM
0

I kept reading, alas. It didn't get any better.
/r/MensRights03/06/09 11:39 PM
1

Could that be because your peculiar notions of what counts as REAL equality are based on fantasies about the oppression of men that are about as believable as the tooth fairy?
/r/MensRights03/06/09 06:55 PM
1

Why would you assume that any women interested in REAL equality would be hanging out in Men's Rights with guys who toss around words like "femidyke?"
/r/MensRights03/06/09 06:16 AM
1

Question for everyone here: Did you actually read this eminently sensible article, or are you simply reacting to one quote from it taken out of context?
/r/MensRights03/06/09 06:09 AM
1

The article is trying to explain why this happens, not to excuse it. It isn't making a value judgment about which is "worse."
/r/MensRights03/06/09 06:07 AM
1

You really think "predatory" is somehow less damning than "pervert?" If anything, it's the other way around. Lots of people jokingly describe themselves as perverts, or pervs, or pervy; I've never heard anyone describe themselves as a predator. Have you ever heard of the show "To Catch A Predator?"
/r/MensRights03/06/09 06:05 AM
0

Before you get too carried away with your little fantasies here, you should know I have a penis.
/r/MensRights01/06/09 05:22 AM
0

You are a neverending source of delight.
/r/MensRights30/05/09 11:09 PM
-6

There is a gender war going on and it time to stop marching in lines like the British. Damn. Could you be more melodramatic? You're approaching self-parody here. EDIT: Ah,the inevitable donwnvotes. I just showed your comment to a friend of mine. It took her a moment to figure out what you were talking about with the whole "marching in lines" bit, but once she did, she laughed and laughed and laughed. On the Men's Rights subreddit, you get upvotes for this remark; in the real world, you're ridicu…
/r/MensRights29/05/09 07:40 AM
-4

Uh, did you actually read the article, or just the headline? No one is opposing the group's right to exist; the reporter merely found a couple of women who thought it sounded sort of pointless.
/r/MensRights29/05/09 07:31 AM
-3

The reporter who wrote this story clearly went looking for controversy. This was the closest she got -- a couple of women suggesting that, perhaps, the group might be pointless. BestServedCold, I think you're going to have to look elsewhere for evil feminist oppressors.
/r/MensRights29/05/09 07:29 AM
2

Uh, there are many more where those come from. Where is the evidence that western feminists are ignoring the struggle for women's rights in the middle east? James doesn't present any; neither have you.
/r/MensRights29/05/09 12:22 AM
0

Hmm. When I submitted a link to a similarly crazy Men's Rights website to this subreddit a while ago, I was admonished by the moderator and others here saying that it was unfair to post such a thing, that it didn't really represent the Men's Rights movement, etc etc. (EDIT: And that submission was one of the things that got me banned from this subreddit for several months.) Here are a couple of links: http://www.savethemales.ca/070502.html http://www.savethemales.ca/000202.html
/r/MensRights28/05/09 11:13 PM
1

Clive James can be a very entertaining writer, but this piece is a weird mishmash of straw men, illogic, and assertions without proof. One quick search on google turns up numerous examples of feminists talking about all sorts of things he claims they're ignoring. A small sampling: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-search.fcgi?IncludeBlogs=2&search=kuwait http://feminist.org/news/newsbyte/news_results.asp?Body=kuwait&Submit2=GO http://womensphere.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/kuwaiti-w…
/r/MensRights28/05/09 08:50 PM
1

Wrong on all counts. But thanks for so neatly embodying all of the worst stereotypes of men's rightsers.
/r/MensRights28/05/09 08:29 PM
-5

If you actually think that people don't think women ever kill their babies, you obviously don't ever watch Nancy Grace, aka the "Casey Anthony Hate Hour." Women who kill their kids are not exactly beloved pop culture icons.
/r/MensRights26/05/09 05:49 PM
0

Uh, who exactly is "honoring" Aileen Wuornos?
/r/MensRights26/05/09 06:05 AM
1

The comment I admonished you for was this. Even your fellow Men's Rightsters thought it was a bit over the line.
/r/MensRights24/05/09 07:26 PM
1

You complain about namecalling ... shortly after calling me a feminazi. Very highminded.
/r/MensRights24/05/09 09:09 AM
-3

stupid
/r/MensRights24/05/09 08:44 AM
-2

is
/r/MensRights24/05/09 08:44 AM
-2

Give me a break. He looks like a corpse.
/r/MensRights24/05/09 08:43 AM
1

I wouldn't say that. I just realized it's probably pointless to discuss anything with someone who actually believes there is a danger of men bing driven from the cab driving profession.
/r/MensRights23/05/09 01:15 AM
1

Oh dear. I forgot for a moment that I was arguing with a crazy person.
/r/MensRights23/05/09 12:23 AM
1

The hysteria about child abuse isn't only directed at men; there were a number of women jailed in the "satanic abuse" witchhunts of the 80s and 90s, for example. And some of the people who fought longest and hardest against that hysteria were feminists like Debbie Nathan. EDIT: Also, men being driven out of the taxi-driving profession? When have you ever even seen a female taxi driver? I think I've seen maybe two in my lifetime, and one of them was on that Taxicab Confessions show on HBO.
/r/MensRights22/05/09 11:49 PM
1

If you're looking for hysteria, you'll find some here.
/r/MensRights22/05/09 10:47 PM
-1

Uh, do these cases actually have any big ramifications, or is this simply two guys getting falsely accused of something? A couple years back, a crazy guy apparently high on meth killed a cab driver in Chicago (stealing his cab and running over him twice, I believe). The friends of the (alleged) murderer set up a website to generally malign the murdered man and to seek out information suggesting he was hot-tempered and that the murderer had been acting in self-defense (by running over a guy lying…
/r/MensRights22/05/09 06:09 PM
4

Really elevating the level of debate here.
/r/MensRights22/05/09 06:01 PM
-1

it is still wrong to "name" persons presumed innocent of such crimes. I agree, and I'm glad you said that. My point in posting about this in the first place is that there was no outrage at the time about pn6's naming the alleged abusers, no one posting that his remarks were "vile" in the way that naming male alleged abusers is. (It was also quite striking that he so frequently posted about the evils of "false allegations" after making what to me seem to be highly questionable allegations himself…
/r/MensRights19/05/09 09:08 PM
-1

No. My understanding is that he "remembered" the alleged abuse years later. As I recall, he said he went to the police then but they didn't believe him. EDIT: I found the post here. EDIT AGAIN: I guess I was wrong about the recovered memory part, though his description of what allegedly happened to him doesn't make much sense to me, and it contrary to virtually everything I've ever read about how memory and/or hypnosis works.
/r/MensRights19/05/09 08:20 PM
-2

It was a long time ago, and Reddit's search is useless, but if you ask around I am sure others remember this discussion as well. EDIT: see above for a link to the post.
/r/MensRights19/05/09 08:01 PM
0

You do realize that the founder of this subreddit once posted (here on reddit) the names of the women that he claimed raped him as a teenager. EDIT: Here's the post in which he did it: http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/6agjq/campus_rape_ideology_holds_that_inebriation/c03biji
/r/MensRights19/05/09 07:13 PM
4

I've been arguing with saydrah on this point since the first week. "Arguing" is sort of an unusual way to describe a process that involved, at one point, you deleting all the other moderators and taking down the whole /equality subreddit and, at another point, you banning all (then most) of those moderators from posting here, despite no poor behavior from them in this subreddit, and even though they (amazingly) never banned you for your actions there.
/r/MensRights05/05/09 02:22 AM
3

Two of those links are to the same story, which is a discussion of prison sentences for rape, not a gbb post. The other two are to posts by Aerik, who is regularly upbraided by the moderators and other people on /equality for his posts; both of his posts have zero upvotes.
/r/MensRights04/05/09 11:47 PM
3

Uh, no. A day after quitting /equality, pn6 still has 8 posts on the front page of that subreddit, including 2 in the top 10. You have a couple yourself. They've all got plenty of upvotes. There are zero -- ZERO -- "men behaving badly" posts on the front page.
/r/MensRights04/05/09 11:37 PM
2

Oh, pn6, you are such a lovable old goof! Do you not see that perhaps some people might suggest that you might be the teensiest bit hypocritical in complaining indignantly that /equality bans "women behaving badly" posts, then banning all the moderators from there from your little subreddit?
/r/MensRights04/05/09 11:24 PM
12

Huh. That seems like the sort of thing that most people would remember.
/r/MensRights29/04/09 10:35 PM
4

Did you relent and reopen the subreddit, or did the reddit admins do it (or force you to do it)?
/r/MensRights29/04/09 10:30 PM
3

As I've said publicly in Equality, I have mixed feelings about the ban; had it been my choice I would have voted against it. But this stuff ... I just accept that the TRUE equality and fairness on Reddit will come from the equilibrium created by men in MR and women in Equality. It's too bad really. Kind of a wasted opportunity IMO... ... seems a bit disingenuous given that won't even acknowledge that you made a bunch of crazy violent posts there. It's not just that you called people "cunts"; you…
/r/MensRights29/04/09 08:48 PM
6

So says the guy who once banned me here, and who took down the whole Equality subreddit after getting into an argument with Saydrah.
/r/MensRights29/04/09 08:38 PM
7

Many of his worst posts -- the ones where he called everyone "cunts" and suggested cutting out vaginas with grapefruit spoons -- are now missing from his history. I'm not sure why; they were there earlier today, even after the ban.
/r/MensRights29/04/09 08:36 PM
1

So this makes what he did ok how?
/r/MensRights10/03/09 10:00 PM
1

You're a man named Ann?
/r/MensRights06/03/09 12:58 AM
2

So I go to google and type in "man murders wife." These are the first stories that come up. Man kills wife with meat cleaver -- paper omits term "domestic violence" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7676285.stm Man uses Civil War replica to kill wife, son -- paper omits term "domestic violence" http://www.suntimes.com/news/24-7/1457591,wilmette-man-used-civil-war-replica-030309.article Indiana Man Murders Wife and Kids after Arguing About Housework -- -- paper omits term "domesti…
/r/MensRights03/03/09 09:28 PM
2

http://www.thespec.com/News/article/474833
/r/MensRights03/03/09 10:15 AM
1

You know, you actually have to CLICK the links and READ them. From the first paragraph of the first link: Mom dies shielding family during rampage OSHAWA, Ont. — A mother of three died shielding her husband from a deranged family associate, who went on a knifing rampage and turned her son’s birthday party into a bloodstained crime scene, relatives and police said Sunday.
/r/MensRights02/03/09 08:42 PM
2

http://www.thespec.com/News/article/474833 http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/printfriendly/0,4139,179985,00.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-478414/Mother-stabbed-20-times-shielding-daughter-3-gangland-assassins.html http://www.sunstar.com.ph/static/zam/2008/09/05/news/woman.dies.3.children.survive.attack.html That took about 30 seconds of googling.
/r/MensRights02/03/09 10:49 AM
2

Saydrah created the Equality subreddit about a week ago in an attempt to encourage discussion between feminists and men's rights activists. In a misguided attempt at bridge-building, she made pn6 one of the moderators. (He had volunteered.) Shortly after being made one of the moderators, pn6 got into an argument with her. He posted an article saying "this experiment has failed." Then he quickly deleted all the other moderators, making him the only moderator of the subreddit Saydrah had just crea…
/r/MensRights02/03/09 03:02 AM
2

The only place I've ever been banned has been the men's rights subreddit. (pn6 later relented, obviously). No, I take that back. I was also banned on the blog of a crazy paranoid psychotic once. In light of what pn6 did to the Equality subreddit 3 days ago (details upon request) this whole thread here is, let's just say, highly ironic.
/r/MensRights02/03/09 12:11 AM
8

Dude, this surprised even me. It's so over the line I don't even know what to say.
/r/MensRights27/02/09 10:25 AM
1

The word you're looking for is "debased," not "debase." You're welcome!
/r/MensRights24/02/09 09:29 AM
3

Some group puts out a flier, therefore being a male at U of I is a crime. Brilliant logic.
/r/MensRights21/02/09 09:51 PM
2

To update an old joke: Q: How many Men's Rights activists does it take to screw in a lightbulb? A: THAT'S NOT FUNNY!!! Aside from things like puns, humor has always involved people (and sometimes kittens) looking silly or stupid, and possibly falling down in a comical manner. And sometimes even getting kicked in the nuts, a form of humor that mostly appeals to men. I'll grant you that prison rape jokes aren't really terribly funny. But given the outrage at which people on this subreddit respond …
/r/MensRights08/02/09 11:06 PM
5

Well, that proves it. All women are evil.
/r/MensRights07/02/09 08:15 PM
0

1) Casey Anthony isn't a feminist. 2) Virtually every article you post is about men as "victim." You're the biggest "victim anti-feminist" I've ever seen.
/r/MensRights02/02/09 10:24 AM
2

Baby eater!
/r/MensRights31/01/09 09:39 PM
1

I am off the train, but I'll make one last comment from the train station. The "discrimination" being alleged here (in the OP and in most of the comments here) is COMPLETELY IMAGINARY. 1) Reich didn't say "discriminate against white men." What he said was, in effect, "let's make sure we don't discriminate against people who aren't white men" by letting the recovery money go disproportionately to white men. 2) The stimulus package as it's now written does not discriminate against white men. Const…
/r/MensRights31/01/09 01:05 AM
1

Uh, yes it is, but this is not actually what we're discussing here, so I'm getting off the train at this stop.
/r/MensRights30/01/09 11:12 PM
0

I actually call what I'm doing "discussing."
/r/MensRights30/01/09 11:02 PM
1

Uh, yes. And I've seen homeless black men. And from other races. And homeless women from a variety of races. Based on my own experience in homeless-person-seeing, I'd say that black men are highly overrepresented in the homeless population compared to their presence in the overall population. Your point is what again?
/r/MensRights30/01/09 10:40 PM
1

that these jobs not simply go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers He's saying let's make sure that at least some of the money goes to people who are not white. How does this mean "if you're white, you won't get anything?"
/r/MensRights30/01/09 09:59 PM
-4

So even if white men collectively get much more from the bailout and stimulus packages than any other group, white men are still oppressed because the ones who got the most were the rich guys? Guess what? That's true for men and women in every ethnic group out there. If you're concerned about class, not gender, go post in the WorkersRights subreddit. Oh, yeah, there isn't one.
/r/MensRights30/01/09 08:29 PM
0

You really think the stimulus package is somehow going to punish white men, or specifically white male construction workers? Have you actually looked at the stimulus package?
/r/MensRights30/01/09 08:23 PM
-5

Because they already collected billions in bonuses from the bailout package? (Damn. I guess I'm unbanned here.)
/r/MensRights30/01/09 07:25 PM
2

I never use "lol" in what I write lol
/r/MensRights30/09/08 04:37 AM
2

What exactly have I said that's wrong?
/r/MensRights30/09/08 04:36 AM
2

not sexist, sexy
/r/MensRights30/09/08 04:33 AM
-1

If you want to argue that the statistics on male vs female crimes are wrong, then make that argument, with evidence. If you want to critique particular feminist claims (the superbowl sunday thing), then make that argument, with evidence. If youwant to companin that men and women get different prison sentences for the same crime, then make that argument, with evidence. If you have a point to make that goes beyond the fact that women do horrible things as well as men, then make that specific argum…
/r/MensRights30/09/08 02:44 AM
-1

Why are random crimes by women, however horrific, a men's rights issue?
/r/MensRights30/09/08 12:08 AM
-1

Men who are self-assured in their own sexuality are comfortable expressing themselves. Perhaps, but whoever wrote this really should be embarrassed -- of their prose, at the very least. This is the most embarrassingly wince-inducingly written piece of crap I've read in I don't know how long. I only made it a few paragraphs in before I had to stop, so I don't know if the content is as awful as the writing itself, but somehow I suspect it very well might be.
/r/MensRights29/09/08 07:53 AM
0

I'd prefer something that was neither myth not propaganda; with most of these questions the correct answer is neither.
/r/MensRights29/09/08 12:32 AM
2

If you're actually interested in communicating, why not explain what it is that you are talking about -- this ongoing issue -- when you refer to stifling? I'm not going to go back through a month's worth of postings to see if I can guess what it is.
/r/MensRights28/09/08 03:26 AM
4

Looking at the recent history of the Mens Rights subreddit I see a subreddit that's mostly stifled itself, due largely to apathy and dogmatism. I see a lot of submissions from pn6 about women committing crimes or otherwise behaving badly, most of which have drawn no comments at all, perhaps because, uh, everyone in the world knows that women commit crimes and this trite fact does not exactly add to the debate on men's rights. When these submissions do draw comments, they tend to be from people n…
/r/MensRights27/09/08 09:26 PM
0

Reddit is both a news aggregator and forum for discussion. As a man I am inherently interested in men's rights, but I think most of what is advocated on the men's right subreddit is bad for both men and women. Teh description of the group on the reddit subscription page says that "Diverging viewpoints are welcome." I am not the only one here who wants more discussion, not less.
/r/MensRights27/09/08 07:41 PM
1

Again, how does someone disagreeing with you "stifle" you?
/r/MensRights27/09/08 07:35 PM
1

Clearly this list is not a complete one, as it does not include "crack whore," a job that I imagine would be worse than "roustabout."
/r/MensRights27/09/08 08:35 AM
1

Ever hopeful! Sometimes it ends at the ridicule point, though.
/r/MensRights27/09/08 08:14 AM
3

I'm hoping this is a joke, but it's similar enough to a lot of what gets advanced here seriously that it's hard to tell.
/r/MensRights27/09/08 08:13 AM
6

The only point you and brunt2 and the assorted others taking your side in this argument are really making is "oh noes! He's shaming us and hurting our feelings!" That doesn't really give me much to respond to here, other than to point out the highly ironic similarity of your language with that of the shallowest and most strident sort of "victim feminism." In other topics here on mensrights, where people have actually made arguments (and even provided evidence -- of sorts -- for some of their cla…
/r/MensRights27/09/08 08:11 AM
4

I know. It takes the true bravery of the brave men of the men's right subreddit to bravely stand up against ads for Dairy Queen that feature men getting hit in the groin. Future generations will applaud your courage.
/r/MensRights27/09/08 07:59 AM
1

A good recipe for groupthink!
/r/MensRights27/09/08 07:56 AM
6

You're right. You aren't calling anyone a nazi. By "you guys" I mean people on the men's rights subreddit in general, who are not quite so restrained in their language. At the moment, and when I wrote that post, the submission with the most points on the mens rights subreddit is a link to a site that, yep, compares feminists to Nazis. The person who started this topic complaining about "Attempts to Subvert and Diminish the Men's Rights Subreddit" has called people who disagree with him on this s…
/r/MensRights26/09/08 11:58 PM
3

My question was essentially: why do you single out feminist mothers to criticize in this case when non-feminist mothers also circumcise their sons? Am I imagining things or did you edit your original remark to add that second sentence?
/r/MensRights26/09/08 09:31 PM
3

Uh, that's not what I said. Can you read?
/r/MensRights26/09/08 09:07 PM
2

They will have the audacity to say such things as "men are genetically programmed to be more arrogant, because they are supposed to be the protectors of the family." Actually, in my experience,, it's the anti-feminist evolutionary psychology types who tend to make this sort of argument nowadays. Most serious feminists today have moved beyond this kind of biological reductionism.
/r/MensRights26/09/08 09:04 PM
3

And what exactly is your point here? Are feminist mothers (and/or fathers) more likely to have their sons circumcised than non-feminist mothers and fathers? I'd actually guess the opposite, but if you have any evidence here I'd be happy to see it.
/r/MensRights26/09/08 08:58 PM
2

Hmm. If dad's out working, how is it that most women end up similarly dependent on the opposite sex? And what about gay guys?
/r/MensRights26/09/08 07:42 PM
4

Yes, let's make bizarre and completely unsupported generalizations about both sexes based on this one story about a tiny handful of people.
/r/MensRights26/09/08 07:41 PM
0

Why exactly do you insist on using the rare secondary form of a word virtually no one uses when the term "self-hating" would convey what you mean far more clearly and effectively?
/r/MensRights26/09/08 07:23 PM
4

Wait, so when you think you're right about something no one is allowed to disagree with you? They're automatically "whiners" who are "subverting" and "diminishing" you?
/r/MensRights26/09/08 07:19 PM
2

How exactly are you being "stifled" here?
/r/MensRights26/09/08 07:15 PM
6

Let's see. You guys regularly compare your ideological opponents to nazis, but when someone dares to criticize you on your own little subreddit they're "invalidat[ing] my feelings or my voice?" Again, you guys are like a caricature of fragile-flower victim feminism at its worst.
/r/MensRights26/09/08 07:13 PM
5

What do you do for a living, danger man? Are you a lion tamer? Do you juggle chainsaws? Or does your work, perhaps, involve a lot of sitting on your ass in front of a computer? The Men's Right subreddit: We're LIVING ON THE EDGE because we COMPILE CODE!
/r/MensRights26/09/08 07:06 PM
-3

Dude, there are more subscribers in the men's rights subreddit than in the feminisms subreddit because Reddit is overflowing with the sort of angry, woman-blaming, socially-awkward, conspiracy-minded, persecution-complexed guys who tend to get the most worked up over "men's rights." (Still, there are actually more subscribers to the lolcats subreddit than to the mens rights and feminisms subreddit combined. Not sure what that means, but I'm just putting that out there.) In the real world, you're…
/r/MensRights26/09/08 06:46 PM
0

Yes, that's right. I have PTSD because I won't watch your video. Thanks for diagnosing me over the internet, Dr. kanuk876! Have you actually been diagnosed as having PTSD, or did you diagnose yourself? Somehow I suspect you're not a real doctor.
/r/MensRights26/09/08 06:31 PM
-1

Why do we need that exactly? You really have a most original style of debate, and I'm tired of playing by your arbitrary rules. You guys are like a bizzare caricature of victim feminism at its worst -- you're such delicate flowers that you faint at the very thought of someone being kicked in the balls? Are you going to demand a ban on America's Funniest Home Videos because once in a while they show a guy getting hit in the balls? Is Bob Saget a secret agent of the late Andrea Dworkin?
/r/MensRights26/09/08 06:26 PM
5

Dude, I think what you're noticing is, uh, me, and maybe a few other people, coming in here and actually challenging some of the accepted beliefs of your little subgroup. In the real world, as opposed to the insular world of "men's rights," this is called "discussion" or "debate." I would also note that we're not the ones suggesting that the people we disaagree with are "retards" who should "go kill themselves." And sometimes I even link to specific research that backs up my claims!
/r/MensRights26/09/08 08:48 AM
1

Your view, and the views of the authors of your quoted links, are typical for people with a gynocentric world view. You realize that these studies are sociological studies based on surveys of actual men and women. They're not just pulling the numbers out of their asses to make men look bad. If you don't agree with their methodology, that's fine, but it really doesn't help your argument to pretend that everyone else is a brainwashed biased gynocentric feminist but you. I'm not going to watch the …
/r/MensRights26/09/08 08:35 AM
4

We're not just talking about a "miniscule" number of men; we're talking about positions of relative power at all levels of society. Most bosses and supervisors are men. Most small business owners are men. Men (still) earn substantially more than women for the same work. It's true that there are more male homeless people than female, and obviously many more men in jail. I don't think feminism is the cause of this. Also, I'm not sure "oil rig worker" is really the best example for you, as skilled …
/r/MensRights26/09/08 08:20 AM
1

Huh. I thought we were talking about housework, since you were so insistent that male chores were being discounted. The study I cited isn't "biased bullshit," it's scholarly research in a respected journal that's simply looking at something slightly different than what you're looking at. If you're looking at total work (housework and paid work), I've seen studies that suggest that men and women work about the same number of hours, and studies that suggest women work more. I don't know about you,…
/r/MensRights26/09/08 07:57 AM
0

In Death Proof there was a car crash that resulted in a woman's leg getting chopped off and flying through the air for about 50 feet. Do I get a point for that? Then of course you've got Hostel, and the Saw movies -- plenty of torture for men and women alike. You don't get out much do you?
/r/MensRights26/09/08 07:45 AM
3

I don't know about you but I'm not demanding anyone be drafted for war, and I'm not quite sure how or why we got on that particular topic.
/r/MensRights26/09/08 07:33 AM
2

Gosh. Here's a feminist blog talking about how important it is to ensure that domestic violence laws protect both men and women, gay and straight people: http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2008/07/10/after-20-years-fight-expanded-domestic-violence-law-in-ny-state/ you know, I think this blog might have more insights in it on contemporary feminism than a blog that starts off a post with a swipe at "the Val Solanases and Biting Beavers and asspoliding Jezabel women."
/r/MensRights26/09/08 05:11 AM
1

Hmm. Why is that study contradicted by, well, pretty much every other study out there? According to a recent scholarly metastudy that looked at 200+ articles and books on the subject of housework, women still do twice as much housework as men. http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1161545
/r/MensRights26/09/08 05:01 AM
1

Not all feminists are Andrea Dworkin. Nor do all or even most feminists think that women are inherently gentle, kind, etc. I think you have a stereotype of feminism.
/r/MensRights26/09/08 04:49 AM
3

Hey that Tripod banner at the top of the page helped my to find some great interracial porn!
/r/MensRights26/09/08 04:31 AM
0

You are aware that correlation isn't the same as causation? You can find correlations almost everywhere; they don't necessarily mean squat.
/r/MensRights25/09/08 09:54 PM
-1

I take it you're not a big fan of "OW! My Balls."
/r/MensRights25/09/08 09:43 PM
0

First of all, your evidence, such as it is, doesn't actually back up your claim. 70% isn't "virtually all," and that figure is only for those who were "ritually circumcised." In any case, the majority of men (born) in the US are circumcised (the rate was 90% in the 60s, and 57% as of 2004). You're telling me that the vast majority of these men (including me, FWIW) suffer from PTSD? In other words, that most American men suffer from it? How is it, then, that the incidence of PTSD in the US is onl…
/r/MensRights25/09/08 09:32 PM
0

Wait, are you saying that everyone who's been circumcised has PTSD?
/r/MensRights25/09/08 07:11 PM
-9

Yep, that's right. Budweiser is run by a secret feminist cabal bent on the destruction of all men! And Dairy Queen, well, just think about the name! Do you want to be ruled over by the Dairy Queen?
/r/MensRights25/09/08 06:59 PM
21

Also it would be good if the site itself wasn't batshit crazy.
/r/MensRights25/09/08 06:47 PM
0

Uh, she's not being charged because there's no evidence that she actually killed the guy. People "confess" to all sorts of things they haven't done; more than 200 people "confessed" to the Lindburgh baby kidnapping. http://www.readthehook.com/stories/2006/05/04/newswashington.aspx
/r/MensRights25/09/08 05:13 PM
2

"Almost ALL tv programs" ?? You're going to have to give me some examples, because all I can think of are counter-examples: The CSI shows, where the men (Grissom, whatever David Caruso's characters mane is) are the central characters? Most crime shows, in fact, feature non-buffoonish male leads. The X Files, where Scully was almost always wrong and Mulder right? The Drew CArey Show where Mimi is the crazy one (as far as I can tell, not having watched the thing) Seinfeld, where Elaine was as craz…
/r/MensRights25/09/08 05:03 PM
3

Yeah, because there are no male heroes in movies. Oh wait: http://www.filmsite.org/afi100heroesvilla.html Only 7/8 out of the top 50 heroes were women: # 6 Clarice Starling in The Silence of the Lambs (1991), # 8 Ellen Ripley in Aliens (1986), # 15 Norma Rae in Norma Rae (1979), # 24 Thelma & Louise in Thelma & Louise (1991), # 31 Erin Brockovich in Erin Brockovich (2000), # 33 Marge Gunderson in Fargo (1996), and # 47 Karen Silkwood in Silkwood (1983). In contrast, 15 of the top 50 villains wer…
/r/MensRights25/09/08 08:44 AM
2

men probably increasingly go out of their way to do something, anything, in order to feel wanted, and often, it doesn’t help. They spend hours on end making themselves pretty, only to have it not be good enough. Uh, what?
/r/MensRights25/09/08 07:07 AM
-2

So you're being oppressed by Marge Simpson?
/r/MensRights25/09/08 06:54 AM
-1

So let me get this straight: Men basically run the world, but that doesn't count because some of them got a little skin chopped off their penises when they were babies and sitcoms sometimes portray them as buffoons?
/r/MensRights25/09/08 06:37 AM
1

How do you know from this article it isn't being classified as DV?
/r/MensRights25/09/08 04:31 AM
0

I don't know if you've noticed this or not, but the vast majority of elected officials (and, come to think of it, dictators) are men, the vast majority of business executives are men, the vast majority of religious leaders are men, the vast majority of movies and TV shows out there feature men in the plumb roles. I could go on. If men face rampant discrimination, where exactly are the effects of it showing up? Please try to answer without suggesting that I kill myself. As a man, I'm very fragile…
/r/MensRights25/09/08 04:17 AM
-3

At least Andrea Dworkin was interesting.
/r/MensRights25/09/08 04:12 AM
0

Wouldn't a case like this be included in the statistics?
/r/MensRights25/09/08 04:06 AM
0

Uh, she's being charged with aggravated assault; legally what she did would be considered domestic violence. Does the terminology used in the article make that much difference?
/r/MensRights24/09/08 11:35 PM
-1

you guys are just as bad as feminists worse, much worse
/r/MensRights24/09/08 04:23 AM
2

Well, there are plenty of extra boys in China. Problem solved!
/r/MensRights22/09/08 07:56 PM
1

You're just saying that because you hate men!
/r/MensRights20/09/08 11:07 PM
1

Killing a four-year old is not remotely equivalent to abortion.
/r/MensRights15/09/08 10:30 PM
2

This is a horrible story, but why is it in men's rights? It's not like this is part of an anti-man baby drowning trend.
/r/MensRights15/09/08 06:50 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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