TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

comehitherhitler Archive

View 1 posts and 375 comments by comehitherhitler on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
17

Anti-MRMcomehitherhitler/r/MensRights26/07/16 08:27 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-5

It's bizarre that this post and the comments agreeing with it have so many upvotes when it's purely false. I can buy some idiocy on the part of users (one of the braindead comments is from a known clown) but 98% upvoted with no comments until 10 hours after posting? And then three comments mindlessly agreeing all highly upvoted after that? Edit: AND it made it to the top of the subreddit after 10 hours despite having no comments (which is why we just saw it and commented that it was a lie around…
/r/MensRights22/06/26 07:30 PM
11

Yes they did it was some thing with a carrot and a turnip. I didn't click through to see what it linked to, though. Edit: https://doodles.google/doodle/fathers-day-2026-june-21/
/r/MensRights22/06/26 06:54 PM
1

I know what it's like to make constant reports on this subreddit, so I can comment on that, right? I've reported that account dozens of times (including multiple simultaneous reports on multiple occasions - does that count as making them easy to remember?) and in several reports I've pointed out that the account constantly breaks multiple rules. I've been doing it for at least 7 months. None of my reports seem to have been read. That means you're either deleting posts reported under the "custom"…
/r/MensRights20/03/26 10:46 PM
3

M0ds consistently delete its posts (after they're reported) but refuse to permanently ban it.
/r/MensRights20/03/26 03:28 AM
4

It's what literally happened. I'm sorry if you were born after that event and don't remember it as vividly as everyone else does.
/r/MensRights23/07/25 12:56 AM
5

Except that one was blatantly a cynical political move. He had his "view evolution" on a controversial issue just as he was launching his re-election campaign. So if this new stance change (which happened in less than a year, btw) is similar to his gay marriage evolution it too is motivated by political winds and not a sincere change in beliefs.
/r/MensRights23/07/25 12:51 AM
3

Like how his views on gay marriage "evolved"?
/r/MensRights23/07/25 12:02 AM
1

Circumcision is a hallmark of a society that has abdicated leadership to women. Have the so-called patriarchies of the Middle East and North Africa where circumcision is more common "abdicated leadership to women"? Have the countries of Western Europe where circumcision is less common not "abdicated leadership to women", despite being unrepentantly feminist?
/r/MensRights28/06/25 12:23 AM
1

U make it sound like he was put in they're for making reddit posts which is absurd ? No, you're doing that and becoming upset about your own invented issue.
/r/MensRights02/06/25 07:54 PM
2

'Institutionalized' means placed in a facility for treatment of mental illness, usually against one's will. OP included that they had just gotten out of such a facility in one of their spam posts a while back. In those days they spammed rants without the help of AI. I'd link you the post but most of OPs stuff gets removed. Somehow still got unbanned and remains unbanned, though.
/r/MensRights02/06/25 09:34 AM
5

Microsoft Copilot to be specific. OP has been banned and was even institutionalized irl. They got out, got unbanned, and made a beeline for Reddit to go right back to spamming. Mods and Admins have chosen to do nothing. It's been months and months of this.
/r/MensRights02/06/25 09:08 AM
2

Can't help but notice you didn't answer the question though. Why shouldn't she be able to resign if they refuse to sack her? Because you answered it yourself with the most likely answer: Maybe she wants to resign so she doesn't have being fired on her record There are probably license/professional record/pension/severance concerns. Which probably also answers why they won't let her resign - so she can suffer the maximum financial/professional punishment instead of getting off with a clean break …
/r/MensRights02/05/25 01:52 AM
2

Is more being part of the accusation That's way outside the responsibility of an employer. I'm not in favor of an employer deciding guilt or innocence outside of established procedure, especially when the employer is the government. I'm not in favor of government bodies or officials starting/joining angry mobs under color of authority. Those directly harmed file criminal complaints, not the local school board. The state's attorney brings charges, not the local school board. Anything else leads t…
/r/MensRights01/05/25 09:32 PM
3

instead of protecting the kids from her by "removing" her Bauer remains on unpaid leave after her resignation was denied. She pleaded not guilty at an arraignment on April 1 and was released on a $100,000 bond. Court records state she was booked into the Huron County Jail and released with an ankle monitor. they are "worried" about money. Good. They should do whatever they can to prevent her from profiting from committing rape by way of something like a wrongful termination lawsuit. Just ask you…
/r/MensRights01/05/25 07:45 PM
2

She should have been sacked already There's a process for that. We generally avoid summary punishments. and the police called in. She's already been charged with crimes. The title of this post lists them. Maybe she wants to resign so she doesn't have being fired on her record, but that's trivial compared to the charges? The criminal case is referenced in this article and receives specific focus in several other articles. Ask the OP why they didn't post one of those others instead.
/r/MensRights01/05/25 05:54 PM
5

It's more likely that allowing this teacher to resign is a more beneficial outcome for her which the district board wanted to avoid. They voted unanimously to reject it. Why assume they're doing her favors? So far it sounds more like they're doing their due diligence to make sure this woman gets the maximum punishment they can issue without giving her legal recourse to win an appeal later: So why did the board take this action? It all circles back to the district following state law, according t…
/r/MensRights01/05/25 05:43 PM
2

It is the case that posts which violate the rules can stay up for a while until either a mod sees them or they are reported - probably both. All three of the posts in your OP screenshot seem to violate rule 12: Gender reversal posts requirements Posts speculating about what would happen if the gender were reversed are subject to restrictions. Gender reversal posts must include comparable examples from both genders and also must be news stories, not some random photo or video or twitter post. Wit…
/r/MensRights14/04/25 12:35 AM
26

The Selective Service System ended in 1973 but was later reinstated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_Service_System Registration requirements were ended by Presidential Proclamation in 1975 by Ford(R) and were reinstated in 1980 by Carter(D).
/r/MensRights13/11/24 03:53 AM
4

I was pointing out that the post consists only a of a title, with no indication that it was a link. It has the same indications as other Link Posts minus a thumbnail icon. Reddit greys out/replaces the thumbnail when an OP puts the word 'spoiler' in the title. Text Posts have a different icon (on old style and new style-compact) or no icon at all (on new style-default). https://www.redditstatic.com/sprite-reddit.vSUv8UUCI2g.png 4th image is the icon for hidden thumbnails (spoiler) 5th image is t…
/r/MensRights19/10/24 01:10 AM
2

Thanks. This website curates in favor of shitposting and trolling (higher engagement), so you don't always know. It allows people to post/comment absolute trash and block anyone who disagrees from even seeing it.
/r/MensRights12/07/24 03:43 AM
2

Not sure how well this issue translates to other people in other places. Facilities are evenly spread out where I'm from, when they aren't directly adjacent. A noticeable exception is a department store where the makeup/perfume/jewelry counter is right at the ground level entrance. However, the men's and women's clothing sections are both on the second floor where the parking lot entrance is located, and the men's sections of clothes and shoes are closer to the entrance there.
/r/MensRights25/11/23 09:19 PM
2

When someone says something that is patently false people will sometimes repeat it back to them in the form of a question to get them to think about what they said. Edit: ...and I just realized you are the person who did the initial "think about what you said" question. I did not follow this comment thread properly.
/r/MensRights05/02/22 09:10 PM
1

Society/Government is not adept at discerning nuance (i.e. shades of grey). Individuals are capable of discerning nuance. A hands-off social/government stance allows people to determine a nuanced approach towards social issues.
/r/MensRights26/12/21 10:21 AM
1

Government makes laws based on black-and-white distinctions: oppressor/oppressed. Society, however, is made up of individuals who are capable of discerning the nuance between those distinctions.
/r/MensRights26/12/21 09:31 AM
1

Society/the government is never going to see men as an oppressed class. Give up on that reality now and save yourself time and effort. The only gain to be made is in preventing feminists from making further extractions of men's productive output. That will be done by appeals to equality.
/r/MensRights26/12/21 08:09 AM
6

we can't both be seem as big strong, stoic alphas and at the same time be seen as vulnerable people in need of sympathy. Why not? We can accept that nuance exists and reject black-and-white thinking.
/r/MensRights26/12/21 01:07 AM
20

It's because of the sexism they experience when gaming It's because they don't play 12 hours a day like the ASD male players that go pro. Even the "cool" esports pros are no-life perma-grinders. Their streams are freely available, btw. They go for 8+ hours then they say "okay I have to go scrim with my team/play a tournament now". They never stop playing. They have little to nothing else to do with their lives. That's why there are no female pros.
/r/MensRights24/12/21 04:34 PM
1

Anything worth communicating deserves more than an emoji. Anything simple enough that it is fully communicated by an emoji is not worth saying, with a silly face or otherwise. That includes superficial emotional responses to totally sick comments :P People use emojis because they're stupid/hypo-attentive or because they think the audience is too stupid/hypo-attentive to parse anything more substantial. It's a mark of stupidity or disrespect. Always XD
/r/MensRights23/12/21 04:02 AM
1

It doesn't help that feminists often falsely claim to be doing satire so they can get away with spewing hate.
/r/MensRights26/05/20 07:03 PM
4

No minds are being changed here, no dialogue between different minds is occuring, etc. all that's happening is development of animosity. You went from thinking it was a cherry-picked answer to thinking it was typical of them. For better or worse at least one mind has been changed. Not everyone is cognizant of everything said or believed by every feminist. You and others reading this post now have a bit more insight into the mind of a PPF type straight from the horse's mouth. You need to get used…
/r/MensRights21/05/20 06:32 AM
5

That's not a "dumb" response in the context of the community in question. That's a smart response for them. They usually just say something snarky like "hating men is my fetish don't kink shame me" because they know how shockingly vile their usual shtick is to outsiders. Go visit PPF or AskPPF. Tell me that's a "dumb" comment for them. No, friend, I'm afraid they really are "like that".
/r/MensRights21/05/20 05:50 AM
5

Reposting without the disallowed link to that subreddit: That being said, this kind of has the same vibes as those alternative left/right (pick your poison) media personalities going to a rally/protest/etc that they disagree with and asking the participants very specific difficult questions In this analogy that question is "why don't you like [group you oppose]?" A real gotcha question there. The whole point of that forum is explicitly ironic-not-ironic misandry. Read the sticky post on ppf. Ask…
/r/MensRights21/05/20 05:22 AM
1

Actually we have already one example of that in Europe(Angela Merkel). Merkel was in favor of nuclear until Fukushima happened. Whether her about-face in the aftermath was personal or political is for you to decide. The anti-nuclear decision, passed into law by the government of her Social Democrat predecessor Gerhard Schroeder, was "absolutely wrong," Merkel said as the meeting ended Monday. https://www.dw.com/en/merkels-conservatives-advocate-return-to-nuclear-energy/a-3399861 The previous Ger…
/r/MensRights12/05/20 07:41 PM
8

Here's another source. Interestingly, a lot of companies went private rather than comply with gender quotas and the entire scheme had a negative financial outcome for compliant companies. Risk taking is part of human growth and is a male attribute exclusively. Predominantly*
/r/MensRights12/05/20 07:04 PM
8

This is a lesson on why companies led by women will will never grow to their maximum potential and in general make 12 % less profit that men lead companies. Source?
/r/MensRights12/05/20 06:02 PM
6

Calling them 'kangaroo courts' in the title biases the reader towards that conclusion before the evidence is presented. It's also not the journalist's words, which is why it's in quotation marks, but it is the journalist's sentiment (as displayed in the article). The journo gets to call them kangaroo courts, but maintains plausible deniability of having done so themselves. It's a dishonest practice.
/r/MensRights08/05/20 01:19 AM
11

'Kangaroo court' is a biased term. Journalists are supposed to be unbiased. If these are kangaroo courts (and obviously they are) we should arrive at that conclusion from the unbiased information presented within the piece, not from the journo telling us they are. Quoting someone to sneak bias or inflammatory/clickbait language into your headline while dodging blame for it is just one of the many shitty journalistic practices taking hold in the media and it should be opposed.
/r/MensRights08/05/20 12:41 AM
3

That's the opposite of what the chart above says, though. It says women get more of every degree.
/r/MensRights08/05/20 12:28 AM
3

Did you mean to say that the majority of associate's degrees go to women and the majority of Ph.D.s go to men? Because neither that nor what you said are true statements.
/r/MensRights08/05/20 12:14 AM
12

Invite everyone on your team to a BBQ at your house except her. Don't do this. It's blatant retaliation.
/r/MensRights10/03/20 10:07 PM
-9

Is the point of this post to broadcast the senseless, disembodied drama of some randos? And that's assuming it's not fake like every other Facebook screenshot.
/r/MensRights02/03/20 04:46 AM
1

When did linking to pictures of headlines become okay? Did people see the way archive previews look with mobile viewers/RES and think that was the entirety of the post?
/r/MensRights09/01/20 07:53 PM
138

When you are trying to persuade people try to keep in mind how they will hear what you are saying, not how you wish they would hear it. A title that you intend to provoke excitement, curiosity, or interest can just as likely provoke annoyance, confusion, or dismissal. Also keep in mind that a significant portion of the audience is not going to forget a provocative title. They will be constantly expecting the body of the work to connect back to it. So if you really just picked a catchy title that…
/r/MensRights02/12/19 09:47 AM
8

Unfortunately that doesn't add the clarity I was hoping it would.
/r/MensRights20/11/19 12:50 AM
7

Mind translating the rest of the post?
/r/MensRights19/11/19 10:24 PM
12

Considering that it's a translation and something is certainly lost, we can't be sure whether the person meant that men power the world or men hold power over the world. "Run" can mean "power", "start", "operate", "control", "direct", etc. and the OP is clearly working with English as a second language at best. It's ambiguous and it's dumb thing to post this without context, a full translation, or further editorial.
/r/MensRights19/11/19 10:22 PM
1

The internet is anonymous. The only reason to DM, PM, whisper, etc. people is to make things personal. It's not your job to privately educate some random on the internet. Defending yourself to a court of <1 people is senseless. Messaging people is, at best, a stupid and pointless thing to do and is more often done maliciously.
/r/MensRights20/10/19 08:37 PM
5

The real sexual "red pill" is this: a) being allowed to determine what is or isn't attractive in an evidence-based manner b) not being forced to pretend that self-serving lies regarding attraction are the truth c) accurately assessing which category you fit into d) making rational decisions based on that assessment
/r/MensRights10/10/19 04:43 AM
2

Every woman has access to makeup and the overwhelming majority use it. We're looking at a measure of relative attractiveness, not absolute. The numbers would hold even if makeup didn't exist.
/r/MensRights10/10/19 04:34 AM
7

Your average person uses 'average' to mean 'median', 'mean', or 'mode' at different times.
/r/MensRights10/10/19 04:24 AM
2

Google or the BBC?
/r/MensRights09/07/19 05:36 AM
12

It could benefit men. It all depends on the stance of the judiciary. The Hayden rider hasn't been a part of it for a while, but that wouldn't stop the courts from simply interpreting it back in. If that's the case I would prefer to hold off on enshrining female privilege for generations to come. These days the ERA is at best cosmetic as far as feminist aims go. This is why you don't see anyone influential or even halfway educated on the topic giving it much attention. The disparity between the g…
/r/MensRights03/07/19 07:57 AM
1

Seems like you're going for /s, but some organizers test for Adderall and the like.
/r/MensRights22/05/19 11:30 PM
32

Bullshit sensationalist confirmation-bias clickbait is cancer. I keep seeing it in here. It's disappointing. There's plenty of concern trolling on this sub, too. Link an example next time. I've definitely seen what you describe, but not everyone else has or knows exactly what to look for.
/r/MensRights26/02/19 07:55 AM
3

Why are you linking that? That Senate version was never made law and the parts about including women in the draft were eventually removed from the final version. It's also from over 2 years ago.
/r/MensRights24/02/19 07:46 AM
29

my whole family and friend support circumcision, having it done to them too This is the real reason support for circumcision is so high. Religion, falsified health benefits - these are convenient excuses invented to allow insecure people to practice mindless, barbaric monkey-see-monkey-do on their babies or make extra commission by up-selling your maternity bill. There is an entire continent of first-world men who are mostly uncircumcised and they have dramatically lower rates of all STDs than c…
/r/MensRights21/11/18 08:56 PM
1

natural selection Natural selection is dead and dusted for human beings. Either we must consider ourselves a part of nature - in which case social remedies are just as valid as medicinal ones because everything we do is natural, or we must consider ourselves apart from nature - in which case worrying about natural selection is pointless because everything we do is artificial.
/r/MensRights13/11/18 06:55 PM
1

Source on feminists forcing the Boy Scouts to change? IIRC they changed of their own volition to increase recruitment numbers since accepting gay members caused a membership drop (Mormons especially).
/r/MensRights12/11/18 04:25 AM
12

This sub has always been anti-feminist to a degree. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/wiki/faq#wiki_4._is_the_men.27s_rights_movement_anti-feminist.3F edit: Also I'm pretty sure /r/MensRights has had more subs than /r/Feminism for years, but I could be thinking of a different sub.
/r/MensRights06/11/18 06:55 PM
2

This is why white nationalists exist. White nationalists existed long before lunatic SJWs.
/r/MensRights26/10/18 08:55 AM
11

Quarantining subs based on vague rules applied opaquely is a threat to every sub. Doing it to a sub because it promotes an "incorrect" view of masculinity makes that threat even more relevant to this sub.
/r/MensRights29/09/18 08:05 AM
13

Open an incognito window and try to go to TRP. That pops up. It's an very strange message. It starts out as a boilerplate content warning, but it's clearly specific to the targeted subreddit(s?). And it recommends a specific alternative resource in opposition to that subreddit(s). It really seems like some admin tried and immediately failed to control their ideology long enough to accomplish their goal of making the sub seem generally harmful. That it sources a college based on Long Island is ju…
/r/MensRights29/09/18 07:52 AM
5

/r/politics has been a shithole the entire time I've used this site. At best it's gone from bad to worse.
/r/MensRights02/05/18 08:00 AM
2

You know good and well You know this is true so why try to argue any different? I know that's the revisionism we use to pat ourselves on the backs for being great just by doing nothing.
/r/MensRights11/11/17 05:52 PM
4

Is the world shocked that ugly dudes used money and power to get laid? Nope. Maybe if women weren't attracted to money, those broads wouldn't have had to watch CK jerk off Some pretty sick assumptions and reasoning here. watch CK jerk off Not nearly the worst accusation being made these days. Not even the worst admitted to.
/r/MensRights11/11/17 07:03 AM
8

And many of these took place 30 or 40 years ago! It was a far different time and place. No it wasn't. None of the shit people are being accused of was acceptable then. Exposing yourself to an unwilling audience, demanding sexual favors in exchange for employment, rape, etc. were never considered kosher. In fact, things like propositioning someone out of the blue were less acceptable. Stop propagating the "the past was an all-you-can-rape buffet" myth.
/r/MensRights11/11/17 06:56 AM
7

Who is he referring to besides himself? The highest profile names -- Weinstein, Spacey, and C.K. -- have admitted they did shitty (at the very least) things that probably should ruin their careers.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 10:59 PM
3

Japan and South Korea have all of these things yet are still very traditional societies, where it is honorable for the men to work themselves to death. And women still aspire to be housewives more than anything else. That's more a consequence of America's culture of personal liberty, unbeholden even to one's family. One could also say that it's becoming increasingly acceptable for men and women to work themselves to death here. We're transitioning from a country where women working was a luxury …
/r/MensRights29/06/17 05:14 PM
2

Yea, men need to stop screwing each other over to impress women. Yes, I too expect equality to follow shortly after apotheosis.
/r/MensRights29/06/17 04:51 PM
3

I view gender rights through a Marxist lens: Each gender is supposed to argue for their own benefit, and it should balance out. How is that Marxist? You're literally describing the defining creed of modern hyper-capitalism: greed is good. And how is it ever supposed to balance out when one group is predisposed to argue for their own benefit and one is predisposed to argue for the others' benefit?
/r/MensRights29/06/17 04:40 PM
5

Secondly, despite the toxicity of the feminist movement, overall I think it benefits men in the long run. You're attributing to Feminism what is better explained as a consequence of broad-based economic growth and the commensurate increase in individual liberty, technological saturation, and the rule of law. Impoverished societies that lack those things line up with what Feminists describe as "patriarchies". Wealthier societies line up with what they would used to describe as "liberated". Femini…
/r/MensRights29/06/17 04:17 PM
1

I wasn't alive when principled adults abolished slavery, after lengthy debate over the issue. lengthy debate Are you doing a bit? I can't tell.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 07:32 AM
2

Just looking at a page of any site that sells usage data (visitors locations, demographics, activeness, etc.) or runs ads (that encompasses ~99% of websites these days) counts towards that site's metrics. Those metrics are used to determine how much that site is paid to run ads or provide usage data. They count pageviews, adviews, adclicks, link clicks, everything. They even know when ads are blocked by extensions like AdBlockPlus, uBlock, etc. and adjust their rates accordingly. On /r/MensRight…
/r/MensRights25/03/17 06:19 AM
1

You upload a webpage to an internet archive site like archive.is so that a) the content is preserved unaltered and b) the website doesn't get adviews, pageviews, etc. The second part is so that you aren't financially supporting those websites by visiting them directly.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 07:36 PM
9

Why is this not archived? This is just free advertising for this shitty media outlet.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 10:04 PM
3

The way Reddit is set up a post that's easily digestible will always get a bunch of upvotes even if it's bad/irrelevant. Add to that an extremely pandering title and you have a recipe for a "front page-worthy" post.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 06:57 PM
6

Courts do not determine objective truth. If they did then it was "true" for 21 years that this man was guilty.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 11:32 AM
24

It is not a fact that the claim is false. It is a fact that the girl lied in her testimony during the trial.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 11:11 AM
22

Has incest sex with stepfather, doesn't want anyone to findout so claims she was raped by another man, innocent man goes to jail for 21 years. Isn't that speculation on your part? Everything /u/AmazingFuckinAtheist said is true to the facts.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 09:48 AM
6

...or we need more female political workers to provide a voice for abortion rights, whether you agree or disagree with the ratio-balancing thought behind it, at least they're trying to offer a true rationale. That's agenda-pushing, not gender-balancing. The rationale recommends that you favor pro-choice people, it doesn't justify that you favor women. It has been demonstrated that a government lacking women can implement pro-choice (an all-male Supreme Court secured that particular right in Amer…
/r/MensRights04/12/16 12:42 AM
1

They shouldn't have the authority to do investigations, I agree, but as long as they do they should put in some semblance of effort beyond the "bury it as quick as possible while avoiding upsetting any powerful special interest groups" shams they currently operate. Edit: If the "least amount of work that is legally mandated" was for them to forward criminal complaints to the police, cooperate with the police investigation, and then stay out of it until the investigation is complete I would be fi…
/r/MensRights20/11/16 02:12 AM
1

PR is still the ultimate goal, but now they've let the gender studies brigade colonize campus "courts". It's funny actually. Universities train the people who will rail against the university unless they cede authority to those same people. The best rackets are self-sustaining.
/r/MensRights19/11/16 07:04 PM
100

Universities always err on the side of doing nothing, because if there's no paper trail enrollment (tuitions) won't suffer. If some government official is watching they do the least amount of work that is legally mandated, so they can keep their public funding coming. If you lawyer up or go to the police you might actually get justice, because at that point it's out of their eternally corrupt hands. Remember that the entire university bureaucracy is one bloated, giant HR department. They aren't …
/r/MensRights18/11/16 11:21 PM
2

This is one of the only serious discussion subs I read where stickied comments are not used constantly because a mod gets off on the inherent imperiousness, but instead are used sparingly and to explain why a potentially controversial discussion is not being censored. Thanks.
/r/MensRights03/11/16 01:58 AM
1

We still get tattoos and piercings and gauges (1 2). I'd say the lip plate example is pretty extreme and they've been around for over 10,000 years, according to Wikipedia. Remember that these fads have been born, died out, and returned many times in the course of human history. Circumcision among Americans was almost dead before the 20th century when it experienced a resurgence.
/r/MensRights01/11/16 07:06 AM
1

Because it's done when a person is too young to have a well-reasoned say in the matter and it's done to someone who isn't you. Dietary, clothing, and social restrictions all eventually fall by the wayside because adults can understand the self-ostracizing purpose behind them and make their own choices. If circumcision was a solely a choice you made for yourself upon reaching adulthood almost no one would do it.
/r/MensRights01/11/16 06:48 AM
12

circumcised penis are much easier to clean Much easier in the sense that going from 10 seconds of cleaning time to 5 seconds of cleaning time is a massive 50% savings. It's still just 5 seconds. I think uncircumcised dudes can manage. I'm circumcised and I clean myself thoroughly anyway. I wouldn't even consider planning around someone not doing that. At that point you've got bigger problems than whether you're cut or not.
/r/MensRights01/11/16 06:35 AM
8

You didn't bother to address a single question I asked you about circumcision in general or even in your own life. You don't seem to have a point to make.
/r/MensRights01/11/16 06:28 AM
7

Pain and mutilation ceremonies are as old civilization. One of their "benefits" relevant to the circumcision discussion is to increase reliance on one's tribe and decrease compatibility between members of differing tribes. In the Old Testament those are the freely given reasons for many of the customs and behavioral restrictions of the ancient Israelites/Hebrews, including circumcision.
/r/MensRights01/11/16 06:21 AM
7

I find it difficult to believe you had the full breadth of experiences required to make a cogent decision on the matter at age 7. Why do you feel it was good that it was performed on you?
/r/MensRights01/11/16 06:08 AM
10

I find it difficult to believe you had the full breadth of experiences required to make a cogent decision on the matter at age 7. Why do you feel it was good that it was performed on you?
/r/MensRights01/11/16 05:57 AM
3

mute *moot purge *scourge?
/r/MensRights01/11/16 05:49 AM
6

Did you undergo the procedure as an adult or as a small child/infant?
/r/MensRights01/11/16 05:01 AM
24

I like my clean circumcised cock. Do you think uncircumcised penises are uncleanable? Do you think that a circumcised penis cleans itself? How did you arrive at a preference, not having ever had an uncircumcised penis? I'd have it trimmed again if it grew back. But ... you don't want to hear that. Considering that choice the entire crux of the issue I'm left wondering what you are arguing here. edit: anyone attempting to tease out a coherent thought from the above poster /u/dbtng should know the…
/r/MensRights01/11/16 04:55 AM
1

It's a question of jurisdiction. The FBI has it over the airways, not so much over fan events.
/r/MensRights06/10/16 05:56 PM
7

the victim's really just a witness The star witness. If they refuse to cooperate fully it is often a large enough blow to the prosecution for the case to be dropped.
/r/MensRights01/10/16 05:55 AM
2

My favorite thing was the victory lap the Obama administration did over the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. What did it do? Extended the statute of limitations on the existing equal pay law from the 60s. That was the great triumph for women he touted during the 2012 election. That's the sort of issue left for Women's Rights. And still we apparently need Hillary to Make Women Great Again.
/r/MensRights10/08/16 05:10 AM
1

They make fun of straw (at least what a feminist would consider straw) feminism but also heavily push "moderate" feminism and its idea that woman-abusing patriarchs rule society. By contrast the idea that the MRM could have any legitimate points is dismissed out of hand. The main thrust is that some feminism is bad, but all men's rights ideas are inherently worthless and misogynistic.
/r/MensRights27/07/16 12:58 PM
0

Every episode of this season up to this one included a Feminist message. Never was the Feminist idea of patriarchy seriously lampooned. Edit: As I said in the topic post I gave the show numerous chances. It's written by misandrists. Edit2: I have to correct myself here. Episode 4 lacked the feminist/misandrist touch. It was also a gimmick episode with almost no dialogue at all. Edit3: I watched the rest of the episode as you suggested. I still don't know what you think a "SJW attitude about abor…
/r/MensRights26/07/16 12:06 PM
3

I remember when this subreddit talked about important things like suicide rates, family law, wrongfully imprisoned men, legal protections for fathers, paternity leave, intactivism and workplace death awareness. And your attempt to get us "back on track" is whining and over-reacting about a Hollywood actress blocking you on Twitter. Part of me still kinda wants to have sympathy, but another part of me keeps thinking, that self-absorbed little bitch blocked me for a compliment, and she wants our c…
/r/MensRights26/07/16 09:10 AM
2

joke set-ups Read repeatedly parodied the ideas that men & boys could have issues and that Feminist caricature is not the end-all, be-all picture of gender relations. Emphasis mine. It's a consistent aspect of the show to prop up Feminist stereotypes and denigrate males. As in every episode. There is no joke in that image. It is a political statement on the part of the writer(s) of the show. This instance showed that the writers were not just joking and were deliberately trying to push a feminis…
/r/MensRights26/07/16 09:06 AM
3

The Xavier scene is in the trailer.
/r/MensRights06/06/16 07:30 PM
3

You quoted the least offensive part of an almost entirely inoffensive post.
/r/MensRights05/06/16 07:30 AM
3

That's the archaic definition. The acts it describes are specific and different from today's common usage of the word 'rape'. It even gives an example. That variant of the word wouldn't apply to men.
/r/MensRights05/06/16 02:16 AM
1

For Avengers or for the standalone Thor movies? Because everyone who wasn't RDJ was going to get peanuts for the team-up movies (and complaining about it) until he stepped into the negotiations.
/r/MensRights19/05/16 03:43 AM
5

Anita Sarkeesian is not a radfem, she's a huckster who finally found her perfect mark. The ideas she's peddling are not the worst radical feminism has to offer. Plenty of actual radfems are fat like Dworkin.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 10:10 PM
8

Whatever your concerns about what terrible things Trump might do try to remember that Hillary has already done terrible things as an elected official.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 11:56 PM
1

I meant specifically that the rhetoric was similar ("I'm moving to Canada! ...not really though.") and the stupid, blind hate replacing coherent criticism was the same (there were Bush = Hitler comparisons then too). Yet the only thing that happened in the aftermath of his re-election was the Dems taking Congress for a few years, during which they did only one thing of substance (ACA). People otherwise shut up and went about their lives. They get irrationally upset over some boogeyman, not becau…
/r/MensRights27/04/16 09:02 PM
2

They didn't melt down when Bush was re-elected (and lord knows they promised to). They won't do anything this time either.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 07:01 AM
7

There are no men like Hillary. There's only Hillary. Seriously she's like a combination of the worst qualities of Nixon, Reagan, and Bush Jr Cheney/Rumsfeld.
/r/MensRights27/04/16 07:01 AM
1

Judging by the nature of the scandals the women would be ignored.
/r/MensRights23/04/16 09:19 AM
3

Luke, a farm boy with no piloting experience Not true. "I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home..." They established his shooting and piloting skills. The whole plot of the movie was about the plan to destroy the Death Star and they explained every step of how it could be done and why it was done that way. They took it even further in the Prequels with Anakin winning the podrace and taking down the Trade Federation control ship at the age of 10. Yup and that's one of the reasons it's a…
/r/MensRights19/04/16 07:03 AM
23

One of you is discussing due process and one is discussing outcomes.
/r/MensRights06/04/16 05:12 PM
6

Stated reason: Female prostitution - even by the ostensibly willing - is a form of patriarchal oppression. Women can't really choose to sell their bodies. Any woman who "chooses" to do so is really just acting out the oppressive roles forced on her by a male-dominated society. Actual reason: Feminists are just human women. For (obsolete) evolutionary purposes biology tells them to punish/weed out certain types of undesirables by withholding access to sex (reproduction) and to reward desirable ma…
/r/MensRights27/03/16 09:04 PM
1

There are a ton of steps between "left-wing regressives have too much influence" and "society collapses into feudalism" and most of them are practical, not ideological. Not enough food, not enough single women, not enough safety from foeman: these are the things that collapse a society because these are the only things most people care about. A police state can work just as well as a liberal democracy (unfortunately) as long as enough people are fed, have access to the gene pool, and feel secure…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:59 AM
1

And I contend that the "eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die" mentality is the one that has ruled human society forever, broken up sporadically by periods of abundance leading to great progress. Just because your books - written by the tippity-top of human society - say one thing about humanity's aspirations doesn't mean that's what the philosophy of life was like for most or even many people. To put it simply: most people are shite, most people have always been shite. The only difference…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:43 AM
2

I don't romanticize the reality of the past. I do, however, believe that the underlying values or goals which they aspired to were worth something. If the "they" you're referring to are your uncle's and grandfather's generations that's still a very modern comparison. It's also disingenuous to say that society went from great to terrible during this generation when those two you mentioned are still very much in charge of society. If your uncle is some kind of Atlas, then his neighbor growing up (…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:24 AM
4

It's a highly romanticized view of the past that has never rung true for most men. Traditionalist values don't elevate a human being from a slavering ape into a polymath - not unless your definition of "traditional" is suspiciously convenient. Most people have been ignorant cogs passing nothing of especial value onto their offspring except the rudimentary skills needed to subsist in whatever society they were faced with. You're taking your modern education (in philosophy, literature, art, scienc…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 12:56 AM
3

Don't try to reason with unreasonable people. Especially don't try to reason with people who are paid to be unreasonable or to outright lie. You just get reasonable people to ignore them, boycott them, and defund them.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 10:41 PM
1

Conscription existed at the time of the passage of the 13th Amendment. It was clearly meant to be exempt from constitutional proscription and the court has consistently reiterated the fact. The issue of gay marriage did not exist at the time of the passage of the 14th amendment.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 09:33 PM
2

You'll get no argument from me that the Court plays it fast and loose with the constitution, but even I don't think the 13th amendment covers the draft. Keep in mind that the Civil War (which immediately preceded the passage of the 13th) included a military draft on both sides. From the same article: Still, the act has been challenged in light of the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution which prohibits "involuntary servitude". These challenges, however, have not been supported …
/r/MensRights07/02/16 04:37 PM
6

The Selective Service System is authorized by the Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution which says Congress "shall have Power To ... raise and support Armies [and] To provide and maintain a Navy;" During the First World War, the Supreme Court ruled in Arver v. United States (1918), also known as the Selective Draft Law Cases, that the draft did not violate the Constitution. Later, during the Vietnam War, a lower appellate court also concluded that the draft was constitutional in…
/r/MensRights07/02/16 08:25 AM
1

There are a lot of really, really dumb people and Machiavellian types have always and will always profit by their stupidity. In this case it's outrage porn being sold to an insecure and self-victimizing audience.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 04:27 PM
2

This article is not the best-written and seems to be motivated by a traditionalist viewpoint which may hurt its ability to connect with part of the audience. The author also fails to explain several points (like what exactly they mean by the "false diplomacy" of feminist self-identification of women as unique, eternal victims) and links others that are not obviously related (inability to marry a desirable man/that man's dissatisfaction with his wife and being internally dissatisfied with a marri…
/r/MensRights21/01/16 10:52 AM
5

She's saying that the women have to undergo a change in themselves in order to survive a repugnant world that prevents them from changing said repugnant world. Of course she later goes on to define 'repugnant' as anything remotely masculine or aggressive, and throws in some "I've never experienced it but I saw it in a movie once" caricatures of male environments for good measure. The rest of the article is scattershot nonsense so lacking self-awareness that it leaves me genuinely wondering if it…
/r/MensRights21/01/16 06:32 AM
1

Fun quote but it comes from a guy who would hang or castrate and exile the player if found guilty. Not a lot of sportsball to be played after that.
/r/MensRights17/01/16 03:07 PM
1

When did I say that everyone gets caught? Plenty of criminals got away with their crimes before the refugee crisis. Plenty will get away with their crimes after it's over. We still haven't and shouldn't throw due process out the window (no matter how hard Feminists campaign for us to do so) and society has yet to collapse or show signs that it will in the near future.
/r/MensRights16/01/16 04:09 AM
3

Throw human rights out the window because they're inconvenient?
/r/MensRights16/01/16 03:12 AM
3

And we've come full circle. You're advocating mass punishment without due process.
/r/MensRights16/01/16 03:08 AM
2

Until either they can sought out what to do with immigrants that do molest women The same thing they do with any other citizen who commits any other crime? Investigate the alleged crime, arrest and charge a suspect, try them in a court of law, punish and/or rehabilitate them if they are found guilty. From a non-European point-of-view this issue looks like racists arguing with head-in-the-sand elites. The only solutions seem to be "deport/cage them all" or "do nothing". That's almost certainly ju…
/r/MensRights16/01/16 02:05 AM
1

I respectfully disagree that this can even be called a punishment. I don't see how when a) they had a privilege taken away and b) it was taken away to send a message. [...]it's a security measure, and a good one given the threat. A particular threat this official admits is unconfirmed, meaning the reaction is premature at best and arbitrary at worst. And applying it to everyone for the alleged actions of a few is unjust.
/r/MensRights16/01/16 12:34 AM
1

There are no museums putting on female exclusive displays. Did you mean "male exclusive"?
/r/MensRights15/01/16 07:22 PM
6

Local Reactionaries Act Rashly and Idiotically The city said that no one has been charged after the incidents that led to the ban, which will remain in place until "the message has come across," The message of collective guilt, collective punishment, and punishment without due process/before facts are ascertained? "I know that I do an injustice to most people, but I do not see an alternative way to send this clear message," Schnapka reportedly said. Speaks for itself, I think.
/r/MensRights15/01/16 06:57 PM
1

https://youtu.be/5wr9PFK52wg Why is she wearing a grin that would put the Grinch to shame as she's asked whether she's married to a serial harasser/rapist or just a massive hypocrite?
/r/MensRights06/01/16 03:59 AM
6

OP is spamming lazy meme content. Please report these kinds of posts.
/r/MensRights02/01/16 06:05 PM
4

No advice animals or other low-effort image or text posts.
/r/MensRights02/01/16 04:07 AM
1

It's fascinating that people don't see the infantilization of women when "do they even love their children?" and "do they even love their women?" are used in the same breath by propagandists. The fact that feminists are utterly silent when this occurs is one of the (many, many) pieces of evidence that feminism is just neo-traditionalism.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:35 AM
2

Europe does not have an HIV epidemic comparable to Africa's despite their low circumcision rates. Circumcision is infinitely less effective at preventing HIV transmission than safe sex, good hygiene, and prophylactic usage. There is no medical justification for circumcision.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 08:22 AM
2

You can prove a person knowingly made false statements to the satisfaction of the reasonable doubt standard without a confession. Perjury is a crime, making false statements to law enforcement is a crime.
/r/MensRights23/12/15 11:12 PM
2

If confession was the only way of getting a conviction the criminal justice system would be redundant.
/r/MensRights23/12/15 11:10 PM
2

That has nothing to do with demonstrably false accusers being punished. Remember the same criminal burden of proof in convicting someone of rape applies to convicting someone of a false accusation of rape (beyond a reasonable doubt).
/r/MensRights23/12/15 11:09 PM
6

We've always lived in an oligarchy. "Democracy" used to mean rounding up the illiterate and mentally unstable and paying them a couple bucks to vote three times for whichever candidate the local political machine had selected to win. For the sixth time in a row. Then for his wife/brother/deputy next year. Then for him again, for another three terms. And paying off the cops to mass arrest people who might be inclined to support your opponent. We shouldn't be reaching back to an idealized past, bu…
/r/MensRights22/12/15 08:56 PM
2

The other side knows the game. It's the casual observer and the useful idiot who can be fooled.
/r/MensRights17/12/15 07:28 PM
2

That's the same video from the OP.
/r/MensRights11/12/15 04:41 PM
1

Not to mention admitting to rich donors behind closed doors that he felt he had almost no chance of winning the election.
/r/MensRights02/12/15 07:01 PM
7

Why is this an archive link? is j4mb reddit banned?
/r/MensRights02/12/15 06:44 PM
1

I did. Even wrote a little about that episode, the reaction to it, and a little about the show in general, posted on this sub. I thought Sorkin mostly got it right, albeit in the most "listen and believe" way he could.
/r/MensRights22/11/15 07:47 AM
2

How do these people rationalize their behavior? Like so: "the ways the patriarchy hurts men are all reliant on the oppression of women" Complete and utter narcissism. First and foremost, everything is men's fault even if it's killing them. Basically, "Once they help us destroy toxic masculinity then [their problems will magically go away | we can start to talk about their problems]."
/r/MensRights16/11/15 09:15 AM
2

The sad this is that people don't realize the scam that is repeated over and over and over: exaggerate an issue until people are worked up into a frenzy, do nothing to solve the issue, cash that syndicated columnist/adsense/diversity officer check, repeat. That's not unique to feminism, but it is sad to see people at universities fall for it so completely. They're supposed to be more critical and skeptical than the average joe, not less.
/r/MensRights12/11/15 07:28 AM
3

the ways the patriarchy hurts men are all reliant on the oppression of women: e.g. forcing them into nurturing roles, idealizing them as weak and fragile beings, etc. the ways the patriarchy hurts men are all reliant on the oppression of women Jesus Christ. I didn't know Hillary Clinton hung out in /r/askphilosophy. Women have always been the primary victims of war
/r/MensRights12/11/15 07:11 AM
5

I've always found feminists to be vague on what their solutions to problems would be, and I've always found that to be because their solutions are either terrible or oppressive. The feminist solution to "the rape epidemic on college campuses"? Let college bureaucrats try rape cases, incentivize (really I should say mandate) convictions, and stack the deck against the accused. The feminist solution to "sex discrimination causes gender imbalance in certain (low-risk, high-paying) jobs"? Reduce the…
/r/MensRights12/11/15 07:07 AM
4

They'll call anything in the US a war Except for the actual wars with the bombin' and the killin'. Those are "police actions".
/r/MensRights09/11/15 04:22 AM
0

They built a great nation but we've been tearing it apart. They built a nation where if you didn't own a certain amount of property you couldn't vote at all, but if you owned a certain number of slaves your vote counted extra. Let's not be overly romantic.
/r/MensRights27/10/15 02:49 AM
21

She assumed he was being paid more than she was because he was a man even though she knew she was higher in the corporate hierarchy? Who's really teaching women to internalize self-loathing? Is it "the patriarchy" or is it feminists?
/r/MensRights27/10/15 12:12 AM
8

She's trying to conflate women presenting a strong front unbeholden to what others think (i.e. the honey badger) with feminism. Women can't be strong without feminism.
/r/MensRights18/10/15 05:31 PM
1

part of me feels obligated to defend myself and other men. If there are people on the fence (or more likely just ignorant) in audience, maybe. You aren't going to convince a feminist of anything for a couple reasons: They're going to see the argument as "your word vs. mine" and unsurprisingly people typically side with themselves. Evidence is irrelevant even if they have none of their own to bring to the table. They benefit psychologically from their beliefs. They help them cope with any shortco…
/r/MensRights30/09/15 10:58 PM
1

That's why judicial standards of proof are not "100%" but "preponderance of evidence" or "beyond a reasonable doubt".
/r/MensRights29/08/15 09:18 PM
3

An equal rights amendment might do that, assuming the Supreme Court didn't decide to ignore it whenever faced with the choice of maintaining the double standards they like. The Equal Rights Amendment everyone is talking about has had an exemption for prior and future female-only rights and privileges since its 1958 draft. The title of this post fails to mention that even this exemption didn't calm fears that women would lose privilege under the ERA.
/r/MensRights27/08/15 01:46 AM
2

Remember: social solutions* for men's issues, legal solutions for women's issues. *where the solution is for men to be more like women
/r/MensRights26/07/15 03:52 PM
2

John or Jane Doe would know why they're in jail. Including what they were accused of and who accused them.
/r/MensRights17/07/15 11:42 PM
1

Knew for ~8 years that the guy was falsely accused. Thought it was not a big enough deal to mention until a) he needed something from the victim and b) the victim brought it up himself. My advice for his college essay would be for him to mention he grew up with a home life that failed to imbue him with a conscience or shame. You know, score some sympathy points with the admissions board.
/r/MensRights17/07/15 10:41 PM
1

On the front end the authorities would have to know who is owning up to the false allegation. On the back end John or Jane Doe would know why they're in jail. Anonymity is pointless.
/r/MensRights17/07/15 10:35 PM
1

He says people informed on the issue don't believe the large gap myth. Maybe, maybe not. In any case, informed people are not the ones making policy or influencing public opinion. His attack on the Capitalism argument is not well-reasoned at all. I wish I was a logician so I could name the exact fallacies being committed throughout, but informally this is what he does: he misstates the claim, offers irrelevant evidence against its veracity, continues to misstate the claim, concedes the point to …
/r/MensRights16/07/15 07:50 AM
1

When you hedge that much you're not saying anything at all. And no one believes men can't be raped, they simply believe one or more of the following" That it was deserved (admittedly Obama is addressing prison rape) That it doesn't matter to them (at best it's much less important than when it happens to women) That women can't be perpetrators (the law reflects this)
/r/MensRights16/07/15 04:11 AM
18

Simply put, Reddit kills Gawker-style media. The content of a Gawker-style site can be duplicated by a monkey, and Reddit provides infinite space for any monkey that wants to throw feces blog their nonsense. You could create /r/Gawker tomorrow and people would post the exact same shit as Gawker but for free. All those Communications/Media/Gender Studies degrees that were pointless become worthless. And thanks to Feminism you can't be a housewife and be taken care of while you do it as a hobby an…
/r/MensRights15/07/15 09:55 AM
1

Nothing about her post even hints at Feminism. A Wonder Woman fan would post the same exact words. OP is an idiot.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 04:17 AM
1

You're thinking about it the wrong way. Sex is one of those amazing things we get to do to express ourselves in the most pleasurable way possible inevitably leads to we've turned it into a shitshow
/r/MensRights13/07/15 08:06 PM
52

It seems like you're conflating men's rights with strict traditionalism. I guarantee you most people on this sub and in this movement are not advocating against losing some millennia-old order but against being treated as disposable (which is part of the traditional system) based purely on our gender, despite technological and social advancements that alleviate most of the need for such disposability. It also seems like you're reading virulent misogyny into otherwise innocuous postings. I'll go …
/r/MensRights12/07/15 11:55 AM
1

It's never been a credible source. It's been well-respected, well-written, and/or well-circulated - at times - but never credible.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 05:20 AM
3

Yup same exact article. Irish Times just chopped up the paragraphs into baby bites and cut most of the Silicon Valley background info. At least they sourced it as coming from NYT at the bottom of the page. Wasn't GG complaining about SJWs running a cabal behind tech/gaming news and blogs by rejiggering centrally disseminated narratives...
/r/MensRights12/07/15 05:09 AM
21

"Scrawny dude picks a fight with huge football player. Hilarity ensues. (Watch till the end XD)"
/r/MensRights07/07/15 05:15 AM
1

Changing your mind like that is a luxury we shouldn't afford to politicians, particularly those standing in front of Congress delivering speeches about the "fundamental bedrock principles of society for millennia". This is beyond "Guantanamo Bay" or "read my lips" level flip-floppery. It's not like politicians are a scarce or even valuable resource. It's ok to disqualify them from time to time for royally fucking up.
/r/MensRights29/06/15 03:28 PM
5

Like all feminist beliefs they are to be practiced by men, first and foremost; then by other women, if necessary; but never by the feminists themselves. From time to time they will extend these exceptions to chosen out-groups to curry their favor: "sex is not a basic human need/right/entitlement for men" (but for gay men it is) or retract them if they have been displeased: "women should make their voices heard in the public sphere" (unless they're Republican women)
/r/MensRights29/06/15 03:18 PM
5

Well, it might actually start working in our favor now that more than 60% of college students are women. Definitely going to get axed with bipartisan support, then.
/r/MensRights09/06/15 07:57 PM
1

This is a great example of why national distinction is still useful. You won't see unbiased research about male circumcision come out of America just as you won't see unbiased research about female circumcision come out of Egypt. You need places that have less of a stake in the question to get a scientifically sound answer.
/r/MensRights02/06/15 09:14 PM
5

Y days allotted for the parents of each child to decide freely who will take them. The issue they're trying to avoid is that the mother will take all of the optional days not because she desires time with the baby more than the father but because of poorly founded, unfair social norms. It sounds kind of like "40% of the company board must be women." The problem with that is the selection needs to be gender neutral and merit-based, so an "x% female" is completely counter-productive even to the (s…
/r/MensRights31/05/15 09:01 PM
4

Assuming you believe Feminism has much of anything to do with combating a Patriarchy. I believe it is, always has been, and always will be a juvenile lashing-out against men for perceived (real and imagined) slights against individual women.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 10:48 AM
15

I don't see anyone clamoring for women to be held accountable for their failures. I see plenty of people trying to credit them for successes before they've achieved or even attempted anything at all. That's before you consider the numerous, exclusive safety nets and fallback choices they have access to.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 09:04 AM
28

So ....more "benevolent sexism" in which one spins benefiting from a situation into a negative? If you are protected from failure while a peer isn't you're the winner in any comparison. You've broken the risk calculation and the only thing holding you back is a lack of self-awareness.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 05:49 AM
26

Ask him how much of your potential daughters' genitals he's willing to have removed. When he says "none" tell him you're adamant about it and they'll be grateful when they're older.
/r/MensRights22/05/15 05:31 PM
2

Is Sansa a good person? I've seen bad stuff happen to her and I've seen her do bad stuff, but I haven't seen her do anything good. Unless you count "not totally evil" as good, and considering the world the story takes place in, fair enough.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 06:24 AM
3

Don't forget tortured, raped, castrated (in a society where you're valueless if you can't produce an heir), and enslaved. Popular character, but the wrong gender.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 12:27 AM
7

Physical strength is not an element of an abusive relationship. Paraphrasing here, but that's the best way I've ever heard it put.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 06:47 PM
3

So we haven't come anywhere with efficient resource distribution since the Roman Empire? Still gotta throw the excess away on battering barbarians? In any case I was talking specifically about the military system. The subsidization of female soldiers is demonstrably inefficient considering they're not more valuable than male soldiers.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 08:07 PM
11

This is a stupid way to run a society. Not if your intention is to cripple the middle and lower classes.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 07:04 PM
9

Mandating equal outcomes is the deliberate introduction of inefficiency into society and is the opposite of progress and meritocracy. It engenders resentment among those who work hard to achieve, and they end up having to pull a disproportionate amount of weight to maintain a consistent group output. You can't tell someone they're mostly interchangeable with any other employee and then pair them with someone demonstrably less capable than they are. That's a recipe for hate.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 07:01 PM
14

Everyone is equal. Diversity is strength. Pick one. I'm strongly in favor of non-discrimination. I'm not in favor of quotas. I'm strongly opposed to quotas that weaken or introduce clear inefficiency to a system. Then again waste and graft are the purpose of the modern military in this Pax Americana, so I guess everything is going according to plan.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 06:43 PM
3

You're under the mistaken impression that these laws are written to advance a Progressive agenda, or based on reason or... These laws are passed because they fulfill neo-traditionalist inclinations to protect women from men (who have superior cognitive ability). Most people, especially Feminists, are fine with treating women as incompetents under the law.
/r/MensRights16/05/15 07:14 PM
2

https://np.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/35y1qh/its_as_simple_as_tea/ The tide in the comments changed heavily since I last looked at it.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 09:09 PM
1

It was the tea one you mentioned. There were some comments in there pointing out how it dodged the issue (motte and bailey tactic?) but there were plenty of "men don't know rape is bad", "consent is simple duh" anecdotes. I'm probably just overreacting, though.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 06:44 PM
2

Don't know if you saw the lobotomized vimeo affirmative consent video that made the top of /r/videos yesterday, but in an otherwise "no-bullshit" subreddit that post was conspicuously highly upvoted and the top comment wasn't one pointing out the utter stupidity of presenting a complex issue in such simple, misandrist terms.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 11:48 AM
0

The picture is clearly of a woman resisting. It's depicting physical coercion and calling it wasted sex/rape.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 09:50 PM
1

The nature of the issue has more to do with willingness to employ the "hostage" tactic than the morality of the tactic itself does. Every post on this sub about the draft has comments like "the quickest way to eliminate selective service would be to extend it to women". Edit: Teachers' unions hold children's educations hostage all the time. Sanitation unions hold public health hostage. Republicans hold the federal bureaucracy and all that entails hostage. Women in the third world have run campai…
/r/MensRights14/05/15 08:31 PM
1

It's an effective and common political tactic used by people of all ideologies. Edit: Think of it like handcuffing yourself to someone who's getting on their private helicopter to escape a burning building, but willing to let everyone else die. "You have to save me if you want to save yourself."
/r/MensRights14/05/15 08:17 PM
10

Churches have always had separate study/social/etc. groups for men and women. In the past most had separate services for men and women as well. Some do to this day.
/r/MensRights11/05/15 06:29 PM
15

coming across as if you think it's bad that this issue is getting attention isn't helping anyone. I think it's bad that it's getting this disproportionate amount of attention compared to the much, much more pervasive and insidious problem of MGM. It says that we'll go to any lengths to condemn the other and excuse the familiar. I will always support derailing discussion of this issue. I will do so because I want people to see the unconditional support MGM has in places that unconditionally conde…
/r/MensRights11/05/15 08:52 AM
9

If you mean the United States then you're in luck because we've had them for over 120 years
/r/MensRights09/05/15 12:39 AM
3

Women passed up the best chance in history to have a female Vice President in 2008. Gender and "making history" don't trump all other concerns.
/r/MensRights06/05/15 02:03 AM
2

The short answer is "all of them". The long answer is "none of them". The BBC is no pillar of integrity. In any case I'm saying the question of "who's more reliable" is moot. There will be a large amount of spin put into even the smallest piece of journalism an outlet puts out. You should trust journalists to deliver accurate quotes from the people making the news. That's about it. Most other stuff will be heavily spun, outright lies, or poorly investigated nonsense. If you really want to inform…
/r/MensRights24/04/15 01:40 PM
1

Again, I majored in Gender Studies - not Philosophy. I'm gonna need you to explain logic without mansplaining logic.
/r/MensRights16/04/15 05:43 PM
0

Sorry, I majored in Gender Studies - not Economics. Can you explain supply and demand with an analogy to how all women have been uniquely oppressed forever and ever while all men lived the good life?
/r/MensRights16/04/15 11:21 AM
3

Feminists as a group certainly had the privilege to bring their issues to the public without facing jailings, beatings, lynchings, etc. as a matter of course. I want to address some of the things you've said in this thread all in one post: The original suffragettes were high society white women. That's a fact. They were in favor of the draft for men, prohibition, and as much racism as you can fit into a petticoat. They got the vote by cynically promising a reliable voting bloc to Republican poli…
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:26 PM
17

I'd say I never saw a feminist have fire hoses and dogs turned on her or her own country's armed forces arrayed to physically prevent her from exercising her rights. I'd say Feminism was, is, and always will be a parlor movement for rich white women by rich white women (the most insulated socio-economic class in the history of the world). I'd say I never saw a Feminist sent to fight in a war for a country in which they couldn't even vote out the people sending them. But I'd say I've seen plenty …
/r/MensRights10/04/15 04:53 PM
3

Oldschool HWL (enh) You're actually scum. I bet you queue WSG/AB (not a respectable BG like AV) 14 hours a day and somehow still feel no shame. Duel me for deletion. No Windfury allowed, though, for the sake of fairness. Kek, or as we non-scum say: bur.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 12:47 PM
8

I'd like to direct you to the comment I made in reply to a guy who asked if NPR was a reliable source for journalismon this very sub. It was in response to the new DOJ stats on sexual assault that give lie to the "1-in-5" talking point.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 03:00 AM
11

Same thing that always happens. War. Guaranteed.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 10:35 AM
9

That's modern Feminism. It encompasses everything and its opposite. It's a bludgeon you can never dodge. Its truths are revealed so all conceivable evidence (even contradictory) supports the conclusions. Like a religion.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 12:34 AM
3

When the new shirt policy took effect they did take action against the 'camgirl' streams. They've become lenient again recently.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 11:34 AM
13

I believe that there is systematic discrimination against women in plenty of areas Such as?
/r/MensRights15/03/15 11:31 PM
5

Even the most generous reading of Feminist's views on men's issues shows that, at best, they suggest social solutions at all times (e.g. "redefine masculinity"), even with regards to rights issues (e.g. leniency shown towards female statutory rapists). Yet social issues faced by women (e.g. unrealistic female body images in the media) require legal remedies (e.g. Israel's banning of "too-thin" models).
/r/MensRights02/03/15 10:33 PM
4

While we shouldn't compare two things that are wholly or almost wholly dissimilar in order to conflate wildly disparate qualities (e.g. Obama = Hitler), analogies should be judged on the strength of the comparison, not the identity of the things being compared. In this case Amanda Marcotte's stubbornness is not the only thing being compared. Blind adherence to dogma, identity politicking, immunity to reason, bigotry etc. are also qualities being compared. It's up to you to decide if both subject…
/r/MensRights02/03/15 10:11 PM
8

Whether they believe or not should have no bearing on their participation. This isn't an echo chamber and it's healthy to be exposed to dissenting views. I'm glad they posted.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 03:05 PM
6

You do know that the majority of women in your mother's generation would not want you to be able to get an abortion - on demand or under duress or otherwise, right? And that an all-male Supreme Court is the only reason you have the right to one now? Also they're talking about about financial, not legal, access to abortion. There's a world of difference between "you can do x" and "I have to pay for your x", and we're still trying to find where in that gulf America should sit for health care in ge…
/r/MensRights21/01/15 03:02 PM
0

A half-century of economic depression and male conscription forced women into the workplace. Women completely took over low-paying, low-labor, highly social work from men including nursing, teaching, and secretarial/clerk jobs. They still dominate those fields today. Feminism's goal was to have women break into upper management, STEM, government, and academia. They've made slight inroads on the last one, but have otherwise failed. Women work because they have to in the modern economy, not becaus…
/r/MensRights20/01/15 07:04 PM
2

Right, I got that. I'm wondering why you credit Feminism with an influx of women into the workforce.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 09:54 PM
1

Feminism has essentially doubled the workforce Source?
/r/MensRights19/01/15 09:47 PM
16

Yet still a more helpful position than the American one of "I don't give a shit about boys". Honestly, if appealing to people's selfishness is the only way things are going to change I'll take it.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 07:08 PM
8

You never settle if you didn't do anything wrong. It can never make you look innocent. Or you do a cost-benefit analysis and decide proving your innocence to uninvolved observers is worth less than some other pertinent factor. Especially considering the number of people who won't believe you no matter what.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 09:06 PM
2

Black activists have no political power these days. People claiming to act on behalf of black people may, but Al Sharpton, for example, is irrelevant. Feminist activists are in government and exercise substantial control in the private sector. Black people have no money and therefore little to no say, rich white women feminists do. Compare: NOW and the NAACP. Which one will be getting more laws passed and politicians elected in 2015?
/r/MensRights17/01/15 11:25 AM
1

They're inherently limited by the impossibility of reporting perfectly on every issue. From there you just need to realize that bias dictates where they choose to spend their efforts. They're also human beings not robots. Even given perfect information there's no reason to believe they won't output nonsense, half-truths, or lies to help themselves or further their causes. Wait till you realize that the Supreme Court is making it up as they go, and not just perfectly interpreting the Constitution…
/r/MensRights17/01/15 11:05 AM
4

We have a fundamentally different view of multiculturalism in the U.S. In America if your culture clashes with the idea of Liberty and Justice for All™ you need to excise the offending part of your culture. I don't think lumping America in with "the West" on the issue of integration is appropriate.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 08:03 PM
2

"Teacher sleeps with student" always generates outcry or titillation. "Teacher sleeps with high school student" even more. I agree with OP that there would be more outcry and less titillation and apologia if the roles were reversed. As far as bickering about the law, I summed up my thoughts in this thread and /u/ransom_stoddard has a comment I agree with in this post as well.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 02:20 PM
2

Typically you can't fuck someone you have legal authority over and you shouldn't be allowed to. Not only because of the potential for a manipulative relationship to develop (at any age), but because of the potential for government sanctioned nepotism. It's not a stupid law, how do you not get this?
/r/MensRights15/01/15 02:11 PM
1

I Am Not A Lawyer
/r/MensRights15/01/15 02:07 PM
1

IANAL, but I think that because of the Fifth Amendment the state would have to prove she illegally abused her sister independent of her memoir confession. That being said, I'm glad that being an awful, shameless human being has lead to her status falling in the eyes of her tribe and their fellow travelers. I would have liked to see HBO pull her show, but I don't look to them to be paragons of morality or decency.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 03:06 AM
2

In the original case age and authority play a part, i.e. the fact that he was under 19 and that she was a teacher combine to form the objectionable relationship (*13A-6-81). In other cases the power dynamic (e.g. prison guard and inmate) or the relative ages (e.g. 25 and 14) alone make the relationship objectionable. The power dynamic objection specifically refers to the ability of one party to exercise legal authority over the other. A teacher's power over a student is given to them by the stat…
/r/MensRights15/01/15 02:57 AM
-1

Should prison guards be allowed to sleep with the inmates they guard without legal repercussion?
/r/MensRights15/01/15 02:06 AM
6

Faith in humanity restored? We'll have to see if the backlash continues or if this was a fluke.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 01:57 AM
2

People in a position of authority should be allowed to have sex with those they're supposed to have control over and care for? Or just after they hit the magic age?
/r/MensRights15/01/15 01:40 AM
9

Who are the radical MRAs? Who are the moderate feminists? Specifically.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 09:58 PM
61

Because in many feminist/women's spaces and subreddits posts and sometimes top-level comments have to come from a woman/a feminist and/or be "woman-friendly"/acknowledge feminist viewpoints as fundamental truths. We get a lot of people coming from the enforced echo chambers who aren't sure if they're allowed to post without apologizing for their identity or views beforehand. It's an old Marxist tactic which feminists have adopted that seems perplexing to anyone who cares about free speech, but t…
/r/MensRights03/01/15 07:48 PM
1

Misandrists often go label-less. See: Claire McCaskill, Elizabeth Warren et al. Whether they would identify as feminists if pressed is irrelevant. They are fellow-travelers with the movement and perfectly fine with oppressing men. Saying you "talk to feminists" is meaningless unless you identify what kind they are. Are they irrelevant, willfully ignorant keyboard warriors like Tumblristas and /r/Feminists, or are they policy-writers at the National Organisation of Women? You will never "make the…
/r/MensRights30/12/14 08:32 PM
1

Don't waste your time on what I like to call 'Reddit Feminists' (as opposed to the "kill all men after checking them for contraband privilege" Tumblr variety). They only appear in order to win easy battles, equivocate on the idea of equality, and NAFALT. They perform no activism (unless you consider aggressively uncontroversial Reddit posts activism), engage in no politicking (except to vote as told), and provide plausible cover for those they deem 'Radical' (who are the only ones actualizing th…
/r/MensRights30/12/14 01:29 PM
3

If we punish false rape accusers then no one will admit their lies. Even if we figure out that they were lying through independent investigation we shouldn't punish them because it will discourage real victims from coming forward. This is why we don't prosecute anyone for perjury or making false statements. How would we ever arrive at truth and justice?
/r/MensRights29/12/14 02:44 PM
17

They know deep down they are full of shit but they don't want people publicly driving trucks through the holes in their logic. It's more that they think they're delivering a revealed truth, which is more consistent with the idea that Feminism is a religion. Comments are disabled because criticism of the truth entails lying and lies are a tool of satan the patriarchy.
/r/MensRights19/12/14 08:12 AM
2

Look up "A Modest Proposal".
/r/MensRights17/12/14 10:52 PM
1

This is exactly the same shit that happened in classrooms. Rigging the system to make it easier for women. Can you elaborate on what you mean here?
/r/MensRights13/12/14 04:28 AM
3

The BBC is no pillar of integrity. In any case I'm saying the question of "who's more reliable" is moot. There will be a large amount of spin put into even the smallest piece of journalism an outlet puts out. At the moment I'm editing my first post to put in a couple examples from this submission - and this is little more than a press release. Should be done in a few minutes. You should trust journalists to deliver accurate quotes from the people making the news. That's about it. Most other stuf…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 08:16 AM
17

Let's put it this way. Did NPR use the 1-in-5 lie after it was thoroughly debunked but before this DOJ report? Yes. Would they use it if they felt they could still get away with it? Probably. Hell, they could have debunked it themselves at any time, but chose not to. There is no such thing as a completely reliable source of journalism. There are news sources that take a slant you generally agree with and news sources you generally disagree with. If an outlet is printing the truth it's more or le…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 07:59 AM
1

There is no place in the world that is not an active warzone where a 1-in-4 rape rate is not ludicrous. If someone tries to prove "prove" to you that there is, the next words out of their mouth will be a plea for money for a scam charity or votes for a scam politician. If you're willing to take outlandish claims on faith you're going to get scammed. It's the same mechanism used to prey on faulty risk assessment during 4 am infomercials and shell games. They make a claim where the reward for beli…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 03:16 AM
5

Sorry I apologized. Didn't think my vernacular was going to be that big of a deal. I was trying to reach out. Making someone apologize for their identity before they can speak is a tactic Marxist Communists used to place internal critics of their policies at an instant disadvantage. Feminists and SJWs adopted it and have spread it throughout the culture of online discussion. This is the origin of the idea of "check your privilege". You're reaching out from a kneeling position and we don't make p…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 02:31 AM
2

Hand-waving. You want compromise for the sake of compromise without any details. Israel and Palestine have a similar state of affairs. Both sides say they want peace. What does that entail? Feminists and anti-Feminists both want equality. What does that entail.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 01:46 AM
6

Everything from the title of your post to your last sentence is what is wrong with the idea of moderate Feminism. You don't need to apologize for or on behalf of your gender. Collective guilt is a real tool of oppression used to justify genocide and other crimes against humanity from the Balkans to Africa to China to the Americas. And it's used by feminists to dismiss all men regardless of individual circumstances. You agree there's an imbalance between the genders? Agree with who? What's the im…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 01:19 AM
11

There was a time when American's came together when things got way too out of hand and we would put politicians back in there place. No there wasn't. This country has always been run by political machines and our politicians have always pandered, lied, and cheated. Don't whitewash history.
/r/MensRights11/12/14 10:59 PM
17

It's the only way to get anyone to pay attention and take you seriously. Well, it's certainly a way to get attention without doing anything worthwhile. I would say you could also do something right and good and true, but if you've never had to do anything difficult in your life why start now?
/r/MensRights10/12/14 01:05 PM
1

Look at the wives of insanely rich men. Can you say they are disadvantaged because of patriarchy or tradition? At what point are the incredible amount of freedoms they enjoy trumped by the few specific freedoms they lack?
/r/MensRights09/12/14 10:06 PM
9

Don't insult people suffering from psychosis by comparing them to a spoiled, abusive, incestuous, inane, soulless overgrown child.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 09:57 PM
1

Exactly what middle eastern country has a booming economy and a backwards culture? If you're referring to Saudi Arabia then I would point out that: a) the oil wealth they have is too highly concentrated in the hands of a few and b) it'll be gone before many generations have a chance to wield it effectively. Even still, this small taste of prosperity they are currently enjoying will spur them to make cultural changes if they don't want to revert to being warring nomadic tribes. I'm not very hopef…
/r/MensRights09/12/14 09:47 PM
3

Calling India anti-woman is reductive. They have a staggering population and a staggering rule of law problem to match. They also have a much more rigid, primitive social structure than most of the West. People of all makes and models suffer immensely with little hope of recourse. OP is wrong about India being anti-male as well. Those in power will pander to the masses in the most effective way they can. Today it's by appearing tough on rape, tomorrow it'll be by appearing tough on porn, the nex…
/r/MensRights09/12/14 08:38 PM
1

Yeah I figured you were a troll. Thanks for being bad at it, though. I might have wasted an inordinate amount of time on you.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 08:21 PM
1

So if we consider it unlikely that people can be educated out of rape and you consider it unlikely that they can be educated into reporting it, where does that leave us?
/r/MensRights09/12/14 08:14 PM
0

I linked that review in the top post but did so through archive.today so as not to give ad traffic to AVClub which has become yet another echo chamber for barely-employable SJW bloggers.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 01:46 AM
1

Even if you disagree with the end result it is valuable to hold people to their own standards. Showing people how their policies can be turned around on their group will do more to change minds than simply opposing them. In this case the coach offered tacit approval of sexist bullying and it did do harm. In a reverse-the-genders situation you can bet the coach would have been pilloried. Assuming OP is to be believed in the first place.
/r/MensRights08/12/14 09:08 AM
1

She claimed she was raped and offered the story of how it allegedly happened as evidence. The story was demonstrably false therefore any conclusion reached as a result of taking it as truth is unsupported. Rejecting unsupported conclusions is the basis of modern intellectualism. Believing them is anti-intellectual.
/r/MensRights08/12/14 08:33 AM
5

In typical Sorkin fashion the villain (the alleged rapist) is a scum-bag strawman, but at least here he didn't pretend to have the right answer™ the way he usually does. The audience surrogate just sorta shrugs and gives up, becoming yet another person who has failed the victim by not acting on her word as if it is an undeniable truth. We still get his wink and nudge telling us she's definitely telling the truth, though. To answer your question: yes. In his own backhanded way he managed to show …
/r/MensRights08/12/14 07:53 AM
7

One of the Internet Lawyers from the /r/news post seems to imply the standard is lower.
/r/MensRights06/12/14 09:17 PM
-1

True. That's my goof and I've been repeating it like an idiot. But the thrust hasn't been "this story doesn't meet federal or state legal standards for rape". It's been "Shia LaBeouf wasn't raped because he's an idiot". "This isn't the right crime" has taken a backseat to "this isn't the right victim". I'll fix my original post.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 06:44 PM
0

I'm not saying we should jump to conclusions or accept his description of events as the truth, or even that we should refrain from calling bullshit and spewing vitriol at him (though we shouldn't). I'm saying that if you do accept the premise of his claim then it is the definition of rape. And I'm expressing dismay at the surprising number of people doing this and still claiming that his general character or lack of action make it not rape.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 01:53 PM
-1

Right, "questions" 2 3 and this lovely comment chain. Nonconsensual sex is rape. The premise is either that Shia gave consent without moving or speaking - by the nature of the project - or that he didn't give consent. Or that he's lying about what happened, but you don't seem to be implying that. The points I made in my previous two posts address some of the things you said, so I'm not sure if you're just doing a long-winded "nuh uh". Other points you made seem to be addressed at a different dis…
/r/MensRights03/12/14 01:38 PM
-1

Stupidity, insanity, assholery... none of these give someone the right to have sex with you without your consent. The former two are often considered to reduce your ability to grant consent further. Before this incident I could say without dissimulation that I'd seen /r/MensRights show skepticism, but never outright rape apology or victim blaming. I can't say that now.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 11:40 AM
0

The response on this sub has been appalling. I've seen people getting heavily upvoted promoting the idea of 'blanket consent', saying that it can't be rape because Shia didn't stop her, and generally casting aspersions on his character - again, as evidence that he wasn't raped or that the event never happened at all. None of us know what really happened. What I do know is that you cannot consent to an act through a double negative. "He didn't say no" is not a valid defense. Only positive consent…
/r/MensRights03/12/14 10:45 AM
2

Feminism is fundamentally flawed. Even the seemingly banal idea of "raising women to the same status as men" assumes that: a) men have [it] better b) male status is desirable in general, at least more desirable than female status The truth is we don't on average have it better than women, regardless of what you define as "it". And the unspoken disdain for femininity inherent to Feminism should be troubling as well. Feminism only means equality if you're the kind of person that undervalues women.…
/r/MensRights01/12/14 04:53 AM
0

'Blanket consent' is not a thing. It hasn't been a thing since marital rape was acknowledged by law. There is only positive consent and lack thereof. If you have sex with someone without their consent that is rape. Are you retarded or trolling?
/r/MensRights29/11/14 02:41 AM
1

Women are historically more opposed to abortion than men. If Roe v. Wade had been decided by polling American women rather than nine male judges, abortion would probably still be illegal here today.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 02:02 AM
2

But that's what they studied to become. You know, instead of engineering.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 02:44 AM
3

'Divorced' and 'Widowed' are possible marital statuses. Even still, I would say marriage fraud is the real crime here, not rape. Marriage should have the expectation of honesty in identity.
/r/MensRights26/11/14 12:10 AM
16

I have friends who are really glad they were circumcised Are your friends glad they were circumcised because they carefully weighed the pros and cons from a medical perspective or are they relieved that they're circumcised in a culture that finds uncircumcised penises distasteful?
/r/MensRights25/11/14 08:50 AM
18

Do we get a dominant aggressor policy biased against women for sustained-pattern mental and emotional (rather than incident physical) abuse? You know, since we're always being told men are emotional midgets and women are known to engage in emotional manipulation and "nagging" behavior.
/r/MensRights23/11/14 06:35 PM
1

And they provide a convenient NAFALT cover. Edit: The plane is flying south while the passengers in coach insist that you can't judge the heading as long as they believe they're heading north.
/r/MensRights21/11/14 12:43 AM
1

There are no good feminists. At the end of the day feminists of all stripes equate "woman" with "good", and filter their actions through this bigotry. You can do anything you want in the name of women and anyone who calls themself a feminist (which has a similarly murky and self-serving definition) won't offer meaningful opposition because you're doing "good".
/r/MensRights21/11/14 12:41 AM
1

Instead they claim "It's not my job to educate you" when that is exactly your role if you are fighting to achieve gender equality. They rely entirely on authoritarianism despite lamenting that all institutions of authority are arrayed against them. They do not need to convince you and have no intention of arguing sensibly in favor of their beliefs. They understand that you can make an end-run around the principles of a democratic society/free marketplace of ideas and be rewarded for it. Like a w…
/r/MensRights20/11/14 02:30 AM
3

I made no statement about whether her videos are scientifically sound (they are not). They fail to present even a half-way complete view of the issue. They fail on a 'persuasive argument' level. I don't know how else to explain this, so I'll put it simply: her videos are nonsense and should be viewed in the same way you might watch a reality TV show, a rom-com, or a mindless action movie.
/r/MensRights18/11/14 01:18 PM
5

I'm not mocking the style. I'm saying they have no substance the same way a 10th grade English paper has no substance. She - like many a sophomoric writer - has a handle on a few forms of argument. A passing familiarity with the persuasive style. But if you look at what she's saying instead of how she's saying it you see that there's nothing meaningful there. She doesn't adequately address potential criticisms or alternate viewpoints, and her lack of knowledge of and interest in her subject is g…
/r/MensRights18/11/14 12:30 PM
5

She puts forward a superficial, cherry-picked, 10th grade English class view of video games as evidence of widespread hatred of women in the industry and consumer base. She begs for inordinate sums of money to do so. When that's not enough she manufactures controversy and plays the victim to get more money.
/r/MensRights18/11/14 11:38 AM
2

We're pointing out the fact that if this kid was female the media would lose its shit over 'death threats'. Hell, there wouldn't be a fraction of the stories sexualizing a minor girl that there are about this boy. We know fervor over 'death threats' is often ginned up (when it isn't an outright false flag by the 'target'), but the general public doesn't. So we must ask why the bullshit machine spins up for one gender and not the other?
/r/MensRights18/11/14 12:49 AM
1

In civics courses they teach you that good laws are ones that are clearly understood, specific to a problem, easily obeyed, applied equally, and easily enforced. The more you move away from these principles the more you move towards the potential for abuse and corruption. There was and is a moral panic about drug use in this country and most others. People pushed for laws tough on drug users without understanding anything about drug abuse or drugs themselves. Not only did this not solve anything…
/r/MensRights17/11/14 02:42 AM
3

This has nothing to do with Mens Rights at all. It does when the group that did the original parody is aiming for some nebulous anti-cat calling government policy. You're trying to make a problem involving women seem like a joke in an attempt to make everyone who believes street harassment is a problem seem stupid. Who is? Where are they doing it? No one is laughing, except the legitimate parodists doing it in video games or costumes.
/r/MensRights16/11/14 08:12 PM
-1

A lot of people use this sub as a less politically correct version of AskMen or OneY or w/e and a more politically correct version of TRP.
/r/MensRights16/11/14 07:56 PM
1

I thought America was bad about politicians and news sources, but the amount of shoot the messenger tactics displayed in Commonwealth discussions is astounding. Every thread about a UK or Australian politician or by their news sources has as the top post some quip about how that person should be killed or how a mirror is needed because your life is in jeopardy. It's gotten to the point that I'm almost pleasantly surprised to see the words "Faux News" or "Obummer". We don't care about your all-co…
/r/MensRights16/11/14 07:17 PM
2

I had a long ass response typed out about selective reading of history, the goals of societies and the way they work, and where Feminism fits into things, but I fat-fingered ctrl+W and I'm not typing all that again. I'll just say this: Feminism is not now nor has it ever been anything but a pseudo-intellectual circle-jerk by the wealthy "women are smarter/kinder/tougher/better than men" crowd. Women's rights (like men's rights, worker's rights, every damn group's rights) are almost entirely a pr…
/r/MensRights16/11/14 06:46 PM
10

"Someone I wasn't attracted to politely propositioned me, therefore everyone in the skeptic/atheist communities needs to praise feminism." "Every man who enjoys making or playing video games that showcase female characters in a way I don't approve of is a sexist and a misogynist." Reasonable, you say? Please point out the people saying it was okay to wear that shirt? Most people I've seen on this sub are saying the following: The shirt was not appropriate for the setting. It wasn't even close to…
/r/MensRights15/11/14 03:06 PM
2

They weren't bad because of the tactics they used, they were bad because of the genocide. Both. Maybe you mean to say is that they're infamous for the genocide, rather than their tactics? That would also be false. Their propoganda techniques are also legendary and contributed massively to their ability to conduct the genocide. If you don't want to imply that the group you're talking about is the worst group ever, then you shouldn't be using a comparison to Nazis. That implication only exists if …
/r/MensRights13/11/14 05:29 PM
3

A bill which would have more than token female support if women faced equal possibility of service.
/r/MensRights12/11/14 01:31 AM
11

"And by 'support an effort to end selective service altogether' we of course mean uttering the previous sentence and this one explaining it. That's the most we'll do."
/r/MensRights12/11/14 01:28 AM
1

I guess I just think you should have to do the following before making people's choices for them: Prove the existence of discrimination towards your subgroup Prove the discrimination comes from outside your subgroup and that this is inherent to your lack of proportional representation Show why you think mandating proportional representation will end the discrimination and how you hope to achieve it, keeping in mind that your subgroup may not even contain enough people interested in volunteering …
/r/MensRights10/11/14 01:41 PM
3

people who make media are disproportionately men, and that is a problem Why?
/r/MensRights10/11/14 05:01 AM
1

In my part of the country we don't do abstinence-only. By 'scared straight' I mean to say in those type of catch-all classes sex ed will be boiled down to showing students a bunch of pictures of extreme STIs, doing a quiz, and passing out condoms. You'll almost certainly have gotten real, comprehensive sex ed in some other year or class already. They do it every year (in multiple classes) starting in elementary school here. And yes, it's disheartening that people don't know the basic principles …
/r/MensRights10/11/14 12:08 AM
1

Yeah. In addition to civics and economics we don't do philosophy here either. I'm not sure why you're contrasting Canada. Are you trying to say "it can't happen here"? You can enjoy the blessings of liberty without understanding them. You can also destroy them.
/r/MensRights09/11/14 06:52 PM
4

Civics education in this country completely disappeared in most places along with Economics (personal and otherwise). The most you get is 'Life Skills' - taught by a P.E. teacher, which is basically the scared straight sex-ed and free study hour. And this was ten years ago in a high-status, progressive high school. Your typical American student might learn something about how the criminal justice system functions once in middle school with a light refresher in a college elective.
/r/MensRights09/11/14 06:09 PM
15

People are born into traditionalism and grow out of it (hence this subreddit and movement). Feminism is taught at the highest levels of academia as a self-evident truth.
/r/MensRights07/11/14 08:29 AM
1

Any place that doesn't have 50%+ female representation is misogynistic. Unless it's dangerous or not entertaining or there's no money to be siphoned. Then men can have that. A lot of times you'll see people make the arguments that forcibly introducing women to a male space adds another, 'fresh' viewpoint (presumably all women have something to say unique to their gender, and it's always relevant to the activity in question) and this viewpoint is somehow inherently valuable (regardless of its obj…
/r/MensRights02/11/14 06:23 AM
1

#Gamergate and my stance as a MRM on it FAQ for curious females. Well, that was certainly your stance. Whether it's the stance of #Gamergate or MR**A***s, or an adequate FAQ for "curious females" is highly questionable. You seem to be under the impression that only a man can be an MRA or a #GamerGate activist, and that they share your motivations for being such. You should probably stick to arguing the facts rather than putting yourself and your self-identitification up as the gold standard for …
/r/MensRights27/10/14 08:07 PM
4

Feminists claim they want respect for women. When asked to define respect, they describe tolerance. When informed of this, they retrench. And it becomes obvious that they actually want reverence. Edit: Dasque beat me to it.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 10:25 PM
10

Warren has done nothing noteworthy besides leading a couple presidential commissions and appearing tough on bankers in front of the cameras. She has a paltry voting record, is a rich Feminist, and, frankly, sounds like a frightened lamb. I've seen people jerking non-stop over Warren since before she became a Senator, and it hasn't done anything to endear me to her. The thing that made me unsub from /r/politics was watching people brigade nearly every thread with "draft Warren" nonsense for month…
/r/MensRights25/10/14 03:41 PM
2

"Let's assume that Feminism is right™ - that women must control at least 50% of the positive aspects of society by default or by fiat, and that men actively hinder them from achieving this goal. The best way for you to achieve this is not to choose to study subjects that have a glut of students and a dearth of financial opportunity. It is to become a lawyer, MBA, computer programmer, materials scientist, etc. Then use your wealth and position to affect change from within rather than throwing ine…
/r/MensRights24/10/14 05:52 PM
3

Further evidence of this is that rich and powerful men are generally opponents of Men's Rights, while rich and powerful women are generally leading the charge for Feminism.
/r/MensRights20/10/14 05:47 PM
7

Don't give money to random 3rd parties, no matter who they are. You're asking to get scammed. Don't trust that the "funds will get to CHS". You're asking to get scammed. </victimblaming>
/r/MensRights07/10/14 12:15 PM
2

It's just insulting when no 2 feminists can argue for feminism in the same way. That's by design. The ideology is purposely nebulous so that 2 people who claim to have different views can give tacit support to any action taken under the guise of "helping women". Disagreements are academic, not practical. As long as you rubber stamp The Movement with your wallet and your ballot you can claim that your brand of feminism is the correct one and sleep easy. And you can disappear into the woodwork tha…
/r/MensRights26/09/14 10:26 AM
8

The OP chose to step into a complex discussion and had nothing nuanced or intelligent to say.
/r/MensRights29/07/14 03:06 AM
11

Any argument Sommers may have made goes unaddressed. The OP expect to win based on her "superior" self-identification or Sommers's "inferior" one or both. When pressed, she admits that she has no intention of engaging Sommers on a civil level and just wanted to sling mud, alert her followers to do the same, and then run away. There's a lack of understanding of how convincing arguments are made, how to maintain credibility, and, possibly, how saying things on the internet works considering the OP…
/r/MensRights29/07/14 03:02 AM
81

She knew. She just pretended he asked a question more to her liking and answered that instead.
/r/MensRights25/07/14 02:36 PM
34

You haven't met the "professors" they have teaching mandatory feminist theory sociology courses these days.
/r/MensRights02/07/14 04:36 AM
7

I see this sentiment every time there's a discussion about making women's social obligations equal to men's. "We shouldn't add more requirements to women, we should lower the burdens placed on men." But when it comes time to actually show compassion towards men guess who disappears into the woodwork?
/r/MensRights29/06/14 12:11 AM
1

What an incredibly stupid post. "I tried a thing. I didn't like it. Everyone should hate it and destroy it on my behalf." Thanks for the heads-up. Any other beliefs and experiences of yours I need to internalize?
/r/MensRights21/06/14 08:30 PM
1

And the latter type resoundingly loses every time and consistently fails to take concrete action.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:51 AM
1

I once visited a school for girls. They only taught girls. Not boys. Alright, now where does that say that I think boys shouldn't have access to their own education? A more appropriate analogy would be if the school allowed boys and girls but the girls were taught math and the boys were taught how not to beat women. I am only being partly facetious.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:15 AM
3

When I visited with Mrs. Calderon Sol at the Salvadoran Institute of Women’s Development today, I met the people who are working on the national hotline, and in other programs, designed to help save women and children from violence and then to try, if possible, to work with the women to rebuild their lives and to work with the men to rehabilitate them. Where in the speech does she speak about male victims needing support rather than being a problem to be dealt with? I feel lifted up already :(
/r/MensRights29/05/14 09:29 PM
4

Try to picture that situation with a guy chasing a "very very ridiculously good looking" woman for six months.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 09:00 PM
3

The cynic in me says they use complex metrics to determine what percentage of the fighting force can be otherwise unqualified while still maintaining the ability to defend the homeland and bully third-world nations.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 04:46 PM
1

Is there a list somewhere of politicians who have parroted this statistic? At this point I'm almost glad to hear a public figure repeat it. It let's me know who is intellectually incurious and/or willfully dishonest at-a-glance.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 04:16 PM
6

Timestamp for the rape apologist quote? I'd like to see her call an actual survivor a rape apologist for myself.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 06:13 PM
3

"Females do not experience the same levels of desire." same
/r/MensRights20/10/13 11:43 PM
1

It's about securing sex for the long-term. That's it. The neuro-chemical rewards serve their purpose of making you pursue women. The more you convince yourself that there's some ethereal quality about you and your potential SO, the more success you'll have. Once you dispel the illusions, however, you can no longer adequately play the game.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 01:44 AM
5

Love is just a chemical reaction in the brain People are violently averse to this fact. Edit: for evidence, see replies below. "I swear I'm more evolved than every other organism ever and I have reached a metaphysical connection (that just can't be described scientifically) with [insert monogamous partner]." Self-reflection and social success are inversely correlated, of this I am sure. The same people who reject organized religion will cling mindlessly to the God of "romantic love". The same pe…
/r/MensRights07/10/13 10:25 PM
6

I recently informed a college-educated nurse friend of mine that we sometimes get boners for absolutely no reason and she was mind-blown. I then tried to steer her towards comparing it to involuntary lubrication for women and she said "oh yeah, of course. That happens all the time" without the slightest hint of self-awareness.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 06:05 AM
4

hides behind his comedian status any time someone calls him on his hypocrisy Yup. And it's genius. He's a world-class influence peddler who gains influence by shitting on other influence peddlers. This is the man who got a show cancelled by appearing on it and telling the hosts they're extremely biased crackpots. He then goes on to host a morality play four nights a week. And I watch religiously.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 06:01 AM
5

It was sarcasm.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 05:08 AM
3

One night I was walking down the street and I saw two lesbians fighting. I say fighting, but it was a one-sided tirade. The butch was absolutely laying into the fem. I watched my parents fight for years, but this woman was scaring me with how violently she was screaming. Her face was completely red, like sunburn was her birthright. I felt like I was in danger just walking past the thing. Normally, I'd walk past a couple arguing (because, sad to say, I really can't give a shit after the upbringin…
/r/MensRights30/09/13 11:25 PM
10

women pretty much have it as easy as men in the workplace Easier. They get the same pay by law and custom but are never required to do any kind of physical labor. At my job the men's schedules are built around the women's, to make sure someone is there to actually keep the place running. Their entire lives are subsidized, their feelings and their hedonism are paramount. College is the worst example of this. They have lower admissions standards, better access to financial aid, more, targeted supp…
/r/MensRights30/09/13 03:43 AM
2

Something about this thread makes it hard to give the benefit of the doubt. Maybe it was the fact that you at no point intended to give anyone in the thread the benefit of the doubt?
/r/MensRights30/09/13 02:35 AM
24

The funny thing is this: wouldn't a society ruled by masculinity send the feminine members to die by the millions? Women could wield a gun about as well as a WWI male soldier (they were notoriously poorly trained, uninterested in killing their fellow man, and conscripted to boot). So why didn't the evil misogynists who only cared about their own gender send the other gender to the hell of the trenches?
/r/MensRights29/09/13 08:41 PM
6

I can't blame the commenters. As I've said before, the vast majority of people are immune to feminist views. They still want men to be "men" and women to be "women". And they're on the internet just like us - we who have been hammered over the head with straight-up-and-down b.s. about what men should be and what women should be.
/r/MensRights29/09/13 08:36 PM
0

Oh? Your interactions with the opposite sex leave you invigorated and enthused about life? You must have that "confidence" I keep hearing about. /s
/r/MensRights27/09/13 02:46 AM
0

But for some reason we...keep trying. Biology. Biology is the reason. We must necessarily sacrifice psychological health for evolutionary reasons. Many people call this "love".
/r/MensRights24/09/13 04:12 AM
5

I am not Andrew Ryan, and I'm here to ask you a question: why do I get paid the same amount as my female colleagues when I am required to be able to competently perform my job (which regularly involves heavy lifting >50 lbs.) and theirs (which, no joke, solely involves making copies)?. I clearly have greater talents and/or skills, yet because we share the same formal title it would be illegal for me to be appropriately (read: more) compensated. Edit: How would a feminist justify this discrepancy…
/r/MensRights12/09/13 01:33 AM
10

A legitimate partiarchy theory would predict male advantage everywhere. Feminists tilted at windmills and - surprise, surprise - won almost immediately. The fact that feminism is irrelevant is a daily, unconscious reality to anyone able to avoid or ignore its tendrils (read: none of us here on /r/MensRights, sadly). The vast majority (weasel) of women still want to be treated like women, and enough men still act like men used to to maintain the status quo, for now. The near future will tell whet…
/r/MensRights31/08/13 03:13 AM
9

If I see one more feminist speaker baselessly claim that "it seems like the man before me had way more time" I'm going to give up on the idea of listening to them and just write them off as mentally unstable. There's no other option for a rational person to treat those who couldn't care less about reality.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 03:16 AM
-2

Usernames rarely tell you anything about the user, on this site.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 10:00 PM
0

Regardless of what she was wearing she was acting like someone who spreads STDs through eye-contact. And even then she had a good success rate. If she hadn't put on the act (dressed the way she was or dressed like a nun) I doubt even the first guy would have turned her down.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 07:53 PM
8

Absolutely. She was hamming it up and being as slimy as one can be while looking like someone out of a "barely legal" porno. Even in the one with the black guy she's purposely* being way over the top and he stills ends up saying "I'm probably about to get gonorrhea, but fuck it."
/r/MensRights29/07/13 11:13 PM
0

You're not being sexist. "Sexist", "misogynist", "creep", "neckbeard", etc.: you will hear these terms used by people who want to make you feel ashamed for having different or displeasing opinions, but don't want to do any of the thinking required to accurately express themselves. What I would say is maybe you should take a look at whether you're letting your fetishes dictate your love life too much. No one can answer that for you other than yourself. You might find as you get older - the way a …
/r/MensRights28/07/13 11:13 PM
10

Even your "spectrum" starts from the assumption that women are oppressed, which is the entire point of the thread. When you start with the conclusion and work backwards you get unscientific nonsense. Furthermore, if feminism is such an amorphous thing, encompassing directly conflicting opinions, why should it be taken seriously? As it is we are forced to reject as "feminist" those ideologies which show themselves to have no influence on the acts undertaken in the name of feminism. If you're a bo…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 06:57 PM
2

This is the correct answer and it's why sociologists shouldn't be commenting on mental health problems.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 05:06 PM
-1

man Check your pants for the only reason they'll ever need to dismiss you. Obfuscators don't require any action on your part to slander, misrepresent, misquote, ignore, demagogue, and censor you. Fools don't need any encouragement to favor an obvious emotional appeal to whatever eloquent rhetoric it is that you want us to produce. Asking us to make ourselves more palatable to those elements borders on concern trolling.
/r/MensRights16/03/13 01:19 AM
6

Are we talking about the "time" that white men have created and defined?
/r/MensRights16/03/13 12:57 AM
22

I'm glad comments are disabled on the video. It keeps the focus of the discussion on the video content rather than Youtube commenters. The immediate stories and back-and-forth on other sites will have to be about what Sarkeesian said instead of what Youtubers said about her and each other.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:09 AM
1

Reading the OP, what are we qualified to say about the situation based on the "information" provided? Firstly, you'd have to start with some kind of "If this is true..." statement, because OP is providing us with a second-hand account and zero verifiable evidence that any of it happened. Secondly, this isn't even a prompt for commentary on broader issues. I'm not sure what OP is aiming to do here except get sympathy for his buddy, and this is neither a bar nor a support group. The information pr…
/r/MensRights02/03/13 11:15 AM
-2

This post is hearsay. There is literally nothing informative to be gleaned from the OP (not even regarding this specific anecdote). Pretty shocked to see it wasn't downvoted to oblivion. "My buddy got jammed up because some judge believed some lies! Is this legal?" What the fuck is that?
/r/MensRights02/03/13 08:13 AM
3

As much as a pregnancy can have a "victim" it would probably be the person who has zero say over its course after its first instant. I don't think it's an apt comparison.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 11:54 AM
1

From what cultural disadvantage do female candidates come from that they need affirmative action in an anonymous selection process? Race-based affirmative action at least has the veneer of an attempt to account for socioeconomic imbalance, but men and women come from the same homes, schools, backgrounds, etc. The path women follow from birth to career is identical to that taken by their male counterparts (ignoring the administrative, academic, and financial encouragement and support women receiv…
/r/MensRights24/02/13 01:48 PM
1

It's less efficient for the economy as a whole for someone to be in a position they are not optimally suited for, or at least to be paid the same as someone who is optimally suited for it. I am not qualified to say who's best for what or to make such biology-based judgements, though. Like I said, the market should make those decisions (based on output).
/r/MensRights09/02/13 02:52 AM
1

It should be acceptable. The goal of any economy is to allocate resources as efficiently as possible. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the basic idea of Capitalism is that this allocation occurs most efficiently in the absence of regulation, direction, and interference. If fundamental biological differences make women less efficient laborers, then there should theoretically be a free market solution to the problem. Feminism, as a marxist philosophy, does not concern itself so much with effic…
/r/MensRights09/02/13 12:29 AM
1

See, that clarification is necessary. As it stands, it reads as you saying that women who return to uni-directional abusive relationships understand that they are hurting the anti-DV cause. It read that way to me, at least.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 04:31 AM
4

Men are not friends to women in the same way that women are friends to women. Your girlfriends might tell you that you look hot but have no desire to have sex with you. Your guy friends typically won't. The female reaction to this is to allow or encourage male friends to desire them sexually to get the positive image reinforcement that they crave. This is the friendzone. If you want to be treated like a sexual being you should look for it outside your circle of friends unless you want to ruin th…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 11:18 AM
3

He wasn't implying that anyone was "asking for it" (please note that calling someone a victim-blamer and other standard feminist tropes will be seen through and ignored immediately on this subreddit). His original reply was incoherent at best, but in the subsequent replies he was alluding to the statistical evidence that domestic violence is often bi-directional. Really, you two seemed to be having two different conversations.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 10:19 AM
28

Maybe that's why she abandoned the series. Maybe she started examining things even the slightest amount more than your average Feminist and realized that her entire belief system was bunk. One can dream.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 04:46 PM
10

GWW had a video about men's and women's different perceptions of danger. Women are more afraid of violence despite being unlikely to experience it and men are less afraid of it even after being victimized. Her explanation was based in evo-psych, but the point is that it is an observable phenomenon. It's still nonsensical, but there is a reason for it.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 09:18 AM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws#All-party_notification_states It's the norm in most states. California is one of the odd-balls
/r/MensRights18/01/13 01:02 AM
335

You should include the reveal that the genders are switched after the "outraged?" part. E.g. "If you are outraged by this fact, are you still outraged by [real fact]?", then a website or short statement, or maybe a citation for the fact. If you leave people with false info, then the ones who don't follow up will be even more misinformed and stuck in their thinking.
/r/MensRights12/01/13 06:57 PM
3

There are salaried individuals in the upper echelons of every charitable organization. There are crony capitalists with direct or tangential relationships to such organizations and the ideologies they espouse. They lobby for government dole, and the government has to hire people to facilitate the wealth transfer. Hell, the people who make pepper spray and rape whistles don't do it for free. Any time money changes hands there will be someone doing everything they can to increase the cash flow and…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:26 PM
4

A lot of social commentators get dumped on for talking - in one way or another - about "the subtle bigotry of low expectations", but it's a valid concern. This is one of Feminism's greatest sociological crimes. They reinforce the idea that women are unable to deal with adversity as successfully as men - that they are, by nature, less emotionally well-adjusted. This is the facade of weakness, and your discussion partners are positively smearing it on themselves. On an unrelated note I found "some…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:06 PM
7

If feminists really cared about women living happy, productive lives, their message would be that rape sucks but it doesn't happen very often, and when it does it is possible to recover from it, move on and have as good a life as anybody else. Where's the percentage in that? Happy, rational people don't spend as much money as unhappy, fearful ones, and their expenditures aren't as easily directed by interest groups.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 12:47 PM
-1

Notice the convicted category labeled "jailed". This is to let you know that those who only "faced trial" (but were found not guilty or were otherwise not convicted) actually "got away with rape" and are still prowling the streets. edit: As someone pointed out, jailed also includes those wrongly jailed. The whole chart is a study in perfectly crafted propaganda for spreading an unfounded fear of rape prevalence in the name of "inspiring conversations".
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:51 AM
-1

And I thought the blogs posted to /r/politics were bad. This is what gives blogs a bad name - a legitimate news source giving tacit editorial support and delivering an audience to Joe Notajournalist. Why do ostensibly respectable news sources give voice to otherwise unaffiliated, hyper-partisan, biased, inaccurate bloggers? Surely there must be some reason other than to say they are hip to the web? Don't they realize the erosion of their reputation that's taking place?
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:43 AM
1

What advantages does the average "White American Male" have that the average "White American Female" does not? (In the future, please keep in mind that MR applies to all men, not just white, American men.)
/r/MensRights07/01/13 06:14 AM
1

Yeah I'd definitely say you're in the minority here if you believe that men inherently have it better than women in today's world. What makes you think that? edit: For the record, the idea that men have it better than women is what Warren Farrell was arguing against in The Myth of Male Power. That is where the title quote comes from, iirc.
/r/MensRights06/01/13 06:40 PM
1

I can only assume that you are saying I'm fine with ... having added consequences to deal [with] due to the perceived strength. despite having read "Men are stronger than women, so it's OK that they are the disproportionate victims of violence." Are you saying that you're fine being held to a different standard for illusory reasons? Are you saying that because you happen to benefit (somehow?) from this double-standard that it is fine that it exists and that it should be applied to everyone, rega…
/r/MensRights06/01/13 03:32 PM
3

It would be more accurate to say "That is because [many] gender stereotypes are [partially or] totally fucking irrational [in today's world].
/r/MensRights06/01/13 11:26 AM
5

It has helped you in many situations. It has hurt men in general in the greater scheme of things. Notice that the quote doesn't say "A man's...", it says "Men's...". Just as (tossed-off) examples of the sentiment Farrell is trying to express: "Men are stronger than women, so it's OK that they are the disproportionate victims of violence." "Women are weaker than men, so they need extra protections."
/r/MensRights06/01/13 11:22 AM
5

Notice that he says "women's" and "men's" not "a woman's" or "a man's". He is saying that men as a group suffer when society gives them a raw deal with the justification that every very one of them can take it (even when they can't), and women as a group benefit when society gives them a preferable deal with the justification that none of them can take it (even when they can). You definitely need the context of the discussion where he made this statement. This is an example of why naked quotes d…
/r/MensRights06/01/13 11:04 AM
1

I'm genuinely curious why you decided to apologize for certain people who identify as MRAs, and for so long. I would have just said "I'm not responsible for those people just like you aren't responsible for all the feminists who advocate androcide." Or maybe you do consider yourself responsible in some way? I don't know. Again, just curious.
/r/MensRights06/01/13 09:38 AM
2

If you are interested in trying to reason with your friends (personally, I wouldn't bother) here are a few arguments to present to the people giving you guff: The people who say "men should never hit women" are doing two things. They are saying that regardless of circumstances women are incorrigibly weaker than men. They are also reinforcing the idea that men being the default victims of violence (including violence perpetrated by women) is the proper way for society to function. They should ser…
/r/MensRights05/01/13 09:22 PM
1

Do you expect them to apologize for the mean, misandrist feminists as a condition for engaging them in discussion? Because that's what happened in your omegle chat with respect to "bad one" MRAs.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 07:42 PM
2

Do you think Feminists and Mens' [sic] Rights Activists can ever ... get along? Why/why not? I see this sentiment a lot. "Why can't we all just get along?" The short answer is that it isn't a man vs. woman struggle, but ostensibly a struggle between two competing ideologies that have no obligation to coexist. It's like asking why we can't teach both creationism and evolution in schools. One is wrong, one is right. For a more in-depth answer we should look at Feminism's philosophical underpinning…
/r/MensRights23/12/12 08:33 AM
5

Please stop upvoting this spammer. If we wanted to read twitter links all day we'd be on Twitter.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 05:13 PM
5

There's no expectation of anonymity in a public, in-person protest. How do you feel about the recent actions against Westboro BC? Do you feel they should remain anonymous? In any case, Reddit has specific rules against doxxing. That's the beginning and the end of the issue as far as many mods are concerned. Doesn't matter if they doxxed Hitler or MLK Jr. Gawker doxxed a Redditor with the help of other Redditors, posted his personal info to Reddit, and was subsequently banned from parts of Reddit…
/r/MensRights21/12/12 01:59 AM
14

Couple issues here: You may be under the impression that because the MRM and Feminism are often opposed some area smack-dab in the middle of the two must contain the "right" answer. This is not a necessary truth. The MRM is not the male version of Feminism. We see Feminism as having outlived much of its usefulness, at best, and a female supremacy movement, at worst. Feminism != women. Feminists have worked tirelessly to bring the idea of womanhood under the umbrella of their movement. They have …
/r/MensRights20/12/12 08:48 AM
6

I think what the letter does best is explain a popular perception of the situation, and a popular reaction to that perception. Feminism has told women that they can have it all, and seeks to give it to them at great social subsidy. You might feel like you don't encounter any ladies who take advantage of this, but do you really know the intimate views of all the women you've ever met? Consider yourself. Do you let everyone know your views on gender relations, sexuality, social order, etc., or do …
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:43 AM
12

Metaphorically speaking, Feminism operates on the heart, not the brain. Give the MRM a few decades of unquestioned "correctness" and outlandish victories and it might be in the same place.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 05:09 AM
2

I didn't say they weren't pulled out of asses. I'm no statistician.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 07:56 AM
2

Surveys. This is the source of the "54% of rapes go unreported" stat.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 08:50 AM
13

You would think so, but too often the feminist approach starts and stops with "teach your sons not to rape" campaigns. This is going to be a tortured phrase, so bear with me: they're willfully ignorant of/uninterested in the causes of and solutions to criminality. They're also offended by any attempt to prevent crime on the victim side (unless it can be spun into a demonization of the male gender). Imagine entering a building is analogous to reducing instances of sexual assault. Feminists are pu…
/r/MensRights11/12/12 08:38 AM
0

Equal rights is the goal of this movement. We're simply trying to put all our cards on the table with the label "men's rights". Men's disproportionate suffering (especially at the hands of the justice system) is enshrined in law. In any case I think you'll find that any MRA will readily identify as an egalitarian/equalist, and, unlike most feminists, can do so without dying of acute hypocrisy. Preferential and protective treatment for women has been the goal of feminism for quite a while now. Th…
/r/MensRights06/12/12 11:16 PM
6

Even in America prostitution is a less penalized crime than solicitation.
/r/MensRights04/12/12 05:23 PM
1

CNN and Fox News are pretty much on level grounds in terms of offering insubstantial editorials, so it's only fitting that CNN answers a deeply flawed Fox News opinion piece with an equally (and opposite in view point, of course) flawed opinion piece.
/r/MensRights30/11/12 05:29 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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