TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

cutcoguru Archive

View 4 posts and 551 comments by cutcoguru on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

You're missing the larger issue here - regardless of how vulnerable a hero is, superheroes glorify male disposability and until such time as we separate out male disposability from bravery in children, their example will be problematic.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 01:46 AM
1

In fact with almost complete predictability, the comments section has now been sanitised.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 01:58 PM
1

And with almost complete predictability, the comments section has been censored. I had suspected it might happen, so I saved an offline copy of the page, complete with comments, but I last updated it at the 343 comment point so I'm missing 12 comments. Anyone know how I can host it somewhere as an archived copy as evidence of feminist hypocrisy and insincerity?
/r/MensRights05/08/13 01:57 PM
7

Ugh, are we really that clueless of a society that people are no longer capable of differentiating between perpetrator culpability and "street smarts"? I knew common sense wasn't that common, but yeesh.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 04:00 PM
1

On the contrary, the idea of the male protector is a manifestation of male disposability and gynocentrism.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 08:40 AM
3

As Forest Gump would say, "stupid is as stupid does".
/r/MensRights04/08/13 03:44 AM
5

If anyone deserves the thanks - it's you; you've just made spreading the word about female-on-male rape so much easier. In fact a few of us are already tweeting your infographic.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 03:31 AM
1

Also the prevalence of prison rape, which is what false rape allegations lead to in terms of sexual crimes being perpetrated (ie rape by proxy) is pretty much an open secret in society.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 03:29 AM
2

The best bet is to talk to GWW about it, I know she mentioned that finding when I spoke to her on talkback radio. In fact I might even hit her up about that myself.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 02:51 AM
11

There is a more glaring error in the pink section/headline here, and this time I have no doubt. The infographics methodology would tell us that 40% of rape cases are perpetrated by women, not that 40% of rapists are female, an important distinction (though the statistic is no less salient). Didn't the same study also find though that where male rapists tended to make up a small number of repeat offenders, female rapists tended to be comprised of a larger number of one off or occasional offenders…
/r/MensRights04/08/13 01:41 AM
10

Thanks for the great infographic. I just shared this on facebook and will definitely keep a copy handy for future reference.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 01:29 AM
3

There's a legitimate complaint to be had here, though I don't think it's feminism's ball to run with, in that Barbie is a shitty role-model compared to He-Man. She's boring and doesn't do stuff and just collects shit, whereas He-Man is rescuing kingdoms. Adora would kick Barbie's ass, she's out leading a rebellion in another dimension against Hordak, Skeletor's mentor. And yet you're missing the forest for the trees here. He-Man, being a superhero, reinforces the notion of male disposability - s…
/r/MensRights04/08/13 01:14 AM
3

There's definitely a fair point in here. In fact the dark side to every single male superhero is the fact that it actually reinforces the notion of male disposability through the role of men and boys as expendable protectors. At some point we need to separate the 2 out in society.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:42 PM
5

To be fair, it mainly seems to be a small handful of people and the 2 on the article have in one case had their ass handed to them by a brutal debunking and in the other homophobic case, been completely slammed by a pithy and satirical comment. The fact that the responses are so pro men's rights on the issue is actually telling of a change in the wind.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:39 PM
16

Wow, did hell freeze over or did HuffPo actually do a men's rights issue justice.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 06:35 PM
1

EvilPundit, you asked me in the article to elaborate on something, so here's a post I made a while back on here which does just that: "... there are glaring issues with feminism, not to mention the fact that it is founded on a fallacy - a fallacy which informs all feminist theory and attitudes. This core fallacy is what I will focus on, although I can draw on issues with feminist lies regarding domestic violence, its refusal to condemn and ostracise militant factions in the mainstream and its [o…
/r/MensRights03/08/13 01:16 AM
1

Yet isn't that how Verizon are making themselves come across here?
/r/MensRights03/08/13 12:43 AM
1

On the contrary, you're clearly not getting it because you clearly don't graps the current situation with social understandings of domestic violence. That sign isn't there in the context of a society that has a non-gendered grasp of domestic violence, but rather a radically gendered understanding of domestic violence. As such it merely compounds the issues which battered men face with all those who see it.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 12:41 AM
2

I get hwere you're coming from, but doesn't the responses to my responses just highlight how many individuals who claim to be MRAs are devoid of the very compassion and empathy which is needed in addressing men's rights issues. What I have said might have come across as "me vs you", however it was also a statement of fact and in this situation, it is pretty black and white. On one hand, people can take a pro-men's rights stance, where they demonstrate compassion and empathy for battered men - in…
/r/MensRights02/08/13 03:59 PM
2

I understand that, but the problem is that in this particular advertising campagin, Verison is precisely sending out that message - that domestic violence only happens to women. Let's face it, we're a long way off the point where public awareness about the ungendered nature of DV is at a point where such criticisms about this ad campaign could be considered to be "splitting hairs".
/r/MensRights02/08/13 03:51 PM
1

Initially I thought she'd broken free from feminism in the article, however judging by her responses in the comments, she's simply exhibiting a milder version of the radical feminism that her mother has clearly embraced for many years.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 03:42 PM
5

I got the following response from her, which was highly telling of the typical denialism amongst feminists who recognise something is wrong, but cannot break free of their indoctrination: I'm not interested in theory because it generalizes ideas over people. Men are not slaves to women. I don't find my husband disposable and I have no idea what you're talking about otherwise, and I don't care. Left the following reply: "Men are not slaves to women." On the contrary, men's value in society has al…
/r/MensRights02/08/13 12:13 PM
3

And yet, in response to the urge you had to laugh; it's all too easy to forget as MRAs that the biggest source of misogyny in the world today is feminism and that it not only deeply damages boys, but as articles like this prove, girls too.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 07:22 AM
3

For the sake of posterity, I figure it's worth mentioning another comment I left there in case it "mysteriously vanishes". In response to the following: That seems to be true of fringe groups. I mean, MRAs seem to pop up on a lot of xoJane articles, but I've never seen anyone espouse those views in "real life." It's probably similar with radical feminists. I replied: That's more a glaring indictment on society than anything else. Remember the Katherine Kieu Becker incident where her husband aske…
/r/MensRights02/08/13 07:20 AM
2

If you think it's nonsense, you're not getting it. Maybe it was negligent as opposed to deliberate, however the fact remains that either way, this sign is part of the problem - a problem you are choosing to be willfully ignorant about. The fact is that female-on-male domestic violence campaigns have thrived by either pretending that male domestic violence victims don't exist, or by pretending that all men, (including victims/survivors), are abusers and that all women (including abusers), are vic…
/r/MensRights02/08/13 07:16 AM
4

Cheers for that - edited the comment there to correct that hyperagency typo. However nothing in there I said was outrageous. Certainly it was extremely counterintuitive and extremely countercultural, but it was in no way outrageous.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 07:02 AM
7

Just left the following comment - hopefully it stays there: First off, coongrats for taking the red pill (well one of them anyway) and breaking free of that psychological matrix. One thing you will start to realise when you look deep enough down the rabbit hole is that feminism does nothing but further entrench the misogynistic paternalisation of women and that "patriarchal theory" is a prima facie taken to ridiculous extremes that does nothing but entrench chauvinistic status quos. If you are t…
/r/MensRights02/08/13 05:13 AM
1

As per usual - treating battered women and female rape victims like "uncovered meat" is met with a thunderous clamour of public outrage; treating battered men and male rape victims like "uncovered meat" is met with thunderous applause by governments and society at large.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 05:00 AM
1

So where's your NOW membership card - it's blatantly obvious you're a member of them.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 02:43 AM
1

If you think I'm disassociated from relity on this issue then you're a domestic violence apologist.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 02:23 AM
1

You're smelling that because you're on the wrong side of history with your opinion here. The fact that you have a male DV survivor who now advocates for other survivors and those men still experiencing DV that is far less than impressed about this, should tell you that in spades. If you can't see the problem that this advtertising campaign only compounds further, then you're not a genuine MRA.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 01:42 AM
3

xzxzzx, here's the thing though - and it really is a glaring indictment of everyone I've gone up against in this thread: I'm one of those men. If a female survivors encountered this sort of genuine sexism in such a vile way and were angry about it, would anyone tell them they were being ridiculous, or would they be met with chants of "you tell 'em sister!"? Yet apparently, even on a Men's Rights board, it has to be pointed out that that anger is justified. It says alot and none of it flattering.…
/r/MensRights02/08/13 01:38 AM
0

toplel What's even remotely funny about that?
/r/MensRights02/08/13 01:32 AM
2

I was just about to point out the irony of your name until I got to the brackets. Cheers for the piece of satire here to prove my point about those I'm up against in this thread.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 01:30 AM
3

On the contrary, what they're doing is perpetuating that lie by using an advertising campaign which actively entrenches that belief. As manhunter has just said: "This is a great example on how marketing embraces stereotypes in order to increase revenue. "
/r/MensRights02/08/13 01:24 AM
0

Except that I didn't say they should have used a picture of 4 men - I said the picture should have either been uinsex or at least 1 of the 4 people pictured sould have been a man. Think about it for a minute - and on the very grounds you brought up: if you had both men and women in the picture, not only are you playing on people's white knight instincts, but you are in fact conflating the plight of battered women with the plight of battered men and in fact it would have been a step to undoing th…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:38 PM
-1

On the contrary, it's blatantly obvious where you stand. You say you're subscribed to it but so are plenty of paleo-masculinists and even feminists for that matter. Being a subscriber doesn't mean squat. All that counts is your attitude and where you are ignorant on issues, being willing to educate yourself. You've failed miserably on both counts on the issue of Domestic Violence. If you actually cared about Men's Rights here and were informed about domestic violence, you wouldn't be trivialisin…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:32 PM
2

Yes and it's because of so-called "MRAs" like you treating female on male domestic violence, female on male rape and female on male child abuse as "champagne issues" that countless male child rape victims are paying court ordered child support to female pedophiles. You should view all injustices against men as important - especially against men who are the most marginalised and vulnerable on all fronts. Until you can get your head around that, you have no right to call yourself a MRA.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:21 PM
1

Well it's obvious you're a closet feminist, so why not just be open about it and seal the deal.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:20 PM
-1

On the contrary, male domestic violence advocates have alot of traction and in time paleo masculinists like yourself will end up on the wrong side of history - right next to the feminists you're such a great asset to.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:16 PM
-3

No I just have my finger on the pulse on this one as opposed to you who has your head well and truly up your ass. The fact is that there is only one informed way to view this which is comptible with a men's rights perspective - a way which recognised the politics of domestic violence in their entirety and the fact that posters like this only compound the stigmas which battered men face. You could not be further on this issue if you tried. I'd suggest you reflect on that, but it would require you…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:15 PM
4

Bobby do yourself a favour and familiarise yourself with the politics of domestic violence- specifically public perceptions of female on male IPV. Posting things like that just makes you look utterly ignorant.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:10 PM
-5

And you are a blue pill koolaid drinking domestic violence apologist. Seriously, just drop the pretense and go and get yourself pegged by the president of NOW already. Clearly that's what you want deep down.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:08 PM
0

Putting women on there creates an "easy" association with victims of violence. Which makes their claims of helping battered men a complete crock of shit! The fact is that battered men have been treated like nothing more than "collateral damage" in the effort to advance the plight of battered women for over 40 years now - which is exactly the approach that this photo and advertising campaign takes.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:05 PM
-3

And you've proven my point in spades. If you consider yourself ny kind of MRA, crawl out of the rock you've clearly been under and actully educate yourself. Your posts have demonstrated a sheer ignorance of the politics of domestic violence, the challenges which battered men face - including acess to services and the stigma they face, or the heavy feminist influence in the above and legislation like VAWA. I'm not going to go into details becuse, quite frankly, I shouldn't have to. If you are any…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:01 PM
-1

You sound like a modern feminist. Highly ironic considering that you don't sound like any kind of MRA here. Female on male violence is a real issue, in never said it is not. And yet you've completely ignored the politics of domestic violence here as well as public perception. The picture in the OP is not a real issue (as has been said, its only a stock ad pic, they help all victims equally and acknowledge the existence of male victims). It certainly is not worth being on the frontpage of this su…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 01:41 PM
2

This is a complete prima facie based strawman which willfully ignores the issue of public perception when it comes to female-on-male domestic violence. Comparing your example to the issue at hand, is nothing short of a reducto ad ridiculum. If I even have to point out why that is the case, then your finger is anywhere but on the pulse when it comes to the politics of domestic violence.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 01:38 PM
2

Don't expect a response, this is just typical feminist hijacking BS from a rad fem with absolutely no interest in recognising the nature of female abusers or female rapists. I suspect they're the exact same sort of person who'd cheery pick from the likes of Richard Gelles and conveniently omit the fact that it has been feminist elements of the shelter movement who have actively engaged in terrorist acts aginst the likes of Susan Steinmetz, Richard Gelles, Murray Straus and Erin Pizzey for over 4…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 12:07 PM
2

And attitudes like this have no place in the MRM. For the past 40 years, myself and other DV survivors out there have been treated like a combination of urban myths, perpetual liars and cheap filthy sluts individuals such as yourself engaging in domestic violence apologetics and misandry - by either perpetuating the lie that where domestic violence is concerned "all perpetrators are male; all abusers are female" or by treating advocacy to educate people that domestic violence is an ungendered cr…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 12:02 PM
6

Which is precisely why they should have gone for a more unisex approach with that photo.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 08:58 AM
1

Actually check out this quote from them in response to my criticism of radical feminist views on sexual politics: Men are raised to be sexual predators (that's a cultural thing, gentlemen, not a biology thing).
/r/MensRights01/08/13 07:18 AM
1

Actually check out this quote from them in response to my criticism of radical feminist views on sexual politics: Men are raised to be sexual predators (that's a cultural thing, gentlemen, not a biology thing).
/r/MensRights01/08/13 07:18 AM
1

The thing which makes me slightly skeptical is when she criticises the MRM for engaging in "victim politics". The fact is that highlighting the plight of male victims is essentially addressing an imbalance. When the MRM highlights the existence of male victims, it is to shift society from a notion of "men cannot be victims" to "men are equally victims" - as opposed to the feminist progression of "women can be victims" to "women are perpetual victims [of men]". Also the piece was slightly toothle…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 06:48 AM
1

(continued from last post) And yeah, I'm mad. You want to know why? Not because you're wrong, and not even because you're actively harming an honest debate over important issues. No, I'm mad because there needs to be a MRM. Men are given longer prison sentences. Men are raised to be sexual predators (that's a cultural thing, gentlemen, not a biology thing). Male sexuality is demonized (not by feminists). Homosexual men are thought of as "less" by a huge portion of our society, even those who cla…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:00 AM
1

It refutes what you said. And yet this video by Karen Straughn lists numerous quotes from prominent feminists which debunk this in spades. I would say the same thing about feminism. Do I need to point out the crossover between the MRM and /r/theredpill? Do I need to point out how many people post in /r/mensrights and the, thankfully banned, /r/niggers? Do you seriously not know how common that was? Actually while prominent feminists such as Hillary Clinton either promote blatantly misandrist sta…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 01:59 AM
-1

No need. Wikipedia went there. Right, so why deny it then? And I can pull up MRA's who are also racists pricks. I can find atheists who are also Nazi's. I can find dog-lovers who are KKK members. What's your point? First off, you're far more likely to find bigots in the manosphere and when they do rear their heads in the MRM they are generally given an asskicking and when that fails, promptly shown the door. Conversely, prominent feminists continue to persist with apologetic bullshit like "we're…
/r/MensRights31/07/13 03:21 PM
1

Any updates on the situation?
/r/MensRights31/07/13 02:44 PM
-2

That's not what rape culture is at all. And it is not feminists who see male sexuality as intrinsically predatory. Spend a little time reading reddit comments to dispel that notion (unless you believe they're all feminists). Do you really want to go there? If need be I can pull several feminist sources where prominent feminists have expressed those very sentiments about male sexuality being predatory. Rape culture is a culture that normalizes, trivializes and dismisses rape; exactly what's happe…
/r/MensRights31/07/13 02:42 PM
1

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/22971286/2013/07/30/soccer-coach-accused-of-having-sex-with-2-teens At the very least, she supplied them with alcohol and as she was in a position of power over them and they can be classed as minors, that in itself is a form of abuse. I agree it should be innocent until proven guilty, but if she's gotten them that drunk that they were staggering home, it's incredibly fishy at the very least.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 02:36 PM
0

Great job white knighting there. She knowingly plied children who she had a duty of care over (and who were minors given the relationship she had with them), with alcohol then forced herself on them. If the genders were reversed, people would be baying for blood and rightly so.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 02:26 PM
-5

Honestly, it stems from the notion of "rape culture" amongst feminists, where male sexuality is purely seen as perpetually predatory and female sexuality is perpetually seen as victim-prone. When feminism in the mainstream is willing to admit to the fact that women are just as much human beings as men are, meaning they are just as likely to inflict violence on men as men are on women (which means actively condemning the merit of any study which only asks men about their experiences as perpetrato…
/r/MensRights31/07/13 02:20 PM
0

The response is almost predictable. Classical feminism views all men as potential rapists while chauvinists view men as being nothing more than dicks on legs who must always want it. I used to be disgusted by this - driven by the hope that those types of people would change - but now I'm at the point where I feel nothing but contempt for those making the comments and a deep seeded desire for karma to bite them hard in the ass for their attitudes.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 02:15 PM
1

Complete bullshit. Regardless of whether it was on the school grounds- the nature of her relationship with that student and the power and trust which come with it remains. Ethically, she was in a parental role to that student as his teacher and she broke the ethical covenant she had in relation to that minor when she want there. End of story.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:31 AM
1

Well this certainly has been an education - I never realised it was possible to be so completely wet behind the ears until reading your posts in this exchange. Untrue, 'for the sake' implies you knowing my motives, which is untrue. Address statements and not perceived motives plox. On the contrary, you are choosing to split hairs in an effort to trivialise an utterly vile abuse of power. Untrue. If people make statements that put crimes out of context, it is not 'white knighting' to protest that…
/r/MensRights31/07/13 07:28 AM
1

Are you really this incapable of processing an argument? Says the ignorant individual who is incapable of recognising their own prima facie based fallacy. What is so hard about analyzing the risk vs reward of a contract? This has NOTHING to do with the person you enter the contract with. If the contract provides you with no benefit and is all risk, you don't sign the contract. Such is marriage for men. This isn't rocket science. And yet you completely ignore the human factor here yet again. Just…
/r/MensRights29/07/13 03:29 PM
2

True, but I think they hold more power than the other roles mentioned so I'd rank them slightly worse... though maybe slightly below bio parents since there's less of an attachment there. At this level though, what you're doing amounts to splitting hairs for the sake of splitting hairs, and I might add, that in the context of this case, what you are doing is white knighting a female predator and trivialising what happened to a male stat rape victim. You might want to reflect on that. If he adopt…
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:53 AM
3

I agree they should be mandatory. Forget about issues of custody and child support for a minute - the fact is that one of the best assets you can have in giving a child the best shot in life possible, is a complete family medical history. The fact is that with so many wrongly identified fathers out there and so many unknown fathers out there, one of the big dangers out there for kids are hidden illnesses and conditions which may complicate surgeries and procedures which might be needed down the …
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:22 AM
-1

The only flaw I see with this article is the way it has spun the issue in terms of gender. The fact is that with how easy it can be to access personal information for a motivated enough person these days, death threats on twitter should definitely be taken seriously - regardless of gender.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:17 AM
2

I wouldn't say equivalent. It'd be more like parent=worst, coach/priest/teacher = 2nd worst By that logic though, an adopted parent or step-parent isn't as bad as a biological parent. Bear in mind that both step-parent - child and adopted parent - child relationships are both "in loco parentis" relationships with the child. Nope, I just don't assume that was the case. Either case is possible. We should keep in mind that the pair becoming attracted to one another prior to her adulthood wasn't nec…
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:13 AM
3

Expect more of this as time goes on. Apparently it's perfectly acceptable for a woman to have a laundry list of traits she wants in a man, but the moment a man has the same with a woman, it's utterly scandalous. To borrow a line from the feminist playbook, anyone who has a problem with men being human beings as opposed to walking ATMs, human shields and penises on legs, needs to get back to the 1950s where they belong.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:08 AM
3

The key here is balance. The evidence should definitely be questioned, but there's a very fine line that needs to be walked. On one hand if you are too unquestioning, then false rape allegations become an implement for someone to engage in either rape by proxy or attempted rape by proxy as the end goal would be a jail term. However equally problematic is if you go too far in the opposite direction where you make it almost impossible for genuine rape victims to be believed. Remember, a society wh…
/r/MensRights28/07/13 03:55 PM
0

Short short version - they attempted to rape you, right down to the psychological coercion they attempted to use on you. Maybe you could chalk it up to the alcohol, but if you haven't heard anything from them in the form of an apology in the next day or so, write them off and if they ever ask why you haven't spoken to them, tell them that after trying to rape you, your friendship with them has been destroyed. Even if you do hear from them, I'd think long and hard about being around them again or…
/r/MensRights28/07/13 03:42 PM
1

The problem here is that you're actually engaging in pervasive misandry here by trivialising the situation involving female child sex predators here. You're so focused on male false imprisonment here that you're ingnoring the issue with male child rape victims and female predators. In child sex cases where the abuser is guilty and unrepentant, I completely support this type of sentence. Remember, the reason this woman was denied a plea bargain was because the one mandatory condition of any plea …
/r/MensRights28/07/13 08:03 AM
1

You're engaging in blanket generalisation and being willfully ignorant of the human factor. Despite your doubling down on misogyny, opportunity!=motive . Heck, if your theory held true, my fiance would have kicked me to the curb a few months ago when she became the sol.e breadwinner (as opposed to the main breadwinner which she was before that).
/r/MensRights28/07/13 07:55 AM
1

I don't see it as an equivalent to statutory apologetics because there's additional power imbalance at work (teacher or parent bonds) which complicate it further than just an issue of age would. First up, that simply puts it further up the scale as far as stat rape apologetics goes. Furthermore, that is precisely why it is the equivalent of parent-child incest with a minor. Practical considerations are relevant to situational ethics. On the contrary, a teacher continues to be bound by those ethi…
/r/MensRights28/07/13 07:52 AM
1

I don't believe I implied in my example that the girl was Torunn. Kinda surprised no 34 of that exists, only solos of her. The thing is that your were arguing in favour of this dynamic with that response and ethically speaking it's the equivalent of statutory incest apologetics. I see a rather large gap between to two. You switch up teachers on an annual basis and teachers are held accountable to various authority figures. Parents are much more long-term and get more leeway to do whatever they l…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 11:55 PM
1

of us husbands. Not because I think she has a nefarious bone in her body, And yet here you imply she does: Legally and culturally wives have incredible power over their husbands and they use that power. Not necessarily. By your blanket argument GWW is nefariously using that power, yet by your own argument you specifically don't believe she is nefarious. Doesn't that just go to show that the human factor is the trump card in all of this. Not because I think she has a nefarious bone in her body, b…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 11:42 PM
2

I propose a 20 year maximum sentence with eligibility for parole at 8 years served for attempted rape ( I looked it up, Nevada classifies attempted rape of a minor as lewd conduct with a minor). And yet the minimum she's facing is only 2 years more than that. Furthermore considering that plea bargains are available, it is entirely just to hit unrepentant criminals with draconian sentences as their crimes are clearly done out of double ignorance. Until such time as their double ignorance is broke…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 08:28 AM
1

Speak English, I have no clue what you're muttering about but I'm quite sure it's yet another unbased leap of assumption. Life must be hard for you. Which just goes to prove you're not any kind of MRA- or you would understand the terms "red pill thinking" and "blue pill thinking" - as well as the fact that your thinking here has been anything but red pill thinking. Nope, All I said was A life sentence is out of line for this crime. Which by it's nature trivialises the crime, thereby engaging in …
/r/MensRights22/07/13 08:07 AM
1

I also asserted that "attempted rape" is not the same as "actual rape." And it is this trivialisation which makes you a child rape apologist. The only reason she didn't succeed was because the mother caught her and the victim would have been under no illusions as to what would have happened had she not been stopped. Stop excusing and trivialising the crime and playing the white knight here. Whether she chose the punishment is irrelevant, Bullshit. This is an unrepentant child sex offender who wi…
/r/MensRights20/07/13 01:39 AM
1

Here's the evidence despite your BS. Child sex offender attempts to rape a coworker's child, gets stopped by mother. Said child sex offender is arrested in what is an open and shut case, knows the charge is life with possibility of parole after 10 years. Said pedophile could choose plea bargain, meaning lesser sentence, but would have to register as a child sex offender. Said child sex offender does not wish to register as a child sex offender so refuses plea bargain. Ergo child sex offender wil…
/r/MensRights20/07/13 12:52 AM
0

What's the sad joke is that you're some white knight feminist troll posing as an MRA who can't get enough of giving this childfucking scumbag a pussy pass whilst showing all the empathy for the child of a clinically diagnosed psychopath. You claim that you have provided an accurate debunk king of my arguments yet by your own admission, she has screwed herself over, yet you still rush to her defence and what to treat her like some poor innocent child! Seriously are you trying to get your screen n…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 11:59 PM
2

Wow, this from Cosmo of all places??? Did Hell freeze over or something???
/r/MensRights19/07/13 11:03 PM
-1

You keep claiming I'm white knighting, and you keep making this about gender. As I've said probably ten times before- this is not about gender for me. If this story were about a man committing lewd acts with a boy or girl, my response would have been the same. Then you're engaging in pedophile apologetics. It was tried as an lewd conduct, but it is clear that in that state, Lewd conduct included anything upto, and including attempted rape. Furthermore she had the option of a plea bargain and she…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 10:45 PM
1

And that's why you get called out for misogyny, misanthropy and misandry. You treat all women as perpetual liars, all men as perpetual mentally-disabled fools and all people as scum. Stereotypes and zeitgeist based approaches are the domain of feminist dogma for a reason - you might want to reflect on that.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 08:32 PM
1

Whenever someone equates trying to protect men from financial destruction with misogyny I move on. Engaging in paternalising men and making misogynistic blanket judgements on all women, as well intentioned as it is though, isn't the answer. What it comes down to is fundamentally how men treat women and expect women to treat them. The reason men get shit on by women is they allow themselves to be and they believe it's how things should be. The bad marriages you bring up are already on the road to…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 08:15 PM
1

I've registered and given a couple of quick responses where needed under the name I usually go by - bowspearer .
/r/MensRights19/07/13 07:59 PM
-1

First off, weren't you blocking me as of your last post to me in the other thread? Secondly you claim all of the above about your advocacy, but in this case your actions have been those of a blue-pill koolaid drinking white knight. After all, if you're as active and informed as you claim, then you would be of the view that women need to be treated like adults and held accountable for their actions. Yet your response to that accountability here has been to play the white knight. Here's the thing …
/r/MensRights19/07/13 07:59 PM
1

The fact that you view my response as "over the top" proves you're drinking blue pill koolaid. You are trivilaising what was done to the boy and ignoring the fact that she is now paying for her choices. Forget about the actual crime here (which was clearly an attempted rape that the DA charged her with under "lewd convict" to safely secure a conviction). She had the option of a plea bargain, yet she refused to negotiate for one because it would mean having to register as a child sex offender. Sh…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 07:44 PM
1

I would agree with you if I said that she shouldn't be punished at all. Then why are you white knighting her here? She got the maximum sentence because she refused to negotiate a plea bargain because she didn't want to have to register as a child sex offender. Even then, she's eligible for parole in 10 years provided she actually reforms. This accusation is as bad as feminists throwing around misogynist for everything they don't like. How ironic when as the facts show, your position here is that…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 07:40 PM
1

The defendants name isn't listed in the original video Yes it is - right when the Judge calls her case up.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 07:21 PM
1

Agreed.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 11:02 AM
-1

People say the punishment doesn't fit the crime, and he flips his shit about how we're all "child rape apologists." For starters everyone had their head up their ass and didn't bother to get the full facts of the crime, or the fact that she refused a plea bargain to avoid being placed on a child sex offender's website. She had the opportunity to plead guilty, she didn't, it was an open and shut case and she copped the maximum sentence. it was her choice- let her suffer the consequences. Despite …
/r/MensRights19/07/13 08:55 AM
-1

Yes because dismissing me as a troll is far easier than owning your shit and actually taking the red pill, isn't it?
/r/MensRights19/07/13 07:37 AM
1

I'll get to it later on, but the short version for the forward thinkers like yourself is: if you consider that the notion of women being oppressed put forward by feminists is actually a half truth, wherby in fact they were paternalised if you consider in turn that the core tennant of paternalisation is to keep the paternalised group infantalised if you in turn consider that infantalisation requires hypo-agency, whereby you reduce the infantalised group to a state of perpetual perceived powerless…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 07:36 AM
1

Actually you're full of shit. You've disputed nothing and you have no point. Here are the facts you choose to ignore: The woman lured her coworker's children to her home under false pretences, got the 13 year old alone, semi-undressed, forced him onto her bed and straddled him, forced him to grope her and forced him to kiss her, whilst demanding sex and trying to rip his clothes off. The only reason she failed to full on rape him is because the 8 year old brother, also in the house, saw them and…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 06:55 AM
-1

Seriously are you just wilfully choosing to be ignorant of all the facts here, or are you actually someone who needs to seek professional help for underlying pedophile tendencies? I am genuinely asking that. Here are the facts you choose to ignore: The woman lured her coworker's children to her home under false pretences, got the 13 year old alone, semi-undressed, forced him onto her bed and straddled him, forced him to grope her and forced him to kiss her, whilst demanding sex and trying to rip…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 06:49 AM
0

Like it or not, the MRM is closer to the right Actually that's the manosphere jackass and if you think that way, then take your misandrist, anti-men's rights attitudes to the likes of Dalrock where you can both proclaim patriarchy exists and glorify it. victim mentality do not fly here. Again, that's the manosphere and paleo-masculinists. Congratulations, you've just proven you know absolutely jack shit about the men's rights movement. The solution to the feminist victim mentality is not a male …
/r/MensRights19/07/13 06:44 AM
1

Thought I'd let you know, I've discovered some additional info, which I've added to the OP.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 06:20 AM
1

Actually more facts have come to light since I posted that. Here's a list of everything: from the Supreme Court Appeal attempt: Prosecutor Chad Thompson argued the statute calls for a 10-year minimum with a possible life sentence with the possibility of parole. Thompson, in his argument to the justices, said there was skin-to-skin contact between the boy’s hand and Taylor’s breast. He also said Taylor tried to remove the boy’s clothing and demanded he have sex with her, rather than requested it.…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 06:11 AM
4

There is a difference between compassion and indignation; caring and exploitation.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 05:46 AM
2

I guess I concede to say I am an MRA with regards to "reading up on what shapes social attitudes to masculinity", and "calling people out when they engage in [sexist shit in general]." Just sometimes wish I could be more of a heavy hitter. That kind of thinking is the worst kind of self defeating fallacy. You never know who or where a breakthrough in social change will come. If you really want to be a highly effective MRA, then accept your limitations and absolve yourself from them and instead d…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 05:11 AM
2

IF you think that seeing the injustice in this requires a feminist lens, then you're way off base. The fact is that the authentic MRA position here is to shake the hell out of it, make the media pay attention, get government involvement in the case - holding it up as evidence of widespread misandry and the real rape culture (in terms of disposable and dehumanising attitudes towards male sexuality) in Britain and in other countries where such cases take place.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:20 AM
2

Being an MRA has nothing to do with how much money you have. It is entirely about recognising the injustices against men and boys, being open to deprogramming the gynocentric brainwashing society forces upon us regarding women and men, and geuinely pursuing justice, compassion and equality for men and boys. Yes with money that means things like funding websites etc, however even on the level of those of us with limited means, it is as simple as reading up on what shapes social attitudes to mascu…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:17 AM
2

Not just the media - people in general. Even some so called MRAs on here have been guilty of the same gynocentric attitudes towards child rape victims in another couple of threads on here.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:53 AM
2

They don't understand and refuse to believe that feminism is a hate movement. I'd say that's 95% accurate as that implies that the inmates aren't running the asylum ("hate movement" that someone at the top fully grasps reality). What would be a more accurate description is that it's a fear movement. It's base assumptions are made out of fear, the train of thought that follows it is steeped in fear and its conclusions are steeped in fear. Furthermore all of the academic fraud feminists engage in …
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:51 AM
1

I know I'm speaking profound truth here. You're just too busy buying into white knighting bullshit and child rape apologetics to see how indoctrinated by blue pill thinking you are and how blinded by double ignorance it has made you. As far as our thoughts diminishing the effects her actions have had on the boy are concerned, saying a punishment is too harsh does not diminish the plight of the victim. On the contrary, countless people have denied that fact that he has been traumatised by this- d…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:41 AM
1

Which simply isn't good enough for anyone who genuinely considers themselves an MRA.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:18 AM
-1

what you must realise is that most people don't have the ability, inclination or time to look everything up. I'll dispute everything there but the inclination part, which I'll get to shortly. First off, ability. We all have search engines so we do have the ability to search, provided that information is readily accessible. In this case, the youtube clip itself gave enough info for a decent google search and the info was readily available. It's important to draw a distinction here between what is…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:13 AM
-1

Good work for bringing more facts to light. One reason why many of the comments were against sending her to jail, and so few supporting it, is because I imagine most MRA's wait for evidence. That's the problem though - when the information is so accessible, like it was in this case, there's really no excuse for people not spending a couple of minutes doing a google search. I imagine the people that posted were reactionary and fell for the tears and fake title. Which is ironic considering one of …
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:50 AM
1

Insert the normal spiel on how the victim goes through "it was my fault" to "how could I let this happen" (feeling to blame :( for the actions of someone else). That's the thing though, with abused boys and men, those attitudes are even more prevalent generally than they are with abused women, due to the extra social stereotypes enforcing it which men face. Yes I realise women do face them too, but there's a significant difference. To draw on that ugly incident in Lakemba with Sheik Hilaly a few…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:47 AM
-7

Then you should probably get the fuck out of the MRM.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:40 AM
0

I don't need to use Google. Yes why get all the facts when you'll be caught out and forced to own your shit right? I was sexually abused by a woman as a boy. Then you are the worst kind of hypocrite and your conduct towards this boy is no better than that of anyone who put you through hell about your ordeal based on your gender. You of all people should no better. Prosecutors lie more than the defendants they are trying to lock up. So the prosecutor is lying about the child being in therapy? Are…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:39 AM
1

Then you're engaging in misandry and child abuse apologetics. It's because of misandrist attitudes like yours towards male child rape victims that boys who are raped are forced to pay child support to female child rapists when child rapes result in the birth of a child.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:29 AM
3

Oh cut the pseudo pussy pass bullshit! A simple google search googling the woman's name and Elko gets people the full facts within a few minutes and a couple of trackbacks. Everyone here has access to internet search engines and everyone here therefore has access to the full facts of the case - facts, I'll add which they would have easily had within a few minutes of doing a search - ignorance here is completely unjustifiable! The fact is that people chose to remain uninformed. People chose to di…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:24 AM
-1

As far as casting the boy under the bus, it most likely stems from the fact that psychological trauma is far less concrete to assess and varies wildly from person to person Except that is nothing but blatant tradcon misandrist myth, debunked by countless experts on child sexual assault on numerous occasions. Even discounting that, the facts of the case clearly indicate how traumatised he has been by it - as noted here: Woodbury says while it might be some adolescent male's fantasy to have sex wi…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:10 AM
1

So you think a woman getting a 10 year non-parole period for attempting to rape a 13 year old boy is "bullshit"? Way to white knight a pedophile there.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 01:56 AM
1

A 10 year non-parole period seems "a bit much" for a woman who actually engaged in the attempted rape of a 13 year old boy? Wow, way to go as an MRA on that one. Your compassion and outrage for the male victim is clearly there for all to see.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 01:55 AM
1

Why is this even an issue. Seriously, even if beds are an issue, why can't the dads be in a chair in the room with the mothers or even in the waiting rooms? Yet this is even a debate? Seriously, is common sense that rare?
/r/MensRights19/07/13 01:53 AM
2

This case is fucked up on so many levels (although at lest the court appears sympathetic to the trauma of the boy- seriously, did hell just freeze over or something?). Of course the face that society treats male rape victims, even child male rape victims, like there's either something wrong with them for not feeling like "they got lucky" when the rapist is female, or like they're in the closet when the rapist is male, only promises to make this poor boy's journey to healing that much harder. If …
/r/MensRights19/07/13 01:49 AM
2

Not to mention that in the case of female pedophiles, victims already face an uphill battle because feminists and tradcons have convinced society that female sexuality is pure and altruistic and therefor female sexual predators simply cannot exist. It's a double whammy when the victim is male.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 12:36 AM
3

Exactly, but much like children in cases of child and domestic abuse, feminists don't really care about rape victims either.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 12:29 AM
0

Right so on other words you're rushing in to white knight a woman here- a convicted child sex offender no less - and engaging in blatantly misandrist child rape apologetics and expressing a desire to punish the male child rape survivors here. Seriously, seek professional help. You clearly need it based on your blatant feminist enabling and child rape apologetics here. Oh and FYI, if my focusing on the male child sexual assault victim here makes me an "extremist" to you, then I suggest you kindly…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 12:23 AM
-4

Or here's a thought- you could actually pull your head out of your ass and see what I and a couple of others are actually pissed off about and that by leaping in blindly, you just acted like a complete hypocrite with how you ended that post. You are upset that the laws that you promoted over the last 50-odd years have backfired. No, what I'm pissed off about are the number of so-called MRAs who had their heads too far up their assess to get the full facts of the case and instead decided to blind…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 12:17 AM
0

You forgot the "/s". Trust me, this is one discussion where you'll need it or people will think you're saying that genuinely.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:39 PM
1

Good on them - hopefully this media attention will result in pressure being placed on the headmaster to change the policy. Ironically I'm reminded of a certain men's rights quote here regarding men wearing skirts, but I can't for the life of me remember the exact quote or the author right now.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:29 PM
-4

Thrownaway_MGTOW summed up what happened perfectly when he said: She (and her attorney) also attempted (sickeningly) to justify her heinous acts because she was "under the influence of alcohol" -- i.e. the "...but I was drunk..." which is one of, if not THE classic faux-excuse of premeditated cyclical sexual offenders. Cf In the mind of a sexual offender -- and note this is NOT the feminist "all men are rapists" bullshit, rather it is the result of DECADES of work researching the cycles and patt…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:10 PM
2

I'll check it out. However here's the thing, and for some reason, in a society like that of the USA, which repeatedly professes itself as a "Christian" seems to millitantly oppose it for some reason. If you're going to have a society which actively seeks to prevent people falling through the cracks, then you need a safety net - which the government, in its duty to the general welfare of the people, has a responsibility to provide. A fundamental tennant of this is governments recognising that the…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:06 PM
-3

I said one of the darkest.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:57 PM
1

The penal system definitely needs reform. However she is ultimately there by her own hand. Furthermore as thrownaway has so accurately pointed out - acts like this are never merely impulsive acts of drunkenness.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:56 PM
-1

I said one of the darkest.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:52 PM
-4

What, you don't suddenly have access to google? A 2 minute google search would have gotten everyone the full story. But apparently a sexually violated boy isn't worth even that meager effort to you and others.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:51 PM
-1

You just told a person, whose own mother was molested as a child, and has seen the damage it can cause firsthand, they are a child rape apologist. Yep, and my assessment of you in light of your conduct in this thread has been spot on - go and have a long hard think about that one and be honest with yourself about it. You have continuously claimed you acknowledge it, yet you and others have made this entire case about the female pedophile rather than the male victim - on a men's rights site of al…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:49 PM
-3

There's absolutely no social value to a life sentence for lewd behavior with a minor. Except that despite what she was charged with, the facts of the case reveal this was an attempted child rape. Furthermore she could be out as early as just over 9 and a half years after sentencing. Next time you're going to make that kind of an argument, do yourself a favour and actually look at the non-parole period - ultimately that's the minimum time served. You're not the person who was violated, and I seri…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:45 PM
-3

It's not even life without the possibility of parole. She could be out as early as a little over 9 and a half years after she was sentenced on parole. Are you saying that at least 10 years isn't a fair sentence for someone clearly intending to rape a child and succeeding in scarring them for life?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:39 PM
1

10 years minus time served to be exact - just over 9 and a half years past the sentencing date iirc.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:37 PM
-7

Oh geez, another social justice warrior. Run along, junior, you're not our boss to scorn us for something you think we did wrong. Men's rights is primarily about social justice for men and boys. Clearly that fact has gone right over your head up until now. And no matter what she did, life in prison is an absurd sentence for any "sex crime" regardless of the victim's or the offender's gender. Except that she's eligible for parole in 10 years minus time served, so let''s cut the "life in prison" B…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:35 PM
-2

First off, she's eligible for parole after 10 years so quit the bullshit about this being life behind bars. Also if you cannot differentiate between attempting to have sex with a grown adult fully capable of giving consent and a child who is unable to fully give informed consent and psychologically unequipped to deal with the consequences of sex, then you really should seek some professional help.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:33 PM
0

Life in prison is far too harsh for such a crime. Quit the bullshit - she could be out as early as roughly 9 and half years after the sentencing date. Or are you telling me that scarring a child for life isn't worthy of someone spending 10 years in jail? You might want to think about that one considering this is a men's rights site.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:32 PM
-11

I don't think castigating debate is reasonable. Except when the perspective of and injustice against the male victim in the case is conveniently ignored in all of this you mean. Also, I wasn't the only one in that thread who was making that criticism. After all: This is Men's Rights, right?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 04:04 PM
1

Just one thing I thought I'd add here. I found the link to this being posted within a few clicks of a simple google search on the woman's name, the age of the victim and the sentence. I then googled the title of the story that was mentioned and immediately had the original source. It took me all of 5 minutes, if even that, to get the full facts here. I'm bringing this up because I want people to be clear on just how accessible info was on this case had they actually looked for it.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 04:01 PM
-9

It might have been questioning in some cases, but there were far too many people in the thread who were all to quick to judge the situation as a miscarriage of justice and infantalise the woman - casting the trauma and violation of the boy - you know, the reason we're all supposedly here - by the wayside.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:52 PM
-2

On the contrary, it's a life sentence with a 10 year minimum non-prole period. The fact is that with good behaviour and signs of rehabilitation, she could be out in less than 10 years (it was minus time served of roughly 6 months). If her incarceration is longer, it will be entirely through her own doing. Also what went on in that thread wasn't curiousity. Curiousity is investigating further, getting the facts. What went down in that thread was people crying outrage at the sentence and ignoring …
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:47 PM
-1

You're a child rape apologist in denial. You claim that the injustice to the boy is being addressed, yet you conveniently omit the fact that supposed MRMs are opposing it, including you, and in doing so, minimising his ordeal. The fact is that the philosophy off the MRM has always been addressing the injustices faced by men and boys in society. Yet in this case, you and others here have turned your back on that mandate in favour of a pussy pass. Stop pretending that a consensus here is even a re…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:40 PM
0

On the contrary, the default MRM stance has always been one which has opposed injustice against men and boys and the notion of said injustice being either perpetuated, facilitated or condoned, for the sake of women. Your position and the position of countless others in that thread, have been anything but the default MRM position on this issue.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:05 PM
-2

Which is sheer gynocentric and abuse-apologetics-driven ignorance on your part. Seriously, you need to read up on what experts in the field have said, and actually familiarise yourself with the facts - because the paradigm you're operating from here is complete manospherian BS that has no place in the MRM.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:59 PM
1

Here's a thought, try actually reading up on the case instead of continuing to talk out of your ass based on ignorant assumptions: As stated here: The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Michelle Taylor, a Jackpot woman convicted of lewdness with a minor. The case went to the Supreme Court in mid-October, at which time Taylor’s defense argued a life sentence for “asking a boy to have sex with her” was “cruel and unusual punishment.” Prosecutor Chad Thompson argued the statute calls for a 10…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:57 PM
0

I agree she needs help, but this is someone who is in denial and is completely unrepentant. Until such time as they are willing to acknowledge they have a problem, they need to be kept away from the general population.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:55 PM
1

Some facts which seem to have been missed from the sanitised version of things: The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Michelle Taylor, a Jackpot woman convicted of lewdness with a minor. The case went to the Supreme Court in mid-October, at which time Taylor’s defense argued a life sentence for “asking a boy to have sex with her” was “cruel and unusual punishment.” Prosecutor Chad Thompson argued the statute calls for a 10-year minimum with a possible life sentence with the possibility of…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:45 PM
0

Ahh the mob rule argument - the last resort of someone with no valid argument. The fact that what countless experts and countless research on the effects of child sexual abuse on boys, the fact that it was an attempted rape (she solicited someone who was legally incapable of giving consent due to being a minor), the fact that even the prosectuor has gone on record stating the boy has been traumatised by the experience, apparently are all irrelevant - what do the experts know compared to the mob?…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:33 PM
0

If the genders were reversed here, would you still be saying the 10 years is harsh?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:27 PM
1

For starters thrownaway has already linked to an article where the prosecutor is quoted as stating that the child is traumatised in a comment he made here. Secondly, as noted here and here the fact is that this boy will most likely be traumatised by the attempted rape and violation he endured (I'd remind you that in cases where consent cannot be given, such as with minors, and form of solicitation is automatically a form of attempted rape). Clearly some people here, seem to be under the illusion…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:26 PM
0

Soliciting a minor is not the same thing as raping a minor. Clearly you have a problem with exaggeration and speculation. On the contrary, soliciting a child equates to attempted rape as both ethically and legally, a child is deemed incapable of giving consent. Any attempt to engage in sexual intercourse where the other party is incapable of consent, is by its very nature, a form of attempted rape. Clearly you have a great deal of trouble grasping the fact that the victim was a child. Nobody sai…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:20 PM
0

And yet you keep proving me right. You have shown a repeated desire to play the white knight to a convicted sex offender on one had and on the other hand demonstrated a callous and willful indifference to the child victim in this case. This indifference has both been in terms of the fact that the victim is a child and the long term, profound trauma which both male and female child sexual assault victims endure. In fact it's this very mentality of pedophile apologetics that you so blatantly demon…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:11 PM
1

Seriously. I've read your replies. They all say, "if she'd had her way, he would have been raped." First off, that's pure speculation. Do courts allow speculation? Remind me. Secondly, if you're likening groping, kissing, and propositioning to the violent act of rape, you are no better than the feminists who would have drunken sex classified as rape. And yet amongst what she was charged with was the solicitation of a minor. Clearly the jury convicting her agrees with my assessment of things. So …
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:45 PM
0

Amazing how you can just decide how that boy feels about it for him. Let's forget for one minute about the fact that even the DA has come out and officially stated that the boy is deeply traumatised. It is a known fact amongst experts into child sexual assault that in the vast majority of cases (and get what "genius", if he's already traumatised at this point then he fits the bill) are just as deeply traumatised as female child sex victims. I'd remins you that the MRM isn't particularly fond of …
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:34 PM
-1

What a complete joke coming from the pedophile apologist who is all to quick to rush in and defend the pedophile because she has a pussy between her legs and demonstrate utterly callous indifference to the child that pedophile has scarred for life because he has a dick between his legs!
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:16 PM
-1

Which amounts to the same thing if she demonstrates both good behaviour and evidence of rehabilitation? But yes, it's all about the female child rapist here isn't it, while the child victim who will most likely be scarred for life can go fuck himself right? Seriously, as I've said to others spouting the exact same blatantly misandrist, pedophile apologetic bullshit, with "MRAs" like you; who needs feminists.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:14 PM
-1

No I wouldn't because unlike you, I don't actually have my head up my ass and I understand that even if the roles were reversed, the 10 years he'd get in jail would pale in comparison to the life sentences the girl would have due to the scars he'd have given her.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:05 PM
-3

To all the manospherian FUCKWITS commenting that there hasn't been harm here or pretending that this boy hasn't been scarred for life, pull your head out of your asses, read this and get yourselves a clue.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:57 PM
-2

Oh bullshit! If you'd actually bothered pulling your head out of your ass and actually researching the issue, rather than spouting manospherian pedophile apologetic bullshit, you'd know what a choc of baseless shit that is! Seriously, with "MRAs" like you, who needs radical feminists?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:52 PM
-1

Yes, never mind the fact that the boy she tried to rape is now living a life sentence due to the scars she gave him and never mind the fact that she's eligible for parole in 10 years - all that matters is what the poor little female child predator is going through. After all who gives a flying fuck about the boy right. I mean let's face it what he went through is a right of passage and if he doesn't see it that way, then there's something wrong with him right? /s Seriously, fucked up attitudes l…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:50 PM
-2

Really? She not only forced herself on him, but in the process of forcibly kissing him and forcing him to grope her, propositioned him. The fact is that if she'd had her way, it would have been a straight up case of child rape. On top of that she's entirely unrepentant. How the hell is 10 years extreme, when the child victim is all ready traumatised and will probably be scarred for life.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:46 PM
-3

Then you're engaging in blatant child rape apologetics - the very same type of child rape apologetics I might add, which are the ideological impetus behind the laws which force male child rape victims to pay child support to convicted female pedophiles.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:43 PM
1

So what you think that someone who attempts to rape a child getting paroled after 10 years is harsh? Seriously?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:28 PM
-1

What are you talking about- she's eligible for parole after 10 years and if you look at the evidence, she would have rapped him if she could have - heaven knows, she was forcing herself on him and forcibly kissing him and forcibly groping her whilst propositioning him. He's already traumatised and will probably be scarred for life. How the fuck does the punishment NOT fit the crime?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:27 PM
-1

Well it's a men's rights issue in terms of the responses for starters. She's unrepentant, forced him to grope her, forced him to kiss her while propositioning him, but to her it's all roughousing, while he's already traumatised and will probably be scarred for life. Meanwhile, she's eligible for parole after 10 years. How the hell is that even remotely ridiculous?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:25 PM
-3

Firstly, take a look through the comments- you're far from the only one I've been scathing with. Secondly I'm well aware of what the consensus is and it is a shameful indictment on this subreddit as far as men's rights goes.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:18 PM
-4

First off, the victim here has a life sentence in terms of the scars she's left him with, so even if she was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, she's hardly any worse off than her victim - especially as she did the crime. However she's not even getting life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. She's up for parole after 10 years minus time already served, which if she behaves herself behind bars, will be all she'll serve. Meanwhile her victim will be deep…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:16 PM
-3

And yet what you've engaged in here is misandrist pedophile apologetics. At best, if you would normally defend sexually abused men and boys, then this is one hell of a lapse in judgement on your part. The fact is that this isn't "life without the possibility of parole". It's not even life with a minimum non-parole period of 10 years. She's gotten life with a minimum non-parole period of 10 years minus time served. Given how much the system loves white knighting women, are you honestly telling me…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:08 PM
0

Yes and in doing so you're speaking against a deeply traumatised, sexually abused boy. But apparently you seem to think that a woman getting 10 years for sexually violating a child is worse than her victim, a boy nonetheless (I'd remins you that this is the mensrights reddit) is somehow worse than him getting a life sentence from being deeply scarred by it. Enjoy avoiding being a hyppocrite, because you're certainly not being any kind of MRA on this issue.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:02 PM
0

A) she's eligible for parole after 10 years and B) attitudes like yours are the reason child rape victims are court ordered to pay child support to convicted pedophiles.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:40 AM
-1

Seriously stop pretending you're an MRA and go join NOW. They need more white knights like you and Futrelle.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:25 AM
-1

Perhaps the lesson in future with this sort of issue - especially given the tendency of even some supposed MRAs given the responses in this thread, let along the average person, to trivialise female-on-male child sexual assault - would be to gather all the facts first before commenting.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:21 AM
-1

You sure like saying how he is scarred for life. I mean, I got it...thanks....this is about the fifth time you've said it? And clearly you just don't give a shit. Man I never said any of this shit, but please keep thinking that I did, I love hearing your replies. You haven't had to say it - your entire post reeks of that attitude. Also, who is a group that just assumes your stance on many viewpoints just because of slippery slope inferences....oh yea, feminists! Highly ironic of you to say consi…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:19 AM
-1

Next time, you need to familiarise yourself with the facts first. You say she deserves 15-20? Well she's eligible for parole after 10. Of course none of this changes the life sentence her male child victim now has by being scarred by this. Considering how much he will suffer- she's gotten off lightly.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:17 AM
-1

You really need to inform yourself about the facts here- she was drunk, all over him "roughhousing" as she put it and she propositioned him whilst already forcing herself on him. If she could have raped him, she clearly could. Furthermore, she's eligible for parole in 10.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:15 AM
0

Go hook up with Vaqlerie Solanas- you two deserve each other.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:03 AM
1

But, in regard to support for abused men... I too would be opposed to state (taxation) support for such things (for anyone) But then where do those abused men with nowhere to turn, turn to- suicide?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:02 AM
1

Nope, read the story, she forced him to grope her, forcibly kissed him and propositioned him. She's shown no remorse and immediately after the even the boy was deeply traumatised by it. Chances are he'll likely be scarred for life in some way by it.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:02 AM
-1

Seriously grow a pair and own your shit! You accuse me of being like a rad fem, yet you are the one whose attitude to this poor traumatised boy is entirely in line with theirs. You refuse to recognise the fact that he was sexually truamatised and will most likely be scarred for life. You argue from a perpsective which is blatantly misandrist in that at best, it expects a child to just "man up" and get over it and at worst, views what happened as a "rite of passage". Also if the gender roles were…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:01 AM
-3

Oh bullshit - she forcibly kissed him, forcibly made him groped her and if she'd been able to, she would have raped him - which I might add has already left him traumatised and will most likely scar him for life. If you don't class that as attempted child rape, then yes, you are a child rape apologist and guilty of the very attitudes responsible for child rape victims paying child support to pedophiles. Stop pretending you're an MRA and stop hiding your white suit of armour in the closet!
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:55 AM
1

I don't have to counter shame- I am simply stating fact based on your own words. You think in terms of feminist bullshit wrt rape - you think a guy pointing a gun at the head of a woman in a dark alley forcing himself on her is the exact same situation as a female teacher having sex with a willing male student multiple times. I see a difference between the two and so you attack me like I'm some kind of a men-hater. Oh the irony from a misandrist rape apologist who clearly believes that a penis e…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:53 AM
-1

She completely forced herself on him and if she had have sufficiently groomed him into compliance, it would have been rape. And yes, the fact that you clearly don't give a fuck about him being scarred for life (while she gets parole after 10 years) means that yes, you are guilty of child rape apologetics here.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:46 AM
-4

Then you're a misandrist, pedophile apologist.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:44 AM
1

A couple of things here. First off contrary to how it might appear superficially - any time you talk about female violence and abuse against boys, it's very much a gendered issue due to the social issues which drive it. When people see women, they identify them arbitrarily as little girls; when people see boys, they arbitrarily identify them as grown men. If you want proof of that, just look at loaws regarding child support which have targeted child rape victims as young as 12 - male child rape …
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:36 AM
-1

Stop pretending you're any kind of MRA. Attitudes like yours are precisely what drive the legal impetus for child rape victims paying child support to convicted pedophiles.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:24 AM
-2

Yes because you know, who gives a flying fuck about the child she actually attempted to rape (next time try getting all the facts before engaging in blatant pedophile apologetics) and who judging by how traumatised he was even after the event, will be scarred for life by this, right? Seriously, what kind of an MRA are you?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:23 AM
-4

Yes because you know, who gives a flying fuck about the child she actually attempted to rape (next time try getting all the facts before engaging in blatant pedophile apologetics) and who judging by how traumatised he was even after the event, will be scarred for life by this, right? Seriously, what kind of an MRA are you?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:23 AM
1

Here's the kicker though. Deansdale was responding to my criticisms of the more manospherian end of the MGTOW spectrum (incidentallly I'd regard you as very much on the MRA end of the spectrum) - specifically to Cerberus Alpha's manospherian misandry- both in his opposition to abused men receiving state support to get back on their feet and where he mockingly referred to legally recognising female-on-male rape, including coerced sex in an abussive relationship, as "rapeflation".
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:16 AM
-1

Complete denialistic bullshit. Your entire argument is is pure pedophile apologetics devoid of even the remote desire to feel any empathy for the boy who has been scarred for life or the fact that his life has beein ruined by an attempted rape! Your entire poswt was blatant pedophile apologetics in the way it trivialised both the nature of the boy's sexual violation and the scars he will most likely have for life from it! The men's rights movement is entirely about justice, compassion, humanisat…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:13 AM
1

Grow a backbone and take a long hard look in the mirror. You cowardly misandrist, rape, domestic violence and pedophile apologist. Most female-on-male rapes fall into this latter category of bullshit so pardon me if I don't take it as seriously. Your own words. Which you8 have just compounded withe the following: I reserve the right to have the opinion that "rape" is something coercive in nature, and without coercion it is not rape. In other words you regard the notion of women coercing men into…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:06 AM
1

Sadly even the MGTOw movement isn't immune from it. To quote the rape apologetics of "Deansdale" in this thread (http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1ifx1j/female_here_how_would_you_feel_about_having/): Most female-on-male rapes fall into this latter category of bullshit so pardon me if I don't take it as seriously. And the guy has the gall to try and claim the relativistic line that there is no one form of misandry and it all comes down to perception.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 09:36 AM
-1

Yes because that's what it had to be- heaven forbid you actually had the spine to own your shit and admit to engaging in misandtirst pedophile apologetics.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 09:34 AM
1

Most female-on-male rapes fall into this latter category of bullshit so pardon me if I don't take it as seriously. Your own words, the words of an misadrist rape apologist, misandrist domestic violence apologist and misandrist pedophile apologist!** People like YOU are the reason for VAWA! People like YOU are the reason why abused men are treated like shit in society! People like YOU are the reason feminism exists! Stop pretending you're an MRA - you're the enemy! Your attitudes represent everyt…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 09:32 AM
-1

Damn, it sounds fucking stupid both ways. Way to throw pathos into it. Of course he's going to be scarred for life - even the prosecutor made note of how traumatised he was you child rape apologist! Seriously, with "MRAs" who the fuck needs feminists?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 09:25 AM
1

First off, of course the prosecution is going to make it sound like that. The defendant may say different. I wasn't talking about that. And you didn't think to check the details, given society's track record where the sexual abuse of men and boys is concerned- especially at the hands of female abusers? Second, let's just go along with that and use what the prosecution said. So you're saying that "borderline rape", as you say, is grounds for life in prison? So anyone who, for some reason, takes a…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:54 AM
0

Fair enough, but in cases like this, especially with the way society downplays the sexual violation of boys and men, it is ab out the worst thing you can do.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:50 AM
1

BUT this thread (and the "head in the sand" mentality displayed by so many) pretty much just sickens me. Tell me about it - I honestly feel like telling so many of them to get their shit, get the fuck out of the MRM and to go join NOW. Seriously, with "MRAs" like this, who needs feminists?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:49 AM
0

Yet the victim has been given one and people here are crying "poor thing" for the child rapist who has given it to them getting a minimum of 10 years! Seriously, how can some people here even call themselves MRAs?!?!?!
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:36 AM
0

Yes, because you know the child victim she attempted to rape totally deserves the life sentence she gave him by deeply scarring him, doesn't he? /s
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:27 AM
1

I have never seen MGTOWs hold men in contempt for the reasons you have mentioned You've never read Cerberus Alpha's blog ("This Is Why MGTOW") then. NAFALT is stupid because it is applied to a movement, which MGTOW isn't. There are no two MGTOWs alike, NA[MGTOWs]ALT is 100% true by default. Anyways, my point didn't even resemble NAFALT, I said they think differently than you. How's NAFALT relevant to this statement??? First off you have negaged in misandry apologetics here with sheer relativist …
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:24 AM
-1

Ridiculous? She forced him to kiss her, forced him to touch her boobs and propositioned him for sex- it was borderline child rape. Furthermore from all indications of what the prosecutor has said, the boy was shaken up about it and far from viewing it as something to cheer about. This was borderline child rape we're talking about here, and only borderline because she hadn't sufficiently groomed the child into compliance. I suppose you think that boys as young as 12 being court ordered to pay con…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:12 AM
3

Stop pretending you're any kind of MRA! She forced him to kiss her, forced him to touch her boobs and propositioned him for sex- it was borderline child rape. Furthermore from all indications of what the prosecutor has said, the boy was shaken up about it and far from viewing it as something to cheer about. This was borderline child rape we're talking about here, and only borderline because she hadn't sufficiently groomed the child into compliance. But hey, who gives a shit about the boy who has…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:11 AM
1

The reason she refused to plead guilty is that she did not want to have to register as a child sex offender.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:09 AM
-1

If the child had've been killed, in many respects, it would have been a kinder fate. In many respects, the scars will make this child's life a kind of living death,
/r/MensRights18/07/13 08:08 AM
-6

Tell that to the child victim who now has been scarred for life and has a life sentence of his own.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 07:19 AM
1

Oh I was simply stating the actions that took place there, but make no mistake - I regard it as a clear cut case of an attempted child rape which only failed due to the child not being groomed to the point of compliance by her. Also I highly doubt this was an isolated incident or that she's somehow learned her lesson - as you've rightly pointed out.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 07:16 AM
1

You talk about your notions of "misandry". So attitudes which hold men in contempt and with disgust the moment they fail to be paradigms of disposability aren't misandry all of a sudden? They think differently than you, which does not mean they hate men. Try to accept that. Wow, I never thought a NAFALT argument could be applied to MGTOWs. You well and truly proved that one wrong. Also, if they don't like the idea of the state nannying over people, so what? So the notion of giving abused men sup…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 06:37 AM
2

Finally some semblance of attitudes of justice towards the boy who has been scarred for life in this thread. Seriously, some of the so-called MRAs in here who have been so quick to condemn the sentence and minimise the scarring this boy will have for the rest of his life, should be fucking ashamed of themselves!
/r/MensRights18/07/13 06:08 AM
1

Pretty steep? She forced him to kiss her, forced him to touch her boobs and propositioned him for sex- it was borderline child rape. Furthermore from all indications of what the prosecutor has said, the boy was shaken up about it and far from viewing it as something to cheer about. This was borderline child rape we're talking about here, and only borderline because she hadn't sufficiently groomed the child into compliance.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:45 AM
1

Fucking ridiculous? She forced him to kiss her, forced him to touch her boobs and propositioned him for sex- it was borderline child rape. Furthermore from all indications of what the prosecutor has said, the boy was shaken up about it and far from viewing it as something to cheer about. This was borderline child rape we're talking about here, and only borderline because she hadn't sufficiently groomed the child into compliance. I suppose you think that boys as young as 12 being court ordered to…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:44 AM
0

That's out of line? She forced him to kiss her, forced him to touch her boobs and propositioned him for sex- it was borderline child rape. Furthermore from all indications of what the prosecutor has said, the boy was shaken up about it and far from viewing it as something to cheer about. This was borderline child rape we're talking about here, and only borderline because she hadn't sufficiently groomed the child into compliance. I suppose you think that boys as young as 12 being court ordered to…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:43 AM
1

A bit much? She forced him to kiss her, forced him to touch her boobs and propositioned him for sex- it was borderline child rape. Furthermore from all indications of what the prosecutor has said, the boy was shaken up about it and far from viewing it as something to cheer about. This was borderline child rape we're talking about here, and only borderline because she hadn't sufficiently groomed the child into compliance.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:42 AM
0

Ridiculous? She forced him to kiss her, forced him to touch her boobs and propositioned him for sex- it was borderline child rape. Furthermore from all indications of what the prosecutor has said, the boy was shaken up about it and far from viewing it as something to cheer about. This was borderline child rape we're talking about here, and only borderline because she hadn't sufficiently groomed the child into compliance. I suppose you think that boys as young as 12 being court ordered to pay con…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:41 AM
-2

Way too harshly? She forced him to kiss her, forced him to touch her boobs and propositioned him for sex- it was borderline child rape. Furthermore from all indications of what the prosecutor has said, the boy was shaken up about it and far from viewing it as something to cheer about. This was borderline child rape we're talking about here, and only borderline because she hadn't sufficiently groomed the child into compliance.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:40 AM
1

On the contrary, she forced him to kiss her, forcd him to touch her boobs and propositioned him for sex- it was borderline child rape. Furthermore from all indications of what the prosecutor has said, the boy was shaken up about it and far from viewing it as something to cheer about.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:38 AM
1

Well until you point out the fact that female pedophiles are treated so "seriously" by the law that their victims are reduced to financial slavery to them for 18 years when it results in a child that is.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 05:29 AM
1

MGTOW is not extreme. Depends on which end of the spectrum you mean. I've encountered MGTOWs whose stances on men's issues range from sympathetic to men's rights, to being downright manospherian - to the point where legally recognising male rape victims, including through sexual coercion in a domestic violence scenario, is mocking dismissed as "rapeflation".
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:57 AM
1

My point was pointing out what an utter trainwreck the thread had needlessly turned into. Furthermore I'm not Jewish, but if you're properly familiar with the scope of the Holocaust, you'll know it was far more than just Jews who were victim's of Hitler's genocidal programs (such as the disabled, which is relevant to me).
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:52 AM
1

Godwin's Law is someone making unreasonable and unrelated comparisons to the Holocaust. Yes, even the term "Grammar Nazi" is a textbook example of Godwin's Law - even though it is widely used.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:42 AM
1

I wouldn't even call it ire so much as bemusement. You've started a semantics based pissing contest here where one was completely unnecessary. Fair enough I can understand your addendum, to which I clarified, to which it should have been the end of things, or even you just clarifying that you wanted the OP to know that they were respected beyond their gender. But then you go on with: I still think it would have been better to say that they're some of the most respect people here and they're wome…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:31 AM
1

Here's what I can gather so far. She's a 34 year old woman, she had kissed him while she put his hand on his breast, and propositioned him for sex. There are claims that she filmed it in the youtube comments section, but apparently the most detailed article on it I've read so far doesn't bring it up. But apparently she was drunk, and as we all know, because feminists tell us so, that women who are drunk are perpetually blameless angels who should never be held accountable for their crimes. /s Fo…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:23 AM
1

No you just decided to start a pissing contest based on semantics and an assumption that I was implying that GWW and TB were only respected in terms of their gender and not as people in general. Seriously, what has been the point of these last few posts by you? Have they actually served any purpose in this thread whatsoever?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:09 AM
-1

All good, I'm actually disgusted with the white knighting this woman is getting. I mean she didn't just sexually violate and corrupt the child, but it turns out that amongst other things, she filmed it. We're supposedly up in arms about male child rape victims paying child support to convicted pedophiles, yet our outrage for injustice against sexually abused boys goes out the window when a female child sex predator gets sentenced to 10 years without parole? Seriously, WTF????????????????
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:04 AM
1

You're the one who started this semantics based pissing contest here. Just because I pointed out them as examples of women who are highly respected in the men's rights movement in; that in no way, shape or form, implies a lack of respect for them beyond their gender. However respect for them beyond their gender is quite clearly implied as my comment was clearly intended to encourage the OP. Oh and kudos for invoking Godwin's Law a few posts in.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:01 AM
0

Depends on whether they're foolish enough to open themselves up to allegations of pedophile apologetics or not.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:56 AM
1

I wasn't disputing that at all, however you need to look at the context of this discussion. It is a woman, wondering if she has a place here based on her gender. In this instance, focusing on the gender of TyphonBlue and GWW is actually a constructive move.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:51 AM
0

It says alot when you're downvoted on the men's rights subreddit for pointing out that regarding MGTOWs as a singular entity is problematic on men's rights grounds.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:49 AM
0

Where does it say that? I heard the defence lawyer argue that she was put through foster homes during her teenage years, implying that she was no longer a minor.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:44 AM
0

What - the fact that they're disputing the sentence, of the fact that they're white knighting a female child sex predator making child porn?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:31 AM
1

As I stated originally "the gender roles that we have now may not be perfect but they've certainly done far more good than bad." Considering how badly they have affected the vast bulk of that men in a radically eugenic sense, you could apply the same argument to the Holocaust. Are men worse off now then they were 1,000 years ago? 5,000 years ago? And how many hundred of thousands of men deemed entirely disposable, line the road that progress has been made on? I never suggested that. Actually you…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:25 AM
1

Considering that male rapists tend to be a small percentage of repeat offenders compared to a large number of female occasional offenders, maybe feminists should get what they want here (provided of course that all forms of legitimate rape are recognised and due process exists). Not only would far more women fall prey to a death sentence for rape than men, but the move would backfire for feminists so badly that women would desert feminism faster than the women in 1st class deserted the sinking T…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:31 AM
6

Ok so this woman makes child porn, with a minor, gets a life sentence, I speak in defence of the boy who has been violated, and when the dust settles, will be deeply scarred by it, and yet I get down-voted? Wow, I could have sworn I was in the mensrights subreddit. clearly I'm not.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:24 AM
6

Just left the following comment: At the end of the day, this is a form of child molestation - pure and simple. The child was being sexually corrupted and violated by an adult in a position of power over him. No matter how good he might feel about it now, in time it will deeply scar and haunt him for the rest of his life. This hypocritical lawyer dares cry crocodile tears over this child sex offender getting a life sentence, yet how convenient that she ignores the life sentence that this woman h…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:14 AM
13

So we currently have an epidemic of men being king hit and either being hospitalised or murdered, yet it's all about safety for women? Riiiiiiiiiight.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 11:43 PM
-1

MGTOW means "men going their own way", which they have every right to do so. They don't threaten or hurt anyone. That's debateable. On the paleo-masculinst end of the MGTOW spectrum, you actually wind up with misandry-filled DV and rape apologetics, where any suggestion that it is important while repealing feminist laws, to also expand rape laws to recognise male rape victims- including coercion based rape in a domestic violence setting - is mocked as "rapeflation" and obfuscated with the femini…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 11:40 PM
0

And herein you have demonstrated why the manospherian position is every bit as filled with misandry and as anti-MRA as the feminist position is. The problem with this "Patriarchy is great" position is that for 99% of men, it's just as much of a shit deal for men as what feminism proposes. What you have said here is utterly blue-pill-thinking-based paleo masculinist dogma - completely divorced from the red pill thinking of any MRA. In fact it is these types of blandly dogmatic and falsely nostalg…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 11:33 PM
1

I never said there weren't biological differences. However you can't tell me that the notion of men and boys being completely dehumanised and valued only in terms of biology or things like female hypoagency and male hyperagency have a complete biological justification to them. There is certainly a biological component to them, but you can't tell me for example, that VAWA is a complete biological construct. The fact is that while there are biological differences there, society has taken those dif…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 10:50 PM
2

The way I see it is that if you've overcome this and he's overcome drug addiction in the first few days of his life, then there's nothing that is insurmountable for you both to overcome in life together.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 08:37 PM
5

And this is the type of father that feminists like to pretend is a fantasy or MRA propaganda. Your son is incredibly lucky to have a father as tenacious and resilient as you have proven to be.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 08:04 PM
2

It was after 6pm EST.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 07:55 PM
1

I am not failing to understand anything. On the contrary, you are obfuscating what is intended by the state for a particular institution with the range of outcomes which can exist within that institution due to the individuals entering into it. Let's take energy. You used nuclear, but we could talk about conventional sources, as well. There was a train derailment in Canada within the last couple weeks that killed 50 people when the fuel it was carrying exploded. Yes, the production and transfer …
/r/MensRights17/07/13 07:54 PM
1

There's definitely some biological basis in it due to biochemistry, however alot of it is social conditioning.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 07:06 PM
2

I started listening at about 6.30pm- I think it was Eastern Time. If it helps, I called in at 08:43 AEST.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 06:00 AM
4

I was actually pleasantly surprised when they bumped me up the queue when they found out I was calling from Canberra. The only problem seemed to be that I got muted or something because I tried to rebut your point about overt signs of emotional scarring with battered men being largely due to social conditioning and being shamed into "manning up", but I didn't seem like you guys could hear me.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 05:07 AM
3

One thing I would say is that it's important to differentiate between the MRA and the manosphere. With the manosphere, you would edefinitely find hostility (in fact I give it 24 months, if that before it's open season between the MRA and manosphere and MGTOWs have to pick a side). However most MRAs - particularly genuine, forward thinking MRAs welcome women just as readily as men into the fold. Heck 2 of the most respected women in the MRM are GirlWritesWhat and Typhon Blue. One thing I would sa…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 04:58 AM
8

MRA's know that gender is the result of biology Actually those of us who are forward thinking have come to see that it's actually a socially constructed amplification of natural occurring differences "upto 11", as I think GWW (might have been Typhon Blue) that put it one time. The notion of it being purely biological is that of the manosphere - who are no friend to any type of man but those who try to embody the role of "patriarchal poster child" (yes I have actually heard some manospherians glo…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 04:45 AM
1

That's because it will take high profile lesbian cases for society to do a doubletake - as it will continue to be the case until society abandons its gynocentric underpinnings.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 04:12 AM
2

The problem is that you fail to differentiate between a potentially dangerous practice and dangerous individuals to undertake that practice with. What I am about to say is based on comments you have made in other threads. The premise you use is that no woman can be trusted with such power and that any man who trusts any woman with such power is a fool who deserves all he gets - while at the same time, ironically, criticising anyone who points out that how hazardous marriage is really does come d…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 04:10 AM
3

Dammit, they let me go before I could mention that the overt emotional responses are largely socially constructed re rape and DV victims. EDIT: I was the guy calling from Canberra commenting on female-on-male rape btw in case anyone is wondering.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 11:16 PM
1

www.oneinthree.com.au
/r/MensRights16/07/13 04:54 PM
3

Just left the following comment: As a male survivor of rape at the hands of a woman in the context of an abusive relationship, I feel the need to say a few things here. First off conventional definitions of rape are utterly rape apologist. The moment you deny men being forcibly enveloped as a form of rape, you are engaging in rape apologetics. Secondly when we actually seek the numbers on envelopment based rape, as the NIPSVS demonstrates and when you ask about it in surveys on battered men, you…
/r/MensRights16/07/13 04:44 PM
1

This was never going to end well. If there's one thing the judicial system does well, it's closing ranks to cover-up corruption.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 04:06 AM
13

Left the following comment there, pending approval: At some point, the question has to be asked whether a certain penal measure is about taking a pound of flesh, or about rehabilitation. As if anything, the outlined treatment actually further maladjusts inmates and if anything, degenerates rather than rehabilitates. Yet it amazes me how many commenters are utterly ignorant of the principles of justice. The entire purpose of the justice system has always meant to be about addressing imbalances ca…
/r/MensRights15/07/13 02:35 PM
-4

And yet generally speaking, all pedophiles are sexual predators. The fact is that where the average person can recognise that a beautiful child is still a child; a pedophile views a beautiful child as a possible sexual partner (male or female - depending on their sexual orientation). Granted some pedophiles fight their attractions because at a conscious level they hate that they feel that way about themselves. However at the end of the day, a pedophile is always going to be one moment of weaknes…
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:05 AM
6

If you want to get technical, the term would be "convicted child sex offender".
/r/MensRights14/07/13 01:57 AM
1

And yet legally the woman is classed as a child sex offender - or at least would be if the system weren't so sexist.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 12:57 AM
2

He's asked to go to the media or news outlet to get his story out. He declines several times. His reason that "I love living here and live a low key lifestyle, which is why I was given the opportunity to live here for free. If I go all public and cause a stink," Actually a club not wanting its reputation to be potentially tarnished by the probably trial by media the incident would generate sounds entriely accurate. He says he will update about his "complaint" to the police department. And that i…
/r/MensRights14/07/13 12:53 AM
1

That depends on whether this is merely a hypothetical based on the case back in 96 like some people are claiming, or a current situation as it is purported to be.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 12:45 AM
2

Not exactly a pedophile technically Legally any form of stat rape with that large an age difference is pedophilia. Technically it's still pedophilia because no matter how physically mature a 15 year old boy is, psychologically, they're far from a mature adult and far closer to a child.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 12:44 AM
13

No it's straight up gynocentrism - the whole thing is driven by female infantalisation and male disposability.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 11:31 PM
30

What kind of crack is that person smoking? Dulith model dogma and feminist corruption of social notions of justice to be exact.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 11:29 PM
51

Except that a convicted pedophile now has custody of a child. At the very least, the case could be made that the child is "at risk" by being in the custody of a known sex offender.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 08:31 PM
3

The big problem with roles like police is that we've made them very much a beta culture within a beta culture - where individuals are trained to unquestioningly enforce laws without any personal sense of justice. They're given a set of parameters for what is "legal" and what is "illegal" in terms of SOP - based on what is deemed "lawful" without any regard for how just or even constitutional certain laws might be. Sometimes I honestly wonder if you'd have a different outcome if you substituted t…
/r/MensRights13/07/13 07:28 PM
4

And she conveniently left out the part about how feminists have advocated against men's rights and worked to hide and discard male victims for the past 100 years. I suspect that will come with time. With the realisations that have been made, they're pretty much the majority of the way there to that realisation anyway.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 12:59 PM
1

Which precisely proves why, if you are going to go there and make it comedy fodder, it can easily do more harm than good.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 11:12 PM
0

A few steps come to mind and highly effective protection: completely abstaining from sex, never being alone with a girl, drinking reasonably and making sure you're never alone. Yes that might kill off the fun of the trip, but those steps immediately come to mind as highly effective ways to protect yourself from false allegations.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 10:08 PM
5

That's the thing these days. Not only do feminists have a terrible habit of overplaying their hand, but victimised men can't be as easily shamed and silenced as they could be in the past.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 10:05 PM
1

One glaring problem with that assessment is that laughter and mockery is the default response which people have in response to female violence against men. All making it comedy fodder will do is further entrench that. If laughter was going to increase humanity and compassion on this issue, it would have done so long ago.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 10:04 PM
1

I'd argue that this is the wrong point in time to be joking about domestic violence - especially female and male domestic violence. The old saying is that "it's all fun and games until someone loses an eye". The problem, as that old saying implies, is that you need to recognise where the line is in terms of comedy. The fact is that when it comes to common understandings of domestic violence, especially violence against men, by women - we've got a ways to go yet before they reach a place where pe…
/r/MensRights12/07/13 09:37 PM
6

After skimming over the 'article' and reading some of the comments, all I can say is - ugh, are people really that bigoted and dense?
/r/MensRights12/07/13 09:20 PM
9

If it comes up again tell them that you've also spoken to a rape survivor in the context of this, who has said they feel that false rape allegations need to be seriously dealt with by society, as they make it just that much harder for genuine victims to be believed.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 08:17 PM
7

Just left the following comment: "Ok let's flip the genders around on that statement."Girlfriends screw up sometimes. You just have to teach them what their mistake was in a way they can understand." Is it still "acceptable" or is that "different"? Way to score one for gender equality there huffpost."
/r/MensRights12/07/13 05:26 PM
2

This is one light at the end of the tunnel. The thing with sociopaths is that at some point, they will always overplay their hand.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 10:15 PM
1

Congratulations. If you were trying to demonstrate your complete ignorance of geek culture and how widespread it is, you just succeeded in spades.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 09:16 PM
1

That generally happens when you argue from the position of an ideologue (as well intentioned as you are) and find your position debunked by logic. The irony is that I don't even disagree with what is driving your argument - ergo that marriage is a dangerous option for men which under a traditional framework (even under "2.0" as people falsely call it when it is in fact 1.1) which if entered into foolishly, will bring nothing but pain. In fact in the height of irony, from what I can gather, noone…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 07:01 PM
1

I am NOT presuming there are no decent women out there. You're making that up. I am saying any man is a fool for thinking he can properly pick the woman who has so much power over him. I would suggest to anyone, man or woman, to avoid any type of one-sided contract. This "blanket approach" is common sense. Hang on - so one one hand I'm making stuff up when I point out the inherent misogynistic stereotyping in your blanket approach and then on the other hand you're defending that approach by clai…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 06:42 PM
3

Sorry to hear you're having such a tough time of it. One thing which comes to mind. I wonder what would happen if the judges mentioned were to learn of the website. I imagine she might have some explaining to do and would most likely face at the ery least, contempt of court charges.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 06:25 PM
1

No it's misogyny to both presume that no women out there exist who can be trusted with that level of power and assume that every woman out there is quietly biding their time until they can get such power and abuse it. Your response blatantly implied the later and it is that blanket assessment of the situation which is what made your post genuinely misogynistic. I can confidently say that GWW and TB would disagree with your assessment as your assessment of things in its blanket approach, also mad…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:48 PM
2

I'm actually slightly impressed with the news report. I don't know whether that was simply the least debunking thing which Karen said that the news crew could use, but I'm actually pleasantly shocked that it wasn't a complete hatchet job. Like others have said though, I'd be interested in hearing the full interview as well.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 04:56 PM
1

Again, this line of reasoning is for fools. Relying on the mercy of your partner is quite different than actually having rights and protections under the law. The only real protection men have against marriage is through avoidance. Actually this is blatant misogyny on your part as it implies there are no women who can be trusted with that level of power. The fact that there are female MRAs who are very much supporters of Men's Rights suggests otherwise. By your argument, female MRAs like Typhonb…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 04:46 PM
5

Just left the following comment there. It'll be interesting to see whether it gets removed: Regardless of how much people want to excuse her behaviour, it was criminally negligent & potentially fatal. It is immaterial that none of the men affected actually contracted HIV. The fact is that they just as easily could have, which in turn could have resulted in full blown AIDS & death. Would anyone even be defending this individual if they were male & their victims were female? We say we want equalit…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 04:03 PM
1

You can't be serious? So, this is the old traditionalist standby that what is wrong with marriage is that men just aren't picking right. Correct? And this is coming from an advocate for men's rights? On the contrary, the traditionalist perspective is based around the man being the provider and the protector and that women must be protected and provided for as they are perpetually blameless, harmless and innocent. Those of us who are MRAs however, don't prescribe to any of that, do not go into a …
/r/MensRights11/07/13 04:02 PM
2

Who said anything about downplaying the dangers. Choosing to go ahead with it simply means that you're extremely aware of who it is that could have their hand on the grip and finger on the trigger of the perpetual gun that's pointed at your head. But then thanks for providing a textbook example of what happens when you ASS-U-ME.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:08 PM
1

You're missing the forest for the trees here. The only Legoland currently in Canada is a Discovery Centre. Had they set up a Discovery Centre as the second theme park in Canada, this problem would never have happened.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 12:06 PM
1

Which smacks of the company simply trying to be seen to care about adult fans, rather than genuinely factoring them into their Legoland business plan in Canada.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 08:51 AM
1

Lego made the decision that children weren't their only demographic when they: a) decided to market their products to "ages 8-80" b) released the first technics set- a line intended by them for older customers c) started selling sets worth hundreds of dollars (in some cases a grand) which were never in the price range of parents buying presents for their children. It's the height of naivety on the part of people and hypocrisy on the part of Lego to claim that child fans are all that matter, when…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 08:49 AM
6

Being anti-marriage isn't a requirement of being an MRA - heck it's not even technically a requirement of being MGTOW either. Just because someone isn't anti-marriage in no way shape or form means they are automatically oblivious to the dangers involved with Western marriage in this day and age.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 07:31 PM
4

including sharing resources. Did this scream out "Heather Mills wannabe" to anyone else?
/r/MensRights10/07/13 07:27 PM
0

What you are missing though is that any toy company these days who has a franchise with an adult demographic ignores them at their peril. Yes Merlin can choose to ignore that demographic as they have here - however the consequences of that, especially in this age of social media are a PR disaster of epic proportions for LEGO themselves, which in turn risks future licensing agreements which Merlin has with LEGO. Ultimately it was Merlin which chose the option which ostracised and excluded adult f…
/r/MensRights10/07/13 07:25 PM
0

Then here's what you missed and it will make perfect sense to you when I say it. There are 2 versions of Legoland - the regular theme parks and the Discovery Centres, which are centred around kids. What happened is that Merlin, the company who handle Legolands, for some idiotic reason, decided that for their first Legoland theme park in Canada, they weren't opening a regular themepark - or even a regular theme park with a Discovery Centre in a part of it - they were only opening a Discovery Cent…
/r/MensRights10/07/13 06:25 PM
6

Which is precisely why this is a well earned PR disaster for Lego. Had Merlin bothered to actually do their homework, they would have seen that putting in a Discovery Centre first instead of a regular Legoland theme park, was always going to spectacularly backfire like this and most likely alienate adult fans. The much smarter move would have been to set up a regular theme park first and a discovery centre second - or even possibly incorporated a Discovery Centre within that regular theme park. …
/r/MensRights10/07/13 05:35 PM
1

Except the problem you've ignored is that the Discovery Centre is the only Legoland in existence in Canada. It's not like they already had a regular Legoland they could have gone to instead. This whole situation could have been avoided had they built a regular Legoland first and a Discovery Centre second. While I understand where you're coming from as a parent, I have to honestly say that you come across as somewhat ignorant of geek culture and how widespread it is. This is the kind of argument …
/r/MensRights10/07/13 05:27 PM
0

So Lego apparently want adult collectors when they sell $1000 sets like the Millenium Falcon set they sold a few years back and when they sell things like their $700 Death Star Sets (seriously, how many parents are going to be the ones buying those sets for kids) but not when it comes to their amusement parts? Riiiiiiight.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 01:19 PM
1

Which those calling the shots don't want. Do you think it's a coincidence that Glass-Steagall keeps hitting stumbling blocks and the same bail-in and hyper-inflationary practices are continuing?
/r/MensRights09/07/13 11:23 AM
2

I suspect she'll soon discover what it's like to be able to make genuine rape allegations being behind bars. Female rapists, like female pedophiles, are the last social taboos and prison, much like it does with male rapists, tends to be a breeding place for them.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 05:24 AM
1

You're ideas are all over the place. Eugenics? Is limiting payments for children born out of wedlock eugenics? I was referring to the fact that if you read through the ideas of eugenicists such as Julian Huxley and the works of Malthus, the poor always tend to be regarded as a scourge and a threat in one regard or another. Bear in mind that anyone who needs welfare of some kind, is generally going to be impoverished. To be clear, the weak I am talking about are single mothers and the policies I …
/r/MensRights08/07/13 04:18 AM
1

Regular Joes like me tend to have our eyes glaze over when you talk over our heads What's stopping you from accessing that higher order thinking though? That you're not smart enough? That you're incapable of it? According to whom? One problem we're going to have to address at some point if we're about treating men as human beings, is the notion that the bell curve based educations systems used when we matriculate from high school do not define our potential, but instead our utility. Personally I…
/r/MensRights07/07/13 05:09 PM
1

It's hardly a bunch of guys shooting the breeze either. The fact is that the more heavily you get into these discussions, the more serious they get and the more formal they are going to head towards. Furthermore if we want to be taken seriously as a movement, given that serious legislative activism is going to require at least some degree of an academic approach, then "unlearning [academic conventions]" is about the worst thing any of us can do.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 04:10 PM
1

You need to understand how arguments are formed when you get into formal (academic) discussion. The subtext of that third paragraph at a formal level is that it is implied as personal opinion. With formal arguments, you don't state that your opinion is your opinion - you state what is the opinion of others and then everything else is implied to be your own opinion.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:43 PM
1

Already reported
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:29 PM
1

Nothing. It was careless wording on their part (which has since already been established), which when you go by academic conventions for making an argument, made it come across as them going from stating the rationale behind the law to them being in agreement with that rationale. That is what I was responding to and it's since been established as poor wording on their part, so at this stage, the entire incident has pretty much resolved itself.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:02 PM
1

And yet in between both those extremes, there there are several degrees of scale in the middle. Part of pushing someone along is knowing when and how hard to push and when to ease off.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 02:45 PM
11

Looks like the system is finally starting to get wise to things. We can only hope that it does begin to snowball and both begin to minimise false rape allegations and make the system vigilant against them in a manner which doesn't cause harm to the cases of legitimate victims.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 02:40 PM
1

Before you make your judgment you should also know i am sociology major. You also assume to understand the culture within the military itself. You also assume that healing and recovery isn't the goal for my own friends with ptsd. You also know nothing of the amount of support they can get. First off, you're the one who came across as thinking that recovery was a case of "flicking a switch" as opposed to a long and arduous journey which takes as long as it takes. Secondly, in any millitary, no ma…
/r/MensRights07/07/13 02:35 PM
1

Yep, just as I suspected, you're a blue piller on this issue. Hardly surprising when your job requires you to exemplify male disposability and the militant gynocentrically driven stoicism which comes with it. What you fail to grasp is that while healing and recovery should be the goal - it should be on the timetable that the individual needs for optimal healing, as opposed to the timetable society wants to force on men and boys.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 02:10 PM
0

You clearly either have yet to take the red pill on this issue or haven't personally experienced female-on-male rape if you think it's as simple as "flicking a switch" on this issue.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 01:52 PM
1

And ironically the conversation is in the context of justice, support and compassion for male rape survivors. All of which of course begins with being sensitive to them and what might come across as either a defense of an agreement with the chauvinistic attitudes which create the culture of silence which we're subjected to on a daily basis. For someone going on about logic, you sure have trouble seeing the larger picture, don't you?
/r/MensRights07/07/13 01:51 PM
-2

And if you were paying attention you'll notice that they started out by restating the rational behind federal law and then in the third paragraph, phrases it like it's their own opinion. We've already established it's careless wording on their part, so why are you interested in perpetuating this needlessly.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 01:50 PM
0

Item 1 is definitely not the case. I've moved on and recovered. I currently view things in what I consider a more reasonable light, noting that if I really want to become emotionally involved, find a reason to be offended, or otherwise devolve an argument into hysterics I am entirely too capable of doing so. I choose not to. I cited the interpretations of others as a sort of "reasonable persons test": namely an indicator of whether or not a reasonable person would interpret those comments in tha…
/r/MensRights07/07/13 09:29 AM
0

To be specific the third paragraph begins with: Forced envelopment is not rape because the victim is not penetrated, which is the point being made here It made it read like "this is also the position I side with" rather than a restating of the underlying rationale. Compare the opening phrase from the first paragraph: Forcible vaginal sex is not considered rape With the opening statement from the 3rd paragraph: Forced envelopment is not rape Had the third paragraph been as considered (see what I …
/r/MensRights07/07/13 06:59 AM
-1

Gee I wonder why I was emotionally responding the last time around. I accept the I misread the last clarification, but your response really didn't help the situation at all. Honestly your entire stance here has been utterly manospherian and it is this type of response which keeps so many abused men in silence. The fact is that if something comes across as apologetics (and the initial post by ambientmouse did) then survivors are going to take offense and be emotional about it. Ultimately you eith…
/r/MensRights07/07/13 05:33 AM
1

On this one, the problem was that I was responding your previous response in amongst a few other responses that were at best dismissive. My point about your initial post stands (ie clumsy wording that came across as apologetics), but I accept the clarification. I'll be blunt: I'm going to ignore your advice on the grounds that only one individual publicly stated they had made that misinterpretation of my comments. And exactly how many of those responding are male rape survivors besides myself? I…
/r/MensRights07/07/13 05:28 AM
-1

That's just it, I haven't missed how the point came across at all. Up until the end of the second paragraph, it was merely describing the legal situation. It was how that third paragraph was phrased, where it clearly came across as agreement with rationale behind the status quo, rather than stating what that rationale was that is the problem here. Forced envelopment is not rape because the victim is not penetrated, This is phrased as stating an opinion, very quickly followed by which is the poin…
/r/MensRights07/07/13 04:56 AM
3

Sadly, things like this don't shock me anymore or even surprise me. The human race are getting closer and closer to living in caves and swinging from trees with each passing day.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 04:13 AM
-1

Well, that escalated quickly... So, how does that foot taste because it seems it's pretty far up there, cutcoguru. On the contrary, if anyone is at fault here it is the redditor who at best, screwed up by making what was merely stating the rationale behind the law, a personal opinion which the law backed up - presuming it was merely clumsy wording on their part. Take a good look at what was actually said (bolding for emphasis): Forced envelopment is not rape because the victim is not penetrated,…
/r/MensRights07/07/13 04:01 AM
-3

Take a good look at how that final paragraph reads: Forced envelopment is not rape because the victim is not penetrated, which is the point being made here If it were phrased along the lines of "In other words, forced envelopment is not regarded as rape, because the victim is not penetrated" your point would be valid. However how that comes across is as them stating a personal opinion in line with the rational behind the law and then using the law to justify their position.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:50 AM
1

On the contrary, they were defending the legal definition. Go back and read the start of the final paragraph. It reads: Forced envelopment is not rape because the victim is not penetrated, which is the point being made here This was phrased entirely from the point of view of stating a personal opinion (and a pretty disgusting one at that), not what the rationale behind the definition is. The fact is that the legal definition of rape is unjust and inaccurate, which is the whole point of this issu…
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:46 AM
0

Except that the part I was quoting wasn't you giving the justification behind the law - it was you defending the justification for it. If that wasn't your intention, then you might want to think about just how you're coming across when posting on issues like this.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:44 AM
-5

Forced envelopment is not rape because the victim is not penetrated, which is the point being made here (at the Federal level. It doe seem NY's statutes are gender-neutral overall, and that there is a knee-jerk reaction based on the assumption that they mirror Federal definitions). Blatant rape apologist bullshit on your part here! I hate to break it to your chauvinistic little mind but if you stopped looking at the issue with your head crammed up your ass and actually bothered to talkj to male …
/r/MensRights07/07/13 01:05 AM
6

This law definitely seems to have a glaring and hypocritical blind-spot with how the article describes it. The fact that it neglects to mention unwanted penile contact, does definitely suggest that male victims have been ignored yet again, even though as studies such as the 2010 NIPSVS prove, when you do keep track of forced penetration, you can quite easily find you have similar numbers of male and female vaginal-based-rape victims. I say "can easily wind up with" because to my knowledge, the N…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 11:35 PM
1

You really have no idea the differences between male and female sexuality then. On the contrary, I understand just how little a difference there is between male and female sexuality all too well. The fact is that the vast majority of what you consider the difference male and female sexuality to be has been artificially hyper-inflated to facilitate gynocentric gender roles (ie infantalised femininity and disposable masculinity). The fact that you want to treat a child being violated in this manne…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 11:23 PM
1

Then you are a rape, domestic violence and pedophile apologist!
/r/MensRights06/07/13 01:00 PM
1

Both are equally bad as a child is a child, regardless of gender. End of story. If your views weren't clouded with doubly ignorant and chauvinisic pedophile apologetics, you would actually see that.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 12:53 PM
2

I highly doubt the system cares what the child's ability to pay child support is.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 09:05 AM
1

Completely spot on analysis of post-moderninsm. I've found that the truth is to relativists as sunlight is to vampires.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 07:45 AM
5

Honestly some of the responses here are glaring evidence of why deep down, feminists and manospherians operate from the exact same worldview and are both, on issues such as abused men and boys, blatant misandrists- spouting virtually the exact same arguments.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 06:57 AM
7

If you believe that a child being interfered with in this manner is ok because "he enjoyed it", then you are harbouring some seriously latent pedophile tendencies. Attitudes like yours are precisely why underage boys as young as 12 who are raped by female pedophiles are forced to pay said pedophiles child support when it results in the birth of a child.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 06:54 AM
1

The problem with that argument is that it's skating dangerously close to eugenics (even going right back to Malthusianism, the poor were deemed the greatest threat to society in one form or another) and if the genders were reversed, would have absolutely no place in the MRM (remember the same sorts of arguments get bandied around by feminists concerning battered men all the time). Even if those examples only made up 2% of the total number of single mothers say for the sake of argument, then that…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 06:30 AM
1

You'll probably find it's just not discussed, like here in Australia. However when you look into it, at least here anyway, it is pretty common.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:45 PM
1

At the beginning of last year, Mattel originally advertised a prop replica Hoverboard from Back to the Future which was advertised as "movie accurate, down to the last detail" for preorder, which cost $130+shipping. They even showed a video during the preorder stage, showing the design team using micrometers with the actual Back to the Future Hoverboard props which were used in the movie. They showed an update at SDCC (San Diego Comic Con) which had several inaccuracies which several members of …
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:44 PM
1

Prison rape happens in more places than just America.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:27 PM
1

I'm not sure I'd put it that vindictively (purely because I believe we MRAs, though filled with righteous and just anger, avoid vindictiveness) however there is certainly a karmic element to this.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:27 PM
2

Anyone else noticing the irony of the self-fulfilling prophesy? Woman makes false accusation of rape against man->woman found guilty and jailed->woman will most likely get prison raped by the other inmates.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 01:51 AM
1

But then what do you define single mothers as. The problem I see there would be if you classed widowed mothers as single mothers for example, or mothers who had been forced to leave abusive relationships as single mothers (or even for that matter, women who had been raped but chose to keep the child). I know the group you refer to and I agree with your intention (here in Australia it was 16 year olds deliberately getting pregnant to get the Baby Bonus), but those groups I could see being problem…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 11:50 PM
-1

First they ignore you, then they mock you, then they fight you, then you win. There was an interesting situation last year in the prop replica community. Mattel had promised fans a movie accurate prop replica with a preorder which could not be cancelled. Anyway the prop replica community was up in arms and several people complained on the Mattycollector forums. Initially people's protests were met with ignorance or canned responses. When that failed, posts were deleted constantly, people were th…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 09:30 PM
1

This is where I think alot of people miss the boat when being critical of mens rights in general. Most people think only of the rich, powerful and successful men when thinking of men and so male victims and marginalised men aren't so much something the average person holds in contempt, so much as I think that they're merely utterly oblivious to them. As such, they don't even see the double standards, much less see them as a problem. There's also the issue of feminism's double standards, prima fa…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 09:18 PM
1

That might sound great in theory, but the reality is that if you proceed down that path, you begin to head down a very totalitarian path in terms of micromanaging the lives of others. That ignores just how dark a path you'd have to head down to even enforce such an approach. Furthermore exactly what are you referring to with welfare reform? I suspect we're in different parts of the world.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 08:34 PM
3

Does anything even need to be said about this? I mean I know that stories open themselves up to criticism, but seriously - the criticism of this utterly ridonculous and sexist plan, virtually writes itself.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:06 PM
1

I don't think that anyone is under the illusion that it an issue of a positive right being used to circumvent a negative right. However part of even that strategy you propose, involves debunking the dehumanisation of children at their most vulnerable, to create both an ideological impetus and justification in the minds of people for changing the status quo.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 07:13 AM
1

In about the darkest chapter of the MRM you mean. Clearly it hasn't occurred to you that "positive rights" (ie privilege) are the biggest cause of injustice in the world today.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:20 PM
-1

And never mind the fundamental rights of unborn boys [and girls] right? Oh wait, I forgot, they're just a "clump of cells" aren't they? And people think eugenics died out with the Nuremberg trials. Oh the irony....
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:19 PM
1

The fact that it is "viewed through a eugenic lens", in your eyes, does not make it eugenics. You'd be more accurate to say that eugenics is viewed through the lens that we currently have for abortion. All eugenics involves abortion, but not all abortions involve eugenics. This is basic logic: You are committing a general to specific fallacy when you equate them to be the same. I.e, all cats have tails, that animal has a tail, thus it is a cat. Complete and utter BS on your part here. The fact i…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:16 AM
1

On the contrary, where abortions have not been either expressly normalised for the purposes of a eugenic agenda, such as African Americans and planned parent hood, or actively a from of eugenics on the grounds of killing an unborn child specifically on the grounds of disability or deformity; they still view the unborn child through a very eugenic lens, where a child is dehumanised using rationalisations heavily steeped in eugenics. Ergo, the entirety of the abortion issue is based in eugenics.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:04 AM
3

Honestly, I can't even believe we're having this conversation. The MRM is supposed to be about taking a stand against injustices against men and boys- especially those who are the most marginalised, the most unjustly treated and the most unable to speak for themselves. Well here we are in this situation and it appears that far too many people in here have forgotten about the group of boys most unable to speak for themselves - unborn boys. Instead of which we have men here scrambling for an oppor…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:48 AM
1

On the contrary, the entire premise of my argument is entirely sound. You, being the relativist and therefore solopsist you are, just can't handle your carefully constructed fourth wall being shattered into what is reality. You are incapable of grasping how bodies of knowledge are constructed, or the fact that the more work that is done on building a body of knowledge, the faster said knowledge will be build (yes, even in terms of discovering roadblocks to progress). Also highly ironic you refer…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:11 AM
1

No I understand what an argument consists of - I just realise there's a point where dealing with a relativist (and therefore a solopsist) becomes futile because reality and truth are irrelevant to someone who only regards as real to be what they perceive and can grasp.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:01 AM
1

By the rationalisation you have just used here, the courts and all laws, including laws against child abuse, rape and murder, should all be done way with as they are not what you describe as natural laws (they're actually manifestations of universal principles, natural law" is something entirely different). Your entire argument flies in the face of the principles with which civilisation is founded on. But wait, I forgot - I'm talking to a relativist where things like this are irrelevant - all th…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:59 AM
1

A cervix is not a membrane, it's made of cartillage. If you want to get pedantic, it acts like a membrane. Furthermore the fact that it is made of cartilage only proves my point about it existing to protect the unborn child through preventing foreign objects from entering the uterus. Ergo my point stands. No. Let me spell it out for you: I w-a-s r-e-f-e-r-r-i-n-g t-o t-h-e f-e-t-u-s.. I knew what you were referring to and you've just proved my point for me in spades, as you keep dehumanising the…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:52 AM
1

You're completely and utterly full of shit. Firstly you're using a legal definition that has even been hotly contested by numerous academics because it was constructed for the purposes of prosecuting those involved with the Holocaust in a manner which did not discriminate against the allies for their own practices of eugenics (eg sterilisation of the disabled and segregation), as opposed to the purpose of examining the scale of genocide in society. Secondly if someone is committing a form of mur…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:41 AM
1

At this point it's clear there is no point discussing this further with you. You have no point, nor anything close to the minimum degree of skepticism of even your own position due to relativism, yet your head is firmly buried in the sand. You may think you're a critical thinker, but you are far too clouded by relativism to even remotely get to that point - much like someone wandering through the wilderness who thinks he's using every tool at his disposal- yet refuses to use a compass. The irony…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:39 AM
2

See all the fembots will say that this is coercion. I can see where they are coming from. On the contrary, it's simple accountability. The fact is that if she is going to put him through the trauma of losing a child, he should not be expected to support her. Furthermore if there is to be an open, honest and mature conversation about it, he should bring it up in the interests of fairness. We need to stop treating women like little girls an start treating them like grown women. If women want acces…
/r/MensRights01/07/13 06:33 PM
1

I just left the following comment: I agree with what some people are saying in that you need to see what the issues are that are causing her to consider an abortion and try to find solutions to try and see whether her concerns can be addressed without it coming to her having an abortion. However in the interests of genuine equality, something needs to be said here should that fall through and she goes through with the abortin anyway. One thing you need to ask yourself is if you could forgive her…
/r/MensRights01/07/13 06:13 PM
0

So if a 16 year old girl wants to have a sexual relationship with her father, she should just have at it? After all we're talking about teacher-student relationships here and so ethically speaking, it's in the very same territory as a parent-child incestuous relationship.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 05:24 PM
6

Just left them the following response: Wow, pedophile apologetics much? Are you telling me you'd say the same thing about a 16 year old girl and a 37 year old man in the same situation if he looked like a greek god? Or is that "different" to you?
/r/MensRights01/07/13 09:57 AM
1

I was overjoyed..... Then I saw this and my heart sank: http://www.facs.nsw.gov.au/about_us/news/it_stops_here_united_effort_to_end_domestic_and_family_violence_in_nsw
/r/MensRights01/07/13 07:02 AM
1

No, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Find an anatomy and physiology site or book and read up on it. Says the person who clearly cannot recognise what a membrane is when it's staring them in the face. After all when the cervix is not dilated and at no point did nature intend for it ti dilate for the purposes of abortion. Your 99% statistic is completely made up. Either you're a liar or not even bothering to read the sources you send my way. That 99% stat came from your last …
/r/MensRights30/06/13 10:11 PM
10

Wow, am I dreaming? Is this finally happening? It needs to be said now, Greg Anderson is the best friend battered men in NSW and Australia-wide for that matter, could ask for. Now all we need is reforms to police training and procedures and battered men will finally start to get justice in this state.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 08:57 PM
1

And here is where I finally call complete bulldust on your part. The fact is that the arguments in favour of abortion have not changed in over 40 years. The core premise of that argument is based on the dehumanisation of an unborn child as "a clump of cells" to argue in favour of practices which would never fly where children who have been born are concerned. In that time, the blatantly eugenic justifications for abortion with reference to the unborn child have remained constant. The fact is tha…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 08:44 PM
1

No. Just throwing people at a process does not necessarily speed it up. It takes 9 months for a woman to make a baby. That does not mean that 9 women can make the same baby in 1 month. A complete strawman on your part. You are comparing letting natural forces run their course with scientific research and development. Pure fallacy on your part and you know it. Well, I've said something very similar regarding the manifestation of eugenics. You seem to think that the reason most women get abortions…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 05:15 PM
1

I don't agree to your assertion that the cervix dialating during childbirth is not a clear case of it's function. You waver quite a bit around 'traditional' abortion and minimize the very real use of chemical abortifactents which would pass through the cervix like a miscarriage or a period. Yet you ignore the direct function of the Cervix in the process of all of this - namely to shield unborn children during gestation. I was raising traditional abortion because it completely proved my point and…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 05:03 PM
1

And yet it was directly implied in what I said, especially when I responded to your point about survivalism.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 11:00 AM
1

If you want to get pedantic then yes, but then I could be even more ridiculously pedantic and blame chemistry. After all survivalism can be classed as a biological need and our bodies exist entirely because of the chemical reaction to DNA. Heck you could even go from there to quantum physics if you wanted to. However how are any of these yardsticks even remotely helpful. This of course ignores the fact that survivalism is an indirect cause of male disposabiltiy rather than a direct cause (male d…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 08:04 AM
2

Gynocentrism is a manifestation of survivalism.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 07:37 AM
1

(continued from last post) You seem to entertain a much different definition of eugenics than I do and have repeatedly defined my terms. So by your own admission, your definition of eugenics is utterly hypocritical, and here's why. You claim that abortion has nothing to do with eugenics whilst claiming to support abortion and reject eugenics. However let's ignore for a minute, where this all falls apart with regards to the disabled. Let's look at things form a perspective of a radically Social D…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 07:36 AM
1

Yes, you did. Yes, I could have. I never said you were the ONLY source of information but simply that I was using you as MY source. I stated that I had no information on creative density and merely took what you provided as a basis for further discussion. If you felt it was important, you might've mentioned other applications in your description, provided a link, or inquired whether I was interested at all to looking it up. For starters, you have stated you are fully aware of Google with your sn…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 07:35 AM
1

Actually, more survivalism than nature per se, besides that though, I completely agree.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 06:41 AM
1

All of which are symptoms rather than the cause. The cause is gynocentrism.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 06:38 AM
2

I was actually really ill earlier on today so I was trying to go with existing knowledge when I wasn't in the head space to give a detailed response, but fair call. Ok here's the deal. Men have, as we all know, only been valued for our utility and viewed as disposable - specifically on the grounds of our ability to provide [for women], the ability to protect [women] and our sexual prowess. The later of these is less than straightforward, although one half of the equation can be seen in female hy…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 03:29 PM
2

As I said on the comments page, I agree with what GWW intends by her message, ergo that women were not oppressed by men ("by men" being the operative term), along with every single one of her subsequent points. However both women and men, have been oppressed by society. Where women have been paternalised (an infantalisation-based form of oppression), men were oppressed into utility based slavery (to women). It's an important distinction because it is these nuances which feminists disregard and …
/r/MensRights28/06/13 02:31 PM
1

It's understandible though - remember just as men are conditioned to solely value themselves based on their utility, so too are women conditioned to base their value around their uteruses and child-rearing capacity (yes, even when you get into rad fem politics around sex and reproductive issues). At some point, women need actual liberation from that mind set to find value in their personhood. Doing so is the only way to truly break the hold of female infantalisation in women.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 01:54 PM
2

The reality is that the only way anyone can truly understand how society is constructed in terms of gender is if they reject feminist dogma in its entirety and start again from the premise of women experiencing oppression and go from there, factoring in every single aspect of gender based social construction, including issues men face and the interplay between those issues. The fact is that no matter how much feminism attempts to respond to gender issues in society, it is incapable of doing so, …
/r/MensRights28/06/13 07:52 AM
5

Actually, by its very nature, it does, considering that what is policed is male dispossability, where the epitome of disposabile masculinity is the ability to provide, the ability to protect and male sexual prowess (which arguably feeds off the aforementioned other two characteristics). Consider hypergamy collectively and in a practical application and you'll see what I mean.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 06:12 AM
1

No, yes, no, and no! Since when was the cervix designed to allow anything besides sperm and a woman's period to naturally pass through it in its typical state (and I would class dilation as an atypical state which only naturaly occurs during childbirth)? The fact is that with D&Cs, and D&Es you are artificially accessing a part of the body that is designed to be shielded from being accessed. Ergo by its very nature, traditional abortions, even if drugs rather than a scalpel are used to bypass th…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 06:09 AM
3

If you're familiar with female hypergamy, that's your answer.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:50 AM
1

According to you (my only source) On the contrary, I told you it was a Vernadskian principle, meaning that you could have easily sought out the writings of Vernadsky for yourself. My understanding of creative density is soley through your description of higher thinking, critical thinking, a group containing a sufficient number of members (for some woefully undefined value of sufficient), and the ability to derive complex ideas. Ideas not implementations. We'll get to more of that in a bit. If yo…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:49 AM
1

Especially survivors of the Stolen Generation as to my knowledge, she is still to this day a member of the Fabian Society and definitely was a member as of 2010.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 04:15 AM
11

On the contrary, that kind of mocking comment is entirely appropriate as the entire notion of patriarchal theory which the radical feminist in question is opeerating from, is at its best and most generous an utterly farcical prima facie. Since you seen so keen on an intelligent comment, I'll give you the full treatise why feminist theory and logic are like oil and water. As I posted in another thread: "[T]here are glaring issues with feminism, not to mention the fact that it is founded on a fall…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 04:13 AM
7

Yes, because at 13 you were incapable of giving adult consent.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 03:10 AM
8

What do you expect, from Anne Summers? After all this is the same woman who wrote "Damned whores and God's police" whilst ignoring who was being [sexually] policed [men] during the early Australian colonial years - or the fact that the practice still goes on here today.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 02:32 AM
-9

"BUTBUTBUT- TEH PATRYAKYZ!!!!!!!!!!!"
/r/MensRights28/06/13 02:24 AM
9

Words fail me......
/r/MensRights28/06/13 01:17 AM
1

C-sections during a 'difficult labor' are emergency procedures (non-scheduled) designed to protect either the fetus or the mother (or both). I can't imagine (assuming a self sufficient artificial womb) why there would be a need for emergency surgery. We cut people open all the time in emergency medicine. Planned procedures generally follow the least invasive/most effective treatment. C-sections are also scheduled, sometimes. Those decisions are generally made because of prior c-sections, known p…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 01:06 AM
1

You're right. I am not factoring creative density into the impact of research. If it works, I'm in favor of it; but, I have serious doubts about the viability of such a process. It's simply too close to magic hand waving for my taste. Perhaps I'm just too old fashioned. If it works? So you're claiming that science building up as a body of knowledge where scientists build upon the body of prior knowledge to reach new and more complex understandings of the universe isn't how science has advanced s…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:30 AM
1

Please note that figure is .5 billion. But, let's be global, it is very likely that the worldwide cost, given countries with universal health care, was in the billions. And, let's further assert that the proportion of spending reflects a general societal attitude towards 'what's important.' So, the world commits significant money towards the development of artificial wombs. Once again, I don't think the money spent will proportionally increase the efficacy of the idea. Because you're failing to …
/r/MensRights27/06/13 05:25 PM
0

Right! My question is why do you consider it a good idea? Because, for reasons highlighted below, I actually recognise the fundamental human rights of the unborn child, even if the collectively genocidal public at large is too cowardly to - including what is regarded as best practice for getting a child out of a womb during a difficult labour. But then it's easy to do that when the group you're butchering are unable to speak for themselves. You're the one that brought up the forceps and pliers. …
/r/MensRights27/06/13 05:25 PM
1

Google "Hyde Exception" and "military abortion regulations." You'll find though that in countries like here in Australia though abortions are state subsidised. Furthermore, even if things have changed; the fact that billions were spent annually previously is highly telling in terms of possible research funding by today's standards (factoring in inflation over time) if the world considered it a priority. Actually, no. My Google-fu has failed. Do tell. It's a Vernadskian principle of higher thinki…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 10:38 AM
1

Well, unless you're taking the whole uterus out, there's simply no excuse to carve her up. Have you had abdominal surgery? I have. I've also had a D&C (I 'aborted' a benign tumor). And, there is one hell of a difference. You clearly haven't considered a c-section being a part of a womb transplant. How long are you planning to wait to do the transplant? I would think you'd want to get it done as early as possible. Assume you wait until the 24th week. You're still talking about a fetus that's arou…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 10:38 AM
1

And this is the same group that deplores women being reduced to "damned whores and God's police". Irony much?
/r/MensRights27/06/13 05:49 AM
1

What?! Why on EARTH would you make incisions to do this? Cutting through the peritenium, stomach muscles, and the uterine wall is a much, much bigger deal than just a matter of 'access.' I don't even know where to begin... I was talking about womb transplants versus D&Cs, D&Xs and D&Es. My point was that you're still talking about a highly invasive process by dilating the cervix and then inserting objects into the uterus - be they forms of suction or pliers and foreceps, so the notion of invasiv…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 05:24 AM
2

You are comparing apples to oranges. I don't know of any existing research funding that is going into abortion techniques. We've pretty much got that down pat! Marketing/advertising/political campaigns are a completely different story, however. I'd like to think that there are many, many areas which would be enriched with those funds. The problem is convincing the people spending to stop doing that and put it somewhere helpful. I wasn't referring to money spent on abortion research - I was refer…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 05:20 AM
3

The thing I would point to there is the low rates of funding and low levels of research into the subject. Bear in mind that any timeline estimates of milestones are invariably based on current funding and research level trends. The fact is that when you compare the money spent on abortion with the money spent on artificial womb research, then you find that what artificial womb research tends to get is a pittance in comparison with the money spent on state subsidised abortion. If that money and l…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 03:33 AM
3

hateCaptchas That's one study. I can also recall off the top of my head, 2 stories which fly in the face of this. The first is the fact that the technology has already proven it works with sharks. Secondly we we would already have proof that it works with humans were it not for regulations which ordered an unborn child successfully growing in an artificial womb killed after a few days. I suspect that the irony that killing unborn children en masse is entirely legal and letting one grow in an art…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 02:25 AM
2

You continue to demonstrate that you don't know the first thing about the arguments for abortion. On the contrary, the entire premise of abortion hangs on the notion of dehumanisation - the notion of fraudulently relegating another human being to a subhuman status on the grounds of one particular characteristic they posess. Such an argument ignores the child's disposition and instead indulges in the pseudo science of eugenics. Regardless of what secondary arguments you conjure up, that is the co…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 02:14 AM
3

I posted this in the other thread, but it's worth posting here: This was a great move. If Gillard were male, she'd have been branded a radical nutjob long ago. The woman is a member of Emily's List - a rad fem organisation who exists solely to get as many women into elected positions as possible based entirely on quotas - as well as to my knowledge, still to this day a member of the Fabian Society - the organisation who were the legal impetus for the Stolen Generation here (they were instrumenta…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 01:14 AM
1

Your response here is nothing but fallacy after fallacy. The fact is that once an artificial womb hits, the entire "my body, my choice" argument goes out the window, as at that point, there is an alternative to pregnancy - whereby women cannot claim that they can choose abortion because the alternative is pregnancy being forced on them for 9 months. In addition such an option also allows for adoption at the point of the womb transplant taking place anyway so there is no valid argument there (eve…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 01:04 AM
3

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. I imagine Symantec legal must be getting very nervous about potential litigation.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 03:50 PM
7

This was a great move. If Gillard were male, she'd have been branded a radical nutjob long ago. The woman is a member of Emily's List - a rad fem organisation who exists solely to get as many women into elected positions as possible based entirely on quotas - as well as to my knowledge, still to this day a member of the Fabian Society - the organisation who were the legal impetus for the Stolen Generation here (they were instrumental in the Half Caste Act being passsed) and the ideological impet…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 03:39 PM
1

This whole situation could be completely resolved if governments funded research to perfect the artificial womb and make it and womb transplants for the unborn child both financially viable and feasible. After all by a pro-abortion argument, mothers can be justified in murdering children post pregnancy because of the pain of labour and pregnancy which they endured. What is lost in all of this is that from the moment of conception, you have a human being in that womb. Regardless of the state of d…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 12:15 PM
1

Their delusions don't surprise me as the entire core of feminism is based on utterly superficial observations taken to their most extreme logical conclusions. The irony is that the very approach they take actually further entrenches female paternalism rather than combating it.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 02:57 AM
1

It was to some degree, but the main reason I admitted it is because I wanted anyone who might be reading the comments and who doesn't understand just how traumatised domestic violence can leave you as a man, especially when it's brutally psychological - that no matter how far you go with time and with treatment, that if for some reason you ever find yourself looking too deeply at the scars, that in some ways it's like it was 5 seconds ago. The notion that men just need to "man up" on almost ever…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 01:41 AM
3

I just left the following reply for Sofaman in the comments section: """Did you feel genuine fear that your safety or life was under threat?" and suddenly the overwhelming moajority of men answer no, and a disturbing number of women say yes. That seems like a significant distinction to me, and certainly a big part of what the author was talking about." I can tell you firsthand and from personal experience why most men respond that way. When your girlfriend or wife is abusing you, you're terrifie…
/r/MensRights25/06/13 02:07 PM
1

You wouldn't believe it - my comment actually got published.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 11:18 AM
2

Actually, the comment is 498 words minus the tweet - put it through Word and used the word count tool to make sure it came in under 500 words. ;)
/r/MensRights25/06/13 06:23 AM
9

I just left the following comment, but as it's a case of a male survivor of DV and rape pointing out uncomfortable truths, I doubt it'll be published: You've come to that conclusion because the truth is far too inconvenient and uncomfortable to you, as it highlights your own double standards. Incidentally, I am saying the following as a male rape and domestic violence survivor. It would be one thing if a focus on women was purely because of the unique challenges that men and women separately fac…
/r/MensRights25/06/13 05:58 AM
2

Actually in most profound respects it is. All that has really changed is that advances in modern technology and medicine have caused the sphere of safe spaces under female infantalisation to increase and simultaneously caused the sphere of male disposability and utility to decrease. The actual underlying ideology governing this however, is exactly as it has been going back to the dawn of civilisation.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 01:27 AM
4

Wow, actual accountability from Paul (did hell just freeze over?). If it keeps up, I might actually have reason to reevaluate my opinion of him.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 12:57 AM
5

Depends on the situation. I'm had family members and friends turn on me - one former friend even accused me even of playing games when I narrowly averted picking up a knife and slashing my wrists in the wake of confronting family members about psychological child abuse that extended into adulthood. I've had some friends and family who have been supportive, but I've also had plenty of friends and family who have either viewed it as a problem to be fixed with minimal compassion or "friends" and "f…
/r/MensRights25/06/13 12:54 AM
1

blergcheese, I realise that it was a slip of the tongue on your part and I completely accept that, however I really do need to take issue with a part of what you've said, because honestly, it comes across as a lack of knowledge of history on your part. The following is highly ironic: "I can't believe you compared me to Nazis because I used the word "disease" rather than condition. You're right that it was an extremely stupid mistake on my part but any credibility you had just flew out the window…
/r/MensRights25/06/13 12:46 AM
10

It's not even his personality per se, but his complete lack of accountability and the fact that staff members there seem to enable and exacerbate it what can only be described as a "Paul Elam pass". I get that he probably cops a mountain of hatemail and the rest from feminists, but somewhere along the track, Paul seems to have lost the ability to discern between feminists trying to silence him and fellow MRAs with legitimate criticisms. Believe it or not, despite being directly in he firing line…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 06:36 PM
4

I posted this on another thread challenging another feminist and it's worth repeating here: "[T]here are glaring issues with feminism, not to mention the fact that it is founded on a fallacy - a fallacy which informs all feminist theory and attitudes. This core fallacy is what I will focus on, although I can draw on issues with feminist lies regarding domestic violence, its refusal to condemn and ostracise militant factions in the mainstream and its [often violent, bordering on terrorist] insist…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 05:52 PM
0

Saved and posted on my facebook wall.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 05:47 PM
7

3) Society is trained to paternalise women and treat men as disposable and so it affects their awareness of and responses to suicidal behaviour in terms of gender. Ergo when a woman is suicidal, the people around her are trained to view her as in need of protecting, both from the world at large, as well as from herself, and so they are both more inclined to be attentive to such behaviours and intervene. Conversely, because men are viewed as being expected to be stoic and disposable, people are t…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 05:10 PM
11

Here's the thing - that shaming language is how male disposability is socially policed. Every single time a man deviates from the accepted social norm of stoic disposability, he will invariably be subjected to genitalia based shaming - be it "grow a pair", "harden/man up", "pussy". In fact it's highly telling how similar "pussy" is to "mangina" the slur of choice used against male feminists. Yet every single time we use such shaming language we send a message that if the MRM is ok with using suc…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 03:44 PM
12

Paul Elam has become a hypcritical joke, claiming one minute to take issue with misandry and the next to use misandrist shaming language; to one minute claim to care about male rape and DV victims and the next to engage in blatantly misandrist rape and domestic violence apologetics; to claim to despise feminist tactics one minute and to engage in feminist style censorship and shaming tactics the next minute. Yet to call him out on this makes you either a "do nothing complainer" or "nuts and a li…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 03:35 PM
2

For anyone interested in using the town's own social media profile against it, the town's facebook page is getting hammered: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Norwood-Colorado/61438061037
/r/MensRights24/06/13 03:19 PM
3

On the contrary, the flaw is that they have looked at things superficially, without ever actually examining the true nature of what they have superficially observed.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 03:09 PM
1

On the contrary, the most forward thinking MRAs would acknowledge that superficially, it does appear that men are the oppressors of women in society - superficially. The big flaw with feminism is, that it never asked the question of "just what it the full and true nature of the oppression of women?" If it did, it would lead feminists to the revelation of female paternalisation, which in turn would lead them to female infantalisation, male disposability (which exists as a function of paternalism)…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 02:06 PM
2

People do get that the unique feature of paternalism is that the individual/group being paternalised are infantalised (and therefore facilitated by a utility-based social class) right?
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:47 PM
1

Actually epidemic refers to how far something has spread, not necessarily how rapidly it has spread. Also you need to look at the significantly higher rates of male suicide here compared to female suicide. If epidemic is an exaggeration, it isn't by much.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:31 PM
1

Oh their reactions are definitely the norm. I just think with this sort of thing, you need friends who get it and can support you.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:29 PM
1

Common sense would say that there is a rational approach to issues and that each person is going to react differently in a given situation. If anything a lack of empathy is likely to feed a lack of common sense and visa versa.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 06:57 PM
1

Schizophrenia is a condition with harmful and destructive effects on the sufferer which I am familiar with through an old school friend and tbh, there's not much you could take from it as a sufferer that is positive, unless it was an incredibly mild case (in which case, someone could make the same claims about character and unconventional thinking I have). That said, I wouldn't begrudge someone who was proud of having severe schizophrenia because they found unexpected blessings from it - in fact…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 06:44 PM
2

How the hell am I getting down-voted for pointing out that breast cancer is a mens' issue because a significant number of men suffer from breast cancer as well as women?
/r/MensRights23/06/13 06:39 PM
1

What you're describing there is arrogance rather than common sense. Common sense would be that the only way you could make a sound and positive judgement on a situation is if you had all the facts and all the contributing factors.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 06:37 PM
1

I'd reverse that. The problem is both a lack of empathy in people and common sense being ironicallly uncommon, equates to a dangerous cocktail.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 06:26 PM
1

On the contrary, ADD is not a disease, it is a condition whereby the brain does not produce enough neuro-transmitters. It is neither degenerative nor contagious and many of us with ADD are highly intelligent, incredibly high functioning and highly successful. It is highly ironic that you would speak about ignorance when your entire response here reeks of ignorance when confronted with an arguably even more misunderstood condition. Furthermore, who said that all conditions have to be treated. The…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 06:24 PM
2

The irony in what - apologising if what he said was misconstrued as a shot at transsexuals and then wanting to extracate himself when it became clear that everyone wouldn't be happy unless they got a pound of flesh too?
/r/MensRights23/06/13 06:17 PM
1

At the same time I can see why he got indignant. The tweets I saw were him clearly being baited when he was already clearly on the backfoot. As for who they were, from the twitter feed I saw, it looked like feminists were using the prior incident as ammo for cheap shots. I'm not doubting their transphobia; however I'm also conscious of the number of them that also claim they care about men's issues with a straight face.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 06:00 PM
1

I totally know what you mean. A few months ago I was publicly mocked by Paul Elam, several members of the AVfM facebook page and several manosphere blogs, because I dared to challenge a rad fem meme. The reason I challenged it was because I endured sexual coersion in an abusive long distance relationship I was in and learned firsthand that it is entirely possible in this digital age, to be raped without any physical contact being involved. The fact is that we make people uncomfortable because we…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 05:55 PM
1

I never said that being transsexual was a disease. However, biologically speaking it is a condition, just as that ADD which I have is a condition. Neither makes us perpetual lepurs, and neither diminishes who we are as people. Furthermore as someone who had related body issues during puberty which I still bear the physical scars of today due to a botched surgery, I can completely empathise with being transexual. However at the same time, just as I don't expect the world to automatically differen…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 05:49 PM
1

On the contrary, there is very much a silent epidemic of domestic violence due to social attitudes- it's just that the vast majority of those silent sufferers are men and lesbians.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 05:39 PM
-1

Ask her if what the specific type of oppression women have faced is. If she doesn't answer paternalism, then she's showing how utterly ignorant she is on even women's issues.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 05:23 PM
1

Noone is segregating here though. The politics of consent is that it is almost universally recognised as only applying to women. What this poster is doing is demonstrating that it applies equally to men - despite what society dogmatically believes to the contrary.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 05:13 PM
1

Bravo for having the courage to call a spade a spade and speak out about your own ordeal.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 05:12 PM
1

I wasn't trying to imply you were doing that. I was simply bringing nuance to what you were saying. A huge stumbling block with the politics of rape is that the nuances of various situations usually become the first casualty of both sides. The distinction between reckless contributing factors on the part of the victim and the culpability of the perpetrator is a textbook example of this - where the militant feminist position denies the impact of reckless contributing factors by the victim and the…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 05:09 PM
2

One of the worst moves we can make from a men's rights perspective is to think that by breast cancer getting more funding in certain areas that women are winning out at the expense of men. It's all too easy to forget that men can and do get breast cancer and so the funding does benefit them. I agree that prostate cancer definitely deserves equal funding to breast cancer. However it's important that we never forget that breast cancer is as much a men's issue as it is a women's issue.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 04:43 PM
2

"No, you don't need to be "taught" that you can decline to have sex with someone." The reason for that is what we are talking about is reeducation, rather than education. The fact is that we're taught from an early age that we must want sex whenever and whomever offers it and if we don't, then either there's something wrong with us or we're gay. You follow this up by rightly saying "You just have to be a functional human individual." However that's the whole point- that society has conditioned u…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 04:36 PM
3

Seduction when someone is initially unwilling isn't necessarily rape. When it crosses over into rape is when after seduction the other person still isn't interested and their lack of consent is completely ignored.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 04:27 PM
2

Nothing to apologise for. I'm going to say it since noone else here has and maybe you've never even put it in these terms yourself- she raped you! She deliberately plied you full of alcohol to get you vulnerable and then promptly decided that no meant yes. Granted, maybe you should have known your limits and it was something to learn from in that regard, but ultimately, she is entirely culpable here and her alone. End of story. Well not quite. You have absolutely nothing to apologise for in disc…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 04:23 PM
1

There's one thing which is far too easily lost in the whole response most people will give. The natural response most people will give here to counter this is that "men should be men". The problem with this though is that generally what is meant by this is a tradcon definition of masculinity, which rather ironically, was scoiety telling men how to act and what conditional set of yardsticks we had to live by in order to be "real men". The great myth of the manosphere is that men were only told ho…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 04:15 PM
1

And honestly from what I read it was more a case of Gabe being caught on the backfoot and people looking for a fight than it was any kind of actual transphobia on Gabe's part.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 03:47 PM
3

Again though, just because people describe things in general terms does not mean that there isn't a sliding scale with it either. Someone who feels disease being in their own body, is going to be far more borderline in terms of being transgender than someone who either mutilates parts of their body (in extreme cases) or opts for gender reassignment surgery. However that does not change the fact that being transgender is by its very definition, a disconnect between a person's biological gender an…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 03:45 PM
3

Granted I did have you confused with fyrenwater in terms of the tweets linked, however the fact is that you brought up the wider context, which I checked out before responding and honestly, it did you no favours by siding with it. Maybe Gabe could have handled things a little better, but his responses read like he was caught off guard and constantly responding off the back foot from people who were utterly idiotic in their responses. Furthermore I stand by my analysis of the situation in general…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 04:20 PM
1

Just got the following response: "You are attempting to change the terms of debate, but I am not fool enough to miss something as 101-level as that. The “men’s rights” movement is predicated on the notion that ALL men are in need of liberation, and your post slides past that. Also, your sub-groups are not being oppressed by women: the reasons for disproportionate male inclusion are typically economic in nature. Finally, you are yelling at me over things I never even said. This does not make you …
/r/MensRights22/06/13 02:19 PM
2

On the contrary, feminist gender understandings are utterly flawed and actually entrench traditional gender based social constructs. That will only change when feminists reject "patriarchal theory" and embrace an understanding of gynocentrism.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 01:35 PM
1

Got the following response: "If a court rules that he is not a prostitute-paying, woman-beating pile of sheep raisins, I’ll publish a follow-up and acknowledge such." Left the following reply: "You really need to revise the legal system in the Western world before posting this. I'm not the individual in question, but if I was I would have legitimate grounds to sue you for libel. The fact at the moment, the individual in question is merely alleged to have committed the crime in question and until…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 01:25 PM
8

Actually looking at it from the outside, the critics in this case are utter morons. There was nothing mildly offensive in the panel in question. What it clearly was (it's amazing how things look when you DON'T have an agenda when reading something) was that a group of industry professionals felt that the fun and magic had been lost and we concerned about recapturing it in a positive manner. It's a perfectly legimate panel. When people took issue with gasp shock horror a panel about gaming return…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 12:51 PM
2

On the contrary, from what was reported in the article, it's pretty clear that the people of that town are beyond rational discussion in the matter. Small towns like that thrive on reputation and on appearing like "good christian, salt of the earth folk". Making them lose face and feel shame is what will really sting hard and isolate them until they're forced to take a long hard look in the mirror.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 12:04 PM
1

Here's the town's facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Norwood-Colorado/61438061037 I left the following wall post on their page and I encourage everyone to equally give them hell: "No doubt you're all supposedly "god fearing" people. Well heads up you satanic pedophile hypocrites. There's a special place in hell for both child rapists and staunch supporters of child rapists, right next to the likes of Hitler!"
/r/MensRights22/06/13 07:25 AM
7

At the same time though, I can understand it to some degree. Considering how misunderstood the transgender community is and the marginalisation and bigotry they face, I can understand how they would be a little on edge with things. As a disabled man, I deal with similar frustration when encountering the term "retard/ed" et al and trying to get it into people's heads that that kind of ableism, no matter how unwitting it might be is quite literally engaging in nazi bigotry due to Nazi Euthanasia P…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 05:36 AM
12

Would most level headed transexuals actually take offence though. The fact is that to a transexual they're the right person in the wrong gendered body anyway so why would they be offended at a game about female masturbation which simply anatomically correct to anyone who considered themselves female. Let's face it, if this wasn't the case, then why do so many transexuals undergo gender reassignment surgeries? The fact is that this is yet another case of rad fems firing anything convenient at som…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 02:35 AM
5

It's too early in the morning for me to give a detailed answer on this, but society, due to gynocentrism, has always seen women as being perpetually in need of protecting and providing for. You can actually see this in the specific form of oppression which women endured- namely paternalism and the female infantalisation it is founded on. The upshot of all this is that society trains people to react (or in many cases, to overreact) at even the slightest perceived threat to women. Ergo when things…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 02:29 AM
8

Left the following comment on the blog: "And an actual conviction was record where exactly? All you have noted is that he was charged, yet you have completely failed to cite any evidence of that charge leading to a conviction. If a mere charge without actually leading to a conviction is sufficient evidence of conclusive guilt for you, then I put it to you that you clearly believe that the Salem Witch Trials are a textbook example of "due process" too."
/r/MensRights22/06/13 02:03 AM
1

2 words- Gina Rinehart :P
/r/MensRights21/06/13 03:26 AM
7

Actually here's the heirarchy of the country. Queen Elizabeth ->Quentin Bryce (Governor General) -> Julia Gillard (Prime Minister) -> Wayne Swann (Deputy Prime Minister) -> Nicola Roxon (Federal Attourney General). In other words, out of the top 5 positions, only 1 is held by a man.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 11:16 AM
1

I agree in theory but disagree in practice. The problem is that had they shown their faces then their defence lawyer could have called a mistrial if this went higher than the local court level as it could be argued that the jury was tainted.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 12:54 AM
2

Except we're not talking about limiting the thoughts of others - we're talking about expressing them in a manner which isn't a complete own goal to men's rights. At no point did I disagree with shaming white knights and male feminists. All I have been critical of is doing it in a way which perpetuates one of the countless barriers abused men have in disclosing their abuse in this world and getting justice and support. More to the point, perpetuating gynocentric mechanisms to combat gynocentrism,…
/r/MensRights19/06/13 03:47 AM
0

Elam initially took the same stance as Angry Harry, however the problem was that when Dean Esmay finally got through to him and the penny dropped, his response was along the lines of missing that James had been drugged. That conditional retraction is highly problematic and here's why. The drugging wasn't the only instance in his story that qualifies what happened to him as rape. Even if he'd been merely drunk and in no fit state to drive, he still in no uncertain terms told the woman "not happen…
/r/MensRights19/06/13 01:23 AM
3

"and although many of you have given me some great information, I still believe in feminism." So in other words you choose to still perpetuate the paternalisation of women and oppose equality then, for the reasons I have already covered in my long post to you concerning the problematic nature of core feminist doctrine.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 12:40 AM
1

Aaaaaaaaand, I was right. Unpublished in their comments section.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 12:36 AM
3

The video by Ian Tynes is especially spot on on all fronts. At the end of the day, I'd define domestic violence this way. Domestic violence is the attempt, using any and all means at their disposal, for a man or woman to control, isolate and subjugate their partner. Means of control and abuse can be sexual (there is a hidden epidemic of raped battered men out there), financial, psychological, emotional and isolation. Regardless of whether some of these aspects can be tried whilst maintaining due…
/r/MensRights18/06/13 07:09 PM
23

The title of this is wrong. This isn't the results of "victim culture"; it's the results of gynocentrism. If we had a society which truly felt compassion for victims, this poor man wouldn't have been just expected to "man up and cop the abuse" from at the latest, him getting a gash from the can.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 05:06 PM
8

Submitted the following comment. I highly doubt it'll be published: Where's a desk when you need to head-desk? For starters, anyone saying Gillard has copped it worse than others has a short memory. For example, during the Howard years, the slurs "Little Johnny Hitler" and "Jackboot Johnny" floating around - Gillard has yet to be compared to a Nazi. Furthermore, attacks on Tim Matherson are actually misandry, not misogyny. Ironically the woman to my knowledge is still a member of the Fabian Soci…
/r/MensRights18/06/13 04:51 PM
4

I don't give a rats ass about what feminists do or do not do in this case. What I care about are men at their most marginalised, including abused men. When you perpetuate male genitalia based shaming, you become part of the reason why so many abused men out there suffer in silence. At the end of the day, what do you care about more, fighting feminism or men's rights? Both are incompatible in this case.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 04:22 PM
9

Ok, seriously, what the hell was that - it was like watching some militant feminist having a shriek-filled nervous breakdown.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 03:46 PM
8

"now you have just turned into another, pussy whipped, mangina. " You mean self depricatin, brainless lemming. I agree with your intent, but as this article is a classic example of, the reason men are kept disposable is due to social policing. One of the most common methods of this is genitalia based shaming. If we want to change that, then slurs like "mangina" (an example of genitalia based male shaming) have to go - as much as male feminists like this deserve to be shamed.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 03:45 PM
1

Either a feminist downvoted me, or some MRAs here clearly cannot grasp that a lie based on a half truth is far more dangerous than a lie devoid of truth.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 01:23 PM
3

Actually you're half right. Women were oppressed - specifically they were paternalised. In other words they were simultaneously oppressed and privileged. In fact that paternalisation continues on today. All that has really changed is that the state has taken over the role of father/husband and the scope of what is deemed a "safe space" under paternalism has merely increased radically.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 01:13 PM
4

"Because feminism outright lies about facts." Wrong. It feminism were founded on outright lies, it would be harmless. The problem is that feminism is founded on just enough half truth while playing on just enough social conditioning to make it believable.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 01:04 PM
2

Actually feminism has always been founded on fallacy (ie "patriarchy" as opposed to gynocentrism and hypergamy). The actual problem is that every single piece of feminist dogma is based on one half truth or another and so there is a danger in dismissing a feminist utterance without extracting the half truth it's founded on first.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 12:57 PM
-1

There is one area where MGTOWs are a problem in terms of men's rights. Specifically the problem is that MGTOWs arbitrarily oppose ANY expansion of existing laws. Anyone who is familiar with the legal issues involving male rape victims and the legal status of male rape victims of female rapists, should be able to see the glaring issue there.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 09:58 AM
3

Good luck getting that out of him. He still refuses to be accountable for engaging in blatantly misandrist DV and rape apologetics on the AVfM facebook page a few months back - arguably far worse than what could be considered an act of naivety on his part..
/r/MensRights18/06/13 09:15 AM
15

"I don't know how she passed the MRM smell test beyond her first dozen videos." I do, in no uncertain terms. The fact is that Paul Elam is far more anti-feminist than he is MRA. From my own experiences with him, he seems more concerned with attacking feminism and channelling the hurt of angry men to blindly oppose feminism than he does in actually advancing a pro-men's rights agenda. I witnessed this first hand when I opposed the use of the term "mangina" on the grounds that encouraging genitali…
/r/MensRights18/06/13 09:14 AM
11

"since the dawn of time women had to deal with much much worse" Tell that to the countless men who died being nothing more than cannon fodder and nothing more than manual labour on projects like the Panama Canal.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 08:34 AM
12

The flaw with this argument though is that the feminist movement has been the chief architect of the perpetuation of the Duluth Model of domestic and sexual violence as well as child abuse. Feminism has repeatedly argued that domestic violence, rape and child abuse are the products of patriarchy, ergo that all are solely manifestations of male oppression of women. Feminism can't have it both ways - it can't claim to seek equality in areas of custody and abuse on one hand and then perpetuate the …
/r/MensRights18/06/13 08:33 AM
29

bayarea415, there are glaring issues with feminism, not to mention the fact that it is founded on a fallacy - a fallacy which informs all feminist theory and attitudes. This core fallacy is what I will focus on, although I can draw on issues with feminist lies regarding domestic violence, its refusal to condemn and ostracise militant factions in the mainstream and its [often violent, bordering on terrorist] insistence on making domestic violence, rape and child abuse gendered issues despite coun…
/r/MensRights18/06/13 08:27 AM
6

It was just one of those articles which just had to be seen to be believed. Just when I think we might be evolving as a race....
/r/MensRights16/06/13 07:02 PM
3

On the contrary, at the end of the day, one person's urges will never override another person's basic and fundamentl right to health and life. Does that make things easy for the person with HIV? Of course not, however that will never change the fact that that person's sexual desires come second to another person's basic fundamental right to life and health. That is the core issue here and that is what you chose to take issue with. Your entire response smacks of the relativist infantalised crap t…
/r/MensRights16/06/13 02:49 PM
7

Left the following comment on the article: Notice the language at play here, as it always is and the chauvinism which guides journalistic ethics these days. A 36 year old man "rapes" an 11 year old girl; a 36 year old woman "has a sexual encounter with" an 11 year old boy. A male teacher "seduces and corrupts" a female student; a female teacher "has an affair with" a male student. It wasn't that long ago that Sydney was up in arms because Sheik Hilaly compared female rape victims to "uncovered m…
/r/MensRights16/06/13 01:27 PM
5

Right so their sexual urges give them the right to subject others to an incurable and potentially terminal illness? Infantalisation much?
/r/MensRights16/06/13 01:25 PM
0

Honestly not surprised. Community service is the standard sentence these days for a second instance of assaulting police.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 01:24 PM
1

That's just it. It's not just this campaign though - it's everything including fairytales from the age children are read and told stories by their parents. I agree that this campaign reinforces female infantalisation. However getting women in trouble out of a bad situation and then giving them a wake-up call in the form of setting them straight the morning after, has a chance of breaking that cycle. Leaving them to their own devices and having them become another statistic, will only turn them i…
/r/MensRights15/06/13 10:12 PM
2

"What's their source that men do it more?" Myths and stereotypes I believe.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 10:04 PM
2

typhon, do us all a favour and quote the source to put these 2 in their place - especially sprinkz.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 11:13 AM
4

While I understand what you're saying here, the problem I see is that taking a blanket "you're on your own" position is that a huge part of our problem as a society is that we are a collective of isolated self-interested individuals - not because we're all assholes; but because in this heavily orchestrated passive consumer society, we're conditioned to think of our own interests primarily and ignore the downtrodden, the vulnerable and the troubled, to focus purely on the self. By all means every…
/r/MensRights15/06/13 11:12 AM
42

Exactly. The flaw with this campaign though is as per usual, that compassion is denied to equally vulnerable men.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 03:45 AM
3

Spot on on both counts. But it is at least a minor improvement on the feminist "all men are rapists" mantra, so at least it's progress heading in the direction of recognising male rape victims (which needs to happen before female rapists will be recognised by society, considering how our gynocentric society is socially contructed).
/r/MensRights15/06/13 03:44 AM
2

I agree with your intent, however I do take issue with the advice you gave Lesterhuffmire. You actually told him to repeatedly tell himself that trust is a weakness, because as I understand it, the subconscious is incapable of processing the word "not". As such, I'll correct your advice. Lesterhuffmire, repeat after me- Trust is a strength, trust is a strength.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 01:43 AM
1

"First of all, there to me is a huge difference between a manipulative partner and a batterer. You are absolutely correct that the Duluth Modal has skewed the DV industry heavily against men and they face horrible bias and blame in this area. " Yes, the psychological scars run far deeper and last far longer than the physical scars. However domestic violence is still domestic violence. "At one point women were severely limited in their lives due to systematic social expectations and bias (by ever…
/r/MensRights14/06/13 04:44 AM
9

And this is why it can pay to read the comments section. I was about to ask where the distortion had come from, but you've just proven their obfuscation in spades. Nice catch indeed.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 02:16 AM
1

There's one key difference here though. After 30 years of the Duluth Model being perpetuated as the dynamic of 99%+ of all abusive relationships, most therapists, trained police officers, etc would never blame you for the abuse you endured based on you having a labia between your legs. The complete opposite is true for battered men. Multiply that by 100 when you start talking about sexual violence by women against men - to the point where even the position of the manosphere and MGTOWs and some M…
/r/MensRights14/06/13 02:05 AM
2

I hear you on the rape mate. One of my "punishments" was being made to have hardore phone sex with my abuser (it was a long distance relationship) where I'd be made too do voices where I'd pretend to be other guys saying how terrible I was. Factory and Dean Esmay have both told me on prior occasions that I was incredibly forward thinking as MRAs go and yet it took me more than a year to recognise that what she'd done to me was rape. It took me over another year to work up the courage to admit it…
/r/MensRights14/06/13 01:59 AM
1

Of course they wouldn't mention the term "rape". Doing so would shine an unflattering light on the family court system and its numerous precedents for court ordering minors as young as 12 who were victims of statutory rape, to pay child support to the [in many cases convicted] pedophiles that raped them.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 01:20 AM
3

The worst thing you can do is fall into the manospherian misandrist script of blaming yourself by viewing this as some shortcoming on your part (ie feeling foolish) which you need to correct to regain some kind of worth as a man. The fact is that abusers are master manipulators - they zone in on our vulnerabilities and exploit them to the maximum, while making us feel like they're the best we'll get and giving us just enough "good days" to keep us in false hop of what happened. This is entirely …
/r/MensRights13/06/13 11:26 PM
2

And the reason for that is control and fear.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 01:51 AM
1

Sounds similar to me, where she'd use her social phobia to guilt trip me into letting her even cyber with guys whilst I couldn't even watch anything where a woman was in bed with bare shoulders showing.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 01:25 AM
2

When I saw the ads for this, I actually dismissed it as a beer ad campaign (anyone familiar with alot of Aussie ads targeting men of late will understand why). I'm actually glad this is getting alot of air time. Unfortunately here when it comes to guys here, it's always a mix of "go get help" or "take a teaspoon of cement and harden the **** up" - where it's more about the person wanting the inconvenient truth of male vulnerability to disappear from their sight, than it is about genuinely comfor…
/r/MensRights13/06/13 12:38 AM
2

This is precisely why one of the greatest assets to feminists is the manosphere. Every single time they make some "men are conquerors" ideological pronouncement, they become yet another example feminists can point to in justifying their ideological stance. After all, feminist notions are merely the notions of "men are conquerors" and "men dominate;women submit" taken to their ideological conclusions.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 12:23 AM
3

While this article in terms of the build up will apply to many guys, it wont cover all of them. What I found for example was that I was already in a vulnerable place as an ex had recently died in a car crash after just breaking up with her and so mine was able to skip alot of those steps and just used a mix of "noone could ever want you"/"I'm the best you'll ever get" lines whilst using anything at her disposal, including child abuse, as a psychological weapon in her arsenal. In short while this…
/r/MensRights13/06/13 12:16 AM
1

To be exact, feminism in practice is a reducto ad absurdum held up to gynocentrism (as much is entirely unintentional by feminists). Feminism merely takes the sanitised version of disposable [gynocentric] masculinity which is glorified by tradcons and the bulk of the manosphere glorify (ie "men are conquerors", et al) and runs with it to its logical conclusions. The fact is that if you go deep enough into issues facing marginalised men, you'll find blatant misandry from the manosphere (traumatis…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 08:15 PM
1

Feminists aren't the only perpetrators of misandry. The manosphere for example, have a really bad habit of engaging in blatant misandry the moment it comes to men who are marginalised and fail to live up to their tradcon notion of the perpetual male superman. Heck I've even witnessed MGTOWs and certain high profile MRAs of also engaging in misandry on certain issues where men are marginalised. At the end of the day, the enemy of the men's rights movement is misandry and those who perpetuate it -…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 09:16 AM
1

While I completely understand your intentions, such a move would ultimately do more harm than good for men and boys - as tempting as it is. Slurs like "man up" are mechanisms of genitalia based shaming designed to socially police men and keep them in a model of masculinity which is disposability based. What is needed in terms of men's rights is to eradicate that model of social policing from society rather than further normalising it. It's for that reason that I oppose the use of the slur "mangi…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 03:36 AM
1

To respond in kind, you don't just focus on buying the horse when you also need the buggy. The problem is that many people seem to see changing laws as the end goal rather than a step in the right direction. The other problem I see is this. Laws will only change when the majority of people demand it. People will only demand it when they perceive an injustice existing that is in need of redressing. People will only perceive that injustice when they recognise the humanity of men and boys and that …
/r/MensRights12/06/13 01:01 AM
-2

People who think that numerous MRAs, MGTOWs and the manosphere haven't been guilty of the exact same thing as the aforementioned feminists, need to look at little closer to home. I truly feel for the rape survivor in question because I was in the exact same position as them on AVfM and several manosphere/MGOTW blogs. A few months ago a feminist meme popped up on the AVfM facebook page which was to the effect of "I need feminism because men can rape women without laying a finger on them." I knew …
/r/MensRights12/06/13 12:16 AM
2

When I saw this, I thought this HAD to be a case of pre-existing sperm at a sperm bank where the husband had died and therefore the sperm deposits had become a part of the estate. In such a situation I could understand where things might get contentious as it's no different to the politics of organ donation. Then I saw the article and I wished I had a desk nearby so I could head-desk. There is no debate here. Either sexual slavery in all forms is acceptable, in which case, everything including c…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 11:09 PM
3

The most disgusting thing about this is that lawyers aren't rushing to take this as a pro-bono case. But then let's face it that would require looking at men as actual victims of the system - a state of male experience which the manosphere, feminists and tradcons rail against. After all all three seek to perpetuate the notion of "men are conquerors" and run with it in different ways to serve their own ends - equally railing in horror at recognising the humanity of men and boys (and all the human…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 10:45 PM
1

Just going for legal equality wont help men at their most marginalised and vulnerable in a profound way. Sure, it'll stop salt being poured in the wounds and the wounds being made deeper and larger, but if we're serious about men's rights, then shouldn't the end goal be to heal those wounds completely (as opposed to the pro-male-disposability position of "heal them enough" - which the manosphere only seems to adopt when it's being really generous)? If we're really serious about men's rights, the…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 10:32 PM
2

""Eliminating gender stereotypes" is marxist SJW newspeak for "eliminating gender roles we don't like, that is, masculinity."" So why let feminists own and define the term or the concept? The fact is that male disposability is one giant collection of gender stereotypes in action, designed to make us slaves while blowing smoke up our asses that it's all for our benefit (for the benefit of 0.0001% of men and women at the most more like it). Suppose you manage to stop that feminist imperative in it…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 09:05 AM
1

The big problem with this debate is that people confuse genuine equality (equality of justice, support where needed and opportunity) with parity (equality of opportunity). The fact is that if we look to men at their most vulnerable in society, we need egalitarianism. In the case of a brilliant woman in a certain field, she deserves the same chance and same fostering of her abilities as an equally brilliant man in the same field. The problem is that so many out there essentially take the same lin…
/r/MensRights10/06/13 08:28 PM
1

Howso exactly (I know the answer to this, but honestly, for most people reading this who don't, it'll come across as hysteria)?
/r/MensRights09/06/13 03:08 AM
2

This is more a sign of how broken the legal system is than women getting a free pass. The fact is that this sentence these days matches what even men get on a second instance of assaulting police. Here's why I say this. Late 2009, I was severely assaulted coming off a train by a violent drunk. The guy left me with 3 teeth snapped off from the jaw at the base of the tooth sockets, a 17cm long hairline fracture to the lower jaw, severe welts from having my head stomped on and a blowout fracture to…
/r/MensRights09/06/13 02:46 AM
3

Sadly male rape, especially female-on-male rape, is one of the most messed up areas of sexual politics out there and all sides are culpable to one degree or another in perpetuating the misandry which the status quo reeks of - including sections of the MRM. To my knowledge, to this day, no country recognises a woman sexually violating a man with her vagina as rape, even though the NIPSVS in 2010 found that just as many men had experienced forced penetration in the previous 12 months as women have…
/r/MensRights08/06/13 08:06 AM
1

"You haven't actually provided any evidence of that occuring though, of MRA fetishing feminist style masculinity." If you want evidence of that, then check out the responses from Angry Harry and Codebuster in the thread on AVfM on James Landrith's rape encounter. I have no desire to go back into that thread with the depraved and misandrist victim blaming which transpired in it, but if you want a glaring example of how MRAs can fit soundly in that paradigm, then look no further in that thread tha…
/r/MensRights25/02/13 02:31 AM
1

"Feminists dislike alphas and betas. They have a very passionate and intense hate for nice guys, and often see them in a worse light than alphas because they aren't attracted to nice guys and so they see nice guys as rapists and creepers. And I wouldn't say most MRA are alpha. The most significant part of the movement is composed of fathers and husbands. Both roles reduce testosterone and are well known to reduce how dominant people are." This is a complete strawman response on your part. What y…
/r/MensRights24/02/13 11:35 PM
1

"Then I don't think we have much disagreement. Most here would agree that the culture at large of the world is anti male, and would want effective ways to counteract abuse from people with a wide variety of social levels." The problem is the ideological trap that feminism has set. The natural state for a man to fall into who feels disenfranchised by feminist manipulation of the system is to knee-jerk against the systems and propaganda feminist have put in place. The typical feminist rhetoric is …
/r/MensRights24/02/13 01:07 PM
1

marauderp, you really need to inform yourself about the politics of male victimhood before making such misandrist statements as this. By your argument we shouldn't encourage male rape victims or male domestic violence victims - heck, even male child rape victims for that matter - because society has most male victims convinced that they cannot be victims because they are male.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 01:54 PM
2

Fair enough, it did sound like you were getting it from even well meaning people though. However when you consider that our attitudes in society towards males is so barbaric that our response to male child rape victims is "oh man up and pay your pedophile child support - if you hadn't have done her then she wouldn't have gotten pregnant"; I'd argue that describing male socialisation as emotional brutalisation is entirely spot on the mark.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 01:51 PM
1

I understand what you're getting at, however your argument is somewhat of a prima facie. The smoking gun here are recovering abuse survivors, particularly recovering child abuse survivors- not to mention sufferers of depression, anxiety and PTSD. In these cases, the coping mechanisms which would allow someone to handle minor setbacks, has either been damaged or simply never developed to begin with. On one hand you disagree with the culture of shaming men for being victims of trauma, but on the o…
/r/MensRights23/02/13 01:48 PM
1

"Women have lots of ways to judge men outside of how socially dominate they are. They can judge their attractiveness, musical skill, kindness, sexual prowess, lots of things. Most people aren't into social order and large scale alpha beta omega masculinity, they're into their own private interests." We're not talking about what people are interested in, we are talking about institutionalised behaviour and dogmatically indoctrinated values systems. What people want in such cultures in terms of sa…
/r/MensRights23/02/13 01:37 PM
2

"Who are these half-men you're talking about? Winston Churchill? Charles Lindbergh?" Generally speaking in modern terms, your ruthless corporate executives and your "hard men" are going to be your more trope-like examples. However it applies to any man who shames other men into "manning up" or have repressed parts of themselves becuase they've been shamed into it by other men. Also you've missed a key point. The first rule of high success and leadership is to know yourself - your limitations, yo…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 01:25 PM
1

The problem with your analysis is that we're not just talking about the Alpha male per se. What we're talking about is the entire Alpha Male paradigm (which every rung of Alpha, Beta and Omega masculinity slots into), which is the other side of the same coin as female hypergamy. The reason hypergamy exists is because of the Alpha male paradigm - as hypergamy simply cannot exist if men refuse to adhere to the Alpha male paradigm. Regardless of whether you are talking about it being perpetuated by…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 12:49 PM
1

I understand what you're saying about groups, however the reality is that in this world, we often have multiple roles in multiple groups and with that comes different standings in the pecking order of each group we are a part of where someone who may be an Alpha in one group is outmatched in another group- where the best chance they have for dominance is to take on a beta role, although this is more in situations where their membership in the groups is more necessary to their lives than optional…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 01:10 AM
2

Certainly it's a beta-male response as the betas have formed the "enforcer" class of traditionalism for several milleniums now. However what has always been enforced has been the alpha-male paradigm, where non-alpha male traits are brutally suppressed to produce alpha males [and as you have pointed out beta males to enforce that paradigm]. Also I'd agree that most of the responses I got were Beta responses. However I'd also say that the response I got from the Madman Entertainment forums and tha…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 09:47 PM
2

"No, it's pervasive Beta-ism that caused feminism. But I'll let someone else explain that one." Wrong. Beta-ism has certainly been the key to enforcing feminism, but it is the male-disposability and female infantalisation of traditionalism - epitomed in terms of masculinity by the alpha male - which has provided the ideological foundations for feminism from the getgo. Furthermore, when you understand how proxy violence against men has worked throughout the ages, you understand that there is abso…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 09:24 PM
0

On the contrary, you've just proven there was. You had your parents split up, you had your father face a terminal illenss, had your father move away, isolating you from him to some degree and then he died - the one key male role model n your life. You should have been treated with compassion, with tenderness. You were just a child dealing with losses which many don't even face in their adult lives. You being an absolute mess, facing so much in such a short space of time and at such a young age, …
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:53 PM
2

Fair enough, I thought you were asking for my rationale rather than experiences. Maybe it's an Australian thing, but men here tend to be either machismo traditionalists or white knights. Personally I've been mocked as a male rape survivor on Madman Entertainment's official forums to the point where the admins who were actively engaged in it suspended me when i defended myself. When I complained about it to Madman themselves, they refused to issue an apology and when I threatened to go to the med…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:44 PM
2

That starts by teaching men that it's ok to be emotionally expressive and especially that real men embrace their feelings and true selves rather than repressing them.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:30 PM
1

Twisted, you just proved my point in spades. I'm saddened you were brutalised into such depraved repression and I hope that things eventually surfacing wasn't too painful. However I'm happy for you that you've rediscovered your authentic self. Oh and if any of the morons who brutalised you growing up has a problem with it - they can get stuffed as far as I'm concerned and I hope as far as you're concerned too :).
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:28 PM
2

Van, the problem is that there is a difference between men having alpha traits and men being alpha males -and the toxic and soul destroying false masculinity it has made society adhere to. Traditionally the state of play has been for men to reject all non-alpha male traits to "man up". The problem there obviously isn't that the alpha male traits are present - it's that the non-alpha male traits are repressed. Yes the alpha male paradigm might create great leaders, but how can men truly be great …
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:22 PM
2

It is - at least when you get to the really profound aspects of male disposability where they're confronted with the cold hard truth that everything they've been brought up to believe is genuine masculinity has been at best, a half-truth designed to make them value themselves only in terms of their utility. But then who wouldn't have a hard time with accepting that. I honestly compare alpha males to survivors of a cult with how they have, for the most part, fallen victim to socialised brainwashi…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 01:30 PM
1

You may have luck. It was actually one of my modern history lecturers who actually put me onto the writings of John Tosh - which I'd strongly recommend for anyone genuinely interested in both men's rights and how masculinity has been constructed by society.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 01:19 PM
1

In my experience, that "compassion" is more a passive aggressive "I see your point" - in other words "yes we get it, now shut up about it already." Some people will respond the way you say, but they tend to be in the minority.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 12:28 PM
6

There is a vast difference between self-control and emotional repression though. Here's the thing. Who among us consciously chooses to be raped? To be the victim of domestic violence? To be a child abuse survivor? To be the victim of a violent crime? To be the victim of any sort of trauma? Exhibiting any sort of fragility in those sorts of extreme circumstances is hardly due to a lack of self control, but rather down to the fact that we are human, rather than Kryptonian. Here's the thing that su…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 12:12 PM
2

Hopefully you come to see how toxic and divorced that is from your authentic masculinity that you're able to find a path forwards with it. Here's the thing, our emotions are the expression of our inner selves and how we respond and connect to the world around us. If you're emotionally shut down, then how can you truly connect and in turn, how can you truly know who you are. Honestly, I truly believe that it's this sort of stoicism which is the prime reason why most of us have mid-life crisies
/r/MensRights21/02/13 12:03 PM
1

I agree that men are starting to wake up, but here's the thing - take a look at the typical reaction to battered men. Take a look especially at the reaction to male rape victims and in particular male child sex victims of female pedophiles. Then you have the way homeless and destitute men are viewed by society. Many of the men who may hate the dog-eat-dog approach will still respond to male victims from an alpha-male paradigm, where any sign of weakness is met with slurs like "grow a pair" or "m…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:59 AM
2

van, your entire argument is flawed here as you clearly don't understand the social engineering at play. Here's the thing. Going as conservatively as possible and going by the male 7 day hormonal cycle, men reproduce 40 times more frequently than women. When men are virile enough that they have the sperm count to be able to reproduce at least once a day, that number jumps to being able to reproduce at least 270 times more frequently. In other words you need 1 man for every 270 women. However it'…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:48 AM
1

You've contradicted yourself here and tbh you seem not to understand just what an alpha male is (as opposed to a man who exhibits alpha traits). You said it yourself in your example of Richard Gere. Sure, he may exhibit some alpha traits, however the fact that he is also Buddhist and therefore spiritually committed to connecting with himself rather than being disconnected and therefore disposable, means that he's not an alpha male at all. After all such spirituality involves embracing non-alpha …
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:31 AM
1

"dude, alpha up, man. " Congratulations. It's attitudes like this which give feminism its roots. I'm not arguing against naivety, I'm arguing against the brutal emotional repression of men and vicious mockery and shaming of male victims. Here's what you're not getting - you can't push an agenda of men being predators without a sound ideological foundation of male victimhood being regarded as an impossibility. That's what the alpha male is - a man who exhibits alpha traits, but at the expense of …
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:26 AM
3

Honestly I'm not. Often the moment Neo throws up in The Matrix is used as an analogy for waking up, however there's a more analagous moment in the movie. Right before he comes out of the simulation and pukes, Neo lashes out screaming at people to get him out of the simulation. His worldview has been so shattered and everything he ever believed has been so thoroughly challenged that he can't handle it. That's how so many men react when traditionalism is challenged. They've been so brainwashed int…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 07:30 AM
1

Here's the thing though - when you're living up to the alpha ideal and building your life entirely around it - it seems like it's great...... .....until it all goes straight to hell in a hand-basket that is. When that happens (and it always does as there's always someone bigger and badder who comes along) all the emotional repression you've been through, all the lack of authentic self-discovery you've sacrificed, winds up being for nothing. On top of that society no longer sees value in you, you…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 07:24 AM
18

I couldn't agree more. However that said I have to disagree about the fact that we shouldn't be critical of male non-emotion. It's an interesting paradox however. In many cases, men are not responsible for their own non-emotional responses any more than someone who grew up in a cult is responsible for the warped views of said cult they have come to dogmatically believe. At the same time however, men in the vast majority of cases are responsible for conditioning other men into non-emotional respo…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 03:43 AM
2

I wouldn't merely say the "alpha" is just another role men are cast into. I'd actually go so far as saying that it's what men are brainwashed into believing is the epitome of masculinity -to the point where this particular red pill can be even too bitter for some men who hate feminism and feel marginalised to swallow. Of course the insidious thing is that feminists have tied lambasting of the alpha role into their whole "patriarchy" dogma, which only serves to make aspiring to and defending the …
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:30 AM
3

Except that, particularly in political circles, you have those at the top who either support a feminist approach which villainises men for being socialised into being disposable, or you have conservatives who glorify male disposability. The compassion you bring up, is often in the form of "yes men are abused but....[the statistics say blah blah blah]."
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:25 AM
4

Except it's not just about victims of violence. Homeless men aren't inherently victims of violence, but of the attrition of the system, yet look at how society views them. The issue here isn't even having compassion for men as even that is symptomatic. The real issue is people genuinely seeing men as human beings and not as items of utility.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:22 AM
2

My point was more for those newer to the movement who might think that simply combating feminism would somehow miraculously give men humanity, dignity and compassion in society and under the law - the problem runs far deeper than that. This entire post and what I'm about to say for those who truly understand how deep the rabbit hole goes will be a case of "preaching to the choir" as the old saying goes. I've just encountered enough "MRAs" who want "things to go back to how they were" that I felt…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:11 AM
19

No, we're (I'm a male rape survivor) invisible because society mocks us (even prominent MRAs when it suits them I might add) and because we're told that a penis equates to consent so we must have wanted it - in other words, we're treated like "uncovered meat" by society. It's not ambivalence society feels towards us - it's cruel and depraved contempt.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 12:30 AM
1

Depends on what you regard the line as and what you call overkill. Here's the thing though. She loses her job on this and she's a Martyr. Also a job loss would merely harden any resolves she had making this. The best course of action would be a formal warning, where she is told that such a stunt will result in unemployment if it happens again, and where she is required to make a public statement apologising for such statements and acknowledging the serious issue of false rape allegations (and no…
/r/MensRights09/02/13 05:30 AM
1

But if you're going to go down that road, then the logical question has to be, was it freely given consent or was it given under a form of duress - either previously established or established at that time. This is more a question for when there is a pre-existing relationship between the rapist and the rape victim, however if consent being given is going to be examined, then the context of that consent must also be examined (with the appropriate safeguards of course).
/r/MensRights06/02/13 01:58 AM
2

Certainly, in cases where a torrid one night stand that was meant to be kept hidden becomes revealed or in cases where when in the morning after a drunken one night stand, the bear goggles wear off and regret sets in, such an assertion is utterly misogynistic as it denied women full sexual agency - including accountability for their choices. These of course are "best case" false accusation scenarios - with far more insidious false accusation scenarios, such as those where sex has never taken pla…
/r/MensRights06/02/13 01:48 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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