TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

cypher197 Archive

View 0 posts and 528 comments by cypher197 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

You can't act lines that aren't written for you. (Well, usually, but you get the idea.)
/r/MensRights13/03/16 11:29 PM
1

"Outraged? You should be. Products just like this already exist - but with the genders reversed." What such an advertisement would show when clicked, probably.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 10:23 PM
1

Giving it up means giving up political power.
/r/MensRights08/11/15 10:00 AM
1

No, that's how you get people complaining that butch lesbians are too butch. (That actually happened. It's bizarre.)
/r/MensRights08/11/15 09:31 AM
1

It was never funny, TBH, not even in fiction. It's hard to like a person that demands mindreading and acts like that.
/r/MensRights08/11/15 09:13 AM
1

Maybe that policy should be changed for /r/mensrants material, otherwise the sub will drift (it already has).
/r/MensRights08/11/15 08:35 AM
1

I admit, I laughed.
/r/MensRights08/11/15 08:02 AM
42

This will be used as "evidence" for "patriarchal power" and "oppression."
/r/MensRights05/11/15 12:19 AM
1

Because it's a huge status contest. Capitalism assigns more status to higher-paying careers.
/r/MensRights04/11/15 04:20 AM
6

Why do you think they fight so hard to keep problems that the public thinks are "gendered" "gendered" in the public consciousness? It's because they know, at some level, that no one would care if it happened equally to men and women, or only to men.
/r/MensRights04/11/15 03:45 AM
2

Goddam idiots in the comments have never had morning wood, apparently.
/r/MensRights29/10/15 05:51 PM
1

Citation, please? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_transsexualism#Brain_structure has some data, and it doesn't look like "extremely consistent" is entirely a correct characterization.
/r/MensRights17/10/15 08:48 PM
18

For heterosexual/mostly hetero males, pairing with pre-op transwomen: Some people are purely attracted to secondary sexual characteristics (breasts, hips, lips, etc) rather than primary sexual characteristic (genitalia). For transwomen themselves, we have reason to believe it's neurologically rooted because the gendering process in the human brain is actually relatively indirect and complex, and can potentially go wrong at a lot of different points. (Structural similarities between brains of un-…
/r/MensRights17/10/15 08:27 AM
1

I'd call it overly optimistic.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 04:16 AM
0

I think more than just entitled princesses will be affected, but I also don't see a complete severing. I happen to rather like my ex a great deal, after all.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 04:01 AM
1

Probably more than that, but noticeably less than 100%. What it'll take are eye implants, mostly. Even then you'll still get a few.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:59 AM
2

The idea that the MRM is against men acting feminine is a common misconception propagated by its political rivals. It would be more accurate to say that they think men should also be able to act masculine, or a mix, not that men acting feminine is bad. Other male-dominated gender movements that are not the MRM may have different opinions.
/r/MensRights14/09/15 04:16 AM
1

Hypoagency/hyperagency is embedded so deeply in people that they don't even begin to vaguely realize it.
/r/MensRights07/09/15 05:26 PM
1

Could be a troll?
/r/MensRights31/07/15 07:56 PM
3

Possibly. Like the basic income, the actual effects will be complicated and we won't know until someone tries it.
/r/MensRights31/07/15 07:54 PM
2

If society ultimately depends on men putting in the effort to get women and start a family, then men going to prostitutes instead is a problem. In the real world, this hasn't been proven one way or the other.
/r/MensRights31/07/15 07:33 PM
5

Woah. Just realized - the one-sided language strips women of their agency by assuming that they can't be at fault for any of this at all. It's reinforcing hypoagency.
/r/MensRights31/07/15 06:52 PM
1

I wonder if men should make such accusations back in response to false accusations.
/r/MensRights17/07/15 05:03 AM
2

He's gonna hate that you linked his blog here.
/r/MensRights30/06/15 12:36 AM
2

No questions at the moment, since others asked most of them, but thanks for making this thread. I'm glad to hear your transition is going well.
/r/MensRights23/06/15 07:50 PM
3

The other thread mentions that OP stopped feeling suicidal after three weeks of testosterone therapy. That shouldn't work unless there's something hormonally wrong to begin with.
/r/MensRights23/06/15 07:48 PM
2

Pro-circ need to justify their creepy obessesion with cutting up infant penises, seriously.
/r/MensRights26/05/15 10:54 PM
1

You've got to be kidding me. American industries being cheap and not caring about collateral damage, and using their money to lobby and bribe ("campaign contributions") the US officials, is a sufficient explanation. No Jewish conspiracy is required.
/r/MensRights24/05/15 07:53 PM
1

Good article. Thanks for posting it.
/r/MensRights24/05/15 07:38 PM
2

It comes from a very limited understanding of power. Power relationships are between individuals, and one individual can have negative power in some areas while having positive power in others.
/r/MensRights24/05/15 07:14 PM
3

Nope, you didn't cross the line at all. You just politically disagreed. I've observed this behavior elsewhere with a lot of feminists on websites and the like. They're about as bad as a typical US political party, with all the tribalism that implies. I know some who know and behave better, but there are a lot that don't. ...just like a typical political party!
/r/MensRights24/05/15 07:05 PM
1

Hey, no consent issues there, assuming it's subsapient. Of course, they'll fight it tooth and nail.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 05:03 PM
1

Sharing this with a lawyer friend of mine.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 04:54 PM
3

Because this wouldn't have gotten media attention if he were white, most likely. Not to imply that black guys have it easier. It just makes him easier to paint as an underdog.
/r/MensRights16/05/15 01:52 AM
6

Most problems black men have are problems men in general have - but noticeably worse.
/r/MensRights16/05/15 01:48 AM
3

Hell, I used "femsplaining" on someone just a couple months ago, unironically. If we go by the "legitimate" "mansplaining" definition, then there are a lot of women out there that have no clue whatsoever about the male experience that are engaging in "femsplaining". I mean, granted, half the reason I did it was to weaken the term "mansplaining", but she was also being completely oblivious to the male experience.
/r/MensRights05/03/15 03:41 AM
2

Ha. Haha. Oh, man, this irony is delicious.
/r/MensRights05/03/15 03:39 AM
3

Some people here are part of collateral damage that many feminists refuse to even acknowledge exists. (In addition to denying that any male suffering is valid or meaningful.) Others are wounded. For myself, I check in occasionally but don't consider myself "an MRA". I'm just a person with MRA and feminist sympathies, doing what seems right. Sticking to one label would constrain what theories and solutions I'm allowed to use (although more-so on the "Feminism" side), and what beliefs I'm allowed …
/r/MensRights05/03/15 03:33 AM
2

Yeah, ignoring the possibility that many women may judge men for relationships on that intuitively and subconsciously, much in the same way people judge appearance. Now we don't know for sure that that's the case, but it has most certainly not been ruled out yet.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 08:53 PM
-1

Usually you would expect them to, but accidents do happen. (That, and they may have decided not to in this case, for ratings, or to "make a point".) Regardless, reality TV is very very not representative of the population at large.
/r/MensRights27/01/15 04:00 AM
2

Pretty strong selection bias, dude. Reality TV is not going to select a group of tough, agreeable women with survival skills. It's going to select a bunch of women who are prone to drama, for all that reality TV drama action. edit: Can't believe I'm getting downvoted for this. Look, you don't bring up this kind of thing except to counter idiots who are all "women are best; men suck", because they use the same level of "evidence" (or even weaker). Then when they complain "but that's not represent…
/r/MensRights27/01/15 02:47 AM
1

Yes, why should feminists get to have all the fun of cooking up portMANteaus?
/r/MensRights23/01/15 08:35 AM
1

Maybe. I think that's a bet society should make. And just think, if it works out you can even rub it in the faces of your political rivals! Personally I think it will be a mixed bag.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 05:38 AM
2

I've argued with a few people about it, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 03:50 AM
3

"Also, saying that totally isn't a reinforcement of traditional male gender roles."
/r/MensRights12/01/15 01:51 AM
1

I think it's that way for all new social change. Not only is the MRM still finding out where it fits in, but men themselves are currently having to re-evaluate masculinity in light of the modern world.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 01:49 AM
1

Meh. This is obviously just a gender flip for a joke.
/r/MensRights09/01/15 03:00 AM
2

My impression is that the research indicates otherwise - i.e. children of gay couples that are well-adjusted also turn out well-adjusted. Not that it wouldn't be wise to ensure a positive male figure is present, of course.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 05:51 AM
1

Not that complicated? Not that complicated legally. Creating a new caste is a minor way to describe it. It's not a new caste because they'll be legally and genetically just like everyone else, assuming it works. Would those 'people' be humans? Yes. They have human DNA and human bodies and human brains. They are also definitely sapient and have emotions, and are therefore also people not "people." If you say yes then how would you define human? Within the range of variation of the human genome, p…
/r/MensRights06/01/15 03:08 AM
2

It's not that complicated. You record whomever ordered the procedure as the parent. As long as you're not allowing organizations to do it without a defined parent, it shouldn't pose too much legal trouble or create a "new caste" anymore than IVF does.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 02:13 AM
1

Was there another parent in the scene? Should be fine if she's married, even if it's to another woman.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 02:11 AM
2

Because it will empower men and lower the relative bargaining value of women. Not all feminists, mind you. I know a few that would be fine with it. Coincidentally, they're not famous. But there definitely will be some, based on previous feminist opposition to measures which aren't discriminatory but which would reduce the relative position of women.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 02:10 AM
1

There are actually quite a few women in medicine, which is neither easy, nor worthless junk.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 02:05 AM
-1

Even if we take that premise as true, by the time the effects would normally have hit we'll be into the Transhuman era. If we're still only reproducing via regular sex by 2100, we have much bigger problems. As to who would do most of the work... Robots and augmented humans. Baseline humans probably won't be able to compete in most fields by that point, leaving most work to those naturally quite adept or deliberately enhanced.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 04:30 AM
1

Hilarious. Confirms how out-of-touch they are that they think guys actually don't want women making games.
/r/MensRights30/11/14 09:47 PM
1

Thatcher was just a hallucination. Never happened.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 12:01 AM
3

Yeah, "child" would still slip under the radar.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 11:57 PM
6

Clickbait Trash Interesting new tag.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 11:54 PM
1

Where your body is considered ugly and any attempt to find love or affection is a perversion. It took me a long time to get over that feeling.
/r/MensRights08/11/14 07:18 PM
3

That would be an example of unilateral gender roles which are a problem.
/r/MensRights02/11/14 03:34 AM
4

Both conforming to traditional gender roles is better than one conforming and the other not conforming, but the best situation is to let everyone decide for themselves whether they want to be traditional or not. Some people are just naturally a poor fit for traditional gender roles.
/r/MensRights02/11/14 03:07 AM
1

This is why we're supposed to do bilateral gender-role disarmament, not unilateral.
/r/MensRights02/11/14 03:05 AM
1

Yeah, all the proper ones I know would done the obvious thing and just went skateboarding, not hide in fear.
/r/MensRights02/11/14 03:01 AM
1

The thing about the biological essentialism where "men" and "women" are absolute categories of mental traits and never overlap is that it's false. There are two populations, with two different population averages, but they do overlap. It's based more on hormones during development than it is on XX/XY genes, it's just that the latter tends to control the former. "Men and women are different, get over it" isn't an accurate summarization, and real gender equality is like most other forms of equalit…
/r/MensRights27/10/14 10:38 AM
1

Some men are also different from other men. We're dealing with biology, here, so the situation is messy. Just because each population might have a different natural average for some traits doesn't mean that the two populations don't overlap.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 10:35 PM
0

It's perfectly reasonable to cancel an event if a mass shooting was threatened and the police are unable to bar attendees from bringing firearms to the venue. Agree. I know it's Ms. Snarkesian, but it's still the case that it's legit to cancel an event if firearms aren't prohibited and a threat is made.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 01:33 AM
1

Feminists also actually accept the results of that study, so it can be useful for attacking the gender warriors with their own accepted research. They aren't rhetorically allowed to dismiss it, like they are for so many other things. When I was young, their rhetoric had me thinking it was more like 10-20%.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 01:15 AM
1

Yeah, we could use numbers on women. They're probably not so different. That needs a new study, though.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 01:13 AM
1

My understanding is that there has to be actual evidence it was a lie, not just a failed rape prosecution. This means that only a few false allegations would be prosecuted anyway, although that's better than none.
/r/MensRights11/10/14 07:50 PM
6

Because it plays to traditional gender roles and feminism.
/r/MensRights09/10/14 06:37 PM
1

Thank you. The lack of epistemic hygiene of what you call the "feminist dialect" is something that's bothered me for a long time. (e.g., that redef of sexism.) It bothers me even when I agree with them on things, which is often the case for moderate positions.
/r/MensRights09/10/14 01:01 AM
3

MRAs are enemies of TERFs, at least, as they tend to be transphobic out of misandry. That's where you get the "transwomen are secretly a conspiracy!" crud.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 12:57 AM
5

I don't think we can actually say the MRM supports trans rights. Rather, the MRM has no official stance on this issue. I, personally, am generally in favor of trans rights, though. Edit: As to why, a lot of the SJW-types consider transmen to still be close enough to being women, plus the regular dislike of men, and they may be less common, and you get this scenario.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 12:51 AM
1

I put "probably", because there might be research out there on it and I haven't checked. It sounds reasonable that women are putting more of the pressure on themselves than men are for breast aug, but that doesn't guarantee it's accurate. I've seen more information suggesting that women don't care that much about penis size so long as it's above certain minimum requirements, and that excessive size can lead to injury, so I answered more confidently on that. I'm fairly confident women feel like t…
/r/MensRights06/10/14 08:41 PM
1

But I suspect that men will, in this case, be blamed for their own insecurities, rather than feminists seeing the choices of women as a problem to men. From what I gather, that's what will happen, but most women don't care about this issue as much as men think they do - which is probably also the case with breast augmentation. This is really just a first step towards total body replacement, and seeing the effects that has on those who get by just on being pretty is going to be hilarious. ( Edit:…
/r/MensRights06/10/14 08:23 PM
1

I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or not, seeing as worries about penis size/etc really are troubling for a good number of men, and that adjustments are currently out of reach. They'd just move onto some other bullshit anyway, like "oh i bet he was born with a small one", even if it's surgically corrected. Best way to undermine that is to just go full-blown Transhumanist and declare/render birth sex/race/body irrelevant - which will also lead to real equality in a way the hypocritical "lo…
/r/MensRights06/10/14 08:21 PM
2

unsolicited dick pic There's almost never a time or place where that's acceptable. We're talking about a normal person receiving it here, not a dictator. If there were a profile asking for dick pics, it would not be unsolicited. You want to complain about people sending dick pics getting in trouble, complain about the misused solicited ones that ended up in an art project.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 09:02 PM
1

I've seen a few, but they're not typical, and mostly in STEM.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 02:57 AM
1

I still gotta go with this being a plot by the creator of the garden in the first place. Possessing infinite resources with which to design, construct, and operate the facility, they nonetheless placed a dangerous item within easy reach of creatures they didn't adequately program not to access it, and also created another entity which told them to consume it, further compounding the safety hazard. This is either a grievous oversight or a conspiracy. My lawsuit is still pending.
/r/MensRights05/10/14 02:52 AM
1

I think they're useless. They won't intimidate the serial offenders that are responsible for most rapes. It's just political self-gratification.
/r/MensRights27/09/14 04:42 PM
5

He's the infamous hacker known as 4chan. "Anonymous" is just an alias.
/r/MensRights24/09/14 12:22 AM
4

"I'm doing some freelance work for a client in Britain. I'd love to go, but I really have to finish this. It's a very important project."
/r/MensRights01/09/14 12:06 AM
1

True, but I'm still quite thankful she did it.
/r/MensRights30/08/14 09:53 PM
1

False equivalence. It wouldn't be r/MR that got defaulted, it would probably be something like /r/AskMen. TBH, I would rather MR not become a default sub. I don't really care about TwoX becoming one.
/r/MensRights30/08/14 09:43 PM
2

Why should I be an MRA isntead of a feminist when I can champion men's rights as a feminist and not be like a leper to women? Because, unless you're a woman, you can't. Your "privilege" will be used to negative-weight your speech into worthlessness. If you are a woman, then you'll be accused of having "internalized misogyny". Also, you don't actually have to mention that you have any affiliation with the MRM. Don't get me wrong, by dictionary-definition Feminism, all moderate MRAs are also Femin…
/r/MensRights28/08/14 06:06 PM
29

but we might have kept things from getting this intense if we directed our outrage towards EVERYONE responsible. We have much more aggression against Sarkeesian and Quinn than necessary, yet very little is being directed towards the "white knights" that I'm constantly hearing you all attack on here. Right, the proper MRA thing to do is to hold people accountable regardless of their gender. This means that the guys with ZQ must be held accountable, not just ZQ.
/r/MensRights28/08/14 05:37 PM
2

Considering it's Daily Mail, not sure that this is actually real.
/r/MensRights28/08/14 01:15 AM
1

Well, I realized it was all selection bias. I personally would never do these things, because I feel independent in my own right. That goes for a lot of things, really. For example, I found out that there's apparently a bit of racism going on in the cosplay community. I had never considered this possibility because why would you do that, you know? It's just silly. (Edit: And even if someone did think that non-cross-racial cosplays looked better, why on Earth would they be so rude as to make a bi…
/r/MensRights18/08/14 11:37 PM
2

I love pink or purple hair, so I'll stick to asking other questions. :P
/r/MensRights17/08/14 09:52 PM
1

Well, I was thinking we could somewhat allay fears of loss-of-privacy due to having cameras on cops by making it so that the footage is archived and left unviewed unless requested by a court/etc. That prevents photos of Joe Random eating in a food court popping up unless there also happens to be a crime investigation relating to the same time and place.
/r/MensRights15/08/14 09:06 PM
4

We can also push for Camera's on the police and or vehicle. This is a cheap solution already in practice in the UK. I've been saying this for a while now, and trying to sell other people (mostly white, because that's who's around where I live) on it. Projects in communities where this has been tried have proved fruitful. I think it's starting to catch on a bit.
/r/MensRights15/08/14 07:54 PM
13

Live by the #hashtag, die by the the #hashtag?
/r/MensRights13/08/14 06:33 PM
5

It's Reddit. r/MR seems to be mostly left / libertarian. Pure right-wingers would probably be more gender-traditionalist.
/r/MensRights13/08/14 06:17 PM
1

There's a number of ideologies I'd like to do that to...
/r/MensRights16/07/14 09:52 PM
3

Men are finally talking about masculinity outside of the traditional camp and on their own terms. It's new, and it stumbles, but this has to happen in order to reach the next level of gender equality. The relative lack of censorship, though it allows some caustic things, is necessary in order to talk about topics which have been rendered taboo in mainstream gender discourse. IMO, MRAs are at the edge of a social change which is now occurring in society.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 07:03 PM
1

It turned out that Honey Badger Radio was an MRA plot all along!
/r/MensRights11/07/14 06:59 AM
3

For me, the things like "you can't be sexist against men" have always been a red flag. Taking a negative word and making it oh-so-conveniently only ever apply to your enemies is an outward sign of poor mental hygiene. It sounds like something a cult would do. Or a politician.
/r/MensRights11/07/14 06:58 AM
3

Okay, given the usual hands-off moderation policy here, I'm wondering what was up with the deleted thread...
/r/MensRights11/07/14 06:11 AM
1

Sorry, but it's the so-called "straw" feminists that seem to be more active. I know feminists that are open to discussion and whom I respect, but I will not take that label, and I have my reasons for that, not least of which is the recurring problem with censorship that movement has (which is related to how the whole 'SJW' thing got started, even if we don't count SJWs). As to your "continuum" argument, most things can be reframed as continuums. (I could, for example, argue that moderate feminis…
/r/MensRights13/06/14 07:08 AM
2

I didn't say anything about domestic abusers, but the hypothesis that somehow r/MR will lead to to more domestic abuse needs some actual evidence, not just "I think men are upset and entitled, therefore it seems reasonable to me that this one thing a guy said is secretly a call to violence." As for Rodgers, again, the stupidity of his ideas followed from his craziness, not the other way around. I believe the others are right and he was an actual narcissist, and his actions were a result of narci…
/r/MensRights12/06/14 05:54 PM
4

Thousands of Americans Surprised to Discover They are Secretly Mens' Rights Activists ... Bob Thorn: You know, it was the oddest thing. Apparently when I played a single game of Magic: The Gathering about three years ago, I automatically became a "Mens Right Activist." I honestly had no idea what that was until just yesterday, when I read an article lumping in things that have nothing to do with Mens Rights together with MRAs in an attempt to denigrate the movement. Interviewer: What will you do…
/r/MensRights12/06/14 03:41 AM
5

Uh huh. Sure. Honestly, it's bizarre how you people believe that that fucker did what he did because of some bullshit like "male entitlement" when, in fact, it's because he was fucked up in the head. The guy said he was a god. You got the causation backwards. The vast, vast majority of idiot "nice guys" don't go on killing sprees. And as someone dealing with a mental illness, since you probably weight speech on "privilege": shut the fuck up. The guy was nuts, and it's not "stigmatizing mental il…
/r/MensRights12/06/14 12:29 AM
2

Look, dude, we know that there are some advantages to having a stay-at-home parent. I'm not saying everyone's gotta do it, but it seems to help. Now, when you stay at home, you're taking on risk by not having another source of income, as well as having a gap in employment history. Now, suppose both people work full time? Then there's no need. Alternatively, if there's a minimum basic income, there's no need, either. (And obviously anything permanent is right out.) But if that's not the case, som…
/r/MensRights06/06/14 08:02 AM
2

Eh, given the target audience and manufacturer, and other messages mixed in, I wouldn't worry about that too much. The protagonist clearly does something of actual value on her own initiative and rejects the disposability aimed at her father. She's not even technically a princess. It's not perfect, but it's better than training girls that Prince Charming's going to swoop along just because they're entitled to it. Admittedly, becoming a national hero is not the best way to get men in practice, th…
/r/MensRights06/06/14 07:18 AM
3

In this economy? I'm not sure i'd count on that. Plus there may be ongoing expenses that can't be easily terminated. Just think of how a controlling, abusive spouse might use the threat of being rendered literally homeless and destitute against someone they convinced to leave the workplace in the first place. It could easily be used to abuse men as well. Doing something like halfing it every year or six months prevents that form of control and allows people to adjust without the insanity of some…
/r/MensRights06/06/14 07:12 AM
10

Alimony that fades out progressively over 5 years or so is what I'd do. I believe women are capable of, you know, actually working and making money.
/r/MensRights06/06/14 02:23 AM
8

That's from Mulan. What I thought was interesting about that movie was that the protagonist doesn't understand the men at first, and way over-shoots into parody masculinity, and the movie treats that as ridiculous. (Edit: Actually, from an MRA perspective there's a lot to recommend that movie.)
/r/MensRights05/06/14 08:24 PM
1

Playmate?
/r/MensRights05/06/14 04:52 PM
1

that women tend to be boring themselves and they act like it's their right to get to pick from a lineup of men whose job it is to "entertain them." I once shot down a woman for being boring, which is a shame because she seemed like an actually nice person. (Most women being boring to me is part of why I don't date a lot, by choice. What few dates I do go on tend to become relationships.)
/r/MensRights01/06/14 07:01 PM
1

The not-deserving part sounds a bit like depression-thinking, although it could be just an effect of the abuse. I'm not too familiar with abuse. In a previous relationship, I had a depressed partner, and frequently would have to console her. IME, sometimes thinking like that can be reasoned with, but other times you just have to say "but I love you/think you're awesome" and follow it up with a hug, because the emotion itself isn't originating from a place of logic. I would also sometimes give he…
/r/MensRights01/06/14 07:36 AM
1

Probably the latter. Experiments to prove just how much of something like gender is social vs bio would often require some questionable actions, like raising someone with norms completely opposite society.
/r/MensRights01/06/14 07:14 AM
1

Not in the suburbs, but in the city? Definitely.
/r/MensRights01/06/14 07:07 AM
0

What you might want to bring up: specific ways (suicide, war, murder) that men die a lot more often than women. Then say "well, #KillAllMen has actually been happening in practice, regardless of theories about male power and privilege. Is it really fair to the victims to use a hashtag like that?"
/r/MensRights30/05/14 08:26 PM
1

Nah, the reason it won't work is twofold... The men that listen mostly aren't the men responsible. It gets pattern-matched as #YetAnotherGenderWarMunition and ignored.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 08:07 PM
2

I must say this makes me fucking sad. That's just how aging is. Either you die while you still have some life in you, or you just kind of wither away. There are a few research initiatives looking into how we might stop or prevent aging, though. We don't have to accept it as inevitable - it's a physical process, which means we can probably stop it through physical means.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 07:59 PM
1

Okay, now I'm curious how you managed to do that.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 07:30 PM
2

Because he's a spammer.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:57 PM
1

That it interferes with verifying whether it's actually for a good cause is a secondary concern.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:54 PM
2

Well, to be fair, that comment doesn't really add to the discussion. It's more about your own emotional state.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 06:35 PM
2

On second thought, there's a loophole. All moderate mens rights activism qualifies as Egalitarianism. Dictionary Feminism is also Egalitarianism (even if real Feminism isn't always) No one has formal authority to police who is and isn't feminist. Ergo, we can just declare any moderate MRA activity a heterodox feminism. Mostly kidding, but the mod there has a distorted view of the MRM anyway.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 06:37 AM
2

It's quite a lot of work. Not so much setting as getting mechanics right. Also, I don't think it would work well done in spite, and one made just by MRAs might turn out weird. Unless it was of /r/TalesOfPrivilege, in which case it might be hilarious. I do actually write a Transhumanist RP setting, but there's no way I'm linking it here, or even answering what it is in PMs. No one would ever guess it was written by someone who sympathizes with MRM, unless they were a madfem. Transhumanism does no…
/r/MensRights29/05/14 05:33 AM
2

I like to test ideas and theories by arguing them with others. This helps me to discard more obviously bad ideas and discover blind spots. I know two people that are mostly reasonable and are feminists. People I can hold discussions with. I don't want to be the kind of person that's all "lol unfriend!" A tumblrfem or a madfem? Sure. Little can be done. But civil discourse must continue where it can, or we will lock ourselves into echo chambers of our own making.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 05:11 AM
1

One of my exs has social anxiety and awkwardness, and we ended up meeting via the internet. She's currently with someone else, and they support each other a bit, which I encourage. So social anxiety isn't a guarantee of loneliness, and there are some other environments to practice in. I can elaborate in PM if you want.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 08:12 PM
1

You might not agree with the discussion here, but we won't ban you for disagreeing.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 07:56 PM
14

Thank you for taking the time to actually check. There's a simple process I've implemented in my life due to my interest in some "extreme rationality" stuff: take five minutes and Google it. This helps cut out a lot of the worst and most obviously wrong stuff.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 02:46 AM
4

Are you really proposing that men are deliberately funding and producing an unprofitable magazine for the express purpose of undermining women, because "real women aren't that shallow/stupid"? Yeaaaah, I'm gonna require a citation on that. (Edit: I mean, who do you think funds all the shallow/stupid mags for men? Men, right? It would be very strange if Cosmo weren't funded by women buying it.) (Edit2: which means if Cosmo dies, it'll have to be women that kill it.)
/r/MensRights26/05/14 02:04 AM
3

Ah, yes. It's definitely not watering down the word "rapist" to sling it at political opponents that haven't actually, y'know, raped anyone. /s
/r/MensRights26/05/14 01:49 AM
3

I think this answer is the most accurate, but the others about not allowing a male-only space to exist are part of it.
/r/MensRights19/05/14 07:19 PM
1

Good link.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 07:16 PM
6

I have one comment in TwoX regarding what to do when a male friend in a friend circle is being a catcaller and not stopping when asked. I advised getting another man to ask him to stop, since he might not listen to a woman about it. It was upvoted a good bit. I haven't visited TwoX since, though.
/r/MensRights10/05/14 02:15 AM
1

100% okay? No. But politicians are going to pander. Who here thought Obama's real position was in favor of "civil unions" for gays and not real marriage, vs pretending that was the case so as not to spook the religious folks? So if I were to vote based solely on explicitly-stated political preferences, i'd be in a bit of a bind. I'd rather vote for someone that's closer to me on the meat of the issues but does a little pandering, than... well, not vote.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 05:40 PM
2

Because I cannot, in good conscience, vote for the Republicans. Not only are they traditionalists on gender issues (which isn't really that much better), but quite frankly I consider economic issues more important.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 05:37 PM
6

Don't worry, you can always vote for a party that wants to throw you under a bus for different reasons.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 12:14 AM
13

pandering That's exactly what's happening here. Unfortunately with the way things work out right now, a politician in America that's left-of-American-center can't afford to lose the votes of women. Same thing with the wage gap myth. Telling the truth would shut people off before they took 5 minutes to listen to the explanation, and cause the one telling it to get written off as "misogynist".
/r/MensRights09/05/14 12:13 AM
9

TBH I suspect there are a number of people that read here without agreeing with 100% of it, and that's okay.
/r/MensRights08/05/14 12:45 AM
9

I'm on my mobile now, but if you dig a little there was a demographic survey (before this latest one that got brigaded) which included gender as a question.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 07:02 PM
0

There were some guys going around asking people when they chose to be straight. That seemed to set off a few lightbulbs.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 08:26 AM
2

Well, supposing it actually worked it might stop some poor bastard getting killed. I think we could tolerate a little immaturity for that. Of course it probably wouldn't work.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 08:20 AM
3

The problem is that, in our species, men tended to marry multiple women, but women did not tend to marry multiple men, and as a result many, many men lost out. We are descended from about half as many men as women. If we allow polygamy, a few men at the top will be very well-off, while lots more men are left lonely. I need to do more researc to verify, but they may also become violent, as there's apparently a correlation with civil unrest. We would have to deliberately make more women than men t…
/r/MensRights02/05/14 05:12 PM
11

I have been attempting to get the feminists to understand their collateral damage, but the ones listening don't cause it, and the ones causing it don't listen.
/r/MensRights20/04/14 03:13 AM
2

We would expect far fewer racial differences anyway, if they show up much at all. Sexual dimorphism predates human races by over an order of magnitude, and evolutionary timescales tend to be pretty slow.
/r/MensRights19/04/14 12:16 AM
2

What you said in the next few sentences didn't really cover it. This #creepywhitedudes crap is just the sort of thing that happens when you decide that the amount and value of speech someone should have, or their moral worth, is determined by how oppressed they are (by demographics), instead of who they are as people (by character). It's othering, it's "acceptable targets", and it's the natural result of identity politics. It's also racism - maybe not as horrible as the more typical systemic rac…
/r/MensRights18/04/14 01:56 AM
2

I think the singling out of white dudes is a little weird. I think the singling out of white dudes is the point. Why else would they single out white dudes in this manner?
/r/MensRights18/04/14 01:35 AM
1

Given that the same term "Feminism" includes both the reasonable sex-positive folks, and those that think all PIV sex is a male rape conspiracy, saying "I'm a feminist" doesn't give us much information. :P
/r/MensRights30/03/14 11:08 PM
1

If this is true... Sounds like drugs or something else that impairs judgment were involved.
/r/MensRights30/03/14 10:52 PM
2

Not necessarily. Humans are chock full of cognitive biases. Consider: Many of the world's major religions are mutually exclusive. (That is, both religion A and religion B can't both be true simultaneously.) So no matter if you're an atheist, or a religious person, the majority of people are wrong about religion, and most of these religions have been going on for hundreds or thousands of years.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 11:41 PM
1

http://permutationofninjas.org/post/57003274589/gender-symmetry-in-sexual-assault-an-analysis-of-the
/r/MensRights25/03/14 09:27 PM
1

Where is this from? Where are the numbers coming from?
/r/MensRights22/03/14 08:53 PM
1

It's about a 2-5% difference if you work the same hours at the same job. Sometimes (single women without children) women get paid a little more than men. Some of the current disparity is due to the social norms present when the current crop of leaders began climbing the corporate ladder. There may also be some underlying biological complications related to how we treat people who present as male or female. There's some evidence that people in general treat men more seriously in fields of busines…
/r/MensRights22/03/14 08:19 PM
1

We first have to get people to acknowledge them as even being a problem. According to what I've read, people in academia try to bring up the lack of male students in university these days and have learned to rephrase it as about retention, and not men having problems, because the latter doesn't actually work. Few people care. That, and, part of the work of the MRM is causing men to stop feeling guilty about being men - in that context, pointing out the workplace death gap helps run counter to th…
/r/MensRights12/03/14 08:42 PM
1

Man A hits Man B Man B: "Dude, stop hitting me!" Fem: "Stop hitting yourself!" Man B: "...but I'm not hitting myself, Man A is hitting me." Fem: "But Man A is also a man, and part of the same class, so your suffering doesn't count." Non-Equity Feminists and Traditionalists - two groups that can't separate individuals from their demographics.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 08:22 PM
1

There's a few, but proportionately fewer than men, IME. If we started valuing women heavily for their ability to be hilarious, there would be more, but that's not going to happen.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 03:41 AM
1

Interesting that the article presented the protester pretty neutrally. Perhaps we're finally gaining some ground here?
/r/MensRights11/03/14 09:26 PM
2

If they weren't male, they wouldn't be in the army, and thus would be significantly less likely to get killed. In a strict evaluation it's not equivalent, but if we're allowed to take a few steps down the causal chain, it makes sense. It's more likely that in an open conflict of ethnic tensions, the same thing will happen that has happened throughout history. Women and children suffer; men die. Also, OP is being pretty abrasive. He does look like he was looking for a fight.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 09:49 PM
2

A similar topic came up in /r/ainbow/. As I said there, a lot of people seem to view it as "part of the punishment", even though we banned "cruel and unusual punishment" for a reason. People really like to be self-righteous.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 09:07 PM
1

It's a more distant causality. You get put in the military because you're a male (and therefore bigger/more disposable). You die in the war because you're in the military during a war. A-> B-> C During the war, who is more or less likely to die? The civilians (an indirect target), or the soldiers (a direct target)?
/r/MensRights09/03/14 08:25 PM
0

Eat shit and fucking die jess. What is this, Tumblr? You could've just left the rest of the post without that one sentence.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 08:23 PM
3

Likewise this comment from myself was removed, being one of the few posts actually commenting on OPs claims about voting and conscription. Read it. Well, there we have it. They've been subverted, as you can tell by the SJW-style censorship.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 08:04 PM
2

...you just gave me the topic I'll post about for International Mens' Day.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 07:16 PM
7

They don't have to operate under the same pressures as men, and men don't generally marry women for their ability to tell jokes, so they don't have the same incentives.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 06:40 PM
1

The argument isn't for the sake of the Facebook OP, it's for everyone else watching.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 03:46 AM
8

That "Manhood101" guy is a spamming spammer. THAT is why his posts get removed.
/r/MensRights03/03/14 03:10 AM
1

Maybe. While some women do select for intelligence, status, and humor, it might be more a product of environment than one of genes.
/r/MensRights25/02/14 06:27 PM
1

We'll see what happens. I've never claimed that women shouldn't go into programming, just that due to what are partially-biologically-rooted preferences, I expect fewer will. The ones that do seem to be fine.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 09:42 PM
6

And again, it needs to be pointed out that the majority of rapes are committed by a smallish population of serial repeat offenders. The vast majority of men are not rapists. Ergo, trying to appeal to men in general not to rape isn't going to make a significant dent in rape stats. The ones that don't already don't, and the ones that do aren't going to listen.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 02:56 AM
2

They didn't make it up. It's a cousin of "scope creep" which is used frequently in programmer circles.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 09:42 PM
20

I'm not sure about "strongest" supporters, but the MRA is a natural enemy of the TERF (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist), as TERFs' hatred of trans folks stems from deep, deep misandry. Like, "transmen are gender traitors" and "transwomen are just trying to sneak into our bedrooms and private spaces to rape us!" hatred.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 09:15 PM
1

Depends on the feminists. The few ones I know IRL are mostly sane and level-headed. Admittedly they're a bit outside some norms, but I like coloured hair or women working in STEM so that doesn't bother me. It's the ones I don't know, that are in academia or the 'net, that are running around going "lol male tears" or pulling fire alarms when men try to actually talk about their issues, or hollowly accuse one of "derailing" a conversation about feminism that didn't happen when one objects to a pol…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 04:59 AM
1

Nah, look at the responses to some of the insane comments. There's comments in there saying "hey, wait a minute, that's not what he's saying", and "well what if it were two men or two women?" etc. I mean the article linked by /u/it_turns_out/ above.
/r/MensRights12/02/14 08:42 PM
2

The comments are a mixture of idiocy and sanity.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 08:47 PM
56

Note that that guy didn't get any responses. Big surprise there.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 08:01 PM
2

The thing about technical interest is that pre-natal testosterone exposure tracks with interest in systems and toys of that kind - in both boys and girls. This effect could be compounded socially afterwards, but it's at least partly biological. It's just that 1) biology is noisy as fuck, and therefore there's a great deal of natural variation, and 2) populations are not their averages. So even if the average woman is less interested in programming than the average man, there will still be a pret…
/r/MensRights08/02/14 04:16 AM
2

If true, that post should be reported.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 04:06 AM
1

I get the impression that women like the article's author would rather be busy doing and creating than managing social activist organizations - thus the social activist organizations being made of those who "tweet for a living." The twitterers want it more.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 04:00 AM
6

Today you learned about TERFs (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists). It's what happens when you combine female gender supremacy with whatever mental tendency it is that causes people to spin conspiracy theories.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 11:02 PM
2

On the other hand, focusing too much on descriptors like race leads to Tumblr-style madness and weird reverse-hierarchies, and the MRM is explicitly about sex/gender issues and not much of anything else. Perhaps the root of the problem is that determining the correct level of consideration is a matter of good judgment and cannot be reliably formalized.
/r/MensRights02/02/14 01:27 AM
1

It has been repeatedly the case that someone who is a genius in one field is a crackpot in another. Damned humans.
/r/MensRights30/12/13 04:48 PM
3

I don't believe that there's an epidemic of false accusations, even though I believe that they happen enough to matter, and I believe that maintaining the due process of law and standards of innocent until proven guilty are of vital importance. I still don't believe that this will overall prove of good value to men, because it will make it more difficult for those who advocate in favor of men to be taken seriously. On the other hand, I believe there would have been a more appropriate time for th…
/r/MensRights18/12/13 07:44 PM
3

Please tell me you at least used something obviously fake as an input, otherwise it's hypocritical since we're supposed to be against false accusations.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 05:39 AM
4

I disagree. While we have to be rough around the edges some times, we're in it for the long game. I don't think this move will do much, if anything, to help men. At the same time, it will damage the MRM's reputation and create an item for the opposition to point back at for years. We're not trying to win over the radfems, we're trying to win over the normals - the bystanders. That must generally be done by taking the high road, even if it isn't as emotionally satisfying. I view this as morally s…
/r/MensRights18/12/13 05:19 AM
3

Godammit, Pigman, we should NOT be acting like gender-flipped radfems! OR 4-chan!
/r/MensRights18/12/13 04:40 AM
3

I agree with FoundLacking. It's vitally important that we don't behave like that. We don't go around pulling fire alarms and stealing calendars, and even if this isn't exactly the same, it's still a dumbass move that I would put in the same category. It's even more important because the mainstream tends to assume that men are a threat. I'm going to see what becomes of this, but if this is what's going to be normal here, then I'll make my way out, because I'm not interested in being a gender-flip…
/r/MensRights18/12/13 04:28 AM
3

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there's clearly a problem--people need to stand up for themselves and, more importantly, If most rapes are by serial rapists, then turning them in would disproportionately affect the amount of rape going on. STOP BEING ASSHOLES! DON'T RAPE WOMEN! DON'T RAPE MEN! Well, there was a smaller percentage that had just one victim and weren't serial rapists. They might be reachable, I'm not sure. More research would need to be done. Serial rapists, though, probably…
/r/MensRights18/12/13 04:04 AM
5

And the thing is, even by some feminist sources it's not normal male behavior. The large majority of male-on-female rapes, by those stats, are committed by 5% of men, with 4-5 victims a piece. I can get a link if someone wants. They stll shot down a commenter who was like "this is great news! It absolves the majority of men!" I think we need to spread the word far and wide that rape is not a normal, male-masculine behavior.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 07:55 PM
8

I think a key part of it is gynocentrism. Women generally do not know whatit's like to be a man, and this heavily influences feminist thought. Thus, you get weird things like thinking that men sitting with their legs spread is part of a male social conspiracy to dominate others. Combine this with a complete dismissal of anything men might say, due to an abuse of the concept of privilege, and you then get a whole bunch of women telling men that they're wrong about sitting with their legs spread f…
/r/MensRights16/12/13 08:29 PM
6

The equivalent would be exclusive-or, or "XOR". Regular language is pretty informal.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 09:18 PM
2

'Men as a group' have power. The system is designed in many ways to suit (white) men. Also, those in (political, economical) power are almost all men. My statement was that regardless of whether "men as a group have power", erasing male victims because "men have power" is the Fallacy of Division. Men can damn well too be abused, and are, and feminists constantly derail and refuse to acknowledge it. I said empowering women was feminism. Is that not the definition? Feminism is what feminism does. …
/r/MensRights15/12/13 09:11 PM
6

Most women in technology aren't any more or less stupid than the men in technology. Also, most women in technology probably have a technology degree rather than a gender studies degree. I doubt whoever said that actually works in computers...
/r/MensRights15/12/13 07:55 PM
23

Well, I admit I would be wary of hiring anyone with a Gender Studies degree. Much more so than just about any other degree.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 07:36 PM
1

Most feminists give a shit about men... I understand those that don't, though. Too much abuse for too long. Some of the men here have been very badly hurt by women, including literally physically and mentally abusive women. Why does that excuse work for women, but not for men? Don't tell me it's "because men as a group have power", because that as a justification would literally be a logical fallacy (division). I feel like the whole MRA used to be feminists thing is bullshit.... I really do... l…
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:42 PM
0

Yeah, that's the thing about offense. I mean, I don't want to be rude to people (which is why "that's offensive!" works in the first place), but anyone can claim to be offended by anything at any time. That's why it's important to rely on good judgment, rather than allowing offense to be used as social currency, as it's becoming now.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:20 PM
1

I do know women, you ignorant. My mother was an engineer, and my aunt is a high-powered executive. They didn't accomplish that by playing damsel-in-distress, or demanding quotas, or playing the victim! They did it by actually going out and doing what was required, making similar sacrifices to those men would. I know women who program, women studying law, women in mathematics... And you know what? I'm proud of them. I really am. That is not at all sarcastic. I even know feminists that actually gi…
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:56 PM
57

If you attempt to create an employment blacklist, you might be on the wrong side.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 04:31 PM
1

IMO computer programming is an intersection of language, philosophy, maths, and engineering.
/r/MensRights12/12/13 08:51 PM
2

Wasn't "Snitch" the new equivalent? Regardless, I'd still say that anyone, of either gender, who uses one of those apps, is not quality dating material.
/r/MensRights12/12/13 07:51 PM
1

Well, of course, just opening it up to check on whether people you know use it, but not actually posting anything to it, doesn't count. ;P
/r/MensRights02/12/13 10:19 PM
2

Nah, I heard she inherited the position from her late husband. Regardless of whether there's a larger trend of comic book industry colonization (I'm not a comic book fan, so I have no idea), this probably isn't part of that.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 09:49 PM
5

I said in one Lulu thread that using Lulu is a sign of a woman who is not a quality woman. I would tend to believe something similar about this.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 09:12 PM
5

Here's a documentary where an undecided filmmaker decides to go visit both the "it's almost entirely socially constructed" and "it's more biological than they'll admit" camps. The traditional analysis tends to assume populations are their averages. So "all women should be home makers, all men should be providers." IME, the feminist analysis tends to assume that "it's nearly all socially constructed, biology has little to do with it." (That argument may be politically effective against targets wh…
/r/MensRights02/12/13 08:58 PM
8

Actually, I've read that the woman that posed for that picture didn't stay in the factory workforce for very long. Here's what's going to happen in your man-less country: in 1st world countries, the gender split between professions is wider than in some 3rd world countries. Why? Because men and women (gasp!) have different preferences as populations. So what you're going to find is not that there will be no women plumbers, or fishers, or programmers, but that maybe 1 in 10 women will be naturall…
/r/MensRights02/12/13 05:43 PM
1

Dude, we have the internet, we have journalists. The quality of journalism is said to be declining, we also have fake journalists, internet "journalism" is often advocacy bullshit / propaganda, etc. That also does not answer the objection of "too much information to reasonably process" at all. It's cheaper and more reliable to just have an EPA, and an FDA, and thus reduce the total cognitive burden imposed on society. They can each take advantage of specialization of labor, and government's rule…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 08:30 PM
1

"General purpose computer" as opposed to some sort of specialized computer. (I suppose I shouldn't have capitalized it for dramatic effect...) A computer that can be programmed to obey just about any set of instructions that it can hold. Most people don't think of things like "object recognition" as something that can be done by a computer algorithm. This is because most people are ignorant when it comes to computers, and think of "intelligence" as a whole, mysterious blob, rather than the resul…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 08:29 PM
1

Sorry dude, but all the company has to do is lie. There's an upper bound to the amount of information a human can obtain and process per unit time, and that's weakened by active misinformation campaigns. Did you seriously not know that "greenwashing" is already a thing? Am I expected to verify the integrity of seventeen different "no really this is totally organic" labels? You are, in a way, far more optimistic about human nature than I am.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 05:06 AM
1

Well, what happens when the commons is the human biosphere? Companies have repeatedly shown that unless someone is around to stop them and actually makes the effort to do so, they will chain workers in factories (resulting in significant casualties due to failure to escape in a fire), dump toxic waste, and establish "company towns." That's what they did the last time around. What can you say to convince me that hardcore Libertarianism won't just be a repeat of the worst and most horrifying exces…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 04:55 AM
1

Well, it would (potentially) allow an abolition of the minimum wage. It also removes the fundamental "work or starve to death" thing from the economy that I truly despise. As a programmer, I have a better understanding of the true power and potential General Purpose Computer than most. Admittedly, it is somewhat terrifying. It used to be said a computer will never play chess, or pick fruit, or drive a car. This derives from a limited and vague understanding of "intelligence." The problem is, "a …
/r/MensRights01/12/13 04:51 AM
1

Also, watching the video, I can't really say I've seen liberals that want to limit or remove government, not since the 19th century. Well, I'm not fond of the whole NSA surveillance thing, or a number of other aspects. The law is large, and needs a "refactoring", as well as a regular (and empirical!) analysis of what laws are working, and what laws aren't. (A test for effectiveness should be baked into laws when they are written.) I've also been considering the Minimum Basic Income or Negative I…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 04:40 AM
1

Aren't ethics important to you? Isn't quality of life important? My view is most accurately summarized as Transhumanist Preference Utilitarianism. The use of death was an example of a bad consequence that is uncontroversially bad (suicides excepted). I do not dispute that markets are very useful as a means to organize the allocation and distribution of resources. They are not, however, moral. (They're neutral with respect to morality.) They are solely a tool, the usage of which should be subordi…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 04:27 AM
1

I've had this argument too many times, but I haven't really kitted myself out for it. It can be more or less reduced to this: If you are shot, you die. If you don't have enough resources to survive, you are still as one hundred percent dead as if you were shot. To reiterate, you are not any less dead whether or not someone else is responsible. It is the being dead part that makes the shooting and starving bad, not that someone is at fault for violating the rules by shooting you. Dying is still b…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 04:06 AM
2

I wouldn't say rationality leads to Libertarianism by default. I'm a computer programmer and, well, let's just say that while I don't want to abolish markets any time soon, I'm not fond of Libertarianism. I think it's more correlated with a certain kind of systems-heavy thinking. Libertarianism, depending on the formulation, tends to be based on a small(ish) number of principles, from which their other rules are deduced. If you embrace a different set of small core principles (say, being a Conse…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 03:44 AM
1

I edited it a bit first.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 07:40 PM
1

vikings But... white people don't have culture! /s
/r/MensRights30/11/13 07:33 PM
1

I can only speculate. It could be that we're being downvote brigaded (it happens sometimes). It could be that they're against MRA-as-egalitarian, and see that it should be MRA-and-egalitarian instead. It could be they think you're infiltrators (but that's a lot of downvotes compared to the size of that crowd). I upvoted you, because it didn't seem called-for.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 05:56 PM
1

I'm not sure how to articulate what it is yet, but I know what it isn't - macho parody bullshit, and what feminists claim it is. I think we as men deserve the right to figure it out for ourselves.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 05:32 PM
1

Yet they always put pictures of trillbys... Next time I see this in action I'm going to get properly postmodern and claim to be a fedora (the hat) wearing a neckbeard (theguy).
/r/MensRights30/11/13 04:55 PM
74

Do you have a link for this? I'd like to read more.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 04:33 PM
0

Interesting read. Thanks for the link.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 08:11 PM
0

I really dislike feminism, its seems to poison and destroy the whole discussion about civil rights and overcoming bigotry. There is definitely a huge amount of bigotry harming society, but then the discussion always revolves around white women first-world problems. You probably already realized this, but that's a big part of why the common position in here is Mens' Rights is about mens rights. Other movements are about their own topics. You are welcomed to be a member of multiple movements if yo…
/r/MensRights27/11/13 08:00 PM
2

I wouldn't actually argue that transwomen need to participate if it would make them uncomfortable. Was just laying out some alternatives.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 01:47 AM
3

I heard of a woman wearing a fake moustache to work after noting her male colleagues were doing the moustache thing. I mean, heck, you could wear a shirt, or a buy a mug, or even just talk about the issue of mens' health with others.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 01:10 AM
1

Never heard of it personally, but I'm not in favor of abolishing fanservice.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:58 PM
1

Hm, I think I prefer this formulation.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:55 PM
1

Interesting article. Thanks for posting it.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:50 PM
6

Masculinity is not some macho parody bullshit. Masculinity is not cutting down trees, or fighting bears, or blowing up helicopters, or benchpressing dumptrucks. Masculinity is not some satirical parody bullshit. Masculinity is not an ironic moustache, or a flannel shirt, or a choice of beverage. My gender is not a monstrous disease, and my gender is not a joke. It was from the MRM that I finally came to understand that. ...as a result, I became more confident and more psychologically healthy. Th…
/r/MensRights26/11/13 10:03 PM
2

Logic always represents and reflects objective reality (otherwise, it would not be logical) while feelings more often do not and are easily manipulated and used to manipulate. Logic cannot be used to do so. Logic can only come to the correct conclusions when it's starting from the correct premises. Like a computer, "garbage input -> garbage output." Not that I don't like logic, just that you can't arrive at a correct view of the world through pure reason by itself.
/r/MensRights25/11/13 11:24 PM
1

Personally, I prefer the MRM philosophy that social movements should be focused on specifics, and that one is allowed (and even encouraged) to support multiple social movements at once. There have been a few transgender MRAs that pop up in here from time to time. Suppose we have an F-t-M transgender. Let's call him Bob. If Bob is passing as male, and is subjected to something bad based on that projected identity, that is an MRA issue. If Bob is failing to pass as male, and is subjected to someth…
/r/MensRights25/11/13 08:16 PM
3

How did that quote go... TERF is just a competition of "I'm more lesbian than you!" Seriously though, while I may be annoyed with regular feminists from time to time, a lot of the whole TERF thing seems to come from true misandry, to the point that transgenders are either seen as "gender traitors" (wtf?) or "insidious menz operatives trying to sneak into lesbian bedrooms and discourse" (even more wtf). I don't think the MRM has what might be called an "official stance" on transgenderism, except …
/r/MensRights25/11/13 07:50 PM
6

Well, this comment only reinforces my perceptions that any woman who would use such an app is not a quality woman and should be avoided. (Not that I wouldn't advise avoiding men using the flipside app.)
/r/MensRights23/11/13 04:57 PM
3

Honestly, I think a lot of where there are negative attitudes is a result of... you can only be told repeatedly "your gender SUCKS and are Evil Oppressors!" so many times before you decide "fuckit". If there's one thing you could do, though, it's to ditch the word "Patriarchy" (at least when talking about the West). If you really mean "Traditional Gender Roles", say that instead, because those aren't properly for the benefit of men asa class.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:14 AM
1

If that was the argument I think it is (I'm on mobile right now), I was mystified by the apparent lack of reading comprehension.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 08:58 AM
14

Although it isn't very liberal and post-modernist of me, every day I thank fuck I have a good job and make significantly more than most women. Regardless of the value of being Liberal, I have to say that perhaps not being very Post-modernist is a good thing. We don't have to accept ideas like "well not cutting up bits of babies is a cultural narrative, and there are other cultures" and do the cultural relativism thing. We can adopt alternative moral theories rather than do the self-contradicting…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 01:38 AM
1

Almost like a white or western guilt, or uncle Tom or somesuch I've heard "Uncle Tim" used before.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 08:26 PM
1

White knight.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 06:45 PM
1

I'm used to disregarding it as a right-wing talking point. I don't have the same reaction to "radfem."
/r/MensRights20/11/13 06:35 PM
1

Yeah, I'm a programmer, but the way I figure, someone has to work the oil rigs, mine the coal, haul the trash, and maintain the warehouses, or I'm fucked, and all those jobs contribute to society. Telemarketers, on the other hand... FWIW, my executive aunt settled down with a blue collar, odd jobs sort of guy, and they're very happy together.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 05:49 PM
6

That would be hate for single mothers, not stay-at-home moms.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 07:47 PM
10

Most women work fewer hours, in more flexible jobs, that carry less risk and allow them to spend more time with family. My aunt is a high-powered executive. It can be done. Further, I haven't really seen tons of hate for stay-at-home moms. I don't think they're really looked down on so much, the way that men in low-earning jobs are.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 06:04 PM
0

Tbh, I prefer /u/EverythingIsRape, but I haven't seen him lately, and his name only refers to the scope creep aspect of the hysteria.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:22 PM
1

I don't think we're going to convince each other, but FWIW, you've presented one of the more reasonable critiques I've dealt with. One thing I would support, that I suspect you would also support, is a periodic re-examination of the utility of specific laws. ("Is this actually leading to fewer criminals on the street?" "Is this actually making buildings safer?" etc.) And probably also a periodic "refactoring," as would be done in a software project (seeing as some things are apparently the legal…
/r/MensRights12/11/13 07:21 PM
1

That's true regardless of regulation though, and the government isn't uniquely insulated from disinformation or trying to make itself more necessary either. My government bureaucrat can spend a full workweek studying the information. Most consumers can't afford to do that. My government bureaucrat can enter the meat processing plant and inspect it. Most consumers wouldn't be able to afford that, nor be allowed to do it. My government bureaucrat can take the meat to a lab and test it. Most consum…
/r/MensRights12/11/13 04:25 PM
1

"In the long run, we're all dead." So I guess we shouldn't invest or save for retirement? The point being that if a cartel can be busted by a government in 5 years, versus naturally dissolving in 30 years, the former is generally preferable, because those Utility-years do actually count. That would mean temporarily operating at a loss, which means that cartel is actually selling things at the lowest price feasible. Except that the cartel wouldn't make much sense if it's not generally making an o…
/r/MensRights12/11/13 02:34 AM
1

Not really. OPEC has continuously lost marketshare as the US, Norway, and Venezeula have increased oil production. Competition increasingly makes cartels toothless. The problem is this effect is not as impactful or immediate in some industries as others, which informs political policy. It depends on the availability of the good sold, as well as the nature of the good itself. It's by no means guaranteed that a cartel will be broken in any reasonable timeframe. ("In the long run, we're all dead.")…
/r/MensRights12/11/13 01:38 AM
1

That's virtually impossible though, and in the long term businesses won't go very far poisoning their customers. Humans don't always think so long-term (in fact, they often think pretty short-term, businesses too), and there's a lot more information out there than any one human can reasonably obtain and process. To profit from snake oil, you don't need to maintain a long-term, positive brand. You just need enough noise. And snake oil is cheaper than an actually effective product. It honestly puz…
/r/MensRights12/11/13 01:09 AM
1

We'd have an even lower one by not covering welfare/abortions too, so I'm not so sure it's that simple. Society overall, not just the government. Resources are limited. If people don't bear the consequences of bad decisions, and we force others to bear them, you remove many incentives for not making bad decisions. When it comes to reducing the number and severity of bad decisions made, there's more than one way to go about that. We can... Change the consequences. (Handing out condoms is relative…
/r/MensRights11/11/13 09:58 PM
2

I'd rather have a lower overall cost to society by handing out the birth control. But then again, I start with the premise that no one deserves to be an idiot (among other premises) and work from there. You probably start with a different premise.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 09:34 PM
1

Perhaps if people were more educated and bore the responsibility of their decisions they would take actions that were based on actual risk. I think that would only have a limited effect in practice, based on what I've seen of previous human behavior. What's the plan for those that continue to behave that way?
/r/MensRights11/11/13 09:13 PM
10

A woman who cries rape has the right to be taken seriously; to be treated with respect; and to be supported if she avers that she is suffering trauma or other effects of sexual assault. A woman who cries rape does not have the right to be "believed." That is... a very good way to put it. As someone with MRA leanings, if a friend came to me and told me they had been raped, I would offer to render assistance. That is not the same as being required to believe all such claims uncritically.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 09:00 PM
4

I upvoted this post (because it was in the negative) even though I agree with government-funded birth control. I know that few people really follow Reddiquette, but come on guys, can we save the downvotes for posts that legitimately cross a line?
/r/MensRights11/11/13 08:39 PM
2

I don't equate government and nature. One is a given, the other is a man-created construct. Who is equating the two? The point is that excluding people from resources (say, because they're all already claimed) kills them just as dead as killing them directly. The distinction, then, is far less important than is typically claimed. It matters more whether they died, than whether everyone followed the proper procedures. I don't want to give government the power to do things that I don't have. The g…
/r/MensRights11/11/13 07:36 PM
-1

Oh, I am aware of that. And I have no serious problem with it. See, the thing is, some of us see whether everyone followed The Rules as independent of whether or not some consequence is bad and action should be taken to prevent that consequence. In this case, one of those rules is "no force!". To a Consequentialist, that makes sense only as a heuristic ("rule of thumb"). It's the consequences on people that matter, not the adherence to social constructions. To be honest, I don't buy Libertarian …
/r/MensRights11/11/13 06:45 PM
3

If people reliably perform bad behavior X, because it's a hardwired evolutionary drive, merely saying Well, maybe people shouldn't perform bad behavior X! does not stop them from doing it, and doesn't stop the resulting consequences from doing it. The question, then, is whether bad consequences are still bad even if you're not personally responsible, or everyone followed The Rules. You might complain that it's not fair, that it's extortion for people to have children they can't afford just becau…
/r/MensRights11/11/13 06:35 PM
3

About tone... It depends on the target. Generally, if you raise someone's mental defenses, they won't be as amenable to your arguments. What you want to do is trigger a re-evaluation of their existing thoughts on gender, in light of the new evidence that men have legitimate problems that need to be addressed. Some people can't be swayed, even if your case is compelling. For those, you should use whichever arguing style will best sway bystanders.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 07:12 PM
2

Hah, now that would be terribly impractical to implement. You'd have better luck either building a full sensory immersion VR environment, or constructing a self-contained life support system around your brain and switching it between a pair of cybernetic bodies. TBH a Feminist that really wants to "break the gender binary" should study biology or bioinformatics or similar, then join the biotechnology industry.
/r/MensRights02/11/13 07:48 PM
3

And make no mistake many scientists are transwomen, in fact, I sort of suspect it exceeds the average in the rest of society. I've had suspicions about this for a while (still unsubstantiated). First, their socialization is different, and they may well already be flaunting social convention just by behaving "normally" by their own standards. (Less exposed to the "you can't do math" meme, or already disobeying silly things like that, so why not do math anyway?) Second, they have a significantly h…
/r/MensRights02/11/13 07:36 PM
3

Yeup, that's stalky. It's sad to see this failure mode of the human drive for companionship.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 06:56 PM
-1

I don't think it's actually prevalent. My point was that what you might call the consensus of MRA opinion is against anti-LGBT bigotry.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 10:04 PM
1

Huh. I just thought of something. If someone really didn't want women to "interfere" in the workforce, because they were an actual misogynist... Well, they might be in favor of women getting a special "women's degree" that doesn't have a lot of practical applications. As opposed to say a degree in Engineering (lots of practical applications), Mathematics or Philosophy (rigorous thinking), Management, Accounting, et cetera. If women got practical degrees that enabled them to be truly financially …
/r/MensRights30/10/13 08:18 PM
11

I can't say I'm that surprised. IMO, most of a woman's beauty is in her face.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 07:54 PM
5

What issue would you ever declare solved based on one person's actions? An issue related to a specific person. An issue where an entire group is described as "necessarily X", and then a counterexample comes up. Usually when there's one counterexample, there's more. In this case, it's being argued that gender identity is purely socially constructed. If we raised a boy as a girl, he'd effectively be, and act like, a girl. But if someone were to be born a boy, raised as a girl, and then reject that…
/r/MensRights30/10/13 06:51 PM
9

There's a few in this sub, but they get downvoted to oblivion.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 06:39 PM
3

I mean, seriously, all sex is rape? Who the fuck could honestly believe that shit? There are plenty of people that believed themselves right into the sides of fucking buildings, behind the wheels of vehicles loaded with explosives. Could someone legitimately believe that all sex is rape? Sure. People have believed stupider bullshit than that and killed and died for it.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 03:22 AM
11

Now I'm imagining a video game level up. You've obtained cybernetic leg implants level 3. You can now move faster than 98% of the population. Check your new ambulatory privileges.
/r/MensRights27/10/13 03:54 AM
1

It's telling that feminist forces are so goddamn obsessed with snark.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 04:47 PM
1

Succint!
/r/MensRights25/10/13 04:04 PM
4

I just explain that it's like Republicans and Freedom. The Republican party would like you to believe that if you're against them, you're against freedom. However, there is an awful lot more to the Republican platform than freedom - they are a real life political organization, much like Feminism is a political movement. As such, they have specific policy goals and behaviors you can agree or disagree with. Insomuch as being against the Republican party means you're anti-freedom, being against fem…
/r/MensRights25/10/13 04:02 PM
1

Fund studies that examine how to raise humans that don't abuse each other. That would be helpful. Although, given that most rapes (among M>F, F>M wasn't studied as much) are by a single digit % of the population, it might be a hardware (inbuilt lower levels of empathy) rather than software (wasn't raised properly) fault. Of course, we couldn't know that for sure without studying it more... I'm sure there are all sorts of other related studies that could be done.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 06:30 PM
2

"Tumblr" is not an acronym...
/r/MensRights20/10/13 07:13 PM
2

There was a gender-neutral version, but the author lost interest. Probably because they had better things to do.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 07:01 AM
1

RationalWiki ... isn't. It's not really a rationality community, although there are some rationality communities elsewhere on the web.
/r/MensRights14/10/13 08:30 PM
6

Luckily this sort of crap gets downvoted.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 08:14 AM
8

What's worse is men, who have experienced unwanted erections, using the "he had a boner! he wanted it!" Excuse when they ought damn well know better.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 07:42 AM
2

If you're just using "Patriarchy" as a word for "traditional gender roles", then you should drop it as a term. It alienates potential allies by incorrectly describing the situation, and has unfortunate implications. How many times does "Patriarchy" have to "backfire" before it's acknowledged that traditional gender roles were not set up exclusively for the benefit of men, but that they are very well-aligned with the survival of pre-industrial societies with high infant mortality, where women are…
/r/MensRights11/10/13 03:30 AM
1

Well, let's suppose you axe all other welfare programs and issue a guaranteed minimum income or negative income tax. Because you're no longer fretting so much about who should and should not be receiving payments (since it's likely based purely on income or similar), both the total number of bureaucrats and the number of bureaucrats per unit benefit are reduced. Thus, a socialist position could actually shrink the government.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 07:32 PM
-2

Atheists have had similar complaints as of late, but there appears to be more resistance there. Anyhow, welcome. The MRM contains a variety of political ideologies, including libertarians, and yes, socialists too. I believe it's important that it remain a cross-factional movement.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 07:00 PM
6

Her motivation for opening up is the realization that people don't often acknowledge the "just staggering" fact that one in four girls and one in six boys are sexually abused before age 18. I'm glad to see that male victims aren't being ignored. "I want to reach out to those survivors and those victims," Smart said. "I want them to know that these things do happen, but that doesn't mean that we have to be defined by it for the rest of your life. You can move forward and you can be happy." I'm al…
/r/MensRights08/10/13 08:34 PM
2

With that many (potentially disposable) personnel, a well-coordinated series of assaults could bring a first-world country to its knees.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 08:26 PM
9

I've noticed that The Patriarchy can be anywhere, do anything, and influence anyone (even women) at any time, even to seemingly contradictory ends. It's apparently some sort of amorphous blob of evil. Say what you will about the Communists, but I think I could actually go out and measure something to determine whether or not they succeeded.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 08:24 PM
1

Why are proponents of multiculturalism so opposed to men and women having different cultures? That's... actually a very good question. Never thought of it that way.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 07:22 PM
1

Personally, I like it that messages that are actually discriminatory towards LGBT people get downvoted to oblivion.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 04:49 PM
1

In fact, if he wanted to attack in the style of the ultrafems, he could have accused her of trivializing rape. Facebook comments you don't want is so very far from being rape.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 03:15 AM
2

Rights are a great idea, especially as limits on state and private power. You are correct that the West, in places with respect for rights, tends to outperform other areas. ...they don't come from a divine entity, though. Nor do they come from nature (which is full of raping, pillaging, and murder). Nor are they truly "self-evident." They work, because they're very flexible and counteract innate humans tendencies ("I'm special. I should be exempt from the 'no violence' rule!", etc) that cause tr…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 02:43 AM
9

She went to the police in the first place after being pressured to do so by her boyfriend. ...which is what I would do, were I to have a girlfriend receiving threatening messages. Paper trails of this sort of thing are important.
/r/MensRights03/10/13 06:42 PM
4

I think it's important that the MRM remains a cross-factional movement.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 03:41 PM
3

There was that "OMG I was raped and attacked by violent Christian extremists!" woman, who completely fabricated both the attack and threats to "raise awareness."
/r/MensRights01/10/13 04:14 PM
21

I didn't mean that in an absolute sense. There's a tendency among feminists to group all opposition as "MRAs", regardless of whether they actually are or not. This results in labeling incoming hostile messages as being "from MRAs". Who sends most violent messages on the internet, though? I suspect that it's trolls. Feminists, being often easily offended, make convenient targets for them. Unless the message is explicitly identified as coming from an MRA (or in the reverse case, a feminist), it's …
/r/MensRights01/10/13 03:23 AM
24

These people do get messages with death threats and whatnot. They're just from trolls or nutters, not from MRAs. It would be sort of like... A proud Democan senator receives a death threat. Instead of assuming that this is probably a lone nutter, he assumes that this is something which is common to many of his rival political party, the Republicrats.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 02:59 AM
1

Don't do it unless you're only going to wear it with appropriate outfits. (A fedora is not appropriate with common street clothes!) Look those up online. I say this as someone who doesn't own a fedora, but has seen too many images of fedoras suffering from fashion abuse.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 02:02 PM
1

Look, you may place a lot of value on sex and want lots and lots of it, and have good control over your erections, able to easily quash them if you don't want sex. However, not all men are you.
/r/MensRights24/09/13 04:26 PM
10

I've never posted here before, and I'm not 100% sure this is where I should post this, But I have to post it somewhere. This would be the correct place for your post. "People don't take male rape seriously" is an important men's rights issue. I think you'll also find a number of people here agree with you about the watering-down of the definition of rape. I'm sorry to hear about your experiences there, as well as those of your trans friends which you mentioned elsewhere. When I found out that TE…
/r/MensRights23/09/13 07:36 PM
3

Except that judgment contains, well, a value judgment. In that sense, humans were defective cavemen because they weren't didn't have similarly powerful jaws. Well, you're obsessively oversimplifying something because you don't want to admit that just the word "male" drags in a ton of assumptions. So, i'd say there's some similarities, although admittedly that guy was worse. I just decided to match your tone. You said "some get this kid a gold star", so I called you a kid. I wanted to see if you'…
/r/MensRights23/09/13 06:53 AM
1

Thank you for completely ignoring the point, kid. Sure, we could say all humans are mutants, because we could only have evolved by mutating from simpler species, but instead we adopt a looser definition because it is useful. Some things we humans called "defects" earlier (like, say, left-handedness) turned out not really to be problems, and making the decision on where to draw the line very often involves normative judgments. In order to define whether something has succeeded, you must first def…
/r/MensRights23/09/13 03:59 AM
4

Oh, and, you do realize evolution can only advance through mutation, right? So, in that sense, we are necessarily all mutants.
/r/MensRights23/09/13 03:37 AM
2

hypothetical gieger: "It's very simple. There are red gumballs and there are blue gumballs." other person: "But what about the other gumballs, like the purple ones?" hypothetical gieger: "If you ignore all the other gumballs that aren't red or blue, then there are just red gumballs and blue gumballs." And this is hypothetical gieger's theory of colors. So ... are you just too ideologically committed to understand how language works (that it's a model), or what? You're not talking about mathemati…
/r/MensRights23/09/13 03:32 AM
1

Sex is a *model*. The underlying universal mechanics don't actually care. Not like we do. We invented the descriptive model because it suited our purposes. As such, the words we use for sex and gender are more correlational, like many words are. Probabilistic. The labels are for convenience. If used in a strict manner, they break down on edge cases. Sex-based brain differences are observable at the population level. But the whole "concepts of male / female" thing is ultimately a retroactive and …
/r/MensRights23/09/13 03:05 AM
4

Yeah, that's why I never take the opinions of conservatives seriously. I mean, just because they have different values from me means that obviously their whole brain is damaged and incapable of rendering an insightful or rational thought. People are monoliths, so if they have a single mental flaw we should write off all their opinions, including those that are entirely unrelated to that flaw. Also, it's completely impossible that the internal mental systems of the brain that determine gender for…
/r/MensRights22/09/13 03:18 PM
4

Oops. It seems your sarcastic reaction was a bit premature. It seems that post got buried under a pile of downvotes, as most "lol gays are disgusting" and "lol transgenders are disgusting" posts are in this sub. In fact, it's almost as if the majority of this sub doesn't actually have anything against LGBT individuals, and the sub actually contains a few gay / trans members.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 03:08 PM
6

Because the Just World Hypothesis is false. The Universe does not actually give people what they deserve. It only sort of looks like that due to a minor correlation, lots of biases, and tendency of similar people to cluster together. (Eg you're less likely to get killed in a drug turf war if you aren't involved in selling drugs.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 06:49 AM
2

My experience with women in computer science (which is more similar to engineering) is that the few women there care enough about the field to buck the social complaints.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 04:20 PM
1

MRM was the first place that explicitly told me that it's okay to be male/masculine. They also helped me see the positive side of men. Even if that was all it did, it'd be useful.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 12:04 PM
1

That really depends on whether sociopathy is more innate or more due environmental factors. Something I'm not that familiar with. Chicken / egg is definitely the case with tests for intelligence.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 06:54 AM
2

Many times in the past that we (humanity) have segregated out a group and been prejudiced against them, it's turned out later that they're relatively normal upon closer inspection. Suppose, for example, someone rants about "men who wear hats." The burden of evidence would be on them to show that they're different. We can carve up humanity into about as many arbitrary subsets as we like. Adopting "a subset of humanity is probably ordinary except in which specific criterion was used to select them…
/r/MensRights18/09/13 11:07 PM
4

I simply assume that the level of evil raping sociopathic monsters among the gay population is roughly equal to that among the general population. That is, that gays are no more or less evil than anyone else.
/r/MensRights18/09/13 04:54 PM
4

Citation very much needed on "homosexuals are far more likely to be psychopaths." Preferably a meta-analysis to minimize the risks of sample contamination, poor methdology, and small sample size. I have gay friends. Aside from being nerdy and gay, they're pretty normal. Hardly evil raping sociopathic monsters.
/r/MensRights18/09/13 03:44 PM
7

I view their common sentiment as "don't be a sexist dick to women", but they differ on definitions of that and pretty much anything else goes beyond that. There are... pro-porn / anti-porn pro-prostitution / anti-prostitution those actually concerned for men (personal experience) / those who want to literally rid the world of men those who empower themselves by actually taking on and suceeding at difficult and useful challenges / those who revel in victimhood In that vein, I take an MRA self-ide…
/r/MensRights17/09/13 06:18 AM
2

I was thinking it was a good example of why that's a useful heuristic. It's an idea we should all keep in mind when evaluating any ideology. I didn't think you believed that now.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 05:32 PM
2

Another comment has the right of it. It's time to teach people about safewords, the no that always means no.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 05:04 PM
5

There's a small group out there outside of BDSM who want men to push past their "no"s as a display of dominance and get turned off if the guy fucking believes them when they tell him to stop. This trains men badly. They definitely need to learn and use safewords if they're going to play around with consent.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 04:58 PM
10

I don't think it's signals. Most rapes are caused by a small group of repeat offenders, including acquaintance rape. While the good news is this means the vast majority of men aren't rapists, it does suggest that it's not a case of waving meat in front of a hungry dog.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 04:51 PM
2

"I could probably construe anything as sexism." A wise young man once said "if your ideology can explain two contradictory outcomes equally well, then it hasn't actually explained anything." ...I think I need to spend less time on Reddit and more time at the place that was said.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 06:01 AM
5

Well, I'm throwing that hypothesis out there because it seems like a lot of the really radical-type people (in general, not just radfems!) are totally unaware of how normal and human whoever they're demonizing is. Take, for example, how some people become less anti-gay once someone in their family comes out. It's a lot harder to think all gays are in league with the devil when Uncle Larry, who you've known since childhood and who has never caused anyone harm, comes out of the closet. Suddenly, g…
/r/MensRights14/09/13 11:10 PM
7

That's a good point. That's not really what I meant, but I can see how it would be read that way. What I mean is, it would be possible to reduce one's interactions with men to pretty much just business ones and mostly cut men out of one's life. (You don't have to talk to your father, uncles, etc. You don't have to have male friends. You don't necessarily have to work closely with men.) If your only regular interactions with men are with store clerks, the postal man, service technicians, and so o…
/r/MensRights14/09/13 10:52 PM
11

I don't know that lesbians have a default negative view of men, unless women in general have a default negative view of men. The thing is, as lesbians, their sexuality does not force them to interact with men on more than a surface level on a regular basis, meaning there is no process to regularly reset their expectations of men. If they drift into thinking men are evil devils, there's much less at work to correct that mistake. FWIW, I think part of the reason so many men put women on pedestals …
/r/MensRights14/09/13 07:42 PM
2

Maybe you should. Shouldn't this post be in /r/MensRants or the like? It's not like this is an article about masculinity or some father describing how he lost custody or even a field report about some rape-related poster campaign.
/r/MensRights14/09/13 03:20 PM
6

I downvoted it. It belongs in /r/mensrants. Of course apparently no one reads that sub (or knows it exists) so it gets posted here instead. ...and /MR doesn't censor much, so...
/r/MensRights14/09/13 03:13 PM
1

There's a rumor that they hired Anita as a consultant, meaning Mirror's Edge 2 might get nerfed, but I think that's a hoax. I'd really hate to see a game with a female protagonist that was pretty good (although love-it-or-hate-it) get damaged due to over-PC, especially when it was already good on the racial and gender axes to begin with.
/r/MensRights14/09/13 03:01 PM
0

I downvoted for that reason. Honestly, it's like the majority of this sub doesn't know that sub exists. Maybe this offsite forum thing will let these posts get sorted properly.
/r/MensRights14/09/13 02:51 PM
3

It was adapted from an existing comic* making basically the opposite point.
/r/MensRights14/09/13 02:45 PM
7

I think this is more /r/MensRants
/r/MensRights13/09/13 05:43 AM
1

Keep in mind the OAG meme is deliberately about a girl that's so attached it's creepy. (It's one of my favorite memes, actually.) There is a certain fetishization of overly-clingy types going on in some circles these days (see the Yandere trope on TVTropes), but I think it's mostly by people that don't understand just how crazy crazy is. Also probably by people who are very starved for affection. If you're in a desert, then getting hit by a massive wave might not sound so bad. I was once with a …
/r/MensRights13/09/13 05:25 AM
3

The second question in your response gets at the heart of it. If men don't have a "right" to judge feminism due to a "vested interest," then obviously women don't either.
/r/MensRights13/09/13 05:07 AM
7

If you mean in terms of equipment, resources, and political connections, yes. I mean in terms of ideology, attitudes, and membership. Feminism is naturally going to focus on women (who form the majority of Feminists), even unintentionally, and the ideological underpinnings for many feminists reinforce this. You won't solve men's issues for real if you have Patriarchy Theory to trivially excuse paying any attention to men's issues.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 07:10 PM
0

Well, given that rapists are around a 5% group of the male population (I imagine the numbers are similar for women as well), and those are mostly repeat offenders... A general-purpose website of 100,000 could have 5,000 such nutters, much like it may have 100-1,000 actual sociopaths, x,000 thieves, x0 murderers, etc. Any sufficiently large website could have a large enough number of criminals to have an entire criminal subforum, even if only 1% of the population are criminals.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 06:26 PM
8

Well, I guess I won't be using StumbleUpon then. Even before I heard of MRM, it was pretty obvious that Feminism was simply not equipped to solve men's issues.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 04:56 PM
60

While I'd rather people reconize the problem by actually bothering to sympathize with men for once... Honestly, if it takes a bunch of bitter lesbian celebrity divorce battles to drive the point home, then that's better than nothing. ( Naturally I wouldn't wish a bitter divorce battle on anyone, lesbian celebrity or no. )
/r/MensRights12/09/13 05:10 AM
1

What's more, not only could virgin-shaming be argued as misandrist, but you can flip their argument on its head to show that they're a "misogynist." Requiring men to be getting pussy to have a voice (so to speak) promotes treating women as sex objects. It would give a lot of PUAs more voice than some male feminists!
/r/MensRights10/09/13 04:57 PM
8

Hm. I don't think "gropists" would actually change. I imagine that the vast majority of men don't grope.
/r/MensRights10/09/13 04:41 PM
3

This might seem weird to some, but... I'm not good at hating people or holding grudges. I'd have to make an active, determined effort to hold a proper grudge. I don't hate women. My favorite person is a woman. It would be far more accurate to say that I'm very frustrated with the actions and attitudes of certain women.
/r/MensRights10/09/13 06:48 AM
3

There's a bit of angst over in the Feminist spheres about this whole racial thing. I believe the disparity was the cause for the hashtag "#solidarityisforwhitewomen".
/r/MensRights10/09/13 06:41 AM
1

I've heard that showy clothes don't actually correlate with rape. Interviews of rapists found that they picked victims wearing more ordinary clothing. Make sure you research this claim if you're going to make it, so you have a strong citation to back it up.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 05:46 PM
3

If you state allows it, of course, OP.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 11:58 PM
1

Hardly. I'm merely suggesting that "not going to strip clubs" is actually the typical behavior, despite all the fuss that's raised about them. It's less significant to find "most MRAs don't go to strip clubs" if "most MRAs are straight males" and "most straight males don't go to strip clubs." This is, of course, ignoring concerns about making assumptions on how the typical strip club patron views women. Barring evidence to the contrary, I don't think it's fair to assume they significantly differ…
/r/MensRights06/09/13 08:47 PM
1

I don't know that most straight men regularly frequent strip clubs in general; though maybe that's just who I know.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 06:03 AM
2

Uh, why were you even measuring this? How is it relevant?
/r/MensRights05/09/13 03:54 PM
1

Blackmail. Power disparity (employer, etc.) Victim is unconscious. There are all sorts of coercion that don't personally involve using force.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 04:02 PM
3

1 - I think it does on net, but sometimes it goes overboard. 2 - I don't know. 3 - many here don't trust the feminist political movement. They would expect the feminists to seize control of a mixed movement. I think it's more important what people do as individuals than their labels. 4 - some would call it "egalitarianism". I have no opinion. 5 - GirlWritesWhat posts here periodically. It's more about the opinion being espoused than the sex. 6 - the MRM does not claim to advocate for womens' rig…
/r/MensRights02/09/13 07:51 AM
1

Traditional gender roles do exist. They also made more sense during the pre-industrial era. They still make some sense. By getting those that have caught this idea of a "Patriarchy" to realize that there is no "Patriarchy," and traditional gender roles are not a "Patriarchy" and are a result of interactions between both men and women, we nip some of this "men are the oppressors" and "men can't suffer" and "it's just the Patriarchy backfiring" crap in the bud.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 03:38 AM
4

You said it better than I.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 01:40 AM
6

Pronouns aren't really a science. While it's true that people like XY females (the result of androgen insensitivity) and intersex-at-birth individuals are special cases, our labels for the sexes, like many nouns, are correlational symbols rather than perfectly-defined absolutes. (Unless you think you can come up with a scientific definition for chair that can perfectly separate out the edge cases between chairs and stools?) If you want to be mad at Manning because you feel Manning's a traitor, I…
/r/MensRights29/08/13 01:37 AM
6

Nah, I think that's just nationalism. This traitor piece of garbage needs to learn that he will NEVER EVER be a woman and just accept that he's a male. That's the Man-TERF part right there. You highlighted the wrong spot.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 01:33 AM
1

Dunno. I suppose I could go look at their post history since that time.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 12:36 AM
2

I dunno, I think I managed to trigger a revaluation of the term in one. That was someone that was deliberately making an effort to be open-minded, though. Let's take it on an individual-by-individual basis.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 12:23 AM
1

I have 99 problems and the white supremacist cis heteropatriarchy is most of them. Also, if I saw anyone wearing that shirt in real life... I do try to be reasonably ladylike and do detest violence... But I think that in that case it might be justifiable. Just tell the wearer "#solidarityisforwhitewomen" and then stand back.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 12:09 AM
3

I think that patriarchy is a very poor word for traditional gender roles. The name obscures what it actually is, what it actually does, and what actually caused it. I think this is a case we should be making to those who are willing to listen.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 11:38 PM
1

That's probably because of misogyny.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:37 PM
10

I think most of them are posting here. I wondered what would happen with that sub.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:16 PM
7

It's a bit of gynocentrism there. Not having a penis, she hasn't realized they don't work like that. Things would be different if men had a little switch in their brain that could turn off erections whenever.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 01:22 AM
1

A system in which 92% of workplace deaths are men is obviously not ruled for the benefit of men as a class. If there really were a Patriarchy, men would make women do all the dangerous jobs that get you killed. Women are involved in the creation of traditional gender roles and gender policing, especially in how they select a man. By selecting for mn who are providers, and not taking on these jobs themselves, they contributed to the situation.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 06:22 PM
1

Except that's not how intelligence works, either. There is no universal sort of intelligence amongst humans. For example, some people are really good at math, some are really good at language, and some are really good at both. You might say the first two groups are equally intelligent, but at different things. I'm not saying that there's no such thing as stupid people, of course. In order to claim that there's a universal standard for intelligence, you first have to define it. Intelligence is no…
/r/MensRights26/08/13 07:09 PM
5

Ah, but you see, basic addition is not discredited. I don't think all of the problems some have with philosophy is the way it's taught, but I think that's part of it.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 07:03 PM
1

Have you ever heard of compartmentalization? It's possible for some otherwise rational people to have a sort of rationality "off switch" in the form of a specific topic. For some people that's religion, for some it's children, and for others it's gender. Of course, nutty radfems are likely less rational generally.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 05:57 PM
6

To be fair, there's a lot of really bad philosophy floating about. Philosophy departments shouldn't start their courses with chronological order - teaching about the discredited things first makes the field seem more foolish than it actually is.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 05:49 PM
3

I'd like to see this done with a few others ideologies as well. A string of failed states would be a humanitarian catastrophe, but it would finally establish, via real-world test conditions, the practical (non-)viability of their philosophies.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 04:12 PM
1

But ... guns are phallic symbols of oppression. How would they survive?
/r/MensRights26/08/13 04:03 PM
2

My ex watches porn. Is she oppressing herself? I've asked this to some of them on reddit, but never got an answer. Perhaps because it points out the absurdity of the anti-porn bullshit.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 03:59 PM
4

There are women that are valuable and intereting as people. There are women whose sex is the only thing interesting about them. Only the second kind lose out to non-sapient sexbots. The first kind don't. I'm guessing you've never met a woman that's really amazing? Also, 2/3 of my exes would be OK with having a sexbot around if it also did housework. So let's not make a false dichotomy.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 03:24 PM
3

It's something we have to keep in mind. For example, there are a group of people that put together costumes of fictional characters ("cosplays"). Apparently there is some racism in the cosplay community. As a white dude (who doesn't cosplay but knows some people who do), this idea literally never occurred to me because (1) it's not like cosplayers really have horns or wings or whatever anyway, so it doesn't make sense to make skintone a big deal, and (2) even if an 'ideal' cosplay would (hypothe…
/r/MensRights26/08/13 04:37 AM
5

Additionally, the pictures weren’t gathered from knowing participants who were honestly solicited for pics of their junk; instead, they were compiled by the artist collective Femme Future, who didn’t let on what they were for, and one of whom even posed as a gay man on Grindr to collect 150 dick pics. Regardless, I have to admit I don't really feel that bad about the idea of totally unsolicited dick pics showing up without permission in something like this. I mean, it's not like there was permis…
/r/MensRights26/08/13 02:07 AM
2

Well, it doesn't actually require that women have "a more scientific way of thinking." Humans are irrational. It would be sufficient that women are simply irrational and biased in subtly different ways from men - not more accurate, just different. Also, sometimes common sense about these things is wrong. I'm legitimately curious if this is just a result of competition, or the result of actual differences in thinking patterns. I'm just not sure how to go about testing that.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:34 AM
2

Can you devise a method to experimentally determine which hypothesis is more accurate?
/r/MensRights25/08/13 11:15 PM
2

No, I haven't kept a specific record, and as I said, it's subtle. My ex and I are both programmers with similar interests. Outside of programming, she radiates a sort of femininity that I can't quite describe. Within programming, we think differently and produce better designs when working together, but it's difficult to disentangle that from our Myers-Briggs personality differences, different life experiences, and my ADHD. In more practical terms, the advantage of having at least one woman arou…
/r/MensRights25/08/13 11:13 PM
2

How would we go about comparing the truth of these competing hypotheses?
/r/MensRights25/08/13 09:19 PM
4

In my experience, they do (tend to) think slightly differently, but it's subtle. I'm not quite sure how to state it, but I'll try. Imagine a Venn diagram of the set of all possible hypotheses humans might propose. One circle is those proposed by men, the other by women. 90% of the diagram overlaps, but 10% doesn't. In that vein, I expect the marginal gain from a small number of opposite-gender participants to be high at first (high gain from one woman or one man), then to decline quickly.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 09:16 PM
2

MR rarely bans anyone in general.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 05:04 PM
1

Money. They want it, and people will pay to look at them. I don't really hold it against them. A comment in that thread brings up that there are a good bit of 'sexy' photos of male celebrities as well.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 04:44 PM
1

Short version: I say that because [reasons] men need a movement, and feminism cannot be that movement because [reasons]. I don't identify as anti-feminist, though. At least not without qualification as to which sorts of feminists we're talking about.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 03:58 PM
0

On my phone right now, but I have a link for you about Patriarchy that you may find relevant. I'll get it to you later. edit: Found it. Patriarchy and Demonstrability.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 03:53 PM
1

In your example, if the blackmail were explicit it would likely count as rape.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 03:43 PM
7

The comments disagree with the article. That's good in this case. Author failed to realize that men are not knights, and she is not a (capital-L) Lady. She and men are both citizens.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 01:09 AM
2

We get a post like this ("I'm an X; am I welcome here?") about once a week. The answer is almost always "yes", or "you're free to join the debate here." For my part, a very close friend of mine is trans. There is one issue of overlap. The TERFs' (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists) hatred of trans people seems based on a hatred of men. I had no idea TERFs were a thing until I arrived here. Also, this sub generally doesn't ban except for spammers, and it has a diversity of opinions. You may not…
/r/MensRights23/08/13 03:16 PM
3

Except that a society without men will limp along with severe shortages of technical workers. It's not all social conditioning - some of the predisposition towards systems analysis is biological. (On phone; link later.) (And it's not an absolute, more a preference.) Anyone who thinks men are "obsolete" at the dawn of the Information Age, where men compromise the vast majority of our engineers and programmers, is an idiot. Although many people seem to have confused ideas about where computers com…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 07:40 AM
5

Just like normal people will never have computers in their homes? I mean, they're these big machines that take up a whole room! More seriously, unlike space travel, the fundamental amount of resources involved in fixing aging are small.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 04:14 PM
1

I was just thinking of one of those "what if all men disappeared from Earth?" scenarios. Supposing a method of creating children, could women, as humans, survive? My answer is yes. The differences in sexes are not so impossibly huge. On the other hand, a society without one of the sexes is missing half its' brain, so it would not be a pleasant existence. There are women engineers and women blue collar workers. Relative pay for those careers would go up, while pay for traditionally-female careers…
/r/MensRights20/08/13 03:11 PM
5

I think women could hold together a State if they really had to. It'd be the critical shortages in blue collar and technical sectors that'd be damaging.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 08:27 AM
7

I've actually upvoted both sides of an argument before, here.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 03:48 PM
0

My point was more "this behavior's not even useful at what it's supposed to be good for."
/r/MensRights19/08/13 03:32 AM
1

Wasn't there a result of some study posted here a while back where it was shown this behavior didn't actually make said wives feel better?
/r/MensRights19/08/13 12:16 AM
1

Let's just say that I have different ideas on the versatility of general purpose information processing systems than you and leave it at that. Yeah. It opens all sorts of doors for things like special pleading. "It's ok that I punched him: he's a man and men are the oppressors!" is similar to "it's OK that I punched him: he's a foreigner!"
/r/MensRights16/08/13 07:13 PM
3

Well, while we're going to need some new form of economy to deal with massive amounts of automation rendering entire swathes of people unemployable in the future... Marxism is a "power narrative", like Feminism. At this point, ikve started to heavily suspect that power narratives have corrosive aspects to reason. Not 100%, but a danger exists when it's always "someone else" that "has all the power."
/r/MensRights16/08/13 04:16 PM
5

Because r/MR has people from a mix of political ideologies. I'm probably classified as "liberal", but I've also seen libertarians and the occasional conservative. I'd say he's right about it containing strong authoritarian tendencies, however.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 03:58 PM
5

Transgender. Transvestite is cross-dressing, IIRC.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 03:34 PM
4

At your age, it's mostly important to understand that men are not bad or evil, nor is masculinity; and that women are human, as capable of good or evil as any man. There's a lot of background messages in our society that will say otherwise. I wish i'd known that earlier.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 01:40 PM
1

I think it's important from the perspective of men's psychological health.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 04:20 AM
1

Perhaps that was why it was cross-posted.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 01:48 AM
1

That would be more useful.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 05:40 PM
1

It can be argued that virgin shaming is misogynist and encourages the mistreatment of women.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 11:49 PM
2

I don't really follow it either. I'm just on the outside looking in. And from the outside, it seems that it's just to replace the character with a woman for the sake of a woman. ...but female protagonists can stand on their own in science fiction and elsewhere. Just randomly swapping out existing men is a rather brutish method, not a nuanced one. This attitude of swapping in to existing male power could easily be spun as misogynist.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 07:41 PM
2

from link: I mean I do think that it’s feminizing for a guy to go see a movie with a female lead unless it’s Angelina Jolie shooting people or Zero Dark Thirty or something that feels like it’s in the male sphere. The devaluation of the traditional female roles or the traditional female approach, it starts to feel like this is what’s wrong with our country. Men will, apparently, watch films in which women beat things up and shoot things. (There's an entire genre of women action protagonists.) As…
/r/MensRights06/08/13 07:22 PM
2

Plus, there are other women that would prefer a male Doctor.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 07:03 PM
9

That ... actually, yeah. I disagree with you a bit elsewhere, and I wouldn't say that all MR issues are the result of gynocentrism... However, gynocentrism tends to cause some MR issues, and tends to contribute to MR issues being "hidden in plain sight" in general.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 06:31 PM
1

I actually do think privilege is a thing. However, for many arguing it, it seems to have morphed into a Liberal form of Original Sin - and as someone left-of-center politically, I'm none too happy about that.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 05:49 PM
1

If women really only made 75 cents to the dollar doing the exact same job for the exact same time, some genius would create a company that paid women 80 cents to the dollar (in a labor-intensive industry) and wipe out all his/her competitors. In practice, it's more about career choices and time worked. Others will swoop in here with citations, though, which are more useful.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 05:30 PM
1

There's a reason most anime conventions I've seen / heard of / been to are about 50% women. I know roughly zero gay men that read yaoi. Now, I don't hate yaoi, nor do I want to get rid of it. It, and other anime and manga targeted towards women, are mostly fine in my book. But! Let's not pretend that the typical fantasies of one gender or the other are evil or bad. And let's also not pretend that only one gender has fantasies or silly fantasies for that matter. It's like pretending only one gend…
/r/MensRights05/08/13 08:24 PM
1

I have yet to hear of a single gay man that likes yaoi. Plenty of girls/women, though. Anime and manga each have their catering, but they just split it up by show and break up into niches as required. That's part of why if you go to a convention it'll be about 50% women.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 08:18 PM
2

I'm a Transhumanist. I want to be literally so powerful that I am capable of saving everyone. I don't think that's "because society," when society does not actually like Transhumanist thought.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 06:14 PM
1

I know one that understands the issues with Patriarchy Theory, and even 'liked' my link to this post here. She's in STEM, though, so you're probably right that it's not as common as we'd like.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 04:12 AM
1

Shit I have hair like her. I must be a tranny as well. In your defence, so does Justin Bieber. In which case, neither of you would be trannies, but actually lesbians. (There's apparently a tumblr for everything these days.)
/r/MensRights03/08/13 10:52 PM
3

MRA is probably mutually exclusive with radical feminism. People like the TERFs (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists), who hate men so much that they think transwomen are some sort of infiltration plot, are probably going to act against the interests of men generally. I don't think it's exclusive with more moderate feminism.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 08:08 AM
3

Feminism is not a safe space for men to do the hard work of rebuilding masculinity for the current era. Here, we debate with each other. To an outsider, that may not seem like a "safe space," but it's important for the task.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 07:29 AM
3

An organization, or a society composed of multiple individuals, is capable of addressing multiple problems simultaneously. It is okay for resources to be sent to address actual problems that women have, but some resources should be allocated for mens' problems as well.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 01:44 AM
33

Well, think about the implications for radical feminisms... If it's really so terrifyingly horrible to be a woman, why would someone who was born male want to do it? Ergo, maybe it's not really that bad. If gender is biologically-rooted, to the point that having a 'wrong' sex causes high rates of suicide, then there might be other mental biological differences between men and women. If gender isn't biologically-rooted, then why would members of the oppressor class so desperately want to join the…
/r/MensRights03/08/13 01:24 AM
5

Any TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist) is pretty much already overboard by definition. If you think that "trannies" are out to get you, that's a pretty good sign your ideology is, uh, probably not the most sane.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 01:09 AM
9

If we were "awful" we'd let people like manhood academy get upvoted to the top. Unlike you assholes we don't ban them even if we think they're disgusting individuals, we just downvote them. Well, technically, we delete most of those Manhood Academy comments. That's because they're spam, though.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 07:07 PM
1

Again, I refer you to the UPB book excerpt about lifeboat scenarios which I pasted above. I didn't address it earlier because it's absurd. Apparently a perfect UPB agent (one that does no wrong ever) would be willing to potentially sacrifice his own life so that he didn't have to break a window. Once you start comparing bads and saying "well breaking 3 windows is worse than breaking 1 window" or "well burning someone's wastebasket is better than burning their car", you're often already starting …
/r/MensRights01/08/13 04:19 PM
1

Great. So I can justify any action by just stating that my calculation was 'imperfect'. Sounds like a great way to run society. No, actually, you can't. But all of your decisions are already based on imperfect information. If there were a subtle logical flaw in your brain, or a deliberate one, you could evaluate UPB, find it perfectly true, and it could be entirely wrong, and you'd have no practical way of knowing. You are already proceeding based on (best) estimates. You will always be acting o…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 04:01 PM
1

What is the value of a moral standard which is not 'computable'? It is valuable because it is true, and can guide the development of heuristical decision algorithms. In other words, it should render better moral performance when used as a standard than false theories. How can you justify using force against people using a moral standard you yourself admit cannot be computed. Sitting there and computing for a finite-but-arbitrarily-long period of time is an action. It is pretty much never the cor…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 03:11 AM
1

Picking a specific action (murder) and calling it a universal moral good in itself is admittedly foolish. After all, how can an action be good or bad without associated preferences for or against it or the results thereof? However, it does not follow that if murder is not suitable as a universal moral good, that it is never a good thing. Why is murder universally bad? Because if everyone murdered they'd all kill each other and no one would be left? That presumes that outcome is bad, which is a s…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 03:00 AM
1

Let me put it this way. In the absence of anything you might deem 'subjective,' demonstrate that life is universally preferable to death for all people at all times.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:07 AM
1

I am indeed confused that you have not addressed any of the points I raised. A shame. I thought it would be more efficient to do a forwards explanation than a backwards explanation, judging by your level of confusion. No, I'm saying you can compare an action to a universal standard to determine if it is moral or not. No agent nor praise involved. Which, as I said, I do. Whether someone should be praised is a separate issue from which outcome is superior. You confused the two in your kidnapping s…
/r/MensRights01/08/13 02:05 AM
2

Well, technically, a woman could be a lesbian slut, non?
/r/MensRights31/07/13 04:00 PM
1

There seem to be fewer women interested in STEM, but when you do find one, she'll be about as good as her male compatriots. (Sometimes better.)
/r/MensRights31/07/13 03:16 PM
4

It's a ManhoodAcademy spammer. So, yeah - it's because it's spam.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 12:20 AM
4

It's like a drug - in reasonable doses it can be beneficial, but too far and it becomes harmful. Interesting metaphor. Victimhood addicts? It's right to claim to be a victim when you actually are one, but once you're not...
/r/MensRights31/07/13 12:08 AM
0

You are confused. For example, you managed to assume that goodness of an action is somehow related praiseworthiness of an agent. Praising is an action in itself which must have its own consequences evaluated. That much should have been fairly obvious. I think I need to take a different tack here. State transitions can only be one of: random, probabilistic, or deterministic. The relationship between the current state of a thing and the future state of a thing is either random (arbitrary with resp…
/r/MensRights30/07/13 11:26 PM
5

Pretty much everyone hates Cathy Brennan. She got kicked out of a gay / lesbian bar because they didn't want her stirring up trouble. She (IIRC) tried to sue a lesbian and called her a transwoman because she couldn't fathom the idea of another woman-born-a-woman lesbian thinking she was nucking futz. The whole TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist) thing is really about misandry and basically androphobia. They seem afraid that transwomen are really deep-cover Menz operatives or something. ET…
/r/MensRights30/07/13 01:11 AM
0

If this is your principal then why not apply it to yourself. Why don't you sell everything you own, go to Africa and use that money to feed thousands of dying people then dedicate your entire life to saving people and donate all your organs to save people. Surely, you can save many more than just yourself. Isn't that the best utilitarian outcome for your life? No, but you don't understand that because you, like most people, use a stupidly shallow analysis of utility, then complain that Consequen…
/r/MensRights29/07/13 11:31 PM
1

The market does not have to be perfectly fair. What does fair or meritocratic even mean? The free market is just people voluntarily trading with each other without using force. I really don't see why that is so hard to grasp. Because if it's not fair, then we may be entirely justified in interfering at times. Not always, but at least some of the time. What you're refusing to understand is that the mere requirement humans have of needing resources to survive means that all humans participate in t…
/r/MensRights29/07/13 11:26 PM
2

Libertarian types tend to have weird definitions of "initiating force," like "polluting such that it passes the boundaries of your area is initiating force." Let me guess, you also think that markets are truly fair and meritocratic? Look, dude. I'm a Utilitarian. I don't boil down morality to NAP and property because that simply would not make sense to me. Minds are real; "property" is not. "Property" is very, very useful. However, the Universe doesn't care about it. All property is virtual. Qui…
/r/MensRights29/07/13 05:00 PM
1

Still doesn't work. So Bob arrives a month early and makes a farm. The property is now "homesteaded." I don't care. We still arrive and either stay and take the resources for ourselves or die. All other things being equal, one hundred lives are worth one hundred times as much as one life. Nothing you can say will convince me otherwise.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 04:47 PM
1

Would not trespassing be "initiating force" by Libertarian-type definitions? Otherwise a bunch of people you don't like could just sit on your land and prevent you from using it. Besides. I don't care how many rules you assign to grabbing unclaimed land; such property grabbing and assignation is not an inherent part of morality, but is merely a convenient set of rules for resource allocation and distribution.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 04:39 PM
0

Let me lay out a little thought experiment. Me, and a hundred other men are sailing on a boat. The boat is hit by a terrible storm that could not reasonably have been foreseen, and sadly it must be abandoned. There is one island, entirely unclaimed by any human ever, which is the only land which it is physically possible for us to reach. (As humans, there are upper limits to our physical strength and endurance.) It contains more than enough resources for the entire crew to survive indefinitely. …
/r/MensRights29/07/13 04:04 AM
0

the initiation of force is immoral. Uh-huh. Even if the initiation of force were required to ensure the continued survival of the entire human race? Or, at a smaller scale, even if killing one man would save one hundred men? Yes, that's a hypothetical, but we use hypotheticals all the time for stress-testing moral theories. You want to know who initiated force first? Nature. Acquire resources or die. Dodge this tiger or die. Oh, you lived too long? LOL, I guess you should die. Nature has pointed…
/r/MensRights29/07/13 03:40 AM
1

Because forcing people through force is never the solution. Except, you know, when it is. Choice is not the only Good. If there are Good things that are not chosen, then there is something else that makes choice Good. In that case, there may certainly be cases where the initiation of force leads to a net moral Good.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:38 AM
4

This runs counter to the interests of countries with nationalized health insurance. When the kid gets an unpredicted genetic disease because the mother lied about who was the father, it's the State that has to pay for sorting it out.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:32 AM
8

One of the current objections to paternity testing is "are you saying I'm lying?!" If all babies are tested for paternity by law, that excuse cannot be made to weasel out of testing. The only people this can hurt are cheaters and those that unduly withhold important information from their partners.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:22 AM
2

So, question here: is my ex girlfriend oppressing / objectifying herself by watching porn? This wasn't something I introduced to her. She's a sweet girl, but she has fantasies of her own. And where do romance novels and written erotica fall?
/r/MensRights26/07/13 07:42 AM
-1

Here dude, watch this. A fellow from Norway decided to ask why men and women typically go into different professions, even though they both have substantial opportunities to do otherwise. He explores it from a neutral point of view.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 06:38 PM
2

Someone should do a study... What is the impact of legalized and regulated prostitution on sex trafficking? We should expect the number of people being kidnapped and forced into sex work to go down significantly.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 05:53 PM
4

Honestly, how many men turn to porn in order to avoid cheating on their wives while simultaneously making their sexual urges shut up so they can get on with their day?
/r/MensRights25/07/13 05:35 PM
1

Hm... That's an interesting proposal. Make people go along with it, then afterwards they'll be forced to defend it to save face. All the better not to join political "tribes," then.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 06:31 AM
1

Alternative hypothesis: power narratives are seductive. Until you have total power, all failures are someone else's fault. They encourage confirmation bias (by rejecting everything that doesn't fit the narrative) and conveniently wrap history up in a nice neat blanket of one Grand Struggle. They're also black and white, and really, really easy to understand. Marxism is a power narrative. So is Feminism. So are other ideologies. The right wing has similar-but-different failure modes.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 01:06 AM
2

"Simply lucky" isn't accurate. I would say more that success = luck times talent times hard work. For instance, your genes did not decide to up and murder you with childhood cancer, nor (apparently) punch you in the face with a crippling disability. That's purely down to chance, and thus luck. Similarly, you weren't born in some third-world poverty trap where horrible malnutrition stunted your potential. On the other hand, had you not worked as hard as you did, you wouldn't be where you are toda…
/r/MensRights24/07/13 08:37 PM
2

Yeeeup. This is also a good clue about transgender people. If gender identity is biologically rooted and not purely a social construct, then it makes sense that this would happen glitches in the process could result in people whose neurological expression of gender was different from the rest of their bodies there may be differences in other preferences, at the population level
/r/MensRights24/07/13 06:11 PM
1

What was the incidence level of trans again? Something like 1%? (I think it may be rarer.) Gays are maybe 10% of the population, IIRC. So in 99% of cases, male sex -> male gender. In 90% of cases, male sex = likes girls. Given that in the vast majority of cases, a male sexed child will be a straight male, it's far more efficient to raise the child as a straight male and be open to the possibility that it may be otherwise. If your kid isn't actually straight or isn't male-identified, but you've m…
/r/MensRights23/07/13 07:50 PM
3

Funny thing. None of my gay or trans buddies are saying crap like that. I suggest that's because they know that anyone who deliberately wishes for a baby to be trans is a fucking lunatic. I mean, it's one thing to accept people that are already trans for who they are. But from what I've seen, being transgendered is a path with extra bonus angst and suffering on top of what you normally get in life. Most trans people just wish they were born as their target sex, not trans.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 07:42 PM
1

Go ahead and look at this article on Patriarchy Theory and Demonstrability, and see what you think.
/r/MensRights20/07/13 12:01 PM
3

In fact, OP, you may not even know they're women. You can't really tell online unless someone drops a clue or states it outright.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 11:50 PM
1

I'm a Computer Science student, but I switched before finishing a BA in Political Science.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 07:54 PM
2

Well, realistically, what level of discourse did you expect from a subreddit that consists entirely of memes?
/r/MensRights18/07/13 07:37 PM
6

Because innocent people do sometimes go down for murder, and no matter how much Revenge! we extract, it's impossible to raise the dead. A civilized society recognizes that its murderers are often broken human beings, and locks them up or puts them down quietly. It doesn't, say, throw them into spike pits. Now, if you can empirically prove that you can raise murder victims from the dead supernaturally by throwing murderers onto spike pits, I'll be all for it. Until then, not so much. ETA: Having …
/r/MensRights18/07/13 04:09 AM
3

Some people simply aren't rational or mature enough to safely handle the concept of privilege. That's when it gets turned from grabbing your buddy by the arm and saying "dude you just said something really ignorant", into a weapon for extracting concessions.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 06:29 PM
1

My experience says otherwise. People pointing left, right, and center and saying "rape culture!" at things that it really doesn't apply to. People implying that yes, our society doesn't want to punish rapists. We don't really live in a rape culture here in the West. The elements that compose it are insufficient even to define a subculture. We don't have another word for the attitudes/practices except "culture," though. Maybe we should separate them out and call one hypothesis "Weak Rape Culture"…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 06:23 PM
1

Or stop self-identifying as "feminist." I've known a number of women who would agree with many things feminists care about that have decided they don't want to wear the label. Personally, as a guy, these days I've just been saying that I have "feminist and MRA sympathies."
/r/MensRights17/07/13 09:46 AM
1

I'm still examining just what masculinity is, and working on constructing a new concept of it. It's ... well, it's very difficult to put into words. Various women I know sort of radiate femininity through their thinking patterns and actions (different, not better/worse), so I've been trying to think of what distinguishes the two sort of... dominant modes of thinking. It's subtle, which just makes it harder. Since finding MRAs, I've at least become far more comfortable with masculinity. Even befo…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 09:33 AM
7

I mostly agree with that.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 04:26 AM
19

Actually, on the whole "what attitudes and practices contribute to the amount of rape that we currently have?" front, I found a fascinating comment on a post elsewhere. (Begins with "Not surprisingly, I have a story?") Sometimes when people start talking about "Rape Culture," they make it sound like the culture-at-large is totally cool with this whole "rape" thing, but that's not really the case. Our Western culture is very not-cool with rape, and vigilantes will attack guys who are thought to b…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 02:57 AM
20

I, too, was fascinated to discover that rape isn't really something normal men do. I think this news is something we need to spread far and wide, not only to result in less rape, but also to help other men who feel as though their sexuality is wrong or predatory when it isn't. "Actually, most men are OK." just doesn't seem to get said a lot.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 02:45 AM
1

One of my ex-girlfriends described RationalWiki as "nothing more than an ammo dump for winning arguments."
/r/MensRights17/07/13 02:03 AM
6

I'm that good. Lawful Good, or Chaotic Good?
/r/MensRights17/07/13 01:58 AM
2

The left seems to be very interested in power narratives. Marxism - everything is an economic class struggle characterized by power imbalance. Feminism - everything is a power struggle between genders. Others - everything is a power struggle between races, etc. Not to say that the right wing doesn't do power narratives, but they don't immediately come to mind. I believe these narrative frameworks are hurting the left and encouraging tribalism. And I say this as someone who is left-of-center.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 01:53 AM
30

I've seen some people get heavily downvoted in here, then post something different in another thread and get upvoted. /MR will at times downvote dissent. What it won't generally do, it seems, is delete comments or ban people unless they're being actually abusive or spamming. And people will even respond to downvoted comments below threshold.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 01:46 AM
1

Nah, I didn't mean "oh, it's not romantic enough." More, "doesn't focus on things important to a woman's sexual satisfaction." In other words, from what I know of those women: meat slapping, but with more foreplay / more authentic. Not beds of roses.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 01:34 AM
13

Woman A: I'm the wife! Woman B: No, I'm the wife! Bystander: Wait, you're both lesbians; aren't you both technically the "wife"? Woman A: That's not what my lawyer says!
/r/MensRights16/07/13 10:57 PM
2

It depends on the woman you're dating. If you're dating a woman that watches porn (they do exist, I swear), she's more likely to be fine with you watching porn. She'll probably complain about porn being unrealistic and teaching men poor sex habits, though, and thus be choosy about what porn she watches. Which is fine, IMO. There is such a thing as too much porn, of course, and you really can become addicted to it and neglect your partner. Like alcohol, it's fine in moderation.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 07:53 PM
18

No. I've been trying to avoid the whole Zimmerman trial story.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 11:53 AM
2

I'm not that surprised that the author is into BDSM. Submissive womens' sexuality causes them to confront the difference in rhetoric versus reality. The rhetoric doesn't quite match their experiences. It would chide them for doing what feels natural and fun to them. Of course, anyone that thinks all women are submissive or should be is a nut.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 08:31 PM
5

I don't know about the others, but I don't generally go mining through peoples' post histories. Considering that a number of the membership have been on the receiving end of "you are an X, therefore you should be silent," they hopefully wouldn't either. The post you made above was reasonable, and it was upvoted.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 11:42 PM
1

It shouldn't be necessary, but it's a quick way of deflecting the angry reaction and getting certain people to stop and think.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 11:38 AM
1

The same messages get copy-pasted. Trivial variations of spam are still spam. It's essentially meaningless noise. It looks like a hook for a scam. I've seen unreasonable dissent in this sub before - it tends to get downvoted, but it generally does not get deleted. The reason that all those M101 posts get deleted is because they're basically advertisements which add even less value to the discussion than unreasonable dissent.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 11:32 AM
1

I mean that people have a really hard time with cognitive bias. It's actually a legitimately difficult task to fight off the effects of things like confirmation bias, tribalism, neurolinguistic priming / framing, rationalizations, etc. The human brain is designed to operate on heuristics (roughly, rules of thumb). Applying actually rational thought to things is not the natural default for us hairless apes. This means that even if presented with the right information, people could make the wrong …
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:25 PM
-3

wouldn't be a problem if so many women didn't play hard to get or some other head game Fuck those women. (Or rather, don't.) If you're a woman and you play "hard to get," it's your own damn fault if men pass you up. And whenever a "hard to get" woman complains about it, tell them why: it's a head game, and we're not playing it. I will not debase myself to chase after someone who cannot be bothered to show interest. I'm not even going to say "it's a casualty of feminism." "Hard to get" was always…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:09 PM
1

It infuriates me. I genuinely believe that if the whole world become empathetic to each other, we would solve every problem overnight, like world hunger. We have the resources, just not the empathy. Nah, it wouldn't. Despite what some economists would have you believe, humans are pretty damned irrational. Even without that irrationality, we all have differing experiences, and would still come to different conclusions. However, if everyone took the time and effort to have some empathy, it would m…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 04:57 PM
1

It just so happens that there's a great post about that.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 10:57 PM
2

Well, that was interesting.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 10:20 PM
1

Wouldn't many of those men be paying to see the women, and without competition from other men? In other words, it could easily be construed as creepy. Much to my amusement.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 08:41 PM
7

I think your sense of "ironic punishment" is a bit, er, off, dude.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 02:51 AM
3

There's a difference between reasoned dissent, unreasonable dissent, and spam. Notice the number of gender articles outside of here that also get the M101 comments. It's neither topical nor relevant - it's just spam.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 09:21 PM
3

It's probably more useful to focus on the issues this sub agrees about than to focus on one that will split it. I say this as someone that does support keeping abortion legal.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 08:21 PM
2

Should this maybe be over in /r/MensRants/ ?
/r/MensRights08/07/13 08:19 PM
1

I've actually been pleasantly surprised recently. Granted, I was talking to some "sex positive" school feminists, who are, IME, a lot more positive about this whole "men" thing.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:03 AM
1

Our subcultures are fracturing. In some subcultures, it is cool and high status to be smart. In other subcultures, it is much cooler not to be a "nerd."
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:57 AM
1

I suppose, in light of my other post, I should also lay down a preliminary defense. It is good and useful to make laws against sexism and racism. Firstly, the amount of variation within a sex is greater than the amount between sexes. We are describing population groups and trends, not individuals. Differences with race are mostly confined to minor differences in the distribution of medical issues (more susceptible to X, less susceptible to Y), as I understand it. To discriminate on race or sex, …
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:37 AM
1

I'm arguing against abortion by point of similarities to illegal actions, you're arguing for it by point of similarity to legal actions. No. We are arguing about what the law should be, therefore I am arguing from morality to legality. Absolutely none of the arguments I presented were made on the basis of "this is legal, therefore it is acceptable." In light of the existence of corrupted and evil states, arguing that because something is legal it is therefore moral is nonsense. they must justify…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:15 AM
8

Now this is a threat to women who are still reliant on sex as a resource necessary to secure a provider, so they use slut shaming in order to discourage it. If the only thing interesting about you is your sex, then you're going to be pretty much fucked in the long term. edit: Of course, this could be misconstrued as "there are no interesting women." There are, of course. It's just that women whose only value is that they're women, rather than say intelligence, personality, wealth, etc, are not g…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:02 PM
2

Cancer cells can be genetically distinct from their host organism, and some lines of such cells can survive and multiply indefinitely provided sufficient resources. That the genetic codes are different is not a sufficient basis for moral consideration. The presence of a handful of neurons is not sufficient for moral consideration. A mouse is not a person, and an insect is not a person, but both creatures have functioing clusters of neurons. A chimp is generally considered worthy of less moral co…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:51 AM
2

Are you a vegetarian? Edit: I know that sounds off-topic, but it's relevant here.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:38 AM
4

They do it because you are physically encumbered and need a hand. That's the standard I use. People on crutches, people carrying things, the elderly, etc.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 06:11 AM
5

No brain -> no mind -> no person. The standard of "well most people wouldn't want to have been aborted" is a problem for its implications. Most people wouldn't want to not have been conceived due to their parents just deciding not to have had sex, either. We should be careful not to adopt any stances that accidentally obligate everyone to have as many babies as possible. Third tri-mester is most likely an open question. The "Morning After Pill" is not - you need a brain to have thoughts or be a …
/r/MensRights03/07/13 06:03 AM
1

Exploring the What-If space can be useful for bounds-testing software or ethical philosophies. However, when dealing with issues like this, it's better to look at empirical evidence.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 07:17 PM
2

Well, it would do wonders for the sex tips in Cosmo.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 07:04 PM
1

My last ex had a higher sex drive than me, and she knew if she was being turned down, that was why (instead of some secret revenge or "I don't really care about you" or somesuch.) She was also an active partner in sex and would be mostly respectful if I just wasn't feeling it. (Although she might make a disappointed noise. Nothing like getting furious like another guy describes in this thread.)
/r/MensRights01/07/13 07:01 PM
1

I escort all insects out. She kills, apparently with no remorse and even pride and joy, things that don't understand any better. By their deeds you shall know them. I love this comment. The phrase "I escort all insects out." doesn't even parse right the first time you read it because it's so unusual. Like a work of art. It belongs in /r/nocontext/ or maybe /r/fifthworldproblems/.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 03:54 PM
5

I think that's the point.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 06:36 AM
3

They probably just haven't seriously considered what death means.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 06:30 AM
2

There was even a story on the news last year or so where 3 women beat a male to female transgendered person into a seizure. This makes me even more glad that my close trans friend is dating someone tall, strong, and protective.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 02:09 AM
1

That hypothesis is something I've considered. It may be that giving weapons-grade arguments to idiots is like giving a gun to someone who is too irresponsible to use it safely. It may be the idiot, or it may be a bystander, but somebody is gonna get hurt.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 10:18 PM
1

I thought transsexual denoted someone who is transgendered and had started making changes to their body, while transgendered just referred to someone with the gender identity mixup, regardless of whether they've made any changes yet?
/r/MensRights24/06/13 09:56 PM
1

TERFs (radfems who hate trans people) What is this an acronym for? "Transphobic (?) Radical Feminists"?
/r/MensRights24/06/13 09:51 PM
8

Anyone who favors the rights of the "oppressor" over the "oppressed" was a shithead. Sounds like she's bought into Patriarchy Theory, and is thus falsely treating men as a class instead of noticing that only a handful of men have power and don't wield it for the benefit of other men. She needs to understand that Patriarchy Theory (in part because it can explain almost anything) is not epistemologically rigorous. Patriarchy Theory is much more like component of a religion (faith-based) instead of…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:29 PM
8

I don't know if you made a difference to others, but MRAs have made a difference to me. I didn't realize that all of the nasty things attributed to men weren't actually normal male behavior. MRAs were the only place in our society that I saw the explicit message that it's okay to be male / masculine. It's healthier not to feel like my own gender is bad.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:12 AM
2

Thing is, as a white dude, I can accidentally say things about the lives of black people that aren't accurate because I'm not on the receiving end of (most) racist crap. For my part, I don't think it happens often because I try to avoid making negative assumptions about people. When that happens that I'm saying something that contradicts reality, though, it should be called out. But when people take it to the point of talking about "thin privilege," it's less like "hey dude you were being cluele…
/r/MensRights21/06/13 07:41 PM
4

The Patriarchy can do anything to anyone at any time, anywhere. Anyone can act out The Patriarchy's wishes - even those who oppose it. Does that sound familiar? I'm an Atheist.
/r/MensRights21/06/13 05:20 PM
6

If my exes left reviews they probably would be a decent source of information. Coincidentally, I don't expect any of them to use this app. (I wouldn't trust exes to give this information in general, though.)
/r/MensRights21/06/13 04:41 PM
5

The funny thing is, one my best buddies is gay (and masculine). When I need to talk about Man Stuff™, I often take it to him because he's the dude I know that's most comfortable with his masculinity. I don't think "bromance" is quite intended to have sexual connotations; it depends on who's using it and where. In fact, I think the term came into usage so that guys could have close male friendships again. As to the folks complaining that the only reason one might object to being (wrongly) thought…
/r/MensRights20/06/13 08:26 PM
4

Should this maybe be over in /r/MensRants ?
/r/MensRights19/06/13 09:45 PM
0

I don't either. (I get that you can end up with racism, homophobia, etc anyway under libertarianism since people are irrational idiots, but then, that's part of why I'm not a libertarian.) You can be a libertarian without endorsing that sort of discrimination. I don't have good reason to believe that most libertarians are being inauthentic when they say they don't agree with that sort of treatment.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 05:07 AM
1

I suspect that the preponderance of similar questions is meant to tease out subtle differences. e.g., I have little trouble communicating my emotions with my romantic partners (we communicate A LOT), but I don't like to communicate them much with anything less than close friends.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 10:45 PM
5

The acknowledgement alone is an invigorating breath of fresh air. Honestly, acknowledgement would go a long way for a lot of men.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 10:29 PM
1

I've found women and feminists that can handle it, but they don't start out with the proposition "all men are scum."
/r/MensRights18/06/13 10:19 PM
1

Wasn't there some big drama over there lately? I think I'll give it some time for the smoke to clear and see what new tone it settles into.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 08:37 AM
12

I unsubbed from /r/atheism for this reason. I'm an atheist, but all it was doing was making me uselessly frustrated and angry at stupid people being stupid. That ain't healthy.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 07:00 AM
7

Does he have much experience with women? Is there a lot of negative experience? In my experience (YMMV), it's always the women that I know that consider themselves feminist that are more-or-less fine. (It's the so-called "internet feminists" and academic feminists where you find the real nuts.) Some have even been pretty open when I brought the idea of mens' issue up. My experience with romantic relationships with women has been limited in some ways, but overall good. I believe what they call NA…
/r/MensRights17/06/13 06:59 AM
2

Well. While I do believe NAFALT, it's hardly the first time a radfem has gone utterly paranoid about groups like trans people or gay men. I know a trans person, and it's bad enough what she'll have to put up with from the traditionalists without this crap being in the mix, too. Seriously though, if the author's going to pick a feminist, he could've done a far, far better job. Even leaving MRAs out of the discussion entirely he could've picked someone a lot more sane.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 05:49 AM
4

There are some games like that reversed, I think. They aren't advertised on Facebook, and I don't believe they're approved of by the culture at large.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 02:06 AM
4

Is this the same Brennan that's rumored to be outing transwomen to employers and whatnot?
/r/MensRights17/06/13 01:59 AM
2

Might be more of a difference of scale. Sibling post makes a valid point that it's their own forums, though, which is different from coming after someone in their own territory and making them unsafe (thus the edit).
/r/MensRights13/06/13 08:47 AM
1

Yeah, I suppose that's a good point; it's their own forums, not sending messages to her directly. I thought I'd read about getting slammed with messages; apparently it's the person who posted the link on r/OKC, not the author of the blog post.
/r/MensRights13/06/13 08:37 AM
-2

It looks like it's a case of cyberbullying. That represents a power imbalance (many-to-one) that's disconcerting about the Information Age. Cyberbullying can break people, but I'm not sure how to handle it. The most important thing is probably not to allow doxxing. Edit: It looks like it's the person that posted the link to Reddit that's getting hit with hatemail, not the author of the blog post. This is what I get for posting at 4 in the morning. Edit2: Child post makes a valid point that it's …
/r/MensRights13/06/13 07:51 AM
1

This sounds like the beginning of a story from /r/TalesofPrivilege/ (NSFW).
/r/MensRights13/06/13 06:41 AM
2

I dunno; I absolutely loved Mirror's Edge (I bought it twice), and "Remember Me" is on my shortlist. Of course, ME is like no other game, and it tends to be love-it-or-hate-it. My favorites would have to be games with selectable-sex protagonist, though. (Mass Effect, Fallout) Out of curiousity, do you have any data on how those (selectable) do compared to other games?
/r/MensRights13/06/13 06:30 AM
4

My mother was an engineer, and my aunt was a high-powered executive. I've never believed that women are incapable of demanding or highly-technical jobs. However, they both made similar sacrifices to the ones men have to make to have those positions.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 09:06 PM
6

I usually require someone to have malicious intent (or not be acting in good faith) to be offended. I just read it as a frustrated semi-joke, more bitter than necessary. :P
/r/MensRights11/06/13 03:17 AM
5

From the article, it sounds like there is at least one. I don't think your snarky response is useful here.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 02:50 AM
2

I think it's like with hardcore religious people. When you get people (even a small handful) seriously saying that all heterosexual sex is rape, people assume that similarly ridiculous beliefs might be held seriously. By comparison, it's hard to tell if someone is a serious religious extremist or sarcastic when you have people on your campus wearing sandwich boards shouting about the end times.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 09:03 PM
1

I was wondering if this was fake. Aren't we supposed to alert the mods to stuff like that? I'm guessing this was done for reddit karma, since the expected reaction to showing people something outrageous is... outrage.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 09:00 PM
10

I've seen complaints about how my generation (Millenials) are running around saying "I'm not a Feminist but...". My experience is that the Millenial women I know agree with a lot of the obvious parts (e.g. "don't be a sexist douche", "women can also do intellectual jobs just fine", etc), while not buying in to some of the more ridiculous parts, or just being more positive on sex and men in general. They just don't see "being a Feminist" as a requirement to be against rape, against double-standar…
/r/MensRights10/06/13 07:23 PM
1

Since this is not the case, gender based pay inequality logically doesn't exist. While I understand your argument, since not all actors behave rationally, you need empirical evidence to make a real argument on this issue. (For example, you (hypothetically) could have someone who actually is misogynist who pays women less just because they distrust women.) Other MRAs have provided empirical evidence elsewhere, and that should be used in lieu of this argument.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 07:16 PM
2

So what do they mean? Immune to death by aging? Immune to death by disease? Immune to aging and disease? What about violence? Immune to death by aging and disease. In this universe, just about anything can be destroyed by hitting it with a sufficiently large mass moving at a sufficiently high speed. While death-by-aging and death-by-disease are mostly solvable science and engineering problems (barring heat death), immunity to violence is simply impractical. Alter your wants. There are a great ma…
/r/MensRights09/06/13 09:33 PM
2

but ascribing things like "strength" to masculinity and "emotional" to femininity sometimes gets misinterpreted by society as "I'm a woman so I can't be strong," or "I'm a man so I can't show emotion." This is more what I was referring to. Ah, yeah. I would agree with that. Some people don't like complex pictures, so they paint simpler ones. I haven't figured out what to do about that yet.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:24 AM
1

I generally won't assume someone is intelligent unless they demonstrate it at least a little. Most of your comments here are just short insults, which any old idiot can do. That doesn't even begin to address possible cognitive biases even if you are intelligent, on top of social pressures or stupid memes (in the original sense of the word.) Besides, I'm not "OMG WIMMINZ IS SOURCE OF ALL PROBLEMZ". Some women are the source of some of my problems. I get along with most women just fine, and my var…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 10:54 PM
2

Trolls aren't supposed to be so blatantly obvious. Plus, one of the things here is pointing out how "lol ur not man enuf" has been used to swindle men into doing stupid, self-destructive crap for ... well, a really long time. It's like ... you're training or something.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 10:00 PM
3

Well I'm definitely a Transhumanist but not a Singulitarian (Doctrinal Conflict!). However, I'll take a Singulitarian over quite a few other failure modes, since they're at least overextrapolating from something that is real (human technological progress), think that saving humanity requires actual human intervention, and have recognized involuntary death and senility as problems rather than romantic truths. Anyhow, I can't see LW being taken over like that, because they'd pick the incoming idea…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 08:45 PM
3

The MRAs have made me feel far more comfortable in being a man. I might not stick around, and I don't totally agree with everything, but they are making a difference.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 07:42 PM
6

Hypocrites. Just because society didn't send them the exact same messages it sent this man and me doesn't mean we didn't receive them. Oh no, if you have a penis everything is perfect and saying otherwise means you obviously don't believe having tits comes with any of its own problems.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 06:53 PM
1

I know this is late to the party, but since you're curious... I've read that womens' sexuality is (on average) more flexible / fluid.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 05:49 AM
1

My (limited) experience is that women partly want someone who can entertain them. If it's impractical to find someone with more social status (in the form of money / etc), it wouldn't surprise me to see women dating guys for interestingness. Can you be funny? Do you have good stories? It can get exhausting when you're always the more entertaining one, though. Of course, this may partly be projection, as I date women with a top focus on interestingness. (Not so much in the form of humor, but I te…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:53 AM
3

Well, do keep in mind that getting to know each and every individual for who they really are is a very involved and time-consuming task. I'm of the belief that men and women really do differ, even if it's in small ways and it's just different not better. (I've known at least one transgender person very well who is just blatantly a woman, despite her typically male interests.) Also, I'd like to add that Feminism (and not even all Feminism, nor necessarily intentionally) is only one of the influen…
/r/MensRights05/06/13 01:38 AM
2

I would disagree on one point and suggest that such men actually are Feminist -Feminism is a lot of different things to a lot of different people. "pedestal" is really the key term here, though. The thing is, with all the talk about negative aspects of masculinity and positive aspects of femininity, it can encourage pedestalling. I put women on a pedestal when I was a teenager. It took some time and other experiences to get over that.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 09:13 AM
1

Well, actually, what's it called ... BBW? Honestly, though, she's really not that bad. That's a stupid thing to call out. I think there are a lot of men that would be OK with it if it weren't for her politics. The politics, though ... why stick around when you're not wanted? Relationships involve vulnerability, and opening oneself up just to be attacked isn't worth it. It sounds like that's what's happening.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 09:02 AM
1

As a liberal in college, I'm not pleased by this sort of thing either. I had to actually explain to someone why he couldn't say that the term "slavery" could only be allowed to apply to the Atlantic slave trade. Because hey, it's not like modern sex trafficking where people are kidnapped and forced under threat of violence to have sex, or the situation where foreigners are being used on fishing boats (some Asian country, can't remember where) and being forced to take amphetamines are really slav…
/r/MensRights03/06/13 02:29 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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