TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

definitelyjoking Archive

View 0 posts and 304 comments by definitelyjoking 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)
1

I'm talking about her conviction and specifically noted I'm not saying this means the men are guilty. Stop seeking outrage.
/r/PussyPass07/01/20 09:55 PM
1

"Proves nothing" is precisely what I just described. The process was garbage, and her case against the men is mixed at best. I'm not condemning anyone here because the evidence is all tainted by the Cyprus police fucking things up. This case is complicated and people here are up in arms about a screenshot of a headline.
/r/PussyPass07/01/20 09:42 PM
2

This ain't it guys. After filing her report, they locked this woman in a police interrogation room for hours until she recanted, charged her for recanting, and then shuffled the accused rapists out of the country as fast as possible. Even her "confession" is pretty suspect, as it's written in bizarre English and she was born in the UK. You don't have to be a feminist to think this isn't how a rape investigation should go down. I'm not saying this establishes the guilt of the accused men either, …
/r/PussyPass07/01/20 09:05 PM
7

Orange is a particularly valuable spot because it's relatively high rent and because the many ways to end up in Jail mean that people spend more time in that stretch than any other.
/r/PussyPass13/09/19 06:39 PM
43

You genuinely see these sorts of violent crime sentences for indigenous men too.
/r/PussyPass05/08/19 12:14 AM
136

This is actually about race not gender. Canada's Supreme Court has ruled that race has to be taken into account for indigenous offenders. Look into Gladue sentencing if you're curious.
/r/PussyPass04/08/19 11:56 PM
10

HIV transmission primarily affects gay men.
/r/MensRights28/07/18 05:27 PM
1

Yeah, the crimes aren't comparable. Just not in the direction you're thinking.
/r/MensRights03/04/18 08:35 PM
4

It's sort of the reverse actually. The suggestion is that the disparity for doing the same thing is worse than the crime they're convicted of shows. It's largely a question of pleading down. Someone commits a felony and pleads to a misdemeanor or a lower grade felony. Favorable plea deals like that are more likely to be given to white defendants.
/r/MensRights03/04/18 01:57 PM
6

You guys know that he was literally mocking feminist protestors at the time right?
/r/MensRights08/02/18 10:07 AM
3

What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You thi…
/r/MensRights05/06/17 07:50 AM
5

Why? It's really not.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 07:18 AM
1

You made a half-assed internet threat about putting a fist in their mouth. Now you're playing dumb. Well, dumber.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 07:17 AM
1

The navy seal copypasta would have been more intimidating. Use that next time you're making internet tough guy statements.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 07:04 AM
11

Sure someone murdered their wife, but they'd need another wife to murder them again so they're unlikely to reoffend. Who's going to marry them now anyways? Probation seems reasonable. This would never fly. She got probation for attempted murder. Stop trying to justify it.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 07:01 AM
0

The reaction to her has been overwhelmingly negative. Even Olbermann asked her to shut the hell up. There's some politically motivated sympathy for her that's every bit as sincere as the politically motivated outrage. If it were a man who did the same to Hillary, the people feigning outrage and sympathy would just be reversed. Exactly like when Obama was hanged in effigy. This is cheap political fodder, and I'm not sure why this subreddit wants to make it a men's rights issue so badly.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 09:19 PM
0

Well, someone would call it that I'm sure. It's not really about misogyny or misandry though. Polarization and the us-vs-them narrative of modern politics are issues here, but I don't think gender plays much role. The specific nature of the criticism is also a pretty unimportant double standard when the outcomes (firing, investigation, and nearly universal criticism) seem to have been exactly appropriate. All-in-all, I think there has been a pretty good response by the media to the whole inciden…
/r/MensRights04/06/17 09:56 AM
0

Oh yeah. Her PR handling has been terrible. Nobody seems to be buying it though, so I'm just not sure what OP is irked about as far as double standards.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 05:10 AM
1

Who takes Kathy Griffin seriously? Does anyone actually believe it was a real threat? It was tacky, gross, and incredibly stupid, but I think it's awfully unlikely she's going to attack Donald Trump. CNN canned her, the Secret Service investigated, and she's taken a ton of criticism from pretty much everyone, so I'm not really sure what double standard in her treatment you're seeing on this. Griffin's lawyer is trying to turn around the narrative because she's Griffin's lawyer, but it isn't work…
/r/MensRights04/06/17 04:21 AM
2

I should mention this is purely my opinion. SPLC has the National Policy Institue (Spencer's think tank) as a white supremacist rather than neo-nazi organization. I just find the ethnic cleansing element to be a close parallel to Hitler's original plan for Germany.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 12:00 AM
3

For me the line is his goal of establishing a white ethnostate through "peaceful" ethnic cleansing. He also regularly quotes from Nazi materials. Praise for Nazis and desire to establish a white state are sufficient for me even if he's brand-savvy enough not to slap a swastika on his arm. I agree it's over-used, and I won't use the term for people like Bannon for example. I just find it applicable here. What would you say the meaningful differences are?
/r/MensRights22/05/17 10:48 PM
9

A neo-nazi's gym membership is a silly hill for MRAs to die on.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 05:10 AM
6

Not a lawyer. Just a law student. This is pretty much basic civics though.
/r/MensRights27/04/17 04:34 AM
14

I think it's fraud. The court dismissed the fraud claim due to lack of economic injury, which leads me to believe the court doesn't actually categorize child support as a redressable economic injury. That wouldn't surprise me because, as I said, the court isn't going to ignore the net effect on the child. Seems like the IIED claim survived precisely because the harms weren't tied to the child support. It's really not a purely monetary obligation. As a non-custodial parent, money is being used as…
/r/MensRights27/04/17 03:41 AM
-9

Despite my heavy reservations about the child support system, I actually think this is an unfair interpretation. It's perfectly plausible to justify an outcome like this on the basis of the child's welfare, and I think you get off track by assessing the father's obligation to the child as a dollar value rather than a generalized obligation to provide as the court likely does. As you've noted, your interpretation would cancel out the money the father owes, which has the net effect of removing tha…
/r/MensRights27/04/17 03:19 AM
3

First off, I agree that you need to stay away from any reference to "Men's Rights" or even making it about ideology at all. Focus on specific issues. If you're talking to a progressive, focus on the disproportionate impact men's issues have on the poor (homelessness or debtors prison for men who lose jobs and can't pay child support) and minority groups (disproptionate enforcement, sentencing disparities, police shootings, etc). A good place to start is comparing the gender sentencing gap to the…
/r/MensRights27/04/17 02:02 AM
9

I don't necessarily disagree, but I also find it more useful and clear to refer to things the way the courts do even when you're suspicious of the underlying motives.
/r/MensRights27/04/17 01:02 AM
29

I suspect he's out of luck as well. The courts massively prioritize the child's welfare over the rights of a parent, and child support has already been assessed in this case. Hopefully seeking IIED damages instead of a revocation of child support helped him. Case probably settled.
/r/MensRights27/04/17 12:19 AM
89

That's not really how the court system works, at least in reference to State of Louisiana v. Frisard case. A Louisiana appeals case isn't binding on other states, and an out-of-state case from Louisiana is particularly unpersuasive given that Louisiana doesn't really do their court system the same as the rest of the country.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 11:43 PM
2

You mean the defense attorney? The prosecutor really should be punished if they brought that up. Not how an adversarial system works.
/r/MensRights23/04/17 10:36 AM
3

I don't know what the Liberals have pushed through, but what feminist changes has Trudeau gotten made into law that you find disagreeable?
/r/MensRights02/04/17 04:34 AM
-2

That does it. I've been on this sub a while, but you people have descended into nothing more than irrational woman haters who will jump on any generalization and back any worldview that stokes your pathetic victim complexes. Fuck what this sub became, I'm gone.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 03:52 PM
1

He lumped a bunch of things you don't like together and labeled them feminine. Its the same ridiculous nonsense feminists often do by labeling things they don't like masculine. Go goose-step somewhere else.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 03:46 PM
0

Copy/pasting his stupid generalizations doesn't make them more persuasive.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 03:40 PM
1

A day old user with an anti-semitic name who's ranting about Jews on /r/pussypass comes off to you as reasonable? That says more about you than people in this sub. It's bad parody you find persuasive.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 03:34 PM
1

That's absolutely not what that means. Not every rape allegation goes to trial due to insufficiency of proof. It doesn't mean that any allegation not going to trial is false. What possible basis do you have for your bizarre leap?
/r/MensRights17/02/17 07:08 PM
2

I think the "looking for something to cut" is in reference to where she stabbed him. Not a general reference to wanting to stab anything.
/r/MensRights17/02/17 06:27 PM
2

What, specifically, is the concern that there is surveillance of public streets? Don't just allude to vague government wrongdoing here. There isn't a right to privacy in a public street. Anyone can record you. That includes both private and public actors.
/r/MensRights30/01/17 08:14 AM
12

Statutory rape is genuinely a weird outlier that way. Strict liability is almost always used for less serious offenses (violations and misdemeanors), and it's probably inappropriate in the case of statutory rape. I would say "recklessly" or at the very most "negligently" would be a more appropriate standard.
/r/MensRights18/01/17 08:08 PM
29

Great highlights here. Only fines with no jail time for an assault committed while out on bail for a separate charge.
/r/PussyPass18/01/17 08:12 AM
-9

Police findings aren't really a legal judgement. The police can recommend things, but it's the DA who actually makes those decisions. Most of these cases don't get that far, and in some cases the alleged victim never even goes to the police. More so, this is still not a policy of this school specifically. It's a terrible federal policy requiring it. Schools essentially all require federal funding (loans) to function. It's why it was such an effective club. Lashing out angrily at the school like …
/r/MensRights12/01/17 02:33 AM
-17

What? Is there something to suggest the school isn't going to follow this judgement against them? Is there some other judgment you're referring to? Frankly, this isn't even a problem caused by individual colleges. Double jeopardy was demanded by the Dear Colleague letter, and it is precisely that federal pressure which has caused all these issues. Thinking a college being backed into a corner by the federal government means the college needs to be shut down is just a bizarre reaction to the wron…
/r/MensRights11/01/17 11:07 PM
0

That implies scared of assault. Robbery sucks, but people don't like being robbed on the street more because of the treat of assault and injury. No, that's not assault. Assault and battery are separate offenses. You can't really threaten an assault. That would be redundant. There are also imminence and reasonability requirements for something to be an assault. Neither of which is remotely present here. "There's some guy walking around near my house" in no way suggests an imminent harmful contact…
/r/MensRights28/12/16 01:26 AM
0

First off, "threat of assault" isn't a charge. The other person didn't reasonably fear an imminent harmful contact. They saw a guy they thought was sketchy and asked the police to remove them from the area. That's not assault. Even a little bit. If they were worried about anything it was probably theft, but a charge in a situation like that would be for loitering or some other bullshit nuisance offense. Not assault. It's not related to assault. I don't know why people who don't understand this s…
/r/MensRights27/12/16 11:46 PM
1

Well, they accept a figurehead royal "ruler" that brings in enormous quantities of tourism money every year. In exchange for the UK paying for upkeep on estates that vastly outearn their costs. You are aware the Queen isn't actually in charge right?
/r/MensRights23/12/16 08:28 AM
1

Not hyperagency. Just regular agency. Men and women both make choices for actual reasons as it turns out. Can't afford regular childcare and your partner also works or isn't around? Gonna need a flexible job that may not pay as well. That's a choice flowing from previous decisions you made. Choices have consequences, and those consequences can be financial, physical, and emotional. I persist in holding both men and women accountable for their choices. A small chunk of truly dangerous jobs may be…
/r/MensRights22/12/16 07:07 PM
1

So, your argument now is that it's a small contribution to the total? Exactly like I said. You wanted a source on that for some reason though. Either it's a significant contribution or it isn't man. Make up your mind. Alleged personal anecdotes on the internet are not evidence. Never have been.
/r/MensRights22/12/16 06:46 PM
1

You're the one asserting that somehow a major contributor to men working dangerous jobs is not just child support, but unrealistic child support. That's a silly claim, and you just asserted it with no proof. I just pointed out that it's ridiculous. Provide a source yourself.
/r/MensRights22/12/16 06:26 PM
1

That is a puny minority of those cases and you know it. Stop being so goddamn desperate to paint men as helpless victims. Makes you sound like feminists.
/r/MensRights22/12/16 06:13 PM
1

Nothing wrong with this. Men disproportionately choose dangerous jobs. They're free to make those choices as free thinking adults. The important thing is that it is a major component of the total wage gap. You have to pay more to get people to do dangerous jobs.
/r/MensRights22/12/16 07:25 AM
3

I wish F4J the best of luck, but I didn't see much there that would prove the knowledge or reckless disregard that's needed in the case of a public organization like F4J. EDIT: Just realized they're a UK organization. Retract my statement. US slander laws are much harder to win under.
/r/MensRights21/12/16 07:37 AM
1

Well, I for one agree that people should stop bragging about being woke. Honestly though, the real crack up is that it's mostly about racial issues, but somehow it's all a guy problem.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 07:36 PM
2

Oh yeah, the Dear Colleague letter was definitely all bullshit by the federal government. Bullshit to the degree that they actually didn't officially promulgate the rule because it's definitely not supported by the law and possibly unconstitutional as well. They just handed down what amounted to an unofficial "interpretation" of what Title 9 meant and made a veiled threat.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 07:01 PM
2

"No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." That's it. That's Title 9. It was mostly intended to have equal access to sports programs. Interpreting that to mean affirmative action for women, equal dollar for dollar spending on sports even given lower female interest, lower revenue, and far more female-only…
/r/MensRights20/12/16 06:21 PM
4

Nice to see more MSM pushback against misapplication of of title 9. Is there anything to suggest the Trump administration plans to roll it back though?
/r/MensRights20/12/16 02:30 AM
1

You aren't getting it, and I'm not up to batter my head into this particular wall any longer. Have a good night.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 12:09 AM
1

I've laid out the imminence and reasonability requirements already. It should be clear what I'm referring to as a threat in this context. Theats don't provide a danger to safety. You can have battery without a threat and a threat without battery. In the latter case, you can recover after the fact even though zero physical harm occured. Because you can't make someone fear imminent harm.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 08:51 PM
1

Interrogate that for a second. Why can't you threaten? No physical harm occurs. It is a protection of people's right to feel secure from harm. Framing it to ignore what the restriction protects doesn't really make sense.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 07:05 PM
2

Now that seems low.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 06:41 PM
5

It's a right with limitations which I spelled out. That's why it isn't illegal to show scary news. That it is a right is maybe best illustrated by it being a tort in addition to a crime. You can recover if someone violates you by making you fear an imminent harm; even with no actual damages you can get an award.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 03:12 AM
4

I laid out a description of assault in my first post. Which no one read. I got 3 replies asking about clearly unreasonable hypotheticals. On top of missing the point and being wrong, there was a high level of confidence in the wrong answers. If your threshold question about if something is reasonable is a scary movie, you're just not getting it. I'm willing to carry on a productive dialogue, but when people aren't reading the posts that's impossible already.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 01:02 AM
3

We're discussing whether a right exists not whether a right should exist. That's law, not morality.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 11:22 PM
9

No, I didn't. OP made a really broad statement. There is a right to feel safe. It is, correctly, a right with limitations, but it is fundamentally a right to feel safe.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 11:06 PM
21

Calm down dude. Swearing and random caps are unnecessary. What I'm discussing is assault. Which is not what you're talking about at all. I don't approve of that sort of police enforcement, but they'd go after you for loitering or something if at all. It's not related to assault even a little.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 10:12 PM
38

No. That would not be a reasonable fear of imminent harm.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 09:48 PM
2

If it's like the US, it sounds like a voluntary manslaughter "extreme emotional distress" claim. People try those, but they're not super successful as a rule. In the US it's mostly raised in intimate partner murders like this one. Again I don't know anything about Swiss justice, but I'd wait to see if it impacts the sentence before getting too upset.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 08:01 PM
7

I mean, that's the defence's job. No idea how Switzerland sentences go, but 8 years for a failed murder attempt doesn't sound like the prosecution is necessarily going soft, which is good.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 07:46 PM
74

Because "feels over reals" is staggeringly prevalent in this subreddit too, and I'm agreeing with feminists on something.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 07:17 PM
24

Now that's a complicated question, but objective reasonability is found throughout the law. There're marginal cases, but in no way is a movie going to provide a reasonable apprehension of imminent physical harm. You should let the Supreme Court know you think restrictions on assault predating the US and found in every jurisdiction are unconstitutional. I'm sure they'll be fascinated. You're not informed enough on the topic for this discussion.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 07:09 PM
91

No. It's objectively determined rather than subjective. As I already said. This "slippery slope" right has existed for hundreds of years. It predates the United States and even the American colonies. I think we're gonna be okay.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 07:03 PM
91

Like I said, it has to be a reasonable fear, which that is not. That doesn't mean there is no protection for feeling safe at all though. We very much protect that right, and we have for a very long time
/r/MensRights18/12/16 06:56 PM
221

You're wrong though. People have a right to feel safe from imminent harm. It's why assault is a separate crime and tort from battery. The limitation is that the apprehension of imminent harm has to be objectively reasonable, so unreasonable feelings of imminent harm aren't protected. We absolutely say that you have a right not to fear imminent harm though, and assault is a pretty ancient cause of action.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 06:48 PM
1

I'm not disagreeing about the bill being bad. I'm saying it's wrong to credit the Conservative Party rather than just these 2 individuals. The Conservatives have an outright majority. If the party cared, the bill couldn't be passed. It's not the Conservative party who cares. It's just these two guys.
/r/MensRights18/12/16 08:31 AM
7

Initial presumption of joint custody, restrictions on what child support can go towards, a hard cap on maximum child support payments (children don't cost 200K a year to raise), ending lifetime alimony, statutory language making the invalidation of pre-nups much harder, and laws explicitly stating child support must be adjusted down with lost income. I'm not personally an advocate, but other suggestions include an end to no-fault divorce or complete reimbursement model child support.
/r/MensRights17/12/16 11:22 PM
3

A total of 2 people voted against the bill. A Conservative majority parliament overwhelmingly passed it. Not super sure why you'd credit the party.
/r/MensRights17/12/16 10:08 PM
7

Totally agree. Don't think they ever found evidence of PIV though, which is why the rape charges were dropped. He penetrated her with his fingers, which I would describe as sexual assault rather than rape.
/r/MensRights10/12/16 07:44 AM
10

What laws are you referring to? What officials are you talking about? The nobody admin who sent out notice to the address on file? The cop who, correctly, noted that he had an arrest warrant for failure to pay child support? The judge? There isn't anything here to whether or not he even initially made a constitutional argument to that court. I don't see anyone acting in bad faith here except the ex-girlfriend. I just don't think there's as clear a particular state official to hold liable as you …
/r/MensRights09/12/16 06:26 PM
16

That's just not how liability for public officials works. You don't have to like it, but it's part of a much, much larger debate.
/r/MensRights09/12/16 06:07 PM
1

No comment on substance. Just a bunch of Harry Potter jokes and dismissal. Tabloids are gonna tabloid, but why is anyone here impressed exactly?
/r/MensRights25/09/16 04:48 AM
2

I've met my share of feminists. I'm not some neckbeard in a basement. A majority of my friends are female and many of those are feminists. I haven't shared your experience frankly. On top of that, what you're describing is basically people being socially inhibited. We are more honest on the internet about our beliefs, not less. If the feminists you meet irl are polite and understanding about men's issues (which I very much still question) and the ones you meet online are generally angry and dism…
/r/MensRights24/09/16 05:27 PM
22

I feel for the guy, and I think he makes a valid point about the double standard about comments on appearances (Chris Christie is an even more obvious example than Trump really). That being said, I don't really think the micropenis thing is purely about physical attraction. It's about ability to perform. It's not fair to mock people with what honestly must be a miserable condition, but I don't think many women are going to get over it either. I know lots of people here agree it's not reasonable …
/r/MensRights24/09/16 06:15 AM
5

It is quite literally a zero-sum game in many arenas. Alimony, child support enforcement, child custody disputes, how colleges handle sexual assaults, how we fund and prosecute domestic violence, etc. There isn't a "I think both parties are neat" side on most of that. It's why, frankly, no one on either side likes menslibbers that much. You want to play the game on both sides, but the actual policy is in such stark contrast that having that as an opinion doesn't make any sense. You can certainly…
/r/MensRights23/09/16 11:47 PM
11

If it's the mainstream, accepted attitude propagated by the leadership then it's a problem with the ideology itself. Individual feminists not being awful doesn't make the overall movement a good way to frame a discussion about men's issues. Especially since the "good" feminists don't seem to do much to reign in the others outside of the "not all feminists" excuse making you're participating in right now.
/r/MensRights23/09/16 08:49 PM
17

The problem isn't tumblr crazies. It's things like the NOW lobbying to get a bill ending lifetime alimony vetoed or giving an award to "mattress girl." It's about the Duluth model of violence ending in men getting arrested in almost any domestic violence situation. It's not about the crazies, it's about the mainstream leadership. It's simply not a paradigm with interest in men's issues.
/r/MensRights23/09/16 08:17 PM
14

Really? I'm pretty willing to believe he smokes marijuana and drinks. That shouldn't disqualify him for custody, but it's probably true.
/r/MensRights22/09/16 04:10 AM
1

On top of what /u/timdesuyo said, it was probably also a plea deal based on the article. She admitted it in court.
/r/MensRights22/09/16 02:12 AM
16

It was 3 hours old when you posted. Chill out.
/r/MensRights24/07/16 04:31 AM
3

Not terribly interested in Breitbart's review. The issue is that they are every bit as invested in pushing a narrative as the SJWs on the other side. The fact that I agree with Breitbart's narrative on this one doesn't change the lack of objectivity in the review.
/r/MensRights20/07/16 05:14 AM
4

It's not that strange. How many people do you think saw this without being pretty set on their opinions of Hillary? It wasn't a very wide release either. If you hate Hillary enough to go see a movie about her being awful, you're probably going to enjoy a movie about her being awful. You'd probably see the same reaction to a negative movie about Trump.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 09:38 AM
8

/thread
/r/MensRights18/07/16 08:57 AM
6

Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. They're a legal advocacy group that tends to help male students. Email them this image, and they'll probably help with how to proceed on this.
/r/MensRights10/07/16 03:16 AM
1

I'm veering into r/relationships territory here, but is this the hill you want to die on? You need to know the answer to that question. You're probably not going to convince her or win her over. There will not be a come to Jesus moment no matter how logical or articulate you are on the subject. If you come back with arguments someone can't refute they are a lot more likely to get angry than admit they were wrong; especially when they are emotionally involved in the subject like your wife clearly…
/r/MensRights28/06/16 10:11 AM
3

Reporting the results of a survey conducted by American Time Use Survey. Redditors love to do this when sources like Daily Mail or RT report poll/survey numbers, but the source isn't especially relevant in these circumstances.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 09:17 AM
2

Your conclusion is unsupported by the facts, as even your own post proves. If what women rewarded (with sex) was men who seek long term stable relationships, that's the kind of relationship men would be trying to establish. And Because men have always wanted and tried to fuck lots of women Men try to fuck lots of women regardless of the social constraints. It's just biology. For a long time, most women did insist on long term relationships. What they got was men looking for lots of sex with lots…
/r/MensRights27/06/16 05:18 PM
2

Eh, 2 and 3 seem awfully sketchy. College men wanted and tried to fuck lots of women long before college women were openly willing to fuck lots of men.
/r/MensRights27/06/16 07:55 AM
2

They're not out to kill them, they're out to deform them.
/r/MensRights25/06/16 08:14 PM
1

Yeah, I was only referring to Jewish in the religious sect sense, but I probably should have been more specific. Not trying to paint "ze Jews" as a group here. Given how insanely unpopular the ultra-orthodox seem to be with pretty much everyone, it's surprising how much power they seem to wield in Israel.
/r/MensRights04/06/16 02:09 AM
2

Well from the article, this sounds like a Jewish issue (and a frequently-tricky extradition from Israel) more than a female issue. Religious communities protect their own. The obvious example is the Catholic Church. That has been almost entirely male defendants. Frankly I think it's promising that both Australia and the Israeli government (prosecutors represent executive government will much more closely than judges) are trying to do something about this woman.
/r/MensRights03/06/16 11:48 AM
3

You took 15 to lie about it. Why not?
/r/MensRights08/05/16 04:43 AM
2

Every part of this is hyperbole. They're not banned. Members are restricted from some scholarship applications and things like being captains of sports teams. Single-sex clubs are what is being targeted, which includes all-female clubs. It's a stupid idea, no need to exaggerate.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 01:05 AM
1

To be clear, this also includes all-female clubs (as it mentions in the second paragraph of the article). I don't approve at all, but it's not a specifically anti-male policy.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 03:07 PM
3

I like Sanders, and I personally look at foreign policy in a president far more than any other area (I know that isn't typical for this sub), but to be clear he is absolutely a feminist.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 03:02 PM
2

It's just counterintuitive to even a basic description of the terms.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 02:57 PM
4

My favorite is the almost complete overlap between PUAs and MGTOW. Makes perfect sense.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 08:08 AM
2

Could we get mensviews.com an editor or something? The average redditor does a better job with apostrophes.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 05:08 AM
7

Yeah, parents have to come to an agreement about where they live. It's not acceptable for either parent to choose to live far away if they want true split custody. Bias shouldn't be towards the mother in this regard though, but probably towards the parent staying in-district. If you wanna talk about instability, shifting schools is harder on kids than pretty much anything else.
/r/MensRights08/04/16 08:24 PM
13

Consistent, regular, and not liable to change. Stable.
/r/MensRights08/04/16 05:56 PM
54

I did this switching back and forth. It really isn't the mind-bending disaster people want to pretend. You adapt pretty quickly to a stable 2-home situation.
/r/MensRights08/04/16 04:29 PM
2

I sometimes get a little too into screwing with people...
/r/MensRights07/04/16 05:43 AM
0

You realize you are too right? Man, Trump supporters are as bright as advertised.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 04:18 AM
1

Well, yeah. I'm enjoying myself while you're clearly pissed off. Calm people generally don't tell others to "fuck off" before you claim otherwise. I don't care about my karma, and I enjoy mocking slow witted internet strangers.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 04:14 AM
2

I tell you that your comebacks suck, and you hip fire with "fuck off" huh? Guys cracking yo mama jokes are snickering at your lack of originality.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 04:07 AM
2

Work on your comebacks and use of punctuation too. You've been here 9 years and still can't do this right?<--- this is an example of a question mark. It's located next to the right shift key.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 04:04 AM
4

If you meet an asshole in the morning, you met an asshole. If you meet assholes all day, you're the asshole. Learn to type properly and stop being such a victim.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 03:56 AM
4

To which you immediately responded by being an asshole right back. Difference is you're the one whining about civility without demonstrating it. You tried to use the federal numbers to prove a point, but those are a tiny minority of convictions, and the state numbers don't back you up at all. Which he pointed out. You made an incorrect claim, he asked you to source it, and your source proved you were either being misleading or misunderstood the context of the number. You were wrong. Period. Ah y…
/r/MensRights07/04/16 03:51 AM
4

He pointed out the flaw in your source and you responded "you like to argue don't you." I'd take it easy on the demands for civility there champ.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 03:34 AM
1

It wasn't meant as some sort of personal attack. You're being a little oversensitive.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 07:25 PM
2

Makes sense that not releasing the overwhelming bulk of your semen inside correspondingly reduces the chance of pregnancy. It's not a magic process.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 07:16 PM
10

The difference is they don't need the day. They just steal extra days off.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 08:41 AM
2

This sounds like a pretty reasonable sentence.
/r/MensRights14/02/16 07:46 AM
4

Eh. A relationship isn't the same as cohabitation.
/r/MensRights05/02/16 08:11 PM
13

That may be a bit of an overreaction.
/r/MensRights20/01/16 08:42 PM
9

Men with families can come. It is exclusively single men being discriminated against.
/r/MensRights19/12/15 11:06 AM
41

Doesn't protect them from a Title 9 claim.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 12:59 AM
7

I've recieved "death threats," I've had people say they were going to fuck me in the ass (rape threat), I literally cannot count how many times I've been called a faggot (not gay), or how how many times my mother has been fucked. I'm absolutely no one. If you think that actual public figures like Oliver or Correa haven't gotten death threats you are the dumbest person I've met today.
/r/MensRights23/06/15 07:30 AM
14

Love John's show, but he's a pretty knee-jerk feminist.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 04:10 PM
10

Things "clicked" for him. Watershed moment where a bunch of realizations come as a result of one relatively small revelation.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 06:22 AM
1

I didn't call him a criminal or even suggest a ban. I called him an asshole who makes us all look bad. Because he made an asshole statement that makes us all look bad. There is an entirely separate forum at /r/mensrants to vent if that is what you absolutely need to do. This isn't that forum. You're an apologist for stupidity, and I'm hardly a PC crusader. You're a limp dick faggot getting off on a rape fantasy. Oh whoops, just "venting my rage."
/r/MensRights20/05/15 03:55 AM
1

You a fan of feminist advocacy of false accusations? It's just a rage outlet. No big deal.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 01:54 AM
1

Assholes "blowing off steam" by actually advocating rape is the sort of shit that critics use to disparage the whole movement.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 12:50 AM
10

Not only is that abhorrent, you are completely wrong about how double jeopardy works.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 08:49 AM
1

The r/news comment thread on this is heartening. People basically agreeing it's a rational choice, and tons of people in other professions saying they are instructed to do the same.
/r/MensRights16/05/15 06:55 PM
1

Ukraine isn't an ally, and if you think a plane is worth any response more than the (effective) sanctions we've already imposed you're looking for an excuse not a reason. Based on....? This is nothing more than rampant speculation to support someone whose foreign policy you see as different from Obama's.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 02:03 AM
1

Russia isn't a threat to the US or any allies. They're an economically crippled country dreaming of past glory. The sanctions and drop in oil prices have neutered them. If you think Romney wouldn't have sold weapons or gotten us involved against Assad you're misinformed. Here's a quote from him on the subject: "Maybe one of the few bright spots in the Middle East developments in the last year has been the rising of the people in Syria against Assad."
/r/MensRights05/05/15 01:09 AM
1

Bad on what? You trying to go to war with Iran?
/r/MensRights05/05/15 12:56 AM
0

What? In 2008 people were pretty excited about Obama. In 2012 everyone voted for "Not Mitt Romney."
/r/MensRights05/05/15 12:53 AM
20

Anyone who says women create less conflict has never worked with women before. I worked in a QA department where I was the only male. They all hated each other. Every one of them. When I started the supervisor and data entry specialist (friends) were working to push out the team lead so the data entry person could take the spot. The team leads from different shifts constantly undermined each other by not dealing with easily fixed issues that started at the end of the other's shifts, so they coul…
/r/MensRights03/04/15 02:29 AM
1

I don't like MSNBC either, but the stats in that article are pretty weak. MSNBC definitely markets itself as a talk show network now. I don't watch that garbage, but I'd say it's better than pretending to be a "fair and balanced" news source. As for the favorable coverage stat, I'm actually surprised it's as high as 8-1 favorable. Fox wasn't exactly Mitt's biggest supporter. Ultimately they're both trash, but MSNBC is more upfront about being worthless as news.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 04:31 AM
7

If it was only first down then possession wouldn't change.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 04:13 AM
1

It's a Georgia bill. Read the article before saying something retarded. Shit, read the comments or the website name. Both tell you it's a Georgia matter.
/r/MensRights15/03/15 07:08 PM
1

Before we all freak out, remember there is a fundamental difference. Women joining ISIS aren't going to be fighting. I'm not sure if this could even be prosecuted as terrorism. Monumentally stupid of course (seriously, why would women want to be in ISIS territory?), but I'm just not sure it was criminal.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 03:15 PM
2

Nah, they just say the women have internalized misogyny. Not Real MRAs.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 07:40 PM
1

Sunshine is another name for mephedrone.
/r/MensRights23/10/14 04:18 PM
7

Sleeping with a 16 year old does not make you a pedophile. That's a term for people attracted to children, not people attracted to people below the legal age of consent. A 16 year old probably has all the signs of sexual maturity even if they aren't emotionally mature.
/r/MensRights23/10/14 04:17 PM
3

You didn't need to read the article to know that. Dailymail.
/r/MensRights23/10/14 03:50 PM
0

Sunshine is fantastic. Cheap high and if you decide to do it at midnight you can be asleep by 3. Like a compressed molly trip and 30 bucks a gram cheaper.
/r/MensRights23/10/14 03:37 AM
1

Oh... carry on then.
/r/MensRights11/10/14 02:47 AM
0

If it doesn't affect mens rights, it's not a story either.
/r/MensRights09/10/14 03:19 AM
0

If they were made today they would probably be phrased neutrally anyways. Laws that govern both sexes only referring to men is an inaccuracy, and one that can easily be corrected without any damage to men whatsoever. There are real issues facing men, don't need to go looking for bullshit outrage.
/r/MensRights09/10/14 02:55 AM
1

Can we PLEASE leave off illuminati references? Makes us look nuts.
/r/MensRights09/10/14 02:16 AM
-1

And? Is there going to be any practical difference if he and his are they and theirs?
/r/MensRights09/10/14 02:05 AM
2

You tend to use "their" and "they" even in non-plural situations. It works pretty well.
/r/MensRights09/10/14 02:03 AM
1

Honestly though, it's not like you can verify if a dude is a virgin. Why would you NOT lie if you needed the money?
/r/MensRights09/10/14 02:01 AM
2

I think it's accurate. This isn't a movement concerned with trans or gay rights except as they overlap with the rights of men in general. Most people here seem to be accepting and supportive of those movements, they just don't especially want to discuss them here. Not really sure why that's a bad thing. Both of those movements have far bigger bases of support than the MRA, and don't exactly need this as a place to discuss their specific issues. Fear of co-option from more powerful groups seems r…
/r/MensRights07/10/14 12:53 AM
1

MeForUs
/r/MensRights30/09/14 09:08 PM
23

It's kind of shocking. You may not like everything 4chan does, but it was comforting to know it was THERE. It's the heart and soul of the internet. Political only when angered, united only when their hatred of something external surpasses their hatred of each other, and really powerful when aimed in a particular direction.
/r/MensRights19/09/14 12:20 AM
1

I watched the video, where a large man fended off a woman who had no weapons and absolutely no idea of how to fight. Did you watch the video? She looked like a child attacking an adult. Annoying yes, a threat no.
/r/MensRights26/07/14 06:58 AM
2

I think probably he has a better understanding of the potential impacts on his life of pressing charges than you do. Pressing charges helps your political agenda, doesn't mean it would help him. It's also nowhere near that easy to destroy an eye. The guy had a clear right to defend himself, and the police clearly recognized that. No need to pretend she could actually hurt him.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 08:02 PM
1

I mean, she was clearly about as much of a threat to him as a child unless she got some sort of weapon. He handled this pretty well. Just gently dropped her instead of getting physical. Took like 10% of his force to end the confrontation.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 05:33 AM
3

Well, that is sort of a preposterous claim. There are plenty of reasons to hate cops, don't need to grow up without a father. My dad was tremendously involved in my life and I loathe cops. Hell, I'm even white. The ever increasing militarization of police, lack of oversight and high death toll caused by police are quite sufficient reasons.
/r/MensRights17/07/14 10:48 AM
17

Do you use 4chan much? I rarely see tits or gtfo when it comes out over the course of a story that the poster is female. Sometimes it is a relevant part of the story. It ALWAYS comes up when people lead with "femanon here" or any variant of that. Because it is in fact asking for special treatment or attention on an internet forum where you aren't special. Similar contempt is generally held for tripfags who want to hold onto their reputation from thread to thread. As for the down vote brigade, no…
/r/MensRights17/07/14 04:47 AM
1

Your argument that if the mom can afford it the dad has no obligation to contribute is pretty damn indefensible too.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 08:24 PM
1

Child support isn't owed because a partner can't afford to pay for the child. It's owed because both partners have an obligation to help provide for the child. The fact that she had savings is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 03:16 PM
1

Its not in this article. Could be a quote from outside or editorialized.
/r/MensRights10/06/14 08:11 AM
3

I'd call that almost as likely in prison as in football. Nobody tests there either.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 02:33 AM
3

Well I was actually just making a joke. I also think results like that are probably much more related to lifestyle, getting fat as shit post football, and dangers of being an enormous human being in general than injuries from playing football.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 02:22 AM
9

Not his life, just his brain function.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 02:08 AM
15

Sweet jesus that's way too meta to be useful.
/r/MensRights18/04/14 12:06 AM
4

The guilty party/parties in this case weren't the "victims." They stated nothing illegal happened. The crown, independent of a complaining victim decided to prosecute. The "victims" did the right thing, they weren't accusing him falsely and probably endured a fair amount of prosecutorial pressure to say he did something wrong.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 01:29 PM
22

There are definitely some sexist comments, they just get down voted.
/r/MensRights12/04/14 03:11 AM
9

I think the perceived lack is as much about how much of a total non issue it is here. We don't care if you're gay or straight. At all. It just doesn't come up in 99% of the topics we discuss and I think most of our gay subscribers have the decency to not inject it where it isn't relevant.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 08:50 PM
10

This is probably more a reflection of greater reporting and awareness than a result of actual increases in abuse.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 04:55 AM
3

Wear a barrel with suspenders.
/r/MensRights08/04/14 03:09 AM
3

Here are my tips for real life argumentation (anywhere not here): First is not to describe yourself as an MRA. To many people right now you may as well call yourself White Power Bill. If you have to define yourself egalitarian or gender egalitarian does an excellent job of defining this movement's concerns without associating yourself with what is currently a pretty toxic label. Secondly, I find that promoting statistics as if they are a shock to you is helpful. An example would be the startling…
/r/MensRights07/04/14 01:29 PM
-3

The military is under direct orders from our representative government, if they just drifted around doing whatever they wanted they'd be a terrible representation of our country as a whole. Nice dishonest analogy though.
/r/MensRights04/04/14 10:37 PM
-1

Let's be generous and say 10% of feminists want to kill all men. It's probably much lower than than but whatever. The most extreme 10% is NOT the true face of your movement. That's a bullshit claim that has more to do with what you want to be true than the actual reality of the movement. Again, NOW and mainstream academic feminism have plenty to answer for without pretending all feminists want men exterminated.
/r/MensRights04/04/14 05:56 PM
1

Some feminists are like that. Its still inaccurate to say they're the true face of feminism.
/r/MensRights04/04/14 05:24 PM
-9

True face of feminism seems a little exaggerated. Sure, there are some feminists that feel this way but they're a minority. There are plenty of problems with mainstream feminism without pretending they all want to kill all men.
/r/MensRights04/04/14 04:43 PM
6

For all the reasons women's studies are useless. Its just another fluffy degree.
/r/MensRights28/03/14 05:52 PM
10

I describe myself as an egalitarian. Its not uncommon here, and that description is about a hundred times easier for use in debates.
/r/MensRights28/03/14 05:51 PM
1

Do you mean the bullies? When did I say they shouldn't be punished? Even if I did, that would be a reprehensible attitude but not a naive one. I know it's appealing to do the whole "your insult applies to your own comment" bit, but you're really reaching here. What I do know is that they won't be punished, but there's a major distinction with shouldn't. The problem is most bullying is of the verbal harassment variety, not the classic "gimme your lunch money" type we see in movies. Verbal harassm…
/r/MensRights26/03/14 01:30 PM
1

I'm not being blindly restrictive. I'm advocating being restrictive of a small desire that has clearly had major social implications. I didn't get the TMNT backpack I wanted either, and my psyche recovered quickly. We're not talking about trying to get a transgender child to suppress their identity here, its just a backpack of a TV show he likes. Shit, let him keep watching the show. I'm not a brony or anything, but I've seen it and the show is pretty good. It's also not worth it for what will b…
/r/MensRights25/03/14 08:35 PM
1

That's a lovely and totally naive way of looking at it. Kids do not process consequences well at all. There are reasons we don't allow them autonomy. Blindly supporting your kid's phases is dumb, overly permissive parenting. When the fuck did I say to let girl's do things deemed socially unacceptable by their peers? It's fine now but I think parents that allowed or encouraged their daughters to have short hair or wear pants when that would make them outcasts were shitty parents too. Advancing yo…
/r/MensRights25/03/14 07:41 PM
1

Exactly. That's where as a parent you should know better than to buy your kid that backpack. Kids are mean enough without a reason, don't give them extra reasons.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 03:38 PM
2

I'm explaining the 8% not saying I think she'll be different. I'm with you.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 05:20 PM
2

Hillary fought for expansive healthcare in the 90s when it was unpopular and is generally seen to be more likely to actually fight the Republicans instead of compromising in order to receive no Republican votes. That's a big deal for frustrated liberals.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 03:47 PM
2

Pro-choice is an equally bullshit, shady catchphrase. I support abortion rights, but its not any better or more intellectually honest than the pro-life tagline.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 03:39 PM
2

He's being downvoted and everyone here is disagreeing with him. People aren't nodding along. No one looking at this thread will leave thinking that his stance is a commonly held MRA belief. Still a shitty reason for censorship.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 08:25 PM
16

We really don't do that and I think its important. Censorship is lazy. If you check his karma count he isn't a troll like the Manhood academy guys. Just a creep.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 03:40 AM
5

How could you leave out "fedora-clad neckbeards?"
/r/MensRights16/03/14 09:11 PM
7

Or just a bad news source that has been found to be about as useful as listening to no news at all.
/r/MensRights16/03/14 08:08 AM
-1

Giving a fake polite please.
/r/MensRights14/03/14 06:16 AM
-1

There's nothing about it in the OPs article. I made a pretty reasonable assumption, which could of course be wrong. Please stop being a condescending ass.
/r/MensRights14/03/14 05:14 AM
6

No... The amount of bail you receive is proportional to the severity of your crime. The worse your crime the more incentive to run and the higher your bail.
/r/MensRights14/03/14 05:11 AM
-6

I think people are pissed that one was ROR, but that's really not surprising for a 15 year old. People in this subreddit have gotten awfully dogmatic lately.
/r/MensRights14/03/14 04:24 AM
5

Most states you can only be held without bail on murder or jail break charges.
/r/MensRights14/03/14 04:23 AM
3

Because they drove away the rest of their audience. Lots of people loved Cracked before it went full SJW and don't read it anymore. I doubt they have the same size viewership anymore.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 03:11 AM
2

The book is always better. Except maybe Eragon. And that's only because the book was an impossibly bad ripoff of Star Wars and the movie totally ignored the plot.
/r/MensRights12/03/14 03:08 AM
3

Oh come on, shitlord should always be a suspicion marker. Side note, I am picturing loading dock workers with lobster claws now.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 04:41 PM
2

Really. I absolutely love the regular "action opportunity" stickies. Helps make some small battles we can win and makes me feel like less of a slacktivist.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 08:54 AM
10

The Australian Liberal Party is center right, Australia's equivalent of our Republicans. The leftist Australian party is Labour. But hey, you're a moron.
/r/MensRights07/03/14 10:50 PM
2

Well, yeah. We're generally calmer people over here and we don't ban as easily. Those are not high bars to cross mind you, but still.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 02:47 AM
1

That's bad, but listing what is definitely the wrong statistic is good?
/r/MensRights04/03/14 08:09 PM
18

While I support it, even as a liberal I know that this is purely politically motivated.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 05:21 PM
1

Its a pretty traditional society. Men get bonuses and detractions. Being drafted is one detraction. In the US or Western Europe where they lack bonuses the draft is seriously unfair. If you are actually much more likely to be hired/promoted its much less unfair to have an extra risk for dying. Men die in wars in disproportionate numbers, but I don't see that as particularly unfair in societies where they legitimately hold more power.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 09:58 AM
1

Its okay. Mostly I'm just sad that a paper that doesn't respond to my point has a bunch of upvotes while I'm downvoted. Says unfortunate things about the circlejerk here.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 09:49 AM
1

Its not. But being shocked that a traditional country where men have extra responsibilities AND rights is rather pointless. Spend a lot of time worrying about the men of middle eastern countries?
/r/MensRights04/03/14 09:47 AM
2

You just cited a US Labor site. Since it doesn't say Ukraine anywhere on the page and since the US government doesn't personally track foreign unemployment, I will assume you just aren't paying attention to what I said. Now, I just read a wikipedia page and could totally be wrong. A paper on US unemployment certainly doesn't prove that though.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 09:39 AM
-3

Let's be clear though. We aren't talking the US here. Despite higher (60%) female college graduation, 80% of the unemployed are women. A majority of women (56%) are housewives. This is still a pretty traditional country.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 08:44 AM
3

Just need to kill the rape victims. For the best really.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 05:38 PM
3

I should probably be more ashamed to instantly recognize it than you should be for not recognizing it.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 05:18 PM
6

That's what it is. Its a 4chan original and there have been many spinoffs and parodies of it. There are a number of copypastas and this is easily the most famous one. Its just a joke. An obviously fake, over-the-top internet threat by someone trying way too hard to be intimidating.
/r/MensRights28/02/14 03:52 AM
3

I've been polite, given examples and you've been rude and dismissive. I'm amused that you reference liberal temper tantrums when the one screaming here is you. The irony of calling liberals fascistic (fascism is an ultra-right nationalist movement) is just too much. You seem to have your history confused. Let's take black people for instance. For decades after the Civil War, blacks overwhelmingly voted Republican. This changed partly under Roosevelt (about a 50/50 split) and then later again und…
/r/MensRights27/02/14 11:31 AM
1

Unfounded doesn't mean false. It basically means can't be proven one way or another, and that is very common in rape cases. It definitely doesn't mean true either, but its important we keep our facts crystal clear.
/r/MensRights27/02/14 09:23 AM
2

I'm not offended, I barely care. Honestly though you're going to have better luck pitching this to liberals as a real movement than conservatives. Most (maybe all, not sure) civil rights movements have been liberal driven. Liberals care about these sorts of issues, even if they are on the wrong side right now. I think at the moment conservatives are generally doing a better job (especially on divorce laws), but I don't see it ever being a platform issue for them. I'd also like to note that liber…
/r/MensRights27/02/14 09:20 AM
2

The statistics about custody? I mean, if there's a primary caregiver they have an advantage but statistics about the rate at which a man and woman get custody couldn't possibly apply. That would mean there was a good chance neither of you would get the kid...
/r/MensRights25/02/14 08:01 AM
6

That last bit is relevant. Pretty good chance the woman you met for semi-anonymous sex on Yahoo Messenger had more than one sexual partner.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 10:50 PM
7

Honestly though that should be included in all news reports of the sort. I like to think we're fair-minded people here and she deserves the same presumption of innocence accused men should have.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 10:36 PM
2

I think we overstate when we say a vast majority. The way that everyone says it makes it sound like almost no men initiate divorce. It IS a 2-1 majority for women, but that's still a lot of men initiating divorces. The men's rights perspective I like to use is false rape accusations. It is estimated that around 8-10% of rape accusations are false (same as every other crime), but we'd hardly dismiss that as an irrelevant number of men being falsely accused. Don't get me wrong, I take your point. …
/r/MensRights23/02/14 04:25 PM
0

True. Traditionalism has no female obligations AND few to no female rights with both present for men. Egalitarianism (what I'd probably call what the MRA preaches) has rights and obligations for both sexes.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 10:31 AM
2

I can't answer if you are a blind person. Kind of like I can't tell you how colors are if you're blind. If you aren't blind or retarded (the latter appears to be a rather excessive assumption) then it should be obvious.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 07:59 AM
2

You measure by being able to see and evaluate people based on an average (5) appearance and having seen thousands of people over the course of a lifetime. Sorry, thought that was obvious to anyone who's lived with people.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 06:17 AM
3

There are multiple ways. The 1-10 system is common, the binary (0 or 1, meaning no or yes) is another system. Picking whether someone is a 7 or an 8 is hard and subjective. Whether someone is of vaguely similar attractiveness is pretty easy. When the 5'7" wife outweighs the 5'11" husband that's not the case.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 05:11 AM
3

In most of those cases it seems like both people let themselves go. I haven't seen a lot of fit, successful men married to fat women that used to be skinny. Many men are willing or even happy to support women of equal to greater physical attractiveness and not so much with less attractivee women. The majority of divorces aren't caused by losing jobs or getting fat, either way we are talking about a minority of cases.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 02:44 AM
1

There are plenty of men checking jailbait photos and the like too. If it was as acceptable as older women screaming at Bieber there probably would've been guys screaming at underage Miley. Instead they just jerked off to her at home.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 01:23 AM
1

Yeah. With magnets and chemicals.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 01:14 AM
-2

If female athletes were being injured at the same rate as men and people were wigging out this would be an issue. It sounds like there's a significantly higher rate of injury for the women which should be addressed. Even top athletes apparently have trouble with these courses, and there are physical limitations to women's bodies. Saying one example of a person dying like it proves a problem is lazy and anecdotal.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 01:03 AM
1

I'm liberal and its nice to see Dems do the right thing this time.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 12:43 AM
9

I suspect you'd see a similar (though smaller) uptick in divorce when the wife "let's herself go." Men are paychecks, women are bodies. There are problems with that system but there it is.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 12:42 AM
1

This is my second reddit account. I knew what would be helpful this time around.
/r/MensRights20/02/14 07:52 PM
1

On the plus side, the writer doesn't use "callow."
/r/MensRights20/02/14 06:43 PM
3

The 45% includes mobile and facebook gaming. Play flash games sometimes? gamer.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 10:58 AM
6

Well except they said their child knew at 3. Which makes no sense. Sounds kind of like they're pressuring him to be trans.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 01:53 AM
17

Women self-select out of these jobs. Even says so in the article. If they don't want to be there then that's their problem. The best was that the stereotype that techies have no social life alienates women. Making fun of awkward tech guys is bad because women don't want to work there.
/r/MensRights17/02/14 01:47 AM
1

It seems to be getting better while I've been here. There are just as many "librul" comments on random articles (I don't mind as much if a politician says/does something bad) but at least now they mostly get downvoted and liberals actually shoot back. This isn't about to be the world's first conservative-only human rights movement.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 05:33 PM
4

Yes but conservative traditionalists can't. They're as much a problem as feminists. Even if she was actually on our side, that's not good. The last thing this movement wants to be associated with is someone who spews the sort of bigoted crap Coulter is fond of.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 02:25 AM
3

That one is better than the others, because you can't have a functioning ask_______ subreddit where you aren't allowed to ask questions. That doesn't fly elsewhere.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 01:55 AM
4

Well they ban us when we go over to their house. Only one side is open to discourse.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 12:45 AM
1

Let's remember that everyone is entitled to presumption of innocence. The facts we get reported aren't always accurate.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 12:44 AM
8

She also said women should lose the right to vote after the 2012 election because they don't vote right. Not a good ally.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 12:13 AM
2

People have a right to their sexual preferences.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 12:08 AM
2

Because justice is an almost entirely subjective idea whereas law can be more objectively interpreted. I take your point, but its important for the whole system to function.
/r/MensRights12/02/14 08:33 AM
5

The hatred conservatives have for liberals in this subreddit is just obnoxious. Conservative traditionalists aren't exactly helping us out either. There are problems on both ends of the spectrum.
/r/MensRights12/02/14 05:33 AM
2

I think its funny how similar the outcomes look. I'm aware we combat both, but since most of our concerns are in 1st world countries, feminism is a more common opponent. Just an observation.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 05:28 PM
6

One thing to note here. This one isn't the work of feminists. Its the work of traditionalists. I think its funny how similar the outcomes look.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 09:07 AM
5

That stuff is fine (I do the same) when its reciprocal. The problem is the expectation that the man treats his woman like a queen and she can treat him like a peasant she sometimes fucks.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 09:33 PM
7

He's not trying to convince them, he's trying to convince the general public. Public sentiment seems generally to favor him and stuff like this where he defends himself well and is generous towards Dylan goes a long way towards protecting his legacy.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 07:04 PM
1

Totally disagree, though you may be being facetious. They have the right to speak just like the white supremacists, NAMBLA, and everyone else.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 01:14 AM
5

Why is it strange? This is a positive thing but I doubt she's saying anything we haven't heard before. I'm glad for CAFE but I'll probably just check a highlight reel after the event. In other words, people here are happy but its not the biggest moment ever for Men's Rights. AMR on the other hand is hysterical and because this is a relatively high profile event they're going berserk.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 11:37 AM
8

I actually found the strangest thing about this to be that $90 is considered to be equivalent to 3 months in jail and $271 for 1 year.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 10:35 AM
5

He's being dumb and so is this post. They are both being down voted appropriately.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 03:02 AM
6

Some tips I've found for public discussion: Describe yourself as an egalitarian, never as an MRA. It's a more useful, neutral term and I think it actually does a better job of capturing the goals most MRAs have. Keep criticisms of feminism narrow. "Feminism is sexist" doesn't play well. Cite issues men have instead. If people are receptive to the concern, secondarily mention the way feminism has mishandled it.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 02:59 AM
1

Good news. The National Post article made them look like idiots and they caved. Honestly, I'm skeptical that there will be some big protest anyways. 10 people holding signs is more likely. The large-scale protests at UT only served to make them look rabid and MRAs reasonable. The most recent event at UT was pretty much protest free.
/r/MensRights05/02/14 12:24 PM
6

As an Oregonian I can tell you that she isn't particularly relevant period. Beating a standing senator is pretty hard and Merkley has some advantages. Even though its a midterm election year there will be a gay marriage bill and possibly a pot bill on the ballot to draw out liberal votes. The mail-in ballot system also means that there isn't as much of a drop off between presidential and midterm turnout. Finally, Oregon hasn't elected a Republican since 2002, and Merkley is the one who beat that…
/r/MensRights02/02/14 10:58 AM
2

Is that really her name? Big Red is much more dignified.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 08:42 PM
1

That's a little response to my points, but I suppose deciding I was angry makes having no refutation go down smoother.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 03:20 AM
1

This is one of the most sanctimonious piles of crap I've ever had the displeasure to read. The way you speak isn't about respect for self or any other self-congratulatory cliche. It is related to where you're raised but being fake polite (because it is largely fake) is not somehow better than being openly rude. Now, I am not someone for whom "fucking" is the best and only adjective I'll ever find and I think swearing and insults can derail debates. However, that's not a problem here. This wasn't…
/r/MensRights31/01/14 08:22 PM
0

Anyone interested in defending a mother who murdered 2 of her children and tried to kill a third isn't someone even remotely capable of being won over and trying to appease them is just stupid.
/r/MensRights31/01/14 09:47 AM
-2

Do you actually read TFM or are you just gutchecking that "frats suck man?" I bet its the latter.
/r/MensRights31/01/14 07:03 AM
37

I reserve the right to call people who commit multiple murders mean names, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation or anything else.
/r/MensRights31/01/14 06:53 AM
29

We can get a quota for that going.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 08:21 AM
2

Oregonian here, I highly suggest my state if that's the goal.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 07:05 PM
2

The doctor has to TEST to find something that indicates a 25% chance you have a condition they should do an effective test for. Doing the first test is a waste of time and limited dollars. If a woman found on her own that there are breast lumps then that didn't waste the system's money.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 07:01 PM
3

I like crazy girls. Partly its the sex, partly that I like to fix things. The result however is I like crazy girls and accept the fact that they're who I'm attracted to. My friends give me endless shit about it of course. I do not go around bemoaning the fact that I can't find a nice sane girl however, because I'm not looking for one. I've dated a couple and found them boring. Back with a crazy girl.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 06:50 PM
10

Was there perhaps a small ripple of laughter after this statement? This sounds like a joke and I'm not opposed to jokes.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 06:40 PM
2

We're talking about video game women here. You know they have huge breasts.
/r/MensRights27/01/14 11:02 PM
5

Honestly most women are not natural DDs.
/r/MensRights27/01/14 06:35 AM
3

She hasn't gotten past the primaries. That was the thing Obama won before he beat McCain in 2008.
/r/MensRights27/01/14 12:49 AM
1

Look, I know we get tired of this "how is this a mens rights issue" posting but this is a good time for it. This is what ought to happen. Women do bad things sometimes, as do men. Posting times a woman did a bad thing and was appropriately dealt with doesn't help with anything.
/r/MensRights24/01/14 10:06 PM
1

Not that this excuses it, but isn't there a surprisingly high majority of MTF trans people? Is there any explanation for that?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 07:39 AM
7

While this is an insane injustice, the fact that it took place in "Sandusky County" did make me giggle.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 07:01 PM
3

Say what? That they don't insult conservatives? Conservatives on this subreddit have way more problems with liberals than vice-versa.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 04:15 PM
1

Yeah, you're more interested in feeling self-righteous than you are in actually persuading anyone. Nobody likes the angry ranting person regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum. I bring up a few statistics politely and sometimes folks listen. Turned a couple people on to some reading materials. But hey, as long as you feel good.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 07:51 AM
1

Hey, I usually debate irl (you know in good situations, when starting arguments doesn't make you an asshole), but fighting with people one on one when they have their minds made up is pretty damn ineffective. If you actually speak up whenever you find something "problematic" like the mra version of an SRSter, everyone just tunes you out. Stick to your principles all you like.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 06:23 AM
2

I'm not saying I wouldn't fight in my current position, I'm saying him getting in trouble accomplishes nothing and may fuck with his grades and future. People without power aren't the ones who should fight our battles, mighty internet warrior.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 05:47 AM
2

Ah yes, clearly you've found a much more balanced, rational outlook. Your opinions are perfect and everyone else is retarded. Congratulations.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 12:32 AM
6

You said "feminists, liberals, etc." They're not the same, don't conflate the two. I didn't insult conservatives or even you. I asked you not to slander liberals AND answered your question productively and this increases your hatred of liberals? Maybe you're just looking for more reasons to be mad. Conservative traditonalists haven't done any better by this movement either.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 11:28 PM
13

Yeah, could you not randomly slander all liberals here? I'm liberal and I'm definitely not the only one on this subreddit. You aren't going to convince someone using this bullshit power+prejudice idea. That being said, the best thing I've found is to point out that you have no power over anyone at the moment and that if you went off about women or black people she would consider that racism/sexism even if you were lying in a hospital bed dying. I also tell people that if they'd rather just be ca…
/r/MensRights20/01/14 11:05 PM
51

This won't be a popular opinion here but I'd let it drop. You can't win against a teacher and you'll only end up hurting yourself. If your female teacher is so up in this mindset that she just thinks men should shut up (that's what "acknowledge your privilege" actually means) then you'll just get failed for arguing.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 08:03 PM
1

Or, you know, us. Not everybody respects the np.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 05:49 AM
1

Good. Best wishes man. Get that lawyer.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 05:04 AM
1

Save the texts, get a lawyer, if there's any personal information associated with this account shut it down now.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 04:53 AM
1

Well they're the National Organization of Women. I'm not sure if they're in the UK or not. They're a US group originally at least.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 01:17 AM
2

Speculating about abuse without a face to face meeting and analysis is not helpful either. Assigning a particular reason to someone's delusions without much better proof is not a good system.
/r/MensRights19/01/14 09:12 PM
8

Well, its sort of a funny story. The charges should be more severe obviously but "woman embarrassed by queefing during SEX ON A BUS and attacks amused onlooker" is just funny. If a guy flipped out over something this stupid and attacked a kid it would be funny too.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 11:35 PM
3

"Its over guys, crack a beer. They got it."
/r/MensRights18/01/14 06:29 PM
23

No true scotsman would do such a thing!
/r/MensRights18/01/14 06:26 PM
0

Jesus bro, take a chill pill. You just told someone you disagreed with in one comment stream to commit suicide. Someone with a stated history of suicidal thoughts.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 03:06 AM
0

Yeah, I kept a copy of a paper I read 3 years ago. Do you have a better explanation? The social answers are pretty obvious for Native Americans. I'm a formerly suicidal white guy. Not like I'm calling out whitey for being weak here.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 02:51 AM
1

I read a paper about it in some class I took. A racist argument? Its no more racist than saying black people are more likely to have sickle cell anemia. Its a disease. I could well be wrong but its not racist to think a group of people may be genetically inclined to a particular disease.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 02:40 AM
0

White men have high suicide rates for whatever reason. I think there's a genetic susceptibility to depression as a big part. Native Americans are the absolute underclass of American society. Staggering poverty and alcoholism rates and just enough government money to keep them alive even if they don't really do anything. If you've ever been to reservations they're pretty awful. Worst pieces of land in the country (lot of reservation land in Oklahoma and North Dakota for example) and no jobs.
/r/MensRights17/01/14 07:34 PM
4

Yeah I'm with you. Kind of assumed it would be much higher, which is very sad.
/r/MensRights17/01/14 07:30 PM
7

shrug speak for yourself. I'm a medical student, like to lift weights, love pro basketball, was in a fraternity, never accused of rape or sexual assault and I've always been successful with women. I'm a traditionally masculine male and the system works for me. I still care about these issues.
/r/MensRights16/01/14 01:39 AM
1

I don't care much for this sort of anecdotal post actually. I wasn't defending OP or this instance, just clarifying the story about the quadruple homicide.
/r/MensRights15/01/14 04:25 PM
2

Oh I'm not the top level commenter. Can't speak for him.
/r/MensRights15/01/14 04:59 AM
21

He was 16. Yes, it was an enormous miscarriage of justice. Let's also not pretend an anecdote is the same as statistical evidence that men are sentenced 60% longer for the same crimes as women.
/r/MensRights15/01/14 04:41 AM
25

Underage (which is huge) and manslaughter vs murder. That being said the judge is that case is clearly corrupt or insanely biased.
/r/MensRights15/01/14 04:27 AM
1

That's ridiculous. Men tend to succeed at suicide.
/r/MensRights14/01/14 07:17 AM
1

I think the value here is that it shows that this shit just happens. To everyone. For basically no reason. Football kickers for example have it worse than anyone. It's the internet, just not a big deal.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 04:35 AM
13

That would not be doing the best possible service to his female clients. Not how it works unfortunately.
/r/MensRights08/01/14 10:55 PM
12

One of the most common critiques of feminism I see here is that it's so poisonously anti-trans. MRAs seem to range from neutral to positive about trans rights (by neutral I just mean that many people like myself don't put it high on their personal list of issues).
/r/MensRights08/01/14 10:10 AM
3

Its easier and doesn't necessitate you sitting on a public toilet where stranger's urine and fecal matter has resided. It's not about masculinity, its about personal convenience and hygiene. At home I often sit to pee if I'm typing something out on my phone. It's also that telling someone how to urinate is just ridiculous, especially given that women's restrooms are ALWAYS worse than men's.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 10:50 PM
1

Obama has been a disappointment but at least for the second election there wasn't a lot of liberal excitement around him. Just a feeling of "better than Romney." I hold to that.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 06:44 PM
0

Its really not the end of the world. I'm circumcised, and you are too. I've certainly never felt mutilated and I figure you haven't either. I don't plan to circumcise my kids but its not like my dick doesn't work either. This subreddit makes it feel sometimes like circumcision means you'll live some miserable half-life. You didn't cut your kid's arm off or anything, don't beat yourself up. Have any more boys and you won't make the same error.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 10:51 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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