TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

dewse Archive

View 5 posts and 322 comments by dewse on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
4

I agree that we ought to talk about men suicide with modern life pressures. My issue is when we twist to make it seem that the complaint on its own was malevolent, or the other non-constructive comments that are reigning the top. [Yeah, all they wanted was a little attention. Why did he have to go...] [They were “devastated” because: 1) their payday wasn’t...] [Toxic femininity, female entitlement, male disposability...] [And they say women don’t lie about such things...] This is the kind of tra…
/r/MensRights27/12/18 05:02 PM
12

People are being retarded in this thread already. Almost -- dare I say -- as bad as some feminists creating narratives. Yes, it's terrible this man took his life, but no, we do not know if the allegations were true or not. So let's not jump to the conclusion that they were false. It's embarrassing that the top comments seem to be more emotional than rational about this event.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 02:41 PM
-1

What a creepy comment. No, I'm not interested.
/r/MensRights20/09/18 09:59 PM
2

He's an idiot. Don't try to read too much into it.
/r/MensRights20/09/18 09:37 PM
-1

Yikes, you don't seem to know much about the opposite sex's ritual in regards to hair do you?
/r/MensRights20/09/18 09:36 PM
0

How about we get rid of every single social system we have in place that care for folks. See, I can do extremes too.
/r/MensRights20/09/18 09:19 PM
-12

Hard to feel bad when the dude does it to everyone else like it's nothing. Normally I'd agree, but it just feels like a dose of his own medicine.
/r/MensRights18/09/18 09:21 PM
1

Great. Another opinion. We're getting somewhere.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 07:36 PM
5

I don't know, I feel the same about folks that use the word "virtue signaling". Now we both have an opinion that stems from nothing but feelings. PROGRESS!
/r/MensRights13/08/18 03:49 PM
2

Yes, and this can easily be done if folks want to troll the search algorithm. Unless you have a concrete reason for this to happen, then it's all just speculation, which won't lead us far. https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/5418jf/wtf_is_going_on_search_european_people_art_on/ This thread seems to discuss this. You can always do more research and figure out why it's doing this, but to assume what OP is insinuating is jumping the gun.
/r/MensRights08/08/18 10:46 PM
3

Please provide some hard evidence on that, otherwise I'll go with occam's razor that because as a society we only give attention to sexism towards women, that the internet will also reflect this.
/r/MensRights08/08/18 01:47 PM
4

Are you insinuating that google themselves are manually filtering out the images you see? From what I remember reading about the algorithm, google doesn't necessarily decide what it shows, but rather shows images based on the popularity of an image online and their meta tags. So yes, there's no doubt that there would be mostly, if not only, pictures of sexism towards women. You can only blame society, not the automated system that gives results based on internet traffic. Actually, you want there…
/r/MensRights08/08/18 01:41 PM
2

This is such an odd post. That's an extremely shallow analysis of data. Most society will favor men over women when it comes to rescuing -- understandly so given how our defaulted physical attributes and hormone functions. So then to point to the fact that a rescue team that must be few in number might take their top performance assets, which are likely to be men.
/r/MensRights08/07/18 09:06 PM
1

On TV, sure. They would still continue and thrive on the internet.
/r/MensRights24/06/18 03:52 AM
1

Tell us again how you worry that skirts will turn guys gay. I've never seen a man fear a piece of cloth.
/r/MensRights05/06/18 04:54 AM
-2

Or I could point out how stupid your statement was and make a very hasty and shallow assessment of your general intellect.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 06:05 PM
0

Are you saying wearing clothes can change your sexuality? These kids may wear skirts/kilts, but at least they went to school. Can't say the same about you.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 05:10 PM
0

Yeah, my bad. Championing was a term I saw another user say and it slipped in. But we shouldn't be giving him praise just yet is what I mean. I agree with the improvement, I just worry if the move was a will to be ethical, or was it for personal gain, which could slightly affect how MRM causes are perceived in the future.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 06:55 PM
1

I think the concern is more that since he's got very strong allegations against his sexual conduct. I think you can both say you strongly disagree with someone, but agree with an action, and still after that, inquire about the intent of that action. The folks we want to champion our cause ought to be role models, so people don't question our movement's intent as well.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 06:37 PM
-5

Yeah, man. This sub is always pissed off about "virtue signaling" and here it's happening and WOAH, so brave! Jokes aside. You can doubt a person's intent even though one of his own goals seems to be aligned with yours. What's wrong with pointing out the potential bias of an individual?
/r/MensRights14/02/18 06:07 PM
2

Are you sure you know what "Projection" is? That's your opinion about women being liars. Sure there are some, but you sound as unreasonable as the women who say " too many men are pigs" or "too many men are rapists"
/r/MensRights18/12/17 11:32 PM
2

I do too. In case this isn't obvious enough, I'm not a feminist. Jokes aside. I personally believe there's a great amount of both feminists and MRA that lack understanding of science, or at least they're louder than the rest of us. Not that science has any direct function in gender rights, but it sure helps to understand human nature. Those that respect the science aren't so incredibly opinionated about such complex things as these, or least aren't as angry towards things they do not understand.
/r/MensRights18/12/17 11:21 PM
-2

Nope, not all the #metoos were legit. No idea why this would be assumed of my opinion. How about you define evil? If you can't then we can't claim anything to be evil -- to give an idea why having me define something so culturally bound is going to lead to a lot of disagreements, even though most of us will agree to some stern example such as the stereotypical event of someone getting jumped in the back alley and forcefully raped. I doubt many folks would argue for this action. I don't doubt the…
/r/MensRights18/12/17 08:28 PM
-7

Oh shit. You got me! Now we just need the recordings of me inviting you to the bathroom while I shower.
/r/MensRights18/12/17 03:19 PM
-4

Oh, no, the man lacking foundation in scientific understanding has an opinion! :P Edit: I remember when I was a huge troll in my teen years, so I kind of empathize the easy way out. If you end up having a rebuttal worth its salt, you know where I am.
/r/MensRights18/12/17 03:15 PM
-20

Be scared for false accusations, not because of what happened to Weinstein. Don't be rapey with your colleagues or inappropriate and there's an extremely small chance someone is going to want to denounce you for the actions you've taken with them. It's not like you really need to be at a meeting to get falsely accused of sexual abuse. I doubt the #metoo has anything to do with idiotic dudes that are too socially inept to understand personal boundaries -- you know, like asking someone to come in …
/r/MensRights18/12/17 06:05 AM
1

Injustice happens. What are you trying to say? All I'm saying is that it's retarded to worry about false sexual harassment accusations while pointing to Weinstein, when we have clear evidence against the guy. Had the article pointed to one of the many other actual injustice in regards to false accusations towards men, I'd agree with it, but it's just a terrible example. Sorry.
/r/MensRights07/12/17 11:48 PM
0

That, or just not exposing yourself to people. I mean, I'm sure there's a healthy middle ground.
/r/MensRights06/12/17 11:52 PM
0

Yep. We can't stop people from being unreasonable, but pointing to Weinstein's situation is dumb as we've gathered so far that he was abusing his position, and doing something immoral. If we were talking about over-sensitivity towards everyday non-sexual actions, I'd perhaps agree, but Weinstein's situation isn't just hugging, or smiling to someone, or asking about their personal life. It's just a terrible scenario to make you worry.
/r/MensRights06/12/17 12:25 AM
1

Of course it's OK, Jesus, just don't invite them into the bathroom while you shower. Doesn't seem that complicated to me, or anyone that understands simple social etiquettes. Just like you don't hug someone and hold on to them past 10 seconds of you're not a close friend. The only people that can be excused of failing social cues are folks with disabilities like autism. If you're not sure, just don't do it. Not like you'll die from missing out on a hug. And I say this as a Frenchie that loves hu…
/r/MensRights05/12/17 12:26 PM
1

That's fair criticism. Thanks. I believe there's plenty enough unconditional support in this subreddit, which is why I feel I need to balance it out with my own form of "tough love" when I see folks agreeing on something I feel isn't completely right. The way I see it is that if the feminist had a bit of this, they wouldn't have grown into the delusional group they now are, believing they can complain when a man simply looks at them or disagrees with their ideas. The fact that I can do this spea…
/r/MensRights14/10/17 10:54 PM
1

"You briefly refer to my point without any substance or anything to prove otherwise and quickly try to turn things onto me instead." Now waiting for you to do the same. I can also pull past comments where I stand corrected when I'm proven wrong. You should learn to do the same.
/r/MensRights13/10/17 09:20 PM
1

How is it "not true"? I'm generally an argumentative person. I really shouldn't be entertaining your silly complaint, but here you go. I had to dig into my comments to find these and waste time on something you could have done. Not that it matters that I have so few positive comments anyway, as I did say I upvote comments and threads I agree with. Does it bother you that I don't put a useless comment to say what an upvote can already do in most cases? https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments…
/r/MensRights12/10/17 10:38 PM
1

If I agree with it, I will simply upvote the thread/comment. I don't need to write a comment unless I need to criticize a line of logic. I care about this subreddit and I don't want it to become the same thing the feminists have let theirs become. I've tried to criticize the feminist threads in the past and was banned quickly enough. Let me turn the question on you. Point to us any post where you are disagreeing with an MRA thread that others seem to agree with. Sounds like you're a little too a…
/r/MensRights11/10/17 10:09 PM
1

I excused female stealthing? Stating the difficulty of proving those things isn't making an excuse, it's simply making an observation. I mean, I even stated that stealthing itself could be difficult, given that it could be an accident on the guy's part. "As much as I agree that those things need to be addressed..." What do you gather from that sentence. If you're going to read my history, read it properly. I absolutely think that "female stealthing" is disgusting.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 10:01 PM
3

Ah, that makes it right then. Sorry. [edit: Sarcasm, in case anyone thinks I agree with this gross behavior.]
/r/MensRights10/10/17 11:23 PM
5

Wait... is that what you gathered from the audio? Yikes. He's asking her to come to the bathroom with him while he showers. Do you think this is appropriate behavior, especially from someone in a position of power, not to mention he grabbed her tits the previous night, which clearly made her uncomfortable. My god, you're delusional. Or you lack an understanding of human behavior. You're the reason why people think MRAs are fucked up. I absolutely think women that lie about sexual assault should …
/r/MensRights10/10/17 10:32 PM
2

http://video.newyorker.com/watch/harvey-weinstein-caught-on-tape Don't care if you're a man or a woman, this shit is just wrong.
/r/MensRights10/10/17 06:00 PM
3

http://video.newyorker.com/watch/harvey-weinstein-caught-on-tape
/r/MensRights10/10/17 05:59 PM
6

http://video.newyorker.com/watch/harvey-weinstein-caught-on-tape
/r/MensRights10/10/17 05:58 PM
1

Damn, got me.
/r/MensRights10/10/17 03:45 PM
1

You could get off your lazy ass and make it yourself, brother.
/r/MensRights10/10/17 02:51 PM
1

Yeah, I agree that there's means to test if they are on birth control. I just don't know how legal it is to require blood tests or other forms of body fluid. Even if it were done, you wouldn't be taking those tests right away, you would be once the pregnancy is known of, which could be much later than when the copulation happens. Not sure how inaccurate this would make the tests. Not saying that accusing someone of stealthing would be considered very accurate, as accidents do happen, but it's mu…
/r/MensRights09/10/17 10:28 PM
1

As much as I agree that those things need to be addressed, how would one know that someone poked a hole prior to sex? Sounds like a much harder thing to prove than clearly seeing a missing condom after ejaculation. Same about lying about birth control. I guess you could always require blood tests, not that this would be an easy thing to ask.
/r/MensRights09/10/17 10:09 PM
1

Never said it would. I'm strictly speaking about alcohol and smoking.
/r/MensRights04/10/17 11:25 PM
6

False equivalence. Unless you're joking. Last I checked smoking and drinking were both dangerous regardless of age.
/r/MensRights03/10/17 08:51 PM
9

Menrights means malerights. You don't begin having rights only when you reach adulthood.
/r/MensRights03/10/17 08:46 PM
2

"I'm in the dark as much as anyone else in this thread." This goes to the stated parent comments, which I highly doubt were fed by the understanding of the context of culture. I never claimed understanding, but at least I'm honest about my lack of understanding, unlike the other comments that claimed to understand the intention.
/r/MensRights23/09/17 02:37 PM
1

A problem with that statement is that China is socialistic. If you had said that in the states, it would have more meaning within that context.
/r/MensRights22/09/17 07:34 PM
-1

I don't know. This is China. I'd have to read into it, but knowing the bit of what I've seen in regards to social justice there, it looks fairly non-existant. Maybe the Chinese folks I've talked to had unique experience, but I doubt this is some form of gender political decision rather than "hey, this cart is available, let me get in."
/r/MensRights22/09/17 07:09 PM
1

I agree, but my question was if there were a 99.99%. In real life, these stats don't exist, but to me if even at a 99.99% chance you still point to the 0.01% as representative of the default whole, then it's worrying for the judgement of the whole system. Not saying you wouldn't be open to seeing every single value of the whole for an exception though. Again, I say this as someone who understands genetics and HATES true racism, sexism, and most phobic ism out there. I just don't agree with some …
/r/MensRights22/09/17 06:01 PM
-1

Neither do I. I'm just pointing out that the intention is not necessarily valiant, so there's nothing to cheer on. I'm pretty convinced they weren't being defiant towards the gender issue, but just not caring about being told what to do. I'll see if there is some followup to the story. I'm in the dark as much as anyone else in this thread.
/r/MensRights22/09/17 03:59 PM
-2

Actually, it is. At some point if the scientific data is too strong, you can make compensations. It works both side; if you're at a disadvantage or advantage. Are you just claiming that you feel like there is no justification for discrimination, ever, even if something were to occur at a 99.99% rate? I'd imagine that it's not an absolute thing, but rather a gradient. Where do you yourself draw the line? [Edit: And I'm aware this argument could be used to parallel what the nazis did, to say that …
/r/MensRights22/09/17 03:17 PM
-5

Or they just don't care about rules. Not going to cheer people for being dicks rather than having a real purpose in action. I know we like to project our ideology to other countries, but some countries truly have issues that mostly originate from the dudes creeping/molesting women (i.e. the trains in Japan or India) I mean, you could always argue that women are as likely to creep in Japan, but I have a feeling the scientific data would strongly disagree. That being said, I have no idea what the …
/r/MensRights22/09/17 02:47 PM
38

Although I agree that I see no reason to shame someone for that decision, it doesn't relate to men's rights, hell, it might not even be women's rights either.
/r/MensRights29/08/17 02:31 AM
1

More or less saying we use SJW with connotation of the left/feminists, but our own activity could be well perceived as that as well. Wanting social justice isn't a bad thing, it's when it gets irrational and not in concordance with science and modern understanding of socio-psychology that it can become a problem.
/r/MensRights24/08/17 08:10 PM
1

Odd, I don't know any friend guys that were beat with belts when they grew up, unlike our parents have. You can both treat someone harshly, and also with love. Positive and negative reinforcement. Also, I'll have to check this again, but wasn't one of the more seen features of boys that grew up sociopaths is that they had an extremely loving mother, and a nearly sadistic father, or vice-versa?
/r/MensRights24/08/17 03:48 PM
5

Because they share interest in denouncing the SJW that also have a tendency to be left-leaning, you get a lot of anti-left folks in here -- although, one could argue that MRA are SJWs in a way, not that it's an innately bad thing to be a SJW. I worry the overtake of these more radical folks will just make our cause look more toxic and lose some credibility, like it has the feminist movement. Talking to those that have nothing but vile, immature comments instead of providing insightful ones.
/r/MensRights24/08/17 03:41 PM
1

Putting aside the obvious fact that they are focusing only on one gender when the rest seems to be the most in trouble, it makes me wonder how the hell do homeless women deal with periods. That's kind of a messed up. Anyone here worked at a shelter or whatever that knows this?
/r/MensRights20/08/17 05:32 PM
2

I figured it was the insinuation of this post. I know the last thread that came up it was the same case that was being made. If this post isn't objective, then fine. It's a sad thing indeed that we get less time (in average) to spend enjoying our retirement.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 12:08 AM
9

Been posted before. The solution isn't simple. Men in general like to partake in more dangerous behaviour. It's the wage gap argument but for men. It sounds awful, but doesn't mean much and cannot be easily solved.
/r/MensRights13/08/17 11:01 PM
5

You need to go see a psychologist, bud.
/r/MensRights24/07/17 02:38 PM
1

Your views on politics are a little twisted. You can provide data that supports your view though and we might get somewhere. You're the person defending the right, I'm saying both have their flaws which can be demonstrated. Your position is that the right isn't at an equal chance of delusion, even though we understand religion to be systemically delusional in regards to reality. This will be a very tough position to argue for you, but do as you must.
/r/MensRights23/07/17 05:36 AM
1

Again, even if they were, how would that rebute my statement about the religious right.
/r/MensRights22/07/17 04:18 AM
1

Ah, right. Thanks for that.
/r/MensRights21/07/17 05:11 AM
1

You don't understand what atheism is if you think it's a religion, and even if it was a religion, that wouldn't take away from the statement I made about the religious right.
/r/MensRights21/07/17 05:00 AM
-1

Same person that stated "Conservatives shape their beliefs to fit reality." as if religious people aren't delusional and emotionally driven. Maybe I'm thinking of the wrong "conservative" demographic though. I'm centrist, before you assume I'm a "liberal", because apparently "Liberals hate reality.", right?
/r/MensRights20/07/17 05:26 AM
1

Have to help me out here. What about the "patriarchy"? I don't get the connection. What strawman are we talking about?
/r/MensRights20/07/17 05:18 AM
2

Some of these comments make me wonder if people even read the article. Very interesting stuff. Didn't know about that autism thing they mentioned down the page. A study showing why boys (or girls with more boyish brains) have a much higher chance to get autism.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 05:16 AM
1

Yikes. Read a bit of your comment history to know what I'm dealing with here. You surely seem to hate atheists. I wonder what your religious affiliation is. This might explain why you don't think the right's actions are destructive. You know mine, I'm sure you don't mind if I know yours. Also, "taking the red pill" doesn't mean you suddenly forget all the other injustice that exists in the world.
/r/MensRights17/07/17 01:22 AM
1

You seem to have a bias towards a side. It's a little harder to argue that you don't have one than, let's say, me who likes aspects of both sides and can see the pro and cons of each. I can assure you I read enough stupid shit that happens in both camps. Unless you have numbers to prove that violence is "almost exclusively" an issue of the left. Because that statement is more up to debate than my own statement saying that violence is a general thing that happens regardless of politics.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 12:58 AM
1

Feel free to compare them. I'm not the one making a statement that only the extreme left is an issue. Even then, I don't like boiling it down to the "right" vs "left" since it's really not seeing the big picture and how complex folks are. But both sides have their extremes and history has shown this.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 04:05 AM
1

Of course they're different, but republicans have a high affinity for conservative politics and vice versa. Keeping the values of the bible in mind for their decisions. Good analogy is atheist and liberals. They're different, but they have similar aspirations. Then again, you can have an atheist republican, just like you can have a devout Christian who supports the democrats. Not trying to oversimplify politics, but I am trying to demonstrate that both sides are well capable of being irrational,…
/r/MensRights13/07/17 12:03 AM
1

Not sure in what bubble you live. I see the violence of both sides, regardless how flamboyant it may be or not. Is this the echo chamber effect they talk about happening in the states? Most of the folks I know are fairly centrists, so it's a little tougher to be blinded to the actions of the extremes. Do you think the right is incapable of inciting violence towards groups based on their own political beliefs, or religious (or lack of religious) beliefs? Do you think that doesn't exist?
/r/MensRights11/07/17 06:19 PM
0

This is you being an adult?
/r/MensRights11/07/17 04:19 PM
0

There's the right that are stagnant in moving forward and away from the christian influence and cultural traditions, even in spite of the scientific consensus. Then that stuff drips down to increase violence and hostility towards groups that don't fit the morality ideas that the right hold.
/r/MensRights11/07/17 05:09 AM
2

If he meant "is hurting themselves", then yes, both are. Are you telling me that you don't believe that the ultra-conservative folks aren't hurting their cause and themselves with their ideology -- high religiosity for example.
/r/MensRights11/07/17 03:39 AM
6

The "alt right" and "alt left" has been eating itself for a while, nothing new to extreme politics.
/r/MensRights10/07/17 09:54 PM
1

All for men wearing earrings if they wish, but I fail to see the point of posting a store that is selling them. Was the sale of these taboo before? Because having been a teen during the 90s, I can say that dudes wearing earrings never seemed to be an issue, and was even in style.
/r/MensRights10/07/17 07:13 PM
1

No clue why you got downvoted, but I think it's because people don't understand what you mean by that, even while your statement was correct. Let me explain it and tell me if this is what you meant. Ok. So title essentially states bigger brain = higher IQ. Now the graph shows a more evenly distributed average in men, while women peak more towards the middle. Alright, now that those things have been established, let's average out both genders distribution, and what do we see? They are both averag…
/r/MensRights04/07/17 12:21 AM
1

I agree with speaking up about something, but what is that something. That a lot more men than women are extremely retarded? There isn't much we can do at that level of retardation other than screening fetus to do our best while we wait for biochem science to catch up and allow us to manipulate potential issues. Not to mention, I think there's even evolutionary science work done that's trying to explain why this happens. Never read too much into it because that's not my field. Brief, it seemed l…
/r/MensRights03/07/17 02:03 AM
2

You made this picture? https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-929b67e5b164c180d10d9ece5773f03f If so, that's certainly an odd looking bell curve. On first look, it doesn't look incredibly accurate and looks much too symmetrical, and doesn't show the IQ values at the bottom, nor the percentile values on the side. Maybe it's just to give an idea of the distribution, so I just wanted to point out that to at least know that it does look inaccurate and the person talking about it on Quora said the sam…
/r/MensRights03/07/17 01:53 AM
2

I'm a little concerned some people might read into this graph a little too much. Also, it should be mentioned that this graph on the site that it was posted on was quoted as "exaggerated". Even if it wasn't, we should let the sociologists/psychologists discuss the implication of these data. Unless OP had a clear message about how this bell curve is important to either women or men and how we should change things to make them better. It's hard to determine the objectivity of this post.
/r/MensRights02/07/17 09:20 PM
6

Either combined them as one, or keep both exclusive. Never understood the argument of separating bathrooms (or locker rooms) to prevent leering eyes. Gay/bi/etc folks still exist.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 06:03 PM
1

Well, I agree that there would be a storm. Remember the plane incident where a girl was told that she couldn't ride with yoga pants or leggings -- I really don't remember the piece of clothing.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 08:46 PM
0

Yes, if there's no lack of space, I couldn't give less of a fuck. You're not invading other's space. I'm more than aware of the feminist's view on it being this "sexually aggressive" "micro-aggression", whatever the hell some hyper-sensitive view on men's mannerisms. I get it. I'm speaking about this in general as a problem I've seen when places are crowded enough as is. I'm sorry if your bar for someone being a "piece of shit" or "garbage" is so low. I was having a civil discussion and lots of …
/r/MensRights10/06/17 11:23 PM
3

Stop being so dramatic. Yes, I'm a man. Also, I'm aware of compression and optimal temperature for testes (which in part is why they are outside our body). That can be either relieved by wearing a kilt, or sitting with some reasonable spread, but let's not pretend we need 2+ feet of leg room, which is what these individuals I've seen many times on subways and busses do. I'm not defending their use of the word manspreading either, nor am I suggesting men should keep their legs tightly closed. The…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 10:47 PM
1

Bigoted? That's a strong word. I'm well aware of the physiological differences between the sexes, and that point doesn't mean that one needs that much leg space. If keeping your berries cooled and less squished is a priority, wear a kilt or sweat pants, just don't take more space than you need on public transport. Also, are you aware that I'm a guy, and I also have a package down there, hence me saying I've hurt myself before, but just by sitting down when they were in an odd position and squeez…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 08:34 PM
-2

I mean, I've seen the exaggerated pictures, but I'm speaking from seeing this happen all the time. I used to take the underground and buses before I moved. I want to clarify that I don't think one should try to squish their legs together, just not so wide that you encroach on your neighbors. I just measured what I think is a reasonable spread sitting in my seat and it seems to be where the edge of your legs are as close as possible to the limit of your own seat. Enough room for your testes (unle…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 05:52 PM
1

Yeah, I get not sitting with your legs tight together. I don't think I ever do that unless it's absolutely necessary for XY reason. I don't know about where you live, but here there's actually signs showing that you should put your bags under the seat, not on them. Again, I don't live in Madrid, so I don't know if they have other signs asking for other simple etiquettes to be respected.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 05:36 PM
1

Again, from reading the comments, I feel like people can't make a difference between a slight spread, and spreading so much that it takes half of the neighboring seats. It's not proper to purposefully take more space than you need, regardless if you're a woman or a man. I'm a guy, and I've even experienced dudes that were 'manspreading' into my personal space. It's kind of manageable if it's only one, but I've had both guy next to me overspread. It's kind of rude and seems to stem from a macho p…
/r/MensRights10/06/17 05:17 PM
-9

I'm real curious, because I've heard this a few times. Does it really hurt your man bits to sit properly? I mean, I've hurt them before just by sitting while they were in an odd position, but never hurt them because I wasn't man-spreading.
/r/MensRights10/06/17 04:58 PM
1

Maybe where you live, but in our country the centrists are the majority. Unless you're talking about the gender ideology spectrum, in which case, I'm sure the non-extremes exists, they are just not as loud and proud as the blabbering idiots.
/r/MensRights08/06/17 03:26 PM
16

https://scontent.fymy1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/18622409_1027133650762354_6409685488747029113_n.jpg?oh=2ca625cae4ad3ae3083b4203f4ea6d00&oe=59A2BED6 How I feel about the extremes of gender rights. We have folks on one extreme warning of the danger of patriarchy, and then on the other end, we have folks blaming the Marxist ideology.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 05:39 PM
2

Doesn't seem to be a connection to men's right. Unless I'm missing something here.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 05:48 AM
5

http://imgur.com/a/V4eV0
/r/MensRights05/05/17 01:13 AM
7

Great movie. I agree that the message wasn't clear enough. The problem here is that too many folks (based on the majority of the comments I read so far) seem to not be able to read quite between the lines. It's the reason why I ended up doing a quick search. The whole notion that men have no business in their uterus is what I was getting from the poster. I guess the message was much too subtle though.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 12:56 AM
3

https://i.imgflip.com/1og8md.jpg
/r/MensRights05/05/17 12:48 AM
3

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/044/247/297.png
/r/MensRights05/05/17 12:44 AM
14

Did a 10 second search and was able to see it's just a quote from Friends when Rachel was pregnant and Ross was trying to tell her about how women usually feel when they get contractions. Sure it's maybe a controversial way to give a message with very little room for clarity if one doesn't know what it's referring to and are reading it as literal as possible. Just imagine a show where a male character is being told by women how other men feel in regards to a man only experience, like vasectomy, …
/r/MensRights04/05/17 11:12 PM
5

I have no clue about your personal experiences, but I can tell you that "right wing Christians" excom people as well. That comes back to my point though that it's somewhat irrelevant if a person is intolerant. It's more important to consider the substance of their intolerance and if it is based on proper reason.
/r/MensRights10/04/17 05:35 AM
1

I find this to be an odd thing, since one of the goals that seem to exist in the "right" is to insure traditions, many which spawn from our religious, intolerant ideas towards outsiders, those of different sexual attraction, and many of the other perceived, imaginary threats of the "good book". Not saying all right folks are religious, but given that a huge portion of its demographic is christian, it has the disadvantage of not being able to be progressive in regards to human rights. I think wha…
/r/MensRights10/04/17 03:46 AM
1

The extra special. Enlighten me more about this.
/r/MensRights05/04/17 04:31 AM
1

I wasn't aware that reading comics was a men interest. Even if 99% of the population that read comics were men, a private company's decision of how they wish they change the stories that belong to them has nothing to do with men's rights per se. If you decide to take offense in bad story telling, that has its own merit, but there is no connection between this and any men's right. Having a fictional story fit your ideals is not a right, which is why I'm criticizing this post as being irrelevant.
/r/MensRights04/04/17 08:40 PM
-1

That is such an odd statement to say. You don't like politically correct stuff, but you're defending comic books. You do understand that most heroes have been depicted as politically correct individuals. The only hero I can think that would not be politically correct is Spawn and maybe another handful, but those are anti-heroes and are the minority. If you can name me one classic super hero that is not politically correct, then I'll take that statement with some weight.
/r/MensRights04/04/17 05:54 PM
2

I feel like this is another irrelevant fact, especially to the men's right movement. Unless you can show the connection to how men's rights are being infringed by a private company losing sales to their own decisions.
/r/MensRights04/04/17 05:43 PM
6

First gold! Wow. Hahaha. Thanks, anon!
/r/MensRights01/04/17 04:44 PM
4

Might be time to start using that /s then, because this was probably told to you before, but sarcasm doesn't do well in writing.
/r/MensRights01/04/17 04:43 PM
16

Everytime someone is a little high and mighty about their reasoning skills, I always like to go back on their comment history and make sure they are. Let's dig some questionable statements and ask for you to present to us your scientific understanding for these ones: "1000000% because of his parents. Fuck. This is the reason why I don't support faggots adopting kids. It's abuse, nothing else!" "I'm a sociopath and an asshole in general []" well this one isn't unsettling. "I'm not proud of my whi…
/r/MensRights01/04/17 04:12 PM
1

"Women make less than men". It's the same type of observation. Presenting an average of gender doesn't mean much for the individual fairness. Interesting observation, but meaningless to men's right.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 04:21 AM
6

Yeah. The damage was him rushing all his stuff out of their house to a new place. The hacking thing is odd. I suspect that's just paranoia.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 11:30 PM
1

Well, that's your own judgement on those things. If you understand that kids stare, then you won't feel so creeped out. Staring is behaviour that kids might not know is rude, and it's not like every culture has etiquette about staring either. Feeling creeped out from people staring does have a biological origin.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 02:11 AM
1

I get that, but there's ways of looking at someone and not stare them down. I think that's where we're both splitting on. Obviously prettier people get by with more staring (and other things), but that's not what is being argued.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 01:56 AM
1

Naw, staring is just creepy behaviour. I was adding some of those examples as a failed joke. Just don't do it, regardless if you're a lady or a dude, or a gorilla.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 01:33 AM
3

I'm fairly certain that also applies to the ladies -- I'm sure at a different level, but still. How would you feel if some "ugly" gal is staring at you. I mean, I'd be flattered, but it would turn creepy fast if it's just staring. What does she want? Do I have something stuck on my face? Does she want my kidneys?
/r/MensRights22/03/17 09:19 PM
1

You know you're a little too straight when you only see women dressing like whores and don't perceive the dude with a rolled up dress shirt, and a clean pair of tight jeans. Everything you said there can apply to guys. It's not just the ladies who like some attention all while looking crisp.
/r/MensRights22/03/17 09:13 PM
2

FTFY: "Another article trying to explain how people should operate if they don't want to be perceived with negative outlook from their peers." And with that fix, it's not a problem anymore. You can delete your submission now. This is just a normal tip for those that have less understanding of body language. Even in a lot of other animals, staring is a sign of dominance and challenge. For us humans, it's just rude, but do it to the wrong person, and those instincts might kick in.
/r/MensRights22/03/17 09:08 PM
1

Yeah. I agree that she jumped the gun on the insinuation, even if it did mean cock. He never said it, and it seemed light hearted.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 07:13 PM
0

I don't get how you can say it doesn't matter either way when both answers to the question implies that you're admitting that it's taunting, and you just told someone else to grow up because he called it taunting. Is it taunting or not? That's all that's being discussed. Regardless, I was only correcting your statement, and then agreeing that it wouldn't matter anyway if he was taunting the situation as he was being harassed and it pulled that reaction out of her making her look like the unreaso…
/r/MensRights21/03/17 06:03 PM
2

Not defending her at all. I'm actually curious about the humongus thing. I've never heard of the fat version of it. I've always just seen it use to mean "hugh mongus" [cock]. Pardon my ignorance. Been out of high school for 10+ years.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 05:46 PM
0

I have a feeling that you are thinking of more extreme levels of taunting. You can still taunt someone very lightly to the point of becoming cheeky for you, but really insulting to someone else. Definition: "provoke or challenge (someone) with insulting remarks." Since insulting can really be suggestive based on your own culture or whatever, it would still potentially fall within the requirement of the definition of taunting. Now the important question is: Does that matter if he was taunting? If…
/r/MensRights21/03/17 05:40 PM
1

Yeah. Here's another post without an actual opinion on it, potentially letting the less informed come to faulty conclusions. Hopefully it wasn't the intent of OP's submission, but I just don't see the relevance to men's right at all.
/r/MensRights19/03/17 06:09 PM
2

I just had an argument on here with a guy who claimed to be in the top 1 percentile (which would allow him to join mensa) and he was far from the brightest guy I've come across. I myself have been tested by a psych at that level, but believe me, there are "idiots" up there, even though they can do well on a standardized test. IQ is to be taken with a grain of salt. It's great to get somewhat of an idea of someone's cerebral potential, but some of those people can still fall for delusions like re…
/r/MensRights19/03/17 05:56 PM
7

You should look at his youtube. He's subbed to Alex Jones. A good portion of his liked videos look like a lot of "alt-right" opinions.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 12:20 AM
5

Anyone here is free to look up the user. Apparently on youtube he's subbed to 13 channels, one being Alex Jones. I know it's a bit of an ad hominem, but it may give insight into the nutty opinions. The only thing he seems to like on youtube is opinion pieces. Absolutely nothing that would describe him as a scholar. An intellectual would easily understand that MRM is not about the left or the right, but about the currect issues we are going through, be it traditions that have existed forever, or …
/r/MensRights14/03/17 12:18 AM
2

Wait, did I say republicans? I said conservatives. I wasn't under the impression that they were the exact same thing. I'm Canadian, so I don't know your politics inside and out, but in the context of TODAY's politics wouldn't the republicans be what we consider to be "conservative", not that my statement eluded to this though, which is why I said conservative and not XY party. If you think science is a joke, then I'd doubt you'd be able to find an adequate alternative other than that process. So…
/r/MensRights13/03/17 11:18 PM
7

You know what the conservatives of 60+ years ago would have probably said about this movement, or your support of this type of discussion? "A pansy little women circle". It's hilarious that you're demonizing -- and it's truly demonizing as you keep using the emotionally heavy word "evil" -- the socialists and leftists, when this whole thing we're doing here by exchanging opinions, facts, and feelings would have potentially been called "left" ideas. Don't take my criticism of the "conservative" o…
/r/MensRights13/03/17 05:50 PM
5

Way to ride off a genius to try an make a point. A bad one at that. Try again.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 05:04 PM
8

Wow. At first I wasn't convinced, then you said that, and now, I can't believe I never looked at it that way. Also, your comment history is quite a circus. I'm going to need to save it and read it when I feel like I might be a little crazy.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 06:27 AM
2

Glad you said that. I didn't want to make too great of an assumption about the intention of the post, but you said what I thought the post was insinuating. You know, using the average of something about your gender is pretty much what we see when feminists do when they complain about the wage gap. The average of a gender should mean fuck all about how individuals are treated, which should be with equal treatment. You may as well point to the fact that "[x race] use retirement money [y times] les…
/r/MensRights05/03/17 07:09 AM
3

Interesting fact, but is that all? I feel like there should be a followup. Do you think anything of this, or you just wanted to post this fact?
/r/MensRights05/03/17 06:02 AM
2

So, are you admitting that what you're saying isn't rational/logical, but rather emotional? If so, I can respect that much more than you claiming that what you think is rational. I was also tested by a psych, and came in at 99.5 percentile, but you and I know that IQ means very little, and doesn't determine if you understand all the fallacies that exists, or understand extremely complex material that is both technical and creative. IQ is great, but I still come across "intelligent" folks that ar…
/r/MensRights25/02/17 03:29 AM
1

I'm sorry, but I don't think you should talking about how "bad women are at science" when you're terrible in logic. Please, just go take some lessons on formal logic. Your line of thinking is filled with faults and will only lead you to hurting yourself and others that don't deserve it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
/r/MensRights25/02/17 01:44 AM
1

my only goal really is to make women and feminists feel bad. You really need to go talk to a psychotherapist if that statement is honest. Taking it out on women because your assailants were women is highly misguided, and if a woman would say that she wanted to make men feel bad because she was sexually abused by men, we would be denouncing that as sexist, and it's no different for you. And thank you for the insight. I appreciated this message a lot more than the few others that made assumptions …
/r/MensRights25/02/17 12:41 AM
1

Ok. I'm going to make this simple for you, because you seem to be all over the place. We are in the subreddit called men's right, which means I'm very likely to be subbed to this subreddit, and by extention, very likely to be supportive of men's right, which in turn, probably means that I understand how terms like mansplaining, manspreading, manwhateverthefuckyouwanttoinsertinhere, and all the other misandry bullshit we have thrown at us are used against us. I'm going to correct your point befor…
/r/MensRights24/02/17 10:31 PM
1

Yeah. I think there is just a lot of residual bitter feelings from interactions with feminists, and even though we should know better to not take individual's opinion as the representation the whole movement, we naturally associate feminists with people that are antagonizing our gender through telling us things like what you said earlier -- "more valid points". My whole life I guess you could have said I was as feminist (100% support for the hardship of women) then realized that it seemed a litt…
/r/MensRights24/02/17 10:16 PM
0

You make very little sense. Another strawman argument, and this one is even worst. You're not even answering the question I asked you, so I'm going to just assume you're a troll. Try again later.
/r/MensRights24/02/17 09:22 PM
1

I don't know about "more valid points". I think some folks would say that this isn't a race or war over who has more valid points. That may fall into the category of "Fallacy of relative privation". The reason why the focus is on guys is the same as why the feminist subs are more about women. We can only really talk about our own experiences as an individual within our gender. This sub is reactive to the feminist movement since there was nothing to balance out the discussion on some of the thing…
/r/MensRights24/02/17 08:53 PM
0

Those strawman statements. Not sure who is saying those things, but I agree that they aren't batshit crazy, and shouldn't be downvoted. Are you just making a general statement to people or are you saying this to me, because it would be difficult to womansplain something when I'm a guy. Not to mention, not cut, and I'm strongly opposed to circumcision. I guess it wouldn't matter if I was if you're simply making those statement to an imaginary feminist, and not me.
/r/MensRights24/02/17 08:22 PM
2

Going to be honest. I'm a little lost why the discussion about the POTUS came in. I meant party as in the general definition of party, not federal parties. I've seen plenty of batshit crazy comments in this subreddit get way more positives than negative feedback, but it's not a very common thing, thankfully.
/r/MensRights24/02/17 06:52 PM
1

I think you're mixing up intention and execution. Both parties claim to be for equal rights. Some MRM are women haters and some feminists are men haters though. You're acting as if our own community doesn't have bat-shit crazy people too that are basically "menazis" in their own way.
/r/MensRights24/02/17 05:53 PM
1

To be fair, being fat as a dude is a little more accepted in general. Not saying guys don't get the butt of the joke --almost all my best friends have been bigger dudes -- but there is a certain manliness that comes from being bigger. The obvious dominance of being out-massed. That being said, we should be tolerant of weight issues, but not supporting of the lifestyle.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 01:04 AM
1

I should have said 'one' instead of 'you'. It was a general statement about the word.
/r/MensRights20/02/17 07:04 PM
18

I mean, liberals and conservatives can be against or for the same thing. When you start to oversimplify politics, that's when you start thinking in "lefts" or "rights".
/r/MensRights20/02/17 05:52 PM
13

Not entirely sure this is worth being posted yet. It doesn't speak of men's issues. It's simply critical of an individual who abused another for disagreeing with them. IF this had been discarded by the system as not abuse or given judgement to be less harsh than what a men would have gone through, it would have been relevant to the sub.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:44 AM
2

You got downvoted for being mature about it. I'm getting downvoted too, for replying to you. The dude under me is going to be downvoted too.
/r/MensRights29/01/17 07:02 AM
2

I recommend a few subreddits if you need some laughter. /r/ContagiousLaughter/ /r/lolwat/ /r/WTF/ <Can be NSFW
/r/MensRights24/01/17 06:22 AM
1

Sure, or kill it if they wish. I don't think anyone is arguing that if you bring a life into the world that you should be responsible for it.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 08:37 AM
1

The line isn't clear, yes. Earlier, the better. I personally consider life worth saving that has experienced the outside world, but that's my personal opinion. What's really terrifying about death to most of us is the knowledge of our own mortality, and fetuses don't think of these things as far as we're concerned.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 08:35 AM
1

Ah, if so, then yes, you have some responsibility, but I think in the context of their slogan they usually mean freedom of their body, which includes terminating the birth. There's very little wrong with terminating a birth before it happens. It's likely that the only folks to be bothered by this are people that have a religious belief, and I'll never be able to convince those, so I understand why it would bother some. Again, abortion has been legal in my country since the 70s, so I may just hav…
/r/MensRights22/01/17 07:37 AM
9

I'm lost here. How is this a men's right thing? Where are the women figure to compare this. If all the people involved are men, then this isn't a men's issue, but a "race issue".
/r/MensRights22/01/17 07:28 AM
2

You'll have to elaborate on what you mean by responsibility. Responsibility to what? Not disagreeing with you, but just confused by the statement.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 07:06 AM
1

Please tell me more about your knowledge about what is crazy. I've been passionate about psychology my whole life, so I feel like I've missed out on some basics here. The floor is yours. As a sidenote, I asked if we can avoid using politically weighted words that are arguably unnecessary to the conversation. I didn't demand that we not use a word. You have a weird view on what policing is.
/r/MensRights21/01/17 08:08 AM
2

I'm "central-left", and I'll gladly say that there are crazies on the left and on the right. No offense intended either. The point is that left and right is a vague term that oversimplifies the complexities of politics. Some of my views would be considered left, and others right. So long as you agree with what is rational.
/r/MensRights20/01/17 11:39 PM
2

I'm not saying it's not "plagued with SJW/fenimist", although I agree to a certain level about that. When I say political spectrum, I mean that it's not black and white. It's very complex and boiling down people to "left" or "right" seems to polarize something that has many layers. I'm central-left, and even calling myself that puts me in a basket with half of the population even if some of my ideas are left and others would be considered right. I guess you could say I'm simply annoyed with the …
/r/MensRights20/01/17 11:07 PM
3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation But even if it was popular only to the "left" folks, it's no different than to call some racist guy a "righty". Yes, it may be true, but it's fallacious logic.
/r/MensRights20/01/17 10:19 PM
12

Can we avoid using "leftist" or "rightist". It creates a divide where it's not necessary on the subject of gender equality, which affects folks of the whole "political spectrum". Thanks, mate.
/r/MensRights20/01/17 08:34 PM
2

It shouldn't be, but until you offer a better solution that will help right now, I think it's not a terrible compromise.
/r/MensRights17/01/17 07:51 AM
4

If it gives a disadvantage to men, then it's unfair, but it seems like a very simple and quick method to deal with groping in countries like that. I see a few comments in here that are a bit dramatic.
/r/MensRights17/01/17 03:25 AM
3

6 year club, and 260 karma comments. His top comments have 0 karma. Yeah, what a wild card.
/r/MensRights15/01/17 01:17 AM
1

Your rhetoric sounds a lot like the type of "patriarchy" stuff we hear from feminists. You can keep your non-scientific ideas to yourself.
/r/MensRights15/01/17 12:45 AM
4

I think it was posted in part to get your reaction, and it seemed to work. It's about being a caring father and doing things you might not feel extremely comfortable to make your daughter happy. Going the extra mile, and to show by example, is manlier than to be scared of looking ridiculous. No one is saying the dude in work clothes isn't as manly, but this shows someone going the extra mile to make their daughter smile.
/r/MensRights14/01/17 09:02 PM
1

The way some Americans see the left and right spectrum is so odd. To me, this thread's title sounds as crazy as the feminists calling out patriarchy as a capitalist movement.
/r/MensRights08/01/17 07:55 AM
3

Well, some people have bitch-resting faces, like me, so that's not the best of assessment.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 04:05 AM
0

This is about the only reasonable comment in the whole thread. Some of our community is pretty backwards at times, but eh, at least we're not censoring folks.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 03:28 AM
7

I feel like you haven't answered the question. What are we talking about here by grooming? Is she pushing her son to be a full time girl, or is this just a little project that they did for fun. You may have your own beliefs about life, but science tells us there's nothing wrong with what is going on here if it's the latter. However, if she's trying to force her boy to be a girl as in the sense of wanting a trans-daughter, that's disputably unethical.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 12:37 AM
-2

Forgot my /s. My bad.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 12:20 AM
-9

You're obviously permanently damaged and won't be able to function as a human being. I'm sorry to tell you your whole life is a lie. You think you're fine, but one day.... BOOM! tits. /s
/r/MensRights04/01/17 12:10 AM
-2

You haven't elaborated anything else other than more pictures of some kid who has makeup on.
/r/MensRights04/01/17 12:09 AM
-22

Permanent damage? That hyperbole. And no, it won't do permanent damage. Stop being so dramatic. Also, I like how no one notices that this is just MORE exposure of the "poor kid" to the public, at least blackout his eyes or something to preserve his identity. [Edit: How about you guys man the fuck up and reply to give me more "insight" on this thing I apparently don't understand, instead of downvoting a statement that is fairly reasonable (other than calling some folks out on being dramatic, for …
/r/MensRights03/01/17 11:37 PM
1

This is ridiculous. I really expected something saucy. That tweet was fine, even for today's extreme sensibility. Carrie would have probably appreciated the tweet too, to put insult to injury.
/r/MensRights29/12/16 05:21 PM
0

"If men don't want kids that much, they should stop gettin' their dick caught in huge vaginas." Also, abstinence is antiquated, not to mention "unnatural".
/r/MensRights26/12/16 07:11 PM
1

Yeah. That's fucked too. Doesn't make the previous solution right though.
/r/MensRights24/12/16 09:37 PM
1

This is somewhat of a natural feeling for them (or anyone of any gender to a certain degree) to be sexually turned off with someone if they disagree with their politics, religion, or anything else that truly matters to them. No idea how you got weapon from that. But even if I did agree that it's a "weapon", if they aren't intentionally trying to hurt you, it's not the same at all. You might as well say that by being sexy, women "manipulate and dominate" men into doing stupid shit.
/r/MensRights24/12/16 09:31 PM
0

A weapon? I guess that's pretty subjective, but if sex is that important to you and your SO is keeping it away from you understanding how important it is to you, then it becomes your decision if you feel that is deal breaker with you. Explain to her how important this is to you and try to give a parallel she would understand. But this is not even the same situation in this article and the usual spiteful sex withholding which I agree is a shitty thing for women to do with intent to hurt. This art…
/r/MensRights24/12/16 08:49 PM
4

Or you could have a spine and break the relationship off if you can't handle having to spank the monkey for a few weeks.
/r/MensRights24/12/16 06:49 PM
1

Yeah. I was going to post this. To think that this is a mensissue is to make perhaps a few assumption about the situation. I'm going to guess this has to do with the fact that some men might see sex withholding as something wrong women do to men -- You have hands and all the porn in the world at your disposal. This is somewhat of a natural feeling for them (or anyone of any gender to a certain degree) to be sexually turned off with someone if they disagree with their politics, religion, or anyth…
/r/MensRights24/12/16 06:47 PM
1

As a Frenchie that has to deal with all the gendered words in my native language, I could do with having a neutral. It's just the learning curve that I would find a pain in the ass. But like a lot of changes that occur in languages, it has to be a fairly natural transition or you'll have the type of blowback you see in these types of forums. I love IPA, languages, and all. I think identifying someone as a human before what gender they are is more important. What great importance is it for me to …
/r/MensRights13/12/16 05:07 PM
1

A kiss! I NEVER!
/r/MensRights03/12/16 01:39 AM
9

As terrible of an event this is, if true, I couldn't help but laugh at the weird plot of a father arguing with his 20 year old son and telling him that NOW is the time to get his dick cut.
/r/MensRights22/11/16 10:13 PM
1

I never stated that X is a true X. I stated that there are different types of X and that some are extreme and others are more "reasonable". And as for MRA not being socially progressive, that's up for debate. Are we not fighting the norm that we're seeing in our society? I know that SJW has a bad connotation, but what I said was meant to be a bit of a joke with some form of truth to it.
/r/MensRights15/11/16 05:30 AM
1

Making a strawman. Yes, the "femenazis" are asking for special treatment, but the feminists are asking for equal treatment. Let's not forget that they had an equally noble intention when the movement started, but without centralization, it became more and more ridiculous and today's wave is the most ridiculous. We started a little late on the movement, but I can see menazis in our own movement already. People that are a little extreme. But regardless if people are extreme or not, a social moveme…
/r/MensRights14/11/16 05:14 PM
4

Hate to break it to you, but we're SJWs too.
/r/MensRights14/11/16 04:26 AM
1

Well, we're unfortunately all at that disadvantage that people will be judged based on all that has been shown publicly about you and personal anecdotes of close ones, and we make decisions based on those things.
/r/MensRights07/11/16 06:08 AM
1

Judgements can stilll be taken on observations. I never stated that my judgement was based on pure facts. Sounds kind of weird that you'd judge someone's behaviour as facts. The mind is a complicated thing to assess and we trust a lot of subtle things when we judge people, which aren't "facts" in themselves.
/r/MensRights07/11/16 05:17 AM
1

No idea what the DNC or media says. I take the statements on their own and every other acts and behaviour he has shown so far. Same is applied to Clinton who seems to have done very questionable things. Keep in mind that not everyone that is in this subreddit live in the states. Some of us are neighbors that are very interested in US politics and world events in general.
/r/MensRights06/11/16 05:10 PM
1

My personal judgement
/r/MensRights06/11/16 05:07 PM
1

Yeah. The irrationals of both parties like to ignore what wrongdoing or questionable things their party has done. That's just the bias you see when people take party over country.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 09:56 PM
10

That sounds like you're saying they're mutually exclusive. However, you could be sexually assaulted AND wait also until there is greater motivation to speak up about it. Sure, the motivation may not be the most ethical. You just said someone IS lying if they wait. Occam's razor would say that most times it would be a lie, but occam's isn't an absolute. There can be a time both events happen.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 09:19 PM
-1

Yeah. He could be bullshitting about it for all we know. My judgement on the guy's past (and present) is my own opinion and is not absolute truth. I wouldn't be surprised if he did do questionable things to some women based on his personality and history.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 09:15 PM
10

In an ideal world, sexual assault would be reported by the victim as soon as it happened. Actually, it wouldn't be perpetrated in the first place. Unfortunately, people will do things that will be questionable. But that aside. Are you really complaining about a 13 year old kid for not speaking up about such a possibly traumatizing event? That's a little fucked, whether the event is true or false.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 08:55 PM
0

Oh, that's another thing, which is in the grey area. I'm more bothered by kissing on the lips and the occasional groping of women.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 08:43 PM
0

Being very forward with people sexually is a form of assault. Perhaps I should have said molestation instead. I know how rape/sexual assault has lost a lot of meaning by how varying the degree of assault can be and how the word is overused by "feminazis", but in the legal sense, I'm fairly sure what happened to all those accounts against him would fall within the definition of a sexual assault.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 08:33 PM
2

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=trump+locker+room
/r/MensRights05/11/16 08:23 PM
-5

Let's not stretch it too far, he doesn't describe sexual assault, nor does he speak of consent. His statements were fairly vague. Unfortunately, you have to read as much as you can between the lines and gather more info in the meanwhile. My personal judgement is that this man is very likely to be a sociopath that has done those things. HOWEVER, that still means that if any female made a false legal claim against him, they should be treated by the fullest extent of the law. A false claim is a fal…
/r/MensRights05/11/16 08:19 PM
4

Yeah, it's not proper evidence, but it's as close as you'll get to having a view inside the private mind of an "alleged" molester. My judgement is that he has, but the law is really the only thing that can formalize the "truth". I've played plenty of sports, and had my fair share of locker room conversation about sex, but let's not pretend that talk is normal. This is so weird to see people protecting him in here -- I understand he's a political candidate and that may weight into some sensitivit…
/r/MensRights05/11/16 08:09 PM
1

Yeah. I'm just surprised that someone hadn't heard the audio that was recorded of him talking about how he treats people he's sexually attracted to. I mean, there's even a 'meme' about it with the whole "grab her by the pussy". Which is why I said I'm surprised you hadn't heard about it. It has been all over the media for the past week. If you hadn't heard of this, sorry for my reaction. I'm genuinely surprised.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 07:59 PM
5

Sorry for making you feel like that. It's a serious question though, since I'm not following your question. Are you questioning the source of the audio, as in who recorded it, or who made it public, or if the voices are real? I'm not following what you mean by source.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 07:46 PM
-1

You'll have to be more specific when you say source.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 07:39 PM
-7

I'm surprised you haven't heard the audio recordings that have been talked about for a good week now.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 07:24 PM
-13

Considering he stated himself that he sexually assaults (or molest, or grope, or however you want to call it) women because of his position, I find it odd that we'd use this guy as an example of false claims. Do you guys need a video of him abusing people to believe his claims even more? Disgusting. To be clear, false rape claims are disgusting as well, but terrible person to make a point about this. [Edit: Remember, his words, not mine. Don't get bitter because I'm repeating them.]
/r/MensRights05/11/16 06:00 PM
2

I wouldn't say it's the worst thing that it ever happened. It started as an honorable movement and degenerated with each generation.
/r/MensRights31/07/16 05:29 PM
1

Yeah, but regardless, even if it's cut, they still have their labia majora over it (in a lot of cases) so it's not getting too much friction, unlike a foreskin. Not saying it should be cut, but they have more layers than we do, so it's still not as bad as getting your foreskin cut.
/r/MensRights31/07/16 01:16 PM
1

You mean cliteral hood. The hood is essentially the same thing as our foreskin. It protects the very sensitive area.
/r/MensRights31/07/16 01:17 AM
12

The Scotsman in me is getting triggered. Hahaha. Just kidding, but really, part of "being a man" is not giving a fuck what petty folks think and to follow your own path. But this does bring a good point about some of the sexist mentality we push on our men that some of today's women would not understand as much like the older generations would have gone through -- women being expected not to wear pants. And now, look at all the creative types of pants that exist for women that are both utilitari…
/r/MensRights30/06/16 05:43 PM
10

How long will it take before we see someone involved in this decision get caught for paying a prostitute! Place your bets, gents!
/r/MensRights06/04/16 10:18 PM
1

You're either an idiot or a troll. I actually study AI, biochem, and many other fields that relate to this and I think you fail to see how difficult it would be to transition into a world where all jobs would be occupied by robots, not that the present world reflects your ideal structure -- not that it all ties back down directly to the CURRENT treatment of men under both system. The conversation ends here.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 08:13 PM
1

Of course, but we're no where near a world where robots can take over every task we need to get done. No reason to speak of a world where robots do everything when we're not even there yet. In the meanwhile, we still have to use humans (or men) to do all those tasks. What is your solution right now while we're waiting to get to that type of society? And how is one of the system better than the other when men still suffer under both?
/r/MensRights29/03/16 08:00 PM
1

And where do robots come into this since current socialism and capitalism don't speak of robots. In the current socialist countries, we still have humans (or men) doing tasks that are dangerous. You have to admit you're not talking about present socialism, but a new ideal built on socialism that could exist once we've become totally automated society with robots repairing themselves and fulfilling all the AI tasks. If you fail to answer that, I'll see this conversation as not gaining grounds and…
/r/MensRights29/03/16 07:45 PM
1

Yes, and how are robots related to socialism? I asked you to show me your school of thought. If its your own, then that's all good, but when people are discussing socialism, they don't mean to include robots doing everyone's work by default, not to mention that in the transition to a society like that, the engineers and repairman would be considered the top jobs, and likely affected by danger as well. The type of workless society you're talking about won't happen for a good while, so let's talk …
/r/MensRights29/03/16 04:58 PM
1

Yes. I agree with you that people would benefit from having robots work for us. I just don't get the connection to socialism when it's not something that is even discussed in general socialism. What you're talking about is apart from socialism. You could have robots doing everything under a capitalist structure where a few people own all the robots and means to make them and don't need workers. That would be a little chaotic, but it's to show that they aren't mutually exclusive as instances. Ple…
/r/MensRights29/03/16 05:32 AM
1

And again, I ask you how that statement is relevant considering that under both systems, men struggle equally. The post is "Socialism versus Capitalism" and not "The various economic models that may affect men's rights", which would been more of a valid discussions than comparing 2 systems that have no say about gender roles. I think you're confusing sociology and economic systems.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 05:17 AM
2

Good for you. I spent more time than I should have going in circles and talking about nothing that even related to genders with him. I suspect he might be a troll.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 09:29 PM
1

I'm sorry if I ignored your inital rant since it didn't look relevant to the discussion about gender issue, but rather about economic systems. If you want to discuss things about how our gender is affected by this and not the other gender, then feel free to tie them together through a clear statement so we can discuss it. Sexism exists under both end of the spectrum, so I fail to see how favoring one or the other changes the values of the cultures they are used by.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 09:01 PM
1

No. You said they're forced. As a man, I've never been forced to do dangerous work. I've chosen to do "dangerous" work before because I actually enjoyed it, and it was an alright pay, but I don't see this reality you speak of.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 07:58 PM
1

Yeah. That is a worker's issue, not a gender issue at that point, which makes it off subject -- and this coming from a socialist person like myself. That's probably why the whole socialism v capitalism isn't directly a subject for mensright.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 07:18 PM
1

I don't need you to, because you never made any mention of a specific gender in your statement. It won't speak for gender hardship.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 06:56 PM
3

Let me rephrase that since the subject at hand was "dangerous" jobs. As a man, I'm not forced into any dangerous job. The only thing I can think about is if you live in a country that has a draft in which case, I am forced as a gender to take on a more dangerous task.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 06:39 PM
2

As a man, I'm not forced into any job, and neither are women. We might have assets that encourages us to take certain jobs, but forced is a bit of a stretch.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 05:09 PM
1

In the comment sections, sure. I thought when OP said post he meant the posts, and not the comments. I still think debating left vs right is a tired subject that doesn't give us much progress on the actual issues we face.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 05:00 PM
3

Sounds like you're oversimplifying it.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 04:48 PM
-2

Woah. What is this? Suppression of speech? We can talk about anything in this sub. What are you, a SJW? If you haven't caught on yet, I'm joking. The point of the post is to state that if the subject isn't directly involving mensright, then it doesn't belong here, as the subject of mensright is about clear and distinctive things that affect us, and not some complex theory that imitates the type of absurd feminist stuff we hear such as the patriarchy. There is sexism under both system, so it's ob…
/r/MensRights28/03/16 06:50 AM
-4

You're right. We should post things about aquatic wildlife in here, because this isn't a "safe space".
/r/MensRights28/03/16 05:21 AM
6

Well, if you think that everyone in here is from the same country, I might agree, but we all come from different countries.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 05:18 AM
4

Serious. To name the most known anime series that also ran in america: Sailor Moon. It's 5+ chicks who kick ass.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 08:53 PM
2

Not if it gets killed before it becomes one. Do you think that mass of cell has a soul or something? If not, then why are you bothered that it could be a human in time?
/r/MensRights07/03/16 11:12 PM
2

You put a small mass of cell in the same basket as a complex life form that can ponder its own mortality? Putting aside later abortions, it's just not the same thing. I meant religion in the broad sense; not organized religion.
/r/MensRights07/03/16 11:01 PM
0

That all depends on if you're affected by a religious ideology. Each to their opinions though.
/r/MensRights07/03/16 04:28 PM
8

I see that I'm not the only one that has issues with English words. Murder is when you unlawfully kill someone.
/r/MensRights07/03/16 08:25 AM
66

In one case, there is no child. In the other, there is one, but with a missing parent. I'm all for analogies, but this one doesn't seem like a great one, or a clear one. Is it trying to say that men should also get the say if he wants the woman to get an abortion? If so, I agree with this. Pardon me, English isn't my first language, so maybe that's why it doesn't sound clear to me.
/r/MensRights07/03/16 06:33 AM
1

T'es donc bin chialeux toi. Just kidding, but serious, I guess I still see it as a sort of win for the wrong reason. Anything that brings this whole subject to light is good for the movement in the long run, no?
/r/MensRights02/03/16 06:44 PM
2

I actually thought it meant that men were more accepting of sexual fluids than females. I guess we're both retarded.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 03:26 AM
2

It's fine. I didn't watch the video either. Haha.
/r/MensRights06/01/16 11:55 PM
1

Someone didn't watch the video.
/r/MensRights06/01/16 06:48 PM
1

Wait. Where is the freak out? And how is this related to mensright?
/r/MensRights02/01/16 08:49 PM
2

Well, I mean society in a very general sense. The market is taking advantage of the idea to sell more, but I doubt they're the only cog in the wheel that pushes it.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 04:19 PM
3

Well, aren't all toys unisex already? They're only "gender specific" because the society that comes with them gives them that purpose. I get the reasoning behind it, but putting gender to items is a little odd to me in the first place, and I'm French. Mostly every noun has a "gender" in our language.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 05:49 AM
0

I agree about both assumptions, which is why I'm using my own reasoning on the case. It either has to be that he has raped and it's obviously wrong, or a group of people decided to destroy his life, for unknown reasons. I tend to have a lot of skeptism when it comes to conspiracy, especially when the motives aren't made at all clear, which leaves me to feel like there's more chances he did do something wrong than not, but I'm leaving it as an opinion. I'm not on jury where I have to judge on evi…
/r/MensRights15/12/15 10:35 PM
2

Which is why I said conspiracy, because we're not talking about nobodies back in the time. We're talking about famous actors who are "opening up" about their "emberrasing moments". If people suspect a deceitful motive behind their stories, then it can be stated, but it would seem to hurt their own image more than anything if it was all a sham. Just trying to understand why they would lie about something like that when their reputation is on the line. I don't have all the facts and most people do…
/r/MensRights15/12/15 09:35 PM
-1

Well, if they're false drug reports, then it's correct to flag it as so, but the whole story stinks of a sociopathic man who fooled a whole lot of people about his actions. Either he did rape all those people or at least some of them and deserves the shit he's being pinned for, or there's a conspiracy with a large group of people (mostly celebrities) that want to destroy his life for whatever reason that the public wouldn't know and on top of that accusing someone that people obviously like whic…
/r/MensRights15/12/15 08:18 PM
-1

All for denouncing false rape reports, but damn, isn't it weird that almost every women that dealt with the guy are coming out of the woodwork to speak of their experience about it. Sounds like some people don't like to think of the soft jolly dude as a rapist, but you should consider that it could be very well true. We're talking about drugging, not just someone who regretted sex after doing it. Come on. This subreddit is better than this. I hope he didn't rape them, but it's looking more and m…
/r/MensRights15/12/15 07:13 PM
1

I wouldn't be surprised, but what I'm saying is that I'm sure there's still as many or more women that attend yoga classes in general. Nothing wrong with that, it's just a little contradicting to something that is sexist against men. Not like they cancelled the classes because the women were finding the presence of men there to be making them uncomfortable. It's irrelevent to men's issues as it affects both genders involved.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 06:20 PM
1

I'm trying to learn something, but all you've given me so far is a loose connection. You can continue and give more evidence. I'm all ears.
/r/MensRights27/11/15 03:31 AM
2

Yes. I hate abuse of humans. And didn't mean to assume you were a troll, but I thought the question weird given the subreddit we're in. I'm a humanist. Here only because I didn't grow up in the world that modern feminists claim to be. I grew up seeing both genders having difficulties with some form of injustice and men's voice isn't as strong as it has been since the focus has been on women for a full generation of folks. I have my own difficulties as others may have had in this subreddit which …
/r/MensRights26/11/15 09:31 PM
1

You're missing the point. I never laid claims to my knowledge about some particular school of thought. I like science, and I don't care for some antiquated point of view of society. I'm focused on the now. Regardless, the article wasn't about gender. End of story. Everyone was affected by this. Not sure why you're bringing in some ideology that loosely relates to it. There are subreddit made to post news about stupid shit SJWs do, this isn't it.
/r/MensRights26/11/15 09:19 PM
1

Yeah, not going further with this conversation. Pretty sure you're just trolling at this point.
/r/MensRights26/11/15 07:14 PM
1

I love psychology and sociology amongst a lot of other such fields, but I have no time to learn all the stupid "theories" out there like the tons of religions that exists and all the "theories" that don't have scientific weight. I read a bit of it when I was bored and I disagree, so I'll focus my attention on other things that have a bit more standing. Regardless of what I believe or follow, it doesn't change the fact that this article is in regards to folks putting a halt on an activity because…
/r/MensRights26/11/15 07:10 PM
1

Everyone in here that is upvoting this in this subreddit as a MRA should be ashamed. To think that some of you actually think that because a SJW was involved that it was an act against men. WOMEN spend the most time in yoga classes, at least by stereotypes. Hell, I think the reason for cancelling it is ridiculous, BUT IT'S NOT SEXISM IT'S "cultural sensitivity" which I also think is a crap excuse. Stop equating MRA with any SJW-hating. I don't come here to read about general idiots (there are su…
/r/MensRights26/11/15 06:57 PM
1

Yeah, and I don't believe in the patriarchy theory, so I'm not going to waste my time focusing on something that I think is a moot subject.
/r/MensRights26/11/15 06:44 PM
1

I have no idea where you get that from, but you're stretching really far for your conclusion.
/r/MensRights26/11/15 06:40 PM
1

You sound like some of those feminists talking about the patriarchy. And no, sexism is the fundamental enemy of mens rights. Those 2 things aren't exactly the same.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 06:49 PM
-2

You've said crybully already, and I'm aware of what it means. It still doesn't connect this to mensrights. All you gave me was your speculation at best. And think about it. Who do you think used yoga classes the most?
/r/MensRights25/11/15 08:57 AM
-1

Unless you can actually connect this to some form of sexist motive, then all you have is this mental gymnastic. It has no place in here unless someone can justify it with clarity.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 06:02 AM
4

As much as I like to show how dumb some JSW are, I don't get how this relates to mensrights.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 01:09 AM
1

Yeah, and so does Germany. I sure hope you don't give a fuck about which position you're in when you're releaving yourself.
/r/MensRights04/11/15 11:58 PM
1

Sounds pretty illogical considering Canada and other developped countries aren't experencing this.
/r/MensRights04/11/15 09:15 PM
9

Agreed. Not like she's going to turn the show into a man bashing circus. I actually enjoy her when she shows up on QI. We'll see how it turns out, but I'll miss Stephen.
/r/MensRights15/10/15 03:44 AM
5

Bad taste.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 07:29 PM
9

I'm also outraged that this app even has to exist.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 10:51 PM
-1

Yeah. Maybe that should be mentioned in the title.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 09:43 PM
1

Saying having testicles would have been a little more accurate.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 08:11 AM
1

Worth a watch for sure, and the interviewer seemed pretty neutral.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 11:00 PM
5

Serious. She's disgusting.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 07:22 PM
2

That, or at least gay men aren't discouraged to show their happiness.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 07:29 PM
2

It's neither. There is no such thing as 'superior or inferior because it's more recent' in genetics. Mutations can be both beneficial or harmful.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 06:17 PM
0

Don't need to get sour because your video wasn't received with positive remarks. Swallow your pride and move on.
/r/MensRights04/05/15 09:17 PM
1

I'd like to know who this guy is quoting. I think most people understand that we're a product of both our genetics and our environment. Perhaps the gender traits the imaginary quote were towards were in regards to things we assign to genders like colors (blue, pink), and clothing (suits, dresses), etc. I think it has to do with how limiting the word gender is. If you think gender should only be used in the strictest of sense, what would you call how we encourage people of certain gender to behav…
/r/MensRights03/05/15 09:27 PM
3

It is an indisputable fact that colors that we assign to genders are social constructs. Use logic, not insults if you want to convey a message.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 08:54 PM
2

Good thing this is the top post (the only post). I completely agree that our default sex has great influence on certain traits we get, but gender identification or perception for most part IS a social construct. I think the guy was just fighting a straw-man.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 08:06 PM
1

Ah. I stand corrected.
/r/MensRights02/05/15 11:44 PM
1

If they are, then yes, it's wrong to pretend they aren't.
/r/MensRights02/05/15 07:18 PM
3

Meh, even if they were gay, it wouldn't make a difference. Who cares what you wear. Men shouldn't be scared of other's petty judgement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m-7CrWkrFk
/r/MensRights01/05/15 11:54 PM
2

Happy and giddy? Sure.
/r/MensRights01/05/15 11:46 PM
1

You mean the Darude Sandstorm button?
/r/MensRights01/04/15 08:05 PM
1

Not sure I understand the point of this letter. It doesn't even talk about specific things that are at issues, just "nolstalgia" of what our society was before we started to fight sexism or dealing with other obvious human rights.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 12:58 AM
-1

Agreed. It sounds like the person writting this letter doesn't really understand the terms he's using, like "genetic code". All to sound like you're saying something scientific, when it's just a weak opinion. Perhaps the few men out there who have some balls would probably try and reply to you and give their thoughts. But let's not hold our breath.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 12:45 AM
3

You do have to consider that this is in India. We're not discussing stats and realities in America. Just wanted to make sure people were aware of this. I'm all for denouncing rabid feminists, but this isn't your generation X girl talking about not being able to wear skimpy clothes without being complimented. Maybe I'm mistaken.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 02:52 AM
1

Oh. I thought you were making a joke. My bad.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 08:03 PM
1

Hahahahaha
/r/MensRights04/11/14 06:40 PM
7

How can the claims be "not reliable" when there are 2 videos of her stating 2 contradictory things? She states that she is a big gamer, and in another video, she claims to not be a gamer. Make up your mind. How more reliable does it have to be?
/r/MensRights03/11/14 11:19 PM
2

How is this related to "mensrights"?
/r/MensRights07/10/14 08:52 PM
5

Woah. I never knew that, AND my childhood friend is M2F. Thanks for that bit of info.
/r/MensRights31/07/14 07:55 PM
23

Wow. It's amazing how quickly this gender equality movement has been picking up in the past months.
/r/MensRights30/07/14 08:25 AM
3

Thanks.
/r/MensRights12/07/14 07:10 PM
6

Aw. I guess I need to be american to sign the petition, right? :/
/r/MensRights12/07/14 05:50 PM
2

I do have to say that rape isn't always reported, but the point stands.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 12:04 AM
1

A lot of MRAs are humanists, so yes, as individuals we fight for social justice, regardless of gender (or lack of), race, sexual orientation, and everything outside of that. As the movement, it's primary focus is on male related injustice. If one of those injustice happens to be how men are judged more on their same sex relation, then we'll cover it. Women's right will do the same for same sex injustice, as they have a lot of humanists too. Sexual orientation is not a gender issue though. Both g…
/r/MensRights02/07/14 08:03 PM
1

No idea who she is. What is sketchy about Ayaan?
/r/MensRights27/06/14 03:05 AM
2

Woah... I never knew about Valerie. Holy crap. "kill all men"... calm down...
/r/MensRights08/06/14 07:46 PM
1

Yes, I'm fairly new, and that's fine. Everyone was new at some point. How are newcomers expected to know everything that's been discussed on this sub to the point of knowing what is deemed as "spam"? Serious question. Thanks for the reply. [Reworded it to not sound like such a dick]
/r/MensRights30/05/14 10:46 PM
2

Agreed, and yeah, who cares if you don't shave. I reread my comment. Should have been clearer when saying "which still needs to be addressed", which was about how we need to address how we perceive women that decide to do what they will with their own body hair. Both gender shouldn't have to worry about being themselves in those aspects, that we agree on for sure.
/r/MensRights29/05/14 07:06 AM
1

I'm pretty sure someone said that last week. It didn't end well. Should we worry about you?
/r/MensRights28/05/14 06:33 PM
1

Yeah. I understand what you're getting at. It's not just men that get judged for it, but it's men that get judged for it more often. Sadly, it seems to me that men pass the most judgement on other men for doing it. That's something we need to educate our brothers about. But to be fair, most of the traits you named were bodily traits and not clothes -- which still needs to be addressed. We see women in pants, suits, overalls, and all the clothes you could think of as being more 'masculine'. Unles…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 06:22 PM
1

Cool. Thanks for that.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 05:39 PM
1

I hear you. What is your view on what a man is then? Physical, mental, experience as that sex? What are things that can allow you to say that you're a man (or a woman)? [Playing DA. I'm just trying to gauge where people put the limit on the term.]
/r/MensRights27/05/14 02:19 AM
1

I respect the honesty and opinion. My child hood friend was M2F and it made me think and ask a lot of questions about the process. Is there at any point that you'd see trans as their felt gender? Being fully identical in physical and mental function, or do you see it as an experience that has to be lived and experienced from birth? Last question, sorry.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 01:50 AM
1

I like this definition too.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 01:32 AM
3

I prefer that definition. Now the question. Does that include F2M (female to male)?
/r/MensRights27/05/14 12:32 AM
1

If we want to avoid people posting it often, maybe it should be archived. I just would like to have a discussion in general about male gender expectations, regardless of the videos that are included. I would have assumed that something as important as that would be discussed a lot since it affects all of us men. Thanks for your time.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 12:09 AM
1

I'm actually surprised that you guys treat that as spam. The message is good and far from misandric. Unless you think that being a man is all about being super strong and lacking feelings, which would be hypocritical to make a sub that talks about emotions towards how society treats us. Anyway. I know you don't want to argue with a user about something you might have dealt with before. I'm just seriously confused about the reaction.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 11:49 PM
1

I would disagree that it's a feminist attack on masculinity. How is it an attack to state that men are being treated unfairly in terms of attitude we force on them. That sounds deeply contradicting. I'll take the opinion from our users, not just from the mod. If you have the link to said discussion I'll go take a look at it though. Thanks.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 11:30 PM
1

Eh. You're free to criticize as well and if your point sticks, people will agree. So long as you use science and you're not purposefully insulting a person, then I don't see how you're being censored. And to be clear, I don't agree with the article, regardless of the political affiliation it has. Good luck with that whole ordeal.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 05:20 PM
1

Agreed.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 04:59 PM
3

Thanks.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 03:58 AM
3

Yep. You got it. Mental illnesses are the root problem here.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 03:52 AM
3

Offtopic: This is driving me nuts. I've googled it and didn't find much off hand. What in the world does SRS stand for?
/r/MensRights26/05/14 01:14 AM
11

"I'll let you in on a secret: misandry isn't a thing. It's just like 'reverse racism' or whatever" with 2 likes. I'm at a loss of words...
/r/MensRights25/05/14 10:30 PM
3

Still, it's completely irrelevant. Timothy McVeigh and Ted Bundy were both republicans and that alone didn't drive them to kill. Keep petty politics out of this. It's on the same level as saying "He mass murdered because he was a man", which sadly would be more valid than pointing to his political affiliation. [The obvious exception would be a political affiliation that has a goal of mass killing people, but that's neither here or there.]
/r/MensRights25/05/14 09:41 PM
5

Probably because he's involving politics in this when it's not needed. You don't need to be a democrat or a republican to do horrible things. Just a guess though. [Canadian... so I'm neither of those before it degrades into an argument about political affiliation. And on hindsight, I think OP was making a joke about politics]
/r/MensRights25/05/14 05:56 PM
2

Yeah. I've seen other questionable articles on that site before. :/
/r/MensRights25/05/14 04:16 PM
1

Troll Alert Don't feed it. Fresh new account. Nothing to do with men's right. He likely had delusions. End of story.
/r/MensRights25/05/14 12:22 AM
1

You're not helping the case that /mensright/ is a hate group. We're not here to bring back the old ways, but rather set the record straight about our hardships as men in regards to sexism. You're calling people "sissy lala", but you're the one that is subbed to a group that discusses feelings about sexism. Think of the irony. Anyway. Hope you change your attitude, because that sort of behaviour shouldn't be welcomed here.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 07:01 PM
2

Dude. No. Just no.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 06:25 PM
40

"The true Alpha Male. What those who call themselves the Mens Rights Movement aspire to be." "The Men's Rights Movement as they call themselves is a nebulous group of pickup artists and misogynists who've found each other on line, and are attempting to create a movement based around their hatred, disdain, and fear of women." That is disgusting. Where in the world do they get this from? That's so far from what we're seeking of all this. That site is pathetic for letting an article like that be pu…
/r/MensRights24/05/14 05:26 PM
1

Yeah. At one point the movement made very much sense for them to fight for their own sex, but now it should just meld into humanism, or just change the name to something recognizing gender equality. A group that fights for just treatment of all genders. It's sad that the feminists and the men's right are sort on their on sides. It becomes a 'us vs them' thing.
/r/MensRights23/05/14 07:33 AM
1

FTFY: Stubborn people cannot accept "being wrong".
/r/MensRights20/05/14 07:54 PM
1

Eh. Let's not mention what it claims to be on the right side. It says nothing about helping gender issues for men as well.
/r/MensRights19/05/14 07:58 PM
2

I just found the post on tumblr too. To be clear, for every post denouncing that ridiculous statement there is 50 posts liking the statement or reblogging it. I'm just mindblown.
/r/MensRights08/05/14 12:22 AM
-1

Got to love the sexism in your statement. We're no better if we act smug with false generalization. Shame, brother. [Seriously. 9 upvotes for a statement demeaning women? This is sad.]
/r/MensRights07/05/14 10:45 PM
9

You most certainly don't babble. I just joined this subreddit less than a week ago. I'm a young man and I've always been against sexism from either side, but I personally felt that the only subjects approached by most of my "feminist" friends were women disadvantages, which is fine, but they claim to cover both sexes/gender troubles even though the male spectrum was lacking in their conversation -- or at least in a good light. It's sad that it has come to it, and that those that wish to protect …
/r/MensRights07/05/14 10:00 PM
2

Great watch. Hope he doesn't get too much hell for speaking up about things that are swept under the rug.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 07:57 PM
1

The worse type of people to argue with. Good riddance. Hope you denounced her for who she was.
/r/MensRights05/05/14 06:11 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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