TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

eberkimer Archive

View 5 posts and 878 comments by eberkimer 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)
3

Screw that. I'd post screenshots of each one of those, showing the user names.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:16 PM
1

Sorry. Family emergency took me away. I'll have them for you shortly.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 01:52 PM
3

There's still a lot of "men aren't growing up" in this, but it's good to see.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 02:03 AM
3

The thing is, there may be some people new to the MRA sphere, and this will give them more places/material to investigate. Probably not a bad thing to have up.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 05:10 PM
1

Agree, we likely will never know. If we do get anything, it will be because she is a victim and is oppressed and her husband wouldn't let he do anything (which may have some truth. Polish families are very much, the man works, the woman stays home - at least in the older generations, and she looks to me to be in her 40's at least). If they immigrated here (I'm from the Chiago area) from Poland, then they may still be in that mindset.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 04:51 PM
1

Interesting that when they total the number of offenders, they calculated both counties, but when they total the number of female offenders, they only mention one county. I wonder how many are in the second county?
/r/MensRights02/11/12 04:48 PM
2

You would think though, that it would be a Civil Rights Violation, and should therefore be an overturnable issue. The SC seems to be kind of contradicting itself (not that that is a surprise).
/r/MensRights02/11/12 04:44 PM
1

That might be a viewpoint to consider, if you were posting any links and actually fostering discussion. If you aren't happy with the quality, start posting something to change it.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 04:39 PM
7

I've got them (FYI, I am one of the admins at CoTWA, and formerly the False Rape Society. I know I have the links. :)
/r/MensRights02/11/12 04:37 PM
1

Based on her name, I would say she is Polish, not American. Chicago has, I believe, the 2nd highest concentration of Polish, outside of Krakow (could be wrong on that).
/r/MensRights02/11/12 04:33 PM
1

Will do. I was on lunch when I posted those, so it will be after I get home from work this afternoon... another 4-5 hours.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 04:21 PM
9

Here you go: This This It does happen, but not as frequently. I can provide more links if you need them. EDIT: a word
/r/MensRights02/11/12 04:02 PM
1

Here's a thought. How about contacting Paul and joining the staff to do exactly that. He's said numerous times he would welcome someone to help. Or, just sit back and armchair quarterback, and bitch about the quality. That's helpful. /s
/r/MensRights23/10/12 05:05 PM
1

You don't get the legal downside to the fact that the next day, since she didn't verbalize a 'yes', she can claim rape, and he has to prove consent? Consent can be verbal as well as non-verbal. I'm glad you don't care about legal terms, but when this kind of crap is part of the law, then it is something that has to be taken into consideration. The problem is, it is applied in a very discriminatory fashion. So tell me, how is it that you can turn learning about consent into a negative thing? Righ…
/r/MensRights23/10/12 04:45 PM
1

That was in response to you saying this: But Register-Her does instigate calling these women, hurling abuse at them and shutting them down. Numerous online feminists have reported similar action targeting them. I can show you the links to SRS egging on people to commit suicide and other despicable acts. Please feel free, which you still haven't done, to anyone involved with register-her calling for any kind of harrassment or stalking type of behavior. Again, I'll wait for your proof. They look a…
/r/MensRights23/10/12 04:39 PM
1

This isn't a job on an assembly line, it's specifically a job related to protecting minority groups You really need to go back and re-read what the powers of the three branches of government are for. Protecting minority groups is not what this job is about.
/r/MensRights23/10/12 04:34 PM
1

But I would think that MRA's from nearby states could get involved as well. The Northeast isn't that big, that it takes a lot of time to cover.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 05:09 PM
1

Really, anything by Warren Farrell as well.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 05:04 PM
0

Sorry, but in this case, I think you are wrong. They are gender ideologues. Look through thier site, Linked here. Right out of the Duluth Model of blaming men. So we can blame sexism and feminism. This is right out of the playbook.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:23 PM
1

You can't show there are no negative consequences. Considering the number of batshit insane people (hi SRS), there is that possibility, and if he wants to remain private, that is his choice. If it isn't a problem, please explain to me why doxxing is forbidden here? Because is does have negative consequences. And not liking someone, is a shit reason to try to destroy thier lives.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:16 PM
3

The problem is, the absence of a verbal yes, doesn't necessarily mean no. But that is how it is trying to be twisted, legally.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:14 PM
1

One thing I wanted to mention as well... for Jenna Myers Karvunidis, I live in the chicago area and when all of that went down, it took me all of 30 seconds on the net to find out where she lived. And as far as I know, no one posted her address anywhere (I'm happy to be wrong on that one). But if I could find it that quick, then so could others. Doesn't mean that there was any kind of request or concerted effort by the MRM/MRA's to go and terrorize her. That was a choice made by individuals (aga…
/r/MensRights18/10/12 07:15 PM
7

Dude, you didn't get your invitation to the Patriarchy meeting? Sorry about that. We are getting together again soon... we'll make sure you get your invite. We hand out all that privilege and higher earnings at the meetings, so you will get hooked up. We'll make sure to get you all the back earnings you missed as well. /s (not that this should be needed)
/r/MensRights18/10/12 07:02 PM
1

Privacy is the biggest issue. VC didn't put himself out there under his IRL information like the others did.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 07:01 PM
1

I see. NAFALT.... gee, we haven't heard that response before. And yet the people whom you call radical feminists, are the one in positions of government, academia, etc. and ARE the ones that represent the movement in the public sphere. Therefore, they ARE feminism. Sorry, but if all MRA's get lumped into one group, that goes the other direction. Here at least, we make an effort to counter the haters. Don't see anyone from the feminist camp trying to tell those at RadFemHub, to knock it off.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 06:18 PM
1

You still haven't provided proof for jack shit. Feel free to show where that was encouraged, or promoted. You can't, because that didn't happen.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 06:02 PM
1

As much as I don't like him, Obama had nothing to do with this. Burge retired long before Obama became a name. Mayor Richard Daley is more on the hook for a lot of this. Burge was a "do whatever you have to, to get a confession" type. And most of what happened was in the 80's and 90's.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 05:59 PM
2

Not going to save you. When we were False Rape Society, we came across a story of a guy that was in a minor fender bender with a woman. 6 months later she said he raped her. I'll have to dig through the archives, but I'm sure that there have been several stories where gay men were accused of rape, falsely. I'll try to find them.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 05:48 PM
1

My concern is the "under most circumstances" and then it doesn't state what those other circumstances are. That is ripe for some form of abuse.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 05:46 PM
1

Too bad that doesn't cover a woman raping a man. So the stats are still going to skew towards men being rapists.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 05:44 PM
1

When you get the financial backing to do that study, let us know. I'd be surprised if you would even get talked to about it.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 05:35 PM
1

The i-Pad was. The i-phone wasn't. But she is the one that linked to two devices. This is her own stupidity biting her in the ass. And the boys are the ones paying for it.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:57 PM
1

But Register-Her does instigate calling these women, hurling abuse at them and shutting them down. Numerous online feminists have reported similar action targeting them. Horseshit. Give me one proven example of that happening. I'll wait.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:53 PM
1

I have just stopped reading him, because he doesn't understand punctuation.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:06 PM
0

The parent's should sue. FTFY
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:04 PM
2

(3) taking nude photos of herself with work property. EDIT: Ok, so she didn't put the photos on the i-Pad, but on her i-Phone. The two devices were synced and they found them on her i-Phone. Still really stupid.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 01:56 PM
1

I'll answer the first one... because register her doesn't post addresses. They post information about women convicted of crimes (has to be proven). Under the bigots section, they post the names of people, who have already put themselves in the public sphere under thier true names.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 05:05 PM
2

Well....only if you aren't a member of SRS. Then they will come down on you.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 05:00 PM
1

Sure, because she punched someone driving a bus, but that isn't violence. And when he reacts to that, he is the voilent one. Stop being a douche and putting words in my mouth asshole, and the hyperbolic "destroy" bullshit doesn't fly. He didn't try to "destroy" her, he hit her once, in response to her hitting him, and then threw her off the bus (notice that she tried to come right back on andtried to continue the fight). Where I'm from, they actually call it self-defence.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 04:09 PM
1

So while I agree with you that the man can't be blamed, blaming him isn't due to chivalry. Imho Fair enough. Upvote
/r/MensRights17/10/12 04:00 PM
13

We are putting together just that thing with the poster campaign on AVfM. The first order of 5000 was placed.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 03:59 PM
1

Not confused at all. There are people in this sub-reddit that are saying the driver was wrong to hit her back. They are still excusing her violence, and putting the blame on him.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 07:07 PM
38

And before the usual "not the daily mail" bitching begins: This and This
/r/MensRights16/10/12 06:46 PM
2

I'll only address one of those: When women were given the vote, who was made unequal? Men, as women weren't saddled with the same responsibilities, to be able to vote, as men were. It sadly, is still the case. Edit: This refers to here in the U.S.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 05:25 PM
6

Let's not forget, that the person who's photo is the largest on that, committed suicide. So no, I'm not "man enough" to follow his example.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:56 PM
6

When seconds matter, the police are only minutes away.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:34 PM
-1

Cannot understand the arguments anti-bus driver. People who think they are in support of men's rights, but are still infected with Chivalristic White Knight tendencies.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 01:56 PM
5

but the man was never in any real fear of his life. Glad you're a mind reader. Driving a bus and getting punched in the head while doing so, would put me in fear for my life. All you are doing at this point, is making excuses for her violence.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 01:27 PM
3

And with that assumption, you're sure to be an idiot.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 07:28 PM
3

No, as long as she can verbally consent, and back that up with action, how drunk she is, is irrelevant. Only if she is passed out, is it rape. And it does matter, because that is exactly what the majority of rape claims are.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 07:11 PM
1

No he wouldn't have raped her. She is on camera asking for sex. Sorry, but that would have been consensual.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 06:38 PM
0

Well, that and the 250-300 pound lineman taking down a 100-150 pound woman. The odds of injury would be huge. Edit: sorry, saw football, and immediately assumed american football. You can ignore this post.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 06:09 PM
1

So, if that IS his impression of feminism, then he is correct, right?
/r/MensRights15/10/12 05:44 PM
1

Not just a robot... a Brobot.... The best kind of robot there is.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 05:16 PM
1

Don't get me wrong... I agree it doesn't need one. Hell, I'm getting downvotes for saying that.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 04:54 PM
2

And not only radical for the time, but such an accurate prediction of what we have now. Scary stuff.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 04:34 PM
-1

You forgot the /s tag (I hope).
/r/MensRights15/10/12 03:21 PM
0

But that isn't what feminism is doing. They are advocating for supremacy. Reproductive rights as the premier example.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 03:19 PM
2

I'd use exactly that. Throw their stupidity right back in their face.
/r/MensRights13/10/12 02:09 AM
1

Thank you for beating me to the punch.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:39 PM
6

Ok. The problem here is, my wife's BC IS covered by Insurance. My BP medicine isn't. So all this BS about coverage and BC and Viagra, it's all a smoke screen for more government control.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:23 PM
2

Thank you. My wife and I were sitting here reading that, and she's still laughing.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:21 PM
3

FYI, Viagra was not created purely for pleasure. It was originally created as a blood pressure drug, and the side effects were unexpected. Turned out, it happened to be better for ED than for BP.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 05:31 PM
1

I would say they are all about increasing representation in the upper tiers of work. They certainly aren't pushing hard to be a ditch digger or garbage collector.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 04:57 PM
4

The door is this way ------> Please don't hurt yourself on the way out.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 04:54 PM
3

It's probably not working. You're right. No one has any respect for someone who kisses ass this much.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 04:53 PM
2

I really wish I could upvote you more than once. Beautifully stated.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 04:47 PM
3

Not to mention, she is lying about the 93%. Again, that is the number of reported cases that result in conviction. The problem is, all other crimes are calculated on the number charged that reach conviction, which is in the mid 50% range (pretty much the same as all other crimes).
/r/MensRights11/10/12 04:52 PM
4

The problem is, you think being a feminist means you want those things. By their (feminists) actions, they don't.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 05:41 PM
2

Well.... that was constructive.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 04:59 PM
1

The plan is for Men's Rights specific activism. Hence the posting here, and not in those locations.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 04:38 PM
1

Talked with the NCFM chapter here, and they aren't an involved activism group. Fathers & Families doesn't have anything here, that I'm aware of. So, it's time to start meeting others, and making plans to do more than chat on the internet.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 04:34 PM
1

Wow, great comeback. Did your boyfriend think that up for you? I know you didn't come up with it by yourself. But of course, when someone responds to you at your level, all of a sudden, it becomes a problem, right? And you still haven't answered the question... why do you come here? You very rarely contribute anything. You derail and hurl invectives more than you do anything else. So answer the question... why do you continue to come here?
/r/MensRights10/10/12 12:25 AM
2

Actually, he's getting negative comments, because he's a self proclaimed sit on his ass and do nothing, while bitching at others to do something. That doesn't make him right. Where I sit, that smacks of hypocrisy at it's finest. And I'll give that a negative comment every time.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 12:23 AM
2

Then get involved. But stop telling others that they need to get more involved, and then do nothing. I'm tired of people coming in here and spouting off, and then doing nothing.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 12:21 AM
1

And I'll try to find the link, but something like 75% of people in the world (boys/girls, men/women) don't have any kind of education.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 12:19 AM
8

And yet we still get posts like THIS. From people who self proclaim they aren't activists. Thanks EP for putting this up.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 06:25 PM
0

Ok, you're right. I called you an idiot, after you started with: Fuck you, buster Seriously, fuck off. I'm not going to tiptoe around a bunch of whiny-ass motherfuckers just to get on their goodside Personally, you should go fuck yourself Not only are you an asshole and a crybaby Pot....meet kettle. idiot
/r/MensRights09/10/12 06:12 PM
2

Posted here
/r/MensRights09/10/12 06:10 PM
2

So what I'm suggesting is that instead of this subreddit becoming a circle jerk of almost /r/circlejerk proportions, why don't we actually try to do something about the main underlying problems? So are you going to be an activist, or are you asking everyone else to do so, and you sit back and armchair quarterback?
/r/MensRights09/10/12 06:08 PM
10

Until you can show some form of your activism, this is BS. And the "Good Men Project" is not a male rights organization. They are the opposite of that, they are a feminist site dedicated to talking down men.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 05:23 PM
1

Idiot.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 05:14 PM
1

That is correct. I don't understand it either. And considering the dollar amounts, I would think it would be grand larceny as well.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:32 PM
1

The thing that shocked me, was the fact that it had to go to the state supreme court to get overturned. Which means the lower courts have been enabling this for god knows how long.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:13 PM
1

Yeah, realized that. Of course, at the top of the comments is the tab for the article, so I didn't worry about it. Thanks for the direct link.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 03:36 PM
1

And that is why you should be banned. I haven't personally insulted you here yet, just called you a troll. Reported.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 03:09 PM
4

Good to see that this has happened. Interesting bit in the article: It notes that five other states have recognized such a claim Was not aware there were 5 other states that recognize paternity fraud as a crime.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:39 PM
1

Actually, it's pretty easy to fault it. Since both boys and girls don't receive education in developing countries, there shouldn't be a focus on one over the other. Educate both.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:36 PM
1

The problem is, in the areas they tend to focus on, no one is going to school. So by focusing on only the girls, they are turning them into a privileged class.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:35 PM
1

No, you're just an idiot. Tell us again why you are here? You rarely add anything to the conversation, you constantly derail, and you almost always go for the insult. Personally, the mods should just ban you.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:31 PM
1

And thank you for showing just how much of a troll you are. Well done.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:10 PM
0

She goes far past the "given the wrong impression". She has been nothing but a derailing troll in 95%+ of her posts. Troll fits her very well.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:09 PM
0

Well played... that made me laugh so hard.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:01 PM
1

It's not sexist, it's ageist. Nothing was said about keeping ALL women from teaching high school.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 12:29 PM
8

gorilla warfare Careful... some of those gorilla's will come back to haunt you
/r/MensRights09/10/12 11:22 AM
0

Tongue and cheek response: Then she shouldn't be having sex (isn't that what guys are always told?).
/r/MensRights08/10/12 07:26 PM
0

I got the reference... and a few others did as well. :)
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:20 PM
0

He was making a Dirty Harry reference.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:19 PM
2

You're doing fine. Completely understood everything you are saying.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 06:05 PM
3

Here you go.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 05:52 PM
1

Never been on a bike at all (even as a passenger). :(
/r/MensRights08/10/12 04:31 PM
2

Which would be great, but winters here in Chicago would not make for a fun ride (25 miles each way). :)
/r/MensRights08/10/12 03:51 PM
2

Exactly. This is part of the government/court record and is available to anyone at any time. The judge in this case is a complete idiot.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 03:50 PM
4

If they wanted to, yes. So what?
/r/MensRights05/10/12 07:26 PM
1

They've made an effort to get women in support roles. They haven't done shit to get women in combat roles.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 02:04 PM
36

The only thing AVfM has put out there are from the publicly available court documents.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 01:42 PM
2

Then you need to provide links to back up your assertions as well.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 01:17 PM
1

2 years old used one ran my wife and I 18K, about the same as a non-hybrid. I fill up with gas every 3-4 weeks. Saved a ton of money already.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 01:13 PM
13

Fuck em. That is all.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 12:25 PM
1

Wouldn't this be something right up Roy Den Hollander's alley?
/r/MensRights05/10/12 12:10 PM
-1

And of course, you have nominated yourself as the arbiter of who gets to say it. Funny that you don't say a single thing in rebuttal, you just feel that you get to define what everyone else gets to believe. So I guess you are one of those that needs to be told: Fuck off.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 06:53 PM
1

But feminists weren't really part of the sufferage movement. The most critical opponents of sufferage, were women, not men.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 06:16 PM
-1

You can't be equal, when the induividuals aren't equal. Not possible. equality before the law is all that matters. Other than that it's individual achievement. And while were here, next time, don't tell people to fuck off. You lost any credibility right there. Downvote for being a douche.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 05:20 PM
7

Sorry, but they weren't largely responsible. Crystal Mangum, with the assistance of the DA's office was. Everyone else jumped on the bandwagon afterward. Let's put credit where it is due.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 03:35 PM
1

I'm going to have to remember to look for the posts outside of the 5-6pm then. because that was hilarious.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 03:32 PM
3

Please learn to format a sentence. Periods, commas, etc., as there is punctuation other than ellipses.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 03:15 PM
2

God I needed that laugh. Thank you.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 01:47 PM
1

no
/r/MensRights27/09/12 12:42 PM
0

My comment: "fund a new position at UM--the Director of Student Assault Prevention, who will oversee violence against women programs and initiatives." So it's an office for FEMALE students, not "students". Glad to see the sexism is alive and well at UofM
/r/MensRights27/09/12 12:41 PM
9

Thanks. Knew I forgot a few.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 12:34 PM
1

Horseshit. They didn't forget a fucking thing. This was an intentional act by a group of bigots, who apparently follow the Duluth model of DV.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 12:27 PM
13

Wait...wait....wait... I know the answer to this one.... We all live in our mom's basement, we're neckbeards who can't get laid, we're losers who only play videogames... what am I forgetting?
/r/MensRights27/09/12 12:11 PM
2

And when she said no, he accepted it, got off at his stop, and that was the end of it. I think that was the biggest problem. Nothing happened, but it was still equated to a sexual assault/rape.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 05:43 PM
1

I'm trying to understand the downvotes here. He/she is being fair and logical. What is the issue?
/r/MensRights26/09/12 05:15 PM
1

I love morons like you, who don't know a thing about the ethnicity of the people you reply to, with blatantly racist and wrong remarks. But you keep on trying buttercup... someday, you'll grow up.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 04:06 PM
-8

Oh look... someone who is talking out of thier ass, without knowing a single thing about the person they are leveling unbased charges at. You must be a proud edition to the feminist cause. Moron.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 03:22 PM
-6

Too bad that's not what the slut walks are about. But nice try.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 01:27 PM
1

People keep posting these things. Can you please link me to anyone actually saying those lines?
/r/MensRights25/09/12 06:30 PM
1

I sat in on a graphic pregnancy discussion today while waiting to watch a joust at the Ohio Renaissance festival. Your list writer is living in the dark ages Can I just say that this made me laugh. Thank you.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 05:25 PM
1

A racist too.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 05:00 PM
1

Good Luck. I tried the same thing for here in Chicago (and I know there are several Chicago area people here), and got 1 response. 1. And some of those people who haven't responded, are the first ones making snide remarks about how people here don't do anything.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 04:44 PM
1

nice
/r/MensRights25/09/12 03:19 PM
1

Downvote, simply for asking for the upvote. Stop with the advocation of violence. That doesn't work here.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 03:11 PM
0

He/she might be, but unlike the OP, there is nothing saying it is. Without some /s or /parody tag, we really can't tell, and it looks like garden variety racism.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:26 PM
1

Not for children under the age of 13 or feminists. What's the difference? I kid...I kid.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:20 PM
11

Ohhhhh noes.... we don't believe in censorship.... we're such loathsome trolls. FUCK SRS.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 04:27 PM
1

Trust me, I'm aware of that. Thought I'd bring it to the fore, for those who DIDN'T click through and read it. :)
/r/MensRights21/09/12 03:44 PM
1

The problem is, no one owes you any aid. They were in a car. They could have easily dialed 911/999 (whatever the emergency number is). That she expected someone else to step in, is the height of and entitlement attitude.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 06:40 PM
1

Gazette Live.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 06:35 PM
1

Yep. I'd call the cops. I don't put myself in a dangerous situation for anyone who I don't know. It's nothing more than an entitlement attitude if you expect others to step. There is also the problem with lawsuits. You can be sued by the person you are stopping from attacking. I've got too many plans to let some douchbag screw that up. Sucks for the person being attacked, but 911 is the most I'm willing to do for someone that I don't know, or isn't a relative.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 06:10 PM
1

I was actually replying to: I'm asking why people try to turn this into a attention whoring contest That made it sound like you didn't think this was an important thing, that she was given a jail sentence. Just misunderstood what you were saying. EDIT: But now that I go back and read what was said, you are in men's rights and you are complaining that we are treating the victim as the victim? we're not attention whoring. We're focusing on the victim here, and to hell with the criminal. I guess I …
/r/MensRights20/09/12 05:34 PM
1

Then they can be adults and call 911. No one is obligated to step in on thier behalf. If they think others are, then they need to check thier privilege.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 05:03 PM
1

Well.... actually they didn't. RadFemHum started a fund raising drive after the piece came out. The writer of the SPLC piece however, did get his information from David Futrelle (Manboobz). Who isn't even close to being unbiased, or even ethical and honest.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 04:44 PM
2

And you are really bad at making assumptions. But again, someone with the name dumbguy, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 04:11 PM
2

Ah yes.... this isn't important. Ignore it. Nothing to see. It's just 3 men that were falsely accused of rape. No biggie. /s
/r/MensRights20/09/12 03:54 PM
1

Actually, it's surprising as hell. The UK doesn't have restrictions on naming the accused, but does have restrictions on naming the accuser. It's a good thing to see.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 03:52 PM
1

As much as I would like to agree... Here you go
/r/MensRights20/09/12 02:19 PM
2

Read thrway_1000's comment above. This article could go either way. Stop pretending that you are the only one who gets to decide what the article is (satire or not). And someone with the username with dumbguy in it, really shouldn't be calling people dumbasses.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 01:10 PM
1

Bad analogy. Feminism isn't attempting to surrender. They are continuing the firefight. When that happens, you fight to win, by any means necessary. You don't have the luxury of playing nice.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 01:01 PM
1

Head on over to Shrink 4 men. There is a transcript of the GAL's report that is horrendous to read. It goes into explicit detail of the things that Tina has done. Not to be rude, but if you want answers, start digging. Stop waiting for someone else to hand them to you. Everything you need is out there.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 12:55 PM
1

crazy.... all there is to it. A Shrink 4 men has a great piece on it. Dr. Tara is awesome.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 07:30 PM
1

Bankruptcy doesn't do anything for court ordered debts. Those are pretty much forever.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 07:04 PM
1

Great family, that they never told you. What a bunch of scumbags.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 06:57 PM
2

We're on the same page.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 04:20 PM
2

Depends. If mom ended the relationship because she was "bored", did her daughter even get a chance to contact dad and ask him? I could see this being tangental to men's rights, depending on how she became a single mom.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 06:16 PM
3

Agree, but did you catch who the person who complained was? Single Mother. Would love to know by choice or by circumstance?
/r/MensRights18/09/12 06:04 PM
2

Adam.... for those biblically inclined.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 05:57 PM
1

Or RadFemHub.... pretty much all that is there.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 04:37 PM
1

Would you mind dropping all of the ellipses. Not needed. just write the damn sentance.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 04:09 PM
1

Feel free to stop putting words in my mouth. You responded to a post by using the exception, as if it was the rule. I responded to that. I'm married as well, but I recognize the risk. You are free to do what you want, but if your wife decides to drop the hammer tomorrow, you're screwed. Whether you like it or not.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 06:45 PM
1

And yet as you said...they are the outliers. Which means that women getting custody is the norm. So what he said holds true.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 06:02 PM
1

All good ideas. Likely going to take more time than we currently have. Looks like we may need to expand. Thanks for the throughts.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 04:40 PM
1

That would take a while, at this point. after 4+ years of stories. However, we've been thinking of something along this line. The biggest problem, is that in a lot (I would estimate 60%+) of the stories, the woman who falsely accused was never named, or had her photograph run.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 09:39 PM
1

But only for babies. Any kids older than 5 have a real problem getting adopted (At least that's my understanding... happy to be proven wrong).
/r/MensRights14/09/12 07:10 PM
1

Add to that, as soon as all of those feminists who are supposedly for equality begin to call out the radfemhub group for advocating genocide, mass mutilation of men, and general dickishness, I'll be a bit more willing to meet them half way.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 06:50 PM
0

Bigot, I think is the word you are looking for. It fits pretty well.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 06:45 PM
2

I'm hoping there was a /s missing from that, because it didn't make sense to me either.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 06:08 PM
1

It's a shame Bill didn't write that. Just because the piece is posted, doensn't mean he endorses it. Mantu wrote it. Feel free to go over and argue the point if you don't think it's representative.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 06:07 PM
3

I see what you did there.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 05:58 PM
1

God you're an idiot.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 04:28 PM
1

Not facebook, but False Rape Society and CoTWA already do this. :)
/r/MensRights14/09/12 01:49 PM
1

You are so full of shit. Without corroborating evidence of a crime committed/conviction, you won't be listed there. Valenti isn't listed as a criminal, but a bigot. And she meets that distinction with ease. Of course, you do as well, so maybe we should list you under that section.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 01:48 PM
3

This isn't a men's rights issue. What?
/r/MensRights14/09/12 01:14 PM
0

I was not aware of that. Oh, Northwestern University, here we come.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 12:14 PM
1

I can respect the circism, but not from someone who is doing the same thing. Lead by example.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 05:50 PM
1

This is the attitude I don't understand. Why is your life so much less valuable than those women? Equality, right?
/r/MensRights13/09/12 05:46 PM
-1

Relax princess... pull your panties out of your ass crack. You're beginning to hyperventilate as it's cutting the circulation off. When you start off insulting, it's amazing you get that in return, isn't it?
/r/MensRights13/09/12 03:38 PM
1

Don't care either way. Rapists are going to rape. I don't rape, so it makes no difference to me.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 03:32 PM
2

Not sure why this is getting downvoted. Are people really too damn lazy to go and find the link?
/r/MensRights13/09/12 02:09 PM
6

I think you missed his/her point. This is exactly the kind of advice that got everyone worked up and started the Slut Walks. It's the hypocrisy of it that he/she is pointing out.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 12:40 PM
0

So you get to be an ass and tell people what they "better" do, but no one else gets to respond in the same way. Hypocrisy, thy name is XSShadow.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 12:32 PM
1

No, it's stop complaining about how nothing gets done, while doing nothing. They bitch about this being a circlejerk, but do nothing offline to accomplish anything or get anything actually done. Hypocrisy at it's finest.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 12:31 PM
2

Then feel free to get off your ass, form a politcal action group (you're not going to get anything accomplished without the government backing), and go to town.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 07:18 PM
12

And if they aren't willing to do so, present it as a Title IX violation. Then sit back with popcorn and watch the heads explode.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 06:42 PM
-2

Stop being an ass. Stop reccomending someone vote for a longshot 3rd party, which is essentially throwing away your vote. Might as well not vote. Generally, fuck off. Each and every one of us "better" be voting? Take your authoritarianism and shove it. YOU, don't get to tell us what we "better" do or not.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 06:19 PM
1

The court heard Wright's ex-lover Graeme Wright allegedly had a vendetta against Mr Clark and convinced her and her then partner Brian Naylor to help plot the brutal attack. She even tried the "a bad man made me do it" card, and it didn't work. Good.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 04:47 PM
2

I believe you are referring to the guy on crutches that took off running without the use of the crutches. That wansn't in Vancouver, but was essentially the same thing.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 03:07 PM
3

I think it's KarmaMGTOW that is in that area. You should get in contact (you could probably do so through AVfM). Help him do poster runs?
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:59 PM
1

Your initial post sounded like you said you like and respect Marcotte. I think it's more a misread of who you were talking about. We're good.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 01:41 PM
1

Hey, that's steveist. I am offended on behalf of all steve's (it doesn't hurt that I am one). :)
/r/MensRights10/09/12 06:20 PM
1

What does any of that have to do with Amanda Marcotte? Nothing. Marcotte is a bigot and sexist.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 01:04 PM
6

You like and respect Amanda Marcotte? She is one of the biggest bigots out there, in feminist circles. Sorry, but nothing she writes should ever be respected, simply because she offers no respect.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 12:43 AM
2

And lets not forget Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton.... this isn't a left/right thing.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 06:47 PM
3

I'll add another $50 to the pot. Same conditions.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 06:32 PM
1

Waves wand....Airplanus boomus.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 06:30 PM
1

Peru is a signatory of the Hague Conventions. If you have a binding agreement, then you can file an action under the Hague Convention statutes. Find a lawyer that specializes in International Abductions. You have a serious case for this. Hague Convention Signatories
/r/MensRights07/09/12 06:25 PM
1

Peru is a signatory of the Hague Conventions. If you have a binding agreement, then you can file an action under the Hague Convention statutes. Find a lawyer that specializes in International Abductions. You have a serious case for this. Hague Convention Signatories
/r/MensRights07/09/12 06:24 PM
0

Barry Nolan.... isn't that Ampersand, from Alas a blog? Does this come as any surprise (other than the surprise that he is getting published at all)? EDIT: never mind. that was Barry Deutsch. My bad.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 06:19 PM
1

Something tells me they pulled it, because with the short amount of time they were able to get VAWA instituted, the fact that they put out a press release that they were in favor of women being required to sign up for SS, and then not actually doing anything about it, makes their hypocrisy available for all to see.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 03:43 PM
0

I don't give a rat's ass about the kind of backpedalling he tried to do. In the original article, they did call this a hate group. All the backpedalling in the world doesn't change that.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 03:41 PM
1

Cool. I would assert that in the act of arresting and confining someone, that is a form of physical violence. But we could get bogged down in the details on that one. As I mentioned, I was only trying to play devil's advocate. I'm in complete support of you calling the cops and reporting that guy. Make no mistake on that. What he did was not only creepy as hell, but does constitute an assault. And the following you out and driving around the parking lot goes into a stalking area, where your safe…
/r/MensRights06/09/12 06:28 PM
2

I'm at work, and all of that is on my home computer. I'll log in and post it later tonight.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 05:48 PM
1

Now I have this image of Jesus and Mary Magdalene.....
/r/MensRights06/09/12 04:43 PM
1

Bullshit. They did indeed call MR a hate group. It's in the original piece. Simply because they haven't added it to their published list, doesn't change the wording they used in the original article.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 03:02 PM
2

Title IX and the Dear Collegue Letter come to mind for major sexism at the college level.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 02:15 PM
1

Can you point me to the page on their site that has that? I just went there and searched for it, but don't see a single thing (other than linked blog pages), that speaks about it.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 01:34 PM
4

Which is hilarious. Lisak, who has a monetary interest in the field, is criticizing someone else, when his own reasearch does exactly what he claims kanin's studies do. The hypocrisy...it burns. Kanin actually did have a methodology. Those claims, where the accuser admitted to lying, were what he based his model on. It just doesn't fit the narrative, so he's criticized for his work. Strange that up until that point, he was doing research for NOW, using the same methodology, but that didn't seem …
/r/MensRights06/09/12 12:30 PM
5

It's a shame that that isn't what the McDowell study was. You should actually read the abstract and the study itself before you make an idiot of yourself.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 12:27 PM
1

I didn't say it was wrong to call them. I said that you say you won't use violence, but then call the cops who, by arresting him, are using violence. The violence of the state to restrict his freedom. We view it as an acceptable thing, for the safety of others, but it is a form of violence. And get off your high horse. it wasn't rude, and I really don't care if you wanted to hear it or not. If you don't want to hear anything, get off the internet.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 12:21 PM
1

And that is where you are wrong. When the cops arrest, that is a form of violence. They are using their power to restrict the freedom of someone. It may be, normally, an acceptable use of state sponsored violence, but it is violence none the less.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 12:17 PM
1

And yet, as I posted above, you were willing to call the cops, who are likely going to respond with violence. A tad hypocritical of you, isn't it?
/r/MensRights05/09/12 07:19 PM
1

I'm going to play devil's advocate here for a moment. Violence doesn't have to be the only solution to a problem. Then why did you waste time calling the cops, who, if they arrest him, are responding with violence? Or is it only different when YOU use violence, or have someone using it on your behalf?
/r/MensRights05/09/12 07:17 PM
1

That would actually be in interesting experiment. Wonder which would fail the quickest (as I think both would likely fail).
/r/MensRights05/09/12 06:33 PM
1

To be fair, the Republicans want women in the kitchen and teaching the Bible to their kids. It's much more than a war on women. It's a war on everybody who doesn't agree with them. No... that's the religious right. That doesn't even come close to the entirety of the Republican party.
/r/MensRights05/09/12 06:32 PM
0

Sure it is. I can call a woman a cunt, and she might be offended, but someone overhearing it won't be. The schools policy has nothing to do with that. Insulting and offensive are not the same thing. When two people can hear the same thing and they have different reactions (i.e., one is offended and the other isn't), then it is in the eye of the beholder, as to what is offensive.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 07:27 PM
1

Yep... and they are free to go work that oil rig, go dig coal out of that mine, go collect all that garbage....
/r/MensRights31/08/12 06:07 PM
2

Downvote. Just an insult and shaming language. Want to try again without the insults? As in saying something constructive, like TiJoHimself? Her speech was nothing more than an appeal to women. It's politics, and that's all it is. If you have something specific to complain about, feel free.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 05:53 PM
2

They think manboobz is some kind of credible source? Really? Good god, how pathetic is that?
/r/MensRights31/08/12 05:39 PM
1

Really, though, how hard would it have been to say: "We would also argue that having the ability to remove the perpetrator from the home, if that is where the incident has occurred, gives time for the whole situation to de-escalate, gets the perpetrator out of the place and cool their heels at the police station for as long as it takes to make an application for the order, do the paperwork and give it to them," he said. "they still get their day in court."
/r/MensRights31/08/12 05:36 PM
0

And neither are they mutually inclusive. Offense is in the eye of the beholder. Intent doesn't seem to play much of a part anymore. The only one of the 3 I have a problem with, is the last one.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 05:27 PM
7

I know there is a case in Canada of a woman collecting child support from 5 different guys. I'll see if I can find it. EDIT: can't find the 5 but here is the story about 2 guys paying.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 04:36 PM
3

We're both correct. I was looking at it from the fed level. The states can (and have) imposed penalties. (And Tennessee did put that in place)[http://usgovinfo.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=usgovinfo&cdn=newsissues&tm=74&gps=498_699_1676_886&f=11&su=p284.13.342.ip_&tt=2&bt=1&bts=1&st=38&zu=http%3A//www.sss.gov/fsstateleg.htm]. So either the state or the federal government is going to punish you for not registering. Lovely.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 04:22 PM
0

Even if you don't want them on the front line they should be up for draft. There are a huge percentage of military positions available OTHER than combat positions. Which means those positions are no longer available to men, who would then be front line troops and die. Again, not exactly equal. Either women get drafted and fight on the front lines, or they don't. If they don't, then they shouldn't be eligible for the bennies they get from the government, than men are denied if they don't register…
/r/MensRights31/08/12 02:16 PM
3

Well.... not quite. You can't get government subsidized loans for education. If you want to pay for it, nothing prevents you from going.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 02:12 PM
2

And absolutely no proof of it. The only thing we know for sure, is that the wife has taken the kids, and the grandmother threatened to kill those kids if the father were to be given the kids back. There has been over 2 years for the mother and grandmother to poison those kids minds (not saying it has happened, but it's certainly possible). Can't wait until she tries to go after some form of support. If she does, he should tell her to fuck off.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 07:35 PM
5

Sexist and racist. Methinks she doesn't understand how the irony burns.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 07:25 PM
1

Wasn't disagreeing. Just wanted to make sure it was out there.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 05:48 PM
1

Think before you post. The irony.... it burns.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 05:47 PM
2

But his administration is the one that pulled it from the website almost immediately after taking office, and just before the PFA promises were made. Couldn't have that sitting out there to counter the "unfairness" claims.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 04:17 PM
2

Here you go.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 03:16 PM
0

This is why I'm a WSU fan. :) Go Cougars
/r/MensRights30/08/12 01:16 PM
1

lol.... I was being tounge in cheek. But really, any time somone at the federal level can put a stop to anything a state wants to do, I don't really consider that sovereignty. With all of the powers that departments have (EPA is the main one that comes to mind), it really is sovereign in name only. But we're on the same page.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 07:27 PM
3

What does it matter? If one drink invalidates consent for women, then it invalidates consent for men.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:50 PM
1

Not to nitpick, but if there are limits to what they get to do, then they aren't sovereign. :)
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:33 PM
2

Nah.... if it's too hard for someone to scroll up, they have issues that re-submitting isn't going to solve.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:23 PM
1

Cool.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:13 PM
2

I actually have 2 problems with this. His son is 17. The SS is supposed to only be regitered for when you turn 18 (the age of majority). This means that the parent is being required to offer up his son if they start a draft tomorrow, even though the son can't vote (that's supposed to be the litmus test for Draft eligibilty - voting). If this was his daughter, and not his son, this wouldn't be a requirement. Nothing in the SS says that registering is required for STATE driving privileges. This is…
/r/MensRights29/08/12 05:47 PM
12

Why does it matter? As a male in the U.S., if you don't register, you can't get student loans, you can't hold a government job, and you are subject to imprisonment and fines. Women aren't held to this standard. So the government is restricting what men are able to do, but not women. It's the discrimination of it, not that there is/isn't a draft that is the issue.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 05:19 PM
3

One of the few times I've actually agreed with you. Upvote.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 04:41 PM
1

FYI, meme's aren't allowed here.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 04:31 PM
3

Without trying to be an ass (me), what exactly do you do offline?
/r/MensRights29/08/12 04:26 PM
3

If someone owened property, they could vote (Male or female). It was just much less likely, due to social constraints, that women would own property. And Wyoming, and several other western states allowed women to vote in the early to mid 1800's.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 04:01 PM
3

But it still puts the onus on the man, and doesn't really hold the woman responsible for her choice to have unprotected sex (or if a condom breaks or BC fails). It still makes men only ATM's for her choice.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 03:30 PM
2

The comments on that article rightly call them out for the hit piece it is. Good for them.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 02:36 PM
2

And this is the problem with those who don't get the argument here (not saying this is you). If there is a medically necessary reason for Circumcision, then fine. But saying that UTI's, which are such a low percentage is a reason to do it to all boys, is horrendous. Circumcision should not happen to babies, unless there is no other medically available option.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 02:16 PM
1

All of that has absolutely nothing to do with what you asked. You asked: How can you correct for this gender imbalance when guys will never have vaginas that make babies? Answer: you can't. So now we have to deal with it. I provided an answer.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 04:29 PM
1

Here you go. Part 1 of the LPS by GWW.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 11:47 AM
1

Because you're being a dick about it. They don't necessarily disagree with you, but calling him a "RETARD" was unecessary and dickish. That's why I'm downvoting you.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 06:31 PM
1

You should be able to search it here. GirlWritesWhat, I believe, has done some videos where she touches on it. But I don't know specific ones. Sorry.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 06:24 PM
2

Legal Paternal Surrender.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 05:29 PM
1

South Africa deserves to be fucked in the ass by "Bubba".... that would be an interesting thing to see. :)
/r/MensRights27/08/12 05:08 PM
1

This is what I don't get. How is it, if a woman wants an abortion, the fetus doesn't matter. But in this kind of situation, it then matters? If someone shoots a pregnant woman (no matter how far along she is), they can be charged with 2 murders. So it makes no sense that a woman who has an abortion isn't charged.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 01:55 PM
4

And the one's saying smart stuff, get ostracized (Christina Hoff Summers for example).
/r/MensRights27/08/12 01:21 PM
1

now go back and re-read my edit. then get back to me
/r/MensRights24/08/12 10:20 PM
5

Edit. I'm going to retract that. I don't think you're a bigot. Just ignorant. You are aware of the studies that show men suffer from postpartum depression, and that it can cause sever medical problems yes? And I'm glad you're an authority on what it is to be mentally drained. Feel free to enlighten us with more of your wisdom ignorance.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 10:00 PM
1

So what is the cutoff point? I've known a whole lot of people that when drunk, act completely normal. How do you know? And of course, nothing in the article said she was blackout drunk. Just that the person writing to Yoffe had seen her blackout drunk. Stop adding things that weren't there or mentioned. And they were are the bar. Was he drinking? Doesn't that make her a rapist as well?
/r/MensRights24/08/12 09:51 PM
4

And that's the part that is messed up. If alcohol invalidates consent, he couldn't consent either, yet he is held responsible, and she isn't. Gotta love the double standard.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 09:43 PM
5

Dumbass.... it wasn't a shooting spree. The cops are the ones that shot 8 of the 10 people. Pull your head out of your ass.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 09:30 PM
1

Which, as has been pointed out to you many times, has nothing to do with the image. It is about opinion, not legislation. Showing your lack of reading comprehension over and over, really doesn't help you.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 05:55 PM
1

No problem. This should be what you need. EDIT: Here is a list of other cases on the same thing.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 02:06 PM
1

You know, it's really sad that this subreddit hasn't made a single comment (unitl I have), and that it only has 21 votes (5 of which are downvotes). Let's have a little action please. Email, call, visit... whatever you can do to make this visible.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 06:20 PM
1

It's a shame that this has already happened (the rapee having to pay c/s).
/r/MensRights23/08/12 04:50 PM
2

Actually, he was a politician before he had his talk show. He was the mayor of Cincinnati.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 05:55 PM
1

I doubt many people know who they are anymore (well...under 40 or so).
/r/MensRights22/08/12 03:01 PM
2

And blacks enslaved blacks. But white people enslaving black people is all that is talked about. I'm part American Indian, so all that white guilt shit can piss off.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 02:30 PM
2

More than one.... that was perfect.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 02:10 PM
9

Government convinced enough people that they didn't have to be responsible. It's been a downhill slide ever since.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 02:09 PM
5

And men are the choice more than 3 times the percentage of women. Combine women and children (and when doesn't that happen?), and people are still voting for men over 20% more. That is actually a good thing to see. Edit: and then I see sarfaraaz's link below and sigh. Although, this is one time, where /b has done something good, as Hach8 stated.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 08:46 PM
2

As sad as it is, I remember the tail end of that era. The majority of the people who call themselves "journalists" today, wouldn't know good journalism if it bit them in the ass.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 08:44 PM
1

My googlefu isn't working. I can't find the case. Do you have the link?
/r/MensRights17/08/12 07:08 PM
2

Don't know why you got downvoted on that. ANYONE accused, is "innocent until proven guilty". Good god people, isn't legal equality one of the things we're arguing for here?
/r/MensRights17/08/12 06:56 PM
0

They marginalize us, call us women haters and we're supposed to reach out to them? Fuck that. They can pound sand for all I care.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 06:48 PM
1

Great reply. Thank you.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 06:31 PM
1

Not sure why you are waiting. I have yet to see a post by this person that does anything other than derail or insult.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 04:55 PM
2

Yes, but a drill is useful. :)
/r/MensRights17/08/12 04:53 PM
5

Wouldn't that be hilarious. File a title 9 case or make them get rid of the women's studies. Talk about poetic justice.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 04:39 PM
8

Nice lack of reading comprehension. He never said any such thing. All he talked about was the repleacement rate regarding births of ethnic germans. At no point was any mention of "superior race" mentioned.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 04:24 PM
2

I'll concede her original video didn't say that she was equating it with rape. It was later on the blog when she got called on her attitiude that she equated that guy with being a rapist. And that is where the whole thing blew up.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 02:57 PM
1

Let's see, she got hit on in an elevator, she said no, and when he got to his floor, he got off and went on his way. Poor little dear..... she was uncomfortable (she equated that guy to being a rapist, that's why she's an idiot).
/r/MensRights17/08/12 01:17 PM
6

What color do Smurf's turn when you choke them?
/r/MensRights17/08/12 11:50 AM
5

Keep trying. Sooner or later, you'll get what you think is being said. Honestly, why are you here?
/r/MensRights16/08/12 05:17 PM
1

That's not how they do it though. Idiots like manboobz, and /SRS take what one person says, and that means the whold sub thinks that. They misrepresent things so bad, they aren't even part of the same reality as everyone else.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 04:55 PM
3

Thanks for re-running these. So everyone who may not be aware, False Rape Society is now COTWA
/r/MensRights16/08/12 04:48 PM
7

Accused, not judged guilty. Until then, she gets the same benefit everyone should, "Innocent until proven guilty".
/r/MensRights16/08/12 04:43 PM
6

Studies show that when only one partner is violent, 70% of the time it is the woman. In reciprocol violence, it is 50/50 as to who is the perpetrator. See the sidebar for the studies.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 01:43 PM
2

I wouldn't waste your time. VSSf has been trolling here now for 15 days (ever since the account was created), and hasn't contributed a thing meaningfully. Just trolling.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 04:26 PM
1

And the statement is incorrect anyway. The rate that is continually used is for "unfounded" accusations (not enough proof to determine either way). LE doesn't track known and provable false accusations. These numbers aren't conclusively knowable.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 03:55 PM
1

Thanks. I went to the dailydot site and clicked their link, and it doesn't work. Appreciate it.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 01:39 PM
3

The only problem is, and Executive Order, has the weight of law. It then requires an override by the majority of both houses of congress, and since that isn't currently possible, it's decree by fiat, bypassing the normal lawmaking process. It's an end run on our 3 branch system.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 01:37 PM
0

Don't know why this is getting downvoted. All societies oppress each in thier own way. What's the issue?
/r/MensRights13/08/12 04:54 PM
1

Then how about THIS? Or THIS?
/r/MensRights13/08/12 04:49 PM
1

And that is incorrect. The last sentence, just before the list of the sites in the SPLC piece, did call them hate sites. Conveniently, that page is now gone. Does anyone have a screenshot?
/r/MensRights13/08/12 03:41 PM
2

That's hilarious. I'm guessing you really don't know the history of the MRM, and who Factory, Zed, Angry Harry, etc., are? Happy to be wrong on that, but that post is way off.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 02:41 PM
2

No. We have a system of Checks and Balances for a reason. Allowing one branch to just bypass it at will, defies everything our founding fathers, and the constitution stand for.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 01:49 PM
5

Aerik is seriously mentally messed up. Someone who spends that much time and effort to try and make this sub look bad, has issues.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 08:03 PM
2

I would recommend the sidebar, as I mentioned, and then feel free to throw out questions. There are plenty here who will step up and respond.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 07:15 PM
7

The reason he posted the length of the account, is an 11 minute old account doesn't really engender trust. We get trolled hard here, usually by brand new throwaway accounts. Then, after people respond, the post is edited to say something completely different, and the responses then paint a different picture. You are going to get a bit of rough response, most likely, but most here just lay out the facts (with some rough edges), and you will also get the idiots who either are trolls, or just reall…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 06:59 PM
1

Henry the V, Act 4, Scene 3. Shakespeare
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:11 PM
6

You might want to go back and re-read what he said. He didn't say just because they were "cunts", he said: because she was a cunt who initiated the domestic violence and deserved everything she got Notice who initiated the DV.... if they get thier ass beat, it it what it is. Cest la vie.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 05:38 PM
1

That's why I like working with him over at COTWA. Pierce is not someone I would care to debate against, or meet in court.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 06:15 PM
2

Not directed at you cabalum, just agreeing with you. "You guys".... which ones of us is that exactly? OP, you know nothing of just about everyone here. You don't know what type of support anyone here does offline. Thanks for the attempt at shaming and minimization. I'd say you just did more to not help than anyone who posts here regularly has done.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 02:05 PM
1

As well, the Haugue Conventions on international child abduction, should be used.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:52 PM
3

Nope... just that you are an idiot.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:19 PM
1

I would agree, depending on where he lives. NYC, as an example, where 15K could be the difference between a crappy apartment and being on the street. And keep in mind this is after all of the taxes are taken by fed/state. It's NEVER that cut and dried.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:08 PM
1

I see what you did there.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:49 PM
14

And they never realize that needs to work towards the women as well. When they use that argument, they are really saying that abortion should not be an option. They really don't get the hypocrisy (or maybe they do and they are just idiots).
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:48 PM
2

Nope, just well aware of how stacked the legal system is against men/boys when it comes to a charge of sexual assault/rape. And they aren't shy of using it, as they know there is little to no punishment.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:42 PM
1

Agreed.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:16 PM
1

Ok... that was just funny.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:16 PM
0

Maybe. I don't see how anyone could reasonably look at this situation and say, "Hey, he is bleeding from a wound in the back of the head, let's arrest him", when the others involved have no wounds. This is really where more people need to be aware of jury nullification, and kill these kinds of stupid laws.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:29 PM
4

I wish I could upvote you more than once. That was hilarious. Is it sad that I remember when they were the ones that kicked everyone's ass?
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:27 PM
2

Well, it has been determined that something like 40% of births are to single moms (here in the U.S.). So it should be fairly simple to cross reference that and see what kind matches could be found on the welfare/public assistance rolls.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 05:19 PM
1

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Sorry, the shaming tactics don't work. Bigot
/r/MensRights01/08/12 05:14 PM
1

Great reply. Guess I shouldn't be surprised. Bigot.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 04:24 PM
1

Here you go. Not exactly...again, it was those false accusers, who admitted to lying about the accusation, compared to the total number a accusations reported.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 04:22 PM
2

Your reading comprehension sucks. They routinely talk about philosophical and psychological issues. It's a hypothetical question. In no way shape or form were ALL women called potential accusers. You're a bigot.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 04:18 PM
2

Look.... the white knight brigade has landed. If she's acting like a bitch, she can be called a bitch. You are the one being sexist here.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 01:44 PM
2

It's intentional wording. It downplays the seriousness of what happened, and allows for the false accusation to be treated as a joke.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 12:40 PM
2

There is a missed opportunity. The very first thing that she should say, is that she is sorry to all of the men that the police even talked to. And that the primary victims of a false accusation, are the falsely accused, and that those false accusations do lasting, and sometimes permanent damage to the falsely accused.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 12:39 PM
1

Over at COTWA, we refer to all of these people as members of the "Sexual Grievance Industry".
/r/MensRights01/08/12 12:28 PM
1

They are not based on statistical data. Law enforcement does not keep track of the numbers of known false accusations. That 2-8% represents unfounded accusations (which are defined as not enought evidence to be able to determine if it is a true accusation or false). And isn't it funny, that if you look at the Lisak study, all he did was look at reported cases and the conclusion of those cases.... the same thing everyone criticizes Kanin for. Yet Lisak is seen as valid, and Kanin isn't. You are a…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 11:51 AM
5

THIS. Legal equality (at least here in the states). It is specifically illegal to do anything to the genitals of girls. That boys don't encounter the same protection, is disgusting.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 03:04 PM
1

There's a reason that Fark has a Florida tag.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 02:37 PM
1

Hey... No need to get specieist. /s
/r/MensRights31/07/12 11:51 AM
1

You are referring to the Kanin Studies (note, that there was more than one). The flaws aren't what you have put there. All Kanin did was come in and total the numbers where the accuser ADMITTED to lying, and then compared that to the overall number of reports. And your percentages are wrong. There are no official statistics gathered for the the number of false accusations. There are stats on "unfounded", which are accusations that can't be proved either way (and those are compiled by the FBI bas…
/r/MensRights30/07/12 06:57 PM
2

That one's a psycho. That whole thing made me sick to my stomach.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 04:23 PM
3

Please keep in mind this is all stated as a generality, as a lot of people here don't understand that unless it's specifically stated. And yet we don't see Selective Service marches, we see slut walks. We don't see women, en masse, lobbying the government to lift the restrictions for combat roles to be changed. We have outcrys for others to pay for their birth control. I'm not real convinced that women do want to argue in favor of thier own agency. They certainly have the political muscle to get…
/r/MensRights27/07/12 07:11 PM
0

And if that is the case, then why is he being shamed. They aren't his. He has no obligation to them. Edit: further down the article, it says they are his. So are they or aren't they? That acutally makes quite a difference (to me at least).
/r/MensRights27/07/12 06:17 PM
-1

OP title is misleading. They aren't his children. They are hers. He doesn't owe them anything. She does. Edit: further down the article is says they are his. So are they or aren't they? That makes a lot of difference.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 06:16 PM
1

Why create a new account for this? Unless you knew this wouldn't go over real well. You don't want to buy their product... don't.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 06:06 PM
2

I thought that's what you were afraid to say that Demonspawns comment was (the truth).
/r/MensRights27/07/12 06:04 PM
1

People have also been killed, and cases where they were beaten so bad they suffered brain damage that completely altered their lives.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 05:56 PM
1

Baroness Stern.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 05:52 PM
1

Well, Fraud would be one, as her and her mother sued and got 1.5 million (Grand larceny?). False reporting. Kidnapping wouldn't be unreasonable. I'm sure there are a few others that could be considered.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 05:50 PM
15

All those single moms. Ooops, was that sexist? Your post is really bigoted AND sexist. You might want to check your privilege. Posted to the comments Edit: posted in reply to: Because varying degrees of Wayne's World, Jackass or Beavis & Butthead is who American males are. Women over 30 know this, as does the entire world that thinks U.S. men are violent and immature and utterly clueless that this is not okay. And now the under 30 women also know it. The larger question is what pack of feral dog…
/r/MensRights27/07/12 04:33 PM
3

Agreed.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 04:28 PM
5

I get ya. While it would be nice for real rape victims to be louder, I don't think there's a lot of approval for it. The only reason I say that, is that as one of the admins at COTWA, formerly False Rape Society, a lot of the email we get is from the mothers of the falsely accused, and from actual rape victims, and they are by a vast majority, in support of the falsely accused, and against false accusers. YMMV.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 04:24 PM
7

The way False Rape Accusers happily put innocent men in jail.... FTFY
/r/MensRights27/07/12 04:00 PM
1

Disgusting doesn't even begin to decribe what is going on there.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 03:57 PM
1

I think I get what you are saying, but let me make sure we are on the same page on something. To me, a privilege is something you are given, not something inherent or earned (that one is debateable). A right is part of who we are. Basing it on that (in my mind), means you can be given a privilege without having to do anything to earn it, or continue to enjoy it. A right requires constant support and vigilance. Freedom of speech here in the U.S. works well for demonstration. You have the right to…
/r/MensRights27/07/12 03:44 PM
2

Proof is on your shoulders to provide. Nothing you post there supports it, and you don't get to determine what a "true MRA" is, anymore than I do. Being an MRA is up to the individual to determine how they will be an MRA. Downvote.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 02:40 PM
2

The post also uses the no true scotsman. Please keep this in mind, the truth is, every true MRA is a humanist...
/r/MensRights27/07/12 02:39 PM
1

But that would require someone to actually think and behave like and adult with agency. And we can't task the poor little women with that kind of expectation. /s
/r/MensRights27/07/12 02:12 PM
3

The truth?
/r/MensRights27/07/12 01:56 PM
2

Not sure I understand that..... responsibilities without rights is called slavery.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 01:55 PM
1

Thank you. Upvotes for this and the other post.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 01:10 PM
2

Blackstone Formula. One of the cornerstones of common law.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 12:32 PM
1

I'd second what Shady8x said. That would be the best option. But if you want to try it on your own, contact the Title IX director on campus and lodge your complaint, and if they do nothing, take it to the Dept. of Education.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 11:39 AM
41

File a lawsuit under Title IX for underrepresentation. Watch the heads spin due to the cognitive dissonance.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 07:03 PM
5

And the male athletes chose to fly business class (not first class), the women's teams get more funding, and the teams themselves choose how to spend those funds. There is no discrimination for that. Edit: Link
/r/MensRights26/07/12 02:44 PM
0

BS. They are indifferent to the issue, because it doesn't effect them. It's one of the reasons they stopped the push in the 70's for the ERA amendment. It actually gave women responsibilities, and they don't want that.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 05:53 PM
9

Congratulations on proving his point.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 05:00 PM
2

Nope.... you nailed it. Welcome to the Matriarchy.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 04:20 PM
1

Only if they are that ignorant. And really, they do more to hurt themselves, than anything you or I could do.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 07:55 PM
5

No. It's because MRA's and r/mensrights don't act like we are the only answer or even that we have all the answers. But that is how we are painted. And to be honest, your username probably did contribute.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 07:48 PM
4

Pierce, You and I have seen it too many times, that unless the "victim" is a woman, then they aren't really important. Lisek's research started with an ideological goal, and he met it. He accomplished exactly what he wanted to. The fact that false accusations of rape/sexual harrasment are mainly leveled at men, means that it isn't an important issue (at least to those who have a vested financial interest in minimizing the issue). If the situation was looked at objectively, instead of through the…
/r/MensRights24/07/12 07:35 PM
2

True, but Vladek is Jewish. So we could probably add the JDL on to the list. Seems like there should be a lot of support for this.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 07:31 PM
6

One has to wonder, at what point the ACLU and the Federal Office on Civil Rights should be involved. This kind of blatant discrimination and punitive action from the DA's office is unconscionable.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 05:35 PM
1

Used to be legal to beat your wife, was perfectly socially acceptable. You know, continually showing your sheer stupidity is not a very good way to get your argument across. You are so wrong here, that nothing you say should ever be taken seriously. EVER.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 01:48 PM
2

Wait a minute.... I thought they were magnetism trolls, not fairies.... no wonder I couldn't find any.... I was looking under bridges, when I should have been looking in the meadow.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 11:48 AM
3

Look for the Mary Koss study for Cosmo. That is where that stat originated. The problem was, Koss and the other "researchers", were defining things as rape, that the women involved didn't define as rape.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 11:47 AM
1

At this point, with a few exceptions, agreed.
/r/MensRights23/07/12 04:07 PM
2

Maybe it's because I, like you have seen it happen too much, but I don't think it will happen en masse. Herd instinct seems to take over for most when a large group gets together. And for someone fairly new to the scene, as doch_doch is, I just view her as another feminist hater. I don't think she gives a rat's ass about men, and based on her responses to you, I think that's a supported view.
/r/MensRights23/07/12 04:07 PM
10

Fuck that. It's turning into one more tradcon/feminist shithole that wants to try and do nothing more than shame men into towing the line for women. With 1-2 exceptions, you have completely discounted or seriously thought about a single thing Factory said, and it was attack, attack, attack. You have certainly showed where the loyalty lies, and like Factory, I'm done with the subreddit. Had high hopes, but the misandry shown to Factory has done it for me.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 10:43 PM
1

And nothing in that last reply by you has anything to do with what you stated previously. You said: Rape is as bad as being falsely convicted of rape, not falsely accused. And I can prove that wrong in a heartbeat. Nice try on deflecting though.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 10:09 PM
1

Most employers don't really require a lot of certs to get your foot in the door. I'd start there with entry level and then work on the certs. Hell, my employer pays for the training/classes for certs. Worth looking into.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 06:59 PM
11

Basketball Australia quoted Scott Derwin, its acting chief executive, in a statement explaining that each national team has discretion over how their funds are spent, including travel arrangements. "We should bear in mind that in fact, historically, more funding has been directed towards the Opals," Derwin said in the statement. The Opals refer to the Australian women's basketball team and the Boomers are the men's basketball team. The spokeswoman for Basketball Australia declined to comment whe…
/r/MensRights20/07/12 06:35 PM
2

What was your MOS? Maybe look for something that the training would cross over to? I'm former Navy, so when I got out, the transition was tough. Same thing as you, joined right out of high school. Took me a while, but I finally went back for a CIS (Computer Information Systems) degree. A reccomendation.... go to school for something you enjoy doing as a hobby.... it makes working at it that much more enjoyable.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 05:09 PM
1

Would you like me to post link after link of people accused who have been beaten, killed, etc.? I guarantee you that I can provide enough stories of where being accused has caused severe physical trauma, up to and including death. Simply over an accusation. It IS as bad.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 05:01 PM
1

FYI, that 8% figure is for "Unfounded" accusations. Not blatantly false ones.... they don't track that. Unfounded means not enough evidence to know either way. Ultimately, we just don't know how big of a problem it is. But just like one rape is one too many, one false accusation is one too many.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 04:51 PM
1

False Rape Society and its successor, Community of the Wrongly Accused. Good place to start. Typically an article a day on a false accusation, usually more.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 04:49 PM
2

Being part of a community means contributing. And you don't do that. Not a thing prevents you from doing so. You want better content, but expect everyone else to do it.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 04:30 PM
6

So.... let me get this straight.... someone who posts no articles/links and does nothing but complain, is complaining about how the subreddit is a lot of BS. Why don't you actually contribute, instead of bitching about something you do nothing to correct?
/r/MensRights20/07/12 04:23 PM
1

Wish I did. In the northern chicago suburbs.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 04:21 PM
4

It's the term used for someone who solicits a prositute. Back before the computer age, when men were arrested, there was a trend to give your name as john instead of your real name. It stuck.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 11:36 AM
6

Down-vote away Done. Douche
/r/MensRights19/07/12 07:06 PM
41

So let me get this straight.... he initiated sex, she took off her own panties, but then when she decided not to, and left the room, he didn't continue....what exactly is the issue here? Other than the fact that she has bought into the feminist trope on rape.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 01:36 PM
2

I'm a dyslexic agnostic..... I'm not sure if there's a dog.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 12:52 PM
1

It's always amazing to me, when I read these, that we don't see a lot more people getting killed, by someone snapping. Or is it maybe, that that is the case in a lot of the IPV where you have a murder/suicide, and it's just overlooked, because the abused person is male? Would make for an interesting study, if it could ever be done.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 10:25 PM
2

Those "experts" as she calls them, were the Women's Law Group. Not exactly unbiased.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 12:45 PM
4

Never posted there, and I was banned, like a lot here. They are idiots.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 07:14 PM
1

NOW and RadFemHub to name 2 off the top of my head.
/r/MensRights12/07/12 04:31 PM
2

You know how I prevent rape? I don't rape. Done in 1 step.....next.
/r/MensRights12/07/12 04:12 PM
16

One thing you aren't accounting for. The loud outspoken feminists are in positions of political/social prominence/power and influence legislation. With the exception of Father's and Families and NCFM, we don't have that level of power. And those are the people who are speaking and acting in your name. Don't see a whole lot of feminist opposition to NOW's opposition to shared parenting. So basically, what COCKPUNCHER said.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 07:24 PM
1

That's possible... but in most of the cases that we run over at COTWA, consensual sex has already been admitted to. But in a case where the police are saying publicly that no crime was committed (except the false reporting by her/him), then I don't know if that would be an issue.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 04:12 PM
4

And this is ridiculous. She may be judgement proof now, but what will the situation be 20 years down the road? Sorry, but more falsly accused people need to start stepping up and filing these suits.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 12:28 PM
1

The original story was from the walesonline site. DailyMail picked it up from there.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 12:18 PM
1

About the same as a father getting custody from the mother?
/r/MensRights11/07/12 12:14 PM
11

Ok. so now look at the posts of GirlWritesWhat. And the blatant lie that the MRM is aligned with white supremacists. So everyone in the MRM is just supposed to sit back and get slandered. Where is the civility from the feminists there who are blatantly lying?
/r/MensRights29/06/12 07:08 PM
6

There was a really good writeup on in at A Voice for Men. Agent orange did a bang up job on compiling everything.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 04:46 PM
1

Actually....no: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID45-PR45.pdf Almost 3% of men reported forced sex and 22% reported verbal coercion. ... 2.3% of [women] reported sustaining forced sex from their current or most recent romantic partner, and close to 25% of the female sample sustained verbal sexual coercion
/r/MensRights29/06/12 04:40 PM
4

And it's about 4-5 years old. Not saying that it doesn't still hold true, but there are much more recent examples to pull from. RadFemHub comes to mind.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 04:18 PM
1

These two men do have balls. Are they big, yellow and fuzzy? Sorry, couldn't resist.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 11:59 AM
1

And what are very low pregnancy rates? How do the number compare in relation to pregnancy rates for women on the pill? What a crappy piece.
/r/MensRights28/06/12 02:48 PM
2

Yet when ears are pierced, if no earrings are worn for a time, the hole will close. Foreskin will not grow back. To borrow the phrase, "my body, my choice" should rule the day in circumcision. Edit: I'm in agreement with you.
/r/MensRights27/06/12 06:59 PM
1

Can you post the link to that? Sounds like interesting reading.
/r/MensRights27/06/12 04:53 PM
1

Thanks. I actually hadn't seen it until you referenced it. It's appreciated.
/r/MensRights27/06/12 12:23 PM
0

Never said there weren't.
/r/MensRights22/06/12 12:14 PM
3

Nothing wrong with that (thinking kindly). Granted, some of the things I think today (at 42) are much different than what I thought at 21.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 06:48 PM
12

I wonder if this extends to any boys she has (if she has any). If she does, are they circumcised?
/r/MensRights21/06/12 03:11 PM
1

thanks.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 02:43 PM
3

Stop with the butt hurt attitude. 58/42 isn't as huge a difference as, there are places where 80% of homeless are men. In this case, it appears it is closer to equal. Glad you read so much into what I said. I didn't say it didn't mean anything, or that it wasn't an issue. Just questioned what the missing percentage was. Is there a link to an actual story, or did you just pull this out of your ass (Since you decided to be snarky to me, I figured I'd return the favor)?
/r/MensRights21/06/12 01:43 PM
32

Not just her dismissal. But she should be arrested for sexual assault of a child as well.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 01:07 PM
1

So what are the other 10%?
/r/MensRights21/06/12 01:06 PM
1

Odd. maybe it depends on where you are at. I grew up with them, and I tend not to live in large cities, so maybe it's due to the more suburban/rural thing.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 07:33 PM
-1

This. couldn't have said it better.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 04:38 PM
1

Mothers day. President Obama. :)
/r/MensRights20/06/12 02:43 PM
1

Anyone here in the DC area that could let him know he has support for this? That there are others who are aware?
/r/MensRights20/06/12 01:22 PM
1

You also have the right to bare legs. :) I'd like to know where you live that people look down on those who do choose to exercise that right. I own multiple firearms, and have never had a problem. I live just outside of Chicago.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 01:08 PM
1

I'd say start with the "1 in 4" lie. Stopped reading there.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 05:10 PM
1

Well, since you started with the insults, I figured you were okay with them. Perhaps primary school education is something you are unfamiliar with. That does come across as really insulting, and implies that the person you responded to doesn't have any education. May not be what you intended, but that's how I read it. Maybe just a text/tone thing. The primary issue here are your posts where you said: but threatening to abuse her is a horrible thing to do Self defense is not hitting someone back …
/r/MensRights19/06/12 04:53 PM
2

I was taught early on, you don't pick a fight with someone you know can kick your ass. So I don't do that. I was also taught that if I do pick a fight with someone larger than me, I will likely get my ass kicked. Take your white knighting somewhere else. Somone smaller who initiates violence get no passes here. They get called idiots. And so do the people who make excuses for them.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 03:38 PM
9

It could be called..... I don't know...... "rape culture", or something like that.
/r/MensRights15/06/12 03:10 PM
2

God I love the Kentucky Fried Movie
/r/MensRights15/06/12 01:14 PM
1

And unless he can come up with the phone, he has no case. He can't prove the cops had it or hid it.
/r/MensRights13/06/12 04:56 PM
3

And the fact that they guy she did this too is a joker as well, and has said it's no problem for him, makes this not a big deal. Agree with those above about the double-standard being real, but in this situation, not an issue.
/r/MensRights13/06/12 04:30 PM
1

I walked past it a time or two myself. While the more recent definition is a good step, it really is too ambiguous. I expect that we will see this change nothing in the stats that come out, with regards to male rape. And when you consider that the groups that were consulted on the change were feminist SGI groups, it speaks volumes.
/r/MensRights13/06/12 04:16 PM
1

Forced sexual intercourse means penetration by the offender Since a woman can't penetrate someone, except with an object, by definition, she can't rape someone.
/r/MensRights13/06/12 12:34 PM
1

But when it is only marketed as men=abusers/women=abused, that shouldn't ever be allowed to stand unchallenged. If all we do is look for what is right, we wouldn't get anywhere. It is by challenging what is wrong, that progress is actually made.
/r/MensRights13/06/12 11:28 AM
3

Not when it is a governmentally supported entity. Sorry, but the government should be neutral and put out the information that EVERYONE should know. Just targeting 1/2 the population is sexist. All I ask for is equal representation. And Fuck you. Stick your sancitmonious attitude up your ass, dickhead. (see, I can call names as well). Step down off your high horse, cupcake.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 06:55 PM
1

Some of the later ones are even worse
/r/MensRights12/06/12 06:31 PM
4

Same here. Thank god my wife likes it.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 05:35 PM
8

The problem is that this is a government supported institution, that is putting out blatantly sexist information. There is no way to get an opposing pamphlet in there (I would guess, as I'm in the U.S.). But the fact that the government is signing off on this, is discriminatory as hell.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 04:30 PM
2

Nope. when it is, it is. His post was dripping with it. How about you stop trying to tell me what I can and can't say, and actually debate what I said, rather than focus on one word.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 03:34 PM
0

No it's not. it's just as hideous. You go ahead and wallow in your hate. But do it somewhere else. You want to campaign against the prosecutor, and work to defeat them in the next election, feel free. But the personal life destruction just makes you an asshole. I'm sure 4chan would welcome that attitude.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 12:59 PM
1

First, the snide little r/ManginasRigts snark. Second, his 3 criteria are crap. His last sentence should have their/them instead of her. d3suxxx's comment has nothing to do with genetic differences. It's misogyny, plain and simple.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 12:56 PM
1

If you would, link me to the evidence. Because all of the links we have to the DOJ stats don't show that.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 12:52 PM
2

Thanks. It also goes more toward our new mission.
/r/MensRights12/06/12 12:51 PM
0

Because unlike you, I'm not an ass. Violence is not the answer. Never said I agreed with the prosecutor, never said what they did was right. But voilence is not the answer. Try again.
/r/MensRights11/06/12 07:20 PM
1

The problem is, the court didn't publish anything (other than official court documents). They just didn't put a ban on the media publishing anything. This is the reason that all parties need anonymity, until such time as a finding of guilt has been entered in court.
/r/MensRights11/06/12 06:51 PM
1

AAAAAAAAAAnnnnnnnnddddddd, no.
/r/MensRights11/06/12 06:49 PM
2

Thanks for the shout out.... but we are now COTWA (Community of the Wrongly Accused). We can be reached at [email protected] EDIT: Formerly the False Rape Society
/r/MensRights11/06/12 06:24 PM
1

Oh look.... a bigot. Downvote.
/r/MensRights11/06/12 04:55 PM
2

Actually, we don't know what percent are. There is a huge grey area, that there isn't enough evidence to know either way. I do think AnthonyZarat is wrong on this one, but to say 10%, makes the same mistake he does.
/r/MensRights11/06/12 04:41 PM
1

Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Just like anyone else. Then sentencing comensurate with the crime.
/r/MensRights11/06/12 01:43 PM
1

You have to ask, when those with a vested stake in the "Sexual Grievance Industry" say women aren't believed, how something like this happens. It's almost as if they are lying. /s
/r/MensRights11/06/12 12:29 PM
1

Not silly at all. We all have come here with different experiences. I've not been personally touched by what a lot here have gone through. But I'm just as outraged at the garbage that our legal system has become, with respect to people (realizing that it is men that get the shaft more often than not). Those who come here, not through personal experience, but through observation, are the lucky ones. And I count myself in that group. Those, like those who have posted their horror stories above, ha…
/r/MensRights08/06/12 07:07 PM
2

I was surfing one day, and came across the False Rape Society. Started commenting there, and soon after, was invited by Pierce to join as a mod/admin. The rest is history.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 06:55 PM
2

I'm well aware of that, hence what I said. But it would be interesting to use the "if being named on the BC means you are liable for child support", then how can it he be denied any parental rights to go with the responsibility, in court. Another of those fun double standards.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 06:53 PM
2

They did.....and it came up negative.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 06:03 PM
1

Ben Rothlisberger can be added to that list. And Brian Banks. And I'm sure I could come up with just a few more.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 05:44 PM
1

Or, it's simply that they don't really give a rats ass about men.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 05:04 PM
3

Here's the question. By the act of him being named on the birth certificate, why isn't he considered the father? How many cases of women naming some random guy on the certificate have we heard about, who they track down years later for support, and even after he can prove by DNA to not be the father, is still liable? Wouldn't that apply here?
/r/MensRights08/06/12 04:31 PM
1

Great Spaghetti monster in the sky that link is atrocious. Not that you posted it, but that they are doing that. I think, again, you are misreading what I am saying. For those that don't live in NZ, it really does mean nothing. It's vague.
/r/MensRights07/06/12 02:26 PM
3

Damn all those babies that are having sex and getting those STD's and AIDS. /s
/r/MensRights06/06/12 04:55 PM
2

I'm going to downvote. The comments on the first link actually cite studies that disprove that article. The second article actually states: Circumcision might reduce a man's risk of cancer. Really? It's possible, though not yet proved. And the third is talking of something that there is a vaccine for. So none of those really supports the idea that circumcision is a necessity, or that they prevent anything. Ultimately, this is performing a non-medically needed surgery on someone who can't consent…
/r/MensRights06/06/12 04:54 PM
0

Hell if women didn't want them, you'd see more women saying eff the standards and meeting the male ones regardless. THIS.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 04:03 PM
1

Do you work, or attend the school? If you do, file a complaint for discrimination, or that this creates a hostile working environment. A Title IX complaint of unequal access/treatment should be considered as well.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 03:49 PM
2

And that is the kind of thing I've never understood. If drunk driving is not an excuse, if you get in an accident and kill someone, then how can it be for any other crime?
/r/MensRights06/06/12 02:42 PM
2

Missed that. Thanks.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 02:18 PM
1

But for the policy in question: The maternity coverage only applies to the policyholder, not their spouse or dependents So why does he have to pay for coverage, that he will never use, and doesn't apply to the people in the household that it would help? It puts a cost on him for a useless service.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 01:47 PM
6

FTA: "The shortage means many boys in need of a strong male presence in their lives are missing out on the adult male companionship they would like How about their fathers? Where are they? Maybe if there was a less adversarial process in divorce proceedings, and visitation interference was punished as heavily as child support non-payment, all of this wouldn't be an issue.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 12:15 PM
1

Ahhh....so what you are saying, is that in the way that the statute is titled, it doesn't actually imply rape. And common sense doesn't show how rape can be construed. So if a 17 year old has sex with his/her 16 year 364 day old girlfriend/boyfriend, that is rape. Don't think so. Again, the only thing that is being said here, is that the "sexual congress with an underaged person", in no way implies rape.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 11:33 AM
-1

Sorry.... gotta downvote.... what proof do you have that women refuse to apply to these jobs?
/r/MensRights05/06/12 04:53 PM
1

Sexual connection with a young person Please show me in any way shape or form, that rape can be construed. For your comment on stupid, well...... fuck you. Drop your condescension at the door, or don't bother to respond.
/r/MensRights05/06/12 04:28 PM
3

I'm a conservative and an MRA. I am definitely anti-left wing.
/r/MensRights04/06/12 05:58 PM
1

Here you go
/r/MensRights04/06/12 05:19 PM
4

Oh look.... a bigot. Enjoy your hate.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 11:05 PM
-2

Didn't women support Obama more than Hillary? I'm not sure that Gender always overrides race. That's one I think is a bit more situational.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 11:04 PM
1

When you click the Saris link above, click the Relationship Violence link on the left side of the page. In the 4th paragraph is a link to the Duluth Model page. Everything there is about men being batterers and women being victims. So by promoting the Duluth Model, Saris, regardless of the fact that their pages are gender neutral, are still pushing the man=abuser/woman=abused.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 11:02 PM
1

After a quick look at the link, while a good part of it is gender neutral, under the Relationship Violence part, they are basing everything on the Duluth Model, which is premised on the man=bad/woman=victim mindset. Anything else they would say, is extremely suspect, as they do appear to be ideologically and gender driven.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 06:19 PM
1

Thanks for the link. I'll be sure to take a look.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 06:16 PM
1

She already did. It's all been spent. Don't know on what, as she has nothing, and actually owes back child support.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 04:32 PM
1

Here's the problem. "Unfounded", by the DOJ/FBI definition, means there isn't enough evidence to know one way or the other. They don't actually track known false accusations. So that is a red herring. And one question to ask.... when you were an RA, who provided that information?
/r/MensRights31/05/12 04:20 PM
1

I get the feeling it was all the links you posted that killed it. Your post without all the links went through.
/r/MensRights30/05/12 02:15 PM
1

He didn't say it wasn't. How did so many people completely miss what he said, and read so much into it that isn't there?
/r/MensRights30/05/12 02:02 PM
1

I don't think that's what ChunkyLaFunga was even remotely saying. I don't live in NZ and had no idea that "sexual connection with a young person" meant statutory rape. The fact that the word rape wasn't used at all in the article makes it seem that she wasn't being charged with any form of rape. Perhaps people need to take a moment and take a deep breath.
/r/MensRights30/05/12 02:01 PM
0

Oh look.... another 1 day old account leveling accusations with no proof. Idiot.
/r/MensRights29/05/12 06:30 PM
5

Warren Farrell - The Myth of Male Power
/r/MensRights24/05/12 04:07 PM
2

I wouldn't waste your time. He's clearly not here for any kind of rational discussion. Hell, what kind of ass starts with saying how this isn't worth being posted, and then spends so much time commenting to others on it, and tries to shut it down using all of the shaming language. All the time, sitting on his/her ass and not actually doing anything. The irony is priceless.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 05:01 PM
8

I think that some women (and most feminists), see gay men as not manly, so therefore it's an insult to a straight mans masculinity. That's how it comes across to me. It's an attempt to deflect and shame.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 04:47 PM
8

There is also the response, "you must be gay". I've had that thrown at me more than once by self identified feminists. So it's also used for shaming straight men, along with the creep-shaming.
/r/MensRights23/05/12 04:21 PM
2

And, of course, make sure what the laws are in your state/country regarding 1 party/2 party recording.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 05:01 PM
1

Agreed. That's why I just report it and move on. At the very least, it places an inconvenince that they have to create the new account and move everything.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 04:58 PM
1

Screw that. Click the report link at the top of the page. That kind of hate and promotion of violence shouldn't be tolerated.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 04:47 PM
2

So in an already overbalanced funding issue, the one change for men is to do something that requires even less funding (cutting of costs), while all those other items increase funding for female only issues. How about increasing the funding for male only issues to parity?
/r/MensRights22/05/12 04:32 PM
3

I don't know... it made me laugh, so that's adding something.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 04:23 PM
2

That was my first reaction as well....OP needs to point her to False Rape Society, and CotWA.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 11:49 AM
1

Actually, that is exactly what is getting attention. Sorry, but sitting quietly isn't going to get shit done.
/r/MensRights22/05/12 11:44 AM
1

You know, this might be a good way to start a good counter to feminism. I'm descended of the Nez Perce (Spokane Tribe). Maybe getting more of the minority status among us to start fighting more forcefully back. If you need any help with your site, let me know.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 05:30 PM
1

Well.... if you are in the British Navy, I guess having surgically implanted flotation devices could be a usefull thing. :)
/r/MensRights21/05/12 04:27 PM
2

The difference being that feminists currently have the ear of those in power (and are some of those people in power). MRA's/MRM don't have that kind of power, so we need to be out there countering, wherever we can.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 04:11 PM
6

It's growing. We are getting more and more notice as time goes by. The 3rd thing that Sigil1 didn't mention.... If the feminists come out and admit that they have been lying, their movement is done. They have painted themselves into a corner they can't get out of, without some form of totalitarian government (which the U.S., at least, has been moving toward).
/r/MensRights21/05/12 03:31 PM
20

When men are treated as human beings
/r/MensRights18/05/12 11:32 AM
1

Sounds good. I would say the same thing. The links in the sidebar are probably a good way to go. On the Blog you are talking about, have different sections: DV Family Courts Rape/sexual assault etc. For each page, have links to studies/other blogs/resources for that area EDIT: Formatting
/r/MensRights17/05/12 05:37 PM
1

along with my other post, I would say ignore idiots like this.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 05:12 PM
3

blogspot, wordpress, your own domain, whatever works. For content, write about what you know and what interests you. It's that simple.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 05:12 PM
2

Mainly, it was our desire to take our advocacy in a whole new direction. We have plans for direct outreach and support to those falsely accused, with a support network for medical, psycological and financial support networks. A complete rebranding was needed for this.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 05:01 PM
1

Your doctor can precribe medication for that. You shouldn't have to deal with your hormones doing that.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 04:32 PM
3

you kind find all of that on A Voice for Men
/r/MensRights17/05/12 03:00 PM
1

If you need any help, give a yell.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 01:41 PM
2

Thankfully, here in Illinois they do compensate. But the compensation typically is about $6,000.00 a year. A lawsuit for more can be tried, but only if there is some form of gross negligence will that succeed. This is an example
/r/MensRights15/05/12 06:53 PM
1

Sidebar. ---------->
/r/MensRights15/05/12 11:49 AM
2

And yet the "Victim" narrative that Feminism pushes, is putting women on a pedestal, and saying that they need all of the support. Once again, they say one thing, and yet thier actions are something completely different. VAWA is one big chivalrous support of women. Alimony/child support, affirmative action/quotas.... all of that is a form of chivalry that women are more than happy to take advantage of. They will only decry it when it looks good in the public eye, but everything they actually do,…
/r/MensRights14/05/12 07:29 PM
1

Please oh wise one, show me the error of my way. How is it a delusion?
/r/MensRights14/05/12 07:02 PM
-1

Actually, feminism absolutely depends on chivalry. Without chivalry, feminism would die quickly.
/r/MensRights14/05/12 02:42 PM
4

There is one other problem with RAINN's stats. They are basing that 5% conviction number off of the reporting figure. All other crimes are based off of the number charged, not the number reported. When you look at the conviction rate using the same criteria as other crimes, the conviction rates are comparable. The same thing was done in the UK with the Baroness Stern report.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 06:55 PM
1

You aren't wrong. And now I'm getting an access denied error on the above link, but this quote is the bread and butter of it that is from Here : Assistant District Attorney David Buettner said Hancock was charged with DUI instead of manslaughter because the state was unable to prove she was the cause of the collision. “Because we couldn’t prove causation beyond a reasonable doubt, we couldn’t proceed with the manslaughter charge. We have a pretty good idea that she was the cause of the collision…
/r/MensRights11/05/12 12:03 PM
2

Correct. And the state didn't feel they had the evidence to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that she was responsible for the death. The other person had swerved so that they were in both lanes, so meeting the requirements for manslaughter or murder, would likely have been impossible. Prosecutors need to consider this more often when deciding to prosecute (either men or women).
/r/MensRights10/05/12 04:53 PM
4

K C Johnson
/r/MensRights10/05/12 04:43 PM
-4

To be honest, as the article states, it 3 times what other first time offenders get. And the state didn't feel they had the proof to show that she was the sole cause of the accident. This isn't a bad thing.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 04:02 PM
1

42, IT
/r/MensRights10/05/12 03:48 PM
2

Pretty sure he was responding to the same person you were, just clicked the wrong reply button. :)
/r/MensRights10/05/12 03:37 PM
64

I think I'd respond with: Supremacy forever huh? So much for that equality thing.
/r/MensRights09/05/12 04:07 PM
11

Problem is, these aren't judicial courts. They are college boards who decide the issue on the college side. So a person can be kicked out of the school, which is a part of thier college transcripts, so if they apply to another school, that's there for the new school to see (guilty or not). Colleges should have the sole responsibility to contact law enforcement when a complaint is made. They shouldn't have a chance to ruin someone's future, based on a 50.1 percent believability of one of the part…
/r/MensRights09/05/12 03:56 PM
2

Didn't know all of that, so thanks. But I guess even that supports the notion of not being able to tell, just by interacting with someone, how drunk they are, and if they are indeed too drunk to consent (and what level that occurs).
/r/MensRights08/05/12 07:06 PM
2

LP?
/r/MensRights08/05/12 06:47 PM
6

This is the crux of the problem right here. What is that level? It's been pretty well defined for drunk driving, but are people supposed to start carrying a breathalyzer, to test potential sex partners? And the flip side of this is, if it is a drunken hookup (both are drunk), why do we never hear of the woman being charged in those situations? I know a lot of high functioning drunks, who you wouldn't know they were drunk unless you had been standing there watching them drink.
/r/MensRights08/05/12 06:22 PM
3

But consent doesn't have to be verbal. So just because they aren't saying "Yes!" doesn't mean they haven't consented.
/r/MensRights08/05/12 05:18 PM
1

I would assume the National Coalition for Men (NCFM), is what she's referring to.
/r/MensRights08/05/12 11:38 AM
1

Where did you get that he did it to the same girl on the same day? I just read: it’s the second time he has gotten in trouble for quoting “Sexy and I Know It.” Don't see where that is to the same girl. That he's been talked to before, makes this a bit less of a problem to me. But a 6 year old suspended for sexual harassment? That seems a bit of overkill.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 07:29 PM
1

That's what came to mind for me too..... and yes, we are getting old. :(
/r/MensRights04/05/12 05:12 PM
1

Fair enough, but Amnesty International is the one you quoted, so that's what I based my remark on. I'm saying they probably shouldn't be the one you quote. The others i'm more than willing to accept, but not them.
/r/MensRights03/05/12 02:51 PM
1

I can't go back and view the video (I'm at work and youtube is blocked), but does it say that the parents of the girls are taking some kind of action? All I know for certain at this point, is that the victim's mother refused to do anything. Part of me agrees with you that it would be better for the law to be the last resort, but a public crime deserves a public punishment. What that punishment is, is up for debate. I still think that there needs to be some form of public apology, as they made th…
/r/MensRights03/05/12 02:49 PM
1

Might I recommend someone other than Amnesty International as your source. This is the same group that supported Sudan and Libya on the UN Human Rights Council. And those 2 countries are some of the worst abusers of human rights on the planet. Not real convincing.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 04:39 PM
2

Here in the U.S., it is not their responsibility to protect anyone. There has actually been a Supreme Court decision on that.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 04:32 PM
2

Alcohol is the biggie. I don't have any studies or polls to cite, but I would estimate that 85-95 of cases we hear about involved alcohol. Drugs (other than alcohol) would seem to be one as well.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 04:30 PM
1

Forgiveness? Ok, so what you are saying is that no bad actions, ever, should ever be punished. No consequences should ever be assigned. If we never punish bad behavior, we condone it. And leave your condecension behind for a minute. Punishment is not getting even. it is deterrent for bad behavior being repeated. If no punishment is levied against these girls, we are telling them that what they did doesn't matter and is acceptable. I'm not okay with that. If we should only focus on forgiveness, I…
/r/MensRights02/05/12 01:45 PM
1

Can you explain how you think they didn't know what they are doing? I think you are too quick to give them a pass on not knowing what they were doing was wrong. 13 is what.... 8th grade? We had sex ed by that point. If they have, and I have no way of knowing, then I think they would know, and it can't just be brushed off. A little public humiliation seems appropriate, as they did the same thing.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 04:17 PM
1

I'm a little late to this one, but..... My god, let the parents handle it privately. No. And here is why... these girls filmed it, uploaded it, and spread the word to make this as public as possible. Their punishment should be made just as public, as an example of what isn't acceptable. What that punishment should be, is up for debate, but the punishment itself needs to be public, as the incident was made public. Hiding the punishment means that others get the message that this kind of thing is …
/r/MensRights30/04/12 05:16 PM
1

No worries. It just didn't read right, so I wanted to make sure.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 05:01 PM
1

True, but I don't think IVF would be covered by most means of public assistance. I'd like to know where the money came from, as that ain't cheap. and the fact that she already had 6 kids, I just don't see her getting approved for this kind of thing.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 04:23 PM
1

Care to apologize, now that the screenshot has been added?
/r/MensRights30/04/12 04:21 PM
1

Sorry, but based on what you said there, hating the patriarchy does = hating men. You said: Patriarchy = all men in the world, So if you hate the patriarchy, you do hate men. Unless I misread something, or you mis-typed something.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 04:20 PM
1

I'll grant you a maybe on the use of "bitch". But the moron the OP responded to is the one referenceing her "vag". All he did was use the whole word. If she is going to expect preferential treatment because of her "vag", it is perfectly respectable to refer to her as such.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 04:16 PM
1

And now?
/r/MensRights30/04/12 04:13 PM
2

Which is BS. It was an intended part of our system.
/r/MensRights28/04/12 04:40 PM
3

Thanks for this. Going up on our site now.
/r/MensRights28/04/12 12:17 AM
18

Either write a check, or give a money order. NEVER pay cash in these situations. Too much is at stake. You know... little things like your freedom.
/r/MensRights28/04/12 12:12 AM
1

Retaliation? How would equal choices be retaliation? I actually am okay with child support in a limited context, if one parent does have the child more (not the insane percentages they make it now), but starting with 50/50 physical custody, and adjust from there... say if a parent is proven to be unfit. Each parent pays for everything when the child is with them, with the exception of medical issues, and school costs, those should be shared (there may be other items, but those are the biggest in…
/r/MensRights28/04/12 12:10 AM
2

Missed that... so yeah. I still think I'd go to trial, than take any plea deal. If I'm going to get nailed for something stupid anyway, might as well roll the dice with a jury. And I'd ask my attorney to ask about jury nullification during the jury selection.
/r/MensRights28/04/12 12:08 AM
1

In a perfect world, yes. As we've seen though, the easiest way around all of that is for her to leave the state and give birth in another, where he isn't on the registry there. He can try to contest it, but if the child is adopted, he has a whole new fight on his hands to get the child back, and the chance for success goes down, the longer it takes. Ultimately, women hold the power of what happens with that child. They shouldn't be able to determine another person's responsibility to that child.…
/r/MensRights27/04/12 06:39 PM
2

Not quite. Her body, her choice, but their responsibility. Sorry, but yes. It's unfair, but such is life. But it's their responsibility, only if she decides it. In an ideal world, women wouldn't have to deal with menstruation, does that mean we should compensate women for it with another inequality? No, because men have nothing to do with the cause of menstruation. They do in pregnancy, but have no say after the fact. I don't think we'll see eye to eye on this one, but thanks for the discussion.…
/r/MensRights27/04/12 05:18 PM
5

We're in agreement. What bothers me, is that in the Rodriguez case, what are juries doing today? Why jury nullification isn't being used is beyond me. Sorry, but bad laws really need to be nullified.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 05:02 PM
6

Agreed
/r/MensRights27/04/12 04:44 PM
2

but they are biologically incapable of doing so because they're not autonomous over the physical existence of the child. And yet, fully dependent on her choice, he can be put on the hook for 18-21 years financially. Her body, her choice, but his responsibility. Sorry, but no. And if he does want the child, and she chooses to abort, he has no say. So she can make the decision to opt out of the responsibility but he can't do the same. Same thing for adoption. She can make a choice without informin…
/r/MensRights27/04/12 04:44 PM
2

And that's the whole point. Most of the stories are of mothers from other states using that to get around the fathers having a say. And even in states that aren't as bad as Utah, all she has to do is not name the father on the birth certificate and there is nothing else needed. If you can show me the statute for another state that says unless the father is named and signs off, she can't adopt the child out, then no, it's not difficult. If the father is named, then he damn well has to give consen…
/r/MensRights27/04/12 04:11 PM
26

Yep. Unless she was raped, she consented to the sex act, so she's just as responsible for getting pregnant.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 03:52 PM
2

No they don't. There have been too many cases posted here where the children were adopted out without consent of the father.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 03:50 PM
2

No, actually, I did address that. Once women get pregnant, they have the option to abort, adopt out, or use safe haven. Men have no options. But, if the woman decides to keep it, her decision puts him on the hook for child support. In the same time frame that she is given to opt out, he should have the same options. I'm not saying he should be able to force her to have an abortion, but he should be able to opt out of responsibility, the same as her. If you are going to argue the abstinence optio…
/r/MensRights27/04/12 03:49 PM
5

The problem is, abortion isn't the only option women have to avoid responsibility. They can adopt or use safe haven laws. And you need to make sure that if you are saying that men having sex is consent to parenthood, that gets applied to women as well, and in the current legal climate, that isn't the case. While I agree that children should have involved parents, we can't allow one side to have the option to walk away (women), when the other side doesn't (men). Equality.... sometimes it sucks
/r/MensRights27/04/12 12:34 PM
1

Because VAWA is the national implementation of it. Stop the major damage first, and then get to the root.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 12:02 PM
3

How about both are idiots, and neither are worth a shit as musicians (IMO).
/r/MensRights27/04/12 01:52 AM
4

VAWA determines funding of police and DV programs, and a significant number of those use the Duluth Model for DV. Which is a "it's always the man's fault" or "men are never victims" view of the issue.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 01:48 AM
2

That's the whole point. There is no boys team. And by kicking him off, they are now in violation of Title IX.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 01:40 AM
1

For some reason, I don't think they get the sarcasm in this. upvote
/r/MensRights27/04/12 01:08 AM
2

You weren't being a jerk. A couple of the posters there were spoiling for a fight, but you were calm and level headed the whole way through.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 01:06 AM
4

THIS.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 12:16 AM
2

That's the one question I never heard answered. Love to know.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 12:06 AM
1

No. But as Alphonso Ribeiro was the only one to try out for the girls team, it tanked.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 11:11 PM
1

I'm in complete agreement about it. I just found it astounding that an Executive Director of a girls activist organization came out and realizes just how much this violates that. If it's going to be used, once again, they need to apply it equally.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 11:07 PM
1

Lord Blair said the government should "use the anniversary of Perceval's death to consider whether enough is being done to combat the pernicious and degrading trafficking of women and girls for sexual services by organised crime". What?????
/r/MensRights26/04/12 04:20 PM
9

I would say this ties in rather well with that whole Rebecca Watson elevator issue. A lot of people excoriated him for what he said during that, going into full attack mode, rather than point out where he was wrong, and back it up.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 04:16 PM
8

While that is an issue, I'll be curious to see if any action against the school for Title IX violation comes in to play, or if this gets swept under the rug. More than likely, it will be ignored, but the girls team may be disanded, or he will have to be allowed to play. And this could set a rather big precendent if he isn't allowed to play, they don't create a boys team, and the girls team is allowed to continue unabated.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 04:13 PM
48

What I found of interest, is this: The decision to remove Keeling from the team raises questions about the school’s compliance with Title IX, a federal law that states both men and women should have an opportunity to play a sport if the school offers it to the opposite sex, Dana Edell, the executive director of SPARK movement, a girls activist organization.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 02:13 PM
3

I neither believe or disbelieve. If this is true, then he shouldn't be posting about it on reddit. Any lawyer worth his/her salt, as soon as he/she finds out about this, and if the OP is smart he will mention it, will refuse to represent him. It's about the biggest idiot move he could make.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 12:06 AM
2

And so, with nothing better to do, you post on reddit.
/r/MensRights26/04/12 12:03 AM
1

Sorry, but I'm down voting this. Why the fuck are you using an account that is 31 minutes old, and instead of finding legal representation, you are asking what the hell to do? Really?
/r/MensRights25/04/12 11:54 PM
2

This. I had completely missed that each time I read the piece. They did use that term for all the sites listed. SPLC can kiss my ass.
/r/MensRights25/04/12 11:43 PM
6

No kidding. Why not: The new will anger men, who should know by now that while politicians like Harriet Harman are vocal about closing the gender pay gap (which doesn't exist), she does little about closing the life expectancy gap.
/r/MensRights25/04/12 11:22 PM
1

This one made me snort coffee out my nose. Upvote
/r/MensRights25/04/12 04:48 PM
1

Actually, the image is of tits. Women objectify themselves by protesting naked, but the big bad menz are to blame. Whatever.
/r/MensRights25/04/12 04:47 PM
1

That to me, is why I like it so much. It follows the real life setup, that not everyone has abilities that are super kick ass, and overpowering. That whole equal but different thing.
/r/MensRights25/04/12 01:33 PM
1

Not sure I am on board with it all the time. I'm ok with specifying men, if it was a group of men, women, if it was a group of women, if that's how is happens. Nothing wrong with it, so long as when it is a mixed group, they don't put emphasis on one, and minimize the other.
/r/MensRights25/04/12 11:43 AM
2

This sentence I think puts to much emphasis on it being Firemen not firewomen He was referencing a specific news article in which 9 FireMEN died though. You could argue that FireFIGHTERS is acceptable (I think it is), so long as the article doesn't make any distinction (such as saying 3 women Firefighters died, along with 6 others).
/r/MensRights24/04/12 06:37 PM
1

Fair enough. I walked right past that. I think a lot of others did as well. Edit: Spelling
/r/MensRights24/04/12 01:19 PM
3

At this point, she's just charged. Not convicted. He's filing a civil suit, which has a much lower standard of proof. Honestly, This is a flip of what we usually see where the man is on the receiving end of this kind of thing. And isn't it amazing how many are usually calling for a verdict of some kind before convicting in a trial by media, are being silent in this case.
/r/MensRights23/04/12 06:53 PM
1

See jacobtk's post above. Just by going there, if that is the correct video, you can be arrested and jailed for viewing child porn.
/r/MensRights23/04/12 06:31 PM
0

Don't see that at the link you provided. What paragraph, or which one of the sites listed does it state that?
/r/MensRights23/04/12 05:08 PM
2

And upvoted by the rest of us who actually would jump in and be involved. If we don't know, we can't do anything.
/r/MensRights20/04/12 05:08 PM
2

I'll have to see if I can find it, and if I'm wrong, someone please feel free to correct, but even those who committed no crime. I'm pretty sure the U.S. does this. If you are ever brought in and DNA taken, even if you are never arrested, they keep it on file/database.
/r/MensRights20/04/12 03:45 PM
1

Does it matter? Seeing as he/they appear to be part of the BDSM community, perhaps there has been previous false allegations, or perhaps he is a bank robber. Either way, it really doesn't make a difference, does it?
/r/MensRights20/04/12 03:12 PM
1

And nowhere in that article are any of those sites called a hate site. They speak of the misogyny of the sites. Hell, False Rape Society (and now COTWA), of which I'm a contributor is listed there, and at no point do they call us a hate site. The fact that they only have 1 of our articles, which doesn't say what they think it says, and the fact that one of thier sources is that idiot Futrelle, really degrades thier credibility. Sorry, but ullere is right on this.
/r/MensRights20/04/12 01:11 PM
2

Would it apply? Possible, but are we willing to allow one person to be culpable for taking away several years of someone's life, and they get a free pass? How would that not be a recipe for abuse of that? Don't like him, have sex with him willingly, and then turn around and cry rape. If she's a good enough actor, and keeps it simple, he's screwed (I use he as it is usually the guy who is falsely accused). Then, years down the road, when she is feeling generous, she can say it was all a mistake a…
/r/MensRights20/04/12 11:54 AM
1

Well, here in Illinois, they just upheld hearsay as admissible in the Drew Peterson case, so I could concieveably see that used by the mother's lawyer to say that the son did this, and then gave that to the mother, so since she wasn't one of the parties involved in the recording, it should be admissible. That could be stretching it, but I don't see where something like that wouldn't be attempted.
/r/MensRights20/04/12 11:51 AM
1

Doesn't work that way. You made the assertion, you prove it. This tells me you can't. I'm done, as you don't appear to want to argue in good faith.
/r/MensRights20/04/12 11:40 AM
4

THIS
/r/MensRights19/04/12 05:01 PM
7

Not defensive. Tired of the idiots who think that punishing a liar will keep others from coming forward. Common sense is about the most ridiculous source I've ever seen attempted. What you are admitting is, you can't back up what you are stating.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 05:00 PM
12

And I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with the unsupported assertion that prosecuting liars will stop actual victims from coming forward. It's complete bullshit that he can't back up.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 04:58 PM
1

I'll see if I can find the link, but NOW lobbied against 50/50 default custody in Michigan.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 04:52 PM
1

Althought it looks like the article has been modified, I just realized that I made some assumptions, based on the comments from Ernie House on that article. Which I was saying above. So it's possible I am incorrect on that. But the back and forth between him and the poster that says she's one of the daughters, Samantha Palacek, they both reference that it was mom's weekend. I would take that to mean the father has custody.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 04:39 PM
1

What you left out, is that it is recommended as long as you live in a 1 party consent state. And this involves a 3rd party (the son), so I don't know the legality of that part. But if your state has 2 party consent, then you shouldn't record without that notification. On the flip side, I'd rather be prosecuted for illegal recording, than say DV or molestation that is alleged in a divorce. It doesn't state it in the article, but I'm not sure how federal wiretapping violations would enter the pict…
/r/MensRights19/04/12 04:31 PM
24

it discourages real cases to come forward [source] That's bullshit. For no other crime I can think of, is prosecuting liars avoided, because it MIGHT discourage others who have been an actual victim of that crime from coming forward.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 04:25 PM
5

I would say it certainly is a men's rights issue. I believe that 98-99% of the people that the Innocence Project has cleared have been men. The inherent anti-male bias in the court system is definitively a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 02:23 PM
2

Agreed. I can't imagine not having my wife in my life.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 02:13 PM
2

I'm all for getting to know someone before marrying/moving in. The problem is, that people can and do change over time. And there is absolutely no way to protect yourself from that. It really comes down to an individual choice, I think. If someone wants to be distrustful of everyone, well, thier loss I guess. I personally couldn't do it, but I understand those that do.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 01:39 PM
1

The thing is, the father already has custody. The kids were with the mom during her visitation time.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 01:28 PM
1

Don't disagree with you. But we don't know if that is the case here. We only have a comment to the article to go off of, from someone who isn't even a parent involved in the case. So unless we get more information, I'm not going to make any assumptions.
/r/MensRights19/04/12 01:27 PM
1

Seconded.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 04:49 PM
2

Agreed
/r/MensRights18/04/12 04:41 PM
1

Cool. I just got a bit confused is all.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 04:17 PM
2

They state in the article: Dropping out of college and choosing lower paying careers contribute to women making less than men, said Madsen. So they are making the choice, of lower paying jobs. Huh....I guess I fail to see how that is discriminatory.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 04:13 PM
1

I'm curious.... what does the CIA definition have to do with anything? They don't handle domestic issues. The FBI does.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 01:47 PM
1

Where in the piece was all of that stated? It was in a comment, but I'm not going to take that on face value. 1) That could be a sign something is seriously messed up with her, but it could also be that she was the breadwinner and he stayed at home with the kids so he got custody. 2) Agreed 3) $10,000 a year is what, 800 a month? Without knowing what she makes, we don't know if this is ruinous or not. 4) Again, don't see that in the article, only in that one comment. Not exactly a reliable sourc…
/r/MensRights18/04/12 12:35 PM
1

Yeah, I got the same message. I've been banned from posting in a subreddit I've never posted in. OH THE HORROR!!!!!!!!! /s
/r/MensRights18/04/12 12:22 PM
2

As long as they are inclusive, then yeah....that's cool. And I'm certainly okay with the marketing of it to same sex. As long as they aren't ignoring the abuse committed by women, and saying only men are abusive. If you run across any, post them please. I think those are needed, and would like to see more of them put up here. Thanks.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 12:13 PM
2

OT, but is your username in reference to 16 candles?
/r/MensRights17/04/12 07:19 PM
2

Feel free. And I'm a he, btw.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 06:31 PM
2

It happens. And that's one of the things I do like about this country.... nothing in the world says we have to agree. Personally, if both side were willing to talk more, and snipe less, a lot of the problems we all face could be addressed. Shame, really.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 05:46 PM
12

I submitted it at: http://www.franken.senate.gov/?p=email_al
/r/MensRights17/04/12 05:44 PM
2

I respect what you are saying, the problem is, this is going to result in higher premiums for everyone, so "I" am paying for it...as an individual. Let women who want this, pay the higher premium. But don't put that cost on me.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 04:50 PM
2

Thanks. I just posted my email.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 04:45 PM
21

My E-mail: Mr. Franken, I was shocked by your recent email that you sent out that is still promoting the idea that women are not equally paid for thier work. The first question that this begs, is if women make so much less, what profit oriented business would hire men, when they could improve the bottom line by hiring only women. Perhaps you are not aware of the CONSAD report, which, after controlling for several important factors, found no gap. When your time permits, would you please address t…
/r/MensRights17/04/12 04:44 PM
3

can you put up the full email? I'm at work and can't see imgur.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 04:35 PM
1

But that 58% is using it as contraceptive and other uses. How many are using it for just those other uses, and not contraception? That's the number that needs to be filtered here. What it ultimately boils down to, is that the major reason, is contraception. And I shouldn't have to pay for someone elses contraception.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 04:32 PM
1

What don't you agree with?
/r/MensRights17/04/12 04:27 PM
19

It would be fun to respond with an email that men only have to work until the middle of january, to equal the total number of deaths on the job, that women total for the full year. Wonder what kind of response that would get?
/r/MensRights17/04/12 04:20 PM
1

It's many, yes, but not "very common" as you stated. And it does state that 86% use it for contaceptive benefits. While they may also use it for other benefits, based on what that is saying, women ARE primarily using it a contraception. And as to the religious angle, they should get to decide what they will provide, and what they don't. You don't like it, don't work there, or buy your own insurance. But don't expect me to pay higher premiums, so you get contraception.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 04:15 PM
1

I hate this argument. Mainly, because it isn't true. The catholic church does allow divorce, for cause. Edit: And in case I'm asked for a source.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 03:32 PM
1

I wonder if that will be something that is lobbied for in those states that don't have it? Kind of surprised that isn't already happening.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 03:30 PM
1

Well... considering the legal nature of things (at least here in the U.S.), is that such bad advice? Thinks are such a legal minefield, that level of distrust, isn't necessarily a bad thing. Each person has to decide for themselves if that is the prudent thing to do. And that isn't something someone should be ashamed of.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 03:28 PM
1

There is a downside to that. In the US, commonlaw marriages (no official status of married), is considered after a certain point in time (7 years?) and you referring to the other person as your spouse. So that may not be the best way to go. Probably falls under the "check your local rules" warning.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 03:25 PM
7

Please direct your attention to the jumbotron in center field..... OH GOOD GOD WHAT IS THAT? Seriously, this is a good thing to see. Any raising of awareness is bound to help.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 02:28 PM
1

You know, in todays legal environment, you are just trying to get someone arrested with this kind of idiotic advice.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 02:02 PM
2

Quick question on that.... in that community, are there any ads targeting lesbians? The reason I ask, is that if they don't, then they are still showing only men as abusers. Just curious, as like hardwarequestions, I don't spend any time in that community.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 01:37 PM
1

They are actually very commoon. [Citation needed]
/r/MensRights17/04/12 01:09 PM
2

I guess that depends on if that 20,000 is a yearly or monthly amount (you really doesn't specify, but I'm not used to hearing it put in yearly amounts, so it could be). If that is the case, then yes, closer to 1,000. Edit: pronouns
/r/MensRights16/04/12 06:50 PM
10

You don't know any different. And that's fine. But we are talking about elective surgery (cosmetic), that using the hygenic argument falls flat. It doesn't take much to keep clean (education, not surgery). And that point that everyone misses.... a baby can't consent to the surgery. And if all you are going to use to argue is culturally favored, then all those cultures that emigrate to western countries should be able to practice FGM, as that is the culture. It's barbaric that we allow surgery fo…
/r/MensRights16/04/12 06:22 PM
3

And when exactly did ALL men get the vote? How many women died in WWI as compared to the number of men? What did women sacrifice to get the vote?
/r/MensRights16/04/12 05:23 PM
12

Then perhaps you can explain to me why FGM is illegal (down to just a pinprick to draw blood)? Doesn't matter if it is a religious choice or not. We protect the bodily integrity of baby girls, but not baby boys. Sorry, but bodily integrity (my body, my choice), should be the norm for everyone. And if it should be up to the parents and doctor, how is it that it is illegal (in the U.S.), to do the same to girls. Except as a medical necessity, no-one should have any part cut off as a baby.
/r/MensRights16/04/12 05:14 PM
2

radfemhub.com They are what the agent orange files on AVfM were about. Edit: link format
/r/MensRights16/04/12 02:55 PM
2

But he also now has to have his own home, food, etc. and 6 figures.... 100,000 or greater, so 20% is 20,000. How is that in any way appropriate per month to raise a child?
/r/MensRights16/04/12 02:26 PM
1

Not sure what article you read, but they have a man in custody, and another was brought in that isn't identified in any way, as to if it's a man or woman. Not a men's right issue.
/r/MensRights16/04/12 02:11 PM
1

As well, you must live in one of the States (at least in the U.S.), that recognizes Common Law marriage. If I remember correctly, there are only 7-10 that do.
/r/MensRights16/04/12 01:58 PM
2

Armageddon comes to mind here, between Bruce Willis' and Ben Affleck's characters.
/r/MensRights15/04/12 11:49 PM
1

Nah, you were down voted for your condescending attitude, and that fact that you are acting like an ass.
/r/MensRights15/04/12 11:27 PM
7

ABOUT. FUCKING. TIME.
/r/MensRights13/04/12 10:45 PM
1

I guess. I really don't care how obnoxious he is.... don't listen to him, so for me it doesn't matter. But he really pisses feminists off, because of the size of his audience, and the fact that he shines the spotlight on what they do. He's one of the few who do that on a national/international level, so I'll put up with it.
/r/MensRights13/04/12 10:35 PM
10

There is no evidence that you ill-treated or assaulted the child.... Yeah, I mean she only took a newborn and dumped it in her friends garden, and walked away. She showed as much motherly concern as she could.... that's not ill-treated. /s
/r/MensRights13/04/12 06:15 PM
1

It raises another question of how can we assure that our users don't do this kind of thing. You can't, unless there is some way to make it so every comment has to be approved before it's published. Fact is, if you are willing to try to censor everyone on the off chance they will post something bad, then you are no better than /r/srs. Free speech, which this subreddit tries to adhere to, means the bad and the good. I would hope that anyone who actually posts something like that, would be downvote…
/r/MensRights13/04/12 04:55 PM
5

So she's afraid to leave, but but they were getting a divorce. uh-huh. And of course, the local shelter only gives stats on the number of women and children killed since 1990..... I have to wonder how many men were killed in DV situations? And of course, it's only framed as male to female, no the reciprocal violence that it usually is.
/r/MensRights13/04/12 04:47 PM
1

Wow.... what an ass.
/r/MensRights13/04/12 12:55 PM
1

My concerns were about the fact that his genitals would be mutilated before he even entered society Seriously? You do have a say in that, you know. It isn't something that the hospital can do without at least 1 parents permission (that I am aware of). Pop culture sucks. While most sitcoms treat dads as idiots and the wives as the intelligent, long suffering martyr, most ads only show women as sex objects, so it kind of evens out. It would be nice if everyone was treated as human, but for some re…
/r/MensRights13/04/12 12:26 PM
4

This Say what you want about Rush, but he does have feminism down pat. He knows what they think and say, and highlights the hypocrisy inherent in the feminist movement, and isn't afraid to call them on it. That should garner him some of our support.
/r/MensRights13/04/12 11:56 AM
1

And I guess this means that no really does not mean no.
/r/MensRights13/04/12 11:52 AM
1

Ah yes.... the good old double standard. It's sexual assault when she prevents him from leaving, and he feels no choice but to have sex with her again. In no way can that be considered consent. Glad it isn't kidnapping and rape. /s
/r/MensRights13/04/12 11:51 AM
3

Hell yes it's abuse. You really need to get out of this relationship. If she has so little respect for your view on her hitting you, she doesn't really give a shit about you. Get out.
/r/MensRights13/04/12 11:49 AM
1

Any particular reason you don't do it? Just curious.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 11:50 PM
3

This. You might start by posting under your main account. Might make your inquiry a bit more believable. 3 hours old account doesn't really bolster much confidence that you are asking this honestly.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 11:31 PM
3

Donating to S.A.V.E. and the Innocence Project can be useful, if you can afford to do so. Volunteer at the local homeless shelter (as the majority of those that are homeless are men). Take a day or two and sit in the back of divorce court. When you see a someone getting raked over the coals, try talking to them as they leave. Have a printout with links to here, Fathers and Families, etc., and let him know they aren't alone in what they are going through. Met one of my best friends that way.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 11:25 PM
2

I really wish the morons who write up these articles would stop and think for a moment. If the girl lied about the rape, she isn't a "victim" of anything other than being stupid. When exactly did Journalism die?
/r/MensRights12/04/12 11:15 PM
1

http://www.fathersandfamilies.org - the accomplishments link isn't working for some reason. But if you go through all of the other topics, you will be able to see exactly what they have gotten accomplished. All without the massive government funding that Feminist organizations enjoy.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 11:11 PM
7

Any guys going to Penn.... you have just had a target painted on your back. Welcome to the Patriarchy!!!! /s
/r/MensRights12/04/12 10:42 PM
1

Would you like the list of states that Fathers & Families have managed to get 50/50 parenting laws passed, to counter the misandric family courts?
/r/MensRights12/04/12 10:30 PM
1

That's fine. And I'll apologize for the "fuck you" comment. Not cool. I'm just not understanding why there are those who will say we need to stop posting things, when the vast majority of the items posted counter the narrative that we see in the mainstream. More of that needs to happen, not less, IMO.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 10:29 PM
2

Guessing the SRS folks don't like the truth that they are morons. :)
/r/MensRights12/04/12 10:25 PM
1

That's better. On your knees, slave. Seriously though.... they don't censor unless it is seriously egregious. All new posters have to be approved by a mod on the first post. After that, it's no big deal.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 10:25 PM
5

If that's the case, then the accuser needs to be named as well. Other than minors, there is no other crime in which the accuser is anonymous. And if she's (and in false rape/sexual assault cases, it is almost always a female accuser) a serial false accuser, others that she has accused aren't afforded the opportunity to come forward. Which is exactly what the argument is, for naming an accused rapist. Again, the double standards apply.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 07:33 PM
1

It honestly wouldn't be the same without you. You are one of the reasons I'm involved here, and in the MRM/MRA to begin with. Reading things you have written led me to False Rape Society, and the rest is history. So in case it hasn't been said recently, thanks for all that you've done.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 06:26 PM
1

What do Jezebel or feministing have to do with this? Typhonblue is not a feminist, and Genderratic is not a feminist website. Quit creating consipracies where there aren't any.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 03:36 PM
4

Fair enough. I'm all about skeptical, but I would just hope we don't automatically discount the possibility of it being real. Then we would be just as bad as the SRS morons say we are.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 02:58 PM
1

I'm sorry, but this gets a big fuck you from me. You do realize that those are posted to show the inequality of the punishments that men and women get in this country (U.S.). It highlights exactly what part of the problem is. Instead of telling everyone what you think is best, how about getting off your ass and creating a group that lobbies the government for change, instead of trying to shame everyone into your preferences. I'm really getting sick of these posts from self-righteous people who s…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 02:27 PM
1

The problem is not women, it's the society we've allowed to be created. As women are >50% of society, shouldn't that place a majority of the problem on thier shoulders? I don't disagree that everyone is at fault, at some level, but here in the U.S., they have the voting power to get what they want done, without the assistance of men (other than the politicians).
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:30 PM
1

Isn't that exactly what imputed income is? Seems that already exists in the current system.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:20 PM
2

Signed. Thanks.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:17 PM
5

So... no laws about paternity fraud. Without knowing what the total amount was, shouldn't it be possible to charge with larceny, grand larceny, or just fraud?
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:09 PM
0

Well, since you are sure, then I guess that settles it. Everyone can now go home, because stesom is sure it's a troll. /s
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:07 PM
1

Good to see you back.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:05 PM
1

Not a surprise. The first time ANYONE posts there, a mod has to approve it. From that point on, all posts show immediately. It isn't some conspiracy to shut you up.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:04 PM
5

Why do the days have to match....nothing says the suicide had to occur the same day as the post.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 11:52 AM
1

Thanks for the carification. I can't disagree.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 06:09 PM
3

Way to miss the point, and then to strawman as well.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 06:07 PM
1

While I disagree, then it needs to be set up that the mother isn't allowed to keep the child, if unmarried. Yes, marriage of the parents is the best situation, I think we can generally agree to that, but if he shouldn't get custody when they aren't married, then any single mother should, by default, have the child taken away and adopted out.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 04:43 PM
2

No worries... FYI, I'm part of the COTWA/False Rape Society group.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 04:18 PM
8

That damn agenda of standing up for those falsely accused. Those bastards..... /s Sorry, couldn't resist.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 02:56 PM
5

But the SPLC, which isn't exactly a "very small cottery", is paying attention. And they got thier information from that idiot Futrelle. So speaking out against thier brand of bigotry needs to be done.
/r/MensRights10/04/12 04:24 PM
1

Which is exactly what he was pointing out. Aych comment there on a regular basis, and tends to use sarcasm quite a bit. There really needs to be a sarcasm font.
/r/MensRights09/04/12 03:31 PM
2

I'll assume sarcasm, but then we get things like: This Edit: Fixed hyperlink
/r/MensRights05/04/12 04:45 PM
12

But.....but.....but..... that's benevolent sexism, it's not female privilege. /s
/r/MensRights03/04/12 06:41 PM
3

It's the only thing I've addressed, so there is nothing for me to go off the rails about. And you, like a lot of people, completely ignored the point that Magic8BallMan was making. Women didn't have to sacrifice to obtain the vote, like men did. They still don't. There isn't a bit of hyperbole in that.
/r/MensRights03/04/12 04:09 PM
4

Also, there hasn't been a draft in over a generation. So? If you, as a male, don't register for the Selective Service at age 18, you can be imprisoned, fined up to $250,000.00, you are then ineligible for goverment grants and loans, and a few other things. As a female, none of this applies. Sexism at it's finest. And we won't even get into the 14th amendment as it applies to this.
/r/MensRights03/04/12 01:22 PM
5

Ah yes... allegations with no proof. The irony.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 02:20 PM
1

Thanks for the link.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 04:56 PM
1

Not trying to be an ass, but the automatic disbelief is also a problem. Giving advice to protect himself, if true, isn't a bad thing. If it's a false story, then the advice doesn't mean a thing, and we go on our merry way.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 03:23 PM
2

Wow, a whole 4 hour old account, telling us that we are terrible people. I'm so devestated. Trollololololol
/r/MensRights29/03/12 02:34 PM
1

Would you by any chance have a link that shows that? It would be very usefull in showing the double standard.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 11:55 AM
1

I mean, after all, we only prosecute people for those that they actually murder But then we have to explain why a person (say Scott Peterson) is charged with 2 murders (lacie (sp?) and the child she was pregnant with.) And he isn't the only person I've seen charged with 2 counts if the woman is pregnant. Either it's murder, or it's not. But the inconsistency in the appliaction of those charges, is an issue.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 05:52 PM
1

The OP needs to go to HR immediately. If his boss goes first, for whatever reason, he's toast.
/r/MensRights23/03/12 04:40 PM
1

I really wish I could disagree with that.
/r/MensRights08/03/12 06:42 PM
2

So, she either lied initially, or is lying now on the stand. Either way, her credibility is shot, and there is absolutely no way he should be convicted. That jury should spend less than 5 minutes deliberating and return a not guilty. And that should be based solely on the lying by the claimant.
/r/MensRights08/03/12 05:17 PM
6

I hope to the spaghetti monster that you are being sarcastic.
/r/MensRights01/03/12 05:15 PM
3

Here you go
/r/MensRights28/02/12 05:17 PM
1

And it takes 1 to carry and birth a child, so abortion choices being in the woman's hands are entirely valid This is why myself, and lot of others here advocate for the financial abortion. And yes, it's victim blaming. If she is the only one who has the right to determine if the child even gets born, then she should have the responsibility to go with that. She doesn't. She has many options that he doesn't have. But he can be held financially liable for the next 18-20+ years on her say so. So yes…
/r/MensRights24/02/12 05:55 PM
1

Along with what MaunoBrau said, I would recommend keeping a journal, of thoughts, things you want him to know about you when he gets older.... that kind of thing. If she is successful in seperating you, this can become invaluable if he contacts you at a later time, asking why you weren't there. Just the fact that you were thinking of him, and of course noted the way you fought, will go a long way. I'm in Illinois as well. If you ever want to have a beer, shoot me a note.
/r/MensRights24/02/12 05:52 PM
1

Not trying to be an ass here, but don't you think that would make you fall under that 1%, not the 99%? Which means that he doesn't think very little of you, just the other 99% who are exactly what he described.
/r/MensRights24/02/12 04:11 PM
1

It takes 2 people to create a pregnancy. But once she is pregnant, she has all of the choice, from abortion, to adoption, to safe haven laws, to keeping the child. And if she chooses to keep the child, he is financially responsible, no matter what he wants. When people continually say "keep it in your pants", that is really a form of victim blaming, and without the equivalent "keep your legs together", it places the sole responsibility for a pregnancy on the man. It completly eliminates women's …
/r/MensRights24/02/12 01:41 PM
4

While I don't disagree with any of that, your statement was: Having sex is like a contract, if you don't agree with the consequences, then don't do it. If it is like a contract, then women shouldn't have the unilateral option of abortion, if they don't agree with the consequences. And while I like the options you've laid out, until women are held to account for thier role in a pregnancy (barring rape), it is unjust to hold a man accountable for her choice, when he has none (after conception).
/r/MensRights23/02/12 03:23 PM
4

Having sex is like a contract, if you don't agree with the consequences, then don't do it. You do realize that this argues in favor of abortion being illegal, right?
/r/MensRights23/02/12 01:54 PM
4

And that has nothing to do with the fact that women were able to attend schools. Nice try on shifting the topic though.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 05:09 PM
12

Oh, look. Feminist history revisionism again. You do know that through the majority of history, it was only the wealthy that were able to send kids (both boys and girls) to school. This constant crap that women weren't allowed to do something, only covers half the equation.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 02:01 PM
1

+1
/r/MensRights10/02/12 07:35 PM
1

Lack of support resources?
/r/MensRights10/02/12 06:07 PM
2

Sidebar----------> EDIT: the Frequently asked questions....#15
/r/MensRights08/02/12 05:42 PM
0

I wouldn't bother. Willfull ignorance is difficult to overcome.
/r/MensRights08/02/12 04:37 PM
3

But women who find themselves pregnant, don't find themselves up on any kind of charges (typically), the way that men will (typically). Missing a movment, dereliction of duty, etc.
/r/MensRights08/02/12 04:26 PM
2

Also a former sailor (not on an Ohio class however), here's the problem I see. You are 2 weeks from a deployment, and one of those women learns she's pregnant, and they don't allow her to go on the deployment. Is 2 weeks enough time to get someone new in that spot and trained? Operational readiness should come before all else. EDIT: Spelling
/r/MensRights08/02/12 02:42 PM
1

You have to wonder if that custody case will be revisited? If I was her ex, I'd certainly be contesting it.
/r/MensRights07/02/12 08:10 PM
2

And then I find this: Michigan DV policies. All the typical gendered bias we've come to expect. Identifying the "victims" as she, throughout the Model Policy link on that page.
/r/MensRights07/02/12 06:04 PM
1

It will be interesting, when he asks for the charges to be dropped (assuming he does), if they will actually agree to that request. Normally, it's full steam ahead with no drop policies (not sure if Traverse City has that policy).
/r/MensRights07/02/12 06:00 PM
2

And you just changed the wording. You initially used the "people" line, and just now you changed it to men and women as equals. They aren't the same thing. Which one do you mean?
/r/MensRights07/02/12 04:08 PM
1

Yes, in this case. But funny, the woman who falsely cried rape....you know, the one who started it all.... no punishment at all. go figure.
/r/MensRights07/02/12 03:16 PM
2

I think it's due to the typo 'yet' instead of 'get'.
/r/MensRights06/02/12 06:46 PM
1

Which might be a valid criticism, if you know what those posters do offline.
/r/MensRights06/02/12 02:32 PM
1

And that's exactly what Jessica Valenti was espousing not to long ago, if I remember correctly. I really hope this isn't an indication that the idea is spreading.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 08:16 PM
1

I really wish I could upvote you more than once.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 02:59 PM
1

Before I say anything, I'll ask...sarcasm?
/r/MensRights03/02/12 01:58 PM
1

Good response. The only thing, at least to me, is that in those 2 types of accusations, someone was falsely accused. For any kind of punishment, yes, that makes a difference, but there is still a person who has been falsely accused, that deserves the presumption of "innocent until proven guilty", and at the time the accusation is made, there is no way to know what type of accusation it is. That is one of the main reasons I have a problem with anonymity for the accuser, but not the accused. Well,…
/r/MensRights02/02/12 09:52 PM
7

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Supposedly a quote of Edmund Burke's, but not really attributable to him.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 08:27 PM
1

No argument (FYI, E. Steven Berkimer of False Rape Society). But the chance of them bieing discovered, I would think, would be much less likely with someone on those lists, as law enforcement would be more prone to look at them as guilty, and not investigate too deeply.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 08:01 PM
6

Not sure why you are being downvoted for this. Your opinion is your opinion, and that doesn't make it wrong. For myself, it's the lack of consent that is the issue. His body, his choice should be the phrase of the day on this, but it seems that males don't really have a choice. Sad.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 06:01 PM
1

The same could be said about the current sex offender lists, but in the opposite direction. Those people could be targeted, but simply as a convenient excuse out. Honestly, I'm surprised we don't see more allegations against people on those lists. Those who are prone to a false accusations, would likely be supported even more if they named someone off those lists.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 05:36 PM
2

Out of sheer curiosity, how do you define "true equality"?
/r/MensRights01/02/12 07:55 PM
1

Because we know he's going to be held accountable. But the likelyhood of her being held to the same account? Much less likely. Sorry we aren't putting her on a pedestal, but the only person on here who called a woman/women a bitch(es), are you, and BearofHappiness...who happens to be a woman. Huh....imagine that?
/r/MensRights01/02/12 07:34 PM
4

Nice try, but no. She tried several times, apparently, to kill him. She got her lover to do the actual killing. They BOTH should be held equally accountable. Edit: removed personal attack.
/r/MensRights01/02/12 05:17 PM
1

It's still abandonment. Doesn't matter why. Sorry, but just walking away because you can't take care of them, with just a note? Seriously? Sorry, but this is an epic fail on the part of the father. And notice, he went from minnesota to California. Not like he was just down the street. There were obviously other relatives the boy could have stayed with, as he is now with an aunt. This is a crappy parent, who shouldn't have any visitation with his kid. He walked away once. Nothing stopping him fro…
/r/MensRights31/01/12 05:40 PM
2

Marines Army You can find more there as well.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 05:28 PM
2

TracyMorganFreeman's comment, that you replied to. But in the military (All branches), women's fitness requirements are lower than the mens. And yet they are still sent into a combat theater, when those men who can't meet the male standards, aren't. Doesn't really make sense to me.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 05:18 PM
3

And the men that can't, aren't serving on the front lines either. So explain to me why women are in an area of combat, after meeting a much lower standard for fitness, when men who can't meet that, don't even get that far?
/r/MensRights31/01/12 04:53 PM
1

Well, if he abandoned him, why would he now want to see him? Kids are taken from parent for neglect all the time and not allowed to see them. I don't see where this is any different.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 04:35 PM
2

I'm at work, so I can't view the video. So I'll just say this: False Rape Society
/r/MensRights30/01/12 07:10 PM
1

Actually, I think the title is pretty accurate. In the article, they refer to the woman who reported it as the "victim". When you use that term, it automatically supposes that there was an attack, so the person she points to, is, by default guilty, if she is a "victim". At this point, there is an alleged assault, but nothing other than her word (as far as has been reported), that it took place.
/r/MensRights30/01/12 06:57 PM
1

Maybe it's just being blocked by work. I get a page cannot be displayed. I'll try it from home later today.
/r/MensRights30/01/12 02:21 PM
3

Expand on that if you would. How are they seperate?
/r/MensRights27/01/12 07:43 PM
6

The problem is, in the U.K., the system incentivizes false accusations with the payout they give. So, they create an incentive for the problem, and then we just hope they handle it correctly?
/r/MensRights27/01/12 05:39 PM
2

Sick, isn't it? Guilty until proven innocent. And no complaint to, or charges from, Law Enforcement needed.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 05:34 PM
1

Not exactly sure how this belongs here. She's been arrested and charged. What does this have to do with mens rights? EDIT: Computer hiccuped and double posted. I deleted one of the posts.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 05:31 PM
1

FYI, the link isn't working.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 04:11 PM
1

FYI, the link isn't working.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 04:09 PM
8

I've worked with women like her at 2 different law firms. Both were in the position they were, because the partners knew that a discrimination/sexual harrassment lawsuit would be quick in the filing. The were just doing what they could not to piss her off. I get the feeling this lady was promoted for the same reason. She really doesn't know what she's doing, and they promoted her to get her out of the way.
/r/MensRights20/01/12 07:33 PM
2

It also completely disregards what the FATHER thinks. It's only about her. That kid is going to be just as messed up as NiceGuysSTFU.
/r/MensRights20/01/12 05:58 PM
1

Hey........ as someone named Steve, I resent that. /s
/r/MensRights19/01/12 04:39 PM
2

Not trying to be an ass, but have you done anything? Or are you just sniping at others?
/r/MensRights19/01/12 03:42 PM
2

r/mr subscribers furious that mothers raping daughters are getting < 1 year in prison. Damn you are crazy.
/r/MensRights17/01/12 01:49 PM
1

Well.... if it was an equality movement, I'm sure it would.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 07:35 PM
0

Here's a novel fucking thought. Why don't you ask for yourself? You are the one arguing that this doesn't belong, but expect others to back that up. Feel free to create an account over there and ask Bill yourself. It really is that easy.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 06:52 PM
1

Typically yes. Again, after looking at the police report, I don't disagree. It's just that your original title and what was in the linked article, didn't really match. I also have to wonder about the veracity of the office's policy to defer to the alleged victim. We've seen countless cases of no drop policies, and I really doubt they will defer.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 06:05 PM
8

Exactly it. The court ordered a ban on publication of anything that could identify the victim, who is still legally married to the woman in the dock.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 05:41 PM
1

And FYI, the idiot I am referring to is not you, but NotTheHumanTornado. Just wanted to clarify that.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 05:38 PM
2

Fair enough, but that isn't what you linked to. In that article it states: While they can bring charges even if victims do not cooperate, Johnson County Attorney Janet Lyness said it is her office’s policy to defer to alleged victims and the woman “did not wish to pursue charges.” So from the article, it is the county attorney who declined to pursue it. Nothing in the linked article says a thing about him being cleared.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 05:36 PM
2

While I don't agree with that idiot above, he wasn't cleared. The girl involved refused to cooperate, and the prosecutor was not able to proceed without her cooperation. Very misleading title.
/r/MensRights13/01/12 04:19 PM
4

Your title is a bit misleading. They just haven't found her yet. It's not that they found the 3 of them and let her go.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 05:59 PM
3

It a shame really. You need to go over to a voice for men and read all of Kyle's posts that show all of the feminist groups and thier involvement in this legislation. But that would require some intelligence. I don't hold up too much hope for you.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 03:27 PM
1

Shaming tactics right out of the gate? And you think that's a good way to convince him? So at what age were you entrusted with the deeply misandrist and offensive mindset. You are not a healthy role model for a young man. I hope you discover this soon.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 03:20 PM
1

Here's a good start. There are links in that piece that will take you to the original articles that started it. http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/amanda-marcottes-secret-decoder-ring/
/r/MensRights11/01/12 07:31 PM
3

It's bullshit. It's trying to shut down someone you don't agree with. Fuck this sideways. THIS kind of crap makes you no more than one of the extremists. tell consumers if they received payment for their review of a promoter’s product or service. So, prove to me that the Good Men Project has done this. If you can't, then you really need to remove this crap, as that is then just an attempt at censorship. I'll check back for your proof they accepted payment and didn't disclose it, but I'm done wit…
/r/MensRights11/01/12 04:29 PM
4

Once again, they aren't claiming to be what you state in the OP. You called them a Fake Mens Rights site. They have never claimed to be one. You are attaching a label to them, that they have never claimed (unless someone can show me different - and I'm willing to be proven wrong). But no matter what you call it, you are trying to shut them down because you don't like what they have to say. And the "there is a chance" is a crappy excuse. Show the proof that they do this, or it is just censorship.
/r/MensRights11/01/12 04:03 PM
3

The question then, is who cares? Why would you want to shut them down? Again, advocating censorship is one of the things we are against. Why would you play thier game?
/r/MensRights11/01/12 03:46 PM
4

Seriously? Fuck this shit. Censorship is not the answer. They are not a "Fake" mens rights site. Their stated goal is to look and the problems men face through feminist lenses. They don't purport to be a mens rights site. Downvote
/r/MensRights11/01/12 02:42 PM
2

And I think it worries the hell out of the extremists. They are no longer dictating the terms of the discussion, and more and more people are taking notice. It gives me more hope for a more balanced response to the issues that plague everyone.
/r/MensRights10/01/12 08:27 PM
4

I have a feeling that the Tom Matlack blowup was a real eye opener to those on the site (like Tom and Julie), who aren't full blown feminists. I think they may have realized that people like Amanda Marcotte and Hugo Swyzer(sp?) really aren't interested in compromise, or honesty. I hope it continues.
/r/MensRights10/01/12 06:59 PM
2

Because the meeting that was held behind closed doors in Baltimore about 2 or 2 1/2 months ago, had reps from NOW at it, but no other attendees but law enforcement. Strange how that worked out. /s EDIT: link to update on the info. It wasn't NOW, it was the Women's Law Project.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 08:23 PM
1

Well, the response to that is, in most state (here in the U.S.), it actually is legal for women to go topless as well. Guess that one doesn't work. :)
/r/MensRights06/01/12 06:21 PM
3

Funny, isn't it, that you never get a response to that from the people you ask it of? Says a lot, really.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 06:03 PM
2

Don't be a dirty whore. Don't falsely accuse someone of rape. Don't get a divorce because your a bored spoiled entitled princess, girls. You might want to try again and not be so insulting.
/r/MensRights05/01/12 03:17 PM
1

He's not a stalker, though. One letter. And instead of going to his bosses, she files a lawsuit. That's a bit of an over reaction, I think. Did he screw up? Yep. But this lawsuit is over the top for this.
/r/MensRights05/01/12 03:15 PM
2

Ok....now that is hilarious. Upvote
/r/MensRights29/12/11 01:46 PM
-17

Have you bothered to actually read any of this? These people are in government, academia, daycare, etc. They are in positions to, and have directly influenced the shaping of laws, and societal perceptions. They are in places to be able to do exactly what they want, which appears to be genocide. And you're comparing that to that moron Futrelle? Really?
/r/MensRights16/12/11 07:37 PM
1

Feel free to link me to it. I'll certainly have something to say to that individual. The only 2 people who have anything to do with posting or admin at FRS are myself (E. Steven Berkimer) and Pierce Harlan. We both post/comment here as well. Me, under my user name (eberkimer) and Pierce, as Pierce Harlan. If someone else is claiming to be one of us, and if I came across like an ass, it's because people are always attributing bullshit to us that we never state. So accept my apologies for the brus…
/r/MensRights15/12/11 10:14 PM
1

You might actually want to, I don't know, follow the links and read what is being stated. http://communityvoices.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/opinion/the-radical-middle/27667--one-in-one-thousand-eight-hundred-seventy-seven WE didn't pull jack shit out of our asses, you moron. This was a piece that was written by someone with no affiliation with us. But then, that's not real important to you, is it.
/r/MensRights15/12/11 08:08 PM
5

Cite?
/r/MensRights09/12/11 04:22 PM
2

Ben is an idiot. And the people commenting there that we attack anyone that doesn't agree with us is just plain false. Of course, when asked to back it up, the obfuscate and evade. Says all you need to know, really.
/r/MensRights09/12/11 04:02 PM
0

How can you have equal responsibility, when you don't have equal rights?
/r/MensRights02/12/11 05:35 PM
3

^ THIS.
/r/MensRights01/12/11 07:16 PM
1

I would recommend reading the sidebar -----> it will give you quite a bit of information you are looking for.
/r/MensRights01/12/11 03:43 PM
4

Show me an organization that MRA's have, that is equal to NOW, that is fighting legislation to deny women shared parenting, because they are female, and I'll agree.
/r/MensRights18/11/11 03:54 PM
2

This may be a semantics game, but you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence Therefore, if you aren't proven guilty, we must still presume the innocence. On an individual basis, sure, presume all you want. But according to our legal system, you're innocent.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 08:12 PM
2

I have one problem with this. Using the chain of command term, means there is one more obligation (at least in the military). You are not only obliged to report it to the next step in the chain, but if that step does nothing, you are obligated to take it to the next step, or even go outside that chain if nothing is being done. Sorry, but the police should have been the first people notified. And sorry, but in one sentence, the article says that Paterno would have violated the confidence of the p…
/r/MensRights16/11/11 11:59 PM
3

Agreed. I like the post-birth option. It makes sense that he should have the same opt-out options post-birth that she does. Equality and all that.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 11:46 PM
2

And our legal system says that if you are not convicted of the crime, you are innocent.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 11:40 PM
6

First, let me start off with a sincere fuck you. If you can prove, in any verifiable way that rape is under reported to the extent that the Sexual Grievance Industry says it is, then pony up. Pierce put a link in there that shows the math on the under reporting farce. You might take a bit of time to actually read something, before you spout off on something you appear to know little about. EDIT: Spelling
/r/MensRights16/11/11 11:36 PM
2

You asked a question. I responded with a question of my own. I didn't say that was your opinion.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 11:33 PM
3

If she has a legal way out of being a parent, shouldn't he? And really, she has a lot of legal ways out. He has none.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 11:17 PM
2

Agree on the asshole thing, but we also tend to hold the men more responsible for thier attitudes, generally, than we do the women with those attitudes. Do you know of any website where men are actively advocating for the extirmination of women (Not saying there aren't, I'm just not aware of any). This is a common perception, specifically in our criminal justice system. A woman can claim abuse, and generally, will be believed. A man doesn't really get that kind of consideration.
/r/MensRights09/11/11 05:57 PM
4

Hi. My name is Steve. :)
/r/MensRights07/11/11 06:22 PM
4

Did he actually advocate that? Or did he express an opinion. Honestly, I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often. Once you push people to the point where they have nothing left to lose, bad things are likely to happen.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 07:03 PM
2

Mr Gustafsson is a strong believer in equality between men and women, and "practices what he preaches," according to colleagues. "I feel overwhelmed and honoured," said, Gustafsson, a newcomer to Parliament, after being elected chairman. "The committee has put their trust in me, and I will do my utmost to live up to that trust." "Among the challenges ahead are EU legislation on violence against women and to increase women's economic independence and their influence in politics," he said. That do…
/r/MensRights26/10/11 03:08 PM
1

Too bad Jenna, that is not what the problem is. You used a flat out lie (the 99% figure), to get men banned from helping kids. And when you were given data the showed how wrong that was, you accused the people who provided the links to the information (which you never did), of being pedophiles who wanted to get in your kids pants. You are a sexit bigot, and really need to just stop. You make it worse for yourself every time you make a statement. And I will keep digging until I find out the schoo…
/r/MensRights26/10/11 01:56 PM
1

I know I did (estevenberkimer)
/r/MensRights25/10/11 02:59 PM
1

No worries. I'm in agreement with you on this. I don't think she is actually sorry, and the fact, at this time, that she isn't (AFAIK), contacting the school administrators and saying, "hey, I was wrong. We need to make the change for both men and women volunteers." speaks volumes in my book. She needs to stay on the register, and we still need to dig and find the school so we can contact the admins there and voice our disapproval and disgust.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 02:24 PM
1

What the hell are you talking about?
/r/MensRights25/10/11 01:18 PM
2

Care to provide a link to these comments? I have yet to see anything of the sort.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 03:11 AM
2

do you have links to any of those comments? I don't remember seeing that.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 03:10 AM
3

Honestly, until I see an email or hear a voice mail, I find it hard to believe a thing she says. She already has managed to get the school to change the policy based on a lie. Nothing has shown me yet that she wouldn't lie about this.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 03:09 AM
1

Really? You're ok with that? They did make an exception, that discriminates against all the fathers that volunteer there. We'll save the message this sends to the kids for another discussion, but the Magnet schools are still part of the CPS, which means this type of discrimination is illegal. Her request, based on bogus stats, really needs to be brought to the attention of the fathers that are volunteering there. She deserves to be a social pariah there.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 03:06 AM
2

Can't argue with that. More and more, men are standing up and being heard. It's a great thing to see.
/r/MensRights24/10/11 10:21 PM
2

Actually, we do know: Happy outcome! The director called me this morning to confirm the preschool will honor my request that only female caregivers will take Bianca to the bathroom. YAY. But wait, that's not all! The executive board also decided this issue is worthy of a policy change. They formed a task committee to research standard practices at other preschools and will institute a change based on that and other findings. It sounds like they completely see my point of view and were baffled th…
/r/MensRights24/10/11 10:20 PM
2

But does she realize the error of her ways? The school policy is still being changed to bar men from helping. So she gets a feel good apology that most here are accepting, but she still gets the policy changed. She's still a bigot.
/r/MensRights24/10/11 06:46 PM
3

And when she posts that she contacted the school to allow the men to be helping, I'll believe she's sincere. Words mean nothing in this situation. She actually got the school to change thier policy. That needs to be fixed before I'll take her apology to mean something.
/r/MensRights24/10/11 06:42 PM
1

I'm going to disagree. If she truly is sorry, she needs to contact the school and make sure they DON'T change the policy. Until she does that, her apology is hot air, as her initial stance is still enforced by action.
/r/MensRights24/10/11 06:37 PM
2

Well, if it wasn't her intention to hurt anyone, I guess now she will contact the school board and administrators and ask them to NOT exclude men from helping out. But somehow, I doubt that will happen.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 05:56 PM
1

Thank you. In no way, shape or form have I EVER advocated any kind of violence. I just know where she lives. And that is information that she herself put out on the net.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 04:43 PM
1

Correct. That was by me. And I won't put her address out there. Just contact information for the school and any other organizations she's a member of. EDIT: the "I can track her down, she lives in Chicago's Edgewater neighborhood..." was by me, not the others.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 04:40 PM
2

I found it through a simple google search (I made the comment on AVfM). She has her info for most of what she does in public. Groups she's a member of, emails, addresses, the whold ball of wax. She's an idiot. Pawjob has it exactly right. And what is really funny, in every post I've made about having her information, I've made it perfectly clear that I wouldn't publish her home address. Just contact information for the school and other organizations she's a member of.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 04:39 PM
4

That was me, that made that comment. And actually, I said that I was going to track down any groups she is representative of, and if I could, the school her kid goes to, so that the board and administration could be contacted regarding thier cave to her demand. Hell, her personal info is available through a google search. And she is the one responsible for putting that out there.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 04:36 PM
2

I've already determined the names and email addresses for the Park Board she is a member of. And no fear, I've been in contact with Paul Elam, and as soon as I have the school information, we'll start running with it.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 04:13 PM
0

The kid goes to a magnet school. There are quite a few, and I have it narrowed down to about 4 (in the area she's in). Still digging, but when I figure out which one it is, email addresses for the school board and administrators (if available) will be published.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 01:34 AM
1

Agree with both you and cyberPIG. I've got her home address and contact info, but I won't publish that. She is however, a board member for a park restoration group, and I'm still giving thought on putting the info for that group. The other 2 board members are men. Wonder how they would feel, knowing what she thinks of them. Still looking for the information on the school. When, not if, I find that information, it will be posted.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 01:32 AM
1

Actually, you are completely correct. Goverment mandated debts are non-dischargeable (For clarification, I worked for a personal bankruptcy lawfirm for several years).
/r/MensRights20/10/11 05:33 PM
2

I know the area she lives in (West Edgewater Park). I'm researching now to see if I can narrow it down a bit.
/r/MensRights20/10/11 04:51 PM
1

Well Pierce, since she lives in Edgewater Park here in Chicago, she's not too far down the road from me. Let me see what I can dig up.
/r/MensRights20/10/11 04:38 PM
15

So lets compare that with: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1331925/Lottery-winner-Nigel-Page-pay-ex-wife-2m-left-10-years-ago.html Funny, she still has a claim 10 years later.... but this guy doesn't? Really?
/r/MensRights18/10/11 04:30 PM
2

Gotta love the idiocy.... the headline from the piece states they are ALLEGED batterers. Not convicted. And yet they have the temerity to let people not convicted of anything go free. OH THE HORROR!!!! /s
/r/MensRights14/10/11 04:22 PM
16

Sorry to rain on this one, but this isn't a double standard. He provided drugs and alcohol to the girls. She didn't. As well, the girls had previously diagnosed with mental disabilities. He's a slimebag. While what she did was wrong as well, it isn't nearly to the level of what he did.
/r/MensRights14/10/11 03:23 PM
1

That information would be good. The problem is, even in a lot of false accusations, they don't identify the accuser. And rarely do they give any kind of identifying details on that. But I'll see what I can come up with.
/r/MensRights14/10/11 02:10 PM
9

Not only did he get allowed back in, did she get kicked out?
/r/MensRights13/10/11 07:23 PM
1

And pardon the insult. That was my bad. I based that purely on the title. My apologies.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 07:21 PM
3

FYI, I'm one of the Admins at False Rape Society. That's where I get my data. Roughly 75-80% of the articles we run, never actually point the finger at a specific man, but the decriptions given are, 99% of the time in those, black or hispanic. Are those absolute? No. But it's an interesting thought. We need to start tracking that. I'll start now.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 07:13 PM
1

Something tells me that would be plenty. Giving them someone to talk to can do worlds of good. Knowing there is a person that can relate to thier problems does wonders. For quite a number of years, I have helped tutor kids at a Southside Chicago school (I'm white). I've had kids I helped 4-5 years ago come back and thank me, telling me that color didn't matter. The fact that there was a male figure who cared meant as much as anything. Go for it.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 05:42 PM
7

Funny, I don't remember saying I advocate for White Men's Rights. I advocate for MEN. Sexual orientation or skin color, don't mean a thing. And since my primary focuse is false rape/sexual assault allegations, and the vast majority of those are levelled at black and hispanic men, I'd say that RealityFalling is a complete moron. But I won't say that, since it's not really that nice. /s EDIT: Grammar
/r/MensRights13/10/11 05:37 PM
2

Brown University was ordered by a federal judge to produce fundraising documents from an alumnus whose daughter accused a fellow student of rape From that, it does look like she went there. Edit - Formatting
/r/MensRights11/10/11 05:21 PM
0

agreed
/r/MensRights07/10/11 12:26 PM
0

So says the douchebag who began this whole thing with insults. You go gurrrllll.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 11:28 AM
1

Wow...you hire people. Impressive. And I guarantee I do more for men's rights than post here. And it's a hell of a lot more than you dream of doing.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 02:32 AM
7

Hi F. Great piece. The "men can stop rape" is a typical blame all the men and put all of the onus on them, even though 99% of men never rape. If that is the case, then when I say "women can stop false rape accusations" means that: All women falsely accuse Only women are responsible for false accusations of rape. It's BS on both counts. Just as "men can stop rape" is BS. Women can rape, so on that count alone, the phrase is wrong. But when have the SGI supporters ever let a good lie stand in thei…
/r/MensRights06/10/11 09:39 PM
4

There are time when I wish I could get an email address for some of these judges, and when they make stupid ass comments like that, send them the link to our website. Chivalrist idiots who think that girls are "sugar and spice" are some of the biggest enablers of false accusations, as they don't punish those who make the false accusation.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 09:18 PM
19

It is a ridiculous phrase. Only rapists can stop rape. I don't rape, and I sure as hell am not responsible for what another person does. Putting the onus on all men is as sexist as it gets.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 09:15 PM
1

Sadly, if you are what is considered a man, I'll pass. You should actually attempt to do something, rather than run your mouth off to people who do a hell of a lot more for men's rights than post anonymously on the internet. Get back to me then, and I'll try to have some respect (doubt it's going to happen).
/r/MensRights06/10/11 09:04 PM
1

Ooooooohhhhh, he's a big tough guy on the internet.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 07:24 PM
2

That was pretty much my first thought. I doubt he gets to spend much time with them. Downside to that office.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 04:28 PM
1

Thanks. That does make it seem more like a retaliation issue. Considering nothing bad happened to his kids or him (by riding the wrong way), a warning should have been the end of it. Something tells me the cops called CPS as a retaliatory move. **EDIT: Spelling
/r/MensRights06/10/11 04:24 PM
13

This is the kind of response that makes it so men can't ever get the help they need when shit happens to them. He was sexually assaulted, and you are blaming him. OP - go to the police. Sorry, but what was done, is NOT acceptable (regardless if it happens to a man or a woman - boy or girl). You were passed out, that invalidates any kind of consent. If you had been functioning, but drunk....meh.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 01:34 PM
1

yeah, I realized I typed that. Mentioned it in the next response. Curious as to how you know there was no traffic? Did I miss that in the article? Or do you have another source?
/r/MensRights06/10/11 12:31 PM
2

Fuck off asshat. I'm guessing that reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. Re-read what I wrote.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 12:30 PM
3

I hated driving in the Chicago, mainly because of the bicyclists. Thank god I'm in the burbs now. But in every city, AFAIK, bicycles must follow the same laws/rules as cars. And it doesn't paint a picture very well at all (just realized I said two way street instead of one way, which it was). If it was a one way street, and he was riding the wrong way, just like a car, that is a ticketable offense. How it became an issue for taking away his kids, I don't know, unless the officer reported it to C…
/r/MensRights05/10/11 06:40 PM
2

Sorry, but in this case, I can't say he's being targeted unfairly. He rode the wrong way on a two way street. Without knowing what kind of traffic there was, we don't know what kind of danger he put his kids in. Since nothing happened, however, I don't think his kids should be taken.
/r/MensRights05/10/11 06:03 PM
1

Also in the chicago area. I'd meet.
/r/MensRights03/10/11 04:40 PM
1

Well, sorry, but I don't know for sure. This isn't ringing any bells. One of the contributors at False Rape Society.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 05:38 PM
1

Not really. There just isn't enough there to prove that it really is a false accusation. If they arrest and charge her? Maybe.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 04:43 PM
2

I don't think you know who I am. I'm the other half of FRS. Pierce, in no way, has EVER said "no men rape". Quite the opposite. But once again, you want to throw a lie out, expecting it won't be called on. Please feel free to show me a post on our site that has ever said "no men rape".
/r/MensRights28/09/11 06:40 PM
2

Not ridiculous at all. Can you show me where someone in the MRM has said that no men are rapists? Or that there are no men that rape?
/r/MensRights28/09/11 04:20 PM
1

But that isn't the case here England adds that their stories didn't match the evidence gathered from the surveillance video from the school. and England said after physical evidence came back from the state police lab, the victim recanted much of her story. So video and physical evidence led to her recantation. Seems to me, she lied about what happened, and when shown the evidence of that, she then recanted. I'd classify that as a lie.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 02:13 PM
2

Too bad that isn't what MRA's believe. We just disagree with the "All men are rapists", not that there aren't men who rape. But why let a lie get in your way, right? EDIT: Re-reading your comment, I realized I misread what you typed. My apologies. I still don't think there are any "no men are rapists" within the MRA sphere, but I guess there's always the possibility.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 01:32 PM
2

With that title, one has to wonder if she looks like admiral akbar?
/r/MensRights23/09/11 07:18 PM
2

Thank you.
/r/MensRights23/09/11 06:50 PM
13

yeah, but notice she didn't get convicted of statutory rape, but on child porn charges. Still a way to go.
/r/MensRights16/09/11 03:53 PM
4

I'll help you out. http://falserapearchives.blogspot.com/2009/06/archives-of-sexual-behavior-feb-1994.html
/r/MensRights16/09/11 12:50 PM
1

It doesn't have anything on the Daphne II project commissioned by the EU several years ago either.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 12:41 PM
3

Married for 7 years, and I can gaurantee I get laid more than you can ever dream of. What a twit.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 12:24 PM
3

I can only think of one word to describe you..... IDIOT.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 04:28 PM
8

Actually, it's because the idiot prosecutors went for a Murder 1 charge with nothing but circumstancial evidence. Jurors for that case have said that they didn't meet the elements of the charge, and that if it had been Murder 2, they would have come back with a guilty verdict. That was prosecutorial incompetence, not the jury.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 04:26 PM
1

Gonna nit-pick just a bit. All of those instances of consent, don't require modification of a body part. And that last sentence made me laugh out loud. People at work think I'm weird anyway, so nothing new with the glances when I started laughing.
/r/MensRights02/09/11 06:55 PM
6

Correct. Title IV-D is where it's containted. States generally get 66 cents for every dollar of child support they collect. NOPE, no conflict of interest to do what's right, in that situation.
/r/MensRights02/09/11 05:22 PM
1

And that is part of what the anti-circ crowd is in agreement with. Medically necessary circ is fine, but the vast majority of circ's are cosmetic, not due to medical issues. I agree that individual perspectives are needed, but taking the choice away, where not medically necessary, is barbaric. Why aren't boys allowed to have bodily integrity that females have?
/r/MensRights02/09/11 04:17 PM
1

"for religious reasons". The not so funny part of that, is that here in the US, FGM is specifically prohibited, even for religious reasons. It's that double standard that is a problem. The federal government has specifically stated, by law, that boys don't matter when it comes to bodily integrity. THAT is the problem I have. Make it equal, or don't be involved at all, but no law that applies to only half the population (barring abortion - but that's a whole nother discussion).
/r/MensRights02/09/11 04:15 PM
6

But the federal law in the US, prohibits it against females, even if it is for religious practice. It's just another type of male disposibility.
/r/MensRights01/09/11 04:26 PM
5

This. The issue isn't if you are ok with being circumcized. It is the fact that the individual it happens to, has no say in the matter (assuming it is an infant it is done to). Here in the United States, federal law specifically prohibits this for females. No law to protect males.
/r/MensRights01/09/11 04:24 PM
1

Yeah.... forget the whole "which leads me to suspect these" in front of that, specifying the women in the story.
/r/MensRights31/08/11 04:31 PM
18

I don't know if you noticed, but this is a supposed "friend" of his, who just kicked him to the curb, based entirely on his gender. If he cares about her, and would have liked to have at least attended, what's the problem. And a "Safe space" from what? If they are friends, I'm going to say that he doesn't have a problem with her being a lesbian, and she knows that. Moron.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 04:02 PM
3

As well, notice that the headline over there reads: "Cop Rapes Woman at Gunpoint..." But when you get into the article, it states: "And then just this week, an off-duty police officer was arrested for allegedly raping a woman at gunpoint in broad daylight, abusing his authority in the grossest way." So the headline says it happened, 100% but it is just an allegation. Sorry, but no. At this point, it is just an allegation, and no rape has been proven. So they are not "victims", they are accusers …
/r/MensRights25/08/11 03:41 PM
1

Don't know about you, but I would think a reasonable person would conclude that vaginal sex CAN result in pregnancy. So "sexual acts, which no reasonable person would expect could result in pregnancy, to use plaintiff’s sperm in an unorthodox, unanticipated manner yielding extreme consequences,” and that that is the statement from the court, in thier decision, after hearing the evidence. That is not what he said. Hence, to me, it has been proved to the court, that his claim has merit.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 04:59 PM
1

I think you should re-read that again. He is spot on.
/r/MensRights24/08/11 04:49 PM
2

There is a third type of case, that we regularly have at our site that constantly use the term 'victim'. Those where absolutely nothing happened (as in, there is no sexual activity of any kind, because the claim is spun out of thin air. This is where anonymity for all involved needs to be introduced (or no one is anonymous), until a conviction is obtained. EDIT: Spelling
/r/MensRights22/08/11 02:19 PM
2

In the circuit court below, Kathy M. Flanagan ruled that Irons conduct was not so extreme and outrageous to sustain a legal action by Phillips. That court was reversed after the appellate court ruled that Irons “deceitfully engaged in sexual acts, which no reasonable person would expect could result in pregnancy, to use plaintiff’s sperm in an unorthodox, unanticipated manner yielding extreme consequences.” That is from the link, and is a direct quote as part of the judges decision. I'd say that…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 02:59 PM
3

While I agree it was twisted, you are aware that this is almost 2 years old now, right? Just like to recommend: http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/p/lamb-to-slaughter-hofstra-false-rape.html
/r/MensRights12/08/11 04:22 PM
0

I live just down the road from McHenry. I'll try to call in as well
/r/MensRights12/08/11 01:58 PM
3

Upvote for making me laugh on the surrender part. Well done.
/r/MensRights12/08/11 02:45 AM
2

So you make your own alcohol, made from ingredients you completely raise yourself with absolutely no other parties involved? What type of alcohol do you make and where can I order it? If you buy your booze, then the person selling it to you is a second party.
/r/MensRights12/08/11 02:07 AM
1

Funny, my wife's has always been covered. Of course, you are talking insurers, and not medicaid. So, any link that medicaid denies that (Asking, because I honestly don't know).
/r/MensRights11/08/11 03:26 PM
4

Actually, that's what happened. And then some other idiot picked up on it, and most of the commenters on that blog started equating what happened with a "Near Rape" (whatever the hell that is), and it got all blown out of proportion. And she can't let it go, and makes another video about it. Sorry, but I really would have to label her as the drama queen. Agree with you on the last part.
/r/MensRights10/08/11 06:02 PM
0

If I wasn't married, I'd ask you out on a date. Please accept my respect (And my upvote) as a pale substitute.
/r/MensRights09/08/11 11:37 PM
1

Never. Going. To. Happen. Hi Snark. :)
/r/MensRights09/08/11 11:36 PM
2

I do have a problem with this. She isn't a "rapist" as the title implies. She is an "Accused rapist". With our work over at the False Rape Society, we do see a lot of these types of accusations, where there is financial interest, get made. While I get the fact that he would have been laughed at for reporting being raped (if he was), he didn't bother to bring this up until years later, when being asked for child support. In a he said/she said case, years after the fact where no supporting evidenc…
/r/MensRights04/08/11 04:44 PM
2

Of course, "try" is the operative word.
/r/MensRights01/08/11 06:11 PM
16

True, sometimes it's not. But props to you for at least sitting down and acknowledging him and trying. As a fellow Chicago area person, thanks for making the effort.
/r/MensRights26/07/11 06:53 PM
1

You're right. I should have worded that differently. I should have said 100% of the false rape/sexual assault claims that police discover are reported.
/r/MensRights21/07/11 12:19 PM
9

So? In the United States, there are specific laws against FGC (Female Genital Cutting). Doesn't matter if your religion mandates it, it is still illegal. http://www.womenshealth.gov/publications/our-publications/fact-sheet/female-genital-cutting.cfm#j If you scroll up from that point, to the section called "why is FGC practiced", Religion is a stated reason.
/r/MensRights21/07/11 02:38 AM
2

Can't say it was a false gay rape charge, but we have had a post or two from men falsely claiming rape at our site. But then, I don't think that most states' (just looking at the U.S.) rape laws take men into consideration. Most view rape as vaginal penetration without consent (I think there are one or two that include anal penetration). When it happens, I believe it's classified as a sexual assault.
/r/MensRights21/07/11 02:22 AM
1

For Kanin, it was published in Archives of Sexual Behavior Feb 1994 v23 n1 p81(12) we have published the intro on our site at http://falserapearchives.blogspot.com/2009/06/archives-of-sexual-behavior-feb-1994.html McDowell's is a bit more elusive. I believe I have a pdf copy of the study. Let me see if I can find it, and I'll upload it to a place that it can be dowloaded.
/r/MensRights20/07/11 10:07 PM
1

What is the exact percentage. We'll probably never know. But the one thing we do know, is that 100% of false rape accusations are reported, and the damage that those claims can do is immense. The most well known studies (Kanin, McDowell) show 40-60% false reporting rate. My guess would be between 15-40%. Lately, a lot have been quoting the FBI stat at 3%. The only problem with that, is they also show about 60% unfounded (IIRC). So those who state the 3% figure, are saying that of those 60%, all …
/r/MensRights20/07/11 07:43 PM
10

Intimidated by anonymous posters over the internet? Really? I'd say you need to put on your big girl panties, but that would be intimidating. /s
/r/MensRights20/07/11 12:52 PM
1

My wife and I have been married for 7 years, and I started out making more, but have had to find new employment twice in that time period. She makes more than me, but we have the same end goal, so that is what is important to us. Not who makes more. All we did was adjust who pays what bills.
/r/MensRights19/07/11 03:20 PM
3

Did you click on that banner and actually read the post it links to? It might be worthwhile to understand the reasoning behind it.
/r/MensRights25/06/11 04:04 AM
1

Wow, obvious you didn't read anything. Bristol never claimed to be unconscious. She stated she didn't remember anything. Big difference. Others are calling it rape, not Bristol. Those people are doing exactly what Mary Koss did in her 1 in 4 study, and classifying things as rape, that the people involved don't.
/r/MensRights25/06/11 03:55 AM
1

When I saw this, I was at work, and started laughing so hard, I almost peed myself. For some reason, the people I work with think I'm insane. :)
/r/MensRights25/06/11 03:49 AM
2

That. Is. Hilarious.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 04:52 PM
2

You did get that a man was arrested based on her description, and several other men were questioned and underwent forensic exams. That is a direct physical violation of those men. She is directly responsible for that. She deserves every second of those 2 years.
/r/MensRights22/06/11 03:56 PM
6

Two things kind of jump out: Why does she need him to wake her up? This is the 21st century lady.... buy an alarm clock. What was so bad that he had to go see his dad, and this is how he attempted to get there. At this point, he should have custody, because she certainly isn't looking after him very well.
/r/MensRights22/06/11 02:51 AM
1

Girlwriteswhat..... I am one of the admins at False Rape Society. would you mind if I took what you wrote here and use it for an article at our site? With due credit of course. And thank you. I wish more people would allow this type of discussion without going overly emotional about it. E. Steven Berkimer www.falserapesociety.blogspot.com
/r/MensRights09/06/11 01:17 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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