TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

enjoycarrots Archive

View 0 posts and 813 comments by enjoycarrots on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
19

Yes, he is overblown, but don't mistake your lack of exposure for lack of influence. You just aren't in the demographic. What's unfortunate is that even boys who watch people like Tate "ironically" and don't think they are actually good guys are still being strongly influenced in their views on masculinity and appropriate behavior whether they realize it or not.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/07/25 01:36 PM
4

The Tim Walz pick said, sure fellas, you have problems, but they aren't as bad as women's and the only people to blame are other, bad men. I'm going to be blunt, probably at the expense of being well received: If this is what you take from Tim Walz as the pick, even specifically in regards to him being touted as a coach, a manly man, or his attacking opponents as "weird" ... then you might be way too down the hole with constantly thinking about how everything must be attacking men in some way. I…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/25 12:46 PM
5

Yeah, it's definitely not true in any sense now, unless you cherry pick specific people who have a bad record with women and paint them as representing the whole left.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/25 03:13 PM
7

Dworkin is sometimes misunderstood by her critics, but also often understood quite correctly by her critics. In this case, she's wrong for painting with a broad brush and her metaphor breaks down when you put thought into what actually differentiates the broader left and right positions when it comes to women. However, you should also consider when this was said. For a lot of her lifetime, a lot of the establishment on both sides of the aisle was absolutely sexist, and that's the vibe of what sh…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/25 02:39 PM
8

This is one of a number of issues where there's kind of two versions of the same complaint. One is unreasonable and comes from a bad place. One kind of has a point to it. The unreasonable version zooms in on Aloy's face and complains that she has peach fuzz facial hair, or has slightly thicker cheeks while still being what most would consider very attractive. The unreasonable version takes any move away from more sexualization, regardless of the reasoning behind it or the intent of the creators,…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/25 02:07 AM
2

Lean hard into pro-labor positions and make raising wages the number one campaign issue. Tie all other issues into that specific issue. Let that advertising and messaging on those issues be primarily male-coded. Sure, those policies don't only help men, but they are issues that will connect with male demographics and majority male professions that currently feel ignored by the Democratic Party. Support government offices for men's health and other "Men's ____" issues to mirror offices and progra…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/11/24 03:36 AM
1

There was an issue, albeit a minor one that affects a small minority of the population. That's why it was changed. You disagree, however, and don't think it's an issue. Okay, but that means that the change, by your own definitions, makes zero difference. So, it's not something that should bother you. It hurts you none, and makes no difference to anybody except for the people it's designed to include.
/r/MensRights03/01/24 11:23 PM
0

Then "birthing parent" and "mother" are synonymous and there should be no issue.
/r/MensRights03/01/24 03:44 PM
-10

And the mother would be the "birthing parent" and the father would be the "non-birthing parent" ... nothing stops those people from being called mother and father by everybody who matters. I have a non-binary friend who just had a child. Calling him the "Mother" would be misgendering. The biological father is (I believe, it's their business and I'm not sure) an anonymous sperm donor who wouldn't go on the birth certificate. But, the child was born to a married couple, so it makes sense to put bo…
/r/MensRights03/01/24 02:39 AM
3

If a doctor presents something as the standard medical procedure that all boys go through, and tells you there are medical benefits, that's different than just peer pressure. They were wrong to do it, but I'm not going to have any anger toward them. It wouldn't be productive.
/r/MensRights11/11/23 04:25 PM
184

I'm a circumcised man. I have an uncircumcised son. I wish I weren't circumcised, but I don't feel bad about my junk. I don't blame my parents, either. Circumcising was basically a default position where and when I was born, and my parents did not have the benefit of an informed decision. They made the wrong decision, but it's not something I hold against them on a personal level. We were asked no less than six separate times if we were sure we didn't want our son circumcised. The pressure to ag…
/r/MensRights11/11/23 09:07 AM
5

I haven't read the post, so I can't speak toward any of the points you made, but just a friendly FYI. Systematic - direct action taken in an organized way. Example: The systematic extermination of Jews. Systemic - being widely present and "baked in" to the systems in question. Systemic things pervade the system, even if they are not explicit or intended. Example: A systemic bias against short men. When it comes to VAW, the people you disagree with would likely have been using the word "systemic"…
/r/MensRights30/08/23 03:02 AM
2

In the OP, you're asking how you should interpret this evidence. It's not really evidence, and you're already interpreting it very strongly through your already-held beliefs about the motivations and identities of the people conducting the survey. You aren't necessarily wrong about any of that -- but these posters aren't evidence that you are correct.
/r/MensRights01/08/23 09:22 PM
2

Not meant as a comment on whether or not your assessment of feminists is correct, but the provided images aren't evidence to that point. The two pictures are asking for participants in a research on those demographic groups. I don't see the connection that makes this evidence that they feel those groups must be treated as sheep to be shepherded. The first study in particular is asking black men to share their experiences as black men. That doesn't sound like they are trying to impose their will …
/r/MensRights01/08/23 08:22 PM
13

Part of the reason for this is the assumption by many that males are, by default, well represented or overrepresented and catered to in matters of medicine, health, or, well, anything. But, in my opinion, that assumption fails to properly read the current social landscape. Males are no longer the default representation, even for male-heavy issues or causes. In the past I've wondered what the youngest generation thinks about heart disease, for example. I wouldn't be surprised if some have been le…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/07/23 05:20 AM
41

Some types of FGM are worse. Some types of ritual circumcision for boys are also worse, in tribal places where that is still practiced. Some types of FGM, that we still call FGM, are not as bad. One of the problems here is that we (appropriately) lump any cutting of female genitalia under the heading of FGM, regardless of severity. It's not called FGM because it's worse. It's called that because it's mutilation. Ideally we should apply that same standard to forced circumcision.
/r/MensRights24/04/23 03:08 PM
68

Also, some of the female suicide attempt statistics that you see mentioned are including a wide range of "self harm" behaviors as suicide attempts, even if they weren't potentially fatal or intended to be fatal.
/r/MensRights01/03/23 02:52 AM
30

My son watches Bluey. Love Bandit. I also like that their car looks like a car with kids in it, with spilled snack foods and the like. The show has a few subtle things sprinkled through it for parents to catch (and a few not so subtle). My favorite is Bluey finding the annoying "Chattermax" toy that has no off button stashed under the bathroom sink, and wondering how it got there.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/02/23 11:54 PM
2

The person above didn't describe being stuck in an abusive relationship. They described having sexual needs that weren't met. If you are trapped in an abusive relationship, then the solution is to get out however you can. It might not be easy, but it's the correct solution. If you are in such an abusive relationship, then the relationship is already a broken, unhealthy one that you should leave. Such a relationship might mitigate your guilt for cheating, but that doesn't make cheating a good thi…
/r/MensRights23/02/23 07:24 PM
2

alleged that anyone speaking up against him was a puppet in the cabal being controlled by Hillary Clinton. This is not hyperbole. This is the reason he should have been rejected, IMO.
/r/MensRights23/02/23 03:12 AM
33

If you aren't sexually satisfied in your relationship to the point that you feel the need to cheat, you should discuss that with your partner and break up with them if that's something you can't work out. Or, don't be in a monogamous relationship. I'm not advocating for public humiliation and ostracization, but cheating as a solution to this particular relationship problem is unambiguously a bad thing that people who do it should feel bad about.
/r/MensRights23/02/23 02:47 AM
0

so didn’t see how he reacted He was angry and confrontational -- some here may argue justifiably so -- in a way that didn't reflect the temperament we expect from a lifelong appointee to the most important court. During testimony he angrily ranted against one specific political party (not just his immediate accusers) and people within that party in a way that showed a lack of restraint and judicial temperament. He showed a vindictive attitude toward perceived political enemies that might call hi…
/r/MensRights22/02/23 09:57 PM
12

Yes, thanks for the further clarification. This accusation was not taken seriously enough to be raised in the hearings. Also, the person who confessed to lying was lying about being the person who wrote an anonymous letter. The letter itself is the accusation, and her lie was pretending to be the accuser in the letter. The accuser in the letter has not recanted, because we do not know who they are.
/r/MensRights22/02/23 07:42 PM
26

And, IIRC the news that she admitted to lying is very old news.
/r/MensRights22/02/23 03:33 AM
201

For context that might be missed for people only read the headline, this is not the primary accusation that was at the center of his confirmation hearings.
/r/MensRights22/02/23 02:51 AM
1

I found "cancel culture" an odd addition on image 9. edit: To clarify, two things: I recognize you're quoting somebody else, so that phrasing isn't really your choice. But, it strikes me odd, particularly on this subreddit, because a lot of people on the left will associate complaining about vague "cancel culture" with reactionary politics. And, it's on a list of things contributing to male suicide... and I'm failing to make that connection. Men kill themselves because of... cancel culture? It j…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/09/22 02:17 AM
3

A small statistical increase in likelihood of your ability to do those things, which becomes increasingly smaller the less money you are born into.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/09/22 10:54 PM
1

The regret isn't the issue. It's that she was penetrated with an object she did not know about, was intentionally concealed from her, and she was not given the option to consent to.
/r/MensRights27/05/22 11:17 PM
1

Currently bowing out of an exchange there in a thread where a huge chunk of the comments are excusing literal sexual assault with a disturbing understanding of consent. Meanwhile a lot of the other comments are just naked anti-trans hate. There's a reason I had mostly abandoned the sub.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/22 05:56 PM
-1

There are trans people elsewhere in this thread explaining why its not transphobia to consider this sexual assault. Excusing rape is a worse look. If we were having this conversation offline I would legit warn my daughter not to be alone with you or some others in this thread who have such an inexplicably warped understanding of consent.
/r/MensRights27/05/22 05:42 PM
-1

Your inability to discern the difference between somebody's personality and the physical object you are penetrated with is troubling to me.
/r/MensRights27/05/22 01:13 PM
-1

Understand that your argument is that it's okay to rape a girl if they just don't notice you are doing it. Edit. To put it another way, "they couldn't tell the difference" should never be a valid excuse for violating consent. And what you would or wouldn't feel violated by is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights27/05/22 12:04 PM
2

If it was a real cock, it was consensual sex -- but since it was a surprise dildo that makes it "assault"? Um.. yes? This should be completely obvious.
/r/MensRights27/05/22 05:26 AM
0

The issue actually isn't their gender identity at all. It's that they used a prosthetic and appear to have actively hidden that from the women, instead of allowing the women to know what was going inside of them. A straight man could do the same thing, and it would be equally a violation. (Some might also have a problem with their gender identity, but that shouldn't be the real issue, here.)
/r/MensRights27/05/22 05:12 AM
-1

it could be argued in court that he didn't lie about his sex. This actually matters very little to me. The sexual assault is because he penetrated with an object he didn't inform them about and actively hid from them. It has (or rather should) have nothing to do with whether or not he's transgender.
/r/MensRights27/05/22 05:02 AM
1

Can a racist woman say she only found out the man was Jewish afterwards so it was rape? Only if by "Jewish" you mean "using an object that she wasn't told about to penetrate her." I'm really confused why this isn't extremely simple to understand.
/r/MensRights27/05/22 04:59 AM
5

There are two sides to this. It is true that consent to sex generally consents to a variety of possible acts that, if you do not object to, do not need to be specifically agreed to because they fall under expected behavior during a consensual sexual encounter. I don't have to stop and ask permission for every kiss, repositioning, and so forth if a sexual encounter is already agreed to and there is no reason for me to expect that consent has changed. But, there are limits to that. Consent to a se…
/r/MensRights26/05/22 04:41 PM
5

You don't have to literally force somebody if you simply don't tell them what you are doing and they are unaware of it. If the characterization of deception is inaccurate, then he shouldn't be charged. I'll agree with that. Understand that there are ways to rape somebody that do not involve literal, physical force. And yes, replace the prosthetic with an actual penis and no crime is committed. Absolutely. This is true for any man, transgender or otherwise. If my wife consents to sex under the un…
/r/MensRights26/05/22 03:28 PM
4

using clothing to conceal his prosthetic and assaulting them when they asked questions. There's evidence of intentional deception here. If the trans man did not go out of their way to deceive or conceal the nature of the sex that was taking place, then I would be on your side. If my wife consents to sex, that doesn't give me carte blanche for all forms of sexual acts. The unfortunate reality of transgender men using a prosthetic is that the prosthetic will never be a real penis. This would also …
/r/MensRights26/05/22 03:12 PM
5

My answer to these kinds of polls changes depending on whether we are speaking about what policies I think would be an idealized end-goal, or what policies I think represent the most effective short- to mid-term goals moving forward.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/12/21 08:03 AM
2

I'm not a lawyer and not gonna dig for it, but plenty of places, local or state, could (and if they got a wild hair up their ass, would) charge for this. No, they would not. This is an asinine take. You could only be charged for a light tap on the shoulder to get attention if there were other significant aggravating factors. They could attempt to bring that charge otherwise, perhaps, but they could never achieve a conviction and it would be misconduct on their part. It's one thing to say that we…
/r/MensRights07/12/21 04:12 AM
30

Women have the option of pregnancy abortion AND financial abortion.. Just dropping some praise for pinpointing the issue nicely here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/10/21 01:40 AM
2

They think that the double standard is justified by biological reality (the woman being the one to physically carry the child, such that it's her bodily autonomy in question), coupled with the best interest of the child. I disagree, but there it goes.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/10/21 01:39 AM
16

Agreed, this is my read on it as well. One could have a secondary conversation about how good or bad the "woke" ad is as an advertisement, but that doesn't appear to be why the ad was pulled.
/r/MensRights28/10/21 05:05 AM
38

Association. Misogynists are the enemy of our enemy. And for many that means we must be friends. There is also some very real overlap between MRA groups and misogynists. One purpose of this subreddit is to put some distance between that overlap, but the association is still going to be there in the minds of people who aren't familiar with us. A feminist who isn't tuned into men's issues comes into this subreddit and they might see some familiar issues and arguments. And they aren't familiar to t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/10/21 02:03 AM
2

The going too far bit is the suggestion that their motives are just hating men. The target audience for this is somebody who otherwise may have bought such merch, and you close the argument by implying that they are just bigots, with its a completely different approach than taken by the rest of the slides. It doesn't take a great deal of insight into human nature to suspect that this might invite somebody to close their mind to your argument. The slide makes a valid point about the messaging on …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/21 03:26 PM
1

Both the legislator (Ginny Shaver) that wrote the bill severely restricting abortions (twice, her first bill was rejected two years earlier) and the governor (Kay Ivey) that signed the law that didn't have a vetoproof majority were women. I agree with the comment above you that the slide could have been better if they had said what I just quoted, instead of simply pointing out that the gov was a woman.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/21 03:34 AM
6

"If cutting off parts of infant genitals was a thing, we'd protect boys and let it happen to girls.... wait a minute." I love this response. I'm going to steal it, thank you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/21 03:07 AM
7

Personally, I was thinking about sharing this particular slideshow with my aunt should the subject come up. Until I got to that slide, because I know she'd immediately be put off by the entire message and the effort would be undermined. Maybe I could just cut that slide out.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/10/21 03:06 AM
5

You can get them for free at a lot of health departments and also through various clinics and other sources, such as the internet option mentioned by the reply to you. Free contraceptives are a thing if you look for them, and that's a great thing. Interestingly, a lot of the places you can pick up free condoms tend to be places primarily serving women's health.
/r/MensRights21/10/21 07:05 PM
17

If people want to point out problematic people in the MRA community and criticize the community as a whole based on that, I think that can be fair. But, there's a difference between feminists and MRAS that makes some of these criticisms work differently between the two groups. Feminists have well funded organizations, people in places of power, public policy written based on their works and theories. Unlike MRAs, we can actually point to feminists with real power who are exercising that power. F…
/r/MensRights21/10/21 06:57 PM
1

In this case in taking Bannon at his word for it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/21 11:07 PM
25

Gamergate is really interesting because there's some truth on both "sides" of the issue. Right wing reactionaries, misogynists, and internet trolls really did latch onto the gamergate banner, dox people, harass them, and use the entire occurrence as a chance to recruit people down the alt-right pipeline. (Edit: I should also strongly note that they were not, by far, the entirety of the movement). On the other hand, the anti-gamergate crowd really did do some horrible shit, quite often the same s…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/21 07:36 PM
1

Depends on the context. As other comments pointed out, such an eyebrow-raising description might serve a narrative purpose. It may be that we're meant to find it slightly uncomfortable for various reasons. I can't say whether or not that's the case here.
/r/MensRights10/10/21 01:58 PM
3

You can argue that it happened a long time ago, but realistically we don't know that until there's evidence for it in practice. This is the evidence for that.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 03:23 PM
8

In fact, our Director of Suicide Interventions told us at a local meeting that women have special needs when it comes to Suicide risk. This makes my blood boil. Just to clarify, were there any special needs listed for men in the same way? Also, what special needs did they identify for women?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/08/21 05:27 PM
2

This comment over there resonates with me, and it's downvoted there: You say someone is "worst than feminist themselves." yet talk exactly like them. Someone says something you don't like so you go with buzzwords and call them a cuck and to "Fuck completely off and grow some balls". Like how is that different than a feminist calling someone an incel virgin who hates women exactly? This sub doesn't need hypocritical shit like this. This sub is for discussion and not childish bullshit and the fact…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/08/21 02:19 AM
6

Why must it always be a compliment from women? It doesn't have to be. You can also make a man's day by complimenting them as another guy. We're socialized not to do that often, and it's part of the issue. The picture, however, was about women and men getting the attention of the opposite sex, with a component of romantic interest, so that was the context of the comment.
/r/MensRights23/07/21 03:11 AM
153

The first image is often true, not because it should be true, but because men and boys are generally lacking in positive attention and socialized to see any female attention as a blessing from heaven. The simple act of greeting a boy in a friendly way can make their whole day. And if they find you attractive, it can make their whole week. The second image is closer to how things should be, as opposed to how they are for a lot of boys.
/r/MensRights22/07/21 05:58 AM
2

Not saying you should like him or anything, but do keep in mind that your looking at a compilation of his worst traits all put together with no mitigation. Most people look pretty horrible if you were to only look at a list of criticisms and flaws, or only judge them by the worst things they've ever said.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/07/21 06:03 PM
1

Hey. I apologize for my tone above. This comment makes it clear that you genuinely weren't trying to come off how I took you. It really is annoying, though. Vaush isn't the monster people make him out to be. The way some people talk about him you'd think he was an infectious disease.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/07/21 08:07 AM
5

You may be under the mistaken impression that I watch Vaush and only Vaush and don't expose myself to other viewpoints.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/07/21 07:43 AM
4

See the other reply to me. He's not perfect, he's a bit of an asshole, and he's got some bad habits. I don't watch Vaush because he's a professer of unfettered truth, nor because I expect to agree completely with everything he says. But, he does usually offer an interesting left-wing perspective that's better than most. He models some good debate tactics and provides some strong arguments for left wing policy. Vaush is also good at derailing the alt-right pipeline. A lot of his viewer base are p…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/07/21 07:31 AM
12

I don't think Vaush should be anyone's barometer of truth I watch Vaush pretty regularly. You could accurately call me a fan. That said, I don't think I've seen a truer statement about him than this. Most of your criticisms of him here are spot on.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/07/21 06:31 AM
1

Thanks for taking the time to properly check context in good faith. He made some really questionable statements in this debate for sure. When in the middle of a debate, Vaush tends to care more about what he thinks is going to be rhetorically effective than much else. He also gets easily pulled into hypotheticals and then sticks to them down strange roads that only exist in the clean context of a thought experiment, when he should probably instead just stick with the original topic in reality. F…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/07/21 01:00 AM
4

Hey, I just checked the link in that thread and I see that the timestamp actually cuts out the preceding context. The clip begins with a question about moral consistency given the context of the discussion that preceded it. His claim is that it would be hypocritical to condemn the mere possession of child pornography as in itself immoral, but then say it's okay to possess, say, an iphone that was made with child slavery. The larger point he is making is not that CP should be okay. It's that we s…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/21 05:04 AM
1

Auto-mod ate it, I thought it might. I'll np the link if you want to resinstate it, but I don't mind if you don't since you got the info either way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/21 04:56 AM
2

https://np.reddit.com/r/VaushV/comments/k728i1/vaushs_position_on_consumption_of_child/ I'm just going to link you to this thread in the Vaush subreddit that talks about the issue in a lot of detail, and provides the link to the conversation I believe the quote above is from. edit: This submission is actually taking a less charitable interpretation of Vaush's stance on the subject than I do given what I've seen from watching Vaush talk about it. But, that's why I'm linking to this one in the end…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/21 04:53 AM
3

Except, they weren't said in defense of child pornography. Vaush has been repeatedly, abundantly clear on where he stands with regards to child pornography, and he is not in favor, thinks it's morally wrong, and is a-okay with it being illegal. Context matters. Quote clipping a single sentence or bad take, while ignoring the much larger body of evidence demonstrating his actual position contrary to the point is dishonest.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/21 04:35 AM
1

Thumbs up. I did indeed misunderstand your point. I completely agree.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/21 04:10 AM
0

The irony of a MRA Hey, can you explain why you think it's ironic for an MRA in particular to do this? The accusation is indeed incorrect, but I'd downvoted you initially for how I interpreted your point about MRAs, but now that I read again, I realize that I might have you wrong.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/21 03:59 AM
5

Thanks. Guy seems to have a relatively level head. Will have to watch the actual debate with Vaush next. I suspect it will be one that has me shaking my head and sighing. I generally like Vaush, and agree with him more than not. But, he's far from perfect to say the least. He's better than most far left people when it comes to men's issues, but he's still got some blinders on when it comes to feminism. Not to mention that he can just be an asshole.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/21 03:53 AM
2

Have not watched. How do you think the MRA did?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/07/21 06:23 AM
3

I think part of removing that normalization is confronting people with the fact that it is, in fact, mutilation to cut off a part of a baby's penis for medically unnecessary reasons. That doesn't mean I'm going to be insulting or combative about it. You can do that with tact. If somebody says they were circumcised, and that they are okay with it, that's their choice. But, if they assert as part of that statement that they don't consider it mutilation, then I'm going to politely address that misc…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 07:51 PM
11

If there was a common practice of forced nonmedical amputations on children, I would very much hope and expect that anybody who received an amputation for medically necessary reasons would understand that I'm not referring to them when I call the common practice of unnecessary forced amputation barbaric. That's common sense, but in the case of circumcision that common sense is overridden by indoctrination and insecurity about the topic. The issue with circumcision is that American culture teache…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/06/21 06:07 PM
3

So, would it be safe to say that, if you didn't come across it in places like this sub, you might not even know that men are at much greater risk for heart disease?
/r/MensRights30/05/21 06:10 AM
7

I understand heart disease effects men more than women and men are more likely to suffer heart attacks at younger ages. Can I ask how old you are? And if you were born after, say, 1995, how did you come across this information? I've had a nagging wonder/worry for a while now that we're raising a generation of boys to think that heart disease is something women, in particular, need to worry about because that's the only messaging they ever receive. I think it's taken for granted that everybody wi…
/r/MensRights30/05/21 05:47 AM
2

I didn't accuse anybody, but I am responding to the discussion point posed. To the second point, those facts must be described in language, and language changes over time.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/21 11:42 AM
9

There are biological aspects of human sex that inform and help create gendered behaviors. But, how those gendered behaviors look in the context of human societies is massively influenced by environment and social norms, far more so than biology in itself. For that reason, it's far more accurate to consider what constitutes gendered behavior to be a social construct, even if it's influenced by biology. On that note, how we define gender is ultimately up to us. Language isn't fixed, and if our und…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/21 05:30 AM
2

No, I mean the actual left on economic issues and other various platform concessions, in a positive way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/21 05:01 PM
17

One angle to take here might be to point out that you'd rather favor policies that help minorities and disadvantaged groups by targeting those areas they are disadvantaged in, rather than targeting the race or gender itself. In this way, those policies would disproportionally help those disadvantaged minority groups, while also not favoring any group over another unfairly. For example, a program that seeks to provide extra assistance to historically redlined communities would greatly benefit the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/21 06:35 AM
0

You're being downvoted, but skepticism is indeed called for. When far-right people bring up seemingly good lawsuits or policy recommendations, there's often something in the details that really sours the deal. Every once in a while, though, they're just plain correct on a given case. Maybe they care about the case for the wrong reasons, and maybe their political goals in bringing it forward include things we wouldn't like. But, that doesn't mean the case itself isn't still a good one. So, in the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/21 04:22 AM
17

should make every left leaning person cheering this ruling take pause. Only if the judge justified their ruling with questionable right wing viewpoints. It's unfortunate that somebody as reprehensible as Stephen Miller is the one responsible for the lawsuit, but that doesn't make the result less correct. That said, I'd have to look a bit more closely at the case to be sure. If the case was brought forward or ruled on in such a way that bolsters other extreme right wing aims, I might take pause. …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/21 04:17 AM
37

Some of his policies certainly are, but I don't think it's because he's personally anti-male as much as it is because he's a typically pandering politician. Of course, functionally there is very little difference. The one important difference, though, is that the latter leaves more room for him to be pushed on the issue if tides shift. Biden is susceptible to "bullying" and pressure. The left is leaning heavy on him on a number of issues, and has gotten some results from that. I hope that there …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/21 04:12 AM
1

It's arguable, and I think morally and technically this is the correct view. But it's not something that would be enforced and I think such a lawsuit would fail for a number of reasons.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/04/21 02:40 AM
3

I support mens rights for the same reason I support any social advocacy. I think the world is better when we treat people fairly. I didn't directly come to male issues because I'm a guy. I became increasingly aware of the uneven treatment of boys and men because those inequalities kept popping up in other parts of my life. I'm an atheist who was active in the community when "elevatorgate" became a thing. It sparked a really heated debate in the skeptic community about feminism and sexual harassm…
/r/MensRights03/04/21 04:13 PM
2

Nobody said his existence was terrible, or that he doesn't live an awesome life. Many girls who experience sexual harassment are also living amazing lives that most people would love to have. But, that doesn't make the sexual harassment okay, or any less sexual harassment. Pointing out the double standard is important here, because it applies to men across the board, not just to rich hunks like Henry Cavill.
/r/MensRights31/03/21 03:05 AM
3

Is she literally on a pedestal? A small one, but still . . .
/r/MensRights29/03/21 05:02 AM
9

Same question, I don't have time RN to dive in for details but I feel like this exact thing happened years ago. Same story?
/r/MensRights07/01/21 03:01 PM
3

The atheist/skeptic community suffered a bit of fracturing and drama a number of years back. Watching that unfold as a part of that community started me on applying that skepticism toward some sacred cows that I hadn't even realized were going unquestioned. Did some research, and arrived at some conclusions.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/12/20 06:09 AM
5

They can be, but for every one that has that kind of sticking power, there are 100 that don't, and they fail for any number of reasons, quite often related to corporate greed. Also, a huge number of Star Trek fans will point to a lot of the recent work as having "destroyed" the series, even if you disagree with them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/12/20 05:58 AM
5

Personally, I think "destroyed" is an overstatement in most of those cases. Usually, those culture war issues are either overblown, or simply the specific flavor of failure in IP that would be failing regardless or for other reasons. The Star Wars franchise would likely still see a huge drop in quality in the main movies even if Rey wasn't a complete Mary Sue. That failing would just look different. The quality is shit because the cow has been milked dry for profit, and it's only a limp, barely …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/12/20 05:01 AM
4

My strategy is to more or less ignore them unless I come across one in the wild making a point that I have a specific refutation for, or until somebody of another political persuasion attempts to tie my own positions to their larpy performative wokeness.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/12/20 03:16 AM
25

A lot of online leftists are really larpy. They like their purity tests and shoot themselves in the foot by looking for people to exclude instead of people to include in whatever movement they are advocating for. I'm not of mind to join many leftist communities online because the online left is just a mess, typically.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/12/20 02:26 AM
4

It's about as relevant as Obama's tan suit. It's just another example of how hollow political attacks can be.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/12/20 08:59 AM
1

I'm not a feminist, so I'm not going to defend that take. Both men and women have advantages and disadvantages in our society based on gender expectations and the legacy of gendered attitudes in history -- but I'm not interested in the specifics of that for this thread. That women are disadvantaged in a patriarchal society is one of the core assertions of feminism, so any response "from a feminist perspective" must accept those premises. But, I'm not a feminist.
/r/MensRights09/12/20 01:38 AM
3

On this point I agree.
/r/MensRights07/12/20 08:31 PM
-3

This is a good point that I did not include in my own reply. Social media outrage posts aren't the best place to look if you are hungry for examples of meaningful activism.
/r/MensRights07/12/20 08:21 PM
5

Not a feminist, but I can provide a partial response from that perspective. To be clear before I start though, I'm not defending the man-hating or otherwise irrational rhetoric/behavior from feminists, particularly on social media. That stuff is still awful. I'm also "steel manning" their position to represent the best version of a feminist perspective. So, the advice about improving yourself, learning a skill, going for that promotion or raise, etc. is all great advice for individual people to …
/r/MensRights07/12/20 08:18 PM
17

I believe it. In general, though, headlines like this tend to merit a measure of skepticism. I've seen too many cases where the student or parent is complaining that they got in trouble "just for" this or that, when the real issue was something else entirely. I've also seen cases where there school really was being as awful as the headline and article suggests. Which does appear to be the case here.
/r/MensRights07/12/20 07:50 PM
31

Often (but not always) stories like this are missing some context and the kid is being punished for more than "just" wearing nail polish. I don't know that this is the case here.
/r/MensRights07/12/20 05:56 PM
1

It's only some schools in America. Other schools have uniforms but they are not particularly fancy or expensive. I've never had to spend a lot of money on uniforms for my part.
/r/MensRights07/12/20 05:51 PM
5

My wife and I were asked at least 5 different times if we wanted to circumcise our son. Luckily for my wife, I was not present for most of them due to COVID limiting people in the hospital visits. My standard response tends to be something like, "Would you be asking that question if we were having a girl?" .. and that's a bit more confrontational about the issue than my wife would like.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/20 06:38 PM
11

To be fair, it's not conspiracy theory to note that wikipedia has a bias toward feminism while also treating "MRA" contributions with unfair scrutiny. It's not really noteworthy at this point, either. It's just how the space trends. I am also put off by Breitbart links pretty much anywhere they appear.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/20 06:36 PM
12

The argument that her views aren't widely held by others is an argument for including those views in the article. Their provocative nature makes them noteworthy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/20 06:30 PM
3

The World According to Garp, by John Irving is up there, although I may be thinking about that book in particular in relation to this subreddit. Slaughterhouse Five, by Kurt Vonnegut is the book I've probably read the most times.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/11/20 04:14 AM
1

All for them in almost every case. Usually concerns or arguments against them don't address the reality of what those rights mean or entail.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/11/20 05:52 PM
8

The downvotes should speak for themselves, but just to state it in words this is a harmful and ignorant take that hurts men who are victims of abusive relationships. Physical size difference does make overcoming violent abuse easier in some situations, but not always. Women who abuse do not need to be physically stronger. Neither do abusive men, for that matter. Abusers use a wide variety of tactics and weapons in their arsenal, usually including emotional manipulation as the primary vector. Wit…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/11/20 09:01 PM
4

Agreed that the judge was trash. That said I'm not surprised he lost this case even had the judge been more impartial. I generally side with Depp here but I think a legal case for libel was tough. That the label of wife beater has had a drastic impact on his career was there strongest point for him, but I expected he'd lose because he can be called a wife beater in a highly misleading but technically true sense.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/11/20 01:27 PM
5

I think Biden's sexual assault accusation had less merit than the accusation against Kavanaugh, but neither should have been enough to tank a career. I was against Kavanaugh for reasons that did not include "he is a rapist!" although some of them were related to how he handled the accusation itself. I would not have complained if there had been a more serious investigation of Biden's accusation. I'm not sure there wasn't a more comprehensive investigation than the public is conscious of, now tha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/10/20 12:59 AM
0

It is, but I've already indicated that I'm not interested in continuing this discussion.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/20 03:49 PM
1

It's limiting because definitions of words limit those words to meaning what they actually mean. There are other words for non-religious ideologies. And yes, some religions don't hold a great deal of supernatural belief. But they do contain ritualistic practices, assertions about the nature of the universe, adherence to a religious or spiritual text, and other traits that are specifically associated with religious following. The supernatural component is a very common but not entirely necessary …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/20 04:12 PM
2

2 things, but then I'm going to end this discussion: First, the specific argument quoted above isn't what I would call a right-wing argument. You might recall that I agreed that the non-falsifiability of critical theory is a good criticism of it. Secondly, I'm going to back down from that statement in regards to this discussion. I was expressing some frustration, not necessarily about the specific comments above there, but the general state of this subreddit. I was expressing frustration with th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/20 04:06 PM
1

As it is traditionally understood and has been through most of history: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion?s=t a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. That is, it's not enough to simply have a moral worldview. A religious moral worldview claims that …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/20 03:43 PM
1

Saying there's "no religious gene" is a reductive argument. It wasn't meant to literally be the sum of the argument. It was shorthand for asserting that it's not a natural, innate part of being human to be religious. In the original comment I replied to the argument was made, as a pro-religious argument, that humans are naturally religious. And sure, if you change the definition of religion to mean any set of moral values, then any creature with a sense of morality is religious. But THAT would b…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/10/20 03:31 PM
1

^- Kinda where I'm coming from as well.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/10/20 12:54 AM
1

I'll take a look later. If they are arguing specifically against the book White Fragility I probably agree with them. I'm not a fan of di Angelo or the "white people bad" framing of racial issues (that's simplifying the argument they make, but I think it's fair in context). While a lot of CRT proponents are guilty of that, that's not really what CRT itself implies. If they use White Fragility as an example of a work embracing Critical Race Theory, and in the process argue against the broader the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/20 03:05 PM
6

CRT tends to rely on unfalsifiable arguments that can be used to construe anything, even polar opposites, as racist in intent or outcome Bingo. That's a much more on-point, concise criticism of critical theory. The next thing would be to identify which arguments or premises critical theory makes that are unfalsifiable, and why we should not accept those assertions axiomatically.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/20 02:24 PM
3

"Critical Race Theory" is not the sole work of Dr. Robin di Angelo. There are definitely proponents of CRT that hold anti-white, racist views. And, as I've said elsewhere I'm actually no fan of critical theory, generally speaking. That said, my main beef here is that criticism of CRT don't tend to address the core assertions of Critical Race Theory as a concept, and instead focus on bad statements and behaviors made by some of its proponents (and there are plenty of those).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/20 02:22 PM
1

I just responded to this elsewhere.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/20 02:18 PM
3

Tribalism and irrational following of a dogmatic ideology are definitely akin to a religious mindset. But there is no religious gene in our DNA. There's nothing inherent to humans that makes us a religious species. We're a social species that engages in in-group, out-group dynamics. We tend toward tribalism, and that can lead to blind following of ideologies.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/20 02:17 PM
3

Let me know what you think. I'm actually not a big fan of Critical Theory in general. But I find takedowns of critical theory tend to be really... lacking. I checked out your link and also looked into the website and organization a bit. The top article was fear mongering based on social pressure that was completely foreign to me and my experience with critical race theory. In the situation they described, I would have no fear of social reprisal for picking the "wrong" person, and more importantl…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/20 02:11 PM
2

it's an inherant part of human beings No, it's not. Seeing patterns and intent in nature is an inherent tendency. Forming social groupings is an inherent tendency. These things contribute to a human tendency toward religious following. But, being religious is not some inherent trait of humans. It's just something we've tended to do.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/20 01:39 PM
2

And I'm confused because I have no idea where any of this is coming from. You aren't alone! I think it comes from how some "woke" people behave in practice, and how the language they use, particularly from angry or immature people on social media, tends to paint white people in a hateful way. People conflate the whole concept of CRT with how the worst people who advocate for it behave, even if those people aren't actually citing CRT to support their views. The common perception of CRT by its det…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/10/20 01:33 PM
5

I think Vaush represents a growing new wave of young leftists who remain very "woke" on most issues, but not so woke that their brains have boiled. He's occasionally off-putting. But for the most part I find myself quite agreeing with him.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/20 08:57 PM
3

See the top level comment here from the user russelsteapot42 for one example of why I think there is a slowly shifting tide on this issue. (Specifically, they are talking about the YouTube streamer Vaush.)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/20 08:54 PM
4

Making a new comment for this because it's basically a separate discussion... Say what you want, but the right-wing platform has been the side of unity and tolerance. There are right wingers who are Muslim, gay, trans, lesbian, Black, Asian, and Latino. They are welcomed into the platform. Meanwhile the left actively disavows and exiles their own kind for not hating the right people (no pun intended). This strikes me as a massive distortion of what the two groups are and what they stand for. It'…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/20 08:46 PM
6

The problem with men leaving the left-wimg platform isn't because of far-right boogeymen You misunderstand me. The far-right is taking advantage of a situation created by the bad messaging and identity politics of the left. I blame the far right for the harmful policies supported by the far right. It's not the left supporting those far right polices, after all. However, I blame the off-putting, male-dismissive feminist left for alienating young men, mostly young white men, and making them more p…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/20 08:35 PM
0

If you would continue on to the next sentence following that quote.... Yes, it might be wishful thinking. But it's based on my experience actually being on the left, listening to left leaning people, being clued into politics and watching what issues people are focusing on and how they talk about them. I definitely get the feeling, vague and unsubstantiated as it is, that there is a growing contingent on the left that doesn't care for the strong feminist language, or are at least more aware of w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/20 06:34 AM
24

The far right intentionally targets disenchanted young men who are put off by man-hating trends in feminism. And they've found it a very successful recruiting ground. The good news, I think, is that we're finally seeing the beginnings of course correction on this front from the left, generally. I don't have a great deal of evidence to back up that feeling. But I do think that tides are starting to shift on the man-hating. I hope. Maybe.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/20 01:38 AM
1

Depends on the self help I guess. I'm going to let you have the last word on the rest, but I wanted to make two comments. First, I fully agree here. It really does depend on the self help. There is some really good self help and also bad self help, and plenty of both out there. I mean self help is basically bootstrap pulling. And second, I'm going to steal this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/10/20 12:25 AM
1

Also third-party dissection is of no real interest to me, it's lazy and only supports echo-chamber arguments. This doesn't track for me, because you're asking for specific criticisms of him, but then say you aren't interested in actually viewing comprehensive criticisms because they come from a third party -- nevermind that those third parties might actually have some really on-point criticism that are much better formed than I could communicate in an off-the-cuff reddit comment. Meanwhile Jorda…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/20 11:31 PM
1

I can't speak to that, because I only know him from the political side. Most self-help could also be called pseudo-intellectual nonsense. But, a lot of it is beneficial pseudo-intellectual nonsense that actually can help motivate you to be more productive and take care of business. You're right that trying to apply those self-help ideas to politics does tend to result in right-wing sounding ideas. That's because self-help advice is about motivating and improving an individual to empower them to …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/20 11:21 PM
6

More importantly, being left wing doesn't make you a feminist. Equating the two is unnecessarily divisive here and harms male advocacy.
/r/MensRights12/10/20 04:06 PM
2

Because his stuff is literally not worth the time, typically. There's usually not much of substance from him to even respond to. He says a bunch of intellectual sounding stuff that, upon further inspection, doesn't actually mean anything, and instead just asserts whatever conclusion he's supporting as true. For example, somebody recently submitted a video of him to the atheism subreddit describing a view of god as a father figure. The video has been removed so I can't link it without looking it …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/20 03:06 PM
8

... almost everything I've heard come out of his mouth. I'd have to pull up a something specific from him to give examples, and I'm really not of mind to get into it. Anybody who likes Jordan Peterson is free to, but I don't find him very impressive.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/20 04:31 AM
11

Jordan Peterson, he leans towards the Right but is a brilliant man. Everything I've ever seen from him is full of pseudo-intellectual nonsense. But, I do agree that listening to him can be useful to see where some others are coming from, as he has a lot of people who follow him.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/20 04:27 AM
9

Ignoring for the moment the debate about whether or not this description of privilege is accurate and useful, I see nothing on this page that tells boys they have to hate themselves due to their privilege.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/10/20 04:25 AM
8

I'm all for educating girls and addressing those places where girls are denied an education, it does have a lasting impact on other socioeconomic factors if we do so, in addition to simply being a human rights issue for the girls in question. My contention comes when we focus on the treatment of girls or the female victims in war-torn areas, while either ignoring male victims or indicating that they are less important. For example, the oft-cited example of Boko Haram's kidnapping, murder, and ab…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/10/20 07:24 PM
8

The statement is more excusable in that context. But, it remains true that boys in those countries are also severely disadvantaged in ways that do not get attention because we focus on saving the girls.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/10/20 05:55 PM
15

I'm not sure what he's even referring to here with girls maybe "never" going back to school? Certainly nothing in the UK. Is he talking about third world countries where education is optional, particularly for girls?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/10/20 04:23 PM
0

This is a really uncharitable interpretation of a bit of material from the Smithsonian. Even viewed charitably, the White Culture thing from the Smithsonian is really bad. But, it doesn't imply that those things are part of white culture, and therefor bad. Nor is it saying that no other culture can value those things. It only identifies those things as values that white culture tends to promote. Honor is a big part of a lot of Asian cultures. But, other cultures will also value honor. No one cul…
/r/MensRights10/10/20 10:09 PM
1

One thing that might help is a push to discourage unrelated political arguments. As long as we're arguably on the left wing, addressing the issues from some flavor of a left wing perspective, we should perhaps officially discourage submissions or long debates about politics that have no direct relation to mens issues.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/10/20 01:39 AM
1

An issue I've noticed is that there is in-fighting between the left, and the other left, and the other other left, if you know what I mean. We have people who are far left, who despise the Democratic Party and consider more moderate liberal takes to be anathema to a proper leftist moment. We have people who are more traditionally left-wing Democrats. We have people who are closer to Libertarian ideals. We have people who are a hodgepodge and will even espouse what others here would consider righ…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/10/20 10:50 PM
2

, it’s called huMANity, .. going to somewhat contradict my comment elsewhere in this thread and point out that some of these changes are ridiculous. I'm okay with adjusting our language when it makes sense. But occasionally people suggest language changes that are just a bit too far, or are nonsense that don't benefit anybody. I mention this because you highlighted the man in humanity. I don't think it's productive to alter the word "humanity" just because it has a "man" in it!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/10/20 05:30 AM
4

I agree with you. I will add that my problem comes when one of two things is happening: I have a problem when we try to enforce language changes by law, or with punitive measures for people who don't use the "right" language. I don't want people punished by HR for saying "chairman" instead of "chair" in a meeting, unless they are doing it maliciously to create a hostile work environment. I have a problem when we start shaming people or treating these language changes as mandatory, rather than a …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/10/20 05:26 AM
5

See, I'm not sending my distaste of his actions to the University for consideration. I'm not offering it up in a court case as evidence against his grievance. I'm answering a question you posed in a tiny, anonymous online space for left leaning people. And you're trying to invoke a nuclear disaster as if me sharing my personal opinion in that context is somehow going to lead to a new one. That's ridiculous.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 11:42 PM
2

I don't share "your kind of leftism" that rejects nuance. Rejecting nuance is part of the problem I have with feminism. Pointing out that his behavior was actually distasteful does no harm here, particularly in the context of my comment. You asked if the situation was okay. Part of that answer involves evaluating his actions to see if the response was warranted. If you wanted to pose a non-nuanced, hard call to action on his part, you shouldn't have posed it as a question. Also, you'll note from…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 11:06 PM
2

, but the "sour taste" comment is failure to show solidarity with an oppressed worker Nope, it's not. I find it distasteful. It's fine for me to say that, because it's what I think and it's true. Full stop he shouldn't be fired for it, if the given description of his behavior is accurate. This black and white, all or nothing bullshit doesn't do the left any favors. It doesn't win battles. It doesn't progress the cause of the oppressed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 10:41 PM
4

Then one day, when the real next Scalia arrives ... how do you determine who is the real next Scalia? By all accounts this person is as close as I can see us getting.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 08:28 PM
6

It depends on the actual behavior of the account. I find it hard to trust what I hear about cases like this. I personally find it off-putting when people pretend to be somebody else online for questionable reasons. In this case, pretending to be a minority woman for political reasons puts a sour taste in my mouth. I understand that identity politics creates a situation where his views were more palatable coming from what appeared to be a minority woman, and his race or gender really should not h…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 08:22 PM
6

This is good reason to take a deep breath and tell yourself that this appointment might not end up as damaging as we think. Judges very often turn out to be less partisan than the people who appointed them hope for. But, that doesn't mean we shouldn't fight it tooth and nail at this moment. Roberts, to stick with your example, has still been a right leaning Justice with a record that progressives shouldn't be impressed with. He just hasn't been as extremely partisan as some feared he might, than…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 08:06 PM
3

To be honest it doesn't say much. In the judiciary, particularly amongst people who are have some semblance of respect for precedence and established legal traditions, these views aren't as controversial as one might think given how divided our political landscape is on the subject.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 08:24 AM
3

Um.. no there are legit other issues that are important to left wingers. For being on a left wing sureddit you seem to have a very low opinion of how lefties approach politics.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 06:22 AM
5

so the idpol left can't support Barrett. Do you think this issue alone means that the left should support Barrett's appointment? I'm confused here, because the left has a lot more to say about Barrett and her appointment than this single issue. In fact, this is the first time I've seen the issue of due process with Title IX being raised with regard to her by any side.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/09/20 05:27 AM
4

That the subject had no business being discussed in his class is more reason to complain loudly to the administration. I disagree with the other comment below here. Statements like this aren't just passive sexism, the perpetuation of these ideas does real harm to male victims of sexual assault. Not only is this teacher technically, legally, and morally wrong, they had no business whatsoever discussing sexual assault and defining who can and cannot be raped. It's grossly unprofessional and I've s…
/r/MensRights25/09/20 07:48 PM
2

Agree this list actually makes some sense if offered as a critique of how women are treated in some theocratic middle eastern countries.
/r/MensRights31/08/20 05:14 AM
3

You're not wrong but the safe thing to do is just end the discussion once somebody indicates that they are personally hurt or offended, even if they have no right or reason to be. It's just pixel panties, and that applies to you as much as them, it's not a hill worth dying on -- or losing your account on.
/r/MensRights31/08/20 03:08 AM
4

I take it with a grain of salt, because it contradicts the general trend of numerous other studies I've heard about. However, I do not have the subject area expertise or statistical chops to actually analyze their conclusions, so I'm left waiting for somebody with more know-how to provide a critique or back up their findings.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates31/08/20 02:48 AM
110

I think that's the attempted point. Of course, this is not the lived experienced of the vast majority of women alive today, and very few men (in the English speaking west) think women should be subject to any of these restrictions ... so it's a total non-point.
/r/MensRights30/08/20 08:46 PM
2

I don't think there's a problem with these places pushing for men to be able to show vulnerability and emotion without judgment. Grit and emotional fortitude are definitely positive qualities that are encouraged in men, and that's not bad. But I don't think that's the problem with those spaces that focus on mens lib from a more feminist perspective. The actual problem is that they only focus on that, and refuse to focus on other issues that might risk countering the feminist narrative on masculi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/08/20 02:54 PM
8

Needs a third option on the question, "Have you or somebody you know been the victim of a false accusation?" There is an option for other, that I chose, but I think an option for "unsure, but suspect the accusation may have been false" might be useful to people. I have a family member who was accused of sexual assault and had their kids cut out of their life by a vindictive ex in the process. But, I can't say that I know the accusation was false. I suspect it may have been, but it might not have…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/08/20 09:35 PM
11

Like imagine a woman calling a suicide helpline and she is told on the phone "oh, were sorry, more men commit suicide so we only help men" , thats what men nowadays have to face when they try to get help from domestic violence shelters, homeless shelters and even the police. There are several countries where it is impossible for women to commit rape. This is a very well put comparison. I might steal this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/20 04:35 PM
20

I expect women to be humans, to battle with the pressures of life and enjoy its frivolities, to care about some issues and not care about others, to be individuals with their own minds and their own values. They seem to exist solely to use men for money and pleasure, and not care about them as human beings either. Some incel-like groups think of women this way. And while I know that all male-advocacy groups end up with these kinds of comments from time to time, that's not what this subreddit is …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/08/20 04:31 PM
9

Article goes out of its way to make sure men are the ones that are assigned blame for this state of affairs, even while providing more examples of women sexually shaming men. Author apparently thinks that "patriarchy hurts you too" is sufficient enough action by feminists to show that they care about these issues and will work to fix them.
/r/MensRights18/08/20 03:26 PM
2

I think there is a selection bias here. MGTOW who don't talk about women probably don't talk very much about MGTOW one way or another. MGTOW isn't about improving men's health or improving education for boys. It's about escaping from gendered expectations that have to do with their utility to women. I do imagine there are a large number of MGTOW who care about other issues men face, but they might not frame those issues as "Hi, I'm a MGTOW and because of that I'm here to talk about..." That said…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/08/20 02:31 PM
10

If you talk about it online, Men’s Rights Activists will come swarming in to derail the conversation into a rant about whatever some prominent controversial feminist said this week. The conversation can so easily turn into a men vs feminists debate. This is unfortunate, because the first people to really impress on me the importance of treating male sexual assault victims seriously were feminists. When men would dismiss feminist critiques on gender roles, feminists would often respond with somet…
/r/MensRights15/08/20 07:12 AM
3

Well, I didn't want to take the political angle of attacking politicians in this subreddit. But, you aren't wrong. I'm speaking as a matter of what should be more than what currently is in our political climate. Maybe I should have said this: We should hold elected officials to a higher standard than porn stars when it comes to their provocative behavior.
/r/MensRights15/08/20 12:30 AM
4

I was going to comment that in addition to the gender difference, we also don't hold porn stars to the same standards of ethical behavior that we do, say, elected officials. Her tweets on this are ridiculous and worthy of consequence. But I'm not certain that Reilly Reid gets treated to a lower standard just because she's a woman. The double standard certainly exists, but this might not be the best example of it.
/r/MensRights14/08/20 09:12 PM
36

Yep, based on the OPs words As is the case with almost every post on that subreddit, or similar subreddits, we're only hearing one side. He might well be a fuckwit, but he might have also had good reason to doubt, and she may have left out any number of details that mitigate his actions, or simply painted his actions uncharitably.
/r/MensRights13/08/20 06:57 AM
18

Those semantics, however, are important. If we don't legally call it "rape" then people collecting statistics on "rape" can ignore male victims, either intentionally or unintentionally. When you don't call it rape, you shape public perception, not just on a level of language, but in those statistics. Also, having a "separate but equal" situation is rarely actually equal, as history has taught us. The maximum sentence may be the same, but that does not mean the sentencing in practice will be the …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/08/20 08:05 PM
5

Not addressing your main point, but speaking of TERFs, I noticed that JK Rowling's positions against trans rights are actually rooted in misandry. And I think this is true for a lot of TERFs. They think that trans women cannot be trusted ... not because they are trans, but because they were born with a penis. Her whole argument against bathroom rights was that it would cause women to be abused by "men" infiltrating a woman's space.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/08/20 03:48 AM
2

Same song and dance we've seen before. Gamergate. Comics. Even atheists and skeptics got a bit of this years ago.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/08/20 09:13 PM
2

I don't really disagree with this. I was only defending why I do consider it to be a slur, albeit not one I'm largely concerned with as used. I'm definitely not clutching pearls about how it's used in the anime community. I'm not in favor of banning its use and I think it was a massive mistake. To rephrase my point above just a little more concisely, I still defend classifying it as a slur for two reasons: It can be used that way, and is used that way by some people. It is of particular relevanc…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/08/20 07:30 PM
3

It doesn't even refer to trans people. .. except when it is used that way, of course. Now, it's true that a "trap" has a more specific definition, but in reality it's used more broadly. I can't speak for that subreddit in particular, because I don't visit it. I'm talking about how I've seen it used generally. It refers to characters who have male anatomy but present as female. I've seen people use "trap" in reference to all permutations of this situation, whether they identify as female, identif…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/08/20 06:30 PM
2

but it is also kind if a silly hill to die on Don't die on it. It's dumb and wrong, but it's not important enough to sacrifice your job, in my opinion. edit: You might, in the mean time, look for employment elsewhere.
/r/MensRights08/08/20 04:02 PM
3

Yep. Trans issues would remain a mere blip on the radar if people didn't push back against trans rights with such passionate fervor. For example, if we just let people use the bathroom they identify with, that issue would be long over and nobody would care anymore. But, both parties use it as a wedge issue. It only works as a wedge issue because transphobes will die on that hill.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/08/20 03:49 PM
6

I was expecting to disagree with this post going in from the title. I'm pleasantly (or perhaps not pleasantly given the context) surprised. "Trap" is a difficult call for a place like animemes because it is, without any doubt, a slur against trans people. And it's a slur that speaks toward a serious, dangerous issue that transwomen in particular face. But, even so, it's rarely used with malice in the anime memes community, and it's a staple of anime meme-like tropes that a lot of people will not…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/08/20 03:45 PM
3

(see the Smithsonian poster about "white culture" for example) Oh, yes I saw that. That was so cringe worthy, it was like they were trying to offend literally everybody at once.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/08/20 03:21 PM
5

We're on a left wing subreddit here, so if I frame typically right wing positions as undesirable, you should perhaps infer that I'm a left-leaning person who agrees with the left and disagrees with the right. But even then, you're shoving a whole lot of positions into my mouth that I did not assert. If you read those implications into there, then that's perhaps my poor phrasing, but it could also be your bias. People do get radicalized into white nationalist viewpoints via the alt-right pipeline…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 10:08 PM
5

Stop blaming the right wing for the left wing misandry. I didn't. The left doesn't give a shit about men's rights, generally. Some of us do, hence this subreddit. The right, on the other hand, is only marginally better on men's issues, and intensely worse on other issues.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 09:44 PM
3

It's imperfect but it's only one step removed from men's rights. And it appears to be an acceptable view point among liberals. Yep, that's my opinion on it. I'll take it as a step forward.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 06:45 PM
11

The left is just as responsible as the right for that recruitment pipeline. I can agree with this, wholeheartedly. It's just not the aspect of that pipeline I was addressing in the comment above. Both are true, the alt-right intentionally recruits in some of these spaces, AND the left makes it easier when they marginalize people in those same spaces and make them feel othered. A HUGE thing the left could do to shut down that pipeline is stop behaving like MensLib does, and stop shoving all disag…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 03:22 PM
2

I never suggested otherwise.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 03:15 PM
6

I've supported gamergate from day one and never had any far-right winger try to recruit me. Brietbart intentionally courted gamergate. What do you think Milo was doing? That Brietbart intentionally targeted gamergate isn't conspiracy theory, it was their marketing strategy as per their own words. KIA is pretty far right nowadays. You can express other political opinions just fine, sometimes, but they still promote Project Veritas as "good journalism exposing the truth" and downvote you if you di…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 01:51 PM
11

tbh the name put me off at first but it was really worth a watch. For what it's worth, a lot of MRAs tried to lobby for a name change to that documentary before it came out.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 05:18 AM
8

I find a little hope in some of the otherwise far-left voices you can find scattered around that will acknowledge areas where men are marginalized and admit that men can be discriminated against. I'm thinking of Vaush as an example, here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 05:15 AM
11

It's unfortunate that right wing groups have intentionally recruited from men's advocacy and anti-feminist groups. The alt-right pipeline is real, and they've used male online spaces to their ends. For example, Brietbart very intentionally infiltrated and courted gamergate toward accepting far right worldviews. In some of these spaces, what happens is that the left wingers leave. They might, for example, create a subreddit specifically for left wing male advocacy, because the more general spaces…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/20 05:10 AM
5

I don't have a problem with a group for women like this one focusing on how a particular issue is affecting women. I do have a problem with the implication that women are currently being neglected in their needs in a exceptional way -- when they aren't. The current situation isn't leaving women behind any more than men are being left behind.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/08/20 02:18 AM
19

I'm curious what their justification is. But the real reason is likely that it takes focus away from women by suggesting men's issues are important.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/08/20 02:34 PM
3

The narrative that men are by nature aggressive, selfish and violent is promoted by men It's not a gender war of men versus women, and this is where a lot of feminists go off the mark. It's promoted by the society in which we live. Men and women are part of that society. So are feminists. Feminists promote this idea very much, with messaging and programs that assume men to be exactly those things. And we're caught up far too much in who deserves the blame instead of what to do about it. When men…
/r/MensRights05/08/20 02:29 PM
1

Current society norms favor a certain ideal of man (the known hyper masculine, loud, aggressive, assertive and all that fluff), and berate men who arent close to that ideal. Its not that complicated. Okay ... so how does feminism work toward addressing mens issues from this perspective? The main problem male advocates have with feminism's "it's the patriarchy" response is that it is dismissive. Feminism seeks to fix the patriarchy primarily by addressing problems and hurdles that women face. Mos…
/r/MensRights05/08/20 02:22 PM
9

Watching the skeptic movement fracture itself over accusations of sexual harassment and the rather.. un-skeptical behavior of feminists in the movement following that was part of it. However, it was also that I was becoming more aware of men's issues, such as the lack of domestic abuse resources and homeless shelters for men, the growing crisis of boys in education, and so forth. In looking into these issues, it became apparent that feminism as a movement was not providing any solution, or even …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/08/20 03:55 AM
3

I agree. I do think a startlingly high number of men are sexually assaulted in their lives. The 1 in 6 stat might not be that far off. But we shouldn't used flawed methods to come up with those numbers. It's actually quite hard to measure accurately.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/08/20 10:38 PM
3

I’ve seen false statistics before (1 in 5 women being sexually assaulted, for example). This is a case of "turnabout is fair play" with the numbers. They use the same metrics, or similar metrics. If those numbers are good enough to create massive messaging efforts to support female victims, then it's only consistent to use the same metrics when discussing male victims. I can see the argument for lowering to that level, of course.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/08/20 10:28 PM
53

Back when I was involved in skeptic communities online, developing a more skeptical worldview and examining various positions I held to strengthen and refine them. Radical feminism was always something I felt tended to go a little too far, but I never objected to feminism generally. There was some drama in the skeptic/atheist circles around sexual harassment, and some of the feminists involved with that drama effectively pushed me away from feminism and prompted me to delve more deeply into femi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/08/20 10:18 PM
5

Thanks for pushing back on the bullshit. I'm glad to see some people doing that in this comment section.
/r/MensRights01/08/20 05:41 PM
5

And you're completely failing to understand what you are reading. Women get women's health screenings -- that is, for their vaginas. This is not the same as a general annual physical. If there was a male equivalent to an OBGYN you'd see mens health screenings specifically covered as well. In fact, preventative screenings for men ARE covered, but those things mostly occur as part of more general preventative care with their GP -- you know, in their annual physicals, which are free under the ACA. …
/r/MensRights01/08/20 05:35 PM
1

Headline is false. There are problems with the ACA but this isn't one of them.
/r/MensRights01/08/20 05:30 PM
0

It's not true.
/r/MensRights01/08/20 05:30 PM
1

You're discovering that the headline is false.
/r/MensRights01/08/20 05:26 PM
1

"people with vaginas" This would actually be appropriate in this case because most of the things afforded to women and not men are on the basis of their anatomy and not their gender identity. Unless you're a man who wants to go in for a mammogram and a pap test?
/r/MensRights01/08/20 05:24 PM
3

The headline is false. Both men and women receive free preventative care including annual checkups. Women receive some women specific things that men don't receive because they don't have vaginas.
/r/MensRights01/08/20 05:21 PM
5

I knew from the title that this would be misleading at best, outright false at worst. The men's movement can do better than this.
/r/MensRights01/08/20 05:19 PM
2

There are plenty of people on the left, who support left wing politics generally, but recognize that left leaning groups and politicians tend to be very bad on men's issues. If you want a movement that sees those people as the enemy and excludes them, that's fine. But that movement will be a smaller, less effective movement. You aren't going to stop them by a narrow focus on only one piece of it. It's fine to recognize that the political left is the primary source of the worst anti-male messages…
/r/MensRights01/08/20 05:10 AM
2

You shoot mens' causes in the foot when you try to lump in other, unrelated political issues or try to make it an exclusively right wing concern.
/r/MensRights31/07/20 10:27 PM
6

This is the worst possible way this could have played out. This connection doesn't prove that Den is the person who killed Marc Angelucci, but it does seem plausible. So, not only has the men's movement lost a great ally and attorney, but we also have an "anti-feminist MRA" who attacked a female judge and murdered her family. This is only going to further the mainstream perception of men's activists as bitter, angry men who hate women in power. If the evidence should play out that this suspect w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/20 02:08 PM
7

Thanks for sharing!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/07/20 03:26 PM
1

But when men insult each other like that, it doesnt make news headlines, because men just suck it up. There's truth to this, in that men do behave like this to each other. Except this happened in front of reporters and by a congressman to colleague. That would absolutely make headlines even if it was another man he was speaking to. You're not wrong on the larger point, we do see it as less of a big deal. And, I agree that focusing solely on sexism instead of the more general lack of respect he s…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/07/20 03:11 PM
1

A man calling a woman a bitch is going to cause outrage because people have an innate desire to protect women, I do think that we see it worse when a woman is insulted than when a man is insulted, generally speaking, because we are wired by both biology and socialization to value the protection of women. And, that does come into play here. However, while this is true, it's also true that the context we're looking at is a legitimate example of a space that has been historically hostile toward fem…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/07/20 02:46 PM
12

It's easy to botch a circumcision in ways that don't get much attention because the damage is minor and chalked up to "normal" for the owner of the penis. You can have even further reduced sensation, or have the skin that's not meant to be on your penis stretched up onto the penis because they snipped too much. Everybody likes a hairy shaft, right? More severe complications you'd notice right away, like... accidental amputation. Which happens. Or infections ranging from minor to life threatening…
/r/MensRights24/07/20 03:24 AM
14

Well said. I think my big contention with the title is the suggestion that women are currently entitled to call men those names in a situation where professionalism is expected. I think that's just false.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/07/20 03:14 AM
15

An congressman confronted A.O.C. in front of reporters, called her all kinds of names, and topped it off by calling her a fucking bitch after she pointed out how rude he was being to her. Subsequently, after he issued a statement that wasn't really a sufficient apology, she made a short speech about the issue on the floor of the House, calling out the sexism of him feeling entitled to berate her and call her a bitch, as if she wasn't a colleague with equal standing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/07/20 03:09 AM
20

If this had been a congresswoman confronting a congressman I would consider it worth a lecture, and I would consider those insults to be sexist as well. I think the sexism is less important than the stark lack of respect it shows. I do think there is an argument to be made that an upstart woman might be more likely to receive that gendered insult than a man in the same context. By calling it sexist, she is questioning whether or not he would have been equally nasty to a young congressman he disa…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/07/20 03:04 AM
2

Strange, isn't it? I've seen some people talk about them like they are a fashion scourge that literally hurts their eyes to look at. But most people are just chill. They're juts shorts. I don't get it, myself.
/r/MensRights20/07/20 07:34 PM
1

Nobody whose opinion I really care about.
/r/MensRights20/07/20 06:17 PM
3

That's fair. You're close but not exact with late nineties.
/r/MensRights20/07/20 07:57 AM
42

From what I can tell a lot of young people view them with the same level of cringe that I may have viewed somebody wearing 70s style bell bottoms when I was 13.
/r/MensRights20/07/20 05:56 AM
294

They're supposed to be cringe level unfashionable. Supposedly. Except they're just shorts. With pockets to carry shit. People who get so passionate about something so trivial really confuse me.
/r/MensRights20/07/20 05:51 AM
9

Some countries make it hard to obtain that paternity test.
/r/MensRights19/07/20 04:56 PM
10

I recognize the "toxic masculinity" could be used in a valid way to describe situations where an "idealized" conception of masculinity is applied in a toxic way. However, as a whole I don't think the term is useful. As a matter of consequence and pragmatism, its usefulness as a term is far outweighed by the damage done by its misuse.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/07/20 04:52 AM
1

I'd taken a glance at their comment history and they seem severely deranged and paranoid.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/07/20 04:39 AM
0

You definitely failed to comprehend the words I wrote. Edit: Let's try again. I didn't mention 9/11 or the Afghan war. I didn't even tangentially refer to them. Those two things are completely unrelated to anything I wrote.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/20 10:53 PM
2

Edit: This was uncharitable. So I'll rephrase. I don't think you understood my comment. It's possible I did not phrase it well. Trump can say the media is broken and be correct. And I can agree with him that it's broken. But, that doesn't mean he deserves any credit on that issue if I disagree with him on why and how the media is broken, and what courses of action might improve the situation.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/20 10:49 PM
3

Agreed, any such conversation should be gender neutral about how people can communicate these things to other people, regardless of gender.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/20 08:34 PM
6

I have no doubt that women are better than us at some things and I take no issue with media outlets reporting information that is factually accurate. I can agree with this except in cases where that difference is presented as a value judgment or carrying an associated political message. Often these things aren't presented as mere facts, but as part of an argument for the devaluing of men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/20 06:34 PM
3

I think they are typically very sexist, but also clickbait pandering to an advertising demographic. People don't become obsolete. People are people. Our value isn't defined by how essential we are to reproduction or whether or not we perform a task better than some other group. Classifying people in this way is inherently dehumanizing and almost always sexist (when involving gender), or racist (when involving race).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/20 06:25 PM
4

Eh, only in the same sense of somebody who looks at a building that is falling down after an earthquake, and declares that we have to fix the building by going after the terrorists who attacked it. Yes, the building is falling down and we need to fix the issue. But, everything else about how and why it's falling down, and what the solutions are...? I can agree with Trump that our media is broken -- but that's not enough. I'm far more interested in whether or not we agree on how to fix it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/20 05:31 PM
2

It is, but putting that knowledge into action can be tricky when you're young and inexperienced and you've received unclear or strange messages about how human sexual interaction is supposed to go. A combination of hormones, inexperience, and a bad take on how you're supposed to gain the "good to go" and what that means in action can create some bad sexual experiences for both you and your partner. Even if you are somebody who would never actually rape somebody (which, I should clarify, is most …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/20 05:20 PM
5

An argument for gender neutral phrasing in these discussions, even if you are somebody who thinks there is a more pressing need to teach one gender over the other: In our current political environment, nobody is going to see a lesson on respect based on gender and valuing consent, and come away with the assumption that we're telling girls they need to respect and obey their husbands. Nobody is going to pull the wrong message from a gender neutral version of this lesson unless the person teaching…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/20 05:14 PM
1

Or, more simply, it's erroneous to presume these comments actually support banning ED meds or forcing men to have vasectomies. That's not the point they are making. I'm sure there are people out there who actually like to ban viagra and force vasectomies. Some of them might also make comments like this. But, in context, these comments aren't offering it as a serious suggestion.
/r/MensRights09/07/20 09:02 PM
3

I think right-wing MRAs are to be expected and worked with on MRA issues. It's something I find completely unsurprising. Those right-wing MRAs will frame their advocacy around other right wing issues and will view their opposition to feminism through the lens of a larger condemnation of progressive, left leaning politics. Again, it's expected. It's also frustrating. Any effective mens movement needs to be able to work with those on the right-wing politically, but it's a challenge. They may ident…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/07/20 09:48 PM
7

'So if it's opposed to a left thing, it's obvious right!" Or so the assumption goes. This assumption also goes both ways. There are lots of people on that sub who are right wing, and use a lot of comment space lumping in mens rights with a right wing attack on democrats, progressives, liberals, the left, or whatever. They want people who oppose feminism to view that as a condemnation of left-wing politics as a whole, and they push for that to be the case. It's understandable, because feminism do…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/07/20 09:31 PM
2

Your question poses a false choice. MensRights is not a "right-wing hate sub" by nature, although it does have some comments and people who would fit with that label. On the other hand, it's not "misandrist" to come to that conclusion or to criticize that sub for any hateful rhetoric and pushing what I would consider to be unsavory right-wing politics.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/07/20 09:22 PM
3

For many circumcised men, the most sensitive area for sexual pleasure are right where they were cut, where any vague remnants of what was removed still linger.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/20 08:47 PM
2

I had no idea who this guy was before this video. But I'm kind of liking his take on things so far. edit: This video in particular is keenly relevant to some comments on the MR subreddit that really rubbed me the wrong way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/06/20 03:11 AM
0

You're not arguing in good faith. I asked you simple questions that you have ignored. I've explained, in great detail, how these issues are related. Because you refused to address my simple questions or make any visible effort to actually comprehend my comments, I will no longer be replying to you. Take that as a win if you want. edit: For anybody who may find this conversation later down the line, I found this video that reminded me very much of this conversation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?…
/r/MensRights16/06/20 07:05 PM
1

Our history of racism has contributed to putting black families in a position where they are currently more vulnerable to the men in the family being arrested and put in prison. I'll repeat that I don't think there are racists coming in and dragging black families apart. It's the reality of black communities that young men in their communities are more likely to be arrested. And our history of racism is one reason that is the case. When the men in the community are far more likely to be either i…
/r/MensRights16/06/20 06:59 PM
0

I'm not responsible for your failure to read English words. But I'll try to remedy the situation nonetheless. They are major contributing factors. There are also other contributing factors. There a ton of single mother families that are single mother families because the father is in prison for drug crimes. It's become part of the stereotype of the deadbeat black father. Let's break this paragraph down sentence by sentence to try to find the answer to your simple question that is simply stated i…
/r/MensRights16/06/20 06:38 PM
0

Again, you're commenting as if you assume I disagree with you. The conversation I was replying to was already talking about racial issues, and comparing crime and poverty statistics across racial demographics. That was the conversation I entered. I didn't come in insisting that we should care about race more than gender in this case. When it comes to problems with police training and excessive force, this subreddit should be particularly interested because those issues directly affect men as a d…
/r/MensRights16/06/20 06:15 PM
0

And anyone who says " oh yeah, well men commit more crime" without then going on to discuss why that actually is... good chance they are a misandrist. You edited this in after I already replied, so I'm making a new comment to address this. I'm a little confused, because your general one here is adversarial, and I gave no indication that I would disagree with this statement. Are you saying this to expand on my point, or to agree with it?
/r/MensRights16/06/20 06:02 PM
-1

I gave specific reasons for this in my above comments. Like... explicitly so. Please read them.
/r/MensRights16/06/20 05:58 PM
-1

They are major contributing factors. There are also other contributing factors. There a ton of single mother families that are single mother families because the father is in prison for drug crimes. It's become part of the stereotype of the deadbeat black father. Note that I didn't say that racism came around and told black fathers to leave, or black mothers to kick out their men. The line isn't as direct as that. What I did say is that black communities are in particularly bad shape, in large p…
/r/MensRights16/06/20 05:47 PM
3

I'm just using this thread to vent that I'm currently angry to irrational levels, again, at the main MR subreddit (and reddit generally) over how the comment sections behave when racial issues are brought up. And I'm glad reddit is a diverse enough place to have communities like this one where we can discuss issues like male advocacy without also bringing in right wing baggage. Anybody curious about what's got my frustrated can look at my comment history immediately preceding this comment. It us…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/06/20 05:37 PM
0

In the 90s, yes. That doesn't really argue against my overall point, though. Those laws were attempts to remedy a situation that was already well fucked. They didn't create the problems. They were a misguided attempt to do something about the crime that was already there. Also, there's no reason to make it about party politics when I didn't suggest one part or the other was responsible.
/r/MensRights16/06/20 05:19 PM
0

And one major reason black families are in this condition is a long history of racist and sexist law enforcement, coupled with decades of drug policy that puts black fathers in prison instead of helping their families survive. Black people, particularly black men, end up in prison more often, and are far more likely to have their poverty situations result in higher crime. And, it's not because their skin color or some "black culture" they are responsible for makes them more likely to be criminal…
/r/MensRights16/06/20 04:58 PM
120

With no context, I'd guess this was a sign that she's holding up because her abuser said it to her.
/r/MensRights07/06/20 04:25 AM
3

This is fair.
/r/MensRights03/06/20 02:26 AM
4

Go ahead and downvote me or call me "racist" Why would somebody do that, I wonder? Are you suggesting that cities have more crime because more black people live there? If not, then I don't think you should fear being called a racist for acknowledging that more black people live in environments that are conducive to crime (inner city, dense population combined with poverty), and thus end up involved in a disproportionate percentage of overall crime. There are other factors that contribute to that…
/r/MensRights03/06/20 02:24 AM
55

if you want to protest for specifically for men’s right, what’s stopping you? Honest answer? Feminists. MRAs have held numerous conferences and events to focus on Men's issues. They are usually the subject of campaigns to shut them down. When people are pulling fire alarms and making bomb threats to stop somebody even speaking about male suicide rates, it's difficult to arrange a widespread protest. Any protest of a meaningful size requires public support. And the current political environment o…
/r/MensRights03/06/20 02:17 AM
3

I'll make a confession. I knew the error in my marble example when I put it up. I was wondering who would call me out on it.
/r/MensRights03/06/20 02:12 AM
2

I did acknowledge that the analogy is not perfect. It's only an example of how skewed demographics lead to skewed statistics. Forget the race of the perpetrator for a moment. If you took each draw as a single instance of crime, and randomized the race of the victims, there would be far more white victims than black. You have a 70 percent chance of a victim being white, and a 30 percent chance of a victim being black, if the victims are chosen randomly. As it happens, in the real world victims ar…
/r/MensRights03/06/20 01:46 AM
1

You're not wrong. I think there is a valid criticism of her, though. For her to be nitpicking this point so aggressively, when it really is black men far more than women who are the victims the movement is discussing. She's technically correct, which as we know is the best kind of correct, but it doesn't show her in a good light that she can't let men be identified as the victims, in a case where men actually are the primary victims.
/r/MensRights03/06/20 12:27 AM
5

Why would you attribute that position to me, when I'm participating in this subreddit?
/r/MensRights03/06/20 12:14 AM
3

I should clarify that there was context to provide that statistic here. It was offered as a statistic to counter the claim that black men are the worst treated demographic. With that in mind, I don't want people reading to think I'm implying the person who offered that statistic in this case must be a racist.
/r/MensRights02/06/20 11:45 PM
7

Is it really a dogwhistle, though, if the conclusion you're meant to draw is obvious? Provided without context, it seems natural to think that we're meant to conclude that black people are more prone to violence against white people than the other way around. That's not a dog whistle. That's a regular whistle.
/r/MensRights02/06/20 11:36 PM
5

A disparity would be expected if you randomized the violence without racial bias, so it doesn't mean much by itself. For example, if I have 10 marbles. 7 of them are white, and 3 of them are black. If I start pairing them up randomly to represent acts of violence, you will see more cases of black-on-white violence than white-on-black violence. (Edit: My example here is flawed, so I'll address that a bit. I was thinking here that we would not be picking the first marble in the pair randomly, but …
/r/MensRights02/06/20 11:28 PM
4

60 bucks, Somebody is getting fancy up in here.
/r/MensRights01/06/20 04:16 PM
2

I have a really small sample size to work with, and it's the product of severe selection bias because, frankly, I'm not in any bedroom's but my own. But... between myself and the very few people on this earth I've actually discussed bedroom matters with, I've only seen a gap in the other direction here. Not just in orgasm number, but in where the entire focus of the bedroom behavior is. It's all about what makes her feel the best and gives her the most amazing physical experience. And not a lot …
/r/MensRights01/06/20 04:14 PM
5

I assume r/Intactivism is pro-choice when it comes to abortion. Trying to marry those issues together in a larger movement would be a bad idea. If anti-abortion groups want to additionally fight for intactivism, that would be great. But, certainly the anti-abortion message would be their primary and more pressing cause to that movement or group. A larger intactivist movement would only alienate and lessen their cause if they took a stand on abortion one way or another. Let abortion be its own is…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/05/20 03:40 AM
5

I'm curious if I'll be asked. I know that some hospitals have stopped volunteering the option, but it's also still part of the normal routine for others. If they even offer it, they'll know I'm not happy that they did.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/05/20 03:34 AM
25

In a few months I'm going to be able to say no, proudly and in my most disgusted tone, when asked if I want my future son to have part of his penis removed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/05/20 11:49 PM
7

It's an over-correction of what used to be a bit of a problem. It used to be viewed only as a men's problem, because it happens so much more often to men. This meant that women went under the radar with heart problems and didn't know the importance of monitoring their own heart health, or even what a heart problem might be like if they experience one. But, nowadays, it's very easy to think the opposite. That it's primarily a women's health issue. Because all of the messaging and programs related…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/20 04:24 AM
2

The method feminists attack men, when mirrored and reflected on women themselves looks stark injustice, doesn't it? I think this might be the intent of the image, but it doesn't communicate it well. Without added context it doesn't nail the point home.
/r/MensRights24/05/20 01:59 PM
1

Something similar might conceivably work as satire to prove a point, if you were to compare it to a message against men that uses crime statistics to demonize all men. But this doesn't read like it's meant to be satire and fails to get that point across. You could adjust the language to be less demonizing of single mothers and still present the relevant statistics in a jarring way, but as it is now this looks like legit woman hating.
/r/MensRights24/05/20 01:58 PM
3

I'm going to dig up a comment I made elsewhere about this a little while back. In short, I don't think colleges have any business dealing with the criminal side of this, and I'd greatly prefer to see the police take this role. Colleges do have a responsibility to the safety of their students, and to the extent that these crimes affect the safety of their students, they are right to have policies to address those things. But, we go way beyond that and create these quasi-courts and hold trials for…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 03:58 AM
2

Agreed. The Obama guidelines allow schools to trample due process, and even encourage them to do so.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 03:43 AM
2

You raise a good point here. It might be "achievable" to badger and frustrate victims, but it certainly wouldn't be following the spirit and intent of the title IX guidelines. Colleges who do that could and should be subject to Title IX complaints and lawsuits as a result.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 03:20 AM
2

Now they can act in bad faith towards the victim, the accused and everyone else by creating a process that ticks all the boxes but is all but impossible to actually use. That's the sticky situation. I think the Obama rules are fine, but open to abuse. And I think these rules are also fine, and even have language that I prefer in regards to due process, but are also open to abuse. The problem isn't the letter of the law here, but schools intentionally abusing whatever system they have to work wit…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 03:12 AM
9

This really is a good take. Thank you for sharing it. I like this in particular because it echoes my thoughts. They are not exactly as I would wish, but they clarify the rights of both victims and the accused in a way that is likely to lead to improvements in basic fairness. The suggestion that even the most controversial provisions of the regulations allow rape with impunity speaks to a disturbingly large gap between reality and rhetoric on the topic—one that is particularly important to addres…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/05/20 01:36 AM
-1

You're not crazy. It wasn't out of context. He used reprehensible language to describe girls he was talking about seducing, and claimed he would just start kissing them and grabbing them by the pussy. He didn't claim he would go and ask them, or flirt with them, or get any indication that they wanted it in any way. If he did what he was bragging about doing, it would absolutely be sexual assault, and the "context" provided by the other comment that's replied to you doesn't justify any other inte…
/r/MensRights18/05/20 01:23 AM
4

Then you have a comparatively good life.
/r/MensRights15/05/20 03:46 AM
1

I'm certain that you have real things making your life shitty. Being a white man probably isn't in the top 50 on that list. I do hope your life improves in whatever way you find possible. My standard advice is to turn away from the "big picture" things for a bit, and look at specific activities, behaviors, and interactions in your day to day life that either make you feel a little better, or bother you and make you feel worse. For those things that make you feel worse, see if you can identify wh…
/r/MensRights15/05/20 03:32 AM
2

You're not alone. I'm pretty far on the left end of the political spectrum. My opinions on feminism and mens rights aren't in line with some others who are also on that end of the political spectrum. Fortunately, associating with a certain political group or leaning doesn't mean I have to agree with everything that's associated with them. I can vote for a Democrat while disagreeing with some of their platform, even strongly disagreeing, because I think they happen to be the better choice and the…
/r/MensRights06/05/20 05:11 AM
5

Joe wasn't even at the event he was accused at. I agree with your sentiment. If we as a movement want to display the high ground, we shouldn't be cheering on a false or unproven accusation just because it's politically satisfying. That said, I'm offering a correction here. The event you're referring to is a different, more recent accusation that is clearly false. The big one making headlines is Tara Reade, and her story has a number of other issues that should lead to skepticism.
/r/MensRights04/05/20 09:42 AM
3

I agree with your take, here. This new method sounds very useful in cases where the victim is female and the perpetrator is male. And, we can't really complain about there not being a test for the opposite if the science behind it just doesn't work that way. But, if they don't also process and search for other fluids and evidence, they may well be leaving potential suspects and leads undiscovered and unprocessed. So, on that note I think the test they're describing should be a useful supplement …
/r/MensRights28/04/20 07:23 AM
7

This is the reasoning, yes. However, it's not true, and the studies this is based on are deeply flawed and have been refuted. See some other comments here for that discussion.
/r/MensRights25/03/20 03:09 PM
14

This kind of message should be reported to Reddit admins.
/r/MensRights21/03/20 01:07 AM
1

I did not go into any detail about what I disagreed with about his pronoun statements, or why. You assumed (somewhat incorrectly) what my position was and attacked me based on that assumption. You assume, again incorrectly, that I'm not familiar with what he actually said on the matter. Why even say it then if that's the case? The entire point of my original comment was that he's not an idiot. Go back and re-read my original comment without your asshole goggles on, and you'll see that my point w…
/r/MensRights06/03/20 03:14 AM
1

You're assuming a lot about what I think and why I think it. You're picking a fight with somebody who commented in support of your guy, and you're going out of your way to be insulting toward me in the process. You're being a huge asshole about a subject I politely declined to engage in discussion about, not because I can't, but because I don't want to pollute this subreddit with those squabbles. So let's repeat myself a bit, and we can end the discussion here, and you can fuck the hell off with…
/r/MensRights06/03/20 03:01 AM
0

I'm not interested in convincing you that he's wrong on anything, though. I'm defending him, and I don't want to have unrelated discussions here. As one example, I disagree with some of his statements about atheists. As another, I disagree with his free-speech justifications for hypothetically refusing to use a person's preferred pronoun. I could go on to more of his philosophies, but again, I'm interested in defending his statements on feminism, not attacking or discussing his views that I disa…
/r/MensRights06/03/20 12:54 AM
4

I'm going to agree wholeheartedly with this comment, as somebody who disagrees strongly with Peterson on some important issues. I very much appreciate that he is well spoken and calm in his responses, and takes effort reasonably justify his responses. Even if I fully disagreed with every position he held, this would be true.
/r/MensRights05/03/20 09:47 PM
1

Why does everyone struggle to be specific when it comes to Peterson? In this specific case it's because I don't want to bring unrelated political/philosophical/religious disagreements into this subreddit. It's unrelated and would only distract from the good points Peterson is making here. For that reason, I'm going to continue being vague because my intent here is not to attack Peterson but to defend him as far as this issue is concerned.
/r/MensRights05/03/20 09:37 PM
5

He has some idiotic stances on some issues, and I'm not a fan of him. But he's not an idiot, and while I disagree with him on many things, he's not wrong on every issue just because the opinion is his. I agree with him more than I disagree when it comes to feminism.
/r/MensRights05/03/20 05:45 AM
1

We've had submissions on this subreddit pointing out that it's inappropriate to congratulate mothers on fathers day, because they already have a day for that that's is a pretty big holiday. The reverse is also true. Fathers day is a thing, and single fathers should be particularly honored on father's day. That said, this is a really minor quibble. I don't really mind posts that innocently congratulate single mothers on fathers day (without shaming men in the process or go overboard trying to tak…
/r/MensRights02/03/20 01:25 AM
8

For quite a few years now I've had a curiosity about what the younger generation actually thinks of heart disease. Do they think it's something that is primarily of concern to women? Do they even know that men are at a higher risk for heart attacks? The original shift in messaging about heart health was (if I'm charitable) an attempt to address the misconception that women don't have to worry about it, because it's something that happens to men. But now we have all this messaging about women's h…
/r/MensRights23/02/20 03:36 PM
15

Having a preference is fine, but expressing it in a belittling way toward somebody who doesn't fit your preference, as some do, is shaming. Liking big breasts is fine. Calling girls who naturally have smaller breasts flat chested and making a show out of not wanting to date them would be shaming.
/r/MensRights16/02/20 12:23 AM
29

I do see some value in giving men rights over their genetic legacy. But, for my part, that value does not outweigh the right of the mother not to subject herself to childbirth if she doesn't wish to do so. For me, this in itself is not a good argument against abortion rights for the mother. I do think, however, that a mother should consider the man's wishes in the matter. But as a moral, emotional matter rather than a legal one.
/r/MensRights15/02/20 02:37 PM
2

Feminism at work in the skeptic/atheist community. Watching otherwise articulate and rational people that I admire turn into irrational and dogmatic assholes due to feminist ideology.
/r/MensRights11/02/20 06:17 AM
1

FYI for anybody trying this out, there are a number of subs who auto-ban anybody who posts/comments on this subreddit or several others. But, you will only be notified of the ban if you've participated in those subs. If a subreddit you've never been to bans you, it happens without notifying you.
/r/MensRights18/01/20 03:18 PM
3

Listen, sexist, no woman is representative of all women. But you claimed that ZERO women were on our side on these issues, in response to a woman that is clearly on our side. Own your own shit. You said something blatantly incorrect and you've been called on it.
/r/MensRights03/01/20 09:15 PM
41

Report this to reddit admins and also to law enforcement. There is explicit content featuring you posted to reddit without your consent. Reddit takes that situation seriously. That you are a minor means it will be taken even more seriously. If you have any evidence that it is you featured in the video, submit it when you report to the admins, even if it's flimsy.
/r/MensRights25/12/19 04:44 PM
6

This sub suffers from the same problems that hassle a lot of large subs, particularly subs that have an interest in appearing somewhat serious about their topic. The nature of reddit makes it difficult for subs like this to maintain a front page that's populated with relevant, quality submissions. The larger a subreddit gets, the quicker its content moves. In a subreddit with a couple hundred or even a thousand subscribers, a really good submission that's got a lot of upvoting from the community…
/r/MensRights25/12/19 03:32 AM
1

I'm not trying to convince you that those churches aren't wrong. I'm trying to say that it's a bit presumptuous to declare that all churches should follow your interpretation. They're free to disagree with you. Just don't join those churches. I'm not out to convince you that any one interpretation is correct or incorrect. Because, although I've studied the Bible, I'm not a Christian, and I think they are all incorrect.
/r/MensRights20/12/19 05:47 PM
0

Should we quote other things that are forbidden in Leviticus? Or numerous other things in the Bible that are stated plainly, but then contradicted elsewhere, or overruled by later versus, or only apply to certain groups of people at certain times? My point here is that you're saying ALL churches should call homosexuality sinful, which strikes me as somewhat arrogant and pushy. If all churches followed the same interpretation then there wouldn't be so many different sects in the first place. And …
/r/MensRights20/12/19 05:38 PM
0

According to Christian belief system homosexuality is a sin. According to your view of Christianity. Not every Christian agrees, and given how fraught with interpretation and contradiction the Christian mythology is, I don't think we should begrudge any Church for accepting homosexuality as not-evil just because some other interpretations do not.
/r/MensRights20/12/19 05:19 PM
1

What do you mean "in favor of it" here? And why should they shun homosexuality itself?
/r/MensRights20/12/19 04:19 PM
-1

but any church that's goes along with homosexuality is hypocritical. Only if you think every church must follow the same view of homosexuality and interpret their contradictory holy texts in the same way. Maybe I'm misreading you but it sounds like you think churches should shun homosexuals. Most Christian churches are hypocritical in a lot of ways, if only because their texts are so full of contradictions. If some churches are being hypocrites about homosexuality, then it's a case where they ar…
/r/MensRights20/12/19 03:30 PM
1

If nothing else, it should be an extremely high bar to pass to allow that sort of treatment on a child. There are other ways to mitigate that trauma for those who have to wait a few more years to undergo medical intervention. A MTF transgender person might have to live with a slightly more masculine body type as a result. It's unfortunate, but on balance I'm fine with that trade-off. Plenty of non-transgender women have manly looking bodies. Likewise there are plenty of non-transgender men who h…
/r/MensRights16/12/19 08:43 PM
3

With those two points, there ARE children who are gender divergent, and they should not be penalized by being forced to remain in the wrong body. However, hormone therapy on a normal brain will induce gender dysphoria. The child or the parents could easily fake it for assorted reasons, and it's almost impossible to work that out even in secure therapy. The child can be essentially brainwashed into answering the questions "correctly" - fooling a therapist, and also reinforcing their own damage. T…
/r/MensRights16/12/19 07:18 AM
6

There are a few possibilities, some that have already been mentioned to you. Let's set aside the plausible idea that the man was just traumatized and acting counter-intuitively, and think about some ways a woman could have forced a man to do all of these things without physically overpowering him. She could have threatened violent retribution. If she were armed, she wouldn't need to be physically intimidating otherwise. But even if she were not, "I'll come back and kill your family" is a chillin…
/r/MensRights15/12/19 12:07 AM
1

Overlapping politics. One thing that makes feminists obnoxious is their insistence that every political issue must also be explicitly about feminism or smashing the patriarchy. It poisons the well. Case in point, Greta Thunberg is getting heat currently for having her name on an op-ed that includes language blaming climate change on patriarchy, and claiming that we won't fix our climate until we dismantle it. When progressive feminists insist that every progressive idea must also be a feminist i…
/r/MensRights13/12/19 01:17 PM
2

No worries!
/r/MensRights12/12/19 01:28 AM
2

I had a huge reply typed to this, but I think you had deleted that comment and replied again with this one. And I lost the whole reply after it didn't go through. Oh well, I'm not typing it again, so instead I'll say I hope you have a nice night!
/r/MensRights12/12/19 01:03 AM
1

Yes, that's the invoking of patriarchy that I am clearly familiar with because I referenced it. This is one line in one op-ed that she was one of three contributors too. This does not make it the primary mission of "her" movement. It's unfortunate, and I've appropriately rolled my eyes at it. When it becomes a larger part of her messaging and mission I'll fret a little more about it.
/r/MensRights12/12/19 12:46 AM
1

I'm okay with Greta Thunberg as the choice. It's a real shame that she's invoked patriarchy, but that's the extent to which I care about that when it comes to her. She's a climate activist foremost, famous for sounding alarms and rallying protests for drastic action on climate change. I do really hope that "fighting patriarchy" won't become a primary mission of the movement she's the figurehead for.
/r/MensRights11/12/19 11:12 PM
1

I didn't claim that America was unique in this. Only that it has had consequences. Other countries have consequences from their own histories. I will say, though, that if you think racism is 'ended' and that we don't have a lasting set of cultural consequences from it, then you're just mistaken. You might think slavery was ancient history, but Civil Rights Movement was decades ago, not centuries ago. It takes generations, sometimes many generations, before the impacts of that are negligible. Thi…
/r/MensRights26/11/19 02:36 PM
0

The idea of privilege is abused to silence people, and racists do use it as a racist label to justify hating a group they want to see as oppressing them by existing. And, in reality, it's not a very useful concept when it comes to how we treat people as individuals or by policy. But I'd argue that it's something that does exist. "White" privilege is far less important than a less specific class privilege, where you might talk about a "privileged class" that is defined most clearly by wealth and …
/r/MensRights26/11/19 02:05 PM
3

My point above was that your original two sentence comment was not sufficient as explanation, and could be read uncharitably as racist: white people are just naturally less criminal, if the brown and black people would just stop being criminals, then they wouldn't have to worry about sentences! I did not think you were being racist, but I can see how somebody could take it that way. Your clarification here removes that problem, it delves into some of the correlations and factors that actually do…
/r/MensRights25/11/19 02:21 PM
1

This in itself does not explain the statistical gap. Poor people and minorities are sentenced more harshly for the same crimes compared to wealthier people and non-minorities. And when the two are combined, the difference is immense.
/r/MensRights24/11/19 09:55 PM
3

I agree with this. I don't like how the concept of "white privilege" is applied in identity politics, and that's what I mean by not buying into it, but I would not be out to deny that it exists.
/r/MensRights24/11/19 04:26 PM
9

It doesn't destroy the idea of "white privilege" because non-white men are sentenced even more harshly than the white men, and that's just not included on this picture. It would, however, be fair to say that this destroys any notion of "male privilege" when it comes to sentencing. Note, I'm not saying that I buy into the idea of "white privilege" as used by many progressives, only that this image would not suffice as a debunking. White women are treated with the most leniency, while minority men…
/r/MensRights24/11/19 11:52 AM
2

Some people can't wrap their head around the issue and realize that it's not "complaining that women get help" if you're pointing out how telling and strange it is that we throw the full resources of the government at an issue or call it a dire concern for women when 1/33 or some other small percentage of victims are women. There's zero difference in their minds between saying "shouldn't we be caring about the men here?" and "I hate that women are being helped here! How dare women get something!…
/r/MensRights22/11/19 09:14 AM
20

Problematic is a useful word and I don't see anything wrong with it. It's just that, how it's been used by some people has caused it to be.... problematic.
/r/MensRights21/11/19 10:50 PM
6

I'm not sure why men would be upset about rapists being killed. Rapists are reprehensible human beings. That's not the problem people have with her message. That's also plainly stated in the tweet that's in the picture. That makes opening with this point a bad sign for you. It means you're very likely about to argue against a straw man. And... reading the rest of your comment, that's what you have done. The problem with the message is the framing that "men" are the rapists, and the implication t…
/r/MensRights10/11/19 11:04 PM
4

In context, they are saying "we care about this issue as a women's group, because women make up a good percentage of journalists killed." It's justifying their interest in standing with the issue specifically as a women's group, for anybody who might say that it's not an issue that affects women. They're not saying necessarily saying (if we give benefit of doubt and context) that 19% is a disturbingly high number, or that it should be lower. For my part, I think it's shitty messaging. It does in…
/r/MensRights04/11/19 07:34 PM
2

We feel similarly on this.
/r/MensRights26/10/19 02:07 AM
4

I've argued against this subreddit's grain here on this case, but that's some bullshit right there.
/r/MensRights26/10/19 01:22 AM
1

The power imbalance could be used to claim this was abusive in nature, but I don't see the claim being made in this case just now. With Louis CK there were accusations that his behavior was coercive and that the women felt "trapped" in the situation. Here, I see no similar insinuation, by the parties involved or otherwise, that the affair and relationships were coercive, nor do I see any suggestion that any of the parties involved were even mildly uncomfortable with the sexual acts. If that chan…
/r/MensRights22/10/19 10:46 PM
2

Ah, thanks. The article as written did not explain this well. Either way, the rest of my comment is the main point. None of the relationships are alleged to have been non-consenting.
/r/MensRights22/10/19 03:08 AM
1

This isn't a "Me Too" situation because nobody that I can see is alleging that the intimacy was unwanted or abusive. It's unclear to me that this is even an "affair" in a traditional sense because it seems to have been a three way relationship involving both spouses, according to the article. Although the article gives seemingly mixed statements on this, claiming both that the husband was involved, but also that it happened "unkown" to the spouse. Unclear reporting. (explained in reply) That doe…
/r/MensRights22/10/19 12:17 AM
2

Motte and Bailey. "Feminist" has been swaped for "your belief that all humans should be treated with equal respect." And not wanting to ally yourself with groups who say "fuck white people" has been swapped with "not opposing racism."
/r/MensRights24/09/19 06:02 PM
5

And if they do make an effort to support their claims, the bulk of what they say, in my experience, will be examples from people who are.... not MRAs. Just men doing and saying bad things, who must be MRAs, because to them, MRA = those things.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 07:06 AM
49

Almost certainly so. The suspension is likely for actions the student took in defense of their position, not that they held the position in the first place. And if they are being suspended for it this is very likely not a first offence, or they did something quite severe. If I get up in class and loudly yell at the teacher that 2+2=4, I'm still being disruptive even though I'm correct. Or, perhaps better here, if I'm arguing with a classmate that the Earth is round, but I escalate that argument …
/r/MensRights18/09/19 01:15 AM
17

Tribalism puts progressive minded MRAs in a tough position, while a lot right wing MRAs lump their stance on mens rights in with their other conservative views as part of the same package. It turns off a lot of people, and whenever a post tries to make things partisan or left vs right political they get pushback from left leaning MRAs. Unfortunately, the current political climate means that MRA stances resonate more with people on the right, and feminist issues tend to be championed in the polit…
/r/MensRights15/09/19 03:59 PM
7

There are a couple of deranged people really throwing shit all over the comments. Oof.
/r/MensRights13/09/19 01:14 AM
12

I don't think their intent was to shit on women, nor to imply that women are incapable of those things. Instead, they're pointing out that construction and architecture are fields dominated by men to the point that the contribution of women to those fields is not significant. They are given as examples of male contributions to the world. We've lately been saturated with messaging that insists "men" primarily contribute toxicity, corruption, and violence to the world. It's easy to view this as a …
/r/MensRights07/09/19 07:27 PM
5

Rather than fearing change, people need to embrace it. It's not the result people fear, but the path. Getting from A to B in our current economic system will likely be painful. I'm hoping that we can embrace policies that will make it less so, but some of the changes that need to happen aren't going to be politically viable until shit hits the fan.
/r/MensRights03/09/19 11:39 PM
11

Eventually automation will enrich everyone... not just businesses. I hope so. But the transition is going to be painful.
/r/MensRights03/09/19 11:35 PM
2

It's a rabbit hole, good luck.
/r/MensRights31/08/19 04:40 AM
1

who offered positive reviews of her mediocre work in his publication in exchange for sexual favors. This part is somewhat unsubstantiated. She had an inappropriate relationship with him (inappropriate both because it was an undisclosed conflict on interest, and because she was cheating on her boyfriend), but I don't think there's any evidence of a more explicit quid-pro-quo.
/r/MensRights31/08/19 04:36 AM
11

They have the right to bodily autonomy. Women are protected against forced genital cutting as a human right. Men are not. Men also have to sign away their bodies to the government (selective service) in order to receive a multitude of services. Also, women have the right to unilaterally decide to terminate a pregnancy and thus parental responsibility. Men do not. Note, I'm not suggesting that this is a right women should NOT have. Only that it's a right they currently do have, that men do not.
/r/MensRights27/08/19 02:25 AM
3

I think a reasonable compromise would be to subsidize underclothes for both kids and not include that in the shopping trip unless the kid wants to spend extra for something more. Then the kids can't complain that bras cost more or that one kid is getting more than the other. Lesson still provided while avoiding the conflict.
/r/MensRights25/08/19 10:46 PM
1

You don't hear much because boys are less likely to make a big stink and girls are more likely to break dress code in ways that require sending them home. I've called many boys out for dress code but it's usually for having their underwear hanging out and remedied by pulling up their pants, or worst case they are forced to tie a makeshift belt. In contrast girls tend to break code with garments that aren't easily remedied and require a change of clothes.
/r/MensRights19/08/19 07:45 PM
10

I've often wondered if some people under a certain age might currently live under the assumption that heart disease is primarily a women's health issue due to the nearly uniform messaging on the subject in the past decade or so.
/r/MensRights19/08/19 07:29 PM
1

Modest clothing would not really solve this. Boys like girls and will be distracted by them. Likewise a lot of girls will be boy crazy. And LGBT students respectively. It's a fact of life and part of growing up. I spent many lessons completely oblivious to the subject because my head was too busy thinking about the girl next to me. The girls who drew this attention from me didn't dress like hookers and if they did they would probably have taken less of my mind space instead of more. I'm with the…
/r/MensRights19/08/19 02:25 PM
4

I don't like the word feminazi. But it's not quite the same as alleging that you associate with or share an ideology with actual nazis or white nationalists. When somebody calls a feminist a feminazi, they'r referring to authoritarian tactics and heavyhandedness. When some people call 'alt-right' people nazis, or groups they lump in with that 'alt-right' label, there tends to be an implication that they are in bed with actual nazis/neo-nazi groups. So, I see it a bit differently.
/r/MensRights10/08/19 10:03 PM
7

Expect your edit to be reversed, and expect to be sanctioned if you press the issue, unless you are a well established editor familiar with wikipedia politics.
/r/MensRights10/08/19 09:57 PM
8

The rules get twisted to support the narrative. I watched it happen with gamergate. They let in blatant falsehoods because enough "reliable sources" report them as true, and the sources who call them out as falsehoods get dismissed on any number of technicalities. Primary sources are thrown out unless somebody notable in the media reports on them. And these guidelines are enforced selectively behind a mountain of legalese-like jargon that is specific to wikipedia, so that only an expert, veteran…
/r/MensRights10/08/19 09:55 PM
2

I'm curious, was this professor just talking out of their ass, or did they have some dubious study suggesting the claim?
/r/MensRights08/08/19 06:33 AM
3

That's not just middle school logic. Loads of grown-ass people think this way. I've had full grown men make this argument to me, and I had to ask them if they only ever get an erection when they want one.
/r/MensRights29/07/19 01:43 AM
18

The comment thread for this elsewhere on reddit is always... "fun".
/r/MensRights25/07/19 03:40 AM
2

I think it's meant for the home, to "train" boys to sit properly. Imagine a similar product for women, designed to force them to sit with proper ladylike posture.
/r/MensRights11/07/19 12:36 AM
4

When I read the headline, I thought to myself, "Oh, she's praising the grandpa for asking permission before giving physical affection, teaching the child that people should get permission before being physically affectionate." That's not so bad, I thought. Then I clicked the link. Nope, innocently trading bubbles for hugs with grandpa is rape culture now.
/r/MensRights04/07/19 05:22 PM
9

There is, of course, plenty of middle ground where you are confident and assertive while also being genuinely kind and not being a dick. You might get laid more in some settings by being the jerk, if that's all you're after.
/r/MensRights28/06/19 07:18 PM
1

The president is a "world leader" so accusations against him are relevant beyond the US. They have an ambiguous and contradictory stance on U.S. Politics that is worthy of criticism, as they can't seem to decide where the line is between "local US news" and "world news" when it comes to US politics. But, "local crime" stories have always been discouraged and usually removed. If there was a larger scale report on the issue as a matter of human rights violations, or an international scandal, then …
/r/MensRights20/06/19 06:21 PM
8

Take abortion off the table and women can still put the baby up for adoption, or just drop it off at a safe haven.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 05:15 PM
2

For what it's worth I saw the movie today. Enjoyed it quite a bit. Movie's not half bad if you're a marvel nerd like my wife and I are. The feminist take on the movie, reviews, and marketing poisons the well a bit. I was very worried that it would be a bad movie, because the "if you hate it you hate women" line is usually cover for a bad movie. But I was pleasantly surprised at the movie itself. It wasn't a masterpiece. It wasn't fantastic. But it was enjoyable.
/r/MensRights22/03/19 06:06 AM
12

Then you shouldn't be commenting on it.
/r/MensRights17/02/19 02:45 AM
1

I think that the Democrats as a party are wrong on a number of gender/men/women's issues. I don't agree fully with the party, and I doubt I'd ever find a political party that I agreed with completely. I'm registered Democrat to vote in their closed primary and because they are the party I'm more aligned with. These issues aren't the only thing I consider in the voting both, though. While I disagree with the Dems on some gender issues, I disagree with the Republicans on a lot more, more often. As…
/r/MensRights09/02/19 07:43 PM
13

Most people, I think, don't even stop to consider the messages we are currently sending boys. As a society we have this ingrained idea that boys and men are privileged, that masculinity is viewed as desirable and positive, and we assume that boys are getting those positive messages just by existing and growing up in a patriarchal society. So when you assume that boys are going to be getting positive messages regardless, then of course it's only right and just to go well out of the way to get tho…
/r/MensRights08/12/18 03:25 PM
30

I'd prefer we stick to sources that aren't a random guy's youtube podcast.
/r/MensRights11/11/18 05:23 PM
11

She wrote an anonymous letter and when her identity was released she retracted her statement. Unless this is a new story I don't know about, she didn't even write the letter. She claimed to be the author of the letter when she was not. The author of the letter did not retract their statement, and we don't know who they are because they've remained anonymous as far as I know.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 11:49 PM
1

She submitted a sworn statement under penalty of perjury. Not in person.
/r/MensRights05/11/18 11:10 PM
2

I'll grant you Swetnick as a retraction because the change in her story was on a very significant, game-changing point. I don't think she'd characterize it as a full retraction, because she still claims that the crimes took place and she thinks that Kavanaugh was involved. She's walked back the certainly of her statement to reflect what she knows rather than what she assumes, but that's a bit too late given the severity of the initial allegation.
/r/MensRights05/11/18 04:06 AM
-3

As far as I know Swetnick did not fully retract her accusation, although she did change her story. Judy Munro-Leighton did not retract the accusation, because she did not make the accusation. She claimed to be the accuser, when she wasn't, and the author of the actual accusation has not retracted it (we don't even know who they are). I suppose technically that makes her an additional accuser, but the anonymous claim that she claimed came from her was not retracted. Edit: Also , Judy Munro-Leight…
/r/MensRights05/11/18 03:55 AM
-17

Your headline is not factually correct. Who were the two women who have retracted their stories?
/r/MensRights04/11/18 10:26 PM
12

Nail this woman to the wall for the damage she's done. But let's be accurate in our headlines and discussion while we do it. This woman is not "the 2nd Kavanaugh accuser" admitting she lied as far as I can tell. This is a woman who took the existing allegation (that has not been recanted, even though it's not substantial enough to merit much attention on its own) and sent an email pretending she was the one who made it. She did it for attention and to signal boost. And I'd hope that Kavanaugh's …
/r/MensRights04/11/18 10:22 PM
1

This is a "concern troll" but it's a concern I wholeheartedly agree with.
/r/MensRights04/11/18 10:09 PM
1

Those protests weren't about this letter. There were multiple allegations, some more serious than others. If this had been the only allegation you would not have seen the same level of protest (or, those protests would have focused more on something else).
/r/MensRights04/11/18 08:48 AM
7

Kavanaugh lied under oath (and not just about his drinking habits or things related to the sexual assault allegations). The accuser referenced in this article did not lie under oath. She was not placed under oath and was not part of the confirmation hearings in any way. She falsely claimed to be the source of a separate anonymous accusation, and not even one of the main accusations that were featured in his confirmation.
/r/MensRights04/11/18 08:44 AM
39

I've never heard of this person. She wasn't one of the accusers prevalent in the controversy. It doesn't look like her accusation was ever made a big deal of, probably because it wasn't credible. It's important to note that people do this, though. But it's also important to note that this is not one of the main accusers that brought credible allegations against Kavanaugh, more somebody who jumped onto the bandwagon for attention. edit: A more careful reading of what's actually happened here is e…
/r/MensRights04/11/18 07:07 AM
3

How does her having some legal action against her in the past (which was quickly dismissed) expose her as a fraud? She may well be a fraud, but this doesn't appear to be evidence of it, as it has nothing to do with her claims against Kavanaugh.
/r/MensRights30/09/18 07:11 PM
9

The included link really offends me for some reason. Not even the content of it (which other comments are talking about, I won't go there), but the inclusion of it at all. I'm not a fan of the red pill subreddit. But something about slapping them down and posting a that link to people trying to visit it just rubs me the wrong way. If they just quarantined it, and didn't try to redirect people with that link, I'd be a lot less irked. Still irked. But less so.
/r/MensRights28/09/18 02:19 AM
3

This isn't a criminal trial, and Kavanaugh would be able to respond* even if he is not in the room during her testimony. The demand isn't that he is removed from the process, but that he not be sitting next to her while she details an alleged sexual assault. If she were telling the truth, that could be an understandable sentiment, so I wouldn't take this request as an attempt to do anything underhanded. *I should note that the insistence that he go first is more troubling. I'm assuming that he w…
/r/MensRights21/09/18 11:30 PM
5

Victims should immediately file detailed reports and cooperate with law enforcement. It gives their statements credibility and provides the best chance that their attackers will face justice. It also makes it much harder for somebody to claim an accusation is false (as seen here). That said, I don't think the implication of this tweet is a good look for the MRM. A LOT of victims do not go to law enforcement after their attacks, for various reasons. The lack of an immediate police report, in itse…
/r/MensRights21/09/18 11:21 PM
10

I had a similarly infuriating experience with my wife. I went to get her a pill and was denied without her being present. I knew the laws in my area and asked why my ID was not sufficient (it should have been), and I was told that she needed to be there because, for all they knew. she could have been underage. I told this to my wife, who worked in pharmacy at the time, and she drove back on her own and yelled at the pharmacist. Because there was no law or guideline saying they had to deny me for…
/r/MensRights21/09/18 09:42 PM
1

Housework can be pretty simple depending on the house. But, to be clear I'm not talking about reality but what the kid perceives, based on what he sees, and what he's told.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 05:35 AM
9

Maybe, but it's also that the child doesn't see the father's work because it's out of the home. Dad goes off to work all day, and is out of sight out of mind. But the kid sees mom slaving away at the housework. Then dad comes home gets served dinner and doesn't do "his share" of the housework. This dynamic has really changed a lot from the "traditional" family structure. But it hasn't changed so much that it's not still true that the father's main contribution to the household is out in the work…
/r/MensRights12/08/18 05:17 PM
26

I watched this exact line of reasoning destroy a friend of mine. His wife cheated on him and emotionally abused him. Occasionally physically as well. He was raised and had completely digested the idea that if she cheated on him, then it was his fault. So he let it go on far, far too long. In reaction to her cheating, he tried to change himself to give her more of what she wanted and better suit her needs. Finally it reached a breaking point and he had to wake up to the fact that his entire ideol…
/r/MensRights29/07/18 12:47 AM
6

That's a very sexist statement, and it's sad to see it has any upvotes here. "Violence is ingrained into the male psyche" wouldn't be acceptable, would it?
/r/MensRights03/07/18 09:39 PM
10

You're almost certainly correct that women are the majority of false accusations like this. But, that's not because women are more likely to sink to these levels intrinsically. It's because women are the group that can get away with it. If men could do the same with similar success and institutional backing, you'd see more men doing it as well.
/r/MensRights03/07/18 03:27 PM
6

Keep up the good fight!
/r/MensRights01/07/18 01:46 AM
1

It's a nice thought but it's apples and oranges really and I don't think it's a great persuasive argument. Divorce is a reality that isn't going to go away. People will misinterpret this comment, coming from an MRA, as a suggestion that wives should be forced to stay with abusive husbands. That's not what this means, but that's how it will be perceived. When you say "families should stay together" it sounds a lot like you're saying divorce shouldn't be a thing. The right to divorce is pretty imp…
/r/MensRights01/07/18 01:40 AM
2

It is indeed. Common and often celebrated, which was more or less my point, but I didn't state it strongly enough.
/r/MensRights01/07/18 01:11 AM
10

male victims are not exempt from the bullshit, victim-blaming rape apology that is so prevalent in our society. More than simply not exempt, it is socially acceptable and very common to victim blame and deny male victims.
/r/MensRights30/06/18 02:31 AM
10

Atheists tend to know more about religion, generally, than religious people. Although they might not know as much about Christian theology as a member of the clergy, they do tend to know more about world religions and theology in general than your average believer. There's a selection bias involved that's similar to what I described in the other comment thread. People who identify as atheists are disproportionately people who have specific criticisms of religious thinking, which means they've pu…
/r/MensRights04/04/18 12:27 AM
1

See my other reply!
/r/MensRights03/04/18 10:55 PM
6

Feminism is almost the default stance for people to take today. Far more people call themselves feminists than call themselves anti-feminists. If you are taking a stand specifically against Feminism, you probably have specific gripes against feminism. That requires you to have some specific knowledge about it. But you don't need to know a lot about feminism to call yourself a feminist. It's a safe, accepted stance that most people agree with, so your "average" feminist does not require any deep …
/r/MensRights03/04/18 10:54 PM
3

I'll provide one example. The history of predominant aggressor laws and the Duluth Model for domestic violence. I'd wager MRAs know more about those topics than Feminists do, even though these are feminist policies and feminist theory in action.
/r/MensRights03/04/18 10:48 PM
9

This picture implies that feminist groups do not or have not pushed for policies that disadvantage men. They aren't the passive recipients of anti-male policies. They've actively campaigned for them.
/r/MensRights10/03/18 04:57 PM
4

It relates to men's rights because it's one way that men as a group are unfairly judged. Beyond that, it may as well be a side issue compared to far more important issues a men's movement should deal with.
/r/MensRights26/10/17 10:38 PM
2

My wife wanted the epidural, but had to do it natural (they took too long to give her the drugs). She was pissed, but took the pain like a champ.
/r/MensRights26/10/17 10:35 PM
3

If I believed this narrative and thought this message was correct re: "male violence" and the necessity of a feminine approach, I don't think I'd see a lot of use in creating more movies that reinforce those roles. That is...if that's what Moana really is all about, then it doesn't actually address any of those problems. It just reinforces them, by painting Maui as the "male" who is violent and incapable of being anything but, or of actually solving the problems he creates. That message won't ma…
/r/MensRights11/09/17 04:18 PM
2

Your title hits on a huge problem with the left. When it comes to gender and minority issues, too many people on the left draw a hard, irrational line in the sand and fall hard into tribal thinking. And it's incredibly frustrating to be somebody who is very much on the left politically while also having a different perspective on those issues. It's also frustrating that the only people who speak sense on certain MRA issues are on the right wing. Because it means those issues sometimes get confla…
/r/MensRights07/09/17 06:31 AM
6

I don't think most of America is particularly enamored with her. Even taking just people who voted for her, support is tepid at best for most. She's seen by supporters as highly qualified and experienced. A solid choice that's far better than what the other party has to offer. But beyond that I never saw a lot of enthusiasm for her. She didn't win the popular vote because people loved her. She won it because she was the Democrat running against Donald Trump.
/r/MensRights07/09/17 06:18 AM
26

both parents have equal say The baby, however, does not. And the baby is the one with the penis in question. This is an issue that uniquely affects men, because FGM is already illegal and heavily condemned, but routine infant circumcision is considered, well, routine.
/r/MensRights21/08/17 11:38 PM
2

Your suggestion is a great one. Joining something casual and social like a bowling league can be a great help and can give you a place to ease up and find people to relate to. But that's not why I hit the reply button here. You're a man. Talking about it isn't going to help. That's a really broad brush, and frankly a damaging attitude. It can certainly help some men. Men have enough trouble getting help when they need it as it is. The idea that men should "man up" and handle their problems "like…
/r/MensRights26/07/17 06:28 AM
1

... suicide statistics aren't really a mystery if you read a thread like this. I hope things improve for you, good luck.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 06:18 AM
5

Troll fits better. I have some disagreements with his politics, and I don't like trolls, generally speaking. But it's not because I think he's a disgusting person. I just find him off-putting.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 09:44 PM
5

I'd just like to see us use better sources. That's part of the trouble right now. We need more people with any kind of public voice who are willing to publish this kind of thing. It fits Milo's agenda and so he writes about it, and until somebody else writes about it we're stuck either pointing to the paywall, or linking to Milo's article. I'd also prefer a better source.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 09:40 PM
41

My wife, who is pretty good with men's issues, had to have this explained to her. I mentioned some news headline, and she didn't understand how a man could be forced to have straight sex because it requires an erection. It took about 30 seconds of thinking about it to realize how silly that was, but she'd never actually taken those thirty seconds.
/r/MensRights09/07/17 04:48 PM
1

Option 2 or 3, CNN looks petty here and didn't handle this correctly at all. But it's hardly an MR issue, and not "big" enough to override the subreddit's focus, in my opinion. I hardly ever see anything from CNN sites here to begin with, so option 1 would probably go unnoticed
/r/MensRights09/07/17 04:32 AM
9

It's disturbingly common.
/r/MensRights03/07/17 03:53 AM
8

Unfortunate if this is faked, because the situation being presented is a reality. If we're spreading and freaking out over a faked picture here, it only gives fuel to people who want to dismiss the issue. If we can establish that it's actually fake, it should be removed.
/r/MensRights03/07/17 03:49 AM
8

Removed from society and put into mental health care. You wouldn't necessarily give a lighter sentence, but you might give a different sentence. Postpartem can trigger a real psychosis. It doesn't usually, but in rare cases. It could be a valid insanity defense.
/r/MensRights02/07/17 03:40 AM
1

I agree. Crazy in itself doesn't amount to ageism. People who call Trump crazy aren't all trying to imply he has dementia because of his age. It's the other way around. People look toward dementia as a possible explanation after they've already decided his behavior is crazy. Which raises a touchy question. Say the President (any president, not necessarily Trump) has dementia. Is there any tasteful way to raise the alarm about that and handle it in our partisan atmosphere?
/r/MensRights02/07/17 02:28 AM
1

The implication is that he may be suffering from dementia, which would be age related.
/r/MensRights02/07/17 02:20 AM
1

I don't disagree. An attack based on appearances alone is not sexist. As I said at the start I come from well on the left politically, but I cringe and groan when I see talking heads start crying sexism. There are moments where the accusation has teeth, but more often than not it's just a personal attack and a distraction from things that really matter.
/r/MensRights02/07/17 02:16 AM
1

Are male trump surrogates like lewandowski attacked primarily for their physical appearance? No I had let this pass, but it's bugging me. So before I bow out entirely from this conversation I want to point out that male members of the Trump team are absolutely bashed for their physical appearance. Immediately after this sentence you listed a number of ways that people bash Trump's physical appearance. I've seen numerous jabs made toward Bannon's weight. They call Jeff Sessions a Keebler elf. I c…
/r/MensRights02/07/17 01:57 AM
1

"Authentic" isn't good enough. I'd rather him be an authentically good person, instead of an authentic blowhard, obnoxious narcissist. How about we just don't sling the mud at all?
/r/MensRights02/07/17 01:35 AM
1

None of that really argues against my point. All of that is distasteful and unprofessional, and I would hold it against them if they behaved like that as president. The double standard between the Trump statue and the Hillary statue is stark. A lot of people in the media and even more people who are just regular internet trolls say a lot of really crude stuff and lob a lot of shallow insults. I'd rather the President be more professional than that. I will say that the hypocrisy of calling everyt…
/r/MensRights02/07/17 01:29 AM
2

People have different definitions of hate. Some define hate as irrational, prejudicial ire or malice, and separate it from righteous anger or well grounded fear. Under that definition hate can be counterproductive, while "righteous anger" would be something else entirely.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 04:20 PM
1

That's a good angle, and maybe that's more what she was going for. But it doesn't really apply to the context she used the "alternative facts" statement.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 04:17 PM
3

I'm on the left. You could certainly call it sexist if the people who make those comments also remain silent on ugly men. I'd even agree with you. Those comments are unprofessional and inappropriate, even if they aren't made for sexist reasons (and they usually aren't). I wouldn't want the president saying those things, either. I'll note, as I've noted elsewhere, that I hope to hold the POTUS to a higher standard than I do partisan pundits, and a much higher standard than I do random comments on…
/r/MensRights01/07/17 04:15 PM
28

She could have said something like, "There is a legitimate mental illness at play with postpartum depression in many infanticide cases that might mitigate sentencing in those specific cases. But speaking more generally, yes, a woman should get the same sentence that a man would." I'd have no problem with that. She didn't say that, though.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 04:12 PM
1

I wouldn't even begin to guess at any real message behind CAH. I meant more whether or not we should see it as a good message for MR. edit: Re-read your comment and I see what you are saying. You could interpret the comic that way, I suppose. The only advice we offer to men who are being walked all over is that they should nut up.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 08:28 AM
7

Not sure I think this is a good MR message. "Stand up for yourself" is a decent angle on it that I can agree with. But "if your wife is behaving abusively toward you, it's your own fault for not having balls" is also implied here and counterproductive to MRA efforts to change attitudes toward men who suffer domestic violence and abuse. This comic attacks the manhood of the victim, and while I'm not at all offended by it (and I think it's funny), I don't think it's a good MR message.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 06:06 AM
3

I'd prefer to continue holding the President to a high standard or professional conduct. It actually alarms me that so many voters actually want their president to behave like an immature buffoon.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 05:06 AM
3

I agree with your comment, except I would also add that I don't think we should consider his tweet sexist just because it was directed at a woman's appearance. You could argue that his pattern of targeting women for their appearance shows a sexist attitude, though.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 05:04 AM
5

Some people need the lube and find it painful or at least completely unpleasant without. Mileage obviously varies.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 01:25 AM
8

You don't have to hate your own circumcision. You can even enjoy it and be pleased with it. But do recognize that it was done without your consent, for no valid medical reasons.* Every argument used against FGM also applies to male circumcision. All of them. And every argument used FOR circumcision has also been used to support FGM at some point or another. edit *unless you are one of the rare people who did have a medical reason. A note on that, some infants end up diagnosed with phimosis incor…
/r/MensRights30/06/17 01:16 AM
3

The unfortunate thing is that he's probably legit, in that he isn't lying about his age or his activism. And I think that's relevant to this thread. The guy who brags about getting laid, virgin shames, and acts like an exaggerated stereotype -- that's the guy who is out there being an activist protesting their capital city. We need more public activism from a wider variety of people.
/r/MensRights27/06/17 01:23 AM
9

For not caring about getting people laid, you sure seem to put a huge amount of weight on getting laid.
/r/MensRights26/06/17 08:29 PM
2

"Men are hurt" is a bit of a miss-characterization, but that's expected at this point. I agree, we shouldn't lose our shit. I think it's legit to point out the double standard. It furthers a troubling trend that it's okay to exclude men, while excluding women will land you in court and dragged over the coals. Point that out, and move on. It's not an outrage beyond that and there are much more important men's issues.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 05:10 PM
5

Not to downplay the importance, but some victory, huh? NOT getting thrown out the door.
/r/MensRights12/06/17 12:58 AM
5

A fair point, but when it comes to headlines their level of fame and name recognition is what matters. It's their fame that makes the event headline worthy, so the person who actually makes the couple famous to most of the world is the natural choice to lead the headline. And leaving him out comes off as a petty political statement. Given that, I agree with the submission title. Include both names.
/r/MensRights07/06/17 08:00 AM
0

Politically it doesn't earn them votes. Ideologically they view men as already over-represented and privileged, and their priorities lie in representing those people they view as under-served first. That's the gentle way to put it.
/r/MensRights31/05/17 06:35 AM
14

I've been hearing about the man-flu or man-cold most of my life. And for some reason that one really gets under my skin. The idea is that men are big babies who take any excuse to shirk their responsibilities instead of working through their colds. Not at all true, of course.
/r/MensRights28/05/17 03:43 AM
10

It's not false so much as not necessarily true in your individual state. States have the power to make all of this true, and some choose to just about complete this list. Some states automatically sign you up for the draft when you get your license. Or, if you are under 18, will automatically sign you up when you renew after you are 18. Or, they'll automatically sign you up at another point while you are using government services. It's very possible to be registered for the draft without even kn…
/r/MensRights25/05/17 02:52 AM
2

Only in the most egregious cases, IMO. If there are severe birth defects, as your title suggests, there should be an avenue to hold the parent accountable.
/r/MensRights09/04/17 01:24 AM
3

You want to know something fucked up? I'm a man and I teach. I have to actively monitor myself to make sure I'm not favoring the girls with behavior issues. A group of boys talking, and a group of girls talking. The boys just automatically hit my "this is disruptive" radar with a higher ping, and if I'm not watching myself, I will treat them unfairly in comparison.
/r/MensRights05/04/17 01:16 AM
4

He's been the enemy of their enemy. And for conservatives, on their political team. Those two things lead people to disregard and rationalize the bad. I've never liked Milo. He came down on the right side of a few issues here and there with regard to feminism, and gamergate, but that doesn't erase everything else I disagree with him about.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 12:16 AM
2

It is, but in context it's a good counterpoint to what you said above. Boys and girls are indeed different. But their differences in this case make the boy more of a child than the girl, not less. So, if we are going to treat them differently based on gender, you could argue that we might treat he abuse of a boy at this age more severely, not less. Personally, I would not argue for treating them differently. Because it is, as you say, a vast oversimplification.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 01:30 PM
2

Biology. Generally speaking, girl's physically mature earlier. A boy of this boy's age in particular is more likely to be be "more of a child" than a girl of the same age.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 03:27 AM
24

The tag is strange. Is there a "women behaving badly" tag (assuming the comment is from a woman) or a "abuse of men" tag that would fit better? Because I don't see anything about feminism in the picture, just somebody being an awful person.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 03:41 PM
3

but unless OP knows who wrote it, it's not obvious any women were involved. Without context, I'd believe this was posted sarcastically by a man who had this kind of manipulation done to him.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 03:41 PM
1

This picture actually shows evidence of a plan for the mess. They left these signs intentionally in one place, in front of Trump's hotel as a message. When it comes to garbage in general, when a hundred thousand people gather in one place, they usually leave behind a mess. That's just reality. Without individuals bringing it all home (which is what they should do), there is no way to handle the garbage on site short of leaving it all gathered in one place where it is easier to clean. Which is wh…
/r/MensRights22/01/17 03:30 PM
1

Again, how do you know the people leaving these signs didn't think of any of those things? It just seems strange to me that this is the point we're seeing reposted multiple times on the front page. That they left some signs behind (on purpose in a specific location) really doesn't undermine or address their message in any way. This is a really shallow criticism, and I'd greatly prefer to see the MR front page address their actual mission and message, because there is plenty there to address.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 03:04 PM
2

How do you know it didn't occur to them? Maybe they thought the message was more important than saving a cleanup crew a few hours of work. These signs weren't just left there because they didn't care who had to clean it up. They were left there on purpose because this is outside of Trump's hotel, as a further statement of protest. They thought the message was more important than keeping that section of street clean and tidy. That doesn't take away your criticism of feminism. I just don't think t…
/r/MensRights22/01/17 02:51 PM
6

Yeah, to restate the point made in the links. This wasn't flippant littering. These were intentionally left outside of Trump's Hotel as a further statement. Doesn't change the point that somebody has to clean it up, but it's a bit different from them just being left on the ground because they don't care.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 02:45 PM
9

They bought the premium grade straw for this one.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 02:38 PM
2

This protest wasn't against poorly-paid, blue-collar men who will be cleaning up the garbage, though. They'd probably agree with you if you said those people deserve more respect and a living wage. Leaving this much trash behind isn't good, and I'm no friend of feminism in general. But this particular protest wasn't directing hate at garbage men. I'm sure there were plenty of man-haters there, of course.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 02:34 PM
0

As a child I was taken away from my parents and sent to live with my grandparents. They fought often and my mother had a drinking problem. It was my mother, not my father, who got screwed by child support laws. The government put us on assistance programs with my grandparents, even though they did not want all of the help that was offered. Then they went after my mother for every penny, even though my mother had already been giving money for support. Because she didn't do it all through the gove…
/r/MensRights26/11/16 01:24 AM
0

Just felt like an upvote wasn't enough to commend this comment that I completely agree with. Presented much better than I could.
/r/MensRights13/11/16 05:42 AM
0

It is, and I'll be using it if the sub keeps up the trend of occasionally looking like a right-wing political forum instead of a men's rights forum.
/r/MensRights08/11/16 11:41 PM
-1

I'm hoping this sub (and several others) improve a bit after the election season. If not, I may leave them behind.
/r/MensRights08/11/16 09:16 PM
2

There are a lot of trump supporters here, and people defending Hillary in any way are often downvoted, in my personal observation. The closer we get to election time (thank goodness it's about to be over), the more prominent the polarizing political stuff is. And more partisan or more politically passionate people will sometimes let other considerations go out the window. The passionately political people commenting on this election, from a men's right perspective, are not going to doings so to …
/r/MensRights08/11/16 09:11 PM
1

To be fair, this is what some people mean by "believed" in this context. They mean that they deserve to have their accusations taken seriously and investigated, and not dismissed or downplayed without due diligence. But, on the other hand, a lot of people mean we should blindly believe any accusation and amplify them to crucify their accused in the court of public opinion at every opportunity. I think Hillary falls somewhere between the two ends, there.
/r/MensRights06/11/16 12:48 AM
0

I don't think he's going to suck neo-con dick. But that doesn't mean I think he's going to do a good job. edit: Don't give a shit about my own karma, but for the sake of good discussion it would be nice if this sub would not downvote political opinions that have nothing directly to do with mens rights, just because you disagree.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 01:35 PM
-2

Trump hasn't had the opportunity to be in those positions of power or make those decisions. Trump has not convinced me that he will be any better on foreign policy. Don't get be wrong, I'm not happy with Clinton over this stuff. But I strongly suspect that 4 years of a Trump presidency wouldn't be any better, and my impression is that he will likely be worse in a number of ways. He's completely failed to convince me that he'd improve the situation.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 03:38 AM
0

Neither candidate is great on men's issues, really. Bad either way. Which means this is not an issue I'm basing my vote on. I could vote third party in protest, or I can pick the candidate that aligns best with me on all of the other issues. I'm going to do the latter.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 10:50 PM
4

They will re-offend and do worse things ... and if they don't, it would only illustrate that we are too harsh on the men, and maybe we'd get better results by treating them similarly.
/r/MensRights31/10/16 04:25 AM
33

I entirely lost interest in Star Wars 7 (The quest for more money), when I realised that the main character was literally good at everything she did, despite having no knowledge on these areas. She was rightly called a Mary Sue. I still enjoyed the movie, but the writing was extremely "safe" to the point of being lazy. It was not a great work of art. Just some mindless enjoyment.
/r/MensRights26/10/16 03:02 PM
1

I don't mind this being at the top of the subreddit, even though it's unrelated. But I'm raising by eyebrow that this is somehow the top submission on the subreddit at an hour old, with only 38 upvotes (73% up). Seems odd, but reddit's algorithms are strange sometimes.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 03:33 PM
1

of course if that happens I'm sure there will be huge cries of misogyny heard from every feminist news outlet. This might well happen, but I'm actually thinking maybe not. At least not when it comes to blocking everything. It would be too transparent following Obama, where "Republicans obstructing everything" has been a huge issue in the media for most of his presidency. Of course, they could say that the obstruction against Hillary is sexist, whereas the obstruction against Obama is racist in n…
/r/MensRights09/08/16 04:53 AM
1

My view as well. She won't be apocalyptic bad. She just won't be any kind of improvement from what we've seen before. She isn't going to do anything for men's issues, that's for sure. Personally I prefer her to Trump, but that's not saying much since we're in a shit sandwich giant douche situation. From a men's rights perspective she is not a good candidate, so this sub is right to lambaste her on those issues. I'm not wholly enthusiastic about any candidate in this race at the moment. They are …
/r/MensRights09/08/16 04:48 AM
5

Maybe it's because feminists are doing exactly what she's doing and deliberately harassing, blocking and behaving borderline illegally towards anybody who tries? Kinda like "Why isn't the MRM actually doing anything about real issues like suicide?" Pulls fire alarm on conference about male suicide and other issues.
/r/MensRights04/08/16 12:37 AM
4

I'd prefer to teach that all people deserve a baseline of respect and decent treatment. They don't have to earn it. But they can certainly lose it.
/r/MensRights02/08/16 02:29 PM
5

Moderately less fucked up if you were in a position of power over the 17 year old (such as a teacher). But I agree, its a silly thing to end up in jail for if there aren't also other signs indicating coercion.
/r/MensRights31/07/16 02:03 AM
3

I'm glad this is in their platform. I can say they are right on this particular issue. But that's not enough for me to say "their platform is good" in any sense. the GOP has written a platform that ought to be applauded by people concerned about the rights of the presumptively innocent. I'm not going to applaud this platform. I'm going to applaud the inclusion of this particular thing.
/r/MensRights21/07/16 04:36 AM
1

I thought it was a good read. She still expresses a very negative view of masculinity and maleness, but her perspective is worth reading all the same. She does make some good points about the issues and groups she's discussing.
/r/MensRights11/07/16 10:22 PM
3

I actually fault the "gorilla parents" as it happens, because the mother was being genuinely negligent and ignoring her child. In this case, they might have misjudged the danger of the area, but the dad was clearly paying attention.
/r/MensRights18/06/16 02:25 AM
3

I can't fault a family for assuming that a Disney Resort is a generally safe environment. They could have done better assessing and informing themselves of the risks, but that doesn't mean I think that qualifies as negligence, and I don't think the parents deserve to be viewed negatively for it. It's tragic and it was avoidable, but I feel like people are too quick to be very harsh toward parents in situations like these.
/r/MensRights18/06/16 02:16 AM
2

See edit! Family might not have known these were "dinosaur infested waters" to begin with.
/r/MensRights18/06/16 02:02 AM
1

As I hear it, the kid wasn't in the water (edit: I'm recalling the news report wrong, the source I was looking at said he was "playing along the shore", so at the water's edge, either out of the water, or ankle deep. Added the source below.) , there were other people about, and a lifeguard nearby enough for the mother to run and get (meaning that there was some sort of swimming area at least close to this). SO, I can't even blame the parents. The gator came out of the water, in the dark, and sna…
/r/MensRights18/06/16 01:49 AM
2

That phrase "accused sexual assault" wasn't referring to only this case in the sentence you are picking it out of. That he was found guilty with good evidence is the reason why this isn't a case we should rally around as an example of injustice. Other cases are far better examples of injustice following an accusation. The MRM would be better served focusing on those. That's my point. edit: Removed the sentence where I was being needlessly defensive.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 09:15 PM
1

If nothing else, this case is certainly not the cross I'd choose to hang on. There have been and will be far better cases of accused sexual assault to make an issue of.
/r/MensRights13/06/16 07:39 PM
1

I can't say I agree with you. You're making a lot of assumptions that are nearly as bad as the assumptions in the other direction. We shouldn't declare that if a rape wasn't reported and convicted, then it didn't happen. As far as our legal system is concerned, maybe. But beyond that, no. That's ignoring reality. Our justice system is designed to let guilty people go free on a regular basis, and if we aren't acquitting at least some men who actually did rape somebody, then our justice system isn…
/r/MensRights09/06/16 04:13 PM
1

Except in those cases that argument isn't supported by any statistics or science. Women aren't more at risk in those areas, and when they appear to be so, it's usually because somebody cooked those books, for example by excluding male victims from consideration.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 01:02 AM
2

I can at least hope that their recommendation is based on cold demographics of the disease. That is, they set a certain threshold of prevalence at which point they recommend increased testing. "Males aged 20-29" surpassed that threshold. "Females aged 20-29" did not. If that's the case here, then I'm not outraged, but I do disagree. With a sexually transmitted disease, both genders will benefit when both genders are tested. If men are more in need because they are getting the disease more freque…
/r/MensRights09/06/16 12:58 AM
15

I marveled at this headline yesterday because it's one of the only times I've ever seen a headline like this where the convicted was male.
/r/MensRights05/06/16 02:24 AM
2

Awful marketing, I think. No hype for it at all. I knew it was coming, but had no idea that it was already out.
/r/MensRights02/06/16 07:21 AM
1

All kinds of lying with statistics going on in this article.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 05:13 PM
1

Slightly sensationalized title, because she didn't make a strong statement like that. But the article does make it clear that she thinks women deserve more considerations than they already have, and paints a picture where we're uniquely victimizing women in prisons, when the opposite is true.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 05:12 PM
2

When you follow the link to her plan and ctrl-F for "women" you turn up nothing. She's giving lip service to these sob stories and trying to paint women as uniquely victimized by the prison system, while women are comparatively treated much better than men are in prisons already. And she doesn't even mention women in the actual plan that she links to in the article as proof that she's going to address these injustices.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 05:05 PM
6

"Let's reduce sexual assaults on women by forcing women to comingle with these men who I am suggesting are sexual nefarious."
/r/MensRights25/04/16 07:35 AM
4

This article is hilarious.
/r/MensRights23/04/16 12:17 AM
1

Canceled out your downvote because you are right. I thought this was common knowledge.
/r/MensRights23/04/16 12:05 AM
1

Thank you! I was just about to post a similar comment. It's notable if CollegeFix picked this up because they are a wider audience, but this is still rehosted content that doesn't even include the whole relevant article. I'd much rather see the original article getting traction, with the CollegeFix piece in the comments, instead of the other way around.
/r/MensRights19/04/16 08:10 PM
1

I'd written out, and subsequently lost, a long comment that I don't care to reproduce. So, I'll give you the very short of it instead. Thanks to the mods of /r/science because from my perspective you are the best mod team on reddit. Your rules are strict and lead to a lot of deletions, but the only agenda those rules serve is keeping the discussion science based and about the science. I think some of the deletions here were unfortunate. Putting aside accusations of feminist conspiracy, /u/MensRi…
/r/MensRights15/04/16 07:34 PM
3

I don't understand why a group of researches that exists to push feminist perspectives has such a strong interest in circumcision to begin with. Much less an interest in proving it's just a fine thing to do. If anything I'd expect feminists to be against circumcision on principle, and the only reason they wouldn't is because it's something that only directly affects men. I guess if you see everything as a zero-sum competition, addressing or acknowledging circumcision means you're neglecting FGM.…
/r/MensRights15/04/16 03:29 PM
1

I actually replied to this one as well. I did so with some hesitation because the person who posted it is a good friend that I'd rather not lose over this shit. My reply is still up, thankfully. I wish I'd known that this is apparently a misrepresentation of what she said to begin with.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 01:13 PM
21

This is going to be spun around until it warps the space around it. This is going to be read as "Judge says rape doesn't violate your rights!" or even "Judge says rape isn't bad!" depending on how far they are willing to stretch it. But what the judge actually said was that rape, in itself, is not by definition a gendered hate crime. If she wants to call it that and benefit from that classification, specifically, she needs to substantiate that the alleged crime was motivated by hate for women.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 02:33 AM
6

There is a reason that scene is so powerful, after all.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 03:11 PM
1

I don't disagree with you. I suggest only that letting her out of the contract might be the best solution for them from a public relations standpoint to make this whole controversy go away. They have no legal obligation to free her from the contract, and she is bound by it until it ends or she negotiates something else with them.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 11:45 PM
-1

Seems to me, they may well have made this offer. If they assumed, as many people here do, that she only really wanted to get out of the contract anyway. "Fine, we'll let you out of your contract (you're being too much trouble to be worth keeping anyway), if you retract the defamation against our company and our employee." It's not such an unreasonable offer if the person making it are certain that no rape actually happened. I think demanding a public apology is a step too far from a PR perspecti…
/r/MensRights04/04/16 03:41 PM
1

And more importantly, there will be a classroom of students listening.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 12:54 AM
3

I admire your consistency, and agree with it.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 04:37 AM
7

Keep in mind she also drew penises as part of her protest, and his sexuality was attacked as a result of the project and surrounding hooplah.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 06:51 PM
20

Harassment centering around a sexual allegation, which would probably be considered "sexual" harassment if the genders were reversed. If he was spreading posters all over campus calling her a sex offender I don't think many people would bat an eye if that was determined to fall under title IX as sexually based harassment. edit: Let's clear up his actual ruling though. The judge ruled that he couldn't be placed in a "protected class" based on the facts of the case, and that's why he didn't fall u…
/r/MensRights15/03/16 06:01 PM
75

Basically, the judge is saying that harassment that involves accusations of improper sexual conduct shouldn't fall under "sexual harassment" as far as Title IX is concerned. And the reasoning for that, is because extending rights to people accused of rape is an unpalatable "extreme conclusion" in the mind of this judge.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 01:50 PM
0

that Indian politician (who is a woman btw) has nothing to do with the MRM and does not represent MRAs. Yep, and the MRM should be clear about that, which is part of the point OP is trying to make. MRAs have had some things to say about India because in some ways men really are getting shafted in their efforts to address rape. But when we do address those issues, we have to be careful because there are people speaking up for men in India that the MRM should probably not be supporting.
/r/MensRights13/03/16 07:20 AM
9

Article hits on a point I connected about the girl power stuff. Boys growing up in this era are being told how great girls are, all the time, and that girls can do anything. With a poverty of any messages telling them that boys are kinda alright as well. It's just assumed that boys already feel empowered, and know how great they are as humans, because of all that patriarchy. So no messaging needed. ... That's not a fair assumption, for reasons that should be obvious to this sub. Boys growing up …
/r/MensRights10/03/16 11:55 PM
1

I'm curious what the results would be if you removed self reporting entirely and went solely based on detectable effects. I'd like to see that as well.
/r/MensRights08/03/16 01:55 AM
1

If that's what the research says, then it should be accepted unless there are huge flaws in the research. The pot shots taken at men in the article, though, I can do without. edit: I'd be interested in a criticism of this from a science standpoint, if anybody can provide.
/r/MensRights08/03/16 12:30 AM
5

Look at it this way. The intent of the act was sexual. The purpose of the hazing was sexual humiliation. I don't see any good reason not to call this rape. That word "sex" is rightfully all over the act, even if the rapists weren't doing it to give themselves an orgasm.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 11:04 PM
1

It's quoting Rachel talking about Allison being those things. The title is just a bit misleading that way because it's not clear who those words are coming from or why.
/r/MensRights27/02/16 10:44 PM
1

She mad. .. Rightfully so.
/r/MensRights27/02/16 08:21 PM
0

I would have tackled this from a different angle, and pointed out primarily that fact-finding in response to an allegation doesn't mean we aren't supporting the victim. If a girl is raped, and following the crime we gather information about the crime, including information that might not paint her accusation in the best light -- that in no way means we aren't "supporting" her in that process. In our legal system, that information needs to come out in order to make the best case for prosecution. …
/r/MensRights27/02/16 03:41 PM
1

Don't fault her a bit for being interested in his height and being happy to find out he is tall. Nothing wrong with having a height preference, although it probably shouldn't be your opening question litmus test for whether or not you're interested in somebody. Since we don't know how she might have responded if he was 5'0" instead, we can't know she would have instantly bailed. She was just pleased that he was tall. Somewhat how I would be pleased if a girl I could potentially be interested in …
/r/MensRights27/02/16 03:33 PM
3

I don't think that's what Lady Gaga is saying, or at least was trying to say, wording aside, as there was more to the quote, I agree. What she said wasn't as simple as the OP is saying.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 11:05 PM
1

I misunderstood your point a bit, because in context we're talking about Gaga's statement in the OP, that laments the government's involvement in this process. Gaga seems to think she should get what she wants, without having to prove it.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 10:57 PM
1

Guns are controversial in a way that it's probably not a good idea for the MRM to get into. It's divisive, and we can tackle male suicides from an MRM perspective without even touching the gun issue. I think that's how it should be. I had typed more here about how suicides are treated in the gun control debate, but I'm taking my own advice and just leaving the guns out of it. Providing support services for men is key, and this ties in with a number of other issues the MRM is concerned with.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 07:21 AM
1

I don't see how this changes the argument very much. If you want the government to act against a rape, you need to provide evidence and establish that it took place. The specifics of that will depend on which system you are trying to go through, be it criminal law, a civil case, or otherwise. A mere accusation or your own personal knowledge that you were raped is not sufficient to get you out of a legal contract. It's a shitty situation to be in, for sure. But she can't expect the government to …
/r/MensRights21/02/16 05:31 AM
5

Wow, I wasn't expecting that to be as bad as it was.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 12:17 AM
1

Agree with your body text, was thinking I'd disagree based on the title text.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 03:29 AM
4

It's nice to see something giving thought to the male experience on something like this. But I suspect this is only an article that got published because of the novelty of the experience, not because of any real regard for the plight of men in the situation. I say that because, as other comments have pointed out, this is an issue that only matters for a very small number of men, comparatively speaking. There are much larger issues that should be getting first attention, but they aren't novel as …
/r/MensRights09/02/16 03:15 AM
1

I may be that your niece was speaking about girls having a period, and if her comments were meant to be limited to what girls go through every month because of their biology, that would explain the confused response.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 06:37 AM
38

And at the same time, the want the freedom to insult and defame anybody they think is a misogynist.
/r/MensRights05/02/16 05:41 AM
1

The snopes article on the meetings refers to these events as mens rights events throughout the article. :(
/r/MensRights05/02/16 05:37 AM
0

Would be much better to break the original image apart and place each rebuttal clearly next to what it's rebutting, instead of drawing lines all over the place.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 11:33 PM
17

These questions are important, not for the purpose of calling OP a liar, but because the answers to these questions would make this story a lot more powerful, and give it much longer legs.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 03:30 AM
4

Even if the wage gap was real, what if the boy had a single mother? She'd have to pay the higher price with lower wages. It's not about any real financial difference between the individuals paying the price. It's about "raising awareness" and indoctrinating students into the idea that the system is unfair to girls, and that this should be forcibly corrected.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 06:33 AM
2

coke501 may be viewing the pictures in a way that does not show the accompanying text.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 11:43 PM
5

Skeptics conferences have been mired in this kind of controversy for years now. I personally know a few people, including myself, who first became aware of how insidious feminist ideology can become by way of these controversies.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 04:00 PM
2

I imagine there are a lot of feminists who would think it very petty and nit-picky to squabble over this point. But it's important, because the history of the suffragette movement, and how men very literally fought and died for centuries to earn their right to vote, is important. It's not important for the purpose of demonizing the women's suffrage movement, it's important to put the issue in perspective at a time when history is too often revised to make "men" the great enemy of history.
/r/MensRights29/01/16 03:53 PM
4

At least take comfort knowing that it's not a MR thing, but a reddit thing. The same thing happens on every large subreddit that doesn't have strictly enforced, restrictive content guidelines.
/r/MensRights17/01/16 07:20 AM
3

vested interest in keeping it out of the news More than this. But they also face strong political and legal pressure to punish anybody who is accused, even if there is no evidence.
/r/MensRights13/01/16 03:02 PM
3

It's not unusual for Bernie in particular to hold a stance that isn't necessarily towing the ideological line. He's a very left leaning politician, which puts him on the "same side" with feminists and social justice advocates on a lot of issues. But I've always had the impression he leans that way because he thinks those positions are the ones supported by evidence and common sense, not because he wants to be a good leftie or a good feminist. This is one thing I'm watching his campaign for. I ex…
/r/MensRights12/01/16 03:23 PM
4

or simply women get more sympathy and the story will be more sensational if the reader does not know the gender and can assume the victim/s is/are female It's this. It's a reflection of what information we (the general public) value as consumers of the media they are selling. The public in general does not find the addition of "they were male" to be a valuable piece of information. It doesn't increase our emotional response or add anything anybody actually cares about. Nobody gives a shit if the…
/r/MensRights10/01/16 07:20 AM
4

I've tried in the past to approach it from the angle of even if you think he is probably guilty, based on statistics, or your subjective feeling about the accusation, the responsible thing to do is abstain from witch hunting and allow the presumption of innocence to stand until better evidence than a mere accusation. You don't have to cry false accusations, you don't have to nay-say and say he's probably innocent. Just abstain from slapping that "rapist" label on him before there is any evidence…
/r/MensRights30/11/15 07:27 PM
1

Can't fault the police for going in person to check on a report of a child abduction. Can fault them for yanking the child away from you before even asking you about it.
/r/MensRights21/11/15 07:08 PM
2

I think that the question being posed as a serious response to the day's mere existence shows that we need one. If it was International Potato Day, people who don't think we "need" that would more or less just ignore it. But if its men, it becomes a huge question and controversy. Because the question being posed isn't "do we really need it?" but rather "do men really deserve it?" Or perhaps, "Is it bad to give this to men?" Of course the answer to both is yes.
/r/MensRights21/11/15 06:59 PM
5

I've got nothing at all against female appointments or politicians. Make it half if you want. Make it 2/3s even. But make them qualified and make them people who deserve the job. That's more important than their gender by a mile, and I'll take a forced diversity group that's well qualified over a non-diverse group of cronies who might even work to destroy the very institutions they are representing. (And, naturally I'd also take a monotone group of well qualified old white guys over a diverse gr…
/r/MensRights14/11/15 07:19 PM
1

it's not really pandering... It's definitely pandering, because they went out of their way to force diversity into the cabinet. There are plenty of qualified women to choose from, but there are far more qualified men in the pool of potential cabinet appointees. As this article points out, those qualified women had a much better shot than the men at getting the cabinet appointment, because they're taking a much smaller pool of women compared to a much larger pool of men, and then drawing the same…
/r/MensRights11/11/15 11:31 PM
21

I commented elsewhere about this that their gender is a lot less important to me than the fact that they are qualified. Putting people who know their shit in there, instead of just token appointments based on gender or diversity or cronyism. If I am to believe what I've read about it (which isn't much) it looks like he chose a diverse cabinet that is also at least more qualified than those previously in place, so that's good. That was the big news about his appointments for me.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 09:14 PM
2

In addition to this, if you're being offered a deal part of that deal might be a specifically "guilty" plea. This person was accepting a deal in exchange for the plea.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 07:03 AM
1

I do appreciate that somebody actually looked into it. It doesn't matter to me which "camp" you are from when you do it. Good information is good information.
/r/MensRights10/11/15 11:43 PM
1

edit: Since the comment above was deleted, they had apparently done some research and translated the sign, confirming that it is indeed asking men who abuse their partners to get help curbing their violent tendencies. Another case of women being provided help if they are abused, and men only being directed to resources to stop abusing. There was other stuff, that I had originally discussed here, but since the comment was deleted anyway, and they've been nice in PM, I'll let it be deleted.
/r/MensRights10/11/15 11:34 PM
2

As translated there, this could easily be a help line for abusive men who are "violent with" someone they love. Could also be otherwise. But the phrasing of your translation, as rusty as your Hebrew is, sounds like it's for helping abusive men to stop the cycle of their own violence. I'd be less likely to think so if we hadn't seen that exact kind of help line for men promoted elsewhere.
/r/MensRights10/11/15 04:47 PM
3

In a modmail getting messages in the 1000s? yes, it is spam No, it's really not. I've been on the other end of that. This isn't spam.
/r/MensRights10/11/15 01:34 AM
1

If you're the kind of student who traditionally would have been stigmatized as "bad at math", you can apply the lateral approach of Googling Maya Angelou. Abused by her mother's boyfriend => x = 2 QED. That's where this whole thing strikes me the wrong way. I don't mind having a worksheet like this where you also learn something multidisciplinary on the side while math is the main thing you are doing. But when you can pass the assignment based on your non-math knowledge, it starts getting iffy. …
/r/MensRights08/11/15 03:52 AM
2

The woman explained how hard it is to be raped, she had said no but had been forcibly held down and violated. Which seems really off, because it has very little relation to the case the rest of your comment describes. Except maybe to convince people that real rape doesn't look like the case they are considering.
/r/MensRights06/11/15 05:02 PM
29

Removed by moderators, likely because it's a controversial topic that will attract comments they would rather not deal with. So instead of doing their jobs and actually keeping a close watch on the comment threads for such a topic, they just remove the submission entirely.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 07:39 AM
4

It's not end of the world, earth shattering offensive of the teacher to do this. But it's still incredibly unprofessional, and not something that should be defended.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 06:50 PM
15

If this we posted as a reddit text post I would insist it was a troll.
/r/MensRights27/10/15 07:28 AM
4

That's a really strange title for me to read, as I can open up a new tab and pull up a nearly endless list of adult comics from japan where men, women, children and their dogs are degraded and raped in every way imaginable. So, taking a look at the article because that title struck me so strangely. The author chose not to continue the series due to negative feedback. This wasn't censorship from above. More of a case where she felt her readers weren't enjoying this work, and moreover were actuall…
/r/MensRights26/10/15 12:54 AM
0

I'm glad that the first time I see gun control brought into the arena of men's rights, it's being dragged into that arena from outside. Because I don't think gun politics and men's rights can mix well together. Men are far more likely than women to end up on the wrong end of a gun. And that could easily lead some to view gun control as a men's issue. But MRAs aren't going to be fighting for gun control, nor should they. Because the right to own a gun, or the regulation there-of, should not be a …
/r/MensRights24/10/15 02:35 AM
3

That's what happens when you have a ridiculously skewed wikipedia article and journalists, as well as a general population, who view checking a wiki page as sufficient research on an issue.
/r/MensRights23/10/15 02:41 PM
2

It's dubious enough that we shouldn't buy the rape story at face value (not that we should buy any rape story at face value without some sort of evidence), but it's not dubious enough that we should declare that it's just regret sex and use that as the baseline for discussing it. You didn't do that, but the comment from lastlaugh50 above did, based on nothing other than the fact that the alleged rape took place in her dorm.
/r/MensRights22/10/15 02:56 AM
-1

I wouldn't assume any given rapist will behave logically about it. I'm not saying that to support her story, but it's really hasty to declare it a false accusation just because it happened in her own dorm room.
/r/MensRights22/10/15 01:50 AM
4

Thanks!
/r/MensRights22/10/15 01:08 AM
5

What picture did you share? Just for context. I suspect fear of just this kind of reaction keeps a lot of otherwise sympathetic people in the shadows, not sharing their thoughts. Which is exactly what feminists want.
/r/MensRights22/10/15 12:31 AM
3

You're thinking of The War Against Boys. Understandable mistake!
/r/MensRights21/10/15 09:41 PM
3

This author isn't CHS, but I'm sure your comment applies equally to this author, even though I don't know anything about her.
/r/MensRights21/10/15 06:54 PM
12

You're upvoted, so apparently other people are seeing what you are. And if so that's a problem. For my part I have not noticed that. On the other hand, I see that exact conflation from people who criticize the movement. And I see MRAs responding to those aspersions. "Why don't MRAs fight for black men, or gay men? MRAs should care about LGBT issues, but they don't!" ... to which the reply is, "Black men and gay men are men, so fighting for men's rights is fighting for their rights. Also, many of…
/r/MensRights19/10/15 12:49 AM
7

Has Marcotte ever done likewise regarding outrageous feminist statements regarding male genocide and the like? This is the important bit. The Honey Badgers aren't perfect, and over the many, many hours of discussions, blog posts, and videos they've released there have been some questionable statements, unfair generalizations, and so forth. On balance they do great work, but it's just a matter of numbers that not everything they say is going to be perfect, and occasionally there's going to be a s…
/r/MensRights19/10/15 12:39 AM
8

This is one reason a lot of Democrats are unimpressed with the leadership of Debbie Waserman Shultz.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 05:35 AM
1

It might be a small factor that people are getting tired of hearing feminist BS, but it's mostly that people just care about other issues more right now. It's good news that the war on women is taking a seat further back. But I think you are correct. I don't think the war on women lines have been abandoned. Just not prominent.
/r/MensRights15/10/15 09:32 PM
3

It's not extreme, in that you're absolutely going to have a bad experience. But it's a problem enough that a male teacher has to be extra cautious with their behavior and how they are perceived. It's more of a problem, in my opinion and experience, in middle school age range. Because the girls are developing and the students themselves become the source of the most damaging accusations. And girls in that age group will absolutely use "he's a pervert" as a defense for their own bad behavior, or j…
/r/MensRights13/10/15 01:18 AM
2

but especially boys Yet we still occasionally see people talking about this issue only in relation to how it hurts the girls.
/r/MensRights13/10/15 01:13 AM
1

Too much of our collective understanding of history is cleansed to be friendly to a narrative that reinforces ideals. It's a lot more convenient politically if the suffragettes were paragons fighting the good fight against oppressors. It's less convenient if they are muddy, and their "oppressors" were muddy. Ideals are often black and while. But the people who fight for (or against) those ideals are usually marbled gray. But history is more convenient if we repaint them the black and white we wa…
/r/MensRights09/10/15 12:54 AM
1

I think, if this is true, that this would have a lot less to do with who watches porn, and a lot more to do with who doesn't watch porn (or at least who won't admit it).
/r/MensRights02/10/15 04:03 AM
1

Key point, though, it's not being used to excuse bad behavior. It's being used as a check for yourself to provide boy-friendly educational activities.
/r/MensRights02/10/15 03:50 AM
1

I saw this cross my own facebook feed and had a similar reaction. It's good that they see the "bumbling man" stereotype as a sexist one. But it's telling it is only framed as an issue by how it harms women. I'm glad they see it as a troubling stereotype, at least.
/r/MensRights02/10/15 03:44 AM
3

To sum up some of the more verbose comments here, and this is my take on it as well. It's not wrong, but the title is perhaps misleading because the finding in question is referring to short-term incarcerations of the kind you find while awaiting trial for some minor offenses.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 12:18 AM
9

I wonder if this would have been perceived differently if the mattress was literally a sign that said "Paul Nungesser is a rapist" instead of only being a figurative one. Would allowing that as a valid art project be accommodating harassment and defamation in their eyes?
/r/MensRights27/09/15 09:38 PM
1

It's every bit as insulting and intrusive when they do it to women, I agree.
/r/MensRights23/09/15 03:44 PM
3

The "door open" policy is common, and it's there to protect the teacher/tutor/person of authority in that situation more than it is to protect the student. Even if it's not written policy, it's often something people adhere to. Educators have it drilled into them nowadays that you don't meet 1-on-1 with a student behind closed doors. Ever. Edit: I say this so that you might not assume she was trying to imply you are a potential rapist. Rather, she might just support that policy as good sense gen…
/r/MensRights22/09/15 06:03 AM
2

This comic reminds me of something I do consider a related men's rights issue. Getting emergency contraceptives as a man has gotten me some dirty looks. I've had to run to the pharmacy to get a plan b pill for my wife a few times. One pharmacist outright refused to sell it to me (even though the law puts no restriction on sale to adults of either gender) without my wife present, and when I asked why, he implied that I might be buying it for an underage girl I just raped. My wife had to go get it…
/r/MensRights20/09/15 05:07 PM
1

This comic just makes it seem like men want keep women in their place. This comic, and the feminist left in general when it comes to playing identity politics. And it disgusts me. Because on quite a few issues I agree with the policy they're fighting for (for example, freely available, low or no cost birth control for any woman who wants it), but I want to wretch when they frame the whole discussion as "if you don't agree with us, you're a chauvinist pig who thinks women should be in the kitchen…
/r/MensRights20/09/15 05:01 PM
2

It's narrative spinning. If you are against X or Y policy, it's because you are against women. No pharmacist has to actually say that for the comic to have a potentially valid message. The comic is trying to imply that this is the attitude our policies are conveying when we support covering viagra for men, but don't support covering birth control for women. Of course, that's in itself is a horrible argument because it doesn't reflect the reality of the issue. I don't see a lot of people fighting…
/r/MensRights20/09/15 04:55 PM
35

Federal mandates are part of it. Schools are legally compelled to investigate and respond to allegations of sexual assault on their campuses. What Lethn says is also true, and ironically that reputation schools have for covering things up to avoid a scandal is one of the reasons people pushed to force schools to address sexual assault.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 02:54 PM
8

Redefine masculinity by acting like 95 percent of men! <- the message on this poster
/r/MensRights16/09/15 03:07 AM
13

Probably means teach young women how to respond to a rape in a way that creates evidence and a clear case that can be prosecuted. So we have less he said she said cases.
/r/MensRights14/09/15 06:25 PM
0

Depends on what you mean by "feminists" and how you qualify man hating. Just taking a very quick glance at the data presented in the link, it looks like the results here aren't drastic in their difference. The scores for "hostility toward men" are slightly higher for nonfeminists. But so are the scores for benevolence toward men. There's a greater difference in the latter case. Feminists are less likely to view men benevolently, even if they are also slightly less likely to view them with hostil…
/r/MensRights14/09/15 02:05 PM
2

I believe it. People I've seen argue to the contrary point to different studies or statements by health organizations that insist otherwise. I am not persuaded by those.
/r/MensRights14/09/15 01:45 AM
8

The physical reality of the difference is something that should be obvious to anybody who has actually looked at a foreskin. But people still argue that sex feels "just as good" by which they mean, circumcised and uncircumcised men both think sex is pretty great, and it doesn't appear to have a huge impact on the prevalence of sexual dysfunction or dissatisfaction. But going back to the obvious physical differences, it really shouldn't be a question that circumcision changes the experience.
/r/MensRights13/09/15 05:54 PM
24

studies done in sub-saharan Africa where the population has completely different standards of personal hygiene. And some of the most commonly used of those studies are riddled with other problems that call their conclusions into question.
/r/MensRights13/09/15 04:00 PM
5

Like others here I think the hypocrisy is important to note, in that an ad like this with genders reversed would very likely draw a lot of ire. The advert in itself does not offend me, and even if it did that wouldn't mean I think they shouldn't be able to run it.
/r/MensRights09/09/15 10:45 PM
2

Your point is a very good one, and I appreciate that you keep your work so professional and on point. I don't think the kind of speculation I was giving in my comments would have any place on COTWA, and I'm glad you keep it out. One reason I bothered speculating here at all, even though I think it's very important to note that it's just speculation, is to offer some counterpoint to the assumptive guilt that tends to fill articles when it comes to college rape. And when you get down to what the a…
/r/MensRights09/09/15 09:56 PM
1

Something like that. Really, the actual details of her rape case could shed light on the whole situation, but I'm just not seeing those facts presented. One of the articles states that she was raped in the room of a lacrosse player. So, the alleged rapist is very likely a student, and probably the lacrosse player in question. We aren't given any more information on the alleged rape itself. As I noted in another comment, I'm not seeing the earlier article even imply that he was the one that serve…
/r/MensRights09/09/15 05:31 PM
1

"Lure" also sounds like getting invited to another party but who knows. Articles like this are full of loaded language. That's why I clicked through several levels in the link chain trying to find the most factual descriptions. Things like this get increasingly spun the further they get from the original source. For example, I'm not seeing a source that claims he raped her, only that she was raped after she got drunk because of him. There's only a circumstantial, assumed connection between him a…
/r/MensRights09/09/15 04:56 PM
1

The article also makes it clear that she's alleging he served her alcohol Not the one I followed and quoted down the link chain, which is the earlier source of the information. edit: Article here. Also, this article does make it clear that underage drinking was involved, if you read the letter they sent her. So you are correct on that point. Also, this article makes it clear that she is also alleging that the school gave her inadequate support moving on from the attack. But the main thrust of he…
/r/MensRights09/09/15 03:13 PM
3

If the attack happened, and if the college handled the situation inappropriately, then there's nothing wrong with suing the college. But it's ridiculous to think the college is in the wrong for doing the bare minimum in an attempt to verify the claims she makes as part of her case. If we were talking about a criminal case, then the only question that should really matter is whether or not the attack occurred. But this is not that case. It really shouldn't matter if she was a virgin before. And t…
/r/MensRights09/09/15 02:01 PM
1

I don't understand why this is a story either way. The arrest was for an unrelated charge. She's only notable because somebody saw her shitty tweet and decided to publicly shame her for it, causing people to dogpile her twitter. She's a nobody otherwise. Just a woman who got arrested on a assault charge. It's not news.
/r/MensRights05/09/15 07:51 PM
59

If a girl says she isn't interested, then that should put an end to trying to pick her up. But men who do persist are less likely to continue hitting on a taken girl, because a taken girl is less likely to change her mind and start responding to it. It's got nothing to do with respecting another man. A single girl who just claims she isn't interested at the moment might become interested later on if her mood changes. A girl in a committed relationship is turning you down because she has commitme…
/r/MensRights05/09/15 03:25 PM
0

I believe the (completely bonkers) idea is that if you are having sex that your wife believes is reproductive in nature, but you have had a vasectomy, then you are violating her.
/r/MensRights05/09/15 07:17 AM
2

I don't have a problem with groups like Chic CEO existing, unless they are leeching public funds in the process. But this case wasn't about attacking their existence. It's about ending some of the discriminatory practices they engaged in. I can't say I personally care much whether or not they hold a lady's only event, either, but it's ironic that a gender neutral equality law suddenly becomes inadequate when it means you can't exclude men. The NCFM rebuttal to the aspersions cast in this article…
/r/MensRights03/09/15 03:58 PM
3

Yeah, that's some pro-level narrative pushing right there. The law in question is an anti-discrimination law, and the title managed to make it sound like they're abusing some sexist law from a sexist era that just happens to still be on the books.
/r/MensRights03/09/15 03:09 PM
15

If you criticize feminists, then you are for all of the things that feminism claims it stands against. Just logic, right? .. no?
/r/MensRights01/09/15 06:11 AM
1

Reading or hearing a story like that sparks a bit of outrage in me. Because it's really awful that those situations exist, and empathy for that makes me wish we could do more about it. And that's why I understand where some anti-rape advocates are coming from when they try to change the rules (for the worse) on rape cases. I think they are misguided, but I can empathize with the position. It raises outrage that such a situation could exist, and so we direct part of that outrage at the justice sy…
/r/MensRights30/08/15 05:39 PM
1

There are difficulties that arise in picking candidates for the MRM to support as a group. A general "get out and vote" is fine enough, but endorsing candidates and such would cause troubles and fracture the movement. We've got people left right and center here, libertarians, socialists, old school conservatives and all. That's one reason I prefer political efforts along the lines of contacting politicians, candidates, and political parties to let them know what you, as a voter, think about thes…
/r/MensRights30/08/15 05:53 AM
2

I have nothing against polyamory and making polyamory more accepted socially. But cheating in a relationship that both partners have understood to be monogamous is a generally shitty thing to do. If you aren't happy with a monogamous relationship, then stop being in one, one way or another. Even if you are polyamorous, it's not very loving toward your "monogamous" partner to disregard the feelings of betrayal your actions are going to cause in them. It's the presumption of monogamy in a partnere…
/r/MensRights30/08/15 05:43 AM
4

Short of physical injury sustained either due to resistance or ferocity, there is no physical evidence of the lack of consent. Those physical injuries are what I'm referring to when to when I say a rape kit can provide evidence for the abusive nature of the sex. Not all rapes are going to leave that kind of evidence, but for those that do, a rape kit is an important part of the body of evidence to prove it. Also, in many rape cases the defendant denies having sex with the alleged victim at all. …
/r/MensRights29/08/15 11:57 PM
3

It should pass the same bar as other crimes. The weight of evidence and testimony has to be convincing enough that doubting the conclusion becomes the unreasonable position. A rape kit can provide solid physical evidence of both the sexual encounter and the abusive nature of it. Convincing and credible personal testimony helps in court, but isn't sufficient. And other evidence might be available depending on the specifics of the crime.
/r/MensRights29/08/15 11:34 PM
0

The point /u/tiqr was making above is that the republicans aren't exactly paragons of truth as a party, and assuming that their candidate will be any better on political lying would be a really silly assumption. They're politicians. Almost all of them are lying about something, and that's a shitty situation but it's what we have right now. Suggesting that we vote against one party (and thus, likely for the other party) because they are lying on one issue, while the other party lies about a host …
/r/MensRights29/08/15 07:13 AM
19

It's troubling that he's making such a strong statement on it here. Because it suggests hes going to be proposing strong, misguided action as a result. There are a couple of key issues like this that have the potential to erase independent and cross-party voters that might otherwise support him. I encourage anybody who supports Sanders, either full stop or as a minor consideration, to let the Sanders campaign know what you think of this issue.
/r/MensRights29/08/15 12:39 AM
4

I don't know about /u/tiqr, but feminist and men's rights issues are not the only important political considerations for most people. They are the most important issue for this subreddit, because that's what this subreddit is about. But it shouldn't be a stretch to think that somebody can dislike the Democrats and others on the left as far as their gender pandering goes, but also strongly dislike the Republican Party for other reasons that don't have much to do with this subreddit. I don't blame…
/r/MensRights29/08/15 12:34 AM
2

I believe OP, but this needs to be spelled out with proof and sources. Otherwise the correction is little better than the mistake as far as fact checking goes.
/r/MensRights29/08/15 12:28 AM
3

Wow, that graph could be used as an example in a statistics classroom under a "how to mislead with statistics" heading.
/r/MensRights28/08/15 06:11 AM
0

On that note, I'd like the posters more if they dropped the rape and sexual assault language and just said: "You're being a douche."
/r/MensRights27/08/15 04:11 PM
2

If it was just the left guy and her, and they were in a college dorm room or a more empty area of a party or something, I think the poster would be a lot more effective. That one would be a situation that a wider range of guys are likely to find themselves in. But I don't think that means it would be a better poster. I'd have a much bigger problem with the poster in that case, because it would be much closer to implying that drunk sex is rape. Note that if you took away the guy on the right, the…
/r/MensRights27/08/15 04:09 PM
3

I don't like the signs. I think they are tacky and off-putting. Personal taste. Like the author of this article, I don't think they are rape culture. But I can see how they fit into their rape culture narrative, so the negative response does not surprise me at all.
/r/MensRights27/08/15 03:50 PM
7

Wait wait, are you implying that girls new to a college campus might want to be invited to a party house where a real party with lots of alcohol and some risque behavior might go on? You may as well say they were asking for their rapes! /s
/r/MensRights27/08/15 03:37 PM
5

A single poster like this in a vacuum doesn't bother me much either. Particularly since I think the girl in the poster is meant to be so drunk the girl can hardly speak, and the other guy is having to hold her up from falling. If they're going for a "she's so drunk she doesn't even know where she is" situation, while the guys are buzzed but still have their wits about them. Fine be me, in a vacuum. But in context, not every poster like this is so clear, and the general campaign is vilifying of m…
/r/MensRights27/08/15 03:30 PM
-5

I agree with your point, but I think the girl posing for this picture is going for an out of it drunk look, like "what am I doing here?" rather than explicit unwillingness. She's got her hands on his chest and it looks like she stops for a moment in confusion because she's so out of it she can't think straight. That's what I get out of the picture. She's meant to be so drunk that she's lost her capacity for decision making, while they're just drunk enough to lower their inhibitions. And the othe…
/r/MensRights27/08/15 03:16 PM
1

The message would be more palatable they framed it as a social issue of gender roles, of wanting to enable women to work more hours, expand child care, and enable fathers to take more time off to take care of family business. Some people do discuss it from that perspective. But when it's time to propose a solution and take action on the issue, the go-to seems to be more laws making it easier to claim wage discrimination. At best, these laws don't appear to be greatly necessary. At worst, they ri…
/r/MensRights25/08/15 07:03 PM
5

The Ashley Madison advertising is interesting. They give every indication of being a site that is primarily for cheating women. But the only reason for that is to create an impression that the site is full of willing, cheating women who want to have an affair with you. It's a more sophisticated version of the "Hey, hot singles in your area ready to fuck!" advertising model.
/r/MensRights25/08/15 02:40 PM
1

And this notion that MEN are to blame for single mothers?!? That's insane. Yep, completely agree with that much.
/r/MensRights20/08/15 11:42 PM
2

The government pays women to kick fathers out of the house. For a lot of people on the left this line sounds like conservative bullshit family values stuff. Until they actually experience it first hand. Women seeking support from the government can often get a better level of support if the father is out of the picture. At the same time, the father in this situation gets more screwed, because the government will come after the dad for all of the extra money his being out of the picture is causin…
/r/MensRights20/08/15 11:17 PM
4

Going to try, and perhaps fail, to phrase his comment in a way that my point is neutral politically. The gender stuff is very important, and no surprise it's particularly important to people on this subreddit. But it's not the only important political issue for me. I could vote for the candidate who is best on men's rights issues, whoever that may be. But if I made that a "single issue" voting requirement I could end up voting for some candidates who are really awful in other ways (as far as my …
/r/MensRights19/08/15 10:35 PM
6

I think some of my advice might rub some people the wrong way, but keep in mind that I'm assuming the following: OP loves his wife. OP likes his wife. OP appreciates his wife, and wants her to know he appreciates her. OP is willing to work with his wife on these issues, as companions and not as adversaries (because that's part of being married). The first step is talking to your wife about it. Describe what happened with the kids to your wife. See if she's okay with that. If she's okay with what…
/r/MensRights19/08/15 04:32 PM
1

"Ma'am, I can't list your husband as the father because I know he isn't. No, Sir, I won't be adding your name to the birth certificate. I can't tell you why. Ask your wife." As unfortunate as this is for cheating wives (they have all my pity I assure you), this is how it should be. Having your name on that birth certificate is a big deal, and stamping a father's name on it when you know they aren't the father is a larger ethical concern than preventing marital spats.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 08:15 PM
2

The correct response adhering strictly to doctor/patient confidentiality would be for the Doctor to politely state that they can't reveal that information to the husband for patient confidentiality reasons. But here's an interesting case. What if the father has brought the child in, and the information comes about as a result of treatment under those circumstances? I wonder how medical students would be told to handle that situation.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 08:11 PM
2

the ethicist impressed on us that we hold no legal liability if we blatantly lie to the husband. In fact, she basically ENCOURAGED us to do so. This is unjustifiable from an ethical standpoint. And that this the expert on ethics speaking makes it all the worse. It's one thing to politely state that they can't answer that question due to patient privacy policies or legal concerns. It's another to present false information. I wonder if it isn't actually illegal to lie about another patient's medic…
/r/MensRights18/08/15 08:03 PM
6

There is also a recent case of the man who assumed a drone (hundreds of feet) over his property was trying to take spy pictures of his teenage daughter, and shot it down. Made a whole bunch of news, with almost all of the coverage assuming that the drone actually was spying on his daughter, instead of thinking critically about it and realizing that those drones don't usually have a lens that can zoom that far.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 07:51 PM
1

That's a valid point for this particular case, although I can see the other side of it as well. I was responding to clarify what I quoted, that you seemed to think this was an issue about the rights of the male victim.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 03:43 AM
3

To clarify, I can forgive this one because there is a legit reason for the lack of parallel phrasing, and using male isn't intended to be denigrating. But that doesn't mean I'm implying that phrasing it otherwise would be bigotry, or that everybody has to conform to this out of political correctness.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 03:20 AM
4

and I fail to see how it impacts the rights of the male victim. The gripe here is not about the victim, but about subtle gender bias in reporting. Most news sources usually have no hesitation about using the word "man" repeatedly when the rapist is a man. It's a larger pattern in media where male victims and female bad actors are erased in the headlines and stories. When talking about victims it looks something like: "13 people killed..." when all 13 were men. But "13 women" if they were women, …
/r/MensRights17/08/15 11:15 PM
15

In this case "male" is explicitly referring to the biological sex at birth, while "woman" is referring to their chosen gender of the moment. So I can forgive this one.
/r/MensRights17/08/15 11:03 PM
1

Refreshing, thank you. You might catch flack from some of the movement's critics for even posting this here.
/r/MensRights16/08/15 03:48 PM
5

I don't mind focusing on some gay issues as long as it's limited to gay issues that gay men face because they are gay men, and not just because they are gay. Even if it's not something heterosexual men also face. I'm all for lgbt rights and in other venues I'm right there fighting for them. But in this subreddit and in the MRM, the focus is men's issues.
/r/MensRights07/08/15 08:27 PM
2

I intentionally phrased it in the manner I did, knowing full well what the response would be, to illustrate how people attack on identity, rather than point (and simply to prompt them into shaming me, as a small number chose to do). This is dishonest brokering on your point. And an exercise in confirming your own biases. You intentionally made it appear as though you were against SSM, and thought it was an important front to fight against progressives on. And then when people point out that bein…
/r/MensRights07/08/15 03:50 PM
2

Sillymod didn't really need to flair the comment. But, I don't think it was intended to express any official viewpoint, or serve as a trigger warning. The only reason moral relativism in general has anything to do with men's rights is that some people use the idea that women are "unequal" from men to justify preferential treatment. I'm dismayed by a lot of things, politically and otherwise. Some of them are even intertwined with my views on gender and equality. But when discussing men's rights, …
/r/MensRights07/08/15 02:11 PM
7

For my part, my biggest issue is that I don't think mensrights should align itself with any other political viewpoints aside being for mens rights. Precisely because there are liberals, conservatives, libertarians, communists, and so forth here. If we make it about fighting the evil progressives in general, instead of just fighting for men's issues, then we're alienating a good portion of the people who want to join that fight. If we start lumping in opposition to gay marriage, then we're not on…
/r/MensRights06/08/15 10:56 PM
6

Thanks for this PSA. Personally, I'm a little dismayed that most of the comments so far have been blanket approval.
/r/MensRights06/08/15 10:37 PM
3

Here you're already making an assumption Not really, in this case simply following the language used in previous comments. Also, you can limit that word "victim" to actual victims and exclude false accusers and my statement still makes sense. Since I'm not talking about any specific case here, I'm only referring to the group of people who are actual victims. There's no assumption involved since I'm not applying that label to anybody specific. I want to do right by actual victims of sexual assaul…
/r/MensRights31/07/15 05:38 AM
9

If the "assaulter" is allowed to present any defense at all against the accusation, then they are shouting down the survivor. This sentence in particular struck me as being very explicitly against providing due process in these cases.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 11:00 PM
6

The real issue here, is that they file assuming guilt for all accusations under "the need of the survivors" in this statement. Does a victim really need their attacker to have no due process in court? On the list of things we need to be doing to support rape victims, I don't think that should be near the top.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 10:57 PM
1

I think they're going to be targeting subs that are explicitly hate or racist subs, or subs that are extremely offensive on purpose, and have no other function. I know we've had a lot of enemies that would like to shut /r/mensrights down. But with the language and examples that have been tossed out so far I don't see us in these particular crosshairs, as much as some would want us to be. I could be wrong, of course. edit: I must be tired, many typos.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 05:03 AM
2

I just don't see this sub (and a few others who share the fear) actually falling into the category of subs they would rather simply not exist, and want to hide under the rug. I may be proven wrong. I know a lot of people want this sub and everything related to it wiped off the face of reddit, and the world. But I'm not getting that as an (immediate) danger from what the admins are currently doing. Not that I agree with putting any subs at all in quarantine.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 04:26 AM
4

Aren't colleges somewhat forced to enter this realm by other laws that mandate they address sexual assaults and the like on campus?
/r/MensRights30/07/15 02:00 AM
25

And I hope you have a pleasant day!
/r/MensRights28/07/15 08:34 PM
22

I'm married with a child, we've been together for ~15 years and we're both very happy.
/r/MensRights28/07/15 08:18 PM
6

I don't know about this particular study. I haven't even looked at it (and thus, I didn't vote on this submission). But the finding that the title mentions is not a new thing. As /u/Demonspawn points out in reply to me above, results showing that women are just as abusive in relationships as men are nothing new.
/r/MensRights28/07/15 08:15 PM
21

I'm curious, did you make this account just to make this comment? You know, when I was in middle school and high school, calling people virgins was a common insult. Most of the people tossing that insult were also virgins. But as an adult, that insult has basically vanished from my experience outside of internet trolls. You may as well hold up a sign saying you're in 8th grade if going the "virgin" route is your biting insult of choice.
/r/MensRights28/07/15 08:12 PM
6

I've sometimes had a difficult time explaining that I reject patriarchy as an umbrella theory while also keeping it clear that I think these gender expectations do exist. If I say I reject the notion of patriarchy, somebody might bring up the comment I just made above as an argument for patriarchy. It's not that I think there are no gender expectations along these lines. It's that I don't think our overall gender relations can be summed up as men asserting dominance.
/r/MensRights28/07/15 04:09 PM
4

Being a successful husband and father is the core of self-worth to many married men. A divorce can leave a man feeling like a failed man in both respects, when your wife decides you aren't good enough and leaves you (more women leave men then the other way around, as I understand it), and the courts are skewed to give the children exclusively to the woman.
/r/MensRights28/07/15 03:42 PM
9

Even when the economic aspect hits both groups the same, I think economic hardships would be more likely to lead men to suicide than women. Men are expected to be breadwinners, and this means for many men their personal sense of worth is tied to their ability to provide. If a man loses his job and can't find another then he's worthless as a provider, and thus as a human being. That's not to say that women won't also be depressed or have similar feelings, but I think it's more likely to hit men i…
/r/MensRights28/07/15 03:37 PM
215

To be clear, this isn't important because "omg women are awful!" as a lot of visitors here might be inclined to assume. It's important because it's completely contrary to the harmful perception that men are generally the abusive party in relationships.
/r/MensRights28/07/15 03:32 PM
12

The big point here that I hope gets made loud and clear at some point: Even if the "individual choices" that put women in lower pay positions are the result of sexism, a Paycheck Fairness Act will not fix that problem. A law that can only (at best) address active discrimination will do nothing to change the gap in earnings. That in itself is reason to think this law is a misguided solution, but it's not in itself enough for me to fight hard against it. But CHS does a good job here of explaining …
/r/MensRights26/07/15 04:24 PM
2

There are guys who are into being cuckolded. It works for them (sometimes), it keeps both them and their wives satisfied (sometimes), and it's even hot for them sexually. I'm not one of those guys, but I certainly "get it" and I don't think those guys are being pathetic by default of enjoying that. But it's got nothing to do with feminism. And that personal preference isn't how things "should" work for all couples, because some nonsense about female sexual expression. As if the same desires woul…
/r/MensRights17/07/15 08:29 PM
5

It's not a "porn collection", it was art prints depicting sexual acts printed on copies of NYT articles covering the alleged rape of Sulkowicz. From /u/tiqr elsewhere in this comment threat. The images in question are related to her "art project" treatment of his case. The case isn't about the alleged rape itself, but about the university's uncritical support of turning his public shaming into her coursework.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 11:45 PM
3

Either way, good art or not art, it's not just a personal collection of porn. It's something directly relevant to the case. I think that's the bigger point about calling it a "porn collection" and how that is misleading. Case in point: We're going to see a lot of comments like this from further down this page. good lord, how is that relivant to a rape case?
/r/MensRights15/07/15 11:38 PM
2

Great response, as expected. She says "without ever mentioning feminism" often in this video. My only quibble with the video is that she verges on creating an all-or-nothing false choice between attacking feminism all the time (which critics claim MRAs do), and attacking feminist laws, theories, and propaganda when addressing some major MRA issues. Critics say MRAs do nothing but attack feminism. Her response could use more examples of MRAs doing positive things that have nothing to do with dire…
/r/MensRights15/07/15 03:44 PM
6

I'm on both sides of this fence, really. As in, this is certainly not /r/LetsPunchWomen and it really sours my mood to see even a few comments that might make you think it is. I also don't think this reaction was the best choice, and I'd rather not have it celebrated as if he was a hero. But, there is also a valid mensrights issue to discuss about cases like this. And you don't have to celebrate the violence for that issue to be important. If a man wouldn't be fired for reacting in this way in r…
/r/MensRights10/07/15 02:23 PM
6

Certainly. If not MRA, they'll call you something else. Right winger republican douche is one go-to that often gets a chuckle from my far left leaning friend who also runs a tumblr that discusses men's issues.
/r/MensRights07/07/15 02:15 AM
6

I don't think joining the social conservatives is a solution It's always nice to see a piece like this where he makes points worth considering, without excessive vitriol, while also advocating for something I vehemently disagree with. I think his opening points are very noteworthy and familiar for a lot of people here. MRA is a standard category that opponents apply to anybody they think fits a certain mold, used to slur and disregard them. Oh, you think due process for alleged rapists is import…
/r/MensRights06/07/15 08:40 PM
14

I read the article, and also followed the link to the group they are giving funding to. The group says this right on the page linked to by the article: safe steps Family Violence Response service provides at no cost a range of professional support services for women and children experiencing violence and abuse from a partner or ex-partner, another family member or someone close to them.
/r/MensRights05/07/15 04:53 PM
1

I do agree with you in part. This is why I phrased it "consensual makes sense" instead of saying that it was actually consensual. That said, I do think a consensual relationship is possible in that situation on a personal level. Just not legally. This is all beside the point of the sentencing, of course. 22 years is ridiculous for statutory rape, unless there are other factors. Again I don't know the full details of this case.
/r/MensRights04/07/15 03:13 PM
153

I don't know the details of this case. But assuming that word consensual makes sense, I don't think the sentencing is fair. But I do think our sentencing should be consistent and not depend on gender. If a man would get that time, then a woman should as well. As it happens, I don't think either case should carry a sentence that weighty unless there are other aggravating factors that make that word "consensual" ridiculously inaccurate. If nothing else, I can be happy that at least this is an exam…
/r/MensRights04/07/15 12:21 AM
14

It's not about fighting a mythical wage gap. It's about getting women in the bar by charging them less and pandering to women's political issues. That's what the cynic in me assumes.
/r/MensRights02/07/15 08:56 PM
8

I actually like the idea of teaching consent as part of sexual education, in a gender neutral way, while teaching about other aspects of sexuality. But, thanks to the "teach men not to rape" mentality most attempts to do this are completely off base and ridiculous. In this comic, the most ridiculous thing to me is the reactions of the (mostly) men in the third They are meant to parallel attitudes men have about sex and consent, but the majority of them are boogeymen that you don't actually see s…
/r/MensRights01/07/15 04:44 PM
3

I didn't downvote you, but there would have been no reason to suspect the man was in any "danger" in the first place. The daycare wasn't open, and it was night time when there wouldn't have been kids around even if it was open.
/r/MensRights27/06/15 04:05 AM
2

My mother has made similar comments. We went to one of the natural springs in my area, with a swimming hole and a lot of beautiful scenery. Some guy was taking pictures, and she was deeply concerned that a man had a camera in public where there were kids in bathing suits. She spent the whole trip stalking this guy, convinced he was a pedophile. And that is not the only time I've heard comments like that from my mother, from strangers, from friends and acquaintances.
/r/MensRights27/06/15 04:00 AM
5

The behavior of left wing pundits and public figures when it comes to feminist pandering and men's issues is deplorable. There is no excuse for it, and it's never incorrect to point out how awful that is. However, that reflects exactly zero on whether or not I agree with left wing policies on everything but their pandering to women. So, while it disgusts me, I'm not about to run to the right on any other political consideration just because I disagree with the majority of progressives when it co…
/r/MensRights22/06/15 06:54 PM
5

It's sad. I really like John Oliver, but he's turning into the biggest white knight. So gynocentric that it makes me vomit in my mouth a little. This is a too common occurrence when you replace "John Oliver" with any number of otherwise intelligent, witty, entertaining and also left leaning figures. And it pisses me off more than it probably should.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 06:34 PM
5

They can lead our adventures as well, if they want. Nothing stopping a girl from acting in adventurous, leadership-minded ways. And they should be encouraged to do that if they want to. This image is about discouraging these behaviors in boys, though, and how maybe we shouldn't be so quick to do that.
/r/MensRights21/06/15 01:47 AM
4

Hi, I'm going to give benefit of doubt here and assume your comment is true, even though some are calling bullshit. Whether you actually know them is beside my point anyway. I'm going to use your comment to get to the core of the actual rights issues I think MRAs should care about by applying some extreme benefit of doubt in her favor to this case. She doesn't really deserve that benefit given the history of this case, but for the sake of this comment. Let's assume she was raped exactly as descr…
/r/MensRights07/06/15 02:25 PM
2

As far as I can tell, they are more or less the only comments that get removed from here, and they only get that treatment because of the long history of spamming that same shit over and over and over.
/r/MensRights06/06/15 11:04 PM
3

I wonder if they actually get any traffic from spamming that image.
/r/MensRights06/06/15 09:31 PM
4

You can just hear how little they care, can't you? Their lack of caring burns in their souls and drives them to loudly shout down those things they don't care about.
/r/MensRights06/06/15 06:29 PM
2

What happens in the video is rape. It starts out clearly consensual, but as things progress she tells him to stop, repeatedly, and starts crying when he holds her down and continues. Then he inexplicably leaves without putting his clothes on. (By the way, given her history the guy in the video must have been insane to agree to create a video like that, which out of context could be seen as video evidence of rape.)
/r/MensRights06/06/15 02:47 AM
11

It's bait. For attention, particularly negative attention that she can use to get... even more attention. If people "objectify" her by passing the video around, talking about it, laughing at it, and treating it as porn instead of art, she gets to point and accuse the world of not taking her rape story seriously, and victimizing her again. It's like, sitting there bent over with your bare ass out with a sign "please spank me I'm a naughty girl!" ... and then crying sexual assault when somebody wa…
/r/MensRights05/06/15 04:07 PM
1

A lot of feminists would actually like you to be correct, and pandering politicians are not eager to disappoint them. The political alliance is a thing. But that doesn't mean feminism itself is a necessary part of a liberal platform. There are a lot of liberals who loathe the marriage of left wing politics and feminist ideology, just as there are a lot of conservatives who loathe the marriage of right wing politics and evangelical Christianity.
/r/MensRights05/06/15 01:00 AM
6

What can you say to someone to stop them taking their own life? To get real about it, not much. It's more about having somebody actually be there, and while strangers can fill that role, it's better if it's somebody closer than that, a friend, some family, showing some actual love and support. The presence of that support is more important than the words used when providing it.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:15 PM
5

A teenage girl sleeping with 30 years old man, is considered lucky by her friends, just as much as teenage boy sleeping with 30 years old woman. I don't think that's the case. We socialize boys and girls to approach sex differently, and I imagine the teenage girl is far more likely to have at least some of her friends consider it rape and not "you're so lucky!" material. Even if he's the "hot teacher" that all the girls talk about (and they do). My experience in classrooms is that the girls will…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:10 PM
8

It's more about removing the double standards that say it's a special kind of evil when a male teacher does it, yet we come up with all kinds of mitigating factors to explain why a female teacher does it. Also, when it comes to teachers, you have the added student-teacher relationship making any sexual relationship more questionable.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:04 PM
1

Courts should be allowed to decide that somebody was too drunk to provide consent. But it shouldn't be an assumption. Demonstrate it, damnit. That's the whole point of the court. Edit: /u/away654321 cites the actual report, and it reads like they would still have to demonstrate that the intoxication was at a level that removed the ability to consent. So it looks like they would actually have to demonstrate it.
/r/MensRights03/06/15 02:33 PM
22

I'm expecting more verbal scuffles with political allies as we get closer to the 2016 election season. Being a somewhat far left leaning individual who also has problems with the modern feminist movement can put you in a strange box where everybody hates you. Look at the bottom of the comments here. A good number of MRAs will get on your case for being on the left, and meanwhile a lot of people on the left will assume you're a right winger if they find out you associate with MRAs. And you get to…
/r/MensRights01/06/15 02:45 AM
1

I have a few big problems with this kind of awareness raising. First, it's based in falsehoods, making it straight up propaganda with no merit. It's raising awareness of something that isn't true, and they would know it isn't true with even a minimum of actual research. They could try to move the goalpost and say it's about the "earnings gap" instead, but the structure of the message suggests otherwise. But the bake sale does succeed in raising awareness of something else, in my opinion. When yo…
/r/MensRights31/05/15 03:43 PM
5

Three different accounts swarming this one, yeesh. Correction after a few hours later it's at least five.
/r/MensRights30/05/15 05:30 PM
44

The presented article is a study on the experiences of male victims specifically, and it's cited heavily with research on the domestic violence victims and perpetrators of both genders. Most of the article is a simple stating of what the research shows. It's not propaganda by any means. Edit: Reading the article more closely. The exact statistic you are looking for isn't in the article because the relevant section is dealing with male victims specifically, and the citation is a survey on male do…
/r/MensRights30/05/15 03:13 PM
96

For anybody who might not be aware, which... now that I think about it is probably not many on this sub. TIL is notorious for this shit. They dominate /r/undelete some days and remove things that might create drama in comment sections even if they don't violate the rules. Then they flair the post referencing one of their rules without really explaining how it's broken them. If it might get people arguing about feminism, it's probably going to be gone from there sooner or later.
/r/MensRights30/05/15 01:29 PM
1

When I was reading the OP, I was hoping they would make exactly these points in response to her statistics.
/r/MensRights29/05/15 04:54 PM
7

I'm just glad it doesn't appear to be a joke in the movie, which would be par for the course historically when it comes to male victims.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 12:15 AM
-2

I agree, and that's why the posters put me off.
/r/MensRights21/05/15 04:35 AM
0

Sorry, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth about it. Some people do make that argument, and when they do it's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights21/05/15 04:31 AM
12

The posters actually put me off a bit. I don't like them (as a matter of personal preference in messaging). But I also recognize that the message they are sending is valid. If she can publicly name and shame him as a rapist in a sustained, highly visible campaign, then a few posters calling her a liar are nothing in comparison. You can't speak up for her right to do the former, without also recognizing the right for the latter to happen.
/r/MensRights21/05/15 04:06 AM
12

Sometimes it is your duty to disobey an unjust law, or in this case, an unjust court order, particularly if you are doing so to stand up for the immediate, physical human rights of another. That doesn't mean you're wrong, she willingly disobeyed a court order, and she should expect to be jailed for it. But it was also the right thing to do, and continuing to fight it by any means she has at her disposal is also the right thing to do.
/r/MensRights21/05/15 04:01 AM
4

That doesn't mean it had no effect, though. And even then, it's a horrible argument to say that because there's no conscious memory, that it was okay. You could use the same argument to justify all manner of abuse on the basis of it leaving no lasting memory.
/r/MensRights21/05/15 03:58 AM
2

While hellowayer offers some counterpoint worthy of considering, I've basically agreed with your comment ever since I heard about this case a while back. While I completely support his right to due process, and hope that new evidence gets proper consideration, this guy is not a horse I'm comfortable hitching my whole wagon to.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 11:33 PM
2

Because feminism is correct by assumption in their current paradigm, and paradigms like that are hard to change. When it comes to politics a lot of it is pandering and trying to stay on the right side of loud special interests. It's also a divisive strategy that lets them paint the other side as "against women" or "against equality" and so forth. I'm somewhat far left politically when it comes to everything but their handling of feminism.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 09:08 PM
6

I don't disagree with the ruling stated in the title.
/r/MensRights12/05/15 10:46 PM
1

When I see a title like this, and having heard this story before, I tend to think the problem wasn't just having an all female workplace. It was her management. edit: Oh, I see somebody already got to the heart of it better, Yup. This isn't "Women can't run a business properly" This is "Sexism is a bad policy"
/r/MensRights03/05/15 03:33 PM
0

What's missing that makes it seem fishy is context. I don't mean these quotes are not anti-science. They're ridiculous even in context. What I mean is that she's coming from a perspective that assumes "scientific" statistics about rape are misleading. The same perspective that looks at a school reporting a very low number of sexual assault cases, and concludes that the school must be covering up all the rape. She also probably considers rape to be a crime that doesn't leave a lot of "scientific"…
/r/MensRights28/04/15 02:12 PM
-1

Parental rights are pretty big. I just don't think this particular statistic is a good example of a "men's rights" issue when it comes to parental rights.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 10:07 PM
-3

No, I don't. I think the courts should be able to force a woman to stop abusing her child, but I don't think it should be a matter of a father dictating it to the mother. It's a matter of the courts stepping in to stop abuse. And where you draw the line isn't clear.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 10:02 PM
1

In regard to this case, none that isn't already adequately covered by the right of the baby not to be born fucked up from substance abuse.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 08:53 PM
6

This is a stretch for qualifying it as a men's rights issue. It's an issue worth discussing and addressing, but it's an issue that affects both genders and not an example of men lacking in rights. I'm less concerned about the father's right to a healthy child, and more concerned about the child's right to be born healthy, and not abused before it's even out of the womb. From that perspective, it's a human rights issue and a "woman's health" issue because it's the women who carry the child, but n…
/r/MensRights27/04/15 08:34 PM
11

Color me confused as well. "Some women do bad things" is not a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 02:31 PM
1

I find it wholesomely weird to be concern about your dick outside of sex. Sex would be the sole reason for the complex.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 05:28 PM
1

I can see developing a complex about it if I felt I was well below average. I'm not, though, so I can't really be sure. I don't care that some guys have a bigger dong than I do. I'm actually glad that I'm not huge, because I've heard numerous stories of how that can get in the way of good sex. I prefer to be "just right" for my wife, which is what I seem to be.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 04:59 PM
6

And why not? Because it's cheating? If they don't want a monogamous relationship, then they shouldn't be entering into them.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 10:51 PM
6

It shows that drunken sex, with many different partners, falls into her normal pattern of behavior. In that sense it's helpful to him. But I do agree with you, it doesn't hurt her case to have her stating to him, on record, that a guy shouldn't be having sex with a blackout drunk girl. That helps her case more than it helps his.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 02:38 PM
9

do you think the opposition will be brave enough to point out she's incorrect? That depends on who you mean. The actual candidates opposing her, during a debate? Maybe not, at least not bluntly. Political opponents in the media, on websites and talk radio and mailing lists and well, anywhere else you can think of? I'm sure they will.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 02:35 PM
2

She has also stated that when she originally started the process of obtaining a booth, they weren't completely decided on what to do with it. The only sure thing was that her comic was going to be promoted as part of it. By the time the event actually took place, though, there should have been no mistaking what the booth was for, the expo had been notified in multiple ways, and being unaware on their part could only be their own incompetence.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 01:50 AM
7

Would you object if I said 'whites are bad because they oppress blacks,' or 'Anglos are bad because they oppress Latinos,' or 'rich people are bad because they oppress the poor'? How about.. "Whites are defective, and whiteness is a disorder, because white people have oppressed blacks." ... still sound peachy?
/r/MensRights17/04/15 10:42 PM
6

Yeah, he's all over the place. Unfortunately he's one of those people who is occasionally right, but for the wrong reasons. I agree with him on more things than I disagree with him on, but that's just incidental to why I really don't like him.
/r/MensRights17/04/15 02:48 PM
8

The only reason I'm for calling this a "sexual assault" is the double standard. I can be okay with calling it sexual assault anyway, if we can be explicit that this means there exists a wide spectrum of behaviors that fall under that category, some of which aren't really worth legal attention.
/r/MensRights17/04/15 03:16 AM
2

Blame the rapists, or anybody actively encouraging them. And for everybody else, blame the bystander effect. Most people have a strong aversion to being that one person who steps out of a crowd to help, or even worse, condemn the crowd itself. It's a survival instinct, I think, and I can't blame any individual bystander for not stepping in. edit: As an afterthought here. I reject the idea that we have a "rape culture" that encourages rape. But there is a college party culture that, as one should…
/r/MensRights17/04/15 03:02 AM
-1

I don't think the the MRM should (or does) deny or downplay just how different some experiences are for women, attractive women in particular. Online dating is one area that men and women have such vastly different experiences it's hard to even think of it as the same activity. Another example the comes to mind is the askreddit thread about girls first noticing male attention. Where I really break from the feminist narrative on all of this comes down to what these differences imply, and what sho…
/r/MensRights15/04/15 03:27 PM
1

As I understand it, the intent of the event is for men to walk, Women who choose to walk are just extra support. That may be their justification, not that it would make it right.
/r/MensRights11/04/15 11:18 PM
7

Are you saying that felony charges are appropriate, because his actions could have gotten a teacher in trouble? I'm genuinely curious because you didn't actually say that, but the context of your question somewhat suggests it.
/r/MensRights11/04/15 10:38 PM
2

I like this picture. I think it's a really good example of my big problem with how we talk about these issues in education. We're so worried about the girls that the boys are invisible. They're only mentioned at all when contrasting their performance with the girls. And even when the girls are doing better, the conclusion is either to praise that situation, or talk about how we can take advantage of it to make the girls even better off still.
/r/MensRights11/04/15 07:55 PM
0

I'm nitpicking here, and I know it, but I would rather the headline "some people" instead of "some men" see injustice, because it's not just men that have that view. Makes it easier to frame it as a gender fight when it's "men" fighting against it, instead of men and women.
/r/MensRights11/04/15 07:51 PM
1

What sucks is that the point the EVAWI is trying to make does have a tiny grain of truth to it. Those red flags shouldn't stop investigators from completing their investigation and taking the accusation seriously for the duration. But they should certainly stop the investigation from resulting in a conviction unless there is some other good evidence to present that renders them irrelevant. And that grain of truth is not only lost, but completely perverted when they argue for throwing out due pro…
/r/MensRights08/04/15 04:28 PM
4

I saw this submission yesterday and had an "eh, not so sure this is the right horse to back" kind of reaction about this case. The media should treat him as presumably innocent and report the facts, while keeping names out of it. And false accusations, or worse outright frame jobs should have heavy consequences. That said, I think there's a difference from treating the case as unproven, and acting as though he's decidedly innocent just because some of these girls behaved poorly on facebook. Eigh…
/r/MensRights08/04/15 03:36 PM
1

Ultimately, 17 year olds are perfectly capable of consenting. They're also perfectly capable of being taken advantage of. The fact that she's the adult in a position of authority over them for at least part of their day matters a bit. But all of that aside, the double standard when it comes to how people react to this stuff is the important bit, as well as how people dismiss even the possibility that a male student could have been taken advantage of.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 07:01 AM
2

Given how the whole scuffle over the gamergate article was reported, I'm prone to suspect that the examples of "bullying" they refer to are stuff like that. Horribly biased and obsessed editors getting handled in arbitration after months of bad behavior.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 12:18 AM
2

Its infantalizing for us to keep assuming that women don't understand basic risk management, while we have some inherent ability to that they don't. That would be so. That's not my read on most of those comments, though. Attitudes about this are really varied, in the end. Bad and good, and everywhere in between, on both sides.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 05:52 PM
1

All I'm saying is if you are throwing your bare naked body at a mans drunk ass dick you are asking for it and have to right to claim you were raped. I'm going to assume you mean "no right" here, because I can't think of how else this sentence makes sense. It's such a sticky situation, because a girl who gets drunk, goes home with a guy and is raped really shouldn't be denied the voice to speak out about it, and seek justice for it. Even if a girl is thinking about having sex with a guy, even if …
/r/MensRights09/03/15 05:49 PM
2

, mra's for some bizarre reason give out rape prevention advice stressing how women bear responsibility if they do x, y or z. I know what kind of thing you're referring to, and I'm no fan of those kinds of comments. But, I think I have a slightly different read on where those comments are coming from. It's more reactionary than prescriptive, in my opinion. It's a reaction to feminists trying to place blame and responsibility on all men, including bystanders, to the extent that it basically infan…
/r/MensRights09/03/15 05:27 PM
2

I've seen it suggested but not outright stated, and only by the most bigoted, slimy assholes. The attitude isn't completely nonexistent, particularly in some different cultures. Unfortunately, to some black and white thinking feminists, almost anything that isn't their exact ideological line is equivalent to saying she deserved it.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 05:18 PM
8

Kinda a huge flaw on the Whitehouse website if you ask me If that's really the limit of the text you can include in the petition, I agree.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 07:13 PM
33

Yep. The petition needs to include in detail where the cuts are occurring and in what context. In political speak "cut funding" can mean a whole lot of different things. Kind of like "voted to raise taxes" can mean a whole lot of different things. I'd like to see what this is actually referring to before I get any anger up about it.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 06:58 PM
2

To me it reads like a whole lot of after-the-fact rationalization justifying the culture they've created and become attached to.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:56 PM
3

I'd love to see more left leaning sources discussing this stuff. It's very useful to me because those sources are more likely to be given a charitable read by the people I'm most likely to actually discuss this stuff with. If I link to to a really good article from a right-wing outlet it might just be ignored. But if it's coming from socialists? Maybe not.
/r/MensRights27/02/15 01:28 AM
3

And that data needs to be published and referenced by somebody they consider a reliable source. And even then they'll probably find some way to consider the sourcing invalid.
/r/MensRights27/02/15 01:22 AM
9

Granted, a majority of circumcisions ARE done on unknowing children, but I just don't want to put words in planned parenthood's mouth; they never stated they support that infant circumcision. Calling it a majority is grossly understating it. It's a large enough majority that any discussion of covering circumcision that doesn't specifically exclude infant circumcision must be considered a discussion about infant circumcision. Other cases are the exception, infant circumcision is the standard.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 10:09 PM
9

I feel like we shouldn't impinge upon the right for parents to make medical decisions for their children This particular bill isn't about banning the procedure. Rather, it's dropping medicaid funding because the procedure is elective. Also, the benefits of circumcision are strongly contested, so many people (including myself) will disagree with you there.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 06:06 PM
3

Other than this article covering the issue, is Planned Parenthood doing any actual advocacy to oppose the bill? I like planned parenthood, and if this article is the extent of their opposition I can look past that with a mere shake of my head. But if they are doing more to support routine circumcision that would be another matter.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 06:04 PM
9

I think they would turn regardless. They would just do it with more flair and buzzwords for a white male.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 09:04 PM
5

It's awesome when good Dads get recognition. But at the same time, it's also disheartening that something as basic as this is considered so remarkable.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 01:11 PM
5

And some individuals display it worse than others, such as when the worst motivations are assumed about a high school/college student based on nothing more than the title of the subreddit they've posted in.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 11:08 PM
12

They you're admitting a bias.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 06:27 PM
3

Memo: I still consider myself left wing, but feminism and marxism are so deeply intertwined I consider it extreme left wing ideology. I get you, but coming from the left myself I don't particularly like this phrasing. They are extreme, and they are left, but calling them "extreme left" makes it sound like they are the most left lefties out there. I don't view them that way. I've used the phrase "feminist left" or "extreme feminist left" before. That lets you know that they are extremists from a …
/r/MensRights10/02/15 06:24 PM
13

What a juvenile joke. Or, they also actually care about victims of domestic violence. The expected reaction isn't really the point, and even if it were for the OP, the poster still has a good message. And if they were expecting the woman in charge to react unprofessionally to it (and it wouldn't be unheard of), having a record of it is a good idea.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 06:09 PM
5

Because women and men tend to display symptoms differently. Heart disease affects men and women differently, but most of our public consciousness about it was mostly on the male side of things. Stuff like Go Red is meant to raise awareness that yes, women get heart attacks and should be concerned about their heart health.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 09:19 PM
10

There were good reasons to raise awareness of women's heart health. Currently, I'm not sure that's still needed. These campaigns have been around for decades, I think people have the message. I don't mind the Go Red for Women day at all, though. What concerns me is that we've focused so much on women's heart disease that we're getting no messages about men's heart health anymore. I wonder how the currently upcoming generation views heart disease, and if they see it as more of a concern for women…
/r/MensRights08/02/15 05:44 PM
1

I hardly ever post on facebook to begin with. When I bring up any MRA issues it's because I'm responding to something posted by somebody else, usually making a factual correction on some bullshit.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:36 PM
2

The good news is that it's not actually part of a curriculum being forced on anybody. Teachers have to actually pick it up as a good idea and use it, which could very well happen, but isn't guaranteed.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:28 PM
5

None of the statistics on this page speak to what you're trying to assert. Other people are addressing those statistics in reply to you, but there are also other conversations about rape statistics going on in this thread if you look. Men in prison are far more likely to be raped the women who aren't in prison.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 02:12 AM
25

Their fear might be just as high, but the statistics aren't even close.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 06:50 PM
1

It'd like to see a study of some kind done where people of various age groups are asked about heart disease, specifically which gender is more at risk, and also what one should do to stay heart healthy. Because it seems to me like we've been decades now with most of the messages we get about heart disease being about women. I wouldn't be surprised if the younger generation thought it was a primarily female concern. The "conventional wisdom" that heart attacks are a man thing... I'm really curiou…
/r/MensRights05/02/15 01:30 AM
1

I don't really mean she should have conceded anything, or bowed to his demands to thank feminism. More that I wish she would have headed that whole line of argument off at the pass before it had a chance to take place at all. I do agree he was being an irrational asshole, and that should be obvious to anybody with an objective view of the exchange.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 01:18 AM
2

Yeah, I definitely feel like people are completely missing the point I was making.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 01:05 AM
0

You're completely missing my point, and what a "not guilty" determination means. I'm saying this: If a court fails to convict somebody, or fails to pursue an investigation, that does not imply that the person did not commit a crime. If I rob a store, and I'm never prosecuted for it, then I still robbed the store. If I rape a girl, but I'm never prosecuted for it, then I still raped a girl. However, and I've said this a few times here even though the people downvoting and responding to me are app…
/r/MensRights05/02/15 01:03 AM
11

It certainly is, that's why I mentioned it. The people who seem to think this guy should be convicted under this circumstance are insane.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 05:00 PM
-4

I'm not demanding anything. I'm pointing out that being found "not guilty" in itself doesn't imply that he was innocent, which is what you asserted in the comment I replied to.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 04:57 PM
-3

Why are you so afraid to admit that a man was innocent? Because that's knowledge I don't have. A lot of men are clearly innocent. This guy shouldn't be held legally accountable for anything in this case. But that doesn't change how those words "not guilty" work in a legal sense.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 03:53 PM
1

Not really. "Not guilty" in a court (or disciplinary panel) doesn't necessarily mean "innocent" of the charges. It just means there wasn't enough evidence to take action. In a lot of cases that's because the accused is just plain innocent. Occasionally not, though. (edit: Of course, it does mean that the media and the uninvolved public should leave the guy alone and treat him as presumably innocent unless there is damn good reason to do otherwise.)
/r/MensRights04/02/15 03:50 PM
40

I haven't gone too in depth into all of the details of her case, but I've certainly picked up the key points. Using her as the face for rape survivors who don't find justice is really telling and disturbing. Even if her account was true. Even if they guy did turn their consensual sex into a violent anal rape. And I say that because there's literally no evidence of the crime beyond her saying it happened, and there is plenty of evidence that she continued to be friendly with him after the fact. U…
/r/MensRights04/02/15 03:27 PM
19

I find myself wishing Karen would insert some more caveats into her points given the audience she's speaking to. Particularly when discussing the history of feminism. She goes to great length to point out that the actual history of suffrage and property rights isn't as cut and dry as the liberation narrative would have us believe. But she does it without indicating that the giving everybody right to vote, for example, was actually a good thing. Of course I don't think she's against the right to …
/r/MensRights04/02/15 03:14 AM
6

he wasn't even trying He might not have felt much compulsion to try, similar to how somebody interviewing a young earth creationist might not feel like they have to try. Her views are so backward from his point of view that he doesn't feel the need to do any work to properly respond to them.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 02:38 AM
1

I rolled my eyes at the commercial, but I didn't find it particularly offensive. There are good arguments out there against the message, of course.
/r/MensRights03/02/15 03:01 PM
2

This ad doesn't infuriate me. But I do find it worth mention. If I had a twitter account I might have tweeted about it when I saw it, because it was noteworthy. I guess that makes me a crybaby to these people.
/r/MensRights03/02/15 02:53 PM
13

Anybody familiar with the gamergate controversy page on wikipedia knows this is really all bullshit, though. A small handful of really aggressive anti-gamergate editors are being sanctioned, probably, for some really bad conduct. But an even larger number of neutral or pro-gamergate editors are being sanctioned for trying to fight against the conduct of the first, smaller group. The arbcom group is just cleansing the drama by topic-banning almost everybody involved, from both sides. Only the mos…
/r/MensRights25/01/15 07:09 AM
10

One way I like to put this -- MRAs are about men's rights. Trans men are men. This isn't a Transgender Rights movement, but a Men's Rights movement. So you won't see many MRAs specifically focusing on transgender issues. But you will see focus on men's issues that will also affect transgender men because they are men. Beyond that, a particular position on transgender issues is not going to be a litmus test for being an MRA.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 06:19 AM
5

I was the only male in my graduating class, as a major in mathematics education.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 12:14 AM
1

I don't have a handy citation, but it wouldn't surprise me to find this happening in Europe, or even the US. When stuff like this happens in Europe or the US it's done in a strongly religious, usually immigrant family or tight knit immigrant community. The kind of environment where their culture really can't be said to reflect in any way on the culture of the country they are in.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 05:10 AM
5

Ah, it's Arthur Chu. This guy has a really special view of the world. Everything I've seen from him has been borderline psychotic. He's a paranoid master of projection.
/r/MensRights10/01/15 07:20 PM
1

I find politifact is notorious for this. They give a "mostly" ruling or even "half" ruling on things that are really black and white facts. So I always read the ruling. I usually, but not always, come out not disagreeing with the write up even if I disagree with the categorization. (This write up in particular is giving too much weight to debunked statistics, just because they are "debated" by policymakers.)
/r/MensRights06/01/15 01:28 AM
1

In my opinion, it's putting the narrative and perceived consequences ahead of facts. If we give weight to the idea that a given woman might be lying about a rape, then that might make it harder to convict people of rape. And it's more important to convict people of rape than it is to have those facts in the light. There's a desperation to ease the pain of rape victims. Everything must be done to make it easier for victims to get their rapists prosecuted. And that goal outweighs everything else. …
/r/MensRights02/01/15 03:57 AM
1

Fair enough. I'm speaking from experience having signed one of those contracts.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 06:20 AM
4

The contract probably allows them to fire him basically for "appearances" for lack of a better word. For example, if photos come out of you doing a keg stand at a private party, you can be fired for that.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 06:01 AM
1

I'm with them on this one. It's a really sticky issue, though. Allowing a woman to abort without the fathers consent can cause some really troublesome situations. But requiring the father's consent can cause completely different troublesome situations. And I'm more averse to the latter cases, particularly from a legal perspective.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 06:31 AM
10

This is an excellent illustration of a concept a lot of people don't get when it comes to gender in online communities. Thanks for providing it.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 01:43 AM
18

I don't care much about this. It's just pandering as usual. But I don't get why this is being celebrated as if it's some great achievement for women. It's not like women have been invisible at these press conferences in the past.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 02:05 PM
1

The person you're replying to.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 05:34 AM
2

In the end, it doesn't matter what their history is in this movement or any other. You're debating their statements here and now, and here and now they are an asshole, and apparently they think being that kind of asshole is part of being a man. I can't disagree with that more.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 05:32 AM
3

Guys like this are allies with somebody like me on a number of MRM issues, but their worldview certainly doesn't seem to jive with mine very much beyond that.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 05:29 AM
2

If I ever make it far in Democratic Party politics, you’ll have an MRA speaking to the leaders of the party. Late to the conversation, but I wanted to say thank you for this. You are needed.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 05:15 AM
1

More likely they'll just say "no shit" and call it a reflection of patriarchal norms.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 01:51 AM
1

Only three times?
/r/MensRights15/12/14 01:41 AM
6

Gamergate people actually tracked down one individual who was making threats and forwarded the information to Anita so she could go to law enforcement... and she's apparently done nothing with it.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 05:39 PM
3

Coming from the left I can't disagree with this rant. The comment nails exactly how furious I've been at the American political left wing when it comes to gender and rape. And I've taken to telling the Democrats this often in response to their requests for donations. If we focused more on actual policy instead of gender warring and pandering to women, I'd jump for joy.
/r/MensRights06/12/14 10:37 PM
2

That's my point, actually. Sometimes people from the West don't notice this if the character isn't very realistically modeled, because they become a "default person" that we assume is white because their skin isn't dark and the stereotypical "Asian" features aren't exaggerated. Ever seen somebody ask why Japanese people make "white" cartoon characters? I have, even though it's completely obvious to me that the characters are Asian.
/r/MensRights06/12/14 10:54 AM
3

Seeing a lot of different outlets report this. I think that's because those media outlets love pointing out when another publication messes up. If that angle wasn't there, we'd probably not be hearing much about it.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 11:50 PM
3

Eh, it's a lot of other things before it is this. Although that's in there. Mostly, it's this, as identified by FlyingSkyWizard: White men are the default person (in western society), if you look at a stick figure you unconsciously assume its a white male, in order to draw a black man you'd have to shade in the head, to draw a woman, you'd have to draw a dress etc. And there are a lot of reasons why that is true in turn. In fact, some of the historically "white male" video game characters are pr…
/r/MensRights05/12/14 11:41 PM
2

I'm not saying the removals were justified. Rather, this appears to me to be where the moderators were coming from. (Some subreddits will nuke an entire thread the moment it is linked somewhere else that has even the potential of causing drama or brigading.)
/r/MensRights28/11/14 12:41 AM
2

I've had to correct women on this, which makes me facepalm. But what makes me want to facepalm so hard I get a concussion is the number of men I've seen express this view.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:20 PM
3

The comments weren't removed because they were breaking any rules or being offensive. They were likely removed because of people brigading, and removing the months old conversation was just to take material away from the brigaders. Nuking the comments is not seen as a big deal because they are months old. Nuking entire threads is a common, if controversial tactic by mods.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:17 PM
2

You're free to be against the dole, but that doesn't change the facts of the system or the statistics about who actually collects. Anecdotal evidence about your sister (coloured by your perception that nobody deserves to collect to begin with) doesn't really describe the reality of what it's like to get disability for most people. My own family experience, in contrast, has been exactly the opposite of yours. I've watched loved ones wait years trying to jump through all the right hoops while the …
/r/MensRights16/11/14 04:44 AM
2

No, we don't. You might not feel that you do, personally. But a whole fuckton of people actually do. Some dishonest people can get disability without deserving it. But a lot of people who really qualify have to go through years of shit before actually getting any benefits, because the system is designed to wear you down until you give up if you aren't in serious need.
/r/MensRights16/11/14 04:26 AM
2

Did you try reposting with a different title? The title is phrased as a yes or no question, even if any decent answer would obviously have more than that.
/r/MensRights15/11/14 04:43 PM
5

I like the part where you provide several well cited links expanding on your argument, so she called you uneducated and gave you a single, poorly supported link and demanded you do the rest of the research yourself.
/r/MensRights13/11/14 02:44 AM
18

Gender plays a part, but not so large a part that we should find such an extreme double standard acceptable.
/r/MensRights09/11/14 04:09 PM
1

The word certainly gets abused to vilify male attention. Given that, in this context perhaps I should choose a different word. But I'm certainly intending to describe a subjective feeling that a situation creates. I'm not trying to define any act or person as objectively "creepy" by using the word.
/r/MensRights09/11/14 04:08 PM
4

Even if you see her as really attractive, and she's the kind of woman you go home and spank it to, getting hit on as a 15 year old by somebody you know shouldn't normally be hitting on a 15 year old is creepy and just doesn't feel right. I've never had a hot older woman actually flat out try to seduce me, but I've been on the other end of some uncomfortably positive attention, and the last thing going through my mind was how lucky I was.
/r/MensRights09/11/14 03:54 PM
37

If you flipped the genders, would you be as likely to question how wrong it is? You can argue that he's sexually mature and capable of making his own decisions. As other comments have pointed out this can be perfectly legal (providing alcohol to a minor aside) depending on the age of consent. That can be an interesting and worthwhile discussion. But that discussion aside, most people would consider this "wrong" if the genders were reversed without too much thought into it. The double standard is…
/r/MensRights09/11/14 03:48 PM
3

I knew a lot of people who sexualized Daniel Radcliffe's portrayal of Harry while he was a teenager. The difference in how the public handles male and female sexuality does create a double standard though. When we sexualize a young woman it tends to be more visual and open, and even when the sexualization of young men is similarly open it's often largely ignored in our public consciousness.
/r/MensRights02/11/14 01:32 AM
2

It's.. difficult all around, as I understand. You say you've visited some of these areas, and under the assumption that your visit was related to some form of aid work you've got a great deal of respect from me for that.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 06:41 PM
35

The media tells them that the wage gap is huge and women are oppressed in the work force -> A survey asks if they think the wage gap is huge, they repeat what the media has told them -> the media reports that yes, the wage gap is huge, based on that survey.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 03:52 PM
9

I've seen some counterpoints to this around, one for example on this page. Three studies in Africa several years ago that claimed that circumcision prevented AIDS and that circumcision was as effective as a 60% effective vaccine (Auvert 2005, 2006). These studies had many flaws, including that they were stopped before all the results came in. There have also been several studies that show that circumcision does not prevent HIV (Connolly 2008). This page does acknowledge the decreased risk for me…
/r/MensRights01/11/14 03:43 PM
0

I think his character could have been a better parody of how people perceive a "conservative gamergate supporter" but eh, it wasn't so bad. Maybe it's easier for me to imagine a hard hitting parody of gamergate because I'm so familiar with it. He could have called her out on completely misrepresenting what gamergate is while staying in character (I've seen him do similar things before with other guests), but it's a comedy show and not meant to be a hard hitting interview. Edit: Image if, after s…
/r/MensRights30/10/14 01:36 PM
7

I'm not overly mad that he was victimized from his perspective, but I do think her actions are extremely unprofessional and worth consequences. And if she's committed statutory rape she should be prosecuted just like anybody else would. She shouldn't get a pass on the law or her serious breach of professional ethics just because she's a "hot teacher" and we assume the boy wanted it. I am mad that the same people commenting in the image would probably crucify a male teacher with the same headline…
/r/MensRights30/10/14 01:20 PM
25

The entire media response to gamergate has been ridiculously one sided, particularly from the left. This isn't the first media appearance she's made about gamergate and harassment. One thing that ticks people off about her is how the media kisses her ass, lets her say whatever bullshit she wants, and instead of asking her tough questions about it they pout sympathetically and tell her how awful it is that she's been harassed.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 04:40 AM
3

Speaking generally, people say a lot of things that I consider obnoxious, and I wish they wouldn't say. But I'm not of mind to police the language other people use. Being obnoxious and annoying is something I disapprove of. Some of those comments I would consider obnoxious and annoying. But am I going to advocate doing anything specific to stop it, other than saying "yeah, that's obnoxious" ...? not really. Let me ask you, what course of action do you think we should take to stop this massive pr…
/r/MensRights29/10/14 04:46 AM
6

That won't be a productive task. It's not a black or white thing. People communicate with everything they do. Their body language, their clothing, their tone of voice, their proximity. Whether or not a comment is obnoxious depends highly on context. Some of those are clearly okay in most contexts. At least some of them are clearly crossing a line in most contexts. But I don't see how going through a list like this is going to be productive to an actual discussion of the issue. (And yes I'm aware…
/r/MensRights29/10/14 04:31 AM
6

Depends on what you mean by catcalling, and it depends on the context. Like I mentioned, a lot of what's in the video is hardly catcalling. It's just men greeting her and trying to be friendly. Are they doing it because she's attractive and dressed like she's putting herself out on the market? Sure. But they aren't being rude and obnoxious about it. Instead of condemning catcalling in general, I'd rather say I think people should try not to be utterly obnoxious in general. Some catcalls are comp…
/r/MensRights29/10/14 04:14 AM
7

My comment from another posting of this video: There's a lot of cultural context behind this. If you don't live in a big city and you don't know the culture on the streets, it can be hard to see the issue. It's validly annoying to be repeatedly, consistently hit on when you are just trying to walk from A to B. Some men are certainly obnoxious with catcalls, and they shouldn't be. But a lot of what gets called street harassment isn't obnoxious or harassing in any way. It only gets perceived as ha…
/r/MensRights29/10/14 03:55 AM
10

There's a lot of cultural context behind this. If you don't live in a big city and you don't know the culture on the streets, it can be hard to see the issue. It's validly annoying to be repeatedly, consistently hit on when you are just trying to walk from A to B. Some men are certainly obnoxious with catcalls, and they shouldn't be. But a lot of what gets called street harassment isn't obnoxious or harassing in any way. It only gets perceived as harassment because the 20 guys before you also sm…
/r/MensRights29/10/14 12:04 AM
4

Dress codes aren't that hard to follow. Girls who break the dress code usually know they are doing it, and they do it on purpose. Then play victim when you call them on it and enforce the rules. I have no sympathy for that.
/r/MensRights23/10/14 04:39 AM
4

I've got to give him props for just publishing the best counterpoints he received, in their entirety, and letting them stand on their own. Edit: .. okay so maybe not all of the counterpoint he ran was the "best" .. but take the bad with the good I suppose The nerds want the women to go away, because when the women go away, so will the alpha males.
/r/MensRights21/10/14 04:25 PM
3

I'm a registered Democrat who thinks its a good idea to have birth control options covered by insurance, for both genders. But I just want to punch right through the screen whenever I hear a pundit start in about the "war on women" instead of addressing the actual substance of the issue.
/r/MensRights21/10/14 04:21 PM
1

To be clear, Democrats are not necessarily opposed to legalizing OTC birth control, but rather they want to ensure women don’t have to pay for it. It sounds like they just want women to have a free ride without context, but they do raise a valid point that might be worth debating before making the change. A lot of effort was put into ensuring birth control would be covered by insurance. Making it an OTC medication could undo all of that by putting the pill into a new category. So, that's one out…
/r/MensRights21/10/14 03:55 PM
2

I agree. A lot of male teachers are really reluctant to enforce the dress code on girls. I understand why, but they need to suck it up and do it anyway. Being consistent is important, even if you risk having the girls call you a pervert for paying attention to their clothes.
/r/MensRights21/10/14 03:37 PM
6

No mention of the real reasons why most people have criticized her. Not surprising.
/r/MensRights21/10/14 01:37 AM
28

Not nearly as often as girls, because girls are far more likely to intentionally ignore the dress code. Most normal boy outfits are within most school dress codes, unless the kid has their ass hanging out. A huge number of outfits and fashions available for girls are in violation of most school dress codes. Girls want to be fashionable, and fashionable for them is a violation. The most common dress code violation for boys is hats. But they don't get sent home for wearing a stupid hat with the st…
/r/MensRights21/10/14 01:05 AM
3

I'm not following any particular recommendations, but this is close to my sentiment as well. I don't tend to vote based on gender issues alone. I'm much more concerned with the broader picture of their policies. I might vote "correctly" from an anti-feminist perspective if I make myself a single issue voter over this stuff. But as I do so I'll also be voting for politicians that I strongly disagree with on a long list of other issues. I very rarely find a candidate that doesn't have an issue I h…
/r/MensRights18/10/14 08:57 PM
6

Strange group of questions. Number 2 is ambiguous. I don't like questions that leave you wondering how your answer will be interpreted. If I say gamergate has gone too far I could be indicating either side of the issue is pushing things too far, or both. If I think one side is going too far, but wonder if the question is referring mostly to the other side, then I won't know how to answer that question because I don't want my response to be interpreted incorrectly. Anyway, good luck on the assign…
/r/MensRights18/10/14 08:49 PM
2

It's from a high school student, so consider it part of a learning process if that helps.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 08:47 PM
1

That's why I tend to take care how I present MRM issues when I do actually make an argument out in the wild. Lefties who also support men's rights can find themselves in a really awkward place. Yet, there are a lot of progressive who are on our side (and in this subreddit). Feminists who aren't very familiar with the MRM or anti-SJW side of the issues tend to assume that this is a movement motivated in part by conservative politics, and that makes it easier for them to dismiss it. Take the whole…
/r/MensRights14/10/14 08:39 PM
1

the modern Feminist movement is wholly funded and empowered by Democratic Party And this is infuriating. Progressives who disagree with this need to be louder about it.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 02:26 PM
8

Criticizes the Dems as a party over the "war on women" rhetoric and their treatment of feminist issues until you're blue in the face. As a registered Democrat I'll be right there next to you turning blue as well. What I will argue against is the suggestion that the MRM should be a political movement embracing conservative politics, or should be a "right versus left" battle.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 02:02 PM
2

Unfortunately, while I'm glad the opinion is being put up for fair discussion, I'm not a huge fan of the actual article. I've seen this position argued much more effectively.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 01:48 PM
26

She's calling out the most important and most blatant abuse of stats, while leaving a lot of the other numbers unquestioned. A step forward on one count while keeping the other foot dragging behind. I'd still count it as a positive sign. Calling out the other numbers requires a bit more depth and is a bigger "ask" when talking to people who aren't already of open mind to it.
/r/MensRights11/10/14 04:28 PM
2

Wow, I missed this. It does look like some suspicious vote activity there, as some comments have noted.
/r/MensRights10/10/14 05:47 AM
1

I don't think the story really belongs here, myself. Just attempting to explain how people can make the connection. It doesn't harm anybody to adjust your language, but coming in with the perception that "ladies and gentlemen" is potentially harmful to your students is a step too far, in my opinion. I don't think fostering that hyper-sensitive attitude is going to help students, and I can even see it potentially doing a bit of harm. Particularly if you explain that policy to students. It's contr…
/r/MensRights09/10/14 03:05 PM
5

It's not harmful in itself, it's just an indication of how hyper-sensitive the education environment is to inclusiveness issues and offending sensibilities. We go overboard with this stuff sometimes and hobble our teachers as a result. I wouldn't call this particular policy an MRA issue, in itself. But there is a hyper-vigilant inclusive culture in education. The idea of being vigilantly inclusive is okay by me, but a lot of the policies and attitudes that result are harming boys in education be…
/r/MensRights09/10/14 02:08 PM
2

I've been through the whole, sometimes bizarre world of inclusiveness training for teachers. You get some very strange suggestions coming from people on the extreme end of the issues. And occasionally they get implemented. As far as I know, most schools aren't going to care if you call your students "ladies and gentlemen" or "boys and girls" when you address the class (I always used the former, myself). But I'm not surprised that at least one school out there has a policy like this.
/r/MensRights09/10/14 01:57 PM
2

I'm re-reading that comment, and I don't see the perpetuation of these attitudes attributed to either women or men. There was no mention of where those attitudes come from. edit - You do add more to the picture, of course, by pointing out how men are viewed on the other side of this coin. My hangup was on why it would matter if more men than women perpetuated those stereotypes.
/r/MensRights04/10/14 09:48 PM
2

That are perpetuated largely by ..... men? Both men and women perpetuate this, but even if it were otherwise I don't see how it matters. MRAs in particular aren't out to perpetuate that stuff.
/r/MensRights04/10/14 09:39 PM
24

There's no room for nuance or context for some people. If you recognize that teenage girls might actually want sex and enjoy a relationship with an older man, then you're an apologist for sexual abuse. Even if you're not condoning the relationship in any way, but only adding some degree of appropriate context to how the relationship is viewed. In a case where the relationship was clearly mutual, consenting, and involved no coercion I wouldn't mind the "lucky guy" comments as much. I only mind th…
/r/MensRights03/10/14 05:43 PM
1

This has only gotten worse since I was in school, apparently. I look forward to the outrage when my daughter grows up a bit and I start having to deal with this kind of thing.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 08:56 PM
1

I'm confused, because your comment seems to suggest that having more male teachers is a bad idea. Do you not want more males in education? Or, are you posing a false choice between having more male teachers and also doing other things that will help young men?
/r/MensRights28/09/14 03:21 PM
4

If you see this Emma story out in the wild, make sure you point out that it's a hoax. Ask publications to update their articles or post corrections. A lot of people who have had their anger raised by this will never know that it was fake unless it's called out prominently. And if it gets called out prominently that's one more drop in the bucket to educate people on how these things work.
/r/MensRights24/09/14 01:35 PM
2

Not all rapists are Dahmer. A great deal of our morality is taught by experience. That said, the message doesn't have to be about rape specifically, but a wide range of shitty behavior.
/r/MensRights20/09/14 05:02 AM
13

I'm perfectly fine with this quote except that it's gendered. Change it a bit, and I'm almost all for it: "It is on parents to teach their children respect in our relationships," Mr. Obama said. "And it's on grown men and women to set an example and be clear about what it means to be a decent human being. It is on all of us to reject the quiet tolerance of sexual assault."
/r/MensRights19/09/14 11:39 PM
8

I've personally known a few lesbians, otherwise reasonable and nice people, who have a deep dislike for gay men. One in particular at least recognized her hypocrisy for what it was, but still couldn't get past it.
/r/MensRights19/09/14 11:35 PM
3

I'm okay with banning sex-selective abortions on principle, but I don't see how to properly enforce it without overstepping in ways I'm not comfortable with. I mean, even figuring it out later. Preventing doctors from telling parents the gender would be a rather extreme step that I'd only even consider if sex-selective abortions were actually a huge problem.
/r/MensRights13/09/14 05:52 PM
18

I think that womenhumans are often unaware of their own thoughts. They quite often lack a certain metacognitive skill. This is just one area where women display this tendency more than men, given the context.
/r/MensRights13/09/14 05:36 PM
1

It occurs to me that teachers have a greater opportunity for this kind of thing, but also perhaps a greater chance of being caught at it. And I wonder how many minors are in these kinds of "relationships" outside of schools, and the teachers are just the ones who are under enough scrutiny to get regularly caught at it.
/r/MensRights06/09/14 03:51 AM
4

Male teacher here. My experience with girls in the various classrooms I have been in confirms the concern in the title. Many girls look at male teachers with scrutiny to decide if they are perverts, and that's the mildest thing they do.
/r/MensRights23/07/14 05:17 PM
1

Both. We had a few discussions in various classes about the lack of male teachers and the implications of that. And the need for more male teachers. Then at the lunch tables the few males who were there, who weren't also uniquely unattractive, were sized up like meat with vividly described sexual fantasies. That latter part is beside the point entirely. I just thought it was interesting.
/r/MensRights20/07/14 04:47 AM
1

In my personal experience it's discussed in education major college classes, where 90 percent of the class are women and gender issues come up. Male teacher candidates were almost viewed as a rare commodity (and, a side note, the object of a lot of overt sexual discussion when the girls got together during lunch).
/r/MensRights20/07/14 04:00 AM
2

Light green are the states with restrictions.
/r/MensRights10/06/14 10:13 PM
5

Different states do this differently. A lot of states do require you to sign up to have a license. If you get your license before 18 you either agree to be automatically signed up when you turn 18, or you have to sign up when you renew or they won't let you renew it. Or, well who knows I'm not familiar with the laws in every state.
/r/MensRights10/06/14 08:36 PM
14

The guy who made this did that legwork and made another graphic with some of that info here. He was pleasantly surprised at how much this particular image took off, and somewhat regrets not squeezing more comprehensive information into it. But if he'd included more details it might not have exploded so much. Anyway, the main point here is that access to these things is not automatic for males. States are free to, and most do restrict some or all of these things unless you sign away your body. ed…
/r/MensRights10/06/14 08:24 PM
123

A female friend of mine was recently arrested on child abuse charges (neglect and endangerment). We found a local news article the next day that printed her mug shot, name, and address. They coupled that with an inaccurate article that painted her in the worst light possible. You'd think she was a monster if that article was all you had to go on. And they practically gave you the pitch forks and a map to her house. My friend, it turns out, deserved the arrest (my opinion). But the article was st…
/r/MensRights10/04/14 01:47 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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