TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

fia_bui Archive

View 3 posts and 2,084 comments by fia_bui on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 2,084 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
47

There's a stereotype that men keep women out of the workplace by discriminating against them. Edit: Also stereotypes like "men compete, women cooperate" and "women are natural leaders" or "women are more social and cause less conflict"
/r/MensRights02/04/15 10:46 PM
1

Lol I honestly don't understand why they still have more than one cabin crew. I guess it makes sense on longer flights or top class airlines where they still treat it like a hotel, but even in the budget short haul carriers they still have two to three attendants trying to keep busy by selling souveniers and snacks. Must be a union thing I guess.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 04:05 AM
1

So the only voices in credible publications should be ones speaking safe mainstream opinions? Because that's the effect of what you're advocating.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 11:28 PM
1

Even taking that as a given (that it's different when newspapers do it) I still don't see why people shouldn't be allowed to publish anonymously when their opinion has the potential to have consequences for the rest of their lives. Eg. SJWs having letter writng campaigns to get any MRA who speaks up fired.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 07:48 PM
1

The claim that women are treated as sub-human still implies that they're treated as a lower status to men. Given that virtually all gender based research has been forcused on women and with a heavy pro-woman bias I don't see how anyone can seriously make that claim.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 07:44 PM
1

But that's exactly my point: It's probably deliberate so asking them to stop doing it is ridiculous.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 06:39 PM
1

I'm not from the US, maybe it's the opposite issue there. Over here, I knew a couple of guys who trained as pilots and the competition for jobs was absolutely cutthroat. It might be the case that airlines are overworking them, but there definitely isn't a lack of qualified pilots looking for jobs. Part of the problem is that the nature of the job has changed. It used to be a high profile glamorous profession like being a doctor or a lawyer, so people were willing to spend huge sums of money trai…
/r/MensRights29/03/15 06:33 PM
1

I spent a summer working in a gay holiday destination alongside a group of mostly eastern european and jamaican workers. My experience was that the women were as likely to disapprove as the men. The same is true of older generations where I live. It's just anecdotes, but I'd be honestly surprised if it were all that different in places where homophobia is a serious issue.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 06:13 PM
6

Too many pilots Forced to resort to more and more extreme contracts to compete One of them goes crazy Feminist solution: We'll just add 100% more pilots, all female Right... If the wage gap statistics are anything to go by I'd be amazed if more than a handful of them remained in the industry even a year later. Then we'd see the campaigns to stamp out cockpit sexism that's clearly responsible for women quitting.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 06:10 PM
3

That was clearly a joke dude :p
/r/MensRights29/03/15 06:07 PM
3

What part of my response suggested this? The bit where you claimed women are treated as sub-human Or, you know, laws prohibiting women from driving? I think you mean "a" law. And I wouldn't exactly describe life in saudi arabia as peachy for men. If you live there and you own a car to drive then whether or not you have to get someone to drive it for you is the least of your worries. Laws treating women as the property of their husband? Where? And can you show that men aren't similarly poorly tre…
/r/MensRights29/03/15 06:00 PM
1

The two referring to homophobia were based in australia and the US, neither of which ciminalise homosexuality.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 05:55 PM
3

Could be. How many men and women were sampled and how many locales was the study conducted in? Unless it was conducted in ghana or sierra leone then it's not of much use to the subject at hand.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 02:01 PM
4

I'm not seeing any statistics here. Anyhow, "which group has more members doing this" has nothing to do with "which group is more likely to be a victim of this." I don't recall anyone saying that the impact of slavery is less important because the initial slavers tended to be west african tribes.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 02:00 PM
4

Yes...by other men. Even if that were true, what on earth makes you think it's in any way relevant?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:52 PM
3

I didn't say anything about who suffers more. You did kinda suggest it. Personally, I'd say women suffer more in peacetime but men suffer worse when things break down. That's a pretty big generalisation, you're talking about alot of countries there, to be honest, it sounds like you're trying to balance things out in your head just for the sake of it. Maybe the reason you think women are treated as sub human is because the UN spends enormous amounts of money on studies researching exclusively how…
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:51 PM
5

Not sure I'd take that for granted: Is it possible women express homophobia differently? Plus, it's always a risk with surveys that the respondent tells the surveyor what they want to hear. Also, were these studies performed in countries where homophobia is a significant issue?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:48 PM
3

Probably because the OP doesn't want to give a pro-feminist site ad revenue. Also for posterity in case the page ends up getting taken down for minimising women's issues or something.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:45 PM
16

Anyone feel like sticking up posters of "secondary victims of war" during her campaign?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:39 PM
1

Is zazhx your real name?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:34 PM
2

Firstly, I'm not sure I want to punish them for expressing an opinion I don't like Secondly, it's obvious clickbait crap. Controversy sells, that's why they printed it. Why would they turn around and do something about it now?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:33 PM
1

How is it shoddy or not in accordance with anything? If someone is deliberately spreading misandry to sell ad impressions then why reward them? I don't see how we owe them anything. I'm honestly not sure why you'd think directly linking to these articles is a sound thing to do.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:25 PM
3

Heck, given how they broadly they usually define it I'm amazed it's that low, for men or women. I'd honestly expect something closer to 100%
/r/MensRights28/03/15 04:17 PM
19

/u/tonyespresso : Please keep in mind that half the reason these stories are written in such a controversial fashion is to draw "hateclicks" from people who disagree. You can discourage this behaviour by using archive links: https://archive.today/XPXMm You still get the story, just minus giving them ad views.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 08:03 AM
1

Other than ones already mentioned Becoming male in the middle ages, some good stuff in there http://www.amazon.co.uk/Becoming-Male-Middle-Ages-New/dp/0815337701/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1427470800&sr=8-1&keywords=becoming+male+in+the+middle+ages
/r/MensRights27/03/15 03:41 PM
1

No, I got that. Over here they're called student unions, but they act more and more like governments every year. It's annoying because they have ridiculously low quotas for their elections to begin with (well under 50%) and they still struggle to get enough people to vote for them even at that. Not sure about the US, but our ones tend to be full of wannabe politicians practicing for the big leagues.
/r/MensRights23/03/15 03:04 PM
2

Frankly there is no way I would I would rent my house to myself as I was at the age of 24. Depends. Two messiest housemates I've ever lived with were women.
/r/MensRights23/03/15 11:54 AM
1

student government Jesus, are they calling it that now?
/r/MensRights23/03/15 11:52 AM
2

According to the OP he specified that he didn't want to rent it because they were guys.
/r/MensRights23/03/15 11:52 AM
10

I'm very sorry to hear that. Not so sure how gender netural this is...
/r/MensRights21/03/15 07:25 AM
1

In fact one of the guiding rules of the event was “no whining.” It seemed that the organizers of the event had no interest in whether or not they had offended anyone. Good for them. A lack of concern about offence caused is a refreshing change.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:12 PM
1

You mentioned seattle, was that just in passing or is the culture particularly bad there?
/r/MensRights19/03/15 06:17 PM
1

I thought maybe SRS or AMR linked to the post, but apparently not.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 05:59 PM
2

I don't get why this was downvoted, it seems like a perfectly reasonable comment to me.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 05:44 PM
2

I've heard of young teenagers using fake IDs to get pierced (and the piercer being charged with sexual assault) but I've never heard of anyone of any age being forced to do it. Piercings can cause nerve damage or infections, so they're not consequence free. FGM doesn't imply an intention, it's purely a physical description.
/r/MensRights18/03/15 05:02 PM
1

I can only imagine the prosecutor had too many files on her desk and started mixing them up?
/r/MensRights18/03/15 06:45 AM
1

Why an archive link for a non-misandric article?
/r/MensRights18/03/15 06:13 AM
1

Abstracting reproduction from het-sex and a gay pill would solve all kinds of problems for MRAs, lol. Edit: Seriously, if those two were possible? Who would take that route and go full separatist/MGTOW?
/r/MensRights18/03/15 06:07 AM
1

Important question: What age is she? If she's some 13 year old kid who's just discovered social justice and feels the need to be edgy, just ignore it.
/r/MensRights18/03/15 06:06 AM
3

Glad to hear it. It seems insane to me that so much work should have to go in to deciding what should be such an unambiguous situation, especially given that they (according to your account at least) weren't disputing your factual claims.
/r/MensRights18/03/15 05:57 AM
3

Why should we accept the WHO's classification when they're so obviously biased?
/r/MensRights18/03/15 02:55 AM
11

Female genital mutilation. It's a moral panic which blew up when feminist anthropologists discovered that some women (mostly in africa) have their genitals ritually altered. It's a men's rights issue because similar procedures performed on men are completely ignored while the women's issue is inflated as much as humanly possible to provide evidence of a patriarchy.
/r/MensRights18/03/15 02:04 AM
11

Even if it is to be considered mutilation, if a consenting adult consents to it then it's none of my business.
/r/MensRights18/03/15 02:02 AM
4

Horseshoe effect: What happens when human being with complex political motivations can't be classified by a one dimensional continuum.
/r/MensRights18/03/15 01:41 AM
17

Out of curiosity, what were their reasons for being so shocked you weren't circumcising him? Are you jewish? Or do you live somewhere people genuinely believe it stops aids?
/r/MensRights18/03/15 01:41 AM
11

in some communities girls are forced to have them. Which ones? Be specific. Have you any evidence that this actually happens?
/r/MensRights18/03/15 01:39 AM
1

I assume that's sarcasm?
/r/MensRights18/03/15 01:38 AM
1

Lol
/r/MensRights16/03/15 10:22 PM
6

He specified that he didn't want to do it because it would upset the female coworkers. It's clearly a gender issue. In addition he's being targeted because he dared to say something anti-SJW in public.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 09:18 AM
1

I think that's a given.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 09:17 AM
5

Shopkeeper in the UK did prison time when his semen was found in bottles of drinking water in his shop.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 09:16 AM
8

/u/wazzup987 You should consider using archive links for this kind of thing in future. You just earned Vice a few bucks in advertising revenue.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 11:11 PM
1

Employment discrimination is a huge deal, even if this is a small example of it. Imagine if the same situation were true for another group, say caucasian employees vs. african ones. Would it be not even a big deal then?
/r/MensRights14/03/15 11:04 PM
1

Fuck vice. If I never see one of their articles again it will be too soon. You can link to archive copies of their articles using archive.today if you want to avoid giving them ad revenue.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 11:02 PM
3

Taking the sports front, boarding school I was in: Girls changing rooms have blacked out windows and only female staffmembers are permitted in that building before and after sports. Male changing rooms, converted corridor with broken fire exits at either end. Unfrosted glass windows on the doors, about 4ft by 3ft and no restrictions on female staffmembers coming and going while we're changing.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 10:31 PM
1

You are saying that the prison movement - the guys that were its normal for men to rape women and that men need to be re-educated not to rape women - is fine. That sentence is a jumbled mess, but for clarity what I'm saying is that, in US prisons, rape is normalised and encouraged. A situation which can reasonably be described as rape culture. The opposite is true with respect to male on female rape in the civilian population. We've spoken about this before and you tried to convince me that men …
/r/MensRights14/03/15 10:27 PM
1

The prison movement is fine. Prisons are, arguably, a rape culture. The rape of women and girls is not and rarely -> never has been acceptable in mainstream society. Human cultures are more likely to embrace murder than rape.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 10:05 PM
1

I'm glad to hear campaigns like this are just my imagination.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 07:53 PM
1

I can articulate it very easily: Men, as a group, are responsible for rape. That's the argument, that's what they put on the posters, that's what they say at the rallies. If that's what you're supporting then I don't see what contribution you have to make to men's rights.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 05:59 PM
1

/u/grapedranksoda this is a sound point, I'd use it.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 05:46 AM
1

I'd agree that rape culture exists for men in at least some ways. I absolutely reject that it exists for women in any western country as described by it's most vocal proponents. And if you argue that there's another, rational, rape culture theory that isn't nonsense, then it needs a new name.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 05:21 AM
1

Defending the theory that rape culture exists or defending rape culture? If the latter base your argument on it not existing or refuse to participate.
/r/MensRights14/03/15 05:19 AM
3

"White criminals who are not dangerous should not be jailed" "Gentile criminals who are not dangerous should not be jailed" What on earth makes them think that this kind of statement belongs in a civilised society?
/r/MensRights14/03/15 05:16 AM
1

Thanks. And I'm sorry for your loss.
/r/PussyPass14/03/15 04:33 AM
5

It might be just me, but this mobile link isn't displaying in my browser and replacing "m" with "www" just redirects me to their front page. Does anyone have a regular link?
/r/PussyPass14/03/15 02:09 AM
3

Has it actually been awarded or has she been granted the right to appeal?
/r/PussyPass12/03/15 04:12 AM
1

Given SRD's SRS overlordship these days I'm surprised such victim blaming wasn't met with instant bans.
/r/MensRights12/03/15 12:15 AM
1

Ah, ok, and no one replied before they hid it? What was the whole TwoX thing with nasty PMs?
/r/MensRights11/03/15 11:44 PM
1

Oh right, it was a comment on that post? I thought you made a post of your own. Yeah... I think most women are sensible about this kind of thing. But I still know some women who swear blind they were roofied or attempted to be roofied when everything they describe could have been anything else. Oddly enough I've mostly heard the stories from guys, naturally the roofying preceeds their gallant rescue of the damsel in question.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 10:20 PM
1

I went looking for it because I was curious what the comments were like. Can you link to the deleted post? While I was looking for it I came across one article about how it's probably an overstated problem (50 upvotes) and a self post which was almost exactly what you were describing (2000 + a few hundred upvotes)
/r/MensRights11/03/15 09:49 PM
2

I am not casting doubt on anyones stories Yes you are, and rightly so.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 08:57 PM
1

Sure, but there's little enough evidence that the type described by kutchener/moore exists at all, let alone in anywhere near the numbers they claim. Not to mention that the solutions they campaign for are counterproductive.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 08:47 PM
1

Two guys pointed that out above and got downvoted.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 08:44 PM
1

It's nice, but this is coming from a guy who supports criminalising prostitution and the swedish model so I'm not all that enthused.
/r/MensRights11/03/15 12:49 PM
3

Or engineering and medicine, or engineering and phamacology, or engineering and physiotherapy. Plenty of STEM areas where women are ahead.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 11:54 PM
12

If almost all the candidates are qualified then the fair thing to do would be to put the places up as a lottery for the people who're over the bar. And even going with your claim that it's just a product of natural statistics, a near exact 50/50 split is suspicious.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 11:50 PM
2

Not sure if that's necessary, but I'd definitely be keen to flick through their thesis and throw them plenty of technical questions in interviews to make sure they didn't coast through on special credit for editing wikipedia or something.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 11:49 PM
10

Hardly a controversial claim: http://boisestatepublicradio.org/post/new-affirmative-action-cases-say-policies-hurt-asians
/r/MensRights08/03/15 11:48 PM
2

I can just guess which gender the "inclusivity" will lean towards.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 11:45 PM
0

I've never been to a restaurant where men were explicitly served first. More than a few where women were, never once men. Is there a link to what they're talking about?
/r/MensRights06/03/15 09:12 PM
6

The test I like to apply to government funded programs is "would people pay for this if they had the option not to"? If the answer is "mostly not" then you're not living in a democracy.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 08:29 PM
1

Plus it's ridiculous: If anything that blatant happens people do speak up.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 08:28 PM
3

Thank you. Good call.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 09:48 AM
1

Of course it is, and they're raking in the ad money from all the people who shared the article because they were offended.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 09:47 AM
2

OP: Use archive.today next time. The reason this article has that title is to piss people off so they'll visit the site and give them ad impressions. Using an archive link cuts the profit motive.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 09:46 AM
1

Sorry, yes, I just misread it. We have counties here too. I was mostly curious about what legal system this all happened in, so that answers my question.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 02:49 AM
2

If you feel comfortable saying so: What country did this all happen in and where did you move to? Either way, good on you for getting out of there.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 05:34 PM
3

Just the fact that it's trying to help have equal numbers of each gender become elected officials. That's what I mean though, why is that a good thing?
/r/MensRights03/03/15 06:53 AM
3

What do you mean "from a gender perspective"?
/r/MensRights03/03/15 06:11 AM
2

White men are doing better than black men, but they're typically singled out as the apex of privilege in US society, which is nonsense if you consider things like incarceration.
/r/MensRights25/02/15 07:30 PM
1

If you take a common legal definition of sexual assault (which includes stuff like pinching someone's ass) I'm amazed it's that low and it's probably similar for men. But it's misleading because that's not exactly what people picture when they hear "sexual assault"
/r/MensRights25/02/15 03:37 PM
1

Restrictions on certain types of firearms don't stop the bad guys from doing things like sawing off barrels and modifying weapons to make them more suitable for crime, but if they do so in an environment where such things are uncommon then it's easier for them to get caught. We do have black market weapons here (as well as a few legal weapons) but gun crime is extremely rare because anyone possessing one sticks out like a sore thumb. In a country where everyone owns guns it's alot easier for som…
/r/PussyPass24/02/15 02:31 PM
1

Yeah... the little ^<sup>"peef"</sup> in movies is a bit silly. I don't have a problem with restrictions on barrel length and magazine size etc. It doesn't really affect a sports shooter or a hobbyist, it's only really a problem if you want to carry a concealed force multiplier around with you.
/r/PussyPass24/02/15 12:24 AM
1

Does he? My mistake. Yeah... I don't really have a problem with that. I'd be disturbed if the fancy stuff was just something people picked up in a cornershop as an impulse buy.
/r/PussyPass23/02/15 08:28 PM
1

And then there's guys like FPS Russia who runs a youtube channel about very publicly owning artillery, lol.
/r/PussyPass23/02/15 04:57 PM
1

It can't be that strict if the police don't arrest people for waving them around, or a guy can pull out an AK in heavy traffic, on camera, and nothing happens. Or did you mean strict on paper but not in reality?
/r/PussyPass23/02/15 04:29 PM
1

Which one lol, it happened a few times XD
/r/PussyPass23/02/15 02:28 PM
1

There's one episode where the police end up getting called. A women ploughed through them and ended up riding for a few streets with one of them hanging onto her hood for dear life. Eventually she pulled over and started trying to kick the shit out of them. The cops showed up and she pulled out a very clear and blatant pussy pass (my kid is crying, you have to let me go) and the cops just separated the two groups and sent her on her way. They didn't get in any trouble though.
/r/PussyPass23/02/15 02:28 PM
2

To be fair the dude with the AK was just trying to get traffic moving I like how that's totally a reasonable thing to do :D
/r/PussyPass23/02/15 02:05 PM
3

They won too
/r/PussyPass23/02/15 12:04 PM
1

I looked it up since, there's a bunch of guys with guns. This appears to be a common occurance. I wonder what they think about gun control?
/r/PussyPass23/02/15 11:55 AM
5

Not quite: http://youtu.be/O1jGNd4Deys?t=2m17s I think there was another one in daylight too. Russians seem to be more gun-happy than americans.
/r/PussyPass23/02/15 03:03 AM
1

Some context would be beneficial: Did she actually assault him or did he take a smack to the face playing sports then make a joke about it? If the former, that's pretty repulsive. If the latter, then I'd say we're being a bit thin skinned by saying "no one can joke about female on male DV"
/r/MensRights22/02/15 11:13 PM
1

Are you sure? It seems fairly 50/50 to me.
/r/PussyPass22/02/15 08:36 PM
6

This is russia, they'd probably drive over them.
/r/PussyPass22/02/15 08:34 PM
2

^ This
/r/PussyPass22/02/15 08:34 PM
5

Some of them, yeah, but the drivers who apologise and go back don't suffer any harm. Other ones though are obviously pedestrian areas, no excuse.
/r/PussyPass22/02/15 08:33 PM
6

I think the scariest I've seen was one guy who pulled a gun.
/r/PussyPass22/02/15 08:32 PM
2

They do great work :D Just for the sake of correctness though: They do have alot of videos with men doing the same thing (trying to run them over).
/r/PussyPass22/02/15 08:32 PM
1

What court ruling?
/r/MensRights21/02/15 11:20 PM
-1

1) Not about being raped 2) The government body that awarded her compensation didn't consider the accusation to be unproven. Even assuming the police didn't fail to investigate properly (as her lawyer claims) it would make sense for there to be a lower standard for compensation claims than for criminal trials. The result of a criminal trial is someone going to jail, for a compensation application it's someone getting some money. I can't think of many government welfare programs which employ a "b…
/r/MensRights21/02/15 11:19 PM
-1

That assumes she's a false accuser. She could be genuine.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 10:56 PM
1

Do you think it is wise to put mothers in prison and separate them from infants? No dice. If you commit a crime you pay the penalty. "But I reproduced" isn't a get out of jail free card. The same infant whose father doesn't want him? What do you propose for care of these babies? See above. The issue of what to do with the children of criminals isn't specific to this, and it's a separate issue. Second, isn't this just a way to coerce women into getting abortions? Nope. It's a way to coerce women …
/r/MensRights21/02/15 06:49 PM
-6

Is she not indirectly accused of making a false accusation if they employ the opposite standard?
/r/MensRights21/02/15 04:36 PM
0

You seem to know more than me so I'd take your word on it. Interesting approach to libel not sure how I feel about it.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 04:35 PM
-3

Their social circles probably know, and if they judge them despite the fact that the case was dropped and she was prosecuted then the problem is the social circules, not the prosecution system. That said, I support absolute anonymity in criminal cases for all parties involved, so there is improvement to be made.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 04:09 PM
-4

The article didn't mention his name though did it? Plus, that goes both ways: She may have been compensated by a non-court government body, but the criminal case was dismissed against him and she was prosecuted for the lie she told.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 03:58 PM
-5

In both cases they're giving the benefit of the doubt to one party over the other.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 03:57 PM
-4

No more than by dismissing the case they're implying that she lied about being raped. I'd actually suspect most rape accusations would result in "we're not completely sure what happened, but either of them could be telling the truth"
/r/MensRights21/02/15 03:47 PM
7

It's not quite the same as campus court martials though: They don't seem to be able to punish the accused, only compensate the accuser.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 03:25 PM
-4

It's hard to know the exact meaning of what they said given that the article is translated, but "clearly substantiated" to me would mean "there's evidence to back up what she's saying," rather than "he's definitely guilty." Plus, unless libel works very differently in Norway to here, he'd have to prove they knowingly lied, which would probably be impossible.
/r/MensRights21/02/15 03:24 PM
2

It's a bit of a twisted case, but I think this might possibly make sense: The case was dismissed against the man she accused, probably lack of evidence. That doesn't prove anything either way, it's just an acknowledgement that nothing can be conclusively proven either way. She was subsequently charged for lying about previously having consentual sex with the man, but not for lying about having been raped. Again, nothing absolutely proven either way about the rape itself, maybe he did it, maybe s…
/r/MensRights21/02/15 03:22 PM
3

Will it change even then? Don't forget the generation in charge now are the ones who did the sexual revolution in the 60s.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 02:36 PM
1

Looking back on the quote again, maybe they were suggesting it as a stopgap thing so that the court can get away with punishing them without really punishing them.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 01:32 PM
29

Clearly they should be having a relationship with their teacher instead.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 11:28 AM
25

Instead, the lawyers say both could have been referred as status offenders for counseling and ordered to take classes on sexual boundaries and appropriate interactions with their peers. Even then.... why? Is it important to teach them sex is wrong and evil or something?
/r/MensRights17/02/15 11:27 AM
12

Men in general
/r/MensRights16/02/15 10:06 AM
1

As in the US government? Probably not the sickest, they're not quite the soviet union, but definitely up there.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 05:50 PM
1

If you're trying to argue that we should never ever joke about DV then no, I don't agree.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 05:47 PM
2

I disagree, anything, no matter how horrible, can be a laughing matter. The problem is when it's a laughing matter even when it shouldn't be, or if it's more of a laughing matter than the same thing happening to a woman.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 02:01 PM
5

I generally make an effort to use "they" when gender isn't specified, if nothing else it's more accurate. But this nonsense of "learn my pronouns" is just silly. 99.999999999999999999% of the time someone presenting as female is female. And, as you said, if they happen to differ from almost the entirety of the rest of humanity and prefer to be called male then, what the hell, I'll run with it. I draw the line at mayonnaise and bunself etc though, I'm not convinced that there's a part of the huma…
/r/MensRights15/02/15 02:00 PM
1

For some reason this domain is blocked on voat.co so it can't be shared there. I've contacted the admins and I'm waiting for a response. Update: Apparently the ban is on blogspot in general, not this specific blog, and can be circumvented by the admin of any sub
/r/MensRights15/02/15 01:26 PM
15

but nothing too drastic sadly This is a good thing :)
/r/MensRights14/02/15 08:41 AM
2

which prompted her to break into his house and start punching him in the head. (The big head, not the little one…at least, not yet.) I really do believe you should be able to joke about anything... but I can't imagine a newspaper making that joke about a woman.
/r/MensRights13/02/15 02:14 PM
2

Not to mention becoming a posterboy for misogyny and calls for legislation funding more duluth centers.
/r/MensRights13/02/15 02:14 PM
1

Either way, the response is still instructive. Both the people supporting her and the people going full no-true-feminist
/r/MensRights13/02/15 02:11 PM
2

As a recovering alcoholic If he hadn't, he probably wouldn't say recovering.
/r/MensRights13/02/15 12:35 PM
1

There's no test to do to determine if your partner is just drunk or in a blackout. My girlfrend had no idea i was blacked out, and I'm sure the same has happenes on college campsuses many times. I was wondering what you were talking about up until the last paragraph, I thought you were saying she had sex with you while you were unconscious. Anyhow, good luck with your recovery.
/r/MensRights13/02/15 12:35 PM
13

Who said anything about tit for tat? The point of this post is to highlight the lack of backlash, not create one. It helps to check the flair.
/r/MensRights12/02/15 04:47 PM
26

It's not a problem, the problem is that there's uproar when men do it.
/r/MensRights12/02/15 04:37 PM
12

I don't think the problem here is that someone joked about rape, the problem is that it's only ok to joke about male rape. They're creating a double standard where crime is only a problem when it happens to women.
/r/MensRights12/02/15 03:26 PM
6

How do you support them while still protecting defenders rights? If it's just a personal conversation with no names named or a support group or a post on mens rights I think it makes sense to believe them and support them (provided they're not claiming they were abducted by aliens or something) If it's a public accusation then it's most fair not to take a side unless there's overwhelming evidence If it's a police report they should investigate with an open mind to all possibilities and treat eve…
/r/MensRights12/02/15 02:23 PM
1

I've never understood why teaching and research need to be performed by the same people in the same institutions. They're two completely separate skills. Anyhow, are there no independent research labs separate to colleges? I thought there was at least a few, for areas like cancer research and such.
/r/MensRights11/02/15 09:04 AM
1

The degree to which that pleasured you makes me feel dirty and objectified... do it again.
/r/MensRights11/02/15 09:02 AM
12

Fixed alignment of logo, added source, you're welcome. http://i.imgur.com/xTZogOh.png /u/mrminibagel : If you're printing off more you can use this one to placate the OCD
/r/MensRights11/02/15 05:38 AM
1

Not sure where he is, but over here sitting in the front is common. Actually, it would be slightly insulting to sit in the back for no reason, like you're trying to get away from the driver or something.
/r/MensRights11/02/15 04:09 AM
2

What have they done? Genuinely curious, I wasn't aware of any scandals about them. The only controversy I heard of was a male-feminist trying to stir up trouble because they wouldn't adopt his anonymous accusation system.
/r/MensRights11/02/15 03:43 AM
1

Ah, yes, I know McKinnon. I just wasn't sure who you were referring to.
/r/MensRights11/02/15 03:34 AM
1

Thanks for the background. Who's "she"?
/r/MensRights10/02/15 06:14 PM
2

Well I didn't fancy my chances of convincing them to restore free speech, so I went for the next best thing and ensured that the people who pushed for the change would encounter the same inconvenience. It doesn't fix things, but it might make them a little less eager to repeat the campaign on other sites.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 06:13 PM
3

Tried to fix it years back, but I was heavily outnumbered by editors from wikiproject feminism and achieved nothing. I wouldn't particularly care to repeat the experience. A few months after I left the page was merged with "Men's Rights Movement" on the basis that MRAs are the only ones who talk about mens rights.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 06:10 PM
5

Good find, but use an archive link next time?
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:53 PM
1

Still seems weird to me that that would qualify as harassment, but hey, if it fixes it it fixes it.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:51 PM
2

I can see the problem there, but in the case of facebook there was a gender neutral policy which was being applied selectively to men. In this case their policy is already gender skewed, so I don't see much hope of convincing them to level it up. If anything I'd encourage them to unrestrict mentions of misogyny.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:49 PM
1

That makes sense I guess.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:47 PM
3

I did those too, but only for the purpose of forcing facebook to apply their TOS fairly and without discrimination, hopefully to knock some sense into all the people who campaigned for them to police some vague idea of hate speech. In this case... have OKCupid even been involved in banning profiles mentioning misogyny?
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:47 PM
1

Except that these bitches aren't even on the website to date. They're there strictly for attention and to mock the MALE TEARS of single men. It's trolling, pure and simple Then who cares? Ignore them. Block them if they become an issue.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:42 PM
1

Feminists have used that weapon and it has worked very well for them, and continues to work. It works in the sense that they sometimes succeed in removing stuff. I'm not so sure doing so actually achieves anything other than pissing people off though. Why stop people from erecting their own set of red flags for everyone to see.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:40 PM
1

What's described in the OP isn't harassment or a call to harassment.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:37 PM
3

Not by much, and it's hard to tell how many people who upvoted actually read the OP. For a pinned post I'd say this is a lukewarm response.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:36 PM
1

Are they already banning profiles which mention misogyny? If so I'm in favour for the sake of fairness and avoiding double standards, if not I'm against on free speech grounds. Honestly, if someone decides to put "I love misandry" on their profile, then they're doing me a favour by helping me weed them out early. The solution to bigotry isn't trying to stop bigots from announcing themselves.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:34 PM
2

Really nice poster, I'll be interested to see how it goes.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 05:31 PM
2

Do you think art is inherently worthless too? Music? Not at all, I quite enjoy art and music. Pure research science? Can often yield huge benefits in applied science. I don't know why there is a theme here and at TRP that is anti culture and anti knowledge. Money and muscle isn't what life is about. I think you're confusing "That's worthless" with "Spending that much time on that thing with only vague promises of a benefit is a luxury." Sure, if you have the resources to do so you could spend ev…
/r/MensRights10/02/15 04:14 PM
1

Well, from what he described it was more serious than a regular nosebleed.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 03:58 PM
1

I agree, but if I'm going to spend that amount of time and money on something I'd want a more specific notion of what good it's doing.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 03:01 PM
1

Weird, thanks.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 02:34 PM
1

It wasn't a hookup pub though, it mostly catered to elderly local residents.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 12:57 PM
1

Sexual harassment? How would that work?
/r/MensRights10/02/15 12:55 PM
5

Heck, even if it's a private school, male students still contributed just as much fees to the construction of the gym.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 12:55 PM
3

If it were free and only took up a few hours a week I'd agree, but a philosophy degree is extremely expensive and takes four years of fulltime work. For me to engage in something that consumes that much resources I'd want a more concrete idea of what kind of return I'm likely to get.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 12:52 PM
1

Are you sure that's an EU wide rule? I don't think it is. There's definitely women's only gyms here.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 12:47 PM
2

Legally they "can" but it doesn't mean they should. Why the hell would you support this? Because sometimes people want to get away from the opposite sex. I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to. It only gets crazy when they do so with resources everyone is required to contribute.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 12:46 PM
2

I think it should be allowed, but not if it receives mandatory funding.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 12:44 PM
3

Unless there was a camera in the car I wouldn't risk it. Headlines tomorrow: Taxi driver attempts to grope student, refuses to allow her to ride when she objects.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 12:43 PM
14

As I leave a lady is walking by and starts screaming at me for being in the wrong restroom. Like she can see I'm covered in blood... doesn't matter. Didn't care that I just needed some paper towels. Just screaming and screaming, saying she's going to call the cops. Well, in all fairness, she might have been screaming because you came out of the women's toilets covered in blood rather than just that you came out of the women's toilets.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 12:40 PM
6

Same in a pub I used to work in. Men's toilets: Barely functional. Women's toilets: Absolutely beautiful with perfume spray thing and a vase of flowers. That said, at least that was a private company so it might be down to market forces.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 12:39 PM
1

Found this gem in the comments: The Danish government made an even weirder law last year: It is now possible to change your gender without actually changing your gender: http://www.amnesty.org/en/en/news/denmark-transgender-law-2014-06-12 So, if you are a man looking for a job at the university, just do the following: 1) Look for positions saying "reposted due to no female applicants in first round". 2) Send a letter to the government saying "I'd like to be registered as a female for a couple of…
/r/MensRights10/02/15 10:23 AM
2

Most news and posters here are from the US. Canada is a close second. Not saying I like it, that's just the way the anglosphere internet is.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 10:21 AM
5

Agreed, doubly so if the inmates are the ones actively seeking it out.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 09:24 AM
7

Good find, but use archive.today links to stop giving them ad revenue.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 09:23 AM
3

And yet I see women mock their husbands all the time. And I don’t mean tease. I mean derisively mock and shame, to their face and behind their back. It used to be grounds for divorce under brehon law if your spouse publicly criticised you.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 08:42 AM
2

I get your point, but it's probably safe to say that if someone's complaining about a college here it's in the US unless stated otherwise.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 07:24 AM
2

In murder cases, our starting assumption is that the alleged victim did not consent to the act (until proven otherwise), whereas in cases of sexual encounters, our starting assumption is that the alleged victim did consent to the act (until proven otherwise). Why is that? Because people almost never consent to be killed, but usually consent to sex. It's not very difficult to understand really.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 08:58 AM
2

It looks like they're trying to make it the new breast cancer, complete with corporate sponsorship and waste of money awareness campaigns.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 08:33 AM
3

If a woman cheats, she deserves equal punishmen O.O Wtf? She actually thinks this is acceptable? I mean, I get laughing at something horrific in the news because part of it is ridiculous, like the darwin awards or something, but actually arguing it's justified? Maybe she'd be interested in converting to Islam.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 07:51 AM
2

Eh... that's true to an extent. They're happy to drive unnecessary politics (which happens to be feminism) out of gaming and leave it at that. I respect GG's willingness to set a goal and not give in to mission creep. And it's not just feminism that's the enemy, traditionalist conservatives are winding up too.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 04:28 PM
3

I'm pretty sure they're aware... and that it's not possible to dictate the scope of your opposition. What did you mean by this?
/r/MensRights08/02/15 03:53 PM
2

What did they do when you explained she did it to you? If it's a workplace thing, and it happens alot, getting your boss to do something about it might be the answer. Unless he just doesn't care of course.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 03:24 PM
5

Ah right. I almost suggested smacking them back, but that might get you arrested.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 03:15 PM
17

Firstly, yes it's a sexist double standard and no you shouldn't have to put up with it. Normally, this would be something that would happen to someone very occasionally (which is annoying enough) but if it's happening constantly, particularly and especially if the same people are doing it, then that's pretty much a textbook case of bullying. Bring it up with your principle, if they won't deal with it, see if you can find someone higher up the chain who might be sympathetic, particularly someone …
/r/MensRights08/02/15 02:21 PM
8

No offense, but /r/mensrights[1] is a fucking joke. You guys are literally the butt of a thousand jokes on all sides because of all the tone-policing, sob stories, cognitive dissonance regarding political parties, and SJW plants. We're the butt of a thousand jokes for the same reason gamergate is: We're breaking the status quo and some people find that very threatening indeed. And all of the issues you listed could squarely be pointed at KiA. This sub could really take a few notes on how to take…
/r/MensRights08/02/15 02:13 PM
11

MRC is cool, but their (only?) mod was just shadowbanned so we'll see how long it lasts. KiA have accomplished great things, but I'm not sure they've done more than we have. Keep in mind that they started off with a ready mader userbase (most of /v/ and /r/gaming) and their energy has come from a rapidly evolving current affairs issue. By contrast, men's rights is a background thing which has slowly built up steam over the years. Just because they started with a bang and were quick off the block…
/r/MensRights08/02/15 12:09 PM
4

Lol, no worries. And yeah, it helps to take a break from this place every so often. No sense in giving yourself a heart attack.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 06:48 PM
12

He-quality :D I love it.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 06:46 PM
2

Define conservative? We're mostly advocating change, so that would surely classify us as radical or progressive right there. Using the word in the sense of "right wing" I'd say it's a pretty even mix.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 04:34 PM
1

She is either a walking stereotype or this is bait.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 04:32 PM
6

Eh... I guess, according to some feminists anyhow. The definition is simultaneously broader and vaguer than that. Edit: The comment i replied to was somewhere along the lines of: Wasn't feminism originally about gender equality?
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:24 PM
20

As far as I can tell it's a parody of feminism, basicly taking feminist talking points and reversing the genders.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:11 PM
6

I understand that. What I don't understand is why doing the exact same unacceptable thing is no longer unacceptable when it's turned around back at the ones who "started it". It seems childish. It wouldn't be acceptable if he were actually doing it (advocating for meninism to be the only gender rights movement). Satire isn't supposed to be understood as being the actual views of the author.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:11 PM
7

I'm not being smart, but do you understand what satire means? It's purpose is to take something fucked up and poke fun at it by taking it to an extreme or applying it to other situations or, in this case, reversing it. I don't think the OP necessarily supports a single, male-centric gender equality movement.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:08 PM
163

I think it's time that women realised they have an equal stake in gender equality and became meninists, many of the issues we're fighting for affect them too. #sheforhe
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:00 PM
1

Not too sure what you mean by that, did you hit the save button too early? Here's another quote at any rate in case there's still confusion: The Council of Europe is not to be confused with the Council of the European Union (the "Council of Ministers") or the European Council. These belong to the European Union, which is separate from the Council of Europe, although they have shared the same European flag and anthem since the 1980s because they both work for European integration. The Council of …
/r/MensRights07/02/15 01:33 PM
1

Not quite, although there is a similar sounding body in the EU: The European Council should not be mistaken for the Council of Europe, an international organisation independent from the EU. Several non-EU countries are party to the EU convention on human rights (such as Russia and Turkey) and their residents can take cases to the ECHR. I agree it's confusing though, there's so many cogs in the clockwork of european bureaucracy it's easy to mix them up.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 01:07 PM
1

Except there's nothing in place yet to replace them Not so sure, there's a whole wealth of private technical training colleges over in Ireland, I'd imagine it's the same in the UK.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 12:48 PM
1

No actually, I used to think so but it's part of a different body called the council of europe.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 12:44 PM
1

If I had to guess I'd say they'd probably end up taking it to the European Court of Human Rights, but it could go to the EU instead.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 07:45 AM
2

and start men's only educational institutions. Honestly, I think universities are dying anyhow. Even without the SJW crazyness it's probably time for a little change.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 07:43 AM
1

This. Plus it'll be alot harder for them to push subtle little bits of their crazy theories when they've had their asses kicked a little in the court of public opinion.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 07:42 AM
0

Honestly, I'm fine with this. When your opponents are making a mistake, why stop them? If they piss everyone off, folks start standing up to them and they get marginalised along with their nutty policies, then we win. If they manage to push their ideas through, the inevitable happens, men start suing the asses off every college in the land until they get marginalised and their policies canned, then we win. If they manage to hang on to the reigns of power somehow and make colleges such a hostile …
/r/MensRights07/02/15 04:04 AM
13

All they're doing by attacking the person rather than the idea is admitting they can't make a counterargument.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 01:16 AM
1

Firstly, we shouldn't allow loopholes for sexual predators to get away with their actions. If someone has caused no harm, why punish them and why call them a predator? if we look at an extreme case of a 50 year old man abusing an 8 year old girl do you think the "no harm was done" thing would still be okay? I find it hard to believe no harm would be done, but an 8 year old kid with no understanding of sexuality or adult relationships is not a 16 year old kid (man?). Do you remember what it was l…
/r/PussyPass07/02/15 12:02 AM
3

Hey, just want to say kudos for doing this and hopefully things don't get too extreme. Maybe, once things get more involved, consider contacting a couple of friendly journalists?
/r/MensRights06/02/15 11:38 PM
1

Hi, welcome :) Yeah, I ended getting into the MRM, and a few other things, in a similar way to why you're here now: People kept telling me how evil and horrible and -gasp- conservative they were so I decided to check for myself. Is it accurate to say this subreddit, mensrights is a MRA subreddit? Yep Do you feel misrepresented/ slandered by the mainstream media? Do you have explicit examples of egrerious mistakes? Yes, I find it hard to think of many articles, particularly in left wing papers, w…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 11:36 PM
1

I'm pointing out that saying "it's still the law" isn't relevant to a discussion about men's rights. If the MRM isn't trying to change things then for what purpose does it exist?
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 11:21 PM
1

If we purely looked for how the victim was harmed (for both male and female victims) we would introduce a very unnecessary bias. But hang on a sec, if the purpose of a law is to protect people from harm, but it applies even to situations where no harm was done, what's the point of the law? The concept of 'don't have sexual relationships with minors' is not a difficult one to follow and the rule of law should apply to both men and women without discrimination. Agreed on the second bit, I doubt an…
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 11:14 PM
-1

Someone so paranoid that they think anyone who disagrees with them must be part of a shadowy conspiracy isn't worth talking to. Fortunately the majority of MRAs don't go in for this kind of behaviour.
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 11:10 PM
-2

Something can be law but be bad, but until it is changed its still the law. Something sexist can still be bad, but until it is changed it's still sexism. I'm not seeing your point here. Edit: And there's plenty of examples of gendered law, like the fact that no rape law in the world recognises envelopment.
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 04:45 PM
-2

Disproven how? "It doesn't matter if it's unjust because that's what the law is"? I guess we can stop arguing against Title IX guys, it's the law! and you change in tone tells me that I was right, and your purpose in this sub is to fuel discord. Coming from this guy... To whoever happens to come across this post, this is nothing but concern trolling. Be alert.
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 03:38 PM
-7

That's irrelevant. The law is what it is, and since it is gender-neutral, the law itself does not fall into the scope of men's rights. If you want the law itself changed, contact your congressman or something. BS, many aspects of the law, particularly when it comes to sex crimes, is far from gender neutral. And if you seriously think that discussion about what laws should exist are irrelevant then you must be pretty new to men's rights. What does fall into the scope of men's rights is exactly th…
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 03:21 PM
0

Sure, but if this isn't a discussion of what should be, then what is it about? I mean, when people point out the sexism of giving men and women different sentences for the same crime, I don't see anyone responding with "but it's the law."
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 03:08 PM
1

Well sure, teenagers are all over the place, but unless you've found a cure for being a teenager that's not likely to change. The majority of people still grow up and learn to manage their body in a healthy manner. I still think this is a bit of a moral panic. Same goes for all the women's pro-fat stuff.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 03:06 PM
-3

It doesn't matter if there was coercion, allowing these relationships opens up the possibility for coercion. It's possible that he's being coerced into agreeing that he initiated the relationship. So you think we should punish people for crimes which might have happened, even if everyone involved said they didn't? Also, bad grades can ruin your career and life I'm pretty sure any grades she gave him are now up for revision and it's not easy to ruin the career of a teacher who has relations with …
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 02:50 PM
-5

Just because someone has power to coerce someone doesn't mean they actually are. And, if anything, he had much more power: She could give him bad grades, he could ruin her career and send her to jail. Again, the article is short on context, but assuming for a moment he wanted to see the pictures she sent, and that's why she sent them, what harm did she do to him? I'm struggling to see any kind of coercion there. And before anyone else chimes in helpfully with "but a male teacher wouldn't be able…
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 02:19 PM
-14

I agree, but that has nothing to do with the question of whether a 16 year old seeing a naked picture they wanted to see is being harmed in any way. CAFargo made a genderless argument: That a teacher being in a sexual relationship with a student is always victimising. I made a genderless answer: Not always, no. When men are punished harder than women the answer isn't necessarily to punish women harder.
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 02:12 PM
-21

Without context it's impossible to say whether her attention was unwelcome or not. If it was, then fair enough, if not, what harm are we trying to prevent exactly?
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 01:08 PM
0

I never mentioned a gender reversal though, obviously a man would get worse and obviously that would be wrong. My comment was regarding the issue of labelling someone as a "victim" when nothing bad has happened to them.
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 01:03 PM
3

I actually agree with them that incarceration usually isn't the answer, but the idea that this only applies to women, and men deserve whatever they get, is just screwed up.
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 11:50 AM
1

I think it's good that people are willing to look at the other side of the coin, but I'd just like to say I'm sceptical that there's any serious body image issue affecting the majority of either boys or girls, although obviously individuals suffering from such issues exist and such things are serious. All of those things (diet/excercise fads, protein shakes, creatine, spending their time in the gym etc.) existed and were prevalent when I was in school, but the people who used them were still abl…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 09:32 AM
3

"International law" doesn't really exist (at least, not like national laws do), but I take your point.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 07:54 AM
2

So you're saying that they shouldn't have tried to stop them from committing assault and dangerous driving in case they doubled up and committed manslaughter instead?
/r/MensRights06/02/15 07:52 AM
2

If they fail to stop then they're the ones driving dangerously, not the protesters. But, hey, they're driving dangerously anyhow by driving on a footpath.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 07:15 AM
5

Well... even one is too many, but one in a thousand is pretty low.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 07:11 AM
1

A vigilante (/ˌvɪdʒɪˈlænti/, /ˌvɪdʒɪˈlænteɪ/; Spanish: [bixiˈlante]; Portuguese: [viʒiˈlɐ̃t(ɨ)], [viʒiˈlɐ̃tʃi]) is a civilian who undertakes law enforcement with or without legal authority. Nabbed from wikipedia, take it as you will.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 07:03 AM
2

More dangerous than driving on a footpath? The sticker is only dangerous if they continue driving rather than stopping.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 07:01 AM
-2

In many country the law says that man can't be raped, do you think that makes sense, because it's the law? Right, clearly clam pandering. She should be fired, because it's highly inappropriate, but I'm having a hard time seeing why anyone, male or female, should be charged with a criminal offence for this.
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 06:42 AM
8

According to the legal system, he's a victim. Yep Whether he felt victimized or not is irrelevant, the law states he's a victim, so it should be prosecuted as such. I don't understand how we got from "the law says it" to "therefore that's the way it should be." In many country the law says that man can't be raped, do you think that makes sense, because it's the law.
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 02:51 AM
5

what is their justification for jumping on peoples' hoods? The car tried to run them down, so instead of getting dragged under the wheels they jumped.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 02:49 AM
-19

I'm a bit uneasy about the boy being called a victim unless he actually felt victimised by her actions. Some context would be nice: Did he ask her for the photos, or did she just send them to him without warning. Edit: No idea why this is getting downvoted. Are we seriously going to argue that a 16 year old seeing porn is going to damage them somehow?
/r/PussyPass06/02/15 02:41 AM
4

I'd prefer to live in a world where my daughters odds of being raped are lower than her odds of getting cancer. It is. Much much lower... Risk of a woman developing cancer: 37.81% (1 in 3) Risk of a woman dying from cancer: 19.26% (1 in 5) Source: http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancerbasics/lifetime-probability-of-developing-or-dying-from-cancer Even going with the crazy 1 in 4 statistic a woman still is more likely to get cancer than to be raped.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 01:42 AM
3

The chance of a woman being either raped or sexually assaulted can climb to as high as 1 in 4 when allowing for certain factors, i.e. military service. Well the military rate is much lower than 25%. But it's still much higher than the national average. Crack addicts and the like are probably the highest. I think you might need to slow down and check what you're typing. Also, stop adding in statistics about "or sexual assault." They're usually uselessly broad.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 01:37 AM
1

The implication that literally 100% of women are catcalled is pure nonsense. Actually I'd say it's probably true, it's just not a major problem. I'd also say the same it true of men.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 12:34 AM
6

Rainn are a pressure group, not an academic source. Edit: Plus, none of those statistics give data on the prevalence of rape, almost all of them can refer to "sexual assault" which can mean anything from rape to having your ass pinched. Edit2: Yep, I'm beginning to see why they use statistics for sexual assault rather than rape. The term is so broadly defined it can refer to just about anything: A wide range of victimizations, separate from rape or attempted rape. These crimes include attacks or…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 12:33 AM
5

If you're a woman it's almost just as high. You're going to need to back that up, and with a statistic that actually refers to being forced to have sex, not having sex while drunk then regretting it tomorrow. Why do you never see women hitchhiking? I never see anyone hitchhiking. The only person I've ever seen actually do it is me, because I was getting way too tired, I had around 10-20 miles to go and work in the morning. Why do groups of women going out at night organize themselves so vigorous…
/r/MensRights05/02/15 08:18 PM
13

I agree, but archive :/ No need to be giving gawker money. https://archive.today/pr5Hn
/r/PussyPass05/02/15 10:41 AM
78

I'm pretty sure the likelyhood of getting brutally held down and forced to have sex is just a little bit higher in prison than in real life.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 08:54 AM
1

I don't think that's their end game, they're looking for something to latch onto to feel important. The actual real world consequences aren't the point.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 06:12 AM
1

Of course the fraternities (in general) were silent. Had they even attempted to speak up, they would have been labelled rape apologists. Would the sororities not have been? And the accused fraternity DID speak up. They were quick to point out the fallacies in the Rolling Stone article, such as there was no frat party on the day in question. Sorry, I should have been more specific, I was referring to the national organisations. Didn't they basicly toe the party line and promise "more indoctrinati…
/r/MensRights05/02/15 05:35 AM
4

Wait, what the fuck? Is that poster satire?
/r/MensRights05/02/15 05:19 AM
2

There are a lot of people who love a long time with heart disease issues It took me a few moments to work out "love" was supposed to be "live", lol. I had an image in my head of Cartman saying "Me love you long time."
/r/MensRights05/02/15 05:17 AM
1

Well, no, but no one else was either, including the fraternities.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 05:07 AM
1

That or maybe "33% of heart disease victims are female"
/r/MensRights05/02/15 05:05 AM
1

"Celebrate"?
/r/MensRights05/02/15 05:04 AM
2

Doesn't seem so bad, just one thing stuck out at me: Bystander intervention Does the person you're helping want help
/r/MensRights04/02/15 12:46 AM
3

Good find, but try to use archive.today or screenshots for sharing sites like this: There's no reason to give them ad revenue for being assholes.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 12:08 AM
1

Er, what?
/r/MensRights03/02/15 12:22 AM
2

So when people hate on women for having body hair, it's not because of unrealistic beauty standards, it's because they hate men.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 08:23 PM
1

That's fair enough, but it sounded like you were blaming the muslim for your unease and expecting them to police other muslims or something.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 08:16 PM
1

Probably a stock photo.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 07:35 PM
1

Thanks for posting, but I honestly think it's a big naive to say this kind of thing isn't representative of feminism.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 07:34 PM
1

The same thing with feminism, if enough extremists+media force the idea that men are monsters, you end up feeling a little bit like a monster. But in your example it's not reasonable to blame the entire group for the actions of a few criminals, any more than it's reasonable for women to blame all men for rape. The problem with feminism is that the "extremists" either are representative of the majority, or the majority are completely silent and permit them to represent them.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 07:33 PM
2

What he said wouldn't be accurate even of TRP
/r/MensRights02/02/15 07:30 PM
1

the reason women disrespect you and won't date/sleep with you is because of your mindset, not because they're horrible people. Women largely don't disrespect me, any more than men do. I don't take issue with women, I take issue with gender ideologues who try to demonise men. Said idiots come in both male and female varieties.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 07:29 PM
4

Or possibly: Stop his wife from beating him.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 07:26 PM
13

Whoosh
/r/MensRights01/02/15 06:41 PM
4

This needs to be the top comment.
/r/MensRights01/02/15 11:31 AM
1

Well, given that there's a motive to declare mitigating circumstances during a trial, it's not really guaranteed that they are victims.
/r/MensRights01/02/15 11:30 AM
4

Yeah... but they used to be a funny clickbait site, now they're trying to be funny with meaning and it's just not working.
/r/MensRights31/01/15 10:29 AM
12

That site badly needs to decide whether it wants to be a social justice blog or a toilet humour comedy site, the two really really don't mix. Plenty of good points in the article, but I don't see how you can be serious about something like that and joke about it at the same time. It's like watching a Big Bang Theory episode about the holocaust or something.
/r/MensRights31/01/15 07:42 AM
6

I actually agree victims shouldn't be forced to report things to the police, and guess what? They aren't. If she decided not to make a report there's no way she could have been forced to do so.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 08:33 PM
4

For the life of me, I still can't understand why a university is supposed to become some kind of welfare state/criminal prosecution service for anything bad happening there. If I got raped in a public park out walking at night, would the trust who owned it be required to supply me with counselling and hold a trial if I don't want to go to the police? How about if it happens in my appartment building, is it my landlord's problem? Universities are organisations which exist to teach you things, tha…
/r/MensRights29/01/15 08:31 PM
0

I think this is unfair, I haven't seen anything to suggest that the people being punished were responsible fore the hysteria.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 03:17 AM
1

It's not the campus, it's the greek association themselves.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 03:16 AM
0

Women barely batted an eye as Fraternity men at UVA had their house vandalized, were called rapists, and portrayed as too dangerous to be around. With respect, both men and women were silent (I didn't really see anyone standing up to the SJWs) and the demonisation seemed to come from a small group of protestors and the university admins, not the sororities.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 03:14 AM
2

Lol. Most of the people messaging her are probably ragey 13 year old kids, not anyone of any consequence or with any self control. And even if, by a miracle, they stopped feeding her dollar-bait I honestly wouldn't put it beyond her to fill in for them herself, or get a friend to do it.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 02:02 AM
2

I think she believes in it too, but that doesn't mean she's anything other than a professional victim. Take away the media attention and the furor around the tweets and she's just another youtube feminist with a failed kickstarter.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 10:40 PM
2

Her buisness isn't based off of that... God damnit. Really? Because it certainly seems to be her primary source of funding (these people said horrible things please donate) and her business certainly isn't based on making youtube videos given that she's two years over her deadline. Or was that all sarcasm? I'm having trouble telling. Disregard if so.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 10:15 PM
2

I don't doubt she was stalked. If her address was given out? no doubt at all. Maybe not some ongoing deal, but I don't doubt some people did some creeping around her home. I do. Unless I see some evidence it actually happened then I'm not willing to presume anything. Especially when the person involved's business is based around claiming to be stalked and threatened.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 10:04 PM
2

That's shifting the goal posts, the OP wasn't complaining about doxxing or stalking, he was complaining about people writing mean things on twitter. That said, when was she ever stalked?
/r/MensRights28/01/15 09:53 PM
1

And seriously: "This is an anonymous death threat" If that's harassment then I'd hate to see the internet she wants to build.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 08:32 PM
1

There's more than enough examples of political actors manufacturing outrage to be suspicious, just look at the union guy who posed as a google worker screaming abuse at anti-gentrification protestors, or Meg Lanker Simons who wrote herself rape threats to bolster her rape culture campaign. And even apart from that, there's more than a few trolls who (correctly) recognise Sarkeesian as a lulcow. As for the rest? I'm sure some are genuine, but it still doesn't matter because they're simply not an …
/r/MensRights28/01/15 08:30 PM
4

Sure, she's a victim of people typing mean things about her, just like I'm a victim of stubbing my toe when I got out of bed this morning or my friend is a victim of having to shovel snow off her driveway. It's not exactly something pleasant (although I wouldn't imagine the hundreds of thousands of dollars in pity money hurts) but on a scale of sunshine to holocaust it's not exactly exhaulted to the point of being a serious issue.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 08:23 PM
1

It's a classic first world non-problem which she is using to accrue enormous amounts of cash she doesn't need.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 08:20 PM
3

Well... the comic uses two extreme examples to make the argument about confused consent seem ridiculous without actually providing a counter-argument ("How could you be confused? She's obviously drunk."). But extremely obvious examples aren't the problem, it's all the shades of grey ones in between. It's a completely dishonest argument which ignores the way things work in the real world. If women consenting to have sex were always in a state of being either, agressively sexual or blackout drunk …
/r/MensRights28/01/15 08:16 PM
2

This genuinely made me laugh. GG
/r/MensRights28/01/15 07:59 PM
2

I actually have no problem with this, or at least there should be some system in place like there is for adoptees so that they can establish a line of communication via a third party, but the biological parent can refuse. Even apart from emotional reasons it can be vitally important for things like medical history or sourcing kidney donors. So long as there's no ridiculous crap like suing them for child support then it makes perfect sense.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 07:53 PM
2

Oh right, so they want to make it easy to tell everyone to unplug their devices at takeoff and landing? That's ridiculous, it should be an open and shut case. "This guy needs to wear ear protection to use your service, it's not hurting anyone, let him do it ans stop whining."
/r/MensRights28/01/15 05:11 PM
1

I think a distinct campaign would be better. The whole point of those things is that people will see it and know what you're wearing it for. Even if people heard of AVFM's campaign, it's so tiny they'll just assume people they see wearing the ribbon are doing it for the regular campaign, Maybe have two ribbons? One a white ribbon for all victims of domestic violence and a black ribbon for the unrecognised men. That serves the dual purpose of shaming the bigots who won't recognise the men by poin…
/r/MensRights28/01/15 05:59 AM
2

(the main issue was i was flying in turbo prop aircraft with 113db SPL on a daily basis and air canada refused to allow me to wear any hearing protection) Why?
/r/MensRights28/01/15 05:56 AM
0

Actually she has a point: A (because there's more than one) dictionary definition is just someone's opinion of what that word means. If the vast majority of the speaking population agree, then sure, we can take it for granted that that's the definition, but with more controversial words, like feminism, it's just a suggestion. And a particularly whitewashed one in most dictionaries. In reality feminism means anything any feminist says it does, so it doesn't really mean anything.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 05:49 AM
4

I think his point was more that the feminists have alot of political influence, not that they're the majority of the population.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 05:33 AM
1

Sweden: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/sweden-left-party-toilet-stand_n_1590572.html
/r/MensRights28/01/15 05:33 AM
1

Not really, it wasn't "the country" just one fringe party.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 05:32 AM
1

Honestly, this whole thing is ridiculous... Why the hell is a sports team getting involved in gender politics? Why is the government in a position to tell them whether or not they can get involved in gender politics? How can they cancel someone's ticket for complaining? Even if they did, how is that a human rights issue? As far as I'm concerned: Let them support white ribbon, freedom of speech and all. If that offends you, don't give them another cent until they stop, draw as much attention to t…
/r/MensRights28/01/15 05:30 AM
1

Actually women participate, sjws don't like it though: http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/13/daily-caller-patriots-harvard-streakers-yell-usa-usa-at-race-protesters-out-to-co-opt-tradition/ They ended up ignoring the protestor blockade and ran the other way around the route.
/r/PussyPass28/01/15 04:53 AM
1

That's pretty much standard fare for rape cases where the victim is female. Happens all the time. Right, but if you want to call these particular individuals bigoted and attribute their actions to bigotry you'll have to show that they would act differently if a woman did this, not some other guy in another city. And in this case, her credibility is impeached because she lied and said she left, when there is video evidence that she didn't leave in the time & manner she claimed, and she apparently…
/r/MensRights27/01/15 11:26 PM
1

The issue here isn't bigotry, that has nothing to do with it. The issue is that the only evidence they have that they had unconsentual sex (or that he didn't rape her) is his word against hers. They shouldn't bring a case to court if it's going to come down to two people telling a story and the jury trying to decide which one sounds more "truthy."
/r/MensRights27/01/15 04:52 PM
1

I'm a dead person being in a living person's body. The necrophobic doctors won't help me transition.
/r/MensRights27/01/15 04:49 PM
2

Would not be believed if the accused was male, and the police would still move forward. This is just a different way of saying the person who made the decision not to prosecute was a bigot. It doesn't matter whether the prosecutor/police believe her or not. What matters is that they believe they can prove her guilt before a jury, which they can't, it's his word against hers that the oral sex was unconsentual. That's an interesting take. I hadn't thought of that. I would think the combination of …
/r/MensRights27/01/15 06:47 AM
2

I'm trying to think how it happens that a woman whose testimony is already impeached by evidence could present a convincing side of this story that somehow merits charges not being pressed by police. Easy: I got hauled into the station where a group of men started accusing me of raping someone I had sex with. I was frightened, so I lied and pretended the whole thing never happened. Unfortunately there were cameras and they performed a DNA test, so I admitted to having sex with him, but it was co…
/r/MensRights27/01/15 06:22 AM
2

As in what she spent it on?
/r/MensRights27/01/15 01:59 AM
2

Firstly, they'd actually have the resources to sue the person for fraud. Secondly, this guy got caught because he wasn't served the notice for his hearing (he was in jail at the time) and the judge automatically ruled in the state's favour when he didn't show up. That wouldn't happen to someone important because the baliff (or whoever serves those notices) would make damn sure to do their job right. It'd be awesome to see it happen though :D
/r/MensRights27/01/15 01:58 AM
2

I had a friend who was raped in college. He didn't want to tell anybody else because he was afraid his girlfriend would think he cheated on her and dump him. Turns out he could have been right.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 11:27 PM
4

See! You had to guess! The fact that it's not obvious to you is just another privilege!
/r/MensRights26/01/15 09:22 PM
13

Vivo-scum pulse-lord.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 09:18 PM
1

I agree wholeheartedly with what you're saying here, but this is also part of why this demonstrates the misandry in our culture. Females are taken at their word all the time in rape cases. In nearly all rape cases, it's impossible to prove it wasn't consensual. The word of the alleged victim is itself admitted as the primary evidence. I agree, I'm just saying that the police's response is exactly what should have happened.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 08:23 PM
6

Well, "she got away with it" assumes she did it. The reason she's not in jail right now is because the only evidence she unconsentually performed oral sex on him is his word. I don't think the point of this story is "we should have a trial every time someone accuses someone of something" so much as "you shouldn't treat your friends with suspicion if they tell you a (plausible) story about being sexually assaulted." One part that particularly stuck out to me was the college board encouraging him …
/r/MensRights26/01/15 06:45 PM
5

Why not? They might have funding specifically put aside for it, or regulations requiring them to do so in every case.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 06:40 PM
6

I think the point was more the reaction of his girlfriend and friends.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 06:40 PM
12

I replied earlier without finishing the story off, my bad. Two things: The police did exactly the right thing, they investigated, found that she was lying and expelled her for that. They didn't press charges because it would be impossible to prove it wasn't consentual, which is fair enough. His girlfriend and "friends" are absolute scumbags. Benefit of the doubt is a vital standard for legal procedures with actual consequences, but personal relationships? If my partner told me they were raped I'…
/r/MensRights26/01/15 06:37 PM
13

"If you don't have to think about it, then it's privilege"
/r/MensRights26/01/15 06:30 PM
4

About as much as opposing the death penalty is islamophobic.
/r/MensRights25/01/15 07:15 PM
2

This
/r/MensRights25/01/15 07:13 PM
1

If he's campaigning to be allowed in then it doesn't matter: Clearly it's what he wants.
/r/MensRights25/01/15 06:34 PM
1

*humans I see no reason to believe men wouldn't do this given the same media climate.
/r/MensRights25/01/15 06:32 PM
1

I understood it first time, no worse than any other title on the sub.
/r/MensRights25/01/15 06:29 PM
7

While some argued that women should be free to do whatever they want with their bodies, others opined that Page Three models were victims and simply couldn’t see they were being used. Inb4 women are weak children who need to be protected. Oh! Too late.
/r/MensRights25/01/15 06:27 PM
3

When I first saw one of those "men, don't rape women" flyers I assumed it was a joke, turned out to be real. This should be a joke, but it's probably quite a serious attempt to "start a dialogue" about how it's men's fault that women get raped.
/r/MensRights25/01/15 06:22 PM
0

I'm not saying that I consider that particular action to be morally justifiable, I'm pointing out that opposing the right to discuss the morality of things which are currently illegal would be a very negative thing for society. Unless you think your local laws are perfect and require no change of course...
/r/MensRights23/01/15 10:08 PM
6

Holy shit, good find!
/r/MensRights23/01/15 08:59 PM
1

but particularly when you're advocating for acceptance of a criminal act by a person in a position of power. Plenty of things which used to be criminal acts are considered perfectly normal today, and came to be that way because people were able to talk about them. Take homosexuality for instance, they used to lock people up for that, but now it's considered a civil liberty.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 08:20 PM
8

Davis says there are thousands of men in Carnell Alexander’s shoes because Michigan doesn’t have paternity fraud laws that protect men. Crazy law hurts people, so clearly what we need is another law to neutralise it. Are they playing pokemon or something? Just get rid of the original law. I'd love to see the stats on how much these family law courts cost compared to how much the state actually gets back in payments.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 08:14 PM
2

Do you have a citation for that?
/r/MensRights23/01/15 08:12 PM
1

What's the turnout for judge elections? I'm willing to bet it's a small minority who can be bothered to vote or even know who the judges are in most cases (perhaps this case might be an exception though). Abstention is stlll a democratic decision. And you don't just get to shift the blame onto the voters. That's a cop out. Why not? And here's the flipside: what if the voters kick out a perfectly good, fair judge for a bad reason/no reason? Bad/no good reason in who's estimation? If people don't …
/r/MensRights23/01/15 08:09 PM
1

Makes sense. I was curious about the gender ratio so I looked it up. Granted it's wikipedia, so it could be wrong, but is that description (huge female surplus) something that was more true a few years back? Or is it something that's currently true, but specific to the cities?
/r/MensRights23/01/15 08:01 PM
3

I'd say we draw the line at the office door. If they do something at work to demonstrate bias then fair enough, if we merely suspect it because of something they said online then we should give them the benefit of the doubt. If there's a specific concern like "did this teacher rape person X" or "did this teacher mark up/down their students based on gender" then it should be possible to investigate that based on actual facts rather than suspicion.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 04:32 PM
4

I don't think anyone here thinks it's not disgusting, but the real test of principles is standing up for people you disagree with. Even just from a perspective of self preservation, if this kind of behaviour becomes standard practice then it has serious potential to bite us in the ass: How many people think that MRAs are dangerous misogynists. http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2008/12/why-defend-freedom-of-icky-speech.html
/r/MensRights23/01/15 04:13 PM
1

As a principle, I support the right of an individual to say whatever they like outside of work without it affecting their job, even if I find it unpleasant. Otherwise you're just exchanging a government censor for a boss censor. Unless the school has reason to believe he was going to rape a male pupil this isn't any of their business.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 04:10 PM
1

So they need to be accountable to someone who is accountable to voters? Seems to me, either they're insulated from oversight or they're not. If they're not then your argument still applies, if they are then they're just as dangerous. But really, how accountable are the elected judges in the US anyway? I remember that judge who was caught on camera beating his teen daughter with cerebral paulsy and he still got re-elected afterwards. Judge Adams I think? Then go blame the electorate for voting fo…
/r/MensRights23/01/15 04:07 PM
1

It's a two edged sword, if you make them accountable then they might be too populist, but if you make the unaccountable then... well I hope that sentence speaks for itself.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 03:36 PM
1

We don't need to coopt other rights movement to become more relevant. Nor should we.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:45 PM
2

Amanda Marcotte is insane and not worth the attention. I'd recommend using archive.today or screenshots for links in future: We don't want to give her enablers ad revenue.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:41 PM
4

First, do no harm. Unless the government tells you to, then you have to do it.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:36 PM
1

The articles don't give much detail about the case itself. I assume there's some reason the judge did this and I'd like to know why.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:32 PM
1

No idea. They can direct a verdict if they think the prosecution's case has no merit, but that's usually done before the jury returns a verdict. Same for declaring a mistrial. This sounds really weird.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:31 PM
1

There's no such thing as an impartial person either. Activist judges still occur even when they're not elected.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:25 PM
1

Judges are elected in Britain too, it's just a very small electorate. I'm not convinced that either system is proof against judges making stupid decisions and exceeding their powers.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:24 PM
2

I think he's s fucking idiot and a despicable individual, but unless that profile was a part of his work as a teacher I don't think he should have been suspended: Fucking with people's jobs based on them excercising their free speech outside of work is a slippery slope I don't want to go down.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:17 PM
4

I hope not a literal crash course. I got behind my first wheel at 11 to help my parents tow a stuck van out of a rut. Goddamn it feels good to be a kid in control of a vehicle more than twice your height :D
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:06 PM
4

Well, with respect, if you object to a particular personality, like effeminate men, and think they should "keep it at home," what would you say to someone who finds your personality offensive?
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:02 PM
2

In Russia the people and the government are two separate entities, and average Ivan on the street does everything he can to not interface with government. The cops are corrupt as hell and the bureaucracy is ridiculously outdated, but there's a certain level of freedom there that we don't have here. Just curious, how do you account for Putin getting voted in over and over? Do you think it's mostly rigging, or do they genuinely think he'll improve things? Edit: Also, you make it sound like a nice …
/r/MensRights23/01/15 02:00 PM
2

There's hundreds of different types of tofu though. Some are practically inedible but most of them you can do good stuff with. Personally I use soymince alot. It's cheap, doesn't require refigeration and has a shelf life measured in years. If you soak it in stock it's pretty much a swap-out ingredient for beef mince with all the same flavour and texture. It's good in things like chili and bolognaise.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 01:58 PM
1

Don't bother with them: They genuinely believe men aren't taught not to rape and nothing will convince them otherwise. I've no idea what conditions they were brought up in but I feel deeply sorry for them.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 01:36 PM
1

Your hypothesis is that men think rape is ok and are not taught otherwise. That kind of action would not occur if that were the case. It's not shifting goalposts, it's direct evidence proving your claims wrong. I'm going to leave this here because it's abundantly clear that your argument is based on fervant belief rather than any kind of facts.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 01:21 PM
1

Who's moving the goal posts? Are you arguing that "thou shalt not kill" isn't a law? "The laws" implying one set of laws. At any rate, you're nitpicking now. Your claim that rape is considered acceptable compared to theft or murder is absolute mendacious nonsense in the light of how it is, and was, treated under the law and vigilante justice. But maybe you have a point. Like in this case where a guy was accused of raping a woman, and some men high fived him so hard he almost died.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 04:20 PM
3

First- and Second-wave feminism had valid rights and issues to fight for. First wave feminists didn't even call themselves feminists, they got coopted later to make "second wave" feminism seem venerable and important. Even that aside, the suffragettes were by and large a pretty nasty bunch of people. They supported conscription as a basis for voting rights and formed the white feather movement to shame men into fighting on the front in ww1 while simultaneously demanding the same right for themse…
/r/MensRights22/01/15 08:44 AM
1

You're right, all those laws against rape with harsh punishments are figments of my imagination.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 10:48 PM
1

Girls aren't formally taught that killing their children is wrong. You can't disprove this so it must be true. We live in a culture of toxic femininity which encourages infanticide. Don't be that mother. Back in reality, boys are taught that rape is wrong. If you weren't then I feel sorry for you but your experience is about as common as someone somehow missing the lesson that hurting people is wrong.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 10:41 PM
2

That's simply untrue, and you have provided no evidence to back up your assertions.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 10:15 PM
2

I'm hesitant to judge without knowing the circumstances. For example: If the parent with primary custody had been only feeding the kid fast food (and I've known parents who did that), the kid now refused to eat anything else, and this had been a bone of contention which no one was willing to do anything to correct, then I wouldn't entirely blame the other parent for refusing to continue cleaning up their mess. Not saying it'd be my decision, just pointing out that there are potentially mitigatin…
/r/MensRights21/01/15 10:09 PM
2

And the moon is made of cheese. I'll believe you when you prove it. Until then literally everything I've ever come across about how western culture treats rapists (and those even suspected of rape) says the opposite.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 09:58 PM
1

Irish journalist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Waters_%28columnist%29 He's usually the only one who speaks up on men's rights issues in Ireland, but jesus he's such an ass about it that sometimes I think he's working for the other side. His most recent triumph was, after being called homophobic for opposing gay marriage, threatening RTE with a lawsuit and had them pull the segment where the dreaded H word was used. Of course the Streisand effect kicked in and he ended up looking even worse…
/r/MensRights21/01/15 07:38 PM
2

Sounds interesting.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 07:34 PM
3

If you're trying to imply that men aren't taught rape is wrong you're going to need a whole truckload of facts to back up that particular piece of nonsense.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 07:33 PM
1

You're dead right, it really should be in the FAQ and possibly the sidebar.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 02:07 PM
2

While I agree that it's important not to tar all feminists with the same brush, I'd just like to provide some context here: A large part of this sub's work is involved in combating the whitewashing of feminism and the pretence that feminists, as a group, aren't responsible for a great deal of misandric public policy (as well as transphobia and other issues mentioned by David). Coopting other equality movements for political gain and hatred of trans people are real issues within the feminist comm…
/r/MensRights21/01/15 02:06 PM
2

Sounds really interesting. How do you plan to publish it out of curiosity?
/r/MensRights21/01/15 01:52 PM
1

It might surprise you to learn this question gets asked on a monthly/weekly basis in here. The answer is more or less yes. Some individual MRAs oppose LGBT rights or don't recognise GID as being a thing, the vast majority do. That said, this sub is a focus group for human rights issues which disproportionately affect men. LGBT rights issues are best handled by LGBT rights groups rather than being coopted by unrelated movements for strategic purposes.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 01:50 PM
3

And inside it, to incubate.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 01:47 PM
4

My first reaction was that this must be due to some kind of cultural or genetic heritage specific to semetic peoples (the study was conducted in Denmark with a population of mostly Jewish and Muslim individuals) but they seem to have controlled for that. I'd be very interested to see a follow up study performed in the US, where a larger variety of people have the procedure done.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 12:15 PM
1

Irish pro-male journalist Please don't be John Waters, please don't be John Waters, please don't be John Waters, YES! :D
/r/MensRights21/01/15 11:55 AM
3

There's plenty of stats out there debunking those myths, but the problem isn't facts it's that your teachers have a platform to speak and you don't. Honestly, my advice would be to keep you head down in terms of what happens in class, unless they open up the floor to a debate you're only likely to get in trouble if you challenge their nonsense (ideologues can be incredibly vindictive if their claims are countered). Outside of class, I'd say arm yourself with facts and above all, don't be pushy a…
/r/MensRights21/01/15 11:51 AM
1

Ah, right, I thought it was something that happened a few years ago. I keep forgetting the internet has people older than me as well as younger.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 02:06 AM
10

And that’s a good thing. Boobs aren’t news. I don’t buy The Sun regularly, No shit. I can tell you don't buy it regularly because you think it's primarily a publication dedicated to spreading news. People seriously need to stop comparing tabloids to broadsheets, they're not the same thing. The Sun is (was?) a paper for working men on their breaks to get the soccer scores, read about a sensationalist court case and smirk at a pair of tits. The tits aren't out of place in that context, they fit ri…
/r/MensRights20/01/15 07:21 PM
2

According to the article some of them actually ban alcohol. Whether the reasoning behind that is because they don't want to clean up the mess, or for safety reasons, isn't clear.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 07:13 PM
2

In my experience, if you make it illegal for teenagers to drink you just end up with teenagers drinking illegally.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 07:12 PM
2

AMR troll, I wouldn't bother.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 07:03 PM
3

This is the thing, police forces the world over spread information to vulnerable demographics advising them on how to avoid crime. Some examples I've personally seen: Burglery Bike theft Laptop theft Gaybashing Identity theft Mugging They conveniently ignore every single example of this and pretend that it's specific to rape.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 07:00 PM
2

The point of the metaphor isn't that mugging is ok, it's that walking through a bad area with large amounts of visible wealth, then complaining when people point out that you're an idiot for putting yourself in danger, is sheer stupidity. At any rate, a more accurate comparison would be someone filling their wallet up with cash, getting shitfaced, spending it all in a casino, then waking up the next morning with no money. Edit: SRS Troll, never mind.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 06:57 PM
1

It's true, women are so emotionally aware that they can smell feelings.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 03:20 PM
2

Holy shit... what kind of place is that? Is it some kind of military school or something?
/r/MensRights20/01/15 03:19 PM
2

Jesus what a waste of everyone's time and money... Bathroom locks are implemented to protect a group of people who feel more inconvenienced than protected The codes are freely distributed online, meaning that the locks serve no function but to inconvenience people The faculty's "solution" it to put code locks on male bathrooms too, thus inconveniencing everyone equally.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 03:18 PM
2

*excesses?
/r/MensRights20/01/15 03:16 PM
15

^ This If you find that you have frequent gaps in your memory while using recreational drugs, then maybe try partying sober?
/r/MensRights20/01/15 01:18 PM
2

This will work either two ways: Either they make parties with rules so strict that no one (male or female) actually wants to attend or They have parties almost identical to all other parties and nothing really changes
/r/MensRights20/01/15 01:17 PM
1

Was it ever any different?
/r/MensRights20/01/15 01:11 PM
1

Ok, hard to tell what's going on here without more context, but my own suggestion would be to refuse to discuss the issue further with her and put in as much distance as possible. If you're stuck with her in a professional or academic setting, treat her politely and formally and refuse to reply to her if she brings up rape. If she continues doing it, and verbally abuses you in public, try bringing it up with HR or the campus administration. Someone suggested below buying a camera and keeping it …
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:43 PM
1

Somehow I suspect she's not the kind of person to be swayed by mere facts.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:39 PM
1

Well yeah, but it's part of being an adult for her too. He shouldn't have to put up with being shouted at in public because she disagrees with him.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:38 PM
13

We are determined to continue to provide education to prepare women for leadership roles. Through being a professional dietician? Snark aside, I wish him luck. I've no problem with private colleges having their own admission rules (provided that all other private colleges can too), but if we must have public colleges then they have to be meritocracies.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:36 PM
1

I think the presentation is overly complicated and verbose, but it has the right message.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:33 PM
1

They might or might not, but they should. Just as they should try to recruit more male teachers.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 10:15 PM
1

In some cases, like teaching and police work, having equal representation has actual benefits for the work being done, so if standards are being met I don't have a problem for them giving preference to an under-represented demographic.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 10:14 PM
3

The gender angle is annoying, and somewhat nonsense: If more men than women are driving, is that not likely because more men than women work on the road, or in general?
/r/MensRights18/01/15 10:00 PM
2

He's pointing out that injuries from a car crash are more likely to be life threatening than injuries from slipping on a pavement. Plus, there's alot of things pedestrians and cyclists can do to keep safer in icy conditions (wear crampons, use winter tires etc.) whereas motorists don't have as many options.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 09:59 PM
19

I think it's probably for the best that you didn't retaliate, but at the same time you shouldn't be so quick to apologise: She was the one who went way over the top by seriously assaulting you. If anything she should be apologising to you (and in a just world, hoping you won't go to the police)
/r/MensRights18/01/15 09:53 PM
2

Nope. If they can't be proven guilty then they're innocent in the eyes of the law. And if they spent time in jail despite not being provably guilty then they should be compensated.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 09:48 PM
1

I can see the issue they're facing: A shrinking public purse and a need to cut expenditure. But the solution to this problem isn't to avoid paying out when your system fucks up, it's to fix the system so that it doesn't. No person should be convicted of a crime when the only evidence against them is someone else's word. If it's even possible they didn't do it (and it clearly was in these cases) then it should never go to court. And if a few million pounds of tax payers money have to be shelled o…
/r/MensRights18/01/15 09:47 PM
2

Where in the name of St. Basil is he getting this stuff? Vladimir Putin is a social conservative, I've never seen him say anything to suggest he would support men's rights.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 08:47 PM
1

Hardly a resounding argument in favour.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 08:46 PM
2

Also /r/mensrightslinks and /r/mensrightslaw
/r/MensRights17/01/15 09:47 AM
1

And the alternative of "allowing me to choose" (how nice of you) would have left me uncircumcised. By allowing me to choose, what you actually mean is I can't decide to choose, because you are applying it to a time when I literally cannot biologically choose. You know this, but you are okay with it because it matches your agenda and previously held ideology on the matter. There is no physical reason that you can't make that decision as an adult, your "it's totally different then" argument holds …
/r/MensRights16/01/15 04:41 PM
1

I understand that it's technically childporn in many jurisdictions, I just don't think it does anyone any kind of good to prosecute people for this, regardless of context. For example: My mum has pictures of me, as a baby, without clothes. I don't think she belongs in jail. Now, granted, the pictures in this case were sexual, but I don't think that makes the kids involved some kind of dangerous predators. I do wonder, though, if police say they estimate the boy had 11 shots and her 8 and by the …
/r/MensRights16/01/15 03:44 PM
1

I agree. Justice in this case (for me) would be her losing her job, being barred from teaching and being prosecuted for falsely accusing him to save her skin. I don't think it helps anyone to hand down a jail sentence for what she was actually found guilty of.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 03:07 PM
1

Their policies don't seem to be as fully-fleshed out as those of the misog..ahem.. anti-feminist political manifesto Oh ho ho ho! So witty! /s
/r/MensRights16/01/15 12:04 PM
1

but I really think the amount of hatred this all spawned was too much. Like any other sex scandal involving the "r" word.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 11:37 AM
5

I think the sentence was fair, but the verdict wasn't. A bunch of teenagers got drunk, had sex, and took pictures. That's all that happened here. She committed suicide because of bullying, not rape or "child pornography."
/r/MensRights16/01/15 11:37 AM
1

Ok, let's apply their other usual argument then: Women and girls attempt suicide at a higher rate than men. Must be because of all that freedom and privilege right?
/r/MensRights16/01/15 11:29 AM
4

Female circumcision describes a variety of customs and modifications. The more extreme ones prevent women from orgasming, but the data on how common they actually are is questionable. The less extreme forms have actually less of an impact than male circumcision as they only involve perforating/nicking the labia or clitoral hood, not removing them entirely. Nonetheless, there's far more backlash against them than there is against much more extensive modifications of male infants.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 11:27 AM
5

Probably not, but the issue here isn't "circumcision is wrong and bad" it's "circumcision doesn't stop AIDs and even if it did, that's not a good reason to recommend snipping infants."
/r/MensRights16/01/15 11:24 AM
7

Not sure if it's what he's talking about but: http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/the-aap-report-on-circumcision-bad-science-bad-ethics-bad-medicine/ Health benefits and medical ethics section.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 11:22 AM
2

This is an excellent question, and one several medical professionaly owe an answer to.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 11:19 AM
2

Whether I'd have a problem with this would hinge on one thing: Would they make the same joke about a woman (for example getting her tits cut off)? If so, hell, maybe they just have a dark sense of humour, I'd be willing to presume they wouldn't laugh if it actually happened in front of them. If not, that's pretty creepy.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 10:26 AM
1

Well, there's the concept of perpetual alimony in alot of cultures, but not necessarily 50%.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 10:20 AM
1

You are trying to say that I shouldn't have that ability to have one as an infant, which is the only time I want one done. You didn't have the ability to make that choice as an infant, someone chose for you, which is the point. As it happens, they chose correctly, I'm glad, but not all men do, and the consequences for not having it done are negligable compared to the consequences of having it done. There is also a BIG difference between feeling pain and feeling AND remembering that pain. Like wh…
/r/MensRights16/01/15 10:12 AM
0

I understand it well enough to have experienced it myself, and the notion that I somehow had no choice in the matter is still bullshit.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 10:09 AM
0

Well, there's not really much there to accept or reject. She acted like an asshole, he felt uncomfortable. I don't see any reason to doubt his description since he's not making any outlandish claims (like being dragged into a bedroom and gang raped on broken glass)
/r/MensRights16/01/15 10:07 AM
2

That's some twisted logic right there. I have a counter proposal: No infant circumcisions If you want one when you're older you can get one If you consider this to be too painful or daunting, then you shouldn't be pushing for infants to have them
/r/MensRights15/01/15 11:40 PM
1

especially for procedures such as male infant circumcision that have to be done while the child is an infant. I am for being circumcised as an infant, but not as an older child or adult, and I consider those to be completely different procedures. Sorry... what? You're going to have to explain that one to me.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 11:28 PM
1

Not all men are against it, just as all men are not against tattoos, but tattooing infants is still wrong and an individual's appreciation of tattoos is irrelevant to the discussion of infant tattooing.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 11:23 PM
1

Right, but when a best case scenario occurs, who does it help to pretend it's a worst case scenario? Other than the sex offenders registry, I think this is a good outcome: He's not teaching anymore, and he has a suspended sentence hanging over him to ensure good behaviour.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 11:19 PM
2

Not even "expect from women" more like "expect from SJWs" And while that's true, the relevance to this sub is the fact that he was treated completely differently from the kids gloves softly softly approach handed out to female students.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 11:03 PM
3

They don't exist, probably because they're an illustration of a point.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 10:48 PM
0

I'm not from Michigan and that definition is a million miles from what we're talking about here. And what would I be put in prison for? "We caught this guy being convinced to have sex with a really annoying woman" "Sounds serious, lock him up immediately"
/r/MensRights15/01/15 10:44 PM
0

"changing the person's mind" can be considered a form of date rape. Coercive behavior in order to obtain sex is considered date rape. Nope, sorry, bullshit. The only person who decides whether I consent or not is me. You can be an annoying asshole all you like, but if I say yes as a result, all you're guilty of is being an annoying asshole (something you clearly have a great deal of experience in). Neither you, nor anyone else, is capable of changing my, or anyone else's, mind simply by "coerciv…
/r/MensRights15/01/15 10:03 PM
1

Not in the OP, to which you were responding. At any rate, your comment still wasn't relevant to the conversation as "I'm happy this thing happened to me as a kid" has no bearing on "parents should be allowed to do this thing to their kids."
/r/MensRights15/01/15 10:01 PM
2

Plus, wisdom teeth often cause health problems, healthy foreskins don't.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 09:18 PM
2

No... the OP is talking about him not being happy with the fact that he was circumcised.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 09:11 PM
1

At times like this I think it's important to be able to laugh at ourselves.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 08:15 PM
1

No problem. Best of luck.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 08:05 PM
1

Well, the physical implications you can't do anything about, but the emotional impact is entirely up to you, and even if you're not up to the task of managing them yourself then there are people who can help you with that.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 08:03 PM
0

are you trolling? You clearly have a great deal to add to this discussion.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 07:58 PM
1

I wouldn't be pleased either, you have every right not to be. The distrust is part of what I'm talking about though, I think you owe it to yourself to be able to unpack that baggage and leave it behind.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 07:57 PM
1

I don't think it's unreasonable for you to be upset, but I'd have to agree with others here in that, if you can't come to terms with this on your own, it might be best to talk with someone professional about it to try to come to terms with what happened.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 07:54 PM
2

You're not being downvoted for disagreeing, you're being downvoted for making posts which don't contribute to the conversation. Are you happy with being circumcised? Good for you, it's got nothing to do with the fact that he isn't.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 07:52 PM
2

Well, there's plenty of examples of shitty behaviour that are worth talking about which aren't a crime and shouldn't be reported as one. For example: My girlfriend cheated on me with a bunch of guys then tried to make me feel bad for doubting her.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 07:33 PM
1

If someone starts kissing you is it considered evidence that they wanted to kiss?
/r/MensRights15/01/15 07:29 PM
1

So they actually require mindreading in order not to break the law? Why am I not surprised.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 07:19 PM
-1

Any unwanted sexual touching is sexual assault. Not under most laws/rules I've ever come across: The person being accused has to have known it was unwanted, If I went home with someone after a party and consented to have sex with them (but secretly, deep down inside, didn't want to) then I can hardly turn around and announce that they breached my consent. In this case he said no, then physically responded to her advances. Granted he knew he was only doing so to keep her moving, but she didn't ne…
/r/MensRights15/01/15 07:07 PM
-1

It's sexual assault by most legal definitions of it. Even then, is it? She caused him to make out with her by acting like a little shit, but she didn't actually force him to. As the rather unsympathetic phone operator pointed out, he could have simply refused. I think the most important part of this story is the double standard: This is exactly the kind of thing american universities are getting worked up about when it happens to women.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:54 PM
3

Firstly, marriage used to be like that here too, then we stopped doing things that way. Secondly, if marriage in India is an agreement to give someone half of everything you have/will ever have should they choose to leave at any point, then it can say so in the contract. No need to go making extra laws after the fact. Thirdly, just because something is the status quo doesn't mean it makes any kind of sense.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:38 PM
3

I'd say it's entirely possible that it's tradition, but that's not the same as a law.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:27 PM
1

Not being able to divulge personal information about Zoe Quinn doesn't appear to be a "huge infringement" on his rights, as one comment suggested, since it doesn't exactly bar him from speaking about his own experiences, and doesn't affect him in any other way. Afaik he's barred from talking about her, or what happened to him because of her, at all.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:25 PM
1

Those FBI numbers are interesting, how much trouble is she in for causing all this furor for attention and financial gain? Well, I'm not terribly familiar with what panels have/haven't happened since then, but I've heard it from a few people since that she lied her teeth off about those. If that's true, and it can be proven, then she's in a heap of trouble: Perjury isn't some minor thing where the judge restricts your right to speak, it's a serious offence. And I seriously doubt her case will be…
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:24 PM
1

No idea, but I assumed that was just some kind of preliminary hearing. Hope he does appeal.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:20 PM
2

Well yes, that's why I said it. The teacher isn't blameless here.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:18 PM
5

Are women even allowed to own land in India? Yes. I know they aren't included in inheritance. Are you sure about that? Maybe historically, but I doubt any such law exists today. And even if they couldn't, how would they receive assets under this law if they couldn't own them? And why would a law shield assets they're not permitted to own?
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:12 PM
15

What happens if (for some bizarre reason) he decided to marry again and his second wife did the same thing. Does he get to keep 0% of his income from that point on? Or does she get half of his half?
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:09 PM
2

Possibly if you slept with someone to get ahead and it destroyed your life. I get what you're saying though, I don't think he actually did her any serious harm. I remember being 16, and I wasn't a helpless child adults could push around (is any teenager?) like any other young adult I made my own decisions, and paid for them.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:06 PM
2

No idea.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:01 PM
2

Make an archive of all the high profile false accusations we've seen recently, including from UVa. Show people that this isn't a good idea based on the overwhelming empirical evidence, and they will (hopefully) oppose it. Do we not do that anyway? The point isn't to show that false accusations exist, most non crazies accept that anyhow, it's to show that the author of "study x" did zero fact checking. If that fails, then point out the inevitable and egregious individual rights violations that wi…
/r/MensRights15/01/15 05:54 PM
2

If the judge's description is accurate? An authority figure reinforced her impression that she could have things her way by having sex with people in power.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 05:52 PM
2

Without knowing what actually went on it's hard to say.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 05:50 PM
-1

Honestly, I'm not sure I would call that sexual assault, but it still shows an interesting double standard. Also: OP, I don't think even he said he was raped.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 05:49 PM
2

Consider, then, that there may be good and bad ways of doing this. You don't counter accusations of being violent by punching the accuser in the face. Suggest some.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 05:39 PM
2

I've no doubt it will become filled with false accusations on it's own. We don't need to contribute (and be saddled with 100% of the blame). Well, yes, that's the point. but they'll be treated as being true.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 05:30 PM
2

"People" (the huffington post) will view anything we do in the worst possible light. Pointing out the failure of a "trust and believe" based reporting system is the right thing to do.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 05:28 PM
3

Wait, did that actually happen?
/r/MensRights15/01/15 03:58 PM
3

"I lived with baskandpurr for several years in the late nineties. During this time he sexually abused me and helped orchestrate the 9/11 attacks on the world trade center. Be careful of your high rise towers around this guy, he's trouble."
/r/MensRights15/01/15 03:43 PM
1

I wouldn't suggest it if the false accusations would have any impact (like, say. a false police report). If anything, spamming an anonymous accusation site with anything and everything reduces the power of any false accusation made there. It's not about creating false accusations, it's robbing existing ones of their power.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 03:40 PM
0

Even if people are uncomfortable making believable accusations, they can always thow in a few hundred ridiculous ones to make a point.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 01:34 PM
3

When was this? Flooding them with false complaints is a perfectly legitimate protest against this kind of thing: It points out that there's no due process involved at all and that the data being collected by them is meaningless.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 10:03 AM
2

Exactly. Plus it looks doubly out of context because, in order to see the accusation, you have install that guy's addon.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 08:50 AM
3

She's not the first one to create a database like this, there's a guy who runs a similar one for sites like OKCupid, he makes a point of refusing to ever delete any data under any circumstances. His solution for false accusations? Address the accusation publicly at the top of your profile. The way to deal with databases like this is simple: Flood them. Ensure that every single individual has such an enormous list of accusations that it becomes meaningless. If they don't care about the truth then…
/r/MensRights15/01/15 07:39 AM
7

I think we need more of them. The more inane their complaints get the better for us.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:38 AM
25

This is a really cool trend. I think we should expand on it... Mancrashing: When a man and a woman are involved in a traffic collision Man-coughing: When a man coughs or sneezes on public transport or in a lift Male-lining: When a man beats you to a taxi, or a man gets into a queue ahead of you Bro-dropping: When a man drops something in public (such as a pen) and asks people to move so he can pick it up y-Blocking: When you're caught in a traffic jam and the driver in front is male Boy-preening…
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:37 AM
1

That's the nature of Irish sites online. Everyone plays up the fun loving drunkard plastic leprechaun thing.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 06:15 AM
7

The comments section on the journal are a blazing wreckage. I hate to think what /r/Ireland is like.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 03:42 PM
1

Hah! And look at the history: Lightbreather and someone called "Siko" moved all objection and discussion of negative aspects to the talk page.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 03:08 PM
2

What's wrong with secession? That said, I'm surprised to see a hardcore feminist supporting the concept since almost all their efforts seem to be aimed at the legislature.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 03:05 PM
1

And will the care work industries hire them? Or view them as a threat to children?
/r/MensRights14/01/15 03:00 PM
1

I don't think they want to ban them, just get more involved in how they enjoy themselves until they resemble a tea party.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 02:57 PM
4

The Greek organizations have until January 16 to sign the new agreements, developed by the student groups themselves I think I can probably guess which ones and how representative they are of the average student.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 02:55 PM
2

Also a society which tells them what they did was wrong and illegal, even if they enjoyed it.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 06:32 AM
2

Not all prostitution is human trafficking. Even when it is, not all people trafficked for prostitution are victims (or at least not of the traffickers). A human trafficker is someone who can get people across borders without going through official channels. They exist because people know, or think, that they can make a better living somewhere else that they just happen not to have access to. Sometimes this trafficking is coercive and ends in torture and slavery, sometimes it's not all that diffe…
/r/MensRights13/01/15 08:56 AM
1

There's overlaps between racial issues and gender politics too, some men's rights issues disproportionately effect particular minorities, like incarceration for example.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 08:42 AM
0

I've seen this come up four or five times here, the answer is the same: Some commentators here are transphobic, but the vast majority aren't and the hateful comments are usually downvoted to oblivion. I personally support transpeople as (I think) most other MRAs do. Trans issues are best handled by trans advocacy groups (I actually don't think LGBT groups do a good job of handling them, they're very different issues to those faced by GLB individuals). Where transpeople face issues specifically b…
/r/MensRights13/01/15 08:38 AM
1

I've long ago stopped expecting journalists to ask those kinds of questions.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 08:23 AM
2

The problem, rather, is that not everyone sees a problem with it. “I think they should be treated different,” says Minneapolis-based defense lawyer Joe Friedberg. “Every high school boy had some kind of fantasy about some female teacher. I walk away from these cases and say, ‘That would have been my finest hour.’ I don’t know that I see the damage to the victim in those cases.” He obviously doesn't know very many women if he thinks they don't/didn't have those kinds of fantasies.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 08:20 AM
1

Depends, if she grabbed someone from behind while they were urinating and got splashed then she can hardly pretend she wasn't at fault. If he did it deliberately then sure.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 07:34 AM
1

I think I'm beginning to understand. Was it the case before that, if people needed the loo, they'd take a key and use it to lock their stall, then this woman took all the keys so no one could use her stall?
/r/MensRights13/01/15 07:32 AM
1

He means that he's not in charge of the locks in use in that building.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 07:20 AM
1

Some of those stalls have latches which can be opened and closed from the outside using a screwdriver/allen key/some other kind of key, either to rescue someone inside if the latch breaks or to close it if it's out of order. I worked in a pub where several toilets had broken latches which couldn't be closed from the inside, but could be locked from the outside. It's at least possible the OP's workplace was like this.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 07:19 AM
1

And sometimes those latches are broken and haven't bothered to be replaced.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 07:15 AM
1

I'm thinking this could possibly be a difference between how Israel defines sexual harassment and some other parts of the world. Over here it refers to behaviour with a sexual motive or explicitly sexual overtones. In this case it's pretty clear she was motivated by being a possessive asshole.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 06:28 AM
2

Not if her motivation wasn't sexual. Nonetheless, it's extremely inappropriate behaviour.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 06:23 AM
3

I assume that's a joke, but in case it's taken seriously: Bad idea. Even assuming HR and a court system would be unwilling to believe a man making that claim, they might well be willing to believe a women. Especially given that he previously claimed she did the same thing to him (they could portray it as revenge)
/r/MensRights13/01/15 06:22 AM
1

Not necessarily, alot of clubs have bathroom cameras, they just don't cover the critical area at bowl level.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 06:20 AM
1

They probably learned from hollaback that if they actually show what they're talking about people notice the gaps between their description (all the men were harassing me!) and what actually happened (good morning!). Who wants to bet that half of this "manslamming" was her bodychecking some guys looking for their keys or checking their phones.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 06:08 PM
1

I think the idea of the campaign is that whenever a feminist coins an anti-male tag using "science" and curious people turn to twitter to find out what's going on, they get slammed with a wall of mythbusting instead.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 05:53 PM
3

Manspreading as in spreading falsehoods about men. Personally I like the idea, it's not necessary to completely reclaim all the terms, just to shift them enough that their use is accompanied with a hint of the prejudice they contain.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 09:54 AM
1

If people are walking abrest and there's no way around them, then I usually put my hand out at an angle so it's obvious which side I'm going to pass to. It's a habit I learned from some martial arts class years back, it seems to work pretty well. If they're taking up the whole pavement and they don't break ranks a bit to let people pass then I just stop and wait for them to realise "oh, we have to actually step aside here, he's not going out into traffic for us." I have seen guys do this, but wo…
/r/MensRights12/01/15 09:53 AM
2

I don't think it'd be hard to spend a few days filming and find, say, 10 guys out of a few hundred thousand that literally slam into people on purpose, and probably more of such people are male than female, but if they're arguing that this is a male thing in general? Hah! Does anyone have a link to the actual study/video btw? I can't seem to find it.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 09:49 AM
0

Right, "ruining people's futures" makes them less likely to commit crimes. Totally justice, not revenge.
/r/PussyPass12/01/15 08:30 AM
-3

Or anyone else for that matter. Fucking people over might be satisfying, but "ruining people's futures" isn't likely to reduce criminality. I'm getting seriously disturbed by how punishment happy and authoritarian this sub has become lately. It wasn't that way a few years back.
/r/PussyPass11/01/15 04:41 PM
6

Possibly. I'd imagine I'd want to bloody strangle them, which is exactly why it shouldn't be up to me.
/r/PussyPass11/01/15 04:36 PM
-5

So if you're close to being an adult, you should be tried as an adult. If you're not, you should be tried as a juvenile, but still assumed to have adult motivations? We all do stupid things as a kid, but that doesn't mean you should be able to escape without punishment. Right, I forgot that the most important thing was to make the universe right again with harsh punishments. It makes perfect sense to ensure that they're aware of the seriousness of what they did and to make damn sure they won't d…
/r/PussyPass11/01/15 04:35 PM
-1

You think they should be put on a sex offenders register and treated as sexual predators for the rest of their lives?
/r/PussyPass11/01/15 03:53 PM
-1

And how is that going to help him?
/r/PussyPass11/01/15 03:52 PM
-12

their futures should be ruined And who is that going to help?
/r/PussyPass11/01/15 01:06 PM
-3

too bad his cunt of a mom didnt press charges to the fullest extent. I'm honestly not sure that would be helpful, with kids that age it's genuinely possible they thought it was a prank. I think a long serious talk from their parents and a police officer with a sufficiently intimidating uniform would do the trick.
/r/PussyPass11/01/15 01:03 PM
9

he is now unable to go to college This warps my mind slightly: Don't some colleges have a tradition of streaking before/after exam season?
/r/PussyPass11/01/15 01:01 PM
1

Just wondering, are you pointing out hypocrisy (as in, that's the reaction a male kid would get) or suggesting that any kid who does this should be treated as a child pornographer?
/r/PussyPass11/01/15 12:59 PM
1

Exactly.
/r/MensRights11/01/15 03:31 AM
2

Maybe Salon is pissed people aren't giving them ad revenue? Oh well, I guess we'll just go back to copy-pasting and screenshotting.
/r/MensRights10/01/15 03:18 PM
1

Possibly, and if they all shot it down then it'd be non-news (or rather great news) sadly many of them supported the notion. Edit: Can't find the original thread so that's based on what others said here
/r/MensRights10/01/15 12:38 PM
3

Why is it ok for women to demand commitment in exchange for sex, but its wrong for men to want sex in exchange for commitment? I can't find a link, but Adam Savage (the guy who came up with "Santorum") put out an interesting opinion on this: He argues that we have the right to expect sex from our partners. Not necessarily all the time, but if we're in a sexual relationship we should be accommodating our lover's desires and having ours catered to. Lack of sex is grounds for a divorce in alot of p…
/r/MensRights10/01/15 12:37 PM
3

Am I missing something? That archive link only contains a few paragraphs of the article. Apologies in advance if there's some scrollbar I missed.
/r/MensRights10/01/15 12:28 PM
4

I'm not suggesting that we should call for all rape jokes to be banned, but maybe we should discuss how it's unlikely homer will ever do that.
/r/MensRights10/01/15 12:22 PM
1

Egalitarian maybe? I guess WRA for someone particularly interested in women's rights. It's less cooptable (much harder to make "but the definition") arguments when it has a definition by etymology and it's a relatively clean slate. Plus people will know immediately what it means when they read it.
/r/MensRights09/01/15 11:56 PM
3

Mandatory Women's Studies Classes: They really haven't thought this one through, average college students are much less prone to that kind of brainwashing than the self selecting SJWs. They might win some hearts and minds, but they'll piss off a whole lot more. On the most extreme end they'll end up creating the next generation of MRAs and anti-feminists.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 06:43 AM
2

If that were decided in their favour... oh my god. Tuition fee refund for every male student who had to sit through them, plus kleenex money. It would stand a genuinely good chance of shutting down the US college system.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 06:40 AM
3

Plus their victims are being encouraged not to go to the police and that any regular prosecution/evidence gathering service is "revictimising"
/r/MensRights07/01/15 06:38 AM
1

We don't like your party, so we're taking some of your money to fund a bigger party with more attractions where everyone has to follow our rules.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 06:37 AM
3

Well they're already referring to people with multiple complaints against them as "repeat offenders."
/r/MensRights07/01/15 06:36 AM
2

Not sure if it's used in the rest of the world, but "sleeping rough" in British or Hiberno-English means "sleeping out doors." Edit: All that said, if it's anything like Ireland, men still make up the majority of the homeless population.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 01:42 AM
5

But it's not "10% of the homeless are female" it's "10% of rough sleepers are female." We don't actually know from those figures what the overall ratio of men to women in the homeless population is because we don't know the ratio of rough sleepers to those in temporary accommodation.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 11:48 PM
8

Devil's advocate, those figures don't quite say that: Rough sleepers are a subset of the homeless population who are actually on the street, adults in temporary accomodation are a separate subset of the same population. If the subset of the homeless population in temporary accomodation is larger than that sleeping rough, it's possible that women represent just under half the overall homeless population and that shelter services are more or less fairly proportioned. Also, it's not clear that the …
/r/MensRights04/01/15 11:46 PM
1

I think it's pushing it a little to suggest that the sub has two entirely separate cultures who have exactly opposite opinions and just happen to never see each other's threads. Even if you account for the fact that they were posted several hours apart, threads on a slow sub stay on the front page for at least a day. Possible? Barely, but ockham's razor says they're mostly the same people and they are hypocritical.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 07:28 PM
1

Yeah I'm aware of all that, I've been here for a while you know, I'm just trying to relate that to any of your posts past the first one.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 04:27 PM
2

The chances of them just happening to be around for one, and not for the other are pretty slim.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 04:25 PM
0

Okay... I'm just having a little trouble relating that to stuff like this: When you invite someone over to your house, do they thank you for the night or make you spend the night rearranging your furniture to better suit their needs? Would you accept someone doing this to you, or would you be angry at the idea that you're being told what to do in your own space? I'm not saying the game industry is an echo chamber, no free market can be, but that doesn't seem to have anything to do with gamergate…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 08:13 AM
1

Again, depends on the context. If it's high fantasy then who cares?
/r/MensRights04/01/15 05:32 AM
1

Oh right, gotcha.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 03:17 AM
-1

I'm confused, are you saying you're in favour of echo chambers?
/r/MensRights04/01/15 03:17 AM
1

Lol, good revenge. I thought you were saying he was an MRA.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 02:15 AM
3

but there's a certain disconnect between feminism and men as, well, we're not women. We just don't understand some of the things that they are doing, or going through. Or even the goals that they are trying to achieve. And they don't understand us. Alot of feminists aren't women either, and many of their critics are (see the honey badgers). This isn't a women vs. men thing, it's a feminists vs. just about everyone else thing.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 02:00 AM
1

Ah right, you might want to reword your post, it looks a bit like you're calling the OP here hypocritical and supporting the idea that guys getting offended by jockstraps is an issue.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:57 AM
3

One has 94% approval, the other has 95%, both are upvoted in the hundreds in a sub where posts are typically stuck in the single or double digits. Either someone's been brigading to make Gamergirls look bad or alot of the same people agree with both posts.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:54 AM
4

Depends on the game, if it's a crazy out there fantasy game like FF I don't really care. If something like that showed up in Kingdom Come: Deliverance I'd be a bit annoyed.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:49 AM
2

but at the same time I think they are just already calling out a hypocritical stance that may come from a VERY SMALL percentage of male gamers. Even if they do... so what? I bet we could find a very small percentage of people who object to the colour purple in games.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:47 AM
3

Oh come on Porn like that has been around for years. Not that there's anything wrong with it, but let's not pretend it's something new or specific to female characters.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:43 AM
1

since my room mate was about as radical masculinist as it got. Out of curiosity, what do you mean by that?
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:38 AM
3

I suppose if I went to a TERF lesbian board, and loaded it up with sexy pictures of men and transsexuals to diversify their space they would welcome me with open arms. Just FYI, "TERF" stands for trans exclusionary radical feminist, so they probably wouldn't be all that on-board with nippy trans characters. In my experience they also tend to be incredibly joyless so they'd probably get offended at the girl-porn too.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:38 AM
8

Those titties are barely noticable, it's like complaining about the length of the dress in the international "female" sign Sexy male armour is nothing new, in final fantasy or anywhere else, and is rarely complained about by anyone of any gender
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:36 AM
3

Wow, so it wasn't even an accident? She literally just decided to pick some random guy and use him as an ATM?
/r/MensRights03/01/15 07:30 PM
25

Thanks for the information. I've actually given up on reddit as a company reforming itself. What we really need is an 8chan style reddit site where individual sub admins are given almost complete autonomy (except for CP). Even for rules like brigading, stuff like that would be better controlled by code rather than selectively applied rules. If you're listening Fredrick Brennan, there's gold in them hills.
/r/MensRights03/01/15 05:17 PM
5

Women are welcome here, as far as I'm concerned at least. I don't personally put too much emphasis on the whole "lived experience," thing, if an argument is a good argument it doesn't matter who makes it. You don't have to be a man to have an opinion on issues that affect men. I'm not sure about straight white men being the most discriminated against. To begin with, I can't really think of much discrimination which affects straight any white people, not where I live at least. As for men, there's…
/r/MensRights02/01/15 03:09 AM
1

I dunno, she basicly tried to reassure her that what happened really wasn't all that big a deal, but if she is going to worry about it then it's definitely worth talking to her roommate about it out of courtest.
/r/MensRights02/01/15 02:57 AM
1

I'm honestly having a hard time working out what that comic's trying to say. From what I saw it looked like it war parodying the blonde woman for over-reacting, but then the last panel... what was that? I think you can joke about anything, but if you joke badly about a sensitive subject it's a double backfire. At any rate, I can't work out what the point of this strip is supposed to be.
/r/MensRights02/01/15 12:03 AM
1

It's an opinion based subject and people typically don't know what they don't know. Heck, we could have it completely backwards for all we know. Thanks for the heads up. Speaking of hard interviews you might enjoy this. When Bush was on his grand tour of Europe most of the press gave him a smooth passage in exchange for access. I think he was genuinely shocked when RTE roasted him like that.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 11:53 PM
11

Oh, don't get me wrong, it's pure hypocracy that the people who'd go crazy if her roommate were male are nowhere to be seen. I just wanted to point out that the top comment is actually a fairly sensible way of dealing with these situations. I was in a (vaugely somewhat) similar situation years back where my and a friend of mine got really pissed and made out in front of her boyfriend. I called him up the next day and apologised and he took it in good humour. Problem solved.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 11:33 PM
1

I don't blame him for that, I don't expect everyone to be an expert on gender.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 11:30 PM
2

David Packman isn't bad, he just doesn't give the subjects of his interviews a free ride, which is honestly refreshing.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 11:29 PM
27

Top comment is excellent advice: Stop worrying, talk to her, don't be a jerk.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 10:56 PM
2

It's possible to define "gender" in such a way that it is purely a social construct, but then the word has nothing to do with what most people mean when they say "gender" and more to do with what they mean when they say "personality." Like it or not, our biology produces two (mostly heterosexual) genders, not three.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 10:53 PM
0

It doesn't. The only people I see perpetuating it are: Feminists People who will happily repeat anything a feminist says
/r/MensRights01/01/15 10:47 PM
1

Which is immoral? Financial abortions or pro-choice? No problem.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 04:19 PM
2

This gets asked alot, but no, assuming a pro-choice situation men shouldn't have any say in the matter. Men should, however, have all the same legal rights as women when it comes to deciding how much or little of a part to play in their children's lives.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 01:45 AM
3

All I see is a bunch of feminists arguing about what feminism really means, which, as we all know, is an argument which always comes to a swift and meaningful conclusion.
/r/MensRights31/12/14 10:10 PM
3

It's a procedure which doesn't even have to be performed by a licenced doctor or nurse, so it's not exactly chemotherapy or heart transplants we're talking about.
/r/MensRights31/12/14 09:49 PM
7

Is circumcision a men's rights issue? Not all circumcisions, just the ones which are performed on children and which aren't medically necessary (which is to say almost all of them). I think like abortion your going to have men on either side of the debate. That's true of any issue I understand Anti-circumcision folks motivation for linking a anti-circumcision flag to men's rights , I see how it benefits their cause. You could say that of any issue It's just that I don't believe their "Cause" is …
/r/MensRights31/12/14 07:37 PM
3

Even in those extremely rare cases, and even assuming the law covers all circumcisions, it couldn't prevent a doctor from circumcising them, it just wouldn't require medicaid to cover it. As procedures go it's pretty cheap.
/r/MensRights31/12/14 07:15 PM
12

It's not clear from the proposal whether it's just excluding elective circumcisions (which make up the vast majority) or medically necessary ones.
/r/MensRights31/12/14 05:15 PM
1

Right, but if you only have hazy recollections of a night before, it'd probably be better to make sure they're real before beginning a criminal process regarding them.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 08:36 PM
2

I'm not saying she shouldn't make a report, but she shouldn't invent details either. And I don't think there's any instance where false allegations are an acceptable route to true justice. Its not demonisation to say that people shouldn't accuse others of crimes they haven't committed.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 05:37 PM
4

If someone has no clear memory of an incident then they shouldn't invent one.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 04:26 PM
2

Was that a false accusation? Yes. Was it malicious on her part? No. Depends on your definition of malicious I guess, but you nonetheless admit that it's a false accusation. Wrongly sounds like something that can happen by accident, false implies deliberate and knowingly mendacious statements.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 01:52 PM
1

Go shopping for lawyers at least, see if you can get them to hear your story and see if they think you have something worth going forward on. If all you're saying is true: Hard worker She's been lying through her teeth, and you have documentation to prove it Old lawyer fucked up and is avoiding you I'd say at least one of them will recognise the fact that, while you have no cash now, there's a good chance you will do in the future. If you've done the rounds and none of them are interested... the…
/r/MensRights27/12/14 01:52 PM
24

women's actions are always medicalized while men's are always criminalized That's a great way of describing it. If you can read those articles (you have a subscription) then you can archive them using archive.today or screencap them for the rest of us to see. If you have a physical copy you can take a picture maybe?
/r/MensRights27/12/14 01:43 PM
42

Man charged for spying on local teacher as she urinated in an outdoor area of her home. Feminist groups have highlighted the link to rape culture, pointing out that he felt entitled to watch her as she engaged in this private act on her own property.
/r/MensRights26/12/14 08:20 PM
1

I'm guessing that's what the OP meant, he just phrased it badly (as in, it's a portrayal of the pussy pass, not a justification of it)
/r/PussyPass25/12/14 02:54 PM
2

Maybe not, but it's the main contributory factor I'm seeing. SJW politics are extremely well represented in print media and tv news, far more than they actually seem to occur in the general population.
/r/MensRights25/12/14 12:14 AM
2

I don't think it's to do with fear so much as the fact that so many gender studies (and related subjects) grads end up in media and journalism.
/r/MensRights24/12/14 04:43 PM
1

This is the thing, both groups were historically given a temporary ban: In Ireland at least if you have anal sex, protected or unprotected, you can't give blood for a year, but only MSMs were given a lifetime ban.
/r/MensRights24/12/14 04:25 PM
1

This is good news for everyone. I fully support temp-bans based on risk factors like promiscuity, anal sex, endoscopy, not using contraceptives etc., but declaring MSMs to be a special risk when it comes to these factors is a-statistical nonsense. Certainly the average gay man is more likely to be HIV positive than the average straight person, but only because of promiscuity, lack of contraceptives, anal sex and other risky behaviours. If a straight woman, for example, engages in the same behavi…
/r/MensRights24/12/14 03:37 PM
1

Not sure about the US, but over here those markers all have lengthy bans, usually a year or more. It's only MSMs that have a lifetime ban.
/r/MensRights24/12/14 03:27 PM
1

All this means is that they're going to be exposed to the same ban as women and heterosexual men who engage in the same sex acts. It's not a free pass for MSMs who have anal sex to give blood with no restrictions.
/r/MensRights24/12/14 03:26 PM
1

As in generally about feminism? I can't think of any general histories which weren't written by feminists, which is a bit of an issue. One excercise I like to play is "Try to find a quote by a 'first wave feminist' in which they actually call themselves feminist." (I've yet to find one) I tried doing that originally because I was reading up on Emmeline Pankhurst and I found out that she was basicly a fascist and very misandric. Before I criticised her as an example of a feminist I tried to find …
/r/MensRights24/12/14 02:07 PM
1

Oh completely, it was a very successful PR stunt.
/r/MensRights24/12/14 01:36 PM
2

Those sound perfectly reasonable, but they started fighting for those things a couple of decades after they'd been achieved. Feminism didn't cause workplace equality, it was caused by it.
/r/MensRights24/12/14 05:59 AM
1

More rape culture nonsense. How on earth do these people think that they can stop someone from raping someone by having them attend a "sensitivity class"?
/r/MensRights23/12/14 11:36 PM
3

or reverted to their old school state When did feminism stand for something other than this? I see all this talk about waves and such, but when I actually look into it's history I don't tend to see anyone acting any differently.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 09:04 PM
9

Going by the tone of your infographic I'm going to take a wild guess that the deleted posts weren't deleted for merely disagreeing with the majority opinion.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 09:00 PM
3

Not banworthy, it was an interesting question and the results were worth reading, but I don't really expect much else from a feminist sub (even if, afaik, those two are more tame than most).
/r/MensRights23/12/14 08:58 PM
1

Yeah, I got banned from commenting there for poking holes in some study or other. This was years back when I assumed "believe the victim" was an extremist position. As for "stealing your content," I don't buy that. You don't own an argument just because you make it. Plagerising might be a better term if they get an idea from you without attributing it.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 01:50 PM
4

I don't think a man should have to give consent, either she has the right to abort or she doesn't. However, I'd add the caveats that: I don't think abortion is as clear cut an issue as pro-life or pro-choice. I do think it needs to be defined in legislation (just like murder vs. self defence) not left up to individuals on the dubious basis that "it's too complicated to legislate for" Men should have full autonomy in deciding whether to financially and personally participate in their child's upbr…
/r/MensRights23/12/14 01:47 PM
39

I wonder if she'd racially profile too if the stats swung one way or the other. Or would that make her feel uncomfortable?
/r/MensRights23/12/14 11:39 AM
1

I'm reasonably familiar with Andrea Dworkin, and I've read enough of her stuff to know that I'm not interested in reading any more of it. I don't think Sarkeesian is an opportunist, I think she's a bumbling idiot who's found a way to make herself important by being a victim and now she's holding on to it with both hands. At any rate she's a radical feminist insofar as she believe almost entirely in nurture over nature when it comes to gender.
/r/MensRights23/12/14 01:43 AM
1

So you can choose to support the laws you don't really have a hand in crafting, or you can choose to abstain in which case you pretty much voted for them anyhow, but it's absurd to suggest I'm not really involved? I don't have to make a case that the law is wrong, laws have nothing to do with right or wrong, they're just someone's opinion. As a society, we have decided that the age set is the age at which today's youth are capable of making those decisions Nope, a few people at the top have. And…
/r/MensRights23/12/14 01:40 AM
1

You're expanding the argument to ridiculous proportions and it isn't relevant. The fact is, the age of consent isn't outrageously high like 25, it's 16-18 which is a perfectly reasonable line to divide those considered able to give consent and those not Why is that a more reasonable line? And it isn't 16 to 18, it's more like 12 to 18. I would say she has definitely hurt someone given she had sex with a 15 year old boy and the repercussions of that experience on him won't be known for some time …
/r/MensRights22/12/14 09:34 PM
5

Holy shit. Not just one either, she seems to have a few other articles up there.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 09:23 PM
11

Can you give some context for a europoor. What's the LA Times usually like?
/r/MensRights22/12/14 06:19 PM
2

I never heard of this before, might look into it.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 06:19 PM
2

Or men only buses/subway carriages? I can hear the soothing chorus of outrage now :)
/r/MensRights22/12/14 06:14 PM
6

I'd be more interested if they were willing to apply the same standard to women. In the pictures I've seen they ignored several women with spread knees taking up a similar amount of room to the men.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 06:13 PM
1

What you think personally is not what dictates how the law works though, the age of consent is the age of consent and that is how it works. I'm aware she broke the law, I just dispute that she did anything wrong. I'm currently breaking the law by torrenting a movie, my opinion changes the law not a bit but I haven't hurt anyone any more than she has so I see no problem with my actions. There are probably people out there that think 12 year olds are capable of providing consent and that having se…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 06:00 PM
1

If he molested her then I'd hope he faces a pretty hefty punishment. If, on the other hand, she enthusiastically consented and there was a backlog of texts to prove that she was pushing the relationship as much as he was, then I'd certainly hope he gets fired, but I don't think he'd belong in jail, no.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 05:54 PM
1

that's an irrelevant argument Hashtag was the one who brought it up, not me. Socially, we have decided that he was incapable of deciding what was good or bad for him in this regard. Have "we"? When was the last time you directly voted on the age of consent wherever you live? And even if a particular community decides "the age of consent is X" it's irrelevant to the question of "is it wrong to sleep with a person of age X," otherwise right and wrong just becomes a question of geography, not actio…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 05:51 PM
1

All I want is for her to get the same treatment that a man would get in this situation. That's a little more reasonable, but... The law says it's rape which is what matters. You seem to be arguing that the law is right no matter what. I don't have to imagine what would happen to a man in this situation, I've been a regular poster here for several years now. Putting aside gender, who do you think she harmed by her actions and how do you think she harmed them?
/r/MensRights22/12/14 05:36 PM
2

I think it might be worth trying to resolve your feelings regarding women, even if you don't decide to enter into a relationship with one: Seeing half the population as being the same as your ex isn't a healthy way to go through life.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 12:19 PM
12

If men are deciding that porn is better than marriage, then maybe we need to fix marriage.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 12:13 PM
2

Probably not too surprising at this point, especially since her friends have spoken up on camera. I actually feel a bit sorry for her, she obviously isn't quite right in the head to do something like that, I blame the people who pushed for this "believe the victim" crap and encouraged her.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 11:52 AM
1

If that is the main concern then it should hold true for 14yo, 13yo even a 10yo. Nope, that's slippery slope. 10 year olds are very different from 15 year olds. My argument is that consent is irrelevant because they are UNDER the age of consent. And what is the age of consent? In some places he'd be considered a legal adult. Age of consent is an arbitrary standard, there's no real consensus as to where it falls. The fact that he was under the age of consent where he lived is more a historical ac…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 11:49 AM
1

So, as far as you're concerned, if a man living in California has sex with a woman who is all in favour of it, but never actually says yes, then he raped her? Laws can say anything, if you support them unconditionally then I can't see how you can stand up for men's rights.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 11:40 AM
1

I agree she could have made things easier for herself by bending over, but the arbitrary nature of all this compared with the extreme punishments doesn't sit right with me.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 11:38 AM
1

I agree the law should be gender neutral, and it's refreshing to see a woman in this situation being treated like a man would be for once. I just remember what it's like to be a horny 15 year old and I don't think it's helpful to slam the prison door shut on anyone they decide to have sex with. Where I live the age of consent is 17. Not that I particularly want to go out and sleep with 17 year olds or anyone younger, but if I did, and it was clearly consentual, I don't think it would be equivale…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 11:36 AM
2

Oh sure, her story stank to high heavens from the start. Particularly the part about the glass, she would be covered in blood if that were true. There would have been no question of taking her home, she'd have been going straight to hospital.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 11:34 AM
3

The whole thing is so insane I don't really know what to believe, although I would agree that Jackie writing it is the least unlikely.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 11:32 AM
1

Do I? I didn't. And why shouldn't it?
/r/MensRights22/12/14 01:22 AM
1

Teachers of any age shouldn't sleep with students of any age, but 15 year olds are more than capable of making their own decisions.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 12:53 AM
-1

Resorting to "it's the law so she shouldn't have done it" is nonsense. Legality does not now, nor ever has, equalled morality. If a law is a shitty law people can, should and do break it. As pointed out above "underage" is a legal standard, not a moral one. Back in reality 15 year old humans are capable of making choices on their own behalf, as this one apparently did. You introduced the gender reversal to counter her defence. It's irrelevant, just because a court would treat a man no differentl…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 12:52 AM
1

It would be no different. Flipping the genders doesn't work if you're not dealing with a sexist.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 12:41 AM
1

So if she'd performed exactly the same action somewhere the law said otherwise, then it wouldn't be rape? Taking this logic, does this mean no woman has ever raped a man in countries where the law doesn't allow for such things?
/r/MensRights22/12/14 12:40 AM
1

She should have lost her job for sleeping with a student, but I don't see the point in jailing someone for consentual sex, no.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 11:40 PM
0

I agree, the law is irrelevant. Trouble is, "underage" is a legal definition, not a physical one. In plenty of parts of the world 15 is an adult. Reversing the genders is also irrelevant: I'm not claiming this should be treated any differently if she were a man.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 11:39 PM
3

I'd be interested too, I think the simplest thing to do would be just to make a survey and leave it as the pinned post for a couple of days. For myself, I was a feminist for an entire three days. Someone handed me the pill of "feminism is about equality" and I believed them. I went to read up on the subject (got lots of approving smiles for asking where the feminism section is) but I ended up finding the myth of male power instead and got red pilled hard.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 11:37 PM
9

To do that she'd have to break anonymity.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 11:05 PM
5

They don't say so in the article, but I assume they reached out to her for comment?
/r/MensRights21/12/14 11:05 PM
6

Unless this Duffin guy is making it up, but that's a bit difficult to swallow.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 11:04 PM
1

Jesus what a nasty mess. I can't tell if she's wilfully ignorant or deliberately misleading her readers.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 10:49 PM
1

At the end of the day she broke the law. Legality doesn't equal morality.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 10:23 PM
2

I don't think it's unreasonable to warn her ahead of time so she goes into it with eyes open, but "don't even bother trying" is a bit defeatist.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 10:19 PM
0

So if they'd lived a few miles further north and waited a few months, this would have been aok? He'd have been a legal adult then.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 10:15 PM
1

I'd say it's rape for neither (given the same facts and just swapping genders).
/r/MensRights21/12/14 10:13 PM
1

a club that engages with the male population to encourage awareness and create an open dialogue on men's mental health issues. My main goal for the club is to create a space in which members are encouraged to think of each other as brothers and feel comfortable seeking help, someone to talk and listen to, or even just meet some new friends and enjoy a beer at unibar together. I thought it was supposed to be a men's rights group at first, but it sounds more like she's putting together a men's sup…
/r/MensRights21/12/14 10:12 PM
1

Society gains a conviction of a sex predator How do we gain anything from this? It's not like she's dragging children into vans and raping them against their will. and future registration as a predator How were her actions predatory? It sounds like he was an active and enthusiastic participant. and equal application of the law across genders Equal amounts of injustice isn't much of an achievement (unless, perhaps, it acts as a goad for change). Say she is convicted. Serves her time and is parole…
/r/MensRights21/12/14 10:08 PM
1

If you check my history you'll probably notice I spend most of my time there. The OP is a woman, which pretty much pulls their teeth when it comes to false accusations. I'm not saying she won't get alot of ranting and wailing in her direction, but sticks and stones.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 09:59 PM
2

Biology might not be, the law is though The law is quite variable actually, over both distance and time. Hop on the other side of an imaginary line and legal sex becomes a criminal act, wait a couple of months for new legislation to pass and your girl/boyfriend is jailbait, which is why the law is irrelevant in discussing right and wrong. There's several countries around the world where this would have been perfectly legal, but still immoral (at least insofar as he was her student) . To be fair,…
/r/MensRights21/12/14 07:08 PM
-1

Fair enough, I thought she was from Canada (where the age is 16), which just goes to show how random and arbitrary the whole thing is. At 15, he is incapable of giving /informed/ consent. At that age, on average, teens are driven by short term gains and are developmentally incapable of making decisions around long term. I'm sorry, I forgot that 15 year olds were impulse driven infants incapable of making their own decisions. Naturally you'll show me empirical proof of this fabulous claim? And no…
/r/MensRights21/12/14 05:20 PM
1

I'm deaf as hell, so I can't listen to their broadcasts unfortunately, what happened to him exactly?
/r/MensRights21/12/14 05:15 PM
1

Ok, but we don't know what they didn't report, so we can only guess about that.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 05:14 PM
0

And a day later, "FOOM" adult. I didn't realise biology was so clear cut.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 05:06 PM
2

I've got a feeling that'd be presented as men trying to take away another women's safe space. Probably, but it'd still be nonsense. And it isn't the participation that makes it invading. It's the deliberate assault by a minority insisting that everything be changed against the will if the group to please them. Then it still needs to be made clear that it's not women doing this, it's SJWs. And even then the phrase "invading a male space" implies that it's a men only club, which isn't true. To be …
/r/MensRights21/12/14 04:22 PM
0

Of age is a determination based on research, and is anything but arbitrary. Look up prefrontal cortex. Its the area of the brain that, once its developed, controls decision making. The problem is that it isn't fully developed until late teens to early twenties. This is why teens do stupid stuff. They can recogise a dangerous situation, but may go into it anyway, where an adult with a developed cortex would avoid it. Sorry, but that's absolute nonsense. I can't count the number of adults I know w…
/r/MensRights21/12/14 04:12 PM
1

This Characterising the whole thing as "men vs. women" isn't accurate or helpful.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 04:06 PM
2

It wasn't run according to male sensibilities, it was run according to a wide variety of sensibilities depending on the target market of any one particular game. Nor are SJW sensibilities "female." If the turnout at XOXOCon are any guide, most of them seem to be male.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 04:05 PM
2

But if the demographics shifted and a bunch of men started using pinterest, they wouldn't be "invading a female space" they'd be "using a service available to anyone"
/r/MensRights21/12/14 04:03 PM
14

Anita Sarkeesian is almost painfully liberal feminist and anyone who calls her a radical feminist needs to read more Dworkin I'm not sure if that's supposed to be apologism or condemnation, but she's definitely a radical feminist (where we take the original definition which referred to the idea that gender is a product of culture). “Five Guys” is a slut-shaming and misogynist joke and people should be ashamed of themselves It might be slut shaming if we were insulting her for sleeping with five …
/r/MensRights21/12/14 03:58 PM
6

transhumanist BDSM O.O This isn't even on tumblr
/r/MensRights21/12/14 03:49 PM
3

Honestly not worth getting worked up over: That article is so bad it parodies itself.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 03:48 PM
2

Is that her husband? I thought it was her lawyer. I could be completely wrong on this, but I was under the impression that only the prosecution, defence and their counsel could cross the bar.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 03:41 PM
1

Do we have any evidence she raped him? Because he testified that it was consentual.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 03:37 PM
1

I pointed this out in my post. It is entirely possible that a 6 year old can be "asking for it" because abused kids can been conditioned to think that it is normal. Should we let old farts fuck 6 year olds? We're not talking about six year old kids, we're talking about fifteen year olds. yes, i remember being 12 and if i could have legally fucked a $20 crack whore I might have made a stupid decision. Why would it have been a stupid decision? And this woman isn't a crack whore. Do you think most …
/r/MensRights21/12/14 03:36 PM
5

Except for the inability to provide informed consent until you are of age. "of age" is an arbitrary number defined by law. It's got squat to do with actual maturity. If they changed the age of consent to 21, do you seriously think 20 year olds would be unable to make their own decisions about who to have sex with? The train of logic you follow would be thrown out immediately if the genders were reversed, so why should a woman in the same position be given the benefit of the doubt when men are pu…
/r/MensRights21/12/14 02:17 PM
1

That's an extremely legalistic argument. If the age of consent were changed to 21, would a 25 year old sleeping with a 20 year old who literally was asking for it be abusive? I remember what it was like to be 15 and attracted to an older woman, it's entirely possible he was asking for it.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 01:55 PM
-4

Like I said, it depends on the details of the case, but if he was enthusiastic about it, rather than being talked into it, then it becomes a bit hard to argue that he was victimised in some way. There isn't much detail given in the article so it's hard to tell.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 01:37 PM
2

Well... I think the age boundary for "statutory rape" (ie.: It was rape even if they said it wasn't) should be much lower. In cases where there isn't consent then that can be tried the same way as with adult rapists.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 01:35 PM
0

To an extent... if she bribed him with good grades or something then yeah, but not if he was genuinely enthusiastic about it.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 01:25 PM
1

76%? I think it's higher than that. At any rate I agree, this isn't about kicking women out (a good chunk of our numbers are women), it's about promoting freedom of expression in the face of a minority political view being pushed by a select few highly placed voices.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:53 PM
1

it is essentially female cultural imperialism (in the form of SJW's) invading a male space. Wut? It's not female cultural imperialism, most of those idiots are guys fawning over a few token women at the top. And "male space"? What nonsense is this? Gaming is for anybody and everybody. Not saying we have to bend over backwards to be "inclusive" and walk on eggshells to avoid offending "oppressed groups" but why the hell is/should it be a male space? I'm an MRA and I don't like most feminists, but…
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:50 PM
2

*dupe ;)
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:35 PM
14

Eh... honestly I think it'd be enough for her to be fired (same for a man in her position). It's certainly inappropriate for teachers of any age to be in a relationship with their students of any age, but if it was consentual, and the person in question is sexually mature, then I don't get what society gains by locking them up.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:34 PM
3

In fairness, I see no evidence that either this woman or the sisters described themselves as feminists.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:32 PM
5

I assume that was sarcasm, but it actually is in many ways if you look at some of the laws which have been passed. "Listen and believe" doesn't begin to describe it.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:32 PM
0

I'd say this article is reasonably neutral, it certainly didn't go out to portray her as a poor innocent, it just reported some weird details from the trial. That said, I'd like to know more, like why exactly she's arguing he's controlling this, what she's accusing him of lying about and who exactly is pushing for the prosecution (him or his mother).
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:29 PM
1

This is actually good advice, even if it was tongue in cheek, why the downvotes?
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:10 PM
1

Nothing ventured nothing gained. I honestly don't think the OP has anything to lose here.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:10 PM
2

No offence but, if it's open to all genders, how would it be a men's group?
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:09 PM
1

When you say staff, do you mean members of the university administration or student union volunteers?
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:08 PM
1

I'm a lady btw, so definitely not men only and I'm guessing a female president will steer people away from the privilege and 'boys club' comments. Don't count on it. A MRA group founded by a woman was shut down in a canadian university by their SU. Somewhere in Toronto I think.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 12:06 PM
7

Try to have at least as many fun bonding events as you do serious political ones. A men only space is probably unrealistic, but not without worth in the long term. Be prepared for the possibility your institution will blackball you, if that happens, it might be possible to continue organising off campus and spreading the message through word of mouth. It might even work in your favour since banning makes things more alluring. It was suggested below to completely ignore the women/feminist group, …
/r/MensRights20/12/14 05:00 PM
5

All fathers want to see their children open their presents on Christmas morning. But thousands of dads across the UK will miss that moment this year. And most of them are probably paying for them too.
/r/MensRights20/12/14 04:54 PM
1

Why wouldn't they? Overcrowding Poor oversight by guards Apathy on the part of guards Boredom due to the lack of amenities General misanthropy due to shit conditions
/r/MensRights18/12/14 02:11 PM
1

Fair enough
/r/MensRights18/12/14 11:47 AM
1

Afaik that's a statistical definition rather than a legal one.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 11:20 AM
8

What's the end result of reporting it if your not going to be taken seriously? Nothing. Not strictly true. For example, depending on where they live, it might be reasonable for a rape crisis center to advise a victim of rape not to report it if local law is such that they would be likely to be prosecuted for adultry, or a victim of gay rape if they would likely to be convicted of some laws targeting homosexuals.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 11:16 AM
22

Jesus, I'm sorry for your troubles.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 11:14 AM
1

First off, I'm very sorry to hear this happened to you. The woman on the phone told me very sadly that the police are unlikely to take me seriously because it was a girl that did it. This is shockingly negligent. They have no real idea whether the police will take you seriously or not and should not be advising you against reporting a crime unless they suspect you could be harmed by doing so. If you feel up to it report it to the police ASAP. I'm not sure how long ago this happened but if it was…
/r/MensRights18/12/14 11:10 AM
2

Isn't manslaughter usually defined as a situation where a reasonable person could not have predicted that their actions would result in someone's death, like speeding? Depends on Chinese law obviously, but I'd personally consider it reasonably obvious that if you cut off a child's organ then leave there's a good chance they'll bleed to death.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 10:13 AM
15

Part of what made gamergate's campaign successful is that we contacted advertisers to inform tham that we (gamers) would no longer be reached by ads placed at those publications. The same isn't quite true of us telling the guardian's sponsors that we're not going to be reading it, since we probably weren't their demographic to begin with. Plus, doesn't the guardian get funding form some public trusts or something? I was under the impression they received donations rather than being purely depend…
/r/MensRights17/12/14 11:12 PM
4

Use archive.today in future.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 11:08 PM
1

That's very interesting given that conditions in women's prisons are usually better.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 03:29 PM
2

It was the defence lawyer who tried to portray her as a victim (as is his job) not the press or anyone else who's supposed to be neutral.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 03:26 PM
38

facing "up to" five years in jail That's the maximum she can get, not a guaranteed sentence. Also, just to point out, this isn't just genital mutilation, it's also attempted murder since wounds like that can bleed out and she left the kid alone without attempting to staunch the wound.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 03:23 PM
52

They're pretty trigger-happy with the death sentence, so this is incredibly light.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 03:19 PM
1

Headline: "OP is woman beater"
/r/MensRights16/12/14 03:14 PM
1

I'm confused, are you accusing him of lying?
/r/MensRights16/12/14 12:49 PM
2

Neither is harassment though I'm pretty sure that was their point.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 12:03 PM
1

Well good luck whichever you decide.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 11:26 AM
2

Jesus, I'm glad to hear you're out of it, and your stepdaughter (I hope you're able to sort things out with her). Any hope for your other kids?
/r/MensRights16/12/14 09:34 AM
1

Well, he seemed to be urging them not to call the police, so nothing.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 09:00 AM
1

And there's videos of them separately commenting on the guy hits girl in the subway incident (Goldberg said she deserved it)
/r/MensRights16/12/14 08:59 AM
2

^ All of this.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 08:54 AM
1

He's picking his battles, which is reasonable.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 08:53 AM
1

I respect your decision not to press charges, I think you're correct that the deck is stacked against you. Hopefully you'll be able to change that some day.
/r/MensRights16/12/14 08:53 AM
4

Yeah... I remember my sister telling me similar stuff they used to do to a PE teacher. Edit: Me neither for most of them, but there was the odd one which stood out.
/r/PussyPass15/12/14 08:34 PM
1

Possibly, but if anything thieves are usually deterred by bad weather, not encouraged by it.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 08:33 PM
9

Being honest, it was when I was that age, and I'm pretty sure the same could be said about at least some (if not most) of my female peers.
/r/PussyPass15/12/14 06:24 PM
1

Thanks
/r/MensRights15/12/14 06:21 PM
1

If the storm is bad enough that you genuinely think their house was flattened then neither of you are going anywhere for a while, your stuff is probably safe ;)
/r/MensRights15/12/14 06:21 PM
10

Probably figured the jury wouldn't convict her.
/r/PussyPass15/12/14 05:38 PM
3

I honestly think this is a little bit paranoid, the chances of a dangerous stranger turning up in the middle of a storm like that are pretty slim.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 05:32 PM
2

Heck, even without the gun, a house-destroying storm has to be the worst conditions I can think of for burgling someone.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 05:30 PM
2

Would you seriously not help someone whose house was destroyed in the middle of a storm? It must be a pretty bad storm to take out a whole building, would you not at least let them wait until the weather calmed down? Edit: Also, the argument that "he's physically powerful and might be a threat" reminds me more than a little of schroedinger's rapist. It's a pretty slim change that someone who turns up at your door during a storm is dangerous.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 05:28 PM
1

Agreed. There's a tendancy in any debate to borrow the language of your opponents, and that's usually a mistake if said language has been selected to favour their point.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 07:25 AM
2

At least some of that work is sometimes done for their partners, but they still get paid: Free rent, food, spending money, utilities, pretty flexible hours, infinite redundancy pay... that has to be one of the highest paying no entry skill required jobs on the planet.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 03:03 AM
1

Firstly, there's a vast difference between date etiquette and trying to run other people's lives, there's at least some consent involved in the former (certainly on a second date anyhow) whereas the latter is undeniably coercive. But taking your definition of traditionalism aside, how would you describe a situation where a couple choose to occupy traditional roles, guy paying for everything, woman staying at home and cooking, no abortion, no kinky sex.
/r/MensRights14/12/14 02:16 AM
1

If you chose it then it does. Provided people are free to choose to follow whatever path they want (including more limited ones) I don't see why I should be interfering.
/r/MensRights13/12/14 09:55 AM
1

Who said anything about institutionalised? I'm talking about individuals personally deciding to live their lives in a traditionalist way.
/r/MensRights13/12/14 09:53 AM
1

I'm all for choice, which includes allowing room for other ideologies. So long as they're content to let me live the way I want to live then fine by me :)
/r/MensRights13/12/14 09:31 AM
3

It seems to be a bit different from Duke alright, but that could just be hindsight.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 09:24 AM
7

Each to their own, I'm in favour of choice, not anti-traditionalism.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 09:24 AM
1

Doesn't Denton own a controlling share?
/r/MensRights12/12/14 09:22 AM
0

Depends on the circumstances of the divorce/separation really. If he skipped out on them and left her holding the baby, then I'd say it's only fair for him to pay something towards his son's upbringing, and maybe some alimony for her. If she left him for another guy... I don't see how it's his responsibility any more. Especially if she cut him off.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 08:27 AM
2

Depending on the circumstances I might argue he owes her a bit for their son (for a few years at least), but by the sounds of things she left him.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 03:29 AM
7

I have to wonder what evidence (if any) he was convicted on to begin with.
/r/MensRights07/12/14 12:19 AM
3

Fantastic analysis, deserves a place in MRARef. I'm not at all surprised to learn that the criteria for "false accusation" are so narrow and those for "true accusation" are so wide.
/r/MensRights06/12/14 07:02 PM
2

Don't have it bookmarked, I've seen it come up a bunch of times though. There are other "high false" studies out there though, here's a short list: http://www.falserape.net/falserapeafa.htm The most famous is the one where the guy polygraphed a group of accusers in the USAF and had three experts independently review the logs. In around a third of the cases all three concluded it was a false accusation. There's another study which found a figure of 60% in the civilian population cited in the myth…
/r/MensRights05/12/14 07:37 PM
1

Interesting logic, let's try it out: "This statistic says the majority of accusations are true, so we should assume all accusations are." works well so far, now let's try it out with another one... "This statistic shows that the majority of people haven't been raped this year, so we should assume no one was" Uh oh...
/r/MensRights05/12/14 06:20 PM
-1

There was a study which claimed so. Realistically it's not a knowable figure.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 06:18 PM
1

Good list, just two things: Firstly, gamergate has explicitly been censored, they don't even hide it. Secondly, that PUA guy, they didn't just censor him, they actively lied about him too. His only "crime" was two risqué jokes on twitter about DV. All the crap about his seminars was fake.
/r/MensRights04/12/14 11:31 PM
3

I used to agree with that, but not anymore. Realistically at least some people find relief from gender specific spaces, I don't see why that should be denied to them.
/r/MensRights04/12/14 11:21 PM
1

Like I said, if they made a general code learning platform like 3wschools and used colour combinations and projects they thought would appeal to girls, but made it open to everyone, I'd be fine with it. But they didn't.
/r/MensRights04/12/14 06:40 PM
2

Oh me too, the audiance were buying none of it. I just found that one guy's persistence funny.
/r/MensRights04/12/14 05:57 AM
5

Firstly: I'd recommend using an archive site for posts like this, no sense in rewarding them with ad revenue. Secondly: Jesus, talk about TL;DR Thirdly: Have a look at those comments for a laugh, a "that's not what feminism means" guy replying to every single post.
/r/MensRights04/12/14 03:57 AM
2

1 in 3? I can only guess how broadly the definition must have been framed. "Have you ever had a loud argument with your partner"
/r/MensRights04/12/14 03:51 AM
1

campaigns to skew and influence individuals interests are a much better way to go than government mandates and affirmative action quotas. I agree, except that I'd use the term "not quite as awful as" rather than "better" since neither are really a positive. A truly "better" alternative would be not to try to enforce equality of outcome at all. Nope, they're two completely different things: Having teachers all being of one gender has an impact on their product (children), whereas code doesn't rea…
/r/MensRights04/12/14 02:34 AM
1

I'm not saying someone should force them to act differently, I'm saying it's shitty of the not to. Those two situations aren't comparable: They cancelled that guy's show because of something he said whereas they're cancelling crosby's shows because of things which are being said about him. Nope, they haven't labelled him as guilty, they just happened to ostracise him the moment some women made claims against him. Totally different.
/r/MensRights04/12/14 01:40 AM
1

So innocent until proven guilty, except when it comes to your job, there it's guilty period.
/r/MensRights04/12/14 01:11 AM
1

Huh?
/r/MensRights04/12/14 01:10 AM
2

You may/may not be able to afford professional help on this one, but are there any groups or people you can talk to to help you work through it? Purely for your own sake, living in fear of 50% of the population is not a pleasant way to live your life.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 09:33 PM
1

Well, apart from the obvious (talking about gender equality with a feminist), you let them set the terms of the discussion far too much. If you're talking about concepts like systematic oppression, privilege and patriarchy then you're already in their theoretical framework fighting a defensive battle.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 08:55 PM
0

I'm not interested in targeting demographics for this kind of thing, it should be about helping individuals. Making the program girly to try and make sure girls aren't put off is one thing, but excluding boys is completely unnecessary.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 08:49 PM
2

"Believe the victim" is one of those phrases that sounds fine in terms of it's literal interpretation, but in practice refers to a whole bunch of political theory that takes it way way way too far. I'm also fine with taking someone's word for it when they say something happened to them (outside of a courtroom), but there does come a point where I begin to question whether the alien space-lizards who anally probed them really exist. In this case I'm willing to take the guy at his word that what h…
/r/MensRights03/12/14 08:46 PM
9

It's selective encouragement. They should run the program for all kids and let girls make up their own mind about what to like.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 04:12 PM
9

What you're talking about here isn't general "gender equality" it's "equality of outcomes." I fully support "equality of opportunity": any boy or girl interested in coding should have the same opportunities to pursue that interest regardless of their gender or any other factor. I don't see how anyone benefits by trying to skew people's interests to ensure a 50/50 gender split. I could see the argument in something like children's teaching where it's a role model issue, but that's not really the …
/r/MensRights03/12/14 03:03 PM
-2

Google have been SJWs for quite some time. There was a group of sex workers in Ireland who bought some google adwords ads to promote their "turn off the blue light" campaign to decriminalise prostitution. Google supports anti-sex worker initiatives so they cancelled their ads. They run ads for their opposition for free.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 03:01 PM
2

I agree, I don't see why encouraging equality of outcomes benefits anyone.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:59 PM
2

I think all of this underlines why anonymity for both parties should be adopted as a standard in cases like this: I've no idea if he's guilty or innocent (nor does anyone else except him and those women) but he's already been tried in the court of public opinion and had his career hit as a result.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:57 PM
1

Wasting his time and money: He's had projects mysteriously get cancelled because of this.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:55 PM
2

In case anyone is wondering, here's the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zs8UNAjYP8s It's not even one of those cases where I can, kinda, sorta, see what they were objecting too. It's just a bunch of fans cheering the game. There's even men there too and none of them are scantily clad or the camera focusing inappropriately on t&a.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:49 PM
19

Next step: Quotas.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:39 PM
11

Inb4 women become unemployable.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:38 PM
2

I don't care about legal standards, they're irrelevant to discussions of morality. IANAL either, I'm talking about my own definition of rape (where I come from this wouldn't be rape even if she'd done it to some stranger at knifepoint). Yep, mens rea. There's at least reasonable doubt that she knew he was unconsenting. He deliberately constructed a situation where consent was vague and kept it that way.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:37 PM
3

That won't happen to me for the simple reason that, if I'm engaging in a performance art piece and someone starts doing something I don't want I'll fucking well tell them.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:31 PM
4

Wait, two witnesses? O.o Do you mean there were actually people with him in the room and noone did anything (himself included)? I'm all for protecting vulnerable people, but there comes a point where people are sufficiently crazy and self absorbed that I'm inclined to just leave them to it.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:30 PM
6

That would be fine, except that it's usually expanded upon to imply it should be a legal standard too. After all, "false accusations are really rare." In this case, it's not that I doubt his word, I'm taking what he said at face value that what he said happened happened. I'm pointing out that what he said happened isn't really rape.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:28 PM
0

Agreed. As the above article pointed out, his victimhood is "self constructed"
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:26 PM
9

Not what we all believe in. That article reeks of "believe the victim" BS.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 02:25 PM
7

the only problem I have with it is that it advertises itself as being a global gender gap study, but it really only takes into account when women lag behind men, not the other way around. That would be because "gender studies," as a field, is actually "women's studies" with a new title implying equality. There was an incident a few years back where a guy tried to sue the LSE for sexism in the course materials for it's gender studies course. The judge refused to hear the case but he did manage to…
/r/MensRights03/12/14 12:44 AM
3

If I were in your position I'd start making plans to get out now. Whoever she was when you married her she is no longer that person, these actions are not the kind of thing you do to someone you love. And even for her sake, she'll obviously never be happy the way things are going. Lawyer up would be a good first move so you can find out what your rights and responsibilities are here. Getting a vasectomy would also be a sensible measure if you're sure you never want children (maybe ask the lawyer…
/r/MensRights03/12/14 12:27 AM
0

Not under no circumstances: I'm at a kink club, I hand my domme a whip and bow down in front of her. ^ Clearly implied consent using body language. The circumstances regarding SL'B's art piece weren't that explicit, but it's not unimaginable why someone might think he intended for the whip to be used on him.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 12:21 AM
1

It's one interpretation, and not entirely an unreasonable one. I'd also argue that people have the right to expect people to clarify cases of confused consent rather than to let it happen and complain about it afterwards.
/r/MensRights02/12/14 11:50 PM
1

Ok... but she still invited them to do so. I think murder is something else entirely. Firstly, I wouldn't agree what he did implied consent to be killed. There is no reversing being killed, whereas whip wounds heal (source: been whipped before). A request to do something very permenant like that calls for a much clearer level of communication. There are examples of people doing that, like the guy who asked that german cannibal to eat him, but it's rather rare, and the request was explicit and in…
/r/MensRights02/12/14 11:48 PM
1

Either mindlessly believe people who make outlandish claims, or require some evidence. Agreed. Maybe I'm wrong, I've just seen alot of "if you don't support him you're a misandric feminiazi" going around.
/r/MensRights02/12/14 11:39 PM
0

I don't, many do. It's quite disturbing to watch.
/r/MensRights30/11/14 01:27 PM
2

They have a point you know (if for the wrong reasons). I'm not at all convinced he'd be receiving this kind of support from any of us if he had been a woman. And rightly so: At worst, this is a case of mixed signals.
/r/MensRights30/11/14 01:26 PM
3

The people here who fallen for it hook, line, and sinker because it was a man who made the claim really need to think about their biases. This all the way. If we obtain recognition of female on male rape by buying into "rape culture" and "believe the victim" then all we've done is make things worse.
/r/MensRights30/11/14 01:22 PM
4

If he had just been sitting in some room, minding his own business, and someone walked in and started whipping him and raping him, then I might agree with the idea that he was "frozen from fear" and couldn't say no, but that's very far from what happened here. He created a performance arts piece resembling Marina Abramovich's and provided someone visiting him with a whip. If I went over to someone's house and they handed me a condom, then said absolutely nothing else, that would imply consent. I…
/r/MensRights30/11/14 01:16 PM
-1

There has to be a reasonable belief that consent was given. There is none of that here. He left a whip on the table outside. What was that supposed to mean?
/r/MensRights30/11/14 01:11 PM
2

If you invite a group of people to do whatever they want with you, and provide them with implements of violence, then you can't really turn around and complain when they do whatever they want with you.
/r/MensRights30/11/14 01:10 PM
0

Seems a bit too perfect, but it could be true. If it is, I hope his local copshop isn't stocked with white knights.
/r/MensRights30/11/14 12:34 PM
2

Like all student unions, membership is mandatory and resignation is unrecognised.
/r/MensRights30/11/14 12:07 PM
6

It is to look at, but politically and economically it's not all that great.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 11:55 PM
51

His point isn't "there are no great games written by women" it's "how the hell could you ever hope to measure something like that"
/r/MensRights29/11/14 07:13 PM
16

You could pretty much erase the last three words.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 07:09 PM
35

Which one has a vagina? If both, how quickly can we turn it into a civil rights struggle and an example of homophobia? There's a law in Ireland right now which, honest to god, prevents a minor from being prosecuted for having sex with another minor under any circumstances if they're female and they had vaginal sex with a male. The rationale provided is "the risk of pregnancy means girls don't do this."
/r/MensRights29/11/14 06:58 PM
1

What does that have to do with the last john being available for men too? Clearly there's already a company running them out there, so I don't see the relevance of the point.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 10:55 AM
-1

That's not quite discrimination, but it's certainly very shitty behaviour.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 10:53 AM
2

We do discuss them, but this is a sub about gender rather than race, so generally speaking we discuss those topics in relation to how men and women are treated by comparison, rather than how men of different races are treated. It's an absolutely valid thing to bring up, and most posters I've seen here do acknowledge it and mention it, but if you're specifically interested in race then you might find more conversations about it in a different sub.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 10:51 AM
1

More like you slapped her across the face during a blazing argument (which happened to relate to a game of monopoly) but yeah, I'd say an arrest would be overboard if it didn't go any further. Maybe if you had a long history of brutally beating her, then yeah, for safety's sake but not purely because of one slap.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 10:28 AM
2

Actually I thought it looked like he hit her.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 10:23 AM
1

I've no doubt it will be passed. Both partners in government are authoritarian moralisers, one centre left, the other centre right. Actually I thought it had already been passed: I read a story a few years back about a lonely man living on his own in the middle of the countryside who saved up his social welfare to get a visit from a sex worker. The judge refused him legal aid on the basis that, if he could afford a sex worker he could afford a lawyer.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 01:31 AM
1

They drape themselves over cars and drink beer seductively, implying to all the women who watch them that that’s how they should be also. Does it imply that to you? Interesting. It doesn't imply that to me.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 01:22 AM
0

All I could see was him hit her twice, but it had a pretty low FPS. I might go back for another look.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 01:20 AM
-1

Ah right. Go figure. In that case it reminds me a bit of Tiger Woods, where he had to apologise to his fans for cheating on his wife after she chased him out of their house with a golf club.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 12:26 AM
8

I watched the video, but I couldn't see any evidence of her being abusive. What did she do?
/r/MensRights28/11/14 10:26 PM
2

Although, judging by the other thread, he seems to do so from us. Two blind rushes to judgement don't make a fact.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 10:20 PM
3

How the hell can they go through all that detail of how biologically determined chemicals influence behaviour, then conclude that gender is a culturally determined performance? The juggling is outstanding: "Sexual orientation isn't a choice, no, that would be bigotry, but it can't be genetic either because that's giving in to evo-psych"
/r/MensRights28/11/14 10:18 PM
3

I'd like to know a little more context here. Did she just slap him once with an open hand? That's assault in most places, but being thrown in jail seems a little extreme. Nice to see the police didn't arrest the guy, but still...
/r/MensRights28/11/14 10:12 PM
3

I don't drive anymore, but if I did I'd ignore it on principle. "You just parked in a woman's space!" "I identify as female" -haughtily strokes beard-
/r/MensRights28/11/14 10:10 PM
2

However, it will introduce an exemption clause for what the department described as "non-exploitative, consensual sexual relationships between peers where there is no more than two years in age difference between both parties". A romeo and juliette law? About fucking time. Two years is extremely strict, but it's something.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 05:30 PM
5

"Proposed" "Introduced" makes it look like it's already been passed.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 05:27 PM
1

True, it does sound like an interesting study.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 05:19 PM
0

Hahahahaha! You're hilarious. Would you care to make any other baseless assumptions? Hint: Check my posting history. To my memory I've never once posted in a feminist sub.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 05:16 PM
1

I agree, the opinions of one court or another are irrelevant. I never once said it was his fault. I said that the fact that he didn't even try to stop her shows that the situation was at least partly of his making. Nope, not an assumption. Unless she was stronger than him (vanishingly unlikely) he was asleep (how would he have remembered it?) or restrained (no mention of it) then he had the power to stop her.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 05:15 PM
0

The fact that a courtroom might not agree is not a logical argument. Sure, I could be wrong, but that doesn't make it automatically rape. It's not a question of desserts, it's a question of what he wanted. If a situation of confused consent arises and an individual does nothing to correct it (despite every opportunity to do so) then it does put into question the notion that it happened against their will. Not an assumption, no.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 05:13 PM
3

All the study suggests to me is that transmena and transwomen are more likely to conform to typical gendered behaviour after transitioning. To put it the other way, why would we expect their choices to differ from the general population? Also, "positive" vs. "negative" is a bit reductivist: Many of the reasons women are paid less than men is because they enjoy a greater quality of life in other areas (more holidays, more time with family, more pursuing personal goals etc.).
/r/MensRights28/11/14 01:44 PM
2

In the case of the wage gap it's been pretty conclusively shown to be a product of factors like hours worked, job performed, holidays taken etc. It's also notable that the gap only really exist in married individuals, single men and women in the US are statistically likely to have the same pay. So in this case, if not sexism, then what? I'd say probably the same things. Were they working the same hours? Did they take more leave? Did they start a family? Did they get married? The article isn't pu…
/r/MensRights28/11/14 12:52 PM
10

Wasn't there a case like that? I actually don't mind which way they decide to go, so long as they make their mind up and apply it equally to both genders.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 12:32 PM
3

Meritocracies are sexist... wow. They're not even trying to pretend that silicon valley isn't a meritocracy any more, they're actually promoting diversity over competence.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 12:15 PM
1

You should check out the comments section. I had a debate with a woman who, no irony or anything, argued that objectionable opinions should result in a jail term.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 12:12 PM
0

Lots of stupid decisions get made in court. If what happens in court is your standard for ethics then what do you think about Brian Banks. I'm not talking about whether a court in that area would call that rape, I'm talking about whether she raped him or not: Given the circumstances she may genuinely have believed the nature of the installation was such that she was allowed to have sex with him. He certainly didn't attempt to correct her if it wasn't. It's hard to argue she had sex with him agai…
/r/MensRights28/11/14 12:05 PM
1

It's not a legal argument, it's a moral one: I genuinely think she may have thought he was consenting, and he did absolutely nothing to correct her impression. It was hardly done against his will when he could easily have stopped it.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 11:39 AM
2

Good point. Well... the movies he actually made weren't that good, but he's been involved in some good movies.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 11:34 AM
0

I'm going to be charitable and assume it was some kind of BDSM thing, but that still doesn't explain the robbery.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 11:34 AM
3

Oh right, I forgot about the US and it's weird relationship with the drink.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 11:33 AM
-2

Em, did you mean to reply to someone else? I more or less agree with you. I don't think it's cast iron consent, but it's certainly enough that the woman who had sex with him might have thought so.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 11:32 AM
1

Context. Look it up.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 11:26 AM
5

Nope, nothing like that. At best this was a case of confused consent, and I seriously doubt any girl in a short skirt would give no indication she didn't want to have sex if a stranger tried to rape them.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 11:26 AM
2

Not really comparable. A short skirt isn't an invitation, an art piece like that might be (depending on the details, he hasn't given much). The circumstances of his art piece make it shakey at best, and the fact that he had the power to stop it and decided not to kinda pokes holes in the idea that she had sex with him against his will. I'm not saying it would/wouldn't qualify under the local legal definition of rape, I'm saying that I'm not convinced she knew he didn't want to have sex with her:…
/r/MensRights28/11/14 11:23 AM
1

Not sure, but given their political leanings it's probably safe to assume so.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 11:14 AM
11

The Boko Haram thing was even more blatant as they had been murdering male students for quite some time, but it was only when they kidnapped (not killed) some female students that the west woke up.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 02:28 AM
10

Eh. People are used to movie stars being crazy. If Tom Cruise can bounce back from his little whack out then I'm sure this guy can too.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 02:25 AM
16

Partially explain? There's nothing to explain. He did nothing wrong other than offend people's sensibilities and have a sex drive longer than he was supposed to.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 02:24 AM
-5

but a lot of the people commenting are unsympathetic about this and they really shouldn't be that way. Why shouldn't they be? If something you don't want is happening to you, you have all the power in the world to stop it, and you decide not to, then it's a bit hard to turn around and ask people to feel sorry for you.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 02:19 AM
25

True, I just hope this doesn't end up being used to write off genuine male rape victims á la "Male rape -snort- you mean like Shia LaBeouf?"
/r/MensRights28/11/14 02:10 AM
-2

Sorry, but I'm not sure this is really rape. If he sat at a table with a bag on his head and a bullwhip on the table in front of him (as depicted in the article) then I'd suggest that he at least implied that that kind of contact was welcome.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 02:09 AM
50

Did you read the circumstances :/ It's not that great.
/r/MensRights28/11/14 02:04 AM
1

Fucking hell, six years? Has any female false accuser ever gotten six years, or even close? Most I've heard of is 12 months. Glad to hear he was convicted and all, if anything it's lenient given the sentences they would have served, but still...
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:46 PM
1

She doesn't want to go to the police, she'd rather have it handled through some unspecified secret process dreamed up by politicians and probably with a much lower standard of proof. Why would anyone be surprised?
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:44 PM
2

I'd like to know the context here, I suspect it might be something to do with women getting mugged/assaulted in darkly lit areas (like the edge of a car park at night). If that's the case, and assuming the Czech republic is like the rest of the world, then it's probably more likely to happen to men anyhow.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:26 PM
0

Those spots actually have a purpose: It's hard to go shopping with kids or heavy pregnancy or a disability.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:25 PM
2

Woop! Progress :) It's a really good analysis by the way.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:22 PM
2

Nothing, but they felt like flying their progressive flag a bit showing off how "pro-woman" they are.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:21 PM
2

That's not the message at all. The message is "don't rape" They honestly think they can prevent rape by putting up posters telling people it's wrong.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:19 PM
5

Doesn't matter, they're "exremely rare." Referring to them at all is silencing rape victims and perpetuating rape culture.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:14 PM
1

And let's not forget the guy in Brazil who exposed himself to a slutwalk and had men and women throw things at him, hit him and chase him down the street.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:13 PM
3

Just wondering about this one: How many people have ever made you show your sexual body parts to them? Remember, we are only asking about things that you didn’t want to happen: This one is real. How is that real? (by "real" I assume you mean "actually referring to rape"). Firstly, while it's possible that rape might follow forcing someone to expose themselves, but it's not actually rape in and of itself by any legal definition I've ever come across. Secondly, this question doesn't even ask about…
/r/MensRights27/11/14 11:09 PM
8

He implied that false accusations were an issue at all, which is the feminist equivalent of getting up during mass to dance on the alter and take a dump in the baptismal font.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 10:53 PM
4

I find this part particularly chilling: Searched were conducted in person months later addition, he was arrested. Seized computers and see whether there was a discernible pornography. I assume by "discernible pornography" they mean BDSM and rape porn. What if they had found some, would he be in jail now? I realise this is considered relevant in several countries, I just don't understand how "you fantasise about this" could ever be considered proof of "you did this."
/r/MensRights27/11/14 10:49 PM
2

Hang on, did they actually ban it? I thought they talked about banning it to appease the radicals in their party but ultimately did nothing about it because they knew they'd get voted out.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 10:48 PM
1

Check out the other MR subs in the sidebar, there's some useful stuff there. MRLinks and MRActivism are pretty good.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 10:44 PM
1

This deserves to be crossposted to MRRef
/r/MensRights27/11/14 10:23 PM
1

Deadlink, so I can't see what exactly was said, but going from the comments... If he knew she wanted kids, lead her to believe he did too and he secretly had a vasectomy and pretended he was still fertile, then that's dishonest (but nowhere near as bad as sabotaging contraception). If there was no real agreement and he just had a vesectomy because he felt like it... his body his choice, but it would probably make sense to discuss something like that with your partner.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 11:28 AM
2

Well, look up Storm Wikipedia and you should get some examples. Feminist ideas on wikipedia are subsidised.
/r/MensRights23/11/14 11:41 AM
2

Been there. Not worth repeating. All the stuff they say about wikipedia having a woman problem is true of men when it comes to socjus related pages.
/r/MensRights23/11/14 11:36 AM
2

Whenever I'm reading a wikipedia article on a controversial topic now I always read the talk page. If it's longer than the article I move on and find something else.
/r/MensRights23/11/14 11:34 AM
2

I tried editing men's rights once and I just got brigaded by editors from wikiproject feminism. For example, they insisted that any academic source opposing the MRM should simply be called "academics" whereas pro-MRA sources weren't allowed to be even if they were doctors like Warren Farrell and CSH. They were pushing this idea of the whole thing being a conflict between prejudiced conservatives and expert academics. In the end I gave up. A few months later they deleted the article and moved som…
/r/MensRights23/11/14 11:33 AM
2

I'm confused. I assumed you were trolling at first, but you seem to be a regular poster in TIA which makes you being an SJW unlikely. Is this just trolling or is there a point here?
/r/MensRights23/11/14 11:17 AM
1

That's a separate issue, and it doesn't prove the accusations are false.
/r/MensRights23/11/14 11:09 AM
2

Agreed, we need another tag for stuff like this. Possibly "assumed guilty"?
/r/MensRights23/11/14 11:08 AM
1

That's a long list... also, holy shit pensylvania, what did you do?
/r/MensRights23/11/14 11:05 AM
1

He seems to be bound by an anonymity statement. That said, she did supply quotes so presumably he could have too. He's probably just keeping his head down and doing his best to get out of there ASAP.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 09:29 PM
1

And all fuelled by three beers and a slug of vodka... I don't care how much of a lightweight you are, if you have a functioning liver that does not get you drunk beyond the point of being able to make decisions. And I'm highly suspicious of her claim that she didn't remember anything.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 09:27 PM
1

I heard there was some crazy library fine too, like €10,000 for a book overdue for several decades or something. That's fair enough then. I think that makes alot more sense (and has alot more benefit to society) than shoving them in a hole and paying thousands or euros to keep them there.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 08:51 PM
1

I don't support the behaviour by any means, but I support his right to talk about it and travel freely wherever he feels like going. It also sets an extremely dangerous precedent that a government will bar someone from entry simply for expressing the wrong opinions.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 08:42 PM
1

Brainwashed? Unless he's dropping sodium pentathol in their drinks and hypnotising them then I wouldn't count talking to people as brainwashing them.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 08:39 PM
1

Wow... he's an anti porn quasi-feminist and he's saying this.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 08:38 PM
2

Incidentally, is the value of the fine pegged to income? Or is it a fixed amount? If the former then I think it's a better solution than incarceration.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 08:35 PM
2

I was considering that a few years back when SRS first started going on about them, but since then it's been turned around and become a general thing rather than a specifically anti-MRA thing. Feminists get hated on for being fedoras too.
/r/MensRights15/11/14 11:40 PM
5

Wait, you weren't provided with a copy of it to begin with??
/r/MensRights30/01/14 05:10 AM
3

Just remember, feminism is working to solve these problems. /s
/r/MensRights30/01/14 04:39 AM
1

The problem isn't that they're helping people out, the problem is that they're specifically and only helping girls.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 04:38 AM
2

Frankly I think it's the right approach, and it seems to work. The only trouble is how it's openly sexist and noone cares.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 04:37 AM
1

In fairness, I don't see any evidence these particular white knights are being racist, just sexist.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 04:36 AM
3

Sounds fantastic. I truly applaud this effort. Where are the boy's courts?
/r/MensRights30/01/14 04:35 AM
1

How many of them will see the email/petition? Chances are, whoever receives it will just delete it. At most they'll forward it to manboobz or someone.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 04:12 AM
1

I learned a long time ago that advocacy like this is best kept under your hat. If the wrong people take a disliking to you they will target you and they will go after you in any way they can, including trying to get you fired/make you unemployable.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 03:55 AM
4

making unwelcome sexual advances Does that mean if you ask someone out, you find out afterwards if you sexually harassed them or not?
/r/MensRights30/01/14 03:41 AM
2

That's just how I've seen the word used. Others may use it differently.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 03:30 AM
1

Is that supposed to be a quote? Sorry, I'm a bit lost. Edit: Oh sorry, you were quoting your own post. Is that supposed to be directed at RAINN? I don't see them coming around somehow.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 02:45 AM
2

Projection is where you take a relatively simple sentence and extrapolate all kinds of unlikely assumptions out of it. It usually says more about the person making the assumptions than the person who made the original statement. It might not reveal their personal opinion, but it's highly likely to reveal their pet hates/fears. No problem :)
/r/MensRights30/01/14 02:44 AM
1

Ah, sorry, I thought the second sentence was still referring to that. It sounds like the kind of thing which might have been legal in the 50s or 60s.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 08:49 PM
1

RAINN most likely won't respond to this, but it isn't about what RAINN doesn't do(and again, they most likely won't change their minds)... it's about what WE do. It's about learning to take proactive action as a united front. That's the real battle for men's rights activists. And we win it step by step. If you agree that they won't change their minds then what does the petition hope to achieve? I'm not being sarky, maybe there's a strategic point I'm missing here, but I'm not seeing what good it…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 08:44 PM
1

As in discrimination according to race used to be ok until last year? Or gender?
/r/MensRights29/01/14 08:40 PM
1

Wow, seriously? When were they allowed do that? O.O
/r/MensRights29/01/14 07:17 PM
4

Because you're part of a group which is likely to spend far longer on the road than them on average and therefore more likely to have an accident. The fact that your gender is more likely to drive for a job doesn't help.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 07:16 PM
1

Hakim says erotic capital is an “unacknowledged asset” that we’ve been tricked into giving away for free, and she blames an “unholy alliance” of the patriarchy and radical feminists. Those wascally bandits. Always the patriarchy and the radfems. We have special names for such ambitious women. Hookers charge for it and sluts give it away for free. Gold diggers want the ring for it and trophy wives are the lucky ones who get the ring. Actually we have special names for women who give it away for c…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 06:10 PM
3

And if it has any serious impact on efficiency the organisations that practice it will get weeded out.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 06:02 PM
1

Thanks to all for the comments, discussion, and gildings. Some really interesting stuff being said from all sides on this topic. I've certainly gained a much broader perspective on the issue. Seems he's learned his lesson a little at least. That said, more evidence Randall Munroe is against men's rights, as if I needed any.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 05:52 PM
1

See below, sources abound.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 04:26 PM
2

Gender based, yes. Discrimination or sexism, maybe/unproven.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 01:55 PM
2

The reason you got downvoted is because we've gone through the wage gap calculations over and over again. It's kinda 101 stuff here. The 77cent figure only works out if you fail to account for all kinds of factors like: Hours worked Part time vs fulltime Public sector vs private Flexibility of hours Holiday time offered Leave taken Inherant danger of job Desireablility of job Among others. Once those factors are controlled for the wage gap becomes negligable, leaving only one or two cents to the…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 01:50 PM
2

I called it projection because you read a heck of alot into what little I wrote. All I said was that I didn't think they'd be responsive to the petition, I never said anything about not engaging in any activism or everyone hates us. Sure, a misunderstanding, this particular form of which was projection ;) Edit: Sorry, thought you were the same poster as the one above. Should have been "they read."
/r/MensRights29/01/14 01:40 PM
1

It wasn't a leather bar, I don't think we have one of those here. More's the pity.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 01:37 PM
4

From what I've seen of them before I wouldn't be inclined to agree. Like I said, good luck, but I wouldn't expect results from that particular group. Please stop the crappy defeatist MRA "everyone hates us" attitude that prevents us from engaging in activism. Whole lot of projection there. I pick my battles, I don't canvas the NOW for instance because I know it'd be a waste of time. There's other DV and SV organisations out there which are more friendly to male victims.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 07:47 AM
1

I could set up as a barber tomorrow if I wanted (and if I didn't mind getting yelled at for giving crappy haircuts), I don't think there's any country in the world where I could set up an abortion clinic without any kind of qualification. It's not a non sequiter, there are over the counter medicines which people can self prescribe because they're low risk and don't require monitoring by medical professionals. The ones required to induce abortions are not among them.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 07:44 AM
2

Still not really comparable: In this case the pregnancy was desired. Also the chemicals used to induce abortion can cause sterility and the women taking them need to be made aware of all kinds of other side effects and warning signs to look out for. Like I said: There's a reason they aren't over the counter drugs.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 07:42 AM
1

Harness?
/r/MensRights29/01/14 07:39 AM
1

What he did was comparable to cutting her hair against her will. You can't get around this. What you seem to be arguing implicitly is that he killed a baby-- which he didn't do. You seriously think inducing an abortion is comparable to cutting someone's hair? It's been established a fetus has no rights. That is premised on the fetus not being a person. The abortion of the fetus carries the same moral weight as cutting her hair, possibly less. Would you advocate 14 years in prison if someone held…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 01:45 AM
2

This has been posted ten or twelve times already. Good find, but it's been discussed to death.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:58 AM
0

Sometimes an unjust action, and illegal action, an action that is wrong, is justified. A Catch-22. But not in this case. What he did was way above any beyond any hypothetical threat she posed. To say otherwise is to ignore the entire history of civil dis-obedience. The civil rights movement, the non-violence of Ghandi, Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange, Snowden. Good thing I didn't say otherwise. I never said illegal actions are never justified. That said, what he did is incomparable to all of the…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:56 AM
1

That's the be all and end all of the situation. He did something he had no right to do. If you have a point to make feel free to make it, this vague "go on, say more" bs is going nowhere.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:50 AM
0

Let me help you out by using the old role-switch: Put a man in that picture for a moment, using similar words about his wife. Do you think viewers of the advertisement would be okay with it? Honestly, I would yeah. I think most people would take it as it's obviously meant to be taken, and a minority would fly off then handle and insist it was normalising domestic abuse. If that happened I think it would make sense for the network to change it, but I'd recognise it's just unfortunate wording rath…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:38 AM
1

Sure. But not all violations of reproductive autonomy are equal.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:22 AM
1

If you're a paid advertiser, that's part of the job: coming up with something to catch people's attention, to give more credit to the show. Popularity is a result of advertising. Well yeah, but some advertisments are paid more than others. Chefs are paid to come up with nice and interesting food, but a €1 chipper isn't likely to put much thought into their batterburgers compared to a five star executive chef. And you're right: sometimes it doesn't take a hell of a lot of thought. That's what's w…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:21 AM
1

I think you're overestimating the amount of time and thought that goes into crappy throwaways like this. I've made similar graphics before, I have about an hour to spend on each from brief to handin and I wasn't working with anyone else. For a multimillion dollar superbowl ad I'd agree alot of thought goes into everything, but for a quickie promo like this? Not much.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:06 AM
0

Have a look through the comments, quite alot of them seem to be saying he was justified because she could have squeezed him for cash for 18 years.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:04 AM
1

It leads to him having no right to do what he did.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:03 AM
1

Obviously at the top of everything is the usual advice in this sub which is "ask a lwayer." Crazy expensive but compared to the worst case scenario it's worth it. My own personal gut instinct is as follows, it's subservient to AAL... 1: No, bad idea. Either write a positive letter or don't write one at all. If they do make a false accusation this could make you look like you're taking revenge. 2: I wouldn't count on it, if they don't the consequences are too severe. 3: I think that if someone's …
/r/MensRights29/01/14 12:00 AM
1

To make it easier for you: I'd be willing to take your point if you can show me that abortion/lack thereof has an equal impact on both parents.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:27 PM
3

It's exactly how self defence works. What he did went miles above and beyond anything she did or tried to do to him.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:20 PM
2

It's not nutjob behavior. The laws surrounding the issue guarantee this kind of thing will happen. I doubt this is the first, won't be the last. Next time the guy might just beat the woman until she aborts. And he'll be a nutjob for doing so, and a violent scumbag to boot. Either way, injustice spawns injustice. Agreed, but at least you recognise that what he did is an injustice.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:19 PM
1

I'm not sure what you're asking...
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:18 PM
3

What you are saying is that if an immoral law exists then you should never disobey that immoral law. I'm saying I shouldn't commit an even greater immorality as a response. If my neighbour steals from me I shouldn't cut off their hand.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:16 PM
1

Where should I stop?
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:14 PM
2

I don't recognise unilateral abortion instigated by the father as a men's right. It clearly has a much more significant impact on the mother. I do recognise the importance of men gaining access to every other reproductive right such as effective contraception, financial abortion and equal treatment when it comes to adoption.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 11:13 PM
1

Ah, I understand you now.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:40 PM
2

I agree it's wrong because it violates her autonomy. That was my point.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:40 PM
2

Self defence against a legal action aimed at securing his money would be to mount a counter action. It's not self defence if the force used is disproportionate to the original attack. If she'd raped him he might have been justified, not otherwise.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:39 PM
3

I would have though so, but you asked him why it wasn't cool.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:36 PM
1

Ok, but that doesn't make his act equivalent to a consentual abortion, as was suggested: given how abortion happens on a daily basis.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:36 PM
3

I don't have a right to unilaterally instigate an abortion, nor should I.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:34 PM
3

Agreed, but two wrongs don't make a right.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:29 PM
4

Good? He drugged her against her will. I'm aware of the argument that he is living in a system which only recognises her reproductive choices. But that doesn't justify him taking liberties which could seriously affect her health.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:27 PM
4

Feminists in the same position would be campaigning for this guy as a hero. There's no doubt about that they would make this guy a national hero. But you guys condemn him. Just because feminists go over the edge and condone nutjob behaviour doesn't mean we should too.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:24 PM
8

Does it even need to be asked why administering medication against someone's will isn't ok??
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:22 PM
8

given how abortion happens on a daily basis. Er, yes, but usually with the consent of the person taking the pill.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:21 PM
10

WARNING Likely troll. Check the poster's history.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:16 PM
1

Even then, it's a subjective thing. Rape and being falsely accused aren't homogenous experiences. Some people in some circumstances might have it worse than others.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:15 PM
4

That's highly speculative, and underperform relative to what? If their skill rating was previously calculated including matches with male opponents then how were they not underperforming then? If it wasn't, then maybe men are slightly better at chess on average. It'd be more scientific to compare the result with blind matches played over a computer.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 10:13 PM
2

It's a show about hardware and DIY, I'm pretty sure they're not suggesting she's going to beat him with the wrench.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:40 PM
1

Yeah, but I think they were supporting that stereotype rather than attacking it. The show mostly follows the typical sitcom trend of dumb/sexist husband vs. long suffering wife. Or at least it did when I used to watch it 15 years ago. Can't believe it's still running.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:38 PM
2

That's a better example.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:37 PM
1

I'm pretty sure she's beating him at some plumbing problem (the subject of the show is hardware). It's an unfortunate image, but I don't seriously thing they were implying she was going to assault him.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:36 PM
2

Humans often smile out of embarassment or distress. It's not evidence he's enjoying himself.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:30 PM
3

Agreed: Marxist/Class-struggle rhetoric is an awful vocabulary to talk about gender.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:19 PM
11

I've seen supposedly straight women turned away from gay clubs on busy nights (along with the "straight" guys, me included) mostly based on dresscode, ie. not wearing the gay uniform. That said, it's nothing to do with them being women so much as the club aiming for a particular demographic. It's also not even an issue given that they'll get in free to most non-gay nightclubs guys would get turned away from.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:08 PM
10

The "myth" of the fag hag? O.o Has this person ever been to a gay bar? This whole article is a joke. Are they really surprised women aren't the center of attention in a club intended for gay men to meet partners? And talk about gender blindness, have they ever been to a lesbian club with a guy friend?
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:04 PM
2

To this end, SRE ought to be taught, in age-appropriate fashion, in primary schools, too. “It’s quite possible to have conversations with children about boundaries, and how boys and girls are treated differently,” Was anyone else thinking "sexual harassment panda"? I actually wouldn't have a problem with this if there were any chance of it being taught in a gender neutral way. But it won't be.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 08:58 PM
2

And when she grows up and has kids of her own: "Oh crap, that guy is buying my kid stuff and spending time with them. Stranger-danger"
/r/MensRights28/01/14 08:55 PM
1

Something along those lines: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garage_%28film%29
/r/MensRights28/01/14 08:53 PM
2

Firstly, it's encouraging to see the support he's gotten. Secondly, wow, given some of those comments we have a long long way to go.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 08:49 PM
-4

Good luck, but I wouldn't count on it. Their rhetoric is heavily invested in the men vs. women model of sexual violence.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 08:42 PM
1

That is what you're too dence to understand. Combat readiness isn't about one specific ability, it's about a general status and ability. This is what you're too dense to explain: Why are pullups relevant? If they're not relevant why does anyone have to do them? Don't even bother replying "because physical fitness" unless you're willing to qualify that with what exact qualities they're measuring and what they have to do with being a soldier.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 08:09 PM
0

Thanks for clarifying, that should be noted. That said, while he's clearly not a very nice person, he's nowhere near a credible threat to anyone and certainly shouldn't see jailtime.
/r/MensRights26/01/14 12:53 PM
1

you're not getting it. You are incredibly dense. Or you're making no sense... Physical health is required. Physical strenght is not. Pullups are a measure of physical health, but pullups are a weak measure of physical health. What? When you measure physical health of a man, you need different measurements than with a woman. Ok, what exactly are they measuring when you say "physical health?" That phrase covers everything from HIV status to skin conditions. What specific abilities are they measuri…
/r/MensRights26/01/14 12:14 PM
1

Friendship is manly is the best thing that happened to me in November :D I'm not pissed about the distribution, I'm a little annoyed by the representation. Watch Dragon Quest again.
/r/MensRights26/01/14 12:08 PM
1

Ok.
/r/MensRights26/01/14 12:30 AM
0

I'm sorry, but even giving you that, three of the shows main antagonists are female. Trixie, Chrysalis and Nightmare Moon. Your point being? It's actually alot more than three, and Trixie is a neutral now, but none of that is an issue because the show has an overall positive and diverse depiction of femininity. A few female villains isn't going to make a difference. The whole point is that they're not going to represent masculinity in a deep and meaningful way in a show marketed to girls. And ne…
/r/MensRights26/01/14 12:17 AM
1

Might not be the owners/designers fault, but then I wasn't really blaming them to begin with.
/r/MensRights26/01/14 12:02 AM
1

Would you have a problem if a show aimed at white kids was taking a jab at PoCs? You can find it playful all you like, but the show's writers are feminists, if they allow this crap in it's not because they think playful sexism is ok going both ways.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 11:28 PM
0

They don't discuss masculinity at all in MLP:FiM. Why should they? Season 2 Ep. 21: "Dragon Quest" There's no need for them to do so at all, but they decided to and basicly went with a "men are bad" line. The majority of the main characters aren't typically feminine. Agreed, they show a varied and diverse representation of femininity. I never disagreed with you on this, it's their representations of masculinity that fall short. Also, if Snips and Snails are proof that the show is rife with misan…
/r/MensRights25/01/14 11:25 PM
1

I've no idea if there actually is, sorry XD. I think some people did mirror her, so people could post criticism, but she DMCA'd them out of youtube. Heck, was it her that tried to DMCA a couple of video responses? Probably the only way to do it would be to rip the flv and share it on bitorrent.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 11:15 PM
3

I actually don't have any problem with them taking it down, so long as it was part of a general policy against parody code, but they don't seem to have any problem with whitespace compilers. Meh, it's not hard to resist the force of butthurt women. They don't pay the bills, it's not like title IX applies here or anything, deleting anything controversial because it's too much effort to delete emails is a bit screwed up, and I'm not at all convinced that's why they did it. At any rate, github, goo…
/r/MensRights25/01/14 10:54 PM
1

Afaik, fedoras is only a stereotype which applies to "creepy" guys like MRAs and PUAs, I've also heard it applied to libertarians. Personally I wasn't hugely into them before, but the whole "eeeww, 'Fedoras'" thing makes me want to buy one, just to give them the finger.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 10:51 PM
-1

Misandry in MLP:FiM? Are you serious? Why is that so hard to believe? I mean seriously There aren't many male characters, but they are spread between good and bad. They're spread between bad and blank, mostly bad. I'm actually tempted to do a numerical analysis on this, it's pretty blatant. And beside, it's targetted at young girls. Why would they promote male friendships to young girls? Why not friendships that young girls can identify with? What part of the world do you live in that young girl…
/r/MensRights25/01/14 10:46 PM
1

Quite a few actually, and if there were no male villains alongside them then there wouldn't be any need for male positive characters (even background characters like Shining Armour) to compensate. If they'd kept the male characters out of the picture it would have been fine, but instead they have to introduce them as evil or incompetant, with nothing/very little to balance out the implication that this stereotype applies to males in general.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 10:41 PM
0

Haven't watched TMNT in ages, but I thought April was pretty proactive. If not, that shouldn't happen. I'd compare Spike more to Erma (with the exception of one or two episodes) or Jeanine from Ghostbusters. I'm all in favour of shows catering to their target market, but it's a basic rule of writing that if you write in a character who's a member of a certain group with negative aspects, there has to be someone else from the same group with positive attributes to balance it out. This rule is gen…
/r/MensRights25/01/14 10:38 PM
1

No idea, it's dodgy as hell though. I've also heard of cases where the investigators (NCIS) canvassed friends of the accuser asking them to make similar accusations against the accused in order to shore up the case.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 10:32 PM
1

I've no idea how the homunculus was actually measured. I just posted it to show how nerve concentration isn't even throughout the body :)
/r/MensRights25/01/14 10:31 PM
1

Sure, but it's a problem if the boy world is being depicted as silly/evil. I mean I expect "snips and snails" type language from preschoolers, not from adult writers who are supposedly interested in gender equality.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 11:10 AM
1

Doubt it. At any rate, this isn't like the "pussy pass" where there's thousands of well documented cases and statistical studies backing it up. Cases like this are pretty rare and I haven't seen anything to suggest people see it as being worse when it happens to a girl.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 11:09 AM
1

That was referring to the admins of reddit in general, I think it's talking about creepshots.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 11:05 AM
2

Your parents made many choices for you as you grew up, but this particular choice was irreversible, didn't really carry any benefits and could easily have been left until you were and adult. People sometimes get angry about it because their body has been altered without their permission.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 09:13 AM
2

According to them, yes. But we've no idea if that's true according to the child until they're not a child anymore.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 09:10 AM
1

Religion is irrelevant, only adults can consent to something like that. If they want to when they grow up they can have it done, if not... that's pretty telling in and of itself.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 09:10 AM
1

Nerves are distributed unevenly thoughout the human body. This can be portrayed through a sensory homunculus, the larger areas of the body are the parts containing more nerves, the smaller parts contain less. I can't speak for anyone else, but the most sensitive part of my penis is the head, followed by the inside of the foreskin, followed by the shaft. However circumcusion also greatly reduces the sensitivity of the head by exposing it to friction with clothing and skin. Over time it gradually …
/r/MensRights25/01/14 09:02 AM
1

Some do. In some parts of the world it's performed traditionally similar to male circumcision, but it meets with much stiffer resistance from the women's rights crowd and there's alot of pressure to outlaw it. In the west it's mostly performed for medical reasons or aesthetic reasons on adult women.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 08:52 AM
2

All the same reasons as circumcision actually: Because it's traditional Because it's considered more attractive Because it's "normal" where they live Because their religion requires it Because of other beliefs and superstitions regarding uncut genetalia For pure aesthetic reasons For genuine medical reasons (rarely)
/r/MensRights25/01/14 08:50 AM
2

Nothing is wrong with circumcision if it's performed on a consenting adult or a child in the case of vitally necessary surgery which can't be put off until adulthood (rare almost to the point of non-existence). If it's performed on a minor unnecessarily, then maybe they'll be ok with it and it'll turn out fine (like in your case) or maybe they won't be ok with it or it'll cause serious loss of function.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 08:47 AM
0

Maybe the father admitted to the verbal agreement? Even so that's a pretty dodgy way to run a hospital, doesn't sound like informed consent to me.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 08:44 AM
1

If there's misandry in kids shows is an issue, yes. Edit: Plus, if depictions of gender on kids shows is inconsequential, why did you post the above link?
/r/MensRights25/01/14 08:18 AM
2

Source is pretty dubious. Downvoted.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 08:14 AM
3

It's typical for women to be denied access to their children?
/r/MensRights25/01/14 08:07 AM
3

Wow, I wonder why those prisoners might not feel peachy about the 'ol stars and stripes.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 08:05 AM
6

This gem from the comments: The culture of misogyny that festers in nearly every corner of reddit makes a toxic environment to women. The Mens Rights subreddit is a registered hate group. Also, the moderator's of reddit have been approached on these topics and unless their child porn subreddit makes the news, they rarely do anything about acts of hate. Essentially, unless you are a hetersexual white cisgendered male, the "jokes" are going to be at your expense. Great video Cristen, but I fear yo…
/r/MensRights25/01/14 07:55 AM
1

We're MRAs (men's rights activists) collectively we're the MRM (men's rights movement). Can't speak for anyone else, but sure, anything can be joked about in the right context. The key thing is that the person making the joke doesn't have any cruel intent. If George Carlin makes a joke about prison rape it's pretty clear he's not saying it's ok. If a radfem wearing a shirt saying "I love misandry" makes the same joke, it kindof implies she's being passive agressive rather than just making a joke…
/r/MensRights25/01/14 07:49 AM
0

Not much you can do really, it's up to her. I've had to let quite a few friends go due to differences in politics, ultimately it's up them: Either they're willing to stay friends with you despite their differences, or they're not. If you want to mention to her that these posts are making you and your friends uncomfortable due to the misandry you could do that, but if she posted something like that I wouldn't expect her to take it on board.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 07:36 AM
-1

Can you show an example of a similar case to this where an accident with a female child's genitalia caused uproar?
/r/MensRights25/01/14 07:29 AM
1

What reason do you have to believe that they took this decision because he was male?
/r/MensRights25/01/14 07:19 AM
4

I don't see what this has to do with men's rights, this could just as easily happen with a female specific surgery.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 07:18 AM
4

Ugh, I'd prefer not to give her views :/ Ratings are disabled, comments are disabled, criticism is disabled.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 07:14 AM
3

I've seen stuff from her for quite a few years, she's been on the team for awhile now ;)
/r/MensRights25/01/14 05:44 AM
2

<etonian_accent>Nonsense boy, you'll scuff up the furniture.</etonian_accent>
/r/MensRights25/01/14 05:34 AM
1

I played it a few times. Can't remember much, but it's not likely to get your heartrate up.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 04:49 AM
-1

Can you name any actively good male characters? Spike very rarely actually does anything (only two episodes come to mind, one of which was a minor act) and same goes for Big Mac. Shining armour takes a positive role in one episode until Sombra knocks him out, that's it. I don't mind it being heavily female, it's oriented towards girls, but they do have rather alot of male villans without any compensating heroes. The Boast Busters episode was particularly bad for this, it introduces the only two …
/r/MensRights25/01/14 04:47 AM
0

I'm not sure lazy is correct either. Preferring a career in nursing isn't what I'd call the easy option.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 04:27 AM
5

I don't have a problem with this. If they want to, they can go there and have their women's only club. Private clubs restrict their membership anyway, it's not like it's an open venue the general public might need to use. BUT, if they want this club, they're never allowed, not even once, to complain about men only golf clubs or masonic lodges or whatever. Edit: which is why most London women couldn’t care less about not being allowed into them. Oh dear, do I sense a little bitterness?
/r/MensRights25/01/14 02:10 AM
1

Sounds like fun to me. I like sherry.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 02:07 AM
3

It's tragic, but I don't think it's a men's rights issue, similar mistakes can happen to female children.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 02:04 AM
6

Okay... I think this is a human rights issue because children shouldn't be tried as adults, but why is a men's rights issue?
/r/MensRights25/01/14 02:01 AM
3

What exactly are they proposing? I read the article and the problem seems to be that some men have argued they continued despite strong objections because they thought it was a case of "no means yes" and the charges of rape were dismissed. If that's the case it's an obvious flaw in the law and should be fixed. I don't see it as a threat to men's rights.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:59 AM
7

Even if it's only evidence of sexism against men on Tumblr it's still evidence of sexism against men. (at least to the extent that the google searches are sexism against women)
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:50 AM
6

And this a mere month after the C+= debacle. GitHub is really showing it's true colours.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:47 AM
6

It's representative of the overall context in which feminist groups attempt to control the language and conversation. They can't allow the word "meritocracy" to be applied to anything in the tech world because it might imply women aren't barred from the tech world by heinous sexism.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:46 AM
5

Lauren Faust is pretty cool. I was disappointed when I watched MLP:FiM and almost all the male characters are negative or non-contributory, but in fairness she didn't actually have a hand in most of those episodes, and she quit when it started going off the deep end.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:33 AM
3

She's credited as storyboard artist, which (for a kid's TV show like this) likely means she wrote the thing.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:30 AM
13

"Burgler: A person, typically of african descent, who enters a property in order to puloin goods." Since when has it been acceptable to wedge demographics into a definition like that, as if they're somehow meaningful? It's a step in the right direction towards not being sexist, but they're still sexist as hell. If OED published the above definition they'd loose their readership, and rightly so.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:22 AM
3

Sorry, completely wrong article, I'll delete it now.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:21 AM
2

There is no defence against false accusations in a legal climate which requires no proof.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:13 AM
12

At least they're admitting women can rape.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 12:46 AM
35

That's really shocking. He's prosecuted purely on someone else's word The accuser's story is "improved" by the prosecution Barely any deliberation (jury effectively picked whichever story sounded more appealing) Even when the only scrap of evidence to put him away turns in his favour years later, everyone scrambles to keep him inside. Christ, if I heard a conspiracy nut tell me about a legal system which worked this way I'd tell them they're nuts.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 12:35 AM
1

Define militant? I'd agree the guys throwing themselves into machine gun nests are usually men, but if you look at the Vietnam war or the Napoleonic Iberian war, it's pretty clear that women (and occasionally children, but less so) were usually a pretty integral part of the war machine.
/r/MensRights24/01/14 02:24 AM
1

Pullups. Are. not. Required. Yeah... I agree. No offense but I think you should probably go back over my comments and have another read, you seem to be arguing against someone else. I'm saying the tests should be relevant and the same for everyone, not that this particular test is relevant. If it's not relevant then why is anyone doing it?
/r/MensRights24/01/14 02:21 AM
7

MRAs have had videos pulled before. If they're smart and keep a copy off the cloud lots of new accounts tend to form from all over the world fighting the censorship. Ultimately she had no moral right here, so I have no qualms whatsoever about making sure the message is spread wide and far. If she wants to publicly apologise for what she said or retract it in some way then fine. But otherwise it's important it stays up.
/r/MensRights22/01/14 06:33 AM
1

Beyond the fact that that's pretty immoral (two wrongs don't make a right) it's also pretty stupid since she has every reason to falsely accuse him of rape (as she's shown she's willing to do).
/r/MensRights22/01/14 04:45 AM
1

Even If they lowered some strength standards for women there is a reasonable way for them to measure men and women differently and achieve the same physical fitness and combat preparedness. How? If they're training to do different physical actions how can they be expected to perform the same physical actions when it comes to doing their job?
/r/MensRights22/01/14 04:28 AM
2

Oh absolutely not. I was just pointing out that they can't exactly get away with drone-striking the PM of England for example.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 11:53 PM
3

Well, people in wealthy nations in general have some immunity. Also some high profile people in unwealthy nations. True.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 09:26 PM
2

I wouldn't say anywhere and any adult male. But certainly most of the more anonymous ones with little international voice.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 09:00 PM
1

I agree, if the guncamera pictures started getting leaked with women in their sights people wouldn't buy it for a minute that all those fleeing civilians are actually dangerous terrorists.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 08:57 PM
2

Christ... all that stuff about "military age men" makes them sound like the romans. And not in a good way.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 03:43 PM
2

That or female presumption of innocence wouldn't let it slide. When people think of a terrorist they think of a beardy brown guy in a turban. If they started labelling women that way (even poc women) they might end up with their listeners actually questioning how they determined the people in question were militants.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 03:42 PM
1

Thanks for confirming. Techrights are usually pretty well sourced but they have a habit of using... unique language from time to time.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 03:40 PM
1

What surprises me is that they don't include adult women.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 03:17 PM
1

How did he hijack it? Seems to me the people above are celebrating it.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 12:46 PM
2

You won't find statistics because it's a hazy definition to begin with, but I'm pretty sure he's correct. It's also impossible to compile statistics showing that the majority of historical rulers/politicians were male, but anyone who's studied even a small amount of history would be aware that this is the case.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 12:40 PM
0

I think that was Warren Farrel's point: If you're going to argue men are naturally violent/evil because most wars have been fought by men then you'd also have admit that... A) When women have had the opportunity they've acted in exactly the same manner B) Most peaceful resolutions/civil rights advances have also been made by men. C) Or we could stop pretending male and female leaders are significantly better/worse than one and other and get on with life. The idea of the quote isn't to say "men a…
/r/MensRights21/01/14 12:37 PM
2

There are, I've met them, they're just thin on the ground. Generally speaking the people I've met who acknowledge male disadvantage eventually drop the label because they don't want to be associated with the others.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 12:08 PM
1

Wait, so we agree pullups and "general physical fitness" exams are a bit irrelevant? Great. Just so we're clear: I'm arguing they should be measuring things which are relevant and necessary to the job and that if they set a standard as being the minimum required to carry a particular job out then everyone should have to meet it. I do however think you guyz need to pull your heads out of your asses sometimes. Most of the time you're not wrong, but when you are it's just in the stupidest way... le…
/r/MensRights21/01/14 11:58 AM
1

It's bull to be honest. It's basicly nafalt crossed with making feminism look older and more important than it actually is.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 11:49 AM
14

Christ, "the cops are not your friend, only talk to your lawyer" is bad enough for falsely accused men. It's even worse that it also applies to men trying to make an accusation in the first place.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 03:02 AM
1

It's more fair because for a few reasons. Firstly, women aren't a special interest group they make up more than half the population. Making things more fair based on the specific trait of gender is really easy to do and makes the gender challenge fairer for a huge chuck of the participants. What's the point of the contest from the beginning? It used to be "to find the fastest human being overall" now it's "to find the fastest male human being and the fastest female human being overall." One stan…
/r/MensRights21/01/14 02:51 AM
1

I'm by no means an expert on the men's rights movement, I'm only a college kid who wanted to complain about a teacher, but doesn't that statement hold true for MRAs just as much as for feminists? Here's the thing, say you'd never heard anything about either group before and someone told you about someone who was a "Men's rights activist," what would you think that meant? Presumably someone who was an activist for men's rights. This means the term has an etymological definition. Next they tell yo…
/r/MensRights21/01/14 02:30 AM
2

Not just hateful and ignorant, there's a grain of truth, but the hateful and ignorant bit is more than enough of a reason for a downvote.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 02:07 AM
2

Excellent article about the philosophical history of this here: http://philosophynow.org/issues/46/Newtons_Flaming_Laser_Sword If the debate doesn't have strict definitions based on empirical evidence then I wouldn't expect anyone to change their minds.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 01:59 AM
1

Some do, some don't Feminism means everything/nothing.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 01:55 AM
1

By definition, yes. Anyone who fights for men's rights is an MRA, no matter what else they might believe. The slight difference is that when it comes to feminists anyone at all can be counted in, and they can even hold their own views up as the definition and noone can prove them wrong.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 01:55 AM
3

"Prove to me that there isn't a teapot orbiting saturn. Until you can prove there isn't I'm going to assume there is" The teacher's theories aren't based on solid data, therefore it's impossible and pointless to argue with.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 01:41 AM
2

Can't wait for SRS/AMR to link to this. Their little minds will explode.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 01:32 AM
1

If we're referring to the MRM and wave theory then we could easily call ourselves third wave. First wave feminists often didn't call themselves feminist, they were retroactively labelled by a third wavers. Second wavers called themselves feminist but didn't use that wave idea.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 01:29 AM
1

Doubt it. The video quality is exceptionally good for a CCTV camera and it's pointed at an odd angle for actually capturing drug use or vandalism. Also, such cameras don't usually capture audio.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 01:21 AM
2

I think you're making the mistake of looking at this as something which can be debated rationally. She's a teacher teaching an irrational subject and she's shown a willingness to shut down debate in order to preserve her bias. I've a feeling you could quote stats at her until you're blue in the face and she'd still default to "men are privileged, we have to look at this with the assumption that it benefits them"
/r/MensRights21/01/14 12:50 AM
1

I wasn't the one who used it.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 12:38 AM
0

Just read the about section. What is he talking about exactly? He seems to be taking a stand against transphobia rather than feminism.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:42 PM
1

False accusations are wrong no matter who they happen to.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:37 PM
1

Why is that more fair? They rig the race to give certain people an advantage because they share a physical charactaristic with a particular group (other members of whom are statistically less likely to run faster than members of another group). Taking that logic we should also be handicapping based on race, so that people of mongolian descent have the same chance as someone of nigerian descent. If we're going to be "fair" about it then everyone would be handicapped based on an unsexist/unracist …
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:28 PM
2

If he gets sent to jail for refusing to support her she'll get his money anyway, and he'll be in jail. You're right though, it's his call. But he should make sure it's an informed decision.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:21 PM
1

If he's a troll: Congratulations, you've just fed a troll If he's serious: Congratulations, you've just told a rape victim to go fuck himself.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:19 PM
2

They're implying that you're a troll trying to make the sub look bad.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:18 PM
1

Good for you, and good luck. If you haven't been already, mention the existence of this post to him and remove it if he tells you to.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:15 PM
0

Don't talk to the girl, her parents, or anyone about anything that happened (including us). Talk to a lawyer, they will tell you if making contact or recording calls is a good or a bad idea. Doing so might land you in hotter water depending on where you live.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:14 PM
1

Maybe, maybe not. What matters is whether it's a good idea or not. A lawyer will be able to tell you this. It's entirely possible that they would be obliged to charge you with statutory rape, even though you claim she blackmailed you.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:12 PM
1

Family law court. The judge isn't likely to care about him or anything she does wrong.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 07:01 PM
2

I think their implication is more that women have been left behind once again (by being excluded from a life threatening institution).
/r/MensRights20/01/14 06:53 PM
1

They're measuring physical health. Physical health is relevant to the job of being a marine. For doing what? Being expected to run long distances carrying heavy objects is relevant to the job, which is why they should make sure everyone can run the distance carrying the same objects. What exactly is the abstract quality they're measuring and how is it relevant to the job? I speak it enough to know that words like "physical health" can mean all kinds of things. that's fucking stupid. There is no …
/r/MensRights20/01/14 04:25 PM
1

Thanks :)
/r/MensRights18/01/14 10:21 PM
1

But isn't there pressure to gender norm them?
/r/MensRights18/01/14 07:01 PM
1

The fitness standard thing is logical because when you measure physical heatlh men and women should have different measurements because physical health manifests in different ways for both genders. Then what are they measuring and how is it relevant to the job? Per capita there are more sexual assaults for women than men even though sexual assault for men is still a big problem, Right, but most of the articles I've seen so far seem to think that it doesn't happen to men at all, and that it's onl…
/r/MensRights18/01/14 07:00 PM
1

Depends how honest their ad policies are. Do they charge per click? Per view? If they charge per view do they exclude viewers with adblocker running? Plus, even if you do visit their page without giving them revenue you're still giving them legitimacy. I'd rather not be a part of some dodgy stat about how popular feminism was in 2013. Unfortunately, as pointed out above, blocksite is malware now, so so much for that.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 06:54 PM
0

That's not my point. If that's how the dojo wants to do things, fine, but nobody should require a business owner to change their practices to suit them and only them. He's not required to. He was just asked to and he agreed. You may be right in that the dojo operator just decided that was fine with him and changed the way he does things, but as with any business, he may have also felt that a big mess would be made if he didn't change his policies. Okay? It's speculative, but even assuming it's t…
/r/MensRights18/01/14 06:51 PM
1

Only working domainblocker I could find. Damn, I'll have to uninstall that now, thanks for the heads up. Do you know of any other, working, ones? Seems like it should be a basic feature.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 06:47 PM
2

Let me guess, your culture is the superior one?
/r/MensRights18/01/14 01:12 AM
1

I used to get caught with jezebel links all the time, then I downloaded blocksite and blacklisted every gawker media domain. I can still visit them if I really want to, but it rules out accidentally giving them pageviews and ad-dollars. Turns out it's been turned into adware. 0/10, would not install again. Anyone know any clean domain blockers let me know :/
/r/MensRights18/01/14 01:12 AM
1

You're kinda preachng to the choir here, except the bit about feminists agree feminism can be defined by anyone bit: I have yet to meet a feminist that will admit that. So far every one I've spoken to (despite "not a monolith") has insisted that there's a universal definition floating up in the ether somewhere which allows them to exclude the feminists it suits their argument to exclude.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 01:10 AM
9

That's fantastic. I don't like celebrity culture, but a prominent celebrity speaking in favour of this (particularly a woman) is fantastic.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 12:02 AM
4

Nominations reflect the number of women working in each respective profession. There aren't many female directors, score-writers or cinematographers so there aren't many nominees. Go figure.
/r/MensRights17/01/14 09:35 PM
1

The real question is, did he know she was 15 at the time of the 'feeling up'? Op has updated. She was actually 13, lied about being 15 (which would have been legal). It doesn't matter what he knew or thought, statutory rape in most countries is illegal even if you had every reason to believe they were of age.
/r/MensRights17/01/14 09:31 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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