TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

genderbent Archive

View 93 posts and 446 comments by genderbent on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
409

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/04/17 01:44 PM
233

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights21/03/17 11:04 PM
220

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights26/06/15 12:15 PM
166

Legal Rightsgenderbent/r/MensRights30/09/15 09:39 PM
151

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/03/17 12:27 PM
117

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/04/17 01:50 PM
110

Edu./Occu.genderbent/r/MensRights22/04/17 01:26 PM
87

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights14/12/16 11:28 PM
71

genderbent/r/MensRights02/12/17 08:46 AM
71

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/03/17 12:20 PM
62

Intactivismgenderbent/r/MensRights26/06/17 02:14 AM
58

Progressgenderbent/r/MensRights26/06/17 02:19 AM
55

genderbent/r/MensRights31/10/17 01:10 AM
53

Satiregenderbent/r/MensRights15/05/16 08:09 AM
49

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights22/12/16 07:49 AM
46

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/06/17 01:07 AM
42

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights12/02/17 08:06 AM
40

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights24/11/16 12:35 AM
40

Eastern Culturegenderbent/r/MensRights24/03/17 01:13 AM
39

Legal Rightsgenderbent/r/MensRights07/09/17 04:43 AM
39

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights21/09/17 07:44 AM
39

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights24/03/17 01:11 AM
39

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights29/09/15 06:57 AM
38

Activism/Supportgenderbent/r/MensRights18/12/16 04:18 AM
36

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights23/03/17 12:26 PM
35

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights14/10/15 04:13 AM
32

Intactivismgenderbent/r/MensRights23/04/17 01:24 PM
31

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights30/09/15 06:57 AM
28

Intactivismgenderbent/r/MensRights23/04/17 01:19 PM
26

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights19/03/16 01:41 PM
26

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/03/17 12:16 PM
26

genderbent/r/MensRights25/03/17 02:13 AM
26

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights17/03/16 02:48 PM
24

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights04/10/15 09:19 PM
24

Analysisgenderbent/r/MensRights02/01/15 09:18 AM
24

Intactivismgenderbent/r/MensRights19/05/17 09:07 AM
22

Intactivismgenderbent/r/MensRights29/09/15 06:22 AM
21

genderbent/r/MensRights30/08/14 02:36 AM
20

Intactivismgenderbent/r/MensRights23/12/16 08:54 PM
20

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights24/03/17 01:14 AM
19

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/03/17 12:05 PM
17

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/07/16 09:25 AM
17

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights06/08/17 09:01 AM
16

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights03/06/16 02:01 PM
16

Feminismgenderbent/r/MensRights21/03/17 11:14 PM
16

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights14/10/15 03:59 AM
14

Legal Rightsgenderbent/r/MensRights30/09/15 06:04 AM
14

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights29/10/16 05:50 PM
13

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights29/05/16 10:24 AM
13

Feminismgenderbent/r/MensRights30/09/15 06:14 AM
13

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights21/07/16 09:17 PM
11

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/11/16 10:04 PM
11

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights16/12/16 12:29 AM
11

Feminismgenderbent/r/MensRights06/05/16 11:52 AM
11

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights06/05/16 11:47 AM
11

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights30/01/17 09:58 AM
11

Intactivismgenderbent/r/MensRights29/09/15 06:24 AM
10

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights24/03/17 01:26 AM
10

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/04/17 01:15 PM
10

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights14/10/15 04:01 AM
10

Blogs/Videogenderbent/r/MensRights19/09/14 05:48 PM
9

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights09/02/16 01:51 AM
9

Opiniongenderbent/r/MensRights26/03/15 09:05 PM
8

Legal Rightsgenderbent/r/MensRights24/06/16 01:00 AM
8

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights24/03/17 01:17 AM
8

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights30/09/15 05:50 AM
7

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights26/12/15 05:39 AM
7

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights05/04/16 10:25 PM
6

Legal Rightsgenderbent/r/MensRights12/12/16 12:58 AM
6

Feminismgenderbent/r/MensRights30/09/15 06:32 AM
6

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights29/04/17 02:18 AM
6

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights05/05/16 10:56 PM
6

genderbent/r/MensRights23/03/17 12:18 PM
6

Feminismgenderbent/r/MensRights12/05/17 09:21 PM
5

Feminismgenderbent/r/MensRights05/02/17 10:04 PM
5

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:44 AM
5

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights20/05/16 12:44 AM
4

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights07/05/16 11:21 AM
4

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights28/10/17 01:12 AM
4

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights02/04/16 05:54 AM
4

Activism/Supportgenderbent/r/MensRights04/11/16 02:55 PM
3

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights24/03/17 01:05 AM
3

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights07/02/17 11:28 AM
3

genderbent/r/MensRights11/09/17 10:49 PM
2

Feminismgenderbent/r/MensRights28/06/16 09:12 PM
2

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights15/11/16 11:35 AM
2

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights31/10/16 02:53 AM
2

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights22/06/16 08:55 PM
2

Legal Rightsgenderbent/r/MensRights27/06/17 12:12 AM
1

Generalgenderbent/r/MensRights23/03/17 12:34 PM
0

Feminismgenderbent/r/MensRights29/08/15 05:00 PM
0

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights30/06/17 08:55 PM
0

Social Issuesgenderbent/r/MensRights20/08/16 02:56 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

Like you, I'm also ideologically closer to /r/menslib than /r/mensrights, but I find it a lot easier to have a productive discussion here. I find moderation on menslib to be a little overzealous, where mensrights is so freewheeling as to be the polar opposite. Both have a downside; menslib tends to punish people who step out of line with the consensus view on the sub, whereas mensrights sometimes hosts discussions that do include legitimate misogyny, with the caveat that the community usually do…
/r/MensRights30/04/18 09:32 PM
1

Also, don't threaten legal action or anything like that; people immediately get defensive when they feel under attack. Instead, focus on positive values like equality, empathy, and respect - you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, and you'll have the best results if it's positioned as "you're a good person, so I know you'd never allow something like this if you knew it was happening"
/r/MensRights29/04/18 01:29 AM
1

I would suggest complaining to your headmaster, preferably in writing - taking the time and effort to compose your thoughts will show that you're thoughtful and serious. Explain the incident and why you found it troubling, stress your commitment to equality, and perhaps suggest that the faculty develop a policy to intervene when something like this happens - teenagers saying stupid shit is hardly a new occurance, but one would hope that teachers would say something when there's blatant sexism be…
/r/MensRights29/04/18 01:23 AM
1

The major news networks other than Fox are pretty much all centrist to center-right. While they may superficially seem left-leaning at first glance, you're unlikely to hear any serious advocacy for actual left-wing ideas, like dramatically raising taxes on the rich, nationalizing industries, providing significantly more government services, or outright abolishing capitalism. But this is to be expected - the networks are the property of multi-billion dollar media corporations after all, so they'r…
/r/MensRights20/12/17 09:59 AM
1

I think one of the largest reasons for the delays is simply that good science takes time. The data collection this paper draws on started all the way back in 2008, but planning obviously started much earlier than that. The final dataset contains what is probably the most comprehensive overview of suicidal intent in history. While data collection ended in 2013, it still takes considerable time to classify, quantify and release all that information, and sometimes longer still to analyse it. Just t…
/r/MensRights04/12/17 10:42 AM
1

The statistics count any incidence of self-harm behaviours capable of being lethal under the broader suicide attempt umbrella. If you take an intential overdose of drugs with the expectation of being found and taken to the hospital as a cry for help, the hospital will record it as a suicide attempt. You may not agree with this methodology, but it's important to remember that it's what all the statistics on suicide attempts are tracking, and it makes sense when you consider that if you were to do…
/r/MensRights04/12/17 10:22 AM
1

Benevolent sexism is a well-established term in the literature for sexist attitudes that ascribe positive qualities to a gender, and there are plenty of examples of benevolent sexism towards men. For instance, assuming a man will be tough is considered a form of benevolent sexism, because our culture values toughness. The term doesn't only refer to women, but the examples refer to women because the study was examining how men's attitudes towards women are percieved as sexist or not sexist. Yes, …
/r/MensRights02/12/17 07:04 AM
1

I'm opposed to sex offender registries in general, but yes, blowing a guy in his sleep is sexual assault. Nobody has the right to engage in sexual activity with you while you're physically unable to tell them whether or not you're okay with it. Once he wakes up, he can consent to the activity from that point on, but before then, he is unable to consent - how can you consent to something you're not even aware is happening? I mean, it's pretty easy to think of minor changes to that scenario that s…
/r/MensRights02/11/17 12:14 AM
3

Oh, i just found out the author used to be the features editor at Gawker. That explains a lot.
/r/MensRights28/10/17 08:25 PM
2

If she's legitimately too drunk to move or speak, which is something that can legitimately happen, then it's rape, full stop. That doesn't mean that nobody ever lies or has a faulty memory (and alcohol can definitely affect the formation of memory) but if they're too drunk to move or say no, then it's rape. The law is very clear on this, and I don't think it's unreasonable - that being said, if they are in control of their faculties enough to indicate their lack of consent in some way should the…
/r/MensRights28/10/17 12:52 AM
1

I know you're not the person who said that, which is why you aren't the person I accused of misogyny!
/r/MensRights26/10/17 11:32 PM
1

His lack of complaining about being raped doesn't justify him being raped again. Yes, he probably should have said something, but that in no way excuses her actions.
/r/MensRights26/10/17 08:53 PM
1

The quote I replied to with the accusation of misogyny was as follows: You think a woman wants to help a man and you call me ignorant? That's clearly a statement about all women.
/r/MensRights26/10/17 08:50 PM
1

Oxford defines misogyny as dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women. If you believed that all women were trying to harm all men, that would certainly hit at least a couple of those categories.
/r/MensRights26/10/17 08:32 PM
1

The bar for being unable to consent is incapacitation, not just being drunk. You can consent to drunk sex, even to drunk sex you wouldn't consent to sober, but if you're so drunk that you are physically unable to say no or resist something you don't consent to, you're incapacitated, much like you're considered incapacitated while sleeping. Two incapacitated people would be incapable of having sex with each other.
/r/MensRights26/10/17 08:24 PM
1

You don't believe it's misogynistic to think that all women are trying to harm all men?
/r/MensRights25/10/17 08:09 PM
6

Good for them. It sounds like they got out of a bad romantic relationship and ended up in a good platonic one, which is better for both of them and the kids.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 12:05 AM
1

Sure, but your girlfriend can tell you to stop it at any time. Her consent is freely given and she can withdraw it at any time, at which point I assume you would stop because you're not a rapist. OP was too drunk to be able to tell her to stop. His consent was not freely given - he was physically unable to tell her to stop.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:56 PM
1

I wouldn't go so far, because he didn't communicate his lack of consent But he clearly says he was physically unable to communicate, which means he was incapacitated, not just drunk. Drunk sex is okay, incapacitated sex isn't.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:51 PM
1

I think the key thing here is not just that he was drunk, but that he was so drunk he couldn't say no. Drunk sex is totally okay, but not when somebody is too drunk (or drugged, or asleep) to say no if they don't want to do it.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:50 PM
0

Really? You hate when women lament that they were raped because somebody had sex with them when they were physically unable to say no or resist? Because this is not just an example of regretting drunk sex after the fact, this is somebody who was physically unable to even communicate that they didn't want it to happen.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:47 PM
1

FYI, here in Canada, the supreme court has ruled that you cannot consent in advance to sexual activity while asleep or incapacitated.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:44 PM
1

Bullshit, this is clearly rape. Being drunk doesn't mean you can't consent, and you can be so drunk you don't know where you are and still consent, but if you're so drunk you can't say no or resist if you want to, you're incapacitated, and it's rape.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:43 PM
1

Being drunk doesn't automatically mean you can't consent, but if you're too drunk to be able to say no or resist, you are considered incapacitated, and it is rape.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:37 PM
1

So, I'm a hardcore lefty, and I totally see the same things you're seeing, but I think it's due to a lack of radicalism, not an excess of it. Radicalism implies a desire to fundamentally change the structure of society, but that's not what the SJWs are fighting for; they seem happy with the same exploitative capitalist system, just with more diversity amongst the exploiters. The truth is that while the SJW's think they're radical leftists, they're neither all that radical nor all that left-wing.…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:28 PM
4

I'm not sure that the story of one group of men getting killed by another group of men in a pointless war is the best example for arguing against toxic masculinity...
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:18 PM
3

Accusations of misogyny get thrown around way too often, but if you literally believe all women are trying to harm all men then you're pretty clearly a misogynist.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:16 PM
2

He seems to have decided that SJWs and anti's are both equally bad, and is fighting a war on everyone.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 11:10 PM
1

Yes. http://jjie.org/2014/04/14/trafficked-boys-overlooked-underrepresented/106688/
/r/MensRights30/09/17 06:45 AM
1

Yet, you apparently see no paradox in holding those two views at once? I don't see any paradox in both wishing that an opinion was less prevalent and also being glad that people who hold it can openly and freely advocate for it. If you're suggesting that other places are more hostile to differences of opinion purely because of feminism, please note I didn't limit the scope of that to feminist spaces. Most communities that talk about controversial issues like gender and politics tend to police th…
/r/MensRights26/09/17 02:32 PM
1

Why do men have nipples? For exactly the same reason women have clitorises. That being said, there is a good point buried here - I think it's stupid that there are places where men can legally be topless and women can't, rules should be the same for everyone. Here in Canada, that was basically declared unconstitutional in the 90s.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 11:31 AM
4

Except this isn't women patting themselves on the back. This is a giant corporation marketing cereal to women by flattering their egos, as a change from their previous tactic of mostly positioning it as a weight loss aid.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 11:23 AM
2

This right here plants the seeds for an excellent action campaign, the sort of thing where MRAs and feminists can work together on a common goal.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 11:19 AM
1

I'm not so sure you can so easily compare them, and effeminate men kind of get the worst of both worlds - one side calls you a rapist, and the other side calls you a faggot.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 11:16 AM
2

The mods in menslib are way too heavy handed, I'm one of the most unapologetically pro-feminist posters in this sub, and my personal values are probably closer to the party line in menslib than here, yet even I find that it's just not worth the effort to engage over there most of the time, especially considering how easy it is to get a good discussion going here.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 11:14 AM
2

There's a lot of anti-feminism here, which is unfortunate from my pro-feminist viewpoint, but there's also lots of good men's issues content, and the community is very welcoming of opinions from either perspective - that's not to say you won't have a bit of an uphill battle if you want to defend feminism here, but you won't get banned for having the wrong opinion and the rules are consistent for everyone. It's kind of refreshing - it's about the only place I know where you can just discuss gende…
/r/MensRights26/09/17 11:10 AM
2

Silicon Valley is an area in California that's been one of the major centres for tech in the US since the 1970s. It got that name because several early semiconductor companies were headquartered there, and it's currently the home to a bunch of major web companies like Google and Facebook. Politically, it's kind of a shitshow, full of billionaires who like to pretend they're leftists by jumping on every social justice trend despite using every trick in the book to extract as much labour from work…
/r/MensRights26/09/17 10:57 AM
1

See? I presented evidence, and you dug in.
/r/MensRights22/09/17 02:13 AM
1

He wasn't convicted on that particular charge, although he did have convictions for drunk driving and assaulting a cab driver until they were pardoned a couple years ago. I live in Manitoba, and I'm a big supporter of the NDP, but this choice of leader seems like a really unwise one that hands ammunition to our opponents.
/r/MensRights22/09/17 02:08 AM
1

As much as it seems that this should work, in practice, psychologists have identified what's known as the "backfire effect" where being presented evidence that contradicts our beliefs can actually strengthen those beliefs. Humans aren't nearly as rational and reasonable as we imagine ourselves to be! http://archives.cjr.org/behind_the_news/the_backfire_effect.php
/r/MensRights21/09/17 04:20 PM
3

You never change minds by attempting to destroy someone, and a flurry of statistics is actually more likely to make someone dig in and defend their position. If you want to persuade someone you have a disagreement with, start by listening their argument and repeating it back to them until they can clearly see that you understand their position. Only then will they be willing to listen to why you see things differently. This still only works like 10% of the time, but that's still better than the …
/r/MensRights21/09/17 07:48 AM
1

You know that you were asking a genuine question, and I believe you, but they probably thought you were concern trolling. If you want to have productive conversations with feminists it's totally possible, but the first thing to realize is that they're as suspicious of MRAs as MRAs are of feminists. The second thing to realize is that this subreddit is one of the most open and accepting communities for dissenting opinions in all of gender politics. Most places, be they feminist or MRA, are much l…
/r/MensRights19/09/17 11:10 PM
5

There's nothing to debunk here, just a debate about what to call the gap. There's debunking to do when people claim that the difference in average earning is primarily caused by gender discrimination, but this article doesn't make that claim, it states that women on average earn less than men, which is verifiably true, and then discusses a number of reasons for it, most of which are the things MRA's use to debunk the discrimination argument!
/r/MensRights19/09/17 11:04 PM
4

This is the third part of a series that's covered a number of problems with campus rape adjudications.
/r/MensRights19/09/17 10:55 PM
17

1) At no point does she say people are wrong to ogle her, she says it's wrong to call her a whore because of her clothes. This is obviously true. 2) Even if she had said that, it's not a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights11/09/17 11:07 PM
8

This is actually a step forward; there's been knee-jerk opposition to CAFE in the past, at least she's willing to consider the centre on its actions
/r/MensRights09/09/17 10:47 PM
3

I actually think a lot of this is correct, although she misses an important part of the transition to agriculture - with agriculture, control of the land, and the resources it produces, becomes important, leading to the concept of private property. Once you have private property, people start passing it on to their children, and suddenly heredity becomes an issue. A lot of gender role stuff is at its core economic, and primarily about ensuring heredity for the inheritance of property.
/r/MensRights27/08/17 03:10 PM
4

The comment you replied to was me saying that bringing up your post history is dumb, because your post history doesn't affect whether you're right or wrong in this debate, just your actual arguments.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 12:58 PM
1

I fully support the right of parents to circumcise Cabbage Patch Kids.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 02:13 AM
5

If I start a religion that requires babies to have penises tattooed on their faces, should that be protected by the first amendment?
/r/MensRights23/08/17 01:22 AM
5

Going to school doesn't cause irreversible physical changes to their bodies that continue on into adulthood. You have the option of rejecting everything you learn in school, but you don't have the option of rejecting your circumcision.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 01:21 AM
2

The validity of his arguments in this thread are not affected by his post history.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 01:19 AM
4

I'm totally down with the idea that anyone should be able to exercise their right to free expression in the form of having themselves circumcised, or any other body modification they desire. Where I disagree is in the idea that parents should be able to have non-therapeutic circumcisions, or other cosmetic body modifications, performed on children who cannot consent to the procedure. The ethics of having a baby circumcised are pretty much the same as the ethics of having a baby tattooed, which e…
/r/MensRights23/08/17 01:17 AM
2

I know feminism isn't popular around here, but have some perspective - the news only broke a few hours before you posted this. There'll probably be a bunch of posts on the feminist sites decrying this by this time tomorrow.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 01:12 AM
1

I don't think the system classifying pictures of men as pictures of women because they're standing near a stove can be described as accurate representation.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 01:07 AM
1

Yes it does, and the page says "In general, both the death sentencing rate and the death row population remain very small for women in comparison to that for men."
/r/MensRights23/08/17 01:04 AM
0

If you ask ten feminists to define what feminism is, you'll get ten different answers, much like if you ask ten MRAs to define the MRM. Those disagreements spill out into the broader feminist community - just google "not my feminism" if you want to see millions of articles where feminists argue about what does and doesn't constitute feminism. If you think about it, the "believing in equality" definition would mean all those examples in your original post imply the people who said them aren't rea…
/r/MensRights23/08/17 01:02 AM
-1

Some people are just dumb. That being said, feminism is as diverse as the manosphere, and there's good stuff and bad stuff in both. While you won't win them over by letting them know you're an MRA, you can totally attack those positions with feminist theory, and they'll be more likely to listen since it's coming from a background they aren't suspicious of like the MRM.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 12:51 AM
10

While this sort of chivalrous attitude comes from good intentions, chivalry is built on assumptions about men and women that aren't good for either gender; it assumes that women are too weak to stand, and need to be taken care of men. It also assumes that men are strong enough, and that it's men's job to take care of women. I think men and women both are equally likely to be strong enough to stand, and that both bear equal responsibility to care for each other.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 12:45 AM
1

I would also like the opportunity to talk with friends and family about my decision without losing my rights to self-determination. If you were concerned that one of your loved ones were about to kill themselves, would you not try to stop them?
/r/MensRights23/08/17 12:38 AM
2

You know, just reading about your situation it's clear that somebody with no predisposition to mental illness would probably be very depressed if they were in the same situation; if you're going to try something drastic, why not try a change in your living situation. You don't even have to do it "right" - go hop trains and live on the streets if you don't have another option. It may seem extreme, but so is killing yourself, and it's clear that your living situation is just making things worse. A…
/r/MensRights23/08/17 12:36 AM
1

Canada legalized assisted suicide, but not for mental illness.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 12:30 AM
1

Yeah, if the university kept a professor from choosing what sources they would accept, they would not respect that professor's academic freedom, and said university would thus be fucked. When institutions actually respect freedom of expression, its only a matter of time before somebody uses it in a way you disagree with; that doesn't mean that freedom of expression is bad.
/r/MensRights22/08/17 11:59 PM
3

Eh, the actions of one professor can hardly be extrapolated to the whole university, especially if the university respects academic freedom and is therefore unfucked.
/r/MensRights22/08/17 12:24 AM
2

One more thing to add - not everything contributing to your mental illness is in your head; your social situation is a major contributor too. If you're isolated, or surrounded by people who make you feel bad, then making a change in that venue can have huge effects. There's a real degree of truth in the saying "before you diagnose yourself with depression, first make sure you're not just surrounded by assholes." Obviously, I'm not saying you're not dealing with real mental illness, but if you're…
/r/MensRights22/08/17 12:20 AM
1

Hey, I'm sorry to hear you're suffering so badly right now. I do hope you find another way though; things may be awful, but they can't get better if you're not alive. The legal situation in Canada for assisted suicide is clear - it is not allowed for mental illness. Anybody who helps you will be in severe legal jeopardy. I know you've had disappointing experiences, but drugs and therapy can work; there's just no way to tell which ones will work without trying them all. We really don't know why t…
/r/MensRights22/08/17 12:14 AM
6

Why have the names been removed? They went to the media under their own name (Josphine Mathias) back in March, which makes finding the articles about this much easier.
/r/MensRights21/08/17 11:28 PM
1

You can believe what you want, but you're unlikely to find any support for your opinion in this sub.
/r/MensRights20/08/17 12:43 AM
4

I'd reccomend this article by Connor Friedersdorf at the Atlantic to get you up to speed. It's largely about how the way this has been covered in the media has been unfair, but also includes a brief description of the controversy with links to relevant coverage including the source document. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/the-most-common-error-in-coverage-of-the-google-memo/536181/
/r/MensRights10/08/17 04:19 AM
1

First edition was 2011, covering 2010 data. 2014's report added the 2011 data, and this year's includes 2012. One of the surprising things is that the 12 month rate of made-to-penetrate for men was roughly equal to the rate of rape of women in both the 2011 and 2014 reports, whereas the new report lists the MTP rate for men as approximately 20 percent higher than the rate of rape of women.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 05:40 AM
1

The 12 month figures are there, and they define made to penetrate as "a form of sexual violence that many in the practice field consider analogous to rape"
/r/MensRights08/08/17 05:33 AM
2

Gotta love Cathy Young!
/r/MensRights25/07/17 09:53 PM
1

Try searching for "intimate partner violence" instead, the results will probably be better.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 06:44 PM
5

Here's a crazy idea: why not post some more stuff about circumcision instead of fighting over this mod decision. I think it was the right call, you think it was the wrong one, and we're unlikely to come to an agreement. Either way, this fight does absolutely nothing to help end circumcision, so why not put your energy into the more important battle? I do have to warn you though, you'll probably end up getting more comments removed if you keep calling people narcissists or other names. The rules …
/r/MensRights04/07/17 10:01 PM
4

It's pretty obvious that your comments weren't removed because they were about MGM, they were removed because you violated the personal attacks rule spelled out in the moderation policy. I post tons of anti-circumcision content here, and I've never had a post or comment removed. I'm sure if you can do the same without attacking individuals, you'll have a much better experience.
/r/MensRights04/07/17 09:47 PM
3

The world you live in must be a very unpleasant place.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 08:50 PM
2

You do realize that there are people on this sub who identify as both feminists and MRAs, right? Anti-feminism is popular in the MRM, but it's not a requirement, and I'm not willing to call anybody who actually cares about men's issues my enemy.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 08:16 PM
8

To be fair, there has actually been pushback against a lot of the appearance stuff by more enlightened feminists. Example: https://www.bustle.com/articles/179571-body-shaming-donald-trump-isnt-an-appropriate-or-effective-way-to-criticize-him
/r/MensRights30/06/17 07:44 PM
2

So you've come to a men's rights forum to argue that men are the enemy? That there's only one "right" way to be a man? To use gendered shaming language to attack men who use their freedom of speech to make a statement you disagree with? I think the Green brothers totally made the wrong call, and should be criticised for it, but you're not just attacking their ideas, you're attacking their masculinity. If you want to bitch about "beta males," go to TRP.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 07:34 PM
1

I think they made the wrong call, but take the "beta pussies" shit elsewhere, this isn't a place to tear down men with gendered insults.
/r/MensRights30/06/17 12:05 PM
1

You might want to check out http://inside-man.co.uk who have actually done exactly what you're suggesting recently. At very least, they may have some useful tips for you!
/r/MensRights29/06/17 12:54 AM
1

It's really sad when supposed leftists perceive a problem space on public transport, and don't think the solution is more public transport capacity. Instead, they craft a narrative about personal responsibility, like a bad parody of the right.
/r/MensRights26/06/17 11:40 PM
2

Eh, the mainstream in feminism is mostly completely unaware of the online gender wars. The vast majority of people who consider themselves feminists have probably never even heard of Jezebel. The truth is that the online MRA and feminist communities are more the hardcore than the mainstream, since we're the ones who are invested enough to spend hours of our lives debating things online.
/r/MensRights26/06/17 11:37 PM
1

I think you're right that there's been too much focus on problems with feminism here lately, but there's definitely no lack of better stuff either. I do have to echo others on this thread who point out that this sub is much more accepting of a diversity of opinion than /r/feminism - people don't get banned for expressing unpopular opinions here, and that's one of the reasons I like this sub so much despite being much more left wing and pro-feminist than the average poster. /r/mensrights lets you…
/r/MensRights26/06/17 02:11 AM
5

Jezebel is kind of like the AVFM of feminism - some feminists really like it, some of it think it's utter trash that sets the movement back. I don't think we should all have to apologize when Paul Elam puts his foot in his mouth, and I don't think all feminists should have to apologise for Jezebel.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 11:19 PM

I think the MRM is too focused on feminism. There are definitely elements within feminism that harm men, and we should critique those when they arise, but our movement shouldn't be defined in opposition to feminism, but rather by what we do for men.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 11:15 PM
1

What's the point of generalizing the point to women specifically when it's equally observed in both genders?
/r/MensRights23/06/17 08:55 PM
-1

AcidJiles acknowledged the women are wonderful effect, and as he pointed out, it's just as prevalent in men as women. You can't simply blame it on women's mindsets when it's clearly happening exactly the same way in men.
/r/MensRights23/06/17 05:16 PM
4

The study showed that men felt the same way as women on this - men also think that a lack of benevolent sexism towards women is an indicator of hostile sexism towards women.
/r/MensRights23/06/17 05:14 PM
1

It comes from a theory called ambivalent sexism, which states (with great evidence to support it) that sexist attitudes can manifest both subjectively positive and subjectively negative expressions. The thing is, the research shows that people who express benevolent sexism are also more likely to express hostile sexism. The paper I posted has some hard numbers on the degree of correlation. A hypothetical example which may be more intuitive to grasp would be a woman who talks about how much she l…
/r/MensRights23/06/17 05:13 PM
1

The research showed men feel the same way as women on this
/r/MensRights23/06/17 05:07 PM
4

I don't think it's so much about female ego as held-over ideas about gender from the victorian era. For all the progress we've made, we still have all sorts of terrible stereotypes about women as delicate flowers who need to be protected from nasty brutish men, which is bad for men and women alike. These sorts of ideas pop up even in places that nominally oppose them - think of how many threads here talk about how men want sex way more than women and how that ties into old fashioned ideas about …
/r/MensRights23/06/17 11:31 AM
12

It's worth noting that the study didn't find any significant differences in the attitudes of men or women; men also judged the absence of benevolent sexism to be indicative of hostile sexism towards women. This isn't a problem with women, it's a problem with society.
/r/MensRights23/06/17 08:39 AM
2

There's a whole bunch to consider. First, there's a whole category of homophobic slurs for men such as fag, sissy, batty boy, fairy, poof, bugger and homo. Then there's more general ones, which we don't automatically associate with gender, but are almost exclusively used to refer to men, like dick, jerk, asshole, cuck, asshat and oddly enough douchebag and pussy. Then there's the new wave of explicitly gendered ones, like fuckboy, manbaby, neckbeard, misogynerd, and shitlord.
/r/MensRights23/06/17 08:29 AM
7

These each have different origins, and they're not all negative. Mansplaining was coined by LiveJournal users who read an article by Rebecca Solnit about a man who lectured her about the content of a book so intently that he didn't notice when she pointed out had written it. She's since expressed mixed feelings about the term; while useful sometimes, she feels it's overused. Manspreading was coined shortly thereafter, capitalising on the popularity of the previous term. Both of these terms I wou…
/r/MensRights23/06/17 08:05 AM
2

if you want to ask gamergate folks directly, check out /r/kotakuinaction
/r/MensRights21/06/17 09:19 AM
3

If they have a 50/50 custody agreement, all that really remains is to work out the schedule of who's going to drive them the 1.5 hours each time.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 06:43 PM
5

What do you think we make maple syrup from?
/r/MensRights20/06/17 08:38 AM
2

There's definitely a problem with the left and identity politics right now, and I say this as an unrepentant marxist. I'm starting to see cracks showing though; people are getting exhausted, and I can't see this trend lasting for more than a few more years. /menslib is explicitly pro-feminist, /mensrights is officially neutral, but leans a bit more anti-feminist than I personally like. /menslib mods are a bit heavier handed, but have been easing up, /mensrights mods have a much lighter touch. /m…
/r/MensRights19/06/17 10:11 PM
3

I can explain this pretty well actually. The general consensus among feminist groups on what the MRM stands for is quite different from what MRAs feel it stands for. In feminist spaces, it's generally assumed that MRAs are just tradcons with fancy language. When they say MRAs want women to be subservient to men, they genuinely believe that's what we think. It doesn't take too much time to figure out that this is an inaccurate assessment, but you have to take the time to investigate to figure it …
/r/MensRights19/06/17 09:33 PM
2

I don't like the title, but redpills as a group are pretty unknown outside the online gender wars, so it's unlikely to have had much impact on the public reception.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 03:56 PM
3

Unless you're hardcore anti-feminist, it's actually pretty good, but not as lively as here, and the mods have been overly heavy-handed in the past. I like it, but I'm a pro-feminist MRA.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 03:53 PM
2

This map is almost totally useless to the red-green colourblind.
/r/MensRights12/06/17 10:26 PM
1

The real irony here is that the economic hardship of the 1980s in the Soviet Union is generally accepted to have been a result of the Gorbachev's 12th Five Year Plan, which greatly reduced central planning, and plunged the country into economic chaos. But your broader point is true, the eastern bloc countries experienced slower economic growth than their neighbours, largely because they were helping finance the industralization of Russia.
/r/MensRights12/06/17 09:39 PM
1

Poverty and starvation surely did exist in communist countries, but they existed in them before as well. By any reasonable measure, communist systems increased total production and average quality of life by massive margins over the agrarian systems that were present in most of the "communist" bloc. As for class restrictions and barriers to entrepreneurship, true free markets tend to breed these; 19th century capitalism was the most laissez-faire system in human history, and Charles Dickens made…
/r/MensRights11/06/17 09:05 PM
1

From what I've seen, even in the official statistics, the USSR had a much lower GDP than the USA, it's just that this was still a massive advancement from pre-revolution production, and the gap would have been much much larger without communism.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 08:56 PM
1

That story is from Solzhenitsyn's "The Gulag Archipelago" about the gulag system pre 1956. It accurately captures the zeitgeist of the era, but it's important to note that it's not exactly a historical document, and a lot of the stories are apocryphal.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 08:50 PM
1

Russia had food supply issues even before the revolution; breadlines were one of the motivating factors in 1917. After that, they returned in two major periods: during the great depression, when the USA also had them, and in the late 80s, just before the collapse, after Gorbachev's reforms allowed some free market elements. The Soviets definitely made some incredibly bad decisions about food production, but it's silly to pretend breadlines are a result of communism.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 08:44 PM
1

I think it produces much worse results than actual communism, and only marginally better results than soviet style socialism.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 08:40 PM
10

The growth isn't even that slow, it's pretty average. Neoliberal economic policy has simply ensured that all that growth lines the pockets of the rich while wages for workers remain stagnant.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 10:08 AM
8

If you look at the actual statistics, economic growth has been relatively stable since the end of the 70s. The problem is that wages haven't kept pace with the increase in productivity during the same period. Every time new technology promises to increase the wealth and leisure time of workers, it instead gets used to increase profit margins. There's plenty of growth, it's just all going into the pockets of the rich.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 10:04 AM
1

There's still lots of important fights feminism fights here, like for access to reproductive services. There's certainly no lack of problems with today's feminism in the west, but let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 11:33 PM
7

Since when is Paglia third wave?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 06:41 PM
2

"That's a really interesting point, which reminds me, I hear there is one true god, his name is Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet, what do you think?"
/r/MensRights03/06/17 08:18 PM
3

Each time it comes up, change the topic to something less controversial, like religion :P
/r/MensRights03/06/17 08:06 PM
2

The quote comes from a press release which was directly and explicitly directed at Rauner, and in context, the argument is clearly that Rauner promised otherwise during the campaign: https://www.pawar2018.com/press-releases/bruce-rauner-liar/
/r/MensRights21/05/17 02:02 AM
4

Agreed, but the question was simply the most important issue facing men. The fact that it's also the most important issue facing women is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 12:27 PM
4

Figure out what you're trying to accomplish first. If the answer is to critique feminism, you should do your project on feminism instead. If the answer is that you want to persuade people to take the MRM seriously, focus on things your audience, including the feminists, can agree on without having cognitive dissonance with their existing beliefs. Good examples of this are topics where feminists and MRAs generally agree, issues facing men that are visible in your community, and things that are ne…
/r/MensRights20/05/17 12:22 PM
3

There's a whole bunch of interesting arguments to be made here about how many pro-lifers are tradcons who genuinely do want men to control women's bodies, but I wanted to address your specific point here about the people who vote for them. The quote in question comes from a challenger to Bruce Rauner, a governor who campaigned as pro-choice in 2014, but now is making pro-life moves in office. It's hard to argue that women voted to support these policies when they contradict what his campaign pro…
/r/MensRights20/05/17 12:04 PM
2

Being ground under the boot of capitalism.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 11:14 AM
1

Being ground under the boot of capitalism.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 11:13 AM
0

Holy shit, an AVFM article that's actually worth reading!
/r/MensRights20/05/17 11:12 AM
2

I generally like Judgybitch, she was one of the first MRAs whose arguments persuaded me to take a look into the movement, but there's a slightly sleazy trick in this article: if you look at the report she's discussing, a chart she left out in her article shows that the average income of each age/gender cohort maps exactly to the tax revenues in the chart she uses. The men are paying more tax on average because they're earning more money on average, and the gross difference in average income is s…
/r/MensRights19/05/17 08:48 AM
3

Yep. Saves lives, reduces the spread of disease, harm reduction at its best. Insite is located in the heart of the neighbourhood with the worst injection drug problem in Canada, and in the 10 years since it's opened it's reduced overdose rates in the area by 35%, and users of the site are 30% more likely to get into treatment. Before it opened, the province it was in had the highest rate of HIV and Hep C in the country, now it's one of the lowest. It's actually been a stunning success, and Seatt…
/r/MensRights19/05/17 07:49 AM
2

We know that two reasons that men represent such a large proportion of overdoses are that they are more likely to use drugs alone (i.e. not at an injection site) and that there are simply more of them. By the sounds of things, that 26% of Insite users who are female represent a larger proportion of the cohort of female injection drug users than the 74% of male users do of the male cohort. I can see the logic in providing more female-tailored services if they're requesting them at a proportionall…
/r/MensRights19/05/17 07:39 AM
1

There are no health benefits to shaving your arms. Washing your balls occasionally is beneficial, although in western societies we tend to wash much more than is actually healthy.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 07:21 AM
1

The tip of the hair, where it is no longer in a moist environment that can sustain it.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 07:15 AM
0

I don't want to live in a society whose justice system gives a shit about petitions.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 07:12 AM
6

Very few people are actually arguing that women should have the right to retroactively withdraw consent; I say very few instead of none because there are always a few crazies. Presumably this point on the list is a rather hysterical take on false accusations.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 07:10 AM
1

It seems pretty obvious to me that if there was anything actually wrong with women having armpit hair, it wouldn't grow there.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 06:55 AM
2

Armpit hair acts as a wick and transports bacteria away from the skin.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 06:53 AM
2

You might be hung up about body hair, but I think your declaration of its grossness holds as much weight as somebody who thinks the current popularity of facial hair on men is a gross trend.
/r/MensRights19/05/17 06:51 AM
1

I read the article before my first reply, and it actually doesn't say much about male suffrage that isn't in the first paragraph of the link I posted. Ironically I initially popped into the thread to make the same fundamental point that your article did: working class men were also denied the vote until 1918, which we clearly both agree doesn't get nearly the attention it deserves. The idea that the study of the history of suffrage has been skewed by feminists is pretty laughable. Certainly, the…
/r/MensRights19/05/17 06:48 AM
1

Well, it's even more complicated than that - it was right-wing suffragettes like Pankhurst and her WSPU who were using violent tactics, but they called for a cessation of actions to support the war effort during WWI, and were deeply involved in the white feather campaign. The war was deeply divisive among the suffrage movement; Leftists like Isabella Ford and the ILP were opposed to the war, but public opinion was against them, and they were marginalised. In the end, the WSPUs tactics worked out…
/r/MensRights18/05/17 10:13 PM
1

I think you should do some further research; it was women's efforts in the first world war that won them the vote too, although it was another 20 years before they had equal voting rights for men. Ironically, had the suffragettes got everything they wanted, many more men would have been enfranchised, but parliament didn't want to lower the voting age to 18. http://www.pearsonschoolsandfecolleges.co.uk/AssetsLibrary/SECTORS/Secondary/SUBJECT/HistoryandSocialScience/PDFs/EdexcelGCEHistoryWomenandt…
/r/MensRights18/05/17 10:04 PM
-2

More accurately, suffragettes gave women, and the 70% of men who didn't already have it, the vote. Another legal right they got for men: the right to buy condoms
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:35 PM
2

Camille Paglia? Christina Hoff Summers? Lindsey German?
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:32 PM
0

I agree!
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:17 PM
1

That's a core belief in radical feminism and socialist feminism, but not marxist feminism, liberal feminism, materialist feminism, libertairian/equity feminism or many other variants.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:17 PM
4

in the UK, the same bill that granted women's suffrage also granted the majority of men the vote; most had been denied it under the previous law.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 10:15 PM
2

The sub leans anti-feminist, but it's officially neither, and pro-feminist MRAs like me are welcome.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 07:56 AM
1

There used to be a unified men's movement with organisations and conferences, but it splintered at the end of the 1970s into pro- and anti-feminist factions, then splintered further during the 80s.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 07:47 AM
7

Protocols of the Elders of Zion Proves... nope, even I'm not gonna touch that one.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 12:17 AM
5

I think you've got us confused with the MGTOW sub.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 12:11 AM
14

This is a question only you can answer for yourself; your reasons are yours alone. Just don't fall into the trap of assuming you can't be both. There are plenty of MRAs on this sub, myself included, who identify with both groups.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 12:07 AM
1

Yes.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 09:47 PM
2

Current Affairs ran an article today on a similiar topic you may find illuminating https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/05/the-view-from-the-back-row
/r/MensRights02/05/17 09:45 PM
2

Yes, what was then called the men's liberation movement and feminist movement were allies well into the late 1970s, when the men's movement split into pro- and anti-feminist camps, and then splintered further from there out.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 08:45 PM
6

It's a good watch if you're not already well acquainted with men's issues, but there's really not much in the way of shocking revelations. The controversy is totally out of proportion in regards to how utterly inoffensive and uncontroversial most of the content in the movie actually is.
/r/MensRights23/04/17 01:27 PM
1

A bit of context: in Canada, hate speech is excluded from free speech protection, so the question of what constitutes hate speech is important.
/r/MensRights23/04/17 05:13 AM
2

I'm a feminist too, but I'm also an MRA, and I think that when they're done right, the two movements complement each other rather than conflict. You're right that you'll probably be downvoted, but not banned, as this group really walks the walk when it comes to freedom of speech. I'm here because gender inequality affects both men and women in ways far more complex than you seem to be arguing. Even within mainstream feminism it's hardly controversial that men are harmed by the present state of a…
/r/MensRights23/04/17 04:15 AM
1

AEI pushing workfare again. Even when they claim to be supporting solutions from the left, they have to push them to the right.
/r/MensRights23/04/17 03:00 AM
1

Well, that's the kind of nationalism associated with the right. The other definition you'll find in the dictionary, a movement for an independent country, isn't associated with either side.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 08:38 PM
2

recognizing that people have national interests and that there are differences between groups of people That's not nationalism; nationalism is like extreme patriotism, it comes with a judgement of the relative value of your nation.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 08:30 PM
1

I agree that left and right aren't enough to fully describe a political position, but you should be careful about those 2D charts you find online; they come with a whole host of problems of their own. For instance, communists want to strengthen the state, but as a short term measure to level the playing field before abolishing it completely; where does that go on the "authoritarianism" axis? What about anarchists, who want exactly the same thing as communists, but don't believe in that short ter…
/r/MensRights28/03/17 08:26 PM
1

Tell me, if you were getting paid the full value of your work, how would your employer make a profit?
/r/MensRights28/03/17 08:02 PM
1

You know the horrible world of workhouses and child labour and indentured servitude and debtors prisons and so on in Dickens' books? That's what the classical liberalism of Victorian England was like. Dickens' fiction was as much political commentary as it was a narrative - in a way, he was the George Orwell of his time. The whole reason that we have so much regulation now is that instead of producing a utopian society as Adam Smith predicted, laissez-faire capitalism in practice produced massiv…
/r/MensRights28/03/17 07:50 PM
1

I think the lack of due process in college title IX cases is horrific, but there were serious problems with that bill (GA 51) like mandatory police reporting. While I agree that the legal system is the appropriate venue to judge allegations of sexual assault, victims should be able to decide for themselves whether they want to pursue it.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 06:28 PM
7

Yes. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/21/youtube-google-advertising-policies-controversial-content
/r/MensRights28/03/17 06:16 PM
1

the idea that you have more right to the product of a man's labour than he does What you don't seem to have grasped is that it's leftists who think you should receive the full fruits of your labour. Right wingers think your employer should be able to skim some off the top as profit.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 05:59 PM
3

The mythopoetic mens movement was part of the second wave of mens activism, alongside the fathers rights movement. Both split off in the early 80s from the established men's liberation movement which was already more than a decade old, and explicitly left wing.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 05:56 PM
1

We've tried it. If you want to understand how it turned out, read anything by Charles Dickens.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 05:49 PM
2

Nazis aren't socialists, they're facists, and generally pretty violently opposed to actual socialism. They just picked the name "National Socialism" because socialism was popular with voters during the era. As for left vs right, facists are generally considered right wing because the accepted definition of left and right has more to do with ideas like the desirability of social heirarchies and acceptability of inequality than it does economic liberalism. Fascists are what you get when you take r…
/r/MensRights28/03/17 05:46 PM
1

Depends what you mean by socialism; Marx was neither the first nor the last to articulate a theory of socialism, although his was the first to be based on a detailed analysis of capitalism instead of a utopian dream.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 12:05 AM
2

No, being an economic Marxist means a lot more than that. Fundamentally it means that you want to replace the present system of production for private profit with a system of production for the common good of all.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 12:03 AM
2

Critical theory likes to present itself as part of the marxist tradition, but most branches of marxism consider it pretty incoherent. You definately see its influence in radical feminism's concept of patriarchy, which applies marxist class analysis to groups that don't meet Marx's definition of a class.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:59 PM
2

Guy Caron is my pick too, and it's hard to overstate the importance of his Quebecois credentials - it's easy to forget in anglophone Canada that Quebec is a quarter of the country's population.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:55 PM
2

it's really quite easy to find examples of them revelling in the idea of revenge and destruction. Sources please.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:52 PM
2

"Critique of the Gotha Programme" (https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/) is an oft-overlooked classic by Marx that lays out the ideas of communism in the way people generally expect the manifesto to. If you're just getting into Marx's work, I recommend you check it out next.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:50 PM
3

I think you're on to something in that radical feminism's ideas of how gender operates are based on marxist class analysis, but they have a critical flaw in that they ignore what makes a class a class, rendering the analysis pretty useless. Marxist feminists recognised this, and have written some of the best critiques of patriarchy theory ever put to paper.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:46 PM
2

So, what you're saying is that you missed the first two thirds of the history of the MRM, but because it was right wing when you got involved, you assume it always has been?
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:43 PM
1

I preferred Hillary, but that's like choosing between a shit salad and a shit sandwich.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:37 PM
1

I'm no fan of Trump, but I actually think he's pretty harmless; his ideas are terrible, but they're politically and legally unviable, and he doesn't even have the support of his own party. Where GW Bush was stupid and dangerous, Trump is just stupid. I would have preferred Hillary, but Trump can't get out of his own way enough to do any real damage, unlike say, Ted Cruz.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:34 PM
1

Classical liberal means libertarian laissez-faire capitalism, not left leaning at all
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:31 PM
1

The whole point of the political compass is to persuade people to be libertarians. National Socialists are extreme right.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:28 PM
1

I'm an economic marxist, and I'm in favour of zero wealth inequality.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:26 PM
2

Orthodox marxist (fuck lenin) here. I don't hate feminism, but I think there's a need for men's movement centred on men's perspectives, and that's the MRM.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:25 PM
3

I suggest reporting it to the BC Employment Standards department, that's almost certainly illegal.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:11 PM
19

They're not banning them, they're just marking them as not being advertiser friendly.
/r/MensRights27/03/17 11:10 PM
1

Are you honestly arguing that the insult "cuck" means "a man who does not have secondary sexual partners, and fails to adequately mate guard" ? Because that sounds like far more of a stretch than assuming it means the same thing cuckold has meant for centuries. It's worth noting that a man who is also cheating on his wife would still meet the definition of cuckold, so your interpretation doesn't make much sense there. Rather than me hunting for ways to make the woman out to be a victim, it seems…
/r/MensRights27/03/17 10:44 PM
0

But once again, if that's the logic, then it's implied that good choices and a lack of stupidity on the man's part would keep his wife from sleeping with other men. Once again, it makes him responsible for her choices and behavior, and therefore implies he should be able to control then.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 08:24 PM
2

Maybe you were an MRA longer than I've been alive, but you're clearly not one now if you believe that tradcon shit.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 08:17 PM
1

Yes, but it is still not an issue of "the man isn't adequately controlling the woman, his property". His wife's actions can only possibly reflect poorly on him if he's expected to have some control over them. The sense that women are to be controlled by men has itself changed on a fundamental level, so it should not be surprising that the definition has changed. The definition would have to change to something other than "the husband of an adulterer" for it to escape the implication of control w…
/r/MensRights25/03/17 02:16 AM
1

https://www.parsemusfoundation.org/ is developing reversible permanent birth control for men under the name ValsaGel
/r/MensRights25/03/17 02:06 AM
9

FYI, rationalliberal is satire
/r/MensRights25/03/17 02:04 AM
1

While original intent doesn't predict modern usage, the definition has remained stable for centuries; the meanings of words change, but generally not overnight. As for what form the supposed inadequacy takes, even in your interpretation, the man's supposed weakness is in the metaphor is only perceived as such because of what his wife is doing - after all, a man whose wife is not sleeping with another man even though he would be okay with it is not a cuckold. The definition of cuckold would have …
/r/MensRights25/03/17 01:58 AM
1

That's one possibility, but not the only one. It's true that it's not the only possible interpretation, but we know from historical records that it is the original intent. Seriously, google skimmington ride - it's a literal shame parade. That usually doesn't involve "a man needs to control his woman" as one of its mores. Doesn't it? I mean, cuckold wouldn't be an insult unless the person using it thought that it reflected inadequacy on behalf of the husband rather than a betrayal by the wife. It…
/r/MensRights25/03/17 12:23 AM
2

The term cuckold has been used as an insult for at least 400 years. It's defined as "the husband of an adulterer" and the name for the fetish derives from it. The insult depends on the logic that if a man's wife sleeps with another man, the man should be shamed for failing to keep his woman in line. And for hundreds of years, this is exactly what happened - google "skimmington ride" to see what this shaming looked like in practice.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 09:32 PM
6

I don't think you understand what the MRA is about. The MRA is entirely against traditional values; we support letting men (and women) choose values for themselves so long as they don't interfere with the rights of others. A man's job is not to police women's behaviour, or protect her from other men. That's insulting to both men and women! Men's and women's jobs are whatever they fucking decide for themselves.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 09:22 PM
18

It's got all sorts of terrible implications when you actually think about it. The logic behind it manages to be degrading to both men and women. It can basically be defined as "a man so weak he can't even control a woman" which should horrify MRAs and feminists equally.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 05:19 AM
8

I engage in hyperbole and emotional argument to pricure reaction.... So you're straight up telling us you're trolling...
/r/MensRights24/03/17 04:55 AM
1

it must be the WHOLE MRA SUB that is in error You don't speak for all of us. There's plenty of people here on either side of this debate.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 02:11 AM
1

Feminists who sling mud at MRAs do so because they sincerely believe that we oppose equal rights for women. They feel exactly the same way about us that you feel about them, and they're exactly as wrong as you are. I think there's plenty of feminist ideas that MRAs should be highly critical of, but there's a huge difference between saying "that feminist idea is bullshit" and saying that all feminism is bullshit. As for MRAs having no choice to be anti-feminist, the simple fact that you're debati…
/r/MensRights24/03/17 02:08 AM
1

Can you give me an example of something in this video that's shaming men? If it's just the idea in general, then isn't your opposition just shaming men who are attracted to fat women?
/r/MensRights24/03/17 01:09 AM
1

How is this a men's rights issue?
/r/MensRights24/03/17 12:51 AM
-1

Wow, sexist much?
/r/MensRights24/03/17 12:44 AM
1

Alimony made sense in a society where women weren't allowed to work. It's time to scrap it.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 12:40 AM
2

I think it's pretty easy to understand - we raise girls to be afraid that there's a rapist or murderer around every corner. We still haven't escaped the victorian attitude of women as fragile flowers who need to be protected from the world. When you add the fact that humans are pretty bad at assessing risk, it's easy to see how a culture of fear can emerge. People tend to be afraid of terrorism, despite being more likely to be hit by lightning than attacked by terrorists. People fret about incre…
/r/MensRights24/03/17 12:38 AM
1

Not all its experiences and posters. My experience has been much closer to Unconfidence's.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 12:15 AM
1

it runs contrary to what everybody else has experienced. Bullshit. Counterexample: it doesn't run contrary to what I've experienced.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:59 PM
1

Dude, most MRAs couldn't even agree on all those things, and if that's the standard you're evaluating on, I could pull enough posts from this sub to make MRAs seem as bad as feminists think we are in a matter of minutes. The MRM and feminism both have lots of reasonable people and a bunch of total assholes.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:58 PM
2

I vote B.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:55 PM
1

Except this ignores his actual argument, he's arguing that both MRAs and feminists can be reasonable or mean, and that IRL, both groups tend to be on the reasonable side.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:54 PM
1

MRAs, including myself, are also skeptical of feminists who claim they care about men. Ironically, this is exactly how feminists feel about MRAs who claim they care about women.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:52 PM
1

You ARE strawmanning! Unconfidence is arguing that both feminists and MRAs share the blame, and you're trying to twist his argument into him saying that it's all MRAs fault.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:49 PM
1

Slogans are very useful to any group, but the key thing is to consider effectiveness with the target audience. As a slogan, "feminism is cancer" only resonates with people who are already opposed to feminism, and it alienates people who aren't. If you're only interested in rallying anti-feminists, I can see the value of it, but it doesn't help to grow the MRM, especially considering that there are lots of pro-feminist MRAs.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 11:40 PM
2

In my experience, the vast majority of feminists are receptive to men's issues, but there are a few caveats. For instance, identifying as an MRA comes with a lot of (unfair) baggage, so it may be best not to mention that if you're trying to be persuasive, and attempts to inject men's issues into a discussion of what's happening to women is often met with an unreasonable level of hostility. That being said, I've certainly had lots of pleasant and productive discussions of men's issues with femini…
/r/MensRights23/03/17 09:54 PM
1

Think about what you're arguing; you're saying somebody who knows lots of feminists and MRAs is less able to compare the two groups than somebody who doesn't know feminists. That makes no sense at all!
/r/MensRights23/03/17 09:47 PM
2

The balance in this sub between pro- and anti-feminist MRAs seems to have veered pretty hard to the anti- side in the last year or two, which is pretty depressing to me. I'm still on the hunt for a broadly pro-feminist MRA community that also sees the value of a men's movement distinct from feminism.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 09:45 PM
1

We don't need their love, but we could sure use their help. Even if you think that the majority of feminists are anti-men, which I think is pretty unlikely, there are still millions of them who are genuinely in support of gender equality. Simply attacking feminism won't win them over - you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 09:39 PM
1

"All that will result in is shit being flung at us and only us" ..which can be a tactical advantage, if people see us behaving much better than the people flinging the shit.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 09:35 PM
1

So what? There's nothing keeping you from being both a feminist and an MRA, and neither group is above criticism.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 09:34 PM
3

Another problem with the line is that it alienates people - even if you're someone who agrees with it, it puts people off, and reinforces negative views of the movement. Even if you think that's unfair, it's an important tactical consideration.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 09:29 PM
8

"If you don't like what he's saying, downvote the post and add your comment on what's wrong with it." ...which is exactly what I did.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 07:41 PM
12

This is a pro-men group, not an anti-woman one, so I suggest you take your "golddigging prostitutes" shit elsewhere.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 12:37 PM
6

This is a great thing! Advancements in reproductive technology have the potential to fundamentally change gender relations in a positive way. As we loosen the rigid roles in reproduction dictated by biology, so to do we loosen rigid gender roles.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 10:56 PM
3

I really liked this article. I'm firmly in support of trans rights, but I think it's foolish to begin transitioning as children; the way you see yourself and your sense of identity are likely to change dramatically in puberty, and that can spill over into your sexual and gender orientation, so why rush into things? Far better to just accept kids as they are, regardless of what traditional gender roles would prescribe for them.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 10:31 PM
1

How about looking at the CDC's NISVS report and analysing how its findings are misinterpreted in the public discourse? This is both the source of the 1-in-6 number that's frequently cited as incidence instead of prevalence, but also an excellent example of male victims classified as "made to penetrate" instead of as victims of rape. It also challenges the perception that women are not perpetrators of sexual violence. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/
/r/MensRights21/03/17 10:14 PM
1

There certainly are vindictive teachers out there, but it's hardly a universal thing; it's easy to forget that the ones who make the news are the most egregious examples. The vast majority are happy to see you engaged and thinking about the material even if you come to different conclusions, especially if you're rigorous in your approach.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 10:10 PM
1

The original post explicitly lays out that it was only fair because the competitors were children, and that the situation would be different with adult athletes.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 09:58 PM
1

The post seemed pretty even-handed to me. The main point of the post was how he (post is by the kid's dad) was happy that his son didn't think it was any worse to lose to a girls' team than to another boys' team, which I agree is a good thing. As for pride, he was discussing the kids on the winning team and their parents.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 09:56 PM
1

Ah yes, the supposed saying of leftists that nobody has ever actually heard outside of right-wing blogs.
/r/MensRights15/03/17 06:25 PM
1

The biggest problem you have with marxists is that they don't consider countries whose political and economic systems didn't meet the definition of marxism to actually be marxist?
/r/MensRights15/03/17 06:19 PM
1

Well, then AskFeminists need to better educate themselves on feminism. It's a movement with ideas that vary as wildly as within the "manosphere."
/r/MensRights15/03/17 06:14 PM
1

Well, I'm a marxist, so I'd argue that those bloody regimes were a total corruption of marxist ideals and ideas. I think leninism is a crock of shit though!
/r/MensRights14/03/17 11:50 PM
1

Well, she's doing other things. One rather clever way she's fighting this is a serious bill she tabled the same day that requires hospitals and clinics to follow best practices for these sorts of disposals as defined in peer-reviewed medical literature. This of course would mean scrapping the ideologically driven disposal rules and going back to the old way. In terms of bringing issues like this to light though, I think the ultimate measure is how effective it is. There's at least 20 pages of go…
/r/MensRights14/03/17 11:45 PM
2

I'd argue they deserve free food. I'd argue that EVERYONE deserves free food.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 11:30 PM
1

Three years after the Jennifer vs John study which showed a weak preference for men, a similar experiment with a much larger sample size (873 professors rather than the 127 in the first study) showed a much stronger 2:1 preference for women. http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.full.pdf
/r/MensRights14/03/17 11:27 PM
2

Marxist feminists straight up think that patriarchy doesn't exist; they outright reject the idea that all men oppress all women, and the idea that there's some universal form of gender oppression that lives on unchanged through changes in the basic economic systems society is built on. Lindsey German's "Theories of Patriarchy" is a really good introduction to marxist feminist thinking on the subject: http://isj.org.uk/theories-of-patriarchy/
/r/MensRights14/03/17 11:14 PM
2

The truth is that nobody really knows how much of the difference between male and female sex drives is biology and how much is environment. There appears to be a biological component that encourages women to be pickier with mates because of the risks involved in carrying children, but there's also a ton of social stuff, and it's impossible to remove all the social stuff and see how large the contribution of biology is. We can definitely tell that culture has a significant effect though, because …
/r/MensRights14/03/17 11:07 PM
1

If her bill was actually going to be signed into law like the fetal disposal bill was, then this would be an entirely legitimate way to protest. The only problem is that it would cost $100 per mailing!
/r/MensRights14/03/17 10:47 PM
3

Awesome question! Here's my two cents. The term "toxic masculinity" comes with a lot of unfortunate baggage that tends to make it hard to separate the wheat from the chaff, and its grounding in patriarchy theory means it doesn't resonate with MRAs or feminist schools of thought which reject the theory of patriarchy such as marxist feminism. At its best, the term simply refers to men being forced into rigid gender roles and social hierarchies, which is a huge factor in discrimination against men.…
/r/MensRights14/03/17 10:44 PM
1

It's Juvenalian satire! There's a long political tradition of jokingly suggesting policies that everyone agrees would be terrible in order to point out problems with the policies that exist today. The most famous example of this is probably Swift's "A Modest Proposal" which criticised British attitudes towards impoverished Irish people in the 18th century by suggesting that those poor people should sell their children to the rich as food. It's supposed to come across as somewhat offensive and in…
/r/MensRights14/03/17 10:22 PM
1

Your argument only makes sense if you completely ignore the satirical nature of the bill. If there were any grounds to believe this was intended as a serious proposal rather than a way to draw attention to an issue, you'd have a point, but it clearly isn't. It's a parody of existing legislation, and it doesn't say anything negative about men. Claiming that this is some sort of coded attack because it uses men as the example is basically accusing them of microaggressions.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 03:54 AM
0

No, it's an attack on pro-life legislation from the perspective that the existing legislation is full of regulations that are as medically and ethically unsound as restrictions on masturbation, presented in a way that's sure to get plenty of media attention.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 01:02 AM
1

She doesn't want to eliminate anybody's rights. It's supposed to be ridiculous. That's the whole point!
/r/MensRights14/03/17 12:58 AM
1

If you look into the story of how condoms (and pornography!) were legalised in the US, you'll see it actually has worked pretty well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_control_movement_in_the_United_States
/r/MensRights14/03/17 12:53 AM
1

Even if it is, and I don't think it is, that doesn't make it an attack on men. There are no negative judgements of masculinity or men as a group in the language of this bill or in the comments she's publicly made, and it's obvious from the context that she doesn't actually believe that men should actually be subject to any of these restrictions.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 12:38 AM
1

Yeah, but restricting women's reproductive options won't lead to more for men. Conversely, expanding their options leads to a climate where it's easier to gain options for men. For that matter, these restrictions are already directly affecting men. It's not like men are excluded from every decision to abort a pregnancy in the real world, and it's not just women who are saddled with unwanted children by these policies.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 12:30 AM
1

I agree that the decision is subjective, although I'd make an important distinction: from a scientific standpoint, there's no question that life for a new distinct human organism begins at conception. The question therefore becomes when does that organism become a person, with the attendant human rights that personhood brings. This is a philosophical question, not a scientific one, and it has some serious political implications if you give it to the states; ultimately, what you'd be doing is all…
/r/MensRights14/03/17 12:22 AM
7

Trans-vaginal ultrasounds, forcing the mother to learn the foetus' gender, telling them that life begins at conception, and not letting them bring a friend or family member for support have nothing to do with terminating a pregnancy either, but those are in actual serious bills that passed in Texas. All she's doing is highlighting the absurdity by tying similar measures to male masturbation.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 11:29 PM
8

The crazy pro-life bills she's protesting don't exactly do men any favours.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 11:25 PM
3

I think part of it is the incredible stigma attached to the MRM. Most of the resistance to MRAs from feminists is based on misconceptions that are entirely sincere - they really think that we want to put women back in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant. Now, you and I both know that the MRM believes very different things from redpills and tradcons, but they don't, so when they see a bunch of MRAs, they genuinely think we want to bomb abortion clinics and so on. This is a deep seated belief, and …
/r/MensRights13/03/17 11:22 PM
1

I agree with your basic argument, that you don't change peoples' minds by insulting them, but what I don't see is how the bill she put forward is mocking men as a group. It's mocking restrictive pro-life legislation, but it doesn't appear to actually say anything negative about men as a group at all. She is saying negative things about the individual men who voted for the existing, incredibly draconian abortion legislation in Texas, but mocking politicians for their policies is totally fair game…
/r/MensRights13/03/17 11:10 PM
0

this isn't an attack on men, it's an attack on pro-life legislation.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 11:02 PM
1

i think you're right on in terms of the fundamental view of the anti-choicers; they sincerely believe (wrongly in my eyes) that abortion is the murder of a person, and any argument you want to use with them has to take into account. that being said, texas actually passed an anti-abortion law last year that also included a bunch of unnecessary rules for disposing of the remains of a miscarriage, so even if they think they're blameless, the anti-choice crowd's laws affect them.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 11:00 PM
3

i don't think you realize how close you are to the real life insanity of pro-life legislation in this day and age. for example, indiana passed a bill last year that required burials even for miscarriages, despite the fact that the majority of miscarriages happen so early that they're totally indistinguishable from just getting a period without lab tests. that particular one was struck down by the courts, but the governor who signed it is now the vice president.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 10:48 PM
1

Why do you think she's mocking men exactly? Basically everything that bill is asking for is a gender-swapped version of something from a real non-joking bill. She's doing pretty much the same thing we do when we switch genders in headlines to show how things are sexist. If you want to look at it from a purely men's rights perspective, draconian restrictions on abortion don't help men, they hurt them by taking options away, and she's fighting to keep those options open. She may not be doing it sp…
/r/MensRights13/03/17 07:53 PM
1

Well, the mockery is of the existing bills, not of men, so I don't really see how this is sexist given the proper context. She is there to do a job, but part of that job is to bring the issues facing her constituents to a broader audience, and this bill does exactly that - she's gotten national coverage for an issue in her state.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 12:49 PM
1

I'm not sure the data bears this theory out; women have made up the majority of voters since 1980, and the military budget has increased significantly (approx 50%) during this period even adjusted for inflation.
/r/MensRights12/03/17 06:15 PM
7

"This is what's wrong with society. Women can do the things men would be called predators for." This phrasing kind of sticks in my craw - isn't the problem here that men are being called predators for doing things women can do freely?
/r/MensRights12/03/17 06:01 PM
1

You could just look at what she's done on wikipedia. If you're left leaning, there's lots you'll like, if you're right leaning, there's lots you'll hate.
/r/MensRights12/03/17 05:54 PM
2

It's more about pointing out how insane some of the anti-abortion bills have been in Texas lately, and it's actually pretty funny if you read it - pro-lifers have tried (and often succeeded) to push through similarly invasive and over-the-top legislation to make abortion more difficult. If I lived there, she'd have my vote.
/r/MensRights12/03/17 05:52 PM
5

The old fetal handling procedures were totally adequate from a public health standpoint, and the new rules don't apply to abortions or miscarriages in the home. It's really just about making it harder to run abortion clinics by increasing the costs.
/r/MensRights12/03/17 05:49 PM
4

well, the fetal disposal bill didn't have any limit on term, and i don't think a 1 day old blastocyst is really all that different than semen in terms of personhood. for that matter, the disposal bill also covered completely involuntary miscarriages. the 20 week thing is kind of a red herring anyways - 88% of abortions are within the first 12 weeks, and only 4% are beyond the 20 week point. the only reason for that bill was to make abortions more expensive for clinics to provide as a way of tryi…
/r/MensRights12/03/17 05:45 PM
1

We SHOULD stop putting women in jail, for many of the reasons listed in the article. We should also stop putting men in jail, for exactly the same reasons.
/r/MensRights11/03/17 01:13 AM
1

ohhh, yeah, that one doesn't exist.
/r/MensRights09/03/17 09:43 PM
1

It's working for me at https://www.reddit.com/r/RedditArmie/
/r/MensRights09/03/17 09:40 PM
2

Berta Lovejoy is a fictional character used by a group of trolls: http://digg.com/2014/reddit-armie-berta-lovejoy-trolls
/r/MensRights09/03/17 09:37 PM
2

we're often considered neighbouring, but not by the choice of either; there's quite a lot of animosity between the two groups. Redpills think MRAs are whiny betas with no game, MRAs think redpills are pickup artists with no actual desire for real social change. As for the film, the choice of title is unfortunate, and Cassie mentions during it that it's not about redpills.
/r/MensRights09/03/17 06:59 PM
2

turned off when i saw "sexual market value" in the description. looks like red pill shit.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 10:59 PM
1

You know, if Hanna Rosin had named her famous article and book "The End of Patriarchy" instead of "The End of Men" she'd probably be quite popular around here. What she argues is that the historical political, economic and social domination of men has effectively ended, while our perception of the state of affairs has not adjusted to keep pace. Her work was a big part of what led me to the MRM.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 09:52 PM
2

I've noticed the same thing; it appears to have become a lot more hardline anti-feminist over the last year or so. I'm a pro-feminist MRA who falls in the "MRAs and feminists should be natural allies" camp, so I find it pretty disheartening to see. I suspect it may be a symptom of the increasing political polarisation around social issues.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 09:47 PM
2

The full text of the judgement basically says that it looks really bad, and that the judge thinks he probably did it, but that the prosecution didn't present any evidence whatsoever that she was not consenting at the time, so he had to give him the benefit of the doubt. If people want to get mad about this, they should be mad at the prosecution for presenting a weak case, not the judge.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 09:39 PM
1

By all means go, but the ACLU is a legitimate and principled civil liberties organisation, and this is exactly the sort of first amendment activity they defend. Most likely, you're going to learn about exactly what legal rights you have as a protestor, and what to do if those rights are violated, as well as civil rights implications of Trump's policies. I don't think you need to worry about SJW indoctrination - The ACLU is deathly serious in their defence of civil rights, even for people with un…
/r/MensRights08/03/17 09:23 PM
1

I find it truly hard to believe that the main cause of men's issues is feminism. Men were used as disposable labour, sent to die as cannon fodder, and living lives of quiet desperation long before the feminist movement became a political force. I certainly agree that feminism has been an impediment to addressing men's issues at times, but the root causes are located much more deeply in the foundation of our economic, social and political systems. Personally, I'm a filthy lefty, so I point the fi…
/r/MensRights08/03/17 09:09 PM
5

I'm not a fan of the fat acceptance movement, not because I have any problem with fat people, but because I think we should be trying to move beyond giving two shits about what people look like. That being said, the OP is actually incorrect - there is a small but rapidly growing male wing of the fat acceptance movement. My GF has been collecting links on the topic, and I can get her to pass along some to post here if anyone here is interested.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 07:59 PM
1

You know, I can understand why you might feel this way, but I don't think it's an accurate evaluation of the issues this community concerns itself with, and I certainly would disagree strongly with what you think we believe men should be. I don't doubt that there are some people here who would defend those positions, but some time lurking around here and watching the discussions would show you that this is because we welcome a diversity of opinions, even ones that depart from the mainstream. To …
/r/MensRights23/12/16 08:37 PM
7

Also telling is this: "offered to release all the records in this case, if Professor Ryan would agree to waive any privacy rights or concerns. He declined." It sounds to me like the university has more information that they're not releasing so as not to infringe on the professors privacy.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 11:36 PM
-1

"I as a man will always be genetically stronger then a woman and a woman will always be more emotional then a man." I'm sure I could find a woman who was stronger than you, and a man who was more emotional in 15 minutes on the street. "Lets go back as far as we can, to a point where there was no real societal structure, just instinct and drive." This has never happened in the history of humanity; like all primates, we're social animals who instinctively form social heirarchies. "The man being ge…
/r/MensRights16/12/16 12:06 AM
3

I think that a united front with feminists on this issue would probably be a massive game-changer for the MRA movement; if ever there was a chance to separate the public perception of MRAs from redpills and tradcons, this is it.
/r/MensRights15/12/16 12:06 AM
1

It's not even that long of a game; Kasich vetoed the heartbeat bill, but introduced a 20-week bill specifically designed to be used in a supreme court challenge to Roe vs. Wade. The long game in their eyes comes to a head in the next year or two.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 11:47 PM
2

it's a bit of a radical solution, but if making a fresh start without this hanging over you is a priority for you, you might want to consider legally changing your name; it would certainly help avoid the stigma that comes with an accusation, however unfounded, of sexual assault.
/r/MensRights04/12/16 08:54 PM
2

"The 2012 survey also indicated that 23 percent of women and 4 percent of men reported experiencing unwanted sexual contact since enlistment. Because approximately 85 percent of military personnel are male, the total number of men who have experienced unwanted sexual contact is estimated to be equal to or greater than the number of women who have experienced such contact. Based on this survey, the DoD estimates that approximately 26,000 Service members experienced some form of unwanted sexual co…
/r/MensRights24/11/16 01:02 AM
0

what about all the services they provide for men's reproductive health? https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/men
/r/MensRights07/11/16 05:00 PM
1

if the university is telling the truth when they say it's unrelated to the tweets, they're kind of in a double bind; explaining what it actually was may put them at legal risk for violating his privacy, but if they don't explain it, he controls the narrative.
/r/MensRights31/10/16 03:01 AM
2

i'm a lefty, and it drives me nuts to hear fellow left-wingers make that argument; the idea that it's only oppressive if the government does it is pretty much the credo of the libertarian right.
/r/MensRights31/10/16 02:57 AM
1

i agree, but in that case they're not losing their job because of their beliefs, they're losing it because they're shitty at their job; the fact that the reason they're shitty is because of their religious beliefs really doesn't enter the equation
/r/MensRights31/10/16 02:55 AM
1

i think witchcraft is pretty dumb, much as i think religion in general is pretty dumb, but people shouldn't lose their jobs because of their religious beliefs.
/r/MensRights30/10/16 02:31 PM
3

still better than silencing!
/r/MensRights29/10/16 08:23 PM
2

I don't want to go to war, lift heavy things, stop intruders, or be groped or catcalled either, and I'm considerably taller and heavier than 5'4" and 100 pounds. I don't think you should have to do these things, but I don't think that men should either. But if somebody has to do them, we should be picking them based on their ability instead of their gender - while men and women may statistically be more suited on average to certain tasks, on the individual level, the statistics are irrelevant; t…
/r/MensRights29/10/16 06:14 PM
1

There's a little misogyny because there are a few shitheads, not because of a problem with the community. The community as a whole is proactive about countering those messages, but to pretend we're all angels is just as foolish as to pretend we're all devils. People say stupid shit here sometimes, just like everywhere else. My point is just that you CAN actually ask critical questions here, and that's a good thing. The downside is that some of those questions will be misogynistic trash, but the …
/r/MensRights26/10/16 10:48 PM
0

I didn't say they were prevalent, and I agree that the community generally downvotes them into oblivion. I just think it's foolish to pretend that it never happens, and because we don't ban people for bad ideas, it probably happens more here than on average. That's not a reflection of misogynistic tendencies in the community, it's a reflection of a genuine commitment to free and open debate.
/r/MensRights26/10/16 04:49 AM
4

There's no denying that there are some misogynistic posts here, although I feel pretty strongly they're more the work of a loud minority than the general consensus of the sub. What sets this community apart is its genuine commitment to free speech, even speech that is objectionable. The downside of course is that a lot of bullshit gets posted here, but I think what we get in the trade is invaluable - a place where everyone is free to discuss their ideas without fear of being banned for dissentin…
/r/MensRights26/10/16 04:11 AM
1

Suspension with full pay sounds like a perfectly fair way to handle it at this stage. Suspension is in the interest of the students, in case she's guilty, but it's only fair she gets her salary until that's proven in court, in case she's innocent. Honestly, I don't know how else you could so elegantly balance protecting her students with respecting the presumption of innocence.
/r/MensRights25/10/16 07:34 AM
1

i don't have a problem with this - these are suggestions, not rules, and people can suggest whatever they want. from the article: “The views of the presenter in no way demonstrate a mandatory personnel policy or a student conduct policy of Cal State Fullerton, and any person at our campus is free to disagree with those views,” said Jeffrey D. Cook., the University’s chief communications officer. “Cal State Fullerton does not police language on our campus and fully supports the rights of free spe…
/r/MensRights25/10/16 06:53 AM
7

I'd just point out that while it may be a tradition for the husband-to-be to pay for the ring, there are plenty of other marriage traditions she most certainly would be opposed to, like the bride's family paying for the wedding. Oh, and dowries. Screw tradition, set your own rules to live by together.
/r/MensRights18/10/16 11:38 PM
1

Threats of violence are a line that should never be crossed. What's happened here is serious, and I highly suggest getting help and getting out of there.
/r/MensRights14/09/16 11:46 PM
7

i guess this makes her a WGTOW
/r/MensRights13/09/16 05:18 PM
1

child molesters?
/r/MensRights02/09/16 08:24 PM
4

So, i did some research on this, and the conclusion I've come to so far is that breast implants are much more dangerous than people realize. About a quarter of breast implant patients have to have additional surgery within a decade to deal with health issues caused by the implants, and a third of these patients go on to require additional surgery in the following decade. Oh, and that's not even getting started on the cancer.... That's just surgery - add non-surgical treatment, and you're looking…
/r/MensRights02/09/16 08:18 PM
1

It's true, there's no lack of rape porn on the internet, but I think it's a mistake to use that as evidence of a rape culture; while scenes of simulated rape appeal to a niche audience, rape culture would predict their ubiquity in mainstream pornography, yet this is far from the case. While it may be online, you're certainly not going to see rape porn in the TV guides of big hotel chains, but this is exactly what we would expect in a rape culture. Another clue is in the marketing of the sites th…
/r/MensRights02/09/16 06:55 PM
3

Not so much low effort as low hanging fruit. Totally appropriate too, as the section in question (on page 6) essentially says 9/11 was an inside job as part of it's argument about how CHS was an accomplice to the staging of Columbine.
/r/MensRights01/09/16 03:01 AM
3

Wow, this is totally insane. It actually argues that CHS is working for the CIA on a project to destroy the family, based on the evidence that she mentioned the Columbine massacre, which everybody knows was a secret US Government operation. What's next, feminism can't melt steel beams?
/r/MensRights01/09/16 02:50 AM
1

if one third of people believe excessive flirting can lead to rape, one third of people are kind of dumb.
/r/MensRights25/08/16 12:48 PM
1

you're missing the point of the article entirely. i'll put it as simply as i can: when somebody is thought to have a privilege, and that privilege is a good thing (unlike being allowed to statutorily rape, which i think we both agree is bad), instead of trying to take that good thing away from the privileged person, we should try and give it to everyone. to quote the article, "...privilege itself is a better thing than is traditionally supposed; everyone deserves privilege in abundance. The ques…
/r/MensRights20/08/16 11:42 AM
1

i would think the most entitled demographic would be billionaires.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 10:30 AM
1

well, the argument that this article is making is that to solve these problems it would be better to send men and black people to prison less than to send women and white people to prison more. basically, it's saying that if you believe in privilege, instead of trying to remove privileges from the privileged, or telling them to "check" it, you should try and extend those privileges to everyone.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 09:27 AM
1

An interesting flaw in the scenario design - I prioritized non-intervention in my responses, with zero attention gender, yet I ended up with a result that appeared to intensely favour one gender.
/r/MensRights16/08/16 01:00 AM
7

if her pregnancy test is showing positive 7 days after you had sex, and it's a legit test, she was almost certainly already pregnant when you had sex with her. implantation takes 6 to 12 days, 10 on average. hormone levels in the blood are high enough for a blood based pregnancy test to detect pregnancy by about 3 or 4 days after implantation, whereas a urine test will take another 3 or 4 days beyond that. so in summary, a urine based pregnancy test is highly unlikely to give a positive result u…
/r/MensRights07/08/16 05:50 AM
8

i certainly have no objection. here in canada, it's actually the law!
/r/MensRights17/07/16 08:21 AM
1

what evidence is there that they're liberal?
/r/MensRights20/06/16 09:35 PM
1

if you're threatening to rape people, women would be right to think you're a creep, and men too.
/r/MensRights07/06/16 10:33 PM
6

could you post your source for points 2 through 4 in the substantiated facts? the articles i've seen don't agree
/r/MensRights07/06/16 10:51 AM
2

how about you decide AFTER you read it?
/r/MensRights07/06/16 10:15 AM
1

there is a definite liberal presence here. more interestingly, there appear to be a few radical leftists like myself, so not just liberals, but communists, socialists and anarchists.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 07:35 PM
4

i agree that we should be working together. unfortunately, there's a lot of mistrust and hostility on both sides that currently stands in the way.
/r/MensRights08/04/16 07:36 AM
1

i think that marxist feminists, who argue against patriarchy theory in favor of a class-based analysis of gender issues, would disagree with you
/r/MensRights05/04/16 10:27 PM
1

no other kind? what about marxist feminism?
/r/MensRights05/04/16 06:54 PM
3

i think they're great. i'm a firm believer that there's no inherent conflict between being an MRA and a feminist, and indeed that the groups are natural allies. to be fair, there are certain varieties of MRA and feminist whose specific analysis of gender are incompatible, but ultimately, most of us are working towards the same goal, a society where gender isn't a barrier to anyone living the life they want.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 08:07 PM
6

to quote the report directly: "The 2012 survey also indicated that 23 percent of women and 4 percent of men reported experiencing unwanted sexual contact since enlistment. Because approximately 85 percent of military personnel are male, the total number of men who have experienced unwanted sexual contact is estimated to be equal to or greater than the number of women who have experienced such contact. Based on this survey, the DoD estimates that approximately 26,000 Service members experienced s…
/r/MensRights25/01/16 02:20 AM
2

even amanda marcotte, who's certainly no fan of us, calls this one bullshit http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/01/08/the_enliven_project_s_false_rape_accusations_infographic_great_intentions.html
/r/MensRights22/01/16 06:53 PM
2

in 21 US states, it's actually still illegal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery#United_States
/r/MensRights12/01/16 05:44 PM
2

Unfortunately, it's run by the Laurel centre, whose mandate is preventing the abuse of women, and the programming it offers is primarily designed to support that, as opposed to helping men for men's sake. It's a "learn to stop beating your wife" sort of place as opposed to a "learn to escape being beaten by your wife" one.
/r/MensRights30/12/15 07:17 PM
8

on the radical left, they get called brocialists. i'm not even joking.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 05:49 AM
1

marxist feminists believe there are gender inequalities in our society, and that they currently derive from the structure of capitalism. not all marxists agree with either of those points.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 05:48 AM
1

you seem to be missing my point - radical feminism is not compatible with marxism, because patriarchy theory (the thing that differentiates radical feminism) contradicts marxist class analysis. and all marxists are radical marxists - in a capitalist society, marxism is a form of radical politics by its very definition.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 04:03 AM
1

no, there's major differences in the philosophy and the approach; there's really nothing about marxist feminism that's incompatible with the MHRM, unlike radical feminism. to simplify it to an extreme degree, marxist feminism argues that the oppression of women has largely happened historically to make the oppression of men more profitable for the ruling class.
/r/MensRights18/09/15 02:51 AM
2

radems aren't marxists. marxist feminism opposes radical feminism, particularly patriarchy theory, which is the very foundation of radical feminism. lindsey german has written extensively on this: https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/german/1981/xx/patriarchy.htm
/r/MensRights17/09/15 02:57 AM
2

no, that's not what the regulations say at all, re-read section 313.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 02:44 AM
2

emily yoffe is fantastic, this isn't the first story of this type she's called attention to.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 02:39 AM
10

your post pretty much captures the sentiment that led me to the MRM.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 04:31 AM
8

while i think the conference was the best thing they ever did, i'm not at all concerned with AVFM fading into irrelevance - they're so meanspirited they're more liability than asset. now, if CAFE organized a conference, i'd be interested in going...
/r/MensRights31/07/15 04:02 AM
4

the piece is actually pretty inoffensive. full text available here: http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/191337/bernie-sanderss-1972-essay-man-and-woman
/r/MensRights23/07/15 05:28 PM
3

sure, it's based on marxist class analysis, but applied to groups that don't even come close to meeting the marxist definition of a class, so the conclusions it draws are meaningless. it's kind of like trying to apply literary criticism to mathematics.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 05:10 PM
6

basically, viacom gave them a bunch of money, and they decided to "go legit." mcinnes had a habit of inflammatory language and behaviour that didn't fit in well with this.
/r/MensRights30/06/15 12:25 AM
15

randi is kind of a legendary troll. wherever there's been crazy bullshit on the internet, she's been sure to be there, dating back to the mid 90s.
/r/MensRights30/06/15 12:09 AM
16

my favorite quote: "In my day, as a gay male, people assumed I was a sexual predator. Today, as a male, I am subject to the same presumption. Thanks #feminism" -‏@PoliticalCynic
/r/MensRights27/06/15 07:36 AM
4

the mrm needs more justin trottiers and less paul elams. this was a masterclass in PR
/r/MensRights21/06/15 06:42 PM
3

i read the discussion documents, and it's all written in gender-neutral language, and the UK law it's based on is gender-neutral too.
/r/MensRights17/06/15 12:52 AM
3

oh, and neither movement seems too fond of outspoken male feminists...
/r/MensRights12/06/15 12:37 AM
1

both movements advocate gender equality, oppose socially mandated gender roles, are generally pro-choice, support equality of opportunity (although not necessarily equality of outcome), and oppose domestic violence.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 12:36 AM
2

emily yoffe, who writes that column, is fantastic - she's also basically the first person who broke the story that the rolling stone UVA piece was bullshit.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 08:13 AM
3

seems like a TERF-lite sort of thing. i was rather galled by this particular phrase: "If that’s the ultimate message of the mainstream of the trans community, we’ll happily, lovingly welcome them to the fight to create space for everyone to express him-, her- or, in gender neutral parlance, hir-self without being coerced by gendered expectations. " what gives her, or anyone, the right to decide who gets to join the fight for justice? that's something that belongs to everyone.
/r/MensRights08/06/15 07:09 AM
3

i know a lot of the people involved in getting this cancelled personally, and it's been really depressing to watch so-called liberals abandon the principles of liberalism so easily. my partner is a radical feminist, and we butt heads on pretty much everything gender-related, but even she's disgusted with this wave of speech policing.
/r/MensRights01/06/15 09:54 PM
10

orthodox marxist here; patriarchy theory is false consciousness.
/r/MensRights01/06/15 04:11 AM
1

i think most marxist feminists would agree with your assessments of most of those facts, plus they'd add on an argument about how intersectionality is no solution to any of these problems. if marxist feminism was the dominant tendency in mainstream feminism, rather than radical feminism, i don't think MRAs would really have a problem with feminism.
/r/MensRights30/05/15 05:02 PM
1

personally, i much prefer dating feminists to traditionalists. MRAs and feminists have much more in common than MRAs and traditionalists do.
/r/MensRights30/05/15 04:46 PM
2

i agree with you about ancaps, but marxist feminism is really quite unobjectionable. it explains gender disparities within society as the result of interactions with class and capital, as opposed to patriarchy and privilege. check out lindsey german's work for some examples: https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/german/
/r/MensRights25/05/15 05:05 PM
0

don't confuse the nightmarish soviet experience with actual communism. hell, even the soviet constitution said it wasn't.
/r/MensRights25/05/15 04:57 PM
-1

you sure can - i am! in fact, you can go further, marxist feminism is quite compatible with the views of the MHRM.
/r/MensRights25/05/15 04:01 PM
1

why do you need to pick sides? just be the best human being you can be to both of them.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:55 PM
1

honestly, more mammogram screening isn't going to reduce the amount of prostate cancer screening; if anything, it increases how "normal" we view preventative screening for cancer is, which helps with prostate screening's image problem.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 11:28 PM
0

ugh, what's with this tradcon shit? a child with a mother and father will do better than one with only a single parent, but so will one with two fathers, or two mothers, or six of one and half a dozen of the other. what's critical isn't the gender or sexual orientation of the parents, but that the child has loving caregivers in their life who can afford to spend time caring for them.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 11:25 PM
1

i think it's a reasonable answer to expect from a 14-year-old, which is exactly what this curriculum is offering it as an example of.
/r/MensRights06/05/15 11:45 PM
1

i'm with you on the idea that people are capable of consent while under the influence of drugs such as alcohol so long as they are not incapacitated, and i agree that the blurring of that line is a troublesome trend in how we talk about consent. that being said, actually reading the document reveals the quote in question is an example of how grade 9 students may respond to the question "what does consent mean to you?" let's not forget that this is a curriculum, and over the next 4 years, the mes…
/r/MensRights06/05/15 11:44 PM
0

well, the next sentence in that example is this: "When we’re talking about sexual activity – or anything, really, including situations that involve drinking and driving or other behaviour where there might be risk of harm – you need to remember to pay attention to body language and behaviour as well as words.” don't forget, the goal of the curriculum is much broader than simply preventing rape. it's about teaching students to make smart decisions that let them manage the risk in their (future) s…
/r/MensRights06/05/15 12:33 AM
0

sure, but sex ed isn't simply about staying within the bounds of the law, it's about reducing risk, and i doubt many people in this sub would disagree with the statement that legal or not, you're putting both yourself and your potential sexual partner at risk by sleeping with drunk people.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 11:57 PM
4

i think this does more to set our movement back than advance it
/r/MensRights05/05/15 11:53 PM
0

i don't understand why people downvoted this, it's well documented historically that the current association of pink for girls and blue for boys was inverted prior to the 1930s, and gradually changed over the next two decades.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 11:39 PM
2

i think it's because areas such as the ones you mentioned are essentially the only places where the views of the MRM are substantially and materially different from mainstream feminism, whether MRAs like to admit it or not.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 02:06 AM
2

the oxford and the webster have very different philosophies; the webster is very conservative, seeing itself as a dictionary of "proper" usage, whereas the oxford is meant as a dictionary of the language as it is commonly used.
/r/MensRights02/04/15 02:57 PM
2

having a fulltime caregiver like a stay at home parent is obviously a great advantage for any child, and while the numbers in this article reflect a somewhat hyperbolic line of reasoning, there is a kernel of truth in all this: for all too many families, a stay at home parent is a luxury they literally can't afford. putting food on the table requires two incomes for many families, but being a stay at home mom or dad should be an option for every parent. we can't separate the gender politics of p…
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:33 PM
-1

this doesn't look like a gender politics issue to me, this just seems like a tragic case of two people's lives taking them in different directions.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:18 PM
1

and this infringes on men's rights how exactly?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 09:53 AM
1

please keep us updated on this, here in canada there's been talk about adopting a similar model, which of course lots of sex workers say would be a terrible mistake (and i agree.) when this hits the media there, it will be of great use to those of us fighting similar policies here.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 11:26 PM
1

so what do you make of the centuries of scatological humour in our culture? more seriously, video games about menstruation don't appeal to me, but it certainly doesn't hurt me that somebody is making them for people who do want them.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 04:48 AM
5

how on earth is this a men's rights issue?
/r/MensRights16/03/15 11:10 PM
0

this looks like progress to me
/r/MensRights14/03/15 11:41 AM
1

one aspect of this i personally find infuriating is that neither the original article nor this blog post use the correct definition of "male gaze"
/r/MensRights09/03/15 11:20 PM
2

while i think that false accusations should be viewed as a criminal matter much more often, i'd also like the justice system to move away from the punishment paradigm back to one of rehabilitation.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 12:14 AM
1

Economic Left/Right: -9.38 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38
/r/MensRights04/03/15 12:10 AM
0

pdxruby, right?
/r/MensRights20/02/15 06:50 PM
3

you're right. that's why there's so little gun violence in iraq.
/r/MensRights20/02/15 06:11 PM
1

an inequality by definition affects both parties. and yes, marxist feminism is essentially analysis of the position of women in the broader context of a marxist critique of capitalism. working class people of both genders get the shit end of the stick under capitalism according to marxist theory, but not necessarily in exactly the same way, and marxist feminism studies the economic roots of those differences.
/r/MensRights11/02/15 07:43 AM
3

i'd skip the statistics and make an ethical argument here, that it's better for a thousand criminals to go unpunished than for a single innocent person to be punished. you could even make it a very personal argument, asking said professor if she thinks it would be morally justified to imprison her without any guilt on her part if it meant a rapist would also be imprisoned. how about a dozen rapists? a thousand?
/r/MensRights11/02/15 07:35 AM
1

liberal feminism doesn't really give a shit who set them up. it's more concerned with things like legal equality. i think that's a group we can work with. as for marxist feminism, it attributes inequalities of gender in economic relations, and explicitly rejects patriarchy theory. a really good introduction to marxist feminism's rejection of patriarchy theory can be found in lindsey german's "theories of patriarchy" at http://www.isj.org.uk/?id=240
/r/MensRights10/02/15 10:05 AM
3

uh, the very first paragraph points out that it's also "no man applicants, no job"
/r/MensRights09/02/15 03:58 PM
2

the concept of patriarchy suggests that the oppression of women happens because they are women, and for the benefit of men as a class. liberal feminism suggests that women are oppressed by a number of social and legal structures - this is true. it's also true of men, and nothing about liberal feminism denies this. as for marxist feminism, it suggests patriarchy was a historical phenomeneon, not a present day one, and that patriarchy was rule by patriarchs, powerful men who controlled households …
/r/MensRights09/02/15 03:51 PM
2

not true. patriarchy theory is only part of radical feminism and related tendencies, most notably socialist feminism. note that the term "radical feminism" refers to a specific school of feminist thought, and not simply feminism with radical beliefs. there are many schools of feminist thought without patriarchy theory, such as liberal feminism (no position on patriarchy theory) and marxist feminism (opposed to patriarchy theory) which are much more compatible with the beliefs of the MHRM.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 07:35 AM
6

the sex-positive/sex-negative divide is a major, well-documented schism within feminism
/r/MensRights08/02/15 10:13 PM
2

i think feminism and the mhrm are natural allies. that being said, i'm not a fan of patriarchy theory (i much prefer marxist feminism to radical/socialist feminism) and i don't think you'll make any headway with patriarchy-based arguments here. i think there's plenty of common causes we can work on together even if we disagree on the theoretical underpinnings, but i would encourage you to research other varieties of feminism if you wish to help bridge the gap between the movements.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 10:06 PM
2

bell hooks is a great writer, and her prose illuminates a viewpoint of deep compassion and intelligence. i actually like her work a lot, although that's not quite the same as saying i agree with it. to me, intersectionality is kind of putting the cart before the horse, explaining material inequalities by way of social inequalities. to this radical lefty's eyes, the opposite is true - we treat groups in society poorly because we want things from them, things of material value like land and labour…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 08:58 PM
1

this is just silly. feminism isn't any sort of organized group, and while history shows that there have been terrorist acts performed in the name of feminism, the same is true of most ideologies. have you got any idea how many bullshit petitions of this sort about the MRM there are?
/r/MensRights05/02/15 01:38 AM
2

research suggests that the slut label is largely used to enforce social hierarchy on lines of economic class. (http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/05/28/slut_shaming_and_class_a_study_on_how_college_women_decide_who_s_trashy.html)
/r/MensRights03/02/15 04:39 PM
1

what makes you think prostitution isn't a real job?
/r/MensRights20/01/15 05:24 PM
2

i can't let rosa parks be mentioned without also mentioning the unsung heroine of the montgomery bus segregation fight: claudette colvin. colvin was actually the first to be arrested for refusing to give up her seat, and she went out yelling about how her constitutional rights were being violated. but colvin was an unwed pregnant teenager, and naacp leadership considered her an unsuitable candidate for an organized court challenge to the law. nine months later, a suitable candidate did present h…
/r/MensRights18/01/15 09:19 PM
1

seems like a bit of a conspiracy theory, but i suppose feminists could be preparing a secret agenda while we're at our weekly patriarchy planning conferences.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 08:32 PM
1

some prostitutes are prostitutes as a last resort. some are prostitutes because they're forced into it. some are prostitutes because it pays well. some are prostitutes because they like the work. there's simply no generalization you can make other than they all offer sexual services of one kind or another in exchange for compensation.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 08:25 PM
0

you know, i agree with the title of this article, and the basic point, that explicit anti-feminism does little to help the cause of men (as opposed to targeted criticism of certain feminist ideas.) that being said, this is pretty yellow journalism. i'm a big fan of the guardian, but they've got some pretty awful columnists on gender. to be fair, they do have a couple great ones, like ally fogg.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 07:59 PM
3

i fully support this idea, and i think it is the only way the MRM will achieve mainstream acceptance anytime soon
/r/MensRights18/01/15 12:49 AM
1

i agree with you that mainstream feminism has been extrodinarily effective at shutting out dissenting voices, and that it's gotten much worse particularly in the last decade, but i still hold out hope that cooler heads will prevail. i think the ultimate problem is that the radical feminist current that dominates mainstream feminism is out of touch with the actual state of gender relations in our society, and i don't think that ignorance is sustainable. one possible interpretation of the increase…
/r/MensRights17/01/15 05:21 PM
1

neither feminism nor the MRM are monolithic, and there are whole schools of feminist thought that are entirely compatible with the beliefs of the MRM - for instance, some of the best arguments against patriarchy theory i've ever read have been from marxist feminists. NAFALT is actually a valid argument, it's just hypocritical in face of the furor over the equally valid #notallmen.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 05:05 PM
1

how does this argument differ from feminists who argue that opposing the MRM is a core part of feminism, because MRAs are staunch opponents of women's rights? as for the argument about dropping the label, i've personally heard exactly the same arguments from feminists regarding the term MRA.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 05:00 PM
1

1) circumcision by consenting adults seems perfectly reasonable to me. we should be free to modify our bodies should we so wish. 2) the health benefits of circumcision are minor (marginally reduced risk of penile cancer and HIV transmission) and controversial at that, especially when weighed against the risk of complications. but even ignoring the risk of complications, the risks circumcision may slightly mitigate are already negligible in infants, so there's no logical reason the procedure coul…
/r/MensRights14/01/15 09:29 PM
2

i don't really think this sort of stance really helps advance the cause. the statement "feminists hate men" is about as fair as the statement "MRAs hate women." some do, but that's the movement at its worst, and it's capable of so much more. some feminists surely do hate men, and we should be steadfast in our opposition to those that do, but it's not fair to paint all of them with the same brush, and the rhetorical hoops you have to jump through to justify as statement like that are basically eq…
/r/MensRights14/01/15 09:06 PM
2

here's some better coverage from the local news: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/school-employee-gave-student-drugs-liquor-to-have-sex-winnipeg-police-1.2897937
/r/MensRights13/01/15 08:36 AM
3

there is no crime called "rape" in canadian law, regardless of gender. each of those terms is the name of a specific charge under the criminal code.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 04:13 AM
2

i agree with you, and i think the distinction is unfair. that being said, we have to work within the world we already have in order to build a better one. given that male sexuality is seen as something dangerous and to be controlled by so much of our society, it's tactically advantagous to focus on this as a health issue.
/r/MensRights10/01/15 12:21 AM
2

i think you're a feminist, and an MRA, and an egalitarian, and a humanist, and a gender activist and a whole bunch of other labels you should feel free to pick and choose from as the situation dictates.
/r/MensRights10/01/15 12:16 AM
4

i think any argument that focuses on men's sexual pleasure is (unfairly) going to be rejected out of hand. i think a more easily accepted argument can be made by comparing the extremely minor health benefits of circumcision with the surprisingly high risk of complications.
/r/MensRights09/01/15 03:58 PM
20

dershowitz specifically asked for them to level formal proceedings against him so he'd have a chance to clear his name in court
/r/MensRights07/01/15 04:21 PM
2

seems pretty compatible with what we believe - it's about not getting stuck in traditional gender roles, evaluating peoples beliefs instead of the groups they identify with, and not allowing feminist rhetoric to replace real human connection.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 02:30 AM
3

how about because using a hashtag is a lot easier than actually being out on the streets?
/r/MensRights02/01/15 08:10 PM
1

it doesn't require any documentation for male claimants either. or you could just get health insurance and be ineligible for the penalty in the first place. the individual mandate actually doesn't affect the majority of americans anyways.
/r/MensRights30/12/14 04:47 PM
2

i'm a marxist, so i'd consider my self a fellow traveller among anarchists. there does seem to be a decent number of radical leftists among the MRA fold.
/r/MensRights26/12/14 07:43 PM
1

from what you're saying, it sounds like you're an MGTOW, but it's not like membership in either one is exclusive
/r/MensRights22/12/14 09:54 AM
1

where exactly are you seeing male blaming in this article? it seems admirably even-handed to me.
/r/MensRights11/12/14 11:49 PM
1

IMHO, in our culture, rejecting religion is an aggressive act. men are expected to conform to aggressive gender roles, wheras women are expected to conform to passive ones. in a world where both were more free to be whatever we want to be, we'd probably see a lot more female atheists.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 08:47 PM
3

if you feel like raising a little hell, why not try "then MRAs are the real feminists"
/r/MensRights09/12/14 01:32 AM
3

uh, no. she was convicted of lying to the police about an investigation of some counterfeit money used at a restaurant.
/r/MensRights11/11/14 03:10 AM
3

good on you for putting your daughter first.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 12:46 AM
1

i think you may find lots to like among the writers of the genderqueer movement - one could argue they're the fourth wave of feminism, and they concentrate on how gender roles are constricting to everyone, not just women. kate bornstein is probably the leading luminary within them.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 08:32 PM
-3

ugh, let's not start giving legal rights to fetuses. you follow that road far enough, and a man who suggests his partner have an abortion could find himself facing conspiracy to murder charges.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 08:12 PM
2

people seem to forget that a population growing at a linear rate means the birth rate is dropping - a stable birth rate would create exponential growth. based on the observed trends, many of us commenting here today will not only witness the peak human population of the earth, but also the beginning of a decline. a really great (and really entertaining) discussion of some of these issues can be found in the BBC documentary "overpopulated" which can easily be found on youtube.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 07:56 PM
12

there's a lot of hostility towards feminism here, but i think what you're doing is an important way of bridging that gap. as for everyone else: if we want to address the elements within feminism that harm men, the best way to do it is to engage in a respectful dialogue with those members of the feminist community who are openminded enough to work with us!
/r/MensRights04/11/14 07:49 PM
1

I think these developments actually could herald a major social change in the way we view male sexuality. specifically, one of the major advances women made with the introduction of the pill and the increased availability of abortion is the decoupling of consent to have sex from consent to reproduce. i think just about everyone here would agree that's a good thing, but unfortunately, men have not made the same advance. reversable permanent contraception for men could prompt a re-evaluation of ou…
/r/MensRights04/11/14 07:46 PM
1

one more: Economic Left/Right: -9.88 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38
/r/MensRights21/10/14 02:07 AM
5

I think it's important to keep perspective. Yes, misguided feminist policies have ruined men's lives, but so have misguided economic policies, wars, and a host of other issues. Feminism, even at its very worst, isn't the source of all men's woes, and while it's important to take a stand against feminist policies that harm men, there are other issues at play, some of which may be a literal matter of life and death.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 08:52 PM
8

the advantage of being female in divorce court is real, but it's nothing compared to the advantage of being rich everywhere else. in a lot of ways, battles over gender just benefit the rich, because poor men and women have more in common with each other than they do with their rich counterparts; when we're fighting each other despite common economic interests, we're not working together to fight the people who profit from keeping all working people down.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 08:49 PM
5

i don't think anybody here is against the circumcision of consenting adults, just the circumcision of children who don't get a say. it's a men's rights issue, because men should have the right not to have parts of their body cut off without their informed consent, even if there are benefits to the cut.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 08:40 PM
9

hey, if all the female supremecists within the feminist movement go form their own communes it would be a great thing - the ones who would be left, the ones trying to improve society instead of separate from it, would be the ones we can work with to build a better world.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 12:40 AM
2

women are still more likely to be stay-at-home parents than men, and that time out of the workforce cuts into their chances for advancement and higher pay. i'm sure among families with a stay-at-home dad and a mom in the workforce that this trend skews the opposite way, but in aggrigate, the distribution of men vs. women as stay-at-home parents means that men with children tend to earn more for reasons that have nothing to do with gender discrimination
/r/MensRights15/10/14 07:56 PM
1

it's not an article per se, but this report by CONSAD commissioned by the US department of labour is probably exactly what you're looking for: http://consad.com/index.php?page=an-analysis-of-reasons-for-the-disparity-in-wages-between-men-and-women
/r/MensRights15/10/14 07:42 PM
1

i think most of us want to develop a better, more equal society alongside women, and that can happen anywhere. i mean, i'm passionate about colonizing space, but that's no solution to gender issues; our social problems are going to follow us wherever we go! the problem isn't women; women are suffering too. the problem isn't even feminism, although some forms of it are harming far more than helping. the problem is that we live in a society where gender is a prison, dictating who and what we can b…
/r/MensRights12/10/14 07:42 PM
4

while i agree pretty strongly with the core argument of this post, it was depressing how quickly it turned into a collection of anti-trans insults. oh, it's by julie burchill, that explains everything.
/r/MensRights29/09/14 07:55 PM
3

relax, according to the last line of the article, the woman is still standing trial.
/r/MensRights27/09/14 07:57 AM
3

you know, this is a good example of a place where we could cooperate with feminists, thereby gaining a little legitimacy. think about it: we'e offended by the implication that men are lazy slobs, and they're no doubt offended by the implication that cleaning the bathroom is "women's work."
/r/MensRights26/09/14 03:45 PM
1

that's a good point; to quote alinsky's rules for radicals, "ridicule is man's most potent weapon." which leads to a second useful point from RfR: "pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it" that is to say, don't attack the CDC as a whole; organizations don't have feelings, so they can weather bad PR much better than individuals. pick an individual with sway within the CDC and humiliate THEM as a rape apologist.
/r/MensRights25/09/14 03:10 PM
3

while i'm broadly supportive of the core concept here, that positioning the MHRM as fundamentally opposed to feminism is only holding us back, i think you may have misunderstood a few terms in use. radical feminism doesn't actually mean the ideas of extremist feminists, although extremist feminists are likely to be radical feminists. the term actually refers to the branch of feminism that brought us the concept of patriarchy, and consequently concepts like rape culture that MRAs find troublesome…
/r/MensRights21/09/14 09:45 PM
1

why did society mold itself into the way it is today? well first of all, it didn't. people fought and died to make it the way it is today; history is made by people. but putting that aside... why does our society encourage inequalities and divisions over gender? well, our society is built on a foundation of a fundamental inequality of wealth; as long as the men and women at the bottom (who outnumber the men and women at the top) are fighting each other over issues of gender, they're not going to…
/r/MensRights20/09/14 10:57 AM
1

i think there actually is a lot of common ground, and while neither sides' extremists are likely to ever get along, i think MRAs and feminists can and should be allies.
/r/MensRights14/09/14 07:37 PM
1

real women of canada is a tradcon group.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 09:56 AM
1

oh, i'm sure they really have recieved a pile of threats; they're cohabiting the same internet as /b/ after all. the real issue is wether the threats have anything to do with gender, which i would argue they do not.
/r/MensRights03/09/14 04:27 AM
7

having a child specifically to preserve a name seems like a terrible idea to me, regardless of the state of divorce law.
/r/MensRights26/08/14 04:30 AM
1

i've watched the first season, it's not nearly as bad as this thread makes it sound. the men are most definately the protagonists, and the humour largely derives from how incredibly shitty the women are to them; it's hardly "celebrating women's sacrifices in war"
/r/MensRights19/08/14 12:15 PM
2

in orthdox marxism, the only classes that matter are economic ones; it's not your gender that gives you power, it's your bank balance.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 11:27 PM
1

i think there may be a small cadre of marxists here, myself included; our focus on an economic system that oppresses working people of all genders as an alternative to patriarchy theory fits well in the MRM worldview. i'm pretty sure the majority of members are libertarians however, and we make strange bedfellows!
/r/MensRights14/08/14 11:25 PM
3

i think a lot of the problems MRAs have with feminism wouldn't actually exist if radical feminism actually was cultural marxism; if it was, it would concentrate on how gender roles are used to legitimize unfair power structures instead of railing against the patriarchy bogeyman.
/r/MensRights01/08/14 03:42 AM
4

there's nothing saying you can't be part of both! there are a lot of differences and disagreements between the MRM and feminist movements, but at their core, both are striving for the same thing - a world where nobody's gender is a barrier or obstacle to living the sort of life they want. it's totally okay to pick and choose the parts of both that you think are right.
/r/MensRights29/07/14 08:43 AM
1

i have to respect greer for reconsidering a lot of her prior beliefs. for instance, she was in the TERF camp for a long time, but recently recanted her anti-trans stance.
/r/MensRights27/07/14 10:49 PM
1

i'm pretty sure that last one is in there because it's illegal to publicly criticise the monarchy in thailand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A8se_majest%C3%A9_in_Thailand
/r/MensRights27/07/14 07:12 AM
1

i consider myself both an MRA and a feminist. the two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, depending on which variety of feminism we're discussing. i mean, we're never going to get along with TERFs, but they're essentially the lunatic fringe of feminism. personally, i think the explicitly anti-feminist position that seems to be the mainstream view within the MRA movement is holding us back; you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, and i think that ultimately feminists and MRAs will need t…
/r/MensRights27/07/14 07:07 AM
1

In Marxism, classes are defined by their relationship to the means of production. Women do not collectively form a class, because their economic relations to production are not homogeneous - just like men, some women are slaves, and some women crack the whip. Patriarchy theory does draw inspiration from Marx, but it's a distortion of Marx's dialectical approach to sociology, and one that orthodox Marxism would consider an example of false conciousness, ideology which obscures, and thereby helps …
/r/MensRights26/07/14 08:47 AM
1

this is actually a divisive topic within feminism, and it's a tactical opportunity for the MRM; there are factions within feminism we could work with on this issue, which will both help with the issue itself, and help legitimize the MRM in a broader sense.
/r/MensRights21/07/14 08:40 PM
1

the CBO estimates that roughly half of the illegal immigrant population actually does pay taxes, and that they contribute about 7 billion dollars to social security a year, despite being ineligible for it. the texas state comptroller reported in 2006 that illegal immigrants contributed 18 billion dollars to the state budget while using only 1.2 billion dollars in services. this concept that illegal immigrants are getting a free ride really isn't being supported by the evidence
/r/MensRights19/07/14 10:49 AM
3

couples whose libidos don't match aren't a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 10:32 AM
1

not really; engels identified the patriarchal family as a method of controlling women to control paternity and thus inheritance, but he was talking about pre-feudal societies, and the concept of patriarchy didn't just apply to control over the household's women, but also its children, slaves, livestock and even people outside the household. in the marxist canon, patriarchs weren't just any men, but men of unusual wealth and power.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 08:27 AM
3

what is your objection?
/r/MensRights19/07/14 12:33 AM
1

the rich and powerful have been fucking men over since the dawn of riches and power. meanwhile, illegal immigrants are poor and powerless. do you really think that illegal immigrants have more influence over the future of america's youth than the captains of industry?
/r/MensRights19/07/14 12:16 AM
2

liberal in the sense of socially liberal, and liberal in the colloquial sense of left-wing. we're not classical liberals by the definition that adam smith would have used, but in modern usage, we're on the liberal side of the liberal/conservative nomenclature for left/right-ring
/r/MensRights18/07/14 11:51 PM
-6

when american students get deported on the whims of their employers, maybe you'll have a point.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 11:41 PM
-4

i really hate calling undocumented immigrants illegals. there's no such thing as an illegal person. anyways, let's not make this an oppression olympics event. to anyone sympathetic (like me) to the plight of undocumented immigrants, this sort of thing makes us look like the petty tradcon stereotype MRAs are so often portrayed as. defending men and boys includes defending the men and boys who risk life and limb sneaking across the border in hopes of a better future. after all, is there a more dis…
/r/MensRights18/07/14 10:18 PM
7

actually, to amend my initial post, the problematic ideas don't simply cease to be relevant, they're counter-productive, because they distract attention and energy from the actual economic injustices that benefit the ruling class. it actually benefits the ruling class, because it makes working men and women fight amongst themselves instead of joining together to wrest control of our society from those who would exploit us. or in full blown commie-speak, radical feminism is bourgeois ideology!
/r/MensRights18/07/14 09:55 PM
9

the concept of patriarchy is generally considered an illusion in marxist feminism, and with its omission, a lot of the feminist ideas MRAs find most problematic, like rape culture, simply cease to be relevant. essentially, we believe both women and men are oppressed, sometimes in gender-specific ways, but ultimately the root of this oppression is not gendered; where women are oppressed in ways men are not, it's because it's profitable for the ruling class to do so, and the same is true of the op…
/r/MensRights18/07/14 09:18 PM
7

i'm an honest-to-goodness marxist, so as liberal as liberal gets. i agree with you on the democratic party; the choice in the states seems to be between centre-right and far-right. here in canada, the political spectrum extends a bit further leftwards, but not as much as you guys on the civilized side of the atlantic :) i'm also a marxist feminist, which is perfectly compatible with being an MRA. it bothers me quite a bit to hear all the talk of "cultural marxism" thrown around here, because the…
/r/MensRights18/07/14 08:18 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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