TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

iNQpsMMlzAR9 Archive

View 0 posts and 628 comments by iNQpsMMlzAR9 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

My first thought when reading it. Damore explicitly said he was not speaking about their capabilities, but rather their aggregate preferences, and continues to do so. So much lying in the media about what was said in that memo.
/r/MensRights29/09/17 12:56 PM
1

Being responsible for the decisions of others isn't personal responsibility because it isn't personal. What you're describing is just-world hypothesis, which is merely rationalized apathy.
/r/MensRights29/09/17 05:46 AM
18

Which if one was going to prioritize one gender's health would actually make more sense since women already have a notably higher life expectancy.
/r/MensRights29/09/17 05:23 AM
10

maybe judges should learn logic as a course Bizarrely enough, philosophy is one of the most common majors for students entering law school. Even then, basic philosophy and logic and reasoning classes were required courses at nearly every school I even considered going to. I can never understand how common irrationality is in well-educated people.
/r/MensRights17/07/17 04:37 PM
2

Not only that, its not even necessarily votes or posters from this sub that catapult those posts to the front page. For years now it's been the case that posts in this sub skyrocket almost entirely because another sub or site links directly to them. That's not reflective of the mindset of posters here. Yet the popularity of the post and the comments posted by people arriving from the outside are all cited as betraying the mindset of not just this sub, but the MRM in general.
/r/MensRights07/07/17 06:27 PM
17

He was actually ranked 203rd and drank a couple beers before starting the matches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis)#1998:_Karsten_Braasch_vs._the_Williams_sisters
/r/MensRights30/06/17 06:37 AM
4

Fair enough about the voting point, I guess I'm still kinda reflexively hostile to it after seeing it spewed about MRAs for years. I don't doubt there are idiots out there that do in fact believe that, but wouldn't they be outliers? I haven't exactly kept up on the development of MGTOW "culture" as it were because I found it rather straightforward, and everyone I had spoken to that lived that way weren't zealous about it, it was more of just a shrug with "I'm not playing that game right now." Al…
/r/MensRights30/06/17 05:52 AM
14

they believe women are slaves to their own nature In fairness, it's not like MGTOWs invented this perspective. Women and feminists happily declare this all the time to excuse female culpability, since women have no agency. Female criminals are never at fault because they were undoubtedly misled/exploited by someone, being the impressionable, innocent beings they are. Hell, there are people that think women shouldn't even go to prison because nothing is ever really their fault. Same goes for rela…
/r/MensRights30/06/17 05:30 AM
7

Withdrawing from the TPP.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 06:52 AM
9

Not only are they inadvertently promoting her, but at the same time they're going out of their way to prove her right about them. "How dare she say we're censorious and intolerant? Ban this film now!"
/r/MensRights20/06/17 06:49 AM
5

Not entirely one-sided. Men still have zero rights towards opting out of parenthood, even when they're a minor who was legally raped. Not saying it's all roses, but women at least currently have a choice in abortion as well as adoption, so the issue isn't entirely without parallel.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 05:53 AM
8

There's a popular video of this that omits some of what immediately preceded it, namely that the woman in question appears to have likely been using bottles as a weapon: https://i.imgur.com/GccJQMq.jpg These pics are from another video of the same incident, and occur approximately 10 seconds before she's punched. You can see she's still wearing her hat, absent in the video of her being struck. Edit: Video
/r/MensRights18/04/17 09:23 AM
4

men are people also who have rights to father a child we are all fighting for the same thing at the base. So please explain how NOW, the largest feminist organization in the United States, opposed a bill to make shared parenting the default position in a divorce proceeding if feminists are truly after equality? Explain why Hillary Clinton is proposing more lenient treatment for women in a prison system where women, when controlled for criminal history, are already receiving vastly shorter senten…
/r/MensRights29/04/16 05:16 PM
4

Well, it is how equality of outcome works, illustrating why pushing for equality of outcome is absurd.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 02:47 PM
6

Not just sentence length, but incarceration rates as well. Women are nearly twice as likely as men to evade incarceration entirely. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002
/r/MensRights28/04/16 02:35 PM
2

Just a couple posts below this one is a story about numerous feminist groups including NOW, the largest feminist group in the country, rallying against a shared parenting bill in Florida. This is not the first time it's done something like this. Mainstream feminism -- not the fringe, not a few bad apples simply tarnishing the image. And it got this way in no small part because of enablers saying "hey, they're not all like this", instead of calling it out and reigning it in. To prove to people it…
/r/MensRights09/04/16 08:06 PM
1

The problem, as with most polls, is the wording is somewhat ambiguous. The question the article is referring to asked, "If the military draft were reinstated, would you favor or oppose drafting women as well as men?" 52% of all respondents either "strongly" or "somewhat" favored, while the remainder "strongly" or "somewhat" opposed, or were "not sure". So insofar as this article is concerned, the only question referring to the draft does have majority support from all respondents. Yet demographi…
/r/MensRights25/03/16 12:53 AM
1

All I saw was that this seems to be hourly average wage by company, with no adjustments performed for types of positions or experience. It seems to simply be looking for how many men and women fall into certain hourly pay brackets in each company. Every company with more than 250 employees will be required by law to publish the difference between the average pay of their male and female employees
/r/MensRights20/03/16 10:43 AM
1

It's no one's job to add context to court statements but your own. You literally swear that every word about to come out of your mouth is 100% truth. Shit gets real in there, and if he didn't recognize that, it's on him. You don't want people to think you really mean what you say, don't swear a fucking oath that you do.
/r/MensRights20/03/16 09:05 AM
13

The President has preached feminist bullshit in the goddamned State of the Union Address. It is certainly not limited to Reddit.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 05:07 AM
11

Stop whining like they do. The message isn't "Look at how bad men have it", it's pointing out that this isn't a women's issue when both genders have it just as bad, and it shouldn't be cast as such. It's the unnecessary gynocentric divisiveness that irks people. If feminists didn't constantly harp about how oppressive societal standards are solely to women, I doubt any of us would be seeing this. It's less "Woe is me", more "STFU hypocrite."
/r/MensRights16/03/16 12:14 AM
0

What would be awesome is if this was all a devious attempt to get get society to acknowledge the double-standard of allowing MGM. Get everyone worked up over how awful it would be to mutilate little girls no matter how minor the alteration, then when everyone's attention is focused on it turn around and say, "Know what, you're right. It's awful. So why are we okay with doing it to little boys?" Don't believe that's what's happening, but it's a nice daydream.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 02:59 PM
3

Which is exactly why we need to start enforcing these unjust laws equally. When attractive women suffer injustice, people miraculously start to care about changing it. I've seen this in comment threads for articles where this has happened. People first start asking "Who would say this is a crime?" Which leads to "Okay, now imagine a man did it with a girl." "That's different." "Why?"... It makes people analyze the double standard. But as it is now, it's usually "Pervert deserves jail," when it's…
/r/MensRights16/12/15 10:22 PM
5

Which is in no small part based on circular reasoning regarding said statistics. Men are punished more frequently and more severely because they're inherently more dangerous. Proof they're more dangerous? Look at how much more frequently and severely they're punished. You see this line of thinking trotted out whenever someone pulls the antiquated "Men are 99% of all rapists (because at one time it was legally impossible for women to be)" stat, and how the vast majority of DV arrests are men (bec…
/r/MensRights16/12/15 12:05 AM
11

Both sides are arguably understandable. I hate this bullshit equivocation. Anyone's side is understandable. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and Satan are understandable. Whether or not you're morally justifiable is always the relevant question.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 11:42 AM
5

Thought the same. There was a DNA study from a while back that found humans are descended from 40% of all men and 80% of all women that have lived. Don't have the time to find it right now but I remember that ratio.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 08:18 PM
1

and I’m like, ‘Yeah, when hell freezes over’ in my head. I imagine that's exactly what's going on when feminists say they're working on men's issues.
/r/MensRights19/11/15 11:40 AM
1

In corporate America at least it does tend to be seen as a certificate of conformity. I've had several friends who work in HR relate tales of this sentiment verbalized, sometimes unconsciously, by management. Some of it I'm sure is old-fashioned belief in indication of work ethic, as you've mentioned. But I've frequently heard managers express that it allows them to trust the applicant, because they've been "screened" by academia. It's a sort of pedigree. "This (self-taught/experienced, but non-…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 04:20 PM
1

And for the love of god don't use bullshit feminist lingo like "concern trolling". I don't disagree with the rest of what you say, but concern trolling is absolutely a real thing -- it just isn't at all what GP is doing.
/r/MensRights18/11/15 03:45 PM
2

Which in my experience is a combination of the person doing the hiring thinking, "Well I spent the time and money -- if it's good enough for me, it should be good enough for everyone", and a degree being a mark of someone that will do everything they're told for four+ years and pay for the privilege. Don't get me wrong, education is incredibly important, and people that attend college for the knowledge are doing the right thing if that's what works for them. But college degrees are incredibly ov…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 08:14 AM
5

juggling stats to cry opression is That's OP's entire point.
/r/MensRights26/10/15 11:58 PM
10

Parent responds with "anecdotal" evidence to a point that was made with zero evidence, and yet your distaste lies with parent's experience? based on statistics and such It was an unsourced statement from an opinion piece on CNN. There were zero "statistics" backing up their point. So why is your rigor being used solely to refute parent's rebuttal if the original point didn't have any substance to begin with?
/r/MensRights21/10/15 11:35 PM
1

Outrageous, isn't it?
/r/MensRights12/09/15 12:50 AM
2

I disagree, and it's specifically towards her work as a photographer. You're not supposed to interact with your environment in this career. In this one instance she not only trips up a man fleeing from police with a child, but kicks a young girl. If you can't keep your filming of the story separate from participation in the story, you're not a very good photographer, and don't deserve to be one. It sucks that this is going to impact her children, but that shouldn't be a defense against poor care…
/r/MensRights11/09/15 11:44 PM
1

Your question is based on a false premise So I'm left to assume then that you weren't accusing the sub of being angry or enraged over this, then? That's good to hear -- it disappoints me when people do that in here. That being the case, you might want to choose your words more carefully in the future. If you merely mean "annoyed", try to steer clear of saying "outraged". In most people's minds, it carries a strong connotation of anger.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 10:51 PM
1

You are literally doing to me what you are claiming I'm doing to the people of this sub. No, that would be me saying you're either angry or annoyed (annoyed is a rather clumsy synonym for outraged, by the way). I said nothing about your emotional state. Still haven't answered my question, either.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 08:24 PM
1

When I hit "save" I figured you'd duck the question and double down on semantics.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 08:02 PM
2

If we're going to play semantics, nearly every definition of outrage contains the very word "anger" and/or violence, including the one you're falling back on. Even the definition of indignation you're choosing to apply to the sub includes anger, if the OED means anything. So I'll ask more specifically: Is it possible to imagine that things get discussed here without anger? That perhaps we're actually just calmly pointing out discrepancies or double standards? Or must we be angry in your mind?
/r/MensRights11/09/15 07:42 PM
1

That may be the case, but think of the people within earshot that see how ignorant that behavior is in response to calmly stated facts. You're not going to change the mind of an obstinate fool, but that fool is demonstrating to more rational people who has the better argument.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 07:18 PM
2

That's not an answer to my question.
/r/MensRights11/09/15 07:02 PM
1

Why are we outraged over this? Who said anyone was? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing the terminology used in the article is improper, but why does simply pointing something out necessitate vitriolic rage?
/r/MensRights11/09/15 12:33 AM
4

We can't criticize rape culture unless we are sex deprived strawmen? Which is literally the only direct MRM criticism the poster ever makes in the entire rant. Everything else is placed simply to add color to it. "You're just like racists and dangerous gamers, and you can't admit it to yourself because the truth hurts!" One tired straw-man accusation that doesn't make sense when you even momentarily acknowledge the existence of gay and female MRAs, and SRD is hailing this like divine clairvoyanc…
/r/MensRights02/08/15 08:38 PM
2

...might not just be harmful, but might make you the bad guy in the civil rights movie your kids will see in thirty years. This is interesting, because I truly believe this is going to be how people who resist the MRM are going to be seen in thirty years. "You fought people trying to keep infants from having pieces of their dicks chopped off? You argued against due process and equal legal treatment for men?"
/r/MensRights02/08/15 07:55 PM
2

What exactly are you going to claim the younger person in a statutory situation gets other than lies about how 'I love you and you're different than the other kids your age' etc? That they get sex they want? Yes, that's exactly what I'd say they get, as far as we're talking about the accuracy of your analogy. What else does anyone get in a sexual relationship?
/r/MensRights31/07/15 11:23 PM
2

In this scenario the elderly person is getting absolutely nothing -- they're being conned. This situation is purely predatory, so I'd say the analogy doesn't match the argument well. Following this analogy would be like saying no one except other elderly people should be allowed to conduct financial transactions with the elderly because some people might try to con them. 'Punish the cons, don't outlaw the commerce' would be the counter.
/r/MensRights31/07/15 11:13 PM
-4

upvotes Not this old shit again. What makes you so certain it's r/mensrights stalwarts and not trolls/brigaders doing the upvoting?
/r/MensRights31/07/15 05:25 AM
10

Think you might be right. I've said some pretty harsh things about feminism and SJWs in the past. What got me on the list was a comment about air-conditioner settings. As luck would have it, it was voted to +5.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 07:39 PM
3

Hence the reason I created an account solely for SJW-touchy issues. Got real old being instantly downvoted below threshold commenting on something like a movie or dog pic because some other comment pissed off some SJWs a week or two prior. Proud I made the list, though.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 05:21 AM
3

...a majority of my posts here are critical of the MRM - and I'm on that list, too. There's your problem, your dissent is impure. On the list you go.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 05:19 AM
6

As my grandmother used to say: When you're too cold, you can always put on more clothes. When you're too hot, only so far you can go. Plus, I'd like to know where this was from: "Researchers had their hands on the controls at an insurance office for a month. And when they warmed the place from 68 to 77 degrees, typos went down by 44 percent and productivity went up by 150 percent." I'd always been told colder offices are more productive because workers are more awake and alert -- the warmer you …
/r/MensRights24/07/15 12:00 AM
1

Then I imagine you'd probably welcome more discussion like this, right? Seeing as the legitimate meaning of "creepy" is being diluted with "man I don't find attractive", calling people out on its misuse preserves the legitimate meaning.
/r/MensRights19/07/15 03:52 AM
24

"The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." John Gilmore
/r/MensRights15/07/15 07:56 AM
1

Insurance isn't a right. It's a gambling based service. Required by law. You can choose whether or not you gamble. You cannot choose whether or not you have health or car insurance.
/r/MensRights10/07/15 09:31 PM
2

That's what this conversation is about, fucktard. And I'm the one upset? Methinks thou doth project too much.
/r/MensRights10/07/15 02:45 AM
6

You're literally inventing reasons to be upset. Stop it. I don't have to be upset to call the admins untrustworthy hypocrites. But you can pretend I am if it makes it easier to deal with.
/r/MensRights10/07/15 02:30 AM
4

conclude that reddit is not a safe platform to express their ideas One could easily conclude by the anti-speech logic employed by many on this site that this fits the bill, when posts on your own sub are being buried by folks outside of it, and posts outside being mass-downvoted by default just because of what subs you're associated with. Plus after articles like this one, where this sub is specifically named and targeted, many here are bothered over what they see as selective enforcement over t…
/r/MensRights10/07/15 02:23 AM
22

Pretty sure parent was channeling the admins' definition of harassment, not their personal one.
/r/MensRights10/07/15 01:13 AM
5

We don't even agree with each other half the time, and we sure as hell don't ban people simply for disagreeing with us -- which puts this sub far behind more than can be easily counted. So no, it isn't.
/r/MensRights06/07/15 03:53 AM
1

As a men's rights supporter, I feel that all men's issues should be protected, regardless of whether I agree with them. Most of us here I'm certain feel the same way. We may disagree with what TRP has to say, but we've defended your right to say it, and will do so in the future.
/r/MensRights01/07/15 11:28 PM
1

Heh yeah, sorry about that. For what it's worth, I didn't think you were crying "Godwin" to shut it down, I just refuse to use /s tags or anything to indicate I'm being goofy -- it's lost in text sometimes, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights29/06/15 01:01 AM
5

Technically it isn't. Parent was discussing the political tactics of the SA, which predated the nazi party. Neither Hitler nor the nazis were being used as a direct point of comparison. Not that it matters because Godwin's law is just a stupid meme (he even admits this). There's a reason people constantly resort to comparison to nazis; it's by far the most recognizable manifestation of fascism to most westerners. Go any more highbrow and the same people that whine "Godwin" like it's some kind of…
/r/MensRights28/06/15 06:55 PM
4

I've always felt this is one of those things feminists say that's actually true, just not the way they say it is. Women being viewed as weak in society means we give women's issues constant priority, which results in apathy towards men's discrimination -- the source of most of the suffering facing men. The fact that we view women as weak bestows upon them a number of institutional advantages -- Default male domestic violence arrests, advantageous child custody and alimony awards, drastically une…
/r/MensRights28/06/15 05:42 AM
0

Nice generalization there. Irony aside, this sub tends to be more knowledgeable and specific about the different flavors of feminism than anywhere else I've seen on reddit, /r/feminism included. Ask anyone what they think of Christina Hoff Summers for a try.
/r/MensRights27/06/15 05:15 AM
0

I realized some people knew he was just making a joke. We all knew he was making a joke, just some decided to, you know, have a conversation around the topic. Discussion forums are kinda' known for that sort of thing. But pretending we don't realize that and are instead trying to seize upon a comedian's jokes and pervert them into a gender-warcry is an understandably easy way to close your mind to all that.
/r/MensRights26/06/15 09:34 PM
0

Alright, just hang on a sec... you ready? This is gonna blow your fucking mind: We realized he was just making a joke. Hope that doesn't ruin your indignation.
/r/MensRights26/06/15 08:53 AM
2

I can tell from the tone in here that people don't like actually doing anything. Why am I not surprised the point would sail over your head? I didn't say not to take action, I said don't bitch (see the irony?) that all people do in a discussion forum is discuss things. In case you haven't noticed, there are folks even on this site that are doing their damnedest to make even that as difficult as possible. If you truly want to help, we don't need people pissing on everyone here because you want th…
/r/MensRights21/06/15 07:11 PM
1

Look, I can sympathize with your feelings of frustration, but try not berate an entire discussion forum because it's not an army that's marching in your desired direction. People come in here to discuss things and inform themselves -- bitching about people bitching instead of joining an organized bitch campaign just makes you sound unhinged, and unable to grasp the function of a discussion forum.
/r/MensRights21/06/15 11:07 AM
3

I also guess it doesn't matter that the lib outlet I'm sure you get your "news" from is worse than Fox could ever hope to be. So if one happens to believe Fox news is a shitty tabloid, that means they must be a liberal that watches MSNBC? Fox's "fair and balanced" mantra is a logical fallacy, for crying out loud. Just because someone points this out doesn't mean they're your sworn ideological enemy on the opposite end of the spectrum. That's a seriously simplistic and unnecessarily adversarial m…
/r/MensRights16/06/15 10:18 PM
10

A trans woman pointed out to me that the fact that "dick is abundant and low value" has become a feminist mantra does a disservice to trans women and conflates gender and genitals. It was all good until she realized it was making women feel bad, then it became a problem.
/r/MensRights14/06/15 09:43 PM
1

That's an incredibly weak password. No wonder it was taken over by radfems.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 07:32 PM
12

According to the definition of rational people, no. But take a look at this article, which was published a little over a month ago: https://archive.is/W0YsY (Direct Link) http://motherboard.vice.com/read/reddit-cofounder-says-women-haters-on-reddit-are-deplorable In it, Pao is referred to as receiving "intense abuse" from the userbase, the article is from the perspective of Reddit's cofounder bemoaning the misogyny (sound familiar?) on the site, and this sub is specifically named as being a hotb…
/r/MensRights11/06/15 05:08 AM
4

It's good that you feel comforted by the admins' official statement today, but some of us have seen a few too many articles like this one to simply take them at their word. Remember, radfems see criticism of feminism as synonymous with misogyny, and this sub is incredibly anti-feminist. Watch that definition of "harassment" shift.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 10:13 PM
7

I used the high horse comment because many people who have not been circumcised look down at people who have Find me a single comment in this sub by anyone saying this. And no one is talking about you, they're talking about the definition of mutilation, which is absolutely accurate with regards to circumcision. You're the one attaching a stigma to it, and to be perfectly honest, I think you're doing it deliberately. From the OED: mutilate, v.: trans. To render (a thing, esp. a book or other docu…
/r/MensRights09/06/15 09:12 PM
14

Poster: Yes, I know they are banning discussion of MGM in a thread about FGM; but none the less, I appreciate them calling mutilation mutilation. Your reply: You can get off your high horse and stop calling me mutilated, thanks. I'm very happy I was circumcised as a baby. The person you were responding to wasn't talking about you at all, they were talking about mutilation being mutilation, which it is according to every dictionary definition of the word. Your comment was arrogant, inflammatory, …
/r/MensRights09/06/15 08:42 PM
3

got over 400 upvotes There was a comment from another user a while back I'm too lazy to dig up that explains it well, but whenever you see a comment with hundreds of votes in this sub it usually means that thread is being linked to from elsewhere. Most of the comments even on front-page threads here rarely get much into the double-digits. So it's incredibly unfair to characterize the sub based on vote counts and cherrypicked comments -- especially a sub that's trolled and brigaded as much as thi…
/r/MensRights09/06/15 08:29 PM
-1

Therefore we should avoid speaking about the mrm as if its been important to gay rights. No one was, though. So were you just concern trolling? Because: Let's not highjack anything here I'm not accusing the MRM of hijacking it ... certainly fucking looks like it. And you were responding to a person who was talking about the stance of most individual MRAs, not the MRM.
/r/MensRights09/06/15 07:04 PM
-2

I'm just saying we should be careful not to overstate our contribution to the gay rights movement. So as I was saying earlier, when plenty of us have contributed to the gay rights movement, we're not allowed to say so?
/r/MensRights09/06/15 07:59 AM
9

Why is it hijacking? Think of overlap -- MRAs didn't pop out of an incubator last week and choose one pet issue to follow. Plenty of us have thrown our support in for a myriad of other causes over the years, and get pissed when we see caustic ideologues try to "claim" them. Ask a few MRAs here about Atheism Doubleplusgood, or GamerGate.
/r/MensRights09/06/15 05:30 AM
3

Or maybe they naively wanted to serve their country and defend those they love. Yeah, people like that are preyed upon by the powerful, but it's not like that's what they're asking for. Those "ridiculous" sacrifices are responsible for a hell of a lot of well-being, even if they're misused.
/r/MensRights09/06/15 05:16 AM
3

But do we really have to always have a "but what about the men" comment thrown in on every issue? This issue is essentially "what about the women?" Women are now exposing themselves to things that have traditionally been something mainly men have been exposed to. And we're seeing, coincidentally enough, their "suicide rate is so high that it approaches that of male veterans". (emphasis mine) The issue isn't about women's suicide rate, it's about veterans' suicide rates. But as so frequently seen…
/r/MensRights09/06/15 05:06 AM
6

I know it's not generally agreed upon in this sub This image problem feminism has extends far beyond just this sub, and please don't assume we don't know the difference. Christina Hoff Summers is practically revered here.
/r/MensRights07/06/15 12:23 AM
2

Chief Executive Officer of one of the largest social media sites in world, yet somehow she's struggling to find a voice and tell her story.
/r/MensRights03/06/15 05:35 AM
3

You forgot "being found guilty regardless."
/r/MensRights02/06/15 09:29 PM
2

One does not negate the other. Who said it did?
/r/MensRights31/05/15 06:24 PM
4

It should be criticized for not focusing on the larger problem. Which is what's happening here.
/r/MensRights31/05/15 06:21 PM
9

Gay or straight, childless twenty-something women outearn men by 8%. http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/02/24/childless-women-in-their-twenties-out-earn-men-so/
/r/MensRights30/05/15 06:48 PM
13

Every time I hear this statement, it seems that gap keeps growing like a fish story. 77 cents, 75 cents, seven tenths of a cent...
/r/MensRights30/05/15 06:44 PM
8

do not try to reason with them I'd add one caveat to this if we're dealing with forums and such: remember the lurkers. You might be arguing with an irrational person, but plenty of rational people are watching you do it, and they can tell the difference. Plenty of this went on with regards to GamerGate, as well.
/r/MensRights26/05/15 09:24 PM
3

One thing that has constantly irritated me about this condescending attitude towards the MRM from a lot of GGers is this idea that GG was a wholly separate entity that the MRM is completely ignorant to. I have news for you: MRAs have been a part of GG from day one. I know I was, as was every hardcore gamer I know of that identified as an MRA or egalitarian. I am sick to death of being preached to about tactics that we had a partial hand in advocating or implementing. The fact that dipshits like …
/r/MensRights26/05/15 07:58 PM
8

I'd be happy if TRP got taken down. Not the biggest fan of that sub, I'd be pissed if it got banned because I'm a believer in free speech. Hell, I'd even defend the existence of AMR. They're total fuckwits, but even they deserve a place to be so. Shit like /r/jailbait was a different beast entirely, but I can't see any morally justifiable reason to silence TRP. That would be straight-up thought policing. Though in one regard, I almost think it would be worth censoring it just to see Reddit shoot…
/r/MensRights26/05/15 06:37 PM
1

And thus the phrase "sexual assault" becomes even less meaningful. Speaking of which, do violators of this law end up on the sex offender's registry?
/r/MensRights26/05/15 06:00 PM
1

This IS a part of patriarchy. Even broken clocks...
/r/MensRights23/05/15 08:39 PM
1

...arguing that men should be forcibly restricted into the same warrior role they have been in for thousands of years. We're still talking about water guns, right?
/r/MensRights20/05/15 07:27 AM
2

I just call myself an egalitarian and forget about it. As an egalitarian that frequently self-describes as an MRA simply to illustrate my current focus, I say call yourself whatever you like. I'm advocating for awareness and just treatment, not trying to get anyone to wave a flag. Think infants deserve to keep their genitals intact? Think men and boys suffer from social problems that need addressing? Then we're on the same team, however you feel comfortable referring to yourself.
/r/MensRights20/05/15 06:47 AM
2

You mean you didn't get the memo you were supposed to set fire to at least one theater showing this movie? Where were you when we convened the secret MRA conclave last week?
/r/MensRights17/05/15 07:48 AM
2

Reddit's codebase is open-source. https://github.com/reddit/reddit
/r/MensRights16/05/15 01:11 AM
1

Says a lot about how fucked the SJW worldview is -- not even Fox needs to twist truths to paint you as a lunatic.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 06:04 AM
8

Love how she constantly mentions harassment alongside us, without providing any evidence whatsoever it's occurring at our hands. Reminds me of Bush Jr. name-dropping Iraq every time he mentioned Al-Qaeda. "Well we never actually said they did it, you just assumed..." These articles also curiously never link to the sub, so readers can see for themselves.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 05:31 AM
2

You know you've got the moral high ground when you're advocating eugenics with a straight face.
/r/MensRights15/05/15 01:19 AM
1

I'd go a step farther and clarify it's not even people of a gender responsible for anything -- both genders are responsible for the problems men face. Feminist talking heads might usually be female, and usually the loudest voices, but there's no shortage of men responsible for perpetuating men's issues, feminist and not.
/r/MensRights13/05/15 07:51 PM
1

Again you can't answer the simple question I ask up front: Don't you think it would have been a more masterful demonstration of rational discourse if you had said something like this from the beginning to parent instead of being dismissive? Where was all of this knowledge in the beginning? That's all I was ever interested in pointing out. Parent came into this topic, made a simple point, and you flippantly waved your hand at it, in spite of obviously having a great deal to say about it. But ever…
/r/MensRights10/05/15 06:00 AM
1

If you had written this wall of text in response to parent instead of flippantly linking to a specific section of a page (yes I fucking read the page and know what it's about, how the hell else would I have known to link another part?) and dismissing his point offhand, we wouldn't be here. he stopped replying and you stepped in and seem weirdly dedicated to defending this misreading, but whatever man. No I'm not, my only point was indicating you were more guilty of irrational argumentation (hell…
/r/MensRights10/05/15 04:41 AM
0

asserting something, no matter whether you say "x is clearly the case", is never justification. ever. Your initial reply to OP said nothing except a link to a page illustrating why name-calling isn't a proper argument. You did nothing to justify your argument. You ignored all else he wrote, and focused on one small part of his post. He provided more justification for his position than your offhand dismissal, which was truncated to exclude his elucidation. So if you were familiar that one can't s…
/r/MensRights10/05/15 01:55 AM
2

asserted obviousness without demonstration That's... rudimentary to the concept of "obvious", no?
/r/MensRights10/05/15 01:29 AM
1

What data-gathering methods are even capable of determining something to that precision? Margin of error usually becomes a concern at much less precise values.
/r/MensRights10/05/15 01:17 AM
1

Especially when one of her beard gripes are "they're scratchy".
/r/MensRights10/05/15 01:10 AM
1

Your own link has this one: DH2. Responding to Tone. The next level up we start to see responses to the writing, rather than the writer. The lowest form of these is to disagree with the author's tone. E.g. I can't believe the author dismisses intelligent design in such a cavalier fashion. Though better than attacking the author, this is still a weak form of disagreement. It matters much more whether the author is wrong or right than what his tone is. Especially since tone is so hard to judge. So…
/r/MensRights10/05/15 12:43 AM
3

...in their lifetimes. I know it seems pedantic, but to me the title seemed to suggest that 50% of all lesbians are currently in a violent relationship, which seemed absurd.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 10:04 PM
2

The program didn't crash. It worked. So it's not a bug, it's a feature?
/r/MensRights08/05/15 10:03 AM
2

Curious what the "enthusiastic consent" crowd have to say about this kind of thing.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 09:07 AM
2

Yeah, far too many WTFs in this article.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 11:15 PM
3

To be honest, your title is a bit patronizing. Not "rape culture", but the "get your head around it" part. It's kinda like saying "let me help drive this knowledge into your thick skulls." That, added with the contentious topic of "rape culture" (a phrase much of this community feels was misappropriated from a men's issue), you cannot be surprised you've received resistance on this.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 11:03 PM
2

Would this survive longer if the phrase "rape culture" wasn't there? I doubt it. What would you have to talk about, then? Isn't rape culture your entire subject?
/r/MensRights07/05/15 10:15 PM
4

Today close to 90 per cent of current war casualties are civilians, the majority of whom are women and children. And one of the ways they arrive at this figure is considering all fighting-age males to be enemy combatants. The majority of civilians are women and children because they're fighting by rules which make it impossible for men to be considered civilians.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 08:57 PM
3

If parent had offered the phrase in a vacuum then extrapolated from it to paint the whole, yes it would be. But GP specifically asked "Give me an exmaple of a feminist..." as though they didn't exist. Asking for an anecdote, then complaining the example is anecdotal is a disingenuous trap.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 08:48 PM
23

What a fucking yellow fluff piece. I know my professors would be upset with me just running though it line by line, but this doesn't deserve respect. Reddit knows it has a problem with misogyny, racism, homophobia, and various other forms of bigotry. First fucking line. Before anything else, it has a problem with a specific form of sexism. Race discrimination in general is a problem. Homophobia in general is a problem. But more dire than both of those? Discrimination against women. Not humans in…
/r/MensRights07/05/15 06:36 AM
23

So one absolute bitch does something You asked parent for an example. Now you're complaining you got one? Familiar with the phrase "moving the goalposts"?
/r/MensRights07/05/15 05:16 AM
3

Oh I agree. Just wanted to point out that one of the things we do actively combat is the "women are wonderful" effect applied to mass media, and people hate us for it the same way. Look at how often people complain on this sub that we're "badmouthing women" when we point these things out. I wasn't saying the description of us was fair, I was saying they actually have a point, just ironically not the one they think they're making. Feminists tend to hate a depiction of women that's anything less t…
/r/MensRights06/05/15 11:41 PM
3

It teaches them that women lie, that they cheat, trick and manipulate. You know, on this account they're actually correct, we do teach this. They just omit the context: Women aren't special -- they're capable of being just as vile or virtuous as anyone else.
/r/MensRights06/05/15 09:47 PM
1

Comorbidity, perhaps? Men with NPD are likely to have a mental disorder along with it, whereas women aren't?
/r/MensRights06/05/15 12:50 AM
23

Why not try to accept your body for what it is without comparing it to anyone else, male or female? Then this sentiment flies out the window when the author writes: While a man is valued for his warm and fuzzy demeanor, a woman is valued as a sexual object. And the women in question don’t look like they’ve ever entered an all-you-can-eat Buffalo Wing contest like their Dad Bod brethren. Couldn't even maintain preach-practice parity 'till the end of the article.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 10:23 PM
2

a feminist would explain this is that men cannot be objectified because they have a position of power Which is what I would suggest lies at the core of all of feminism's strife against the MRM -- they don't like evidence that undermines the assumption that women are asynchronously disadvantaged in every area of society. When you point out that male babies are the ones that still suffer genital mutilation, point out drastically unequal suicide, homelessness and sentencing rates, childhood behavio…
/r/MensRights04/05/15 07:46 PM
1

You're conflating liberal arts with critical theory, which is more of a component of sociology/anthropology. Liberal arts encompass far more than these disciplines -- philosophy, linguistics, etc. Even then, misapplication of the discipline doesn't mean sociology is worthless. If it was, I doubt you'd see politicians shelling out the money they do adding sociology majors to their campaign staff. As for the dismissal of English and History majors, and the appalling ignorance I've witnessed from o…
/r/MensRights02/05/15 10:23 PM
29

Liberal Arts might be useless when it comes to making money, perhaps. But far from useless to society. Education degrees you could say the same thing about, really. We might not be willing to compensate people that quench the metal of human discipline with wisdom, but I don't think for a second we'd be better off without them. Even the enlightenment of bar-tending philosophy majors eventually trickles back into society-at-large. We are all the poorer when we dissuade these people from realizing …
/r/MensRights02/05/15 11:28 AM
5

I personally disagree, look at donglegate for example. A determined busybody can easily ruin your livelihood in today's world. Someone willing to put their name on what they believe is indeed bold and respectable. But you can't fault someone for not wanting to expose themselves to petty retribution simply because they want to defend or refute an idea. Ideas stand on their own merit.
/r/MensRights02/05/15 12:04 AM
6

Doubleplusgood universities offer students a safe space to get away from the crimethink and triggers. Universities are where you're supposed to challenge ideas. Doesn't give me much hope for our future if students are fleeing from them.
/r/MensRights01/05/15 11:56 PM
2

The investigator doesn't look too concerned about this. It actually looks like he's trying to stifle a smile.
/r/MensRights01/05/15 11:40 PM
6

Advice Animals is a completely unrelated sub. Many here feel the same about TRP. And your response is completely unrelated to my point. Regardless of how similar or dissimilar these subs actually are, my point was asking what difference does the comparative numbers of a sub's subscribers make? much younger sub and is set to take down MRM in a few days. It's like you see this as a competition. If you think having a greater number of subscribers means that TRP supplants MR in relevance, then Advic…
/r/MensRights01/05/15 10:16 PM
5

Who cares? So does Advice Animals. If popularity=quality, Subway is the finest cuisine on Earth. This kind of factoid is no more relevant than AMR using the quantity of Google search results to prove/disprove a point. Plus, what do subscribers really mean, anyway? I've been here for years and I'm still not subscribed.
/r/MensRights01/05/15 10:02 PM
1

The last guy to respond to me said that if I was actually subscribed here, I would have heard evidence like this hundreds of times before. And he is absolutely right, I have. First, please don't immediately assume because this is the Men's Rights forum you're speaking to a man. Second, if you knew OP's post wasn't whining, and instead a sardonic dig at an opposing viewpoint, why did you dismiss it as simply whining? Your reply is basically to the effect that our ideas would have more traction if…
/r/MensRights01/05/15 09:43 PM
3

I could swear I remember once reading here a study showing that unattractiveness had a more pronounced negative effect on one's job prospects for men than it did for women in the corporate world. Might be mistaken, but hoping someone knows the one I'm thinking of.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 09:31 PM
9

makes me think about unsubscribing I'm amazed how many people that never post here come out of the woodwork to tell us all they're cancelling their subscription to a sub that if they were actually subscribed to, they wouldn't misinterpret so badly. This post isn't a whine, it's counter-evidence to the idea that women aren't allowed to thrive in the corporate world. If you actually were subscribed to this sub, you'd have heard that hundreds of times before.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 09:11 PM
2

Is this a trick question?
/r/MensRights30/04/15 09:04 AM
2

It's about discrimination against men, and ending it. You haven't perchance arrived at that conclusion in your course of constantly looking for someone to blame, would you? Who, for example, is the outside discriminator responsible for unequal suicide rates? The MRM is about addressing the problems facing men. Not all of these problems are the result of discrimination. Try not to see the situation as bifurcated -- it can blind you to the complexity of the real problems. Again back to the OP grap…
/r/MensRights30/04/15 08:50 AM
2

discrimination Again... no one said that.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 08:22 AM
2

Come on, you and I both know that question is absurd. Why not just ask me how to fix the Middle East? Pretty sure that would put a big dent in combat deaths for a lot of places.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 07:42 AM
2

Re-read the title of OP's graphic and instead ask how my comment relates to that.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 07:25 AM
2

The bin. So you were lying?! After all we've been through?
/r/MensRights30/04/15 07:19 AM
1

For starters we could stop telling men they have life on a silver platter, and don't know what it's like to fall on the wrong side of gender inequality. Can't imagine that would hurt anyone.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 07:14 AM
2

You suggested discussion, and reading the source material. So what place is there for the infographic you just said you're not advocating excluding?
/r/MensRights30/04/15 06:43 AM
1

If the infographic says nothing about why the stats are the way they are, then why are they mens rights issues? Seriously? One gender is doing 97% of the dying in combat, 76% of the dying at another's hands, 80% of the dying at their own, and their chances of winning custody of their children is around the same as guessing the roll of a die, and you need the problem with this explained? Since this is /r/MensRights and everything, I used my CONTEXT CLUES to make the judgement that these stats are…
/r/MensRights30/04/15 06:39 AM
0

Out of curiosity, is the reason women comprise a minority of STEM positions as matter-of-fact with you as your hand-waving of men just being innately more violent? Women just aren't interested and that's that? Or is there a number of other complicated factors in play there?
/r/MensRights30/04/15 06:17 AM
4

You're suggesting the discussion in lieu of other forms of awareness, yes? You're telling OP to stop doing this to have the discussion.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 06:12 AM
3

So yeah I guess I do have a problem with the graphic. I'd have problems with a feminist graphic without context as well, if you'd care to find me one. Alright, there it is again, the "context" mantra is what's throwing me for a loop. I thought the piechart was incredibly straightforward, and couldn't fathom what the hell it was you were going on about with regards to "context". But rereading your original post, and seeing how you strawmanned the hell out of OP's intent, I'm assuming you're readi…
/r/MensRights30/04/15 05:58 AM
3

At least military intelligence comes with context and not in the form of three or four pie charts. I'm honestly not even sure what your point is here. What is your gripe, exactly? Because you're all over the place. Is it OP posting the information? Is it you feel the MRM has too little action? What is it about a simple graphic with a few stats on it that has you so bent out of shape?
/r/MensRights30/04/15 05:11 AM
8

Information is there to inform, not enact change. Your criticism is like saying the military shouldn't conduct reconnaissance operations because intelligence doesn't directly accomplish objectives. The two work in tandem, and tossing one out because it isn't the other is ignorant.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 04:18 AM
2

Practically every comment in this thread is talking about the abstract ideas of rape and age of consent. Almost no one is talking about her specifically in any way whatsoever, so I'm not really sure who you're addressing.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 12:07 AM
2

Anchor: ...to hatch a false sexual harassment allegation... Why do I doubt he'd be downplaying an accusation of sexual battery into simply "harassment" if there wasn't video making it obvious the girl was lying?
/r/MensRights28/04/15 11:54 PM
3

I don't see how I am trying to stifle discussion. This is last thing I want to do. Apologies, then. Seen so many trolls and attempts to hijack/redirect discussion here I tend to be a little hypervigilant about it. I'd say it's a good representation of some people's opinion, definitely. But the MRM in general is against any kind of... I dunno, dogma, code of ethics, etc. It's hard to really pin down a good, centralized place to see what the prevailing MRA ideological climate is like. Which I supp…
/r/MensRights28/04/15 05:32 AM
4

How is that in any way related to my comment. You're trying to stifle discussion under the guise of how the discussion "presents" the movement. But this isn't a PR hub. It's not the MRM's official Twitter page. It's not a press conference. It's a discussion forum, and you're trying to stifle discussion with shame. How people interact here directly influences how people are this movement. How people interact here isn't even influenced by "the movement". Radical feminists post here. Trolls post he…
/r/MensRights28/04/15 04:45 AM
10

More pedantry that goes out of its way to miss the point. Posts like OP's are part of why MR has an image problem. Miss the point? I explicitly acknowledged and agreed with that part of your statement before I said anything else. But by all means, don't let that restrain the torrent of thin-skinned insults. The point of The Boy Who Cried Wolf isn't that we should be skeptical of cries for help , it's a caution against abusing social assistance under false pretences. The moral isn't directed at t…
/r/MensRights27/04/15 11:15 PM
8

I'm saying not to make broad statements condemning all women claiming to be rape victims as liars. OP never said that, though. Only a fool would read "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" and come out of it thinking "Boys are a bunch of fucking liars, fuck every one of 'em who cries wolf."
/r/MensRights27/04/15 10:47 PM
10

I agree completely with the first part of your post, but: You look like a fucking moron when you make broad statements that encourage people to doubt any and all victims. Our legal system requires us to doubt any and all victims. For every crime.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 10:36 PM
3

This has nothing to do with men. Well technically neither does infant circumcision, right? Because your standpoint is purely semantic, just like every poster that complains "This isn't a men's rights issue." From the FAQ: The Men's Rights subreddit is a place for those who wish to discuss men's rights and the ways said rights are infringed upon. Decades of one-sided vilification of males is absolutely responsible for a fuckload of issues men face today. Dearth of compassion for males stems from …
/r/MensRights27/04/15 10:26 PM
2

This isn't a movement. It's a discussion forum. Like literally every other part of Reddit. We discuss things here.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 10:16 PM
3

So that was basically just a long-winded "yes"?
/r/MensRights27/04/15 10:02 PM
3

So we shouldn't address it because it's not something that specifically and exclusively benefits men? Don't you think that kinda sounds like something a radical feminist would say about women's rights?
/r/MensRights27/04/15 09:48 PM
1

From the FAQ: If r/MR is not anti-female, why are there "Women Behaving Badly" articles? Western societies seem to believe that women are not violent or do not commit crimes. Reduced sentencing for women as compared to men and overwhelming evidence for gender parity in domestic violence with higher police records of male perpetrated domestic violence indicate that there is very much a view that men are "bad" and women are "good". Society accepts that men should never hit women, but turns a blind…
/r/MensRights27/04/15 09:39 PM
13

Let us not forget about our online activists -- the SJW who cried "death threat" or "harassment".
/r/MensRights27/04/15 09:29 PM
2

Go to r/sex, and you'll find that the vast majority of questions concerning penis size come from people with penises. Makes sense. I can't imagine there are many questions about penis size someone without a penis could have that can't be answered with a google image search.
/r/MensRights27/04/15 04:03 AM
2

Unfortunately, there are some people on this subreddit who simply oppose feminism because they want to maintain the patriarchy and traditional gender roles, but there are also many people who just want to give the same opportunities to boys to overcome their gender roles that feminism has been working so hard to give girls over the last few decades, and to provide boys the same basic protections against abuse that girls enjoy as well. That... did you forget an /s?
/r/MensRights27/04/15 03:47 AM
2

I did not mean to belittle your own formed opinions. I apologize if I gave you that impression. I wasn't offended, I was quoting to prove I'm trying not to stray from what I perceived as the presented context.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 12:16 AM
2

My comment was defending the neutrality and devotion to reason over "belief", as you put it, of this sub. I was saying nothing about you, or feminism in particular. I was making a statement that it's been my observation that one of the greatest strengths of the MRM (and largest dissimilarities to the radicals it's compared to) is this resistance to unthinking dogma, even when it cuts against its own members, or shoots down what could be otherwise useful "propaganda". One of the biggest reasons t…
/r/MensRights26/04/15 12:04 AM
5

But be aware that like any group with a certain belief, there will be evidence skewed to support a side instead of reaching a truth and real equal balance. Which is why MRAs try to rely on logic, reason and evidence instead of codified dogma. Look at how often people complain this sub "attacks its own posters" -- rational thought has no master and no agenda, save reason itself.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 09:05 PM
6

I like the part where you strawman the entire site in the process of denouncing strawmanning. Also, you opened with an appeal to authority.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 02:40 AM
4

It's called the fallacy of relative privation, one of many radfems hold dear.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 02:34 AM
1

Are you guys here to criticize or work together? Not exclusive things. Criticism not only strengthens ideas, it protects against becoming a thoughtless echo chamber. Many respect this sub because of how self-critical it is.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 12:38 AM
7

Every front-page story I've read on this ends up having loads of comments culled from it as well. Over the years, Reddit has become more and more brazen about mass damage-control censorship (TotalBiscuit GamerGate thread, for example), and TBH, I don't think it's got much time left before it fucks up and incites a Digg-esque brain drain exodus of its own. Already starting to see it a little.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 09:53 PM
10

I think this one's more accurate. Parent is using an extreme form of the argument to illustrate what they see as the flaw in it.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 01:12 AM
1

Bunch of cut vs uncut fags This whole thread is basically a cut vs uncut 4chan thread. Self-fulfilling prophecy?
/r/MensRights22/04/15 04:45 AM
13

But I'm not 'mutilated'. From google: inflict a violent and disfiguring injury on. That's but one definition. From the Oxford English Dictionary: mutilate, v.: trans. To render (a thing, esp. a book or other document) imperfect by cutting out or excising a part; to change or destroy part of the content or meaning of. 2. trans. To deprive (a person or animal) of the use of a limb or bodily organ, by dismemberment or otherwise; to cut off or destroy (a limb or organ); to wound severely, inflict vi…
/r/MensRights21/04/15 11:46 PM
2

A child cannot consent That's exactly the point.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 11:23 PM
7

A study of circumcised baby boys, for example, found that those who received pain relief felt less pain when getting vaccinations three months later than those who didn’t receive any pain medication. “Now that we have seen for the first time what is happening in babies’ brains while they experience something mildly painful,” says Slater, “there should be a big drive to try to treat pain in these children, especially those having a high number of procedures performed in their early days.” Because…
/r/MensRights21/04/15 11:21 PM
1

Bunch of cut vs uncut fags arguing. Can I ask where you were linked here from? Just curious.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 11:17 PM
4

talking about this is great, the conversation here isn't You're not exactly leading by example. All you're doing is ignoring the topic and just generally speaking negatively about the sub.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 11:09 PM
2

Men have got problems. Men are destroying lives – and let me be very clear here: it’s not just their victims, but their own lives they’re destroying. There are times I fear that my daughters might grow up to be victims of a violent man, but just as often I fear that my son might grow up to be a violent man. And while the former is something I simply have to hope doesn’t come about, the latter is something I can, I believe, have some little influence on. And that’s men’s rights, right there. If y…
/r/MensRights20/04/15 10:35 PM
9

The reason that there is a disparate impact on males is because males commit more crime than females. Men are sentenced to far longer incarceration lengths for the same crime than women. They are also acquitted much less frequently than women. Their sentencing rates are out of proportion with their numbers. So no, it isn't simply because they commit crime more frequently. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html
/r/MensRights20/04/15 09:33 PM
4

Interesting you used the word "hidden" instead of "censored". Almost like the two have different meanings, and you realize one doesn't apply here.
/r/MensRights17/04/15 12:55 AM
3

I'm not abandoning my ship, I'm going to pitch in and save her. Good luck to you, truly, but just know that until that ship is retaken, we're going to return its fire. It's not personal.
/r/MensRights16/04/15 10:08 PM
7

Downvoting comments you disagree with is defacto censorship. Aside from the whole "comment still present, readable and completely intact" part.
/r/MensRights16/04/15 09:33 PM
9

Libturd Can we please leave the highbrow political jargon out of this?
/r/MensRights16/04/15 08:47 PM
10

...posts where it just points out something a woman did, or a post about how some feminist did something stupid. What do posts like that have to do with men's rights? From the FAQ on the sidebar: If r/MR is not anti-female, why are there "Women Behaving Badly" articles? Western societies seem to believe that women are not violent or do not commit crimes. Reduced sentencing for women as compared to men and overwhelming evidence for gender parity in domestic violence with higher police records of …
/r/MensRights14/04/15 09:27 PM
7

I'm all for men's rights, but not at the cost of others. Human rights are not a zero-sum game. Attacking feminism is not the same thing as attacking women, and it doesn't set women back.
/r/MensRights14/04/15 08:37 PM
1

I thought you men might be more logical than fucking Tumblr for fucks sake. You were already way off the mark when you arbitrarily assumed we were all men, now you're assuming everyone's attacking you because you're egalitarian? Please.
/r/MensRights13/04/15 02:51 AM
48

"Hillary to make one gender's Issues Key to Presidential Bid." Fairly certain infant genital mutilation and the sentencing/empathy/violence-victim/workplace-fatality/combat-death gaps aren't what they have in mind when they say "gender issues".
/r/MensRights13/04/15 02:36 AM
3

When I say "feminism is an irrational misandrist pseudo-religion", what do I really mean then? Didn't see that one on the list.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 07:48 PM
9

You believe in treating others the way you'd like to be treated? Congratulations, you're a Catholic!
/r/MensRights09/04/15 06:17 PM
6

"Let's hold a demonstration, but we'll tell half the potential journalists not to bother showing up because genitals. That'll raise awareness for our cause!"
/r/MensRights09/04/15 06:12 PM
3

honestly I think that whole thing should be done away with. Same here. It's just until we start forcing women to wear the scarlet "S" in equal measure, too few of us are going to care enough to want to see anything done about it. Spend enough time on this sub and it becomes blindingly apparent that society-at-large has little problem with arbitrarily ruining people's lives in perpetuity, as long as they have certain genitals. Goes on for decades, until women start getting a taste of the same tre…
/r/MensRights09/04/15 06:04 PM
2

I know you are trying to strawman what I said into something unreasonable No, I'm sarcastically denigrating your tired anti-discussion bent. Wanna talk about fallacious statements? We will ride the downvote train from the more radical of our group together, Dimitrisan. Preemptively establishing that everyone that disagrees with you is doing so because they're a radical -- no other possible reason. That's an ad-hominem, combined with poisoning the well (not fallacious itself, but a rhetorical dev…
/r/MensRights28/03/15 08:34 PM
2

Pointing out the behavior that this subreddit, and all subreddits to a degree, has toward unpopular opinions is not whining. You're right, it isn't. It just wasn't what you did. And we most certainly didn't talk about rules. You mean aside from the unspoken "If it's not a 100% bona-fide, non-peripheral FDA-certified Men's Rights Issue™, we shouldn't be discussing it" rule?
/r/MensRights28/03/15 06:22 PM
3

"Don't drop the soap": we, as a society, promote rape. In prison. Which is where the term "rape culture" actually originated. Now men are generously being included in a phenomenon that began with them in the first place, before it was appropriated to champion female victimization and shame men.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 05:52 PM
0

We will ride the downvote train from the more radical of our group together, Dimitrisan. Whining about downvotes isn't a men's rights issue, either. It's also against the reddiquitte, if we're gonna get all rules-lawyery.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 05:40 PM
4

This is a mental illness issue, not a men's right's issue. Why does it have to be one or the other? Most situations in life are comprised of more than one facet.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 05:02 AM
2

Totally agree. I was talking more about not succumbing to it. In the video I realize he's mostly talking about things more from a meme/viral marketing standpoint. But with regards to how this video pertains to argument, it's illustrated almost exclusively with angry brains. And it's a popular belief, too -- everyone on the internet discussing divided topics is swearing at their monitor, red-faced and dripping with sweat. And that's always struck me as an immature, closed-minded, dismissive way o…
/r/MensRights10/03/15 11:34 PM
2

If you're charged with a crime, they'll throw everything they can at you. If you're not, they won't do anything without lots of proof. That's what happened. They have all the proof they need. They have both evidence and a confession. From both of them. Are you just ignoring that fact because it's inconvenient?
/r/MensRights10/03/15 11:00 PM
15

By this logic, wouldn't the fact that women need to start asking men out imply women have always been cowards? Or is this another one of those "totally equal genders but two totally different sets of rules" kinda people?
/r/MensRights10/03/15 10:58 PM
2

I've always disliked the idea that argument necessarily entails anger. Anyone that's taken a philosophy class knows otherwise. To many people, yes, this is true. But it never has to be.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 10:43 PM
2

But the boy's parents' decided not to press charges. That's on them. It doesn't matter who decided to press or not press charges because the police don't need their help. If they're going to prosecute for this crime both kids confessed to, there is absolutely no reason to only charge one of them. They have all the evidence and confessions they need regardless. The "they didn't press charges" defense is a smokescreen, and in this case totally irrelevant.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 10:40 PM
2

Rape isn't the felony the boy is being charged with, it's "possessing pornographic material featuring a minor." Rape cases tend not to get prosecuted in lieu of the victim pressing charges because in many cases, that victim's testimony is essential to the prosecution effort. Not so in this case -- the police already have all the evidence they need.
/r/MensRights10/03/15 10:21 PM
31

“Men’s greatest weakness is their facade of strength, and women’s greatest strength is their facade of weakness.” -- A former NOW board member
/r/MensRights08/03/15 11:44 PM
4

You're simply stating that having unprotected sex makes people pregnant. The question is why should we retain the situation of men having absolutely no reproductive rights when it happens.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 12:41 AM
21

Sounds like a pathetic made-up thing to try and counter the very real mansplaining. I've seen parodies of feminists that weren't this obtuse. Please tell me this is a troll.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 09:38 PM
2

And the only evidence she has for this is that she's had her ideas and attitudes criticized, heard jokes spoken and had her looks complimented at some of these companies? There are loads of people in the Silicon Valley being told their ideas are small and attitudes misaligned on a daily basis. This sounds to me like another woman screaming about inequality, when she doesn't realize that the source of her gripe is that she's being treated like an equal and expected to step up, instead of being co…
/r/MensRights03/03/15 09:44 PM
166

An argument that keeps coming up in the deletion discussion is that violence against men isn't "distinct" enough from violence at large to warrant a specific article. So basically, the fact that victims of all types of violence are overwhelmingly male removes the very need to address this fact. Convenient. They also go on to mention how violence against women is distinct enough from violence at large to warrant its own article, when over half the things in that article apply to men as well. Rape…
/r/MensRights27/02/15 09:31 PM
5

Comments are disabled.... Votes are hidden.... In a video about confidence, amusingly enough.
/r/MensRights26/02/15 10:59 PM
10

It is not even about helping boys. It is about not intentionally sabotaging them. I find a lot of the MRM's issues are like this. Circumcision, adversarial family and criminal courts, disproportionate DV arrests... I find that on so many fronts it's not that MRAs are even asking for something positive to be done or give men and boys special treatment, they're merely advocating for something negative to stop.
/r/MensRights26/02/15 10:10 PM
3

What exactly is wrong with being anti-abortion? Never said anything was or wasn't. But a lot of the people who feel that "if a man doesn't want to pay child support he should keep it in his pants" tend to become livid if you suggest "a woman should just keep her legs closed" as a counterargument to abortion. Hence the reason I suggested parent ask how said commenter feels about it. Many hold a double standard about it.
/r/MensRights24/02/15 02:37 AM
1

They called it "derailment" I've always found this phrase amusingly diminutive. Their "train" of thought is on a one-dimensional rail -- any expansion of its possible course by suggesting two or even three dimensional headings is catastrophic to such a singular vehicle. That said, I agree with the commenters below -- if they want to start their own club to hate us, who are we to stop them? They're just hurting their own credibility by making their one-dimensional echo chamber so transparent.
/r/MensRights24/02/15 12:51 AM
5

comments on Reddit saying men make a choice to have sex and therefore should be aware of the consequences Whenever you see a comment like that, ask the commenter how it makes them feel knowing that they're using exactly the same line of argument as an anti-abortionist.
/r/MensRights23/02/15 11:29 PM
1

I personally identify with egalitarian. As do many MRAs. Not saying you are or should be referred to as an MRA, just wanted to reiterate that the two aren't mutually exclusive.
/r/MensRights20/02/15 10:42 AM
4

Neither sex nor alcohol consumption are 100% good or bad for you. I've seen a few glasses of wine save people's sanity in the face of grief and crisis, and I've seen people ruin (and some end) their lives having sex with the wrong person. I don't find the equivalence false at all. In fact, in this case, both things are forbidden by society under the same rationale -- minors have not yet fully developed the decision-making capacity to consider the consequences. I'm not saying that makes the prohi…
/r/MensRights19/02/15 09:07 PM
9

both sides There is no legitimate "other side" in this. You either support the right to bodily autonomy or you don't. There is no one that can in any way legitimately claim they have a stake in the circumcision of an infant, with the exception of the infant himself. It affects absolutely no one but him. It's mind-boggling that there even could be a debate on this. Giving equal weight to the "other side" is the same "fair and balanced" crap Fox News pulls when they rail against evolution. It seem…
/r/MensRights18/02/15 10:06 PM
7

"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." -- Sir William Blackstone
/r/MensRights17/02/15 09:25 PM
2

1) post contact info of the institution involved as accurately as possible. Not just the front desk, the customer care services desk, our what ever is most applicable. Be careful with this. I know you're not suggesting doxxing anyone, but critics of the MRM love to accuse its members of "harassment and intimidation" along those lines. In fact, you can pretty much count on anyone getting a substantial amount of feedback decrying it as such, however polite, professional and reasonable it may be.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 09:12 PM
12

it's fairly useless to anyone, especially employers. And yet the entire reason we treat a college education as superior to work-training programs is that "broad study of everything" college requires of you. I always found it odd how the very thing that sets college apart from every other type of education suddenly becomes "useless" if one chooses to make that interconnection their focus.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 04:40 AM
22

“He was trying to raise the rights of men and lower the rights of females." Knew there'd be zero-sum feminist dogma somewhere in this article.
/r/MensRights17/02/15 03:56 AM
6

heteronormative She wasn't even on-topic. You were talking about gender, your friend responded with sexual orientation.
/r/MensRights15/02/15 09:00 PM
14

Would that make them Atheists+?
/r/MensRights15/02/15 08:48 PM
4

As I just got through saying, so what if it's on the front page? That says nothing about how we feel about it, it just means we found it interesting. Why does it have to be outrageous?
/r/MensRights14/02/15 09:09 PM
11

Please remove this or make the title such that we are condemning this act. Posting something on this board doesn't mean that we "approve" or "disapprove" of what happened in the article. What does that even mean in this case anyhow? We approve of the rape? We approve of the prosecution of the rape? I hate it when people use the mere posting of an article in here as a chance to color the whole damn sub. Stuff gets posted in here because we enjoy discussion of gender issues. Rape is presently a bi…
/r/MensRights14/02/15 09:05 PM
6

It's also testament to Vice's superb journalistic standards -- not letting a source's explicit denial of its own validity prevent them from citing it anyway.
/r/MensRights14/02/15 04:13 AM
3

A terrorist is, by definition, someone who uses violence or threats of violence in order to intimidate or coerce. Pretty open definition. Our entire legal system falls under it, for starters. There needs to be accountability, and there need to be swift and just consequences. Hopefully not at the hands of the police though. That would make you, by definition, a terrorist.
/r/MensRights14/02/15 04:06 AM
2

Poe's Law. The trolls are indistinguishable from legions of people that truly think the same way. I have known plenty of feminists that explicitly believe in precisely what this troll is spouting, and aren't ashamed to admit it.
/r/MensRights12/02/15 12:09 AM
10

Because parent suggested women might be fallibly human like the rest of us scrubs and not transcendental saints of pure goodness and sunshine? Unless of course you forgot your /s and I once again ran afoul of Poe's Law.
/r/MensRights11/02/15 11:18 PM
45

When most MRAs say they're against circumcision, what they usually mean is they're against non-consensual infant/minor circumcision.
/r/MensRights11/02/15 12:02 AM
9

Sometimes this sub absolutely disgusts me. Over downvotes? Surely you're aware there are far more groups than just MRAs that vote in here. SRS, AMR, SRD watch this sub like vultures and love to stir shit, just to name a few. Don't take it personally.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 02:36 AM
7

But I'm quite a big dude (6.6, 95kg) I have trouble picturing women hurting me. I've known more than a few women capable of throwing a proper punch, and throwing them fast. Leave your throat exposed at the wrong moment, and your size suddenly doesn't matter much. Anyone willing to abuse you is not going to abide by tournament rules and fight you in a padded ring. They're going to kick you in the nuts, blindside you with bottles, grab a kitchen knife... and those are the ones that don't know how …
/r/MensRights08/02/15 11:21 PM
5

Still an average man slapping an average woman is going to make more damage than the other way round. It's also far more likely to cause a bystander to intervene or show compassion for the victim than the other way around. Far more likely to be prosecuted, as well.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 10:31 PM
1

Meanwhile, we've got people here seriously debating about whether mass suicide or simply taking it up the ass is the better approach. Parent was doing you a favor calling you a troll. Otherwise, you're someone who actually believes this shit.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 10:14 PM
1

I respect GG's willingness to set a goal and not give in to mission creep. On that note, I think activism is something that a sub such as this one, devoted to information, discussion and debate, might want to continue to stay away from. Let activist movements define their own actions. I for one like this place being one of ideas and debate. Nothing is stopping anyone here from branching out further.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 10:08 PM
1

I've noticed some (neither all nor most) KiA folk tend to discard the MRM as an analog of feminism. They tend to think of themselves as egalitarians, but the kind that arrogantly believe they're above everyone that doesn't (and that means everyone that doesn't think exactly like them), and just see us as merely partisans -- feminists that fight for male superiority. So I imagine that's where this laundry list of totally inapplicable feminist bullshit comes from. Which is disappointing, because t…
/r/MensRights08/02/15 09:24 PM
1

Oh I do. I'm not suggesting you're taking sides here, I'm just clarifying my thoughts.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 04:32 AM
1

You're still not making sense, so I'm still not entirely sure if you are engaging in sophistry (maybe for the lulz) or are just clueless. You throw in another question that is so dumb... No matter how many times you insult me, it doesn't add anything to your argument. I don't know what I'm supposed to do with this random question. Do you seek to know to what degree the MRM is "adversarial" (whatever you mean by that exactly) and you think I have the wisdom and knowledge to enlighten you, or is i…
/r/MensRights07/02/15 04:23 AM
1

When a group gives only one side of the story, another group needs to give the other side. This preceded the comment about tubs, which itself was about hot/cold scale. Both analogies were arguments about balance. I'm arguing there is no balance, because granting human rights doesn't upset the rights of others. It doesn't affect it at all, but so many argue as though it's a given it does.
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:50 AM
1

The kid on the swing doesn't stop the other swings But metaphorically, this implies there are only so many swings, which again lends itself to the idea that rights are a finite resource, and giving rights to some necessitates taking it from others. Moreover, parent later went into detail that gender issues were a matter of give and take, so they explicitly supported the idea of "balance".
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:35 AM
0

I can only presume you're asking this rhetorical question as part of the construction of a straw man. Interesting you considered the question rhetorical. It wasn't. And if I was going to construct a straw man, why would I even need to ask you anything? The entire point of a straw man is that I'm speaking for you. And you agreed that it's possible to advocate for gender equality without diminishing the rights of another group, so again, how is the existence of the MRM adversarial? However, an adv…
/r/MensRights07/02/15 03:31 AM
3

You say I'm being combative for fun, but your perspective on gender necessitates that advocating for human rights be adversarial. You just typed an entire paragraph establishing you view the situation as one of give and take. So I'll ask you the same question I asked OP: How does advocating for instance against the circumcision of infant males take anything away from the status of females? How is this an adversarial situation?
/r/MensRights07/02/15 02:04 AM
2

a balancing side So I assume you, too hold the idea that human rights are a zero-sum competition between the genders?
/r/MensRights07/02/15 01:17 AM
7

It's complicated. Almost every issue affects both genders. That sounds like a yes to my question. So I'll extend the idea: How is advocating against, say male infant circumcision something that affects females? How does that cause "disparity" between the genders, and how is advocating against it "absurd"?
/r/MensRights06/02/15 11:34 PM
3

A divisive gender group you mean? You appear to believe advocacy for a gender's human rights must necessarily be in opposition to the rights of another gender, am I correct?
/r/MensRights06/02/15 11:15 PM
6

Obviously an infant can't advocate for themselves but that's a small part of the problem. I feel that people can advocate for themselves So... who's advocating for the infant, then?
/r/MensRights06/02/15 10:35 PM
7

I am a gender egalitarian and feel that the very existence of gender groups is absurd. Currently men's rights is required to combat radical feminism You contradicted your own premise. Furthermore, you seem to think that the only thing the MRM is good for is combating feminism. So if all "gender groups" were to flash out of existence, all of the societal problems faced by men would just take care of themselves? We're still slicing up infant boys' genitals, for example. If feminists suddenly stopp…
/r/MensRights06/02/15 10:04 PM
1

Maybe I've just recently woken up to it, but I've been noticing a hell of a lot of Vox articles suddenly getting submitted to Reddit recently.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 12:50 AM
1

Just like feminism, there are the reasonable and unreasonable ones. I'm sure plenty of the unreasonable ones are feminists.
/r/MensRights05/02/15 10:57 PM
2

MRAs tend to have one of the most reliable communities I've ever seen when it comes to calling out the idiots in their midst. We're all keenly aware of what happened to feminism, and what caused its fall into irrational, hateful zealotry, and none here seem too eager for this movement to follow suit. Part of feminism's problem is that it not only fails to discourage, but actively defends the radical feminists they say don't speak for feminism. They want to defend the name of feminism so badly th…
/r/MensRights05/02/15 12:36 AM
1

Not a "joke", but you are right on the counter-feminism angle. MRAs don't get bent out of shape over things like that the way people are accustomed to seeing with feminists and SJWs, they bring them up to illustrate how absurd/myopic/one-sided a common feminist or cultural standpoint is. As you say, MRAs don't bring up He-Man to say, "Woe is us! Look how oppressed we are with these unrealistic standards!" They do it to say, "If Barbie is toxic, where's your outrage over this?" But the movement i…
/r/MensRights05/02/15 12:16 AM
2

Men and women are definitely very different physiologically, which is why they're separated in most formal sporting events. Honest question: Is there any evidence that men have physiological advantages over women when it comes to playing video games?
/r/MensRights04/02/15 10:04 PM
1

Wait, so an all-female gaming league actually had a ban in place on lesbian and bisexual members? Because they might have an "unfair advantage"? WTF? Is enjoying pussy the fast-track to Challenger league? "Secrets LoL pros don't want you to know..."
/r/MensRights04/02/15 10:01 PM
3

Numerous surveys have shown that women vastly underestimate their own risk of heart disease, and vastly overestimate the likelihood of contracting breast cancer. Men are far more likely to accurately gauge the threat. Incorrect, see /u/freedomfreighter's comment down below. CDC data says that men are twice as likely as women to die from preventable cardiovascular disease.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 09:42 PM
1

Amusing how often The Guardian will complain about racial demographics all over the world, but when you look at the demographics of their own readership: http://www.theguardian.com/advertising/demographic-profile-of-guardian-readers ...race is nowhere to be found. Funny, that. I would love to see an article complaining to their readers about how "pale" and "non-progressive" said readers are.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 09:23 PM
8

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into." The salience of the point simply isn't going to register. All they'll remember is you were a sexist asshole that literally asked her to make a sandwich under threat of rape. Her outrage will mask the cognitive dissonance.
/r/MensRights03/02/15 09:50 PM
8

Could you please not roll in here and preemptively admonish us for something no one's done? You look like a concern troll when you do that.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 09:46 PM
25

Telling someone they "run like a girl"? Bad. Telling someone they're an objectifying monster with a violent rapist inside of them, and they aren't doing enough to protect others from this innate perversion? Education.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 09:27 PM
3

But you cannot say 1st or 2nd wave feminism had a goal to remove accountability from women. And 3rd wave wasn't politically active enough to really have a goal. What difference does it make either way? Feminism currently isn't what it used to be, so who cares what it was? Bringing up the history of feminism to counter its present is like saying Republicans are the more minority-friendly political party because they freed the slaves.
/r/MensRights02/02/15 09:10 PM
3

Most with experience with both will tell you arguing with a radical feminist feels exactly like arguing with a religious fundamentalist. Same arrogant, dismissive tone, unyielding to reason, full of hatred and judgment, unswerving loyalty to codified dogma...
/r/MensRights30/01/15 11:19 PM
2

There it is -- was waiting for you to likely ignore my arguments again, but this time got a "u mad" cherry on top. Awesome.
/r/MensRights30/01/15 06:55 AM
2

And I understand there may be more to the issue than 'just the sign'.. I'm just trying to figure out why you're putting it there. I thought I was pretty explicit about that. Perhaps if you'd stop ignoring two thirds of everything people write here it'd be clear to you. All of the drama surrounding this has been going on for months, all of it was a hot topic long before the signs came out, and yet you can't see the relevance? If I'm the one putting it there, then tell me, why did Jon Stewart dedi…
/r/MensRights30/01/15 06:11 AM
2

If anything, I broadened the topic a little. No, you're ignoring most of it. I'll answer your earlier question to show you how: The stick figure in the current picture we're arguing with is black.. if I used that same character in a picture of him stealing, and said "Watch your belongings" or "don't steal", that would be pretty fucking stupid if you said "that's anti-black!" wouldn't it? It absolutely would be fucking stupid. Because as I just said, you're viewing the sign in a vacuum. But suppo…
/r/MensRights30/01/15 02:34 AM
2

You keep bringing this back to signs, and ignoring everything else going on around it as though the signs exist in a vacuum. We're not taking issue with a sign, we're taking issue with what's become an entire social campaign, with narrative now pouring out from mainstream media sources.
/r/MensRights30/01/15 02:19 AM
2

You explicitly said this is an issue men need to listen to more than anyone else, it's a campaign whose name explicitly targets men, and even the depictions in media (like the one linked at the top of the thread) focus nearly exclusively on men, yet you then argue because there's some other signs that don't, that nullifies everything else. So I ask you again, would that same tactic of whipping up some generic signs that run contrary to the prevailing narrative nullify an obviously racist campaig…
/r/MensRights30/01/15 01:22 AM
2

So if we were to start a "Blackthieving" campaign, because to paraphrase one of your earlier comments, "This is clearly something blacks need to listen to more than whites," and made signs reminding blacks not to rob people, would it be less offensive if we included some other signs with them, that reminded people not to assault, rape, etc., but still kept the name and focus on blacks? That wouldn't be offensive anymore, would it?
/r/MensRights30/01/15 01:00 AM
2

the operation is not to denigrate men, it's to suggest proper etiquette on the train.. It is to denigrate men, the generic call to etiquette is an attempt to deny that's its intent. For fuck's sake they chose the name "MANspreading." As has been repeated countless times here, why didn't feminists, self-described champions of gender-neutral language, come up with a less inflammatory phrase and focus if all they were doing was trying to get everyone to pay attention to the space they're taking?
/r/MensRights30/01/15 12:52 AM
2

On the other hand, men are often neglected in cases of abuse, divorce cases, etc. But this is a nonissue. There's a surprise. This is a comedian making a joke about a news story. Yeah, we got that. We happen to think in the course of doing so, said comedian ignored the absurdity of this crusade, and belittled an entire human rights movement in the process. Lots of us who do watch his show expected him to be a little more even-handed with the subject matter, something we've come to expect of him.
/r/MensRights30/01/15 12:41 AM
2

My point was that women are not some gender put up on a pedestal. ... in other parts of the world. We're not focusing on that, though, and neither are feminists. By your own admission, what the hell are feminists doing to help these women that are being murdered around the world while they're wasting their time policing the placement of men's legs on subway cars? What you have to understand is we're anti-feminist here. We are not anti-woman. Most of us identify as egalitarian. Plenty of us have …
/r/MensRights29/01/15 11:54 PM
3

take a look outside of America. Take a look at the millions of women that are killed and treated like animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation
/r/MensRights29/01/15 11:31 PM
4

if you're going to run your mouth, know what you're talking about Your rant is so off the mark you're attacking a caricature. Explains why you mindlessly believe feminism at its words, yet are totally ignorant of its actions. Lurk moar. You'll learn a few things.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 09:55 PM
6

And what if that definition is utter bullshit?
/r/MensRights29/01/15 09:20 PM
9

I mean jeez haven't you seen an episode of Law & Order SVU? Funny thing, it's been my experience that a person's propensity to believe there are rapists and boogiemen waiting around every corner tends to scale linearly with how much Law and Order they watch.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 09:03 PM
1

Plenty of feminists do come in here, and a lot of people visiting for the first time don't identify with any group. This sub has a (rightly deserved) reputation for being powerfully anti-feminist. A lot of visitors come here specifically wondering why. This post is an example of it. Not a great example, I've always been of the opinion that posts like these are really low-hanging fruit, but it is relevant.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 02:49 PM
1

Should cut her throat. She obviously finds it a reliable remedy for crying.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 02:37 PM
1

The "white knight" thing is pretty common on reddit in general Indeed, but the suggestion they're doing it "just to get laid" isn't nearly as common. (Not unheard of though, I'll grant you.) There are plenty of gay male feminists out there, for example, so there are obviously other reasons.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 11:56 AM
1

The majority of my gripe is over the loaded title, really. Regardless of how long you've been here or what your post sounds like, broadly declaring we need to stop [whatever activity] is frustrating to see. "We should stop beating our wives," etc. Not calling you a troll, just saying that the way your post was titled, coupled with the age of your account set off alarm bells. We get lots of trolls in here. and I fear posting gender related issues with that one. Totally understand. I started this …
/r/MensRights29/01/15 11:31 AM
1

You can't really say there isn't a patriarchy. You can't really say there aren't invisible pink unicorns, either. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof
/r/MensRights29/01/15 11:19 AM
3

I'm gonna be honest, seeing submission titles from a four-day-old account that beckon "us" to stop doing something ignorant just screams "concern troll". Your post is reasonable enough (though it does sound a bit like "patriarchy hurts men too"), but your title is incredibly loaded. Most of us don't do what you're saying we should all stop doing, and it's really popular right now for those opposed to human rights for men to try and convince newcomers that this is the kind of juvenile thinking pe…
/r/MensRights28/01/15 09:41 PM
6

to be a feminist, he would understand that it is about women putting themselves first in order to raise their gender to equal status. And it's this fundamental zero-sum assertion that is at the core of all of feminism's errors. Women are not oppressed in western society, and feminists have so entrenched themselves in an ideology founded upon this idea that they distort their perception of reality to perpetuate it. MRAs threaten this standpoint because they come armed with a mountain of evidence …
/r/MensRights28/01/15 01:57 AM
2

Toilets are monuments to male dominance. Colloqially referred to as a "throne", it's a Patriarchal fixture that serves to display and impart a regal significance to human waste simply because it appears phallic. They even come pre-equipped with an adjustable seat, for men of course, so they may urinate in the most dominant position available to them, instead of just sitting like a civilized woman would.
/r/MensRights27/01/15 11:34 PM
9

How do the feminists react? Sound of crickets chirping. Boys have fallen way, way behind despite all their so-called "male privilege," and the people who would have us believe they care most about gender inequality don't mention it. Exactly the behavior we expect from those that for years have been asking us to lay down our arms because they've got it covered.
/r/MensRights27/01/15 10:28 PM
3

You laugh, I went to high school with a shitload of people that didn't think folks from Italy, Spain or Portugal were latin, just "white". (School was ~40% Latino as well.) Hilariously, when you ask them if Brazilians are latin -- yup. But not the latin people that brought it to them, they're white. This all came up in a class after a couple self-avowed feminists lashed out at a dictionary definition because "the dictionary was written by white people." If memory serves, they were cherrypicking …
/r/MensRights27/01/15 09:13 PM
2

"Pro"-gamergaters are regarded to be those considering GG to be a legitimate issue of corruption, cronyism, and censorship in the games and games journalism industries. "Anti"-GG is the SJW/feminist/established media side that thinks gamers all need to die (not paraphrasing here) and gamergate is simply an issue of gamers harassing women because they're women, nothing else.
/r/MensRights25/01/15 10:43 PM
2

Of course they do, they're a clickbait site. Clickbait works best on people without critical thinking ability -- they'd be out of their minds to neglect pandering to feminists.
/r/MensRights25/01/15 09:44 PM
4

A woman isn't gonna call me a faggot for being a virgin. Agreed, "loser" is usually far more common. "Faggot" tends to get thrown around when a woman is rejected.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 09:23 PM
5

Are you kidding? This is worse than men's "problems" of infant genital mutilation, quadruple the suicide rate, 60% longer prison sentences, plummeting college attendance and 3/4ths of homelessness combined. We need to drop our petty issues and stop this needless suffering of women. Only when men crush their oppressive nuts together on subway cars will we ever break free from the yoke of The Patriarchy, and finally allow women to participate in this utopia mens' spread legs have too long barred t…
/r/MensRights22/01/15 08:52 PM
2

I'm just saying that it's likely not some female conspiracy. I got the impression OP was sarcastically mimicking a radfem-esque response.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 08:35 PM
3

Also, have you ever taken any Women's Studies classes? Have you educated yourself on the history of feminism? Have you ever taken any philosophy or logic and reasoning classes? Because both those "questions" are appeals to authority.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 01:17 AM
3

Human anatomy obviously isn't required for women's studies majors over there.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 09:30 PM
1

Dan Savage is gay, and parent is living in the 1950s. That's all the evidence they need.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 12:41 AM
5

You know, it's interesting that feminists insist that men should keep silent and not "derail" in "women's spaces", yet will loudly and violently insert themselves into and disrupt events discussing men's issues. Projection. I know people that viciously and aggressively screech in protest if anyone ever so much as mumbles a single word edgewise when they're trying to make a point. These same people will howl at the top of their lungs to drown out disagreement and criticism, to a person. Every sin…
/r/MensRights20/01/15 11:58 PM
4

The Secret to Smart Groups Isn't Smart People—It's Women I wonder if the author's aware of what they implied here.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 06:21 AM
8

It's not just blacks: Whites, who appear to be unironically supporting the civil rights cause - are sharing photos of themselves in the march.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 06:09 AM
3

A great deal of mental health issues are physical in nature. "It's all in your head" is incredibly antiquated thinking.
/r/MensRights20/01/15 06:06 AM
2

If it's okay to reduce people to genitalia, it's okay to say this article was written by a twat.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 05:57 AM
2

Perpetuation of the "women are wonderful" effect.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 05:28 AM
2

And yet people act bewildered as to why male university attendance is dropping.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 08:39 AM
1

They're infants. They have no will. The hell they don't. They may not have the means to accurately express it, or the knowledge to fully understand it, but watch a video of a forced circumcision sometime -- those infants are unmistakably screaming "do not want" as loud as their little lungs will let them. There are absolutely zero infants that have ever walked this Earth too young to realize that the experience of having bits hacked off your junk fucking sucks.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 08:16 AM
2

If you do it right, your masculinity or lack thereof are totally irrelevant when discussing gender.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 10:50 PM
2

Saying someone isn't altruistic enough to grasp what is a relatively simple concept is not going to endear them to your cause. I'm not trying to endear them, I'm trying to reason with them. Endearing someone is a plea to their emotions. I'm of the legitmate belief this personification (we never have any idea if this person posting right now is for real, a troll, someone's younger sibling...) is a sociopath. A person that explicitly supports female genital mutilation, something considered barbari…
/r/MensRights16/01/15 07:59 AM
3

In all seriousness though, please try not to read what we write here with malice and rage. It's a frustrating ad-hominem/strawman that keeps getting fired into here, reminiscent of "tone argument" when some use it as an accusation. Serious discussion doesn't necessarily entail gnashed teeth and glaring eyes -- most people dedicated enough to spend more than a few minutes discussing important political topics are more likely speaking with a raised brow and inviting palm. Either way, how anyone sa…
/r/MensRights16/01/15 07:22 AM
4

So basically, "they mad"?
/r/MensRights16/01/15 06:53 AM
7

the commenter below who essentially insulted you for lacking altruism because you made a statement expressing confusion That was me, and I stand by it. His lack of compassion is in my opinion the source of his confusion. Keep in mind, the person I was referencing straight-up said he doesn't have a problem with female genital mutilation. Said that infant circumcision is perfectly fine because it's better to agonize male children when they're too young to remember it than have them endure that sam…
/r/MensRights16/01/15 06:23 AM
7

I should've known you'd duck the question. Oh, that's rich. Almost three hours ago I asked you: What's the problem with letting men decide for themselves to have it done when they get old enough? Never got an answer then, and you ducked it again now. But yeah, you go ahead and level that indignation at someone else.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 03:07 AM
4

I have a better question: how does allowing someone to make that decision affect you?
/r/MensRights16/01/15 02:52 AM
6

Reddit's anticircumcision stance is one I've never understood at all. I believe you. You selfishly want to make a decision for everyone because that decision was good for you. We on the other hand are more concerned with freedom of choice here. You don't seem to possess the altruism required to appreciate our stance.
/r/MensRights16/01/15 02:48 AM
18

All of the men I grew up with in real life have 0 issues with being circumcised and prefer it that way So what? I'm sure there were plenty of Chinese girls that would have said the same thing about having their feet bound when they were toddlers. Doesn't make it any less barbaric taking their freedom of choice away from them. What's the problem with letting men decide for themselves to have it done when they get old enough?
/r/MensRights16/01/15 12:08 AM
11

I'm gonna guess they'd say something along the lines of [deleted].
/r/MensRights16/01/15 12:03 AM
1

This study didn't select feminists as participants. I don't see where parent implied anything of the kind.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 11:57 PM
24

You have to admit that taking that decision away from everyone else just because you like yours would be incredibly selfish. You wanted a circumcision at 11 and you enjoy having it. That's great, absolutely no lie. More power to you. But there's a hell of a lot of men out there that never got to make that choice, many of them dealing with long-term effects of said circumcisions. There's no way anyone can justify that just because some wish they could have gotten theirs done sooner.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 11:56 PM
24

You're probably one of the only ones that knows the difference, considering most men that are circumcised were strapped down to a table against their will when they were at most days old. Coincidentally, this forced infant circumcision is the only thing most people here are opposed to.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 11:27 PM
1

Even alchemy occasionally had falsifiable tests.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 03:39 AM
2

never have i spoken here about the group of people who make up the mra movement in a generalized sense. Like I said, you erroneously assumed that's the group I was talking about, even after I got through telling you that was the case. many people here have tried so, so hard to make a convincing argument that feminism is somehow an injustice against men Actually they provide specific instances, usually at the hands of prominent feminists or feminist organizations committing injustices against men…
/r/MensRights15/01/15 02:11 AM
3

i'm not disparaging an entire group of people by the way. Yes you are. You're just assuming I mean a different group.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 04:21 AM
3

You just broadly use gendered language when you want to disparage an entire group of people, then? Not very feminist of you.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 04:00 AM
7

Why do you keep assuming everyone here is male?
/r/MensRights14/01/15 02:40 AM
7

I think that pic is just /u/pancakewafflebake's subtle way of telling us he/she needs a brain.
/r/MensRights14/01/15 01:09 AM
5

...on the first date the guy should cover the tab. Why? Because guys take girls out on dates to treat them. Why does the author think this? In their own words: Mostly because no one seems to understand what dating is supposed to be anymore.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 10:05 PM
5

So I guess this means body cams perpetuate rape culture?
/r/MensRights12/01/15 10:26 PM
7

i got 19 downvotes yesterday just for asking who anita sarkeesian is Actually, you asked: why do you guys hate anita sarkeesian? ...which is a loaded question.
/r/MensRights10/01/15 12:01 PM
3

I think the modmail I got was "ewwww. ur gross" or something like that. How is someone qualified to weigh in on gender issues if they haven't yet reached puberty?
/r/MensRights10/01/15 10:43 AM
6

Do we have any evidence this was part of a coordinated smear campaign? No? Then lets not make assumptions. Aren't we against making assumptions? Who said it was a coordinated smear campaign? Isn't that an assumption?
/r/MensRights09/01/15 12:51 PM
6

My point is sometimes, and this case most certainly qualifies as one of them, "actively attacking these failed feminist notions of entitlement" is an incredibly costly endeavor. You imply that men that fail to fight these things are doormats. But the prospect of entering a high-profile, protracted legal battle to prove your point is an extravagance to most people, and implying that they lack spine because they can't afford to commit to such a battle is incredibly unfair. Edit: Oh, FFS, I just lo…
/r/MensRights07/01/15 11:47 PM
2

I imagine that's what parent was implying.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 10:15 PM
17

More men need to take the hint here. Most men aren't Alan Dershowitz. If they had half the resources he has at his disposal, I'm sure they wouldn't need a hint.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 09:41 PM
1

I figured as much, just kinda' tossed it out there for any lurkers that haven't been.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 11:38 PM
3

Poe's law and whatnot. Well, there you have it. We argue against actual fanatics here -- folks with whom your tone isn't in any way an exaggeration. Want proof? Look at AMR. I've seen posts there by folks flabbergasted at some of our mockeries of feminism. Not because they're outlandish, mind you; because they didn't understand how we couldn't "get it" after we reiterated their stance so perfectly.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 11:11 PM
2

William Mattson was allegedly caught in the act of raping a girl by her boyfriend Gonna have to play Devil's Advocate here, because that's exactly what due process, reason, and neutrality demand. It isn't unheard of for a disloyal partner to cry "rape" when they're caught, and this fact-sparse article doesn't give us any information beyond the boyfriend's say-so. If he was actually raping her? I'm with you, fuck him. But we currently don't know shit about what happened here beyond a picture of h…
/r/MensRights06/01/15 12:01 AM
6

Girls smarter than boys? LOL you know its true. Wait, the "problem" is boys are actually outperforming on standardized tests? Serious business.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 09:32 PM
2

As well as the author declaring that "parity between the sexes" isn't something she can ever truthfully claim she's seeking.
/r/MensRights05/01/15 02:58 AM
6

I don't even understand how she can write this and still think she's even making a case for the suffering of women. She's basically saying here that to end up out on the streets, you need to seriously drop the ball as a woman -- you're gonna be an addict, insane, and/or a felon all at once. But men? All you have to do to end up on the streets is simply come back from serving your country, or fall into disfavor with your spouse. And it's nine times as likely to happen, too. But the point is women…
/r/MensRights05/01/15 01:31 AM
2

Our message and arguments are becoming much more widely understood and accepted online these days, Which means all of our reading and typing is actually working. So naturally, we should cut back on it?
/r/MensRights01/01/15 06:18 PM
2

I think like abortion your going to have men on either side of the debate. Has there ever been a debate where this isn't true?
/r/MensRights01/01/15 05:21 AM
7

...toxic misogynistic viewpoints. You mean like the idea that they're helpless victims that can't think for or take care of themselves?
/r/MensRights31/12/14 09:51 PM
2

The only people I've ever heard use the term "meninist" are people mocking the MRM. The tag started as a bitter parody -- no fucking way is anyone serious ever going to adopt it, and I'm rather certain after reading this fine article that the author knows it too. Oddest of all, nobody can work out whether it could possibly the beginnings of serious men’s movement or just another flash-in-the-pan parody... But it did make them ripe for parody in the same way the New Man was savaged by lad culture…
/r/MensRights30/12/14 12:32 AM
6

Because we're not a dogmatic echo chamber. We welcome discussion and disagreement here.
/r/MensRights29/12/14 06:03 AM
3

I'm not sure you want this man to represent you. I'm not sure anyone asked him to.
/r/MensRights29/12/14 04:31 AM
2

Because it's nothing more than a vengeful gesture. Avenging what, exactly? How is "I'm not interested," an act of vengeance? Especially on a date -- its entire function is to evaluate a potential romantic partner. You sure you're not projecting something here? You seem to be unable to accept the idea that someone could casually walk away from a date without feeling rage and enmity.
/r/MensRights26/12/14 11:15 PM
2

It's a really shitty social norm but you're not doing yourself or anyone else a favor by holding any one individual responsible for it. My entire point was you don't have to hold anyone responsible for it to decide you want nothing to do with it. You claimed doing so was a mark of "hate." I'm saying judgment doesn't even factor into it. You don't have to hate someone to say "no, thanks," then hit the pavement. Whether it's a "social norm" or not, it's unfair to force outdated expectations on som…
/r/MensRights26/12/14 10:10 PM
5

They want to get rid of urinals, men spreading their legs on buses and many other things. I'd call this "gender regulation" more than "gender neutrality." Forcing genders inline with legislation that regulates specific behavior is far from neutral. They're enforcing gender roles, not abolishing them.
/r/MensRights26/12/14 08:33 PM
7

Yes, if you hate her then that's what you should do. Why does hatred have to have anything to do with it? No one is under any kind of obligation to endure entitled behavior from someone. You don't need to hate people to simply walk away from red flags.
/r/MensRights26/12/14 08:25 PM
1

No, it's still the same. It's about the adult actor -- it's not that girls expressing sexuality is bad, it's the predatory male sexuality that behavior attracts that's bad. Boys, not yet fully men and thus by extension not yet fully tainted, share their still-somewhat-pure sexuality with the unblemished, nurturing sexuality of women on the other hand. No harm can ever come to them. At least that's how I've had it explained to me.
/r/MensRights01/12/14 08:55 PM
1

Don't hold your breath. Feminist ideology and activism doesn't stay confined to a single sub, discussion of it isn't going to, either. If you don't like it, just ignore it the same way you would feminism -- it's just as likely to disappear by doing so.
/r/MensRights18/11/14 08:57 PM
100

“I agree that there should be a law against street harassment,” wrote a commenter named Andrea from Boston. “I am sick of people telling me that a man’s First Amendment right is more important than my right to feel safe in public places.” She's literally arguing "Your rights end where my feelings begin."
/r/MensRights03/11/14 08:15 PM
20

Women Feminists and video games in a nutshell Plenty of hardcore gamer women out there with no love for this SJW bullshit.
/r/MensRights28/10/14 06:30 PM
11

I think the image OP linked makes it obvious they understand this. They're making the point that if you focus exclusively on a small facet of the problem, you can end up with a summary that's wildly untrue of the big picture. OP isn't saying we're living in a matriarchy, they're saying if we were to examine men's issues with the same myopia feminists do with women's issues, we'd have the same incorrect generalizations of society.
/r/MensRights27/10/14 06:09 PM
3

Yet coincidentally the only time they mention it is when the topic shifts to including women in it.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 08:28 AM
3

Include women in it, and you're suddenly going to see loads more people asking this question.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 08:09 AM
1

If you place an absurd set of conditions that precludes most dessert partners before you allow them to eat chocolate ice cream with you, then yes, you are choosing not to. Whether you realize it or not doesn't change it.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 05:46 AM
3

Some people like to discuss anti-feminism here. Like it or dislike it, but bitching about bitching is even less constructive.
/r/MensRights14/09/14 09:55 PM
2

This is exactly the reason so many people use anonymous accounts for any kind of political discussion. A practice that many forums have been discussing abolishing, and I'm certain this right here is the reason they want to do it -- enforcing ideas through real-life shame and retribution. It's disheartening. When the internet was in its infancy everyone talked about how it would become a wonderful vehicle for pure discussion and ideas, unencumbered with the real-life baggage speaking in public br…
/r/MensRights13/09/14 01:25 AM
8

Those safer suicide methods are also more likely to be reported as attempts, whereas the more violent ones are less likely to be noticed. Someone getting their stomach pumped after calling their friend to inform them of the pills they swallowed is going to be recognized. That same someone alone in their bedroom with a gun in their mouth, trembling as they put more and more pressure on the trigger, then drop the gun to the floor sobbing -- no one records that as a suicide attempt.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 08:11 PM
3

The majority of US gun deaths are suicides, around 60%. http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2013/01/20/the-gun-toll-ignoring-suicide/xeWBHDHEvvagfkRlU3CfZJ/story.html
/r/MensRights04/09/14 08:00 PM
2

Excellent point, and why I get so bent out of shape when people come here and use vote counts to prove bias in here, as though MRAs are the only ones casting votes. Your post for example is being upvoted at least in part by people who don't care about men's rights or this subreddit, but enjoy seeing drama rise and seeing criticism levied against the subreddit. Coincidentally, several posters in this thread supporting OP have very little (if any) posting history in this sub, but extensive histori…
/r/MensRights04/09/14 04:16 AM
1

...we want to be taken seriously, right? We want to shake the MRM's unfair image of only existing to complain about women and be angry about feminists? So let's put a post on the front page saying to everyone coming in here that's all we do. That'll fix it.
/r/MensRights03/09/14 10:19 PM
3

You want the sole focus of this issue to be harassment. Every single post you've made on this thread is about harassment. With every post you make, you're just proving the point more and more.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 09:46 PM
4

If you don't want to discuss harassment, don't click on an article about harassment. I didn't. I clicked on an /r/mensrights thread about IGN's disposition. Can't we all agree that all the harassment is wrong? Be honest. That's not what you want at all. You want the discussion to remain fixated on harassment, to the exclusion of all else. It's the only avenue of defense the industry and SJWs have in this whole debacle. You want the sole focus of this issue to be harassment. Every single post you…
/r/MensRights02/09/14 09:31 PM
6

I'm not going to discuss harassment because 1) it's a desperate attempt to derail the main subject of this issue 2) people that try to make this issue about harassment never mention the harassment taking place at the hands of the SJWs themselves. No mention of the doxxing they've performed, no mention of death threats against gamers on twitter, no mention of threatening to stab 10-year-olds, no mention of Zoe Quinn doxxing rival indie houses. You want to discuss harassment? Start there. Otherwis…
/r/MensRights02/09/14 09:10 PM
3

The article is about harassment. Of course it is, because that's the distraction that the gaming press is repeatedly trying to make this issue about. It's a smokescreen. I and other posters have already pointed this out. No matter how many different aspects emerge from this situation, the gaming press keeps trying to frame this entire issue simply as one of "harassment." And you're doing it, too.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 08:30 PM
3

The subject of the post isn't the letter mentioned in the article, it's the article itself, which overwhelmingly sides with the Gamer+, SJW distraction that Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian are nothing merely victims of an ongoing harassment campaign, and there's nothing more to the story than that. It's yet another game "journalism" site trying to steer the gaming community away from the issues of corruption, cronyism, and censorship in the industry, and back towards the "look at these poor oppre…
/r/MensRights02/09/14 08:03 PM
6

Because then the cops would find out how many of these threats were really SJW sockpuppets.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 07:48 PM
8

This is a rather petty thing to be discussing. Not the best preamble to a paragraph of discussion.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 01:58 AM
0

What kind of marauding barbarians downvote the archive bot?
/r/MensRights30/08/14 03:24 AM
1

You're right, you are confused. I imagine it's because you're focusing on an incredibly narrow aspect of this whole situation. Check out some of the links on this page if you want to know why this is such a huge issue with people. For information, I'd recommend this one for a start.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 02:52 AM
7

Not to be combative, but your second paragraph sounds exactly like the apologetic, subject-changing concern trolling that the people defending ZQ have been spouting from the beginning. The interesting aspect of this whole scandal has been the SJW righteous-indignation-shame-muzzle that's been employed to clamp down on discussion of this topic. ZQ has been nothing but a peripheral figure in this whole thing since. Telling us all to "stop harassing Zoe Quinn and others with threats of rape and mur…
/r/MensRights28/08/14 08:34 PM
3

Only 0.01% of complaints of violence against women were false, she said. I love statistics that are orders of magnitude smaller than margin of error. If she's gonna pull stats out of her ass, why not just add a few more zeroes?
/r/MensRights24/08/14 12:23 AM
2

Why is it that so many male feminists have histories of misogyny? They're veteran sexists. Makes it easy to transition to feminism when they already have the core job skills in place.
/r/MensRights24/08/14 12:10 AM
4

Even in polyamorous relationships you can cheat. Polyamorists value open communication about said relationships. Cheating violates this -- it violates trust and violates safety. If you're not open, you're not in a polyamorous relationship, you're in something else.
/r/MensRights23/08/14 06:13 PM
8

Moral of the story: Don't get anyone pregnant Top comment. Sensible and responsible. Yet if you direct the same argument towards women to suggest abortion should be illegal, it suddenly becomes idealistic, out-of-touch, misogynistic nonsense. In both cases it's a red herring.
/r/MensRights22/08/14 05:23 PM
3

These comments have not (to my knowledge) been opposed by anyone at the rally. Silence is consent. Took a look at the video you linked below. It wasn't even silence, it was smiles, cheers and applause.
/r/MensRights21/08/14 10:21 PM
4

I have spent some time reading through the popular MRA sites... ..and yet somehow my knowledge of what they're fighting for is limited solely to the nefarious hyperbole radfems have given me, and I couldn't name any of their actual issues if my life depended on it.
/r/MensRights21/08/14 04:49 PM
1

You need to look back a bit further if you're going to try and shitpost about someone's posting history. The irony. You come in here criticizing this entire sub because of the one Facebook-related link on the front page, then you try to act like that's what the whole sub's about. But when someone looks at your posting history, you defend it by saying you have to look deeper than the first few pages to find any substance? As I said earlier: Practice what you preach.
/r/MensRights20/08/14 09:59 PM
1

"lol u mad?" Do you even know what "constructive discussion" is? Because I just glanced at your posting history, full of pages and pages of snippy one-line responses and little else. Try to practice what you preach. Your trolling will be more convincing that way.
/r/MensRights20/08/14 09:40 PM
-1

Funny, I haven't seen you post to any other threads in this sub, just this one -- the only inane Facebook-related post on the front page. Don't even act like "constructive discussion" is something that interests you.
/r/MensRights20/08/14 09:09 PM
5

Don’t be an online bystander in the face of sexism. Challenge people who make, say, or post sexist things on the Internet, especially on social media. I thought feminists wanted us to stop doing this.
/r/MensRights19/08/14 07:11 PM
63

Taking classes with actual academic feminists... Ironically, this is what made me realize feminism wasn't about equality.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 08:59 PM
2

like propaganda Unlike "Feminism is for Everyone."
/r/MensRights17/08/14 09:03 PM
1

But then a large number if top-posts on this subreddit are "look at what this dumb feminist said." "On this subreddit" being the key difference here. When people post such things here, they're trying to dissect what they feel might be a prevalent sentiment amongst their opposition, in a separate forum, to mostly like-minded individuals. It's not the same thing as broadcasting a blog post or op-ed smear piece, and using those disparate, anecdotal statements as "sources" to paint the target of you…
/r/MensRights16/08/14 12:17 AM
4

I remember there was a stat posted in here some time ago that showed the incarceration rates for white males were still higher than that of black females. Seems obvious that the gender issue would be more severe than the racial one when we're talking about police brutality. Black males just get the worst of both worlds. If the Men’s Rights Movement wants to take on an issue, besides bashing feminism, I strongly urge them to take on this issue. The victims of arrest-related deaths are overwhelmin…
/r/MensRights15/08/14 04:46 PM
1

As it stands, this is exactly like anti-MRA articles from the Elliot Rodger shootings trying to link his actions to MRA ideology. Yes, they were both present in the same person, MRA ideology was never present in Elliot Rodger. Not agreeing or disagreeing about Williams' suicide being alimony-related, but I'm getting tired of seeing the false equivalence to the Rodger-related feminist shaming campaign. It's not even close to the same thing. When the MRM starts up twitter hashtags to propagate thi…
/r/MensRights14/08/14 11:16 PM
5

"I don't care." "Fine, we don't, either." "What! How dare you?" Transparent troll.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 03:46 AM
6

It's quite disgusting really (and I'd say borderline neurotic) - this subs overall reaction Not to mention fictional. The "overall reaction" of the sub is usually to reiterate we're against having the choice made for infants and minors. The fact that you keep trying to steer the conversation solely in this direction makes me think you're just trolling.
/r/MensRights13/08/14 11:32 PM
6

It's like if when PETA shows up to like a holocaust memorial with "meat is murder" signs. It fucking isn't, it isn't anywhere close to reality, and everyone hates them more for the bad taste of being wrong and for being wrong at that particular time and place. This isn't /r/holocaustmemorial, nor is it Robin Williams' funeral. And neither is this discussion taking place on a streetcorner, shaming passersby with signs. This is a forum where people discuss men's rights issues. At present, there is…
/r/MensRights13/08/14 12:02 PM
2

Speaking about progress in discussion, thank you for this nice exchange. Same to you, thank you.
/r/MensRights13/08/14 05:19 AM
1

I only ever heard of it when there is some kinda shitty or downright hateful opinions that people feels the need to defend. Common sentiment that comes up with regards to the First Amendment. But it's exactly what it's there for. Tell me, why would anyone need an amendment to protect popular speech? It's speech that goes against the grain of popular opinion that needs the protection. And if the only thing you see is "bizarre and baseless things" being protected, you're reading with far too narro…
/r/MensRights12/08/14 06:11 AM
4

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." If we eliminated the First Amendment, we'd see a lot less groups like the Westboro Baptist Church spewing their hate in public. But it would be incredibly myopic to think that would make it an overall benefit to society. Similarly, removing the ability to comment anonymously may cut down on trolls, but it also cuts down on people that are afraid of being publicly shamed for arguing a viewpoint that runs contrary to the status quo. I'd bet my bottom do…
/r/MensRights12/08/14 02:19 AM
17

It's well established that the quality and constructiveness of comments increases immediately with a real-name log in. Right, "quality and constructiveness" are definitely the first things that come to mind when I think of Facebook comments.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 06:38 PM
-1

This article reads like it was written by a high-schooler trying to emulate Cosmopolitan.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 12:02 AM
7

I've seen a lot of zealous, selfish shit on TwoX before, but the majority of responses in this case, especially the top ones were entirely reasonable. Granted I'm 11 hours late to the party so for the sake of argument it may have been different, but I see nothing wrong here.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 08:13 AM
2

(It’s interesting, too, how the same misogynists who say feminists have no sense of humor are so quick to pout when they’re on the receiving end of it. If you criticize feminism, according to her, you're a misogynist. Not criticizing women, mind you -- criticizing feminism, an ideology. Then throughout the article, as you say: All the article implies is that if you're a misogynist, the joke will offend you. And you don't see any implication there? She's a published author and writes for The Guar…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 02:30 AM
1

I must admit, this has me a bit confused over the outrage. To me the fact that a prominent political figure can make a joke about women being smarter without triggering the negative response that would meet a prominent political figure making a joke about men being smarter than women seems to reflect much more poorly on the public perception of women than it does the public perception of men. Wait, you're "confused over the outrage" because her comment didn't trigger a negative response? Like ou…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 01:57 AM
24

How in the hell does not finding what Obama said appropriate or funny make one a "misogynist?"
/r/MensRights09/08/14 04:21 PM
1

And somehow they managed to find a way to make this line relevant in an article about what men do by themselves with bits of plastic.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 07:59 AM
1

At the very least, as the article alludes to, it could have been beneficial to have a woman involved in the marketing department. I don't know, to me this always seemed a bit of a post-hoc fallacy. Kotex has a male board of directors, Kotex has a shitty marketing campaign, therefore Kotex's shitty marketing campaign was because their board was all male. It doesn't seem to make that much of a difference even according to the article you linked: Many of the men she worked with on feminine care pro…
/r/MensRights09/08/14 07:37 AM
1

companies whose products are largely marketed to women. What difference does that make, really? The vast majority of people that work for any company are not the ones involved in product development. Why does it matter if most of the janitors, security, maintenance, IT, accountants, etc. at Kotex were male? For that matter, what difference would it make if the R&D was mostly male, either? Male scientists are incapable of understanding how to produce pantyliners because their teams aren't compris…
/r/MensRights09/08/14 05:32 AM
3

I don’t want to pathologize anyone, but I think there’s a danger around the way that processes like that objectify men’s relationships with themselves in a way that restricts an authentic emotional intelligence.” Not "creepy", just dangerous, objectifying, and stifling to emotional intelligence. Can't imagine anyone could be insinuating creepiness there. These days, though, many people are okay with sex that isn’t reproductive. We’re less okay with emotional attachments that aren’t socially prod…
/r/MensRights09/08/14 03:01 AM
2

How about we just abolish the whole thing? Develop this petition into law and I'm sure a whole lot more people are suddenly going to start caring about this question.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 11:23 AM
3

Because feminists would never do anything as absurd as posing as their own opposition.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 08:51 AM
1

"If."
/r/MensRights08/08/14 01:45 AM
7

it is something feminists can point to and say "look. our opponents are just childish name-callers" They're going to do this anyway. Even if literally no one said these things, they'd just whip up a few sockpuppets and do it themselves. I'm not wholly convinced that isn't what's happening here.
/r/MensRights08/08/14 01:36 AM
3

This is really the problem I have with statements like hers. Yeah, we all know that she's joking, but do 8-year-old boys and girls that hear things like this know she's joking? At the very least, it's incredibly bad taste coming from someone in her position.
/r/MensRights07/08/14 08:55 AM
1

Before you posted this reply, I edited that language out and noted it as such. I was recalling parent's argument from hours earlier.
/r/MensRights07/08/14 08:18 AM
1

I disagree: Meanwhile, men hold 94.5% of commercial patents, and women are "smarter" than men according to Michelle.. Nowhere is it implied that women aren't as smart as men. The very same sentence reiterates Obama's stance for contrast. The problem was it wasn't explicitly stated that's not what he/she meant, so everyone that wants to take potshots at the thread just casually shoehorns whatever nefarious intent they want into the statement. But let's say for the sake of argument that's true -- …
/r/MensRights07/08/14 07:48 AM
2

Fair enough.
/r/MensRights07/08/14 03:00 AM
5

Hell, the statement about commercial patents means absolutely nothing with regards to intelligence. I got the impression the person posting that was simply using it as a counterargument to Obama's assertion. "If what you say is true, explain this..." I'm gonna be honest, you really come across like a concern troll here. The vast majority of people in this thread are not saying men are smarter than women, yet this is what you're choosing to focus on. You're in a thread whose topic is the wife of …
/r/MensRights07/08/14 02:38 AM
6

Hence the effort by SJWs to redefine the words "racist" and "sexist" so they don't have to think of themselves as bigots.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 01:14 PM
3

Ironically, she runs right over this point, making it about women instead: And even if it’s a man being objectified in an ad, he is usually shown in full form with complete awareness of his presence, unlike women who are often shown with heads missing or from the back, effectively dehumanizing them.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 05:04 AM
3

And according to the second, feminists constantly objectify women as well.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 04:46 AM
12

Anyway, it's your son, so it's your decision... When it shouldn't be anyone's but his.
/r/MensRights04/08/14 10:55 AM
2

"forcing penises on lesbians"..., intimating that "penis" is a threat, with the assumption that trans women are nothing more than whatever genitals they may have been born with. Good thing cisgendered men don't have to deal with those kinds of sexist assumptions.
/r/MensRights04/08/14 05:20 AM
2

She was mildly downvoted when I made my comment so I figured otherwise. It's not just MRAs that lurk in this forum. Folks from SRS, AMR, Feminism, etc. all have a hand in the moderation that takes place here. Pointing out someone was momentarily downvoted here says nothing about the disposition of the sub at large.
/r/MensRights04/08/14 05:12 AM
7

MRAs are not against circumcision, they're against forced circumcision of infants and minors. You wanna get cut as an adult, more power to you. What we're against is you taking that decision away from your infant son.
/r/MensRights04/08/14 04:58 AM
2

You're making a lot of assumptions about my post that I never said. The subject of the post was the difference between an altrustic or manipulative act. Nowhere did I say it makes you a de-facto manipulative person if you committed this act. Nowhere did I say nobody does these things, or that purely moral people refrain from them. In fact, I said nothing about the morality of it at all. None of this changes the fact that a selfish act is selfish, and there's nothing wrong with noticing and decry…
/r/MensRights01/08/14 01:16 PM
3

Maybe the fact that I take so much pleasure in pretending to cause harm to my fellow human beings is something I should think about. Especially with the well-established correlation between crime and violent video games.
/r/MensRights01/08/14 12:55 AM
4

If I buy my wife flowers or something because I want to spend some of our shared money on something I want, is that really so bad? Not at all. But if you buy your wife flowers when you want something from her, that is manipulation. And in this article's case, that's exactly what's happening. The rewards are a means used to obtain something (behavioral modification), not an end to themselves.
/r/MensRights01/08/14 12:38 AM
2

People have already suggested that these women were simply doing it so that men would like them. Or so that their boyfriends would be happy. Not surprised they'd think this, seeing as they're accustomed to being surrounded by males supporting feminism for exactly that reason.
/r/MensRights30/07/14 11:07 PM
4

...and will berate anyone who points out the pragmatism for avoiding combat for the sake of itself. It's been my experience that when this subject comes up, those advocating avoiding violence are usually just trying to sidetrack the conversation. "How bout nobody hits anybody!" Because what kind of savage would disagree with that? I've seen posts on the frontpage with this very subject. But it's really just a deceptive way of saying, "Let's stop talking about the fact that women in Western socie…
/r/MensRights30/07/14 12:36 AM
2

I am so sick of this patronizing red herring. When people advocate gender equality for self-defense, they're not saying you should hit your assailant back, they're saying the assailant's gender is irrelevant. If you wouldn't get worked up over a man retaliating against another man, you shouldn't say anything if it happens to be a woman, either. Nothing more. If you wanna preach pacifism you go right ahead, but you are arguing an entirely separate issue.
/r/MensRights29/07/14 10:28 PM
1

A good deal of us already are.
/r/MensRights26/07/14 04:03 AM
3

"Never answer the question that was asked. Answer the question you wish had been asked."
/r/MensRights26/07/14 12:05 AM
12

Fighting against someone who actively takes an opposing role to your goals is fighting for your goals.
/r/MensRights25/07/14 11:53 PM
2

Reminds me of Mission Impossible. "If you're captured posting any of our talking points to people with critical thinking ability, we will disavow any knowledge of your affiliation with Feminism."
/r/MensRights25/07/14 03:45 AM
2

"So what if he's bigger than you? Are his balls bigger than yours, too?" Edit: To whoever's downvoting, I'm not saying this, I've heard this. Verbatim. Hence the quotation marks.
/r/MensRights25/07/14 12:21 AM
0

So your anecdotal example means I never saw a fight? My experience with school fights was "whoever wins the fight was the instigator, and we're punishing both of you," regardless of sex. You're conflating American schools' zero-tolerance policies with general attitudes towards self-defense. Not what I'm talking about. Edit: I was agreeing with your original comment, by the way. I wasn't saying "this never happens," I was saying "funny how when it's two men, people don't sing the same 'but they'r…
/r/MensRights25/07/14 12:17 AM
15

"You're bigger, therefore; defense of your self is not acceptable." In all my years I have never heard this spoken to a man defending himself from a smaller man. In every single one of those situations, the smaller man was regarded as a fool for attacking someone so much larger, usually accompanied by laughter.
/r/MensRights24/07/14 02:08 AM
2

They almost never do nowadays. I'm sure that's a huge relief to these two.
/r/MensRights23/07/14 07:13 PM
6

No, I am saying you are making males look worse for me trough that comment. You're making a mistake suggesting the MRM is composed purely of males, and feminism purely females. It's the type of confusion that leads ignorant people to call critics of feminism "misogynists." The MRM is not the voice of men, it's a voice for men.
/r/MensRights23/07/14 12:27 AM
1

circumcision is not mutilation. Do you consider cutting off a girl's clitoral hood mutilation?
/r/MensRights22/07/14 10:24 PM
1

It is possible that you can find something offensive without actually being offended yourself.
/r/MensRights22/07/14 09:15 AM
1

Try to get over your concern for witches. Poor babies.
/r/MensRights22/07/14 09:05 AM
3

No idea, concept or philosophy is above criticism (and this includes the MRM) Which is why so many try not to adopt any sort of rigid, unwavering dogma. Closed-mindedness is never a healthy thing.
/r/MensRights21/07/14 10:05 AM
1

Yes, I was, and not only do I disagree with your depiction of the sub, but I feel I need to remind you that this sub is not the men's rights movement, it's a forum that participates in it. Even if your personal judgement was true, it only would speak to the attitudes of this sub, not the MRM at large. You sound like someone with an axe to grind because others take issue with your beliefs.
/r/MensRights21/07/14 12:01 AM
1

So you read my post, and the only thing you took from it is me saying "prostitutes are immobile?" I think further discussion is likely futile at this point.
/r/MensRights20/07/14 03:48 AM
1

I'm glad the movement has moved on from that. A handful of trolls spouting nonsense doesn't indicate "the movement" was ever fixated there to begin with.
/r/MensRights20/07/14 12:45 AM
1

Stop acting ignorant. You and everyone else knew exactly what you were saying, now you're trying to act like all you did was accidentally use a "taboo word." A real man would realize that you do not meet violence with violence. If this was all you claim you were saying, why include the first half at all?
/r/MensRights19/07/14 08:11 AM
1

Prostitution is a service, drugs are a product. You can't smuggle 20,000 prostitution doses in the trunk of a car and move them to a sex-deprived area that ran out of its prostitute supply because the feds found the prostitute stash. The analogy really doesn't work here.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 08:04 AM
2

Gotta work on those gender neutral pronouns while I post in mensrights. No. You have to work on your ideas, not your words.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 07:51 AM
3

“Women in our criminal-justice system are pretty well underserved.” You can say that again.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 07:44 AM
1

A real man would... You are not the arbiter of what constitutes manhood.
/r/MensRights19/07/14 07:23 AM
1

OP asked if men's rights were getting anywhere, not if this subreddit was.
/r/MensRights18/07/14 02:20 AM
7

They diminish the severity of FGM in order to make their point about circumcision. Pure projection. The go-to counterargument from radical feminists is that Male Genital Mutilation is so much less severe than Female Genital Mutilation that it's insulting to even call it mutilation. (Note the poster's usage of the word "circumcision" instead of "MGM.") They are so accustomed to thinking like this, that they egocentrically believe that MRAs must think the same way.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 06:19 AM
5

That's what happens when you ban differing opinions (and users with them) from your echo chamber. You insulate yourself from every truth that falls outside your pre-established dogma -- just like a religious zealot.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 06:10 AM
2

Feminists are still trying to state that Eliot Rodger is a perfect example of what the MRM is about. And the more they continue to do so, the more desperate and deceptive they appear to everyone with an ounce of critical thinking ability.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 12:34 AM
3

Sex-negative feminists. 21st-century Puritans.
/r/MensRights12/07/14 09:40 PM
18

MRA's understand and accept that women as a gender see more discriminate than males, but the MRA position is that men have their own issues where they're disadvantaged also. I'm not even sure you can say the first part of that is true for a majority of people here. I think most would admit that yes, women do face issues, but I doubt they'd agree they're more discriminated against. Most I've met think it's absurd even trying to "measure" who's worse off.
/r/MensRights12/07/14 09:16 PM
2

Yeah, that's like Magna Carta-era thinking. Get with the now, grandpa.
/r/MensRights11/07/14 05:17 AM
1

Remember kids, don't do drugs! Except when we want to take pictures of your erect, underaged junk.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 06:13 AM
3

Gathering evidence for a rape case is a world of difference from, "I'm gonna lock you up if this is you in this pic, so I'm gonna take some snaps of your underage cunt so I can prove it. And get it all juicy so it looks like the one that's in the pic, or we'll drug you to make it that way." Still sucks, but it's not remotely the same thing as this situation.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 05:54 AM
4

Apparently it's only human trafficking, exploitation, and prostitution when males do it. In fairness, male sexuality is horrible, perverse and objectifying. Female sexuality has been scientifically proven to cure cancer and make rainbows shoot from your butt. Male prostitutes should be so lucky.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 04:45 AM
9

Baby sitter makes it "worse" because she has "control" over him as an "authority figure" No shit, isn't this the exact reason we ostensibly have statutory rape laws? Authoritative coercion?
/r/MensRights09/07/14 04:31 AM
5

They're not always random, either. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/03/meg-lanker-simons-hoax-university-wisconsin_n_3210326.html
/r/MensRights06/07/14 09:04 PM
2

Even if that's true, it's like saying people who obsessively wash their hands to the point of bleeding are less likely to contract a cold. Doesn't mean they don't have a mental problem.
/r/MensRights06/07/14 09:30 AM
7

I guess because [Bethel] pushed her, and she kind of pushed him back. "Then all of a sudden, I see him get back up," So she "kind of" pushed him hard enough to knock him to the ground? Seems this witness might be soft-selling the aggression a little.
/r/MensRights05/07/14 08:38 PM
1

That's a pretty literal interpretation. I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume parent was being facetious.
/r/MensRights05/07/14 08:33 PM
2

I subbed because I thought it would be good to join a community concerned with Men's rights, not woman bashing. So you thought it would be a place to hear about men's issues, then came in and ignored 99% of the posts, the FAQ, pretty much everything except the "woman-bashing," as you say. Right. Sorry to let down someone with such an open mind. We'll miss you.
/r/MensRights04/07/14 02:28 AM
10

Is lack of female enrollment in STEM bad? Society at large seems to think so, but doesn't really seem to care about lack of male enrollment in... everything. At the very least it's an illustration of a double-standard expressed by many people.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 10:38 PM
1

Why were you subbed in the first place if you couldn't be arsed to even read the FAQ?
/r/MensRights03/07/14 10:20 PM
3

Likely a troll. That phrase is the only thing they post in this sub.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 08:20 PM
2

The FAQ on the sidebar addresses this.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 07:49 PM
6

Excellent post, really. I just have one small gripe: Misogynists. These are pick-up artists, gamers, some MGTOWs, Red-pillers, just general fucking idiots. I'm disappointed that you seem to have swallowed a gulp of the feminist kool-aid and lumped gamers in with the rest of the "typical misogynists." Gamers are no more misogynistic than your average person. It's just when you let feminists dictate how misogynistic that is... well, I'm sure you know how that ends up. Don't help radfems get their …
/r/MensRights03/07/14 05:58 AM
1

One thing that severely bothers me is that many still see this as boys v girls. I feel like many people on this thread see that I am a feminist and must immediately hate them or all men in general. Kinda funny, when in this same thread you say: IRL, (or at least in my real life), the MRM comes across as a bunch of butt hurt little boys who are afraid of losing their privilege. So not only is the MRM entirely composed of men, whose only motivation is being "butthurt over the loss of their privile…
/r/MensRights02/07/14 11:06 PM
0

"Nazi" doesn't get an apostrophe when it's plural. Move it to the word "Shoulda," because it does need one. And add a comma after the word "school." As someone who claims to have paid attention in school, you should know better.
/r/MensRights02/07/14 08:58 PM
1

I honestly do believe that men still rule the world. Most politicians and CEOs of major companies are men, so many people don't see the point to rally around a group that already has so much. I take it you're unfamiliar with the phrase "glass cellar"? Take a guess what most coal miners, trash collectors, loggers, and plumbers look like. Which sex accounts for 94% of workplace deaths? Which sex comprises 75% of the homeless? A handful of ultra-wealthy men doesn't negate that.
/r/MensRights30/06/14 09:28 PM
1

IRL, (or at least in my real life), the MRM comes across as a bunch of butt hurt little boys who are afraid of losing their privilege. I'm assuming this is the reason "Men's Activism" is in quotation marks in your title?
/r/MensRights30/06/14 09:16 PM
3

if we focused on the problems men face rather than the creators of the problems. We're doing both, and they're not exclusive.
/r/MensRights30/06/14 08:17 PM
1

And how is it determined that "we don't know what their point is the first place?" Oh, right. Disagreeing with it.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 08:07 PM
1

Because they're probably projecting the idea that the same standard of evidence they're rallying for in rape cases is going to be the same standard of evidence used against them to investigate their veracity. They're terrified "If they said you did it, you did it" is a standard that's going to be applied to them, not just the men they're trying to lock up.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 08:04 PM
1

So if feminists make a point, and we disagree, we're idiots? Just like that? We're not allowed to find fault with it? It's not up for discussion?
/r/MensRights27/06/14 07:42 PM
5

Every single one of us at Posthuman Studios stands in support of feminism's basic principle: treating only women as people. Fixed.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 11:51 AM
4

Well yeah, they want them to be inclusive. That's why they can't be inclusive, because then they could no longer want for them to be. Now they have something to look forward to.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 11:42 AM
1

As any mra to articulate how their rape culture theory works and what you will generally get are guesses based on slogans. Creationists feel the same way when scientists talk about evolution. Scientists just "don't get it." People disagreeing with you doesn't mean they don't understand your point. They just think your point is hogwash. And you don't seem to be able to accept that.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 02:59 AM
1

Its not my fault that this movement is collectively too stupid to find out what an argument is before objecting to it The people replying to you are perfectly aware of what the argument is, and they not only think it's bullshit, they've illustrated how. Deal with it. You're just repeating yourself and throwing a fit.
/r/MensRights26/06/14 09:50 PM
7

"He types, all day, into the endless void that is the internet." I love it when an author unwittingly disparages their own work.
/r/MensRights26/06/14 07:25 AM
1

“Hey, I know you mean well, but you don’t have any place telling a woman what feminism is supposed to look like.” Yet feminists constantly feel entitled to tell MRAs that they shouldn't even exist, because feminists are fighting on men's behalf?
/r/MensRights25/06/14 09:45 PM
1

more than once here I've seen people say some rather questionable things about feminism that on a surface level do look rather misogynistic. But feminism is an ideology. How can one say something misogynistic about a system of ideas?
/r/MensRights25/06/14 08:17 PM
2

More than once here I've seen people say some rather questionable things about women/feminism that on a surface level do look rather misogynistic... You think that could be because you seem to equate women and feminism? Criticizing feminism is in no way criticizing women, yet you write "women/feminism" as though the two are analogues.
/r/MensRights25/06/14 06:35 AM
6

"Grow a pair" is what gives away the true nature of all these insults: it's not that a boy's acting like a girl, it's that he's not acting like a "man." Any deviation from a male's assigned gender roles results in shaming, regardless of the nature of the deviation.
/r/MensRights25/06/14 06:17 AM
1

The sickening truth is you can buy a silencer for a woman. It’s a called a handgun. Wait, I thought men didn't need them because they're like 900% stronger than the average woman. Isn't that the reason women are terrifed to walk anywhere in public without a marine escort?
/r/MensRights24/06/14 10:29 PM
3

Once upon a time they used to get the same reaction when they said blacks/asians/latinos are worse or dumber than whites at X. Eventually people came to the realization it was kinda' fucked up.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 07:56 PM
2

Homer's got your back on this one.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 04:33 AM
2

Heaven forbid that women be responsible for the amount they drink... FTFY, since men have always been responsible for the consequences of their drinking. And recently, responsible for the consequences of women's drinking as well.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 04:26 AM
4

Would this have been posted if a man had said it? If a man said "all men cheat"? Yeah, it probably would have. And it wouldn't be any less trite -- remember, I'm not fucking defending it. But anyone that comes in here, ignores every other post on the front page, but then sees this one and somehow comes to the conclusion this sub hates women? That person already had their mind made up, and is just cherry-picking whatever affirms the prejudice they came in here with. That said, I still downvote sh…
/r/MensRights23/06/14 10:29 PM
4

...this sub is essentially /r/womanhate for some people. People too stupid to realize "this person, who happens to be female, is an idiot," does not equal "I hate all women?" Don't get me wrong, I don't care for this kind of crap either, but the reaction people have towards this sub upon seeing it is completely disproportionate, and tends just to be lame affirmations of their own prejudices.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 09:45 PM
2

Now, shhh. Grown ups are talking. After the ignorant bullshit you posted earlier? That's rich.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 03:08 AM
0

Poor people are poor because they spend all their food money on their insatiable face tattoo habits? It's obvious you've never been a poor person, but have you even met one before?
/r/MensRights22/06/14 09:19 PM
1

Imagine for example if the UN space ambassador ever is needed and turns out to be a feminist? All the lies she would tell and the potential consequences terrifies me. I would hope that an alien race advanced enough for interstellar/inter-dimensional travel would have a deep enough foundation in logic and reason to filter all the incoming bullshit. I would love to see an advanced species' reaction to being told sexism isn't sexism if it's directed at a male, for instance.
/r/MensRights22/06/14 09:08 PM
2

You CAN be discriminatory, rude, inconsiderate, and/or prejudiced against men but you CANNOT be sexist toward them. sexism noun \ˈsek-ˌsi-zəm\ : prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women Looks like the dictionary disagrees, though it does seem to think that sexism against women is somehow extra sexist.
/r/MensRights22/06/14 08:50 PM
3

Do you really think that was the point parent was making?
/r/MensRights22/06/14 02:52 AM
9

what it seems like to me is losing some skin compared to the possibility of losing your penis to infection. Or you could, you know, wash the fucking thing every now and then. Know how much bacteria grows under your fingernails? I vote we permanently remove all children's fingernails at birth. What's losing a little keratin compared to the possibility of losing all your fingers to infection?
/r/MensRights20/06/14 09:56 PM
8

The majority of the MRM's ire is not toward circumcision per se, but specifically the circumcision of infants. Without addressing the veracity of its ability to "prevent std's and infection", I doubt anyone here would be opposed to someone deciding for themselves they wish to be circumcised. Our opposition is towards making that decision for someone that is too young to consent for themselves.
/r/MensRights20/06/14 09:51 PM
2

Depends what you mean by "punching". Taking a swing at someone is assault. It becomes battery if the swing connects.
/r/MensRights20/06/14 09:45 PM
1

When I completed my obstetrics and gynaecology class, we were given our ward assignments, and strangely, whilst my female counterparts were sent to delivery, post natal clinic, etc., I was posted to a surgical ward. When I queried the assignment, I was told ask why I would want to work in those areas, and told the women wouldn't want me there anyway. We've changed their gender coffee with racial coffee. Let's see if they notice the difference... When I queried the assignment, I was told ask why …
/r/MensRights20/06/14 09:33 PM
2

How would we get through to someone like this? You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
/r/MensRights15/06/14 12:45 AM
1

Wait, I'm confused. If "pussy" isn't offensive because it's not a gendered slur (since its meaning isn't derived from genitalia), why is "dick" acceptable?
/r/MensRights15/06/14 12:28 AM
1

Not saying that I personally do, but you can see why one could take issue with it though, yes?
/r/MensRights14/06/14 11:51 PM
1

Presumably from the way you have been talking earlier Like where I said "as a slur"? "Girls have pussies" obviously would not qualify. Yes, I meant the former.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 11:45 PM
2

TBH I agree with most of what you said, just the absoluteness of the preamble made it seem like you were advocating that as a catch-all approach to everything. It was the only thing I was really taking issue with. Not your conclusion, but how it seemed to be arrived at.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 11:25 PM
1

Didn't want anyone that did think so to feel left out. As a proponent of "equal treatment", I'm sure you can appreciate that. Out of curiosity, how do you feel about people using "pussy" as a slur?
/r/MensRights14/06/14 11:20 PM
1

Like all reasonable people you could suggest meeting in the middle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation
/r/MensRights14/06/14 10:34 PM
8

Equality. If it's good for the gander, it's good for the goose. If that's problematic, then address the law, not its application to females. Otherwise, it sounds like you're saying "you don't seriously expect us to apply this unjust law equally to females, do you?"
/r/MensRights14/06/14 10:31 PM
1

That wasn't really my point. The names are of secondary importance to the ideas people carry, and none of the discussion in this subthread addresses that. If MRAs started calling themselves feminists, would the media stop portraying men as predators? What's an egalitarian's stance on legal paternal surrender? What's the Fluffy Rainbow Unicorn movement going to do to solve the vastly disproportionate suicide and homelessness problems facing males? But really, it doesn't matter that much what name…
/r/MensRights14/06/14 10:20 PM
2

Contrary to the prevailing logic in this thread, the members of this sub don't just blindly attack anyone who refers to themselves as a "feminist." People who come into this sub self-declaring themselves as feminists have quite often been welcomed here, depending on what their stance is on issues, not their title. It's what I've found so nauseating about this entire "egalitarian" sub-thread. Everyone stroking themselves over how better-suited their titles are, with no substantive discussion on i…
/r/MensRights14/06/14 09:23 PM
2

The men here should also remember... Why do you assume everyone here is male?
/r/MensRights14/06/14 09:15 PM
2

why don't we all just lock arms and tackle these problems together, rather than fighting amongst ourselves? Only if we sing "Kumbaya" while we do it.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 05:36 AM
2

I am however, not a men's rights activist. I'm an egalitarian. These are not mutually exclusive things. Not saying what you should identify as, but one is perfectly capable of being both.
/r/MensRights14/06/14 04:48 AM
4

whoosh
/r/MensRights13/06/14 11:11 PM
10

SRS began the same way. It's not what it started as, but what it became that has people annoyed.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 10:30 PM
0

There are links to outside sources in the article.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 10:13 PM
-3

It's really dishonest and sets your argument back when you say "Women just plain choose easy jobs." Guess it's a good thing parent never said that then, isn't it?
/r/MensRights12/06/14 09:59 PM
3

If you believe in "The patriarchy," then no, you are not working towards the same thing as the MRM.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 09:46 PM
-1

So, Dexter?
/r/MensRights12/06/14 09:41 PM
1

Keep in mind that your attacker isn't necessarily going to be alone at night, either. No matter how large he is, one man is not going to easily deter five assailants. I'd personally agree that women taking steps to mitigate their vulnerability through numbers definitely has an effect on how often they're assaulted, but I don't agree that they're that much more vulnerable when they're by themselves. Between numbers and surprise, you're a mark alone at night, regardless of gender.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 10:30 PM
7

"More reasonable" is still a really low bar to clear when you're comparing to /r/feminism. And while I do agree twox is more reasonable, there's still an awful lot of clueless misandrist garbage, and absurd feminist talking points (72 cents on the dollar, 99% of all rape victims, etc) highly upvoted and circlejerked to there, frequently accompanied with a hearty dose of zealous MRA bashing. The only difference is over there, they usually have people that will call it out. They're just not nearly…
/r/MensRights11/06/14 09:57 PM
2

If you were Ubermensch you'd know that's not true.
/r/MensRights10/06/14 10:31 PM
5

How can equality possibly make things worse for women when all that men have is privilege?
/r/MensRights10/06/14 09:23 PM
12

Don't limit yourself to being a man. Be a mensch. Jawol! Heil the feminazi party!
/r/MensRights10/06/14 05:07 AM
3

men on the Internet (#NotAllMen etc., whatever) tried to co-opt a Twitter conversation about violence against women... ...which itself was started by co-opting a mass shooting that killed more males than females, and instead made it solely about the threat to women.
/r/MensRights09/06/14 11:03 PM
4

Who said the authors are the hypocrites? Maybe it's Jezebel's editors that are hypocrites here.
/r/MensRights09/06/14 08:12 PM
6

In fairness, it was never really a problem until it started to affect women. A full 1% of the American population behind bars? Meh, that's some interesting trivia. Almost 1/10th of 'em are women? Holy shit, we need to do something about this injustice!
/r/MensRights09/06/14 04:27 AM
2

And written in The Guardian, no less. I know they typically have a pro-feminist slant, but the bigotry in this article is just transparent. It's stunning how such a well-respected newspaper could be so oblivious to this myopia, even if it is an editorial.
/r/MensRights09/06/14 04:13 AM
7

Reality alert: the United States female prison population has increased 800% in the last three decades. During that same period, the male prison population also exploded, but only at half the rate of the female one. Yet nary a peep about how the male prison population still dwarfs the female population by over ten-to-one... Real prisons weren't designed to accommodate white, upper middle-class ladies with college degrees like Kerman. A new report out last week found that 59% of the US prison pop…
/r/MensRights08/06/14 11:01 PM
4

I've spent the better part of my life trying not to develop an inferiority complex for having been told, in so many ways, that I'm a defective female, "poisoned" by testosterone. If I had a dollar for every time I heard a teacher say this to boys as far back as grade school...
/r/MensRights03/06/14 05:19 AM
17

but yall feel left out from some of the movements that deal exclusively with just females. By your own words, if they "deal exclusively with just females", then men aren't feeling left out, they are left out.
/r/MensRights03/06/14 04:57 AM
1

Here's the system in a nutshell: women are weak and must give up their rights to control their lives and have agency in exchange for being benevolently protected by men... So you're saying that women have no control over their lives because most murderers are male? Murder is so widespread that women literally have no agency to do anything? Where the hell do you live? There were women in the middle of the Stalingrad meatgrinder that at least had some control over their lives. But the society we c…
/r/MensRights03/06/14 04:31 AM
1

You realize this works more against the person making the original argument than anyone else, right? If it's so damn easy to find, what excuse does the person presenting the info have to not have the sources handy?
/r/MensRights03/06/14 03:23 AM
7

She can't consider herself complete because of her gender? A little less self-loathing would cure that -- no need to abolish an entire race.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 03:39 AM
12

How in the hell did you arrive at that conclusion?
/r/MensRights02/06/14 02:16 AM
2

I see it like an opposite of the "women behaving badly" posts that make it to the front page here. Like those, while not directly a MRM issue, it addresses a cultural misconception (men are deadbeats/pedophiles, etc.) that hinders progress towards other MRM issues.
/r/MensRights01/06/14 05:07 AM
1

Already listed some of your talking points, and even said I agree with a few. That's about what I thought. You don't have a clue what MRAs are about, especially if you're content to leave it at what you've mentioned thus far. If you had any clue, you wouldn't have finished your post with a recitation of Title IX. And good lord, do you still not understand what it was I was trying to get you to realize with my first reply? I was trying to get you to see how bigoted and intolerant your standpoint …
/r/MensRights31/05/14 11:27 PM
3

Why not just carry some pepper spray, a Razer, or a gun? You want women to protect themselves with a gaming peripheral? Don't you know how objectifying and sexist video games are?!
/r/MensRights31/05/14 12:26 AM
7

Do people who spout this nonsense realize how frail and cowardly they make women sound when they post this?
/r/MensRights31/05/14 12:20 AM
3

Not nearly as traumatic as rape. But more traumatic than a rape that never happened.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 11:56 PM
2

Maybe he was a racist too? I have seen more than one feminist/troll/knuckledragger explain away the male deaths as "objects" that were "merely in his way," unlike the women that he "actually wanted to kill." So I suppose for him to be a racist, the women would have to be of color, since they apparently seem to be the only human beings that were present.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 05:14 AM
1

The way it should be is the way it works in business. Completely fake flattering human emotions to beguile them from the fact that you're attempting to exploit them for whatever asset you're after? Doesn't sound like the start of a healthy relationship...
/r/MensRights30/05/14 04:49 AM
1

Can't really see how saying there's a lack of women in STEM is anything but a thinly-veiled jab at their intelligence That's because you can't stop projecting your contempt for men, who are in a perfectly analogous situation to these women. In fact, many would say that men's position in this regard is more dire -- women have an enrollment shortfall in one specific area of college studies. Men have an enrollment shortfall in college as a whole. Not only do you not consider that to be of secondary…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 03:07 AM
1

Your use of italics belies your deep-seated issues, man. Never said I was a man, and I can't say I've ever seen anyone ad-hominem over the use of italics before. Amazing. This is why I feed trolls. Sex has nothing to do with one's mental capabilities and the fact that you're implying women are stupid... Nothing to do with one's mental capabilites unless they're men, you mean? I wasn't implying I thought women were stupid, and I'm not surprised you didn't notice. I was merely pointing out an inco…
/r/MensRights29/05/14 09:23 PM
4

Oh, am I too stupid to earn a college scholarship by my own merits... But a shortage of women in STEM? Women making less money than men? Bet that's because of discrimination, isn't it?
/r/MensRights29/05/14 12:40 AM
1

Because the "movement" refers to itself as doing something positive for women, yet its focus is actually on demonizing men. The tag is defensive and altruistic, when the rhetoric is offensive and divisive. Try turning some of that skepticism inward.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 09:55 PM
5

So "yes all women" is actually about "toxic notions held by men". Feminist doublespeak. I'm shocked.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 07:42 AM
6

If I've learned anything from feminists regarding this issue, it's that wanting to do bad things to women is worse than doing bad things to men.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 07:14 AM
9

The MR movement is equivalent to the "White Power" movement. You just recently became aware of the Men's Rights movement from some news article, I'm guessing?
/r/MensRights27/05/14 09:19 PM
10

Well, that's a relief. If I'm ever stabbed to death, I hope I have the comfort of knowing my internal organs were being perforated merely for someone's convenience, rather than some sort of hate-shivving. I imagine that would make a cut throat sting so much worse.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 09:12 AM
5

Unfortunately there are often people who try to make political capital out of tragedies like this.
/r/MensRights25/05/14 06:59 AM
3

They concluded that ages ago, before they ever saw any numbers. These are the same idiots that hail Google search result quantities as academic research. This kind of lowbrow "data" is right up their alley.
/r/MensRights21/05/14 01:42 AM
7

Worth noting that considering how politically charged men's rights issues are, and the subsequent nuisances like brigading and doxxing it attracts, there are those of us that have accounts solely for posting here and other controversial subs. I for one post to a very large variety of subs on Reddit, but aside from commenting in the occasional front-paged post, this particular account is really only used for posting here. Not sure how much that messes with the results because I've no idea how com…
/r/MensRights20/05/14 09:07 PM
8

When a man (though, of course, not all men) butts into a conversation about a feminist issue... I wonder if the author realizes the way this is worded betrays the fact that they view men as perpetual outsiders to feminism. If male input is automatically categorized as "butting into" feminist issues, it kinda' implies men don't have an equal place there, no? Yet I just can't understand how that could be the case when feminists testify that they're working so hard to remedy men's societal inequiti…
/r/MensRights19/05/14 06:34 AM
1

I have no idea what anyone from this sub would be doing in /r/Feminism/ in the first place. At the very least, it exposes them for being a closed-minded, ban-happy echo chamber. But it also does add a smidge of bridge-building credibility that people here at least try to have a dialogue with them. Even if we get immediately banned from the sub, it shows that we welcome discussion and disagreement from their members over here -- they do not extend that same courtesy. I wish it was more likely to …
/r/MensRights17/05/14 12:49 AM
1

Thought the same. It wasn't until I got to the comments here that I realized it wasn't.
/r/MensRights15/05/14 07:06 AM
2

I would think the fact that we don't ban people for disagreeing with us makes MRAs seem open to discourse. As cheeky as parent may have been, I think they have a point. Lots of MRAs are guilty of going over to the feminist subs to do exactly the same thing we invite them over here to do. Problem is the feminist subs appear to be in place to facilitate monoculture, not discussion. Some even say as much in the sidebar.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 06:03 AM
7

Maybe she was trying to "teach him not to rape."
/r/MensRights14/05/14 01:17 AM
7

“The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.” -- Abraham Lincoln
/r/MensRights12/05/14 11:01 PM
16

Curious that you had no problem saying men oppress women, men can oppress men, women can oppress women, yet you carefully tiptoed around saying women can oppress men. Do people who "discriminate against and silence the voices of men" fall short of what you'd call an "oppressor"? I'm genuinely curious why you used exactly the same word to describe every listed situation except female-on-male.
/r/MensRights12/05/14 04:06 AM
2

Child Abuser n. A person, typically a woman, who physically, emotionally, and/or sexually harms children.
/r/MensRights11/05/14 05:26 AM
1

The argument intensified to the point of Condron yelling in her face and ear, according to Graham. Just sayin'. If she had attacked him for no reason at all, it's not like she'd say so to the police.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 05:40 AM
4

Out of curiosity, would you play devil's advocate if this same situation had the sexes reversed? If a woman was yelling into a man's face and ear, and he punched her in the face hard enough to leave it bleeding, would that be a "very clear cut argument for assault" on behalf of the woman?
/r/MensRights07/05/14 05:33 AM
2

But as I've already said, it's been clearly demonstrated that you can set up a bot to check whether or not you've been shadowbanned, so this advantage would do nothing to thwart any bot programmer with half a brain. Shadow banning seems far more useful as a means to surreptitiously censor humans.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 02:52 AM
0

But why shadow banned? What is the advantage to instating a ban that the account isn't aware of, versus just plain old-fashioned banning?
/r/MensRights05/05/14 10:26 PM
1

How is that? I would think it's because bots would continue posting unaware they've been shadowbanned, but that doesn't make sense since both of the shadowban subreddits listed above use bots to determine if people are shadowbanned.
/r/MensRights05/05/14 08:55 PM
20

Complaining that your critics have a voice here is hypocritical. Re-read the topic. Parent isn't complaining about them posting here. It's a complaint that shadowbans aren't being meted out equally, especially when you have entire subreddits whose existence largely revolves around the very reasons Reddit ostensibly states they're banning people. I for one find it nauseating that shadow bans even exist. But if you're going to do it, you'd damn well better do it fairly. And parent is complaining t…
/r/MensRights05/05/14 05:38 AM
1

You evaded the question. Do you feel that women having access to contraception is a sufficient reason to outlaw abortion? If not, why do you employ that same line of reasoning when the sexes are swapped?
/r/MensRights05/05/14 05:25 AM
11

If you don't want to be a dad, use effective contraception, and fight for improved contraceptive choices. When the anti-abortion crowd uses this exact same argument for why abortion should be illegal, do you find yourself agreeing with it?
/r/MensRights04/05/14 04:28 AM
12

Free speech is a highly cherished value amongst most MRAs I've encountered. However I've never seen it used as a "defense" for anything. Free speech is prized for allowing arguments to be voiced, not as the arguments themselves.
/r/MensRights20/04/14 08:53 PM
4

I'm not reading a chapter of a book to make some petty point here. I don't blame you. Most of the petty points you make here don't seem to have ever required reading of any kind.
/r/MensRights13/04/14 08:20 AM
2

If you do a little search for it, "white knight" brings up 172 results... Why do people have this notion that the number of search results brought up by anything means a goddamn thing? For example, in this thread you are the only person to employ the word "mangina", something you did twice. So what does that search result say about you?
/r/MensRights08/04/14 08:00 PM
1

That's because the idea that SRS is a bunch of fuckwits isn't controversial -- the site's in total agreement.
/r/MensRights16/03/14 04:50 PM
5

Thank the Lord for a voice a sanity. I'm not sure how much attention you pay to what goes on around here, but that singular "voice of sanity" you imply a dearth of around here is actually the chorus. Almost no one on this sub advocates censorship, and in the threads I skimmed over regarding the SNL skit, I didn't notice any upvoted posts advocating it. I'm almost tempted to say your passage smacks a bit of concern trolling.
/r/MensRights14/03/14 03:06 AM
23

So, feminist here. Welcome to the sub... If you feel that is sufficient to downvote me before you read the rest of my post, please go right ahead, that will spare me your commentary. ...but please make an effort to refrain from prefacing your comments with this presumptuous condescension.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 07:25 PM
2

Left out the part where the dude on the right paid for five scoops from the machine. One on the left didn't pay for any, but desperately needed to check his privilege.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 09:17 AM
15

Concern trolling -- the $2 strawman argument. The poster is attempting to give everyone the idea that the only thing anyone does on this board is mindlessly bitch about feminists, but hides it in a veneer of altruism so no one suspects the duplicity.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 08:01 AM
8

By this author's logic, wouldn't men, having their "libido and aggression fueled by testosterone", be considered emotionally "weaker" than women who aren't enslaved by their hormones? Shouldn't the "higher standard" for preventing drunken sex then fall on women's shoulders? If having your perception impaired by alcohol makes one a victim, wouldn't that mean that men are the ones preyed upon, being perpetually "bereft of their faculties"?
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:41 AM
24

I'm sure there will be a massive influx of feminist support pouring into the WSJ to tell them how NOW is a bunch of fringe radicals that don't speak for them.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 08:28 AM
6

If you're so thin-skinned you can't handle the toxicity of random assholes in a pub game, you don't have what it takes to cut it at a competitive level, regardless of what sits between your legs.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 07:36 AM
23

Ransom money for your diploma.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 07:07 AM
1

go post this to /r/science and see what happens. They'll literally laugh you out. That's because they laugh everything out. "This study is ridiculously flawed. Correlation does not equal causation. Science journalism is literally Hitler." Every /r/science post ever.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 10:01 AM
1

your feelings are your responsibility. "Trigger warning!"
/r/MensRights12/02/14 01:33 AM
1

it seems to be blocked by people underneath him -- not proof that he has no part in it, but also not proof that he is. At the very least, that says he's incompetent. Any manager that doesn't have a clue what his subordinates are doing is not much of a leader. If he does know what they're doing, then they have his tacit approval.
/r/MensRights05/02/14 02:37 AM
5

Careful, it looks like in the midst of giggling to yourself, you accidentaly posted something in this board. Might wanna push your keyboard aside next time you're overtaken by a fit of idiocy.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 10:30 AM
15

Well for starters, "77 cents for every dollar" implies that there's a 23% wage disparity. But the actual statistic was calculated as average annual income, which doesn't take into account employment choices, hours worked, etc. Men on average work longer hours than women. Men work more dangerous, and typically more demanding jobs than women. These things are going to cause men to earn more money over the course of the year. But when it's stated as "cents on the dollar", it implies that if you hav…
/r/MensRights01/02/14 02:58 AM
12

Wait, so you just got through saying that many feminists, namely ones that regurgitate false statistics (like the 77% stat), are assholes. Then you say that there's nothing wrong with Obama's statement, which was the 77% stat. Are you calling yourself an asshole feminist?
/r/MensRights01/02/14 02:28 AM
15

"You know, today, women make up about half our workforce, but they still make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. That is wrong, and in 2014, it's an embarrassment." President Barack Obama, 2014 State of the Union Address So, by your definition, "uneducated radical"?
/r/MensRights01/02/14 01:09 AM
4

I am a feminist. Are you trying to say that you know more about my movement than I do? Amusingly, I've heard this exact response countless times from religious fundamentalists when they ask me about problems I have with their religion. They don't even realize it's fallacious. And the fact that you follow up this gem with that old, cluelessly parroted, "we're on your side" tripe and genuinely think anyone in this sub is going to buy it says that you don't know anything about us.
/r/MensRights01/02/14 12:55 AM
6

Whenever a contentious gender issue hits the front page, you can often find people who will proudly proclaim it right in the thread. "I just went to that /MR place, and OMG <cherrypicked, out-of-context posts>."
/r/MensRights30/01/14 01:58 AM
15

One thing I've noticed that comes up a lot in rants like these is the fact that since this subreddit isn't a full-fledged activism group that's actively lobbying in government or the like, it's a colossal failure. Are they any other subreddits that are held to this standard? I mean, it's Reddit for fuck's sake, the site that has idiotic image macros and pictures of cats as its banner material. But for some reason, this subreddit needs to have nobel prize winners and legislation working its way t…
/r/MensRights30/01/14 12:33 AM
12

focusing on issues that affect us rather than complaining about double standards What if cultural double-standards are issues that affect us?
/r/MensRights27/01/14 01:14 AM
4

How is pointing out that men are also subjected to unrealistic body imagery in video games and movies "putting down" feminists, or "us vs them"?
/r/MensRights27/01/14 01:07 AM
12

Yet that's exactly the mindset he's operating from.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 05:41 AM
3

I can't imagine a better way to get the general populace to desire the abolition of quotas than implementing a bunch that favor men.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 12:03 AM
9

As a male, I'm stronger than most females. I think you'd find that fact would be little comfort if one were to put a knife to your neck, or gun to your head. Neither would it do you much good if you were drugged. And that's just covering straight-up physical violation. As others in this thread have mentioned, violent assault is not the only way one can be raped.
/r/MensRights03/01/14 11:29 PM
13

anti-woman vitriol "Anti-feminist" does not equal "anti-woman." If you are truly concerned that "the public face is often so horrible", then please stop perpetuating this stereotype that MRAs hate women.
/r/MensRights01/01/14 02:55 AM
11

male culture of powerplay and dominance You think the idea that men need to be powerful and dominant is only espoused by males?
/r/MensRights25/12/13 09:55 PM
4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifurcation_fallacy
/r/MensRights24/12/13 07:32 PM
29

Makes you wonder how many times this has happened where the person placing the files didn't get caught doing it.
/r/MensRights23/12/13 02:04 PM
4

I would love to hear their rationale for how a calendar of scantily-clad men is an example of misogyny.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 10:14 AM
1

...real egalitarian activists like Malala Yousafzai. I got the impression OP was using her as an example of who they weren't talking about.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 12:45 PM
5

The Poe's Law is strong with this one.
/r/MensRights14/12/13 02:35 AM
3

MRAs actually make an attempt to marginalize radicals within their own community. Hence ideologies such as redpill, etc. actually advocating their own movements separately from the MRM. Just look on this very sub, members here are very vocal about policing our own. We don't tacitly endorse crazies, then only rebuke them when they get called out publicly. Take a look at how well-recieved Manhood Academy idealogues are when they show up here, for example. Posters here are even critical of some of …
/r/MensRights08/12/13 12:28 AM
1

I don't have a source handy or anything, but extrapolating from incarceration statistics, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out police brutality is a problem disproportionately affecting males.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 07:22 AM
22

I don't think calling the article's author a whore really helps parent's post, but the word is merely a gender neutral synonym for prostitute. Men are just as able to be whores as women. It's just more commonly used to refer to women because prostitutes are more commonly female.
/r/MensRights07/12/13 07:19 AM
1

Considering there's no alt code for typing it (presumably the reason you linked a pic of it instead of typing it yourself) I wouldn't hold my breath on it being in widespread use here anytime soon.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 12:01 AM
3

This empowers girls! This is right here is a good example what differentiates MRAs and feminists. MRAs don't advocate sexism in response to sexism, they're egalitarian. Supporting a sexist ideology is never empowering. It may seem like it to some, but it enslaves you to the ideology. Contrasts like this post point out the hypocrisy of screaming "opression" at things like toys for girls, while turning a blind eye to the fact that boys have to deal with the same kinds of brainwashing. What it does…
/r/MensRights04/12/13 11:59 PM
9

There are even comments on the imgur thread that resemble yours: "The problem with using these two as an argument against feminism is because He-Man wasn't made to appeal to men's sexual fantasies>>" "It's too early in the morning for stupid strawmen and false equivalences, reddit." "What is male power fantasy. Men set the beauty standard in Barbie. Men set the power ideal in He-Man. He-man is not the standard of what men must meet to be deemed attractive. Seriously, He-man is a muscly exaggerat…
/r/MensRights04/12/13 07:38 PM
0

I think it's safe to say that the majority of people here hear the word feminism and think "oh yeah, a dry thilthy lesbians who are trying to be better than us." If you've come to that conclusion based on the reaction, or more to the point, lack of feminist-compassionate reactions to the posters in a thread illustrating disgusting radical feminist actions, then you already had your mind made up of the MRM worldview before you even came in here. I mean really, you're stereotyping everyone here be…
/r/MensRights04/12/13 07:10 PM
0

People here seem to believe every feminist is okay with this?? Really? You seem to believe every poster on this board thinks like this? Really?
/r/MensRights04/12/13 10:17 AM
2

These are perfect examples, though. If a white nationalist advocated programs to help feed the poor, that doesn't mean feeding the poor is a bad idea. Animal rights is not a bankrupt idea because Hitler was for them. The ideas are separate from the advocates. This is the very basis of what makes ad-hominem attacks fallacious.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 02:49 AM
5

"Look at what this insane feminist is saying," does not equal, "see how evil women are!" You're perpetuating the "All MRAs are misogynists" strawman.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 01:43 AM
1

If "man up" means exactly the same as "grow up," why isn't there also an analogous "woman up" in common parlance? I'd say it's because "grow up" isn't what the phrase means, its real meaning is tied to a man's worth being his utility -- being a "real man." Manhood isn't something that society values intrinsically, it has to be earned and can be taken away, unlike womanhood which is (rightfully) a female birthright. It's a thought-terminating cliche that's invoked almost universally in situations…
/r/MensRights29/11/13 07:51 PM
1

According to feminists, you can't consent while drunk.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 08:06 PM
0

Then don't drink too much and have sex with people you don't know. How about instead of shaming him for drinking too much, we teach women not to rape? /s
/r/MensRights10/11/13 05:03 PM
3

Not if you're a zombie.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 10:16 AM
3

Wasn't there a video posted here not too long ago about a man who was scolded by CPS because he bought his child McDonald's? Damned if you do, damned if you don't...
/r/MensRights08/11/13 10:12 AM
7

Change a couple words around: Blacks are incarcerated for criminal thinking and anti-social behavior. Whites come in because of social influences and trauma. Wonder if MSN would have any reservations about publishing that one.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 10:25 AM
5

What you have to understand is the last line is a really touchy subject for many MRAs. Feminists are frequently of the opinion that the men's rights movement shouldn't exist at all because feminists are "already on it." Look at how many times a feminist will say something along the lines of "Oh you believe in gender equality? Congratulations, you're a feminist." Asking the MRM to support feminism is usually phrased in such a way to coax MRAs to abandon their cause, and instead support feminists.…
/r/MensRights07/11/13 06:32 AM
1

But some posters here have definitely decided that their discomfort with the word "creep" trumps the right of people to use it... And how have they done that? By censoring their speech and deleting their post? Banning their accounts? Because we pride ourselves on not doing that here, unlike certain other subs on Reddit that claim to champion tolerance, and unlike feminist groups that attempt to do everything they can to prevent access to "offensive" ideas. Here, you're welcome to say whatever th…
/r/MensRights06/11/13 10:33 AM
5

Overpopulation is not really an issue in developed countries. Most industialized countries are already below replacement fertility rate. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/TFR_vs_PPP_2009.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-replacement_fertility
/r/MensRights06/11/13 10:06 AM
3

Occam's Razor, that explains it. "Man bad, woman victim," is the simplest way to look at it.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 08:19 AM
7

Threats of violence, imminent danger to others, self defense The woman was obviously not in any danger. The man she attacked, not once but twice, was standing in the doorway to a building that she was outside of. If she was in any danger there was nothing preventing her from simply turning around and leaving. And as for self defense, you're condemning the only person in the video who exercised it. If you can excuse the actions of the woman, who might have been acting in self-defense, how can you…
/r/MensRights05/11/13 04:08 AM
3

What possible context could excuse a kick to the genitals?
/r/MensRights05/11/13 03:32 AM
0

Hate to be a rules lawyer, but I imagine... No advice animals, rage comics, or other low-effort image posts. ...is referring to just this sort of thing.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 10:56 AM
1

"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." - H.L. Mencken Normally I'd say this idea has a much better place when we're talking about govenment surveillance, unjust imprisonment, free speech laws, etc. But I think the sentiment applies at least a bit in this case as well.
/r/MensRights27/10/13 04:21 AM
22

A man goes out and fucks 20 women he's a stud, a woman goes out and fucks 20 men she's a slut. If you don't think there is something wrong with that then you don't understand what equality means. A woman stays chaste for years she's noble, a man stays chaste for years and he's a fucking loser. If you don't think there is something wrong with that then you don't understand what equality means.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 09:10 AM
3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot You cannot disprove something that hasn't been proven to begin with. Patriarchy is very much akin to religion -- nebulously defined, and unfalsifiable. You can't disprove it any more than you can disprove the existence of invisible pink unicorns.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 01:22 AM
3

It doesn't make it an unimportant issue. It makes it an irrelevant issue, because we're talking about what a news channel should or shouldn't be broadcasting. You seem to want to spend time myopically dwelling on "is bullying bad?" The rest of us were talking about something else.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 10:23 AM
2

Do you think 20/20 should air a story about it every time someone gets called a cunt on the internet?
/r/MensRights18/10/13 08:48 AM
7

But the problem now is not just sicko men wanting to leer at female bodies... Face it, she doesn't care what the state of the porn industry actually is, she's a sex-negative feminist who has a problem with male sexuality. If the desire to view a naked body makes men "sickos", all pornography is tainted, not just "as it currently exists".
/r/MensRights15/10/13 05:49 AM
1

Well, the wikipedia example states how an Argument from Authority can be fallacious, in particular if the speaker is not an expert on the subject matter. With regards to how I feel it applies to "privilege", I'd say that the premise “privilege imparts inescapable bias on the privileged” is where the argument falls apart. Privilege is usually invoked based on nothing but superficial criteria -- the target is caucasian, so their thoughts have no relevance on race or poverty. The target is male, th…
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:09 AM
3

Invoking "privilege" has always struck me as a kind of a fallacious inverse argument from authority. Instead of the speaker asserting an authoritative position, they instead posit that the "privileged" target is in an insurmountably un-authoritative position, i.e., they can't possibly know what the invoker is discussing because their perception is warped by x privilege. That makes the speaker an "expert" on their subject in comparison to the target, who will never be able to offer a meaningful c…
/r/MensRights23/08/13 08:21 AM
7

I was wondering the same at first, but there's actually quite a bit of demonization of male sexuality in there. "Conquering", "sexualizing", "dehumanizing", "consuming", "...a desire to colonize her body". Nowhere in this article is male desire referred to as anything but pejorative.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 09:23 PM
13

/r/MensRights really needs some perspective sometimes. Please don't presume to speak for this whole board. There are irrational posters on here as there are in any sub, but lumping the whole damn subreddit into that same circle is unfair at best, and comes off as slanderous concern-trolling at worst.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 10:05 PM
9

Hey now, one English major having his head up his ass is no reason to shit on the whole lot of them.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 07:10 AM
5

The few that can't be explained through such a feminist lens can usually be explained in ways that make so much more sense than the MRA's theory, which is pretty much non-existent. First thing I thought of when I read this line is how religious fundamentalists claim science is a failure when it doesn't have answers for things because their sacred texts already have the answer.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 02:59 PM
2

The scale of the figures posted in this graph diminishes as they go from the left to the right. Take a look at it in a graphics editor -- the tops of the heads of the rightmost figures barely come up to the shoulders of the ones on the left. Statistics aside, the graph is visually misleading.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 11:37 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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