| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | This just in: Pepsi superbowl was bad because it was racist, not because it showed domestic violence against men as funny.The abusive and dominating spouse dynamic definitely offended me, but I was more struck by the racial element at the end. My first thought was that the couple ran away because they recognized the futility of the situation. Black people accidentally attack white woman = guilty. They knew they had no chance of defending themselves against the police/justice system, so they ran. Seemed like it could've been a Dave Chappelle bit: "Oh, shit! We hit a white woman! We're screwed. Let's get the fuck out… | /r/MensRights | 11/02/11 04:01 AM |
| 2 | What does "creepy" mean?Fat. Then run away. | /r/MensRights | 14/11/10 04:20 AM |
| 1 | Astounding: Court says there's a 'reasonable likelihood' that a man was wrongfully convicted of sex crimes, but refuses to upset the convictionWho says the facts are bad? They seemed to convince the judge. Prejudicial "twisting" of the law to arrive at a just decision isn't prudent, I agree. However, I don't think it's necessary in this case because the charge was never contested nor scrutinized; the defendant plead guilty as a minor. Even the judge admitted that the the decision was "likely" wrong. How can you deny an appeal when the case wasn't even truly heard in the first place? Is the precedent even worthy of protection? I'd say t… | /r/MensRights | 18/08/10 08:08 PM |
| 2 | Astounding: Court says there's a 'reasonable likelihood' that a man was wrongfully convicted of sex crimes, but refuses to upset the convictionYeah, I understand that's the way the law works. The appeals process is supposed to protect the integrity of the decision, but it's absurd to protect the integrity of law at the expense of innocent people. Appeals process should exonerate the innocent, but it only works in favor of the wealthy who can afford legal representation. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the law shouldn't exist in its own right or for the sake of maintaining order. It should protect our liberties and prese… | /r/MensRights | 18/08/10 06:32 PM |
| 1 | Astounding: Court says there's a 'reasonable likelihood' that a man was wrongfully convicted of sex crimes, but refuses to upset the conviction"Reasonable likelihood"? Whatever happened to Reasonable Doubt? | /r/MensRights | 18/08/10 03:51 PM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter