TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

juanml82 Archive

View 0 posts and 257 comments by juanml82 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)
20

"Women" in general, I don't know. Feminist NGOs, absolutely. It undermines their narrative and they are insanely useful in divorce proceedings. Woman married a man who already owned a house, moved there, had a kid, things went wrong and they divorce. Slap a fake child/domestic abuse accusation and she gets a restraining order against him as well as continuing to live in his house. Is she angry at him? (reasonably during a divorce) Slap a fake accusation for shits and giggles. Is dividing the goo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/02/21 07:40 PM
26

No, but it warrants self defense
/r/MensRights07/08/20 01:31 PM
3

That's because feminists are women, and they feel jealous of more beautiful women than them having the spotlight
/r/MensRights30/07/20 03:15 AM
3

Which one of those?
/r/MensRights29/06/20 12:29 AM
-6

Of course it is. It's called self defense, and it applies to all genders and sexual orientations.
/r/MensRights13/06/20 08:36 PM
-1

The reason this topic is brought up is because there are always cunts like you who are ready to jump to the defence of women and act like they can do no wrong When did I say such a thing? You are also a lying cunt generally with how fast you went for the incel accusations. I didn't. I reminded whoever bothered to read that those accusations exist
/r/MensRights04/05/20 10:12 PM
-4

To show how worthless marriage is and thus hopefully prevent more men from marrying. You could say the exact same reverting the genders. Cheating isn't a gender thing. And so what if its bitching about women? I just love this hypocrisy that women can bitch about men whenever they please. But men doing it is bad. If you want to bitch about women, go ahead. But don't complain if people then believe the people who frequent this sub are woman hating incels or something.
/r/MensRights04/05/20 07:16 PM
-4

Well, those tips are useful for either gender, so other than bitching about women, who is this related to men's rights?
/r/MensRights04/05/20 05:53 PM
16

It works, as long as people are professional and don't report coworkers to HR for "not being friendly"
/r/MensRights24/01/20 02:12 PM
1

The boy man in question is 18 years old. FTFY
/r/MensRights16/01/20 07:30 PM
3

On the whole, millennial men might not be quite as effective at assembling cabinets or suppressing their less-manly emotions as Lahren would like, but I’d much prefer that my friends called in a tradesman once in a while rather than going through the maelstrom of mental health issues. But you can both express emotions and know how to do simple repairs. It's not like fixing a tap has something to do with emotions
/r/MensRights15/01/20 10:34 PM
3

I guess the first filter is to check how many men have/use firearms vs how many women do. If more women are more reluctant to have or use them, then it stands to reason fewer women will have the intent or even opportunity to use a firearm to commit suicide
/r/MensRights10/12/19 02:38 PM
-2

If they are above puberty and are happy about it, it's at best a conflict of interest - because rape isn't a happy occurrence.
/r/MensRights07/12/19 05:50 PM
-3

Is there anyone here who'd be really, seriously, negatively affected in the situation of the delivery guy? Is there anyone who's afraid of watching half-naked beautiful women? What's with the victimhood complex and the whining?
/r/MensRights07/12/19 03:33 PM
0

No, you can't project your fantasies onto anyone. Not everybody wants the same things as you. You have no idea what the teenagers involved wanted. They are teenagers. The vast, vast, majority of them want sex. It's entirely possible they were forced or pressured into this. And if so they may have been traumatized by the experience. And it's also possible that they weren't Not to mention the possibility of STDs or pregnancies resulting. Condoms. Which every teenager should know how to use and use…
/r/MensRights07/12/19 03:28 PM
1

Which part? Bringing and using your own condoms or making sure none sticks a needle into it when it's in the teenager's erect penis and the needle would continue on to pierce the penis? ​ Just in case, I'm going with "yes on both"
/r/MensRights07/12/19 03:25 PM
3

So you bring your own condoms, put them on yourself and make sure none approaches the condom with a needle in their hand while it's covering one of the most sensitive parts of you body?
/r/MensRights07/12/19 03:31 AM
-9

That's why you use a condom
/r/MensRights07/12/19 03:01 AM
-14

Can I project them onto teenagers?
/r/MensRights06/12/19 11:51 PM
-25

I'd fuck her
/r/MensRights06/12/19 10:12 PM
0

The 14 year old is incapable of consent Source?
/r/MensRights28/11/19 09:34 PM
1

Rape isn't "Fornication not approved by a third party". Rape is "Fornication not approved by one of the involved parties". If a 14 years old teenager wants to fuck an adult and that adult wants to fuck that teenager, then nothing going on in the 14 years old's brain will scream "rape". On the contrary, it would scream "Yay, sex with someone I like!". We can discuss the morals of adults getting in a relationship with teenagers, specially because relationships involve a lot more than just pumping …
/r/MensRights28/11/19 09:16 PM
7

I understand Caster Semenya is actually intersex. She has XY chromosomes and external female genitals.
/r/MensRights26/11/19 02:45 PM
2

The whole deal with men and feelings is an American issue. And I concur with some people here, what this ad is doing is to feminize men instead of celebrating emotional manly men. TyC Sports, an sports TV channel in Argentina does it well This is with English subtitles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TemGPjaNSw I haven't found these ones with subtitles, maybe you can still get the gist of them This one is a bit of a comedy about parents whose sons became fans of a different football club https:…
/r/MensRights09/11/19 12:01 AM
2

You are, if they said "stop". Let's be clear: a woman may not be up for anal sex, or genitals may get sore and either party would want to stop for a while. Disregarding this (if communicated) is rape.
/r/MensRights31/10/19 04:35 PM
2

What percentage chance? Less than 10% IIRC with a 2% of serious pain For what duration? Life I wonder how much pain you'd get from paying child support for a child you never wanted for 18 years? Or paying for a child that isn't even yours? Wear a condom. You still need it if you don't know for sure if your lover has an STD
/r/MensRights23/09/19 02:57 PM
2

And has a small chance of causing life long testicular pain
/r/MensRights23/09/19 02:12 PM
2

So a few young women discover that men pay sugar babies to have sex instead of having a girlfriend. How is that related to anything other than the lack of street smarts of those women?
/r/MensRights22/09/19 10:47 PM
0

There is no discussion about a woman imprisoned for not wearing a hijab. What are people going to say? "Too bad" followed by "That sucks"? Make a post about a controversial topic and people will argue about it. I wouldn't take lack of comments for lack of interest
/r/MensRights30/08/19 10:07 PM
1

fact that they were in it for money, free dinners, gifts, and maybe sex if they felt like it, and were 100% okay with leading guys on, lying, and generally taking advantage because... they could. They can't. Some men let them do that. Other men will simply use their money to get laid. People are supposed to have a bit of street smarts. It's like complaining that a guy is offering women at a club a free drink and women just take the drink and leave. That's not on the women for taking advantage of…
/r/MensRights26/07/19 03:17 AM
12

That... sounds like a depressing movie
/r/MensRights23/07/19 11:55 PM
-27

Lucky guy
/r/MensRights14/07/19 03:28 PM
1

It sucks. They laughed because you've responded in the way a woman would answer, and do so in a way to bring bystanders to her side instead of convincing the harasser to stop. That girl knew she was upsetting you - she didn't care, or may have enjoyed it. That's because most of the time, sexual offenders aren't confused nice people - they are bad people, so talking to them politely accomplishes nothing. People are expected to ride to the defense of damsels in distress, so women can rely on bysta…
/r/MensRights12/07/19 08:06 PM
3

There is evidence that he grabbed the breasts of the actress who accused and later wiretapped him in New York against his will. That's a proven crime, if a minor one.
/r/MensRights01/07/19 02:43 PM
0

The guards and cell mates of people who framed people for crimes they didn't commit should be told the new prisoners aren't guilty of framing someone else. They should be told they are guilty of the crime they've framed someone else. So, did you frame someone on child sexual abuse? Your fellow inmates will be told you're guilty of raping children, even if you are not.
/r/MensRights29/06/19 11:57 PM
14

You mean humans of both sexes are sexual creatures and therefore evaluate the sexual attractiveness of other humans? Who would have thought it! Someone please develop the drug Prozium from the movie Equilibrium so we can end that and turn everyone into perfect cogs in the corporate machinery!
/r/MensRights14/06/19 02:27 PM
-7

And men are tough enough to handle it. ​ Go back to children's tales and reread Sleeping Beauty. She was cursed. But the cursed went into effect because her parents, trying to shelter her, didn't warn her about it and tried to keep all spindles forbidden in their kingdom. As a result, she was unable to recognize danger and ended up comatose, raped (in the original story) and unwilling mother of twins. The lesson? Don't try to protect children from reality (ie: there are more attractive people th…
/r/MensRights11/06/19 03:15 PM
1

But we aren't talking about not passing out, we're talking about using your arms under those loads
/r/MensRights07/06/19 08:15 PM
3

I wonder that too, but if there is a performance difference, we'll see it
/r/MensRights07/06/19 02:55 PM
4

F1 racing strains the upper body, due the g-forces involved and the fact that you need to use your hands while under those g-forces. Women have less upper body strength that men. So I don't know, but it is possible that women may be physically unable to perform as well as men in F1 to races. If that's so, W series would show women achieving lower records in the same tracks than her male peers. In that case, we've evidence regarding why women barely compete in F1 and we'd end up with gender segre…
/r/MensRights07/06/19 02:18 PM
2

No reasonable woman who doesn't want sex and is in a normal relationship will remain naked, waiting and silent while her partner is putting a condom on. If, at that point, she doesn't want to fuck (for whatever reasons, because if the two reached that point, she wants to fuck) will remain quiet. If she's just waiting, it's because she wants to fuck. And if she'd claim you've raped her because you didn't ask at the obvious point in which both are naked and you're putitng a condom, then she'd clai…
/r/MensRights07/06/19 02:06 PM
3

Whether a condom goes into a man or a woman has nothing to do with who applies it. Had I been born a woman, I'd like to belive I'd make sure to put male condoms in my lovers myself, to make sure they are properly applied and had been properly stored as well. As I'm a man, I make sure I put them myself not because of social pressures, but to make sure they are properly put and, and since they are my own I also know they have been properly stored.
/r/MensRights07/06/19 01:59 PM
0

Because they are physically and emotionally capable of desire sex and enjoy it. You may find it immoral for teenagers to have sex, but criminal law should punish damage, not protect someone else's morals.
/r/MensRights04/06/19 09:33 PM
1

If he isn't her teacher, he shouldn't. Puritanism sucks as it tells people sexual desire is wrong. "Let's be as puritan as radfems" isn't a good idea.
/r/MensRights04/06/19 02:31 AM
-2

Now I have to say that in my youth, I got up to some hijinks with my crazy ex, but A.) She wasn't my teacher. B.) She wasn't my teacher. and C.) She wasn't my teacher. Neither was that woman. There was no conflict of interest and no power abuse. 17 years old teenagers aren't 11 years old kids either. They are mature enough (physically and mentally) to desire, have and enjoy sex. They may be raped, yes, just like any adult can be. But this seems to be puritanism. Why was the teenager thinking it …
/r/MensRights04/06/19 01:30 AM
2

Now you've gone from identification to behavior. Not the same. I can go "Meow," it don't mean i identify as a cat. Behavior depends in part in identification. Yes, you can go through the streets going "meow". Now compare how many people walk through the streets meowing and how many walk through the streets in typical masculine or feminine ways Biological is not the same as genetic. Brain differences may be due to upbringing. Genes determine how hormones will be produced. Such hormones have effec…
/r/MensRights23/05/19 01:15 AM
2

All sexually differentiated species show behavioral differences between the two genders. That can't be culture because, no matter how you define it, animals which everyone would agree have no culture have gender roles. That means animals without language or culture still act as either male or female. That has to be biological, which means it's influenced by genes. Humans are animals. And we know from MRI that there are physical differences between the brains of men and women. So either we throug…
/r/MensRights23/05/19 12:17 AM
1

But how else would people find a politically correct way to refuse to believe in evolution?
/r/MensRights22/05/19 04:01 PM
0

No, little girls, by genes, identify as little girls. Then parents/teachers/youtube/whatever tells them pink is for girls and they, identifying themselves as girls, choose to use pink
/r/MensRights22/05/19 03:59 PM
2

Not to mention, what does forcing all men to have vasectomies have to do with forcing women who get pregnant from unprotected sex to give birth? The extinction of the human race, of course. You can't count on a particular vasectomy to be reversible. Even more, the longer the time between the vasectomy and the reversal, the less likely it can be reversed.
/r/MensRights20/05/19 09:38 PM
1

But what if birth control fails? What if a condom rips? But here's the deal: condoms aren't magic. They aren't dices. They are a sheet of latex bound to the laws of physics. A properly manufactured, properly stored, properly put and properly used condom can not rip anymore than a glass of water can freeze at 4°C/39°F at a 1 atm pressure. And hormonal birth control, when used in long term forms (hormonal iud or subdermic implants) have a failure rate of over 2,000 woman/years. And they are the sa…
/r/MensRights19/05/19 12:26 AM
3

Without it trust or friendship is not possible. /tinfoil hat mode on That's the plan /tinfoil hat mode off
/r/MensRights30/04/19 02:26 PM
3

Let's see. If someone rapes, that person is a rapist. If that can be proven in a fair trial, that person is convicted of rape and the rest of society can know that. If it can't be proven in a fair trial, that person is a rapist, but no conviction should take place and society can not know for sure if that person is a rapist. I think there are essentially three issues when it comes to criminal trials, of any crime: Did this person commit the crime? Can we know if this person committed the crime? …
/r/MensRights16/04/19 05:27 PM
0

Of course I'm not wong. It's right in the title "just imagine". The OP is telling us to imagine a hypothetical situation and get outraged at it. I don't know about everyone else, but I have enough problems as it is to throw in imaginary ones.
/r/MensRights29/03/19 06:57 PM
-3

So, this thread is about getting outraged about imaginary offenses, right?
/r/MensRights29/03/19 03:48 PM
2

Why is breastfeeding taboo in the USA? What does this has to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights28/03/19 08:14 PM
2

Keep in mind that life expectancy isn't the average age in which people die of old age, but the average age people dies. In other words, more men dying in their 20s than women in their 20s translate to a lower life expectancy for men. On top of that, yes, men tend to die of old age a bit younger than women. But, for instance, a male air traffic controller who dies at the age of 50 from a stress related heart failure doesn't get fewer years of retirement than a woman. He gets no retirement at all…
/r/MensRights21/03/19 04:56 PM
0

And what if someone decides they want to expend Saturday night getting drunk, and going to a night club drunk in order to dance and make out with strangers, including possibly having sex with them? They may or may not be an acceptable decision maker once they are drunk, but they were an acceptable decision maker when they've laid out their plans for the night
/r/MensRights21/03/19 01:24 PM
2

True, but if such a housewife had a decent enough husband and reasonably ok family, she had secured a long, prosperous and extremely safe life at little (or no) cost. It's a crystal prison, but a very nice one at that.
/r/MensRights08/03/19 03:22 PM
2

Yep. 100% targeted at women. Even includes the rom-com bit of falling in love with Che Guevara to shave his beard the moment they get married: fall in love with the loving muscular soldier, who promptly leaves the military when the woman needs safety instead of fantasies.
/r/MensRights02/03/19 11:37 PM
2

Depends on the gender of the person doing it
/r/MensRights20/02/19 03:31 PM
-1

Maybe, but what is wrong? That the hypothetical male coach would be unemployed or that this real female coach isn't?
/r/MensRights04/02/19 09:41 PM
1

Yes, now consider what happens if Mike Tyson answers a punch from a regular dude with a punch
/r/MensRights03/02/19 04:40 PM
1

Hurting people without need is wrong
/r/MensRights03/02/19 03:06 PM
0

Well, it was rhetoric, but you can improve a small one with a deodorant spray and a lighter
/r/MensRights03/02/19 03:05 PM
-7

teach women not to assault men. When a person is assaulted they should be able to defend themselves by any means they have access too. No. If someone slaps me in the face, I don't have the right to burn him to death with a flamethrower.
/r/MensRights03/02/19 04:57 AM
-9

A man that big doesn't need to punch women in the face even if he's being physically attacked, which isn't seen in the video. All he needs to do is to push them back. If this sub was about supporting violence against women, or against far weaker people in general, then it has earned the moniker of being a hate sub
/r/MensRights03/02/19 04:18 AM
1

There is a country where that's the rule. It's called "Saudi Arabia" and I've heard it doesn't work too well for women either
/r/MensRights25/01/19 02:37 AM
30

"Now you ask for permission" None has the right to forbid people to look whatever they want to look or say whatever they want to say - and arousal doesn't need consent, it's the actions on someone else's that require consent.
/r/MensRights21/01/19 02:22 PM
-4

Huh, is someone here against women' asses? Because backlash over this would mean women losing their jobs, more puritanism and less teats and ass. Sounds like a loss in every front.
/r/MensRights16/01/19 11:27 PM
1

I once read that the MPAA ratings somehow reference "signs of arousal" or something like that. In other words, it's not so much penises they are bothered with (when it comes to mature ratings, that is) but erect penises. So suppose you are shooting a scene about a naked couple during sexy times. You'd expect the guy to be erect, but you can't show that. But since women don't have such an obvious display of libido, you're free to show a full frontal naked woman. Again, you could show a full front…
/r/MensRights04/01/19 09:26 PM
5

Not quite. AFAIK, FGM is practiced in countries like Ethiopia, which aren't Muslim, and not practiced in plenty of Muslim countries. MGM is a Jewish and Muslim custom.
/r/MensRights28/12/18 03:11 PM
0

I haven't got the faintest idea. What I'm saying is that I think it's an issue for a fine, at best, rather than prison time, let alone 20 years.
/r/MensRights11/12/18 03:11 AM
-1

I think the reasoning is that since a male sending pictures of his private parts to a student would garner a max of 20 years That's still 19 years at 9 months too much. Really, it's just an issue for a fine, nothing else.
/r/MensRights11/12/18 02:32 AM
2

20 years in jail for sending pictures of her breasts to a fifteen years old? What's wrong with Americans?
/r/MensRights10/12/18 07:28 PM
103

Where do I go to pick up this allegedly "power of Men"?
/r/MensRights08/12/18 02:57 PM
15

I've thought people in power act in the interests of people in power as a class, at the expense of people without power.
/r/MensRights03/12/18 05:24 PM
4

Not while Grrl Pwah is around Grrl Pwah isn't around anymore. It's the opposite of victimhood.
/r/MensRights01/12/18 12:58 PM
2

Vasael gel. Never going to happen. Edit. To the down voters, I've been in pharma for 30 years. So, why won't Vasalgel ever enter production? Honest question
/r/MensRights24/11/18 02:46 AM
1

Probably not, because unless the "strong woman" is a body builder, how would they know? Even then, a "strong woman" is likely to be at the same level as an average guy
/r/MensRights22/11/18 03:07 PM
1

Well, only a Sith deals with absolutes. The crowd behaving differently it's because the damage dealt is different, that doesn't make it right, it makes it different.
/r/MensRights22/11/18 02:50 PM
0

Nope, because I didn't say it's right, I said people will react differently to you trying to fight Conor Mcgregor than to Conor Mcgregor starting fights with average guys
/r/MensRights22/11/18 01:56 PM
1

Which part of "The action is wrong no matter the genders" did you not read?
/r/MensRights22/11/18 01:41 AM
-4

To have a double standard you must first have a standard which is judged differently. Most men are stronger than most women, so when we reverse the genders, we usually have two different standards. That doesn't make either action morally ok (which I did clarify) but it explains why people react differently - the harm being inflicted is different.
/r/MensRights22/11/18 01:39 AM
0

When did I suggest such a thing?
/r/MensRights22/11/18 01:39 AM
-57

Because of the massive difference in upper body strength. The action is wrong no matter the genders, but if we reverse it, the physical damage would be a lot worse.
/r/MensRights21/11/18 07:52 PM
2

I'd say the same
/r/MensRights16/11/18 02:47 AM
-10

Guys, what's the implication? That the teacher was going to fail them from the choir if they didn't fuck her? These aren't "children" or "boys" either, they are 17, nearly of age and perfectly capable of consenting to sex. This isn't rape, so it shouldn't be prosecuted as such.
/r/MensRights15/11/18 09:50 PM
4

I've just skimmed through that and it's insanely boring. I've never read Mein Kampf, but wasn't Hitler supposed to be charismatic?
/r/MensRights13/11/18 01:49 AM
5

I don't see Iran banning circumcision, considering it's (also) a Muslim practice. But who knows, maybe I'm wrong.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 11:25 PM
-11

I don't see how one angry woman leads to social commentary. She is right in asking for an actual answer. On top, she did spend two hours getting ready - you know, the sunk cost fallacy and all that...
/r/MensRights18/10/18 08:01 PM
2

I'll bite. I believe in honor. I'd say people have a duty to defend their nation-state. That means defense, not offense. Russian conscripts dying in Siria or Ukraine should have no duty to die for Russia - that's slavery. Ukranian conscripts, on the other hand, well, it sucks for them, but one could argue that their slavery is means to an end (the survival of the Ukranian State), although I believe that in the long term, it's best for Ukraine to yield, as Russia can hold their aggression indefin…
/r/MensRights03/10/18 10:17 PM
1

I'm not sure if Disney child stories are a good benchmark. They've always seemed more targeted towards young girls than young boys (or a mixture of both). Movies like The Little Mermaid and The Beauty and the Beast seem, IMHO, more like romance flicks for girls than more adventure/action stuff like, idk, Toy Story. So it kind of make sense they have more female characters. But they also produce the Marvel Cinematic Universe and it took them about ten years to make one movie starred by a woman, e…
/r/MensRights24/09/18 06:11 PM
3

No but let's not think of adults like idiots. We all know there is a sexual component in being asked to strip naked in front of a person of the opposite sex and, what's more, in private.
/r/MensRights19/09/18 01:41 PM
26

If there is a double standard, it's because the modern puritan discourse infantilizes women and refuse to see them as sexual beings - not because it discriminates men. Nobody would read this and think "OMG, men are victims of this woman" because we all understand men are capable of making their own choices regarding their own sexuality and whatever reasons they had to agree with this, they are they own reasons. Puritanism, however, refuses to set the same standard for adult women. The answer to …
/r/MensRights19/09/18 03:16 AM
8

But that doesn't mean mothers can't apply for a job driving forklifts or buses. How many do? And yes, maybe they are discriminated against - or not - but we'd first need to start with the statistics about it.
/r/MensRights15/09/18 02:47 PM
7

We don't need to imagine. There are plenty of images of girls undergoing puberty, it's been a staple of art for millennia.
/r/MensRights15/09/18 02:44 PM
-1

I would agree if there wasn't alcohol/pictures involved But what's "alcohol"? One or two glasses of beer is "alcohol" and so is "a full bottle of vodka". They obviously have different effects.
/r/MensRights23/08/18 07:46 PM
5

Let's flip the script a bit here. Matthew McConaughey is a guy most people would agree is handsome, attractive, whatever, right? I'm gonna use him as an example because Interstellar is the last movie I watched with a male movie star that most people would agree is attractive, who played a role as a young girl's father. Let's say that a year before she turned 18, Matt decided to invite his movie daughter up to his hotel room, ply her with alcohol, then engaged in sex acts with her. Took pictures …
/r/MensRights23/08/18 03:32 PM
1

Which has nothing to do with what I wrote. Sexual abuse doesn't happen whenever a law says it happens. Sexual abuse happens when an individual can't consent to sexual actions. Whatever the law says is irrelevant to that - the law is there to use State violence against people who break it, but it has no power regarding what happens inside the human brain. Did it happen in this case? We'd need a lot more information about the relationship between these two individuals and how the events developed.…
/r/MensRights20/08/18 10:31 PM
1

Suppose a particular legislature passes a law which states "anyone who wears green in this jurisdiction will suffer severe psychological trauma". You walk into that jurisdiction wearing a green shirt. Do you receive significant psychological trauma the moment you cross the border?
/r/MensRights20/08/18 08:37 PM
-1

In a normal situation yes. Bennett was 6 when he first started appearing in movies with her. In emails / written communication back and forth, they referred to each other as 'mother and son'. They are actors. We don't know if they meant it in a 'real' way (as in, she's truly a mother figure to him) or if they are saying it in a playful way, referring the way they met each other. As for the age, imagine the exact same events happen, but they happen 10 months later, so he's 18. Or that they happen…
/r/MensRights20/08/18 03:38 PM
-8

And in this case, she's committed actual statutory rape, and paying hush money to her victim. Right, but "actual statutory rape" with a 17 years old depends on the side of the imaginary line in the ground were they had sex. I think we should all be able to agree that a 17 years old, healthy, person is mentally and physiologically capable of having consensual sex. What should matter here, in order to judge the evilness of the act, is if there was something in their relationship which invalidated …
/r/MensRights20/08/18 03:46 AM
4

If you read the article, she's enacting work-life-recover your wits balancing policies for everyone, men and women. There might be things worth criticizing her work for, but gender issues doesn't seem to be one of those.
/r/MensRights02/08/18 06:53 PM
4

Linda revealed her aim to create a work-life balance where women can prosper The actual quote is So this, for me, is what feminism is really about: helping to create a work-life balance and a professional environment in which women (and, of course men, too) can prosper.
/r/MensRights02/08/18 06:36 PM
2

leading to men not wanting to fight for their nation as much. Yeah, well, if push comes to shove, the USA has 7000 nuclear warheads to defend itself. The USA doesn't need young men nor women to die in Afghanistan, Iraq or Syria for their nation. They need them to die so billionaires can keep playing "Call of Duty: Eternal Warfare" in real life.
/r/MensRights01/08/18 06:18 PM
-1

Puritanism
/r/MensRights01/08/18 12:11 AM
1

Eva Peron was Evita. Everyone has heard of her and how she and her husband (leader of Argentina at one point) were hated. And which war did she start? The female privilege z of Argentina I'm speaking about is the one going on now for the past few years about how she wants her Malvians back. We almost went to war again a few years back over her rhetoric. The British were never even near of going to war due rhetoric and Cristina Fernandez is, if anything, an antimilitarist hippie.
/r/MensRights28/07/18 10:34 PM
0

I'm a bit at loss at to what war Eva Peron started or who's the "female prez of Argentina who is always calling to war"? Are you talking about Estela Martinez de Peron (ie, not Eva Peron)? If so, I'm not sure if historians made up their mind as to how much of the government sponsored right wing terrorism was on her command and how much was she outsourcing her government to Lopez Rega
/r/MensRights28/07/18 08:46 PM
5

That wasn't Thatcher, that was Galtieri
/r/MensRights28/07/18 08:44 PM
3

No, she's talking about relationships, not about law. It doesn't help that puritanical, sex-negative feminism has become mainstream feminism, but if we remove that context and understand she isn't talking about the law, she makes sense.
/r/MensRights24/07/18 12:07 AM
1

Identity Politics tells us that Christine Lagarde, head of the IMF, is part of an oppressed group (and should be lauded for breaking the glass ceiling) while the unemployed Greek men (or so many others the IMF left in its wake) are the oppressors. I don't think you can go farther right in the political spectrum than that.
/r/MensRights14/07/18 09:46 PM
1

And this is related to Mens Rights because?
/r/MensRights11/07/18 02:23 PM
2

Because most societies easily understand that men, including teenagers, have sexual drives and may very well desire their hot female professors but, at the same time, have a hard time coping with the idea that women, including teenagers, have sexual drives and may very well desire their hot male professor. Calling teenagers "children" or "kids" and mixing ephebophilia with paedophilia doesn't do any favors either. A fifteen years old teenager, of either sex, isn't the same as a seven years old c…
/r/MensRights08/07/18 04:23 AM
3

As in a pickup game among friends? That can be fun. In a competitive league? Women just wouldn't be competitive except as coach and maybe goalkeeper.
/r/MensRights04/07/18 03:17 PM
45

Never stick your dick in crazy
/r/MensRights04/07/18 03:14 PM
1

Are you talking about a career, or a job? A career, which is what I've described
/r/MensRights01/07/18 10:43 PM
-1

Indeed, between the Second Industrial Revolution and the rise of the Benefactor State plenty of middle class women found themselves enjoying the luxury of not having to work due the increase of productivity. But those who wanted to work and to do so in professional capacity found themselves rejected from universities, or had to fight an uphill battle to study, were openly discriminated against, had to deal with (real) sexual harassment if they managed to graduate and make a living out of whateve…
/r/MensRights01/07/18 08:32 PM
2

And if a camera held at eye level disagrees? In what kind of situation, other than a paparazzi trying to get a glimpse of a celebrity underwear when she gets out of a car, can you possibly snap a picture of someone's panties by holding a camera at about 1,75 meters above the ground?
/r/MensRights22/06/18 12:46 AM
2

If it is on display in public, then whatever it is is not private. And for things done in public you can't have an expectation of privacy. Let me rephrase this simple concept: women who wear miniskirts do not display their underwear in public. Trust me.
/r/MensRights21/06/18 11:36 PM
1

I'm not sure about jail time but considering that "deepfake" means it pretty much looks like the face really belongs to that body, making it a civil offense is a no brainer
/r/MensRights21/06/18 11:25 PM
2

Well, unless the person portrayed in the picture openly flashed her underwear, I think we should agree she would have wanted her underwear to remain private
/r/MensRights21/06/18 11:23 PM
3

Women had less freedom but also less responsibilities. In peacetime, perhaps. But women aren't conscripted to fight in wars. I'd say people in general are oppressed or not based on their political, economical and (maybe) symbolic capital. That, in itself, doesn't depend on gender. How they are oppressed (if they are oppressed, that is) is what depends on gender. For instance, be born a slave in an age and country in which warfare is expected: If you're born a woman, you'll be raped, you'll give …
/r/MensRights29/05/18 01:40 AM
-29

So, are you complaining because a woman shows cleavage online?
/r/MensRights24/05/18 12:23 PM
-1

Is this r/incels ?
/r/MensRights22/05/18 07:04 PM
1

According to the article, it turned out a hefty profit. Marketing costs aren't included in the article, though, but even adding those, it seems to have been a successful product.
/r/MensRights18/05/18 08:48 PM
0

I don't understand the article. Both Vikander's Tomb Raider and Atomic Blonde turned to be successful commercial products, not flops.
/r/MensRights18/05/18 07:43 PM
-1

In the adult world, people are biased towards attractive people. In the case of women, "pretty, but not too much". That doesn't mean an attractive person is hired solely on his/her hot body, but rather than the hot body predisposes the interviewer favorably towards the applicant and that allows the applicant a better job at selling his/her workforce than someone who's doing his best to look displeasing. This has nothing to do with sexual harassment in the workplace.
/r/MensRights17/05/18 02:27 PM
3

She's absolutely right, and what she says has nothing to do with actual sexual harassment. Going to a job interview well groomed, well dressed and showing an amicable and reasonably attractive facade is helpful to land the job (specially vs making oneself look uglier). That doesn't equal to "go to the interview with your tits almost jumping out of your cleavage so the interviewer will think you'll fuck him to get the job"
/r/MensRights17/05/18 02:24 PM
3

So, how about "Teach teenagers to be assertive"?
/r/MensRights11/05/18 08:14 PM
4

Then you have a safe word
/r/MensRights10/05/18 07:17 PM
3

It can not exist. Human beings are attracted to other human beings, not to things. None gets aroused by looking at a doorframe or a desk. We get aroused by looking at other human beings. Thus, if a man gets excited by looking at a woman (or the image of a woman) in an attractive posture, by feeling excited he's recognizing her as a human being. Objectification grounds itself in the incorrect duality of mind and body (we are our bodies. Literally. That's why that's incorrect) in order to slut sha…
/r/MensRights10/05/18 06:05 PM
1

No need. A trial doesn't require the defendant to prove his innocence, it requires the State to prove his guilt
/r/MensRights10/05/18 03:35 PM
3

How do we tell the difference when it comes out years later and now the women are saying "I didn't want this, I told him no". Well, that's easy: if your lover told you "Hey, I have this fantasy, let's try it out", then you're ok. If she didn't ans she was screaming "stop" out of her lungs, you belong in prison. It's a bit like acting, right? No Emilia Clarkes were raped during the making of Game of Thrones, after all. And whether Emilia enjoyed or not that scene (another actress said she had fun…
/r/MensRights10/05/18 02:09 PM
1

And puritanism would hurt women more than men. It hurts both, but women have more to loose.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 11:28 AM
1

I agree, but that's something more related to r/twoxchromosomes than this - the article, after all, never says suggardadies aren't victimizer, it simply doesn't say they are, and doesn't focus on the customer but the prostitute.
/r/MensRights27/04/18 07:36 PM
1

I didn't read a word of that in the article, it's just about a secretary working as an escort on the side.
/r/MensRights27/04/18 06:53 PM
0

And that's related to this sub because...
/r/MensRights27/04/18 06:50 PM
3

Your point is?
/r/MensRights27/04/18 04:05 PM
1

I don't think so. Isn't prostitution legal in the UK?
/r/MensRights27/04/18 02:12 PM
0

And this is related to Men's rights because?
/r/MensRights27/04/18 02:07 PM
4

Well, nation building isn't just about waging wars. By looking at Argentina's history, for example, one could say that generals Mitre and Roca, both men, consolidated the national State by force of arms (wielded by men). But nation building didn't consolidate until mandatory public elementary education came into effect, by a law passed during Roca's first term, by a Congress filled with men and with schools were American women taught. You can't sit in a throne made out of bayonets, after all.
/r/MensRights10/04/18 04:04 PM
1

The excerpt you quoted doesn't blame men because, theoretically, women could write a magazine about how to best be seen as inanimate sex objects... ...only that Cosmo is the exact opposite of that - it tells women how to (supposedly) own sex as sex subjects who act to make it pleasurable to their male partners which, in turn, in pleasurable to them because sex is a team sport and not something that men do to women. This is Walmart embracing puritanism
/r/MensRights29/03/18 03:23 AM
1

Sure you would. But at 16 you would have had no idea what else could go wrong. Such is life. We don't demand teenagers to put their lives on hold until they mature - and then expect them to know everything there is to know about the adult life. EDIT: Teenage relationships can also go wrong and have bad lasting consequences. We don't tell them to keep away from romance though
/r/MensRights22/03/18 03:22 PM
-1

It's the abuse of power for me when it comes to 16-19 year old kids. In most companies your boss will get in trouble for fucking someone that they are directly over. Conflict of interest. True enough, but while a boss may fire you, you may be able to request your tests to be corrected by a different teacher, should it come to that. 16 years old me would have recognized the risk of a conflict of interest, and given the chance, would have taken it without hesitation.
/r/MensRights22/03/18 03:48 AM
1

Re money, how much do you pay somebody who can play at the level of a 12 year old boy? A portion of the income the sports event makes. The fact that one sportsman is five times stronger than a colleague doesn't equal to that first sportsman achieving five times the TV ratings. Teams in women only leagues are competitive against one another. How many people watch those games and, therefore, how much there is to make with it, is unrelated with how (un)competitive those same teams are against male …
/r/MensRights21/03/18 07:22 PM
3

And this is totally not a mysoginist sub. Also, would you care to show me the lockbox with my inheritance?
/r/MensRights20/03/18 03:34 PM
18

Huh, have you ever heard of the Soviet night witches of WW2 or, in current times, of the Kurdish female fighters?
/r/MensRights20/03/18 11:41 AM
1

I'm not sure how is this related to men's rights, unless we're discussing the plight of male prostitutes (or the lack thereof depending on who you ask?) or the Catholic Church condemning people who have sex out of wedlock (to none's surprise) This Pope comes from a country where prostitution (but not pimping) is more or less legal and the local porn industry is a joke. So unlike people imbued in American culture, he probably didn't even think about the porn industry. He was answering to a woman …
/r/MensRights20/03/18 01:37 AM
1

Argentina still had two female presidents to the USA 0, one of them reelected
/r/MensRights15/03/18 03:54 AM
0

This is the original Vox article https://www.vox.com/first-person/2018/3/8/17087628/sexual-assault-marriage-metoo I can not possibly label what the husband did as "sex", let alone "love making" or even "be decent to your wife". It's easy to write "Oh, no, this sub isn't misogynist. We don't have women". And then someone posts this and dozens of comments bash the woman and claim "wait, technically, she said yes even though she was reading a book in order to pretend she wasn't being penetrated and…
/r/MensRights10/03/18 11:26 PM
1

Send people with access to food to an impoverished land where the locals lack easy access to food. Bonus points if it's a military intervention or any other organization where most of the staff are men* and there are few women. Those men will want sex. The local women around them will want food, for themselves and maybe their family. How much does it take for local women to seek a man able to provide for her, and exchange sex? And since the foreigners are coming with a huge gender imbalance, mos…
/r/MensRights04/03/18 06:04 PM
2

Puritanism
/r/MensRights25/02/18 01:57 PM
4

So what is the problem? Is it that men are demanded to be puritans? Or is it that women are not? In other words, is the proposed solution to make women follow the standards sex-negative feminism (which is to say, mainstream feminism) wants to enforce on men? Or is it to ditch puritanism altogether?
/r/MensRights22/02/18 09:58 PM
6

How does this rule affect the society in general? Any potential long run hidden consequences? Fewer people having sex? Puritans surely love it.
/r/MensRights22/02/18 03:16 PM
4

Has Raisman ever said it's wrong to desire a naked woman? She mentioned respect, but desire doesn't equal disrespect.
/r/MensRights16/02/18 11:46 PM
1

In that case, an article related to men having to wear suits in hot weather while women are allowed to wear miniskirts would be on topic, rather than this. And ideally, aiming at increasing the range of business-friendly clothes a man can wear rather than restricting women's.
/r/MensRights16/02/18 11:36 PM
0

I read that. It looks like a woman's issue.
/r/MensRights16/02/18 10:11 PM
0

What does this have to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights16/02/18 07:46 PM
3

You're overrating genetics. Yes, they play an important role in jobs which require attractive people. It's not the only factor. Look for pictures of porn actresses with and without makeup nor photoshop. Many of them are actually ugly. They have fit, slim bodies (well, unless we're talking about fetish actresses, but let's keep it in the "mainstream"). But that's not due genetics but because of their lifestyle, diet and regular excessive. We could say that there isn't enough of a supply of porn a…
/r/MensRights14/02/18 03:54 AM
27

Men are competitive, men like to be competitive So are women. One of the stereotypical motivations of the stereotypical fat, ugly feminist is that she'd like to compete, but feels she can't possibly win so she wants to destroy the competition instead or bring everyone down to her level.
/r/MensRights13/02/18 03:18 PM
-2

That's a reasonable answer, but keep in mind a person may not jump from long term relationship to long term relationship. They may end an LTR and follow with a series of casual hookups until they fall in love again and, if reciprocated, start another LTR. Even more, a person to goes from LTR to LTR may lack experience in flirting (as in, being at the receiving end of someone who desires that person and wants a hook up) and people will find, through their marriage, third parties who will want a s…
/r/MensRights10/02/18 11:51 PM
-1

Indicating that a slut black woman isn't good marriage material is not slut black shaming, there's nothing wrong with not being good marriage material. Now you see the problem? See, there is no issue if someone isn't attracted to a potential partner's traits, or even actively dislike them. If you aren't attracted to black women, well, you aren't attracted. That's not racism. However, if you are attracted to black women, if you date black women, if you fall in love with black women yet you refuse…
/r/MensRights10/02/18 01:46 PM
-10

No, you weren't born that way. You were educated into believing women are somehow less worthy if they have plenty of sex. That's called "slut-shaming"
/r/MensRights10/02/18 03:06 AM
-3

If someone who wants to be your wife is hiding her past from you, she is a horrible person and deserves to die alone. I'd same the same applies to someone who'd dump a woman he loves because of her past
/r/MensRights10/02/18 02:30 AM
-14

Hence, slut shaming. And if you think that, unless you live in a small town, you're going to know every detail of a woman's past life if she doesn't feel to confide them to you, you've got your head in the sand.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 02:04 AM
-12

The author can claim he isn't slut shaming as many times as he wants - but that's precisely what he's doing. Sleeping around in their 20s is only an argument against marrying and having children if you believe sleeping around somehow makes women "not marriage material". And that is slut-shaming. And when people here complain that this sub is consider misogynist by media, those media outlets have articles like this to point and claim they are right.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 01:23 AM
1

From oppressor/oppressed perspective, most of the time it was rich oppressing the poor. But, but, but, but if you claim that, how can you use identity politics as the smoke screen of modern capitalism?
/r/MensRights09/02/18 03:15 AM
2

I wouldn't call it "coercive" - it's not putting a gun in someone's head - but it's still not good. Sexual acts should be done because both partners enjoy them and that, in turn, because both partners should take pleasure in both partners' pleasure instead of just their own.
/r/MensRights08/02/18 06:20 PM
1

Uncomfortable but necessary question: Can you be sure your kid is biologically yours? She could have been cheating on you for a long time, after all.
/r/MensRights06/02/18 01:01 AM
3

But, society was built by both men and women
/r/MensRights05/02/18 02:25 PM
3

It was, until they've realized "strong women" don't feel like victims and thus, feel they don't "need" feminism. Now they need to kill that idea to continue recruiting. Hence, why the author doesn't call "strong women" inspiring but rather writes how weak women would feel bad by watching them on the screen.
/r/MensRights05/02/18 12:05 AM
1

How about we beat puritanism instead of being as puritan as sex-negative feminists?
/r/MensRights03/02/18 11:05 PM
1

Do you believe that female breasts and male chests are equally sexualized?
/r/MensRights03/02/18 11:04 PM
12

And this is related to men's rights because...?
/r/MensRights01/02/18 05:56 PM
-3

Huh, a woman can be a promiscuous doctor, laywer, healthcare professional, consultant, etc and be successful as shit. If your respect of women is based of the way they dress, you aren't respecting women, you're respecting clothes.
/r/MensRights30/01/18 11:26 PM
6

Still doesn't work that way because the way the body is presented it's up to that person's decision. It's pointless, though. Objectification is the feminist way to slut shame women
/r/MensRights30/01/18 05:12 PM
12

You do know he confessed he groped one actress who was recording him with a hidden mic as part of a police investigation, right?
/r/MensRights22/01/18 07:29 PM
14

Pull one arm over her chest to keep her in place and use the remaining arm and your head to make sure her legs remain open. Disclaimer: not legal advice
/r/MensRights22/01/18 04:12 PM
133

Just your reminder that Weinstein was accused of rape, as in, women said "no" and he still proceded to grope them, eat them out, or other stuff covered under NDAs
/r/MensRights22/01/18 03:17 PM
10

True story: a scumbag in the outskirts of Buenos Aires contacted unemployed single mothers offering them his influence in getting a job at a supermarket in exchange for sex. He'd meet them, get their resume, presumably leave it at the supermarket like anyone can do because he had no contacts whatsoever, and had sex with them. Some of them, eventually realizing the scam, accused him of rape. The court decided it wasn't rape. Had they filed a civil lawsuit for scam, they might have been successful…
/r/MensRights22/01/18 03:13 PM
-2

And this is related to men's rights because...?
/r/MensRights20/01/18 01:57 PM
2

Because it wasn't a work related meeting but a romantic date
/r/MensRights17/01/18 02:12 PM
1

So what's your point? Is it that men should be allowed to hurt women when simply pushing their hand away is more than enough? Or is it that men shouldn't go to jail if they grope women against the woman's will? You do happen to realize how both options are problematic, right?
/r/MensRights12/01/18 09:50 PM
1

Of course you are. A slap in the face doesn't hurt anywhere near the hurt that hit in the gif that, and you knew it already.
/r/MensRights12/01/18 12:41 PM
-5

And this sub is totally not a mysognist sub, right?
/r/MensRights11/01/18 07:00 PM
5

Well, let's face it, if actress A refused to fuck someone for a role out of respect of the better actresses out there, actress B would do it and those better actresses wouldn't have landed those roles anyway. The same apply to men, as they can also be subject to sexual harassment, either by women or by homosexual men.
/r/MensRights11/01/18 06:59 PM
2

IIRC there is a recording of a security camera showing her at the scene of the crime and the murder weapon has been identified as her father's weapon, so it looks like this case ends with her conviction. The defense best bet is to try to find mitigating circumstances or avoid the aggravating ones, but it's unlikely they'd be able to do so.
/r/MensRights09/01/18 06:49 PM
3

This is the exact kind of thing those gynocentric laws were passed for. So when women do ill, they face as little punishment as possible. She's facing a life sentence if she can't prove self defense. And it's very unlikely that she'll be able to prove self defense.
/r/MensRights09/01/18 05:46 PM
4

What's hard to believe about people organizing orgies?
/r/MensRights02/01/18 07:58 PM
2

but I do agree feminism is trying to force women to be like men That stops the moment someone claims women should be expected to defend themselves (within reason)
/r/MensRights30/12/17 02:19 PM
2

While the article is from a women's magazine, it's gender neutral. The picture itself shows a man cheating with another woman. So... why is this in this sub instead of, for instance, r/relationships ?
/r/MensRights16/12/17 11:35 PM
1

That boy desperately needs a father (we don't know what happened to the actual father) and the worst part is, that woman doesn't even think to realize that
/r/MensRights16/12/17 11:29 PM
1

Cop bangs slut, slut says she was afraid to not say yes, cop loses job 100% of the time "Slut" or literal prostitute? Because there is a clear power abuse in "fuck me or I'll arrest you"
/r/MensRights16/12/17 01:50 AM
1

But don't campaign on their behalf when they don't want to. Indeed, but leaving up to the victim doesn't work either. Or, let's say, it can work in situations that are socially shady at best, like patting the butt of someone who isn't in a relationship with you. But when you move to "OMG, he asked me out, harrasment! harrasment I say!" you can't leave it up to the "victim"
/r/MensRights12/12/17 03:19 PM
1

Why would you use linked in as a dating website? Dumb. Just in case it works? Or the guy was just bored and decided to tell random strangers on the Internet they were pretty. Who knows.
/r/MensRights12/12/17 03:07 PM
1

Well, there is "Everyone is welcome to touch my ass" "I like the guy doing it. He's welcome to keep touching" "It's no big deal" "It bothers me but not enough to make a scandal" "I'm not making a criminal accusation over this" Slaps guy in the face
/r/MensRights12/12/17 03:03 PM
4

If anything, it belongs in r/feminism Not that anyone here would be allowed to post there, though.
/r/MensRights07/12/17 04:13 PM
2

How else would someone later complain about this sub being called mysoginist if none gives anyone fuel for those accusations?
/r/MensRights04/12/17 02:55 PM
0

So does locking people you work with in your office, getting naked in front of them and, when the employee gets visible shaken, reprimanding them counts as courtship as far as this sub is concerned?
/r/MensRights30/11/17 04:21 PM
10

I think I can speak for all my compatriots if I say none of the other 43, likely already dead, sailors are seen as invisible nor disposable by anyone
/r/MensRights24/11/17 02:27 AM
26

Depending on the version you're reading, the prince doesn't know he'll wake her up by kissing her. And in the original he literally rapes her and it's their children who wake her up. Even in the kiss versions, most of us here are adults. What do you guys think the prince was doing with his hands as he kissed her? Like many fairy tales, sleeping beauty is a horror story with a cautionary tale (heck, she falls into a comma because her parents didn't want to upset her by telling her the dangers of …
/r/MensRights23/11/17 12:32 PM
5

That's later with his peers. He could have told her he didn't want to have sex. He didn't. Maybe after saying no she could have blackmailed him or forced her upon him, and in that case it would be rape. But that didn't happen, instead, he played dead.
/r/MensRights22/11/17 06:29 PM
7

You do realize people are expected to say "no" unless they are dealing with telepaths, right? How could she possible know you didn't want to fuck her if you were letting her do her thing? People, both men and women, ought to stand up for themselves, for their own sake.
/r/MensRights22/11/17 03:10 PM
1

I kind of doubt Harvey Weinstein loved being chivalrous
/r/MensRights20/11/17 09:03 PM
1

What you're saying is that the relationship is likely to be a toxic one. You're right. Should the State regulate who can people choose as their romantic partners, though? And, in any case, none can argue that having sex as a mentally healthy 17 years old is an intrinsically traumatic experience. "Consent" isn't about the ability to choose a good romantic partner - an ability many adults lack - is about whether damage inevitable happens if there is sexual interaction.
/r/MensRights19/11/17 12:19 PM
2

Does the guy's brain changes if he crosses an imaginary line on the ground into some state/country with a higher age of consent? Or is a person's ability to consent to sex independent from legislation?
/r/MensRights19/11/17 04:26 AM
1

If "winning" the "war" (wait, how is men's rights at war with feminism?) means a victory to puritanism, how is that a victory?
/r/MensRights17/11/17 03:18 PM
1

Because it implies the standard is a good standard
/r/MensRights17/11/17 12:25 PM
4

i.e. if she's willing to suck my dick, then she can suck my dick How about not taking ownership of the puritan & conservative trend that took over feminism a few years ago? There is probably no man on Earth who doesn't like to receive a blowjob from a lover they've chose. In other words: instead of leveling down: "Uh, sex-negative feminism claims I should ask a woman before going down on her, so women should ask before giving me a blowjob", level up "We're both relatively confident adults and, j…
/r/MensRights17/11/17 02:46 AM
7

What confuses me is that if she has a partner who she cherishes, why does she care if other men notice her or not? Because it boosts her ego. That's not a female thing, it's a human thing. Yeah, it won't have a practical effect (ie, getting laid), but it means you remain attractive in the eyes of someone who isn't in love with you. Even better, you could get laid with someone else if you wanted.
/r/MensRights17/11/17 02:36 AM
5

So this https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/7d36he/young_people_are_confusing_flirting_with_abuse/ But reversing the genders?
/r/MensRights16/11/17 03:32 AM
-1

I think the point is to acknowledge that on average, men and women really are different. Our brains are different, not just our genitalia. You see, if you were right, and the differences stated in the article were biological differences, you'd see the same situation in every company, in every culture and in every country. And this doesn't represent my life experience at all. So, assuming the article expresses the truth about the author experience, those flaws aren't universal.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 08:10 PM
-14

This has nothing to do with men's right - even assuming the article is genuine and not made up.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 01:59 PM
29

Except that the ones who actually claimed rape claimed to have been actually raped, as in, they wanted out, they expressed they wanted out and Weinstein forced them.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 03:34 PM
1

“I was so nervous. I was kind of shaky,” the teen testified, according to the Lansing State Journal. A couple days later, the teen said, he was able to overcome his jitters and return to the 26-year-old teacher’s home for a second bout of sex trauma. Since when being nervous equals trauma?
/r/MensRights30/10/17 08:11 PM
8

I think it should be a human - not a gender - thing to support those who need to be supported. But that's easy to say when it's not my neck on the line for acting that way. Also, how is sexual harassment and abuse in Hollywood a gender thing? Are we supposed to believe that there are no gay producers acting in the exact same way towards aspiring male actors?
/r/MensRights12/10/17 03:00 PM
2

A pen? Weinstein likes to put his most vulnerable body part right between women's teeth. All they need to do is to bite as hard as they can. But how do you explain that to the police later on?
/r/MensRights12/10/17 02:58 PM
1

a) Absolutely. b) Don't assume there will be c) Indeed. Laws shouldn't protect against hearth break, though.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 09:27 PM
1

A fifteen years old is perfectly capable, biologically speaking, of having sex and enjoy it. That's why you need to go through all those hops to suspect the kid may be traumatized by the experience, despite having no declaration of the kid in question. Yes, there was a position of power and that makes it illegal. The idea that the kid is traumatized or will feel the trauma later on is something you're making up in order to get upset, because nowhere does it say that the kid was hurt. And no, it'…
/r/MensRights06/10/17 08:33 PM
0

Well, there is a significant difference between a 15 years old and a 5 five years. That you know, but just in case, you can read about it yourself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puberty
/r/MensRights06/10/17 07:28 PM
1

Well, it looks like you're saying that regret after sex means one of the parties can claim rape afterwards. As for "your user name and IP address has been noted", what's that about?
/r/MensRights06/10/17 07:00 PM
0

Well, he's not a child but a 15 years old teenager. I'd like to believe you understand the difference.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 06:57 PM
-1

Well, as far as the law is concerned, the accusers are innocent until proven guilty. So if the kid has been left with psychological scars serious enough to warrant a harsher sentence, that has to be proved in court. According to the prosecutor, whom the judge listened before saying that, he had a good time.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 06:40 PM
-2

How about: A boy who is not ready for sexual relations? A boy who feel compelled to because she was in a position of power? A boy who is gay? A boy who does not want to have sex until he is married? A boy who does not want to partake in an act which he knows to be illegal? A boy who is too immature to engage is such a relationship? And do we know if one of those is the case? From the article The prosecutor said: 'He felt special and accepted it. She took him out to Olympic Park, they went for st…
/r/MensRights06/10/17 06:29 PM
110

See? If not for men, the shooter wouldn't have had a vantage point. It's always men!
/r/MensRights05/10/17 07:58 PM
1

"As far as I know." The mother asked her daughter to show her what had happened. Even if you want to assume the child wanted to lie to her mother for reasons, the mother's advice is to kick them in the balls if they do the stuff the daughter represented. Is advocating for violence really the position you want to take here? Yes A slap in the face for them could mean a bloody nose and/or scrapes and bruises for her. If you mean the boys will punch her in the face, then comes the advice to hit them…
/r/MensRights04/10/17 01:52 PM
1

Again, was there really any need to defend herself in that manner? Yes. She was being groped by two boys. Had it been just one, a slap in the face should suffice. But with two, it's best to escalate to make sure they realize she's off limits.
/r/MensRights04/10/17 02:57 AM
1

Self defense isn't "ownership". Do those boys want to avoid pain? Then they stop touching this girl in a way she said she didn't want. After all, society doesn't need people to be good for people to act good.
/r/MensRights04/10/17 01:59 AM
1

Where's the attack on men? As for a six year old escalating to the principal... no. She won't always have someone to defend her in life, so it's best if she learns she should defend herself, should the need arise.
/r/MensRights03/10/17 10:11 PM
6

But according to the article, the girl talked to the teacher, who did nothing useful. IDK, either girls have to be taught grown women are helpless creatures who need a white knight to protect them or they are taught women are adults who are capable of fighting their own battles - and then they have to be taught how to fight. This mother is absolutely right and I fail to see how a child being taught to act in self-defense is, somehow, a men's issue.
/r/MensRights03/10/17 10:03 PM
2

That reads like the negative aspects of feminism in itself don't bother you. Instead, your response suggests you're bothered by being unable to reverse their use.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 01:56 PM
0

No, but if you're at work, you either explain why you can't sit or you don't get to complain if the person asking you can't read your mind and ends up believing you're a jerk.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 01:55 PM
1

It means: "A bunch of bullshit created by political activists who can't wrap their minds around the fact that social class is at the root of most of the inequality in the world"
/r/MensRights26/09/17 03:14 AM
2

If he didn't explain why sitting down hurt him, how would the trainer know that? By mind reading?
/r/MensRights26/09/17 03:12 AM
13

How does it come from a system that preferentially benefits men exactly? Because it doesn't. If you don't believe me, check any WWI graveyard.
/r/MensRights25/09/17 03:07 AM
4

To be fair, this particular doll as a rape-like mode which allows the user to role play a rape scenario. This brings two possibilities: It allows rapists to satisfy their desires without hurting anyone and, thus, it's best for everyone. It encourages people who may otherwise not rape to act in rape role plays and, should they like them, they may look for the real thing, which is obviously bad. It's not unlike the question about whether children shaped sex bots should be made or not. And I'm not …
/r/MensRights22/09/17 02:08 AM
6

See? It can't consent, so it's rape /s
/r/MensRights22/09/17 02:04 AM
14

Or, you know, maybe they are committing suicide because of PSTD?
/r/MensRights19/09/17 01:31 AM
5

Oh boy, are you just looking for excuses to become offended? I was answering to the idea that "machismo" meant "masculine pride". Maybe you want to explain to us all how is it that, for instance, believing that women can't drive cars (let alone trucks or fly planes) is "masculine pride" instead of misogyny. Or how is it "masculine pride" to believe that your significant other must be boring in bed because there are things the mother of your children can't do - only sluts do them, so a proper man…
/r/MensRights10/09/17 03:24 PM
1

I'm a native Spanish speaker
/r/MensRights10/09/17 02:32 AM
1

Possibly, it depends on how "machismo" is read in the USA. IOW, it's sounds about right in the mouth of the woman being interviewed. There might be a connotation lost in translation.
/r/MensRights09/09/17 03:47 PM
5

Well, TBH and giving it more than 15 seconds to think a response, there are elements of what feminism ended up calling "toxic masculinity" in what's usually referred as "machismo" but I wouldn't call it "masculine pride". I haven't read the article, but that line sounds like a proper use of the term and it's not an attack on masculinity in itself, but on certain ideas about what it means to be a man in that culture. Then again, there is also "you don't hit women"...
/r/MensRights09/09/17 03:34 PM
7

"machismo" is the Spanish word for mysoginy
/r/MensRights09/09/17 02:20 PM
2

And the examples of "assaults" she gave?! Bitch, please! So "a cheerleader at a football party consents to sleeping with a player and during it two of his friends walk in the room!" Uhm....and now they all assaulted/raped you?! NO!! You either continue riding and make eye contact (to establish dominance - joke) or you throw the covers over yourself and scream for the two extra men to LEAVE THE FUCKING ROOM! Or YOU leave wrapped in the bed sheets, get that guy's number and try again another day. …
/r/MensRights08/09/17 03:34 PM
4

Absolutely. But all that doesn't mean you can break into the guy's home.
/r/MensRights07/09/17 03:32 PM
-38

No. What Terena asked was about the situation in which the person can't buy a power bank because is in the middle of a hurricane. Which Michael promptly ignoring and keep writing about the benefits of power banks. The point he missed is: power banks might be awesome if you already have them. But if you don't already have them, you can't have them shipped during a hurricane and you need to look at alternatives.
/r/MensRights07/09/17 03:22 PM
1

A woman wants to be "sexually equal" to any man? Okay then -- I'll call her a "perverted swine." There's her sexual equality for her. Cool. Everyone starts off as a perverted swine then. Everything related to dating becomes simpler. After all, when everyone is a perverted swine, none cares about who is a perverted swine. Of course, everyone has the personal freedom to act like a lecherous slob, rubbing their smelly bits together with every other person's smelly bits if she can convince them to d…
/r/MensRights07/09/17 03:08 AM
2

The real irony occurs when a female sleeps around a lot, yet still expects to be regarded as some form of saint, nun, or virtuous potentate. Why? IDK, probably something relating to personal freedoms, not hurting anyone by sleeping around or desiring to be treated like someone with a sexuality equal to any men?
/r/MensRights07/09/17 02:57 AM
1

Wow. It is as if they can separate reality from fiction.
/r/MensRights06/09/17 07:19 PM
1

Hasn't been. That doesn't mean it won't be. And maybe in such a future Australian soldiers will risk their lives for their country. But right now, wherever they are deployed, it's not Australia they are risking their lives for.
/r/MensRights11/08/17 07:46 PM
0

Australia hasn’t been under attack since WWII. Whatever Australian soldiers risk their life for, it isn't their country
/r/MensRights11/08/17 02:20 PM
1

Two things: first, it's not 18 for women in Nebraska (where this happened), it's 16 for both. And I don't think the age of consent differentiate gender anywhere, so there is gender equality there. Second: rape is just behind torture as the most abhorrent crime a person can commit. By naming consensual sex as rape, what you get is the banalization of rape. Third, related to one: if you had a jurisdiction in which the age of consent is as high as 18 for women, what makes sense is to lower it to a …
/r/MensRights19/07/17 08:47 PM
1

Do you even know if that 16 years old teenager felt raped? Since when is not condoning teachers raping students "sex negative"? Since you're considering sex between individuals biologically and in this case legally capable of consent "rape"
/r/MensRights19/07/17 08:33 PM
-1

But unless Canada has an effective system to separate abusive husbands (or wives for that matter) for their victims (and since I'm not Canadian, I don't know if that's true), Elizabeth Sheey is right. For a victim of physical abuse is a lot safer to kill his/her abuser when the abuser is defenseless than run away and hope the State is effective in defending her. Self defense shouldn't be a gender issue.
/r/MensRights19/07/17 07:50 PM
-2

Well, I remember being 16. If my hot geography teacher wanted to have sex with me for my birthday, I would have jumped in joy instead of ending up suffering PSTD. There is a potential abuse of a power position, since she was his teacher and could have failed him in class on purpose, but I wouldn't compare this guy with a person who was actually raped. For an antifeminist sub, there is too much copypasting of sex-negative feminism here.
/r/MensRights19/07/17 07:39 PM
-6

It didn't happen to me, but it would be cool
/r/MensRights30/06/17 02:40 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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